The lengths Christians will go to! Then again, their deceptive activities are supported by scripture. 1Corinthians 9:19-24
The irony of this absurd claim is astounding. Apart from the fact that Paul doesn't support deception at all, nearly everyone who reads this blog knows that Ibn's prophet does support deception. Even more ironic is that Ibn has to be deceptive in his desperate effort to make Paul sound deceptive. Amazing!
Let's compare Paul's words with Muhammad's. In 1 Corinthians 9, Paul is discussing his liberty as a Christian and as an apostle, along with the constraints he freely places on himself for the sake of the Gospel. He begins the chapter by noting that, even though he has the right to get married and to receive funding from the Corinthian church, he chooses instead to remain celibate and to support himself financially by working. Later in the chapter, Paul explains why he doesn't take full advantage of other liberties: Even though he is free, he won't put a stumbling block before others.
For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it. (1 Corinthians 9:19-23)
Is Paul advocating deception here, as Ibn claims? Certainly not. Paul is simply saying that when he's around Jews, he won't eat pork, etc. When he's around gentiles, he's not going to live according to Jewish restrictions. For Paul, food, clothing, pleasure, and so on, are all secondary. What's important is the truth of the Gospel. Thus, he's not going to let something like food preferences get in the way of preaching the Gospel.
Yet Ibn claims that this is deception. Here we simply have to disagree. When I am around Muslims, I don't eat pork, because I don't want to offend them over something as silly as food. Am I trying to deceive anyone by not eating pork? Not at all. If anyone asks me, I will gladly tell them my view. But if I'm going to offend someone, I want it to be over something important, not over something completely insignificant.
According to Ibn, it would be entirely appropriate for me to show up to a mosque eating a ham sandwich. I disagree. The difference between our views, it seems, comes down to whether we have any respect for other people's feelings and beliefs. Since I have respect for people who disagree with me, I don't want to offend them over nonessentials. According to Ibn, we should have no such respect for those who disagree with us.
Hence, Ibn's claim only holds if we're willing to admit that respect equals deception. I doubt even Ibn would claim this, so we have to ask ourselves why Muslims are so desperate to attack the apostle Paul. Quite simply, Muslims need to attack Paul because they need to blame someone for the fact that early Christianity is nothing like the early Christianity preached by Muhammad. Muslims need to say that someone corrupted the religion and destroyed all evidence that Jesus was a Muslim, so they blame Paul.
But there's another reason Muslims are willing to misrepresent Paul in an attempt to discredit him. When we place Paul side by side with Muhammad, Muhammad doesn't look very good. Muslims therefore have to resort to deception in an effort to bring Paul down to Muhammad's level. Ibn does this by saying that Paul advocates deception. He apparently thinks that this will draw our attention away from the fact that Islam advocates deception.
According to Sahih Muslim 6303, it’s okay for a Muslim to lie if he's doing it to bring reconciliation to people, or if he's trying to avoid a dispute, or if he's doing something good.
In Sahih al-Bukhari 4037, Muhammad allows his followers to lie and pretend to be friends with a Jewish merchant named Ka'b in order to assassinate him.
Surah 3:28 says that Muslims are not to take unbelievers as friends; however, the verse gives one exception. If a Muslim feels threatened by unbelievers, he can pretend to be their friend. In a commentary on this verse, Ibn Kathir says that if Muslims feel threatened by non-Muslims, they are allowed to show friendship outwardly, but never inwardly. He adds that Abu Darda said, “We smile in the face of some people, although our hearts curse them.” Imam Bukhari says that Taqiyya “is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.”
Consider also a modern Muslim scholar's comments on the above verse (3:28):
This verse explains all the verses quoted above which forbid taking the kaafirs as friends in general terms. What that refers to is in cases where one has a choice, but in cases of fear and taqiyah it is permissible to make friends with them, as much as is essential to protect oneself against their evil. That is subject to the condition that one’s faith should not be affected by that friendship and the one who is behaves in that manner out of necessity is not one who behaves in that manner out of choice. . . .
Shaykh Muhammad al-Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about the ruling on mixing with the kuffaar and treating them kindly hoping that they will become Muslim. He replied:
Undoubtedly the Muslim is obliged to hate the enemies of Allaah and to disavow them, because this is the way of the Messengers and their followers. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibraaheem (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: ‘Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allaah, we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred for ever until you believe in Allaah Alone’” [al-Mumtahanah 60:4]
“You (O Muhammad) will not find any people who believe in Allaah and the Last Day, making friendship with those who oppose Allaah and His Messenger (Muhammad), even though they were their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their kindred (people). For such He has written Faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with Rooh (proofs, light and true guidance) from Himself” [al-Mujaadilah 58:22]
Based on this, it is not permissible for a Muslim to feel any love in his heart towards the enemies of Allaah who are in fact his enemies too. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists) as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth” [al-Mumtahanah 60:1]
But if a Muslim treats them with kindness and gentleness in the hope that they will become Muslim and will believe, there is nothing wrong with that, because it comes under the heading of opening their hearts to Islam. But if he despairs of them becoming Muslim, then he should treat them accordingly. Source
We may compare this with the Apostle Paul's view:
Therefore, since we have this ministry, as we received mercy, we do not lose heart, but we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. (2 Corinthians 4:1-2)
Let's review the facts. Islam allows deception, while Christianity condemns it. Yet Ibn condemns Christianity for allowing deception, and overlooks the fact that his own religion allows deception (and, therefore, should be condemned, according to Ibn). Moreover, in order to show that Christianity allows deception, Ibn tries to deceive us by misrepresenting the teachings of Paul. Will his fellow Muslims condemn him for his deception? Why would they?
Wood:Is Paul advocating deception here, as Ibn claims? Certainly not. Paul is simply saying that when he's around Jews, he won't eat pork, etc. When he's around gentiles, he's not going to live according to Jewish restrictions. For Paul, food, clothing, pleasure, and so on, are all secondary. What's important is the truth of the Gospel. Thus, he's not going to let something like food preferences get in the way of preaching the Gospel.
Nice try Wood. Paul specifically said that he acts in accordance with the norms of certain peoples in order to WIN THEM. Win them to what? To Christianity, of course. The best expression of this Pauline deception appears in the work of Martin Goldsmith's "Islam and Christian Witness".
Information about these deceptive Christians can also be found in the following sites:
The above is a Messianic Muslim site. What the hell?
Another article on how Christians don the Messianic Muslim persona to dupe unsuspecting Muslims into accepting Christ as their Savior.
As for Taqiyyah, that's a Shiite practice. Historically, it has been used by them to protect themselves from being harmed by their enemies. They don't use it to win converts, unlike Christians.
Let's not forget Paul also said
I have become all things to all men so that BY ALL POSSIBLE MEANS I MIGHT SAVE SOME.
By ALL possible means? Hmmmm. What could that mean? Lol!
Ibn... you are so distant from the light thate you don'st eben have a shadow... your heart -- and I say this with an incredible sorrow... what a pain to realize this facte in a fellow human beeing... -- is your shadow...
Paul is not tryeing to "win" -- "kerdesu" -- anyone to christianity, but to the truth... to the onlie truth that makes the human earth realize its own autheticity... he is not saying he would lie... that would be in total constract to all his teachings because it woulld be in constract with God which is the TRUTH...
And yes Ibn... when one says that someone "can use any possible way" to prove that 2+2=4 he is not saying that someone could use false argumentations or false logical or mathematical rulles...
Another exemple: when I say to my pupils that they can use all they can to make a goog draw they are sufficient inteligent to understand the contextual limitation in which to interpret that "all"... is as simple as that...
In Paul's case he is saying that he would do everything that the truth -- that is inseperable from the true love -- allows... never a lie is in accordance to true... that's why the christian martirs accepts that someone else give death to them... that's the true martirdom...
By the way Ibn... the linkes you suggested us to see are something like suggesting the link in "Sesame Street" site that explains how to make a draw when one is trying to debate tha meaning of Picasso's second cubism... appalying...
Ibn... by the way... in this spanish muslim site's link (www.islamhoy.org/principal/novedades/amor%20en%20islam.htm) some one says that the Qur'an expresseliy says that «"God is Love"»... what doi you call this? Where in the Qur'an it is sayd "verbatin" that "God is Love"?
Fernando:Paul is not tryeing to "win" -- "kerdesu" -- anyone to christianity, but to the truth
Don't you believe Jesus the way, the Truth and the life? If so, Paul was trying to cozen people into accepting Jesus which is equivalent to the truth.
Ibn said "I have become all things to all men so that BY ALL POSSIBLE MEANS I MIGHT SAVE SOME.
By ALL possible means? Hmmmm. What could that mean? Lol!"
This means he will do anything to save his people he can act jewish to converse with a jew on his level he can converse with a roman because he is also roman.Now you have to know Paul was a roman/jew/christian he was a man of knowledge and many identitys.It wasnt common for a man in those days to be a roman and also a jew who later turned christian.But because of this worldly experience he can speak to everyone on there level and communicate with them better.So when he said he will become anything to save men he means he will become a jew when speaking to a jew.Yes meaning he will use their expressions when speaking their accents etc.But he cant lie as it is against jewish/christian belief of have u forgot Ibn?We havent got no form of Taqiyyah in our religion sorry.We face the truth under persecution and we accept the punishment.As paul did himself when beaten stoned etc for his belief in jesus he never once denyed jesus!
Ibn also said"As for Taqiyyah, that's a Shiite practice. Historically, it has been used by them to protect themselves from being harmed by their enemies. They don't use it to win converts, unlike Christians"
Now again he is using Taqiyyah.Now this practise is a QURANIC TEACHING!and it is plain to read i will put in capitals the words giving the command to lie! and he is telling me only shiite do this.Well call yourself a shiite because you ae doing this now:
"Let not the Believers take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than Believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: EXCEPT by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from THEM."so basicly save yourself by lying.
Also paul says he will becomes anything to save so he will talk to a jew like a jew and act like a jew(wont eat pork etc)he will speak to a roman like a roman.When you are mixed and have travelled you can speak to people on all levels,you can be like them.I am half turkish and half scottish,Born in england i can be at home in england scotland and turkey.Even though they are totally opposite i can be equally relaxed at any of them countrys.I can understand the scottish accent and the way of life,same as i can speak turkish and know their way of life.So when you can be anything to all,that means you are a travelled individual who can be on anyones level.
Ibn, you are a typical case of sifting the bug and swallowing the camel.
A couple of things:
Paul doesn’t PRETEND to be the people’s friend – your prophet does!
Paul doesn’t PRETEND to have good intentions with people – your prophet does!
Paul doesn’t endorse lying – your prophet does!
Paul says that doing what is evil to achieve good is condemnable – your prophet says that doing so is good!
And we can go on. Yet, you condemn Paul and excuse your prophet!
What is wrong with trying to win people to the Truth with a display godly manners without compromising Gods truth, as Paul says?
What is right about pretending to have good intentions with someone, when in reality you are to hate them in your heart, as our Qur’an says?
Which one is deceptive and conniving?
Let's not forget Paul also said
I have become all things to all men so that BY ALL POSSIBLE MEANS I MIGHT SAVE SOME.
By ALL possible means? Hmmmm. What could that mean? Lol!
Paul was a martyr. That should give you an idea what he meant with "by all possible means".
Do you think you can impress people who actually know what they are talking about?
I had an exchange with a guy on Answer- Islam and he had this same interpretation of Paul’s speachs. I was startled by his lack of spiritual intelligence, of moral elevation. It seems that Muslims are destitute of all real spirituality. It is not amazing because Quran is absolutely unprovided of spirituality. Spirituality is unknown in Islam, and that is why they can’t see all the nobleness and generosity of Paul. They only see an imposture. No need to be Christian to understand correctly what Paul means.
Ex, Romain, 3:7 Paul does not say to Romans that he tells them lies. Think a little bit, please ! This would be realy stupid. Would you say to a person you want to decieve chat you are doing so. Paul quotes Salomon’ words who say that God is rtuthfull whilst all men aer liars ( in comparison with absolute truthfullness of God). So Paul with great humility says to Romans, that, only being a poor man himself, what he can say about God, looks like a lie in comparison of what God is in reality. Paul says that he can only speaks like a poor man. His words are like lies but he have to speak humanly even though. Men has no other means to promote God’s glory. Who can reproach him? Chat is what Paul says.
Those who can see dishonesty here are to be pitied. So is the heart so are the lips.
Muslims can’t see the great spiritual elevation and honesty of these words. They can’t see the deep understanding of God’ greatness who is beyond all what men can say. No need to believe. This is implied in the notion of God even for atheists, philosophers, mystics and all men of “good will”.
Muslim’s lack of real spirituality is perfectly understandable for who had read Quran where God is depicted with the most sordid human “qualities”. Fear, hate violence, curses do not guide to spiritality. This is pitifull and disheartening. It seems that God put a seal on their heart, like they, themselves, say about “unbelievers”. But this is certainly not the case. Fear and brainwashing put a seal on intelligence, not God, who would certainly not commit this crime against justice, goodness and love. Asserting that Allah is unique , that Muhammad is his Prophet and cursing everyone who don’t believe : this is Muslim’s “spirituality.” This is tragic.
Claude said: «It seems that Muslims are destitute of all real spirituality»...
You're absoluttely righte about almos every muslim...
even those who wantt to say thate islam is very spirittual and start quoting sufis writters (forgetting, or tryeing to mislead, that sufism has allways been considerer herecttical...) ignore that they're just adapting christian and jewish spiritual texts, poems and prayers... as it has been proveen by Martin Almaida in responce to the islamic apologist Luce López Baralt (she even lost her place at the universitie where she tought when people realised the lack of profissionalism she had showen in her attenpts to defend islam... appalying...)
Ibn said: "Nice try Wood. Paul specifically said that he acts in accordance with the norms of certain peoples in order to WIN THEM. Win them to what? To Christianity, of course."
Let's review here. Paul says that he's allowed to do certain things as a Christian, but that he will refrain from doing these things when he's around certain people, so long as these people are offended by these things due to their cultural background. Thus, if Paul were around Muslims, he wouldn't eat pork, so that the Muslims wouldn't be distracted by his eating habits while he's preaching the Gospel to them.
So, according to you, not eating pork around a Muslim is deceptive. The point I'm making is that it's not deceptive at all. I'm free to eat pork. I'm also free not to eat pork. When I'm around Muslims, I choose the latter course. Does this make me a deceiver? You're being deceptive if you say yes.
The reason you're calling Paul deceptive (and completely misrepresenting his views) is that you're desperate to attack God's true followers, because they make Muhammad look bad.
And let's not forget that, based on your standards, Muhammad stands condemned, since he advocates deception in both the Qur'an and the Hadith. You might just as reasonably say, "I condemn Paul, because he's from the Middle East! Everyone should believe in Muhammad!" Why are you still a Muslim?
Wood:Let's review here. Paul says that he's allowed to do certain things as a Christian, but that he will refrain from doing these things when he's around certain people, so long as these people are offended by these things due to their cultural background. Thus, if Paul were around Muslims, he wouldn't eat pork, so that the Muslims wouldn't be distracted by his eating habits while he's preaching the Gospel to them.
You basically repeated what you said in your opening post, choosing to conveniently ignore the fact that Paul imitates other people in order to win them.
As is written in the Oxford Bible commentary, "His goal is not self-gratification but the interests of the gospel, and in particular the desire to ‘win’ converts. Like a demagogue who enslaves himself to the populace to campaign for their rights, Paul has deliberately renounced rights and demeaned himself to advance the cause of the gospel .....His self-sacrifice is first illustrated by the chief characteristic of his mission, his cross-cultural adaptability (vv. 20-1). Among the Jews he could live like a Jew; that is, among the law-observant he observes the law, although not considering himself utterly bound to it (v. 20). The purpose is to win Jews for the gospel.....Similarly, for Gentiles ‘outside the law’ Paul lived in a Gentile fashion, although in truth not lawless before God, but under full obligation to Christ (v. 21, ‘under Christ’s law’; no code of teaching is here envisaged). Again the purpose is to win Gentiles"
Wood:The reason you're calling Paul deceptive (and completely misrepresenting his views) is that you're desperate to attack God's true followers, because they make Muhammad look bad.
Nonsense. I challenge you to show me one Quranic verse or hadith in which it is permissible for Muslims to imitate the Kuffar in order to win them.
His goal is not self-gratification but the interests of the gospel, and in particular the desire to ‘win’ converts. Like a demagogue who enslaves himself to the populace to campaign for their rights, Paul has deliberately renounced rights and demeaned himself to advance the cause of the gospel .....His self-sacrifice is first illustrated by the chief characteristic of his mission, his cross-cultural adaptability (vv. 20-1). Among the Jews he could live like a Jew; that is, among the law-observant he observes the law, although not considering himself utterly bound to it (v. 20). The purpose is to win Jews for the gospel.....Similarly, for Gentiles ‘outside the law’ Paul lived in a Gentile fashion, although in truth not lawless before God, but under full obligation to Christ (v. 21, ‘under Christ’s law’; no code of teaching is here envisaged). Again the purpose is to win Gentiles
Hello? You call that deceptive?
That's like reading the parable of the Good Samaritan and then claiming: "See? Christians are commanded to slaughter each other!"
Ibn said "Nonsense. I challenge you to show me one Quranic verse or hadith in which it is permissible for Muslims to imitate the Kuffar in order to win them."
The difference is we dont call people kuffar,we dont use derogatory terms to describe non-christians,so that is the difference.
I learned quite some time ago, it is prudent to take EVERY accusation that Muslims level against other religions (or groups of any kind for that matter) and ALWAYS check to see if Islam is infact wholly guilty itself of what is being accused.
I would say, as an informal ball-park figure, Islam comes up guilty at least 85% of the time.
Projective identification runs so deep in Islamic culture, it is almost a tragic comedy when you really see it.
Dan said: "The difference is we dont call people kuffar,we dont use derogatory terms to describe non-christians,so that is the difference."
A personal story on the use of the term "kaffir" in Arab culture:
I've had quite a few friends from the Gulf-states in school (mostly from KSA and UAE). There was one in particular that I was quite close to. He was honest to a default (an admirable quality). One day we were discussing the topic of Islam and politics. He divulged some information about the true face of Saudi culture that shocked me. One of his Saudi friends became FURIOUS and started yelling at both of us in Arabic. To his credit, Mutaaz defended me. A fist fight almost started, and when his angry friend stormed off he shouted "Kaffir!" at me and spit at my feet.
I recognized the sound of the word, and proceeded to ask Mutaaz, "How offended should I be at what he just called me?". He looked me in they eye and said, "My friend...if he had just called you a n****r ...that is about how offended you should be".
How convenient! Changing the topic from Christian Taqiyaah to the definition of Kaafir.
Ibn said: "How convenient! Changing the topic from Christian Taqiyaah to the definition of Kaafir."
Actually, I was responding to something Dan said. Last I checked this was an open forum to comment. I don't think I will be allowing you to constrict what topics I discuss or which comments I expand upon, thank you anyway.
What is REALLY funny though, is the fact that you believe the TOPIC is "Christian Taqiyah" :-). You might want to check the original post from David again. What makes it even MORE sweet, is that in order to express the concept you are trying to convey you have to use an Arabic word that is completely anachronistic to the Bible or any form of Christianity! Perhaps next you will tell us about "Christian Eid ul-Adha" or "Christian Ashura"..or perhaps "Christian Jizyah"!! That would really put a smile on my face ibn :-D
I NEVER CHANGED THE TOPIC IM ANSWERING YOUR CLAIM,WE DONT USE TERMS LIKE THIS AND ITS TRUE..ALSO U SAID "Christian Taqiyaah" DID YOU JUST MAKE UP A NEW WORD.AGAIN LYING IS AGAINST OUR RELIGION UNDER ANY INSTANCE OR CIRCUMSTANCE SO DONT TRY TO LEAD PEOPLE INTO FALSE BELIEFS,BE HONEST WITH YOURSELF AND YOUR RELIGION.YOU CAN ARGUE WITH YOUR LIES BUT WHEN YOU ARE ALONE WITH YOUR THOUGHTS YOU KNOW YOU ARE LYING IN EVERY INSTANCE TO SAVE FACE FOR YOU AND YOUR RELIGION
Consider that David's original post included the following-
"Consider also a modern Muslim scholar's comments on the above verse (3:28):
This verse explains all the verses quoted above which forbid taking the kaafirs as friends in general terms..Shaykh Muhammad al-Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about the ruling on mixing with the kuffaar..." etc, etc.
You see, the issue of "kuffar" was plainly addressed in the content of the original post. This is clearly why Dan mentioned it. It was from Dan's mentioning of the word, and it's impact on Muslim non-Muslim relations that I expanded into a personal anecdote.
So, it is unfortunate if you do not like what is reflected about Muslims in Dan's comment or my anecdote, but it is perfectly appropriate and within the scope of discussion for both of us to mention it (even over your objections, which I assure you are at my utmost level of concern). Even if it WAS off topic, it is perfectly fine for me to post as I see fit, as long as it doesn't raise the objections of the blog's operators. I am sure you will find a way to remain at peace in your life, even if you find a few of my comments or Dan's comments to be off topic, ibn. I believe you have the emotional fortitude needed to survive such an ordeal.
Look at the great insights Paul had like these one, for exemple :” Do you not understand that you are God’s temple, and that God’s Spirit has his dwelling in you?…It’s a holy thing, this temple of God which is noting other than yourselves.” Paul, I Corr,3:16
“It is a spiritual, not a written law; the written law inficts death, whereas the spiritual law brings life. Paul, 2 Corr, 3:6
Muslims friends, compare these profound words to those inimitable, unchanged and eternal verses of the Quran. Compare the high spirituallity of these words with the sterility and the brutality of the Quran based on blind submission and who raise up division, fear, hate and violence. Quran is a written law, without spirituality and love and accordingly, brings death. Just look around.
Takkhia is an islamic notion. There is no such thing anywhere else.Proselytism is not Takkhia. Christians and Muslims are the most proselytes. This is problematic. All religions fears the proselitism of the others. This is a huge complicated problem. Let not discuss on that but on the very core of Islam and Christianism. Read the two quotes above and compare them to those of the Quran like Q, 6:125, 10:100, 6:25, 8:13, 9:29 etc etc. Quran and Islam are the letter without the spirit. It is blindness instead of light. It is submission instead of love. It is death instead of life.
claude said: «Quran and Islam are the letter without the spirit. It is blindness instead of light. It is submission instead of love. It is death instead of life»...
that's well sayde claude...
David said: “Let's review the facts. Islam allows deception, while Christianity condemns it.”
Yeah Islam allows it during times of need like war. If your religion says that during war you have to let your enemy know where you are so that he can kill you and aren’t allowed to deceive him, than that is actually a problem with your faith.
Ibn, i just recently found this blog and i love it so much. it has taught me so much abt the islam religion/political ideology. i have notice that u comment here quite often. do u know who u remind me of? the rich young ruler in the Bible. he came and asked Jesus what must he do to be saved. Jesus asked him if he had followed the ten commandments. he answered that he had since child hood.
then Jesus said give all u have to the poor and follow me. then the Bible said the man walked away in sorrow.
You see Ibn, this rich young ruler knew what he must do to be saved (follow Christ) and yet he refused deliberately knowing the truth.
You Ibn, know the truth. you know what u must do to be saved. you know what Islam and Jesus teach. you have knowledge that MANY muslim ppl don't have. you debate and talk w/ many Christ followers e.g. Nabeel, David, Mary, etc. And still yet like that young ruler u refuse to follow Jesus.
Not only that but u knowingly deceive other muslim's whom u have contact w/ from the truth. Rather than sharing the truth to them u deceive them.
Every man is accountable for what he does when he appears before the throne of Jesus.
I'm sure u know the consciences for those who spread false teaching deliberately. Paul talks abt that in all of his Gospels.don't drag others w/ u.
Ibn, please a life w/ out Jesus Christ is not a life, but a slow and agonizing death, and it only gets worst as u head into hell. trust me u r in contact w/ these people (Nabeel, David, Mary) and others as a sign from God telling u, to Listen and follow Him before it's to late.
Ibn, Many people in this world don't have this much knowledge as u abt the Bible, and yet they believe. U will have no excuse before God on Judgment day.
Ibn, u know Christ Loves u and wants nothing, NOTHING! more than adopting u as one of children, if u allow Him.
I'm writing this to u b/c i care abt u and want u to have the Joy i found in Jesus Christ. I want to see u in heaven. i want u to be healed from all the pain, suffering, and confusion u have abt salvation and Jesus. I want all ur answers answered, like mine were, through Jesus Christ.
I know it is hard, i was once in ur Shoes, but trust me it's harder w/ out Christ than it is w/ Christ. there is no second chance when the final bell rings. this is ur second chances. all this opportunities u r having is ur second chance. if u say no now, u have said no for ever.
i don't know why u hate Jesus so much. He has done nothing to u. in fact He laid his life for u so that u may have eternal life. Allah, didn't offer u that, Mohammed didn't offer u that. no one but Jesus offered u that.
Ibn, don't become like the rich young ruler please. you know what is right, you know the way the truth and the life. Jesus said come to me all who r thirsty, and that includes you Ibn.
Chose Christ before it's to late. Jesus loves u. and God bless.
Post a Comment