First of all, belief in anything religious at most is not imperative of evidence as I observes but rather through emotional attachment that is, influence. In the case of Christianity, whether there is evidence or not, faith comes initially through the process called calling as it say:

1 Corinthians 1:26-29

[26]For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

[27]But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

[28]And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

[29]That no flesh should glory in his presence.

Who are the ones called? Those who are predestinated to be children of God.

Ephesians 1:5

[5]Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Romans 8:30

[30]Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

How are we called? Through Jesus Christ calling us through our preachers. We hear jesus voice through them thus through it we feel an emotional attachment. We become influenced, then, afterwards we become christians.

2 Corinthians 13:3

[3]Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking by me, which to you-ward is not weak, but is mighty in you.

John 10:3-5,14,16

[3]To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. 

[4]And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. 

[5]And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers. 

[14]I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. 

[16]And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. 

Thus regarding evidence, it comes secondary to the calling. In cases wherein there is no evidence, calling is a confirmation to its reliability. Now that I’ve shown you the case for Christianity, is it indeed true that Jesus didn’t fulfill the prophecies meant for the messiah? Let us examine the jewish argument and show them how that they are wrong.

  • My answer in this format interjected within the issues.

One of the most common questions we receive at Aish.com is: “Why don’t Jews believe in Jesus?” Let’s understand why – not to disparage other religions, but rather to clarify the Jewish position.

Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:

  1. Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.
  2. Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
  3. Biblical verses “referring” to Jesus are mistranslations.
  4. Jewish belief is based on national revelation.

But first, some background: What exactly is the Messiah?

The word “Messiah” is an English rendering of the Hebrew word Mashiach, which means “anointed.” It usually refers to a person initiated into God’s service by being anointed with oil. (Exodus 29:7, 1-Kings 1:39, 2-Kings 9:3)

(1) Jesus Did Not Fulfill the Messianic Prophecies

What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? One of the central themes of biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. (Isaiah 2:1-4, 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34)

Specifically, the Bible says he will:

  1. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).

  • Let’s quote:
  • Ezekiel 37:26-28
  • [26]Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
  • [27]My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
  • [28]And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.

  • Nowhere did it specifically says that building the Third Temple is one of his mission. Tabernacle or sanctuary was nowhere to be interpreted as the Third Temple. It is not literal tabernacle/sanctuary or the physical temple of Solomon rebuilt. How come? A new covenant was said to be coming:
  • Jeremiah 31:31-32
  • [31]Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
  • [32]Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

  • When was that covenant? Obviously during the coming of the messiah as it say:
  • Daniel 9:24-27
  • [24]Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
  • [25]Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
  • [26]And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
  • [27]And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

  • As you can see, 70weeks would materialized. 69weeks would transpire since the command to rebuild and restore Jerusalem and this happened probably since Cyrus commanded the temple to be rebuilt. After the 62th week the messiah would be cut off most likely killed. The end of this is the last week wherein war and desolation was expected.
  • The question is, when did this all happen? When was there a messiah cut off close to the war and desolation?
  • War and desolation happened since the 70AD war instigated by Gen Titus. The closest event wherein an alleged messiah was cut off is during when Jesus was killed. So when was the new covenant initiated? Obviously, during Jesus time as logically, the only event yet that happened close to war and desolation. Therefore jesus is the true messiah as expressed by this reality. In essence, tabernacle/sanctuary must be interpreted by this new covenant we see as having laws. Tabernacle/sanctuary in the new covenant is the church of God–the people.
  • How about the covenant of peace?
  • The answer can be seen in the revelation of John–the millenial peace of israel after jesus comes to reign as king wherein Jerusalem would be the city of the saints. After this millennial peace would be Armageddon war, wherein all nation would battle israel–a breaking of peace then afterwards the eternal peace that continues to eternity. 
  • After Armageddon war, this would happens: eternal peace for Israel specifically, Jerusalem as one God (the unified godhead) or ONE YHWH (explanation later) reigns in it as king.
  • Zechariah 14:9
  • [9]And YHWH shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be ONE YHWH and his name one.
  • Zechariah 14:16-21
  • [16]And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
  • [17]And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
  • [18]And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
  • [19]This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
  • [20]In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD’S house shall be like the bowls before the altar.
  • [21]Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts.

  • That is only possible after the Armageddon war. 

  1. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).

  • Isaiah 43:5-6
  • [5]Fear not: for I am with thee: I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west;
  • [6]I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth;

  • Nothing in those verses suggested the intervention of the messiah.

  1. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: “Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore.” (Isaiah 2:4)

  • This is a misinterpretation! How sure are you that you have interpreted the scriptures correctly? 
  • Isaiah 2:2-4
  • [2]And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
  • [3]And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
  • [4]And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

  • As you can see my premise how that the new covenant is the final ground for interpretation. I’ve shown you how that is relative to the gospel of Christ. And in the gospel, the lord’s house is the church wherein inside it war is eradicated but instead a conversion to something peaceful.

  1. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: “God will be King over all the world – on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One” (Zechariah 14:9).

  • Same as above. The gospel will be the final ground of interpretation for to make a contextual scripture. 
  • Zechariah 14:9
  • [9]And YHWH shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be ONE YHWH and his name one.

  • IN THAT DAY THERE SHALL BE ONE YHWH implies that there were more than one YHWH.
  • Firstly, Jesus admitted to be the I AM as it say:
  • John 8:57-58
  • [57]Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
  • [58]Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. 

  • Note the words used: I AM and not I WAS, thus confirming he too, is the I AM. Likewise, he too is YHWH as it say:
  • Zechariah 14:3-4,9
  • [3]Then shall YHWH go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
  • [4]And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
  • [9]And YHWH shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one YHWH and his name one.

  • As you can see YHWH would come down to earth and that he would make one YHWH. We don’t believe God almighty himself would come down to earth but through a representative–Jesus himself being the I AM and as he once said: “he that hath seen me hath seen the father”.
  • So who is the ONE YHWH that would be king over the earth? The collective unity of God and Jesus. That as utilizing the contextual participation of the gospel as the final ground for interpretation. 

    If an individual fails to fulfill even one of these conditions, then he cannot be the Messiah.

    Because no one has ever fulfilled the Bible’s description of this future King, Jews still await the coming of the Messiah. All past Messianic claimants, including Jesus of Nazareth, Bar Cochba and Shabbtai Tzvi have been rejected.

    Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming. Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright; in the Bible no concept of a second coming exists.

    (2) Jesus Did Not Embody the Personal Qualifications of Messiah

    A. Messiah as Prophet

    The Messiah will become the greatest prophet in history, second only to Moses. (Targum – Isaiah 11:2; Maimonides – Teshuva 9:2)

    Prophecy can only exist in Israel when the land is inhabited by a majority of world Jewry, a situation which has not existed since 300 BCE. During the time of Ezra, when the majority of Jews remained in Babylon, prophecy ended upon the death of the last prophets – Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.

    Jesus appeared on the scene approximately 350 years after prophecy had ended, and thus could not be a prophet.

    • ASSUMPTION. Nothing to that effect, was spoken to that regard. And regarding sources other than the bible, we don’t accept other religious books than the bible as stated:
    • ISAIAH 34:16
    • Seek ye from the SEPHER OF YHWH (writing) and read, none of it shall fail, none wants REUTH (Additional one)…his spirit it hath gathered them.

    • Historically, no other religious books fit this description than biblical manuscripts. That as inclusive of the new covenant and its laws I mentioned earlier bec if this fits only the jewish scriptures, doesnt it need an additional one, that is, the prophesied new covenant and its laws? Of course, it needs it. Having this reality, the jewish scriptures cannot be the fulfillment of the one sepher of YHWH. It could only be the bible. Therefore the bible is the writing of God.

    B. Descendant of David

    Many prophetic passages speak of a descendant of King David who will rule Israel during the age of perfection. (Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5)

    The Messiah must be descended on his father’s side from King David (see Genesis 49:10, Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Ezekiel 34:23-24). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father – and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father’s side from King David. (1)

    According to Jewish sources, the Messiah will be born of human parents and possess normal physical attributes like other people. He will not be a demi-god, (2) nor will he possess supernatural qualities.

    • I ask again, did you correctly interpreted the scriptures correctly? The messiah would come from his father’s side. Let’s quote their sources:
    • Genesis 49:10
    • [10]The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.

    • Obviously, it is interpreted that way bec customary genealogy then was through the father but remember what I keep reiterating that the new covenant and its laws would be the final ground for interpretation? We believe that is the gospel which has been the abrogating part of the scriptures. Meaning, the new way of interpretation is a reality now through the gospel. 
    • Next,
    • Isaiah 11:1
    • [1]And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:

    • That stem of Jesse is David and not a patriarchal line.
    • Jeremiah 23:5
    • [5]Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
    • Jeremiah 33:17
    • [17]For thus saith the LORD; David shall never cut off a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;

    • True. But nowhere was it said that kings are the descendants of the messiah. 
    • Ezekiel 34:23-24
    • [23]And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.
    • [24]And I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the LORD have spoken it.

    • Thank you for not confirming anything.

    C. Torah Observance

    The Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)

    Throughout the Christian “New Testament,” Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. For example, John 9:14 records that Jesus made a paste in violation of Shabbat, which caused the Pharisees to say (verse 16), “He does not observe Shabbat!”

    • Let’s quote:
    • Deuteronomy 13:1-4
    • [1]If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
    • [2]And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
    • [3]Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
    • [4]Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.

    • Thank you again for not confirming anything. Nothing that say the Torah is binding forever in fact, this is a selective reality bec the verses speaks of itself and not for the whole torah. Deut 13:1-4 is binding forever yet only for itself and not speaking of the whole torah. Jesus abrogated the torah as it say in Luke 16:16.

    (3) Mistranslated Verses “Referring” to Jesus

    Biblical verses can only be understood by studying the original Hebrew text – which reveals many discrepancies in the Christian translation.

    A. Virgin Birth

    The Christian idea of a virgin birth is derived from the verse in Isaiah 7:14 describing an “alma” as giving birth. The word “alma” has always meant a young woman, but Christian theologians came centuries later and translated it as “virgin.” This accords Jesus’ birth with the first century pagan idea of mortals being impregnated by gods.

    • Even new testament passage never specifically stated any virgin birth. 

    B. Suffering Servant

    Christianity claims that Isaiah chapter 53 refers to Jesus, as the “suffering servant.”

    In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews (“Israel”) are regarded as one unit. Throughout Jewish scripture, Israel is repeatedly called, in the singular, the “Servant of God” (see Isaiah 43:8). In fact, Isaiah states no less than 11 times in the chapters prior to 53 that the Servant of God is Israel.

    When read correctly, Isaiah 53 clearly [and ironically] refers to the Jewish people being “bruised, crushed and as sheep brought to slaughter” at the hands of the nations of the world. These descriptions are used throughout Jewish scripture to graphically describe the suffering of the Jewish people (see Psalm 44).

    Isaiah 53 concludes that when the Jewish people are redeemed, the nations will recognize and accept responsibility for the inordinate suffering and death of the Jews.

    • Indeed, at some point, Ezekiel or isaiah expressed the death of Israel as a nation then afterwards revived. It could be reflected as the reality in Isaiah 53. It could possibly be talking about the death of Israel but then nothing is confirmatory of it bec matter of fact is, it could be speaking about the messiah. As for me, I prefer the latter. My evidence for it is this:
    • Daniel 9:24-27
    • [24]Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
    • [25]Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

    • [26]>>>>>And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.<<<<<<

    • [27]And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

    • As you can see, there is a report about a messiah to be cut off before war and desolation. This would happen before the dispersal of Israel and its return to build one kingdom bec after this, there is no more any possibility of desolation in Israel. Whereas the cutting off of the messiah is prior to desolation.
    • Ezekiel 37:21-22
    • [21]And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
    • [22]And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:
    • Amos 9:15
    • [15]And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.

    • Why I believe Isaiah 53 speaks of the messiah? Bec in the abovementioned passages it implied the cutting off of the messiah happened before war and desolation and this desolation specifically speaks of the desolation prior to israel’s reestablishment as one nation that happened 1947 or 1948 bec after this there is no more desolation as implied “they shall no more be pulled out of their land”. Therefore the cutting off of the messiah happened before 1947 and before 70AD war and desolation. This only points to no other than the crucifixion of Jesus bec there was no other messiah killed before war and desolation other than Jesus Christ.
    • So why do i believe isaiah 53 speaks of the messiah?
    • Bec its a reality, the messiah was killed in the person of jesus christ.

    (4) Jewish Belief is Based Solely on National Revelation

    Throughout history, thousands of religions have been started by individuals, attempting to convince people that he or she is God’s true prophet. But personal revelation is an extremely weak basis for a religion because one can never know if it is indeed true. Since others did not hear God speak to this person, they have to take his word for it. Even if the individual claiming personal revelation performs miracles, they do not prove  he is a genuine prophet. All the miracles show – assuming they are genuine – is that he has certain powers. It has nothing to do with his claim of prophecy.

    Judaism, unique among all of the world’s major religions, does not rely on “claims of miracles” as the basis for its religion. In fact, the Bible says that God sometimes grants the power of “miracles” to charlatans, in order to test Jewish loyalty to the Torah (Deut. 13:4).

    Of the thousands of religions in human history, only Judaism bases its belief on national revelation – i.e. God speaking to the entire nation. If God is going to start a religion, it makes sense He’ll tell everyone, not just one person.

    Maimonides states (Foundations of Torah, ch. 8):

    The Jews did not believe in Moses, our teacher, because of the miracles he performed. Whenever anyone’s belief is based on seeing miracles, he has lingering doubts, because it is possible the miracles were performed through magic or sorcery. All of the miracles performed by Moses in the desert were because they were necessary, and not as proof of his prophecy.

    What then was the basis of [Jewish] belief? The Revelation at Mount Sinai, which we saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears, not dependent on the testimony of others… as it says, “Face to face, God spoke with you…” The Torah also states: “God did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us – who are all here alive today.” (Deut. 5:3)

    Judaism is not miracles. It is the personal eyewitness experience of every man, woman and child, standing at Mount Sinai 3,300 years ago.

    Further reading: “Did God Speak at Mount Sinai?”

    Waiting for the Messiah

    The world is in desperate need of Messianic redemption. To the extent that we are aware of the problems of society, is the extent we will yearn for redemption. As the Talmud says, one of the first questions asked of a Jew on Judgment Day is: “Did you yearn for the arrival of the Messiah?”

    How can we hasten the coming of the Messiah? The best way is to love all humanity generously, to keep the mitzvot of the Torah (as best we can), and to encourage others to do so as well.

    Despite the gloom, the world does seem headed toward redemption. One apparent sign is that the Jewish people have returned to the Land of Israel and made it bloom again. Additionally, a major movement is afoot of young Jews returning to Torah tradition.

    The Messiah can come any day, and it all depends on our actions. God is ready when we are. For as King David says: “Redemption will come today – if you hearken to His voice.”

    Lastly, if ever that after discussing it yet nothing is resolved regarding this issue. If we cannot resolve if Jesus is messiah or not. If by a fraction of misinterpretation, nothing is resolved through biblical evidence, prophecy and historicity. There is still one way for you to believe Jesus is messiah that is through supernatural means termed as calling i emphasized early on. However faithful you’re to Judaism, if god calls you in the christian faith, rest assured you will believe Jesus is the messiah as i reiterated, evidence is not primary, the calling is.

    May you be called to this faith.



    There is no ayat which directly says that Islam is terrorism, on the other hand many ayats supports logic or reason to say Islam is terrorism. Logic or reason is an integral part of Islam so its best that we utilize this aspect in making our conclusion as a Muslim site confirms:

    Muslim scholars throughout history have undertaken the challenge of reconciling reason (aql) and revelation (naql), the divine scripture with the findings of natural law and science. The health and well-being of Muslim societies depends upon the proper balance of religion and science such that these two great bodies of knowledge and truth perform their necessary social functions in harmony with each other.

    Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

    الْعَقْلُ شَرْطٌ فِي مَعْرِفَةِ الْعُلُومِ وَكَمَالِ وَصَلَاحِ الْأَعْمَالِ وَبِهِ يَكْمُلُ الْعِلْمُ وَالْعَمَلُ لَكِنَّهُ لَيْسَ مُسْتَقِلًّا بِذَلِكَ بَلْ هُوَ غَرِيزَةٌ فِي النَّفْسِ وَقُوَّةٌ فِيهَا بِمَنْزِلَةِ قُوَّةِ الْبَصَرِ الَّتِي فِي الْعَيْنِ فَإِنْ اتَّصَلَ بِهِ نُورُ الْإِيمَانِ وَالْقُرْآنِ كَانَ كَنُورِ الْعَيْنِ إذَا اتَّصَلَ بِهِ نُورُ الشَّمْسِ وَالنَّارِ وَإِنْ انْفَرَدَ بِنَفْسِهِ لَمْ يُبْصِرْ الْأُمُورَ الَّتِي يَعْجِزُ وَحْدَهُ عَنْ دَرْكِهَا … فَالْأَحْوَالُ الْحَاصِلَةُ مَعَ عَدَمِ الْعَقْلِ نَاقِصَةٌ وَالْأَقْوَالُ الْمُخَالِفَةُ لِلْعَقْلِ بَاطِلَةٌ

    Reason is a requirement for acquiring knowledge and performing righteous deeds, through which knowledge and deeds are perfected, but it is not enough on its own. Rather, it is a faculty of the soul and an ability like the ability within the eye to see. If it is connected with the light of faith and the Quran, then it is like the eye receiving the light of the sun and torch. If it is left to itself, it cannot gain insight into matters that it cannot know alone… Thus, the circumstances resulting from the denial of reason are defective, and ideas that contradict reason are false.

    Source: Majmūʻ al-Fatāwá 3/338

    And he also writes:

    مَا جَاءَ عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كُلُّهُ حَقٌّ يُصَدِّقُ بَعْضُهُ بَعْضًا وَهُوَ مُوَافِقٌ لِفِطْرَةِ الْخَلَائِقِ وَمَا جُعِلَ فِيهِمْ مِنْ الْعُقُولِ الصَّرِيحَةِ والقصود الصَّحِيحَة لَا يُخَالِفُ الْعَقْلَ الصَّرِيحَ وَلَا الْقَصْدَ الصَّحِيحَ وَلَا الْفِطْرَةَ الْمُسْتَقِيمَةَ وَلَا النَّقْلَ الصَّحِيحَ الثَّابِتَ عَنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

    Every reliable narration from the Prophet is the truth and confirms one another. It agrees with the natural instinct of creatures, sound reason that has been placed within them, and noble purposes. It cannot contradict sound reason, nor a noble purpose, nor an upright instinct, nor an authentic and established revelation from the Prophet.

    Source: Majmūʻ al-Fatāwá 6/580

    Indeed, one of the trustworthy methods by which a narration falsely or mistakenly ascribed to the Prophet can be recognized is whether or not it contradicts sound reason.

    Ibn Al-Jawzi writes:

    إِذَا رَأَيْتَ الْحَدِيثَ يُبَايِنُ الْمَعْقُولَ أَوْ يُخَالِفُ الْمَنْقُولَ أَوْ يُنَاقِضُ الْأُصُولَ فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّهُ مَوْضُوعٌ

    If you find a prophetic narration disagreeing with sound reason, contradicting established revelation, or conflicting with the principles, then know that it is inauthentic.

    Source: Tadrīb al-Rāwī 1/327

    Conversely, Allah has blamed those who forsake the use of their God-given reason. Irrationality is the characteristic of unbelief, idolatry, and hypocrisy, as the betrayal of reason hinders the ability of people to recognize the value of religion or causes them to cynically abuse religion for some worldly purpose.

    Allah said:

    وَإِذَا نَادَيْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ اتَّخَذُوهَا هُزُوًا وَلَعِبًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لَّا يَعْقِلُونَ

    When you call to prayer, they take it in ridicule and amusement. That is because they are people who will not reason.

    Surat Al-Ma’idah 5:58

    And Allah said:

    أَتَأْمُرُونَ النَّاسَ بِالْبِرِّ وَتَنسَوْنَ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَأَنتُمْ تَتْلُونَ الْكِتَابَ ۚ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ

    Do you order righteousness of the people and forget yourselves while you recite the Scripture? Then will you not reason?

    Surat Al-Baqarah 2:44

    You have to accustom first yourself with how I concluded that Islam is terrorism. Please read this blog first for the premise of this conclusion:


    Now for the logical concept, let me pose these questions?

    • I follow nothing, except what is revealed to me. Truly I fear, if I should rebel against my Lord, the chastisement of a dreadful day.’ S. 10:15 Arberry

    Now for the logical conclusion, what is Islam? Based on the aforementioned Q & A, it is conclusive to say, Islam is killing people through transgression of the law, including innocent people if by the leader’s decision, they are not innocent bec it is an Islamic principle that transgression of the law is a good thing as exemplified by Muhammad’s murder of Banu Quraisha.

    That as by the ruling of logic.



    Many people regarded Muhammad as a pedophile or sexual pervert yet that is an ignorant analysis bec as provisional, there is no certain Islamic text that supports this idea. Phedophilia or sexual perversion is a psychological disorder and to say, Muhammad is a pedophile is unfair as there is no sufficient fact supporting it. Marrying children and having sexual relationship with them must not be seen as pedophilia provided it is cultural or in the case of Muhammad is a sanction from an assumed deity, Allah. So we must be careful in accusing anyone of pedophilia. Muhammad sexual affair to nine-year old Aisha must not be concluded as pedophilia but as submission to Allah. In this case, it was faith and not sexual perversion. Indeed, Muhammad sexually consummated the marriage with Aisha when she was nine-years old as it say:

    Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated that the Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) married her when she was six years old, and he consummated her in marriage when she was nine years old. Then she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death). [2]

    Khadijah died three years before the Prophet (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) departed to Madina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old. [3]

    Urwa narrated: The Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years. [4]

    Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old. [5]

    Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. [6]

    Six-year old Aisha was already at the onset of adulthood as Islamic sources claimed bec the only way two persons are married is when they are adults as a muslim apologist say:

    Critics allege that Aisha was just six years old when she was betrothed to Muhammad, himself in his 50s, and only nine when the marriage was consummated. They base this on a saying attributed to Aisha herself (Sahih Bukhari volume 5, book 58, number 234), and the debate on this issue is further complicated by the fact that some Muslims believe this to be a historically accurate account. Although most Muslims would not consider marrying off their nine-year-old daughters, those who accept this saying argue that since the Qur’an states that marriage is void unless entered into by consenting adults, Aisha must have entered puberty early.

    So Aisha was an adult at six years old. See how perverted is the mentality of those proponents of childhood marriages? Though Aisha may be an adult at nine bec she probably and as believed had premature menstruation ordaining her to be at puberty stage yet that is where the problem arises as United Nations released a statement condemning early pregnancies due to health hazard in places like Middle east as it say:

    An excerpt

    In many parts of the developing world, especially in rural areas, girls marry shortly after puberty and are expected to start having children immediately. Although the situation has improved since the early 1980’s, in many areas the majority of girls under 20 years of age are already married and having children. Although many countries have raised the legal age for marriage, this has had little impact on traditional societies where marriage and child-bearing confer “status” on a woman.

    An additional health risk to young mothers is obstructed labor, which occurs when the baby’s head is too big for the orifice of the mother. This provokes vesicovaginal fistulas, especially when an untrained traditional birth attendant forces the baby’s head out unduly. [23]

    There is a medical hazard to early pregnancies. Though Aisha was never pregnant but that imposed other Muslims to have sexual relationships with nine-year olds endangering their health due to early pregnancies. Muhammad is the pattern of conduct for Muslims necessitating premature sexual relationships with nine-year olds resultantly, early pregnancies and now has Middle east plagued by this islamic culture whereas United Nations voçally condemned the practice. 

    The thing is, scientifically, when is the right age to have sex?

    Obviously, bec of health hazard due to early pregnancies, it is advisable to avoid sex at an early age such as nine-years old. Let me quote again:

    An additional health risk to young mothers is obstructed labor, which occurs when the baby’s head is too big for the orifice of the mother. This provokes vesicovaginal fistulas, especially when an untrained traditional birth attendant forces the baby’s head out unduly. [23]

    The presented health hazard by definition as follows:

    Vesicovaginal fistula, or VVF, is an abnormal fistulous tract extending between the bladder (or vesico) and the vagina that allows the continuous involuntary discharge of urine into the vaginal vault.

    In addition to the medical sequela from these fistulas, they often have a profound effect on the patient’s emotional well-being.


    It is often caused by childbirth (in which case it is known as an obstetric fistula), when a prolonged labor presses the unborn child tightly against the pelvis, cutting off blood flow to the vesicovaginal wall. The affected tissue may necrotize (die), leaving a hole.

    Lastly, for morality’s sake, is Muhammad’s sexual affair with Aisha a moral thing to do? Let me quote David Wood:

    There is a simple, but highly explicit, way to evaluate the importance of Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha. We must begin by trying to get a mental picture of a morally perfect man. For Muslims, this will include all the things they have been taught about Muhammad. According to their picture, he is kind, generous, patient, humble, and trustworthy. He protects orphans and widows, endures persecution, helps the needy, and promotes justice. He prays faithfully, fasts regularly, and obeys God in everything. He is loyal to his friends and patient with his enemies. He never gives in when tempted with evil. Now we must picture that same man in a room with an innocent little girl. He takes away her doll, climbs on top of her, and puts his penis inside her. She doesn’t know what is happening because she is too young to know much about sex. Frightened and confused, she cries because of the pain and bleeds on her bed, but she tries to remain quiet out of respect for her new husband, who, in return, endangers her life.

    If a person is able to keep the same vision of moral perfection throughout that description, he may have the faith necessary to be a Muslim. But if his vision of the perfect man is at odds with what Muhammad did on numerous occasions, he will need to look elsewhere for an ideal human being.

    I agree. The mental picture of a moral man, an example of a perfect man, appraised to be at its highest value, virtuous and pious–then suddenly, we see him to be lustfully consuming his appetite on a nine-year old, and endangering her for a possible early pregnancy, should that mental picture not shatters our own personal view of what is indeed moral?



    To set the record straight, no religious leader of the true church is infallible unless they are perfected men. Proof of perfection is not yet evident even as well to the apostles who preached the law of Moses yet it was already a dead law–a sign of imperfection–as it say:

    Acts 21:17-24

    [17]And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.

    [18]And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.

    [19]And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.

    [20]And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

    [21]And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.

    [22]What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.

    [23]Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;

    [24]Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.

    As a matter of fact, during these times, the law was already dead as it say:

    Luke 16:16


    As you can see, apostles did err to have preached the law of moses when it was already a dead law how much so Bro eli soriano when he said as i paraphrase: December in Bethlehem was full of snow, so how come Caesar would have discretion to implement a census during these uncomfortable times? Bro eli could be wrong but unless you refutes his sources which by now are not exposed, i cannot certainly say, he is wrong but only by assuming a possibility that he could be wrong seeing how internet is full of info regarding bethlehem’s winter as absent of snow, but who knows what evidence he holds?

    We have not attained yet to that level of perfection thus expect us to have errors as we are yet on the process of being perfected.

    Matthew 5:48

    [48]Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. 

    Nevertheless, it was catholics themselves that confirmed that the date of the lord’s birth is unknown. By being that, to have christmas as tradition is a lie.And having the foundational significance of a lie in a religion is deception. Refer to the various info below:

    Time.org says:

    Pope Benedict Disputes Jesus’ Date of Birth

    With the release of his new book, Pope Benedict XVI asks how much we really know about the birth of Christ

    Pope Benedict XVI holds a copy of his book

    REUTERS / Osservatore Romano

    Pope Benedict XVI holds a copy of his book “Jesus’ Childhood” as he meets RCS publisher Paolo Mieli and Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, president of the Pontifical Council for Culture, in the Vatican on Nov. 20, 2012

    Pope Benedict XVI has revealed in the third installment of his trilogy, dedicated to the life of Christ, that Jesus may have been born earlier than previously thought. The calendar we use today, which commences with the birth of Christ and was created by a Dionysius Exiguus, a 6th century monk, may be mistaken. According to the Telegraphthe Pope explains in his book that Exiguus, who is considered the inventor of the Christian calendar, “made a mistake in his calculations by several years. The actual date of Jesus’ birth was several years before.” The suggestion that Jesus wasn’t actually born on Dec. 25 has been tirelessly debated by theologians, historians and spiritual leaders, but what makes this case different is that now the leader of the Catholic Church is the one asking the questions.

    Pope Benedict’s book, Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives, was published on Tuesday. Like the previous two installments, it’s predicted to be a best seller, and a million copies of the book have already been printed. It is expected that the book will be translated into another 20 languages for publication in 72 countries. The Infancy Narratives follows the life of Jesus from conception to his presentation in the temple at the age of 12. The Pope describes this third book as a “small antechamber” to the trilogy on Jesus of Nazareth, reports the Vatican Press Office.



    Catholic encyclopedia says:

    Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the ChurchIrenaeus and Tertullian omit it from their lists of feastsOrigen, glancing perhaps at the discreditable imperial Natalitia, asserts (in Lev. Hom. viii in Migne, P.G., XII, 495) that in the Scriptures sinners alone, not saints, celebrate their birthday; Arnobius (VII, 32 in P.L., V, 1264) can still ridicule the “birthdays” of the gods.


    The first evidence of the feast is from Egypt. About A.D. 200, Clement of Alexandria (Stromata I.21) says that certain Egyptian theologians “over curiously” assign, not the year alone, but the day of Christ’s birth, placing it on 25 Pachon (20 May) in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus. [Ideler (Chron., II, 397, n.) thought they did this believing that the ninth month, in which Christ was born, was the ninth of their own calendar.] Others reached the date of 24 or 25 Pharmuthi (19 or 20 April). With Clement’s evidence may be mentioned the “De paschæ computus”, written in 243 and falsely ascribed to Cyprian (P.L., IV, 963 sqq.), which places Christ’s birth on 28 March, because on that day the material sun was created. But Lupi has shown (Zaccaria, Dissertazioni ecc. del p. A.M. Lupi, Faenza, 1785, p. 219) that there is no month in the year to which respectable authorities have not assigned Christ’s birth. Clement, however, also tells us that the Basilidians celebrated the Epiphany, and with it, probably, the Nativity, on 15 or 11 Tybi (10 or 6 January). At any rate this double commemoration became popular, partly because the apparition to the shepherds was considered as one manifestation of Christ’s glory, and was added to the greater manifestations celebrated on 6 January; partly because at the baptism-manifestation many codices (e.g. Codex Bezæ) wrongly give the Divine words as sou ei ho houios mou ho agapetos, ego semeron gegenneka se (Thou art my beloved Son, this day have I begotten thee) in lieu of en soi eudokesa (in thee I am well pleased), read in Luke 3:22Abraham Ecchelensis (Labbe, II, 402) quotes the Constitutions of the Alexandrian Church for a dies Nativitatis et Epiphaniæ in Nicæan times; Epiphanius (Hær., li, ed. Dindorf, 1860, II, 483) quotes an extraordinary semi-Gnostic ceremony at Alexandria in which, on the night of 5-6 January, a cross-stamped Korê was carried in procession round a crypt, to the chant, “Today at this hour Korê gave birth to the Eternal”; John Cassian records in his “Collations” (X, 2 in P.L., XLIX, 820), written 418-427, that the Egyptian monasteries still observe the “ancient custom”; but on 29 Choiak (25 December) and 1 January, 433, Paul of Emesa preached before Cyril of Alexandria, and his sermons (see Mansi, IV, 293; appendix to Act. Conc. Eph.) show that the December celebration was then firmly established there, and calendars prove its permanence. The December feast therefore reached Egypt between 427 and 433.


    Catholic encyclopedia says:


    The Gospels

    Concerning the date of Christ’s birth the Gospels give no help; upon their data contradictory arguments are based. The census would have been impossible in winter: a whole population could not then be put in motion. Again, in winter it must have been; then only field labour was suspended. But Rome was not thus considerate. Authorities moreover differ as to whether shepherds could or would keep flocks exposed during the nights of the rainy season.


    The Catholic Encyclopedia 

    Volume 2/Page 607


    The feast of the Savior’s birth is called Christmas, the Mass of Christ. It is celebrated on December 25 and is one of the main feasts of the liturgical year. See Church Year. 

    The actual date of the Lord’s birth is unknown, and its commemoration was generally included in the Feast of the Manifestations(Epiphany, January 6)during the first three centuries of the Christian era. See Epiphany. 

    History. In about the year 330. However,the Church in Rome definitely assigned December 25 for the celebration, in order to honor Christ, the light of the World and the true Sun of Justice. This was the day which had been dedicated in pagan Rome to the feast of the sun god and had been called Birthday of the Unconquered Sun.


    Jesus is life. Life in the sense that he is the word–the truth.

    John 14:6

    [6]Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. 

    John 6:63

    [63]It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. 

    John 11:25-26
    [25]Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 

    [26]And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? 

    He is the embodiment of the literal words of God as it say:

    Pr 4:20 . My son, attend to my words; incline thine ear unto my sayings.

    Pr 4:21 Let them not depart from thine eyes; keep them in the midst of thine heart.

    Pr 4:22 For they [are] life unto those that find them, and health to all their flesh.

    His being the life or the truth causes eternal life for men.

    John 6:68

    [68]Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

    Yet his being life or the truth is by itself eternal life.

    John 1:4

    [4]In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

    John 8:12

    [12]Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. 

    IN HIM WAS LIFE meaning he being life has in himself that life also. What life is that? The light of men or the light of life. Light implies salvation, therefore it is eternal life. Therefore his being life as the light of men is eternal life. Therefore Jesus is the eternal life, and being eternal life automatically makes him the true god. 

    1 John 5:20

    [20]And we know that the Son of God is come… This is the true God, and eternal life.

    1 John 1:2

    [2](For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

    That life manifested was Jesus as he said: I am the life, and that as the verse say is not the father but someone with him called eternal life and being eternal life then he is the true god as it say: this is the true god and eternal life. Meaning, the eternal life is the true god and that is no other than Jesus Christ. 

    We are also the light of this world are we the eternal life? We are light by being saviours but we are not the life.

    James 5:20

    [20]Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

    Jesus, is the sole title holder, of that embodiment of the truth called life. Thus being in that position, he is the true god. Therefore when it say:

    John 17:3

    [3]And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 

    It didn’t say, God is the only true god in heaven and earth bec what if it meant as: the only true god remaining in heaven bec the other true god is on earth? How come? Bec jesus too is the true god.

    And when it say:

    1 Corinthians 8:6

    [6]But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

    Does it mean, there is a single god in the whole universe? Or it simply means, among the gods there is one god of whom are all things called the father? How come? Bec jesus is also the true god. Comparatively speaking, when saying: there is but one man, the son of manalo, of whom are the guns in 36TS, Does it mean there is one man in the world?

    Obviously, proponents of the single god concept are refuted by this reality: Jesus is the life therefore he is god. Much so as supported by John1:1 the word was god. They say, that is a metaphor like time is gold yet that is weak as nothing to that effect has any contextual back up.


    A book author has this to say in his website:

    Texe Marrs releases his newest bombshell: DNA Science and the Jewish Bloodline, now available through Power of Prophecy.

    This fact—that modern DNA science proves the Word of God correct—is the subject of my startling new book, DNA Science and the Jewish Bloodline. This is a book you must have. It proves absolutely that the people who identify themselves today as “Jews” are not Jews—they are the Synagogue of Satan, just as the Bible says!

    DNA Research Brings the Truth

    The undeniable evidence of this has become clear with the advent of DNA research. In 2001, Dr. Ariella Oppenheim and her team at Tel Aviv University released their study which found that the “Jews” were mainly Khazars, from Khazaria, a Caucasus country which is now called Kazakhstan, Georgia, and other names. The Khazarians converted from pagan religions to talmudic Judaism after the 8th century, but of course, racially they remain Khazars.

    The Khazars were and are a genome that is mainly Turkish and Mongolian blood.

    Thus today, when you see a “Jew,” what you are actually encountering is a Khazar who practices Judaism. The Khazar has no Israelite blood. His ancestors are not the Israelites of the Bible. They did not worship the God, Jehovah, but instead literally were a phallic cult. They worshipped Satan by means of the male penis idol. The Khazars were never in the land of Israel. They are not the seed of Abraham. They have no promise from God. Now we know this as absolute scientific fact.

    Dr. Eran Elhaik

    Dr. Eran Elhaik

    In late 2012, yet another Israeli-born scientist, Dr. Eran Elhaik, of the McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Science, Johns Hopkins Medical University, published his research in The Journal of Biology and Evolution. Considered by geneticists worldwide as the “definitive study” and peer-approved, this authoritative research confirmed Dr. Oppenheim’s earlier findings and went even further.

    “There are no blood or family connections among the Jews,” reported Dr. Elhaik. “The various groups of Jews in the world today do not share a common genetic origin. Their genome is largely Khazar.”

    “Whatever Israelite blood the Khazar Jews have,” added Dr. Elhaik, “is miniscule.”

    Like Dr. Oppenheim, Elhaik’s research connected today’s Jews to the Turkic clans of Khazaria, in the Russian Caucasus.

    The facts are: Israel and America are populated by people saying they are Jews who are not Jews! They are Khazarian. When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims, “God gave this land to our Israelite forefathers,” he is not telling the truth. When today’s Khazar Jews say they possess the land of Israel as a divine right, they are sadly mistaken.

    Indeed, Elhaik and Oppenheim found that the Palestinian people may have more Israelite blood coursing through their veins than do the people who say they are Jews! A DNA test would no doubt confirm this eye-popping fact.

    So as you can see, proponents of the khazar myth, has used genetics to discredit Zionists as real Jews. They say, a research study, peer approved and authoritative so as claimed by the book author is proof enough to their khazar concept about Zionists. Yet is it indeed true?

    First of all if its true, then what shall we say then of the biblical prophecies about Jews returning to Israel and its building of a kingdom? Should we say, there would be fulfillment in the future and the Zionists and its government now is a false fulfillment?

    Let’s consult the bible:

    Ezekiel 37:21-22

    [21]And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:

    [22]And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:

    So were not the zionists and its government the fulfillment of this prophecy or are we yet to wait for the allegedly real jews to fulfill it? But who are these real jews scattered abroad? When they return to reclaim Israel, would its inhabitants be dispersed for them or would they reclaim it without force?

    Yet was it indeed true that these Zionists are not the real fulfillment?

    Let’s see how they defended Zionists likewise with genetics but before that let’s ask, would peer-reviewed paper indeed guarantee truth? The answer is, not necessarily for many scientists as i quote:

    Peer review’s history is of particular interest now because there is an increasing sense in the scientific community that all is not well with the peer review process. In recent years, high-profile papers have passed peer review only to be heavily criticized after publication (such as the 2011 “arsenic DNA” paper in Science that claimed a particular bacterium could incorporate arsenic into its DNA—a finding most biologists have since rejected). Others have been retracted amid allegations of fraud (consider the now-infamous 1998 Lancet paper claiming a link between vaccines and autism). Many scientists worry that requiring approval from colleagues makes it less likely that new or controversial ideas will be publishedNature’s former editor John Maddox was fond of saying that the groundbreaking 1953 DNA paper would never have made it past modern peer review because it was too speculative. In 2011, Great Britain’s House of Commons commissioned a report on the state of peer review. The report concluded that while peer review “is crucial to the reputation and reliability of scientific research,” many scientists believe the system stifles innovation and that “there is little solid evidence on its efficacy.”

    If peer review is indeed broken, as some observers have claimed, an important part of fixing it may be adjusting our expectations of it. It seems a bit ambitious to ask any bureaucratic process to distinguish scientific successes from scientific mistakes with total accuracy. Scientific findings will always be questioned after publication and some will ultimately be rejected, including ones by excellent scientists. Although there are good reasons to solicit expert feedback on scientific articles before publication, the conversation about whether something is “real science” does not end when an article reaches print.

    Source: Click here!

    Therefore, its not necessarily, that the peer-approved paper about zionists as khazars is true. Alexander Beider, another book author and linguist, refutes this particular peer-reviewed paper as he said:

    Finally, we come to genetics. One does not have to be a professional geneticist to see the inadequacy of the methodologies used by Eran Elhaik, the champion of the “Khazarian theory” in that domain. In his paper of 2013, he pretends to show that modern Ashkenazic Jews are genetically closer to Khazars than to biblical Hebrews. The last mention of Khazars is almost one thousand years old, while biblical times are also far from us. For these reasons, Elhaik needed modern substitutes, so he substituted Armenians and Georgians for Khazars (because all of them are related in some way to Caucasus); and he substituted Israeli Palestinians for biblical Hebrews. In his paper of 2016, he analyses the links between various population groups by introducing another “bold” idea, that of finding a sort of “geographic average” point for various genetic features. Using it, he links the Ashkenazic Jews to the southern part of the Black sea, not far from the Turkish border but still in places inhabited by fish only.Read more: https://forward.com/opinion/382967/ashkenazi-jews-are-not-khazars-heres-the-proof/

    Lets see the other side of the spectrum, the genetics that proves zionists are real jews, then compare. From another source it say:

    A variety of DNA studies over an extended period of time support the fact that Ashkenazic Jews originated in the Middle East (also called the Near East). Some of these studies include the following:

  1. Hammer, et al. conclude that the Y chromosome of most Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews contained mutations that are also common among Middle Eastern peoples, but uncommon in the general European population (source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2000). This suggests that the male ancestors of the Ashkenazi Jews could be traced mostly to the Middle East;

  2. The proportion of male genetic admixture in Ashkenazi Jews amounts to less than 0.5% per generation over an estimated 80 generations, with “relatively minor contribution of European Y chromosomes to the Ashkenazim,” according to Hammer et. al. (source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2000);

  3. Two studies by Nebel et al. in 2001 and 2005, based on Y chromosome polymorphic markers, suggest that Ashkenazi Jews are more closely related to other Jewish and Middle Eastern groups than to their host populations in Europe — defined in the using Eastern European, German, and French Rhine Valley populations (source: European Journal of Human Genetics);

  4. In 2004, Behar et al compared data from Ashkenazi groups in ten different European areas (France, Germany, the Netherlands; Austria-Hungary, Byelorussia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine ) with data from non-Jewish groups in seven different countries (France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Russia). They found that nine of the Jewish groups were similar, with low rates of admixture with non-Jewish groups, but that these Ashkenazi groups were closely related to non-Ashkenazi Jews and to some non-Jewish Near Eastern groups (Human Genetics, 2004);

  5. A 2006 study by Behar et al. based on high-resolution analysis of haplogroup K (mtDNA), suggested that about 40% of the current Ashkenazi population is descended matrilineally from just four women, or “founder lineages”, that were likely from a Hebrew/Levantine mtDNA pool originating in the Middle East in the 1st and 2nd centuries C.E. Behar et al. suggest that the rest of Ashkenazi mtDNA is originated from ~150 women, most of those likely of Middle Eastern origin. (source: American Journal of Human Genetics, 2006);

  6. Medical studies of the DNA of various diaspora Jewish populations — from Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, Italian, Turkish, Greek, and Ashkenazi — have shown them to all be close Middle Eastern kin (source: American Journal of Human Genetics, 2010); and

  7. Ashkenazi Levites paternally descend from an Iranian people, not from Khazars or Slavs, according to genetic evidence revealed in a study by Siiri Rootsi et al. (Nature Communications, 2013).

  8. Since no other paternal or maternal haplogroup among Ashkenazim comes from a Central Asian Turkic source either, there is a total absence of evidence for Khazar ancestry in Ashkenazi Jews. Kevin Brook, who has been researching the possibility of Khazar ancestry for 20 years among Ashkenazim and wrote a book entitled “The Jews of Khazaria”, concludes: “Surprisingly, there is evidence for small amounts of southern Chinese, Berber, and Slavic ancestry in Ashkenazi Jews, but not for Turkic Khazar ancestry.”

    Lastly, with due respect to peer-reviewed paper as authoritative, it doesnt diminish the fact that peer-reviewed paper has no guarantee of infallibility. In fact, it has failure and comparing two contrasting genetic studies, one must consider reality, that one of them could either be true or false. Whichever is true, we must not neglect the prophecy, that israelites would be returning to israel and builds a government of its own. Coincidentally, a people claiming to be jews did just that, the zionists. If its a matter of consideration, would they indeed be the ones confirming the prophecies as much so that a genetic study comes to their support?

    Or are we still waiting for real Jews, scattered around the world to fulfill yet the said prophecy?

    The question is, who are they, if so that the Zionists are fake? Or are we not looking at a failed peer reviewed science journal?


    Muslims are so persistent in their derogatory move in attacking Christianity so to exalt the integrity of Islam. They say, nothing in the bible speaks of Jesus Christ under the condition of death. Nothing prophesied so they say, yet for us, clearly, Dan 9 established the reality that the messiah was killed. Whoever this messiah is, Jesus or any other prophets, is in the process of debates. 

    The purpose of this blog is to show that that Messiah killed is Jesus. Let’s begin.

    Daniel states,

    Daniel 9:24-27

    [24]Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

    [25]Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

    [26]And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

    [27]And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

    To sum it up, 70weeks is the timetable for the succeeding prophecy in Dan 9:24-27 to happen as it say: 70weeks are determined to seal up the prophecy, meaning, there would be 70weeks wherein the succeeding prophecy would materialized. Within this 70week timeframe is the 69 weeks wherein the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem would happen, included too is the 62th week after which the messiah is cut off or killed as it say: after threescore and two weeks shall messiah be cut off. At the last week of the 70week timeframe, is the time of war and desolation as it say: and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

    To which historical event all of these took place? To add for more clarity, Jesus himself admitted that they were waiting for that coming of the last week of the 70week timeframe: the war and desolation as it say:

    Matthew 24:15-20

    [15]When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 

    [16]Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 

    [17]Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 

    [18]Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 

    [19]And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 

    [20]But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 

    Meaning, Jesus’ time was inclusive of the 70week timeframe. We would utilize that to resolve the issue at hand, as reference point to know where in the 70week timeframe has happened the last week event of the time frame: the war and desolation. So I’ll have to ask, when was a war and desolation happened after Jesus’ time and which Messiah was existing during these times?

    If we are to decipher when was the war and desolation spoken of to have happened at the last week, we could decipher the nearest time a Messiah was cut off or killed?

    So when was there a war and desolation after Jesus’ time?

    There was none except after the 70AD war wherein Gen Titus besieged Jerusalem that initiated the desolation. Historian Josephus confirmed as it say:

    Now, that we have established the last week event, we could trace back in history which event has a Messiah killed?

    The closest event was the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Was he the one spoken of in the prophecy as:And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself meaning, he was killed not for himself but for the people as it say:

    Matthew 26:28

    [28]For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 

    Clearly, being the only Messiah killed nearest the last week timeframe of war and desolation, implies the only event that foster to the concept, that Dan 9 speaks of Jesus as the killed Messiah. How come? Bec there was no other mentioned killed messiah close to the last week event.

    That for sure, construe the fact that Jesus was the killed messiah of Dan 9. The problem is how many tried to resolve this issue through calculation. Some say, 70weeks is 490years as by the process of calculation used in the torah that one day equates to one year as it say:

    Numbers 14:34

    [34]After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.

    The problem with this calculation is that it never affirmed it as a general equation utilized for all number problem. Taking 490years as equal to 70weeks posed a problem as it would points to 460BC as the initial point of the 69weeks wherein it was commanded to rebuild Jerusalem. Historically, none of it affirms of such command. It was at the time of Cyrus that such command was initially feasible through his command to rebuild the temple. 

    Some say, Cyrus was the killed Messiah of Dan 9 yet this is problematic too as the 490year timeframe cannot be conducive for a timeframe that includes Jesus’ time.

    For me, Daniel knew the calculation by basing it on other books than the bible yet for random thought, there is a hidden way to calculate the 70week timeframe but for the moment, it is hid. What is undenial though is the reality of Dan 9. There was an only messiah killed close to the last week timeframe of war and desolation. There is nothing in history that support this reality except Christ crucifixion.