Violence at Speaker’s Corner

Speaker’s Corner is one of Britain’s quirkiest and most important institutions, a global icon of free speech. You can come and preach or advocate or ridicule anything you like, within the bounds of the law. And it’s a fantastic mission opportunity for the Church, although the Church has been slow to recognise this.

Muslims, on the other hand, have taken full advantage of Speaker’s Corner to do da’wah. Over the years, Muslims have become by far the biggest special interest group there, dwarfing the numbers of other groups (which are Christians, Atheists, Jews, Hebrew Israelites, Marxists, Vegans, LGBTQI activists and miscellaneous political/conspiracy theorists). Islamic Da’ists have the biggest internet presence, with some missionaries getting more than 300k subscribers on their channels. In principle, what they are doing is perfectly lawful.

However, let’s pause to consider the religion the large Da’wah team is there to defend. This is a religion whose founder ordered critics of it to be assassinated (Life of Muhammad, Guillaume trans. (p675-676), whose God’s vision of sucesss is an earthly kingdom, a caliphate, (Sura 24:55) where believers live in complete accordance with sharia law (Sura 4:59), and where the violent subjugation of non-believers is prescribed (Sura 9:29). Unlike in the Bible, where God loved us before we loved him (1 John 4:19), came into the world to save sinners (1 Timothy 1:15), Allah has no love for transgressors (Sura 5:37.) The Bible constrains Christians, like Jesus, to turn the other cheek (Matt 5:39), not repay evil for evil (Romans 12:17), not contend for the Gospel with the ‘weapons of the world’ (2 Cor 10:3). Muslims are not bound by these constraints.

“And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.” (Sura 8:60)

“O you who have believed, fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous.” (Sura 9:23)

According to Islam, earthly success matters; and when you are unsuccessful in debate – as is the case with missionaries’ inability to answer the question ‘who is Allah praying to?’ -it is in keeping with Islamic teaching to resort to other means of asserting dominance. Muhammad after all, claimed he had been made victorious “through terror” (Bukhari 4:52:220).

Over the past few of weeks, we’ve been surrounded by crowds, every attempt at sensible discussion being brought down by chants of “clean your arse” and “drink camel piss” Or love-filled speeches like these.Three of our team have been threatened with stabbing. There are plenty more examples of these kinds of incidents; usually we brush this off, and/or report it to the police, because we have better – so much better! – things to talk about. Last Sunday, a woman on our team was punched in the arm by a Somali man leaving the Corner. Why? For challenging Islam.

The reaction of the Dawah team? No pause for reflection on the assault let alone an apology, just more mockery:

Other groups at the Corner have noticed what’s going on too; atheists have been defending us, as well one group of Muslims have had the decency to put out a video condemning the recent behaviour of their co-religionists (warning: the video is full of profanity.) We hope they make the link with the teachings of their false prophet. As Jesus said,

“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.” (Matthew 7:15-17)

We can take the heckles and the mockery. Jesus said in Matthew 5:11,”blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. ” We are undeterred in our mission to make Him known and to expose the false religion of Islam.

Find us on Twitter @DCCIministries and Facebook

But no-one should have to put up with violence for doing so. It’s wrong and it needs to stop.


70 thoughts on “Violence at Speaker’s Corner

  1. The West will be conquered peacefully without sword, with no blood, no beheading, let alone bombings and terrorism, but with the good converts:
    Muslim Book 41, Hadith 6979
    Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Apostle saying: You have heard about a city, one side of which is on land and the other is in the sea (Constantinople). They said: Allah’s Messenger, yes. Thereupon he said: The Last Hour would not come unless seventy thousand persons from Bani lshaq would attack it. When they would land there, they will neither fight with weapons nor would shower arrows but would only say: There is no god but Allah and Allah is the Greatest, and one side of it would fall. Thaur (one of the narrators) said: I think that he said: The part by the side of the ocean. Then they would say for the second time: There is no god but Allah and Allah is the Greatest, and the second side would also fall, and they would say: There is no god but Allah and Allah is the Greatest, and the gates would be opened for them and they would enter therein and, they would be collecting spoils of war and distributing them amongst themselves when a noise would be heard saying: Verily, Dajjal has come. And thus they would leave everything there and go back.

  2. On the day of Resurrection, will the Jihadi who struck the Christian missionary have his actions counted as a good deed?

    1. I wonder if there’s Stone fetihism in Christian paradise.
      What will the “White stone” give for Christians (for pleasures perhaps) in their paradise? for a weird Stone fetishism? for their daily smooching?
      Perhaps for stupid enigma?
      Maybe for laying down his head (function as pillow)?
      Rev 2:17
      He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a WHITE STONE, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

      Do you ever read a tale of “weird homeless man” who keeps holding his stone everywhere, to be his pillow?

      Why is that white stone so important as a reward?

      1. the white stone has an alegorical meaning you idiot. to a stupid abdul like you who believes he is going to have an endless penis and 72 virgins from hell as well as a 70 year orgasm with prostitutes of hell, and believes that water with shit, dead animals and womens menstrual dirty clothes is clean water in the budas well, who believes in flying carpets and birds arranging marriages for soloman , who believes that satan taught mohamed, and believing in a prophet who did not know the difference between god speaking to him and satan speaking to him, not to mention him flying on a donkey to heaven, oh forgot to say sleeping with his dead aunt in the grave, sleaping with a child, sleaping with his adopted sons wife, raping his wifes servant when the wife was not at home, killing sofias family and raping her after that, drinking camel piss, sucking the penis of ali’s sons, you would not have a single brain cell to understand the alogorical meaning of the bible. so stick to your moronic toilet paper called the koran, meant for dead brained idiots like you , because you just dont have the capability to understand spiritual and holy things of a resplendent God.

        1. “ben says: the white stone has an alegorical meaning you idiot.”

          Tell us, what allegory is it for the white stone?

          “to a stupid abdul like you”

          You sound familiar with cp? Are you him or his?

          “who believes he is going to have an endless penis and 72 virgins from hell as well as a 70 year orgasm with prostitutes of hell,”

          Why do you envy with our happiness which will not harm yours? What’s wrong with that?
          In our Islamic Heaven whatever of good wishes, even “less good” wishes, can be granted quickly as long as there’s no sin.
          Thus, if a man wishes to have a “normal” earthy sexual organ, it is fully granted for him. No big deal.
          People of Heaven don’t pay the women for sex. If the women of Hell refuse to be released from Hell, that is okay, that’s their choice and consent, no compulsion.
          Are you jealous?

          “and believes that water with shit, dead animals and womens menstrual dirty clothes is clean water in the budas well,”

          That’s a miracle of Prophet Muhammad.

          “who believes in flying carpets”

          The Bible has:
          – flying clouds.
          – flying white horses but weirdly without wings (how is it possible?).
          – angels who need a loooong ladder, not elevator, to go from earth to sky (how many steps it is? Hundreds?Millions?).

          “and birds arranging marriages for soloman ,”

          Isn’t it romantic?
          How about story of the “forced marriage” between Hosea and whore?

          “who believes that satan taught mohamed, and believing in a prophet who did not know the difference between god speaking to him and satan speaking to him,”

          Prophet Muhammad choked and tied a Satan who tries to disturb him during prayer.
          Please compare him with Jesus who just falls into a Devilish temptation by wishing a suicide and committing it afterward. You can notice a furor how Jews immediately reacted after hearing such a “suicidal note” of Jesus, by responding “he has a devil” bluntly.
          Jn 10
          18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.19 . There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.20 And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?

          “not to mention him flying on a donkey to heaven,”

          That’s cherub with wings. In the Bible, the cherub is a well-known heavenly vehicle.
          Are you atheist or Non-Biblical reader?
          2Sam 22:11
          And he rode upon a Cherub, and did fly: and he was seen upon the wings of the wind.

          “oh forgot to say sleeping with his dead aunt in the grave,”

          Stupid translator of False Hadith.
          Let alone sleeping, touching a corpse is a Najis, that’s why a corpse is clothed by 3-7 linens.
          Prophet Muhammad just comes down to add a cloth (from his cloth) to cover more a fully clothed women, that’s it. It is done properly in front of all mourners and all eyewitnesses. In Islam, a female corpse is clothed more so tightly with 7 linens, in order to delay physical damage on her body. How could a man sleep with a female corpse?
          But, in the sick mind of Islamophobes under a sick Satanic inspiration, the False Hadith talks about an act nasty necrosex in front of all Madinah’s mourners. Silly.

          “sleaping with a child,”

          Aisha was a fully mature post-pubescent woman after Prophet waited her for 3 years fully.
          Just like a young Mary, do you think Mary was still a child when getting impregnated by someone other than her husband, outside of marriage, so that she is not a legitimate wife of Jesus’ father?

          “sleaping with his adopted sons wife,”

          In the Bible it is a norm to marry a divorced woman.
          In Secular law it is OK. In Jewish law it is OK.
          In Oriental tradition, in American culture, in African life, in Roman law, everywere it is OK.
          Only in the ancient Arabian convention it is regarded superstitiously as a bad omen.
          Why do you think it is a sin? Are you a pagan?

          “raping his wifes servant when the wife was not at home,”

          Abraham also marries Hagar in Sarah’s house.
          Mary the Coptic is Prophet Muhammad’s legitimate wife with dowry, she is not a slave of anyone.

          “killing sofias family and raping her after that,”

          In the Bible it is OK to marry a beautiful captive woman by her consent after letting her mourn.
          Moses and Jews did that on Midianite virgins, but killed the rest of women.

          “drinking camel piss,”

          Too much drinking a camel’s urine turns the drinkers to be apostates, heh.
          Prophet Muhammad foresaw that certain tribesmen will apostatize, thus they would immediately die if they drink the urine a lot.

          “sucking the penis of ali’s sons,”

          At most, it is a norm for the father to circumcise his boy’s organ.
          At least, it is a weak Hadith.

          “you would not have a single brain cell to understand the alogorical meaning of the bible. so stick to your moronic toilet paper called the koran, meant for dead brained idiots like you , because you just dont have the capability to understand spiritual and holy things of a resplendent God.”

          Nothing new.

          1. Do the infidels think so naively with a typical Islamophobic prejudice that our Islam is a religion of power, lust, wealth and women? A Big No, No, No thrice.
            Abi Dawud Book 14, Hadith 2510
            Narrated AbuHurayrah: A man said: Messenger of Allah, a man wishes to take part in jihad in Allah’s path desiring some worldly advantage? The Prophet said: He will have not reward. The people thought it terrible, and they said to the man: Go back to the Messenger of Allah, for you might not have made him understand well. He, therefore, (went and again) asked: Messenger of Allah, a man wishes to take part in jihad in Allah’s path desiring some worldly advantage? He replied: There is no reward for him. They again said to the man: Return to the Messenger of Allah. He, therefore, said to him third time. He replied: There is no reward for him.

      2. Some Christians think the white stone refers to the judicial practice of providing a white stone to signify innocence and vs a black stone to signify guilt. It was recently portrayed in a documentary where soldiers who failed to do their duty on the battlefield were forced to draw lots or stones to decide who would be beaten to death. One out of every ten stones was black, thus explaining the practice of decimation in the Roman Legion. I suggest the new name signifies a transformation from the person you were to the person that you could or should be. Very few Christians understand fully the Book of Revelations and it is not uncommon to find any two people claiming to understand it to be in disagreement. The tradition is that the Book of Revelations was added to the New Testament on a narrow consensus.

        1. “Danny L Newton says: Some Christians think the white stone refers to the judicial practice of providing a white stone to signify innocence and vs a black stone to signify guilt.”

          So, the white stone will have no any superstitious power? Will any Christian keep it anywhere like an ID because there will many cases of fraud (stolen identity)? I thought it will be a kind of “secret” item or bonus with a secret password to explore a secret forbidden site in Heaven, heh.
          What would happen if the stone is missing, anyway?
          Can that “useless” white stone be bartered with more valuable items?

          “It was recently portrayed in a documentary where soldiers who failed to do their duty on the battlefield were forced to draw lots or stones to decide who would be beaten to death. One out of every ten stones was black, thus explaining the practice of decimation in the Roman Legion.”

          A very stupid guilt-culture.

          “I suggest the new name signifies a transformation from the person you were to the person that you could or should be.”

          That white stone is a kind of a “Sci-fi device” for changing personality, changing gender, changing identity, and changing forms, like avatar-machine? is that what you mean?
          Will it cause a little bit confusion?

          “Very few Christians understand fully the Book of Revelations and it is not uncommon to find any two people claiming to understand it to be in disagreement. The tradition is that the Book of Revelations was added to the New Testament on a narrow consensus.”

          Where’ the 3rd person when you need it?

          1. [email protected]
            says:
            5 February 2019 at 8:35 am
            “Danny L Newton says: Some Christians think the white stone refers to the judicial practice of providing a white stone to signify innocence and vs a black stone to signify guilt.”
            So, the white stone will have no any superstitious power? Will any Christian keep it anywhere like an ID because there will many cases of fraud (stolen identity)? I thought it will be a kind of “secret” item or bonus with a secret password to explore a secret forbidden site in Heaven, heh.
            What would happen if the stone is missing, anyway?
            Can that “useless” white stone be bartered with more valuable items?

            The white stone is used to signify a,”not guilty” verdict. You get two stones, black and white at the beginning of the trial and you cast whichever color stone that reflects your judgement. The origin of the stone does not matter because the person judging the case gives the stone significance. If your name is written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, you will be judged to be innocent in spite of all of your deeds because Jesus paid the price for those sinful deeds. If you don’t know the traditions, you are very likely to default to a straightforward understanding of the passage and see in your mind a real stone that could be used later or have supernatural powers. This is probably why Muhammed was no fan of allegorical interpretations of the Qur’an.
            ‘A’ishah said:
            The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) recited this verse: “He it is who has sent down to thee the Book: in it are verses basic or fundamental . . . .” Up to “men of understanding”. She said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) then said: When you see those people who follow that which is allegorical in the Quran, those are the people whom Allah has named (in the Quran). So avoid them‏.‏
            Grade
            : Sahih (Al-Albani)
            صحيح (الألباني)
            حكم :
            Reference
            : Sunan Abi Dawud 4598
            In-book reference
            : Book 42, Hadith 3
            English translation
            : Book 41, Hadith 4581

    2. Why does Jesus not ride a cherub (or Buraq in Islamic knowledge) if he were god?
      How is a horse (being referred as “him” rather than “it”) able to fly and come down from the heaven to the earth without the wings?
      Rev 19
      11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white HORSE; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him, upon white HORSES, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
      Versus:
      Ps 18:10
      And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly: yea, he did fly upon the wings of the wind.

    3. There will be certain sickness and sins in Christian paradise. Is it unhealthy place?
      Weirdly, the paradise’s sickness needs such a “herbal medicine” or botanical treatment with a leaf of tree. Is the leaf going to absorb the sin and illness when being touched? Or will the leaf be extracted to be a drink?
      Rev 22:2
      In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the HEALING of the nations.

      1. I take this to mean that you arrive in the state that you left and the healing that you need restores the functionality of the body. These are the people who have their name written in the Lamb’s book of life. The tree of life is the means by which their bodies are restored and perfected in Heaven. They were resurrected for judgement and the restoration of the body comes after the judgement. This could be the means of eliminating death and deterioration that was mentioned in Rev 21:4. The tree of life will be the same as in the original Garden of Eden only the population will be way more than just two people.

        1. “Danny L Newton says: I take this to mean that you arrive in the state that you left and the healing that you need restores the functionality of the body. These are the people who have their name written in the Lamb’s book of life. The tree of life is the means by which their bodies are restored and perfected in Heaven. They were resurrected for judgement and the restoration of the body comes after the judgement. This could be the means of eliminating death and deterioration that was mentioned in Rev 21:4.”

          Depiction of Rev 22:22 is so cryptically idolatrous, too primitive (similar to pagan Asherah), and competing with Jesus for curing and perfecting the sick body (equal with the water of Siloam, dirt of clay to give eyesight, handkerchief of Peter) with an alleged tree’s divine nature.

          Why do Triune Gods still “need” a leaf to heal and perfect the body? Is it too hard for them to heal without it?

          Worse, will the tree be marking a return of “Old idol” of Canaanites in Heaven?
          Deut 16:21 states that God hates Asherim in a form of living trees:
          Dt 16:21
          Thou shalt not plant thee a grove of any trees near unto the altar of the LORD thy God, which thou shalt make thee.
          1Ki 14:23
          For they also built them high places, and images, and groves, on every high hill, and under every green tree.

          1. Man lives his life in a fallen world that is “subjected to futility.” The only thing that needs to be healed is our fallen nature so that we may come before God as perfected beings. While on this side of Eternity, we must still struggle against our faults through the renewing of our mind via the Word of God. The warning about the trees only reminds of those who worship the creation instead of Creator. I don’t think the trees in Paradise or Heaven will serve the same medicinal purposes as those on this side of Eternity.

    4. Trinity of Satan, Beast and Dajjal gives life to trinity of the living devils from the non-existence, so are they three “life-givers” like the Triune God?
      Rev 16
      13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

      1. The only people who need to worry about what this means are those who might be there on the Last Day plus all of those who have rejected Jesus as the Son of God and Savior. As I stated before, there are numerous allegorical interpretations to Revelations which can provide a lot of entertainment for those who are saved. I remember a former Pope who gave an interpretation of a passage in Revelations that I certainly did not concur but, that belief in the proper interpretation does not impact my salvation. These revelations are outside of the core passages that describe the need for salvation and the certainty of salvation for the lost.

        1. “Danny L Newton says: The only people who need to worry about what this means are those who might be there on the Last Day plus all of those who have rejected Jesus as the Son of God and Savior.”

          Ironically, both Satan and devils are the ones who happen to believe in the Son of God according to Gospel itself. So, How could those “Son believers” be enemy of the Son?Devils believed in the Son of God, but Jesus sent them down to their deaths with condemnation as unclean spirits.
          Moreover, many Christians who have called Jesus “Lord” and have cast out demons with his name will rather go to the fire of Hell.
          Lk 8:28
          When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not.
          Mk 5
          7 And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.8 For he said unto him, Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit.
          Mt 7
          22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

          “As I stated before, there are numerous allegorical interpretations to Revelations which can provide a lot of entertainment for those who are saved.”

          Yeah, how could it be quite entertaining for those believers of “Son of God” to shed bloods each other.

          1. Trinitarians are truly the most expert of all figurative speeches. Look, had Gideon and Samson defeated the Canaanites and Gentiles just with harmless “Faith”, not with the violent efforts whatsoever, well those Trinitarians could make a lucrative entertainment industry in faith.
            Heb 11
            32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:33 Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions,

    5. David is foreseeing Tawaf in Heaven:
      Ps 7:7
      So shall the congregation of the people compass thee about: for their sakes therefore return thou on high.

      Ps 26:6
      I will wash mine hands in innocency: so will I compass thine altar, O LORD:

  3. Name of Muhammad is named and placed by God on the Throne more higher, above the Heaven, not in, nor below, the heavens (of Acts 4:12) where the name of Jesus was written by mortals in Gospels, and given by other creation the angel Gabriel.
    Name of Muhammad makes both the Original Sin and the Crucifixion obsolete and in vain.
    Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Baihaqi in Dalayl an-Nubuwah.
    Narrated Umar bin Khattab: the Prophet said: When Adam committed the sin, he said to Allah, O My Lord, I ask You with reference to Muhammad to forgive me. Allah said: O Adam, How did you know about Muhammad, for I have not yet created him? Adam replied, O My Lord, when You created me, I looked up and saw inscribed on the legs of the Throne the words: There is no God worthy of worship except Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger. I knew that you do not attach to Your name but the name of the dearest of Your Creation. Allah said to Adam, You have spoken rightly, Adam. Muhammad is the dearest of My Creation. I have forgiven you because you asked by Muhammad. And had it not been upon him (as a mercy for all world), I would not have created you (as a part of a sinful world).

    Peter never heard the word “Trinity”, “Dualism of Jesus”, not even the divine person of the Word. Acts 4:20 is what we Moslems say over and over to the Trinitarians:
    Acts 4:20
    For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.

    1. By what mechanism would Adam know the name of Muhammed? Was Adam the original Dr. Who and could fast forwarded into the future with his Tardis?

      1. “Danny L Newton says: By what mechanism would Adam know the name of Muhammed? Was Adam the original Dr. Who and could fast forwarded into the future with his Tardis?”

        In order to “read” a Name inscribed on the Throne, Adam doesn’t have to meet or travel thru time for meeting with the owner of name.

    2. [email protected] says: (of Acts 4:12) where the name of Jesus was written by mortals in Gospels, and given by other creation the angel Gabriel.”

      Recently I came across a website that presents a debate in a topic of “apostasy in Calvinism”, and I read the basic flaws how the main debaters (Calvinists’ Sola Fide and Catholics’ salvation by works) do not bring forth Jesus’ own words in Matthew 7:23.
      In the Unitarian belief, the Name of Jesus is nothing, it can’t save, hence a lie of Peter in Acts 4:12 was fore-negated by Jesus in Matthew 7:23.
      1. Unitarian best counterargument of a silly “Trinitarian saving Name”.
      Mt 7
      22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy NAME? and in thy NAME have cast out devils? and in thy NAME done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

      2. Unitarian best counterargument of a silly Calvinist salvation: Can any Spirit-renewing Calvinist lose his salvation by his sins? Yes.
      Mk 16
      16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be SAVED; but he that believeth not shall be damned.17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my NAME shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
      Versus:
      Mt 7
      22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy NAME? and in thy NAME have cast out devils? and in thy NAME done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

      1. Jesus uses the great “I AM HE” 4 times, and “I AM” 5 times, but weirdly you know what? None of Jews ever thinks he is blaspheming the great I AM.
        1. In Jesus’ threatening tone:
        Jn 8:24
        I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I AM HE, ye shall die in your sins.
        2. In a FAILED prophesy that all Jews would convert after killing him (at same moment he complained about the Jewish efforts to kill him, as a weird contradiction):
        Jn 8:28
        Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have LIFTED up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I AM HE, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.

        3. In the answer when the Romans asked him:
        Jn 18:5
        They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I AM HE. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them.

        4. In a negotiation for letting the others go away.
        Jn 18:8
        Jesus answered, I have told you that I AM HE: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way:

        5. In equating himself with a bread:
        Jn 6:35
        And Jesus said unto them, I AM the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

        6. In parable of light:
        Jn 8:12
        Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I AM the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

        7. In Jesus’ exclusion of the great “I AM” for the Father:
        Jn 8:18
        I AM one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

        8. In parable of the door:
        Jn 10:7
        Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I AM the door of the sheep.

        9. In parable of a killed shepherd (but Jews don’t take the “killed shepherd parable” as blasphemy, because God the Shepherd in Psalms 23:1 is not dead).
        Jn 10:11
        I AM the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

    3. Unitarians do not believe in such a Calvinist nonsense “tasting Spirit’s renewal” to ascertain one’s salvation.
      – Heb 10:29 doesn’t talk about the closeness of future repentance after committing sins, it just imagines punishment.
      Heb 10:29
      Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

      – Heb 6:4-5 describes a long list of reasons why one’s repentance cannot be accepted any longer, most importantly it is a rare reason of “tasting the powers of the world to come”, which refers to a power of resurrecting the dead ones.
      Now, surely, having a resurrecting miracle is hard for any Jesus’ followers to taste or experience.
      Therefore, Heb 6:4 does refer to one particular “unforgivable sin” which is rare to happen.
      Heb 6
      4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

    4. [email protected] says: Peter never heard the word “Trinity”, “Dualism of Jesus”, not even the divine person of the Word. Acts 4:20 is what we Moslems say over and over to the Trinitarians:
      Acts 4:20
      For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.”

      Peter is a known liar. Peter lied thrice concerning Jesus.
      Yes I agree that Peter never heard about the Trinity, Dualism, and divine person of the Word.

      Nevertheless, Being said that, Peter must lie (old habits die hard, right?) if he never heard what Jesus said in Matthew 7:23 on how Jesus’ Name renders no effects whatsoever on sinner’s salvation.
      Mt 7
      22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy NAME? and in thy NAME have cast out devils? and in thy NAME done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
      Versus:
      Acts 4:12
      Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

    5. Matthew 7:23 has been used by the Jews, Unitarians even Catholics to show and prove how Jesus is a common Judaizer who teaches the good work is vital for salvation, and the sins can overrule the gift of grace.

  4. [email protected]
    says:
    1 February 2019 at 8:29 pm
    Narrated Umar bin Khattab: the Prophet said: When Adam committed the sin, he said to Allah, O My Lord, I ask You with reference to Muhammad to forgive me. Allah said: O Adam, How did you know about Muhammad, for I have not yet created him? Adam replied, O My Lord, when You created me, I looked up and saw inscribed on the legs of the Throne the words: There is no God worthy of worship except Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.

    D Newton: If I understand this correctly, this is a conversation that has not happened yet. Are not Adam and all of the prophets still in the grave? Adam was mummified according to some scholars. How would Adam have a conversation with Allah unless there was an individual and targeted resurrection for Adam alone? Obviously this resurrection would be before 570AD. Was there a special resurrection for all of the prophets? How could Moses and Adam have a conversation without being resurrected? Are there missing revelations in the Qur’an? If not, I suggest this one.

    1. “Danny L Newton says: If I understand this correctly, this is a conversation that has not happened yet.”

      Conversation just took place at the time after Adam descended from Eden to the earth, but not after his death.
      On the earth Adam remembered the moments while he was in Eden, how he ever saw and read the Name “Muhammad” inscribed on the legs of the Throne.

      1. The only way this works is that Adam was created with the ability to read. I wonder what language was used? This whole story is much more believable if Adam and Allah were in the Garden in Paradise, thus facilitating access to Allah and the Throne without going through an angel if the Garden was located on Earth. But in the story about the death of Adam, The sons of Adam tried to get grapes from the Garden for their dying father. This suggests that the location of the Garden was on Earth. According to Ibn Kathir, the angels brought a coffin and Adam was mummified. What a waste of time. According to Abu Dawud, Book 15, Hadith 3:…Muhammed said that ,”Allah has prohibited the Earth from consuming the bodies of the Prophets.” Too bad that was not written on the Throne too, it would have saved a lot of trouble making that coffin and mummifying the body.

        1. “Danny L Newton says: According to Ibn Kathir, the angels brought a coffin and Adam was mummified.”

          Not really. The funeral or burial rite has been taught since the time of killing of Abel by Cain.
          Adam died at the age of 930 when Lamech (father of Noah) was still 56 y.o, and at that time the proper burial has been known.

          “The only way this works is that Adam was created with the ability to read. I wonder what language was used?”

          There’s one Adamic language before the Babel’s scattering that eventually splits into 70 languages.
          Adam was taught by God how to read and speak, that’s why he can read what was written on the Throne, such as Salawat and Name of Prophet Muhammad.
          Vol. 9, Book 93, Hadith 643
          Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah’s Messenger saying, Before Allah created the creations, He wrote a Book (wherein He has written): My Mercy has preceded my Anger. and that (Book) is written with Him over the Throne.

          “This whole story is much more believable if Adam and Allah were in the Garden in Paradise, thus facilitating access to Allah and the Throne without going through an angel if the Garden was located on Earth.”

          Yes.

          “But in the story about the death of Adam, The sons of Adam tried to get grapes from the Garden for their dying father.”

          Yes, apparently with a help of angels and Nephilim (a group of fallen angels) who still have access to fly between Heaven and earth. During the time of Adam the Nephilim were still good. Somehow, they turn to be so evil shortly after Adam’s death.

          “This suggests that the location of the Garden was on Earth.”

          Simple and too funny.
          While on the earth, you don’t call the grapes “grapes of Heaven”, just grapes.

          1. If I am wrong about the location of the Garden of Eden, it is no big deal but if Ibn Kathir is wrong, it seems like a more serious mistake that would cause a lot of questioning about some of the other things he wrote.

  5. [email protected]
    says:
    24 January 2019 at 1:50 pm
    The West will be conquered peacefully without sword, with no blood, no beheading, let alone bombings and terrorism, but with the good converts:
    Muslim Book 41, Hadith 6979
    Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Apostle saying: You have heard about a city, one side of which is on land and the other is in the sea (Constantinople). They said: Allah’s Messenger, yes. Thereupon he said: The Last Hour would not come unless seventy thousand persons from Bani lshaq would attack it.

    D. Newton : The soldier of Allah, who struck the missionary, was not willing to wait for the Last Day. Stop dodging the question. Will this be counted as one of his good deeds?

    1. “Danny L Newton says: The soldier of Allah, who struck the missionary, was not willing to wait for the Last Day. Stop dodging the question. Will this be counted as one of his good deeds?”

      I don’t think he did so.

  6. Why the Triune God has a new 4th God.

    Certain Trinitarians try to analogize the Trinity to be as “three twins”. But the problems with this analogy are:
    1. Three twins have three wills, whereas the Triune God just has 1 (one) Will based on one Nature (instead of “normally” based on Person). One Will is not distributed nor shared among 3 persons (namely, each person should have owned just 1/3 will), but each person owns 1 same exact Will.

    Now, according to the Unitarians, if or when a nature has a Will, it must be a sentient being (regardless whether the sentient being has person or not). The Personage relates to the feeling (moods, characters), whereas the Will relates solely to a purpose of existence, objective, mission.

    Thus, having 1 Nature with 1 Will means there’s a new 4th God in the Triune God.

    2. Three twins are independent, whereas there’s “eternal” generation of the Son’s Personage from the Father’s. The Son depended in the person solely on the Father’s. Hence, the Triune God cannot be analogised with three twins.

    1. This sounds like an argument among children arguing about which super hero can beat up another super hero or not. The Unitarians have this problem because they reject the Trinity. If three wills are imagined, there is no problem as long as they are in agreement. They can’t admit that agreement during the time Jesus took human form, otherwise there would be no reason for Jesus to communicate with the Father. Are these identical twins or fraternal twins? Jesus was fully man but showed evidences of transitioning back to his original power and glory. That is why there are arguments about the nature of Jesus while on Earth. A snapshot in a single verse can not see the big picture until lots of snap shots are strung together.
      In the real world, when your theory fails to explain reality, you have to get another theory. With spiritual matters, things are not as straightforward because you can always invent magic and devils to patch up the cracks in your theory. I don’t think the will would be a problem as long as all three are working for the same purpose. The only fourth person working against God is Satan.

      1. “Danny L Newton says: If three wills are imagined, there is no problem as long as they are in agreement. They can’t admit that agreement during the time Jesus took human form, otherwise there would be no reason for Jesus to communicate with the Father.”

        An “alleged” agreement among 3 wills doesn’t solve the problem of salvation. Will there be a “vote” among 3 Persons over a Fate of individual? Will it be a vote to decide those who shall be saved?
        The Spirit has a* limited* will to just save the elects only, whereas the Father has the *universal* will to save all kids, both elects or non-elects. Apparently, the will of Spirit has prevailed (as the Father fails to exert his will to save all kids):
        Mt 18:14
        Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

  7. There’s a “Hidden Tritheism” in the Triune God: the Father is the Lover (subject), the Son is the Beloved (object), and the Holy Spirit is the inanimate process of loving (verb) of two persons, from one for another.

    Even though Catholics and Protestants agree that Jesus has 2 wills according to his 2 natures, but they differ a lot on how many “Will” three Persons have. Is it 1 or 3?

    Catholics believe that “God has but one will”.
    Alphonsus Liguori, History of Heresies, p.269.
    …as is the case in the Most Holy Trinity, then in this Nature there is only One Will and one operation alone, common to all the Persons included in the term of the Nature.

    Thus, the Trinitarians have an unsolved problem of contradictory dilemma:
    1. There are three “Differing” wills, that each person has its “Parallel” will.
    The Father is the Lover, cannot be the beloved.
    The Son is the beloved, cannot be the lover.
    The Spirit is a process of loving, cannot be either the lover or the beloved.

    2. Or, the Holy Spirit is simply ignored, or no longer a “person”, but just inanimate love that processes and passes between two persons. The Spirit is a mere “abstract force” of feelings.
    Now, the 3rd person turns more lower to be an “it”.

    3. Or, the 3rd person is free to do as he wills with two other persons and with followers, as much as the Spirit sees fit.
    Herein, the 3rd person is a “he”.

  8. Protestants believe in 3 wills of 3 Persons, hence they would say in plural sense “by God’s wills”.

    Catholics believe in 1 will of 3 Persons, hence they would say in singular sense “by God’s will”, but with a bad consequence that having 1 Nature with 1 Will means there’s a new 4th God in the Triune God.

  9. The Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, hence the spirit cannot be the Main source in Triune God.
    The Father is the Main source of both Son and Spirit, hence the Father cannot be the object.
    The Son is generated alone from the Father, hence the son cannot be the main subject.

    Paul identifies the will of God as identical with the will of the Father alone:
    Gal 1:4
    Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:

    Limited will vs. failed will.
    The Spirit has a limited will to just save the elects only, whereas the Father has the universal will to save all kids, both elects or non-elects.
    Apparently, the will of Spirit has prevailed (as the Father fails to exert his will to save all kids):
    Mt 18:14
    Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

    The will of the Father is a sole precondition of salvation.
    Mt 7:21
    Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

  10. The Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, hence the spirit cannot be the Main source in Triune God.
    The Father is the Main source of both Son and Spirit, hence the Father cannot be the object.
    The Son is generated alone from the Father, hence the son cannot be the main subject.

    Paul identifies the will of God as identical with the will of the Father alone:
    Gal 1:4
    Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:

    Limited will vs. failed will.
    The Spirit has a limited will to just save the elects only, whereas the Father has the universal will to save all kids, both elects or non-elects.
    Apparently, the will of Spirit has prevailed over the will of the Father (as the Father fails to exert his will to save all kids):
    Mt 18:14
    Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.
    Versus:
    1Cor 12:11
    But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

    The will of the Father is a sole precondition of salvation.
    Mt 7:21
    Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

    1. “Anonymous says: The Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, hence the spirit cannot be the Main source in Triune God.
      The Father is the Main source of both Son and Spirit, hence the Father cannot be the object.
      The Son is generated alone from the Father, hence the son cannot be the main subject.
      Paul identifies the will of God as identical with the will of the Father alone:
      Gal 1:4
      Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father”

      I also noted that in John 1:1 there’s no relation between the “Father” and the “Son” (let alone with Spirit), so Arius the priest of Alexandria was correct: there’s a moment when the Father was not. Later on, in John 1:14 we read a New relation between the Word and the so-called the “Father”, that is, Jn 1:14 And the Word was made flesh…the only begotten of the Father.
      Afterward, in John 1:18 there is a more later developing relation between the Son and the Father, that is, Jn 1:18 …the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father…

      Moreover, If the so-called *generation* of the Son were to be identical with the act of bringing forth the Word from the Father’s mouth, to be present side-by-side with the Father, John 1:1 should have already said “…the Word was with the Father…”, but it doesn’t.

      1. The Trinitarians insist on distinction between divine Nature and divine Persons, but in the Old Testament and the New Testament the divine Nature (God) is the Father of all creations, and then in the New Testament the 1st divine Person (the Father) is also the Father of all creations, hence somehow the divine Nature is identical with the divine Person when it comes to the Father, therefore the Trinity is false.

        1. The Trinitarians argue that when Jesus uses the term “my Father” (not the term “my foster father” precisely, because he has no biological father) he must refer to a relation between the 1st Person and the 2 Person.
          Now, in Mathew 12:50 Jesus uses obviously the term “my Father” alongside the familial terms of my brother, (my) sister, and (my) mother. Certainly Jesus doesn’t refer to his biological family members, he must refer to the spiritual members, just like a relation between Father and Son in the Trinity.
          Thus, Does the Trinity have spiritual brothers and sisters?
          Mt 12:50
          For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

          Also, for the Spirit who inspires four writers of the Gospels, the Father is synonymous with God.
          ompare with a substitution of “my Father” with “my God” and “word of God” by Mark and Luke:
          Mk 3:35
          For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.
          Lk 8:21
          And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it.

          1. According to Paul, the Holy Spirit is not God.

            In 1Cor 14:32 Paul dismisses the divinity of the Holy Spirit by stating the Prophets are masters of the Holy Spirit. How can it be?
            The term “Prophets” there includes the ones in the Old Testament, such as David who speaks prophetically in the Holy Spirit (such as Psalms 110:1), and Jesus interprets it in .
            In other words, when it comes to a prophetic speech given by the Holy Spirit, it needs to be “Interpreted” by 1 Prophet acting as human interpreter with the witness of 2 or 3 Men, hence the Holy Spirit was a *slave* who is subjected to Prophets, i.e. Human interpreter.
            1Cor 14:32
            And the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets.

            Without having a Human interpreter, the prophetic speech from the Spirit can turn to be a “confusion”.
            1Cor 14:33
            For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

            Jesus acts as the interpreter of Holy Spirit:
            Mk 12
            36 For David himself said by the Holy Spirit, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. 37 David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then his son? And the common people heard him gladly.

            So, Holy Spirit still *needs* a human interpreter to make the inspirations (in figurative speech and parables) get “fully understandable”, thus Holy Spirit is subjected (being submitted) to a Prophet, and cannot be God.
            1Cor 14:27
            If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

  11. John 17:5 is oftentimes used by the Trinitarians to argue for Jesus’ Preexistence but at the same time avoided because it is against the Dualism. Why? Because Jesus infers and confesses that he “lost” his supposedly divine glory (meaning that there’s no Dualism when he was on earth).
    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

    If Jesus had kept retaining his Dualism while on the earth, why would he feel the need to pray for a great thing (divine glory) to his Father? Isn’t that nature supposed to be always intact within his Person (fully divine, fully human)?

    Some “silly” Trinitarians argue with a weak self-defeating fallacy that Jesus simply asked for restoring again his former heavenly seat up-there, but they forget that that position is for “earthy nature”, not for a suppsoed divine nature that should have been “corporeal” (omnipresence).

    1. [email protected] says: John 17:5 is oftentimes used by the Trinitarians to argue for Jesus’ Preexistence but at the same time avoided because it is against the Dualism. Why? Because Jesus infers and confesses that he “lost” his supposedly divine glory (meaning that there’s no Dualism when he was on earth).”

      Fascinating.
      I would add that there’s a contradiction between Carmen Christi in Phil 2:5-7 that the Trinitarians use for Kenosis, and John 17:5 that the Unitarians use to reject divinity of Jesus.
      Phil 2
      5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:6 Who, being in the form (morphe, external form) of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form (morphe, external form) of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.

      If there were to be such a Duality (full divine and full human in 2 natures, rather than 2 forms) in Jesus, he would not have *prayed* to the Father for “restoring” again a divine glory, which is supposedly omnipresence, i.e. without considering a terrain difference and spatial divergence between the heaven and earth.

      You don’t restore what you don’t lose.

      1. “Anonymous says: If there were to be such a Duality (full divine and full human in 2 natures, rather than 2 forms) in Jesus, he would not have *prayed* to the Father for “restoring” again a divine glory, which is supposedly omnipresence, i.e. without considering a terrain difference and spatial divergence between the heaven and earth.
        You don’t restore what you don’t lose.”

        Moreover, John in 1 John 1:1 says in the most literal sense ever throughout the NT Bible that the Word can be “touched” and “seen” physically (apparently referring to John 20:28 where Thomas touches Jesus’ body by his fingers, as well as a reference to Philip’s question of seeing the face of the Father in John 14:8).
        1Jn 1:1
        That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life.

        This external physical – being termed as “a” form of “God” (without article the) by Paul in Phil 2:6 – is perhaps similar to what John has in his mind when writing John 1:1 that the Word is “a god” (without article the). John just refers to a temporary form that had “lost” and needed to be “restored again” when Jesus was on earth (per John 17:5).

        1. Carmen Christi of Philippians 2:8 doesn’t indicate such a restoring again of an alleged divine glory of Jesus.
          John 17:5 talks about a prayer for “Restoring” again what has been “Lost” when Jesus was on earth (there’s no such a man Jesus existing yet before the world began).
          Therefore,
          1. A form of a God in Phil 2:6 is not about the divine nature.
          2. If Jesus were to have Duality, he would not have prayed to God for restoring again his “lost” nature (that nature should have been always intact within his Person).
          A divine nature is omnipresent.

          1. In Islam, The Word had not had a Human person yet at moment before Allah created him by commanding “Be”, and that way means a process.
            The process of life-giving is similar to John 5:26.
            Jn 5:26
            For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he *given* to the Son to have life in himself;

            In Christianity, how can Jesus be a “fully man” if he has no Human person? Was he a zombie?

  12. Another theological gem from Unitarians:
    Jehovah argues within himself alone, not with two other “Persons”, not with angels, not with spiritual agent who comes in his name. This singular personality proves that the double destruction of Sodom is caused by two Jehovahs, but by one Jehovah of one person.
    Gen 18
    17 And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do;18 Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?19 For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.

  13. Another theological gem from Unitarians:
    Jehovah argues within himself alone, not with two other “Persons”, not with angels, not with spiritual agent who comes in his name. This singular personality proves that the double destruction of Sodom is NOT caused by two Jehovahs, but by one Jehovah of one person.
    Gen 18
    17 And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do;18 Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?19 For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.

  14. Some incoherent narrations, unanswered questions and unsolved problems in the Fall of Adam in the Bible:
    1. How can it be possible for Adam and Eve to be completely “blind” of their nakedness but somehow they can “see” both a talking serpent and a Forbidden tree?
    What kind of myopia is it?
    In my opinion, Adam and Eve (Eve was Adam’s wife shortly after Eve was formed) had not slept together, they never had intercourse to go mutiply, never bathed together, thus never saw each nakedness while they were still in Eden.
    Gen 3
    5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your EYES shall be OPENED, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?

    In Islam, both Adam and Eve were fully clothed since the time of their childhood, not blind of nakedness, per Q,7, v.27 and Q.20, v.118-119.

    2. Why does God forget to forbid Adam and Eve from talking and being nearby the serpent?
    God of the Bible forgets to make a fatal precaution for Adam and Eve that Satan is so evil.

    In Islam Allah forbids Adam from trying to be nearby both a Forbidden Tree (Q.2, v.35) and a Satanic presence (Q.20, v.117).

    3. Has the death ever occured before before the Fall of Man?
    Apparently, yes, God sacrificed certain animals to get their skins.
    Gen 3:21
    Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of SKINS, and clothed them.

    Death has occurred before, therefore Adam and Eve understand fully what the death is about:
    Gen 3:3
    But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

    4. Was the childbirth not so painful once, before the Fall of Man, for the females?
    Gen 3:16
    Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in SORROW thou shalt bring forth CHILREN; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

    5. Eve was created by taking a rib rightly from Adam’s internal organ, thru a “bloodless” surgery procedure during his sleeping, but if so, why has not Eve been called “Daughter” of Adam?
    Why have not both Eve and Adam been considered as Two distinct persons in 1 human nature, but we considered them as 2 humans?

    6. Did a talking serpent have some legs once to walk and go everywhere?
    Gen 3:14
    And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy BELLY shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.

    7. Was Eve just a “fake wife” of Adam before the Fall of Man?
    Gen 3:16
    Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall RULE OVER thee.

    8. Had Adam and Eve (they are hubby and wife) not slept together and never had intercourse in Eden?
    Gen 4:1
    And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

  15. Myth vs. Fact.

    1. Myth: Salvific name.
    Do you think there’s only one Name of salvation under heaven, which is Jesus?
    Do you think Jesus will consistently confess to the Father, and to angels, of whosoever confesses him on earth?
    Fact: No, Not all Christians who called Jesus “Lord” and ever believed in his Name will be saved.
    Mt 7
    22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

    2. Myth: Do you think Jesus is the “only” way of life to the Father?
    Fact: No, there are many ways of Life according to Peter (who ironically believed there’s only one salvific Name under heaven):
    Acts 2:28
    Thou hast made known to me the WAYS of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.

    3. Myth: Do you think Jesus has been alive eternally?
    Fact: No, Jesus indicates that he was once non-existent, or dead, in the past before then God *gives* him life:
    Jn 5:26
    For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

    4. Myth: Do you think Jesus is always the eternal Son?
    Fact: No, there are three evidences:
    – John 1:1 indicates that there’s no such a thing as “Father-Son” relation yet in the beginning. There was still an attribute relation between God and his own Word.
    – Heb 1:2 indicates that there’s a “moment” for God when he was not yet the Father. There’s a moment when the source (1st person) has NOT yet generated his personality.
    – John 5:26 indicates that there’s a “moment” for the Father to NOT yet “give” the life for the Son.

    5. Myth: Do you think Jesus is that invisible Word which frames the world?
    Fact: No, 1John 1:1 and John 20:28 clearly teach that Jesus is visible, thus the visible Word is not “that” invisible Word which frames the world.
    Moreover, Carmen Christi Phil 2:6 indicates that Jesus just gets a form (external and visible appearance) of “a” God, without definite article the.
    1Jn 1:1
    That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life.
    Versus:
    Heb 11:3
    Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

    6. Myth: Do you think Jesus has Duality (fully man fully divine) with a concept of self-emptiness (Kenosis)?
    Fact: No, John 17:5 clearly teaches that Jesus loses (not simply being emptied) his heavenly glory so that he needs to pray to God for making it restored again.
    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

  16. Is the Islamic denial of “Son of God” a mark of antichrist?

    No. On a more deeper analysis of 1 John 2:22, it actually makes definition of “antichrist” as a denier of “Son of Man” (Jesus in the flesh), relating to 1 John 4:2-3 in which the Spirit teaches a confession that Jesus comes in the flesh.
    1Jn 4
    2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:3
    And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
    1Jn 2:22
    Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

    Other relation: Son of Man has the human family members:
    How could Jesus be considered as the only “unique Son” whereas he has many brothers, sisters and mothers pertaining to his Father? Certainly, he doesn’t refer to his foster father, Joseph.
    Mt 12:50
    For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and Mother.
    Mk 3:35
    For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and Mother.

  17. Trinitarians cannot answer why only half attribute (the Word) of the Father can have a “divine Person” but other words such as Torah and Gospels do not have persons.

    Worse, Trinitarians cannot answer why Jesus can be counted as a “fully Man” whereas he has no HUMAN person whatsoever? At most, such a man without a human Person is like a zombie, just a half man.

    In Islam, Jesus has a Human person only but with attribute of the Word (without divine person), thus Islam is similar to what the Unitarians believe.

    1. Jehovah also has the Wisdom with a female person (Prov 8), and the Arm with a “revelation” (Isaiah 53:1). Hence, if the Word had had a divine person, then other parts (such as Wisdom and Arm) of Jehovah could have been the divine persons as well.
      I don’t think the Word is Wisdom and Arm combined.
      Rev 53:1
      Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the Arm of the LORD revealed (Hebrew: Niglatah).

      Hebrew word Niglatah means telling, communicating, explaining, having smilar root of word with Galita and Galitah.
      1Chron 17:25
      For thou, O my God, hast told (Heb: Galita) thy servant that thou wilt build him an house: therefore thy servant hath found in his heart to pray before thee.

      2Sam 7:27
      For thou, O LORD of hosts, God of Israel, hast revealed (Heb: Galitah) to thy servant, saying, I will build thee an house: therefore hath thy servant found in his heart to pray this prayer unto thee.

      1. Additionally, how could a spirit be identical with a hand and a finger?

        The Holy Spirit is spirit, hand, and a finger combined?
        Ezek 3:14
        So the Spirit lifted me up, and took me away, and I went in bitterness, in the heat of my spirit; but the hand (Hebrew: Yad) of the LORD was strong upon me.

        Lk 11:20
        But if I with the finger (Greek: Daktulo) of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.
        Mt 12:28
        But if I cast out devils by the Spirit (Greek: Pneuma) of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.

        1. I think certainly Judaism, Unitarianism and Islam all agree that the Manifestation of God is possible but there’s no incarnate God whatsoever in the world. Divine nature cannot enter, let alone mingle, with the nature of the world.
          Belief of incarnation and Duality is highly polytheistic.
          God does not enter the creation just as impossible for living man to see God’s face.
          By same argument, thus the Holy Spirit cannot be a god because it enters and indwells the creations, not only souls, also the Hell.

          Solomon and Isaiah record the idea of possibility of God – not in regard of nature – thru manifestation (from manifestation in Mt Sinai, Temple of Jerusalem, to vision of Isaiah in Jerusalem et cetera), to enter the world:
          Isa 66:1
          Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?
          2Chr 6:18
          But will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house which I have built.

          Hence, Jesus was a human with the manifestation of God, just like the Holy of Holies, but not as a holy incarnate God.
          Hence, Mart was a human who receives the manifestation of God, just like the Jerusalem Temple, but not as a holy vessel of incarnate God.

          1. But Trinitarian belief is founded on incarnation.

            That’s so appalling: In order to kill a God due the sin a man did, entire system of God-world is turned upside-down, then what is more crazier is: he just manages to save a few selected people whom he already wrote by himself in the Book of Life.
            Isn’t it crazy? There is a God who needs to go thru all upside-down system just to save a few people whom he already wanted to save.

          2. That’s ironic, I think. Trinitarians mostly re-use (also misinterpret) the Old Testament’s verses for their multipersonal God, in the context of time when there are Manifestations only, not Incarnation yet.

            Nobody on Judaism ever accuses Isaiah of prophesying a silly Incarnation that a virgin will give the birth literally to a Jewish God. But the Trinitarians say so.

            Nobody on Judaism ever believes that there are 2 Yahwehs when Sodom was obliterated. But the Trinitarians say so.

            Trinitarians refuse to believe in several instances of “possible incarnations” before the conception of Jesus.
            Jews do not worship several (more than three) manifestations of God, such as the burning bush, pillar of fire, pillars of thick cloud, angel, one of 3 men, Ark of Covenant, even a “likeness of sapphire feet” Exod 24:10) on Mount Sinai.

  18. John’s Gospel is such a writing of amateurish writer:

    Firstly Jesus intended to resurrect ALL dead people universally, both good and evil ones.
    Jn 5
    27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

    But, somehow someway, just a chapter later, Jesus changes his mind, he will selectively resurrect his sheep:
    Jn 6:54
    Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
    Jn 10
    16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

  19. Firstly, Jesus gladly accepted that he was DELIVERED to Jews and the sinful world (such as Pilate) by the Father:
    Jn 3:16
    For God so loved the world, that he GAVE his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

    Jesus still has a little “hope” (but begins to suspect that he’s wrong) that the Father delivered him NOT to die:
    Jn 18:36
    Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be DELIVERED to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

    Lastly, Jesus truly regretted, he condemned everyone whosoever (including the Father) delivered him to die in the sinners’ hands:
    Jn 19:11
    Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that DELIVERED me unto thee hath the greater sin.

  20. Firstly, Jesus has a tremendous lack of confidence, hence he needs supports from other witnesses, i.e. John and Moses.
    Jn 5:31
    If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.

    Supports:
    Jn 5
    33 Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth. 46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

    But, fortunately, Jews cannot be convinced by Jesus’ claim that both John and Moses ever taught a blasphemy (Son of God) for Messiah, let alone for a sacrificed Son.
    Jews don’t find from a bulk of data in their Books that God has a unique Son.
    After all, those Prophets were dead. Dead men cannot take a witness. Dead men tell no witness.

    Thus, Jesus has to use other tactic, he realises he cannot use dead men to support his claim.
    Now, Jesus changes his mind, now he claims unilaterally that his “sole” witness is truth. Jesus uses a circular fallacy: he is true because he says so.
    After all
    Jn 8:14
    Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.

    Yet Jews cannot be convinced.
    Jews argue that if Jesus had truly come from the Father, and will go to the Father, How could the Jews know and verify who, where, and how that Father is, because he is Unseen or Invisible?
    Jn 8:19
    Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father:

    The debates between Jews and Jesus concerning “witnesses” are so interesting and fascinating, yet Jesus fails to convince Jews.

  21. Is it a “Closed case” of Suicide or a crime of homicide?
    Firstly, Jesus posed a very bad tendency of having a suicidal mentality under a Satanic temptation:
    Jn 8:22
    Then said the Jews, Will he KILL himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come.
    Jn 10
    18 No man taketh it from me, but I LAY it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.19 . There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.20 And many of them said, He hath a DEVIL, and is mad; why hear ye him?
    Jn 18:11
    Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

    But, Later, Jesus blamed everyone for a SIN (crime) of harming and killing him unjustly:
    Jn 19:11
    Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that DELIVERED me unto thee hath the greater sin.

  22. Tactics of Good cops vs. Bad cops?

    Firstly Jesus praised the old preachers of Jews, even also he went further to validate and confirm a Jewish belief. Jesus agrees that Abraham was Jewish father, Jacob was a Jewish hero, John the Baptist was Jewish Prophet, Moses was Jewish leader.
    During his initial evangelist days, Jesus still employed a same typical racial hatred of Jews toward Samaritans.
    Jn 4
    12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?22 Ye worship ye know not what: WE know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.
    Jn 5
    33 Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth. 46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

    But, then somehow someway, later on, he changes his mind.
    Now the Jews are a new Samaritanism. Now, those previous Preachers of Jews are so evil: hireling, thieves, robbers, coward fake shepherds.
    Suddenly Jews do not KNOW what they worship any longer.
    Jn 8:44
    Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
    Jn 10
    8 All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. 12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.

    If Jesus just referred selectively to a band of Pharisees and Sadducee during his time, it means he still confirms that previous Jewish way is valid, and old Jewish Prophets were the same GOOD Shepherds, just like he was. Are they then “same additional gods” for the Trinity?
    Jn 10:14
    I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
    Jn 10:35
    If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

  23. Firstly Jesus “challenged” Jews to seek a bulk of data from their Book concerning himself:
    Jn 5:46
    For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he WROTE of me.

    Now, those Jews find NOTHING:
    Jn 12:34
    The people answered him, We have heard out of the law that Christ ABIDETH for ever: and how sayest thou, The Son of man must be lifted up? who is this Son of man?

    Thus, what’s Jesus’ response then? Just pretending like nothing is happening.
    Nothing to respond.
    Notice how Jesus just dismisses and totally ignores what Jews has found in their Scripture, from the verse John 12:34 to the verse John 12:35. What a bad way of preaching.
    Jn 12:35
    Then Jesus said unto them, Yet a little while is the light with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you: for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither he goeth.

  24. Firstly, John the Baptist said that he cannot afford to touch “That Prophet” shoes, how he is not worthy enough to touch the Prophet’s FEET who will come after him. Certainly, John doesn’t refer to God since God doesn’t put any sandal nor latches.
    Jn 1
    25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither THAT Prophet? 27 He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose SHOE’S latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

    But then, John touches rather Jesus’ HEAD (which is far more important and more glorious than feet) when baptising him.
    Therefore, rationally speaking, how could Jesus (whose even HEAD was touched by John) be THAT Prophet (whose feet could not be touched by John)?
    Jn 1:33
    And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

  25. Who is more powerful in omniscience?

    Paul precludes the Son from the ones who know of deep things of God:
    1Cor 2
    10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

    Jesus precludes Spirit from the ones who know of deep things of God:
    Mk 13:32
    But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

  26. Unitarians believe that the Spirit is a “thing”, not a Person, of God.
    1Cor 2:11
    For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

    Trinitarians believe in a literal sense that there are some “things” as elements that comprise God, thus they have a composite God known as the Trinity.
    1Cor 2
    10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.