Pope Francis says, ‘Faith and Violence are Incompatible,’ Is he Teaching the Bible or the Quran?

Epigraph: Do not think that I came to bring peace on Earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10:34)

Written by Zia H Shah MD

Anyone who has heard any quotations from the Holy Quran would have heard the often quoted portion of a verse, “There should be no compulsion in religion.” (Al Quran 2:257)  This one liner clearly distances violence or compulsion from faith or religion.

To read the context of this verse, the seeker is amazed to find that this is no cursory statement of the Holy Quran, but follows soon after the Crown verse of the Holy Quran, which is a jewel, describing the attributes of All Knowing and All Powerful God.  So, this verse against violence purports to say that anyone, who has seen even a small glimpse of the majesty and glory of God, would find no reason to enforce God’s religion through coercion on others.

The context of Pope Francis’ statement, “Faith and violence are incompatible,” making the title of this post, is the recent violence in Egypt and especially the burning of the Churches.  Here, we are on the same waive length as the Pope, we strongly condemn the destruction of Churches or any places of worship, for that matter.  Destroying any Church is polar opposite to the teachings of the Holy Quran.  It says that the very purpose of Jihad or defensive wars is to secure the sanctity of places of worship, including Churches, Synagogue and Mosques.  Interestingly enough, when talking about this issue, the Quran mentions the Churches and Synagogues before the Mosques, ensuring religious freedom for the whole of mankind:

And if Allah did not repel some men by means of others, there would surely have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques, wherein the name of Allah is oft commemorated. And Allah will surely help one who helps Him. Allah is indeed Powerful, Mighty.  (Al Quran 22:41)

The question arises that if the Quran is so clear about religious freedom, why do some of the extremist Muslims resort to violence.  Here, allow me to point out that humans are creatures of rationalization.  They can read their vain desires into any scripture or religion.  Not to talk of ordinary Christians, a person no less than Pope Urban II, was able to find violent Crusades in the teachings of Christianity and the Catholic Church tagged along for centuries to come.  There were more than a dozen Crusades, from eleventh till the seventeenth century.

All Crusades were announced by preaching. After pronouncing a solemn vow, each warrior received a cross from the hands of the pope or his legates, and was thenceforth considered a soldier of the Church. Crusaders were also granted indulgences and temporal privileges, such as exemption from civil jurisdiction, inviolability of persons or lands, etc.[1]

In reality the Crusades continued until the end of the seventeenth century, the Crusade of Lepanto occurring in 1571, that of Hungary in 1664, and the Crusade of the Duke of Burgundy to Candia, in 1669.[2]

It seems that Pope Francis has overlooked many of the verses of the Old Testament in making his statement after recent events in Egypt.

The reason, why I say that he may be teaching from the Quran is that there are no verses in the Holy Quran to trigger and promote genocide, but there are in the Bible: When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby. However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. (Deuteronomy 20:10-17)

There are no verses in the Holy Quran to destroy polytheism with sword and kill all polytheists and even their livestock, regardless of whether they are at war or not, but in the Bible there are: If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely,both its people and its livestock. You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt. (Deuteronomy 13:12-16)

There are no verses in the Holy Quran to kill people for sexual misconduct but there are in the Bible: If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10) And: If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she disgraces her father; she must be burned in the fire. (Leviticus 21:9) There are no verses in the Holy Quran ordering to attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. There is nothing in the Quran ordering, ‘do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys,’ but there is in the Bible: Samuel said to Saul, “I am the one the LORD sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the LORD. This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’” So Saul summoned the men and mustered them at Telaim—two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand from Judah. Saul went to the city of Amalek and set an ambush in the ravine. … But Saul and the army spared Agag and the best of the sheep and cattle, the fat calves and lambs—everything that was good. These they were unwilling to destroy completely, but everything that was despised and weak they totally destroyed. (1 Samuel 15:1-9)

To read further account of some of the violent teachings in the Old Testament, read the following article:

The Pope did try to explain away one of the verses of the New Testament, which is often quoted to show that its teachings is not all about turning the other cheek.  Here I quote from a recent Huffington Post article:

The pope focused on a passage of scripture that has, in the pontiff’s words, “lead to confusion or misunderstanding.”

The Christian text is Luke 12:51, which reads, “Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division!”

Pope Francis explained that the passage was intended to encourage Christians to place God in the center of their life and not just as a decoration. The Catholic leader explained that Jesus does not want division, but God does lay down the choice that you can live for yourself or live for God.

But, if we read the verse in the full context, Pope Francis’ and other Christian apologists’ Monday morning quarterbacking, does not amount to much.

It seems to me that the Pope has ignored the context of Luke 12:51, in his explanation.

Let me quote the relevant verses from a few different versions of the Bible, to show that what Pope is saying is at complete odds with the Biblical message of fire, conflict and discord.

Common English Bible:

I came to cast fire upon the earth. How I wish that it was already ablaze! I have a baptism I must experience. How I am distressed until it’s completed! 51  Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, I have come instead to bring division. From now on, a household of five will be divided—three against two and two against three. Father will square off against son and son against father; mother against daughter and daughter against mother; and mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.” (Luke 12:49-53)

1599 Geneva Bible:

I am come to put fire on the earth, and what is my desire, if it be already kindled?

Notwithstanding I must be baptized with a baptism, and how am I grieved till it be ended?

Think ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, nay, but rather debate.

For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.

The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father: the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother: the mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.  (Luke 12:49-53)

Wycliffe Bible:

I came to send fire into the earth, and what will I, but that it be kindled?

And I have to be baptized with a baptism, and how am I constrained, till that it be perfectly done [till it be perfectly done]?

Ween ye [Guess ye], that I came to give peace into [the] earth? Nay, I say to you, but parting.

For from this time there shall be five parted in one house; three shall be parted against twain, and twain shall be parted against three; the father against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the husband’s mother against the son’s wife, and the son’s wife against her husband’s mother.  (Luke 12:49-53)

Lexham English Bible (LEB):

In this Bible, we also see the heading, “Not Peace, But a Sword of Divisiveness.”

I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish that it had been kindled already! But I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how I am distressed until it is accomplished! Do you think that I have come to grant peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division! For from now on there will be five in one household, divided three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law. (Luke 12:49-53)

If we try to find the broader context of this verse in the New Testament, the text in the Gospel of Matthew is very similar but it talks of a “sword,” rather than “division.”  Read the full text:

Do not think that I came to bring peace on Earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it. (Matthew 10:34–39)

Another verse from the New Testament that contextualizes these verses is the one labelled as, Sell your cloak and buy a sword.  It is an instruction by Jesus, may peace be on him, to his disciples, which has been recorded in the Gospel of Luke. At the Last Supper Jesus says:

He said to them, ‘But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.’  (Luke 22:36)

The exegesis of the Bible is often very liberal.  The Christian apologists can read anything in the verses of the Bible and the violence in the Bible can be made to look like ‘turning the other cheek.’

In the first 6 centuries through the various Ecumenical Councils and legislations, the early Church was able to transform  One and the Only God of the Old Testament, mentioned thousands of times in the text of the Old Testament and understood by Jewish people in a Unitarian sense, for two thousand years, before the time of Jesus, into a Triune God of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.  So, for the creative Christian apologists sky is the limit.

The Pope may see in Luke 12:51 a message for exclusive devotion to God, but to those who are not indoctrinated with the obsession of the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the verse speaks of conflict and struggle in human society, which at times becomes violent, for a fault of one party or the other.

For now, let us spend a few paragraphs on how violence defined the Christian faith in the early centuries.

According to a Pentecostal priest, Robert A Sabin, “Trinity was a doctrine drawn from inferences, made into formulations, the formulations were canonized, made holy and to be believed, then they were imposed, you must believe it and those who did not believe these were demonized.  Folks, it has gone one for 17 centuries.”

The Emperors that followed Constantine’s conversion in the fourth century forced their views on the point of sword.  Constantine I, Roman Emperor from 306 to 337, exiled those who did not believe in the creed of Nicaea.

Constans,  Roman Emperor from 337 to 350, was tolerant of Judaism but promulgated an edict banning pagan sacrifices in 341.[3] He suppressed Donatism in Africa and supported Nicene orthodoxy against Arianism, which was championed by his brother Constantius. Although Constans called the Council of Sardica in 343 to settle the conflict,[10] it was a complete failure,[11] and by 346 the two emperors were on the point of open warfare over the dispute.[12] The conflict was only resolved by an interim agreement which allowed each emperor to support their preferred clergy within their own spheres of influence.[12]

Jovian (LatinFlavius Jovianus Augustus;[1] 331 – 17 February 364) was Roman Emperor from 363 to 364. Upon the death of emperor Julian the Apostate during his campaign against the Sassanid Empire, Jovian was hastily declared emperor by his soldiers. He sought peace with the Persians on humiliating terms and reestablished Christianity as the state church. His reign only lasted eight months.

Jovian, a Christian, reestablished Christianity as the state church, ending the brief revival of paganism under his predecessor. Upon arriving at Antioch, he revoked the edicts of Julian against Christians.[2] The Labarum of Constantine the Greatagain became the standard of the army.[3] He issued an edict of toleration, to the effect that, while the exercise of magical rites would be punished, his subjects should enjoy full liberty of conscience.[4]

However, in 363 he issued an edict ordering the Library of Antioch to be burnt down,[5] and another on 11 September subjecting those who worshiped ancestral gods to the death penalty. He extended the same punishment on 23 December to participation in any pagan ceremony (even private ones).[6] Jovian entertained a great regard for Athanasius, whom he reinstated on the archiepiscopal throne,[2] desiring him to draw up a statement of the orthodox faith.

Arcadius (LatinFlavius Arcadius AugustusGreek: Ἀρκάδιος; 377/378 – 1 May 408) was the Byzantine Emperor from 395 until his death in 408.   In 399 CE, at the peak of his power, on the 13th July, Arcadius issued an edict ordering that all remaining non-Christian temples should be immediately demolished.

This is not a comprehensive discussion but only a demonstration that faith was always coerced in the early Christian centuries until the Protestant reformation in the 16th century.

I will mention the thirty year war between the Protestants and the Catholics, only in name here, for the sake of brevity and move onto linking here a more detailed study on the issue of violence and the Christian dogma:

Trinity and other dogma at the point of sword: Christianity drips with blood!

Despite this violent history spread over 15 centuries, the Christian apologists keep weaving stories of love, compassion and tolerance, without grounding their presentation in the Bible or the history of the Church, banking on the successes in the past.

However, what escapes them often is that non-Christians and the 50% agnostic or atheist population of Western Europe and the 25% unaffiliated in USA and Canada are able to see through their verbose make belief and juggling.


Human life and society is more complex than can be managed with “feel good,” one liners like turning the other cheek or “Faith and violence are incompatible.”  We need a well founded religion and philosophy that not only justifies love and compassion but also, just war, policing, punishment of crimes, checks and balances and all other aspects of modern civilization, including the need of intelligence agencies, operating within a given country and without.

Let me share a real life story that may drive the message home.

It is said that a teaching of the Bible is that if a person is smitten on the right cheek he should present the left one to the one who smites. This sounds very attractive so long as it is not put into practice. But if an attempt is made to act upon it, it is soon discovered to be entirely impractical.

It is related, that a Christian missionary used to preach in the streets of Cairo how full of love and tolerance the teachings of Jesus were. He would cite the injunction to turn the left cheek when the right one is smitten as an example, and make unfavorable comparisons with the teachings of other faiths. His discourses were couched in a very fine language and his audience used to be greatly affected. A Muslim, who had heard the missionary preach in this fashion on several occasions, became much upset. He wondered why no Muslim divine cared to tackle the missionary on the comparative merits of Islamic and Christian teachings. One day while the missionary was in the middle of his discourse this man approached him and expressed a desire to speak to him. The missionary inclined his head towards him to be able to listen to what he had to say. But the man instead of saying anything gave the missionary a violent slap on the face. The missionary was taken aback for a moment, but then fearing lest the man should proceed to further violence, raised his own hand in order to strike his assailant. The man remonstrated with the missionary and pointed out that he was expecting that in accordance with the Christian teaching, the missionary, instead of preparing to strike him in return, would turn his other cheek towards him. The missionary said, “I have decided today to act upon the teaching of the Quran, not the Bible

It may be that Pope Francis is also emphasizing the teachings of the Quran rather than the Bible and emphasizing the Crown verse of the Holy Quran, followed by the verse stressing the freedom of religion and disparity between faith and violence:

Allah — there is no God but He, the Living, the Self-Subsisting and All-Sustaining. Slumber seizes Him not, nor sleep. To Him belongs whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that will intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them; and they encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He pleases. His knowledge extends over the heavens and the earth; and the care of them burdens Him not; and He is the High, the Great.

There should be no compulsion in religion. Surely, right has become distinct from wrong; so whosoever refuses to be led by those who transgress, and believes in Allah, has surely grasped a strong handle which knows no breaking. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. (Al Quran 2:256-257)  

We applaud the Pope for upholding the Quranic teachings and shying away from the violence in the Bible, especially the Old Testament, which forms 75% of the volume of the Bible.


1. http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/eurvoya/crusades.html

2.  http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/eurvoya/crusades.html

Categories: CHRISTIANITY, Islam

Tagged as:

17 replies

  1. Matthew 10:34-36 /Luke 12:51-53 = “Do not think that I came to bring peace on Earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a “sword” (“division” in Luke 12:51). For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household”

    A: Jesus said that accepting his message would cause division in some families. This is not because the Bible message of itself causes family division. Rather, unbelieving or unfaithful family members cause a rift by rejecting, abandoning, or even opposing the way of Christianity (with act of quarrel in various level of degree which led to division, even possibly to a more life threatening acts toward his followers). This is what has been happening for majority of humble christians who live among non-christians, started from his/her own family circle thruout his/her surrounding community.

    Why God of Old Testament seems so cruelof even ordered a genocide to babies?

    A: In many cases, innocent people do inevitably suffer when justice is being wrought. But aside from that, when the Righteous Judge of the universe is sitting on the bench, any means that He may choose to use is self-justified. After all, He is the very creator and sustainer of human life, and we must admit that we are imperfect human, has very limited understanding to some of God’s act , like in Isaiah 55:8 God says: “For the thoughts of YOU people are not my thoughts,+ nor are my ways YOUR ways”.

    In a fallen world, isn’t it possible that God may have to periodically authorize some less-than-ideal measures in order to deter further evil? If you think about it, whenever God tolerated or “ordered” violent action in the Old Testament, it was to restrain evil or to deter some greater atrocity in the future. (look also Isaiah 14:21= “Make ready, YOU men, a slaughtering block for his own sons because of the error of their forefathers,+ that they may not rise up and actually take possession of the earth* and fill the face of the productive land* with cities).

    Exodus 34:6-7 cites this very principle at work. By the way, notice God’s attributes here in this Old Testament passage: “Then the Lord passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in loving kindness and truth; who keeps loving kindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations.”
    It seems that the only alternative would be for God to perpetually purge the world by sending Noah type floods over the entire earth about every ten minutes. That wouldn’t be very realistic, would it?
    What God eventually condoned here as necessary is certainly not what he originally envisioned as ideal ;
    Ancient sects and nations like the Amalekites would often heat up an idol like Molech with fire until it was glowing. Then they would take their newborn babies, place them on the arms of the idol, and watch them burn to death. (Source: New Bible Dictionary, Tyndale, 1962.) At other times they would kill disabled, weak, and elderly people without so much as a second thought (Deuteronomy 25:17-18).
    [The Amalekites & other Israel’s enemies at that time, which most of them were the descendants of unfaithful rebels generation or from incess, like the descendant of Luth with his daughters] were not nice people. In fact, there were utterly and totally depraved. Their mission was to destroy Israel, which at that time was the chosen nation to bear the oncoming messiah, Isa Almasih/Jesus, thus all burden from within & outside that could contaminate or threatening the holiness of messiah’s way, must be swept away by God’s interference. The destruction of their nation was necessitated by the gravity of their sin. Had some hardcore remnant survived, they might have resumed their aggression against the Israelites and God’s plan.

    God said to Israel, “I am using you here in this war as an instrument of my judgment upon this nation, and I’m bringing my violence upon this unbelievably wicked people… I’m going to have them destroyed” (Deuteronomy 13:12-17).

    He said, “I am calling you out of my grace to be a holy nation (to prepare the oncoming messiah: Isa almasih). I’m tearing down in order to build something new, and out of what I build **new, a holy nation. I’m going to bless all of the peoples in the world (via Isa Almasih). Therefore, I want you to be separated, and I don’t want any of the influences of this pagan heritage to be mixed into my new nation that I’m establishing.” That is the reason (God) gives.

    **(Jesus later made this startling declaration to the Jews of his day: “The kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a **nation producing its fruits.” (Matt. 21:43) Who would make up this new nation, and how are we today affected by this change? Find the answer at : http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2010202?q=new+nation&p=par

    So, is God really merciful?

    Not limited to judicial action. . Since God’s exercise of mercy is always in harmony with his other qualities and righteous standards, including his justice and trueness (Ps 40:11; Ho 2:19).

    Not to be presumed upon. While God (Jehovah, his name) has great mercy toward those who draw near to him in sincerity, he will by no means exempt from punishment those who are unrepentant and really deserving of punishment. (Ex 34:6, 7). A person cannot presume on God’s mercy; he cannot sin with complete impunity or be exempted from the natural results or outworking of his wrong course of action. (Ga 6:7, 8; compare Nu 12:1-3, 9-15; 2Sa 12:9-14.) Jehovah may mercifully show patience and long-suffering, giving persons the opportunity to correct their wrong course; though manifesting disapproval, he may not completely abandon them but may mercifully continue supplying them a measure of aid and direction. (Compare Ne 9:18, 19, 27-31.) But if they do not respond, his patience has its limits and he withdraws his mercy and acts against them for his own name’s sake.—Isa 9:17; 63:7-10; Jer 16:5-13, 21; compare Lu 13:6-9.

    Not governed by human standards. It is not up to humans to try to establish their own standards or criteria by which God should show mercy. From his heavenly vantage point and in harmony with his own good purpose, with his own long-range view of the future and his ability to read the heart, he ‘shows mercy to whom he will show mercy.’ (Ex 33:19; Ro 9:15-18; compare 2Ki 13:23; Mt 20:12-15).

    NB: You may find the same topic & perhaps the same answer from a ‘christian’ source at : http://www.thegodislovesite.com/Cruel.htm

    Knowing The Real Truth you never knew before, so “The Truth Will Set You Free” : http://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/

  2. Wait a minute , let me get this straight holy jesus who’s sent by Yahweh comes knocking on the doors of the holy and pure Israelites and says I’m not here to bring you peace but a sword and to do what with it turn your whole family against one another and cause division and disunity among brethren so now go bless all nations with the same message of love. hmmmm, there’s a big difference between the jesus of Yahweh and Isa(as) son of Mariam(as) who was sent by Allaahhh . I don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings , but please how would anyone in their right mind understand this any differently and that’s enough for me

  3. Isa Ibn Maryam ( Arabic: عيسى, Transliteration: ʿĪsā ), known as Jesus in the New Testament, is considered to be a Messenger of God and the Masih (Messiah) in Islam[1] who was sent to guide the Children of Israel (banī isrā’īl) with a new scripture, the Injīl or Gospel.[2] The belief in Jesus (and all other messengers of God) is required in Islam. The Quran mentions Jesus by name twenty-five times, while it only mentions Muhammad by name four times as Muhammad and once as Ahmad; making it a total of five times.[3][4] It states that Jesus was born to Mary (Arabic: Maryam) as the result of virginal conception, a miraculous event which occurred by the decree of God (Arabic: Allah). To aid in his ministry to the Jewish people, Jesus was given the ability to perform miracles (such as healing the blind, bringing dead people back to life, etc.), all by the permission of God rather than of his own power.

    Why Is Jesus Called God’s Son?
    The Bible’s answer:
    God does not have a literal wife with whom he fathered children. But he is the Creator of all life. (Revelation 4:11) Therefore, the first human that God created, Adam, is called a “son of God.” (Luke 3:38) Similarly, the Bible teaches that Jesus was created by God. So Jesus is also called a “Son of God.”—John 1:49.

    God created Jesus before he created Adam. Regarding Jesus, the apostle Paul wrote: “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” (Colossians 1:15) Jesus’ life began long before he was born in a stable in Bethlehem. In fact, the Bible says that his “origin is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.” (Micah 5:2) As God’s firstborn Son, Jesus was a spirit creature in heaven before he was born as a human on earth. Jesus himself said: “I have come down from heaven.”—John 6:38; 8:23

    Here’s the Answer: http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/wp20100301/trust-biblical-gospels/

  4. Dear Herry Wiyana

    What was Jesus’ birth in the stable, all about?

    Did Mother Mary have 9 month of pregnancy and labor pains for nothing, if Jesus was already there before?

  5. you are twisting God’s word totally – the sword is a metaphor, you need to read the following sentences. It only says that one person following the Bible will be in division from another one, even in the same family, not following it

    why don’t you honestly find all the passages in the Bible showing how God calls to love one another? there are HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of them

    and moreover, you saying that people teaches Quran is just an insult… this is probably the last article I am reading on this website as it is becoming outrageous how people can twist Truth to prove their point.

    what you are doing it just like saying: “Bible says: Judas went and hang himself” and in another passage it says “go and do the same” and claiming that Bible teaches to kill yourself… (even though passages are in different chapters and they are parts of two different stories)

  6. and if you really are interested in the truth, read the real history of crusades, not the ones taught by Muslims (who were the invaders so obviously they cannot admit to it now… Germans teach their history now too, saying that it was Russians who attacked them in 1941, they conveniently forget their aggression since 1939 and murdering millions of people of “inferior race” by then)


    (and if you don’t publish these comments it means you really are afraid of truth, cutting other arguments out so that your point is not challenged)

  7. and one final comment: why is this website focused on discrediting christianity…? don’t you have enough of your own religion books & teachings to focus on them? somehow the christians are not all about “let’s prove muslims are wrong”, we cherish our faith & tradition and it is sufficient for us

    checking out the articles on this website it seems that your religion is defined by the negation of others, instead of building your case… sorry, but looks like without the christians and the Bible you would not exist…

    if your religion is TRUE it will defend itself, won’t it…? you don’t need to prove everyone else is wrong… truth comes out eventually, always… think about it.

    Why do muslims feel this constant need of questioning other people’s beliefs…?

  8. Alexendra, there are more than 17,000 articles here and many have made a positive case for Islam.

    I see your perspective, but, human condition is such that once people have believed in whatever ideas, for more than a generation, they take a life of their own. So, with two billion people living with the Christian doctrine, discussion is inevitable and necessary.

    Even the atheists among them, like Richard Dawkins like the Christmas carols.

    If such articles are not written the common media will link Islam, a religion of peace, to terrorism, because of misdeeds and misunderstanding of minority of people and Christianity with love, hope and rationality despite its origin in violence and dogma.

    Read Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason, how the great man, one of the Founding Fathers of USA had to snatch rationality, out of the jaws of intellectual coercion and Joseph Priestly’s book to know about the Christian history.

    Joseph Priestly, who discovered oxygen, had to leave UK for USA, for his house was burnt for writing the book.

    Read Andrew Dickson White, who founded the Cornell University, to learn how science needed to be snatched from the jaws of Christianity, to understand the rationale of this article.

  9. one thing is certain: to prove you are right you don’t need to discredit others, never ever

    if you prove someone else is wrong it may only prove that they are wrong, not that you are right

    the disproportion in here is visible, on the christian websites I read (a lot) there are NO articles about islam at all, other than facts reporting (killing in Egipt and so on)… we don’t go trying to prove Mohammad did that or that, Quran is wrong here or there… simply: we don’t need it.

    Try performing the apologetics of Islam basing on the islam only …

  10. I would like to see proofs of Mohammad’s miracles and proves that Quran was actually written during his lifetime.

  11. Alexandra, your above comment proves my point. Killing in Egypt is fault of Islam, whether done by the military, the Muslim brotherhood or for whatever reason.

    No one will care to find out that Egypt is simply poor and their army has been paid by the West for decades and rest is history …

    Any death in the Muslim countries is not assigned political reasons.

    Killing done in Chicago or New York may be fault of mafia, Afro-Americans or killing by army of any of the Western countries or drone attacks is not Christian fault, it has social, political and rational reasons.

    Our struggle with this double standard, created over the centuries, since the fall of Jerusalem in the seventh century, requires articles like this.

    Read a chapter, Muhammad the Enemy, in Karen Armstrong’s first biography of the Prophet, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet.

    The day this dichotomy will be removed you will not see this disparity between the Muslim and the Christian apologists.

    One God of Judaism, Unitarian Christianity and Islam easily stands out once the Triune God of Christianity is exposed. Even the polytheists will go for this Transcendent God, who is beyond time, space and matter, the Creator of our universe and of life on our planet.

    Interestingly enough all the Christian apologists make a case for the Unitarian God and then by bait and switch imply the Triune God.

    So, my paradigm is very simple, if I can make the Christian apologists genuinely talk to all the agnostics and the atheists, Islam wins. This is a special providence for the Muslim apologists, every one is working for us, without being on our payroll.

    So, this is why we have to talk about Christianity often, as all the Christian apologists are working for Islam, allow me to say, including you, every moment of your and their life.

    You do not want me to let their efforts go waste? Do you?

    Alexandra, you have asked about the Quran. Here is a link to a few articles:



  12. Dear Herry Wiyana

    I appreciate that Jehovah witnesses have good arguments against Trinity.

    One fact that escapes most Christians is that if they study the centuries of debates about essence of God and nature of Jesus, between Unitarians and Trinitarians, spread over centuries and different understanding of God among different sects, they will want to follow the simple yet elegant understanding of One God in Islam.

    Muslims may differ on different details about the prophet and later politics but never about One God of Monotheism, introduced by Prophet Abraham and later Jewish prophets, including Jesus and John the Baptist, who baptized Jesus, may peace be on all of them.

  13. I like the comment by the sister about the only facts about islam they put out for reading is the killing in Egypt and so on . That’s exactly what the deceivers want you to know about islam, only it’s called obstacles between you and the truth, but you were smart enough to go on this website to learn some real facts about islam, I pray you’ll continue to seek the truth by turning to our creator only and praying for true guidance .Peace to all

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.