I'm not challenging Hassaballah's argument. Really, I think the question of what the "true" teachings of a religion are is somewhat beside the point.

My argument is an abstract one--that one can be an expert in something even though one is not a member of the class to which one is studying. An ornithologist knows more about birds than do birds, to take a silly example. Likewise, one who has spent years formally studying Islam is likely more expert in it than a mere adherent, regardless of one's religious persuasion.

I didn't realize Schwartz was Muslim, as I didn't catch that when I read his book or from various articles. It's really immaterial to me, though. I presume Bernard Lewis is not Muslim but I nonetheless recognize him as qualified to discuss the topic.

I don't expect atheists to "defend" Christianity, although I do it myself all the time. But one can be an atheist and still be more knowledgable about Christianity than a random believer.

I am frequently stunned by people who want to argue with me over these things, but when I point to actual muslim scholars they could argue with, they insist on arguing with me instead.

I find that bizarre, I really do.

Steven Schwartz is, by the way, a Muslim.

There are lots and lots and lots of people out there in the blogosphere and among American Christians (especially of the biblicist/evangelist variety) who expound at length about the dangers inherent in the Islamic faith--a faith that, when you scratch them hard enough, they'll admit that they think is possibly satanic and certainly an evil religion that leads people away from the true faith of Christianity. And a lot of these people are very fond of pulling various verses out of the Koran, completely out of context, as proof for their thesis of how evil and oppressive Islam is.

And then, when I point to Muslims who directly address such accusations by explaining how these people are pulling various Koranic verses out of context, these people then turn around and accuse those muslims of obfuscating somehow or even of "not really understanding the truth" about their faith. Their proof? None really--they just think their own non-muslim (and frequently anti-muslim) interpretations are more valid than those of muslims.

I mean, really: this is absurd. Who better to defend a religious faith's beliefs and practices from indictment than those who practice it?

Do you look to atheists to defend Christianity?