ALLAH SAYS JESUS WAS KILLED ON THE CROSS

In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad.
DEDICATED TO
Allāh–the Glorious and the High,
Lord of the worlds
AND TO
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms.

*

    ALLĀH SAYS JESUS WAS KILLED ON THE CROSS
One Christian quarter on the Internet wrote:
“Surah 5:68 (of the Qur’an) – Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law (Torah), the Gospel (Injeel), and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord."
Surah 29:46 Muslims are told by Allah, not to question the authority of the scriptures of the Christians, saying, "And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one;
   Islam says that Jesus did not die. So, again –Islam has proven to be false; because Muhammad claimed the Gospel is true, and all 4 Gospels (Injil) testify that Jesus died and rose from the dead. God does have a begotten Son (not made, but one with the Father), which Islam denies.”

Response: Muslims are NOT told “not to question the authority of the scriptures of the Christians.” Only that Muslims are to not get into a dispute with certain Christians, as shown further on. 
   Allah speaking about the Torah and Gospel and all other revelations refer to the ORIGINALS. The Gospels that Christians have, though it may contain words of Jesus, is NOT the Injil. The Gospels that Christians have are four books “ACCORDING TO” Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and tailored to suit King James –“King James Version.” They are NOT “according to” God or Jesus, or God’s or Jesus’ “Version.”
   Whereas Allāh enjoins belief in His REVEALED Books Allāh also tells us what not to believe in them such as Divinity of Jesus –Trinity, sonship of God– inherited sin and vicarious atonement, karma and reincarnation, and more than one Creator (as in Zoroastrianism).

Regarding Qur’an 29:46 which the Christian quotes: "And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one.” This does not mean that the Bible/Gospels are “all” word of God or that Muslims are not to “argue” with Christians. The entire verse reads:

“And argue not with the People of the Book EXCEPT BY WHAT IS BEST, save such of them as act unjustly. But say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him we submit.”

   The verse lays down two points: 
   (1) Argue with Jews and Christians from a point of reason as noted in Qur’an 16:125: “Call to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and goodly exhortation, and argue with them in the best manner. Surely thy Lord knows best him who strays from His path, and He knows best those who go aright.”
   (2) Not to argue with Jews and Christians who are not given to reason, to such Jews and Christians Muslims are to say: “We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him we submit.” 
   The Prophet Mohammad “argued” with the Christians of Najran; and while the Christians were convinced that Jesus was/is not God yet they persist in their false belief (see Christians of Najran & Prophet Mohammad
).

(From personal experience with Christians –mostly Jehovah’s Witnesses Christians do not care about reason and truth, they are steeped in blind faith, looking for people to eat the body and drink the mythical blood of Jesus Christ: spiritual cannibalism).

   Why would a believer in God knowingly follow falsehood? While blind faith may be one reason, power wealth and prestige seem to be other reasons. As Muhammad Husayn Haykal notes in his book The Life of Muhammad (p. 197):

“It was this materialistic ambition for wealth, worldly prestige and social eminence that caused Abu Harithah, the most learned of the people of Najran, to tell a friend of his that he was perfectly convinced of the truth of which Muhammad was teaching. When that friend asked him why he did not then convert to Islam, he answered: “I cannot do so on account of what my people have done to me. They have honored, financed, and respected me; and they insist on differing from him. Should I follow him, they would take away from me all this that I now have.” (The Prophet Mohammad is reported to have said whoever wants to be honored let him build his house in the Fire).

   Shepherds who lead their flock astray are fuel for the deepest part of Hell. How aptly Allāh says that those who lead others astray will bear their own punishment as well as part of the punishment of the unlearned whom they lead astray–(Qur’an 16:25; 29:12-13).
   That the unlearned will also be punished is because reason would dictate that idols, things fashioned by one’s own hands, cannot confer benefit or effect harm; and that since no one can eat or take medication to relieve us of hunger and/or suffering (or can die for us) then no one can die for our sins–‘Your doctor chopping off his head cannot cure you of your headache.’ (If one can die for the sins of others then one should be able to take food, medication and laxative to free others of hunger, suffering, and constipation: vicarious refreshment).

Regarding the Christian’s assertion: “Islam says that Jesus did not die. So, again –Islam has proven to be false; because Muhammad claimed the Gospel is true, and all 4 Gospels (Injil) testify that Jesus died and rose from the dead. God does have a begotten Son (not made, but one with the Father), which Islam denies.”
   Response: (The Christian is confused between Islam and Mohammad. The Qur’an/Islam was revealed to Mohammad. Whatever Mohammad claims is what the Qur’an/Islam teaches). Islam/Mohammad claimed the ORIGINAL Gospel is true –the current Gospels are “according to” Matthew, Mark, Luke and John who were NOT eyewitnesses to the data they recorded. That the “Jewish Torah” and the “Christian Gospels” “have been corrupted” is admitted by the Bible itself and by Christians, see Bible corrupt & obsolete.
   Islam is NOT “false.” Christians follow doctrines –Trinity, inherited sin and vicarious atonement– that have no Divine foundation, no prophetic foundation, no logical foundation, and are repugnant to reason the factor by which God requires us to govern–(Isaiah 1:18; Qur’an 16:125). 
   Inherited sin and vicarious atonement were concocted by Paul, and Trinity was concocted by Christian Fathers 325 years after Jesus’ mission was over. (See Jesus-trinity
). It is no wonder then that for two thousand years Christians are wandering in “darkness and misunderstanding” and confusion as to who Jesus was/is and his mission:

   -Whereas some Christians say Jesus is God some say he is only Son of God. Whose belief is right?    

   -Whereas some Christians believe in Trinity some say Trinity is a “senseless God-dishonoring doctrine” that can come only from the mind of “Satan the Devil.” Who is right?

   -Whereas some Christians say that Christ died for inherited sin some say he died for committed sin. Whose belief is true?

   -Whereas some Christians believe Jesus was killed, buried, and raised, “some of the early Christian sects did not believe that Christ was killed on the cross. The Basilidans believed that some one else was substituted for him. The Docetae held that Christ never had a real physical or natural body, but only an apparent or phantom body, and that his Crucifixion was only apparent, not real. The Marcionite Gospel (about A.D. 138) denied that Jesus was born, and merely said that he appeared in human form.”1  

   -Whereas some Christians say Jesus was of “virgin” birth Paul taught he was not (see Jesus-son of God).

   Such varied and dubious expositions about Jesus could hardly be sources of genuine inspiration. With such contradictions and conjectures cloaking Jesus, but for Mohammad Jesus Christ may have long since been relegated to the bin of myths and legends.
   It was Mohammad who, through Divine Grace, removed the shroud of calumny wrapped around Jesus and his mother, Mary –that Mary was an “adulteress” and Jesus was of illegitimate birth– and appareled them in rubious robes of righteousness; and cleared away the clouds of conjectures covering Jesus and sat him elegantly in the celestial spotlight of Divine Truth –of him being human and a prophet of God– and has secured for them the unflagging allegiance of more than one billion Muslims.
   And counting. As Islam spirits on. Inexorably. Invincibly. Impregnably. As Divinely decreed. To prevail over all: “He (Allāh) it is Who sent His Messenger (Mohammad) with guidance and the Religion of Truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religions, though the polytheists are averse” –(Qur’an 9:32-33; 48: 28; 61:8-9). Allaho Akbar!

If God had put Adam’s sin onto us and sent Jesus to be killed for this sin,2 it would be reasonable that God should have sent Jesus soon after Adam. It is bewildering that God did not give this teaching of inherited sin and vicarious atonement to Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Zoroaster, Abraham, or Jacob/Israel –His “firstborn”– or to Moses –but rather gave Moses the Ten Commandments as the vehicle into heaven– or give it to David –His “son”– or to Jesus –His “only begotten son;” but had Jesus declare he was sent only to Jews and prayed only for them, and to exhort obedience to the Mosaic Law as the way to eternal life (until the arrival of the Comforter, Mohammad, who will guide into “all truth” and “abide for ever”). But that God would wait four thousand years after Adam to give this basic and crucial knowledge on which man’s life in heaven hinges to Paul –a self-admitted liar3 and forger of gospel4 and who was “crafty” and caught people with “guile”5 and would wait till 325 years after His “son” (and even Himself as Christians say Jesus is God) completed his mission to have a collection of Christian Fathers at Nicaea6 concoct the “senseless and God-dishonoring” doctrine of Trinity.

   Like Islam, the Gospels show that Jesus was NOT killed. Jesus himself said he was NOT killed. After the alleged crucifixion and resurrection Jesus had his disciples examine him to verify he was NOT a spirit, as the resurrected is, but was of flesh and bones: a MORTAL–(Luke 24:38-39). The resurrected “are (spiritualized) as the angels”–(Matt. 22:23-30. Luke 20:34-36). Jesus had flesh and bones: he was HUMAN. Christian source also shows that Jesus was NOT killed (see Jesus-inherited sin to ascension).

   Even if Jesus was killed this would not make him God or Son of God or vicarious atoner or that mankind inherited sin from Adam; and even if Jesus was “ransom” for sins he would have been so only for Jews; but not even Jews, whose landscape is colored with miracles, bought into this Christian scam –vicarious atonement is diametrically opposed to adherence to the Judaic Law which Christ came to uphold till the passing of heaven and earth as he declared; and which he upheld. (See Christianity-Man Made To Live Forever; Jesus-only for Jews; Jesus vs. Jews).

   About the alleged crucifixion Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din exposes in his revealing work The Sources Of Christianity that “a reference to the crucifixion in the history of Josephus, a contemporary of Jesus; and secondly, a letter alleged to have been written by Pilate to the Roman Emperor, speaking of the crucifixion. This letter exists in the archives of the Vatican, but both these testimonies seem to be inadmissible. The original MS of Josephus does not contain the page referring to Jesus, which is admitted to be a subsequent insertion; the letter of Pilate, with the signature on it as well, is now considered a pious fraud.”(pp. 46-47).  

Incidentally, Jesus was not put on a “cross” but on a pole –ask Jehovah’s Witnesses. Also, Jehovah’s Witnesses reject the belief that Christ was/is God.

On the Christian’s claim, “God does have a begotten Son (not made, but one with the Father), which Islam denies.”
   Response:Apart from the fact that the Biblical God has a legion of sons and daughters. Jesus is NOT “begotten son of God” (made or otherwise). “Begetting” –fatherhood– requires the joining of sperm and ovum. And as God does not have a consort He could not have a “son.” Mary was not the wife/mate of God. To say that got has a “begotten” son is to attribute the animal function of sex to God, which is uber-blasphemy.  

   God DECREED that Jesus is only to be “CALLED” son of God: “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee (Mary)….the holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be CALLED the Son of God”–(Luke 1:35). 
   “Son of God” is only an epithet of honor:“the Lord came unto Nathan, saying, Go and tell my servant DAVID….I will be his father, and he shall be my son”–(2 Samuel 7:4, 5, 14). Thus David also is “begotten” son of God, thus David vowed, rightly: “I (David) will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, THOU ART MY SON; THIS DAY HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE”–(Psalm 2:7). 
   Incidentally, whereas Jesus is only “CALLED” Son of God, Moses was a “god”: “And the Lord said unto Moses. See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh”–(Exodus 7:1). And Moses performed Miracles greater than those of Jesus. Thus, Moses is greater than Jesus. In fact, even John the Baptist is greater than Jesus as Jesus himself testified: “Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist”–(Matthew 11:11). Jesus also was born of a woman. 
   If Jesus is “one with the Father;” then all the Jews that Jesus prayed for so they could be one with him and God are also “one” with God and are also even “Gods”–(John 17:9-21). (See Jesus & God are one).

The Christian continues: “Like Muhammad, Satan also cringes in fear at the sight of the cross.” 
   Response: Allāh God tells us in His Qur’an that He raised prophets among all people and gave them acts of devotion–(Qur’an 10:47; 21:25; 22:34; 35:24). Thus it is not doubtful that followers of these prophets can recite prayers from their respective Books and exorcise spirits.
 
   Christian may be exorcising spirits from humans, but to charge that Satan “cringes in fear at the sight of the cross” is a betrayal of ignorance. The cross –Trinity, inherited sin, and vicarious atonement– is of Satan’s making. Jesus Christ is just a figure-head in the Church. In fact, Satan was so bold and fearless of Jesus that Satan openly tempted him–(Matthew 4:1-11).

Regarding this temptation the Gospel states: “Jesus was led up of the SPIRIT into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.” It is intriguing that the Spirit (God) would want to tempt His son (or Himself as Christians say Jesus is God); was God not certain of His Son’s (or His own) faithfulness or trust His son (or Himself)? And unless the Devil is incredibly stupid (or thought that Jesus (“God”) was a dope, or full well knows that Jesus is human) why would he try to bribe Jesus (“God”) with “all the kingdoms of the world” if Jesus was the “son of God” (or “God”) when these treasures already belong to Jesus (“God”) (his inheritance from his Father or His own); or try to con Jesus (“God”) into throwing himself down the mountain when he knew the “Son of God” (“God”) can fly (as he can walk on water?–Matthew 14:25-26). And if Jesus was/is God then God led himself “into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.” (For more Christian intrigues see Jesus-the three wise men).

   Moreover, the cross is not original to Christendom. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din notes in his revealing book The (pagan) Sources of Christianity:

“The sign of the Cross also is not of Christian origin. It does not date from the crucifixion.” That “the cross in Christendom signifies the same as did the Egyptian cross –the sign of new life brought by the crucifixion. In Ireland a similar cross has been discovered, with a crucified effigy, but it is the effigy of a Persian prince and not that of the Nazarene, as the head of the crucified bears a Parthian coronet, and not the crown of thorns; which identifies it with the Mithraic cult, originally from Persia.” (p. 50)

And, initially the “Fish,” which “represented Jesus,” was the symbol of Christianity. “The Gospel cannot explain the why and how of the Fish symbol, excepting that Jesus often ate fish. But the sun-scripture is the real explanation. The sun passes the Zodiacal sign Pisces –the Fish– in February, and if the date of the Epiphany is in February, Christ, as a Sun-God, must be symbolized by the Fish.” (Ibid; p. 51). Even the Passion Play of Jesus is stolen from the pagans, see  Jesus-pagan passion play. 

About the Christian’s claim that “Muhammad…cringes in fear at the sight of the cross.” 
   Response:Mohammad’s entire mission was devoted to the illumination of man morally, socially, spiritually, and intellectually; and to the freeing of man from all manner of falsehood –Idolatry; Paganism; Polytheism; Dualism; Trinity; inherited sin and vicarious atonement; karma and reincarnation. As Allāh reveals in His Qur’an 16:63: “By Allah! We certainly sent (messengers) to nations before thee (Mohammad), but the devil made their deeds fair-seeming to them.” And Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din points out:

“The whole world was a world of fetish worshippers at the appearance of Islam. From an eggshell to the man-worship of Christianity and Hinduism, the adoration that should go to God went to His creatures.” (Open Letters To The Bishops of Salisbury And London, p. 17).

   Rather than “cringe(s) in fear at the sight of the cross” Mohammad obliterated the useless and unGodly man-made cross. The cross crumbles under the crescent.

The Christian quotes Proverbs 30:4 and applies it to Jesus, (notably Proverbs is the writing “of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel,” as the Bible informs), it states: “Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou canst tell?”
 
  Clearly this “son” could not apply to Jesus as Jesus was not yet sent by God (“descended”) to earth nor yet “ascended” to heaven (but Enoch and Elijah had already “descended” from and “ascended” to heaven–Genesis 5:21-24, Hebrews 11:5; 2 Kings 2:1, 11; notably, every person had a pre-existence before being born, shown shortly).
 
   This “son” may very well have been Satan before his ‘fall” who had already “descended” to earth and “ascended”–(Job 1:6-7), or to Solomon for as Solomon says: “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way….I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was”–(Proverbs 8:22-30). Or perhaps in this verse of Proverbs 30:4 Solomon was speaking about his father, David, whom God had taken as His “begotten” son (already noted above).

   That every person had a pre-existence is noted by the prophet Jeremiah: “Then the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee”–(Jeremiah 1:5). And Allāh tells us in His Qur’an that we took an oath with Him before we were sent into the world. Allāh reminds us of this in His Qur’an:

“And when thy Lord brought forth from the children of Adam, from their loins, their descendants, and made them bear witness about them-selves: Am I not your Lord? They said: Yes; we bear witness. Lest you should say on the day of Resurrection: We were unaware of this, Or (lest) you should say: Only our fathers ascribed partners (to Allah) before (us), and we were (their) descendants after them. Wilt Thou destroy us for what liars did?”–(Qur’an 7:172-173).

   Thus, depending where the Day of Judgment will be executed, it might be correct to say we all “descended” from heaven (Allāh God) and will all “ascend” to heaven (Allāh God).

   Strangely, Jesus says in John 3:13no man hath ascended up to heaven.” Surely as “Son of God” and even “God” as Christians say Jesus is God, Jesus would know Enoch and Elijah “ascended” to heaven.
 
   Significantly, this statement of Jesus in John 3:13 reads in full: “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the SON OF MAN which is in heaven.If Jesus is “Son of God” who came down from heaven and the SON OF MAN was till then yet in heaven to come, who is this son of man?Prof. Abdul Ahad Dawud –“the former Reverend David Benjamin Keldani, B.D., a Roman Catholic priest of the Uniate-Chaldean sect”– has shown in his book Muhammad in the Bible that this “Son of man” is the Prophet Mohammad).(See Mohammad-Narcissist or Reason for Creation?).

   However, even if Proverbs 30:4 does refer to Jesus it is moot to use it to Divinize Jesus or to enthrone him above all prophets. 
   Jesus. could have been with God in a thousand beginnings and endings, he could have been foretold on every page of the Bible, and he could have performed all and every miracle that could be performed yet these would not make Jesus God or Son of God or vicarious atoner. As shown, Trinity, inherited sin and vicarious atonement are assumed and propagated as Divine truths.

   With all the honor and praise and worship that Christians have heaped onto Jesus yet Jesus advocated adherence to the Mosaic law as the vehicle into paradise; until the arrival of the Comforter who will guide into “all truth” and will “abide for ever” and who is to be followed. Thus, from his own mouth there is no need for Jesus –Jesus-redundant! (There is no Armageddon; there is no returning of Jesus: Jesus-1000-year ruleJesus-foretold). 
   And this Comforter of whom Jesus spoke is, as Prof. Abdul Ahad Dawud –“the former Reverend David Benjamin Keldani, B.D., a Roman Catholic priest of the Uniate-Chaldean sect”– points out in his insightful book Muhammad in the Bible, is the Prophet Mohammad. The Professor states: “The Holy Spirit, in all the Christian literature of diverse languages, has not a fixed gender. He, she, it, are all commonly used as the personal pronouns for the Holy Ghost;” And      

“The Comforter –the Spirit of Truth– spoken of by Jesus was no other than Muhammad himself. It cannot be taken as the Holy Ghost, as the Church theology says. “It is expedient for you that I go away,” says Jesus, “for if I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you, but if I depart I will send him unto you”(John 16:7). The words clearly show that the Comforter had to come after the departure of Jesus, and was not with him when he uttered these words. Are we to presume that Jesus was devoid of the Holy Ghost if his coming was conditional on the going of Jesus: besides, the way in which Jesus describes him makes him a human being, not a ghost. “He shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear that he shall speak” (John 16:13). Should we presume that the Holy Ghost and God are two distinct entities and that the Holy Ghost speaks of himself and also what he hears from God? The words of Jesus clearly refer to some messenger from God. He calls him the Spirit of Truth, and so the Qur‘an speaks of Muhammad, “Nay, he has come with the Truth and verified the apostles”(Qur’an 37:37).(Muhammad In The Bible, p. 6).

IT IS THE COMFORTER, MOHAMMAD, WHO IS TO BE BELIEVED IN AND FOLLOWED AND WILL ABIDE FOR EVER!!! IT IS CHRISTIANITY THAT IS “FALSE” (see Christianity-a fake).

Whereas Jesus was merely a prophet of God sent wholly and solely to Jews –Jesus regarded non-Jews (the Blacks, Whites, Browns, Yellows, and Reds) as “dogs” and “swine” which is the worst of denigrations as dogs and swine are scavengers and regarded as the lowest of creatures; and he preached in parables so these “dogs” and “swine” would not understand and be saved– and whereas God made David a material king, Christians try to make Jesus a spiritual king. And to effect this, Christians consigned Jesus to the bed of celibacy, crowned him with Divinity, made him scapegoat for non-existent inherited sin, and consecrated him ruler of the future-world. (See Jesus-only for Jews; Jesus-like David; Jesus-a Muslim taught Islam).
   “To-day it is an establish verity that Church theology was only an assimilation of Paganism: what an irony of fate that those who called others heathens should have turned out to be heathens themselves in their beliefs!”) 7
   Christians are mostly following Paul, “a renegade from Judaism,”8 who is leading them into Hell. (See Allah and Jesus or Paul).

  If the current four Gospels are “true” and “all” Word of God as Christians claim, Christians will not hesitate to drink “any deadly thing” as Christs tell them:“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved…and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them”–(Mark 16:16-18). Christians must put their dignity where their mouths are and drink this “deadly thing.”  Surely to demonstrate their “Word of God” and trust in their “Son of God” is the highest of belief.9

 BLIND FAITH MAY BE BLISSFUL
BUT IT IS NO PASSPORT TO PARADISE!

Rather than try to find non-existent fault with Islam/Mohammad Christians need to wail and gnash their teeth at the lies, falsehood and blasphemy they are following. And as Jesus Christ admonishes, blasphemers are destined to Hell which is an “everlasting” “furnace of fire” that “never shall be quenched” and in which there will be “wailing and gnashing of teeth” (and those who have no teeth or dentures shall bear it on their gums).
   Christians have the grand opportunity while they are alive –and no one knows when he or she will die– to turn to Allāh and Paradise; when you die this grand opportunity evaporates like a dewdrop in Hell.

Ever wonder what Hell must feel like? You might want to stand by a boiling pot. Have some of the hot liquid splash onto your bare skin. Multiply the sensation by a few thousand degrees. Imagine being consumed in this “furnace of fire.” For “everlasting.”

*

                                                     NOTES
1. Ali, Yusuf, Qur’anic comm. #663.

2. Inherited sin and vicarious atonement were invented by Christians:

“The Christian Church had caused a General Council of the Church dignitaries to be appointed in A.D. 325 in which certain doctrines were made to be the foundation of the Christian Church, and belief therein was made essential for one to be Christian. This is known as the Nicene Creed. Under this, the confirmed doctrine of Atonement may be explained as follows:

(i) Adam (and Eve) committed a Sin, and this Sin was inherited by their descendants.
  
(ii) The attribute of “Justice” in God demanded that a sin must be punished, for the wage of Sin is death.
  
(iii) God sent his son Jesus Christ to this world, so that he may die on the Cross an “accursed” death, and after spending some time in Hell, atone for the Sins of the human race, and then be resurrected again.” (M.A. Faruqui, The Crumbling of the Cross, pp. 109-110).

   Note well these are Christians’ assumptions they are NOT Divine revelations or teachings of Christ. Whereas these Christians say God sent His SON to die for sins, according to Christians who believe Jesus is God GOD sent Himself to die for sins. How can it be “justice” to kill an innocent person for the guilty one?
   If God sent Jesus to be “ransom” for sins there would have been no need for Christians to invent inherited sin and vicarious atonement. Reason would dictate that human invention cannot give life in heaven. 
   If God sent His “Son” (though Jesus is only “CALLED” Son of God) to be “Justice” for “inherited sin” why are babies yet born with “sin”? 
   To say that God loads Adam’s sin onto every person (and even as babies in our mothers’ wombs) is to attribute injustice to God.
   To say that God had an innocent man killed for the sin of the guilty not only attributes injustice to God but also makes God complicit in murder.

3. Paul a self-admitted liar: “For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my LIEun-to his glory; why yet am I also judged a sinner?”–(Romans 3:7).

4. Paul forged his own gospel: “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to MY GOSPEL”–(2 Tim, 2:8; Gal. 1:6). Not according to God’s or Jesus’ Gospel! but according to HIS (Paul’s) gospel!

5. Paul was crafty and caught people with guile: “being CRAFTY, I caught you with GUILE–(2 Cor 12:16).

6.

“Trinity, the doctrine of God taught by Christianity that asserts that God is one in essence but three in “person,” Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament….

The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. Initially, both the requirements of monotheism inherited from the Old Testament and the implications of the need to interpret the biblical teaching to Greco-Roman paganism seemed to demand that the divine in Christ as the Word, or Logos, be interpretedas subordinate to the Supreme Being….It was not until the 4th. century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons.
  
The Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is “of the same essence [homoousios] as the Father,” even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit. Over the next half century, Athanasius defended and refined the Nicene formula, and, by the end of the 4th. Century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers) the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. X, art; Trinity, p. 126. Emphasis added.
  
More than sixteen Ecumenical Councils have been summoned to define the religion of Christianity, only to be discovered by the Synod of the Vatican in the nineteenth century that the mysteries of the “Infallibility” and the “Immaculate Conception” were two of the principal dogmas, both unknown to the Apostle Peter and the Blessed Virgin Mary! Any faith or religion dependent upon the deliberations and decisions of General Synods –holy or heretical– is artificial and human. The religion of Islam is the belief in one Allāh and absolute resignation to His will, and this faith is professed by the angels in heaven and by the Muslims on earth. It is the religion of sanctification and of enlightenment, and an impregnable bulwark against idolatry.”(Prof. Abdul Ahad Dawud –“the former Reverend David Benjamin Keldani, B.D., a Roman Catholic priest of the Uniate-Chaldean sect”– Muhammad in the Bible, pp. 191-192. Emp. added).

To say that God incarnated Himself as Jesus is to saythat God, the Omnipotent Omniscient and Omnipresent Lord, went into the belly of Mary for nine months (and how? as a sperm? and whose? or how did He?), went through the various stages of fetal development, and emerged from her vagina –rendering God less “clean” than Adam, Eve, and Melchisedec who were not born of a woman– making Mary “Mother of God” and reducing God to “Son of Mary” –son of a woman He created– which is blasphemy of the highest order. And clearly, a woman could not be “mother of God;” God being First and Creator of all could not have a “mother.”

7. Kamal-ud-Din, Khwaja, Open Letters to the Bishops of Salisbury & London, p. 15.

8. Paul “a renegade form Judaism”:

“A renegade from Judaism –the hatred of his own people left Saul, afterwards Paul, no chance to work among the lost tribes to reclaim whom only, Jesus had come. Paul was driven to the Gentiles, the people beyond the pale of the Hebraic law. He had no other resource, therefore, but to ignore the law when he had to work with those outside the law, and to observe it when with the people of the law, as he himself says: “To them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, that I might them that are without the law”–(1 Cor. 9:20-21).  
  
The door of innovation, once opened, remained ajar forever. A thoughtful study of the whole Pauline literature shows that his inspiration came from sources other than those of the real Christianity. The subsequent builders of the new Church so founded, found the Pauline method of incorporation from the current creed a most efficacious instrument to win favour for the new faith, and make it popular among others. Within a few centuries the faith of the Master lost all its pristine beauty, and became one with the current cult. Is it, therefore, a matter of surprise if the Cambridge Conference of the Modernists in 1917 was of the opinion that the Church of Christ, as it stands, was never founded by Jesus?”  
  
“What an irony of faith that he (Jesus) who declared “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or title shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled,” should be followed –nay, superseded– by him (Paul) who declared the Law a curse and not a blessing from God, and that only to win favour with those with whom the Master would have nothing to do –the Greeks and the Romans. But the reason is not far to seek. St. Paul could not claim any respect from his own people. At first an implacable enemy of Jesus and persecutor of his followers, then a renegade from Judaism and therefore hated by the Jews –so much so that his very presence in the synagogue, where he came to explain his schism to Judaism at the request of the other apostles, excited such contempt and hatred of the people as to drive him, an exile from his home. He could not, moreover, work with the other apostles, who would take him to task for ignoring the Law. He, therefore, had sufficient reason to make the Gentile lands the field of his future work. He must work somewhere, and that was his last resort. The Gentiles were not the people of the Law. Actions in observance of the Law could not carry any weight with them; Law was a burden and a gate to sin if not observed, and hence a curse.  
  
Thus begins the philosophy of his epistles to the Gentiles; they were a sinful tribe, like others. They were visited by calamities, as others were. They ascribed it to their mis-deeds. But sacrifice only, and not repentance and reclamation, could please the angered Deity, in their belief. Sin and sacrifice was the basic principle of their creed.
  
….They (Gentiles) had heard of gods, as Gibbon observes, who used to descend from heaven in olden days, in the garb of man, to participate in human actions. They knew that gods incarnate suffered hardships for the benefit of the human race, and gave their life to ward off impending calamities that came to punish men for their mis-deeds. The angered deity thus became propiated, the penalty of the sin remitted; the incarnate god descended into Hades to reclaim the sinners. His task thus fulfilled, he ascended into heaven. The Greeks and Romans were not unaware of such gods. Their bards had written of them….St Paul and his successors went to them with the message and gave the longed-for good tidings. They informed the pagan world that one of those whom they had been hearing of, and would naturally be glad to receive if they came again, had, at last, appeared in Judea, and had undergone all that they had read and believed of the deified class. The story was given to them the same; the apostle of the new faith did not make any new demand in the way of belief; the same traditions and the same rites sufficed. No action, but bare belief in the story, was sufficient for salvation.” (Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, The Sources of Christianity, pp. 28, 80-82. For a copy of this invaluable book see: www.muslim.org).  

9. Regarding this statement of Jesus in Mark 16:16-18: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved…and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them,” one Christian apologist wrote:
   “The Muslim is guilty of misinterpreting Jesus' meaning in this passage since a sound rule of exegesis is to interpret scripture in light of scripture. Once this is done, we discover the true meaning of Jesus' words:

"The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 'If you are the Son of God,' he said, 'throw yourself down from here. For it is written: "He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone."' Jesus answered, 'It says: "Do not put the Lord your God to the test."'" Luke 4:9-12

In light of this passage, Jesus was not telling his followers to go around picking up snakes or drinking poison. Christ's point was that no matter what the enemy tries to do in thwarting the efforts of the believers, he will never succeed. This is based solely on the promises of Christ that his authority rests upon all true believers to accomplish his will in our lives:

"'The seventy-two returned with joy and said, 'Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name.' He replied, 'I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you. However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.'" Luke 10:17-20”

   Response: This is typical Christian-crud. What is a metaphorical “deadly thing” that one drinks? Can anyone put God to “test”? And if it is written that God said "He will command his angels” to safeguard Jesus and if Jesus asked God to fulfill His promise and protect him how is this putting God “to the test?” Wasn’t Jesus certain that God would keep His word or did he not trust God? (And if Jesus is God then Jesus did not want to put himself “to the test”).
    If asking God for help is to put God to “the test” how is it that Jesus asked God to be spared from death?–(Matthew 26:39). And why did Jesus ask God to forgive those who nailed him to the “pole”–(Luke 23:34. Incidentally, since Jesus had power to forgive sins, why ask God to forgive them?–Luke 5:24. And if Jesus is God, God asked Himself to forgive them). And, didn’t Jesus tell his people to pray to God for their daily bread and to ask and it shall be given them and that “in ALL things whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive”? Were his followers who prayed to and asked God putting God “to the test”?–(Matt. 6:9-11; 7:7; 21:22).
 
   Since “a sound rule of exegesis is to interpret scripture in light of scripture,” how is it that Christians interpret Jesus’ CLEAR teachings that he was sent only for Jews –to seek and save them and that he prayed only for them– and that eternal life lies in following the Mosaic Law (until the coming of the Comforter who will guide into “all truth” and “abide for ever) to mean that mankind inherited sin from Adam and God sent Jesus to be killed/scapegoat for this (non-existent) sin?
   Since “a sound rule of exegesis is to interpret scripture in light of scripture,” how is it that Christians take Jesus’ clear statements that he was SENT by God and that he does only according to what GOD commands to mean that Jesus is God –that God went into the belly of a woman He created and came out her vagina?

   That Jesus answered the Devil: "Do not put the Lord your God to the test"'" Luke 4:9-12, this has no relevancy to Jesus saying “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved…and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them.” If the drinking of deadly thing is metaphorical then these “that believeth and is baptized” must also be metaphorical. 
   Jesus gave his followers power against harm from poisonous creatures much as he gave them power to forgive sins–(John 20:23); and power to “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils freely ye have RECEIVED, freely GIVE”–(Matt. 10:8). One cannot receive and give “authority” “to trample” on metaphorical “snakes and scorpions” AND to overcome ALL the power of the enemy” and yet be told that “NOTHING WILL HARM YOU.” The history of Christians is proof that Christians were “harmed” by the “enemy” –many were fed to lions. Does this mean that Christ lied to his followers or that Christ did not know what he was talking about? 
   In drinking this “deadly” thing Christians are not putting their God “to the test,” they are verifying their Son of God’s (and their God’s) dictum that so long as they “believe” and are “baptized” they “shall be saved” from Hell and if these believers “DRINK any DEADLY THING” these “deadly things” will not “harm” them. Here is Jesus’ full saying with comments in italics:

“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; and he that believeth not SHALL BE DAMNED (If drinking deadly things is metaphorical, then the DAMNING of the disbelievers must also be metaphorical: they do not have to worry about going to Hell, it is not real/ literal). And these things shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues (let the Christian apologist explain Jesus’ followers metaphorical speaking “In Jesus’ name” and their metaphorical casting out devils and speaking new languages). They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them (What is a metaphorical “deadly thing” that one drinks?); They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover (let the Christian apologist explain the metaphorical laying of hands and the metaphori-cal recovery of the sick from their metaphorical sickness).”

   It would seem comical for Jesus to give his followers LITERAL “authority” over METAPHORICAL “serpents.” 
   “The Muslim is” NOT “guilty of misinterpreting Jesus'” Muslims are correct in “interpreting” Jesus. In contrast, Christians are the ones “guilty of misinterpreting Jesus'”: Christians have somersaulted Jesus clear teachings: desecrated Godhood–Trinity–; ascribed injustice to God–inherited sin–; and made God complicit in murder–vicarious atonement.

   The Christian apologist’s claim that “Christ's point was that no matter what the enemy tries to do in thwarting the efforts of the believers, he will never succeed. This is based solely on the promises of Christ that his authority rests upon all true believers to accomplish his will in our lives,” is a joke. 
   The enemies of Christ –Satan, Constantine, and certain Christian fathers– have been successful in “thwarting the efforts” of Christ’s true “believers” by instituting Trinity, inherited sin, and vicarious atonement (all of which were alien to Jesus and the Jews of Jesus’ time).

   (Except for Muslims who believe in Christ in his true status and mission) Christ has no followers today. The some two billion who call themselves Christians are so only in name, Jesus Christ is only a figurehead in the Church. Christianity may rightly be named Churchianity or Paulianity; and adherents named Churchians or Paulians.
   Rather than accept and follow the Divine truth that Jesus was only a messenger to the Jews and “There is no God but Allāh and Mohammad is the Messenger of Allāh,” the Christian apologist engages in all manner of verbal gymnastics to pacify himself and fellow Christians who revel in blind faith (and to hoodwink uneducated and unthinking people).
   Christians can reject Mohammad but Christians cannot refute Mohammad’s claim to Divine Messengership. In fact, of all the claimants to Divine Dispensation Mohammad is the only one who can substantiate his claim. (See Jesus or Mohammad-greatest, Pastor James Mc Donald).