The Christian missionaries and their Islamophobia allies have been calling for the destruction of Islam openly ever since the advent of the Internet. A cursory glance at these fanatical and bigoted websites will at once give the dilligent reader an idea of their genocidal
While their intention is clear (i.e. the destruction of Islam), some liberal Christians who have taken this author to task for the so-called “call” for the destruction of Christianity are blissfully unaware of these developments. Sadly too, some ignorant liberal Muslims from among the ummah are siding with these passive Christian liberals
It is clear that in the Qur’an, God Almighty have denounced the innovations of Christianity, with special regard to the doctrine of Trinity:
Surely, disbelievers are those who said “Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity).” But there is no Ilah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilah (God – Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall on the disbelievers among them.
The nature of the humanity of Jesus(P) is stressed throughout the Holy Writ; that he was born of a chaste woman (Mary), takes food and drink, functions as any normal human would do. Yet what distinguishes him from others is that he is favoured by the Almighty to become His Prophet
In brief, one of the competing groups in Christianity suceeded in overwhelming all others. This group gained more converts than its opponents and managed to relegate all its competitors to the margins. This group decided what the Church’s organizational structure would be. It decided which creeds Christians would recite. And it decided which books would be accepted as Scripture. This was the group Iraeneus belonged, as did other figures well known to scholars of second- and third-century Christianity, such as Justin Martyr and Tertullian. This group became “orthodox,” and once it had sealed its victory over all its opponents, it rewrote the history of engagement — claiming that it had always been the majority opinion of Christianity, that its views had always been the views of the apostolic churches and of the apostles, that its creeds were rooted directly in the teachings of Jesus. The books that it accepted as Scripture proved the point, for Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all tell the story as proto-orthodox had grown accustomed to hearing it.
Bart D. Ehrman, “Christianity Turned On Its Head: The Alternative Vision of the Gospel of Judas”, in Rodolphe Kesser, et. al. (eds.), The Gospel of Judas, National Geographic, 2006, p. 118
On the Day of Resurrection, the following dialogue will take place between God and Jesus(P):
And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): “O Isa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: ‘Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?’” He will say: “Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours; truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden (and unseen).
It should be noted that until today, and unlike the Qur’an, there is no clear and reliable picture of Jesus(P), as derived from the texts of the New Testament. With the recent findings of the Gospel of Judas which casts Judas Iscariot, the “betrayer” of Jesus, into a more favourable light
Joachim Jeremias — one of the foremost exegetes of the New Testament in this century, who after a lifetime of study of the original — finally agreed with the German theologian Rudolph Bultmann that:
“[W]ithout a doubt it is true to say that the dream of ever writing a biography of Jesus is over.”
Joachim Jeremias, The Problem of the Historical Jesus (Fortress Press: 1972), p. 12
Meaning that even the chronology of the life of Jesus(P) could not be properly established from the New Testament. From the above exposition, it is clear that one now may be lead to ask, if this was the state of Christians who cannot even agree on their basic theology, how are we expected to trust the Christian interpretation of events on even bigger matters such as Christian ethics and Weltanshauung? Yet we still wonder why the Christians are anxious to proclaim their “one out of many” deviant versions to Muslims.
J.S. Vos in summarising the beliefs of Christianity and Islam, says thus:
“There is nothing in Islam to lead a man to say, “Oh wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death”? or “I know that in me; that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing.” A religion with reasonable attainable objectives…does not give the sinner the anguish of a guilty conscience nor the frustration of trying without success to attain in practical living the requirements of an absolute moral standard. In brief, Islam makes a man feel good, while Christianity necessarily first, and often thereafter, makes a man feel bad. The religion of the broken heart is Christianity, not Islam.”
J. S. Vos, A Christian Introduction to Religions of the World, pp. 66-67
Hence our conclusion remains: that while Christianity is indeed a religion of blind faith and one of the broken heart, Islam is the religion par excellence, of logic and rationality, bringing the previous religions of mankind to a completion. Thus, why should the Christians be allowed to persist in their misguidance with regard to the nature of the Messiah Jesus(P)?
The vision of the future, therefore, should be one of a world without the existence of Christianity
And verily, only God knows best!