Thursday, 21 April 2016

Muslim Discusses John 3:16 - Aqil Onque



In refuting the current day Christian Apologist and polemist, I will be looking a bit deeper at the pivotal verse of Christian faith and doctrine found in the book of John, 3:16. This may in fact be the most quoted verse in the Bible, while also the most misunderstood or misplaced one as well. The Christian propagates this verse and hails it at the nonbeliever at any chance possible. But, it is the false notion and misunderstanding in which they assault people that is the problem, as we will come to see here.

The aforementioned verse is not an isolated verse that can be cited without looking at the doctrinal implications behind it, or the contradiction thereof. And, though many things are left for interpretation, the Bible enthusiasts love to decorate this verse with all of the extra curricula doctrine that was not taught by Jesus himself. For instance, they love to imply that this verse is referring to the alleged death and resurrection of Jesus. However, such a doctrine and belief was NEVER taught by Jesus. We are hard pressed to find any teaching of Jesus, from the words of Jesus, that his mission was to come and die and be resurrected for the sins of man to be forgiven. Rather, it is Paul who said that, “If Christ was not raised, then your faith is in vain…” 1 Corr 15:14-17. But given this Pauline reality and teaching, everything is viewed through his theology and doctrine. Just look at the fact that John 3:16 does not have any mention of Jesus dying or being raised up. Rather, it just mentions that out of the love of God, He gave Jesus. Yet, for some reason, no Christian will quote this verse without telling you that it means the death and resurrection of Jesus! Why? Because they have been brainwashed and indoctrinated to do so. Putting this aside, let us look at some of the theological consequences and relationships of John 3:16 with Christian doctrine.

I would like to examine this verse in relation to five core Christian beliefs, and then refute each of these beliefs as non biblical and contradictory, all the while connecting it to the conclusion of John 3:16, while showing that John 3:16, in fact, does not support such false claims, not even the love of God as the bible thumper tries to impress upon us. The five core beliefs are as follows:

      1. The sole need of blood for atonement (fabrication)

2.      The human god sacrifice (fabrication)

3.       The Original sin (fabrication)

4.      The holy God versus the unholy man (fabrication)

5.      The unconditional love and forgiveness (fabrication)

Before we explore these five core Christian beliefs, let us first have a look at the verse in John under discussion.

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).

There are four clear declarations in this verse, namely:

1          That God loved the world

2        That, because of this love, God gave His son

3         That God only has One and only One son

4        And that whoever believes in this son, will not perish but have everlasting life.

A few words about these points, before we look at our five core Christian beliefs in relation to the verse itself and the idea of the love, unconditional love of God as implied and declared by Christians.

 When we truly examine this and the Christian doctrine, we must conclude that this expression of love is either a farce and a lie, or that the god of John 3:16 has failed miserably in truly expressing his love. Why is that, do you ask? Consider this. The verse clearly connects the fact that the son was given, due to the love of God for the world.  In other words, giving the son was God’s way of expressing His love to the world.  But, the problem arises in a related doctrine of the Christian, which is in Predestination.  The Christian believes that it is solely God that elects His believers and man has absolutely no role in receiving the grace of God.  This is most clear in the statement of Paul in Ephesians 2:8-9.  If it is God alone that elects those who will believe, without any action of man that would warrant election or rejection, then this expression of giving the son, so that to believe in him would allow for eternal life, all because of the love of God for the world, is a hoax and a lie!  How could anyone benefit from the son, when ultimately, God is the one that elects those who will in fact believe? This idea is akin to saying, if I have ten or more children and I promised to buy them all new cars because of my love for them, but I know that I will only allow a few of them to drive, while the others will never be able to, then how is this act of buying them cars a true expression of my love? For my expression brings absolutely no benefit to them, which means that either, my expression of loving in giving them the cars (giving his son) was either a deceptive lie, or I failed in truly loving them all as I stated, for I was only able to benefit a few, in spite of my statement to all.  And the intent for benefit is clearly made clear, for accepting the son is what is said will allow for eternal life.  Evidently, God’s intent was to benefit by the giving of the son.  But in what way did those benefit, who were never elected by God?  So it is clear that this verse and what it attempts to propose is inconsistent and incongruous with what was stated by Paul in Ephesians 2:8-9.

The next two points; one is the idea that God gave His son.  Was this giving of His son freely and unconditional? What was the mission of his son? Did the son know his mission? Was this mission ever declared by God? Was this mission ever declared by the Son? What does son mean here?  Is this some special kind of son?  Which joins the us to the point of this verse in which it says that he is the one and Only son, only begotten son! In actual fact, God has many sons in the Bible!  Adam is called the son of God.  Angels are called the sons of God.  So, what is it about this sonship that is so special? Could it be the idea that Jesus was the only begotten son?  Well, this is false also, as God himself declares that he had begotten David,     Psalms 2:7.  Thus, it is impossible for God to have only one begotten son since there are more than one begotten sons clearly attributed to God in the Bible.
Lastly, let’s look at the idea that believing in the son brings everlasting life. Well, again, according to Christian doctrine, God is the sole decider of those elect.  Man has absolutely no part to play in the election of God.  Thus, believing in the son means nothing, because if God didn’t elect you, your belief means nothing. It would just be a wasted life and this is most evident in the words of Jesus in the book of Matthew, 7:21-23, where he says:
 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
So, it becomes quite clear that the Christian finds himself in a serious quagmire. On the one hand, he wants to believe in Christ for salvation, even though he really has no ability to decide this since only God chooses the elect.  Furthermore, if in fact he did believe, this belief of his does not assure him salvation as was promised, due to the fact that many will be rejected by Christ!  So, basically, damned if you don’t and maybe damned if you do as well.  As we can see, it is not such a win-win situation as the Christians might espouse it to be. Good luck!
Now that we have briefly dealt with John 3:16, let us turn our attention to the five core Christian beliefs that fail to measure up against the verse under discussion and are either contradicted by it, or contradict it. Through this, we will be able to conclude that the Christian doctrine and faith ultimately fails because it is a self defeating doctrine and theology from the position of its scripture and non-scripture based beliefs.


The Christian has been tricked and programmed into accepting a completely fabricated doctrine as it relates to the scriptural position on atonement and the use of blood. The Christian new blood doctrine absolutely stresses the fact that blood is the ONLY means to forgiveness and that without blood, there is no remission of sin.  This idea is found in the book of Hebrews, 9:22.

However, there are a number of problems with this belief.  First and foremost, such an understanding was never believed or understood by the Jewish community at any time in history and this is a very essential point to consider.  Furthermore, there is NOTHING in the Old Testament that supports such an exaggerated and forged belief.  Rather, the Old Testament states the opposite and promotes repentance and forgiveness without any blood sacrifice.  For example, refer to Ez. 33:11-16, Ez. 18:20-24, 2Chr. 7:14, Is. 55:7, Hos. 6:6, Ps. 51:17, 1Sam. 15:22, and others.  We see in these verses that blood is not at all a necessity for atonement and forgiveness.  On the contrary, the Old Testament clearly states that one can easily petition God for forgiveness through prayer and repentance while never needing to use any blood sacrifice.  Moreover, any use of a blood sacrifice would and could never be completed without prayer and petitioning God for atonement. Then, here comes Christianity and turns this practice completely upside down so that they can usher in this exclusively blood atonement doctrine that could only be satisfied by the sacrifice of the blood of a human god, an incarnate god!

Further, the main catalyst for this doctrine of blood atonement is found in the book of Hebrews and it has become common knowledge that the scholars of the Bible agree almost unanimously that the author of the book of Hebrews is UNKNOWN! Thus, we are burdened with an unknown doctrine, presented by an unknown author!  Are we really to take this seriously?

Another point to consider is the fact that the sin offering was predominantly for “unintentional” sin.  Though there are some cases in which it extended outside of that, the common practice and stance was that it was for unintentional sins, brought with confession for atonement.  Please see, Lev. 5:14-19, Lev. 7:7-11, Num. 15:27-30 to substantiate this point. Since blood sacrifice was not required for all sins and intentional and severe sins demanded much more than any blood atonement could offer, how did we get to the doctrine that, without the spilling of blood, there is no remission of sins?  Who taught this ideology?  Was it Abraham, Moses, or Jesus?  Who?  The author of the book of Hebrews, that’s who!  And who might that have been?  I hope you understand the bewildering nature of this issue now.

To close this point, I would like to cite a very insightful verse from the Qur’an that truly puts this discussion in its proper context. In Surah Hajj, 22:37, after mentioning about the animals of sacrifice, though in a different context, but very relevant in principle, it states:

“Their meat will not reach ALLAH, nor will their blood, but what reaches Him is piety from you. Thus have We subjected them to you that you may glorify ALLAH for that [to] which He has guided you; and give good tiding to the doers of good.” 

This verse makes it quite clear that God is concerned with our obedience and devotion to Him, not with the blood involved in any act.  The blood does not reach God; but rather, the demonstration and striving of the servant to do their best to satisfy the commands of their Lord.

As we can see, this verse of John 3:16 has almost no relevance when it comes to the issue of blood atonement.  If the Christians insist that we, as humanity, needed an ultimate blood sacrifice, thus God, knowing this, out of His love sent Jesus for this, then we have to beg the question, did we in fact need a blood sacrifice for atonement in the first place?  The burden of proof is upon the Christian to prove this!  And we know that can’t be done from the Old Testament, as we have proven!  So, what do they have to prove their case? We think nothing, but we will wait and see.

The great Christian reformer and theologian of the 16th century, Martin Luther, commenting on the self loathing and despised doctrine of Christianity, said the following; “The most damnable and pernicious heresy that has ever plagued the mind of man is that somehow he can make himself good enough to deserve to live with an all Holy God.”
Echoing such a mentality, the Christians berate the world with quotes and doctrines of self loathing and self despised rhetoric that traps the individual into a downward spiral of moral regress in order to build up the human /god doctrine.  To read some of the earliest writings from the church fathers on how they viewed the self and the world will make you lose your lunch in your lap if you were not prepared.  One can get a glimpse of this sinister doctrine by reading the writings of Paul in the New Testament.  For instance read the more famous support for this in Romans 3:10-18.  And then there is the infamous quote, (always out of context), of Isaiah 64:6, in which it states that our righteousness is like that of filthy rags.  Such non contextual quotes, along with other passages, have a twofold effect and both are ungodly and unproductive.  The first is that such a pathetic disposition prepares you for the blasphemous doctrine of incarnation of God.  For one is so filthy, that God won’t even look his way!  Thus, the only way that God can help man is if God becomes man!  Then die, so that the holy blood of the incarnate god can be spilled for the remission of sins for man once and for all! The second effect is that such a doctrine instills in the subconscious of the self a feeling of contentment with being lowly and a lack of aspiration for rising above and challenging oneself to be better in deeds before God.  Why would one exert oneself in good works when deeds are regarded as filthy rags anyway?  So, remain pathetic and depend upon some divine savior.

This doctrine is again in opposition to the Old Testament teachings and understandings of the people for over thousands of years before the New Testament and the new Christian faith.  One will find explicit and strong verses like Jeremiah 17:10, which states; “I the Lord search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve.”  Such a verse, along with what we read in Psalms 37:27-29 as well as many other verses, all show that God is expecting good deeds from us.  They are to be done earnestly, as a token of deep gratitude to God and a petition to God for His favor and reward, not in boast.  The new doctrines  taught by the Christians of this idea of self-worthlessness is paralyzing and un godly, to say the least.

Now, let us look a bit at this need for a human/god and its related belief.  Given that we have proven from the Bible that God actually encourages us to do good works and to expect to be rewarded for it, we are in no need for God to come down himself and save us. God does not  deem us unclean and unworthy; but rather, God wants to see the best from us.  He wants to bring out the best in us and have us achieve our maximum human potential, which is to be as righteous and faithful as possible. All for His glory!  Not that we sit on our unholy bottoms waiting for some savior to rescue us from our lowly despised states!  NO!  Rise up and be counted and do your level best before God, for your salvation depends on it!  In the Qur’an, 17:13-14, God says, “And [for] every person, We have imposed his fate upon his neck, and We will produce for him on the day of Resurrection a record which he will encounter spread open. [It will be said], Read your record! Sufficient is yourself against you (or for you) this day as accountant.”

In conclusion of this second point, as this relates to John 3:16, after looking at the historical picture of relationship that man has with God in trying his best to work righteousness and earn His favor, we see that we are not by default despised and filthy and unworthy before God. Rather we have an honor and dignity that God gave us above everything in creation, as  is beautifully articulated in the Qur’an when it states, 17:70, “Indeed, We have honored, (dignified) the children of Adam…” So we sit not inept, but empowered by God to be His representative and to lead the true way of life back to Him.  We are not pathetic and in need of a savior to come die for our sins. What we are in need of is the Divine Watch of our Lord and His guidance through His Scripture and Messengers and His forgiveness as we traverse this path. Thus we conclude that the Bible itself, the Old Testament and even passages in the New Testament refutes the idea of John 3:16, as commonly interpreted to us by the bible thumpers.


In what has remained to be the irrefutable refutation of this Christian doctrine, the most clear and explicit verses of Ezekiel 18:1-24, we cite for you in this point.

The word of the Lord came to me: “What do you people mean by quoting this proverb about the land of Israel: “ ‘The parents eat sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? “As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel. For everyone belongs to me, the parent as well as the child—both alike belong to me. The one who sins is the one who will die. “Suppose there is a righteous man who does what is just and right. He does not eat at the mountain shrines or look to the idols of Israel. He does not defile his neighbor’s wife or have sexual relations with a woman during her period. He does not oppress anyone, but returns what he took in pledge for a loan. He does not commit robbery but gives his food to the hungry and provides clothing for the naked. He does not lend to them at interest or take a profit from them. He withholds his hand from doing wrong and judges fairly between two parties. He follows my decrees and faithfully keeps my laws. That man is righteous; he will surely live, declares the Sovereign Lord. “Suppose he has a violent son, who sheds blood or does any of these other things (though the father has done none of them): “He eats at the mountain shrines. He defiles his neighbor’s wife. He oppresses the poor and needy. He commits robbery. He does not return what he took in pledge. He looks to the idols. He does detestable things. He lends at interest and takes a profit. Will such a man live? He will not! Because he has done all these detestable things, he is to be put to death; his blood will be on his own head. “But suppose this son has a son who sees all the sins his father commits, and though he sees them, he does not do such things: “He does not eat at the mountain shrines or look to the idols of Israel. He does not defile his neighbor’s wife.

He does not oppress anyone or require a pledge for a loan. He does not commit robbery but gives his food to the hungry and provides clothing for the naked. He withholds his hand from mistreating the poor and takes no interest or profit from them. He keeps my laws and follows my decrees. He will not die for his father’s sin; he will surely live. But his father will die for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. “Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. “But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? “But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will die.”

This is the Jewish teaching on sin! This was Jesus teaching on sin! This was Moses and Aaron and all of the Prophets and Messengers teaching on sin! So where did we get this doctrine of original sin from? Yep, you guessed it. Paul again! As he make this doctrine clear in Romans 5:19 and most explicit in 1 Corinthians 15:22. But, how does he promote such a doctrine so fundamentally opposed to the Jewish teaching? The secret to the answer lies in the fact that Paul was adamant about being the appointed apostle of Jesus that would preach to the Gentiles! Why? Because he knew quite well that his new message could no way resonate with a serious Jewish audience. For they knew such ideas as original sin, incarnate, human sacrifice and all of these paganistic influences into their Jewish faith was unacceptable.
A quick consideration to ask you, as we discuss original sin, that you keep in mind that this is the same doctrine responsible for the corrupted belief that will put millions of innocent children into the blaze of hell, all because of the fact that sin is supposedly inherited. And because God is so holy and sin is so lowly, that even a baby who have not accepted the only means of sin remission, which is the blood of Jesus, will be cast into hell, because God can’t bear to look at him. Yes, an innocent baby is not even spared from original sin. Just something to keep in mind
In conclusion of this third point, as it relate to John 3:16, it is obviously clear that original sin doctrine is a concocted heretical belief. This being proven by the extensive quote from Ezekiel 18:1-24. This being the case, if no one can die for the sin of another, then what purpose would a savior who die for your sins be?  Again, proving the fallacy of the verse of John 3:16

Though this is not a doctrine of the Christians as stated, the concept is one deeply entrenched into the thoughts and theology of the Christians. Now, we will all proclaim the Exaltedness of God and how far removed He is from being associated in being and essence with man! But never will we stoop to such a low opinion of God, that he has made the human being so vile and corrupt and wicked and filthy and stained and detestable and unworthy and inept that the only way that this creation of His could ever receive redemption and salvation is if God himself had to come and die!

How would you feel if your father considered you so despicable  that he didn’t even want you to tell people you were his son? He was so ashamed of you that he could not even bear to look at you!  You were so worthless, that no matter what you did, even of good, it amounted to absolutely nothing? How would you feel? Well, try to understand that this is the way the Christians view God over man. They may deny it, because who would in their right mind accept such an idea? But, when you explore the theology and doctrine of the Christians, this is what you will come up with! Such beliefs is the essence of making the idea of  the incarnate god a savior for man. Have you ever talked with a Christian? Have you ever heard him say, we are too unclean? What do you think he means? Ask him. But in the meantime, lets quote again Martin Luther, the leader of the Protestant  reformation and movement of the 16th century; he said:  “The most damnable and pernicious heresy that has ever plagued the mind of man is that somehow he can make himself good enough to deserve to live with an All Holy God.” And this is just one quote. There are literally tons of such expressions from the early church fathers on this idea. 

Now, the question that needs to be asked and addressed is this, how did man ever have any kind of fruitful personal relationship with God prior to the advent of Jesus? If the Christians believes that God has such a loathing attitude towards man because he is stained with sin, then how did man last the tolerance of God for so long? Of course, we see a quite different narrative in the Old Testament, as well as the Qur’an. We seen several quotes from the Old Testament, and here is one most intimate verse about God and His relationship with man. In the Qur’an 2:186; “And when my servant ask you [O  Muhammad], concerning Me, indeed I am near. I respond to the invocation of the supplicant when he calls upon Me. So, let them respond to Me  [by obedience] and believe in Me that they may be [rightly] guided.” 

Now we are interested in the Christians answering these questions, for it is their theology and doctrine that promotes it. We would like to hear what they really have to say about it and their proof texts from the Old Testament.

In conclusion of this fourth point, as it relates to the verse John 3:16, if it is proven, and we believe that it is, that the relationship between God and man was not as strained as the Christians would have us to think, then there would be no need for a savior, as man could, as he was turning to god in repentance long before the arrival and departure of Jesus! Further, if this doctrine is true, then another question arises. Why were the first followers of Jesus, even after his departure, still making sin and guilt offerings? If Jesus act on the cross was the ultimate sacrifice, then what were Peter and James and the others still making sacrifices at the temple? It’s makes absolutely no sense! Just a bit more to think about and another question to ask our Christian friends pushing the bible down your throat. Take a minute to clear your throat, and ask a couple of questions yourself.  So, we see again the failure of John 3:16. What need was there for a savior, a divine savior, when man was already turning to God for forgiveness? Forgiveness? That brings us to our next and final point.


It would be such a nice flowery message to have one believe, that no matter what, God loves you; this is especially the case for the Christian since already they understand how loathsome they are to God because of sin. Though the two beliefs are clearly contradictory to each other, it seems that doesn’t cause much care to the Christian. But this is what their faith adheres to. Now, the concept of love is probably thee greatest emphasis of Christians as it relates to God, and it’s clear that John 3:16 has a great deal to do with that. However, does the claim hold up? When we examine the Christian doctrine and theology against the Old Testament passages we are faced with some serious problems and these problems seems to never stop popping up. Here I want to look at two main problems. The first is that, the view that the Christians have of the love of God is not supported by the Old Testament. Which lends to the belief that either God has changed, and changed drastically or that the New Testament projection of God is a forged doctrine foreign to the earlier revealed scriptures. And the second problem is that the concept of forgiveness in the New Testament and amongst the Christians is misleading, even to a lie. For if the idea that God MUST take every sin into account and that it MUST be punished, then where is the reality of forgiveness in this? It’s nonexistent! You cant have absolute retribution and at the same time claim forgiveness!

Now, let us explore these two problems facing the Christian theology and doctrine and expose them for what they are.      

The Christian, when asked about the love of God will tell you that God love all and that Christians love all. But neither is true, and this is proven from the Old Testament and the New Testament. For it states in the Old Testament, Deut. 7:9-11, “Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments. But those who hate him he will repay to their face by destruction; he will not be slow to repay to their face those who hate him. Therefore, take care to follow the commands, decrees and laws I give you today.”  Does this sound unconditional to you? God is faithful… keeping His covenant of love to… those who love him and keep His commandments… Now, is this the same God of the New Testament? Did something change along the way? Please help us understand how all of a sudden now in the New Testament, supposedly, God loves everyone no matter what.
How about Psalms 7:11 “God is a righteous judge, a God who displays his wrath every day.”
These are verses that no Christian can explain how they coincide with their concept of God, all the long in their delusion they believe something contrary. It is for proofs like these that we really have to scrutinize the New Testament message and the Christian doctrine. For it fails the test, over and over again and presents an unsupported theology that can’t be substantiated by or through the former scriptures. Unconditional love from God is not a biblical concept and it never has been, until the Christians arrived and tried to make this the message of Jesus decades to centuries later after Jesus.
 Then there is the case of forgiveness, or should we say the absence of forgiveness. While the doctrine of the Christian is staunch on the consequence of sin is death and that no sin can go unpunished, they are either deluded or sinful liars to turn around and try to preach that the god of this doctrine is also forgiving.  It’s impossible for both to be true! If God is forgiving, then He won’t punish every sin, as He will forgive. That’s the whole purpose of forgiving, so as to not punish for the sin committed. However, if one insist that all sins must be punish, then by default that eliminates any idea of forgiveness, for retribution was exacted. Look at what it states in the Bible; 2 Chronicles 7:14, “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”  How do we get around such explicit verses that crushes the Christian doctrine? If there is any truth to the Old Testament, then we are forced to abandon the New Testament. For they both can’t be correct. This reminds me of the piercing declaration in the Qur’an 2:113 where it states, “The Jews say "The Christians have nothing [true] to stand on," and the Christians say, "The Jews have nothing to stand on," although they [both] recite the Scripture. Thus the polytheists speak the same as their words. But Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ.”  Certainly, some insightful words to conclude with, so reflect, will you!

In conclusion of this fifth point, as it relates to John 3:16, we have seen that the God of the Old Testament has a particular love that is reserved for those who love Him and keep His commandments. That He is angry at the wicked and punishes them. Yet, at the same time, he encourages His faithful to repent and do good deeds to petition His forgiveness. This does not sound like the God of John 3:16, who  promotes an unconditional love, yet has seen the need to send himself to come die for all sins, because he needs to spill blood to forgive. And again, if the Old Testament is true, which the Christians believe is the case, then John 3:16 and a great deal of the New Testament material can’t be true as well.
This concludes our look at 5 core beliefs of the Christian faith and how they all are proofs against the often quoted verse of John 3:16. Moreover, we showed how the Christian doctrine and theology is filled with contradictory precepts and unsubstantiated claims. All of this through textual proofs and sound reasoning, we provided.  We now invite our Christian friends to go back and investigate your doctrine and theology and correct it as needed and see that your path is neither consistent with itself nor other previous scriptures. This we hope is enough to awaken you all to the facts of your misguidance and serve as an impetus to your finding the truth.       

No comments: