Our Muslim friends are at it again, we enjoy showing them the truth time and time again perhaps one day they’ll learn that they don’t know as much as they think they do. Either way, we love Muslims and pray for their salvation. And that brings up something quite hilarious.

On their blog, it reads “A Quiet Place in Cyberspace Dedicated to the Search for Truth and Salvation”, this word comes from the Bible as Christians use it to explain the redemption Christ Jesus has procured for us. Why are Muslims using Christian terminology?

Salvation in Arabic is (خلاص), this word was placed in Google translate, note on the bottom left. It mentions that Christians believe in salvation through faith in Christ. In the Qur’ān the word salvation is not used, you’ll find words like successful, attainment, victory etc. Yusuf Ali primarily had translated words like (الْمُفْلِحِينَ) which means “prosperous” into “salvation”, this is a deceptive translation.

Also provided is the Arabic dictionary as you can see the word (خلاص) and its definition. Therefore, we highly recommend that qnBb changes its title to reflect what Islam teaches.

Don’t expect them to change it because they dabble in deception and want people to think there’s salvation in Islam when in reality there’s none. Even Muhammad didn’t know if he would make it to Jannah, but I digress that this is a topic for another time.

The “Evidence” 2 John 9–11 (Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:28)

This will turn out bad for the Abdools, I hope they’re prepared. In their weak attempt to attack Christianity Muslims grossly misinterpret scriptures in hopes to get people to believe in their false religion. The ignorance of Abdools is on another level!

The unknown author of this letter did not mince words regarding associating with unbelievers. A Christian was forbidden to greet such a person or to let him in his house.

Can Christians be “Friends” with Non-Christians?

Internal evidence for the authorship of 1 John:

Incorrect, we do know who wrote 2 John. It was the Apostle John the same one who wrote John and 1 John said:

During the last supper in the upper room before Judas Iscariot would leave the company to betray Jesus to the Pharisees, John was sitting close to Christ, he was an eyewitness of all that Jesus Christ did which leads to 1 John 1:1.

The disciple John was part of the inner circle along with Peter and James. The 3 were privy to when Christ revealed His glory on the top of the Mount of Transfiguration. John would have touched, heard, and seen the miracles of Christ personally.

Keywords (emphasis ours): “That which was from the beginning, … we have heard, … seen with our eyes, … we have looked upon, … our hands have handled, of the Word of life;”.

A clear reading of the Gospel of John along with 1st, 2nd 3rd John and Revelation, John provides evidence that the one named the beloved disciple, also known as the disciple whom Jesus loved, is also the author of the named books.

This known phrase “the disciple whom Jesus loved” materialises a total of 5 times in the Gospel of John. This disciple has a prominent role to the extent that Simon Peter asked “Lord, and what shall this man do?” in reference to the beloved disciple’s ministry in John chapter 21.

External evidence for the authorship of 1 John:

Quotes from the Epistle as being authored by John the Apostle are Irenaeus ¹ in his work against Heresies mentions John by name stating that he taught certain principles namely Jesus as the only begotten Son of God, in which the Father created all things.

Other notable mentions are Clement of Alexandria,² Tertullian, Origen and his pupil Dionysius who argued for the authorship of Johannine works.

If they understood the background of 2 John they wouldn’t make this grave mistake. The background of 2 John is a continuation of 1 John. The context is Christians who were travelling from house to house, in which Christians would gather for worship and fellowship before the construction of Church buildings. The Apostle John was writing to warn of false teachers who were masquerading as Christians and bringing into the congregation erroneous doctrine.

This is the background of 2 John, with that context in view we can now turn to the passage qnBb brought into question.

2 John 9-11 explains how if an individual comes and teaches false doctrine (like Muhammad) is not welcomed. These false teachers don’t “abide in the doctrine of Christ”, and what is that doctrine? It’s that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, God in the flesh, that He died for our sins and rose from the dead for our justification. That we can have salvation through the atoning death of the Lamb of God.

As well as the doctrine of the Trinity (Abdool trigger!), hence John writes stating whoever denies the fact that the Father and the Son collectively are the One True God. We are to not allow them to spread their cancerous doctrine in the assembly.³ Nowhere does it speak about not being friends with non-Christians. The Lord Jesus is called a friend of sinners (Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:34) as followers of Christ we are called to imitate Him.

If someone posing as a Muslim at a Masjid was spreading teachings contrary to Islam they wouldn’t be welcomed. This is the context of 2 John, he’s not telling Christians they cannot be friends with non-Christians. Now let’s bring this into the Qur’ān where Muslims are told not to be friends with non-Muslims. In Surah Al-Ma’idah the words from their god Allah says:

Believers are discouraged in Islam from taking unbelievers as friends, if they do Allah will not help them. And it gets worse. Allah commands Muslims to not be friends with people who don’t believe in Allah.

According to their Qur’ān Muslims are not allowed to take Jews or Christians as friends. It’s plain and simple, they try to add the word “war” etc. This verse mentions nothing about war, it has to do with a person’s BELIEF because they are not a Muslim, therefore, it’s not allowed to be friends with them.⁴ This is why the Qur’ān says if you do then you are one of them, in other words no longer a Muslim.

Here’s the Tafsir (emphasis ours):

(Let not the believers take) the believers ought not to take [the hypocrites:] ‘Abdullah Ibn Ubayy and his companions [and] (disbelievers) the Jews (for their friends) so as to become mighty and honourable (in preference to believers) who are sincere. (Whoso doeth that) seeking might and honour [by taking the hypocrites and disbelievers as friends] (hath no connection with Allah) has no honour, mercy or protection from Allah (unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them) save yourselves from them, (taking (as it were) security) saving yourselves from them by speaking in a friendly way towards them with, while your hearts dislikes this. (Allah bideth you beware (only) of Himself) regarding the shunning of unlawful killing, unlawful sex, unlawful property, consuming intoxicants, false testimony and associating partners with Allah. (Unto Allah is the journeying) the return after death.⁵

Tafsir Ibn ‘Abbas

The donkeys at qnBb are unaware the homes spoken of by John are house churches. Christians gathered in different homes to worship and learn doctrine spoken of by the Lord Jesus passed on to His Apostles, and to the disciples. The 2nd Epistle of John is a letter warning the believers of the Gnostics who claimed “secret knowledge”, John was against their false teachings as they denied Christ came in the flesh.

The muta’h boys are arguing for heretical teaching. The Gnostics taught Jesus didn’t come in the flesh, that’s a direct rejection of the Qur’ān as this would deny that Isa came in the flesh. It’s hilarious they quote the church fathers as if they’re saying Christians cannot be friends with non-Christians.

The context is not to fellowship with those who teach erroneous doctrines masquerading as a Christian when they’re anything but. Cults such as Arianism, and Sabellianism are against orthodox Christianity.

It’s in this context the church fathers are read, when done so it’s clear to see they’re against cult teachings not people. Looking at the quotes in light of people like Jehovah’s Witnesses who teach Jesus is not God (Arianism), Oneness Pentecostals who say Jesus and the Father are the same Person (Sabellianism) or Mormons who teach Christ is one of many gods (polytheism).⁶

1. Tertullian: “Although we ought to be seeking at all times, where ought we to seek? Among the heretics, where all is foreign and opposed to our truth, with whom we are forbidden to associate?”
2. Ambrose of Milan: “Since it is written that we should avoid such people, how can we not assume that someone who associates with Arians is also an exponent of their heresy?”
3. Hilary of Arles: “Here you see an example of excommunication in the New Testament, both from table fellowship at home and from table fellowship in church.”
4. Irenaeus of Lyons: “By wishing that we do not even give them a welcome, John, the Lord’s disciple, made their condemnation even stronger.”
5. Clement of Alexandria: “John forbids us to greet such people or to offer them hospitality, which in the circumstances is not at all unkind. But he also warns us not to argue or dispute with people who are unable to handle the things of God, lest we should be taken away from the true doctrine by clever arguments which have the appearance of truth. Furthermore, I think that it is wrong to pray with such people, because during times of prayer there is a moment for greeting and sharing the peace.”
6. Didymus the Blind: “Anyone who dwells in the doctrine of the gospel and who acts according to its teaching will separate himself from those who think and act differently.”

The Abdools then said:

“… we saved the best for last. Basil “The Great” plainly stated that Christians cannot be “friends” with non-Christians. …”

^{Can Christians be “Friends” with Non-Christians?}

Let’s be clear Christians follow Jesus Christ, not the church fathers or anyone else, qnBb mentions Basil “The Great” (emphasis ours):

“It is obvious that those who make friends of people who SPEAK FALSELY about God and who even eat with them do not love the Lord who made them and who feeds them. Instead of being content with that food they are led away into blasphemy against the one who feeds them.”

^{Basil “The Great”}

I guess qnBb likes people speaking falsely about Allah their god. Perhaps they can take a few non-Muslims out to dinner who speak against Islam unless qnBb are hypocrites and won’t prove otherwise?

The “Evidence” 1 Corinthians 5:9–11

Thank you muta’h boys for a good laugh, it was fun! Muslim ignorance rears its ugly head again, 1 Corinthians 5:9–11 is speaking about someone who’s in fellowship in a local assembly. In other words, a Christian who is going around practising sin, as Christians we cannot tolerate sin among the fellowship of believers and the offending party is to be put out of assembly fellowship.

By doing so these sinful practices will not spread to the rest of the believers. As it’s said leaven corrupts and spreads like yeast in bread. The Lord Jesus said, “Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod” (Mark 8:15).

And in keeping in context with 1 Corinthians Paul the apostle said: “Your glorying [is] not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth.” (1 Corinthians 5:6-8).

Garland in his exegetical commentary on the New Testament draws from the text, that the Corinthians had a problem in the church. There was an incident of an individual who committed incest with his father’s wife, this sin was unacceptable but the believers in the Corinthian church didn’t confront the man, thereby being complacent. Paul rebukes them saying this should not have happened.⁷

Muhammad on the other hand committed all sorts of sexual sins, he had sex with a minor as a child paedophile (Sahih al-Bukhari 5133), any believing woman can give herself to the prophet for sex (Quran 33:50).

Muhammad contradicted himself because he said in the book of Jame’ Alsag’er (Imam Al-Soiuty), Hadith 2994: “Any woman, [if] she gives herself to a man to marry him without her father’s, or man of the house’s permission, she is a whore”

^{Jame’ Alsag’er (Imam Al-Soiuty), Hadith 2994}

Comparing this to 33:50 we have to ask the question, how can the woman, who gives herself to marry a man be a whore, but the woman who gives herself to Muhammad be a good/pious woman? Challenge give one woman’s name who became a wife to Muhammad by giving herself to him. None of his wives gave herself to him as there’s no such thing as marriage in Islam. Proof Muhammad was a sexually immoral man.

Conclusion

The truth is that Muslims worship an immoral man called Muhammad which means “the praised one”, how can a sinful man be praised? As a Christian, the only One who gets praised is God alone. The black stone smoochers love sin and are hypocritical, these are traits from Satan himself because that’s who Allah is. We can only continue to provide evidence from their own sources, showing them how sinful their prophet is, a man who allowed sexual immorality, lying, killing, extortion and a whole slew of other sinful practices.

We’ll close out this article with the words of their “god” Allah, notice how Allah wants to spread terror into the hearts of unbelievers. That’s not all he wants Muslims to smite people on the neck and cut off their fingertips.

What god commands such wickedness? Allah must love chicken fingers, maybe we should get him a bucket of KFC? Come to Christ our Muslim friends, the Lord Jesus knocks will you invite Him in? (Revelation 3:20)

And Allah (Shameful and Perish He’ll be) doesn’t know best!

Footnotes

1 “Further, they teach that John, the disciple of the Lord, indicated the first Ogdoad, expressing themselves in these words: John, the disciple of the Lord, wishing to set forth the origin of all things, so as to explain how the Father produced the whole, lays down a certain principle,—that, namely, which was first-begotten by God, which Being he has termed both the only-begotten Son and God, in whom the Father, after a seminal manner, brought forth all things.” Irenaeus of Lyons, “Irenæus against Heresies, 1.8.5.” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 328.

2 ”Peter having preached the word publicly at Rome, and by the Spirit proclaimed the Gospel, those who were present, who were numerous, entreated Mark, inasmuch as he had attended him from an early period, and remembered what had been said, to write down what had been spoken. On his composing the Gospel, he handed it to those who had made the request to him; which coming to Peter’s knowledge, he neither hindered nor encouraged. But John, the last of all, seeing that what was corporeal was set forth in the Gospels, on the entreaty of his intimate friends, and inspired by the Spirit, composed a spiritual Gospel.” Clement of Alexandria, “Fragments of Clemens Alexandrinus,” in Fathers of the Second Century: Hermas, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus, and Clement of Alexandria (Entire), ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, trans. William Wilson, vol. 2, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 580.

3 “Such hospitality was open to easy abuse, however. There was the false teacher, on the one hand, who yet posed as a Christian: should hospitality be extended to him? And there was the more obvious mountebank, the false prophet with false credentials, who was dominated less by the creed he had to offer than by the material profit and free board and lodging he hoped to gain. It is against this background that we must read the Second and Third Epistles of John, for in them the Elder issues instructions concerning whom to welcome and whom to refuse, and why. Genuine Christian missionaries, he writes, maybe recognized both by the message they bring and by the motive which inspires them. If they faithfully proclaim the doctrine of Christ (cf. 2 Jn. 7), and if they have set out not for filthy lucre but for the sake of His name (3 Jn. 7), then they should both be received and helped forward on their journey ‘as befits God’s service (3 Jn. 6, RSV)” Stott JRW. The Letters of John: An Introduction and Commentary. 2nd ed. (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press; 1988), p. 199

4 “Taking them as friends in general terms, taking them as helpers and supporters, and throwing in one’s lot with them. Allaah forbids all this, as He says (interpretation of the meaning): “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as awliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but awliya’ to one another…” [al-Maa’idah 5:51].” Islamqa.info (1998, September 10) APA citation. Clarification of the important rule: it is haraam to take kaafirs as close friends and protectors. Retrieved from https://islamqa.info/en/answers/2179/clarification-of-the-important-rule-it-is-haraam-to-take-kaafirs-as-close-friends-and-protectors

5 altafsir.com (2021) APA citation. Tafsir Ibn ‘Abbas. Retrieved from https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=3&tAyahNo=28&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

6 Gerald Bray., & Thomas C. Oden (2020). Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: James, 1-2 Peter, 1-3 John, Jude, Volume XI (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2000).

7 Garland, D. E. (2003). 1 Corinthians (Ser. Baker exegetical commentary on the new testament). Baker Academic. p. 184-185