David Wood “ex-con”

David Wood, the notorious anti-Muslim Christian fundamentalist confesses he is an “ex-con” who has been in “multiple jails, multiple prisons, and multiple mental hospitals” – see 1 minute 50 seconds onwards. At one time he attempted to kill his father with a hammer. His ongong behaviour towards Muslims suggests he is not entirely recovered from his mental illness.



Categories: Anti-Islam, USA

48 replies

  1. Listen to the whole thing. He does not talk about Islam at all in this video.
    His analysis of 5 kinds of guards / OC officers and the parallel with 5 kinds of policemen is brilliant.
    Helps understand a lot of our current situation.

    He already admitted his past and the Lord has changed him. He also served time in jail, prison, etc.

    If anyone is in Christ, he is new creature, the old has passed away, behold the new has come.” 2 Corinthians 5:17

    “ongoing behavior towards Muslims” – usually, he is just exposing the content of the Qur’an and Hadith and Sira and Tarikh literature – granted he is polemical and also does a lot of snarky humor and mocking also. He has a shark wit and focuses on reason and logic.

    He makes a lot of great points.

    Like

    • I meant “sharp wit”

      not shark

      Like

    • he is just exposing the content of the Qur’an and Hadith and Sira and Tarikh literature – granted he is polemical and also does a lot of snarky humor and mocking also. He has a shark wit and focuses on reason and logic

      I don’t think so, Ken. If we put his lies, misrepresentations, and the deceptive framework by which he presents Islam aside, you would still have a big flaw called (inconsistency/double standard) with most of his videos.

      David Wood & his kinds are not much about proving Christianity, rather they are about disapproving Islam. That’s why you find him many times bringing atheists. He also knows that most of his audience actually are ignorant about Christianity let alone about Islam. He exploits this point very well. Also, he knows the general attitude of the average western person (including Christians) who has abandoned his traditions in favor of the values of the secular world. David exploits this point very good against Islam as well. In other words, he gives his audience what they want to hear emotionally. But at the end of the day, the outcome of his school will be just a bunch of ignorant people who think Allah is the moon god for pagans.

      Liked by 2 people

      • “Allah is a moon god” is a stupid idea;
        Robert Morey was wrong.
        I have never heard David Wood use that argument.

        Like

      • I have never heard David Wood use that argument
        You missed the point. I didn’t say that David said that in particular although I think he adopts this view. What I was saying is the outcome of David’s apologetic garbage will be “Allah is moon god for pagans” as a strong argument against Islam because his audience are mostly ignorant and don’t seek the truth. And David knows that, and he just gives them what they want to hear.
        By the way, when David was asked about the “argument” of the moon god, he answered it’s (over used). Notice that he didn’t say it’s not true, and christians should avoid this stupid thinking, rather he said (it’s over used) which is an answer that matches perfectly his deceptive apologetic method.

        Like

    • Ken

      His chilling impersonal mocking of other faith traditions may well come from a psychopathic personality type he has admitted to having. To discount mental illness as a contributing factor given his long stays in mental health institutions is unwise.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Except the gospel message is if you are in Christ you are a new creation you’re a new person – 2 Cor. 5:17

        if you’ve been born again your past nature has been crucified with Christ- Romans 6:6

        First Corinthians chapter 6 verses nine through 11 says that we have been washed; we have been cleansed; we have been justified; we have been sanctified so that now we can grow in holiness and godliness or in Islamic terminology – piety.

        His focus is on the doctrines of Islam and exposing the nature of seeking to establish the sharia and the caliphate by using aggressive jihad.
        That is the kind of thing he demonstrates showing that this is a false religion as a religion based on war and force and conquering other areas.
        The whole Islamic doctrine of Dar-al- Islam versus the Dar-Al-Harb (war) it is at the root of the Islamic religion.

        Like

      • I have a question for you Paul –
        since you admitted you are no longer a Muslim,
        why do you continue to defend it if you have found a problem with it?

        What exactly is the problem with it?

        Liked by 1 person

      • The great thing about the Christian faith is that a true Christian is a new person (2 Cor. 5:17; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11), but not completely all at once – we have the potential to grow in piety (holiness, godliness, character) – so David Wood certainly has some of his personality as a human being – maybe that is why he is so bold and courageous and does not care what Muslims think – he is happy that so many Muslims have turned away from a false religion.

        From Abdullah’s perspective, he calls it “lies”, etc., but from a Christian perspective, if Christianity is true, and it is, then logically, Islam is a false religion, and it is actually “the lie”.

        Like

      • You are not a true friend of Wood’s if you cover over his personality which many righly think still shows signs of mental illness, manifesting as it does in his extreme behaviour patterns.

        Like

      • Meh… Pascal’s wager in action. Sorry, but a new person in Christ is not supposed to criticize in impunity the way of Submission (al-Islam) and their prophets. A half-century gap is a nonissue, different cultures and mythologies explain that. It points out corrections to misunderstandings in the face of unenlightened Christendom at that time. And still the Submitters do today. This is the Sophia I have thought out.

        Another one, some crazy pacifist conservative said in a website: cops are mercenaries paid by some legal corporate entity. Forcing responsilibity is no easy task though, that guy should have a sackful burden of proof for such statement. Lawfulness versus legality is a very dangerous topic in my presumptions.

        Like

      • From Abdullah’s perspective, he calls it “lies”, etc., but from a Christian perspective, if Christianity is true, and it is, then logically, Islam is a false religion, and it is actually “the lie””
        This’s just a lie because this’s not what I said either. Christians, especially David and his kinds (and clearly you’re one of them), adopt the view that if Islam is wrong, then that means christianity is the true religion. This’s non sequitur. It’s not an actual argument for why christianity is the truth. To be honest, I even think David in particular doesn’t care wether christianity is the truth or not. What he cares about is that Islam is wrong. Got it?
        By the way, it’s not only muslims who can see how deceptive David’s apologetic method is. Even non muslims can easily see that. His stupid fans are so drunk with his mockery that even cannot use their minds any more.
        Enjoy 🙂

        Like

    • Ken Temple: He already admitted his past and the Lord has changed him. He also served time in jail, prison, etc.

      You do realize that there is no cure to pscyopathy?

      Like

      • spelling – psychopathy

        Maybe according to modern medical determinations – but the modern medical world has also taken homosexuality and Transgenderism, etc. off its list of mental illnesses and emotional illness. (1970s) Christians disagree – they are mental and emotional problems and illnesses.

        we all retain aspects of our personality and upbring even after we are saved by Christ – true Christians are growing.

        David Wood’s friendship with Nabeel Qureshi in college really proved you wrong – God is able to change our hearts.
        2 Cor. 5:17

        But we (Christians) still have to keep putting off the old self and putting on the new self (Colossians 3, Ephesians 4, Romans 6-8) – David has demonstrated that God has poured his grace into his heart by a changed character and desire to see Muslims freed from the bondage of that false religion. Part of his bold and courageous personality is being used by God. Many Muslims have told him that their eyes have been opened to the evil and silly aspects of Islam.

        Like

      • Ken Temple: Maybe according to modern medical determinations – but the modern medical world has also taken homosexuality and Transgenderism, etc. off its list of mental illnesses and emotional illness.

        But ‘modern medical determinations’ have not taken off psychopathy from it’s list of mental illnesses.

        Temple: we all retain aspects of our personality and upbring even after we are saved by Christ – true Christians are growing.

        So which aspects of psychopathy has Wood retained according to you?

        Temple: David has demonstrated that God has poured his grace into his heart by a changed character and desire to see Muslims freed from the bondage of that false religion.

        Can you name five good things Wood has said about Islam?

        Like

  2. David Wood can’t live without Islam

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Carl wrote:

    Meh… Pascal’s wager in action. Sorry, but a new person in Christ is not supposed to criticize in impunity the way of Submission (al-Islam) and their prophets.

    Why not?

    As Jordan Peterson says, “in order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive”

    https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2020/06/27/because-in-order-to-be-able-to-think-you-have-to-risk-being-offensive-jordan-peterson/

    In the west there is freedom of speech to criticize an idea or philosophy or religion.

    If Christianity is true, and it is ( 500-600 years established before Islam) – then Islam, by logic and reason is false. We already have the proper respect for the true prophets. Prophets and Apostles ceased with the death of the apostles of Jesus around 96 – 100 AD.

    Islam has many ideas that deserve to be criticized. (Jihad, aggressive warfare (Harb), Caliphate, Sharia, imposint that upon the rest of the world by force, etc. – Surah 9:1-5; 9:28-29; also the claim to be God’s Word, yet making so many errors of history and science. (denial of established history, Surah 4:157; not understanding the doctrine of the Trinity or Deity of Christ – etc. other really goofy mistakes that details of verses in the Qur’an are brought out by details in the Hadith. Saying that women are deficient in their minds and a court case has to have 2 women’s testimony as equal to one man, etc.

    Christianity (both OT and NT) already has a doctrine of submission to God – see Romans 12:1-2; James 4:7 – we don’t need a false religion to come along 500-600 years later telling us how to submit and then making war on everybody just because we did not submit to you.

    Like

    • Plus Islam anachronistically re-interpreted all of the previous prophets and the result was mixing true things with false things, resulting in lies being told about the prophets and apostles before Muhammad.

      Like

    • Also, a new person in Christ by definition will criticize any other religion that comes along later in history and claims to be the real thing, since that entails by definition what being “in Christ” is – the truth of all the NT.

      Jesus said, “beware of the false prophets” – Matthew chapter 24

      2 Peter chapter 2 ; 1 and 2 Timothy, I John 4, etc. – beware of false prophets and false teachers

      Like

      • 2 Peter; 1 and 2 Timothy

        All forgeries. What a bizarre religion.

        Like

      • No, they are God-breathed.

        Like

      • “Beware” is not the same as “criticize”. If “cave canem” means beware the dog, does that mean you immediately make reports on *all* the dog’s activities to its master?
        Your faith (or your subjective representation of such) relies on councils upon councils of bishops who formed the canon into one Biblios.
        First step is question what you have read from books and heard from others. If something is inconsistent, irrational, or otherwise challenges your view(s), put that to the test. For example: the sun setting at mud-colored water, that is Kuruš (Cyrus the Great) witnessing a sunset facing west of the Caspian Sea. Rely only on modern astronomy and you will get confused more easily.
        Regarding false prophets, I didn’t see any ravening wolves during the cleansing of the Kaaba, establishment of universities in Iberia, the Islamic Golden Age, etc. Remember who sparked your Renaissance—remnants of the disbanded Knights Templar with its treasures of knowledge from the Islamic world and beyond.
        “Who is the liar who denies…” is refuted by the Qur’an statements calling Jesus as al-Masih. The Recitation (claimed authroship by the one True God, transmitted by mouths of many believers) is not to be compared to a series of Jewish books, evangel and letters compiled into one Book. “Woe to them write with their hands, claiming from the God, to traffic with coin…”
        I will happy to give you my view of the Kristos if you wish. All of the New Testament has little truth that applies today than it was almost 2000 years ago. What is the product of the 40,000+ Christian sects? Confusion.

        Like

    • 500-600 years established before Islam
      This’s really not an argument. I told you this’s the outcome we would expect from David’s school. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Other ridiculous claims that Islam makes that deserve to be questioned and even criticized:

    “First, Muslims argue that Muhammad’s miraculous scientific insights are proof that his message was from God. The obvious problem with this argument is that both the Qur’an and the Hadith are filled with scientific inaccuracies. In Sahih Al-Bukhari 547, Muhammad tells his followers that if a fly falls into their drink, they should dip the fly into the drink, because one of the fly’s wings has a disease, while the other wing has the cure for the disease. While it’s true that flies spread disease, they certainly don’t have the cures for these diseases on their wings.

    Muhammad told his followers that Adam was 90 feet tall, and that people have been shrinking since the time of Adam.v Yet it’s physically impossible for a human being to be anywhere near that tall, and we have no evidence that humans have been shrinking since the time of Adam.

    The Qur’an tells us that the sun sets in a pool of murky water (18:86), and that stars are missiles that God uses to shoot demons when they try to sneak into Heaven (67:5). In Surah 27, ants talk to Solomon. In Surah 86, we learn that semen is produced between the ribs and the spine. According to several verses in the Qur’an, humans come from a clot of blood. All of these claims are scientifically false. ”

    https://www.namb.net/apologetics/resource/was-muhammad-a-prophet/

    Like

    • Yeah, the sun stood still, and the moon stopped.

      The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day.

      Liked by 1 person

      • That passage from Joshua is the combination of “phenonomical language” (how nature and creation appears to the human eye and experience, as in “the sun rises and sets”, etc.)
        and with God’s miraculous power.

        Like

      • @ Ken
        “phenonomical language” (how nature and creation appears to the human eye and experience, as in “the sun rises and sets”

        Exactly! But you don’t want to apply it to Quran, because you have agendas.

        Like

    • “The Qur’an tells us that the sun sets in a pool of murky water”
      Although this stupid claim got refuted big time, for you information, Ken; this language got used in the Hebrew bible. But you’re not aware of the original language of your scripture as most christians.

      Liked by 1 person

    • If you allege the Qur’anic verses as scientifically false, show us scientific papers discrediting them instead of an apologist’s notes!
      Some of them are not to be taken literally. Do your research first, then take both positive and negative views into account. Don’t forget a Classical Arabic dictionary “if you are in doubt…”

      Like

  5. Maybe the nuttiest of all –
    In Sahih Al-Bukhari 547, Muhammad tells his followers that if a fly falls into their drink, they should dip the fly into the drink, because one of the fly’s wings has a disease, while the other wing has the cure for the disease. While it’s true that flies spread disease, they certainly don’t have the cures for these diseases on their wings.

    Like

    • It’s very very hard to take christians’ objections seriously. I mean the core of your religion is that God was a baby who needed his Mom to change his diaper. For you this’s how to make sense of this world and why we are here, yet christians shamelessly have the time to make stupid objection against Islam by that hadith all the sudden! Deal with the nuttiness of your religion first, man! Why would you waste our time with these really stupid objections!?

      Moreover, what’s exactly your problem with that hadith? Doesn’t Jesus tell you that eating with dirty hands is ok because “Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them“?
      Try to take Jesus’ advice seriously especially with this time of Coronavirus if you dare, Ken!

      Like

      • So, you think Jesus meant that all physical hygiene is wrong?

        That is not what Jesus is saying in Matthew 15 and Mark 7.

        He is saying that you follow all those physical rituals of washing your hands and bodies and still have spiritual defilement in your heart. The spiritual defilements of evil thoughts in the heart – arrogance, hatred, hypocrisy, lust, sexual immorality, jealousy, foolishness, greed, malice , adulteries, murders, thefts, envy, slander, etc. – those are the things that defile (spiritual defilement of original sin that makes you guilty before God and sends you to hell – see also Matthew 5:21-30).

        Mark 7:14-23

        Read the entire passage and meditate on it, with Matthew 5:21-30
        Mark 9:45-48 also.

        Abdullah1234 wrote:
        “Doesn’t Jesus tell you that eating with dirty hands is ok because “Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them“?”

        the answer is what I wrote above and also, you left off the rest of the verse:

        Mark 7:15
        15 there is nothing outside the man which can defile him [spiritually] if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile [spiritually] the man.

        By leaving out the rest of the verse, and also the whole context of Mark 7:1-23, you have misunderstood and skewed the passage.

        This is the great problem with Islam – most of the emphasis is on external obedience to external laws, while those laws and rules can never cleanse the heart from internal sins that defile and make all of humans guilty and on our way to hell, unless one realizes this and turns to the Jesus Al Masih of the New Testament (Deity, incarnation, eternality, substitutionary ransom atonement -Mark 10:45, resurrection) to save them from their internal guilt and defilement. (repent and believe – Mark 1:15)

        Like

  6. Carl wrote:

    Your faith (or your subjective representation of such) relies on councils upon councils of bishops who formed the canon into one Biblios.

    Wrong. This is the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox understanding of the authority of the councils and church over the canon, but it is not the Protestant understanding of “the canon”. The church or councils did not created the canon, nor did they decide the canon; rather they discerned and discovered what was already canon from the first century apostolic witness. The “Canon”, as originally understood, was a “criterion”, “standard”, “rule”, “law”, “measuring rod” and described the existence of books and scrolls that already existed and were “God breathed” at the time of writing, from the apostles and their disciples / helpers. Much like the meaning of the Arabic, Furqan فرقان (criterion, standard, rule) and Qanoon قانون (law) – in fact the Arabic Qanoon is linguistically related to the Hebrew word that is the background of the Greek word, “kanon” κανων, (Principle, rule, law). The 27 books of the NT existed as “God-breathed” / inspired as soon as they were written, therefore they were already “canon”; they were already the criterion, principle. The historical process of discerning, witnessing to them, and collecting the different scrolls written to different areas and putting them under one “book cover” then later became the meaning of “Canon” (the list of inspired books), but they have self-authenticating power, not dependent on councils and church authority. Councils and church authority discerned and discovered what was already truth, inspired, “God-breathed”, apostolic.

    For really understanding this issue, I recommend:
    Michael Kruger, “Canon Revisited” and “The Question of Canon”
    David King and William Webster, “Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of our Faith” ( 3 volumes)
    Keith Matthison, “The Shape of Sola Scriptura”
    James R. White, “Scripture Alone”
    Don Kistler, Editor, “Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible”
    R. C. Sproul, “Scriptura Alone”

    Like

    • This is where the rift is: God should’ve manifested as Scripture descending from heaven, which doesn’t make sense.
      God > “Logos” > witness(es) > scribe(s) > scripture(s) > canon
      Remove multiple witnesses attestation (and probably canon), that is gnosis in a nutshell. Reading into the text, taking verses out of context, all that stuff: creative power even if it disagrees with canon, dogma, etc.
      Oral transmission is God > “Logos”/“Kalima” > messenger > messenger 2 > … > messenger n > scribe(s) > scripture(s)
      Then again, every person have their own concept of God.
      Thank you for your book recommendations; I now know that Protestantism is the daughter of the Pauline ekklesia. Biblios as a while calling itself God’s Word collapses on one premise—how can it be the entire message of one God? There are words from Jewish prophets, the evangel from differing points of view (some impossible to harmonize), epistles from the faithful, ending with, an ambiguous vision from one John of Patmos.
      If you would have caught a glimpse of ancient Egyptian mythology and history, Greek philosophers, Kabbalah, dharma, etc. the Biblios will reveal one level of understanding, going up higher with more gnosis. That is if you set canon and preconceived dogma aside for one bit.

      Like

  7. Carl wrote:

    “Who is the liar who denies…” is refuted by the Qur’an statements calling Jesus as al-Masih.

    You left out the rest of the verse and the context.

    The passage does not mean just calling Jesus Al Masih, المسیح (the Messiah) as if phonetic sounds have inherent power, rather denying the significance of “the Messiah” and the eternal Father and Son relationship (pointing to the Deity of Christ and the Trinity – see the rest of the verse and context, along with John 1:1-18 and 2 John 7 – denying the truth of John 1:1-5 and 1:14 – “the Word became flesh” – the one who fulfilled the OT prophecies, in his nature and person (eternal Son of God who became flesh / human ) and was the suffering servant of Isaiah 52:13-15 to 53:1-12. (final atoning sacrifice for sin, substitutionary atonement) (1 John chapter 4)

    22 Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. 23 Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also. 1 John 2:22-23

    Like

    • In my current knowledge, if you presuppose the deity of Christ and Trinity while believing in this verse of the epistle, you’re probably following al-Masih ad-Dajjal. The hadiths say he wll claim to be al-Masih and the God.
      Appealing to the Greek, which is philosophically either atheist or polytheist in origin (depending on who you like to quote), would strip off of Semitic lingustics and philosophy, which is of a collective nature. Pater and Ioun are but how the early Christians call the God and Logos/Khristos (creative power of God/title, there were many messiahs). Jesus himself is not equal to the Logos but rather the “bearer of the Logos” or Evangel—Kalimantullah. He brought down the Sophia and other teachings to man.
      Apply the atonement sacrifice concept today and it has no effect—placebo effect. The lost sheep of Yakub would’ve been in heaven (free from samsāra) almost 2000 years ago if Jesus died for the sins of Israel. But most humanity is still in the level of minerals (ignorant) and yet to ascend to a Christlike state. Barking dogma will not help, just goes to show how more secular are the Protestants are, sacrificing the experience of spiritual union with God for intellectual dishonesty.

      Like

      • Carl wrote:
        In my current knowledge, if you presuppose the deity of Christ and Trinity while believing in this verse of the epistle, you’re probably following al-Masih ad-Dajjal.

        “in my current knowledge” = you have much to learn about the NT, and the doctrines of the Deity of Christ, the Trinity, the atonement, and early church history. Your understanding of the canon demonstrates that you have gotten your knowledge from bad and incomplete and skewed sources.

        You have to read the entire context of the passage (1 John 2:18-28) and the context of the whole epistle. Read the whole book of 5 chapters, and 2 John and the Gospel of John (22 chapters) all the way through in one sitting. The whole argument of the book/ epistle of 1 John is the message about “the Father and the Son” (1 John 2:22) “This is the anti-Christ (Dajjal دجّال )

        1 John 1:1-4 is all about the incarnation of the Word (the author is pointing to his other book, the Gospel according to John 1:1-5; 1:14-18; 20:28; 5:17-18; 8:24; 10:30, etc. – the Deity of Christ and the incarnation)
        and the substitutionary atoning death of the Son ( 1 John 4:10)

        These are the root principles that Islam denies, so it is Islam that is actually a philosophy / religion that is at root, an Al-Dajjal (Anti-Christ) principle.

        Like

  8. 1 John is not about “the Father and the Son” ( 1 John 1:1-4 and 2:22)
    but
    also about “the Spirit”

    1 John 4:13 and 3:24

    So, the Trinity (the 3 persons of the One true God) is affirmed there also, so you are wrong because you have twisted the passage in 1 John 2.

    Athanasius used these passages to explain the process of believers sanctification (being conformed to the image of Christ = growing in piety, holiness, godliness.) (page 71, John Piper, Contending for Our All, chapter 1 on Athanasius.)

    You can find Piper’s book and lecture at DesiringGod.org

    Like

    • Typo, I left out a key word: ( I am getting old and noticing that in typing, I leave out words like “not” and “only” sometimes . . . sigh . . . drat !)

      1 John is not only about “the Father and the Son” ( 1 John 1:1-4 and 2:22)
      but
      also about “the Spirit”

      1 John 4:13 and 3:24

      Like

    • You didn’t have to reply like that. Apologetics and exegeses are dangerous routes of study—even if one is religiously bigoted.
      Behold someone who is not Christlike. Come back when you have sincerely felt God within you.
      Eventually, religious differences will be cast aside and there’s transcendence.
      I’ll be at my sancutary. Basileus within.

      Like

      • You didn’t have to reply like that.

        What do you mean?
        I answered your charges
        1. You wrote that
        “you’re probably following al-Masih ad-Dajjal.” and by judging the Deity of Christ and the Trinity as presuppositions rather than proper interpretations of all the relevant texts of the NT.

        It was you who made the personal charge first. Ad hominem

        2. I demonstrated that
        are mis-interpreting the passage in 1 John.

        Apologetics and exegeses are dangerous routes of study—

        how so?
        Are they not the proper sciences of interpreting the text (exegesis) and defending (apologetics) the truth of NT Christianity?

        . . . even if one is religiously bigoted.

        Christianity and it’s defense is a matter of truth, logic, and history vs. Islam. If the NT is true, then logically and automatically, Islam is false. There is no bigotry by using thinking processes of logic, reason, truth, history, and exegesis of the NT text.

        Behold someone who is not Christlike.

        What do you mean? Jesus did not defend Himself and His teachings as the Way, the Truth, and the Life in the presence of false teachers, like the Pharisees, Jewish leaders who rejected His Messiahship? To rebuke falsehood is being Christlike. “speaking the truth in love” is Christlike.

        Come back when you have sincerely felt God within you.

        Already have, and therefore I engage with you and others, as much as possible here.

        Eventually, religious differences will be cast aside and there’s transcendence.

        Are you saying that both Christianity and Islam are wrong and you are offering some other kind of higher truth called “transcendence” ?

        I’ll be at my sancutary. Basileus within.

        I am guessing that by using something close to the Greek word for “king” Βασιλευς (Basileus) or maybe you meant “kingdom” (Βασιλεια) –
        are you claiming to be “king within” (autonomous) or possessing the kingdom of God inside of you ?

        Like

  9. Kmak wrote:

    Can you name five good things Wood has said about Islam?

    If by good you mean true, there are many more than five. He has exposed it as a false religion many times, much more than five.

    If it is true, then it is good.

    Like

    • Temple: If by good you mean true…

      No, by good I mean positive qualities.

      Temple: If it is true, then it is good.

      The Holocaust is true. Therefore, the Holocaust is good. You are not very good at logic.

      Like

      • Exposing the Holocaust was good, but it itself was evil.
        Exposing Islam as false is a good thing.

        Like

      • Temple: Exposing the Holocaust was good, but it itself was evil.
        Exposing Islam as false is a good thing.

        I asked you specifically to list five good things Wood has said about Islam. The fact that you can’t name even one good thing Wood has said about Islam speaks volumes. Both of you are trash.

        Like

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

%d bloggers like this: