(C) Copyright 2001
Muhammed Asadi



Islam & Christianity
Conflict or Conciliation?

Author: Muhammed A. Asadi
A Comparative/Textual Analysis of the Koran and the Bible

ISBN: 0-595-21258-1
Publisher: Writer’s Club Press
~Order online~

The “industry” of manufacturing the “word of God” was in vogue in ancient times when religion was the most powerful institution in society. The elite whenever they wanted to convince people of something, to further their economic gain, used religion. This not only distorted and ruined the genuine “words of God”, it created mischief and corruption in society which ultimately got blamed on religion. It was not religion but pseudo-religion and constructed books, like parts of the Bible, that got institutionalized and caused great harm and injustice to humanity.

The Koran, coming to reform such a world, presented itself as a criterion to distinguish true from false (Koran 2:185), based on the principles of science and rationality. It termed nature as being the reflections of God’s will (Sunna in Arabic). It termed the careful analysis of nature and contemplation based on it, as a duty for every believer (3:195). The history of modern science began with the Koran. Muslims inspired by the Koran did pioneering foundation building work in all fields of modern science, thus sparking the European Renaissance.

The Koran, the source of Islam, from the beginning has sought conciliation with the “People of the Book.” It presented itself as “all-inclusive” to members of all religions based on their sincerity in accepting the truth when it gets to them. In this context, it states that all those who believe in God and the last day, regardless of label, will have nothing to fear. Christians are termed as the “closest” to the Muslims in “love”(compared to all other groups). Mary, the mother of Jesus is honored in the Koran as, “a woman chosen above the women of all nations” (3:42).


FRANKLIN GRAHAM is one of America’s most powerful Christian leaders. He delivered the benediction at George W. Bush’s inauguration. His father, Billy, counseled a long list of presidents. But Franklin, taking advantage of the national tragedy of September 11th, 2001 says that Islam is:

“wicked, violent and not of the same God.”

The Baptist “Reverend” Vines called Muhammed a “demon possessed pedophile”

Pat Robertson consistently attacks Muhammad on his 700 Club Newtork and on Cable News Networks, especially FOX, which gives him and his perverted message wide exposure

Jerry Falwell on CBS 60 minutes called Muhammed a “terrorist”

Their whole “case” against Islam is based on Ad Hominem arguments against Muhammed- Ad Hominem arguments are logically invalid and are even doubly invalid when they are based on shady sources, sources that did not exist as “canon” until over 200 years after the events-information that would never stand up in a court of law to condemn anyone. Islam is not about the personality of Muhammed but the message of the Koran. Koran is the only sourcebook of Islam not tales that so-called historians penned down centuries after the death of the prophet.

. Here is what this “wicked” religion says,
” Let NOT the hatred of a people incite you to be unjust.” (Koran 5:8)










Islam and Christianity

The “industry” of manufacturing the “word of God” was in vogue in ancient times when religion was the most powerful institution in society. The elite whenever they wanted to convince people of something, to further their economic gain, used religion. This not only distorted and ruined the genuine “words of God”, it created mischief and corruption in society which ultimately got blamed on religion. It was not religion but pseudo-religion and constructed books, like parts of the Bible, that got institutionalized and caused great harm and injustice to humanity.

The Koran, coming to reform such a world, presented itself as a criterion to distinguish true from false (Koran 2:185), based on the principles of science and rationality. It termed nature as being the reflections of God’s will (Sunna in Arabic). It termed the careful analysis of nature and contemplation based on it, as a duty for every believer (3:195). The history of modern science began with the Koran. Muslims inspired by the Koran did pioneering foundation building work in all fields of modern science, thus sparking the European Renaissance.

The Koran, the source of Islam, from the beginning has sought conciliation with the “People of the Book.” It presented itself as “all-inclusive” to members of all religions based on their sincerity in accepting the truth when it gets to them. In this context, it states that all those who believe in God and the last day, regardless of label, will have nothing to fear. Christians are termed as the “closest” to the Muslims in “love”(compared to all other groups). Mary, the mother of Jesus is honored in the Koran as, “a woman chosen above the women of all nations” (3:42).

Franklin Graham is one of America’s most powerful Christian leaders. He delivered the benediction at George W. Bush’s inauguration. His father, Billy, counseled a long list of presidents. But Franklin, taking advantage of the national tragedy of September 11th, 2001 says that Islam is:

“wicked, violent and not of the same God.”

Here is what this “wicked” religion says,

” Let NOT the hatred of a people incite you to be unjust.” (Koran 5:8)

Growing up in Pakistan, due to the diffusion of Western culture, the legacy of Colonialism, I became well aware of the “traditional” Western claims against Islam. To many Muslims in the “Third World”, these claims have resulted in an inferiority complex. As a result, they must emulate the West and the religion of the West, in order to cure their “disease”. Christian missionaries are well aware of this and usually take advantage of it. They may criticize the ways of the so-called “free society” while at home in the West, but in Muslim lands they present these “freedoms” as a consequence of Christianity.

Muslims are generally unaware of the historical conflict between freedom, science and Christianity. Ironically, they are also unaware that the history of modern science began with the Koran. Muslims inspired by the Koran did pioneering foundation building work in all fields of modern science, thus sparking the European Renaissance. The majority of Muslims live within countries whose regimes are as oppressive as they are un-Islamic, and as such, they fall easy prey to Christian propaganda, at times disguised as “human-relief” or charity.

The German philosopher, Fredrick Nietzsche was well aware of the harms Christianity’s relationship to learning and freedom:

Not only did Christianity deprive us of the benefits of Roman culture, says Nietzsche, but of those of Islam as well. The rich Moorish culture in Spain was trampled down “because it said Yes to life.” It was a culture from which Christendom could and should have learned much. The crusades were fought against a culture that “the crusaders would have done better to lie down in the dust before.” An unstated real motivation behind the Crusades was to plunder the wealth of the Near East; Nietzsche refers to the Crusades as “higher piracy.” [A 60, http://www.debunker.com/texts/anti_chr.html, retreived 12/08/’01]

The source of the conflict between Islam and Christianity are the historical stereotypes about Islam, usually quick and cheap excuses to lure people into Christianity. The culprits here are not the masses in the Christian world but the Christian missionaries. Evangelical Christian missionaries do not represent Jesus, according to my readings of his words and my experience with them. Similarly, Muslim preachers in mosques in “Third World” countries do not represent the words of the Koran.

The Koran from the beginning has sought conciliation with the “People of the Book.” It presented itself as “all-inclusive” to members of all faiths based on their sincerity in accepting the truth when it gets to them. In this context, it states that all those who believe in God and the last day, regardless of label, will have nothing to fear. Christians are termed as the “closest” to the Muslims in “love” (compared to all other groups). Mary, the mother of Jesus is honored in the Koran as, “a woman chosen above the women of all nations.” Such honor for Mary is not to be found in the Holy Bible itself. The Koran terms Jesus as one of the greatest of God’s messengers and celebrates his birth and mission.

The major difference between Islam and Christianity revolves around the nature of Jesus. The Koran terms Jesus as a messenger of God, a mortal. It does not accept the Christian claim that God (immortal) becomes man (mortal), or that God begets offspring. The Koran presents reasons and encourages rational inquiry. This book is an attempt to state those reasons and to dispel common stereotypes held against Islam, which have no basis in reality.

This work is also an attempt at conciliation with those who study the historical Jesus, members of the Jesus Seminar for example. A textual analysis of the source books of Islam and Christianity shows that we have more in common, if we follow the sayings and doings of the historical Jesus, than is realized. The Koran is the bridge over which traditional Christians and scholars of the historical Jesus can approach each other’s territory, safely and in harmony with the core sayings of Jesus.

Is The Bible God’s Word?

In his book, Is the Bible God’s Word? Dr. William Scroggie of the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, states:

Yes, the Bible is human, though some out of zeal, which is not according to knowledge, have rejected this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men, and bear in their style, the characteristics of men. (Page 17)

The Bible comes in many versions. Some common ones are the King James Version, the Revised Standard Version, the New International Version, the American Standard, the Catholic (Douay) and the Good News Bible etc. If the Bible is indeed the word of God, then we need to ask, “which version is from God?” The different versions of the Bible are not merely different translations. They add and take out what other “versions” contain.

The most common among the Bibles in the world is the King James Version and its many major revisions. It was first published in 1611. It is the only Bible that has been translated in over fifteen hundred different languages of the world. The King James Version (KJV) has 66 books bound together within its covers. Compare this to the Roman Catholic Version (Douay) of the Bible which has 73 books bound within its covers. Seven whole books have been removed from the King James (a Protestant version of the Bible) that the Douay Version includes. Protestants have expunged these books from their Bible, calling them “Apocrypha” or “weak” in authority.

The Bible within its text never claims to be one uniform book. Nowhere within the text of the Bible is the Bible called “The Bible”. The word Bible itself was invented to represent a collection of books. As we saw above, this collection of books was not the same among different groups. Compare this to the Koran; there is not a word of difference between two Koran’s anywhere in the world. The Koran is the only thing common among Muslims of whatever nationality, sect or group. The Koran within its text names itself times as “The Koran”. It also claims to be completely from God, as a whole (Koran 55:2 etc.).

There are about 24000 manuscripts of the New Testament in the Greek that are termed “original”. However the fact is that these “originals” are themselves copies of documents that have now been lost. Also, no two of these 24000 “originals” are identical. They are not even self-consistent. To substantiate this claim, one need not be a scholar of the history of the Bible. Any modern version of the New Testament has footnotes that clearly state after most statements, “Other ancient manuscripts add” or “Other ancient manuscripts delete” or “Other ancient manuscripts insert” Which manuscript out of these is from God and who did the additions and deletions?

The Koran in its history and transmission is very different to the Bible:

1. The Koran is present in a living language, Arabic. Over 250 million people speak the language of the Koran. Hundreds of millions more study the classical script of the book, making the Koran the “most read” book on earth (ironically the least understood).

2. The Koran has always been in the possession of the people, the masses and not only the elite, as there is no priesthood in Islam. The Bible on the other hand has always been the possession of the Church elite, where it got shaped, modified and passed on based on Church authority.

3. There is not a word of difference between two Arabic Koran’s anywhere in the world. The Koran is the only unifying force among Muslims. Muslims frequently disagree on everything else except the Arabic wording of the Koran. However, in the case of the Bible, ancient manuscripts are not identical, no two “copies” of the so-called originals are the same. Footnotes in all new versions of the Bible clearly document the differences.

The Most Ancient Manuscripts:

The Revised Standard Version (RSV) of the Bible first appeared in 1952. The editors claimed in the preface that it went to the “most ancient manuscripts” of the Bible. By “most ancient” they mean those that date 200 to 300 years after Jesus. “Ancient” manuscripts on the other hand, on which the King James Version was based, date 400 to 600 years after Jesus. All scholars agree that none of the originals of any of the manuscripts exist. All we have are “most ancient” and “ancient” copies.

The preface to the RSV says that it was produced by thirty two scholars of “the highest eminence”, backed by “fifty cooperating denominations (of Christianity).” Historically, since the RSV goes back to the “most ancient” manuscripts it is more accurate than the KJV. About halfway down the preface of the RSV, on page one, these fifty-two scholars unanimously declare:

The King James Version has grave defectsand that these defects are so many and so serious as to call for a revision (1952:1)

The Grave Defects:

A look at the New Testament section of the RSV, we see that the only “proof” from the Bible that the Christian fundamentalists had of the concept of the Trinity has been removed. The “most-ancient” manuscripts never had this passage (1st Epistle of John 5:7). However, as Christianity got Romanized and moved away from pure monotheism, the elite who possessed authority on what becomes doctrine shoved this statement in:

“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.” (New Testament, 1John 5:7)

Not only the RSV but also all modern versions of the Bible do not contain this statement anymore. It has been unceremoniously thrown out. By doing this the scholars are not only bringing Christianity closer to Islam, they are confirming the part of the Koran that says:

“And do not say Trinity, desist from this, it will be better for you, for God is one God (Waahid in Arabic).” (Koran 4:171)

Another thing that we notice in the RSV, that goes to the “most-ancient” manuscripts is that the word “begotten” in the famous verse in John (3:16) has been taken out. John 3:16, in the King James Version (KJV) reads:

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son”(New Testament, John 3:16)

By removing the word “begotten” from this verse, the scholars of Christianity are once again coming closer to Islam. The Koran states that God doesn’t adopt or beget sons or daughters. The concept of “son” and an uncreated, eternal “God” are mutually exclusive, logically speaking. God represents one who received life from no one, while son signifies one who got existence from another source. In the literal sense of the word, no one can claim to be God and son at the same time.

In the language of the Jews however, the word “son” has a metaphoric meaning as well. Thus, the term “son of God” is used in the Bible, both Old and New Testaments to signify good, righteous people. Jesus himself is quoted as saying, “Blessed are the peace-makers for they shall be called sons of God.” (Matthew 5:9). The word that was causing difference in John 3:16 was the word “begotten”. The scholars “of the highest eminence” are informing us that this was an interpolation, a later addition to the text of the statement.

“In their relentless search for “the historical Jesus,” various Biblical Scholars argue that the Gospel stories of the empty tomb and Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances are fictions devised long after his death to justify claims of his divinity.” (Rethinking the Resurrection, Newsweek. April 8 1996, page 42)

“While believers through the ages have echoed Peter’s faith-filled declaration, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,” some modern scholars say that historical evidence reveals a much different portrait of Jesus than the one in Christian creeds.” (In search of Jesus, U.S.News & World Report, April 8 1996, page 47)

In the 1952 version of the RSV, the first eleven verses of the 8th chapter of the Gospel of John have been removed. The chapter now begins at verse 12. The scholars explained that these eleven verses were interpolations, later additions to the manuscript of John. As a result they are now in the footnote and not the text of the 1952 RSV. Also taken out are the only two references in the gospels to the ascension of Jesus (Mark 16:19 and Luke 24:51). They are taken out as interpolations as well.

In 1971 they revised the RSV, and this time due to pressure from certain denominations, they added back the eleven verses of the 8th chapter of John that were taken out. This “game” of adding and taking out has been going on for centuries. The construction of “God’s word” has also been a prosperous industry. It is precisely for this reason that the Koran warns us:

Woe unto those who write the book with their own hands and then say, “This is from God,” that they may trade it for some miserable gain. Woe to them for what their hands do write and woe to them for what they earn with it.” (Koran 2:79)

According to the doctrine of most Christian denominations, the first five books of the Bible, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy were “written” by Moses and are called the “Books of Moses”. However, scholars don’t attribute any of these books to Moses at all. Internal evidence in these books makes it clear that Moses could not have written these words. In the 34th chapter of the Book of Deuteronomy, we read:

“So Moses the servant of the lord diedand He (i.e. God) buried Himand there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses.” (Deuteronomy 34:5-10)

Moses could not have written these words, written in the past tense, after he died! Also the word “since” in the verse clearly shows that whoever is writing this lived long after Moses had died. All through these five books, the structure of the sentence as well as the “third-person” reference to Moses and to God shows that neither God nor Moses wrote these words. Sentences, repeated hundreds of times, “God said unto Moses and Moses said unto the Lord,” in these five books, clearly shows that a third person, someone other than God and Moses is writing these words.

Also, consider these words in the Book of Numbers, thought to have been written by Moses:

Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the fact of the earth.” (Numbers 12:3)

The meekest man on the face of the earth would never say that he was meek. Moreover, the meek man does not appear to be very meek in the judgments that he gives in the same book of the Bible:

“And Moses was wroth…And Moses said unto them, “Have ye saved all the women alive? … Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman, … But all the women children … keep alive for yourselves.” Num.31: 14-18

What about the Gospels?

J. B Phillip, a prebendry of the Chichester cathedral in England, a paid servant of the Anglican Church, in his, New Testament in Modern English (1996), states in the preface to the gospel according to Matthew:

“Early tradition ascribed this gospel to the apostle Matthew, but scholars nowadays almost all reject this view…The author, whom we can conveniently call Matthew has plainly drawn on the mysterious “Q”, which may have been a collection of oral traditions. He has used Mark’s gospel freely”

J.B Phillip is telling us clearly that Matthew didn’t write Matthew. We don’t know the source or the author of this anonymous book. He is further stating that whoever has written this gospel (one that can be conveniently called Matthew), has plagiarized Mark.

Not only do modern scholars reject that idea that Matthew wrote Matthew, internal evidence in this gospel clearly shows that someone other than Matthew (and other than Jesus) wrote it. Consider the 9th verse of the 9th chapter of Matthew:

“And as Jesus passed forth thence, He (i.e.Jesus) saw a man called Matthew sitting at the receipt of custom, and he (Jesus) said to him (Matthew), “Follow me,” and he (Matthew) arose and followed him (i.e. Jesus).” (New Testament, Matthew 9:9)

The “third-person” reference to Jesus and Matthew, the hes and the hims, clearly shows that whoever is writing this is not Jesus and is not Matthew. The same situation is encountered while reading the gospel of John, in at least two places:

i) “And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true, and he knows that he says the truth so that you may believe (John 19:35)

ii) “This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and who wrote these things, and we know that his testimony is true.” (John 21:24-25)

The word “we” above clearly shows that more than one person authored the passage above. Similarly the “third person” reference to the witness of events shows that the writer is either copying or editing the narration of “he that saw it.”

The author of the gospel of Luke does not claim inspiration of his gospel writing from God. He says that he wrote it because he knew of the events and it “seemed good to him” (Luke 1:1-5). Also see 1 Corinthians 7:25 where Paul, in this specific case says that he’s informing without God’s commandment. 2 Timothy 3:16 is presented to “prove” that the entire Bible is God’s inspiration, the above 2 references apart from the many others disprove that.

“Many scholars think the gospels are unreliable records since they were written as proclamation, not objective history, decades after Jesus’ death.” (In search of Jesus, U.S.News & World Report, April 8 1996, page 47)

“There are, after all, four Gospels, whose actual writing, most scholars have come to acknowledge, was done not by the Apostles but by their anonymous followers (or their follower’s followers). Each presented a somewhat different picture of Jesus’ life. (The search for Jesus, TIME, April 8 1996, page 38)

Language of the New Testament:

Jesus spoke Aramaic; therefore the general implication that arises is that his gospel would be in Aramaic, which is very close to Arabic, the language of the Koran. However, all the manuscripts of the present-day New Testament are in Koine Greek. If Jesus spoke Aramaic, why are his gospels in Greek? Why are there gospels in the plural when Jesus spoke of one gospel (Mark 10:29etc.)? Which gospel is the “word of God” since they add or take away from each other and even contradict each other?

There are certain chapters in the Bible that are attributed to different authors, in different periods of history, yet they are 100% identical. This shows that “editors” were at work in manufacturing what would later become the word of God. For example, 2 Kings 19 and Isaiah 37 are identical word by word, sentence by sentence, throughout the whole chapter.


According to the assumptions about God in the Bible itself, i.e. God being all knowing, and not the “author of confusion”, any book that claims to be from God should be free from mistakes and contradictions. However, the Bible is full of scientific and logical errors and contradictions among and within its various books. Here are a few examples: Old Testament:

1. God or Satan?

2 Samuel 24:1 in the Old Testament of the Bible says that God incited David to take a census of the Jews, i.e. to number Israel. 1Chronicles 21:1 however, says that “Satan” inspired David to conduct the census. God and Satan are not synonyms in any religion.

2. Was Jehoiachin 8 or 18?

2 Chronicles 36:9 in the Old Testament says that a guy named Jehoiachin was 8 years old when he became king. However, 2 Kings 24:8 in the same Old Testament says that he was 18 when he became king.

3. Was it Cavalry or Infantry? Was it 700 or 7000?

2 Samuel 10:18 states that David slew the men of 700 chariots of the Syrians and 40,000 horsemen (cavalry) including Shobach the commander. However 1 Chronicles 19:18 of the same Old Testament of the Bible states that he slew the men of 7000 chariots and 40,000 footmen (infantry) and the commander Shobach. How many were they and was it infantry or cavalry? Who made the mistake, an all knowing God or humanity?

4. How many stalls for horses did Solomon have? Was it 4000 or 40,000?

1 Chronicles 9:25 in the Bible says that Solomon had 4000 stalls for horses and chariots. 1 Kings 4:26 however, states that he had 40,000 stalls for horses.

5. Did Arah have 775 sons or 652?

Ezra 2:5 of the Bible states that Arah, an exile, had 775. However Nehemiah 7:10 states that he had 652. The lists are the same, yet the numbers are different. Who made the mistake? Was it God?

6. Were humans created before or after the animals?

Man was created AFTER the other animals (Genesis 1:25-26) OR Man was created BEFORE the other animals (Genesis 2:18-19).

New Testament:

1. John the Baptist contradicts Jesus!

According to Jesus, John the Baptist was Elijah in the Second Coming (Matthew 17:11). John the Baptist however, denied being Elijah when the Priests and the Levites questioned him (John 1:19-21). Here Jesus contradicts John the Baptist. Who was lying? Jesus, John or the author who lived much after the events?

2. Cross or Tree?

Was Jesus put on a cross, Stauron in Greek (Mark 15:11) or was he put on a tree, Ksulon in Greek (1 Peter 2:24).

3. Ascension, none or some?

John 3:13 quotes Jesus as saying the no one ascended into heaven except the son of man (himself) who descended from heaven. This contradicts 2 Kings 2:11 of the Old Testament of the Bible, which says that Elijah, ascended into heaven.

4. What were Jesus’ last words?

Matthew 27:46,50: “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is to say, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” …Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.”

Luke 23:46: “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, “Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:” and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.”

John 19:30: “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished:” and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.” ,

Were the last words, “My God, my God..” or were they “Father into thy hands..” or were they “It is finished” ?

5. The Genealogy of Jesus: 41 ancestors or 26?

Matthew in describing the genealogy of Jesus gives 26 names (generations) being the ancestors of Jesus. However, Matthew describing the genealogy of the same Jesus gives only 26 names in Jesus’ genealogy. A difference of 15 whole ancestors. Luke in his gospel claims that from Abraham to Jesus there were 14+14+14, i.e. 42 ancestors of Jesus, yet if you count the names that he gives, he mentions only 41 and forgot the 42nd! Both Luke and Matthew trace this genealogy through the same man, Joseph the carpenter who according to both Islam and Christianity had no part to play in the birth of Jesus. The New Testament clearly states that Joseph the carpenter was not Jesus’ father, why trace a genealogy that is incorrect from the very beginning?

In these two lists, except for the name of Joseph no two names are identical

Matthew mentions that Jesus was the “seed” of David through Solomon, while Luke says that he was the “seed” of David through Nathan (Solomon’s brother). The “seed” of David however, could never reach Jesus through Solomon and Nathan (his brother) at the same time. According to Matthew, Jesus’ grandfather is Jacob (who was the father of Joseph the carpenter), while according to Luke it is Heli who is the grandfather of Jesus. There are numerous such contradictions in the two genealogies alone.

6. Can God be seen or not?

“No man hath seen God at any time.” (John 1:18)

“And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live.” (Ex. 33:20)

“Whom no man hath seen nor can see.” (1 Tim. 6:16)

Compare the above to:

“And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my backparts.” (Exodus. 33:23)

“And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend.” (Exodus 3:11)

“For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.” (Genesis32:30)

7. To judge or not to judge:

1 Corinthians 3:15 ” The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment:”

1 Corinthians 4:5 ” Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.”

8. The Second Coming of Jesus:

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things are fulfilled. Matthew 24:34

Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done. Mark 13:30

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. Luke 21:32

How many generations have passed since those words were written, yet there has been no Second Coming yet!

“For another, the post-resurrection stories contain a variety of factual discrepancies about the main characters, places, times and the messages attributed to the Risen Jesus. For example, the Gospel of Matthew has Jesus appearing first to Mary Magdalene and other woman. Luke gives the first appearance to Peter, and (with the exception of a later addition to his Gospel) Mark contains no post-Resurrection appearances at all. Luke’s Gospel says that Jesus appeared to the apostles in the Jerusalem area; Matthew says it was in Galilee.” (Rethinking the Resurrection, Newsweek. April 8 1996, page 44)

9. Did Jesus deliver the sermon on the mount or plain?

On the MOUNT (Matthew 5:1,2) or on a PLAIN (Luke 6:17.20).10. Was the woman Greek or not?

Was it a GREEK woman who sought Jesus since her daughter was ill (Mark 7:26) or was it a woman of CANAAN (Mark 15:22).

Scientific Errors in the Bible:

Old Testament scholars recognize that there are two different versions on creation given in the Book of Genesis. The Yahwist narration is the older of the two, the other one being the Sacerdotal narration. Scholars have concluded that the Sacerdotal version was the work of priests living in the 6th century BC.

The Sacerdotal version contains genealogies that go back to Adam that are scientifically unacceptable because they set a figure for the age of the world (5738 years) and when man appeared on earth, that are proven to be false. The appearance of man can be measured in tens of thousands of years, while the earth is at least 4.5 billion years old.

The Biblical narration about the creation of the universe (Genesis 1) also contradicts what has been established by modern science. The Bible mentions “primordial waters”, something cosmologists do not accept. It mentions “light” being created on the first day, before the creation of the stars which are responsible for the light in the universe. It mentions the existence of an evening and a morning before the creation of the earth, whose rotation causes night and day. It mentions the creation of the earth on the “third” day and the sun on the “fourth”, which is incorrect scientifically. Contrary to the Bible, the Koran gives an accurate description of the creation of the universe from one unit, the expanding universe and preempts much of today’s hard-earned scientific facts in cosmology (for details see http://www.rationalreality.com/).

Paleontologists have established that mammals came first and then birds, yet the Bible states that the birds came on the “fifth” day and the beasts of the earth came on the “sixth”. These are the results of beliefs prevalent at the time and have nothing to do with being the words of an all-knowing creator.

About Noah, the Bible speaks of a universal flood that occurred roughly 300 years before Abraham. This would correspond to the 21st of the 22nd century BC. In view of all the historical data that we have, the universal flood never happened. How can we believe that in the 21st and 22nd century, all of civilization was destroyed when the history of the Egyptian Empire is unbroken all through this time. Contrary to the Biblical description, the Koran mentions that only the people of Noah were destroyed by the flood and not all of humanity. We have historical evidence of such floods in that general area but no universal floods.

Contrary to the Bible, the description of the natural world in the Koran is amazingly accurate and pre-empts much of today’s hard-earned scientific findings. Consistent with Karl Poppers Critical Rationalism, the Koran offers falsification. As such, it challenges people of learning to find fault with it and to falsify it. By discovering the Koran. For further information see http://www.rationalreality.com/

The Bible & Terror:

There and many other passages in the Bible would get an “X” rating for violence and pornography from even the most lenient and liberal censors as they contain lucid details of sexuality and racially justified killing of “foreigners” (i.e. non-Jews), as commanded by “God”. Consider theses:

Jesus says that he wasn’t sent with peace on earth but with a sword (Matthew 10:34)

Jesus is presented as a baby-killer: “Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he who searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.” (Revelation 2:22-23)

PSALMS 144:1 God is praised as the one who trains hands for war and fingers for battle.

2KINGS 2:23-24 Forty-two children are mauled and killed, presumably according to the will of God, for having jeered at a man of God.

2KINGS5:27 Elisha curses Gehazi and his descendants forever with leprosy.

2KINGS 6:29 “So we cooked my son and ate him. The next day I said to her, ‘Give up your son so we may eat him,’ but she had hidden him.”

2KINGS 9:30-37 Jehu has Jezebel killed. Horses trample her body. Dogs eat her flesh so that only her skull, feet, and the palms of her hands remain.

2KINGS 10:7 Jehu has Ahab’s seventy sons beheaded, then sends the heads to their father.

2KINGS 10:14 Jehu has forty-two of Ahab’s kin killed.

2KINGS 10:17 “And when he came to Samaria, he slew all that remained to Ahab in Samaria, till he had wiped them out, according to the word of the Lord ….”

2KINGS 10:19-27 Jehu uses trickery to massacre the Baal worshippers.

2KINGS 14:5, 7 Amaziah kills his servants and then 10,000 Edomites.

2KINGS 15:3-5 Even though he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, the Lord smites Azariah with leprosy for not having removed the “high places.”

2KINGS 15:16 Menahem ripped open all the women who were pregnant.

2KINGS 19:35 An angel of the Lord kills 185,000 men.

2CHRONICLES 13:17 500,000 Israelites are slaughtered.

2CHRONICLES 21:4 Jehoram slays all his brothers.

ISAIAH 49:26 The Lord will cause the oppressors of the Israelite’s to eat their own flesh and to become drunk on their own blood as with wine.

EZEKIEL 6:12-13 The Lord says: “… they will fall by the sword, famine and plague. He that is far away will die of the plague, and he that is near will fall by the sword, and he that survives and is spared will die of famine. So will I spend my wrath upon them. And they will know I am the Lord, when the people lie slain among their idols around their altars, on every high hill and on all the mountaintops, under every spreading tree and every leafy oak….”

EZEKIEL 9:4-6 The Lord commands: “… slay old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women….”

EZEKIEL 20:26 God commands infanticide? In order that he might horrify them, the Lord allowed the Israelites to defile themselves and amongst other things, the sacrifice of their first-born children.

EZEKIEL 21:3-4 The Lord says that he will cut off both the righteous and the wicked that his sword shall go against all flesh.

EZEKIEL 23:25,47 God is going to slay the sons and daughters of those who were whores.

HOSEA 13:16 The “Lord” says: “They shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”

MATTHEW 11:21-24 Jesus curses [the inhabitants of] three cities who were not sufficiently impressed with his great works.

Book of Judges 3:29 The Israelites kill about 10,000 Moabites.

BOOK OF JUDGES 3:31 (A restatement.) Shamgar killed 600 Philistines with an ox-goad.

BOOK OF JUDGES 4:21 Jael takes a tent stake and hammers it through the head of Sisera, fastening it to the ground.

BOOK OF JUDGES 7:19-25 The Gideons defeat the Midianites, slay their princes, cut off their heads, and bring the heads back to Gideon.

BOOK OF JUDGES 8:15-21 The Gideons slaughter the men of Penuel.

BOOK OF JUDGES 9:45 Abimalech and his men kill all the people in the city.

BOOK OF JUDGES 11:29-39 Jepthah sacrifices his beloved daughter, his only child, according to a vow he has made with the Lord.

BOOK OF JUDGES 14:19 The Spirit of the Lord comes upon a man and causes him to slay thirty men.

BOOK OF JUDGES 15:15 Samson slays 1000 men with the jawbone of an ass.

BOOK OF JUDGES 16:27-30 Samson, with the help of the Lord, pulls down the pillars of the Philistine house and causes his own death and that of 3000 other men and women.

BOOK OF JUDGES 18:27 The Danites slay the quiet and unsuspecting people of Laish.

BOOK OF JUDGES 20:43-48 The Israelites smite 25,000+ “men of valor” from amongst the Benjamites, “men and beasts and all that they found,” and set their towns on fire.

BOOK OF JUDGES 21:10-12 The “Lord” says: “… Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword and; also the women and little ones…. Every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall utterly destroy.” They do so and find four hundred young virgins whom they bring back for their own use.

The Bible & Women:

“When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.” (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)

Burning Women:

“And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.” (Leviticus 21:9)

Killing witches:

“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Whoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death. He that sacrificeth unto any god, save to the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.” (Exodus 22:18-20)

Birth of a female child makes a woman unclean longer than the birth of a male child does:

“Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be uncleanBut if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.” (Leviticus 12:2-5)

Men rulers and “gods” over women:“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” (New Testament, I Corinthians 11:3)

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. ” (New Testament, Ephesians 5:22-24)

Women created for man:

“For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” (New, Testament, I Corinthians 11:8-9)

Silencing the woman:

“Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” (New Testament, I Timothy 2:11-14)

“God” wants to stone women and men:

“If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her, then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.” (Deuteronomy 22:24)

“God” rips pregnant women and kills infants, according to the Bible:

“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.” (Hosea 13:16)

“God” lifts up skirts according to the Bible:

“Look, I am against you!- declares Yahweh Saboath- I shall lift your skirts as high as your face and show your nakedness to the nations, your shame to the kingdoms. I shall pelt you with filth.” (Nahum 3:5-6)

Bible and pornography:“Yet she multiplied her whoredoms, in calling to remembrance the days of her youth, wherein she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt. For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.” (Ezekiel 23: 20-21)

“and lusted after her paramours there, whose members were like those of donkeys, and whose emission was like that of stallions.” (Ezekiel 23: 21, NRSV)

“Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and naked: I will make a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the owls.” (Micah 1:8)

Contrary to the Bible, the Koran, justly egalitarian in its approach, based on its emphasis on the common origin of men and women (Koran 4:1 etc), doesn’t agree with the Bible where the Bible says that women were created “from and for” men nor does it say that women cannot teach nor have authority over men. The Koran also dispels the common myth among other religions in general that a woman is evil by nature and has been created to deceive mankind.

The Koran over 1400 years back gave women the right to property ownership, the right to initiate divorce, the right to legal testimony and the right to earn their livelihood if they so pleased. It emphasized equity and kindness in a marital relationship and gave women an equal right to arbitration to resolve differences with their spouses. An unbiased reading of the Koran clearly reveals that it liberated women long before modern women’s rights movements were born (for more information see: http://women.rationalreality.com)

The prophets according to the Bible:

Abraham married his sister (Genesis 20:12)

Lot had incest with his daughters who begat his children (Genesis 19:30)

David/adultery with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11:1-7)

Solomon worshipped idols (1 Kings 11:4)

Noah was a drunkard and lay naked in his intoxication (Genesis 9:20)

Aaron led people to worship the golden calf (Exodus 32:2-11)

Jesus was seen as a wine bibber (Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:34)

Jacob was a deceiver (Genesis 27)

Alcohol dependency and the Bible:

Proverbs 31:6-7 “Give strong drink to him who is ready to perish, and wine to those that be of heavy hearts. Let him drink and forget his poverty and remember his misery no more.”

Or this contradiction:

Proverbs 20:1 (just 11 chapters earlier):”Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a raging and whomsoever is deceived thereby is not wise.”


The Koran, in establishing itself as being the word of an all-knowing God, presented a scientific test of falsification regarding books that claim to be from God. It stated:

“Do they not consider the Koran with care. If it had been from anyone other than God, it would contain many contradictions.” (Koran 4:82)

This “industry” of manufacturing the “word of God” was in vogue in ancient times when religion was the most powerful institution in society. Thus the elite whenever they wanted to convince people of something, to further their economic gain, used religion. This not only distorted and ruined the genuine “words of God”, it created mischief and corruption in society which ultimately got blamed on religion. It was not religion but pseudo-religion and constructed books, like parts of the Bible, that got institutionalized and caused great harm and injustice to humanity. The Koran, coming to reform such a society, presented itself as a criterion to distinguish true from false (Koran 2:185), based on the principles of science and rationality. It termed nature as being the reflections of God’s will (Sunna in Arabic). It termed the careful analysis of nature and contemplation based on it, as a duty for every believer (Koran 3:195). The history of modern science began with the Koran. Muslims inspired by the Koran did pioneering foundation building work in all fields of modern science, thus sparking the European Renaissance.

The Koran knew that pseudo-religion was harmful, so it termed telling lies about God the greatest wrong anyone could do. The Book of Jeremiah in the Old Testament of the Bible, regarded by many Jewish scholars as being the “most authentic” of all books of the Bible, clearly states how scribes deliberately lie with their pen to convince people of certain things that they falsely manufacture, being from God when they are in fact not:

“How can you say that we are wise and that the law of the lord is with us but behold, the false pen of the scribe has made it into a lie.” (Jeremiah 8:8)

The Koran And The Bible: Is Jesus God?

The main difference between Islam and Christianity revolves around the divinity of Christ. Whereas the Koran states that Jesus was no more than a prophet of God, a human being, Christian doctrine insists that he was in some way divine, a son of God. The doctrine of God incarnate, whereby it is implied that that “word” that was divine became flesh, is central to almost all denominations of Christianity.

The concept of the Trinity, popular among the majority of Christian churches embodies within itself the notion that three distinct co-equals are God. The Koran on the other hand states unequivocally, that God is just one (indivisible) and that no one can be held equal to God. This absolute oneness of God forms the very heart and soul of the system called Islam. The Christian articles of God-Incarnate, Son of God, and Holy Trinity, clearly violate the oneness of God embodied in Islam.

In any logical/scientific study of religion, it is necessary to consider the facts and then go to the origin of the problem, as opposed to just dealing with the subjective claims of the followers of the various systems. The standard for Islam is the Koran that for Christianity is the Bible particularly the New Testament. Therefore, let us go to the sources and examine them to see if there is conflict or conciliation.

As a Muslim is writing this document, it is understood that the majority of people belonging to the “other camp” will be skeptical as to the intentions and purpose of this research. For this reason, it is request that the style of the document be considered, which will hopefully show that value judgments have been avoided and that the arguments and quotations are stated clearly and truthfully. If however it is still believed that some information has been presented incorrectly or misquoted from the source books, it is requested that corrections be sent to the author for comments and consideration and possible change of stand on issues.


The Athnasian Creed historically formalized the concept of the Holy Trinity. In its standard form, the wording runs as follows:

“There is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, and the majesty co-eternal…. The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Ghost is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God.”


The concept of “God incarnate” that Christianity embodies, states that God became man, and that man was Jesus. It is claimed that Jesus shared the nature of God in every way and that he was in every way a God, and a man. He was the only “begotten” Son of God and hence a “Son of God” in a unique fashion, unlike anyone else.

Logic and the Trinity:

From the standpoint of mathematics and the English language, when we say that this is a person, that is another person and that that one is yet another, it is understood that there are three people involved and not just one. One plus one plus one will always be three and not one, no matter how its put. Therefore, the concept of Trinity is itself faulty logically speaking. If the three are separately and distinctly God then there are three distinct Gods, according to the language. If there is only One God, then each, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, on their own cannot be God but only parts of God. Yet God is supposed to be indivisible!

From the standpoint of the human mind’s comprehension, when the preacher says, “In the Name of the Father,” a certain distinct mental image or idea emerges. When he continues, “And the Son”, the idea or image that one gets now is different. The same is the case when the preacher utters the words Holy Ghost. No matter how hard you try; you can never super-impose these three distinct pictures as one. When the “Son” is mentioned, most Christians see a Jesus, whatever image of him is popular in the culture, when the “Holy Ghost” is mentioned, the picture changes. Three persons can never be one person. One person can have parts to his/her personality. Together those parts form the person. However, the concept of the Trinity states it completely different. It is claimed that Jesus is not a part of God but 100% God on his own, so also the Holy Ghost and the Father. But then it is concluded that they are not three but One God. The premise of the statement does not support its conclusion about there being One God. It makes the assertion about the trinity impossible to prove logically and reduces it to just words, which can not have any meaning.

Jesus, according to the source of Christianity, in the records that we have of his sayings, never made a claim to be divine. In an answer to a question on what the first commandment was, he replied,

“The First is, “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is One (Mark 12:29).”

The word translated “one” in the above verse is the Hebrew Ikhad. This word is the same as the Arabic Ahad. It means one whole, indivisible. It does not and cannot in anyway represent the Trinity but rather it disqualifies it. It is well documented and understood by scholars of the history of Christianity, universally, that the Trinity was a later invention, and was never preached by Jesus. Jesus talked about the one God and His kingdom. When the believers in the divinity of Christ are asked about whether Jesus himself ever made a claim to be God, in the sources that they have, a handful of basically similar references across the board are offered to the questioner. However, all of these references when studied in their context and in the context of other explicit statements made by Jesus, fail to prove that Jesus was claiming to be God in any way.

There are three main problems with the claims that are presented. They are either i) insufficient on their own to prove the divinity of any person, ii) or it is impossible, on the basis of the verse alone to prove the divinity of any person, or iii) They are ambiguous; in that they are open to alternative interpretations which are as valid as what is asserted.


Claim 1. Jesus says, ” I and the Father are One (John 10:30).”

It is claimed on the basis of the above quotation (which is almost always presented without its context) that Jesus was claiming equality with God. The problem with this assertion is that the context has been taken out, either deliberately or out of ignorance. My experience with people presenting this claim is that often enough they are even unaware of where the quotation came from in the Gospel of John.

Beginning at verse 23 of the Gospel of John, chapter 10 we read (in the context of 10:30) about Jesus talking to the Jews. In verse 28, talking about his followers as his sheep, he states:

“…Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29) My Father, who gave them me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. 30) I and the Father are one.” (John 10:28-30)

The above verses proves only that Jesus and the Father are one in that no man can pluck the sheep out of either’s hand. It does not at all state that Jesus is God’s equal in everything. In fact the words of Jesus, ” My Father, who gave them me is Greater than ALL…” in the same passage, completely negates this claim, otherwise we are left with a contradiction. “All” includes everyone even Jesus.

In the 17th chapter of John, verses 20-22, the same word ONE used in the above verses, in the Greek, i.e. HEN is used, not only to describe Jesus and the Father but to describe Jesus, the Father and eleven of the twelve disciples of Jesus. So here if that implies equality, we have a unique case of 13 Gods.

“That the ALL may be made ONE. Like thou Father art in me, I in thee, that they may be ONE in us. I in them, they in me, that they may be perfect in ONE (John 17:20-22).”

Of the verse in question, “I and the Father are One (John 10:30),” we also need to take note of the verses following the 30th verse in the passage. In those verses, the Jews accuse Jesus falsely of claiming to be God by these words. He however replies, proving their accusation wrong by their own text:

” The Jews answered him saying, ‘For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou being a man, makest thyself a God ‘(John 10:33).”

Jesus replies to this accusation saying:

“Jesus answered them, ‘Is it not written in your Law, “I said ye are gods.” If He can call them gods, unto whom the word of God came, say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, “Thou blasphemeth,” because I said I am the son of God?’ (John 10:34-36).”

In the language of the Bible, in Psalms 82 from which Jesus quotes above, the word “gods” is used by God to describe the prophets (“to whom the word of God came”). Jesus argues with the Jews that if God can call the prophets “gods”, then his saying that he is the “son of God,” is no claim to divinity, just as the other prophets were not God just because they were referred to as gods by God himself.

The point that Jesus makes to the Jews is further proven by the use of the term “Son of God,” in both the Old and the New Testament. Metaphorically speaking, God is the cherisher and sustainer and hence the “Father” of everybody. This doesn’t mean that the person so described as a “Son of God” is physically begotten by God or of the same nature as God or literally the “son” as humans have biological sons. Otherwise the term “son of God” would not make any sense.

God by definition signifies one who received his existence from nobody, whereas son signifies someone who received his existence from somebody else. God and son are mutually exclusive terms, they cannot go together. The use of the term by Jesus and in other places in the Bible is metaphoric and not literal.

The many Sons of God in the Bible:

1. Luke 3:38 “…Adam which was the Son of God.”

2. Genesis 6:2 &4 “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men…and when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men…”

3. Exodus 4:22 “Israel is my son even my first born.”

4. Romans 8:14 “For as many as are led by the spirit of God are called sons of God,”

5. Matthew 5:9 “Blessed are the peace-makers for they shall be called sons of God.”

By the above quotations from the Bible it should be clear that the term “Son of God,” signifies only a righteous person. It does not mean that the person so titled is divine, or we would have hundreds of Gods according to the Bible. Jesus is described as the “son of man,” 83 times in the New Testament whereas he’s described only 13 times as the Son of God. What we also see is that Jesus used the terms, “Your Father,” “Thy Father,” describing God’s relationship with people 13 times before the first time he ever said, “My Father,” about God. All these show that he was in no way implying that God physically begot him or he was unique as a “Son of God”.

It is claimed that in John 3:16 (the favorite verse of the evangelists) that Jesus is referred to as the only Son of God. A careful reading of the verse compared to Hebrews 11:17 shows that Isaac is described as the only son of Abraham, whereas literally speaking Isaac was never the only son of Abraham as Ishmael was born before him. The use of the word is metaphoric; Jesus was special among the sons of God but certainly not unique or begotten.

Peter in the Book of Acts testifies about Jesus:

“O you men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a MAN approved of God among you…(Acts 2:22).”

Jesus thus even to his disciples, as to early Christians, not poisoned by Pauline doctrine, was a man, not a God. Claim 2) Jesus was Immanuel, i.e. “God with us”.

Another claim that is often times made is concerning Isaiah 7:14. In the Book of Isaiah in the Old Testament of the Bible it states:

“Therefore, the Lord himself will give you a sign, behold a young woman (almah) will conceive and bear a child and shall call his name Immanuel.”

It is claimed that the above was a prophecy about the birth of Jesus to the Virgin Mary. It is further claimed that since the word Immanuel means “God with us,” the person being talked about, i.e. Jesus was God.

The above quotation is from the King James Version of the Bible. The word translated as “virgin” is the wrong translation of the Hebrew word ALMAH. The word ALMAH in Hebrew means “young woman.” The correct Hebrew word for virgin is BETHULAH. Since many young women begot children since those words were penned, it is not at all necessary that those words should apply to Jesus.

Another fact that is often ignored is that Jesus was never named Immanuel, nor did anyone ever address him as Immanuel when he lived. On the contrary, the Messiah was named Jesus (Luke 2:21) by the angel according to the gospels. Also, even if a person is named Immanuel, it doesn’t mean that the person so named is God.

Consider for example all the people named ELI in the Old Testament. ELI means God in the Hebrew. It is also narrated that Jesus while talking to God referred to Him as ELI (Mark 15:34 & Matthew 27:46).

We cannot however on this basis of just a name accept all the people named ELI in the Old Testament as Gods. Similarly, we cannot accept a person named Immanuel (which means “God with us”) as God. Jesus was never named Immanuel anyway, so both ways the argument and claim are false.

Claim 3) The word became flesh:

Another common claim is John 1:1 which reads:

“In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.”

This is often presented from the Gospel of John to prove that Jesus was God. There are however several problems with this claim. By the above verse it is assumed that Jesus was the “word” and since the word was God and became flesh, Jesus is God. The statement that John reproduced in his gospel however was uttered not by John but by a certain Philo of Alexandria, years before Jesus or John were born. It is therefore completely unlikely that Philo was even remotely referring to Jesus.

There is also another reason, considering the Greek of the above verse, which disproves the assertion that Jesus is referred to as God in the verse. In the verse above, the first time the word God is used, the Greek is HOTHEOS, which means “The God”. The second time the word God is used, “and the word was God,” the word for God is TONTHEOS, which means “A God”. Europeans have evolved a system of capital and small letters non-existent in Greek. The God, HOTHEOS is translated as God with a capital G, whereas Tontheos, which means A or ANY God is translated with a small g, god.

In this case however, we see the unlawful translators trying to prove Jesus being God by putting capital G for both, whereas it doesn’t belong in the case of the “word”. Consider these other candidates for “a god” i.e. Tontheos, in the Bible:

Exodus 7:1 (God said to Moses)”See I have made you a god (in the Greek it would be Tontheos, doesn’t mean God almighty but just a god.) to Pharaoh and Aaron thy brother will be thy prophet.”

Consider this statement where the Devil is “The God”, i.e. Hotheos, but the translators cover it up:

2 Corinthians 4:4 Paul states that the Devil is the God (should be Hotheos in Greek but the translators translate it with a small g instead of capital) of the world.

The word “a god”, Tontheos, in the Bible is used for every other person including the prophets. It does not mean the person is God almighty. As examples consider the above quote from Exodus where Moses is referred to as God and also Psalms 82:6 where God allegedly refers to the prophets as gods:

“I said, Ye are all gods and all of you are the children of the Most High.”(Psalms 82:6)

Claim 4) God in the plural?

Another common claim presented from the Bible to “prove” the divinity of Christ is presented surprisingly from the first chapter of the book of Genesis. God supposedly says: “Let US create.” The word “us” is plural and has been used by God for himself in Genesis. Christians assert that this plural proves the Trinity, otherwise God would have used the singular. This claim is based on ignorance of Semitic languages. In most eastern languages, there are two types of plurals, i.e. plural of numbers and plural of respect. In the Koran, God speaks of Himself as “us” and “we” as well. Yet in those verses, no Muslim will ever doubt that God is referring to Himself alone.

Even in old English, the King or the Queen would use such plurals for themselves alone. An objective inquiry from Jewish scholars, whose book the Old Testament is, will reveal the same. Also, modern translators recognize this and therefore translate the word ELOHIM in the Old Testament as God and not Gods even though it is a plural. I have never seen a Bible with the word ELOHIM translated as “Gods”. It is a plural of respect; it does not signify the Trinity.

Claim 5) Seeing Jesus is seeing the Father?

Yet another common claim that is presented is Philip’s statement in John 14:9 where Philip asks to be shown God, and Jesus replies,

” If you have seen me you have seen the Father.” (John 14:9)

By this statement the Christian claims that what Jesus is really saying is that “I am the Father.” However, Jesus is not saying this. We need to read the context of the verse in question. Beginning from verse 4, we see that the disciples are misunderstanding Jesus from the beginning. Verse 4) Jesus is talking about a spiritual journey, i.e. going to God, whereas Thomas takes it to be a physical journey. In verse 7, Jesus makes clear that to know him would be to know God since Jesus was conveying knowledge about God. Philip then asks Jesus to show them the Father to which the response in 14:9 comes. Since God cannot be seen according to the law of the Jews (which says that No one can see God and live), the only way that He can be known is through His signs and messengers. Therefore, Jesus’ response “If you have seen me you have seen the Father,” is consistent with this. He is not claiming to be God.

However, to further prove that Jesus was not claiming to be God, consider what Jesus says in John 5:32:

“You have not heard him (God) at any time NEITHER seen His shape or form.”

Now the Jews and the disciples were seeing Jesus. If Jesus was God then this statement by him is a gross error and a contradiction compared to John14: 9. However, to the contrary, Jesus says:

i) “The Father is greater than I.” John 14:28

ii)” The Father is greater than ALL.” (John 10:29)

iii)” I can of mine own self do NOTHING…I seek not my own will but the will of Him who sent me (John 5:30).”

Iv)” the one who is sent is not greater than the one who sent (John 13:16).”

God according to Judaism, Christianity and Islam has knowledge of everything. Jesus according to the Gospels had limited knowledge and therefore can not be God:

“For of that hour (of Judgment) knows no man, no not the angels, NEITHER THE SON, but the Father in heaven (John 10:32).”A similar event is documented in Mark 11: 12-13 where Jesus appears ignorant of the season of fruiting of the fig tree.

Claim 6) Jesus raised the dead?

In trying to prove the divinity of Jesus, Christians assert that Jesus gave life to the dead, something that only God can do and hence he was God. The major problem with this assertion is the continual denial on the part of Jesus that he was doing the miracles on his own. In John 5:30 above, for example, we read that Jesus disclaims having the power to do anything. In Matthew 28:18 it is further asserted that all power to do everything was GIVEN to Jesus. In this context read John 12:49. Hence Jesus is the receiver (recipient) and not the originator of that power. A reading of John 11:40-43, which tells the story of the bringing back of Lazarus to life, clearly reveals that it was God who brought Lazarus back to life, using Jesus:

“Then he took away the stone from the place the dead was laid; and Jesus lifted up his eyes and said: ‘Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me, and I know that you hear me always….’ (John 11:40-43)

God heard Jesus, and Jesus knew that God would work the miracle through him.

Claim 7) Jesus had no father:

The Koran and the New Testament both suggest that Jesus was born without a father and only had a mother. This is sometimes presented by Christians to prove that God was the father of Jesus in a physical sense and hence Jesus was God the son or the Son of God.

The Koran clarifies this misconception by comparing the creation of Jesus to the creation of Adam (Koran 3:59). God, who created the first humans could create a man without a father. It is no big deal for God. Modern science can theoretically do the same using just the egg of the female through cloning. The New Testament points to another man also, born without a father or mother; with greater than Jesus, who is not God. Consider this passage in the Bible, New Testament:

“For this Melchizedec, King of Salem, priest of the Most High God…. Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days or end of life….” (Hebrews 7:1-3)

Can anyone match that? Therefore, it is insufficient on the basis of the above alone to prove that a person was God just because he had no father. According to the Christian assumptions about God, He has no shape or sex (see John 4:24), but Jesus had a human form and was of the male gender (Luke 2:21). Therefore, Jesus cannot be God. God has no beginning or end. Jesus had a beginning (Luke 2:6) and according to Christianity, a violent death on the cross. Therefore he cannot be God.

Claim 8: “My God and my Lord”?

It is often claimed that since Thomas referred to Jesus as “My God, my Lord” (John 20:28), that Jesus was God. An ignorance of the context of the verse and of Christian doctrine prompts this claim. The context of the verse talks about an unbelieving Thomas being surprised when Jesus offers him evidence. The exclamation, “My God,” on his part was just astonishment. We use such an exclamation everyday while talking to people (abbreviated as OMG). This doesn’t mean that the person we are talking to is God. For example, I see John cutting his wrist with a Rambo knife. I say: “My God, John what are you doing?” Do I mean that John is God? Similar is the use of the expression by Thomas. If you go into Jewish or Muslim societies even today, you’ll hear people exclaim “My God, my Lord,” at every situation which surprises them or causes them anguish or is astonishing.

In the verse above Thomas says: “My God, my Lord,” he was not claiming that Jesus was his 1) God and 2) Lord. If he did then the Church and the disciples should have stamped him a heretic right there and then. That is because claiming that Jesus is Lord and God is a violation of Christian doctrine, which asserts that there is One God, the Father and One Lord, Jesus. Jesus can’t be God and Lord.

“…Yet for us there is but one God, the Father…and one Lord, Jesus Christ.” (I Corinthians 8:)

Believing the above (i.e. Jesus is Lord and God) would leave a person with unorthodox doctrine branded by the church as Sabellianism, Patripassianism, or Monarchianism.

Claim 9) “I am”! It is claimed that Jesus used the words, “I am”, and since these same words were used by God to describe Himself to the people in the Old Testament, Jesus was claiming to be God. John 8:58, is presented to back this claim. In the verse, Jesus says:” Before Abraham was I am.”

Now, if Jesus existed before Abraham did, that might be a remarkable thing, but does that prove that he was God? How many people existed before Abraham? The Bible presents Jeremiah as being a prophet before he was conceived in his mother’s womb (Jeremiah 1:5), yet no one says that his pre-human existence qualifies him for being a claimant to deity.

In Exodus chapter 3, God allegedly says: “I am what I am.” Long before the time of Jesus, there existed a Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint. The key word, “I am,” in Exodus, which is used by Christians to prove the deity of Jesus is translated as “HO ON.” However, when Jesus uses the word in John 8:58 the Greek of the “I am,” is EGO EIMI. If Jesus wanted to tell the Jews that he was claiming to be God he should have at least remained consistent in the use of words or the whole point is lost. How many people in that age would have said, “I am,” in answer to questions in everyday life, hundreds of thousands. Are they all gods? If you ask me: “Are you Asadi,” and I say “I am,” am I claiming to be God just because God happened to use the words “I am?” The argument clearly is not valid.

Claim 10) ABBA, father

It is sometimes claimed that the use of the Hebrew word for father, ABBA, by Jesus for God, signifies a special relationship of a physical type. This however is unwarranted since every Christian is supposed to use the same word ABBA for God (see Romans 8:14, and Galatians 4:6)

Sometimes, certain other terms used by Jesus for himself are presented to prove that he was claiming divinity. Terms like “Messiah,” and “Savior,” are not only applied to Jesus in the gospels but have been applied to others in the Bible. Yet in their case, no one says that they prove divinity. If these claims were to be presented truthfully then we would have not one but many candidates for divinity.

As examples, Cyrus the Persian, who was a pagan is called Messiah in the Bible (Isaiah 45:1). It is however covered up by the translators who translate the word as anointed. The Hebrew and the Arabic word Messiah comes from the root Masaaha, which means to rub, message or anoint. Ancient kings and priests were “anointed” or appointed, into office. It does not mean that the person so named and termed is God at all. The title of “savior,” or “saviors” is used for other people in the Bible (2 Kings 13:5 and Obadiah 21 and Nehemiah 9:27). Translators are well aware of this so they substitute the word savior for deliverer to throw off readers.

Jesus had a servant-master relationship with God. He never claimed to be equal to God, or to be of the same nature as God. Attributing divinity to Christ, a man, goes completely against his teachings as found in the New Testament of the Bible. He says for example that God was his God as well:

“…And go and tell my brethren that I ascend to My Father and Your Father, to MY GOD and your God (John 20:17).”

The Koran confirms this statement made by Jesus:

“Indeed they reject the truth, those that say, “God is Christ, the son of Mary.” For indeed, Christ said, worship God, who is MY GOD and your God (Koran 5:75).”


Asadi, Muhammed. Islam & The Divinity of Christ. (1989, revised) Deedat, Ahmed. Is Jesus God. Miller, Gary. A Concise Reply to Christianity.


Christianity and its view of Muhammed:

Whereas Islam honors Jesus as a great prophet of God and mentions his mother Mary as being “chosen above the women of all nations,” Christianity has harbored hate and contempt for Muhammed, the messenger of Allah, throughout history.

“The famous Christian monk, John of Damascus, showed a complete lack of respect for Muhammad when he wrote of him as a “false prophet”, calling his pronouncements “heresy” and “worthy of laughter” (as quoted. in Phipps 3). In the twelfth century, Peter the Venerable wrote:

Muhammad, instructed by the best Jewish and heretical doctors, produced his Quran and wove together, in that barbarous fashion of his, a diabolical scripture put together both from the Jewish fables and the trifling songs of heretics. Lying that his collection was brought to him chapter by chapter by Gabriel, whose name he already knew from the standard Scripture, he poisoned with a deadly poison the people that did not know God. (as quoted. in Phipps 4)

Thomas Aquinas, the Catholic theologian, not only insulted Muhammad but his followers as well when he wrote,

“The truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrine of the greatest falsity . . . Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms” (as quoted. in Phipps 5).

The Protestant Martin Luther likened Muhammad to :

“the warring horses of the Book of Revelation that bring great destruction to Christians”, described him as “course and filthy” (as quoted. in Phipps 6), and with the maturity of a child called him “an uncouth blockhead and ass” (as quoted. in Phipps 5).

Martin Luther also wrote that

“the spirit of lies had taken possession of Mohammed, and the devil had murdered men’s souls with his Koran and had destroyed the faith of Christians”(as quoted. in Phipps 5-6),

“We are fighting that the Turk may not put his devilish filth and blasphemous Muhammad in the place of our dear Lord, Jesus Christ” (as quoted. in Phipps 6), once again associating Muhammad with lies, the devil, and destruction.

Phipps, William E. Muhammad and Jesus. New York: The Continuum Publishing Company, 1996.

Paul And The Invention Of Christianity

On the road to Damascus, while persecuting the early Christians, after the death of Jesus, a man claimed that he saw a vision, a vision of Jesus. The man was Saul of Tarsus (Latinized as Paul). From there on, the teachings of Christ were transformed and Romanized and modern Christianity was born.

The vision in which Paul claims that Jesus gave him an authority to teach in his name is recorded a number of times in the New Testament. If we were to analyze these variant descriptions, made by the same man, as in a court of law, they would be thrown out as fabricated “evidence” because of inconsistencies. For example:

1. Acts (9:3-7)

[3] Now as he journeyed he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed about him.

[4] And he fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

[5] And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting; [6] but rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.”

[7] The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.

In this description, it is stated that only Paul fell to the ground. And, the other men who traveled with him did not see anything but heard a voice. Compare this to the next description:

2. Acts (22:6-9)

[6] “As I made my journey and drew near to Damascus, about noon a great light from heaven suddenly shone about me.

[7] And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, `Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?’

[8] And I answered, `Who are you, Lord?’ And he said to me, `I am Jesus of Nazareth whom you are persecuting.’

[9] Now those who were with me saw the light but did not hear the voice of the one who was speaking to me.

In this description, in complete contradiction to the one above, Paul states that those who traveled with him did not hear the voice but saw the light. The previous description said that they did not see anything but heard a voice!

3. Acts (26:14)

[14] And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language, `Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It hurts you to kick against the goads.’

In this description, Paul says that they “all” fell to the ground whereas in the previous description, only Paul had fallen to the ground.

In any court of law, anywhere in the world where justice is upheld, this testimony of Paul would have been thrown out as fabrication and he would have been prosecuted for perjury.

Paul’s Christianity is not what Jesus taught:

The German philosopher, Fredrick Neitzsche recognized Paul’s role in constructing the “new” Christianity, and was convinced of deception:

In Nietzsche’s view, the very worst of them was Paul, the actual founder of the Christian church and doctrine. Nietzsche was convinced that Paul was not sincere in his beliefs, that “his requirement was power.” Nietzsche cannot bring himself to believe that Paul, “whose home was the principal center of Stoic enlightenment,” is sincere when he offers up a hallucination as proof that The Redeemer still lives. Paul invented the doctrines of ‘eternal life’ and ‘the Judgement’ as a means to his ends. In Die Morgenrote (translated by R. J. Hollingdale as Daybreak, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1982), Nietzsche had earlier discussed Paul’s frustrations at being unable to master, and to comply with, Jewish law, and hence Paul “sought about for a means of destroying” that law. Christianity offered Paul just the weapon he had been seeking.

[A 40-42; Die Morgenrote 68, http://www.debunker.com/texts/anti_chr.html, retrieved 12/08/’01].

Paul destroyed the Law:

Romans 3:28

[28] For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law.

Romans 7:4

[4] Likewise, my brethren, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God.

1 Corinthians 10:25

[25] Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience.

Contrary to what Paul taught, Jesus stated that he came to fulfil the Law and not abolish it. He further states that whoever takes the least bit out of the Law will be “the least” in the Kingdom of Heaven. Since Paul took the “whole” law out, according to Jesus’ criteria, Paul is the “least” of the “least”! Consider these words of Jesus:

Matthew 5:17-20:

[17] “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them.

[18] For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.

[19] Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

[20] For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. ”

The Law laid down strict dietary laws, for example, the Book of Deuteronomy, a part of the Torah, states:

And the swine, because it parts the hoof but does not chew the cud, is unclean for you. Their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch. (Deuteronomy 14:8)

Furthermore, the concept of salvation that Paul brought into Christianity from Greek myth was also alien to what Jesus taught. According to Paul, believing in the “lord” Jesus and confessing that he was raised from the dead, saves a person. He says:

Romans 10:9

[9] “Because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. ”

1 Corinthians 15:14:

[14] If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain

This is unequivocally against what Jesus himself taught. Christians need to ask themselves here, “Whom do we believe, Paul or Jesus?” Jesus says explicitly:

Matthew 7:21-23

[21] “Not every one who says to me, `Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. [22] On that day many will say to me, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ [23] And then will I declare to them, `I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.’

Matthew 19:17

[17] And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? One (God) there is who is good. If you would enter life,keep the commandments.”

James, who knew Jesus much closer than Paul says:

James 2:26

[26] For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.

The Original Sin:

Christianity and Islam differ regarding the concept of the Original Sin. According to Christianity, Adam and Eve, the first humans sinned when they ate the forbidden fruit. They were expelled from heaven and sin entered the world. Every child of Adam, you and I, according to Christianity has inherited this sin (as genetic inheritance). Therefore, every male and female is born stained with sin and is therefore destined to hell, from birth. This belief in Christianity gave rise to the doctrine of Atonement. According to this doctrine, God sacrificed his “only begotten” son, Jesus to wash away the sins of the world. The only thing people have to do to wash away their hereditary stain is to believe in Jesus as God’s son and that he died for them.

Islam does not agree with all this. According to the Koran, every one is responsible for their own doings and nobody can carry the burden of another. God is forgiving and if a person sincerely repents, amends and does what is good and righteous, God forgives. Adam did not ask us before eating the fruit, so how can we be blamed?

In any society, where justice is one of the highest valued morals, killing an innocent man (Jesus) to wash away the sins of the guilty would be condemned as immoral, yet billions of people rejoice over this “gift” of injustice! Once again, the source of conflict is Paul and not Jesus. Jesus never talked about atonement or a “free-ride” through the blood of an innocent man.

On the contrary he said, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:17). It was Paul who brought the concept of the Original Sin into Christianity. He says:

Romans 5:12

[12] “Therefore, as sin came into the world through ONE man..”

1 Corinthians 15:21-22

[21] “For as by a man came death (sin), by a man also has come the resurrection of the dead.

[22] For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.”

As we saw above, Jesus contradicts Paul. Not only that, the Old Testament contradicts Paul as well:

Ezekiel 18:20-22

[20] The soul that sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

[21] “But if a wicked man turns away from all his sins which he has committed and keeps all my statutes and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

[22] None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him; for the righteousness which he has done he shall live.

2 Chronicles 25:4

[4] But he did not put their children to death, according to what is written in the law, in the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, or the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall die for his own sin.”

Major Yeats Brown, in his book, Life of a Bengal Lancer, summarized the concept of atonement in Christianity. He states:

“No heathen tribe has conceived so grotesque an idea, involving as it does the assumption, that man was born with a hereditary stain upon him: and that this stain (for which he was not personally responsible) was to be atoned for; and the creator of all things had to sacrifice his only begotten son, to neutralize this mysterious curse.”

Paul actually transformed the strict monotheism that Jesus proclaimed into a religion that is closer to Greek mythology, than it is towards either Judaism or Islam. Things like the “only begotten son”, atonement for the sins of humanity etc. were all alien to the strict monotheism of Abraham, Jesus, Muhammad and all the prophets of Israel.

John H. Randall, emeritus professor of philosophy at Columbia University, wrote:

“Christianity, at the hands of Paul, became a mystical system of redemption, much like the cult of Isis, and the other sacramental or mystery religions of the day”

(Hellenistic Ways of Deliverance and the Making of the Christian Synthesis, 1970, p. 154, http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/yama.html, retrieved 12/0-8/’01).

Greek cults were prevalent in the Mediterranean long before Jesus was born. They were brought into Christianity by Paul to make doctrine “inclusive” thereby destroying the strict monotheism that Jesus proclaimed. Some of the ones, with their parallels in Christianity, are:

1. Attis of Phrygia (later called Galatia in Asia Minor):

He was regarded as the “only begotten” son and savior. He was bled to death on March 24th on the foot of a pine tree. He also rose from the dead and his death and resurrection was celebrated by his followers.

“A Christian writer of the fourth century AD, recounted ongoing disputes between Pagans and Christians over the remarkable similarities of the death and resurrection of their two Gods. The Pagans argued that their God was older and therefore original. The Christians admitted Christ came later, but claimed Attis was a work of the devil whose similarity to Christ, and the fact he predated Christ, were intended to confuse and mislead men. This was apparently the stock answer — the Christian apologist Tertullian makes the same argument.”

(http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/PaganChrists_Attis.html, retrieved 12/08/’01)

2. Adonis of Syria:

He was born of a virgin mother. He also suffered death for the redemption of mankind, arising from the dead in spring.

3. Bacchus of Greece or Dionesius

He was termed the “only begotten” son of Jupiter. He was born of a virgin named Detemer on December 25th. To his followers, he was “redeemer”. He called himself “Alpha and Omega” i.e. similar to the words used for Jesus by the author of the Book of Revelation.

4. Orisis of the Egyptians

He was born of a virgin mother on December 29th. He was betrayed by one Typhen (remember Judas) and was slain. He was buried (just like Jesus), remained in hell for two to three days (just like Jesus), and then rose from the dead (just like Jesus).

5. Mithra, the Persian Sun-God

He was also born of a virgin on the 25th of December. Christmas and Easter were the most important festivals of the Mithras. They also had other surprising similarities with Paul’s Christianity like the Eucharist supper etc.

Dr. Arnold Meyer, professor of Theology at the Zurich University, after describing the basic Christian beliefs of today, i.e. the divinity of Christ, atonement etc. states:

If this is Christianity, then such Christianity was founded by St. Paul and not by our lord (Jesus or Paul, page 122)

© 2001 Muhammed Asadi. This essay comes from Muhammed’s website at http://www.rationalreality.com – visit it to find out more and buy his books.



0 Responses to “ISLAM & CHRISTIANITY”

  1. Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Stefan Rosty Founded TruthBooth22.04.07

  • 475,216 hitz

“Virtual Insanity”

That's not nature's way Well that's what they said yesterday There's nothing left to do but pray I think it's time I found a new religion Waoh - it's so insane To synthesize another strain There's something in these Futures that we have to be told. JAMIROQUAI

RSS Genuine Islam

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

trashcontentz (by day)

August 2007
« Jul   Sep »

trashcontentz (by month)


RSS 9-11 News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS RationalReality.com

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Selves and Others

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS المؤلف: احمد صبحي منصور


%d bloggers like this: