Occasionally, we come across Christians face-to-face and, more frequently, on the Internet, who, when informed that the text of the gospels underwent corruption during their transmission, often react with the following type of questions: “When?有时，我们遇到的基督徒面对面，更频繁，在互联网上，谁，当得知福音书文本传输的经历在他们的腐败，往往反应与以下类型的问题：“什么时候？ Who did the corruption? 谁做了腐败呢？ In what country? 在哪个国家？ Before or after Muhammad? 前或后，穆罕默德？ Why was it done? 为什么做呢？ How come no one noticed it?” These type of seemingly “innocent” questions merely reveal the incalculably colossal ignorance of the person in question. 怎么没有人注意到了吗？“这些类型的看似”无辜“的问题只是揭示了人的问题不可估量的巨大的无知。 Christians who pose such questions do not seem to realize how utterly foolish they come across to anyone who are familiar with at least the very basics of textual criticism.基督徒谁提出这样的问题似乎并没有意识到他们遇到完全愚蠢的人谁用最少的文字来批评非常熟悉的基础。 Thus, the poor questioner only succeeds in on humiliating no one else but himself.因此，只有可怜的提问成功地在羞辱别人就是自己。 Christian apologists and missionaries need to stop posing such outdated, absurd questions since it reflects quite badly upon their intelligence and gives others a very bad impression of them….基督教的辩护士和传教士需要停止冒充这种过时的，荒谬的问题相当严重，因为它反映在他们的智慧和他们给人的印象极坏...。 Read More阅读更多

From the beginning of Orientalism, the Christian missionaries have been assuming that Islam is “headless” enough to be attacked and scrutinised with a ferocity that one can only conclude borders on fanaticism.从东方开始，基督教传教士已经假设，伊斯兰教是“无头”，足以攻击和审议了凶猛只能得出结论，人们可以在狂热的边界。 These missionaries proved then that they don't have the brains to acknowledge their own headlessness.这些传教士证明这时，他们的大脑中没有承认自己headlessness。 One such example is其中一个例子是 David Wood大卫伍德 , a recent zealous recruit by the ever-intolerent Answering Islam , whose only amazing ability is his extreme belligerence, and what can only be described as fanatical intolerence, towards a faith different from his. ，最近无耐力，热心招聘的不断intolerent 回答伊斯兰教 ，其唯一的惊人能力，是他极端好战，什么可以作为狂热只能说对他的信仰不同。 This is a review of one such这是一个这样的审查 article文章 …. ...。 Read More阅读更多