Here just some comments on Saifullah's argument in this article.
An important Islamic principle states that deeds are judged according to intention.
Despite this, Saifullah seems not to have learned yet that all texts need to be evaluated on the basis of their intended meaning, not in regard to some other interpretation that might be possible to force on the passage but which was clearly not in the mind of the author.
Patrick Holding's article Was Paul inspired when he wrote Titus 1:12-14? explains the issue well, as does Epimenides' Paradox: A Logical Discrepancy In Titus 1:12? by Zach Smith of Apologetics Press. There is no need to make further words about it.
In case that Saifullah wants to insist that "all" cannot have any exceptions whatsoever, he might do well to ponder the contradiction between Sura 39:53 and 4:48 in the Qur'an and rethink his question of inspiration and revelation that he tried to raise regarding the writings of the Apostle Paul.
If he is not satisfied with a contradiction between two verses in different suras, then we can also offer him a problem of formal logic in Sura 26:192-196 that arises when taking the text absolutely literal and not in its intended meaning.
1. This is based on Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 1, Hadith No. 1. I personally consider words to be part of our deeds, since what we say often has even more impact on other people or situations (for the better or worse) than what we do. Also Sura 33:5 speaks about the importance of the intentions in our deeds.
Responses to MSM Saifullah
Answering Islam Home Page