Pastor's Wife Converts to Islam - Habiba Adamu

Her name is Fatima Edoh, a 47-year-old Deeper Life elder. She lives in Karon-Majigi, a satellite town located along Airport Road in Abuja. On April 12, 2001, Fatima performed ablution and recited Lailaha Illa Llaahu, Muhammadu Rasullullah (Salallahu Alaihi wa salam). She accepted the Islamic faith and converted to Islam.

Fatima, who hails from Togo, a small West African country, is married to a Deeper Life Pastor who hails from Benue State. With four children, Fatima said she never had any personal problem with her husband neither did she experience maltreatment from him. She was neither underfed nor uncattered for in any form. The Deeper Life elder narrated her experience to Abuja Trust thus:- "On a night, sometimes in April this year, I had a dream. It was about the calling of Adhan - the Muslim call for prayer. The following night I had the same dream. After the first dream, I confided in an old Muslim woman who happens to be one of my customers. She told me that the dream was a divine calling for me to become a Muslim. I refuted it and left her after my second dream, I had to organise myself to embrace Islam, which I did successfully without my husband and relations' knowledge.

When my family heard about my conversion, they were not pleased. It was bad news for my relations, friends, church members, husband and a host of others with whom I worship at the Deeper Life Church. Even my daughter who is a nurse, when I informed her, she thought that I was crazy. She went ahead as she had threatened to pack all her belongings in my house and leave me. She forsook me."

Mallama Fatima told Abuja Trust that she was traumatised as a result of her decision to convert to Islam. She recounted further:- "It all began with my church members quarrelling with me. They warned that I was going the dangerous way. When all verbal effort to change my mind failed, enemies resorted to witchcrafts and charms. At one time, I became seriously sick. My stomach was swollen like that of a pregnant woman. In fact when I was taken to the hospital, doctors could not diagnose my ailment. Instead, I was told that it was not an hospital matter.

"I was later taken to a Mallam who wrote some verses of the Quran on a slate and rinsed it for me to drink. The Mallam prayed for me and told me that I was going to vomit through out the night. I drank it, and throughout the night, I was vomiting. When morning came, I felt strong and healthy! It was a wonderful experience."

According to Fatima, her church members were surprised that her protruded stomach had become normal. She continued her narration: "After some period of time, another traumatic experience started. I began to see some people in my dreams with blood in their mouth. This time around, some Muslim brothers and sisters in prayers joined me. That was how I overcame the problem."

Perhaps worst than Fatima's health problems was the fact that her father and in-law disowned her. The old woman only reacted with a lot of tears but could not change her mind. Said she, "My family members told me that I had brought shame to them by converting to a Muslim. They persuaded me to reconvert to Christianity. They applied a lot of tactics. They even drew my attention to the attack on America, but I was rather angered. I told them that there is no evidence that Muslims masterminded the attack for religious purpose. If you know the Muslim very well, you will agree with me that they are a peace loving people."

As far as Fatima is concerned, her conversion to Islam was a manifestation of divine calls. As expected, Fatima received a lot of assistance from Muslim brothers and sisters. Her ordeals was so deep that she even had to be assisted with such things as dresses to wear and mattress to sleep on, after her daughter made away with all her belongings. But the woman had what she described as a pleasant dream. "While I was in the hospital, I had a dream that my spirit was lifted from the earth to a big building. I was ushered in by a small girl through a big gate and was welcomed by some women dressed like me in white gowns, gloves and socks. They sang some beautiful songs to me in a language quite foreign. I woke up only to find myself on the hospital bed with drips. I am also pleased to tell you that my son-in-law has converted to Islam through my influence. I believe it is gradual. Some day, we will all become Muslims.

"I must tell you however, that when my son-in-law converted, I received serious warning from some people who told me that they were aware that my conversion would influence a lot of people, adding that I should be careful.

But I replied and told them that I had converted many people to Christianity when I was one. Today I am no longer a Christian, so why should they be aggrieved at that."

Fatima, who is firm in her decision and actions further told Abuja Trust that she used to lock her door in the night for fear of physical attack from enemies. Now she is no longer afraid of them for she knows that the heaven is open for those who die in the pursuit of the course of Allah.

Mallama Fatima has since converted two other Christians to Islam, one of whom is her sister.

::: How I returned to Monotheism :::
part 1

POLOSIN ALI VIACHESLAV SERGHEYEVICH

Biographic data: Born June 26th, 1956 in Moscow.

In 1978 graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy of the Moscow State University majoring in "sociology", the subject of the scientific research: "Criticism of Max Weber's theory of the "spirit of capitalism" (dealing with the influence of protestant reformation on the development of the market economy).

In 1980 started to work for the Orthodox Church, his first position being a reader.

In 1983 graduated from the Moscow Theological seminary, was ordained the deacon, and later the priest.

In 1983 - 1985 a priest in a number of Orthodox parishes in Central Asia; was the dean of a church in the town of Dushanbe and was deported from the region by the Soviet authorities for insubordination to the authorities.

In 1986 unemployed; later became a free-lance translator of theological literature at the Publishing Department of the Moscow Patriarch's Office.

From June 1988,when the persecution of religion started to cease, became a priest in a newly opened half-ruined church in the town of Obninsk in Kaluzhsky region, in 1990 became an archpriest.In January 1990 was nominated by the "Narodny Front" of Obninsk a candidate for the people's Deputy of the Russian Federation representing Kaluzhsky Region; in March, the same year - elected a Deputy and a member of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation.

In 1990 - 1993 was the chairman of the Committee of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation | to the freedom of worship, member of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation; the author of the Russian Federation law "On the freedom of religious beliefs" which was in force from 1990 to 1997; the author of various legislative initiatives and amendments which released believers from a number of restrictions of their civil and property rights, including the exemption from many of taxes.

In 1991 was empowered to act for Boris Eltsin at the elections of the President of the Russian Federation, elaborated the ceremony of the President inauguration (of the pattern of 1991).

In 1990 took part in the establishment of the Russian Christian Democratic movement, member of its governing body till 1993.
At the same time continued his studies and in 1993 graduated from the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,

in May 1993 defended his thesis in political sciences, the subject of his research being "The Church and the State in the USSR

in 1971 - 1991", received his MA degree in political sciences.
In 1983 - 1991 - a priest of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROCh),

by 1991 gave up church office on the grounds of the impossibility to combine his religious and parliamentary activities.

After the Supreme Soviet had been dispersed in September 1993, declined an offer to return to his activities as a priest;

in 1993 - 1995 - the free-lance consultant of the Department of Internal Church Relations of the ROCh.

Did not take part in the elections to the State Duma,
from March 1994 to March 2000 was the consultant of the State Duma Committee for Public Associations and Religious Organisations, state adviser of the 3 rank.

In February 1999 defended Post-doctoral thesis in philosophy on "Dialectics of a Myth and Political Myth Creation", PhD.

Author of a number of publications on religious and political-religious issues.

In 1999 published his work "Myth. Religion. State" (440 p.) which deals with the influence of myth creation on the political development of society and of the advantages of Monotheistic ideology for the state building.

In May 1999 publicly announced his (and his wife's) return to Monotheism, the religion of his fathers and forefathers, and embraced Islam.

In 1999 was elected co-chairman of 'Refakh', the Social and Political Muslim Movement.Editor-in chief of the "Muslim newspaper" (published since 1999)

Although I grew up in a non-religious family, still from as early as I can remember I deeply believed in God, yet unknown to me, Omnipotent and always ready to give His hand to those who seek his guidance. In my youth years, when faced with a predicament and my own powers failed, I turned to God in my heart and the situation changed for the better.
It came naturally, therefore, that to learn the truth about God I made a decision to join the Department of Philosophy at the Moscow State University. It was there that I first read the Bible. It left me with a contradicting impression: some texts seemed genuinely inspired by God, while others attributed God with a desire to destroy the majority of the humankind and were abundant in such strange notions as God's "hand", "body", "flesh and blood".

But in the 1970s in Moscow the Russian Orthodox Church was the only real alternative to the Communist ideology. So when I first came to the Orthodox cathedral at the age of 19, I discovered an ancient tradition and the beauty of the Christian hymns, which praised the Lord, and I decided to get a deeper theological knowledge. To this end I later entered the Seminary. It was not an act of conscious choice of one specific religion over another, as I didn't have a chance to compare Orthodoxy with any other religion. Rather, it was a pronounced definite decision against the false concept of denial of God, as I joined the only religious organization that was available at the moment.

Having learned the fundamentals of Christian theology, I became a priest in 1983. At the moment my benefice symbolized the spiritual and intellectual struggle against the absence of God, and I felt I was a warrior of the Lord. But unfortunately, when my real service began, I was faced with carrying out the rituals ordered by largely superstitious people rather than with fulfillment of my spiritual and intellectual tasks. Even as I was fully aware of the fact that those rituals were not any different in meaning from pagan chanting, I could not avoid them, as they had become an integral part of the Christian religious practice. This situation brought about an intrinsic opposition between personal faith and public duty.

In 1983-1985 I worked as a priest in Central Asia. It was there that I first met Muslim people and began to feel the propensity towards the Word of Islam. Once an elderly Tajik of noble appearance came to my church. People believed he was really a secret sheikh. After a brief conversation he suddenly said to me: "You have Muslim eyes, you are destined to become a Muslim". This seemingly controversial statement, made in an Orthodox cathedral to an Orthodox priest, did not provoke my resistance. Moreover, his words were imprinted on my mind.

In 1988-1990 the struggle against atheism became a matter of the past. The Orthodox Church, however, became more inclined to prefer building new premises and carrying out the more profitable ordinances to the educational mission or the drive against superstitions. No longer did I feel like the warrior for God, I felt rather like an official magician, solely expected to fulfill magic ceremonies and chants. This made me step outside the clerical staff in 1991.

In order to find a theological explanation that would endow the church rituals with the true faith, I turned to studying the early Christian sources: the history of Church, the history of church services, the history of theology. The profound study of theology and the Christian primary sources made me cast doubt on the true character of the Roman-Byzantine church services, as they contained all too many borrowings from the pagan worship of the past. This realization came to me in 1995, and made me quit the church services even outside the clerical staff. Still, the belief in the theantropic nature of Christ prevented me from understanding a simple and clear principle of the One and Only God.
At that time I did not know the true word of Islam, as Krachkovskij's Russian translation of the Quran all but obscured the meaning of Divine Revelation. When I first read the periphrastic translation of the Holy Quran, made by V. Porokhovaya, with a commentary to the text of the Quran and the Islamic teaching about Jesus (let peace be upon him!), my last reservations about accepting the word of Islam vanished. Allah, Almighty and Most Merciful gave me strength to go on, and my spouse and I made a decision to publicly profess our return to the true faith in the One and Only God. Every human being is born into true faith; the choice of Judaism, Christianity or heathenism is predetermined by the individual's upbringing.

Hereby I would like to commit to paper the thoughts that helped me reject idolatry and profess love and worship of the One and Only God, without associates.

- - -

Christianity and the heathen cults

The Christians of the first two centuries disregarded the ancient mysteria as the "Satanist staging". They did not worship the image of the Holy Cross (they had the fish as their symbol) and condemned any attempts to endow God with associates, such as the Theodorite's doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The early Christian forms of worship were deeply rooted in the Jewish celebration of Sabbath and can be compared with Mohammedan prayer. During their meetings the worshippers commemorated historic events, sang psalms and professed morality.

Most of what we now know as the Christian cult in reality clearly originated in the heathen worship. It was in the IV century that these traditions were declared "Christian", with the political aim to unify numerous people of the Empire under the rule of Emperor, the single "emissary of Christ". Thus, Paisius Ligarid, the Metropolitan of Constantinople Ecumenical Patriarchy, in his speech at the Russian Orthodox Church assembly in 1666 in Moscow expressed the clerical view on the Czar's position: "Both in Rome and in Egypt, the emperor enjoyed both ecclesiastical and governing powers. Due to these, as well as other causes, the emperor shall be called after God. That means that you, godlike Alexei Mikhailovich, also have the right to be called after God".

Thereby the Orthodox priest, whose views were bolstered by the clerical assembly, acknowledged the profound intrinsic similarity between the Orthodox doctrine that viewed the Czar as the "Lord's anointed" monarch and the old Eastern despotic mythology. The patriarch was able to see the identity of the Christian Czar and the Pharaoh of the Ancient Egypt. The Medieval political system, based on the Judaic-Christian doctrine of the New Testament sought to help the leader enjoy the absolute political power over his people. Dostoyevsky brilliantly revealed this political side of Christianity in his legend of the Great Inquisitor. The Great Inquisitor regarded the fact that Jesus only professed spiritual freedom and refused to accept Caesar's power as a flaw in the Early Christian doctrine. This "flaw" of the Early Christianity was successfully corrected in the 4th century.

The Church, which had previously rejected the heathen mysteria, now implemented them within the framework of the Christian cult. The process essentially involved a mere substitution of the pagan gods' names in accordance with the New Testament. The magical and conjuring nature of the mysteria, however, managed to survive the name change. As the ancient myths go, both Egyptian Osiris and the Persian god-man Mytra were born approximately on the day of winter solstice (December 25th) and Mytra was born in a cave, among wild animals. The Roman Empire saw magnificent celebrations of these gods' nativity. The origins of the Russian word for Christmas carols, "kolyada", can be traced back to the early Slavic cult of Kolyada, the savior god. In 4th century the Roman emperor chose Christianity for public purposes and, seeking to oust the popular feast of Mytra, nominated December, 25 the day of Christmas, although this date had never been celebrated by the Early Christian Church.

The divine sacraments of Jesus' birth, suffering, death and bodily resurrection, established by the Christians of the Roman Empire were not only identical to the pagan mysteria but also aimed at incorporating the heathen mythology and cults in order to redirect the army of believers under the command of the new, Christian clergy. The priesthood, in turn, established the cult of the Emperor, who was now not merely worshipped alongside with other gods, but was endowed with the power of the world Savior, the representation and emissary of the chief Rabbi and the "king of the Jews".

The ways of worshiping Osiris in Egypt, Ortheus in Greece, Attis and Mytra in Rome, and Zoroastre in Persia, as well as many other heathen cults, invariably follow one pattern: the miraculous birth from the virgin -> suffering for people and death -> descent into Inferno -> resurrection and the ascension. The heathen priests would ritually reproduce the mythological pattern, watched by the multitudes of worshippers: they would head the religious procession chanting "Attis has come from the dead" or "Osiris has come from the dead". In addition they would administer communion with the blood of their god, which took form of wine (Greece), bull's blood (Rome) or a red wheat drink (Egypt). They believed the ritual would allow the worshippers to overrule the laws of nature. A thousand years before the word of Christ an ancient Egyptian would utter a prayer:

Oh, ye holy spirits!
Have ye uttered these words before me:
"Let him be part of Eternal Life
After he received the holy breads of Geb?
White wheat shall be the bread of my communion,
Red wheat brew I shall drink for my communion.
(Book of the Dead)

Communion by divine body and blood is characteristic of the majority of the early religions. In the course of time, cruel naturalism gave way to more humane expressions: the primitive tribes might have had a substitutional human sacrifice, which was later replaced by the animal-killing ritual. Gradually the animal's blood was replaced with wine and bread became the symbol of the sacrificial body. In the book of Zoroastre Mytra, the godly embodiment, instructs his disciples: "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood shall abide? In me, and I shall remain in him." This sacred formula of the single most popular religion of Rome obviously deeply impressed the Christian authors of the New Testament.

The general structure of the ancient myths, as well as the texts of some prayers, were incorporated into the Christian doctrine and remained largely intact. It was quite common in Rome, that images of Egyptian Isis, who was usually portrayed as a mother carrying a child, were sometimes worshiped by the early Christians, who were not inclined to see any profound differences between an Egyptian goddess and Jewish Miriam. The fourth century saw the revival of the ancient sacrament of communion by divine blood, symbolically substituted with red wine. It should be noted, however, that even in the heathen world this ritual was not so readily accepted, as it was in the new Christian church. Thus, Cicero noted: "When we call bread by the name of Cerera and wine by Bachus, we use nothing but common figures of speech. Or else does it really occur to you that there exists a man, who would truly believe in his insanity that the food he consumes is the body of god?"
Medieval Church also revived the long-forgotten ritual of praying to the spirits of dead people, emploring them to reverse the natural laws of existence. In its essence, this ritual turns the spirit of a dead person into a being that is able to willingly change the order of the universe, thereby equaling to heathen understanding of the divine creature. Simple logic reveals an obvious paradox: how can he change the universal order, he who had never created it and never had the power over it? And furthermore, if it is the Omniscient Creator who makes changes to the world as though at the plea of the soliciting ghost, why cannot we address Him directly? What is the reasoning behind regarding Almighty Creator as similar in His judgement to a human leader whose decisions are dictated by a group of the chosen ones, or saints, rather than justice?! This idea either stipulates disbelief of the Lord's Omnipotence, or, worse still, blasphemously denies His actions to bear the justice that He Himself had granted in His Revelation.

The following ritual, for instance, had survived in the rural Russia until as recently as the beginning of the twentieth century: the official Church, unable to eliminate the heathen worship of the cattle-protecting god, Velesh, had substituted it for the cult of a Greek saint, Vlasiy. In reality, however, the practice of worship remained the old way. On the day that had been originally allotted to prayers to Velesh, the head of the family, in an echo to the ritual of Velesh, would give his cattle consecrated water wearing a goatskin inside out.

Do they indeed ascribe
To Him as partners things
That create nothing
But are themselves created?
No aid can they give them
Nor can they aid themselves! <�>
Verily those whom ye
Call upon besides Allah
Are servants like unto you
(7:191-192, 194) Next Part...

Why didn't the texts of New Testament which were based on the teaching of the great apostle of the One and Only God, prevent the restoration of heathenism? Is the evangelical text really a revealed Word of God? What shall we CALL a Divine Revelation? Do the Christians have Revelation?

The answers to these questions constitute the second major step towards the conscious choice of religious position.

Allah, the Moslem name of the Lord, is formed with the use of the Arabic definite article "al", which emphasizes the concept ouniqueness and the Arabic "illah", which stands for God. In Russian, analogue of the word Allah, therefore, is the word combination "Single God" (One and Only God). Hereinafter we shall use the terms "Allah", "God" and "Single God" as identical.

In accordance with the faith of Abraham (peace be upon him), God is unique and unattainable to His creations, unless He Himself wills otherwise. The knowledge which the Almighty Himself decided to reveal to humankind is available to us through mediation of Holy spirits and prophets, the apostles of God. Lord Almighty is the subject of Revelation, with man as the instrumental medium of fulfillment of His will.

The prophet does not have a predetermined knowledge of the subject of Revelation, but gains it from the Word of God. The Lord's Revelation is marked with formal signs: prior to conveying the Word of God the prophet says: "The word of the Lord came to me, saying, go forth and tell your people the following�". That is the way of conveying the Revelation, characteristic of both the prophets of Israel and Muhammad (peace be upon them all). This Revelation may be accepted or rejected, but never altered at man's discretion, as in that case, it ceases to be the Word of the Lord and becomes the word of this world, and, if distorted, may turn into heresy. The Holy Quran invariably follows the "Go tell them" pattern, and no one has the right to amend the Revelation at any time.

The sacred texts of Judaism and Christianity, however, have undergone some important changes. The Old Testament incorporated the contradicting historical chronicles, the books of dubious origin, as well as the books that had only survived in translated version. Many books of the prophets have undergone some textual changes, often affecting the meaning.

As for Christianity, one would notice that there exists only fragmental data about the life of Jesus, and that his sermons were only put on paper after several decades of being part of the verbal tradition. The clericals of the 3rd and 4th enturies, apparently looking down upon the prophets, carried out a selective evaluation of the ancient texts. Some of the books were expurgated about 200 years after being written, while others were randomly incorporated into what we now know as the New Testament. The final version of the New Testament was approved no sooner than the year 692, at the Trulle Clerical Assembly. Not only did most of its corpus consist of the interpreted sermons of Christ, but also the sermons of his disciples, as well as the teachings of Paul, who persecuted early Christians and never even saw Jesus. These texts lack the prophetic formula, "Tell them" moreover, quite the reverse is true.

Thus, for instance, the canonized sinodal Russian translation of St. Luke's gospel starts with the following words: "Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the world: It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilius, That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed" (St. Luke, 1:1-4).

This extract clearly shows that the good tiding's (evangelion) subject is not the Lord, but man, who is not even an immediate witness to Christ's sermons. The gospel's aim also seems to be quite natural, - it "seemed good" to the author to strengthen his disciple's knowledge of the subject. The word combination "delivered them onto us" clearly shows the ways of passing the Gospel in spoken tradition. The closing statement of St. John's Gospel, the origins of which have raised much argument between contemporary scholars, goes: "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written everyone, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written" (St. John. 21:25). This final message reveals the true subject of the gospel. It is man who chooses the information to be made public and in the meantime acknowledges the fact that he has deliberately abridged the huge corpus of information about Jesus that he had learnt.

Likewise, in his first epistle to Corinthians St. Paul refers to either his own will, or the will of the Lord (Jesus Christ): "But I speak this by permission and not of commandment. For I would that all men were even as I myself "(1 Corinthians, 7:6). "And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, <�>But to the rest speak I, not the Lord. Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgement" (7:25) etc.

Judging from the position of the believer in the One and Only Almighty God, all that is said on behalf of a man, however noble and respected, should be distinguished from the Lord's Revelation proper, and incorporated into the body of edifying, theological and philosophical works, rather than in the Bible. If the Christians truly consider the New Testament to be God's Revelation, they probably should have placed the extracts where the apostle acknowledges that he is not delivering the Lords commandment, or even the teachings of Jesus (let peace be upon him!), outside the realms of Divine Revelation. They should publish these extracts separately as the testimonies of the pious men.

The sheer fact that the Christian scholars did not do it testifies to the effect that the whole corpus of the New Testament should be perceived as a testimony of events, rather than a Book of Revelation. And if the reference to the words of Jesus (let peace be upon him!) contains merely a reconstruction of his sermon, rather than a direct quotation, - such reference constitutes a first-hand account of Jesus, but should not be perceived as Christ's revelation of God's will. The Christian New Testament, therefore, contains merely the recurrent interpretations of Israeli prophets' books and does not offer a Revelation beyond the scope of the Old Testament tradition! The proper formation of the Christian religion was a gradual process that took place in 2-4th centuries; Christian institutions were formed during the 4-5th centuries by the efforts of the Roman emperors and the priestly class, without the new prophets or new prophetical Revelation.

So where is the Lord's Revelation, on which the apostles should have commentated, rather than substitute for their own thoughts? Jesus Christ (let peace be upon him!) did not leave a book of Revelation saying "God commanded me to tell you this" followed by a text that would allow for no changes or amendments. No Christian book has such words. So if we truly believe in the Almighty God, we should acknowledge that if He would grant us with a Revelation of the New Testament, His will, as any will of the Almighty, would undoubtedly be fulfilled and protected from any amendments.

Moreover, in many instances Jesus (let peace be upon him!) forbade his disciples to tell about him, while the disciples said that should all he said be written down, many books would not suffice for this purpose. Jesus of the New Testament constantly reiterates that he was only sent to Jews; for instance, when asked to heal a Canaanite woman, He replies: "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel <�> It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to dogs"(St. Matthew; 15; 24-28). In the gospels there is no mentioning of heathens joining in the group of Christ's disciples. This is just the Church interpretation, which is disproved by the Book of Acts (10, 11:1-19), where Apostle Peter, 17 years after Christ's Ascension, converts a heathen Cornilius, - much to everyone's surprise! As a result Peter invoke his authority as an apostle by mentioning of a recent omen, to convince the other apostles of necessity to convert other heathens, too. Should Jesus really have told his disciples to convert non-Jews, why wouldn't they have been doing this for 17 years? Why did they seek reassurance in the new miracles and omens and not in references to their master's direct orders?

In the Gospel according to St. John, Jesus unveils God's reasons to postpone the new Revelation: "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that he shall speak: and he shall shew you things to come (St. John, 16; 12-13). " But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you" (St. John, XIV: 26).

Is it anything but a convincing evidence of the fact that Jesus Christ, by the name of God stated that the true essence of his prophecies should not have as yet taken the form of a written book of Revelation? Even his Jewish disciples could not as yet "bear" the whole Truth; the Truth that had to be revealed to all the people of the world, who were for the time being unprepared to accept the One and Only God! Hence, the Lord announced that the holy spirit will later reveal what he heard from God, and that is when the teachings of the great prophets, - Abraham, Moses and Jesus (let peace be with them!) will be available to everyone.

To teach and bring remembrance of the Word of the Almighty God, the Holy Spirit needed another medium; another prophet, endowed by God to convey His Word. We, guided by the Holy Quran, came to the understanding that this Prophet was Muhammad, and Jibrael (Gabriel) was the spirit sent to him to convey the Word of God.

It became obvious to me that the Christian tradition did not provide me with a book that I could firmly accept as given by God's will by God through His mediator, who proved these very Words to be the Words of God. What I have instead - the numerous apocrypha and sermons of the 1st century, which some 200 or 300 years later were in parts pronounced sacred, and partially disregarded as non-canonical by some people, who were not prophets and consequently did not have the right to draw such a distinction. Moreover, the same people would incorporate into this code some additional chronicles and narrations of unknown origin, as well as the new insertions into the existing text.

For instance, as recently as the 16th century, someone's impertinent hand added a new verse to the 5th chapter of John's First epistle. The new verse, "For there are three witnesses, the Spirit, the Word and the Father, and these three are one", was apparently introduced to negative the Protestant position. The verse was later incorporated into both the Greek and the Slavic editions of the New Testament. Should this verse also be considered as a part of God's Revelation? The contemporary Christian scholars argue that some authors of the 3rd century quoted this phrase as being a lost part of St. John's Gospel. But this justification can only strengthen one's inclination to question the authenticity of all New Testament texts, as they allow for deliberate manipulation on the part of the clerics who were not given a Divine prophetic mission.

Deze kanonade is een zwaktereactie op de topic van Sunni.

Is het zo verschrikkelijk moeilijk eens in de spiegel te kijken?