Related articles and links |  1 of 4

Ever since September 11, 2001, I have seen a sharp increase in books about Islam by American evangelicals. Even if the titles do not include the word "unveil," most attempt to expose Islam for its theological, historical, and moral shortcomings. According to Richard Cimino of the New School for Social Research, evangelical attitudes toward Islam have hardened since the attacks, positing that Islam is an essentially violent religion. Responses to the cartoons depicting Muhammad in parts of the Muslim world have only strengthened such perceptions.

Unfortunately, too many of these evangelical polemics are historically inaccurate, theologically misinformed, and missiologically misguided. Apparently, a lot of us simply dislike Muslims (usually without knowing any).

When we critique Islam, we need to be fair and accurate. Those of us who make Muslim-Christian comparisons must do so from a position of informed engagement, as those who have worked with Muslims. When we review historical tensions between the two faiths, we must apply rigorous historical analysis. When we write about Islam, we must remember that love is the greatest apologetic.

The seven titles I discuss here represent contemporary American evangelical perspectives on Islam. The worst in denigrating Islam and demonizing Muhammad undoubtedly is John MacArthur's Terrorism, Jihad, and the Bible: A Response to the Terrorist Attacks (W Publishing Group, 2001). Given his lack of expertise in Islam and experience in working with Muslims, one wonders why MacArthur is writing in the first place. His purportedly biblical response as to why 9/11 happened is reminiscent of the wildest medieval caricatures of Islam, a faith that supposedly was founded by a sword-wielding, oversexed prophet. MacArthur claims, for example, that the suicide bombers had "pent-up sexual desires"—as did their founder. And he does not hesitate to categorically state that Muhammad was demonically inspired.

The book fails for generalities, inaccuracies, and weak research. MacArthur, no stranger to polemics, simplistically claims 9/11 was directed at Christianity and on account of Christian support for Israel. That is only partly true. Militant Muslims perceive many reasons to hate us, including 1,500 years of unhappy encounters with the West. He claims that several million Armenians were killed by the Turks, when the real figure is 1.5 million. (But, hey, what's another 1.5 million or more when you're trying to make a point?) MacArthur talks about the 72 black-eyed virgins as a prime motive for Muslim martyrs but then fails to mention that only non-authentic traditions make that claim. Finally, he lacks sympathy for and understanding of the Palestinian cause.

Runner-up in the art of vilification is Don Richardson's Secrets of the Koran: Revealing Insights into Islam's Holy Book (Regal, 2003). In Richardson's view, a real Muslim is by definition a violent one.

Unable to find a redemptive analogy in Islam, Richardson, who wrote the missions classic Peace Child, sets out to "X-ray the Koran [his spelling] on moral grounds." True, the Qur'an does lack integrity, but so does Richardson's "fact-based commentary." To be fair, he should have presented modernist as well as fanatical Wahabbist interpretations.

Continuing to "wage truth" on Islam, Richardson makes other unfair assumptions. For example, when rape occurs in Islamic contexts, he claims Muslims are simply following their sex-crazed prophet, demonic book, and perverted religion. And he approvingly quotes a former president of the Southern Baptist Convention who publicly called Muhammad a demonized pedophile.

next page... |  1 of 4

June 2006, Vol. 50, No. 6