Jesus-inherited sin to ascension


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

Jesus says in John 14:12-14: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; (man can do greater works than God/Son of God?) because I go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.”
Instead of trying to convince the more-than-one-billion Muslims that Jesus is God, that he died on the cross (for inherited sin) and that Muslims are to follow the  Gospels –and only the uneducated, the gullible, and the unthinking would believe these and kiss the useless and unGodly crucifix– Christians would be better served by asking Jesus to grant abundance to the world’s starving and destitute; and for Jesus to heal/cure all those, especially children, afflicted with cancer and suffering other chronic ailments/diseases.
Are you Christians loathe to ask Jesus on behalf of these unfortunate “children of God”? Or do  you Christians not believe/trust the word of your God/Son of God that he will do “whatsoever” you  “shall ask in” his “name” and alleviate the maladies of man?


(Hosea 6:6).
“I am not come to call the righteous,
but sinners to REPENTANCE
(Jesus: Matthew 9:13).



Christians claim, because Adam sinned by eating from the forbidden tree, mankind inherited this sin from Adam (through our father); and to free the world of this “inherited sin” God sent Jesus who was sinless (because he was of “virgin” birth and therefore did not inherit sin from a father) to die for this “inherited sin”

There is no place in the Bible where GOD or JESUS says mankind inherited sin from Adam that God puts the sin of Adam onto BABIES and in their MOTHERS’ WOMBS and worldwide for at least five thousand years now and until the Resurrection.

To imprison one person for the crime of another is an injustice. To say that God put Adam’s sin onto others is to attribute injustice to God. But God is not unjust. (Mormon Christians do NOT believe in “inherited sin”).

Jesus belies inherited sin; he taught we are born sinless: “Except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven;” “Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God”–(Matt. 18:3; Luke 18:16-17).
    If children inherited sin the kingdom of God would be sinful. A person born with sin is not innocent or pure. That we are born sinful is to say we are criminal by nature –that we are born with two little horns on our foreheads and a barbed tail on our behinds(devils).

   Even if man had inherited sin from Adam and if this “sin” that David sang of was “inherited sin” then Jesus also would have inherited this “sin,” for Jesus was of the “seed” of David: “I Jesus…am the root and the offspring of David”–(Revelation 22:16); and David is referred to by the angel as the “father” of Jesus: “the Lord shall give unto him (Jesus) the throne of his FATHER David”1–(Luke 1:31-32).
   Thus, if mankind had inherited sin from Adam Jesus would have inherited sin from David.

   Paul, who knows more than Christians, states that Jesus had a human father:

   (a) “Therefore (David) being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the FRUIT OF HIS LOINS, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne”–(Acts 2:30);
   (b) “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ…which was made of the SEED OF DAVID ACCORDING TO THE FLESH”–(Romans 1:3);
    (c) “Remember that Jesus Christ of the SEED OF DAVID”–(2 Timothy 2:8).
   And “seed” is sperm, and “according to the flesh” is male-female union: sexual intercourse.

   That Jesus was of “Virgin birth” does not free him from “original sin.” As woman is the ‘transgressor’ and thus the actual vehicle of the transmission of sin, Jesus would have received sin through his mother,Mary (who would have received it from her mother/father). (1Tim. 2:14; 2 Cor. 11:3; Gen. 3:6, 12).

   “Sin is an acquisition, and not a heritage.” Sin is not a physical factor or a biological/genetic factor, as some diseases are, that can be transmitted from one person to another. Sin is a defect in the spirit acquired through committing an unGodly act.
   While a baking pan that had fallen and gotten a dent would produce loaves reflecting this dent, this defect in the pan would not affect the composition and taste of the loaves.
   If sin is a voluntary transgression of a known law of God by a morally responsible person, where is the voluntary transgression of the new-born for sin to be loaded onto his and her head?

   Inherited sin and vicarious atonement were invented by Christians (shown later in VICARIOUS ATONEMENT). Moreover, that Jesus was the only “sinless” and “perfect” man is belied by the Bible which says:

●“Enoch WALKED WITH GOD; and he was NOT (dead); for GOD TOOK HIM”–(Genesis 5:24; Hebrews 11:5). One who walked with God could not have sin.

●“Noah was a JUST man and PERFECT in his generations, and Noah WALKED WITH GOD” –(Genesis 6:9). One who has “sin:” could not be “perfect” and to have “walked with God.”

●“Zacharias…and his wife…were both RIGHTEOUS, walking in ALL the commandments and ordinances of the Lord BLAMELESS”–(Luke 1:5-6). One who has “sin” could not be ‘righteous” and blameless.

●“By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained WITNESS (from God) that he was RIGHTEOUS, GOD testifying of his gifts”–(Hebrews 11:4). It is doubtful that God would “testify” to one who has “sin” as being “righteous.”

●Mary, mother of Jesus (and even “mother of God” as some Christians say) was “highly favoured” by God, and “blessed” among women–(Luke 1:28). One who has “sin” could not be a “highly favored” of God and “blessed” among women.

●John the Baptist was “great in the sight of the Lord”–(Luke 1:15). One who has “sin” could not be crowned (by God) as being “great in the sight of the Lord.”

●Jesus says:“I am not come to call the righteous, but SINNERS to REPENTANCE” (not to vicarious atonement)–(Matthew 9:13). If Jesus was the only sinless man how are there “righteous” people that he did not come to call to repentance? Surely these “righteous” had to be sinless for Jesus to not “call” them to “repentance;” as Jesus declared he only came to call “SINNERS.”

●Even John the Baptist was greater than Jesus, as Jesus himself declared: “Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist”–(Matt. 11:11). Jesus also was born of a woman.

●Jesus says only God is good: “Why callest thou me good? there is NONE good but one, that is, GOD”–(Matt. 19:17). Thus no one, including Jesus, is good; one who is not good cannot be “perfect” or “sinless” (and such a one cannot be God or son of God or vicarious atoner).
Evidently, Jesus was NOT the only “sinless” and “perfect” man.

The God that needs to have someone killed in order to remove sins is the God that is devoid of mercy and forgiveness. Allāh forgives all sins without need for blood. He reveals to the Prophet Mohammad to convey to the world: “Say: O My servants who have sinned against their souls, despair not of the mercy of Allah, surely, Allah forgives all sins. Verily, He is Most Forgiving, Ever Merciful”–(39:54).

As there is no “inherited sin” there is no vicarious atonement.

There is no place in the Bible where GOD or JESUS says God loaded everyone’s alleged “inherited sin” onto Jesus and sent Jesus to be killed for this “sin” –that whereas MAN is to forgive his transgressor seventy times seven and go another mile with his compeller and give the other cheek to his assail-ant as Jesus said, but God cannot forgive even one-seventieth or go another mile with His compeller or give the other cheek to His assailant; and that God would not only load the sin of a MAN (Adam) onto BABIES in their MOTHERS’ WOMBS and worldwide and for at least five thousand years now and until the Resurrection but that God is so devoid of mercy that He had Jesus, an innocent man, savagely beaten and killed to free us of a “sin” committed by Adam. Rather than being a demonstration of “love” for world this can be said to be a demonstration of monumental and grotesque injustice.

   To have someone killed is to be complicit in murder. To say God had Jesus killed is to make God complicit in murder. To have one person killed for the crime of another(s) is an injustice. But God says: “The father shall NOT die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but EVERY MAN SHALL DIE FOR HIS OWN SIN”–(Deut. 24:16; Eze 18:20; 2 Chr 25:4).

God “visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me” is not analogous to “inherited sin;” then it would not have been limited to “third and fourth generation.” This is about those who engage in false worship and hate God. Exodus 20:5. Further Deut. 24:16; Eze 18:20; 2 Chr 25:4 are speaking about dying for “sin” whereas Exodus 20:5 is speaking about “hatred” of God.

If man inherited sin from Adam and if Christ died for this sin Christians should not die.

   Regarding Paul’s statement: “For we see Jesus, who was made a LITTLE LOWER than the an-gels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for EVERY MAN”–(Heb. 2:9).
   If Jesus tasted death for EVERY man man should not die. Since “inherited sin” is not selective, “vicarious atonement” cannot be selective but is to free all men, believers in God or not.

   The Gospel of John chapter 3 verse 16 that says: “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” is NOT about Jesus dying for sins.
   When taken in its context, from verses 2-15, it shows that Jesus was having a conversation with Nicodemus who concluded that from his miracles Jesus could only be a man from God. Jesus answered that man must undergo spiritual birth before he can see the kingdom of God. Jesus then compared himself to the brass serpent Moses lifted up in the wilderness; which serpent had the power to preserve the life of those bitten by a snake–(Num. 21:9), for “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the son of man be lifted up” –the allusion being, as the serpent had power to preserve life of the afflicted on account of their belief on it, likewise, Jews who believed in his (Jesus’) miracles and accept him as a prophet from God–(John 8:28)–would also be saved: “That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life”–(John 3:14-15). Then came the verse of John 3:16 which, when expressed in the context of this discussion would convey the full meaning of:

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son the power to perform miracles that whosoever believeth in him to be from God through these works of miracles  should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
   Miracles were necessary because the people believed only in miracles: “Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe” –(John 4:48).
   Clearly, your doctor chopping off his head cannot cure you of your headache.

   If one can die for the sin of others then one can take medication and laxative to free others of ailment and constipation –vicarious refreshment.

To infer that John 3:16 is about crucifixion is to inject a meaning that is alien to the subject.
That Jesus is saying God “gave” him to be “crucified” for sinners and for him to pray pitifully to be spared from this glory and to indict God as having “forsaken” him must be the blackest degree of disgrace exampled by a son of God in Scriptural history:
“My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”–(Matthew 27:46).
   (A soldier who refuses to fight in an illegal and unjust war is hounded and charged and jailed as a deserter and a disgrace. Consider then, the “son of God” entrusted with the lofty honor of dying for the sins of the world; for him to pray to tears to be spared this glory and to blame God as having forsaken him must be the “Mother” of all disgraces).

(Not even Jonah in the whale’s belly made such a grotesque and ignominious expression as that of the Christian’s God and Son of God but rather prayed to God–Jonah 2:1-10. Even the 1400’s Viennese Jews behaved more honorably than the Christian’s God and Son of God, choosing to die in the Christian inferno than desecrate their Holy Sheema and kiss the useless and unGodly crucifix.2 Allāh, God, must be well-pleased with these Jews in their steadfastness to Divine Purity).

That there is NO vicarious atonement is further cemented in these statements by Jesus:

   -“I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to REPENTANCE” (NOT to belief in inherited sin and vicarious atonement/crucifixion)Matt. 9:13. This is how Jesus [and all prophets] saved his people from their sin, by calling them to repentance);

   -“I say unto you, there is JOY in the presence of the angels of God over one SINNER that REPENTETH”–(Luke 15:10).

Jesus contradicts vicarious atonement. He taught that heaven lies in righteousness and following the Commandments brought by Moses (until the coming of the Comforter who will guide into “all truth” and abide “for ever”):

   –“For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven”–(Matthew 5:20);

   -“If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments”–(Matthew 19:16-19);

   -“The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: ALL therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do”–(Matt. 23:2. Scribes and Pharisees do not teach inherited sin, vicarious atonement, and crucifixion).

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.” (pp. 109-110).

Reason would dictate that human invention cannot give life in heaven. (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. Those who lead others astray will, in the Hereafter, bear part of the punishment of those without knowledge whom they misled–Qur’an 16:25; 29:12-13).
   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”?

Paramountly, Jesus is NOT son of God. Jesus is only 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. God has a legion of sons and daughters; see JESUS-SON OF GOD).
   As Jesus is only “CALLED” son of God there is no vicarious atonement seeing that vicarious atonement is dependent upon the existence of a son of God and there is/was NO son of God!
   That Son of God is only an epithet of honor is made clear in this statement by God: “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).

The METAPHORICAL son (Jesus)
cannot die for LITERAL sins.

If “the wages of sin is death” and as Christians say Jesus died for this “inherited sin” then all who believe in Jesus should not suffer “death.” But Christians are dying.  And will continue to die.

   That Adam and Eve eating from the forbidden tree caused “death” to come into the world. The Bible says God created Adam and Eve, the first humans–(Gen. 1:26-27; 2:18-23). And their first children were Cain and Abel–(Gen. 4:1-2). After Cain killed Abel “Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain KNEW HIS WIFE; and she conceived”–(Genesis 4:16-17).

   Since Adam and Eve were the first humans and they did not have any other children till later–(Genesis 4:25), there must have been other humans in the land of Nod who were NOT descended from Adam and Eve for Cain to have taken a wife.

That Cain’s wife must have been his sister or other female family member is not sup-ported by facts. The Bible is clear that it was 130 years after Cain and Abel that Adam had other children, beginning with Seth, their third child. AFTER Cain went to Nod and fathered “Enoch” the Bible says, “And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth; For God, saith she (Eve)hath appointed me ANOTHER seed INSTEAD of Abel, whom Cain slew”–(Genesis 4:25).

And daughters were born more than 130 years after Cain and Abel: “This is the book of the generations of Adam…And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name SETH. And the days of Adam AFTER he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat SONS AND DAUGHTERS: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died”–(Genesis 5:1-5).

That there were pre-Adamites is supported by archaeology and paleontology. Human bones found in Ethiopia –“Kibish River Skull,” 195,000 years old– and human teeth in Israel –400,000 years old– have negated the Biblical view that man is only 5,000 years old.

Cain’swife, according to Biblical narrative, could only have been a pre-Adamite –a Nodite. And since Christians say “death” came because Eve and Adam ate from the forbidden tree then the people of Nod, NOT descended from Adam and Eve, would have been free from “inherited sin” and “death.” In which event the people of Nod are still living and will live forever.3 (See CHRISTIANITY-MAN MADE TO LIVE FOREVER).

Even the inherited-sin and vicarious-atonement invention is lopsided. The Bible says: “Adam was NOT deceived BUT THE WOMAN BEING DECEIVED WAS IN THE TRANSGRESSION”–(1 Tim. 2:14; Gen. 3:6, 12).
    Since Eve/woman was the transgressor how is it that “sin” is “inherited” through Adam’s/man’s sperm and not through the transgressor Eve’s/woman’s ovum? Moreso, as Christians view woman as “the devil’s gate-way”:

““Do you know,” says Tertullian, when addressing Women, “that you are each Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age; the guilt, of necessity, must live too. You are the devil’s gate-way; you are the unsealer of that tree; you are the first deserter of the Divine Law; you destroyed as easily God’s image.”…She is “the organ of the devil,” “a scorpion ever ready to sting,” “the poisonous asp,” “the malice of the dragon.” These are some of the blessings that Woman received from persons of exalted position in the Church, such as St. Bernard, St. Anthony, St. Jerome, St. Cyprian, and St. Paul.”4

Jesus taught forgiveness (as opposed to vicarious atonement): “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you”–(Matt. 6:12, 14; 18:21-22).
   Paramountly, Jesus taught that “salvation” –eternal life– lies in following the Mosaic Law (till the coming of the COMFORTER who will bring “all truth” and “abide forever”):

-“The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: ALL therefore WHATSOEVER they bid you observe, that OBSERVE AND DO(and the scribes and Pharisees do not teach Divinity of Jesus, inherited sin and vicarious atonement);

-“if thou wilt enter into life, KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS (brought by Moses);

-“except your RIGHTEOUSNESS shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, YE SHALL IN NO CASE ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN”–(Matthew 23:2-3; 19:17-18; 5:20. And the Mosaic law does not teach inherited sin and vicarious atonement).

-“And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever;” ”When he, the Spirit of truth (the Comforter), is come, he will guide you into ALL TRUTH”–(John 14:15-16; 16:13).

   Since the COMFORTER will replace the Mosaic Law and as eternal life lies in following the Comforter because he guides into “ALL TRUTH” and abides “FOREVER,” THERE IS NO NEED FOR INHERITED SIN; THERE IS NO NEED FOR VICARIOUS ATONEMENT. AND THERE IS NO NEED FOR JESUS! JESUS IS REDUNDANT! (See JESUS-REDUNDANT).
   Jesus became REDUNDANT the moment he preached salvation through the Mosaic Law; and the Bible became OBSOLETE six hundred years after Jesus with the advent of the COMFORTER, Mohammad.

(This COMFORTER as   Prof. Abdul Ahad Dawud B.D. –“the former Reverend David Benjamin Keldani, B.D., a Roman Catholic priest of the Uniate-Chaldean sect”– has shown in his revealing book Muhammad in the Bible is the Prophet MOHAMMADMohammad has given us “all truth” –all that we need for our moral, social, intellectual, and spiritual upliftment are in the QUR’AN which is to abide “FOREVER” to the Resurrection; the Qur’an consists of, exceeds, and supersedes all Scriptures.
   Even if Mohammad was not the Comforter, Jesus and the Mosaic Law would still be REDUNDANT and the Bible OBSOLETE at the coming of the Comforter).

   Vicarious atonement is unjust, illogical, and unGodly.

The God that takes the life of the sinless for the sinners could not be praised as wise, just, or loving. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din notes:

(Like monkery and Holy Communion) “The idea of Sin and Expiation is also an ancient idea. The sacrificed animal represented the Dying Deity, as the Lord Krishna says in the Bhagwat Gita, “I am the oblation, I am the sacrifice, I am the ancestral offering.” “In the truly orthodox conception of sacrifice,” says Elie Reclus, “the consecrated offering, be it man, woman or virgin, lamb or heifer, cock or dove, represents the deity himself.”5

The God that forgives sins without the need for “blood” sacrifice is the God that “loves” us –Allāh!


At the last Supper Jesus gave bread and wine to his disciples saying the bread is his body and the wine is his blood: “Take, eat; this is my body…This is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many”–(Mark 14: 22-24).
    This eating of the “body” and drinking the “mythical” blood of Jesus Christ can be construed as SPIRITUAL CANNIBALISM.

God commanded: “Thou shalt not kill,” and “I desired mercy and not sacrifice”–(Ex. 20:13; Hosea 6:6). And Jesus explained God desiring mercy and not sacrifice to mean, “I (Jesus) am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to REPENTANCE(NOT vicarious atonement) –(Matt. 9:13).

   It is rather strange for Jesus who came to die willingly for the sins of the world to tell his disciples that “they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ”–(Matt. 16:20); for him to hide from his executioners –(John 11:54); to rebuke the Jews “why go ye about to kill me?”–(John 7:19); and to beseech God to be spared from death–(Matt. 26:39).

   Jesus was so terrified of the Jews, fearing for his own head, that after he learnt of the beheading of John the Baptist he rushed off to Bethsaida–(Matthew 14:10-13; Luke 9:9-10).

   If Jesus had come to die for the sins of mankind, he should have come forward joyously into the hands of his executors; and Judas, the “betrayer,” should be blessed and not cursed; and the Jews should not be blamed but praised for fulfilling the prophecy of “crucifying” Jesus.

   Neither should Jesus have prayed:“Father, forgive them for they know not what they do”(Luke 23:34). There was no need to “forgive them” if they were fulfilling Scripture. (Notably, whereas Jesus gave others power to remit/forgive sins he is here asking God to remit/forgive the sins of those who put him on the cross –John 20:23).

   Allāh God says about Jesus: “they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them”–(Qur’an 4:157). Jesus only seemed dead. This is how God answered his prayers and saved him. In those days no one checked for pulses, if you’re limp you’re dead.
   The Bible supports the Qur’an that Jesus was not killed/crucified:

-Jesus prayed to be spared from death-(Matt; 26:36-44); his prayers were answered-(Heb. 5:7. One is not glorified by being killed; and God does not need to have anyone killed in order to be glorified–John 17:1; if He does then for the thousands of years before Christ He was not glorified because as far as Scriptures go He did not require anyone to be killed); prayers of the righteous are always answered–(James 5:16; Psalm 22:24; 34:15-19; John 9:31; Matt; 7:8-9); God always answered Jesus’ prayers–(John 11:41-42).

As noted, Allāh, God, says about Jesus: “they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them”–(Qur’an 4:157). Jesus only seemed dead. This is how God ans-wered his prayers and saved him. In those days no one checked for pulses, if you’re limp you’re dead.

Even Jesus’ followers, upon removing Jesus from the cross/pole must have realized he was not dead, for they took “spices and ointments” to “anoint” him–Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56; 24:1. For as Ahmed Deedat points out Jews do NOT anoint their “dead”.

-Angels said Jesus was “alive,” not resurrected or risen–(Luke 24:23);

   -the Apostles treated the news of Jesus’ resurrection as “idle tales”–(Luke 24:11.If the crucifixion and resur-rection were prophecies, the Apostles would not have treated the resurrection as “idle tales”);

-Jesus said his sign would be like Jonas, as Jonas was alive in the whale’s belly so he shall be–(Matt. 12:39-40; Jonah 1:17; 2:1-10; if Jesus came to die for sins there was no need for his sign to be like Jonas’); if Jesus was killed/crucified his sign would not have been like Jonas’.

Even if we take Jesus’ sign to refer to time (three days and three nights) rather than to status (that he would be alive) he is unlike Jonas. Jesus’ alleged crucifixion was on Friday afternoon and alleged resurrection on Sunday morning (Jewish Sabbath is on Saturdays); this would put Jesus in the earth two nights and one and a half days –Friday and Saturday nights, and half-a-day Friday and all day Saturday.

Jesus told the thief on the cross beside him, “To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise”–Luke 23:43. If Jesus went to Paradise “To day” (the day of his alleged cru-cifixion) he could not have gone into the earth: Paradise is not in the earth!).

-After the alleged crucifixion and resurrection Jesus had his disciples examine him to verify he was not 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.

If those claiming Jesus was killed are right, Jesus would be wrong that he was not killed.

If Jesus came to die for sins why the cow-dance, speaking in parables so only Jews would understand and be saved:
   After relating the parable of the sower to the people Jesus said to them: “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear;” and, afterwards, when he (Jesus) was alone with the Israelites they asked him about the meaning of the parable: “And he said unto them, Unto you (who have God) it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them (non-Jews) that are without (God), all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them”–(Mark 4:9-12).
The Good News Bible put it even more clearly: “You have been given the secret of the Kingdom of God,” Jesus answered. “But the others, who are on the outside, hear all things by means of parables, so that, ‘They may look and look, yet not see; they may listen and listen, yet not understand. For if they did, they would turn to God, and he would forgive them.’”
   What a ghastly, horribly sickening thing for God/Son of God and who came to “die” for sinners to do. And to refer to people as “dogs” and “swine,” which are scavengers, is the worst of denigrations.

That Jesus did not die on the cross is supported by Christian source. M. A. Faruqui has taken “Extracts from the book Jesus Nicht am Kreuz Gestorben (Jesus Did not Die on the Cross) by Kurt Berna of Stuttgart, Germany).
    (After Jesus was taken down from the cross he was covered with a cloth, this sheet is known as the Shroud of Turin). In his book The Crumbling of the Cross M. A. Faruqui notes: “There is a German Research Convent about the Holy Shroud in Stutt-gart, W. Germany, and Kurt Berna is the Catholic author and Secretary, in charge of Business of the German Convent.” (M.A. Faruqui notes that after receiving permission from the Vatican to carry out tests on photographs of the Shroud of Turin) the committee’s conclusion about the body that was in the Shroud was submitted to the Vatican).

“But the Vatican made all sorts of excuses; as apparently its publication would seriously embarrass the Catholic Church and undermine its established doctrines.”
  (M.A. Faruqui notes the following which was translated from German and sent by the German research Convent of Stuttgart, W. Germany to the Vatican. I quote in part):

“In the past twenty-four months several specialists of the German Universities have tried in vain to refute these extraordinary discoveries, but their efforts bore no fruit. These critics would have very easily refuted the results of our investigations with their scientific knowledge, had they not retreated quietly in the background. On the other hand, they have acknowledged and admitted the validity and soundness of this important research for both Christians as well as the Jewish religions…

According to the real facts which could not be challenged by anyone, the Convent is convinced that the results are an open challenge to the whole world.

The Holy Shroud so zealously kept and carefully preserved at the Turin Church has been regarded as an esteemed relic by many Popes who have declared it as the original Shroud of Christ.

It has been proved beyond any doubt that Jesus Christ, after the crucifixion and after the removal of the crown of thorns from his head, had been laid in this Shroud.

According to the existing proofs it is further established that the body of the crucified person at that time was placed in this shroud and it remained there for some time. In the medical sense it is proved that it was not a dead body, because at that time a free movement of the heart was traceable. The existence of the flowing of blood, its position and its nature which is found on the Holy Shroud furnishes a clear scientific and medical proof that the so-called execution was legally not complete.

According to the present discoverythe present as well as the past teachings of Christianity are incorrect.” (Just as Allāh revealed, that Christ was not killed–Qur’an 4:157). 

(The committee suggested certain tests be carried out in order to refute their findings, and continued). “The aforementioned results of the investigation by the German research Convent and by some other agencies, can only be refuted if the suggested scien-tific tests are applied…We can safely say that no one and nothing on this earth can refute these discoveries. This is an open challenge by the Research Convent.” (pp. 98-100. Color added. Italics are M.A. Faruqui’s).

   Regarding John 19:34 where it is stated that when the soldier thrusted his lance at Jesus “forthwith came there out blood and water.” “Since the flow of blood indicates a person still alive, the Christian historians and leaders have gone to considerable pains to prove that the point of the spear must have pricked that inside chamber of the heart where some liquid blood was still accumulated; and it was that blood that flowed out. But Jesus, they claim, had been dead already for some two hours past. Kurt Berna has proved that the heart was not pierced by the spear at all and that the flow of blood could only be due to the beating of the heart (however slow) of a person still alive.” (Ibid. p. 108).

   M.A. Faruqui notes further that while the writers of the original Gospels did not use the word “death” for Jesus but used words “which could be translated to mean Jesus gave up his ghost to the keeping of God,” later translators “translated the passage to mean that he died or expired while still on the Cross. But after careful inspection of the imprints on the Holy Shroud, Pope Pius XII took up a position in between the two, that is Jesus had neither died nor was he alive. However, it is obvious that “death” as such only occurs when the heart-beating and circulation of blood in the body has completely and finally stopped and deterioration in the body cells has already started. But since in the case of Jesus, fresh blood still flowed after he was taken down from the Cross, hence he could not have been dead. It may also be borne in mind that, in the time of Jesus, nobody knew about the nature and essentials of blood circulation in the body. To them, when breathing stopped, a person was taken to be dead.” (p. 109).

“St. Paul had thought of and adopted the doctrine of Jesus Christ having died on the Cross and being resurrected afterwards, and this became the confirmed doctrine of the Christian Church. But the investigations made about the imprints of Christ’s body on the Shroud put the Church in difficulties. Pope John XXIII had made a proclamation on 30 June 1960, which was printed in an issue of the Vatican newspaper, Osservator Romano dated 2nd July 1960, under the title “Complete Salvation through the Blood of Jesus Christ,” in which the Pope informed and directed all the Catholic Bishops to believe and to propagate that the complete salvation of the human race lies through the blood of Jesus Christ, and that the death of Jesus Christ is not essential for this purpose.”(p. 109).

   (This is Papal’s verbal gymnastics. How can salvation be through the “blood” of Christ when there was no “blood” of Jesus Christ? and Christianity stands on the foundation of the “blood” of Jesus Christ –of “inherited sin” and vicarious atonement; and Christians are preaching to the world that Jesus Christ “died” for sin inherited from Adam?
    Note well, that “salvation of the human race lies through the blood of Jesus Christ” is the Pope’s [Christian’s] teaching; it is NOT God’s teaching; it is NOT Jesus’ teaching. What more proof is needed that CHRISTIANITY IS A FAKE?)

   How can salvation lie through the “blood” of Jesus Christ when Jesus Christ, the Christian’s God and Son of God, taught that “salvation” lies in following the Mosaic Law [till the coming of the COMFORTER who will bring “all truth” and “abide forever”?] And as salvation lies in following the Mosaic Law THERE IS NO NEED FOR INHERITED SIN!

(Putting aside the fact that the Christian Communion among other practices are traced to Paganism). Jesus says that he came to “give his life a ransom for many,” and urged his disciples to “Take, eat; this is my body…this is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins”–(Matthew.20:28; 26:28).
That Jesus was “ransom” and remitter of sins only for his disciples/apostles is clearly stated in Luke 22:14-20, 30: “This cup is the new testament in my blood which is shed for YOU (his apostles) ….That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel”

(Apart from the fact that Jesus’ dying for the remission of his disciples’ sin is a contradiction of his teaching that eternal life lies in observing the Mosaic law, until the coming of the Comforter who will then guide into all truth’ and ‘abide for ever”). For which “sin” did Jesus die (though as shown he did not die on the cross).
No one knows!
Thus we have the Christian cow-dance: some saying Christ died for inherited sin (though there is no teaching from God or Jesus that God loaded Adam’s sin onto fetuses and then transferred onto Jesus) and some saying Christ died for committed sin, arguing, rightly, that your father being a millionaire does not make you a millionaire.
Though both guesstimations are wrong.
For as shown (and the Vatican was given proof from their own Christian investigators, that) the body in the shroud of Turin, which is believed to be the body of Christ after the so-called crucifixion, was “not a dead body.” Even the Gospel, as shown, proves that Jesus was not killed on the cross.

There is yet another proof that Jesus was no “ransom” and no remitter of sins. Since God did not say that mankind inherited sin from Adam or that He loaded the sin of Adam onto every newborn and then loaded everyone’s sins onto Jesus and that He sent Jesus to be killed for sin, but since (according to the Gospels) Jesus says he is a “ransom for sin” and that his blood “is shed for many for the remission of sins,” who is to be believed God or Jesus?

God says in the Bible that if the thing that a prophet says does not come true then God did not say that thing: “And if thou say in thins heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord HATH NOT SPOKEN, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: THOU SHALT NOT BE AFRAID OF HIM”–(Deut. 18:21-22).
   Did Jesus’ saying that he would be killed so he could be a “ransom” for sin come to pass? NO! IT DID NOT COME TO PASS! As noted, the Bible shows Jesus was NOT killed; Jesus said he was NOT killed; and investigative evidence by Christians showed Jesus was NOT killed on the cross/pole.

That Jesus was sought by Jews to be killed because of his condemnation of Jewish authorities and NOT for fulfilling scripture is noted by Biblical scholars. The ‘Bible Dictionary’ notes as part of its explanation of the term ‘scribe’:

“Their familiarity with the law allowed the scribes to take on a role of growing importance in Jewish society –teaching in the synagogues, serving as judges, and becoming members of the Sanhedrin. Jesus refused to accept the mass of detail and the superficial technicalities which they affixed to the law, and He accused them of hypocritical interpretations of the law. For these reasons they opposed His teachings and were one of the groups, as were the Pharisees, that helped to plot His death–(Matt. 5:20; 21:15; Mark 10:33; 14:53; Luke 11:44; 20:46; John 8:3; Acts 4:5; 6:12).”6

Jesus was taken captive not for prophecies or redemption of sins, but because Jewish hierarchy “opposed His teachings.”

There is NO inherited sin.
NO vicarious atonement.
NO “ransom” for sin.

Given Paul’s “lie” “crafty”ness and “guile” it is not surprising that he should write: “And if Christ be not raised, YOUR FAITH IS VAIN; ye are yet in your sins”–(1 Cor. 15:17).
   Why is “your faith is vain” when you are following God and Jesus THAT JESUS WAS NOT KILLED?
    If God had sent Jesus to be “ransom” for sins there would have been no need for the Christian Fathers to convene and invent the doctrines of inherited sin and vicarious atonement.

As stated, if Jesus came to die for the sins of the world and for him to pray to be spared this ”glory” and to blaspheme that God had “forsaken” him (which is tantamount to disbelief in God), this must be the blackest degree of disgrace ever exampled by a “Son of God” in scriptural history. (If Jesus is God then God prayed to Himself and “forsaken” Himself–(Matt. 26:38-42; 27:46).

   Whereas God and Jesus did not teach that Jesus is God, Son of God, Trinity, and vicarious atoner, and that man inherited sin.
    According to Christians their God/Son of God, Jesus, did not give them clear teachings as to his status and mission so that 300 years after his mission they had to conjecture whether Jesus is God, Son of God, or three Gods in one (Trinity) and vicarious atoner, that mankind inherited sin from Adam.
 As Prof. Abdul Ahad Dawud B.D. –“the former Reverend David Benjamin Keldani, B.D., a Roman Catholic priest of the Uniate-Chaldean sect”– notes

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.”7

Unlike Christianity whose cardinal doctrines –Divinity of Jesus, inherited sin and vicarious atonement– are assumed the cardinal doctrines of Islam –Unity of Allāh God; Prayer, Zakaat (obligatory Charity); Fasting, and Hajj/Pilgrimage to Makkah– are clearly expressed by Allāh God in His Qur’an and explained by the Prophet Mohammad.
   The Christian doctrines of Divinity of Jesus, inherited sin and vicarious atonement are NOT Divine Revelations; they are Christian fabrications.

“And say: The Truth has come
and falsehood vanished.
Surely falsehood is ever bound to vanish”
(Qur’an 17:81).

Passion Play of Jesus: Like SON OF GOD being of pagan heritage, the Passion Play of Jesus is a photocopy of the Passion Play of the pagan god, Bēl (Baal), who preceded Jesus by centuries. (See JESUS-PAGAN PASSION PLAY). 

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).  

Even the cross is not original to Christendom. Whereas Allāh, God, gave us the Divine and noble jihad. Christianity brought the man-made and unGodly crusade –derived from a blend of the French croisade and Spanish cruzada; and which crucifix is pagan in origin, dating to the “Mithraic cult”– whose goal was to rid the Holy land of Muslims and Jews; so much so that in the first crusade “All Muslims, men, women, and children, as well as Jews, perished in the general slaughter that followed” the surrender of the city;8 and the 800-year Inquisitions –Medieval, Roman and Spanish– from 1000-1834. (Crudely, now-a-days, western media demonize the noble jihad and promote the ignoble crusade to symbolize honorable pursuits).

   Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din notes: “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.”9

   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.”10

   Even if Jesus had died on the cross this would have been not for the redemption of sins but an answer/sign to the “adulterous” Jews who wanted to see a sign. And if Jesus had died his sign would have been UNFULFILLED; as he would NOT have been like Jonas who was ALIVE in the whale’s body.  

As God is “merciful and gracious” and is “ready to forgive; and plenteous in mercy unto all them that call upon” Him, there is no need for Him to have an innocent man killed to forgive sins–(Exodus 34:6; Psalm 86:5).

   As God is “the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort” there is no need to send an innocent man to be killed for sinners: it is not “mercies,” but savagery and murder, to have the innocent killed for sinners; it is not “comfort” to be nailed to a stake and be lanced, it is torture and suffering and agony–(2 Corinthians 1:3).  

   Reason –the factor that God requires us to govern by (Isaiah 1:18)– dictates that as your physician chopping off his head cannot cure you of your headache and someone taking laxative cannot free you of constipation; no one can bear the moral and spiritual burden of another.

   Allāh, the God Who forgives sins without having anyone killed –moreover an innocent man– is the God Who is merciful and loves us.


As there was no crucifixion there was no resurrection. Allāh and Jesus confirm this.
   It was Paul who taught that Jesus was resurrected: “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). Paul forged his own gospel. Who will you believe ALLAH & JESUS OR PAUL?



   The doctrines of Divinity of Jesus, inherited sin, and vicarious atonement are not from Jesus. As shown from the Bible, Jesus prayed to God to be spared from death, and God answered Jesus’ prayers and save him from death–(John 11:41-42; Hebrews 5:7).   Jesus cried from the cross “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”–(Matt. 27:46). In the words of Khwaja Nazir Ahmad:

“If the prayer of Jesus was heard and granted, as it must have been, he could not have died on the cross. But if it was not heard and he was in fact crucified, this cry of Jesus, at a moment of extreme weakness of mind and the extreme limit of physical torture, is an everlasting answer to the blasphemous dogma of Christians that Jesus, the son of God, knew that in fulfilment of His Divine will, he was dying for the sins of others.”(Jesus in Heaven on Earth, p. 188).  

The men in white garments at Jesus’ tomb “have always remained a mystery” to Christians, thus they “described them as angels.” The Qur’an refers to these helpers of Jesus as “hawariyyoon” –(Qur’an 3:51). These helpers could not be the “so-called disciples of Jesus who were always “wondering” and “doubting” and were running away from Jesus whenever he was in adversity. The word hawariyyoon is a plural of hawari, which is from the root hoor (meaning: simple whiteness). The word hawari, therefore, means “one who whitens his clothes or garments by washing and beating them” Lane opines that for this reason the word hawariyyoon is applied to the companions (not the disciples) of Jesus. The Holy Qur’an is very exact in its terminology and it described the helpers of Jesus by their distinctive dress–white garments).” (K. Nazir Ahmad, Jesus in Heaven on Earth, p. 221.  

The Christian’s God and son of God, Jesus, says: “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). Would Christians like to drink some “deadly thing”?

Christians claim that the Bible is “all” “Word of God” and that Jesus is the Son of God. If Christians believe in their “Word of God” and Son of God they will have no reluctance or hesitancy to drink this “deadly thing.” Surely to demonstrate their “Word of God” and trust in their “Son of God” is the highest of “moral standards.” Don’t Christians trust their God and son of God? It is scandalous that Christians are not clamoring to honor this “truth” of Jesus. After all, if this “deadly thing” does not hurt them they can boast that Jesus spoke the truth. And if they die, well, they will get to sit with Jesus sooner “on the right hand of God”–(Mark 16:19).  


Ahmed Deedat notes in his booklet Is The Bible God’s Word? that the Ascension–(Mark 16:9-20)–was expunged from the Bible but restored.
   Matthew and John have nothing to say about this momentous event. Mark had Jesus ascend from inside a house–(Mark 16:14-20); Luke took him in the open air at Bethany–(Luke 24:50-51).

   In Luke 23:43 Jesus says he would ascend on the day of “CRUCIFIXION,” he told the thief: “Verily I say unto thee, TODAY shalt thou be with me in paradise,” but Luke conveys that the ascension took place on the DAY OFRESURRECTION–(Luke ch. 24); John had Jesus hanging around at least EIGHT DAYS AFTER the “resurrection”–(John 20-26); the Acts said Jesus ascended FORTY DAYS AFTER the “resurrection”–(Acts 1:3, 9. And Paul claims Jesus visited him on the road to Damascus, which was more than forty days after the alleged resurrection–Acts 9:3-5).
   Thus, either Jesus did not know when and where he will be going or Jesus must have been busy shuttling up and down between “heaven and earth.”

  As noted Ahmed Deedat points out that the Ascension–(Mark 16:9-20)– was expunged from the Bible but restored.
   The claim that after the make-believe resurrection and before his alleged ascension Jesus changed his mind and said to preach the Gospels to all nations not only shows that Jesus was uncertain of his mission but these verses are “forgeries” in the Bible. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din points out in his book Open Letters To The Bishops of Salisbury & London, (pp. 31-32):

“The concluding eleven verses of St. Mark-(16:9-20) and the well-known verse of St. Matthew -(28:19), speaking of the Son and the Father and the Holy Ghost, are forgeries, an admitted addition to the ancient MSS (manuscripts). The fact was discovered by the first translator of the Bible into English and they made a marginal note in their version of the Bible which continued for some time. But we do not find the said note in any of the copies now published by the said society(Foreign Mission Society). Is it fair and honest to keep others in darkness as to the true value of the contents of the Bible? The reader must know that the concluding portion of St. Mark and the verse in St. Matthew are spurious and a subsequent addition. But I am afraid the Foreign Mission would not allow the correction. It would tell against their very Mission, if they eliminate the verse from St. Matthew; they lose the only pillar that supports the structure of the Trinity. No other verse in the whole Scripture speaks of it. The said eleven verses of St. Mark are the only justification for the existence of the Foreign Mission. You, as well as I, know, my Lord, that the call to Jesus came solely and wholly from Judaism. He came only to gather the scattered sheep and would not give the children’s bread to the dogs, the world beyond the Israelites. The Foreign Mission is a mere trespass on lands forbidden by the Master. It transcends the limit marked by Jesus. Throughout his life the Gentiles and others did not concern him: they were the swine. Then came the make-believe Resurrection, and they say the Master changed his mind as to his mission and ordered it to be carried to the four corners of the world (indicating that he was unsure of his mission), but this all depends upon the questionable verses of St. Mark, and hence their retention in the Bible. St. Matthew is no authority on this point. The word “nations” there is a mistranslation and a wrong substitute for “the tribes”–the rest of the Jewish tribes scattered all over the world. This being the case, the Mission cannot afford to eliminate the verses from their version, nor will they put marginal notes, as did the old versions, to show the true nature of the verses. It would weaken the cause and show the futility of their status, since in carrying on evangelical work in the non-Christian world they are acting against the express admonition of the Master. It may that reasons other than religion are at the back of it all, and goading their activities, but decency, if not religion, assuredly demands the publishing of things as they are.”
   (Such is Christian’s deception and desperation to have the world eat the body and drink the mythical blood of Jesus –SPIRITUAL CANNIBALISM. This must be the lowest depth of spiritual depravity).

Even if Jesus had said to teach the Gospels to all nations, yet this would not make Jesus GOD or SON OF GOD or one in a TRINITY with God or vicarious atoner or that mankind INHERITED SIN from Adam/Eve. These cardinal doctrines of Christianity are lies, falsehood, and blasphemy. See CHRISTIANITY-LIES EVIL, HATE).

   Whereas Jesus was only a messenger of God sent to the Israelites to call them to “repentance” and “forgiveness”, Christians consigned Jesus to the bed of celibacy, crowned him with Divinity and made him scapegoat for non-existent inherited sin. (See JESUS-LIKE DAVID).

Evidently, Christians are following Paul and his pagan son of God; they are not following God and His Christ. (See ALLAH & JESUS OR PAUL; JESUS OR MOHAMMAD-THE GREATEST).



1. David singing in Psalm 51:5: “I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me,” is not about “inherited” sin as Christian’s claim; David believed he was of illegitimate birth. According to the Internet, David’s father, Jesse, believing his marriage to David’s mother, Nitzevet, was a “forbidden” union avoided marital relation with her. Later, Jesse, desiring a child of unquestionable ancestry, proposed to his “Canaanite maidservant” to have a child with her. The maidservant, informed Nitzevet about Jesse’s proposal. The two women decided to secretly switch places in Jesse’s bed (much as Rachel and Leah were switched to trick Jacob into mating with Leah–Gen. 29:16-25). From this union with Jesse, Nitzevet became pregnant with David. Nitzevet, not wanting to disclose the “switch” to Jesse, was viewed as “adulterous” and her child, David, as being “illegitimate.” In this Psalm (51:5) David, lamenting his own adultery with Bathsheba, is recounting his mother’s assumed “adultery.”

2.Vienna, “hundreds of Jews were burned alive in 1421 for refusing to convert to Christianity,” Toronto Star, Sat; Sept; 8, 2007; p. AA2; Pontiff shows…by Tracy Wilkinson.

3. The people of Nod not being of Noah’s people and not being descended from Adam could NOT have perished in the flood of Noah. Moreover, there is evidence that the Flood was NOT a global occurrence–see Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, The Qur’an, And Science, p.34. Only Noah’s people perished–Qur’an 25: 37; 29:14-15; 71:21-25. It would have been unjust for God to flood the entire world because of the sins of Noah’s people. Even in our time one area is flooded while surrounding areas are dry –New Orleans and some areas in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh are prime examples of flooding).

4. Kamal-ud-Din, Khwaja, Open Letters to the Bishops of Salisbury & London, p. 73.

5. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, The Sources Of Christianity, pp. 57-59.  Thee Sources of Christianity may be obtained from

6. Self-Pronouncing Edition, The World Publishing Company, Cleveland 2, Ohio, p. 77. (Emphasis/color added).

7. Muhammad in the Bible, pp. 191-192. Emphasis added.

8. Ency. Brit; 15th Ed; Vol; 5, Crusades; p. 300.

9. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, The Sources Of Christianity, p. 50.

10. Ibid; p. 51.

11. Maurice Bucaille, The Bible The Qur’an And Science, pp. 52-53. Caps, highlight added).