Both statements which are contradictory can be seen in the same book. It is said that God himself came to earth in human form. So we don't have to consider God and Jesus as separate entities. Jesus himself is the God. In the latter statement son of God reference points to two separate phenomena, i.e. God and Jesus. What can be called this game of changing opinions? The second statement exposes the Christ as a part separated from the God. Here Christians think God as a thing which can be segregated and separated. According to the earlier statement, after the descent no portion of God existed above. The 'whole' of God came down.

What we want to known is this. Who died at the cross?. The God or a piece of the God? Either of these is to be confirmed by Christian believers. If it were the God himself that died at the cross, who reigned the universe during those three days the God was not alive. The belief that the Christ resurrected three days after he died at the cross raises such a question. Can a Christian say that the universe has passed three days with out the presence of God? Then how can he justify himself and his belief before an atheist? If universe has run three days without the God why not the rest of the days be so?

Now do they say that it was a piece of God that lay dead these three days? If so why not the other pieces too can lie separated from the body. These partially damaged God was the one who ran the world those three days? Was the God administering the universe these three days like a person whose leg was amputated?

If a Christian believes that there is divinity in Jesus, you have to admit that it was a handicapped God who reigned the world those three days! When a disabled walks we see his short coming in his walks. What do Christians have to say to speak about the administrative short-coming that happened because of the loss of his part. Are they ready to describe the deficiencies which happened during those three days as due to the disabilities he had. If those days and present days had not any differences between them shouldn't they say that the God hadn't got any handicaps? If no handicaps happened to the God, there should not be any part of God on the dead person's body. That means Jesus who died at the cross according to Christians should not be a part of God.

Read the first statement again. 'He descended down as a human being'. Now read the story of cross put forward by Marcos in his version of Bible. When it was 6 o' clock, it became dark until about 9 o' clock, at 9; Jesus yelled aloud as, "Elohe, Elohe, lemma shabbakanee" which mean "oh God, why did …… thou give up me?" Some of those stood near by heard him and said. He called the God crying loudly" Jesus' body separated his soul. If Jesus was the word descended down to earth or if it was God who was coming in the guise of a human being, who cried to whom? Isn't it he himself who descended down crying to escape? Who is remaining there to hear his cry for escape. This yell contradicts with the first statement.

Does it agree with the second statement?. It is alright only when it is described as a apart of God yells to the remaining parts (of God). As foolish as saying that the broken part of the tail of a lizard sorrows to its other parts. Why didst thou abandon me?

Does it correspondent with the second statement? Neither a piece of God cries to the remaining part of God? Like a lizard's separated tail jumps and complaints? to the cry why did you leave me alone? Does a Christian agree that this cry of Jesus equals to the cry to complaint of the tail of a lizard?

If so, can he admit that Jesus, the part of God (The tail part) got stitched to the main part (as it happens in a surgery) and at present he stands so? Then whom does Christian worship, the tail part or the main part? If he worships the combine of the tail and main parts as a whole, why should a religion exist in the name of the tail part? Is'nt it better for Christianity to exist in the name of the God than existing in the name of Jesus. Christians install the image of the tail part in front of their churches! The part of the God should be replaced by the whole. If you can't imagine the shape of that whole how could you shape the tail part? Why don't you take away idols of Jesus Christ from the churches? Not only the body of the Christ but his soul also gets stitched to the main part according to the Bible. Bible quotes the words of a guide who was standing by the tomb of Christ "he is not there. He resurrected as he prophesied; come and see the place where he lay" (Mathew 28/6).

What happened to the body of Christ after it rose from the tomb? Did it get sewn or stitched to Jehovah? When a Christian starts to believe so Bible traps him into another confusion! The body, like lizard's tail, gets cut from Jehovah for some time and later gets stitched to (After vanished from the tomb). This process of cutting and connecting continue even after it joined to the main part. That means god often loses his tail part. "He appeared first to virgin Mary" (Marcose : 16:14 )

A poor Christian believes that this process still continues. He gets pleased and satisfied when he thinks he meets the tail part of the God, but he doesn't think about the handicapped God who loses one of his part. He firmly believes that the form which comes to appear is divine. Suppose he admits that beyond that tail part main part of the God remains unseen. Then the things get worse. If he believes the main parts remain disappeared he has to admit the God as handicapped. If not the question that to whom Jesus cried and complained appears unanswered. Again, when God appears before somebody else he remains tied to a particular place or person. Then under whose control exists the other parts of the universe? When God gets narrowed to appear before a particular person, other parts of the universe becomes orphaned. Others who don't get an appearance of God are actually neglected. Christian might not be aware of this sort of a negligence by the God.

Oh... Christians, how can you escape? Yes, to believe that the birth of Jesus was not the descent of God to the earth. God is not one who descends or cries and complains. Believe that Jesus is not a part of the almighty but a human being. He could walk and run, sit and stand, climb up and down, appear and disappear. But he cannot be worshipped because he is only a dependant of God. Anything that does not have permanency cannot be worshipped. He lived here depending on. Jesus searched food, so he depended on food, We can't worship the one who depended on food to live. Jesus used woolen blanket. The one who went after a woolen blanket to get protection from coldness cannot be worshipped as the God. These realities block the Christians from bestowing divinity upon Jesus Christ. Do Christian think that even when Jesus Christ is depending on all these things, he can be worshipped? Then why can't Christians worship one another? If this worshipping of one another is a sin the logic behind worshipping Jesus has certainly to be proved.