Is Christianity the true religion and do Christians have real faith? The Gospels provide the litmus test…

This is a simple challenge to the world’s 2 billion Christians. Prove that you have faith and demonstrate the power of that faith by fulfilling the promise of Jesus in the Gospels.

He replied, “Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move.Nothing will be impossible for you.”” – Matthew 17:20

Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done.” – Matthew 21:21

And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”” – Mark 16:17-18

So this is the litmus test. Christians can prove the truth of their religion if they could perform such miracles. So here’s the challenge. Move Mount Everest from the Himalaya mountain range and drop it into the Indian ocean. Surely, at least ONE Christian out of the 2 BILLION Christians of the world can do this? Let us see if they can.

118 thoughts on “Is Christianity the true religion and do Christians have real faith? The Gospels provide the litmus test…

    1. Cherub Aradhana

      Yes Jesus said if you have faith like a mustard seed you can move mountains but by saying that He meant that where there is a tiny bit of faith, it can grow to immense proportions and can spread its influence far and wide. The mustard seed is one of the tiniest, most insignificant seeds found in the Middle East. A fast-growing annual herb, the mustard seed grows up to 10 feet tall in just a few short months, demonstrating the striking example of the potential of a small, insignificant seed.

      The seed in this parable grew into a big, strong tree, much like the way in which Christianity began, eventually growing into a huge kingdom that encompassed the world and traversed centuries of generations.
      And Jesus also said to satan “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.”
      The devil was telling Jesus to “prove” God’s Word was true by forcing (just like what you are doing) God’s hand—if Jesus was in peril, God would have to save Him. Jesus refused to test God in such a way. We are to accept God’s Word by faith, without requiring a sign (Luke 11:29). God’s promises are there for us when we need them to manipulate situations in an attempt to coerce God into fulfilling His promises is evil.

      Like

      1. Hello Cherub. Welcome to the blog.

        First of all, Jesus elsewhere described mustard seeds as the smallest, not one of the smallest, of seeds. This is incorrect as there are smaller seeds.

        Second, he said the thing about moving mountains in the context of the fig tree withering at his command. Therefore, it’s more than just a metaphor. If the fig tree can literally wither, then you can move a mountain.

        And I’m not manipulating anything. I am simply taking Jesus at his word, as the Bible claims.

        Also, there is a contradiction between Mark and Matthew as to when the fig tree withered. What are your thoughts on that?

        Like

    2. I have to ask – as someone who is neutral – why does it matter which is the ‘true’ religion? The strength – and perhaps flaw – of faith is that it tends to be unshakable, irrespective of evidence and arguments. Why not simply live and let live?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Well, no one is saying don’t live and let live. Christians can believe whatever they want. And so will Muslims. But accepting the other person’s right to choose what they believe does not mean I don’t have the right to disagree and criticize that belief. I sincerely believe that Islam is the truth, and that Christianity is false and will lead one to hell. Faith may be unshakable, though not always. It is my hope that at least some Christians will shake off that faith and accept Islam, even if it is just one person.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Lol, yeah it can seem never-ending! But, as any faithful Muslim will tell you, it is destined to end eventually. I actually believe that we are living in the end times. Part of the events of those times will be the descent of Jesus (pbuh), InshaAllah. When that happens, the debate should hopefully end.

        Liked by 1 person

  1. Pingback: Do Christians Today Have “Real Faith”? – Vake Biblia

      1. I have no idea how this is a reasonable response. You are just changing the topic. That’s called a red herring fallacy.

        You do know that there are plenty of Christian priests and ministers that have converted to Islam, right?

        Liked by 1 person

  2. That is not what those verses mean.

    “a mountain” is not a literal mountain.

    The mountain or in the context of the same kind of teaching Jesus taught about the fig tree in Mark 11 and Matthew 21

    a mountain in those contexts is a symbol for something that is standing in the way of the moral will of God, but always under God’s sovereignty also. (in Matthew 17 the context was sickness and healing – but God does not always heal us physically by just praying for it or “claiming it” by faith, etc.

    The cursing of the fig tree and the cleansing of the temple in the Mark 11 and Matthew 21 passage shows that Jesus was using those physical things as symbols of apostate Israel who had no fruit. (no good works or love or true faith – the temple in Jerusalem had become a den of thieves and robbers (focused on material things, making money from selling the animals, etc.) and was not being used as a “house of prayer for all the nations” (Mark 11:17 – see the quote is from Isaiah 56:1-7

    “the mountain of the house of the Lord” = the temple in Jerusalem

    The Gospels are hinting at the fact that the temple in Jerusalem will be destroyed in 70 AD, because Jesus is the final sacrifice that fulfills all the previous Levitical – sacrificial system of animals – blood sacrifice.

    The cursing of the fig tree is an illustration of Christ’s righteous anger against apostate Israel, who turned their back on Yahweh because they rejected Him and His Messiah. (Psalm 2:1-12)

    Like

      1. Nope. The context of the cleansing of the temple and the cursing of the fig tree shows that Jesus is talking about apostate Israel who rejected Him and His teachings. The Pharisees and leaders had no fruit – only leaves – fakers, hypocrites. The cleansing of the temple shows the same thing. If you read all of Isaiah 56:1-7 (where Mark is quoting from in Mark 11:17) and all of Mark 11-12 and Matthew 21, you would see the meaning of these passages.

        “this mountain” in those chapters means the mountain of the house of the Lord” (Isaiah 56:5, 7; Isaiah 2:2-4; Micah Micah 3:12; 4:1-3; 6:1-2)

        Jesus is speaking against the lack of fruit in apostate Israel and the corruptions in the temple – and is alluding to the future when the temple will be destroyed.

        “have faith in God” Mark 11:22 – means have true faith in God and His Messiah, Jesus, and not the false faith of the Pharisees and apostate Jewish leaders.

        The context goes on to say that Jesus is going to take the kingdom away from Israel and give it to a people who produce the fruit of it – Matthew 21:43-46 – and the Pharisees understood that He was talking about them.

        43 Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it. 44 And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust.”

        45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard His parables, they understood that He was speaking about them.

        Matthew 21:43-46
        the lack of fruit of the fig tree is apostate Israel
        the mountain that needs to be removed is the hypocritical external ritualistic religion, that will be removed in 70 AD.

        Jesus is the final substitutionary sacrifice for sins for all time. (Hebrews chapters 7, 8, 9, 10)

        Like

      2. Sabit cekic

        @ken
        When your bible scripture has a literal meaning you conveniently accept it and then shamelessly attribute other stories to it as supporting parables. You rather make up your own interpretations and go against church scholarship when they concur errors in bible scripture. To people with reason and logic your mad lip interpretation of bible scripture is deplorable.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. mr.heathcliff

        “Jesus is speaking against the lack of fruit in apostate Israel and the corruptions in the temple “–

        mark has the stone rolled away u pagan, did jesus have faith he will walk out the tomb ?
        ken, do u work and have a bank account, save money and preach your bs religion? your jesus says dont worry holy ghost will do the worrying for u.

        “and is alluding to the future when the temple will be destroyed.”

        So it was all about jesus having faith that one day temple will be destroyed and then nothing unique here since hebrew bible makes prediction about the temple too and its doom.

        u make jesus into every day prophet like modern day preachers

        Liked by 1 person

    1. mr.heathcliff

      ken, you better give up your money and live in a card board box otherwise you are screwed.

      the truth is that the gospels are from yhwh the pagan god of CONFUSION and here is why,

      It is also possible to list the examples used by Matthew’s Jesus of individuals who will not be saved, because the text itself is defining what exactly this righteousness above and beyond the Torah is:

      Any individual who does not forgive the sins/trespasses of others, their own sins/trespasses will not be forgiven by God! (6:14, 18:35)

      Every one who does not bear good fruit, that is do good (7:19). Presumably, we are to understand this as an ethical obligation to fellow humans.

      Those who do not do “the will of the Father” (7:21-23). This deserves a whole other enter because “will of the Father” as defined by Jesus himself in this gospel is in complete and utter contradiction of doing, say for example, the will of Yahweh as defined by Leviticus. But in the context of Matthew’s Jesus it means abandoning wealth, possessions, and giving all to the poor. Again, “unless your righteousness exceeds”

      It is implied that whoever hears Jesus’ teachings and does not do them will also be unforgiven, not saved (7:26-27; cf. Rom 2:13). Of course this contradicts John’s Jesus, who—I would argue “John” consciously created to speak against Matthew’s Jesus—merely states that hearing and believing is the criteria by which one is saved, nothing is ever said about doing them (Jn 5:24; cf. 3:16).

      Whoever denies Jesus, that is Matthew’s Jesus (10:33)! This seems to included: those who love father and mother, son and daughter more than Jesus, and those who do not pick up there own cross, i.e., become martyrs.

      Whoever blasphemes against the Spirit (of God) (12:31). Certainly the individuals in the 2 entries above would qualify.

      Causing a child who believes in Jesus to sin (18:6).

      Those whose hand or foot has caused them to sin, and they have not cut it off! (18:8).

      Those who have committed adultery with their eye and have not plucked it out!! (18:9). Yes, we are to read these literally—if your righteousness does not exceed that of the Torah, you will not be saved is the message here! What do you hold more valuable: your eye or your (eternal) life?

      Those who do not forgive a fellow man’s debt (18:35). I sure hope my creditors are reading this!

      Apparently all who are not watchful and ready (25:1-13).

      And finally, those who do not feed the hungry, give drink to the poor, take in the homeless, clothe the naked, and minister to the sick and imprisoned (25:31-46).

      The argument is clear from the text: unless your righteousness excels beyond that stipulated in the Torah!

      Thus, accordingly, it looks like no one is getting saved according to the sayings of Matthew’s Jesus. Or in Matthew’s Jesus’ own words: “Difficult is the way which leads to life and there are few who find it” (7:14). In point of fact, Matthew’s Jesus’ criterion for salvation is worse than the Old Testament! So unlike the Pauline literature, and the Gospel of John, Matthew’s Jesus does not postulate belief as an all encompassing blanket-criterion for being forgiven or saved.

      Indeed, it is not belief, nor Paul’s sacrificial atonement theology, but righteousness that is the sole criterion for Jesus’ Matthew, and that righteousness is defined in ultra-human ethical terms. The message is clear: Anyone whose righteousness does not exceed the righteousness stipulated in the Torah will not be saved!

      YOU ARE screwed ken, your FAITH can not win unless u DO BETTER than torah lol

      Liked by 1 person

    2. mr.heathcliff

      important article exposing the likes of ken pagan temple:

      This included things like the literal resurrection of all the dead, the return of Jesus as the “Son of Man” to gather the elect and to initiate the final judgment, and so on. It could also include things like this idea of the destruction and re-creation of the “space-time universe,” but also various other utopian or preternatural developments on earth prior to this — including the dawn of a preternatural “kingdom of God,” etc.

      In any case, the first argument is pretty simple: when modern apocalyptic claimants make a prediction about a catastrophic event that’s to take place within a very short period of time, we usually take these at face value. For example, when they say that within a year, an enormous asteroid will hit the earth or that there will be a catastrophic global earthquake or that the oceans will turn to blood, or whatever it may be, we take them to mean exactly these things.

      And if they try to retroactively smuggle in qualifications to these predictions after the fact, we don’t take too kindly to that. If they try to say that the “earthquake” or impact they had in mind was actually just a spiritual one, or that the predicted date for the catastrophe was only tentative and open to revision, we don’t accept these as any more legitimate. (They usually end up suggesting a different, revised date for when these things will happen — and then, when this date fails to produce the apocalypse, too, they suggest yet another; and so on.)

      As a slightly different variant of the “spiritual fulfillment” explanation, sometimes the original prediction is somewhat vague, or else they try to point to other phenomena as a purported fulfillment of their prediction. Not too long ago, an unfortunately mentally-unwell poster on DebateAnAtheist predicted that “Thirty-three disasters will be spread globally between 12pm EST on Christmas Eve [2018] and 12pm EST on Christmas Day.” He later tried to cherry-pick global events from around that time that he believed qualified as disasters, in an attempt to account for all 33 — eventually including things like general anxiety about the economy (figuratively a “disaster”), etc.

      In short, I think that many of these same sorts of explanations can also be found today, proposed by Christian apologists, in an attempt to explain early Christian predictions of imminent eschatological events, found in the New Testament and elsewhere.

      First and foremost, Christian apologists point to the destruction of Jerusalem at the apex of the Jewish-Roman war as a purported fulfillment of some of the expected catastrophic events. And while it’s more or less demonstrably true that pre-Christian Jewish literature used various elevated, even cosmic figurative language to describe various catastrophic earthly events, there’s good evidence that New Testament language similar to this can’t be understood similarly. (See, among other critiques of this, Dale Allison’s essay “Jesus & the Victory of Apocalyptic.”)

      Similarly, apologists try to understand the prediction of the imminent “coming of the Son of Man” — Jesus’ second coming — as a figurative reference to the “judgment” of Jerusalem in the war; or else they try to understand it not as Jesus’ return to earth, as traditionally understood, but rather his going: “coming” into heaven by ascending after his resurrection.

      Similarly, the prediction of the imminent “kingdom of God” is interpreted not as something that entailed the final judgment and the destruction of all unrighteous forces/persons/nations on earth, as traditionally understood, but instead just as a more subtle phenomenon that involved individual miracles or even just purely social/internal spiritual realities. (See Luke 17:20-21, which may already be a kind of apologetics for the traditional expectation.)

      There are other apologetic approaches which seek to reinterpret the timing of these events. It’s suggested that the originally predicted imminence of the eschaton wasn’t intended to be understood in terms of a human scale of time, but rather a divine scale of time, which is drastically elongated.

      Similarly, some of the other markers for this imminence, chronological or otherwise, are reinterpreted: for example, Jesus’ prediction that “this generation will not pass away before [eschatological events] come to pass” is explained by either reinterpreting the sense of “this” or “generation.”

      There are a number of other lesser-known apologetic explanations that attempt to reinterpret other aspects of this. The main point, however, is that Christian apologists apply a radically different standard in applying these sorts of reinterpretive strategies to the predictions of the founder of their own religion and the New Testament authors, meanwhile rejecting the same strategies when they’re employed by other smaller religions or cults — in fact often scoffing at these as absurd or ad hoc.

      They also use these reinterpretive methods uncritically, when the evidence doesn’t support the legitimate application of these to the Biblical texts in question, etc.

      In any case, I wanted to keep this post a bit shorter than my usual ones, but I’d be happy to expand on how “the evidence doesn’t support the legitimate application of these to the Biblical texts in question” and such in much more detail.

      Like

      1. mr.heathcliff

        hey paid missionary ,

        Can you make a scriptural argument using the OT that makes the differentiation what laws applied to Hebrews and what laws applied to everyone?

        can you show where ot divides its laws in to moral laws and ceremonials ones?

        Like

      2. mr.heathcliff

        convert to islam liar for jesus. the prophecies are in your face. you are seeing them. your jesus made false prophecies. how can you reject muhammad ? how?

        Liked by 2 people

    3. mr.heathcliff

      Paid missionary, how you gonna spin out of this one

      been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
      19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
      20 teaching them to observe all that I COMMAND you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

      jesus summoned his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every kind of disease and every kind of sickness

      Liked by 1 person

    4. mr.heathcliff

      hey temple, i know you can see this message.

      you think that prophet muhammad fabricated revelations and at the same time believed that “holy bible” and its prophets were inspired

      according to you, young prophet muhammad p, read stories about solomon having hundreds of wives

      who is solomon ?

      Now God gave Solomon wisdom and very great discernment and breadth of mind, like the sand that is on the seashore.

      : “And God gave Solomon wisdom and exceedingly great understanding, and largeness of heart like the sand on the seashore” (1 Kgs 4:29).

      But King Solomon loved many foreign women, as well as the daughter of Pharaoh: women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites– from the nations of whom the Lord had said to the children of Israel, “You shall not intermarry with them, nor they with you. Surely they will turn away your hearts after their gods.” Solomon clung to these in love. And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart. For it was so, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned his heart after other gods; and his heart was not loyal to the Lord his God, as was the heart of his father David. (1 Kgs 11:1-4)

      so the arabs before islam had no RESTRICTIONS on how many women one can take
      when prophet was young, he had only one wife.

      now when he was younger, this would be a time for more women, the merrier.

      you believe the prophet was inspired by the pimps of yhwh and he lived in a place where arabs put no restriction to the number of women, why didn’t the younger prophet muhammad FABRICATE vurses which said that he was allowed unrestricted number of women ?

      why didn’t he say that i can marry any amount of women because they would allow with the invitation of islam?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. No, Muhammad could not read. He was ignorant of the Scriptures. He was just hearing things and then adding his own spin on them. He heard Midrash from the Jews and Apocryphal gospels from heretical and nominal Christians from outskirts of Arabia; later Arabs added some details.

        Like

      2. Amazing how you tried to avoid the main point! Typical Pennywise! Moron, it doesn’t matter what you think. The point Heath is making is that Muhammad (pbuh) would have heard the stories of Solomon’s multiple wives, so why didn’t he just fake some verses so he could take more wives early on in his prophethood? Answer the question. Don’t deflect.

        Like

      1. mr.heathcliff

        “Which religious text claims that God commanded killing women and children? 🤔 Hmm, what book was that? Dang it. What book was that?”

        Like

      2. mr.heathcliff

        when the paid missionary got humiliated

        Bad fruits like the Inquisition, Catholic-Protestant wars, burning of heretics, kings claiming divine right to rule because of Paul’s statement, massacre of non-combatants in crusades etc?

        Or how about Heraclius going to forcibly convert the Jews in the Byzantine empire because they sided with the Persians. I wonder what stopped that from happening?

        Also what happens to all this lovey-dovey talk in the second coming? “He will punish the nations and fill their lands with corpses;”[Psalms 110:6]

        More importantly about God’s love and forgiveness, I believe in a God who actually forgives sins, not a God who transfers punishment.

        And while we are talking about bad fruits. the worst fruit of them all is associating partners with God, taking as deity a human who needed air to breathe(Isaiah 2:22), taking as deity a
        man who was not all-knowing(Ezekiel 28:3), taking as deity someone who was tempted by evil(James 1:13) and a creature who needed food for sustenance(Psalms 106:20).

        Since you love to throw references. Look at the ones I cited above and ask yourself if your beliefs line up with the theology of these texts.

        :::::::::::::::::::::::::

        First of all, that verse is not “nasty”, especially that you believe in the perfect law of god! That law in which god had kept commanding his eye’s apple to keep so that they can be holy
        before him! You know it! That law which commands you to stone your own family if they invited you to worship other gods! … That law which Jesus gave a serious warning for anyone wants to break it or even teach to break it.
        That verse is not “nasty” while you believe in Roman13!
        Aren’t you obligated to obey the pagan romans!? Their swords are from god, and their punishment is approved by god, so why do you complain about that verse? At least we believe in Jesus!
        Moreover, Jesus will do more than that verse when he will come ( Isaiah11:14).
        In fact, you have done that already as christian nations & western imperialism over the world. I can show you what have you done in Iraq which Trump wants its oil for the decmcrcy you spread.
        I can show you the real history of christianity before 1945!
        I can qoute from great Christians theologians whom christians qoute to explain your creeds, and how they had no problem with burning heretics alive, for example.
        It’s just you from 90% Americans who are “what’s Aleppo” or those who are with “nuking Agrabah”.
        After you think seriously to get over this hypocrisy, we can explain that verse for you with its own historical context.

        Liked by 1 person

    5. mr.heathcliff

      i know you can see this pennywise. after this roasting, you will never bring up “kill until they convert”

      good thing is that this article is pinned

      KILL THEM UNTIL THEY CONVERT

      “”””I have been commanded to fight the people until the people [accept islam]” -sahih quote of Muhammad.

      Just think about it for a second… regardless of context or who he may have been referring to in this quote, he’s literally saying that if they decided to throw down their arms and make peace, he wouldn’t accept it. he would only stop attacking them if they converted to Islam.

      That’s enough right there to tell you that Muhammad wasn’t a peaceful man who spread Islam by way of peace”””

      Awesta Khalid Well, you certainly did surprise me — by completely avoiding everything I said and simply repeating yourself.

      Yes, I’m aware of what you said. I’m telling you that these people DID NOT STOP because they kept VIOLATING THEIR PEACE TREATIES.

      So your hypothetical doesn’t apply here because it’s not meant for people who STOP.

      I’ve thought about it for many years, considering I’ve studied the hadith, seerah, etc. for many years in academia. I don’t need a second.

      Your statement “regardless of context…” indicates to me you’re not interested in an actual response to your query, but simply wish to undermine any future responses by implying context is some sort of “excuse” and that it should be dismissed. However, this is absurd — context is necessary for everything (even the literal).

      Definition of ‘context’:

      n. the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed.

      That said, allow me to answer you in hopes that you retract that sentiment.

      The context of this hadith states that a certain people (the Quraysh, more specifically, given the definite article ‘the’) should be fought till they convert to Islam. Alright. Anyone who has read the seerah knows that the pagan Arabs violated several treaties of peace prior to this statement being made — they slaughtered many innocent people and refused to abide by the peace treaties afforded to them.

      Now, according to you, it was “not peaceful” to fight them and force them to conform to a different set of moral standards. The answer is “obviously, it’s not peaceful”, because it would have been absurdly immoral to continue allowing them to break treaties over and over and over again until the Muslims were slaughtered.

      Now, perhaps you think pacifism is a good thing or that the Muslims should have allowed themselves to be slaughtered by allowing these people to continue doing what they did, but I don’t particularly consider your standards rational nor sane.

      Your reasoning seems to imply that groups like ISIS should be tolerated without restriction — left to their own devices and allowed to continue killing and conquering innocent people in Iraq, Syria, etc. without any force of action to stop them and force them to give up those values.

      Now, I anticipate your response to this response will be one of the following:

      1) Accuse me of “mental gymnastics” for explaining a simple term like ‘context’ to you, because you have this absurd idea that being literal = no context (said no rational person ever).

      2) Change the subject by claiming Muhammad (sallAllahu alayhi wasallam) and the early Muslims are just like ISIS, attempting to avoid the above critique through emotional appeals and simple minded analyses of history.

      3) Miraculously admit that context is necessary, but then proceed to build a smokescreen of additional ahadith without any concern for those contexts.

      4) Argue with me about the definite article ‘the’, claiming it means “all humanity and not the pagan Arabs” without realizing that it’s literally impossible for that to be the case because the hadith does not include options for peace treaties and jizya, as per the norms of traditional Islam (i.e. fiqh).

      Or, maybe you’ll surprise me, although I doubt it.

      Like

      1. No, all they show is that you are a scumbag who lies, gets refutes, pretends he didn’t lie, and then repeats the same lie as before.

        You see, you’re a nutjob and no one actually takes your nutty lies seriously.

        Like

      2. I don’t say that ISIS or Al Qaeda or Hamas or Taliban or Islamic Jihad or Boko Haram or Al-Shabab or Abu Sayyaf or the Iranian Shiite 12er Regime or Hezbollah, etc. represent ALL of the Muslim world, but dang it, they get all of their ideas from Islamic texts and history.

        Boom!

        Like

      3. “says he doesn’t read Heath’s posts…and then proceeds to read his post and respond ”

        What I meant was I don’t read most of the ones that are long, filled with cursing and dirty language and bad grammar and bad spelling. But if they are short and understandable, I may read, and MAY respond, but that is my freedom of choice.

        Like

      4. mr.heathcliff

        “I don’t say that ISIS or Al Qaeda or Hamas or Taliban or Islamic Jihad or Boko Haram or Al-Shabab or Abu Sayyaf or the Iranian Shiite 12er Regime or Hezbollah, etc. represent ALL of the Muslim world, but dang it, they get all of their ideas from Islamic texts and history.”

        which texts are those?

        Like

      5. mr.heathcliff

        quote
        It’s like I’m debating a shia right now, Lol.
        Show me when was he wealthy during his life. Statements with no references will be dismissed.
        I can show u multiple instances were he was extremely poor.
        Again, unfalsifiable statement detected & dismissed.

        1. You didn’t show how he benifited from the alleged wealth he had.
        2. Fadak was given away by him PBUH for charity.
        3. Minutes ago you complained he died poor & not leaving anything for his family.

        Contradictory twisted empty unfalsifiable claims detected again.

        https://mobile.twitter.com/abdullahadam/status/1216835361365733376

        LOVE OF WEALTH? So much love for the material gains?

        Like

    6. mr.heathcliff

      pennywise, we know u can see this :

      quote:
      The Quran didn’t allow him to divorce “even if beauty pleased thee” and while it extended the amount of wives he could have, it restricted the categories he could marry from.

      Further, the Prophet’s wives being given greater responsibility was made known to them and were given the option to leave if they desired, God and his Prophet providing them a noble parting gift. So there was no ‘hiding’ towards the significant issues they may encounter being the wives of the Prophet (S).

      Liked by 1 person

      1. mr.heathcliff

        so much love for wealth and power:

        5 out of 11 wives being aged 40 at marriage, no cooking in his household for months on end, wrapping stones around his abdomen due to hunger, sleeping on the side of a palm tree leaf, having no money to his name on his deathbed, he really got what he desired.

        Liked by 1 person

    7. mr.heathcliff

      power hungry prophet?

      Quote from twitter
      His 1/5th war bounty was given to the muslims in the end anyway as stated by his hadeeth in Abu Daoud (2694) “Nothing belongs to me from this bounty except the fifth, and the fifth is given back onto you” (rough translation by me)

      Liked by 1 person

    8. mr.heathcliff

      Abu Mas’ud reported: A man came to the Prophet ﷺ and his voice trembled as he spoke to him. The Prophet said to him, “Be calm, for I am not a king. Verily, I am only the son of a woman who ate dried meat.”

      Sunan Ibn Mājah 3312, Grade: Sahih according to Al-Albani

      Liked by 1 person

    9. mr.heathcliff

      Hi ken, i hope you will never bring such arguments up again.

      Asalamu Aleikum

      Question:
      As a former Christian myself, I often heard some say that the relationship that God has with us as a father with his son/daughter surpasses the Islamic concept of us being slaves of Allah. What would you respond to the Christian that presents this argument to you?

      I ask this out of sincerity, because I realize that I still have much learning to do. Having been Christian for my entire life, there are still traces of Christian ideology in my thinking and I don’t want it to lead me astray and corrupt my understanding of this beautiful deen. I appreciate it, brothers/sisters

      The very first problem is identifying a son/daughter relationship with God…in Islam we do not have that since God has no partners in any shape or form…Surah 112:3 explains further…what I mean is that analogy causes issues
      Rather we have something better, a relationship with Allah as we are known as his servants (Abdullah) like every Prophet and Sahaba beforehand…we are known as many other phrases within our deen such as God conscious which is mentioned in Surah Al Baqarah verse 2

      But it is explained to us that Allah loves us more then 70 mothers. I believe the hadith that explains the love of the mother was that the love of the mother was mentioned 3 times by Rasulallah Saw then the father.

      the exact Hadith says Allah loves us and is more merciful to us, 70 times more, than a mother to its own child.

      The relationship with Allah goes beyond the relationship between a mother and father towards their child

      The name Rahman replaces the title of father in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
      Rahman comes from the root R-h-m in Arabic which means “womb” and the name implies that God is tenderly loving, merciful, compassionate etc. in fact there are ahadith in which the prophet ‎ﷺ says that Allah loves us more than a mother loves her child.
      Umar ibn al-Khattab reported: Some prisoners of war were brought to the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and a breast-feeding woman was among them. Whenever she found a child among the prisoners, she would take it to her chest and nurse it. The Prophet said to us, “Do you think this woman would throw her child in the fire?” We said, “No, not if she was able to stop it.” The Prophet said, “Allah is more merciful to his servants than a mother is to her child.”
      (Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 5653, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2754)
      The Arabic word for “mercy” used in the Quran is rahma whose meaning is often lost in translation. Rahma is equivalent to the word “agape” in the New Testament which greek translators translate as “love”
      It may seem that Christian “love” in the Bible – agapē – could actually be more similar to rahmah and not other Arabic words like hubb. By contrast, hubb may correspond more to the Greek philia. Though no two languages can ever match perfectly, both rahmah and agapē are non-desirous, nurturing forms of love that God expresses universally.
      In the Prophet’s many sayings about rahmah on earth, the central theme of nurturing, parental love clearly stands out. Allah’s rahmah, according to the Messenger, is the sole source of all earthly rahmah, such that all creatures show “love and kindness to one another, and even a beast treats her young with affection.” Rahmah thus finds its most natural expression in the love of a mother as alluded to in the hadith I quoted above.
      In fact the name Ar-Rahman appears more times in the surah of Mary than in any other surah, the Quran, while vehemently rejecting the notion that God has any need for a son, using this repetition of the name Rahman to remind Christians that He remains the source of universal tender love, compassion, and mercy.
      A more correct translation of the word Abd is not slave in this context but rather servant, and Allah loves his servants than a mother loves her child. Allah says in the Quran:
      ‎إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ وَعَمِلُواْ ٱلصَّٰلِحَٰتِ سَيَجۡعَلُ لَهُمُ ٱلرَّحۡمَٰنُ وُدّٗا
      As for those who believe and do good, the Most Compassionate will ˹certainly˺ bless them with ˹genuine˺ love.
      (Mary 19:96)

      even the word Rabb..that replaces the word Abb (meaning father)
      Rabb means Cherisher, Sustainer along with multiple other meanings

      You must first understand one essential point before considering anything and it is this:
      A father with his son or daughter are both from the same genus. That is, they are both created beings, which inherently means that any relationship one creation has with another creation will always be different to the relationship one has with God. This is why and where Islam differs with others.
      If God was a created being (which is impossible and not the point of discussion here), then you could have such a relationship. If God was a created being, then, a) He would not be God and b) no thing would exist.

      I was thinking about something just now. Please let me know what you think. A father’s or a mother’s love for their children is one of the strongest and purest forms that love can be expressed. Those of us with children will understand this wholeheartedly. However, a father and mother are still susceptible and have the potential to make mistakes, and in fact, they do! So to say that Allah is our father, I might believe, would be like saying that He has the potential to be flawed and unjust. I think it limits His essence. He would then not be able to present Himself as the Most Merciful and the Most Compassionate (SWT)

      The most repeated name of Allah in Quran is Rehman, which is the extreme love and care that a pregnant mother have for her child.
      The English word slave might not be the right word to use, servant would be more accurate.
      And as for referring to God as father indicates pagan influences in judeo-christian tradition. Why is God father and not mother?
      They also lie when they say the best relationship you can have with Allah is slave master relationship.
      And Allah took Abraham as an intimate friend. (Surah 4:125).

      Firstly, the word عبد exists in Hebrew and is used in the Bible, to describe relationship between the believers and their creator.
      Secondly, this “father/son/daughter” metaphor has led the Christians into open idolatry, so alhamdulilah we don’t believe in this garbage.
      “But take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law, which Moses the servant of the LORD charged you, to love the LORD your God, and to walk in all his ways, and to keep his commandments, and to cleave unto him, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul.” (Joshua 22:5)
      “Moses the servant of the LORD” is literally in Hebrew מֹשֶׁה עֶֽבֶד־יְהוָה “Moshe Abd-Yahweh”, just as we say “Abdullah”.

      Thank you.
      I rarely comment, but I had the necessity to explain that there is no “slave” in Islam, as the word Aabd is not translated to “slave”, but to worshiper. Eloquence of the Arabic language that is often lost in translations.
      But you were first to it, so thank you

      On a more traditional arabic approach, we do call the “family words” to prove the origin of a word, thus we have these:
      worship = عبادة
      معبود = Worshiped
      عبد = Worshiper
      عبّاد = A strong/insisting/devout worshiper
      Hope this simplifies it to any other reader.

      Wa’alaikum Salaam wa RahmatULLAH.
      This is a very easy question to answer:
      1. Let us avoid emotional arguments by using terms like “father/son” etc. These only confuse the issue, and distract from the real argument.
      2. The opposite is in fact, the reality. Meaning, Muslims have a much closer relationship to ALLAH, than Christians do, for the obvious reason being that we do not need an intercessor in order to reach ALLAH. Our du’a is our immediate, and direct link to ALLAH. Christianity clearly makes the distinction that we simply are too sinful to reach ALLAH (a’udhubILLAH), and thus we need to go “through” the blood of ‘Isa AS. A’udhubILLAH. Yes, as sinful as we are, in spite of how low we are, ALLAH Is so Merciful, and Loving, that ALLAH STILL ALLOWS us to make du’a directly to HIM.
      3. Christian theology rests on the foundational concept of “original sin”. In other words, the entire reason why ‘Isa AS was sent was to be the sacrificial lamb for humanity as a result of sin being introduced to humanity in the first place by Adam AS disobedience to ALLAH in Jannah, which led to him, and Hawa being sent to the dunya. Our narrative of the story of Adam AS is one of hope, and redemption. Why? Let’s look at it:
      a. Adam AS, and Hawa indeed sinned by disobeying ALLAH’S Command. Yet, both made du’a to ALLAH, and ALLAH Forgave them. Adam AS and Hawa lost Jannah, the greatest loss imaginable to humanity. Yet, rather than despair of ALLAH’S Mercy, they were taught by ALLAH To Make du’a, they made du’a, and ALLAH Accepted their tawbah. Yes, they lost Jannah, but they also regained it, subhanALLAH.
      b. Like Adam AS, iblis also disobeyed ALLAH. Yet unlike Adam AS, instead of making du’a to ALLAH seeking istighfar for his sin, Iblis asked for life in the dunya till the Day of Judgment. What truly is amazing here is that i. the devil himself made du’a directly to ALLAH without an intercessor and ii. ALLAH Accepted the du’a of the devil, and that in a sinful state I might add. This shows just how Merciful ALLAH is. ALLAH Answered the du’a of the devil who was in a state of sin. Moreover, what the devil asked for wasn’t small. He asked for life until the Day of Judgment. This shows us, that if ALLAH Accepted the du’a of the devil in a sinful state for something so huge, then what about the rest of us? This is TRUE LOVE, TRUE MERCY. This is NOT the ALLAH of Christianity.
      4. The fact that ALLAH Legislated a shari’ah for us also shows HIS Love for us. The fact that we have been guided to live our daily lives so much so that we even are taught how to use the toilet shows to what degree, length, and completeness is our shari’ah. Indeed we thank ALLAH for Giving us a shari’ah to live our lives by, and not leave us to our own judgment, a’udhubILLAH.
      Case closed. I feel sorry for Christians honestly. How deluded, and misguided they are. Just sad, and disgusting.

      Vanity is said to being one of the greatest sins in the Old Testament . So much warning against it. First commandment is to only Worship one God. Saying that you are Gods child is a act of compete arrogance. Elevating yourself to a divine being or like a divine being.
      Islam we obsessive in following Gods command to prove our love for him so we call ourselves slaves. So we don’t trap ourselves in the arrogance trap.
      Why else so much racism and slavery happen from people who thought they were Gods special little child.

      https://www.facebook.com/groups/130763117665481/permalink/666965570711897/

      Like

  3. Pingback: Do Christians Today Have Real Faith? – A Response to Two Christian Apologists, Part 1 – The Quran and Bible Blog

  4. mr.heathcliff

    When u know ur “saviour” words are COMPLETE FAILURE, spin the ….. out of the text since that would save your failed jesus. your jesus said faith moves heavy stones, the proof is within the story of the stone being rolled away. this is about miracle that faith can produce and mark is clear that it is faith , not jesus who heals.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. mr.heathcliff

      “Matthew 21:43-46
      the lack of fruit of the fig tree is apostate Israel
      the mountain that needs to be removed is the hypocritical external ritualistic religion, that will be removed in 70 AD.”

      Nonsense u pagan. as we all know that your filthy religion is dependant on animal sacrifice (EXTERNAL RITUAL) human sacrifice (external ritual) and none of these saves from sin / HYPOCRISY, yet book of hebrews thinks blood have magical power to prevent one from sinning.

      the fig tree is a plant . Matthew Sped up the miracle and mark says that AFFECT WAS NOTICED THE next day

      Matthew

      “Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done.” – Matthew 21:21

      matthew took the story literally and thinks that you can have removals via just a command. Lol that means jesus though u were bigger gods than him. Faith helps u beat jesus in miracles.

      Your reinterpretation is based on the DOUBT ur diseased heart is having.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Pingback: Do Christians Today Have Real Faith? – A Response to Two Christian Apologists, Part 2 – The Quran and Bible Blog

    1. KMAK

      Oh no. If Faiz doesn’t accept Shamoun’s challenge then he is going to lose his job and his wife and kid will leave him. Lol.
      We all know what an insignificant piece of shit you are Shamoun. We lose nothing by ignoring you.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. stewjo004

        @ KMAK

        I’m dissapointed in you Shamoun practically gave this to you:

        Shamoun: Come out of your wife’s mirt and debate me.

        KMAK: At least he has a wife.

        It was right there KMAK.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. stewjo004

    @ QB

    Again all this effort could have been spent working his marriage so his woman didn’t go creeping with the guy next door. Curiosity how many times you think he kissed her after… you know what I’m not even going to go there.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. mr.heathcliff

    ken temple is dependant on a violent ritual which tells him that his that his sinful thoughts and actions have already been cleared . in book of job , job thinks that animal sacrifces can clear past sins ,

    which job had to do physocal cutting, ken just has to imagine roman rape of his man god and since ken is having bank account, washing his hands and LOVES his life (opposite of luke) , then ken is really a hypocrite

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Pingback: Hadith Database – Hadith on ‘Ajwa Dates and Protection Against Magic and Poison – The Quran and Bible Blog

  9. Am a Christian and am born in Christian home but most of us that call themselves Christian or musim, see let me talk to you all if you don’t know Jesus and you have not accepted him as your Lord and personal Salvour all you are doing is vain
    You can check out on https://tugadar.com
    Please comment when you. Visit and share it too
    Thanks

    Liked by 2 people

    1. mr.heathcliff

      ” you have not accepted him as your Lord and personal Salvour all you are doing is vain”

      accepting jesus is like accepting the almighty is weak and his mercy and love is controlled by sacrificial ritual. God is all hearing and seeing, he does not need an intermediary and neither does his creation sin God is all hearing and seeing.

      Like

  10. mr.heathcliff

    “Very truly, I tell you, the one who believes in me will also do the works that I do and, in fact, will do greater works than these, because I am going to the Father. I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If in my name you ask me for anything, I will do it.”

    word of warning, do not ask in jesus’ name

    your prayer will fail.

    Like

  11. mr.heathcliff

    “if you say to this mountain go dunk yourself in the sea…..”

    christianity is unable to do this
    the blood of jesus does not save from sins

    one thing muslim dawah teams need to do is constantly pose this question at hyde park like brother faiz does here.

    christians EVEN today have so much faith in the lies of markan jesus that they WILLINGLY get bitten by snakes lol

    this is crazy stuff.

    FALSEHOOD IS CAUSING THE DEATHS OF HUNDREDS OF IDIOTS.

    just look at the versions of this religion in africa, they took jesus’ words so literally that they would deceive people and do pretend stage plays showing people how much “powerful” jesus’ fake blood is.

    i say brother Faiz questions and challenge in this article must be employed more in dawah

    Liked by 1 person

  12. mr.heathcliff

    Ask and you will receive (John).

    Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you (Matthew).

    Whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours (Mark).

    He who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do (john)

    Quote:
    Repeating the Lord’s Prayer in unison is babbling rote repetition.

    ////

    And what do they say about muslim salaah?

    dont you love it when these kuffar get exposed for their hypocrisy?

    Liked by 1 person

  13. mr.heathcliff

    “Heath, a little harsh but if someone wants to believe that garbage, that’s their problem. They can answer for it in the Akhirah. But yeah, spreading that nonsense? No thanks!”

    I spoke out of anger akhi, i agree with you. Ken temple is a scum bag and his job is to provoke.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. mr.heathcliff

    While your at it pray in your false messiahs name and ask him to unite the crosstians on which bible is the word of god

    https://old.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/e75vw1/why_do_churches_use_so_different_bibles/?st=k3xhpn9s&sh=05bd2903

    John 17:20-23 (NIV)
    20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

    zozo, how can you cockroaches be in UNITY WHEN u r not even united on what the word of god is supposed to be?

    prayer in jebus name is the GREATEST failure

    Liked by 1 person

  15. mr.heathcliff

    Quote:
    I still see Jesus’ prayer in John 17:20-23 as the greatest prayer failure ever. Christians were supposed to agree in unity so impressively that the whole world would come to believe. Christians have never had that unity and the whole world didn’t come to believe. The populations of 20 centuries have lived and died since then.

    Why wasn’t Jesus’ prayer answered when he asked? (Matthew 7:7-8; Luke 11:9-10; 1 Kings 3:5)
    Did he not have the faith of a mustard seed? (Matthew 17:20; Mark 4:30–32; Luke 13:18–19)
    Did he not ask in his own name? (John 14:13-14; 15:16; 16:23-24)
    Did he not pray with faith? (Matthew 21:21)
    Did he not believe it was answered? (Matthew 21:22; Mark 11:24)
    Did he doubt? (James 1:6)
    Did he not ask with the right motives? (James 4:3)
    Was he not righteous? (James 5:16)
    Did he not keep God’s command and please God? (1 John 3:22) God said he was well pleased with him, so that wasn’t it.
    Did he not pray God’s will? (1 John 5:14-15)
    He must have forgotten to confess his sins. (James 5:16)

    Liked by 1 person

    1. mr.heathcliff

      “Move Mount Everest from the Himalaya mountain range and drop it into the Indian ocean. Surely, at least ONE Christian out of the 2 BILLION Christians of the world can do this?”

      i think we should first ask them to create unity on what books belong in the word of yhwh

      Liked by 1 person

    1. Yeah, this is clear evidence that Christianity is a false religion. All these claims of miracles are clearly fraudulent, yet we hear of these miracles from even early Christian sources. So the whole history of the religion is built on these lies and false miracles.

      Like

      1. mr.heathcliff

        notice how confidently dan wallace uttered his lies and ehrman like a joker said ” i believe you” ?
        all of this was BS.

        Like

  16. mr.heathcliff

    oh, i could i forget ….how could i forget , yhwhs wants to prove roman catholicism is false by having the r catholics perform miracles.

    how did i forget that?

    Like

  17. mr.heathcliff

    crosstians are sinners man, i dont see how eating and drinking jesus and doing church rituals brings u to getting closer to god when u already programmed your brain to say that god considers u filth and all ur sins have been cleared

    i mean look at this rapist pastor, he told himself that jesus died for all his future sins so already their is a psychological relief.

    Liked by 1 person

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s