Reponse a un Argument Musulman que Revelation dit aux Chretiens d'agir avec Violence

Dans un debat (c’est a youtube) entre le chretien Jay Smith et le musulman Abdulah Andalusi sur laquelle des deux religions, le christianisme ou l’islam, etait la vraie religion de paix, Andalusi a cité Revelation 18:1-8 comme preuve que le christianisme est violent.

Le chapitre parle de l’avenir, d’une situation et d’un regime d’oppression, d’injustice contre les justes, les chretiens.Je vais montrer que l’emphase dans Revelation 18:1-8 est sur la justice, pas sur lavengeance, mais obtenir la justice d’un regime corrompu.

Jay Smith

Le Texte:

Revelation 18:1-8:

“Après cela, je vis descendre du ciel un autre ange, qui avait une grande autorité; et la terre fut éclairée de sa gloire.Il cria d’une voix forte, disant:” Elle est tombée, elle est tombée, Babylone la grande! Elle est devenue une habitation de démons, un repaire de tout esprit impur, un repaire de tout oiseau impur et odieux,parce que toutes les nations ont bu du vin de la fureur de son impudicité, et que les rois de la terre se sont livrés avec elle à l’impudicité, et que les marchands de la terre se sont enrichis par la puissance de son luxe.””

“Et j’entendis du ciel une autre voix qui disait:” Sortez du milieu d’elle, mon peuple, afin que vous ne participiez point à ses péchés, et que vous n’ayez point de part à ses fléaux.Car ses péchés se sont accumulés jusqu’au ciel, et Dieu s’est souvenu de ses iniquités.””

Puis,les versets soulignes par Andalusi comme preuve que le christianisme preche la violence

Verset 1:

“Payez-la comme elle a payé, et rendez-lui au double selon ses oeuvres.”

Analyse:

On doit croire,selon Andalusi,etre une reference a la vengeance

Verset 2:

“Dans la coupe où elle a versé, versez-lui au double.”

“Autant elle s’est glorifiée et plongée dans le luxe, autant donnez-lui de tourment et de deuil. Parce qu’elle dit en son coeur: “Je suis assise en reine, je ne suis point veuve, et je ne verrai point de deuil!”

“A cause de cela, en un même jour, ses fléaux arriveront, la mort, le deuil et la famine, et elle sera consumée par le feu. Car il est puissant, le Seigneur Dieu qui l’a jugée.”

L’Explication:

On peut penser que les versets font reference a la lex talionis.La lex talionis sont 3 lois de la loi mosaique:

Exode 21:22-25:

“Si des hommes se querellent, et qu’ils heurtent une femme enceinte, et la fasse accoucher, sans autre accident, ils seront punis d’une amende imposée par le mari de la femme, et qu’ils paieront devant les juges.

Mais s’il y a un accident, tu donneras vie pour vie,oeil pour oeil, dent pour dent, main pour main, pied pour pied,brûlure pour brûlure, blessure pour blessure, meurtrissure pour meurtrissure.”

Levitique 24:19-21:

“Si quelqu’un blesse son prochain, il lui sera fait comme il a fait:fracture pour fracture, oeil pour oeil, dent pour dent; il lui sera fait la même blessure qu’il a faite à son prochain.Celui qui tuera un animal le remplacera, mais celui qui tuera un homme sera puni de mort.”

Deuteronome 19:21:

“Tu ne jetteras aucun regard de pitié: oeil pour oeil, dent pour dent, main pour main, pied pour pied.”

Ce que Jesus (Dieu) a dit:

Il a dit que le group pharisien avait la bonne interpretation de la Loi Mosaique:

Matthieu 23:2-3:

“Les scribes et les pharisiens sont assis dans la chaire de Moïse.

Faites donc et observez tout ce qu’ils vous disent; mais n’agissez pas selon leurs oeuvres. Car ils disent, et ne font pas.”

La Lettre de la Loi et l’Esprit de la Loi:

Il y avait 4 groupes juifs differents dans la Palestine du 1e siecle:

1.Les esseniens
2.Les saduceens
3.Les zelotes
4.Les pharisiens

Les saduceens sur la Lex Talionis

Les saduceens etaient le groupe surtout chargé des fonctions du temple de Jerusalem. Ils ne croyaient pas a la resurrection des morts, ni a l’existence d’un paradis. La mort etait la mort, c’etait la fin de tout, point final.

Les saduceens disaient que la lex talionis etait litterale, on devait litteralement arracher un oeil pour un oeil perdu, arracher une dent pour une dent perdue,etc

Les pharisiens  sur la Lex Talionis

Les pharisiens etaient de l’avis que ce n’etait pas litteral. C’etait le prix d’un oeil pour un oeil perdu, le prix d’une dent pour une dent perdue. On devait savoir differencier entre la lettre de la loi et l’esprit (l’idee essentielle) de la loi.

Jesus (Dieu en personne) a dit que les pharisiens avaient la bonne interpretation.

La Loi Orale et la Loi Ecrite

La loi ecrite sont les 613 lois de la Loi Mosaique trouvées dans la Bible, elles ont eté ecrites.Mais les pharisiens croyaient et leurs descendants intellectuels (les juifs orthodoxes) sont d’accord que Dieu en meme temps qu’il avait fait la loi ecrite il avait dit une Loi Orale qui fut transmise oralement pendant des siecles jusqu’a etre ecrite et etre inclue dans le Talmud(500 apres J).

Les saduceens sur la Loi Orale

Ils disaient que ce n’etait pas vrai,la Loi Orale etait fausse.

Ce que la Loi Orale dit sur la Lex Talionis:

Que les lois de Lev 24:19-21/Exode 21:22-25/Deuteronome 19:21 signifient le prix monetaire d’un oeil pour un oeil perdu, le prix monetaire d’un dent pour une dent perdue,etc.

Conclusion

De nouveau l’emphase dans Revelation 18:1-8 est sur la justice, pas sur la vengeance, mais obtenir la justice d’un regime corrompu.

Was Samson a Terrorist,as the Muslim Shabir Ally says?

In a debate between Shabir Ally and Shmuley Boteach,a famous Orthodox Jewish rabbi,the former said that if one says the Palestinians are terrorists and condemns them,then the Jews have to condemn Samson as a terrorist since he killed people in an act of suicide.The debate is here,1st segment:

Why are Hamas,Hezbullah and Al-Qaida terrorists?

Hamas,Hezbollah and Al-Qaida are terrorists because they intentionally kill innocent men,women and children as part of their military plan.They try to kill as many as they can.

Samson’s Case was Different

In the Samson story we have a different situation,it turns out that Samson was made a prisoner by the Philistines.And they had contempt for Yahweh.In the story they had a religious festival in honor of their god and they decided to bring out Samson as proof that their god was greater than God.It was a religious ceremony offensive to God,and Samson knew it.

He decided to show God was greater and asked God to help him by punishing the Philisitnes.Here is the story:

Judges 16:23-30:

“Now the rulers of the Philistines assembled:

1.To offer a great sacrifice to Dagon their god

2.And to celebrate, saying, “Our god has delivered Samson, our enemy, into our hands.”

3.When the people saw him, they praised their god, saying,”Our god has delivered our enemy into our hands,the one who laid waste our land and multiplied our slain.”

While they were in high spirits, they shouted, “Bring out Samson to entertain us.” So they called Samson out of the prison, and he performed for them. When they stood him among the pillars, Samson said to the servant who held his hand, “Put me where I can feel the pillars that support the temple, so that I may lean against them.””

The text says nothing about children being there,only men and women inside the Temple and on its Roof

“Now the temple:

1.Was crowded with men and women

2.All the rulers of the Philistines were there

3.And on the roof were about 3000 men and women watching Samson perform.

Then Samson prayed to the LORD, “O Sovereign LORD, remember me. O God, please strengthen me just once more, and let me with one blow get revenge on the Philistines for my two eyes.” Then Samson reached toward the two central pillars on which the temple stood. Bracing himself against them, his right hand on the one and his left hand on the other, Samson said, “Let me die with the Philistines!” Then he pushed with all his might, and down came the temple on the rulers and all the people in it. Thus he killed many more when he died than while he lived. ”

Comment

Notice it says the ones killed were men and women,it doesn’t mention children.It was a religious ceremony it which only adults participated and they were saying a false god was greater than God.

Either Shabir Ally is a less than competent and able scholar of Judaism by comparing  Samson to modern-day Islamic terrorists (after 20 years of study) or he was misleading his audience.

Debate between 2 Friends

Michael Brown and Shmuley Boteachare both Jewish and Boteach has a high opinion of Brown as a person and of course they are Jewish brothers,but they do debate.Here are 2 short debates of about 15 min each in total:

Debate 1:

Debate 2:

Check out a Jewish Website that is for Jesus

It is Jews for Jesus:

http://jewsforjesus.org/

One of their latest articles is:“Jesus the Jewish Martyr?”(about Jewish intellectuals accepting Jesus as a fellow Jewish brother):

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/blog/20100724

 

100% Proof Tariq Ramadan,Muslim Intellectual Leader,is a False Defender of Human Rights

The PROBLEM with the Muslim intellectual leaders in the West.Tariq Ramadan is the most famous Muslim intellectual in the WEST,the leader of the new generation.He has quite a number of times in his books CONDEMNED the MUSLIM TERRORISTS.I have read it.In that he is similar to MAGDI ALLAM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariq_Ramadan

Magdi Allam

He was a Muslim intellectual,not religious,from Egypt,who worked for one of the best Italian journals and offers similarities with TARIQ RAMADAN.They BOTH condemn the terrorists:Hizbullah,Hamas,Al-Qaida,Taliban.

Later in 2008 he became a Christian and was publicly baptized by the Pope.He wrote:“My Conversion.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdi_Allam

Magdi Allam wrote alot against them while he was a Muslim,unlike Ramadan:

1.Jihad in Italy:a Journey through Radical Islam(2002)

2.Kamikaze made in Europe:Will the West defeat Islamic Terrorists?(2004)

3.Conquering Fear:My Life against Islamic Terrorism and Western Unconsciousness(2005)

4.I love Israel,but do Italians love her?(2006)

5.Long live Israel(2007)

Because of that he has security protection since he has received death threats.

The Ramadan Case

He has been accused for quite some time by Caroline Fourest (French feminist and journalist, in her book Brother Tariq) and also by Magdi Allam of not being sincere,of really being in favor of the terrorists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Fourest

Recently,in 2009,Ramadan was fired from Erasmus University in Holland because he had for a considerable time also been WORKING for an IRANIAN STATE TV STATION.It was financed by the GOVERNMENT OF IRAN.

He had a WEEKLY show there where he spoke about Islam called “Islam and Life”.He was also fired from his post as “advisor on integration”by the city of Rotterdam because of it.He called it “a NAIVE and SIMPLISTIC” decision.

SO?

Ok,now,Ramadam condemns the terrorists yet works for a government that:

1.Finances the Shiah terrorist group Hezbullah that kills innocent people.

2.That violates human rights in Iran daily.

3.That punishes apostasy from Islam by death.

4.Persecutes and kills the BAHAIS,a very peaceful group,for no reason.

5.Whose leader Ahmadinejad is a fanatical judeophobe.

An Imaginary Situation

Ramadan says he is against racism.Suppose we still:

1.Had APARTHEID in South Africa?

2.Would Ramadan ACCEPT to work for a SOUTH AFRICAN STATE TV STATION that violates human rights and practices racism?I don’t think so.

Another Imaginary Situation

He considers:

1.The Israeli government to be EVIL for X reasons.

2.Would he ACCEPT working for an ISRAELI STATE TV STATION?No.

It is obvious by his action that he secretly agrees with the terrorists.

WOULD MAGDI ALLAM HAVE ACCEPTED WORKING FOR IRAN?

No,I really don’t think so.He and Caroline Fourest were right about him.And Ramadan is considered a “moderate” but it is not true.

Great Debate by David Wood vs Ali Ataie

It is on “Who was Muhammed?”

His blog is:

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/

Christian and Muslim Dialogue

Going through my collection of Islamic literature that i have gathered over the years, i found a publication by the late Ahmad Deedat’s IPCI. When i first began having dialogue  with Muslims i was handed the above titled booklet and thought it would be a worthwhile exercise going through it, so as to give the public an insight into how Islam views Christianity.

The ‘dialogue’ is supposed to be between (C) Christians and (M) Muslims, though the names of the ‘questioner’ and ‘answerer’ is not stated. Now, reading the booklet one may feel a Christian of some standing was being asked to explain a number of Biblical issues, which i shall list, and apparently was not able to tackle. For this reason i will list the Q and A from the booklet, and then point out just how Islam uses propaganda to defame Christianity and brainwash the unsuspecting. But first;

Acknowledgment

I am an American raised from childhood in the Christian belief. Until I began my soul’s quest for God, I had taken many matters of importance for granted.

After discussions, reading, and rereading the manuscript of the present Muslim Christian Dialogue, I have gone over the quotations from the King James Version of the Holy Bible and the Holy Qur’an.

I finally announce my shahadah (testimony) publicly in English, then in Arabic: I bear witness that there is no deity except Allah, Who has no partner, and that Muhammad is His servant and messenger (a shhadu an la illaha illa Allah, wahdahu la sharikah lahu wa ashhadu anna Muhammadan ‘abduhu wa rasulahu).

Through this very basic and simple testimony, I believe many people will submit to Allah in spirit and truth.

I hope that this short and easy to read booklet will be read worldwide and will attract many who are searching for a true belief where their minds may find rest and satisfaction.

Roy Earl Johnson

This is his testimony, but is it based upon sound knowledge? The readers can judge this for yourselves.

Note from the Author

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

This booklet has been written as the result of dialogues that I had with members of the Christian clergy and laity. The discussions were polite, pleasant, friendly, and constructive without the slightest intention of hurting the religious feeling of any Christian. It is provocative and a challenge to Christianity. It is indispensable for those looking for the truth and those studying Comparative religion.

C: Christian
M or m: Muslim
(pbuh): peace be upon him
(pbut): peace be upon them

(The latter two phrases are said by all pious Muslims after mentioning the name of a prophet. They will be assumed throughout this booklet).

H. M. Baagil, M. D.
January 1 984

And so to the list of contents.

Part One: Dialogue

 

	The First Contact between a Christian and a Muslim
	The Holy Bible
	The Doctrine of the Trinity
	The Doctrine of the Divinity of Jesus Christ
	The Doctrine of the Divine Sonship of Jesus Christ
	Was Jesus Crucified?
	The Doctrine of Atonement and Original Sin

Part Two: Muhammad in the Bible

 

	Both Ishmael and Isaac Were Blessed
	Criterion of the Prophet by Jeremiah Until Shiloh Come
	Baca Is Mecca
	The House of My Glory
	Chariot of Asses and Chariot of Camels
	The Prophet Like unto Moses
	My Servant, Messenger, and Elect
	King David Called Him “My Lord”
	Art Thou That Prophet?
	Baptizing with the Holy Ghost and with Fire
	The Least in the Kingdom of Heaven
	Blessed Are the Peacemakers
	Comforter
	Revelation to Prophet Muhammad

More on Why Atheistic Scholars reject Shabir Ally's Arguments Against Jesus' Death

The first article on this is here:

http://www.avraidire.com/2010/04/why-shabir-allys-arguments-about-jesus-not-dying-are-rejected-by-atheist-scholars/

Argument 4 of Shabir

“Crucifixion does not pierce any Vital Organs.”(to thus cause death)

He cites Catholic scholar Father Raymond Brown’s  “Death of the Messiah” where Brown states:

1.“Crucifixion pierces no vital organs”

2.And so we can’t know what really killed Jesus.

That is True but it is Also True 

1.Flogging pierces no vital organs either yet people can be flogged to death.

2.Stoning pierces no vital organs either,yet people die.

3.The same for a heart attack,no vital organs pierced.

Also Brown accepts the death of Jesus.We can’t know exactly what killed Jesus:if too much loss of blood,or heart attack,or lack of air,or shock,or all or a combination,but based on medical and scientific evidence he would have died.Shabir isn’t logical.

About Roman Military Customs

They were brutal,deadly.And not just in the military.We have:

1.In Acts 12:7-19 Peter is freed from prison by an angel and escapes.King Herod finds out and he orders the guards in charge to be executed.

2.In Acts 16:23-29 Paul is in prison and miraculously all the prison doors open and the man in charge of the prison thinks they have escaped and was about to kill himself when Paul stops him.Why kill himself?Because he would have been killed anyway,for letting a prisoner get out.

3.Petronius was a great Roman writer,the author of the first novel.He died about 64 AD,near Jesus’ time.His novel Satyricon has a story calld The Widow of EPHESUS.

It is about a beautiful widow decides to die with her husband’s body,not eating or drinking.She’s in a cave.A handsome Roman soldier who is in charge of a dead body of a crucified man(to make sure the body isn’t stolen)finds her and seduces her and they are happy together for several days.

The family of the crucified man steal the body,the soldier finds out and declares to her he will kill himself for the penalty was that he be crucified for letting the body be stolen.She say no and insead they hung the body of the dead husband on the cross and he is spared.

Pilate was told by the Centurion that Jesus was Dead

In Mark 15:44-45 that’s what happens.Pilate asks him if Jesus’ died.The centurion affirmed yes,he was taking responsibility for it.If later Jesus was proved to have survived the centurion would have been punished,most probably killed.HE knew the consequences of not making sure.Pilate was in effect saying to him:

“Ok,now you are taking the responsibility for this and you know what happens if he is still alive.”

It’s all these details scholars consider in the process called “going where the evidence leads.”

Argument 5

“In Antiquity there were Case of the Dead Waking from a Coma”

Shabir cited cases in Antiquity of apparently dead people coming back from a coma,etc,found in a scholarly book, in a debate with Michael Licona.True.But they:

1.Had not be been flogged.

2.They had not lost alot of blood.

3.They had not been crucified and suffered shock.

They are like people today who suffer a heart attack or brain hemorrage and apparently die,then come back from a coma.Today we have no crucifixions.Does Shabir make a comparative analysis of the 2 cases like an impartial scholar?No.

Jay Smith : Sharing your Faith with the Muslims Part 7

Jay is a christian apologist who debates with muslims on Speakers Corner and on university campuses at a very high level, his heart is to share Christ with the muslim people he loves and to expose the false religion that is Islam.

Sharing your Faith with Muslims : Jay Smith part 1

Jay is a christian apologist who debates with muslims on Speakers Corner and on university campuses at a very high level, his heart is to share Christ with the muslim people he loves and to expose the false religion that is Islam.

La Bible a-t-elle été falsifiée?

Article de answeringislam.org version française

Les musulmans prétendent que les Ecritures ont été altérées ou corrompues, qu’ayant perdu leur authenticité, elles ne sauraient engager la foi, et qu’elles ne ressemblent que de loin au Pentateuque, aux Psaumes et à l’Evangile auxquels se réfère le Coran de façon élogieuse. Ils disent aussi que les Evangiles de la Bible sont truqués et qu’ils ont été substitués à l’Evangile original, qu’ils sont la fabrication des hommes, et non le noble Evangile descendu d’en haut sur Jésus.

Remarque : Quand nous considérons les passages censés comporter des accusations de falsification des Ecritures, deux faits ressortent. Remarquons que Mahomet met en cause des juifs et non des chrétiens; en effet, nulle part ces derniers ne sont incriminés. Il faut souligner aussi que les juifs ne sont pas accusés d’avoir intentionnellement altéré le texte de leurs Ecritures. Dans son ouvrage «Christianity explained to Muslims», L. Bevan Jones souligne ce point à juste titre. Les juifs sont accusés soit d’avoir mal vocalisé les mots de l’Ancien Testament, soit de les avoir mal écrits, ou bien d’avoir dissimulé la vérité – jamais d’avoir effectivement changé le texte.

Note. L’arabe comme l’hébreu est souvent écrit sans voyelles. Par exemple, ktb peut être kataba (écrire) ou kutiba (prédestiner) ou kutub, des livres. On peut donc changer le sens d’un mot écrit en le vocalisant différemment.

Le Chrétien peut répondre en posant plusieurs questions :

• Quand la Bible authentique a-t-elle été en circulation?
• Pouvez-vous me montrer un exemplaire de la Bible authentique?
• A-t-elle été altérée intentionnellement?
• Pouvez-vous me montrer un exemple d’altération du texte dans la Bible?
• Comment le passage était-il exprimé dans l’original?
• Quand, par qui, comment, où, pourquoi a-t-il été altéré ou corrompu?
• S’agissait-il d’une corruption du TEXTE ou du sens?

Un fait de première importance est que, de nos jours, les textes de la Bible sont identiques en tous points de doctrine à ceux qui existaient des centaines d’années avant la mort de Mahomet en 632 après Jésus-Christ.

Le diagramme suivant peut être utile:

Les sept cercles dans le diagramme représentent les éléments suivants:

(1) Traductions ou portions de la Bible, en circulation aujourd’hui dans le monde musulman.
(2) Textes imprimés de l’Ancien Testament en hébreu et du Nouveau Testament en grec, couramment employés aujourd’hui. (3) Anciens recueils de l’Ancien Testament en hébreu et du Nouveau Testament en grec existant en bibliothèque aujourd’hui : Codex Sinaiticus – 300 ans avant l’islam Codex Alexandrinus – 200 ans avant l’islam Codex Vaticanus – 300 ans avant l’islam Manuscrits de la Mer Morte – 700 ans avant l’islam
(4) Anciens manuscrits de la Septante traduits de l’hébreu en grec plus de 800 ans avant l’apparition de Mahomet.
(5) Anciennes versions en syriaque, latin, copte. Beaucoup de ces versions étaient en usage de 300 à 400 ans avant l’islam; et d’autres traductions n’existent plus aujourd’hui. Mais nous n’en avons que quelques traces dans les citations des Pères de l’Eglise.
(6) Anciens manuscrits de la Bible n’existant plus aujourd’hui ou pas encore découverts.
(7) Les textes originaux inspirés en hébreu et en grec (n’existent plus aujourd’hui).

LA BIBLE A-T-ELLE ETE ANNULEE?

Voici la théorie musulmane : de même que dans les premiers âges, une révélation postérieure abrogeait (déclarait nulle) une révélation antérieure, ainsi le Coran abrogea les précédentes révélations. Les premières Ecritures, même s’il en existait encore des exemplaires authentiques, sont ainsi déclarées inutiles pour les musulmans … Leur raisonnement est fort simple : comme l’Evangile a abrogé le Pentateuque de Moïse, ainsi le Coran abroge l’Evangile.

UNE REPONSE CHRETIENNE POUR CEUX QUI DISENT QU’ILS N’ONT PAS BESOIN DE LIRE LA BIBLE PARCE QU’ELLE A ETE ANNULEE

Le chrétien: Le verbe «annuler»(nasakha) est employé seulement deux fois dans le Coran, et à chaque occasion il ne s’applique pas à la Bible, mais à certains versets du Coran lui-même, qui sont déclarés être annulés. Vos chefs religieux affirment que 255 versets ont ainsi été annulés dans le Coran, mais leurs avis diffèrent quand il s’agit de les nommer. Lisez-vous encore ces versets annulés?

Le musulman: Oui, car nous lisons tout le Coran.

Le chrétien: Si donc – persuadés que vous devez le faire – vous lisez des versets que le Coran lui-même déclare annulés, pourquoi vous jugez-vous dispensés de l’obligation de lire le Pentateuque et l’Evangile, que le Coran ne déclare PAS annulés, mais auxquels le Coran vous commande de croire? (Sourate 2:130)

Welcome to a new author/ Bienvenue à un nouvel auteur

Let’s welcome esperanto, who is joining us on à vrai dire!

Esperanto  mainly writes on christian apologetics. He is also interested in exposing Islam and the Koran and has quite a good knowledge in that field, which I am sure, would initiate very interesting debates on this site.

 Esperanto also happens to be bilingual so you will be able to read some of his articles in French. It’s fantastic to have him on board as he will add great value to this blog. Now, together with esperanto stephane and myself, we are building a strong team and are also welcoming  new writers to take part in this exciting project. So if you feel inspired, let us know!

Bienvenue à esperanto, qui lui aussi nous rejoins sur à vrai dire!

Esperanto se spécialise en apologétique, il est aussi familier avec l’Islam et le Coran et je suis sûr que sa connaissance du sujet ouvrira sur de nombreux débats passionnants.

Esperanto est bilingue donc vous aurez aussi l’opportunité de lire certains de ses articles en anglais. C’est un grand privilège de l’avoir parmi nous, et tous ensemble, avec Stéphane qui vient aussi de nous rejoindre, formons un collectif ouvert à d’autres candidatures; donc si vous êtes intéressés, contactez nous et nous vous informerons de la démarche à suivre.

Soyez bénis et merci de votre fidélité,

Antoine Martin

Jay Smith, Sharing your Faith with the Muslims Full Length

Jay is a christian apologist who debates with muslims on Speakers Corner and on university campuses at a very high level, his heart is to share Christ with the muslim people he loves and to expose the false religion that is Islam.

http://www.kt.org/_lib/playerv2/archive.php?service_id=1219&type=video&page=archive