Islam on Trial: History, Revelation, and the God Who Cannot Contradict Himself

Watch this on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v738tak-islam-on-trial-history-revelation-and-the-god-who-cannot-contradict-himself.html

Monologue

This episode is not an attack on Muslims, and it is not a political performance. It is a Christian examination of truth. Christianity does not test religions by their size, their sincerity, or the devotion of their followers. It tests them by continuity. If God is truth, He does not contradict Himself across history. If God has acted decisively in the world, that action cannot later be denied and still claim the same divine source. Tonight, Islam is examined by that standard alone.

Islam presents itself as a final correction of earlier revelation. It affirms Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, yet it denies the central act that Christianity declares as God’s intervention in history: the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. This is not a small disagreement. It is not a misunderstanding. It is a total rupture. A Jesus who does not die cannot redeem. A Jesus who does not rise cannot conquer death. A God who does not enter suffering remains distant, issuing commands but never bearing the cost of love.

The Ethiopian canon preserves something that later Western theology often flattened: the patience of God, the depth of mercy, and the legal necessity of the cross. In that tradition, creation itself hinges on Christ’s descent into death and His victory over it. Islam’s Jesus cannot fulfill that role. Islam’s God commands submission, but offers no assurance of reconciliation, no indwelling Spirit, and no completed atonement. Obedience replaces relationship. Fear replaces intimacy. Judgment looms, but redemption is never secured.

This does not make Muslims evil. It makes them human beings navigating a system that withholds certainty and replaces sonship with servitude. Christianity does not despise those people. Christ wept over crowds who were misled. Truth spoken without love becomes cruelty, but love that refuses truth becomes silence. Neither serves God.

It is also critical to say this clearly: Islam does not need to be invented by Rome to be dangerous or useful. History shows something far more sobering. Religious systems that deny redemption and emphasize submission are easily exploited by empires. Christian–Muslim conflict has been fueled again and again by elites who profit from fear, division, and endless war. The boogeyman is not Islam alone. The boogeyman is power that feeds on blood and chaos.

The real war is not Christianity versus Islam. It is truth versus counterfeit authority. It is redemption versus control. It is the God who enters history, suffers with humanity, and restores life, versus systems that demand obedience without relationship. Islam fails the Christian test not because its followers are hateful, but because its theology denies what God has already done.

Christians are not called to mock Muslims, harass them, or fear them. They are called to stand firm, speak honestly, and refuse to be manipulated into hatred. God does not need violence to defend truth. He needs witnesses. And truth does not require exaggeration. It stands on its own.

That is what this episode is about. Not fear. Not propaganda. Not conquest. But the refusal to let God be redefined, redemption be erased, and history be rewritten without challenge.

Part 1

Truth does not restart itself. God does not reveal Himself in fragments that later cancel one another out. Revelation moves forward, not backward. What God does in history establishes a record, and that record becomes the standard by which every later claim must be measured. If God has acted decisively, no later message can deny that action and still claim the same source.

Christianity does not stand on a book alone, but on an event. The death and resurrection of Jesus are not teachings that can be revised or reinterpreted away. They are the center of the faith. Remove them, and Christianity collapses. Any system that affirms Jesus while denying His death and resurrection is not offering clarification; it is removing the foundation and replacing it with something else.

A claim to correction only makes sense if what came before failed. Islam presents itself as a restoration of earlier revelation, yet what it removes is not secondary doctrine but the very act God used to reconcile creation to Himself. A God who enters suffering and conquers death cannot later deny having done so. That would not be refinement. It would be contradiction.

This distinction matters because Christianity does not judge people by their sincerity, devotion, or birthplace. Human beings can be honest seekers of God while still trusting a system that does not come from Him. The issue is not moral intent but alignment with what God has already revealed. Truth is not measured by effort, but by continuity.

If a religion requires God to erase His own redemptive act in order to stand, then it cannot come from Him. No hostility is required to say that. No fear is required to believe it. Truth stands on its own, whether it is accepted or resisted.

Part 2

Islam did not emerge in a spiritual vacuum. It arose in a world already saturated with stories about Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, and Jesus. Arabia in the seventh century sat at the crossroads of trade routes, oral traditions, and religious disputes. Jewish communities, Christian sects, and hybrid movements all circulated fragments of Scripture, often disconnected from their original context. This matters, because Islam does not claim ignorance of earlier revelation. It claims knowledge of it, and then claims authority over it.

What Islam presents is not a continuation of biblical revelation, but a reinterpretation of it. Familiar names appear, but their meaning changes. Abraham is no longer the father of a covenant fulfilled through Christ, but a prototype of submission detached from redemptive history. Moses becomes primarily a lawgiver without trajectory toward incarnation. Jesus is honored as a prophet, but stripped of the very acts that give His life eternal consequence. The story is recognizable, yet altered at its core.

From a Christian standpoint, this raises an unavoidable question. If God had already revealed Himself through prophets, covenants, and finally through His Son, why would a later message return humanity to a pre-incarnation framework? Why would revelation move from intimacy back to distance, from sonship back to servitude, from sacrifice back to law? Progression that reverses direction is not progression at all.

This pattern is not unique to Islam. Throughout history, systems that emphasize submission without redemption often arise in periods of political consolidation. Law is easier to administer than transformation. Obedience is easier to enforce than love. A faith built around command and compliance can unify tribes, regulate behavior, and sustain empire, even while withholding assurance of reconciliation with God.

Understanding this does not require hostility toward Muslims. It requires clarity about systems. Islam’s structure reflects a world seeking order after fragmentation, authority after chaos, and certainty through control rather than through surrender to grace. The question Christianity must ask is not whether that structure produces disciplined societies, but whether it reflects the God who chose to enter history, bear suffering, and restore humanity from within.

Part 3

The figure of Jesus becomes the clearest dividing line. Islam speaks respectfully of Him, yet redefines Him so thoroughly that only the name remains familiar. He is presented as a prophet, a messenger, a teacher of righteousness, but not as the Son of God, not as the bearer of sin, and not as the conqueror of death. The cross is denied, the resurrection is dismissed, and with them the entire logic of redemption disappears.

From the Christian and Ethiopian perspective, this is not a negotiable difference. The cross is not an unfortunate end to a good life; it is the point where death is confronted and defeated. The resurrection is not symbolic; it is the reopening of life itself. Remove these events and humanity is left with instruction but no cure, commandment but no restoration. A Jesus who does not die and rise may inspire obedience, but He cannot save.

Islam’s denial of the crucifixion introduces a profound theological problem. If God allowed humanity to believe, preach, and die for a false account of His own intervention for centuries, then revelation becomes unreliable. The apostles become deceived witnesses, martyrs become victims of error, and God becomes a silent observer of a global misunderstanding. This is not a small correction of doctrine. It calls the entire trustworthiness of God’s action into question.

The Ethiopian canon preserves the coherence of God’s character in a way that exposes this fracture. God is not distant, nor reactive, nor improvising. He is patient, deliberate, and willing to enter suffering to resolve what humanity cannot. Christ’s descent into death is not weakness; it is judgment against death itself. His resurrection is not escape; it is victory. Any theology that removes this sequence alters the nature of God from Redeemer to Regulator.

This is where the Christian position becomes firm without becoming cruel. Islam is not rejected because its followers lack sincerity, but because its Jesus lacks a cross. Without that cross, the story of God no longer moves toward healing, but toward endless submission without certainty. That is not the gospel, no matter how reverently the name of Jesus is spoken.

Part 4

Islam replaces redemption with obedience. Where Christianity centers reconciliation on what God has done, Islam centers righteousness on what humanity must continually do. Submission becomes the defining virtue, not transformation. The believer is never invited into sonship, only servitude. Assurance is withheld, not because God is mysterious, but because the system itself has no finished work to point to.

This shift reshapes the nature of God. In Christianity, God commands, but He also carries the cost of His commands. He enters history, bears suffering, and restores what humanity cannot fix. In Islam, God commands from above, remaining untouched by the consequences of obedience or failure. Mercy exists, but it is discretionary. Judgment is certain, but redemption is never complete. The relationship is vertical, not relational.

Fear becomes functional in such a system. When salvation is never secured, obedience must be maintained through uncertainty. Works accumulate, but assurance never arrives. This produces devotion, discipline, and loyalty, but it also produces anxiety. A faith built on command without completion can regulate behavior, but it cannot heal the conscience.

This structure has consequences beyond theology. Systems that emphasize submission without redemption are easily aligned with political power. Law can be enforced. Compliance can be measured. Authority can be centralized. This does not mean Islam was created for empire, but it does explain why empires find such systems useful. Control thrives where assurance is absent.

From a Christian perspective, this is not liberation. God does not withhold intimacy to maintain authority. He grants intimacy because authority is secure. The gospel does not produce obedience through fear, but obedience through love. Where redemption is finished, obedience flows freely. Where redemption is absent, obedience becomes survival.

Part 5

This difference in structure explains why religious identity becomes so easily politicized. When faith is built around submission rather than reconciliation, it can be mobilized without ever appealing to the inner transformation of the heart. Loyalty can be demanded, boundaries enforced, and enemies defined, all while presenting obedience as righteousness. The religion itself does not need to be false in every detail for this to happen. It only needs to lack a completed redemption that frees the conscience from fear.

History shows that Christian–Muslim conflict has rarely been driven by ordinary believers alone. It has been shaped, amplified, and prolonged by those who benefit from permanent division. Fear is profitable. Endless struggle justifies surveillance, militarization, taxation, and control. A world kept on edge never asks deeper questions about who is directing the conflict or why peace is always postponed.

This does not mean Muslims are pawns by nature, nor Christians victims by default. It means systems that emphasize obedience without assurance are vulnerable to exploitation. When people are taught that submission itself is the goal, authority can always claim divine justification. When redemption is absent, conflict never truly ends, because there is no final victory over death to anchor peace.

Christianity, particularly as preserved in the Ethiopian tradition, cuts through this cycle by declaring that the decisive battle has already been fought. Death has been confronted. Judgment has been addressed. Life has been restored. That announcement removes the spiritual fuel that endless religious war depends on. A people who know they are reconciled do not need perpetual enemies to justify their existence.

This is why the examination of Islam matters now. Not because Muslims are the threat, but because systems without redemption are repeatedly used to keep humanity divided, fearful, and controllable. The exposure is not of people, but of mechanisms. And the answer is not domination, but truth anchored in what God has already done, not what power still demands.

Part 6

The question, then, is not how Christians should feel about Muslims, but how Christians should respond to truth. Scripture never calls believers to defeat false systems through force or ridicule. It calls them to expose error by light, to speak plainly, and to remain unmoved by fear. When truth is clear, manipulation loses its power. When fear governs belief, truth is easily traded for security.

The Ethiopian canon reinforces this posture by presenting God as patient rather than panicked, deliberate rather than reactionary. Judgment is real, but it is never rushed. Mercy is extended farther than institutions would ever allow. This understanding removes the urgency that false systems rely on. When people believe God is constantly on the verge of condemning them, they become easy to control. When they know God has already acted to reconcile creation, fear loses its grip.

This clarity also protects Christians from becoming what they oppose. Hatred masquerading as discernment is still hatred. Truth spoken to wound is no longer truth; it becomes another weapon in the same cycle of control. The goal is not to replace one religious hierarchy with another, but to bear witness to a God who does not need coercion to rule.

Islam, examined honestly, reveals a god who demands submission without self-disclosure, obedience without intimacy, and loyalty without assurance. Christianity proclaims a God who reveals Himself fully, bears the cost of reconciliation, and invites humanity into restored relationship. These two visions of God cannot be merged, but neither do they require hostility to be distinguished.

At this point, the responsibility of the Christian is simple and heavy at the same time. Do not lie about Islam. Do not exaggerate its origins. Do not mock its followers. But do not surrender the truth of Christ to preserve comfort or social approval. God does not ask His witnesses to be loud. He asks them to be faithful.

Part 7

There is also a responsibility to speak to Muslims as human beings, not as symbols. Many are born into Islam, taught its prayers before they can question its claims, and disciplined into obedience long before they are invited to understand God. Their devotion is often sincere, their moral seriousness real, and their desire to please God genuine. None of that is dismissed by Christianity. Christ never condemned people for inherited belief. He addressed systems that misrepresented the Father.

This is where the tone of witness matters. Truth does not require humiliation to be effective. The gospel spreads through clarity and compassion, not through fear or force. When Christians reduce Muslims to enemies, they confirm the very distortions they claim to oppose. When they speak with honesty and humility, they expose the difference between a God who commands from a distance and a God who draws near.

The Ethiopian witness strengthens this approach by preserving a vision of God who waits, warns, and invites rather than crushes. Judgment is real, but it is not arbitrary. God gives time because He desires relationship, not compliance. This posture disarms fear and opens space for conversation that propaganda cannot survive.

At the same time, respect for people does not mean silence about truth. A system that denies the cross cannot be affirmed as divine. A theology that withholds assurance cannot be presented as good news. Love does not require agreement, and disagreement does not require hostility.

In this light, the role of the Christian is not to win arguments, but to stand as a witness to what God has already done. The power of that witness is not volume, but consistency. When truth is steady and love is genuine, false systems lose their grip without a single insult being spoken.

Part 8

The Ethiopian canon ultimately reframes the entire discussion by restoring a long view of God’s intention. God is not scrambling to regain control of creation, nor issuing competing revelations to correct His own failures. He is patient, deliberate, and consistent, allowing human systems to rise and fall while His redemptive work remains intact. This perspective exposes why later religions that deny Christ’s victory over death feel urgent, rigid, and defensive. They are trying to secure obedience in a world where assurance has been removed.

In the Ethiopian witness, death itself is the true enemy, not rival religions or cultures. Christ’s descent and resurrection resolve that enemy at its root. Once death is defeated, fear loses its leverage. Once fear loses its leverage, control systems weaken. This is why redemption-centered faiths are always inconvenient for power. They free people inwardly, making them harder to govern through terror or endless threat.

Islam, by denying that decisive victory, leaves humanity locked inside history, still striving, still submitting, still hoping their obedience will be enough. That condition can produce discipline and devotion, but it cannot produce rest. It keeps the conscience working without closure. From a Christian standpoint, that is not liberation. It is spiritual exhaustion dressed as righteousness.

This is where the conversation must return to God Himself. The question is not which religion produces stronger followers or larger civilizations. The question is which vision of God is true. A God who enters history, suffers, redeems, and restores is fundamentally different from a god who commands from above and never shares the cost. These are not two paths to the same summit. They are two entirely different mountains.

Recognizing this does not require fear of Islam, nor obsession with it. It requires confidence in what God has already revealed and preserved. The Ethiopian canon stands as a witness that truth does not need revision, and redemption does not need replacement. God has spoken, God has acted, and God has not contradicted Himself.

Part 9

What remains is a warning directed inward, not outward. Christianity has often failed its own standard by responding to false systems with fear, aggression, or political compromise. When believers abandon confidence in redemption, they begin to mirror the very structures they critique. The moment truth is defended through coercion, it stops being a witness and becomes another form of control.

This is how elites succeed in weaponizing religion. They do not need believers to abandon faith, only to abandon discernment. When Christians are driven by panic about Islam, they become predictable, reactive, and easy to steer. When Muslims are driven by fear of judgment without assurance, they become equally vulnerable. Fear is the common currency. Control is the shared outcome.

The gospel interrupts this cycle by refusing to operate on urgency manufactured by threat. God is not racing against time. He is not losing ground. He is not dependent on institutions, borders, or dominance to accomplish His will. A people who understand this cannot be easily manipulated into holy wars, culture wars, or endless دشمن narratives disguised as righteousness.

This clarity also guards against pride. Christianity does not stand over Islam because Christians are superior, but because Christ has already acted. The authority rests in what God has done, not in who claims to represent Him. That truth humbles the witness while strengthening the testimony.

In the end, exposure is not about tearing Islam down, but about refusing to let God be redefined. It is about protecting the integrity of redemption in a world that prefers systems it can manage over grace it cannot control. When that line is held calmly and consistently, deception loses its urgency, fear loses its power, and truth stands without needing to shout.

Part 10

What this examination ultimately leaves behind is not anger, but clarity. Christianity does not survive by opposing every other belief system on earth. It survives by remaining anchored to what God has already done and refusing to trade that anchor for relevance, safety, or approval. Islam has been examined here not because it is unique in error, but because it stands as one of the clearest examples of a system that speaks of God while denying His decisive act in history.

The final dividing line is simple and unavoidable. Either God entered history, bore suffering, defeated death, and restored humanity through Christ, or He did not. If He did, then no later message can undo that without undoing God Himself. If He did not, then Christianity collapses entirely. There is no middle ground, no blended path, and no diplomatic resolution between redemption and denial.

This clarity frees the believer from fear. A God who has already conquered death does not need enemies to prove His power. He does not need His followers to shout, threaten, or dominate. He needs witnesses who trust that truth stands on its own. When Christians stop reacting to Islam as a threat and start responding from confidence in redemption, the entire posture changes.

The goal, then, is not to defeat Islam, but to remain faithful to Christ. Not to provoke conflict, but to refuse confusion. Not to harden hearts, but to speak honestly about who God is and what He has done. Systems rise and fall. Empires manipulate and collapse. But redemption, once accomplished, does not need to be defended by force.

In that light, this is not a message of fear for Muslims or triumph for Christians. It is a reminder that God has not contradicted Himself, has not retreated from history, and has not replaced grace with command. He has spoken, He has acted, and He has preserved His testimony. The responsibility now is simply to stand in it.

Conclusion

The conclusion is not a call to confrontation, but to steadiness. Christianity does not need Islam to fail in order for Christ to be true. Truth is not validated by comparison, but by coherence. God has revealed Himself through action, not abstraction, and that action stands complete. Any system that requires God to retract, revise, or deny His own redemptive work cannot originate from Him, no matter how disciplined its followers or how vast its reach.

This clarity should produce neither arrogance nor fear. It should produce peace. A redeemed people do not need enemies to define themselves, nor do they need perpetual conflict to justify belief. They stand on what has already been accomplished. That posture exposes manipulation without hysteria and error without cruelty. It allows Christians to love Muslims as neighbors while refusing to blur the truth about God.

History shows that religions without redemption are easily weaponized, but it also shows that redemption-centered faith quietly endures while empires burn themselves out. God is not served by panic, outrage, or domination. He is served by witnesses who remain faithful when confusion is profitable and fear is encouraged.

In the end, this examination is not about Islam’s future, but about Christianity’s integrity. Will the church remain anchored to the cross and resurrection, or will it trade clarity for comfort? God has not contradicted Himself. He has not hidden the truth behind fear. He has acted openly, decisively, and mercifully. The task now is not to invent a new message, but to remain faithful to the one already given.

Bibliography

• Armstrong, Karen. Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet. London: Phoenix, 1992.
• Bauer, Thomas. A Culture of Ambiguity: An Alternative History of Islam. Translated by Hinrich Biesterfeldt and Tricia Tunstall. New York: Columbia University Press, 2021.
• Berger, Maurits S. A Brief History of Islam in Europe: Thirteen Centuries of Creed, Conflict and Coexistence. Leiden: Amsterdam University Press, 2014.
• Donaldson, Dwight M. The Shi‘ite Religion: A History of Islam in Persia and Irak. London: Luzac & Company, 1933.
• Hayden, Timothy J. Islam and Christianity Exposed: Errors in Pastor Tim Roosenberg’s Islam and Christianity in Prophecy. Brimley, MI: Final Crisis Publishing, 2015.
• Levtzion, Nehemia, and Randall L. Pouwels, eds. The History of Islam in Africa. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 2012.
• Lings, Martin. Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources. Rev. ed. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions International, 2006.
• MacLean, Gerald, and Nabil Matar. Britain and the Islamic World, 1558–1713. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
• Malone, Henry. Islam Unmasked. Lewisville, TX: Vision Life Publications, 2002.
• Najeebabadi, Akbar Shah. The History of Islam. Vol. 2. Riyadh: Darussalam, 2001.
• Razwy, Sayed Ali Asgher. A Restatement of the History of Islam and Muslims. N.p.: Lulu.com, 2022.
• Robinson, Chase F., Maribel Fierro, David Morgan, and Robert Irwin, eds. The New Cambridge History of Islam. Vol. 4, Islamic Cultures and Societies to the End of the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
• Trimingham, J. Spencer. A History of Islam in West Africa. London: Oxford University Press, 1962.
• William Federer. What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur’an. St. Louis: Amerisearch, 2011.

Endnotes

1. Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet (London: Phoenix, 1992), discusses Islam’s emergence within a late antique environment already shaped by Jewish and Christian traditions, emphasizing that Islam presents itself as a correction of earlier revelation rather than an extension of it.
2. Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources, rev. ed. (Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions International, 2006), provides a synthesis of early Islamic sources showing that Islam explicitly denies the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus while affirming Him only as a prophet.
3. Thomas Bauer, A Culture of Ambiguity: An Alternative History of Islam, trans. Hinrich Biesterfeldt and Tricia Tunstall (New York: Columbia University Press, 2021), demonstrates that Islamic theology developed within a framework emphasizing law, submission, and authority rather than redemptive finality.
4. Chase F. Robinson et al., eds., The New Cambridge History of Islam, vol. 4, Islamic Cultures and Societies to the End of the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), documents how Islamic religious structures historically aligned with imperial governance and legal administration.
5. Timothy J. Hayden, Islam and Christianity Exposed: Errors in Pastor Tim Roosenberg’s Islam and Christianity in Prophecy (Brimley, MI: Final Crisis Publishing, 2015), critiques interpretations that frame Islam primarily as an eschatological enemy while arguing instead for theological discernment grounded in Christ’s redemptive work.
6. Dwight M. Donaldson, The Shi‘ite Religion: A History of Islam in Persia and Irak (London: Luzac & Company, 1933), traces internal Islamic divisions that reveal how authority, obedience, and legitimacy became central to Islamic identity formation.
7. Nehemia Levtzion and Randall L. Pouwels, eds., The History of Islam in Africa (Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 2012), illustrates how Islam adapted to diverse political contexts, reinforcing the argument that its structure is highly compatible with state power.
8. Gerald MacLean and Nabil Matar, Britain and the Islamic World, 1558–1713 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), provides historical evidence of how later Christian–Muslim conflict was shaped and exploited by imperial interests rather than driven solely by theology.
9. Henry Malone, Islam Unmasked (Lewisville, TX: Vision Life Publications, 2002), represents a strand of evangelical critique focused on Islam’s denial of salvation through Christ, while underscoring the need to distinguish systems from individual believers.
10. Sayed Ali Asgher Razwy, A Restatement of the History of Islam and Muslims (n.p.: Lulu.com, 2022), offers an internal Islamic historical narrative that confirms Islam’s self-understanding as a corrective revelation, reinforcing the Christian claim of theological discontinuity.
11. J. Spencer Trimingham, A History of Islam in West Africa (London: Oxford University Press, 1962), further supports the argument that Islam’s expansion historically coincided with governance, law, and social regulation rather than redemptive theology.
12. William J. Federer, What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur’an (St. Louis: Amerisearch, 2011), documents doctrinal differences between Islam and Christianity, particularly regarding Jesus, salvation, and judgment, from a Christian analytical perspective.

Synopsis

This episode presents a sober Christian examination of Islam that avoids fear, hostility, and speculation while remaining uncompromising about truth. Standing on the Ethiopian preservation of Scripture, the show tests Islam by a single standard: continuity with God’s revealed action in history. It traces Islam’s emergence in a post-biblical world, examines its redefinition of Jesus, and explains why the denial of the cross and resurrection represents a complete theological rupture rather than a minor doctrinal disagreement. The program distinguishes clearly between Muslims as human beings worthy of respect and a religious system that replaces redemption with submission and assurance with obedience.

The episode also exposes how religions lacking a finished redemptive work are easily exploited by political and imperial power, turning faith into a tool of control through fear and perpetual conflict. Rather than framing Islam as a boogeyman or conspiracy, the show identifies the true danger as systems that deny reconciliation and therefore remain compatible with manipulation. The conclusion calls Christians to steadiness, clarity, and love, affirming that God has not contradicted Himself, has not retreated from history, and has already acted decisively through Christ. The task of the believer is not to dominate or panic, but to stand faithfully in that completed truth.

#ChristianTruth, #IslamExamined, #EthiopianCanon, #JesusChrist, #TheCross, #Resurrection, #BiblicalDiscernment, #TruthOverFear, #FalseAuthority, #RedemptionNotSubmission, #SpiritualWarfare, #FaithAndHistory, #ExposeTheLie, #LoveWithoutCompromise, #CauseBeforeSymptom

ChristianTruth, IslamExamined, EthiopianCanon, JesusChrist, TheCross, Resurrection, BiblicalDiscernment, TruthOverFear, FalseAuthority, RedemptionNotSubmission, SpiritualWarfare, FaithAndHistory, ExposeTheLie, LoveWithoutCompromise, CauseBeforeSymptom