How Christianity Might Have Been Stolen From The Arabic Church

The QUR'AN has a history, but it's mostly about JESUS!

Polemics are the pushing of an idea, strategically "offensive." Apparently, the hymns, praise, and worship-of-Jesus lectionaries of 1st through 7th century Aramaic Christians were well published in the Fertile Cresent. But the church northeast of Arabia was monophysite; it believed in Jesus, but did not believe Jesus had the same nature as God. That was a matter of apologetics: was Jesus a) an incarnation of God with God's nature, or b) a devout and submitted man who did God's will in sacrificing himself to BECOME the Messiah? Through the centuries the Aramaic literature was translated as well as it could be into Arabic. This in itself was commendable: "This is our worship to our God, the one and only true God."

The argument as to whether Jesus - the Praised One - was to be praised for BEING God or for BECOMING Messiah spilled into the Arabic church. Obviously, the polemics for the latter won out. Unfortunately, Arabic pride came in, and they distanced themselves further from the former church by inventing their own historical narrative - a load of you-know-what - indiscriminately (not questioning as to whether it was true or not) accepted by masses of Arabs, becoming Islamic dogma. THAT is why questions as to whether the historical narrative is true or not are not allowed: “Don’t look! (For you will not find!)”

The truth is, in my opinion, there is only God’s nature. Man does not have a separate or different nature, but God’s nature in us is obscured from our awareness by our IGNORANCE. THAT is what we are here to overcome. It is true that God alone has His nature, but we too are Him. THAT is why in Psalm 82:6 He says, “I have said, ‘You are God!’” Why do we not believe Him, ladies and gentlemen? Why do we not believe God?