I've read and seen several Christians reflecting on the Ravi scandal. I think the person who gets closest to what I'd want to say is David Wood. It's a long video, but Wood makes several insightful observations and as is often the case Wood is keen in his psychological analyses.
10. The Quran contains miraculous scientific truths.
9. The Quran is a literary miracle.
8. Muhammad was sinless.
7. Islam is anti-slavery.
6. The Quran contains no contradictions.
5. Islam is a religion of peace.
4. Islam is pure monotheism.
3. Islam promotes women's rights.
2. Islam is spreading rapidly due to conversions.
1. The Quran has been perfectly preserved.
David Wood doesn't care about big tech demonetizing and deplatforming him. He's going to continue speaking the truth, exposing Islam, exposing big tech, exposing the mainstream media, and so on. I think that speaks volumes about Wood's character.
At the same time, Wood has a large family (by modern western standards) to provide and care for including two special needs kids if I recall correctly. Last I heard he lives in NYC which isn't exactly an affordable place to raise a family nor a friendly place for conservatives of any stripe. Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be more prudent for Wood to be less provocative, but I suppose then he wouldn't be who he is nor accomplish all the good he has accomplished.
Regardless, when leftists talk about fighting for freedom, I'd say David Wood (and the many others like him) is far closer to what fighting for freedom looks like today than, say, leftists taking selfies at Antifa protests (let alone burning down local businesses and violently attacking other protesters) so decades later they can tell their kids or grandkids that they particpated in "the revolution". I just hope history remembers that they took part in what should be shameful activities, but even if history doesn't, God sure does.
Just my own summary:
1. David Wood goes into some depth about his testimony or conversion with Eric Metaxas. It starts at approximately 32:30 with Wood meeting another inmate named Randy who was a Christian. Wood saw Randy always sitting in his bunk reading his Bible. Randy wouldn't do anything the other inmates were doing.
2. One day Wood told Randy he was only reading the Bible because Randy was born in the US. If Randy had been born in China, then he'd be Buddhist. If India, Hindu. If Saudi Arabia, Muslim. Wood also told Randy "people like you believe whatever you're told to believe". Wood had the same idea of Christianity that he had of objective morality - that it's just a false belief that people are told by others, which they accept, because they don't know how to think for themselves. I guess Wood's idea is that Randy is a sheep. Like everyone else. Except for Wood himself.
3. However, Randy was the first Christian to put up a fight against Wood and argue back against Wood. Randy challenged Wood. The most "annoying" thing for Wood was that Randy would constantly question everything Wood himself believed: "Where did you get your idea then?" And Wood couldn't respond to Randy. Other than with silence.
1. David Wood defends his satire of Muhammad and Islam (it looks like this was filmed before Wood's most recent "mockery" which involved the "desecration" of the Quran):
The above is an excerpt, but the complete video is here:
2. I left my own comments regarding Wood's latest "mockery" in Peter's previous post.
My previous post about David Wood eating a portion of the Quran brought up some good discussion in the comments, and I wanted to bring out some of the key points here since I know there are some people who don’t read comments, and because this will help focus comments made on this post. Thus far, the main Biblical passage being used against Wood’s tactics has been 1 Peter 3:15, with the focus being on the word “respect.” So let’s examine the verse.
The first thing that should be noted is that 1 Peter 3:15 isn’t even a complete sentence. It’s a portion of a sentence that, in the ESV, begins in the middle of verse 14 and goes to the end of verse 16. The immediate context of the passage is Peter’s argument that if we are to suffer we should suffer for doing good, not for doing evil. In establishing that context, Peter first asks: “Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good?” (1 Peter 3:13). I have to take this as a rhetorical question since Peter knew Jesus suffered harm for being zealous for what is good, and he had suffered plenty at the hands of evil men. That is why in the next verse he says, “But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you will be blessed” (1 Peter 3:14a). So Peter basically begins by showing that it is less likely for us to suffer if we are doing good than if we are doing evil, but if we do suffer for doing good then we are blessed.
It is in this context that he then says, “Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.” (1 Peter 3:14b-16). We will look at this sentence in more detail shortly below, but to confirm the context, immediately after this Peter writes: “For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God’s will, than for doing evil.” (1 Peter 3:17).
So the context of the passage is the same throughout. The sentence we are interested in is sandwiched between two statements about being persecuted for doing good. Thus, 1 Peter 3:15, far from being a text telling you how you should approach every apologetic encounter, is actually focused on what a Christian should do when he is being persecuted. In addition to the context being related to persecution, the exact wording of the text is saying only that we should always be “prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.” This verse is not prescribing the way that you introduce the Gospel to another person, nor is it telling you how you should behave in your day to day life. It is telling you how to behave when someone asks you for the reason why you have hope, in the context of persecution. And that makes sense, since without persecution, most people wouldn’t be curious as to why you have hope. Hope in the face of persecution, on the other hand, is powerful.
Does this mean that we cannot expand from the immediate context and apply this to other contexts? No, but it does mean that if you wish to apply this to other contexts then the onus is on you to provide a reason why the verse would apply to other arenas that it does not talk about in its own context. In other words, 1 Peter 3:15 only says that we are to answer questioners—questioners who, in context, are persecuting us—with “gentleness and respect”. The verse itself does not say that we are to treat every single person we come into contact with gentleness and respect—that needs to be argued for, not assumed.
Since people tend to miss things on controversial topics, let me be clear. I am not saying that this verse doesn’t apply to other contexts—I’m saying that if you wish to show that it applies to other contexts, you need to supply a reasonable argument making that case. Simply saying, “1 Peter 3:15!” isn’t an argument.
I know I'm more than a week late to the party, but this might be one of the most important videos online now, and not just because I found out about it due to Nameless Apologist taking offense at yet another thing that Manly Men do. I encourage you to watch the entire video to get the full context of David Wood's actions here, but it is a bit long. If you don't have time to watch the whole thing, you should at least familiarize yourself with the immediate context starting around the 1:40:00 mark. But for the portion everyone is interested in, begin around 1:49:00.
That's right, David Wood...oh wait, I almost forgot. DOCTOR David Wood--who went to an actually accredited university (as opposed to an "unaccredited online university")--ate a page he tore out of the Quran!
To be fair, he spat it out after chewing for quite some time so he didn't actually eat it.
But now Doctor Wood is being attacked by the girlie men who are afraid the feels of those who wish to murder ex-Muslims, to violate their wives, and to do unspeakable things to their children might be pained by seeing the satanic verses that inspired them to engage in such depravity gnawed on. Especially since Allah couldn't even be bothered to cut the good Dr. Wood's aorta in retaliation.
Yes, that's right. Nameless Apologist is once again upset, not by the depravity that the demonic book drives people to commit, but by the fact that Dr. Wood did not show respect toward that evil book. Consistency is only virtuous when you're actually hitting the target though.
How dare Dr. Wood not show at least the same respect that King Josiah showed to the Asherah poles in 2 Kings 23:14! How dare Dr. Wood not show the same reverence that King Hezekiah showed the pagan altars in 2 Chronicles 31:1! I mean, Nameless Apologist does not wish for us to use the example of Elijah and how he treated the prophets of Baal--he was quite adamant on this point since, he boldly declares, our hearts are black and wicked and we're not prophets. So let Josiah and Hezekiah be our examples then! They were also not prophets, and their hearts were just as "black" as ours are, having been redeemed.
But but but 1 Peter 3:15 says respect!
Yeah, and "respect" must mean what Nameless Apologist declares it to mean and it must be applied 100% in all circumstances no matter what. Yes. But...how much respect did Paul show Peter in Galatians 2:11-14, opposing him to his face in a shame-based society?
You're not the apostle Paul!
Okay, but clearly you can still see that respecting a person doesn't mean respecting their idols. Right? When someone views an evil text as sacred, it is not respecting them to give RESPECT to those evil scriptures!
But they'll eat the Bible in retaliation!
So?
You know, I realized something. David Wood is a hero. Girlie men are sobbing about it.
I think 2020 is getting back to normal.
I saw Peter Pike mention David Wood's video here.
Also, Wood includes a lot of autobiographical material in his video. I think Wood is someone who was given so very little in life (albeit he's very intelligent), but who has turned his "little" into a tremendous harvest.
Chowdhury described American David Wood as a “hardcore enemy of Allah” to undercover police but added: “He does a better job of explaining Islam than most speakers in the west.”He repeatedly shared Mr Wood’s videos with the officers, instructing them to watch them and describing the passage on vehicle attacks as a “really good breakdown of options”.
In Telegram chats, Chowdhury claimed that despite mocking Islam, Mr Wood was “more truthful than the majority of Islamic speakers”.
He told the jury that he found the videos while “looking for the truth” of religious doctrine, adding: “Mr Wood uses the references and proves this is the truth about Islam … it’s taboo, it’s like forbidden knowledge.”
(Source)
We will never be a Socialist or Communist Country. IF YOU ARE NOT HAPPY HERE, YOU CAN LEAVE! It is your choice, and your choice alone. This is about love for America. Certain people HATE our Country....
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 15, 2019
In light of Pres. Trump's recent remarks directed at Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib:
I've sadly spoken to many Muslims. All they knew of the Christian response to their beliefs was either ignorance or mockery. And they were shocked when they discovered there were Christians who knew what they believed and were able to interact with them on a respectful basis and not just simply mock them…I lament the attitude Christians have towards the Muslim people.
I've sadly spoken to many drag queens. All they knew of the Christian response to their beliefs was either ignorance or mockery. And they were shocked when they discovered there were Christians who knew what they believed and were able to interact with them on a respectful basis and not just simply mock them…I lament the attitude Christians have towards the predatory drag queens at public libraries and gay pride parades.
I just watched the section of James White's Dividing Line where he talks about David Wood and Vocab Malone's satirical series "Muhammad's Boom Boom Room". White begins his remarks about Wood and Vocab's series shortly after 1 hour 16 minutes and ends around 1 hour 24 minutes. Respectfully:
