On the Side Effects of Polemics

In attending conferences recently, I’ve noticed a trend gaining traction among some ministries to Muslims. I sometimes meet individuals who are part of Muslim Background Believer (MBB) networks claiming to have access to ancient Qur'anic manuscripts that, they argue, differ significantly from the standardized Qur'an.

When I inquire further, it becomes clear that the hope behind these efforts is that new scholarship will expose the Qur'an’s flaws, ultimately undermining the foundation of Islam itself.

This approach raises some critical missiological concerns for me.

Firstly, I do not need Islam to be a priori disproven for Jesus to be Lord. My faith rests in the perfect revelation of Christ — there is no one like Him, and no one has done more for me. Whether or not Islam is polemically dismantled has no bearing on Christ’s Lordship, and it shouldn't for any of us, including Muslims.

I am deeply interested in Islamic studies, and understanding Islam’s emergence is essential for missiology. However, recognizing that many elements of Islam’s traditional narrative are mythological should not make us triumphalistic, but empathetic. We can sympathize with Muslims who are navigating their faith in a complex, real-world context. For example, I sometimes reflect on my own identity as an “Evangelical” — a term that carries its own set of contested meanings! Just as Muslims wrestle with internal questions of faith and identity, so do we as Christians.

Secondly, there has been extensive scholarly work in this area already. I am shocked when leaders in these groups are unfamiliar with key scholars like Gabriel Said Reynolds, Martin Accad, or Daniel Brown, whose work extensively explores the complexities of Qur'anic manuscripts (see also various sections in The Religious Other).

This kind of oversight suggests that such MBB-driven research, while earnest, may not be engaging with the broader academic landscape. Any attempt to dismantle “Islam” through textual criticism needs to reckon with this body of existing scholarship.

Finally, a strong focus on polemics reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of what sustains Islam. Biblical faith is grounded ontologically in the person of Jesus Christ and His Kingdom. Yet Islam, like all other religious traditions, is a socially constructed reality – without Muslims there would be no Islam. Islam does not rest simply on a textual foundation or a reality outside the realm of experience. Instead, it is Muslims themselves who decide what Islam is, and they continue to shape, evolve, and contest its meaning.

Even if one were to discredit the Qur'an academically, Islam as a lived religion would persist. In fact, polemics often have the unintended consequence of solidifying group identities. Though it’s true that some Muslims convert to Christianity through these debates, such conversions are exceptions rather than the norm. The broader impact of polemics on the Muslim ummah (community) often serves to reinforce, not weaken, religious boundaries.

If a medical treatment has severe side effects that make the patient worse than the illness being treated, one might say the treatment is worse than the disease. Let’s be discerning with our use of polemics in ministry to Muslims.