More Substitutionary atonement in Islamic sources

For more see:

Why did Allah substitute an innocent ram in the place of Abraham’s son?

Islam could not get rid of the concept of substitutionary atonement.

About Ken Temple

I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a sinner who has been saved by the grace of God alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), through faith alone (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; 4:1-16), in Christ alone (John 14:6). But a true faith does not stay alone, it should result in change, fruit, good works, and deeper levels of repentance and hatred of my own sins of selfishness and pride. I am not better than you! I still make mistakes and sin, but the Lord is working on me, conforming me to His character. (Romans 8:28-29; 2 Corinthians 3:16-18) When I do sin, I hate the sin as it is an affront to God, and seek His forgiveness in repentance. (Mark 1:15; 2 Corinthians 7:7-10; Colossians 3:5-16 ) Praise God for His love for sinners (Romans 5:8), shown by the voluntary coming of Christ and His freely laying down His life for us (John 10:18), becoming flesh/human (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), dying for sins of people from all nations, tribes, and cultures (Revelation 5:9), on the cross, in history, rising from the dead (Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 28, Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians chapter 15). His resurrection from the dead proved that Jesus is the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, the word of God from eternity past; and that He was all the gospels say He was and that He is truth and the life and the way to salvation. (John 14:6)
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Islam, Muslims, Substitutionary Atonement. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to More Substitutionary atonement in Islamic sources

  1. Vaqas Rehman says:

    Hi Ken i just finished the video and i must say i’m disappointed. Most of the video could have been easily answered if david simply understood the islamic concept of sin. You see in islam when a person misleads another into sin that in it of itself is a sin. and that sin(the misleading) will get bigger each time the person they mislead will sin. thus they will get a share of what the other person earned in punishment without detracting from the other persons sin.

    please see these links
    https://islamqa.info/en/answers/128686/whoever-sets-a-bad-precedent-will-bear-the-burden-of-sin-of-those-who-do-it-until-the-day-of-resurrection
    https://www.answering-christianity.com/karim/suffer_for_sin.htm
    https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2016/05/05/does-islam-teach-substitutionary-atonement-a-response-to-a-christian-apologist/

    The hadith of the jews and the christians is to be interpreted under the same principle laid out in the quran and ahadith. Aside from the fact that they will go to hell mainly for their own sins, which would be things like shirk, killing the prophets, changing the Torah and Gospel, etc, The reason jews and the christians are being given the weight of the muslims sins is due to their misleading the muslims. this isn’t just my interpretation either. it is stated in another hadith,

    Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri:

    The Prophet (ﷺ) said, “You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure, you would follow them.” We said, “O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)! (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?” He said, “Whom else?”
    https://sunnah.com/bukhari/96/50

    • Ken Temple says:

      Thanks for your comment Vaqas!
      Of all the Muslims over at “bloggingtheology”, your behavior is the best.

      Issue # 1 –
      Question: Where does it say in those Hadith narrations that the sins are the extra ones – the ones that Jews and Christians committed by leading Muslims astray?

      I quoted at least three of the same Hadiths that David Wood did in my own article, which I linked to at the bottom of this post with David’s video.

      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2014/08/23/islam-could-not-get-rid-of-the-concept-of-sacrifice-ransom-or-substitutionary-atonement/

      Issue # 2 –
      Question # 2 – Does your interpretation mean that all Muslims who “were led astray” (by Jews and Christians) – that is, committed apostasy and are no longer Muslims, will be redeemed / saved / enter into paradise, even though they left Islam?

      Issue # 3 – the Islamic concept of sin is wrong, (coming 500-600 years later and seeking to diminish God’s holiness and wrath against sin with just “Allah can forgive if He wants without justice / wrath being satisfied)”, so that is a moot point with me, no matter how your religion defines more and more sin and guilt added onto the previous sins and guilt that is enough to send to hell-fire. The emphasis in Islam is on external sins and rituals and social behavior, even though there is some teaching about internal sins – it is not the emphasis in Islam.

      Issue # 4
      One of your links is to Faiz’s (QuranandBibleblog) article where he tries to refute my articles, but he did not at all. To try and refute him directly to his articles is useless anymore because of all his spewing angry and ad hominem arguments and insults and bravado and ugly behavior.

      The idea of substitution is there. “deliver to every Muslim” – a Jew or a Christian is delivered in their place; this is their rescue from Hell-Fire. to rescue or save from hell means that there is forgiveness of sins.

      ‘When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your rescue from Hell-Fire.’

      ‘No Muslim would die but Allah would admit in his stead a Jew or a Christian in Hell-Fire.’

      “in his stead” = substitution
      “as heavy sins as a mountain”, = metaphor for guilt

      ‘There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians.’

      “forgive them and He would place in their stead” = substitutionary payment, or ransom or atonement.

      the ideas of salvation (rescue from Hell-fire), guilt, and substitution are there. Allah did not forgive them without a substitution/ransom.

      Islam could not completely get rid of the very clear teaching in the OT and the NT, and it is even clearer in the Qur’an with the story of Abraham and his son.

      Qur’an Surah Al Saffat 37:107 – “We have ransomed him with a mighty sacrifice.”
      See my article on that, where I demonstrate the concept of substitutionary atonement is unknowingly affirmed.
      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2016/10/21/so-why-did-allah-substitute-an-innocent-animal-in-the-place-of-abrahams-son/

      The idea of ransom and redemption is there, since the Qur’an is seeking to use the historical event in Genesis 22 and capture it for their own. Since it changes details of God’s holy word in other details, the Qur’an is wrong and guilty of seeking to change God’s word. Even though the Qur’an in another place denies blood atonement (Surah Al-Hajj الحج
      22:37), the Qur’an is wrong in this, because it denies the previous established revelations from God in the OT and the NT about blood atonement, and it also contradicts itself since it unknowingly affirms/ confirms مصدق (and related forms of this word) the previous revelations (Surah 5:47; 5:68:10:94; 3:3; 2:136, 29:46, etc.)
      “Their meat will not reach Allah, nor will their blood, but what reaches Him is piety from you. Thus have We subjected them to you that you may glorify Allah for that [to] which He has guided you; and give good tidings to the doers of good.” (Surah 22:37)

      So, Faiz (Quranandbibleblog) did not refute anything at all that I have written.

      Issue # 5 – I appreciate your proper demeanor in reasonable debate and argumentation, but Faiz has discredited himself and he discredits your religion in the extreme sinful and angry way he responds to me and my arguments. The fact that you and other Muslims (and Stewjo004 also shows his sinful anger and hatred sometimes and even admitted he has hatred toward me) do not rebuke your fellow Muslims in bad behavior (manners, Adab ادب ) demonstrates the emptiness of your religion to give you “Piety” تقوی or صالح – whether that means character or behavior or obedience to a religious ritual, it is all about your own good works, which even that verse shows (Surah 22:37), that Islamic “salvation” / going to paradise depends on the person’s own righteousness and good works.

      I have spent a lot of time over the years debating with Paul Williams and other Muslims over at Paul’s blogs ( he had deleted 2 of them over the years; and Ijaz hijacked one and then he recently got it back, etc.) Faiz is too rude and evil to give me much desire to read his material and respond anymore, although I reserve the right to respond if I want to and when I want to, if I have time, God willing, Insha’Allah. But for now, there is just too much to keep up with in life and the many articles that he and Stewjo004 have written, that have already been refuted in different ways by different people, myself included.

      Issue # 6 – Do you know why Paul Williams suddenly took an indefinite leave of “bloggingtheology” and also completely deleted his Twitter account? If you know, why?

      It seems weird to me to completely delete the Twitter account, when he could just leave it as is, and turn off notifications, etc. He does this kind of thing every year or two, since around 2013.

      See here
      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/the-mysterious-disappearance-of-paul-b-williams-web-sites/

      (and other articles in the side bar under “Paul Bilal Williams”. I have refuted and interacted with him many times in the past.)

      I hope he is ok and I sincerely wish true peace for you and for all of you Muslims. I wish peace for Faiz and Stewjo004 and Shaad and others also. True peace is only found is Jesus Al Masih, the NT (the true Injeel), the content and revelation and truth about Him, His character, person, and work of redemption in atonement and resurrection.

      John 14:27
      Romans 5:1
      Matthew 11:27-30

  2. Vaqas Rehman says:

    @Ken Temple

    Thank you for the reply Ken.
    Issue 1)
    I felt it was implied by the ahadith i gave. again
    Muslim (1017) narrated that Jareer ibn ‘Abd-Allah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever sets a good precedent in Islam will have the reward for that and the reward of those who do it after him, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. And whoever sets a bad precedent in Islam will bear the burden of sin for that, and the burden of those who do it after him, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.”

    Issue 2)
    No and i apologize for the confusion. I should have worded it better. By misleading i meant general falling into sin and the like. Not the ultimate misleading of leaving the religion.

    Issue 3)
    With all due respect Ken i don’t care if it’s a moot point to you,(especially when you’re interpretation is still wrong) if you seek to criticize something it’s only fair you know what you’re talking about. Which, quite frankly, david and you on this topic don’t.

    issue 4)
    I disagree. I feel QB did an excellent job in refuting you’re articles, though I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree.

    issue 5)
    If QB’s behavior discredits himself and his religion, then surely the same can be said of david and certain other christian apologists. And yet you still use their material. Moreover I feel the same way about david and others that you do about QB and the rest on the blog. Yet I still sit through such content david wood and his ilk produce to see if they have a point, and offer a response if i feel like it. I also haven’t seen any true “refutations” of QB and Stews work so if you have some, then please share them.

    issue 6)
    Sadly I don’t know what’s going on with him but i’ll be sure to let you know if anything comes up.

    And I invite you to the true peace that comes from Islam ken.

    • Ken Temple says:

      Thanks.
      No. 1 – the Hadiths that I quoted in my article (and they are also in David’s video) don’t indicate that.
      No. 2 – thanks. How do Jews and Christians make Muslims sin? Aren’t the Muslims stronger than that? Those Hadiths don’t say that they led them astray.
      No. 3 – wrong. You guys also don’t know what you are talking about when it comes to Christianity and the Bible (both OT and NT) The Islamic concept of sin is very weak and shallow and emphasizes external actions, rituals, and social behavior. Your religion does not diagnose the heart of mankind very well at all, although there are some hints at it.
      No. 4 – Yes, we disagree. QB’s articles don’t refute anything true about Christianity and the Bible.
      No. 5 – My point still stands, since I did rebuke Sam Shamoun many times over the years for his behavior. When they stick to arguments and principles and texts, their material is good.
      No. 6 – ok.

      How can Islam bring peace when true peace was already established 600 years before Islam, through Jesus the Messiah and His atonement and resurrection?
      John 14:27
      Matthew 11:27-30
      Romans 5:1

      You are all alone with no mediator on the day of judgement with your own claims of righteousness and piety تقوی of your own doing. (faith plus works righteousness)

      You can never be assured of paradise / salvation – everything is Ensha’Allah – “if God wills”.
      Abdullah Kunde (and many Muslims have admitted this to me over the years, since 1983) admitted that there is no assurance of salvation or paradise. (see in the post and debate he had with Samuel Green several years ago.)

      Abdullah Kunde quoted it (from Al Ghazzali) at the end on the last video section of questions from the audience.

      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/still-looking-for-two-references-to-famous-al-ghazzali-quotes-and-the-essence-of-our-differences/

      “If on the day of judgment Allah decides to send all the good people (believers in Allah) to hell and all the evil people to paradise, He can do that, and we have no right to question.” Al Ghazzali, famous Muslim theologian

      Can anyone track that down and publish the reference? (he promised to try and get it for me and never did – many years ago.)

      If all or even most Muslims agree with that statement that it is Islamic theology and not much disagreement; then that is enough for anyone not to want to become a Muslim, for it reveals the arbitrary and capricious nature of Allah and that His capricious will is above His nature/character and any promise or word to be faithful to that promise that He would give to believers.

      But the God of the Bible cannot lie and is faithful to His promises.

      Titus 1:2 – “God, who cannot lie”

      The true God is not able to lie.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        Thanks again for the reply.
        1) I’m using Quran and other ahadith to interpret that hadiths in question. The hadith about “whoever sets a bad precedent in Islam will bear the burden of sin for that, and the burden of those who do it after him, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.”
        +
        “The Prophet (ﷺ) said, “You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure, you would follow them.” We said, “O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)! (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?” He said, “Whom else?”
        =
        The interpretation that i’m using.
        I don’t think its a stretch and in fact I think it is proper use of scripture interpreting scripture.

        2) What do mean how? By calling to generic sinful behavior. surely you’re not suggesting that christians are impervious to being pressured into sin are you?

        3-4) I obviously disagree with everything you’ve written and it seems we’re simply going to talk at each other at this rate.

        As for you’re concluding remarks i’m pretty sure Stew and QB have already refuted you on those points so I won’t go into too much detail.

        “We say Inshallah because everything is in Allah’s hands. This is how we praise Him. We don’t just arrogantly say that we are saved. Of course, Allah does promise salvation to those who believe in Him. We just don’t say we are saved or have assurance because we don’t know the future.”-QB

        Also God has forbidden injustice for himself so i don’t see the point in disregarding Islam due to a hypothetical scenario that won’t even happen.

        As for the faith plus righteousness, please see Matthew 25. The parable of sheep and goats shows that righteousness saves. Though i’m sure you’ll respond that
        I don’t have the “whole message.”

      • Ken Temple says:

        Regarding Matthew 25, one must first become a sheep by accepting the Shepherd and His atoning death. The Magi submitted to Him as the shepherd-king-Messiah (Matthew 2:6 and surrounding context, 2:1-12 – “they worshipped him”; and “As it is written, Strike the Shepherd . . . ” Matthew 26:31 (Quoting Zechariah 13:7; see also Zechariah 12:10 – “they will look upon Me who they pierced . . . ” – the “striking” and “piercing” is talking about Christ’s work in atonement.
        The good works of Matthew 25 are the results of being true sheep, as opposed to goats (unbelievers). They do those good works because they had already become sheep.

        The rest of your comments I already answered many times.

      • Ken Temple says:

        “Also God has forbidden injustice for himself . . . ”
        In the Bible, the previous true revelations, God does not need to command Himself to not do injustice because He is by nature and essence justice and truth and purity and therefore He cannot do injustice or evil, based on His nature.

        This is a much more superior principle than yours in Islam that says that Allah commanded Himself to not do injustice.

        God does not need to command Himself to obey; as purity and holiness and justice is His nature.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        Quick question Ken are you saying that if God wanted to be unjust he couldn’t have the power to do so?

        Anyway the statement of God forbidding injustice for himself is akin to when he asks a question he already knows the answer too. One could even say its a metaphor to express his justice. God is just, pure and holy, that’s what forbiding injustice for himself means. How you can derive the opposite is beyond me.

        Also did you find my explanations of the hadith sufficient? And if not, why not?

      • Ken Temple says:

        God cannot do what is contrary to His holy nature. God cannot lie and God cannot sin or do evil; although He sovereignly ordained [decided beforehand that it would come into being] that evil happened and entered into the world and He sovereignly allows evil to exist, like Satan and evil people.

    • Keith Smith says:

      Not sure it’s obvious what is going on here by looking just at these hadiths. Perhaps these should be part of a more comprehensive discussion of how Quran and hadith see punishment for sin.

      The first hadith (Bukhari/96/50) says only that the Muslim blindly follow Christians and Jews, maybe by their own will and not necessarily that they are led astray.

      Not sure but dosen’t the second hadith (Muslim 1017) talk about Muslims? I mean, Muslims wouldn’t expect other than Muslims to set good precedents in Islam.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Keith Smith
        Hi Keith, and thank you for the reply.
        You see in Islam when a person sets a bad example that causes people to sin, it doesn’t matter if the recipients are willing or unwilling. for example,-

        ” It was narrated that Ibn Mas‘ood (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “No soul is killed unlawfully, but there is a share of the sin on the first son of Adam, because he was the first one to set the precedent of killing.”

        Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3336) and Muslim (1677).

        The second hadith does talk about muslim in that instance but there are generic versions as well. I should have started with the generic one first my apologies for any confusion.

        “Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Whoever calls to guidance will have a reward similar to those who follow him, without detracting from their rewards at all. Whoever calls to misguidance will have sin upon him similar to those who follow him, without detracting from their sins at all.”

        Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2674

        Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Muslim

        I hope that helps clear things up.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        I just realized my comment may come off as saying those who are compelled to sin by say threat of death are the same as those who aren’t, and that was not my intention! i meant willing as their own will from the get go. And i meant unwilling in the context of being led astray but still choosing to sin. I must apologize again for the confusion.

      • Keith Smith says:

        Hi Vaqas,

        Thank you for your thoughtful clarification and response.

        “You see in Islam when a person sets a bad example that causes people to sin, it doesn’t matter if the recipients are willing or unwilling. for example”.

        But are Muslims not supposed to follow their own religion rather than following examples set by Christians and Jews? Jews and Christians, for example, are allowed to consume alcohol and this might be setting a bad example or even lead a Muslim to sin.
        Should a Jew or a Christian bear part of the Muslim’s sin even if there was no intention of making the Muslim sin?

        And if a person unknowingly and unintentionally does something that sets a bad example and a Muslim who knows it is wrong then sees it but nevertheless take this lead. Would it not matter here if the recipient (the Muslim) is willing or unwilling? Should I bear part of his sin if I did not know and did not intend but he knew and did intend? Would Allah not here be merciful and forgiving?

        Regarding al-Bukhaari (3336) and Muslim (1677). I see your point, though I suppose Cain was a Muslim, as he is the son of Adam, a prophet of God in the Muslim understanding. Still, I would ask philosophically if it is right that Cain should bear punishment for as long as there are unlawful killings going on in the world.

        Regarding Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2674, I appreciate your point. But here I would ask why would the hadiths single out Christian and Jews as ransom for Muslims if the point is a general one? And why does it not single out Sabeans and Zoroastrians for example.

        Also, I see two sides to it. In 5:48 the sharias of Muslims, Christians and Jews are all allowed to exist side by side in order that these communities might encourage each other to do good. Shouldn’t there be a hadith that says that Christian and Jews following their sharia can actually cause a Muslim to be rewarded and should perhaps also have a share in this? I don’t’ know if there is or isn’t any such hadith, so it’s just a question.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        Hello again Keith and thank you for your interesting questions.

        “But are Muslims not supposed to follow their own religion rather than following examples set by Christians and Jews? Jews and Christians, for example, are allowed to consume alcohol and this might be setting a bad example or even lead a Muslim to sin.
        Should a Jew or a Christian bear part of the Muslim’s sin even if there was no intention of making the Muslim sin?”

        Muslims are obviously supposed only follow their own religion but anyone can be pressed by others and led astray. The question of whats permissible for the people of the book setting a bad example is a perspective i hadn’t thought of and wasn’t referring to in my initial comments. Instead I was thinking more along the lines of what we see today in the world. With secularism on the rise and core religious values being lessened or discarded in favor of flavor of the week political ideologies. Rather than whats permissible I think general sinful behavior among them that then gets pressured into the muslim community is what the hadith is referring too but Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala knows best.

        “And if a person unknowingly and unintentionally does something that sets a bad example and a Muslim who knows it is wrong then sees it but nevertheless take this lead. Would it not matter here if the recipient (the Muslim) is willing or unwilling? Should I bear part of his sin if I did not know and did not intend but he knew and did intend? Would Allah not here be merciful and forgiving?”

        Again a rather interesting question and perspective. I would say that it is a case by case basis. Your examples of religious Christian or Jew doing their best to follow God in their minds and consuming what they think is permissible is one category. Another would be the porn industry who either don’t care or don’t see what their doing is sinful. Yet another more extreme example would be a serial killer who honestly doesn’t see what he’s doing as wrong, and is indifferent to the prospect of copy cats. I want to be clear i’m not lumping all these perspectives in the same category or even comparing them. Rather what I’m saying is that God is just and will judge on a case by case basis that only he know fully knows, and he will know when a situation is black, white or has shades of gray.

        “Regarding al-Bukhaari (3336) and Muslim (1677). I see your point, though I suppose Cain was a Muslim, as he is the son of Adam, a prophet of God in the Muslim understanding. Still, I would ask philosophically if it is right that Cain should bear punishment for as long as there are unlawful killings going on in the world.”

        I would say so but i understand if you disagree.

        “Regarding Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2674, I appreciate your point. But here I would ask why would the hadiths single out Christian and Jews as ransom for Muslims if the point is a general one? And why does it not single out Sabeans and Zoroastrians for example.”

        I would say it’s because the Christians and Jews are more numerous and more impactful religious groups by comparison.

        “Also, I see two sides to it. In 5:48 the sharias of Muslims, Christians and Jews are all allowed to exist side by side in order that these communities might encourage each other to do good. Shouldn’t there be a hadith that says that Christian and Jews following their sharia can actually cause a Muslim to be rewarded and should perhaps also have a share in this? I don’t’ know if there is or isn’t any such hadith, so it’s just a question.”

        I don’t know if such a hadith exists(there are a LOT of ahadith out there) but i don’t think it’d be a problem if it didn’t. While it is certainty possible to be inspired by a member of a different religion I think it would be odd for God to reward following a different religion than the correct one. Unless you take an agnostic approach only one interpretation of God is the right one. Which can be seen even in the Quran verse you quoted and the one after it.

        Quran 5 : 48-49
        “We sent to you [Muhammad] the Scripture with the truth, confirming the Scriptures that came before it, and with final authority over them: so judge between them according to what God has sent down. Do not follow their whims, which deviate from the truth that has come to you. We have assigned a law and a path to each of you. If God had so willed, He would have made you one community, but He wanted to test you through that which He has given you, so race to do good: you will all return to God and He will make clear to you the matters you differed about.

        So [Prophet] judge between them according to what God has sent down. Do not follow their whims, and take good care that they do not tempt you away from any of what God has sent down to you. If they turn away, remember that God intends to punish them for some of the sins they have committed: a great many people are lawbreakers”

  3. Keith Smith says:

    @ Vaqas

    Thanks Vaqas, all fair points.

    I don’t think it would be a problem either. What I tried to say is why use Christian and Jews if the message was a general one? That could potentially lead to a Muslm looking down on these groups.

    I understand that there are people who can or will misinterpret or misuse texts no matter what, but in this case it seems like this risk, so to speak, is rather great.

    • Vaqas Rehman says:

      @Keith

      Thanks for your insight Keith.
      “I don’t think it would be a problem either. What I tried to say is why use Christian and Jews if the message was a general one? That could potentially lead to a Muslm looking down on these groups.”

      I would say that in addition to what i’ve already said on the issue, another reason would be a cautionary prophecy. In other words a warning to not imitate the other abrahamic religions. whether that be ordinarily or in their folly. And i would say the benefits of giving that prophetic warning outweigh any of the risks involved. But that’s just my thoughts on the issue.

  4. Keith Smith says:

    The point though is that if Jews and Christians through their sharias could also cause a Muslim to be rewarded and not only to sin, this point should also considered when discussing the issue. And I was just missing that perspective.

  5. Jesse says:

    Did my comments by any chance get stuck some spam filter?

Comments are closed.