PREACHER HELPS
by Evangelist Don Boys, Ph.D.
Copyright 2009, Don Boys, Ph.D.
#115
Under Bill s. 1618 TITLE
III passed by the 105th US Congress this letter cannot be considered Spam as
long as the sender includes contact information and a method of "removal." To be
removed just select Reply, type REMOVE in the Subject line and hit send.
If you strongly agree with one of these columns, please
forward to your mailing list. Some pastors put them is the church bulletin.. Make no changes in a column from title
to tag at the end.
Contents:
*Dogs, Cats,
and Birds in Heaven, Flies, Mosquitoes, and Ticks in
Hell?
*Nobel Prize
Committee, a Bunch of Hypocrites!
*Finally, a Non-answer from my Critical
Friend!
*Love Without Truth is
Hate!
*Liberalism Rots
Brains!
*Christian Anti-gun Nut in
Australia
*Little Known
Facts of History: Such Was Life in Ancient Greece and Rome!
*Illustrations: Any Preachers
Around Like Cartwright?
*Funny Story:
Why Athletes Can’t Have Normal Jobs!
*Incredible Quotes You Can
Use:
*Pithy Sayings:
*Did You Know?
Dogs, Cats
and Birds in Heaven, Flies, Mosquitoes, and Ticks in
Hell?
In a recent column, I threw
a rock at those who teach that pets will be in Heaven, and it sure caused a
ruckus. Of course, those who yelled were those I hit with the rock. I do not
believe the Bible teaches that dogs, cats, and birds will be in Heaven or that
flies, mosquitoes, and ticks go to Hell.
One of my readers replied,
“While it may be true that dogs and ducks won't be in heaven, or even dinosaurs,
you cannot dismiss the fact that there are horses. Nor does this take into
consideration any of the other fabulous beasts mentioned in Revelation. Clearly,
the Bible teaches that there will be animals in heaven. Maybe not your pets, but
animals nonetheless.”
The references to various
“fabulous beasts” in Revelation are surely symbolic according to the context and
all commentators I have read. As to the horses in Revelation 19, I can take two
positions. Either they are symbolic or they will be created for that great
end-time battle and are not stabled somewhere today on a back street in Glory.
When that passage refers to Christ with a sword in His mouth, no one teaches
that a literal sword will come from His mouth. Moreover, even if John is
referring to literal horses, that does not speak to the issue of pets going to
Heaven.
I googled “Animals in
Heaven” and got 22,000,000 hits! This is a big issue for many people, far bigger
than I thought. It is my opinion that many people are totally warped when it
comes to pets. Sure, we can love them, even cherish them, protect them, take
care of them, but they are still animals. They are not “one of the family,” nor
your “babies,” and they will not share your home in Heaven.. One fool said, “If
my pets are not in Heaven, then I don’t want to go there.”
One
website declared, “Our mission is to prove without a shadow of a doubt that
when God made animals He made them with spirits and souls and intended that they
have a place in Heaven.” Sara commented on that site saying,
“I have a story for all of you who have come here to this
site. I had a direct message from God, soon after one of my furbabies passed
away. I was in so much grief and pain. I frequently have dreams sent by God
about animals that I am supposed to rescue for him, I usually know what they
look like exactly before I find them from these dreams. Well, This night I
didn't expect a dream about my cat who had passed away. It was a vivid picture
of her silver hair and big eyes looking back at me sitting in a windowsill, in
the background was a huge Rainbow. God was telling me his promise: He will take
care of my baby in heaven.”
The shallowness and
ignorance of the Bible as displayed above is astounding. First of all, Sara did
not have a “direct message from God,” since that only comes from the Scripture.
There are no additional revelations, not until Christ returns again. Secondly,
God does not send dreams today although He could use a naturally occurring
dream. Thirdly, God’s rainbow is the
promise about no future world floods to wipe out the human race, not a promise
that He would take care of a cat. Fourthly, her “baby” was not a baby but a cat.
Fifthly, her “baby” is not in Heaven but buried in the back yard.
Many
of the “Fido in Heaven” crowd get very biblical and quote Isa. 11:6, “The wolf
also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and
the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall
lead them.” However, that does not refer to Heaven but conditions on Earth
during the Millennium.
Of course, there will be
animals on earth during the Millennium but that misses the whole issue: Do cats,
dogs, lizards, snakes, gerbils, and parrots go to Heaven? If they do, must their
owners (bad word according to the fanatics) also go there to guarantee admission
for their pets? If so, since we know an individual must trust Christ to get
there, what must a pet do to qualify? Do they skate in on their owners’
salvation?
Is it possible that all animals go to Heaven? Does that
include mosquitoes, ticks, and snakes? Some declare that every animal and insect that has ever lived will be in
Heaven while others teach that only those pets that were loved while here on
earth will walk the golden streets and scratch themselves on the Tree of Life.
Animal fanatics declare that
religious scholars such as Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, Francis of
Assisi, Dr. Albert Schweitzer, and the late Pope John Paul
II
supported the belief that animals
have souls and a place in Heaven. However, “Fido in Heaven” people are not
honest since they take statements (that I have read) by Luther, Calvin, and
Wesley totally out of context to prove their unsupportable
point.
Pope
John Paul II showed his dedication and love of animals, when he proclaimed, "the
animals possess a soul and men must love and feel solidarity with our smaller
brethren," and animals are "fruit
of the creative action of the Holy Spirit and merit respect" and are "as near to
God as men are." Well, John may have been an animal lover and was dedicated to
them but he obviously was not dedicated to the Word of God as his above
balderdash displays. “Smaller brethren” indeed.
Jack Van Impe, formally an
Independent Baptist evangelist, now television evangelist has a 102-minute video
on this subject. On that video, he maintains that animals have praise sessions!
They “worship the Lord Jesus Christ!” According to a website that promotes his
books and videos, many of “the greatest theological scholars, both past and
present, emphatically and dogmatically taught and teach” that our little furry
and feathered and faithful friends will be in heaven. Van Impe says that such
leaders include Billy Graham, John Calvin, Vernon McGee, Dr. John Walvoord,
among many others! If true, that only proves that great scholars are often
wrong, very wrong. Two examples from
his web site are Graham and Walvoord.
Billy Graham's
response to a child's question, "Will my dog who died this week be in Heaven?"
Graham replied, "If it would make you any happier, then yes, he will be." Graham
was wrong there as he was wrong when he told a writer that baby baptism would
provide eternal salvation for those “baptized” children. Moreover, he was wrong
when he told Robert Schuller and Larry King in two interviews that heathen go to
Heaven even if they had never heard the name of Christ as long as they believe
in God.
It is
alleged that Dr. John Walvoord, past president of Dallas Theological Seminary
and “the greatest prophetical genius of the 20th century,” said our pets will be
raised from the dead at the Rapture mentioned in Revelation 4:1 and 1
Corinthians 15:51-54! Of course, there is no indication of any animals being
resurrected in those passages.
Jack’s teaching has caused a great deal of harm during
the last 20 years with his date setting and sensational far-out application of
Scripture and now his dog and pony show video of pets in Heaven. Such confusion
is reprehensible but it does sell videos and books. Moreover, all is fair in the
market place. After all, it’s a “dog-eat-dog” world.
Some of the books
referred to by Van Impe are Do Pets
and Other Animals Go to Heaven?, How to Recover From the Loss of an Animal
Friend, There is
Eternal Life for Animals, and Cold
Noses at the Pearly Gates. I think Jack is off his meds again.
Charles Colson
wrote in Christianity Today,
“It's true
that only humans are created in the moral image of God (Gen.
1:26), but it doesn't logically follow that because my cat isn't
morally accountable before God, she won't join me in the life to come.” Chuck
knows better than that.
We are told that
God is able to bring pets back from dust and ashes as simply as He does humans
when the dead in Christ rise but that is not the issue. We know God could do so, but will He do so? Such a
position cannot be supported by Scripture. Others teach that animals will be
raptured or resurrected along with their owners. We are told even John Calvin
“made shocking statements about animals being raised from the dead at the
resurrection.” However, Calvin also made some other outrageous statements as he
tiptoed through the Tulips.
Desperate people use figurative Old Testament language to
prove their point such as Job telling us that animals and fish can teach us
various lessons, but that has nothing to say about pets in heaven. Of course,
humans can learn from animals.
One website settled the whole issue: “The Bible is very
clear that there will be animals in heaven.” Well, that answers all my questions
and settles the matter.
They misquote Rom.
8:19, alleging it to be KJV, to prove their point: “Romans 8:19 says that the
lesser creatures await Christ's return to redeem the sons of God so they, too,
will be released from physical death to eternal life.” However, that verse
actually says, “For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the
manifestation of the sons of God.” Adding “lesser” is dishonest and the word
“creature” does not refer to animals but is like preaching the Gospel to every
“creature.” Or as Paul tells us in II Cor. 5:17 that when we come to Christ we
are new “creatures.” Cats are never new creatures. Neither are dogs and a horse
is always a horse, of course.
One
website declares, “Yes all things have a soul even the trees of the field have a
soul toward their Maker. God made all of the birds, the cats and the dogs and
yes, I believe they have a soul. Animals are able to understand commands and
love. They often crave love. They would not understand love if they had no soul.
I believe we shall have pets in Heaven including those we fear here. We shall
have nothing to fear there. Not all animals are edible and therefore have
another purpose.” Great reasoning, huh?
Another said,
“Look into your pets eyes and see their soul.” Sure!
Still another
said, “From Numbers 22:21-34 {about Balaam and his donkey} it is quite obvious
that at times animals are much more spiritual discerning than people are!” Well,
I think I have documented the low level of spiritual discernment and Bible
knowledge in this article!
Another deep
thinker wrote, “God likes animals--Animals serve God. If such were the case,
then it would make sense that He would have them in Heaven as His pets.”
However, just because God forbids us to mistreat animals (and for kids to
torture animals is a definite predictor of further cruelty to humans) that does
not mean God will have Fido or Fluffy or Felix sitting at His feet in Heaven.
Another member of “Fido in Heaven” crowd said, “Heaven is for everyone
and every living thing.” Another said, “If there are no animals in heaven then
heaven does not exist.”
All traditional
Christians have taught that only those who have trusted in Christ (and innocent
young children) will go to Heaven. Is it possible for a pet owner to go to Hell
while the pet goes to Heaven? Must animals hit the sawdust trail in repentance?
No animal can repent of “sins” besides they can’t even sing “Just as I am.”
No, dogs, cats, and birds
don’t go to Heaven, and flies, mosquitoes, and ticks don’t go to Hell? They go
to a shallow grave in the back yard or end up as road kill.
Finally, a Non-answer from my Critical Boyhood
Friend!
Recently I
was viciously attacked by a lifetime friend and he promised to answer my message
of correction to him. I sent him a short note two weeks ago that I was still
waiting for his reply. In that email, I sent him a copy of my lengthy rebuke to
him for his many mistakes and misinformation so he knew what it was all about.
In my original missive to him, I told him I expected him to do one of three
things: Apologize, or prove his statements or not do anything. He chose, like
most critics, to do nothing. I called him a coward then and he is still a
coward. A boyhood friend, but a coward! Following is his
non-reply.
“Don: I can't remember what it was about so just
forget it. What ever I wrote, it wouldn't be right anyway. You have
not changed since we were young together. You were always right then and
you have to be right now or no one has an opinion but you. Forget it and
we will go on. I don't need an answer from you.”
Sorry, David but that is unacceptable. You made
malicious, slanderous charges using misinformation and I corrected you with the
facts. Therefore, I will not “forget it.”
Your statement “Whatever I wrote, it wouldn’t be right
anyway” doesn’t make any sense. I assume you are referring to the fact that I
might not agree with you. Well, you were surely not right in your original
tirade. That’s why I expect you to make it right. If I respond wrongly then that
is my problem not yours. Then you
are obligated to correct me.
You declared that I have not changed since we were young
together, but I have in many ways. However, one thing that hasn’t changed is my
commitment to truth. All you or other critics need do is supply me with truth
and I will jump to that position. However, you are wrong (again) in stating that
I thought I was always right when I was young. Well, I was both right (about
some things) and wrong (about some things). Moreover, that would be true of
every person on earth!
Of course, everyone has a right to his own opinions but
not to his own facts. Our opinions are not very important, but facts are. You
seem to have assumed your opinions to be facts or cannot differentiate between
facts and opinions.
You stated that you didn’t need an answer from me. You
want to move on and you can do that but not without understanding that you are
the one who started this by using false information and making silly
unsupportable accusations. I rebuked and corrected you but you refused the
correction. Proverbs 9:8 speaks about people like that: “Reprove not a scorner,
lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.” Also Pro. 27:5
declares, “Open rebuke is better than secret love.” I rebuked you and challenged
your misinformation because of our long-time relationship and my Christian love
for you. Instead of appreciation, I received scorn.
You didn’t want a reply but you got it anyway. I am very
disappointed in your response to my rebuke. If I am wrong, you should have
corrected me as an erring brother. I built my case for your errors plus your
unchristian attitude toward a long time friend and you stiffened your neck in
rebellion. That is your choice. You were not taught that at Grace 50 years ago.
Makes me wonder about your spiritual life and church involvement at this time in
your life.
I have done my part. Now you are on your own. What you do
is between you and Christ. You will not hear from me again. You are still my
erring friend and a personal coward.
Fantastic News For YOU!
Preachers: Does your church have a
Missionary family that is just starting out or does it have veteran
Missionaries coming home on furlough? Jump-start their efforts to raise
support with a Missionary Package from GospelHaus.com. Sharp, unified look from
Prayer Card to Letterhead to Envelope to Web Site. The ideal congregational
gift to help launch a new Missionary effort or provide a returning
Missionary with a fresh, updated look to his
presentation.
Bro. Doug Heckaman at
GospelHaus.com has been hosting the hundreds of
pages we offer at
CSTNews.com since 1996. The system they have in place for adding articles,
photos and documents to my website is very simple to use. I would
recommend it to any church or business with a need to update their website
on a regular basis. 502-523-9474.
As usual, I have no financial interest in the
above.
Love without
Truth is Hate
Recently an
Australian wrote me saying, “Wow you guys are so full of hate... maybe you
should exercise a bit of love and tolerance, stop hating everyone and
everything. Reading your site, I now understand what is meant by the religious
right in America. Thank god, we do not have
such an ugly equivalent here in Australia. Our right is far less
loony than you guys. Smile, relax a bit, and try to hate a bit
less.”
He was
responding to my article “Homosexual Mob Prove they are Fascist Jerks!” I was
commenting on a violent reaction by homosexuals. I wrote, “Yesterday, WND reported on Christians who were singing
in San
Francisco’s Castro (homosexual) District and were
surrounded by a mob of 500 homosexuals threatening to kill them. One man grabbed
a woman’s Bible and hit her over the head with it. The mob chanted, ‘Shame,
shame, shame.’ Homosexuals shouting
‘shame’ to praying, singing Christians is like a skunk accusing a rabbit of
having bad breath.” (Read the complete article here: www.cstnews.com.)
Note that the Aussie did
not point to any hate in the Christian group or in my article although he no
doubt objected to my identifying the mob as “perverts.” Of course, that is a
very apt, accurate, and acceptable term for those who practice perversion!
However, I am “full of hate” because I reported on the mob’s action but the
hateful mob gets a pass! I think my Australian fan has been standing in the sun
too long and his thinking is impaired.
As to his advice for me to
smile, I’ll go much further than smile. I’ll laugh out loud at his unthinking,
unbalanced, and unfair comments.
Liberalism
Rots Brains!
Thanks for
writing about my article dealing with sodomy; however, you evidently are a very
careless reader as well writer. You wrote, “Your article scares me a bit. I am
straight but you are saying we should get rid of anyone that is different. I
guess you also hate African Americans (sic)! You mentioned that some lives could
had (sic) been saved if sodomy was illegal, but isnt (sic) murder also illegal
so what makes you think another law would scare them from committing
murder?”
If you read
my article again you will note that I did not suggest getting rid of anyone
“that is different.” I did take the position that if sodomy were illegal, then
the police could have arrested the sodomite/killer/cannibal before he
sodomized/killed/ate other victims. The fact that laws against murder do not
deter all killings is no valid objection to such laws.
It is
interesting that you suggest that I hate Blacks (I don’t use “African Americans”
since they are either Africans or Americans). It is amazing that you equate or
parallel “race” with the “behavior of sodomy.” From your comments and others, I
am convinced that sodomy may not rot the brain but liberalism sure does.
Christian
Anti-gun Nut in Australia
Recently an
Australian reproached me for my article dealing with Christians and guns. He
declared that American Christians were obsessed with guns although we should be
serving God and leading others to Christ. Did I miss something in that
statement? Is he suggesting that one cannot do both? Is he suggesting that if
one likes, uses, and promotes guns, he cannot be the right kind of Christian? If
so, he did not support that contention. He needs to understand that an assertion
is not an argument.
He affirmed
that Christians are not to be “overly” involved in politics but who defines
“overly”? I will not permit him to define my words, not with his lack of
balance. He then managed to get scriptural by quoting the statement of Christ
giving unto Caesar what is his and to God the things that are His. Of course,
that is the first fallacious argument that wimps, weasels, weaklings, wafflers,
and worldlings use to justify an unscriptural, unprincipled, and undefendable
position. (My word here should be indefensible but for sake of alliteration, I
made up a new word. Look for it in next edition of
Webster’s.)
He asked,
“Are guns an issue that will lead people to Christ, or lead them away?” Guns
won’t do either since they are inanimate objects. In another email, he declared,
“Guns are evil. They are meant to kill.” No, people are evil and those evil people
use guns, knives (now illegal in Australia) clubs, cars, rocks, etc.,
to kill other people (who don’t have a gun for protection). And guns are for protection, not to kill, but they will
do that if necessary, especially to provide food.
He questioned where I got
my information about the heavy increase in Australian crime since most guns were
banned in 1996. Of course, that is a ploy or tactic that a desperate person uses
rather than deal with the issue. It is true, as claimed
by gun possession advocates, that the assault rate has increased a huge amount
since the ban/buyback. The homicide rates provide no support for a proposition
that the ban/buyback has helped. But, in the event that my critic really does not know the facts
about results of his nation’s oppressive gun laws, the following stats (found in
various places if one really wanted to know) are from WorldNetDaily: Nationwide,
homicides are up 3.2%; assaults are up 8.6%; armed robberies soared almost 45%;
in Victoria gun homicides climbed 300% and a “dramatic increase” in home
burglaries.
My critic
declared, “I can tell you that majority
of Australians SUPPORT these laws,” however, he did not tell me how he knew
what a majority of Australians believe today about the gun ban in 1996.
Then the
gun-hater developed a scenario when someone breaks into my home. “This is
usually done suddenly, so you have no time to unlock your gun from a cupboard.”
No, my gun is always loaded and accessible so I will be ready if a thief,
rapist, killer, etc., breaks into my home. He then brought up the probability of
my children playing with my guns; however, my children were taught better than
that. They did not rummage through our house or anyone else’s. Furthermore, I
kept my guns out of sight and on a high shelf. For the record, since my children
are now grown, my loaded gun is always within reach. I do take extra precautions
when grandchildren come to visit.
Waxing
eloquent, he then decided to arm the intruder. Now we both had guns and “you
both start shooting and everyone gets killed.” No, the intruder gets killed. That is reason
for having the loaded gun!
My critic
thought that the Kennesaw, GA requirement that every home must have a gun was a
joke or urban legend. He wrote, “It is serious, it actually happened?? Dear oh
dear. The logic is, make everyone
have a gun, then they will all cancel themselves out. A bit like 2 wrongs
make a right. Sorry but my wimpy pacifist cowardly logic says, if something is
bad then remove it. Don’t give it
to everyone and hope it cancels
itself out.” Dear, oh dear, his “wimpy, pacifist, cowardly logic” is
breathtaking!
Although he
told me that he was very familiar with the Bible, he admitted that he was not
familiar with the command of Christ in Luke 22:36 for the disciples to sell
their coats to purchase a sword. He then admonished me not to subjectively quote
Jesus “to support our own hobby horses.” I don’t but I do quote Him to support
every Christian owning a gun and knowing how to use it.
Like all
pacifists, wimps, and cowards he managed to find, quote, and misapply Matt.. 5:30
that teaches if someone smites you, “turn the other cheek.” Obviously, Christ
was not speaking of self-defense since He would never contradict other scripture
passages. It should not be necessary to remind Christians that Abraham called
out his trained servants (militia) and went after the bad guys who had captured
Lot and stolen his goods. That was justified
retaliation.
Exodus 22:2,
3 clearly teaches that I can defend my home
and family if a thief or intruder breaks in my home at night. However, if it is
during the daytime and the situation is not life threatening then lethal force
is not permitted. Moreover, Paul told Timothy in I Tim. 5:8 that a man must
provide for his family. Provide also carries the meaning of protection and
protection requires a protecting agent and that means a weapon and a backbone. A
wet washcloth does not qualify.
In the turning the other
cheek passage, the Jews had taken Old Testament Scriptures that were to be taken
as instructions for civil leaders and applied them to personal reaction. Christ
was saying, if one smacks you on the cheek as an insult, you are not to respond.
We know this example is not a matter of self-defense since an assailant would
normally slap a person on the left cheek. However, the passage specifically
mentions the “right” cheek so the assailant uses the back of his hand to insult
him. The Christian is to suffer the humiliation and bear it for the cause of
Christ and never take revenge but reflect the meek spirit of Christ. On the
other hand, many Bible passages teach that we do have the right and the duty to
defend our families and ourselves.
The gun hater
then wrote that the third paragraph “scares me.” I wrote, “I took a vow to protect my
wife so that means anyone in our home late at night will be presumed a thief,
rapist, and killer. He will be shot graveyard dead. The following day, I will
contact the governor of Georgia and ask him when he wants me to come to
Atlanta for an
awards ceremony. I assume he will give me the key to the city of Atlanta and maybe
designate the day, ‘Don Boys’ Day; in honor of me removing scum from our state
and making innocent people more secure.” My statement was meant to scare a
would-be intruder from breaking into my home.
My critic
wrote “Be in the wrong place at the
wrong time in Georgia (and I assume also the wrong colour..) and you will be assumed
scum and shot dead and the Governor will hold a parade... urghh.. it is possible
for someone to be on your property
for genuine reasons, and shoot now, ask questions later does not allow for this.
I am a liberal wimp, I know.” Not
only is he a wimp but he can’t read or understand plain English. The “wrong
place at the wrong time” is a person being in my home late at night! Is that too
complicated to understand? How could any thinking person suggest that a person
could be in my home late at night “for genuine reasons”? Guests
excluded.
He then got
way off base and added that the intruder is probably the wrong color! Now, this
desperate Aussie, not being able to discuss the issues, resorts to slurs,
slander, and stupidity by assuming race. (I don’t like to suggest a brother is
stupid; however, getting saved does not cure stupidity.) He plays the race card.
Ah, yes, when going down in flames, play the race card then maybe shallow folk
will not notice the dearth of his arguments.
After
insulting me, he claims to be insulted! He wrote, “Our brains are not steamed,
thank you. That is a pure insult.” Maybe not, but if he had any brains, he was
not using them.
He insisted
that England and
Australia are still great nations and
“I guess we do not share the American paranoia of the government. I do not fear
my government as you obviously do yours.” Then he is a fool or knows nothing of
history, every nation’s history. I love my country but I fear my government.
Government must be chained down by laws to protect citizens. George Washington said,
“Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like
fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”
Government is a fire and if it gets out of control, it
will destroy everything.
My Aussie
fan declared, “You will struggle to find a Christian that would entertain owing
a gun” in Australia. He doesn’t even know his
own country. I know many Christians in Australia who not only believe guns
are legitimate but who own illegal guns! Some of them admitted to me that they
sold some junk guns during the buy back in 1996 and purchased better guns on the
black market or from abroad.
He closed by
writing, “Anyway, you keep your Georgia with guns, and I keep my
Australia as gun-free as we can,
maybe one day we will meet in heaven and discuss it further.” Moreover, living in Sydney without a gun he may get to Heaven (with a bang) before I
do!
I Don’t Think
These Muslims Like Me!
“Did you , Don Boys, who pretend to be Ph.D
is really does not have Ph.D. ...That Don Boys has no sort of information about
Islam, but he pretend that he knows a lot. ...that Don Boys thinks by starting
rumors about Islam, he could turn world against Muslims, but he does not know
that he is wrong.”
*****
“what are you talking about? haha, this a little
funny but also pathetic. i am a Muslim and lying to anybody is a sin. you should
not lie because it will not get anybody anywhere. your information is inaccurate
if not completely wrong. god bless you, i hope you stop hating and spread more
peace and love in this world.”
The above
from a Muslim!
*****
“dear u r not
know any thing about isam all thing u write not true u should before lie ask the
peoble who become muslim in your contry which god help them to find the right
way the way of fair the way which lead us to heaven and remember this words well
because there will aday every 1 will be sorrowful to not go on the way which god
order us to follow honestly.”
Evidently
these dudes don’t know much about their own religion. However, I am pleased that
they have mastered English.
BIG
NEWS!
The new edition of my book, ISLAM: America’s Trojan Horse! is now
available with 25 additional pages and completely updated. The new chapter deals
with “The Gospel of Barnabas” which is a best selling book in
Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi
Arabia, etc. “The Gospel of Barnabas” is a
medieval forgery that purports to be written by the biblical Barnabas. It was
written to give some credibility to Mohammad and Islam that they don’t
deserve.
This “gospel” has Judas dying on the cross instead of
Jesus. This seeks to give some credibility to the Muslims’ teaching that Christ
did not die on the cross and rise from the dead.
The alleged Barnabas “quotes” Jesus giving Mohammad a
biblical and historical record that he does not have. It is a farce, falsehood,
fraud, and fake. And did I make clear that it was written not in the first
century but about the 14th or 15th century? I easily prove
that fact, and some honest Muslim intellectuals recognize the fact of the
forgery.
My book is the only Islam book that deals with this
