Tuesday, 26 December 2017

Analysing Jay Smith's Student's Debate At Speakers Corner On Atonement

This is a review and commentary on a Muslim –Christian dialogue video which I saw online. The Muslim is Hashim (a popular speaker for Islam at Speakers Corner) and the Christian, Elizabeth Schofield of St Nicholas Church, Tooting.

Dusters and uneven scales

Lizzie Schofield begins by throwing dust in the air. She makes a big deal about nothing. In her view it’s a contradiction if one believes in works/good deeds alongside the belief that you’ll only go into Paradise through Allah’s (God’s) mercy.

This is one of the traits I don’t like about Lizzie. She goes into simplistic and shallow thinking when talking about Islam just to make room for a polemic to attack Islam

Good deeds are the product of sincere faith. Sincere faith and good deeds are due to the mercy of God. It is due to God’s mercy that He rewards good deeds. Ultimately, every blessing is due to the mercy of God; the decision to forgive somebody and permit them in heaven is due to God’s mercy when all things are said and done.

There is no contradiction.

Lizzie will jump through hoops to support ideas such as the god-man dying or the trinity in an effort to justify these church beliefs as non-contradictory yet she will not even go beyond surface level thought when talking about Islam. There’s a reason for this, she will not have any polemics left (and will ultimately have to consider Islam seriously).

A Catholic would understand this so perhaps Lizzie’s limitation in this regard is just simply born out of her denomination and the crowd she’s involved with.
Paul (not Williams, of Tarsus) talks about God giving eternal life as a reward in some sense in Romans 2:

6 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”[a] 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.
Would Lizzie says this contradicts Romans 3:24 which talks about justification by grace

24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

Catholics would say our good works are a product of God’s grace and mercy. Catholics would argue the “reward” for the good works in Romans 2 is ultimately due to God’s grace.

Is this a contradiction the Bible? I don’t think so.

You’ve heard of James the Just, meet Hashim the Just

Hashim then argues against the Christian view of blood atonement. Is this not unjust?

This is a good argument: a moral issue of an innocent person suffering for somebody else.

Hashim mentions the wrath of God being poured out on Jesus in the Church’s beliefs.

God’s anger toward sin has been satisfied in Christ because His wrath was poured out on Him, at Calvary.[Robert L Deffinbaugh]

24 eHe himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we fmight die to sin and glive to righteousness. hBy his wounds you have been healed. [1 Peter 2:24]

Lizzie does try to address this point by appealing to John 10:18, discussed later in this commentary.

Penal Substitutionary Atonement

We’re talking about a penal substitutionary atonement. If Lizzie and her church believe their sins were put on/in Jesus on the tree then are they saying Jesus suffered for every sin they do/did?

Are they saying the sin of a Christian bloke viewing porn was put on Jesus? How about the sin of lying? Every time Lizzie Schofield (or any Christian lie) or behave rudely, does that mean this sin was put on Jesus for him to suffer more pain?

If you truly believe this, the idea that every one of your sins (including being intellectually dishonest, lying about Islam, lying about Muslims, heckling Muslims, being rude and abusive towards Muslims, misrepresenting Islam etc.) means/meant Jesus felt more pain then; then why do we continually see so much sin in the church and amongst Christians?

How about the sin of a rapist? Are you saying the sin of rape was put on Jesus and he suffered for it? The sin of every rapist who became Christian and/or was a Christian?

Is that fair? Why should Jesus be punished for rape, bestiality, murder, racism, hypocrisy and other sins he did not commit?

This is a splinter of what Hashim is driving at here. Is this just?


Hashim also mentioned a verse in Ezekiel which seems to contradict the idea of somebody else suffering for your sins

I think he was referring to Ezekiel 18:20

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.

Lizzie was willing to consider Islam and doubted Christianity? [#3.40]
Lizzie, now goes on to talk about how she had some doubts in faith after her last debate with Hashim. Apparently, if she’s not bending truth for effect (and having made Jesus feel even more pain according to her beliefs?), Lizzie was moved to think about what Hashim said in the last debate and began to think she could be wrong about her beliefs and Islam may be right. If the plain meaning of what she said is taken as true, then I applaud Lizzie for thinking about what the Muslim said. That is very, very encouraging.

However, I don’t agree with Lizzie Schofield’s thinking here. She says Hashim said to her if she comes to Islam she will be saved (this is of course is true - saved from being cut off from the presence of God, saved from the wrath of God, saved from Hell). What I don’t agree with is Lizzie being moved by a promise of salvation. A bloke could turn up at the park next week and make up a religion, Selfianity, and promise everybody Heaven as long as they believed and done what they wanted.

Would you consider that faith?

We should not be moved like this based on fluffy promises, regardless of how satisfied and good they could potentially make us feel. This is emotionalism. I always get the feeling, when listening to Lizzie, and to be honest, many Christians, that they are involved in the church because of this type of emotionalism, and/or support network that the church offers.

It’s clear that every faith offers salvation and promises salvation. But we must look into the theology of that faith rather than being moved by promises which may make us feel good.

Is the Bible clear on Faith/Works Salvation?

At 5 mins Lizzie says the Bible teaches, “clearly”, our works will not lead us to salvation and it’s the grace of God which will save us.

This statement is not true for Lizzie (if Lizzie is consistent).The Bible is not clear on this issue, why else are evangelicals arguing with the biggest and the older church (Catholics) on this very topic? There’s a grey area here which should give us pause. The verse I showed above mentions a reward for works (Romans 2)

IF Lizzie is consistent, she would say the Bible is contradictory. But of course, she’s adopted a hermeneutic of friendship for her church tradition but for Islam it’s a polemical hermeneutical approach; if she’s doing it knowingly, that is intellectual dishonesty (which is a sin, something which Jesus suffers further pain for on her behalf according to her faith?)

Would Martin Luther agree with Lizzie Schofield?

I’d like to quickly show that even for Martin Luther, this idea was not terribly clear. Bart Erhman summarises this:

Since the Reformation, but especially since the 19th century, scholars of the Bible have noted that there are theological differences, sometimes big differences, among the books that made it into the New Testament. Martin Luther himself recognized this. When he made his famous German translation of the New Testament – which in German Protestantism carried the same kind of reverential awe and respect as the King James Version did in English-speaking Protestantism – he, as is well known, did indeed (of course) translate all 27 books. But rather than following their traditional, canonical order, he put four of the books in an “appendix” at the end: Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation.

The reason: he wasn’t really sure about the revelatory character of these books. His best known complaints were about James. The letter of James is quite explicit that a person is NOT “justified” (that is, put into a restored relationship with God) “by faith alone” but “by works.” For James, “faith without works is dead. Indeed, Scripture itself teaches that a person is justified by works through the example of Abraham. James quotes Genesis 15:6 to prove it. “And Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” For James, this faith in God justified Abraham because of what he did: he willingly offered up his son Isaac on the altar to God as a sacrifice. And so it was not simply by believing God that he was justified, it was by doing something about it. (See James 2:14-26)

Luther considered this view to stand in flat contradiction to the gospel proclaimed by Paul, who was equally explicit. For Paul, a person is “justified by faith, not by the works of the law, for by works of the law will no one be justified” (See Romans 3 and Galatians 2). Paul backs up this view by appealing to Scripture – specifically to Abraham, precisely also the person named by James! What is more striking, he quotes exactly the same verse, Genesis 15:6, to prove it. For Paul, Abraham was justified (in Gen. 15) BEFORE he “did” anything (e.g., before he circumcised his son Isaac in Gen.17). And so justification comes before, not because of, works.


Personally, I don’t really care for this topic right now, it’s drifting away from the debate but it’s certainly something which I’d encourage Christians to think about – including Lizzie Schofield.

Hashim: Christians are not certain of their salvation

Hashim goes on to tackle this idea amongst certain Christians that they will certainly go to Heaven. The bulk of this is captured in this video. I would recommend you watch this short video and learn that in reality,Christians who have imbibed emotionalism, and strut about claiming they will certainly go to paradise. are not consistent with their texts. Hashim does a good job in bringing up important and relevant verses which are overlooked by this type of Christian in their dopamine fuelled proclamations.

Lizzie was deceived by an anti-Islam missionary website/missionary about a Hadith?

Lizzie tries to nullifies Hashim’s philosophical criticism of vicarious atonement as being unjust with a tu quoque fallacy. The idea that you have this concept as well...

She tries to build this on old refuted internet polemics from the usual websites by misrespresenting a Hadith and stating that in Islam, Muslims will go to Paradise and be saved from Hell because a Jew/Christian will suffer in their place.

No. No. No. This Hadith has already been explained. I don’t understand why nobody in the anti-Islam Christian camp is relaying this response to other Christians so they don’t end up further propagating distortions of somebody’ else’s faith (which would be a sin, if done knowingly - meaning Jesus suffered more pain on the cross according to the church?).

The Hadith in question does not teach penal substititutionary atonement. Muslims don’t view it literally. It’s explained here.

You’ve got to represent our beliefs accurately, folks. Even if it means you have drop the polemics some older missionary/polemicist handed to you.

So, will somebody get the message across to those polemicists because I’ve seen this misleading polemic bandied about before.

The idea that God dies by his own creation...

The Muslim speaker, Hashim brought up the issue around the blood atonement: God dying by his own creation. Lizzie did not pick up on this point and expand this talking point. That may just be because she was pushed for time or forgot. This is a very important discussion as the set Christian response based on orthodox Christian theology leads Christians, in my view, into a few different theological conundrums which I would like to see explored – this topic is of paramount importance. I think a properly conducted dialogue on this topic will help a Christian to see Christian beliefs to be contradictory and unravelled upon deeper thought.

Lizzie’s admission on hell implicates her in double standards (sin?)

Hashim got Lizzie Schofield to admit she believes the Bible teaches that non Christians (unbelievers) will be put in Hell forever. This was an notable admission because, previously, Lizzie (and Hatun Tash) had been attacking Islam for the belief that unbelievers go to Hell.

This video highlights this inconsistency on their part:


Like I say, if this was deliberate, it means Lizzie and Hatun were sinning (and having caused Jesus to suffer more pain according to their faith?) when attacking Islam because they were being intellectually dishonest. If it was not deliberate, then it begs the question, why are they preaching “Christianity” and what did Jay Smith, CJ Davis and Beth Grove teach them if they did not know this about their own faith a few months ago?

It’s a valid point for consideration.

Lizzie partially quotes John 10:18

Lizie (~13 mins) did try and address the issue of injustice (an innocent person suffering for somebody else) by arguing Jesus laid down his life willingly. Lizzie appealed to John 10:18 selectively. Crucially she did not cite the full verse, she omitted the last sentence of the verse – a sentence which could conflict with her interpretation. This issue was addressed here in more detail alongside Matthew 26:39 where Jesus is said to be praying to the Father to save him (Jesus) from death (Lizzie, if consistent, would claim this verse contradicts her interpretation of John 10:18)

She quickly moved on in an effort to use this verse to support the idea that he was God. Unconvincing.

Two points of consideration on this:

1. I’d imagine Unitarians would simply argue that Jesus was given power by the Father thus the ability to raise yourself from death is not a proof of divinity – think about the proclamation in Acts 2:22 where it says miracles were worked by God through Jesus. I *think* this is how Hashim would have responded if he had had time to pick this up.

2. For me, folks should be awfully wary when somebody quotes anything from John purported to be from the mouth of Jesus. We know scholars believe John changes things for theological reasons (for instance the day of the crucifixion) and we know scholars believe the sayings such as the I AM sayings are untrustworthy. Let’s be mindful of these things so we can have a healthier approach to John’s gospel. Remember, it’s John who introduced the spear thrust into the narrative. Let’s be wary, if one or more of the authors of John lie (or introduce spurious material into the story about Jesus unknowingly), then what’s there to say other parts of this gospel are not of the same spurious nature?

For more on John see here for the following two videos Craig Evans: Some Sayings in John Weren’t Said By Jesus and the video Is John’s Gospel Reliable;

Lizzie’s mistake on 1 John 2 Corrected by Hashim

Lizzie was teaching the idea that Jews and anybody else who does not believe Jesus is the messiah (christ) is an antichrist. I think this verse would not fit in with today’s society I point this out as many anti-Islam Christians use today’s societal norms as judge, jury and executioner on what is true and what is not true religion.

Lizzie’s mistake was to assert this verse refers to Prophet Muhammad. She was unaware that the Quran teaches Muslims that Jesus is indeed the messiah. Hashim, did a splendid job in recalling this and bringing it to the attention of the audience – Lizzie included. A very important intervention by Hashim, a much needed one. The last thing we need is more misconceptions about Islam and Muslims. This debate was well worth the listen just for this part.

You catch this bit here


Final thoughts

Overall, this was one of the more coherent and cordial Muslim-Christian dialogues at Speakers Corner. To give Lizzie Schofield her due, her behaviour has improved markedly since a concerted effort online to highlight unbecoming and unloving behaviour from Christians at SC. Hashim praised her for more controlled behaviour in this dialogue at the end of the debate; opening up the possibility for further dialogue. I’ve always believed this, even back when Lizzie was behaving erratic in videos, she’s the more reasonable out of the Jay Smith/DCCI Ministries crew. This is actually one of the reasons why she receives more opprobrium than the others – deep down she knows and is better than many of the things she’s said/done.

I would personally advise her to ditch the young guys who flank her and heckle for her. You’re a grown-up person, you really don’t need immature cheerleaders or supporters yelling and heckling for you from the margins whilst serious discussion is trying to take place – those young guys look uncontrolled and unsophisticated. There’s a bit of that in this discussion with Hashim – thankfully Hashim was experienced enough to not allow it to detract from the dialogue.

The fact remains, the paranoia and the “us vs them” mentality that Beth Grove and Smith injected into Speakers Corner is being overcome, slowly but surely. I also applaud Lizzie for thinking about what Hashim said, if she indeed did think Islam may be the truth. Hashim should try to engage with her more at the park, perhaps off camera as pride and cheerleaders should not influence important discussions and decisions concerning God.

Christian Polemicists on Love, Quran 3:32, John 3:16 and Romans 5:8

Grooming Crimes Which Tommy Robinson and Britain First Will Not Publicise As Much

Queen James Bible and the Islamophobes

Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Friday, 22 December 2017

Christian Uses 1 John 2:22 To Attack Prophet Muhammad (p)

In this video, a Christian is claiming Prophet Muhammad is the Anti Christ based on 1 John 2:22. She shortly learns that Muslims believe Jesus is the Christ (Messiah). See Quran 3:45 and 4:171.

This video is also uploaded here and here

1 John 2: 22
Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son.


Missionaries Misusing the Hadith: Sins On Jews and Christians

This hadeeth is to be found in Saheeh Muslim (2767), narrated from Abu Moosa (may Allaah be pleased with him) from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who said: “On the Day of Resurrection, some of the Muslims will come with sins like mountains, but Allaah will forgive them and will put them (the sins) onto the Jews and Christians.” So this hadeeth is saheeh

For explanations of this hadith:


This video has also been uploaded here and here

Did Jay Smith Not Teach Hatun Tash About Hell in Christianity?

Did Jay Smith Not Teach Hatun Tash About Hell in Christianity?

Jay Smiths former colleague, Lizzie Schofield, admits she believes the Bible teaches that non Christians (unbelievers) will be put in Hell forever. This was a notable admission because, previously, Lizzie (and Hatun Tash) had been attacking Islam for the belief that unbelievers go to Hell.

This video highlights this inconsistency on their part. Like I say, if this was deliberate, it means Lizzie and Hatun were sinning when attacking Islam as they were being intellectually dishonest.

If it was not deliberate, then it begs the question, why are they preaching Christianity and what did Jay Smith, St Nicholas Church, CJ Davis and Beth Grove teach them if they did not know this about their own faith a few months ago?

St Nicholas Church Hypocrisy On Hell

This video has also been uploaded here

Jay Smith Is Confident He's Going to Paradise!

Jay Smith Is Confident He's Going to Paradise!

Christians like Jay Smith make claims that they are confident they will go to heaven. This slogan is not even true according to their own religious traditions.

Hashim goes on to tackle this idea amongst certain Christians that they will certainly go to Heaven. The bulk of this is captured in this video. I would recommend you watch this short video and learn that in reality,  Christians who have imbibed emotionalism, and strut about claiming they will certainly go to paradise. are not consistent with their texts. Hashim does a good job in bringing up important and relevant verses which are overlooked by this type of Christian in their dopamine fuelled proclamations.

This video is also uploaded here

Verses discussed:

Matthew 7
21 “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. 22 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?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

1 John 3
7 Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. The one who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. 8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work. 9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. 10 This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister.

Matt 25
11 “Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, ‘open the door for us!’
12 “But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’
13 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

Mark 3
29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.”

 Advice For Muslims On Dealing With Christian Anti-Muslim Sentiment...

Karen Armstrong: Early Gospel Authors Did Not Believe Jesus Was God

Jay Smith, Did John Write Down What Jesus Said?

Christian missionary Jay Smith claims John wrote down what Jesus said. I think the admission by Prof. Craig Evans in this video will help Jay to understand that scholars do not believe John's I AM sayings are historical.

This video can also be viewed here

Response To A Christian Blog on Muslim Girls School in Stoke

Christian Polemicists on Love, Quran 3:32, John 3:16 and Romans 5:8

Grooming Crimes Which Tommy Robinson and Britain First Will Not Publicise As Much

A Review of Sara Khan's The Battle For British Islam

Thursday, 21 December 2017

Response To A Christian Blog on Muslim Girls School in Stoke

Archbishop Cranmer (blog) got my goat with the following comments in his piece entitled ‘A school for Muslim girls that forbids them the use of toilet paper ‘for cultural reasons’?’:

I understand Stoke-on-Trent is shortlisted to be named a ‘City of Culture’. Ah, but which culture? It is disconcerting to hear of a school for Muslim girls that forbids them the use of toilet paper ‘for cultural reasons’. Soap, too, is off the menu, so the poor dears have to ablute the Karachi way. One wonders if the school provides proper toilets, or simply issues the girls with a trowel and points them towards the shrubbery? So much for all cultures being equal, for indeed some are more equal than others. At least inspectors have deemed the school to be ‘inadequate’, which should send leftists spinning and surely counts as a ‘hate-crime’.

I wonder if Archbishop Cranmer wrote this whilst on the toilet. I understand he’s using a bit of hyperbole, what is it with irate Christians and hyperbole?

Likewise with one of the rabble-rousers in evangelicalism in the West, not many can do ‘hyperbole’ like Jay Smith.

One man’s hyperbole is another man’s bowel movement, right Archbishop Cranmer?

1. The school in question did not “forbid” the girls from using loo roll. Toilet roll was available, but apparently not put out.

I suspect it’s just a massive oversight and/or a bit of a blunder by the school. I mean, so what if your culture is to wash rather than wipe. Folks who wash rather than wipe also use toilet paper in that process too. It’s a bit foolish to leave toilets without toilet paper even if you have washing facilities. I’ve noticed this in some mosques too — I’ve always suspected, here comes the cynic in me, it was an effort to save money or a subtle way of saying do your business at home rather than here.

2. Calm yourself down Archbishop Cranmer, it’s a school of 34 pupils. It’s hardly representing the overall culture of Stoke on Trent never mind supplanting the current culture. Why are traditionalists at the CofE so bitter? Christianity and “Christian culture” (whatever that is, surely not toilet paper only!) is not being ring fenced any longer thus Archbishop Cranmer, Christian Concern, Gavin Ashenden are all in a bit of a tiff.
This seems to be a regular theme amongst this type of CofE-er. Zoning in on some odd story about Muslims or some other minority culture and making a big hoo-ha about it. Why can’t they shake off that chip on their shoulders?

3. Archbishop talks about soap being off the menu. Hmmm, I don’t think the head teacher said that was due to cultural reasons. Again, I’d imagine it’s just a case of lack of thought if the school had no saop dispensers in the toilets — either that or it was a cost-saving tactic.

In fact, Muslims played a vital role in the development of soap and shampoo was introduced to Britain by….a Muslim!

Washing and bathing are religious requirements for Muslims, which is perhaps why they perfected the recipe for soap which we still use today. The ancient Egyptians had soap of a kind, as did the Romans who used it more as a pomade. But it was the Arabs who combined vegetable oils with sodium hydroxide and aromatics such as thyme oil. One of the Crusaders’ most striking characteristics, to Arab nostrils, was that they did not wash. Shampoo was introduced to England by a Muslim who opened Mahomed’s Indian Vapour Baths on Brighton seafront in 1759 and was appointed Shampooing Surgeon to Kings George IV and William IV. [Source]

The absent-mindedness or the scrimping of the school is hardly to be attributed to their culture. That would be like attributing gay marriage, divorce, sex before marriage or Atheism to Church of Englan culture. Archbishop Cranmer, what say ye?

4. On a personal note, Archbishop Cranmer may want to hit up the head teacher and have a look at his notes on toilet etiquette — it could help him to avoid a fissure or two. As a CofE-er, I’m certain he’s an expert on fissures of a different kind given the CofE are in constant disunity (the mind boggles further if they seriously consider themselves to be the “body of Christ”). Get some lessons on cleaning your derriere as your chosen cultural method is a mover but not exactly a shaker:

“Toilet paper moves s***, but it doesn’t remove it.”

“Aggressive wiping can cause painful anal fissures which can take eight to 12 weeks to heal and even haemorrhoids.” [Source]

5. Archbishop Cranmer asks which culture when talking about Stoke on Trent’s now failed bid for City of Culture status. I guess as a CofE-er he’s used to asking such a question given that the Church worships an Asian man (Jesus), believes in a doctrine from Greek philosophy (Trinity) and relies on manuscripts found in rubbish heaps amongst other places in North Africa to help reconstruct its book (the Bible) by the academy which is largely a Western enterprise. Indeed, Archbishop Cranmer, which culture?

Dr Adrian Hilton, do us a favour mate, edit some of this into Mrs Proudie’s article. Consider my thoughts the water to wash away the hyperbole. Don’t forget to wipe!

Christian Polemicists on Love, Quran 3:32, John 3:16 and Romans 5:8

Grooming Crimes Which Tommy Robinson and Britain First Will Not Publicise As Much

Queen James Bible and the Islamophobes

Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Thursday, 7 December 2017

Christian Polemicists on Love, Quran 3:32, John 3:16 and Romans 5:8

It’s commonplace for Christians to exaggerate the Christian view of love. For the most part this is probably just due to an ignorance on their part and a Westernised liberal mindset rather than the product of some sort of wilful effort to misinform. This is why you get Westernised “Christian” evangelical organisations making such comments on social media:

Thank God for christianity. For a God that loves us even while we were yet sinners, For a God that loves us enough to come down to earth, for a God that just doesn't just create but wants relationship with his Children. It sometimes takes learning about a religion such as Islam to appreciate what we have in Christ. Allah HATES DISBELIEVERS #Surah 3:32 # John3:16#Romans 5:8 [DCCI Ministries via FB]

RC Sproul says: I think there are few things more dangerous than preachers out there preaching that God loves everyone unconditionally

Do Christians really believe God loves everyone unconditionally? No.

Here are three points to think about in this regard.

1. The Bible teaches that God HATES sinners/wrongdoers (sinners would include unbelievers, right?)

4 For you are not a God who is pleased with wickedness; with you, evil people are not welcome.
5 The arrogant cannot stand in your presence.You hate all who do wrong
Psalm 5:4-6

Pslam 11:5 is in a similar vein. Additionally, Christians believe God is angry with the wicked (I assume this includes unbelievers)

11 God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day.
[Psalm 7:11]

2. Common sense. Christians believe those who do not accept Jesus will be in eternal damnation (Hell) for eternity. Can you seriously tell me you believe God and Jesus love these people?

3. Paul of Tarsus curses anybody who does not preach his version of Jesus. Paul seems to hate these people. If you believe Paul in Galatians is inspired by God then how can you believe God curses those who he loves? Here’s Paul of Tarsus in his own words Galatians 1:

8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you,let them be under God’s curse! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!

Love of God in Christian and Muslim views

God, according to Muslim and Christian beliefs, has a beneficient, providential and benevolent love for everyone regardless of belief/disbelief. The rain falls on the just as well as the unjust. Both the wicked and the righteous have oxygen to breath and both groups receive wealth, health etc..

Likewise, both groups believe God loves the world so much so that He gives a salvific message and thus humans have the potential to be saved.

The love God has for the redeemed (Love of complacency) is not extended to the unbelievers according to Christian tradition. Likewise, love of complacency (or love conditional love) is not extended to disbelievers according to the Islamic tradition either.

God abhors the wicked according to the Bible. In Christianity God sends the sinner to Hell, not the sin. Clearly, for the Christian preacher, it would be contradictory to the Bible to say God loves unbelievers the same way he loves the “saved” – Christians will believe God abhors those who he sends to Hell. Christians believe TCVO Jesus will send Muslims, Sikhs, Atheists and Unitarian Christians to Hell. To say TCVO Jesus loves all these “unbelieving” groups would be difficult to reconcile with the aforementioned.

Christian groups who are more into simplistic slogans like the one we are responding to are being a hindrance to a deeper and more healthy understanding of religious traditions.

Quran 3:32, Romans 1:18 and sound reasoning

The Christian group cite this Verse in their social media post (above) yet they have not applied thought to the context, The Verse is talking about those who reject God’s message and do not obey God. Obviously these people ultimately reject God’s love, Quran 3:31-32:

 Say, [O Muhammad], "If you should love Allah, then follow me, [so] Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

Say, "Obey Allah and the Messenger." But if they turn away - then indeed, Allah does not like the disbelievers.

Christians believe the same thing with respect to their tradition. Those who reject the message of God, effectively reject God and are ultimately cut off from the love of God. This has been outlined in the Bible verses we have presented previously. To re-emphasise this we can additionally cite Romans 1:18 which is essentially teaching the same thing as Quran 3:32 with respect to the Christian tradition

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness [Romans 1:18]

Again, even if you did not have access to the Bible, the fair-minded Christian would conclude the same thing as Quran 3:32 with respect to Christianity by thinking about the doctrine of hell. Why else do Christians believe disbelievers go to hell if it is not for the rejection of God and ultimately the rejection of God’s love?

Christians who peddle simplistic and shallow polemics dishonour their Church traditions.

RC Sproul in his criticism of Christians who preach unconditional love explains the motivation behind their thinking: “We want to so much win people to Christ that we’ll do everything we can to hide from them the wrath of God”

Mark Driscoll says the Bible says, on multiple occasions, that God hates those who are sinners. He says, all the ways the Bible speaks about the wrath of God are greater than the number of times the Bible speaks of the love of God.

Driscoll’s candid admission explains why folks at small Westernised evangelical outfits preach the way they do. It’s because their churches are afraid of speaking about the wrath of God for the fear of losing congregants, potential new members and donations. They are essentially being told what they want to hear. Driscoll sums this attitude up by mentioning the Old Testament:

The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof? Jeremiah 5:31

Theologian John McArthur says “preaching that God loves you unconditionally is the wrong message. The sinner needs to be terrified about his condition”.

Jesus and the Sword

Tooting’s St Nicholas Church’s Elizabeth Schofield has taken to telling Muslims that Jesus will come for them with a sword if they don’t worship him (a man!). How can you truly believes Jesus loves everyone when you believe he will come back with a sword for those who do not want to worship Jesus ( man!) and then ultimately put them in Hell for eternity?

In addition, CJ Davis and St Nicholas Church in Tooting, on paper, accept the Thirty Nine articles derived from Thomas Cranmer’s Forty Two Articles which not only talk about hell but also teach that God chose the believers (saved ones) before time (predestination). For academic honesty, this does not necessarily mean Calvinism’s Unconditional Election but it does seem to leave the door open for that theology to be a valid theological view within the CoE paradigm. How do St Nicholas Church folks who endorse or are part of DCCI Ministries parse this part of their teaching as well as the belief that Jesus will come back in condemnatory judgement for the unbelievers - do they think these views are consistent with the idea expressed in the social media post that Jesus loves unbelievers?

John 3:16 and Romans 5:8 and Islam’s equivalent

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]

But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. [Romans 5:8]

These verses are not about universal salvation, they simply express the idea that God offered mankind a way for salvation. Christians do not believe everyone will have eternal life, Christians (with a focus o Arminianism) believe God has offered mankind a route to salvation and it is ultimately down to people to decide to accept this offer of salvation (i.e. via the killing of Jesus for their sins).

Islam has the same general teaching in that God (Allah) offers a route to salvation to mankind. He sent messengers to every nation so people can know God personally, worship Him and obey Him in a relation of love with Allah. In Islam as well as Judaism, God is perfectly forgiving so does not need to have somebody or Himself killed in order to forgive us. The final message and route for salvation God (Allah) gives to humankind is Islam – those who accept the message to submit their will to God will be those who are saved. Interestingly, this message of submitting to God’s will seems to be presented in a purported quote of Jesus in Mark 3:35 too

35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.”

Once we scrape away the emotional harrumphs and fluff certain, unhelpful, Christians add to proceedings we see very much that in Islam, God loves the world enough to offer mankind a way to Him. Likewise, the same is taught with respect to the Christian tradition in John 3:16.

Let’s call for obscurantist Christians to be more fair-minded and stop clouding matters with unhelpful emotional accretions (fluff).

Now you know all this, you (the truth-seeker) can start to look deeply into both religions and decide which one carries more truth.

I think it’s counterproductive for anybody who believes in Heaven and Hell to state God loves everyone (unconditionally) and condemn teachings of other faiths which teach the view that is compatible with common reasoning, that God does not love unbelievers (why else would He put them in hell for eternity?).

Do you really think TCVO Jesus loved those he ordered to be killed in 1 Samuel 15:3?

Come on DCCI and Tooting’s St Nicholas Church folks, you’re looking contradictory. My advice to DCCI Ministries, move beyond shallow and inconsistent polemics – you do not honour Paul of Tarsus, your churches or even sound reason. You simply serve to get people’s backs up and ultimately become an obstacle to sound dialogue between Christians and Muslims

Advice For Muslims On Dealing With Christian Anti-Muslim Sentiment...

A Difficulty On the Christian Idea of Salvation and Forgiveness

How Jay Smith, Nabeel Qureshi, Sam Shamoun and David Wood Contribute to the Apostasy of Christians

Geza Vermes on How Jesus Would Have Reacted to Trinitarian Christians

Is Limited Atonement Doctrine Taught Clearer than the Trinity Doctrine in the New Testament?

For Christians who say Allah is a Deceiver- a Message from James White