[Faith-talk] The missionary techniques.

[Mostafa Almahdy]

Dear all, peace be with you.

Today I will inshallah proceed to discuss the Christian missionary 
techniques of raising misconceptions to us.

My point here is crystal clear.

I am attempting to show my Muslim fellows how does Christian apologists 
think.

They do not have much to offer to Muslims though.

They only try to keep themselves somehow devoted to what they believe.

One of the quite common tennets of Christianity that they explicitly 
resemble the  divine being into temporal portrayals.

It is indeeed something incontrovertible, it is quite difficult to refute.

When Muslims discuss them regarding that, they usually attempt to turn 
it back on us.

Some Christian apologists have accused us of worshipping what they 
fabricated as the moon god.

They say Allah glory be to Him was among the pagan gods of Mecca, and 
that Muhammad chose his God from there.

That is tremendously preposterous to say the least.

I have attentively been listening to what they pose on that regard.

It is all demonstratively fallacious and it lacks the minimum competency 
of theological reliability.

   As Muslims, we predominantly believe in the divine oneness of Allah 
glory be to Him.

  We believe in the oneness of Allah that it cannot be added to or 
subtracted from.
Whilst most Christians today believe in the triune being of God.

The Christian god is coequally represented into three distinct 
individuals, of course that is according to them.

As an attempt to tempt us from our religion, they tend to deliberately 
misquote the Noble Koran whilst forcefully striving to deduct the 
Trinitarian concept out of therein.

As Muslims, we do not believe in implications or in implicit conclusions 
unlike Christians.

I am fully prepared to be engaged in a theological debate on Skype if 
somebody is brave enough to show up.

I knew what I say, I do not make things up.


I constantly ask Christian missionary activists about the concept of 
redemption.

I always argue with them about it and so on.

When they perceive they are theologically defeated, they tell me;

But Islam has got animal sacrifice.

What has this to do with the subject at hand?

I honestly do not know.

In Islam, we have animal sacrifice because we basicly  follow the 
commandments of Allah glory be to Him.

Do not Jews have animal sacrifice too?

Well, what does that signify?

Does that signify their belief in the method of salvation through a 
sacrificial lamb as Christians do?

Please show me a Jew who believes in that.

Animal sacrifice in Islam signifys an act of worship.

When we intend to slaughter a lamb, a sheep, a cow or  a goat, for 
instance, we just initiate the act in the name of Allah.

But this has nothing  to do with the major concern of salvation.

It is just an act of submission, it is a type of blessing, it is  an 
obedience to Allah glory be to Him.

To illustrate  a bit further, the missionary says to the Muslim;

How do you know that Allah loves you?

Their question actually aims toward perplexing the Muslim comprehension.

They believe they possibly can deceive the Muslim by attempting to 
implement the delusion that God forgives with the brutal Crucifixion of 
some innocent.

It sounds to me that it is somehow conditional.

For Christian missionary activists, God forgives with merely shedding 
the blood of his begotten son as they proclaim.

  Thus, they circuitously eliminate the  transcendent Omnipotence of 
Allah glory be to Him.

Yes, they absolutely do because he only forgives when he sheds blood 
which signifys his radical violence of atonement and it furthermore 
signifys his inability to just forgive in a peaceful manner and without 
using a third party to get through.

I am afraid but, this is the type of divinity they believe in.

It is a trilateral and a fallible type of god.

That is what they want to somehow export to Muslim monotheistic believers.

It is plainly denoted the radical distinction between Islam and 
Christianity on that regard.

Christian Theology proposes its essence of recognizing the divine being 
in a trigon god, whilst Islam believes in the divine oneness of Allah 
glory be to Him.

They constantly resemble that into someone and his ability to perform 
multiple tasks.

So you could be a teacher, a father, a  son, and a husband all at the 
same time.

Well, that does not signify  that each role represents a distinct 
individual.

You are still the same person who has multiple factors.

That plainly exposes the tremendous fallacy and the total falsehood of 
what they attempt to analogize.

They essentially based their analogy on logical misrepresentations, 
deception and mental rascality.

I believe I am making sense.

I believe that my point is rationally expressed.

My argument objectifys establishing the genuine apprehension of monotheism.

I have nothing against Christians as people.

What I intensely decline is the missionary manner of topical digression.

I am certainly interested to discuss all different denominations along 
with their affiliated pastors.

I am intending to build up mutual understanding of each other.

When I say missionary techniques, I do not necessarily hold an 
aggressive disposition against missionary activists.

However, I  may courteously express my criticism in a slightly strident 
manner.

Now, I would like to discuss the concept of Jesus having two natures.

One is human, and another one that is divine.

The human nature of Jesus is limited, whilst the divine one is limitless.

That is their belief in summary.

Now, to the theological rebuttals.

1; The doctrinal tennet of the two natures within Jesus is quite 
philosophical.

It has not been based on  scriptural authority, either explicitly or 
implicitly, and it is interpreted or derived at its best.

That interpretation could be true or false, depending on how they use 
the inferencial roots to determine.

2; Scientifically, the concept that someone can develop two natures, or 
two personalities is specifically found within schizophrenic patients, 
and emphatically, Jesus may the peace of Allah be upon him was not like 
that at all.

3; Who was Jesus when he was born?

Was he merely mortal or divine too?

If he was merely mortal, what is the attested historical incident which 
witnesses the divine part uniting with the human body?

Is it when he was baptized?

Well if so, what does that say about unremarkable people administered to 
Baptism?

Does that make them divine?

If he was divine when he was born, does not that contradict within the 
concept of divinity and its eternity?

4; Who were Jesus when he performed various miracles?

Were he just mortal?

If he were just mortal, what does it say about his supposedly divine 
nature that is fully capable to do anything.

   If he were both human and divine when he performed miraculous 
actions, what does that say about the omnipotence of the truly divine 
being, which is unparalleled and utterly unrivalled.

     Do not you think that attributing miraculous occurrences to God is 
predominantly blasphemous to his transcendence?

     5; Who were Jesus when he was crucified?

Was he just mortal, divine, or both?

If he was just mortal, what does it say about the fact that the divine 
Jesus has not sacrificed himself for the multitude expiation?

If he was simultaneous, what does it say about the divine entity of 
Jesus being brutalized and savaged on the cross?

     These are my five basic contentions regarding the divinity of Christ.

I pose them to Christian pastors and apologists.

I quite comprehend that the Church leaders are attempting to eminently 
ingratiate themselves by influencing their authority on the Christian 
masses.

It is their major motive to constantly denounce Islam, because of its 
rapid embracement which highly threatens their religious hierarchy.

Well, it is the history repeating itself.

It was quite the same motive of the pagan elites in Mecca when they 
confronted Islam at its inception.

They furiously confronted it, they viciously perpetrated their 
persecution and cruelty on the physically frail believers.

That what had escalated the conflict.

Similarly, it is evangelical fundamentalism which now slanders Islam, it 
atrociously demonizes its essence.

That is my criticism, and I am principally open to public scrutiny.

Peace be with you.