Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:56 pm Post subject: False Religion Spreads False Doctrine and Practice:
False Religion Spreads False Doctrine and Practice:
INTRODUCTION:
Many religions teach a belief in a false god or gods or that the soul or some invisible part of a human that survives the death of the physical body. Some teach we should worship or venerate the instrument used to execute Jesus (Yeshua), the Isa, and much commerce is made by sales of replicas thereof, They use these and other false teachings, these false religions extract money from and exploit their members. They also wink at the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, practices such as immoral sex. Some claim their false god(s) demand money or other valuables to protect them, answer their prayers, or to build grandiose edifices or buildings, etc.
But the Bible does NOT teach any of these, they are all false. Let's start by examing two well known false god(s), the Triune god and the old middle eastern celestial Moon god, "Allah."
TWO FALSE GODS:
First it is important to realize there are many false gods of all types that are worshipped. Some individuals even worship money. To fully understand this statement we need to understand what worship means and to do so we need to look at its dictionary definition in a religious dictionary, and is, "homage rendered to God which it is sinful (idolatry) to render to any created being (Ex. 34:14; Isa. 2:8). Such worship was refused by Peter (Acts 10:25,26) and by an angel (Rev. 22:8,9).' [source - Easton's Bible Dictionary by M.G. Easton]. In fact, Jesus (Yeshua), the Son of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, showed even he should not be worshiped at Matthew 4:10-11, "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. 11 Then the devil leaveth him; and behold, angels came and ministered unto him." (Authorized King James Bible; AV) .
Now why so many false gods? A very good question that the Bible answers at 2 Corinthians 11:14-15, "And no marvel; for even Satan fashioneth himself into an angel of light. 15 It is no great thing therefore if his ministers also fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works." (Authorized King James Bible; AV) ; and 2 Corinthians 4:4, "in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn upon them." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
Let's look at two examples, using the two largest religions, Catholic and Islam, as examples.
One, apostate (counterfeit) Christians claims to worship but in actuality does NOT; whereas, the other worships the old middle eastern celestial Moon god, "Allah."
Let's first look at so called Christianity who falsely claim to worship the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, but actually worships a hybrid three-in-one god known as the Trinity - no where mentioned in the Bible. To try and 'prove' this none Biblical god, Trinitarians use questionable translations of John 1:1, but conveniently miss the point that this is "a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb," that is, not just that the noun theos lacks the Greek definite article. Similar Greek construction such Mark 6:49,
Mark 11:32, John 4:19, John 6:70, John 8:44a, John 8:44b, John 9:17, John 10:1,
John 10:13, John 10:33, John 12:6 as usually have an inserted either an "a" or "an" there in most translations.
But we need not get so technical as a quick application of logic to the usual questionable translational construct for John 1:1 quickly shows that it can in no way support a trinity god. Let's look at why. John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.) (AV) - now to have a trinity of anything, one must have THREE like items and only two spirit creatures are mentioned, not three, hence no trinity. In addition, someone can NOT be with someone and be that person also.
Now how did this false god get into so called Christianity? Well it came about in 325 AD when a pagan Roman Emperor, Constantine, a wordhipper of the Unconquered Sun, wanted religious unity in his empire and called a church conference with the view of getting them to accept some pagan doctrines so he could bring about a fusion of so called Christianity with paganism. This council went on a very long time and through coercion and political skull drudgery he finally got most of the attendees, bishops, to go along with what he wanted. This amounted to most of the so called Christian church going apostate.[sources & references - Laing, Gordon Jennings. "Survivals of Roman Religion.". New York: Cooper Square Publishers. 1963, The Encyclopedia of Religions, Carter, Jesse Benedict. "The Religious Life of Ancient Rome: A Study in the Development of Religious Consciousness, from the Foundation of the City Until the Death of Gregory the Great." New York: Cooper Square Publishers. 1972. (page 16-19), Pelikan, Jaroslav. "The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition" (100-600). Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1971. Vol. 1 of "The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine." 5 vols., heraldmag.org., Morodenibig, Naba Lamoussa. "Light From the Trinities.", Edersheim Bible History (page 59-62), New Catholic Encyclopedia, (Vol. XIV, 306), International Encyclopedia of the Bible," Vol. 5, (page 3012), McClintock & Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. 6, Lamson, Newton & Durant, Will, "Caesar and Christ," cited from Charles Redeker Caesar and Christ, W. Duran (page 595), ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366), Payne, Robert, "The Holy Fire: The Story of the Early Centuries of the Christian Churches in the Near East" (1957), BETHUNE-BAKER, J,F. "An Introduction to the Early History of Christian Doctrine". Methuen; 5th Ed., 1933, ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366); David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, "De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitone" [Latin](The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son, and Holy spirit), 1566 A.D., by Francis David and others, Eklof, Todd F., "David's Francis Tower, Strength through Peace," (06-16-02), The New Encyclopedia Britannica: " Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126. (1976), Parkes, James, "The Foundation of Judaism and Christianity," 1960, Durant, Will. "Caesar and Christ." New York: Simon. 1944. Vol. 3 of The Story of Civilization. 11 vols. 1935-75, and Durant, Will, "Age of Faith,"].
Let's next look at Islam who falsely claim to worship the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, but actually worship the old middle eastern celestial Moon god, "Allah."
Dr. Arthur Jeffery, one of the foremost Western Islamic scholars in modern times and professor of Islamic and Middle East Studies at Columbia University, notes:
<<"The name Allah, as the Quran itself is witness, was well known in pre-Islamic Arabia. Indeed, both it and its feminine form, Allat, are found not infrequently among the theophorous names in inscriptions from North Africa">> [source - Islam: Muhammad, and His Religion, New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1958, p. 85.].
The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, states, <<"The origin of this (Allah) goes back to pre-Muslim times. Allah is not a common name meaning "God" (or a "god"), and the Muslim must use another word or form if he wishes to indicate any other than his own peculiar deity">> [source - Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, I:326, Hastings.].
The Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend, states, <<"The name Allah goes back before Muhammad">> [source - Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend, I:41, Anthony Mercatante, New York, The Facts on File, 1983.].
And, <<"The word "Allah" comes from the compound Arabic word, al-ilah. Al is the definite article "the" and ilah is an Arabic word for "god." It is not a foreign word. It is not even the Syriac word for God. It is pure Arabic.">> [Reference - There is an interesting discussion of the origins of Allah, in "Arabic Lexicographical Miscellanies" by J. Blau in the Journal of Semitic Studies, Vol. XVII, #2, 1972, pp. 173-190.]
And, Neither is Allah a Hebrew or Greek word for God as found in the Bible. Allah is a purely Arabic term used in reference to an Arabian deity.
Hastings' Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics I:326, T & T Clark, states:
<<"Allah" is a proper name, applicable only to their [Arabs'] peculiar God.">>'
[source - Hastings' Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics I:326]
<<"Pre-Islamic Arabia also had its stone deities. They were stone statues of shapeless volcanic or meteoric stones found in the deserts and believed to have been sent by astral deities. The most prominent deities were Hubal, the male god of the Ka'ba, and the three sister goddesses al-Lat, al-Manat, and al-Uzza; Muhammad's tribe, the Quraysh, thought these three goddesses to be the daughters of Allah. Hubal was the chief god of the Ka'ba among 360 other deities. He was a man-like statue whose body was made of red precious stone and whose arms were of solid gold.">> [source - (George W. Braswell, Jr., Islam Its Prophets, Peoples, Politics and Power" [Broadman & Holman Publishers, Nashville, TN; July, 1996], p. 44]
<<"The old middle eastern Moon god who has gone by many names is still well venerated. This is shown by "The Archeology of The Middle East" which states, "The religion of Islam has as its focus of worship a deity by the name of "Allah." The Muslims claim that Allah in pre-Islamic times was the biblical God of the Patriarchs, prophets, and apostles. The issue is thus one of continuity. Was "Allah" the biblical God or a pagan god in Arabia during pre-Islamic times? The Muslim's claim of continuity is essential to their attempt to convert Jews and Christians for if "Allah" is part of the flow of divine revelation in Scripture, then it is the next step in biblical religion. Thus we should all become Muslims. But, on the other hand, if Allah was a pre-Islamic pagan deity, then its core claim is refuted. Religious claims often fall before the results of hard sciences such as archeology. We can endlessly speculate about the past or go and dig it up and see what the evidence reveals. This is the only way to find out the truth concerning the origins of Allah. As we shall see, the hard evidence demonstrates that the god Allah was a pagan deity. In fact, he was the Moon-god who was married to the sun goddess and the stars were his daughters.
Archaeologists have uncovered temples to the Moon-god throughout the Middle East. From the mountains of Turkey to the banks of the Nile, the most wide-spread religion of the ancient world was the worship of the Moon-god. In the first literate civilization, the Sumerians have left us thousands of clay tablets in which they described their religious beliefs. As demonstrated by Sjoberg and Hall, the ancient Sumerians worshipped a Moon-god who was called many different names. The most popular names were Nanna, Suen and Asimbabbar. His symbol was the crescent moon. Given the amount of artifacts concerning the worship of this Moon-god, it is clear that this was the dominant religion in Sumeria. The cult of the Moon-god was the most popular religion throughout ancient Mesopotamia. The Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Akkadians took the word Suen and transformed it into the word Sin as their favorite name for the Moon-god. As Prof. Potts pointed out, "Sin is a name essentially Sumerian in origin which had been borrowed by the Semites." [source - The Archeology of the Middle East]"[additional references - "South Arabia's stellar religion has always been dominated by the Moon-god in various variations" (Berta Segall, The Iconography of Cosmic Kingship, the Art Bulletin, vol.xxxviii, 1956, p.77).; Isaac Rabinowitz, Aramaic Inscriptions of the Fifth Century, JNES, XV, 1956, pp.1-9; Edward Linski, The Goddess Atirat in Ancient Arabia, in Babylon and in Ugarit: Her Relation to the Moon-god and the Sun-goddess, Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica, 3:101-9; H.J.Drivers, Iconography and Character of the Arab Goddess Allat, found in Études Preliminaries Aux Religions Orientales Dans L'Empire Roman, ed. Maarten J. Verseren, Leiden, Brill, 1978, pp.331-51); Richard Le Baron Bower Jr. and Frank P. Albright, Archaeological Discoveries in South Arabia, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1958, p.78ff; Ray Cleveland, An Ancient South Arabian Necropolis, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1965; Nelson Gleuck, Deities and Dolphins, New York, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 1965).; Another Aramaic Record of the North Arabian goddess Han'Llat, JNES, XVIII, 1959, pp.154-55.">>[source - There is Only One True God by Iris the Preacher 2005.].
WORSHIP/VENERATION OF OBJECTS-A FORM OF FALSE WORSHIP:
Catholics and other apostate (counterfeit) Christans worship/venerate objects such as the cross which Jesus (Yeshua) is believed by some to have died on, but which was more likely to have been a straight piece of tree as the Romans executed none Romans on such so they could simply drop them in a slit trench. Of course such veneration is both Biblically wrong as shown at Isaiah 44:9-18, "They that fashion a graven image are all of them vanity; and their delectable things shall not profit: and their own witnesses see not, nor know; that they may be ashamed. 10 Who hath fashioned a god, or molten a graven image that is profitable for nothing? 11 Behold, all his fellows shall be ashamed; and the workmen, they are of men: let them all be gathered together, let them stand up; they shall fear, they shall be ashamed together. 12 The smith maketh an axe, and worketh in the coals, and fashioneth it with hammers, and worketh it with his strong arm: yea, he is hungry, and his strength faileth; he drinketh no water, and is faint. 13 The carpenter stretcheth out a line; he marketh it out with a pencil; he shapeth it with planes, and he marketh it out with the compasses, and shapeth it after the figure of a man, according to the beauty of a man, to dwell in the house. 14 He heweth him down cedars, and taketh the holm tree and the oak, and strengtheneth for himself one among the trees of the forest: he planteth a fir tree, and the rain doth nourish it. 15 Then shall it be for a man to burn; and he taketh thereof, and warmeth himself; yea, he kindleth it, and baketh bread: yea, he maketh a god, and worshippeth it; he maketh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto. 16 He burneth part thereof in the fire; with part thereof he eateth flesh; he roasteth roast, and is satisfied: yea, he warmeth himself, and saith, Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire: 17 And the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image: he falleth down unto it and worshippeth, and prayeth unto it, and saith, Deliver me; for thou art my god. 18 They know not, neither do they consider: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand." (Authorized King James Bible; AV) . Of course this also applies to statue idols, pictures, icons, etc.
Of course, this same false practice is found in Islam. How so? Members of Islam prostrate themselves and make prayers five times a day toward the Kabba in the city of Mecca, a man made large masonry building which they consider the 'holiest' place in Islam. They even go so far as to drape a large piece of cloth over it heavily inlayed with lots of gold.
And, the Bible goes on to show idolatry in any form is wrong at Acts 7:40- , "Saying unto Aaron, Make us gods to go before us: for as for this Moses, which brought us out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him. 41 And they made a calf in those days, and offered sacrifice unto the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their own hands. 42 Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness? 43 Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.'" (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
WORSHIP AND PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD:
False religion also misleads people with respect to death. They teach such things such as one has a soul that goes somewhere at death and some even teach that a certain sum of money must be paid to get him/her out of a mythical place called Purgatory. Yet the Bible clearly says at Ezekiel 18:4, "Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die." (Authorized King James Bible; AV) . This fact is further emphasized at Ecclesiastes 9:5 and 10, "For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten." (AV) and "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." (AV) clearly emphasizing that we are a living soul, not that we have one. If the reverse were true, there would of course be no need for a resurrection as shown at Hebrews 6:1-2, "Wherefore let us cease to speak of the first principles of Christ, and press on unto perfection; not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, 2 of the teaching of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment." AV); and 1 Corinthians 15:12 and 20-21, "Now if Christ is preached that he hath been raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?" (AV) , and "But now hath Christ been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of them that are asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead." (But now hath Christ been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of them that are asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead." (AV) , and 2 Corinthians 4:13-14, "But having the same spirit of faith, according to that which is written, I believed, and therefore did I speak; we also believe, and therefore also we speak; 14 knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also with Jesus, and shall present us with you." (AV); and Acts 17:13-14, " inasmuch as he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." (AV). This all is in harmony with what was prophesied at Isaiah 25:8, "He hath swallowed up death for ever; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the reproach of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it." (AV) .
And Muslims do not believe in the resurrection by the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, of his Son, Jesus (Yeshua), thereby denying the truth and showing they are not in harmony with John 8:32, "and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (Authorized King James Bible; AV) .
LUST FOR IMMORAL DEVIANT FORMS OF SEX:
Among both apostate (counterfeit) Christians and members of Islam some practice deviant forms of sex and both religious groups say this is wrong, but wink at its practice. On 11/02/2006, one leading Evangelical leader was uncovered to be publicly denouncing homosexuality as condemned at Romans 1:27, "and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due." (Authorized King James Bible; AV); here is the news account of this winking at wrong doing by The Rev. Ted Haggard, <<"CATHERINE TSAI, Associated Press Writer (11/03/2006), COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. - A leading evangelist and outspoken opponent of gay marriage has given up his post as president of the National Association of Evangelicals while a church panel investigates allegations he paid a man for sex. The Rev. Ted Haggard resigned as head of the 30 million-member association Thursday and also gave up leadership of his New Life Church pending the investigation into allegations he had monthly trysts with a gay prostitute over the past three years...
"I just know that there has been some admission of indiscretion, not admission to all of the material that has been discussed, but there is an admission of some guilt," Ross Parsley told KKTV-TV of Colorado Springs.
Parlsey did not elaborate, but in an e-mail addressed to congregants, he wrote that the church's four-member board of overseers had since met with Haggard. "It is important for you to know that he confessed to the overseers that some of the accusations against him are true. He has willingly and humbly submitted to the authority of the board of overseers, and will remain on administrative leave during the course of the investigation," the e-mail stated. A copy was obtained by KMGH-TV in Denver...
[outted by]Jones, who said he is gay, said he was also upset when he discovered Haggard and the New Life Church had publicly opposed same-sex marriage. "It made me angry that here's someone preaching about gay marriage and going behind the scenes having gay sex," he said.
Jones claimed Haggard paid him to have sex nearly every month over three years. He said he advertised himself as an escort on the Internet and was contacted by a man who called himself Art, who snorted methamphetamine before their sexual encounters to heighten his experience...
At the time, Haggard said that he believed marriage is a union between a man and woman rooted in centuries of tradition, and that research shows it's the best family unit for children.">> [[Note, the Los Angeles Times also had a very telling article on this, "Evangelical leader steps down amid allegations The Rev. Ted Haggard denies a man's public charges that the pastor of a mega-church had been paying him for sex. By Stephanie Simon, Times Staff Writer (11/03/2006).]].
Of course this is no isolated case. The cases are so numerous that the accounts would definitely fill a library rack many meters or yards long. Some references on this dysfunction would be "The Church and the Homosexual Priest Facing the challenges and accepting the gifts offered by homosexual priests in the Catholic Church" by James Martin - in The National Catholic Weekly, The Changing Face of the Priesthood, Rev. Donald B. Cozzens, Prince Charles Praises Openly Gay Anglican Priest, by Terry Vanderheyden, published Oct 11, 2006, by LifeSite News:, etc.
And this wrong practice is not limited just to apostate (counterfeit) Christians but the winking at violation of Romans 1:27 carries over into Ialam where gay members of Islam actually operate a web site implicitly implying Muhammad (pbuh) may have been gay, called Gay Egypt>com which states, "sponsors 3,500 forums for 175 million GAY muslims & their admirers across the Middle East, Africa, Asia, & Worldwide."
Gay Egypt said this of Muhammad (pbuh), <<"These essays reveal a forgotten history including the amazing saga of the Prophet Muhammad [(pbuh)]and Zaid Ibn Haritha. A story which has been suppressed in order to justify the persecution of gays in the name of Islam.
Zaid was a slave, a wedding gift from Muhammad's [(pbuh)'s] wealthy older bride Khadija, so there was no question of adultery under Sharia law. When the Prophet eventually freed Zaid, he proclaimed a formal partnership or union, equivalent to a marriage. Zaid became, in effect, a "male wife" who was equal in status to Khadija.
First with Zaid, and later with Ali, Muhammad [(pbuh)] formed a bond which was even closer than those of his ten "heterosexual marriages." Love that was tested through extreme adversity and martydom. [source - http://www.gayegypt.com/archivesonly.html]>>.
Of this organization, Newsweek said,<<"GayEgypt.com "pokes fun at Egypt's autocratic regime with an irreverence no domestic site would dare express,">>, and the The Middle East Times said, <<"GayEgypt.com has emerged as a key source of information and communication for the gay community in Egypt.">>.
Interestingly Islam is winking at this and doing nothing about Gay Egypt.com, nor are members of Islam protesting what most would take as a serious attack on their prophet's moral character; yet they rioted over silly cartoons of Muhammad (pbuh). Makes one wonder does it not?
CONCLUSION:
Apostate (counterfeit) Christians and members of Islam have been shown to practice what was shown as wrong in the Bible and to also wink, do little about or turn a blind eye to them, at these wrong practices.
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 _________________ Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:29 pm Post subject: False Religions of The World in Politics
False Religions of The World in Politics
INTRODUCTION:
False religion of all flavors, i.e., apostate (counterfeit) Christian, Islam, Buddhist, Devil Worshippers, etc., all meddle in politics around the entire world. Clearly false religion is identified as such by this looking to the politics of men to solve their problems and/or to gain power over others, and they forget what Jeremiah, the prophet of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, said long ago that is recorded at Jeremiah 10:23, "O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps. " (Authorized King James Bible; AV) .
Why is the meddling in politics a characteristic of false religion that sets them apart from true religion? Let's look at 1 John 5:19, "And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness." (AV), which clearly shows that the true followers of Jesus (Yeshua) and his Father, the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, would NOT be apart of the worldly political system. But they would be looking for the solution of this world's problems in the Kingdom of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, that all true followers of Jesus (Yeshua) pray for as he did at Matthew 6:9-10, "After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.." (AV).
In fact, true followers of Jesus (Yeshua) are clearly warned to stay clear of the wicked political system of this world at James 4:4, "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (AV) ; and 1 John 2:15-16, "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.." (AV) .
In fact, Jesus (Yeshua) said at John 17:16, "They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world." (AV) , with respect his genuine (true) his footstep followers.
METTELING BY FALSE RELIGION RECOGNIZED I ASIAWEEK:
An article in the journal Asiaweek which basically confirms the fact that false religion and corrupt politicians meddles in each other's affairs as follows, <<"Across Asia and beyond, power-hungry leaders are cynically manipulating people's religious sentiments for their own needs.">> And the journal goes on to warn, <<"The world threatens to sink into madness.">> It also reports that a prominent religious leader in the United States said, <<"You've got to kill the terrorist before the killing stops." And his final solution? "Blow them all away in the name of the Lord."[source - Asiaweek]>>.
However, in contrast to this, the Bible clearly says at 1 John 4:20, "If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?" (Authorized King James Bible; AV). In fact, Jesus (Yeshua), the Isa, plainly said at Matthew 5:44, "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;" (AV).
Clearly showing the intertwining between corrupt politicians and religions that think of and/or bless engaging in war.
TRUE FOLLOWERS OF JESUS (YESHUA) DO NOT SEEK ASSOCIATION WITH CORRUPT WORLDLY SYSTEM:
The Bible clearly shows that genuine (true) followers of Jesus (Yeshua) do NOT seek association with the corrupt political system or religions that bless war at 1 Peter 4:3-4, "For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries: 4 Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you:" (AV) ; and 1 John 2:15, "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." (AV); and 2 Timothy 2:22, "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." (AV); and Psalms 26:4-6, "4 I have not sat with vain persons, neither will I go in with dissemblers. 5 I have hated the congregation of evil doers; and will not sit with the wicked. 6 ¶ I will wash mine hands in innocency: so will I compass thine altar, O LORD:" (AV) .
DO NOT IDOLIZE MEN AND ORGANIZATIONS:
Genuine (true) Christians do not idolize men or organizations in keeping with 1 Corinthians 10:14, "Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry." (AV): and Romans 1:25, "Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen." (AV); and Acts 12:21-23, "And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. 22 And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. 23 And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost." (AV); and Matthew 4:10 where Jesus (Yeshua) showed his kingdom was not this worldly system when he rejected Satan's offer of all the worldly kingdoms, but did NOT dispute that they belonged to Satan and that he could give then to whom he wanted, "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (AV) .
CONCLUSION:
This world is just plain and has as its unseen ruler, Satan the Devil, per John 14:30, "Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me." (AV); and 1 John 5:19, "And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness." (AV); and Revelations 12:9, "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." (AV).
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 _________________ Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:32 pm Post subject: False Religion Turns It Eye From Immoral Sex
False Religion Turns It Eye From Immoral Sex
INTRODUCTION AND WESTERN EXAMPLES:
In western lands many church groups tolerate immorality in violation of Romans 1:19-27, "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;" (Authorized King James Bible; AV) . They ordain gay and lesbian members as clergy and partition governments to recognize same sex marriages. Even churches which claim to condemn immorality have tolerated religious leaders who have sexually abused children and/or have committed adultery. But 2 Corinthians 6:9-10 says, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (AV).
ISLAM TACITLY CONDONES IMMORAL SEX:
Now Islam condemns what they see as immoral conditions in western lands, but it too permits immoral sex and sometimes severly punishes women who resist rape. Let's look at an actual case.
<<"Rape Victims Held Criminally Libel, a news item on page 17a, of the Sunday, June 2, 2002, The Palm Beach Post article, "Pakistani rape victims the criminals." This article stated, "The evidence of guilt was there for all to see: a newborn baby in the arms of its mother, a village woman named Zafran Bibi.
Her crime: She had been raped. Her sentence: death by stoning.
Thumping a fat red statute book, the white-bearded judge who convicted her, Anwar Ali Kahn, said he had simply followed the letter of the Koran based law, known as hudood, that mandates punishment.
Furthermore, he said, in accusing her brother-in-law of raping her, Zafran had confessed to her crime.
"The lady stated before this court that, yea, she had committed sexual intercourse, but with the brother of her husband," Judge Khan said. "This left no option to the court but to impose the highest penalty."
Although legal fine points do exist, little distinction is made in court between forced and consensual sex.
When hudood was enacted 23 years ago, the laws were formally described as measures to ban "all forms of adultery, whether the offense is committed with or without the consent of the parties." But women are almost always punished, whatever the facts.">>
This is of course absurd and a tacit approving of rape; a total injustice.
Here is another example,
<<"Imam justifies rape of unveiled women
Australian cleric compares victims to 'uncovered meat' that attracts cats
October 26, 2006
(c) 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Australia's top Muslim cleric rationalized a series of gang rapes by Arab men, blaming women who "sway suggestively," wear make-up and don't cover themselves in the tradition of Islam.
Sheik Ibrahim Mogra with Sheik Taj el-Dene Elhilaly. (Courtesy Sydney Daily Telegraph)
Sheik Taj el-Dene Elhilaly's comments in a Ramadan sermon in a Sydney mosque have stirred a furor in the country with even Prime Minister John Howard weighing in with condemnation.
The cleric also said the judge in the case, who sentenced the rapists, had "no mercy."
"But the problem, but the problem all began with who?" he said, referring to the women victims - whom he said were "weapons used by Satan."
The victims of the vicious gang rapes are leading the national outcry - with some calling for deportation of the sheik. In a Sydney Daily Telegraph online poll, 84 percent of people said the Egyptian-born sheik should be deported.
(Story continues below)
"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?" the sheik said in his sermon. "The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."
A 16-year-old girl, whose gang rape investigation was the subject of a secret police report, issued an open letter yesterday.
"You are a sad person who has no understanding of what really happens when these people inflict harm and degrading acts upon me or any other young girl," she said.
Initially, the mufti of Australia would not back away from his comments. But today he apologized.
"I unreservedly apologize to any woman who is offended by my comments," he said in a statement. "I had only intended to protect women's honor."
Howard said the sheik's remarks were "appalling and reprehensible." ">>
Now one can ask what was the antecedent for such an outrageous speech by the grand Mufti of Australia? Well, let's look at it.
<<" FrontPageMagazine.com | December 15, 2005
In Australia this week amidst anger over an Islamic man's rape conviction and the bashing of two Aussie life savers, working-class locals erupted in a rampage of anger and brawling in some of the worst racial riots in decades. But there is more to the story than is being repeated in the American mainstream media....
Four days after he set foot in Australia, the rape spree began. And during his sexual assault trial in a New South Wales courtroom, the Pakistani man began to berate one of his tearful 14-year-old victims because she had the temerity to shake her head at his testimony.
But she had every reason to express her disgust. After taking an oath on the Qur'an, the man - known only as MSK - told the court he had committed four attacks on girls as young as 13 because they had no right to say "no." They were not covering their face or wearing a headscarf, and therefore, the rapist proclaimed: "I'm not doing anything wrong."
MSK is already serving a 22-year jail term for leading his three younger brothers in a gang rape of two other young Sydney girls in 2002. In his own defense, he argued that his cultural background, was responsible for his crimes.">>.
Let's look at one more case so all can see they are noy isolated incidents,
[quote] 7 January 2006 -- Iran's "Etemad" newspaper reports today that an 18-year-old woman has been sentenced to death by hanging for killing a man she said was trying to rape her.
The newspaper reported that the woman, identified only as Nazanin, testified during her trial that she and her niece were out with their boyfriends when they were accosted by two men who chased away the boyfriends then tried to rape the two young women.
Nazanin admitted stabbing one of the men to prevent her and her niece from being assaulted.
Nazanin was only 17 years old at the time, but under Iranian law a boy can be executed from the age of 15 and a girl from the age of nine.
At least 81 people were executed in 2005 in Iran, which has been heavily criticized within the international community for its laws and practices on capital punishment. [source - AFP]">>.
CONCLUSION:
Many religions of both east and west are tacitly promoting and/or condoning immoral sex. Sometimes even punishing those who report it to death and/or putting to death those who try to prevent being rapped.
Now what does the future hold for religions that produce rotten fruit like this? Jesus (Yeshua) warned, at Matthew 7:19, "Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire." (Authorized King James Bible; AV). Yes, false religion will be cut down and destroyed. NOW, How will this occur? Revelation chapter 17 and 18 "And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:
2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.
7 ¶ And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.
8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
14 ¶ These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.
18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
1 ¶ And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory.
2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
6 Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.
7 How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.
8 Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.
9 ¶ And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,
10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.
11 And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more:
12 The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all thyine wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble,
13 And cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men.
14 And the fruits that thy soul lusted after are departed from thee, and all things which were dainty and goodly are departed from thee, and thou shalt find them no more at all.
15 The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her, shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping and wailing,
16 And saying, Alas, alas, that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!
17 For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off,
18 And cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, What city is like unto this great city!
19 And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas, that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.
20 Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her.
21 And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.
22 And the voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard no more at all in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, shall be found any more in thee; and the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee;
23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
24 And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 _________________ Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
Discourse on the False Doctrine of Apostolic Succession Claimed by Some:
Introduction to a discourse on the Apostolic Succession which Is a false tradition:
Now the Apostolic Succession false doctrine is that the 12 apostles have successors to whom authority has been passed by divine appointment. In the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the bishops as a group are said to be the successors of the apostles, and the bishop of Rome, the Pope, is claimed to be the successor of Peter. It is maintained that the Roman pontiffs come immediately after, occupy the position and perform the functions of Peter, to whom Christ is said to have given primacy of authority over the whole church, but this is really not the case, and is NOT SUPPORTED BY THE BIBLE.
Let's take the first argument of the RCC that Peter was the 'rock' on which the church was built when in reality the 'rock' was Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Let's now consider whom the Apostles Peter and Paul understood to be the 'rock,' the 'cornerstone as shown at Acts 4:8-12, " Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said to them: Ye princes of the people and ancients, hear. 9 If we this day are examined concerning the good deed done to the infirm man, by what means he hath been made whole: 10 Be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him, this man standeth here before you, whole. 11 This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible). And this is further testified to at 1 Peter 2:4-8, " Unto whom coming, as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men but chosen and made honourable by God: 5 Be you also as living stones built up, a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 6 Wherefore it is said in the scripture: Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious. And he that shall believe in him shall not be confounded. 7 To you therefore that believe, he is honour: but to them that believe not, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner: 8 And a stone of stumbling and a rock of scandal, to them who stumble at the word, neither do believe, whereunto also they are set."(DRCB); And further affirmed that Jesus (Yeshua) is the 'rock' at Ephesians 2:20, " Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:"(DRCB).
Last we look at Matthew 16:18 which the RCC tries to twist its meaning to be that Peter is the 'rock,' but as we have seen already, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the 'rock,' " And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."(DRCB) clearly affirming that he, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ was the 'rock' to Peter, so no apostolic succession here.
Let's see what Augustine had to say on it as reported in a Catholic source:
With respect the false doctrine of Apostolic Succession, Augustine had this to say per, "In this same period of my priestthood< I also wrote a book against a letter of Donatus...In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said; 'Thou art Peter, and upo9n this rock I will build my Church," that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying; "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven." For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ," in confessing whom as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter." [source="The Fathers of the Church--Saint Augustine, The Retraction," (Washington, D.C.; 1968), translation by Mary I Bogan, Booi I, p. 90. }
The Bible clearly states that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the head of the congregation, that he is alive, so why would he need a successor(s)?
Hebrews 7:22-25 clearly says in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible, "By so much is Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And the others indeed were made many priests, because by reason of death they were not suffered to continue: 24 But this, for that he continueth for ever, hath an everlasting priesthood: 25 Whereby he is able also to save for ever them that come to God by him; always living to make intercession for us. 26 For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens: 27 Who needeth not daily (as the other priests) to offer sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, in offering himself. 28 For the law maketh men priests, who have infirmity: but the word of the oath (which was since the law) the Son who is perfected for evermore."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB).
This is ratified at Romans 6:8-10, "Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with Christ. 9 Knowing that Christ, rising again from the dead, dieth now no more. Death shall no more have dominion over him. 10 For in that he died to sin, he died once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. "(DRCB); and further testified to at Ephesians 5:23-24, "Because the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject to Christ: so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things."(DRCB). So the Bible shows that no successor is necessary as Jesus (Yeshua) is alive and needs no successor.
Now, if a group really were as the RCC claims the successors to the apostles you would expect they would be adhering to the teachings and practices of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ and his apostles. A Catholic Dictionary clearly states: "The Roman Church is Apostolic, because her doctrine is the faith once revealed to the Apostles, which faith she guards and explains, without adding to it or taking from it." [source = A Catholic Dictionary," by W.E. Addis and T. Arnold, page 176, published in London in 1957]. Now the question is one of fact, is this group really not adding to or taking from the faith as revealed by Jesus (Yeshua)and the Apostles, let's see:
Commentary on the Apostolic Succession which s a false tradition:
Now the Apostolic Succession false doctrine is that the 12 apostles have successors to whom authority has been passed by divine appointment. In the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the bishops as a group are said to be the successors of the apostles, and the bishop of Rome, the Pope, is claimed to be the successor of Peter. It is maintained that the Roman pontiffs come immediately after, occupy the position and perform the functions of Peter, to whom Christ is said to have given primacy of authority over the whole church, but this is really not the case.
Let's take the first argument of the RCC that Peter was the 'rock' on which the church was built when in reality the 'rock' was Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Let's now consider whom the Apostles Peter and Paul understood to be the 'rock,' the 'cornerstone as shown at Acts 4:8-12, " Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said to them: Ye princes of the people and ancients, hear. 9 If we this day are examined concerning the good deed done to the infirm man, by what means he hath been made whole: 10 Be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him, this man standeth here before you, whole. 11 This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible). And this is further testified to at 1 Peter 2:4-8, " Unto whom coming, as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men but chosen and made honourable by God: 5 Be you also as living stones built up, a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 6 Wherefore it is said in the scripture: Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious. And he that shall believe in him shall not be confounded. 7 To you therefore that believe, he is honour: but to them that believe not, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner: 8 And a stone of stumbling and a rock of scandal, to them who stumble at the word, neither do believe, whereunto also they are set."(DRCB); And further affirmed that Jesus (Yeshua) is the 'rock' at Ephesians 2:20, " Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:"(DRCB).
Last we look at Matthew 16:18 which the RCC tries to twist its meaning to be that Peter is the 'rock,' but as we have seen already, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the 'rock,' " And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."(DRCB) clearly affirming that he, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ was the 'rock' to Peter, so no apostolic succession here.
Let's see what Augustine had to say on it as reported in a Catholic source:
With respect the false doctrine of Apostolic Succession, Augustine had this to say per, "In this same period of my priestthood< I also wrote a book against a letter of Donatus...In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said; 'Thou art Peter, and upo9n this rock I will build my Church," that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying; "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven." For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ," in confessing whom as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter." [source="The Fathers of the Church--Saint Augustine, The Retraction," (Washington, D.C.; 1968), translation by Mary I Bogan, Booi I, p. 90. }
The Bible clearly states that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the head of the congregation, that he is alive, so why would he need a successor(s)?
Hebrews 7:22-25 clearly says in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible, "By so much is Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And the others indeed were made many priests, because by reason of death they were not suffered to continue: 24 But this, for that he continueth for ever, hath an everlasting priesthood: 25 Whereby he is able also to save for ever them that come to God by him; always living to make intercession for us. 26 For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens: 27 Who needeth not daily (as the other priests) to offer sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, in offering himself. 28 For the law maketh men priests, who have infirmity: but the word of the oath (which was since the law) the Son who is perfected for evermore."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB).
This is ratified at Romans 6:8-10, "Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with Christ. 9 Knowing that Christ, rising again from the dead, dieth now no more. Death shall no more have dominion over him. 10 For in that he died to sin, he died once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. "(DRCB); and further testified to at Ephesians 5:23-24, "Because the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject to Christ: so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things."(DRCB). So the Bible shows that no successor is necessary as Jesus (Yeshua) is alive and needs no successor.
Have you ever wondered or considered whether the Apostle Peter was ever actually in Rome, and what the facts indicate? Rome is referred to in nine verses of the Word of God, and interestingly NOT one of these says that the Apostle Peter was there. In fact, 1 Peter 5:10-14 shows he was NOT in Rome, but in Babylon, " But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory in Christ Jesus, after you have suffered a little, will himself perfect you and confirm you and establish you. 11 To him be glory and empire, for ever and ever. Amen. 12 By Sylvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I think, I have written briefly: beseeching and testifying that this is the true grace of God, wherein you stand. 13 The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you. And so doth my son, Mark. 14 Salute one another with a holy kiss. Grace be to all you who are in Christ Jesus. Amen."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB). Now some claim this was a cryptic reference to Rome, but would this be consistent with his assignment to preach to the Jews as indicated at Galatians 2:9, " And when they had known the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship: that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision:"(DRCB), since there was a large Jewish population in Babylon. The "Encyclopaedia Judaica," Jerusalem, 1971, Volume 15, Column 755, when discussing production of the Babylonian Talmud, refers clearly to Judaism's 'great academies of Babylon' during the first part of the Common Era.
Now, if a group really were as the RCC claims the successors to the apostles you would expect they would be adhering to the teachings and practices of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ and his apostles. A Catholic Dictionary clearly states: "The Roman Church is Apostolic, because her doctrine is the faith once revealed to the Apostles, which faith she guards and explains, without adding to it or taking from it." [source = A Catholic Dictionary," by W.E. Addis and T. Arnold, page 176, published in London in 1957]. Now the question is one of fact, is this group really not adding to or taking from the faith as revealed by Jesus (Yeshua)and the Apostles, let's see:
The Identity of God (YHWH):
The Catholic Encyclopedia clearly says, "The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion." [source = "The Catholic Encyclopedia," 1912 edition, Volume XV, page 47. However the New Encyclopedia Britannica clearly states, "Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament....The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies." [source = " the New Encyclopedia Britannica," 1976, Micropaedia, Volume X, Page 126].
The New Catholic Encyclopedia clearly states, "There is the recognition on the part of exegetes and Biblical theologians, including a constantly growing number of Roman Catholics, that one should not speak of Trinitarinism in the New Testament without serious qualification. There is also the closely parallel recognition on the part of historians of dogma and systematic theologians that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4 th. Century." [source = "The New Catholic Encyclopedia," 1967, Volume XIV, page 295].
Also, the very concept of the Trinity, is shown to be just a myth in the New Testament (NT) at many places such as at many places, for example at John 17:3-5, " Now this is eternal life: That they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 4 I have glorified thee on the earth; I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5 And now glorify thou me, O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee." (Douay Rheims Catholic Bible: DRCB), etc. clearly showing Jesus (Yeshua) as a distinct individual separate and apart from his Father (YHWH) and subject to his Father (YHWH) and carrying out his Father's (YHWH's) will. Also, there are countless other scriptures clearly showing that the Trinity is nothing more than an impossible myth.
Celibacy of the Clergy of the Roman Church:
Pope Paul VI, in his encyclical, "Sacerdotalis Caelibatus," (Priestly Celibacy, 1967 in English), endorsed celibacy as a requirement for the clergy, but he admitted that 'the New Testament which preserves the teaching of Christ and the Apostles...does not openly demand celibacy of sacred ministers...Jesus Himself did not make it a prerequisite in His choice of the Twelve, nor did the Apostles for those who presided over the first Christian communities." [source = "The papal Encyclicals 1958-1981, published at Falls Church, Virginia, 1981, page 204]. The scriptures clearly show this NOT TO BE A RECOGNIZED PRACTICE AMONG THE APOSTLES in the 1 st. Century at 1 Corinthians 9:5, " Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas"; and at John 1:42, " And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone."(DRCB). And at Mark 1:29-31 where reference is made to the mother-in-law of Simon, " And forthwith, when they were come out of the synagogue, they entered into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John. 30 But Simon's wife's mother lay sick of a fever, and anon they tell him of her. 31 And he came and took her by the hand, and lifted her up; and immediately the fever left her, and she ministered unto them. "(DRCB).
And the specific instructions with respect to qualifications of those seeking responsible positions in the congregation at 1 Timothy 3:2, " It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher, color](DRCB).
In fact, the requirement for Celibacy for priests, bishops, etc. is of pagan origin with the Buddist requiring it of their priest and monks before the Christian era per "History of Sacerdotal Celibacy in the Christian Church, by Henry C. Lea, London, 1932, fourth edition, page 6. Even earlier, the higher orders of the Babylonian priesthood were required to practice celibacy, according to "The Two Babylons," by Alexander Hislop of the Scottish church, New York, 1943, page 219.
Interestingly 1 Timothy 4:1-3 says, " Now the Spirit manifestly saith that in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error and doctrines of devils,
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy and having their conscience seared, 3 Forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful and by them that have known the truth."(DRCB).
The Bible Shows Separateness from the World not Attachment to It:
Pope Paul VI, when addressing the United Nations in 1965, said: "The peoples of the earth turn to the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace; We presume to present here, together with Our own, their tribute of honor and of hope." [source = "The Pope's Visit," New York, 1965, Time-Life Special Report, page 26.
But John 15:18-19 clearly shows true Christians do NOT belong to the world, " If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (DRCB); and James 4:4 says, " Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world becometh an enemy of God."(DRCB) clearly showing if the Pope was truly the successor of the Apostles he would not be saying, " the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace," but would recognize Jesus (yeshua) Christ was the actual last hope as clearly shown in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible and in The New American Bible (Catholic).
Jesus (Yeshua) Clearly Showed That Christians Do Not Resort To Cardinal Weapons in Their Warfare:
Catholic historian E.I. Watkin writes: "Painful as the admission must be, we cannot in the interest of a false edification or dishonest loyalty deny or ignore the historical fact that Bishops have consistently supported all wars waged by the government of their country. I do not know in fact of a single instance in which a national hierarchy has condemned as unjust any war...Whatever the official theory, in practice 'my country always right' has been the maxim followed in wartime by Catholic Bishops." [source = "Morals and Missiles," London, 1959, edited by Charles S. Thompson, pages 57 and 58].
Now, let's consider what the Bible clearly says at Matthew 26:52, " Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword."(DRCB); and 1 John 3:10-12, " In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil. Whosoever is not just is not of God, or he that loveth not his brother.
11 ¶ For this is the declaration which you have heard from the beginning, that you should love one another. 12 Not as Cain, who was of the wicked one and killed his brother. And wherefore did he kill him? Because his own works were wicked: and his brother's just."(DRCB).
Therefore, in the light of the foregoing, it is readily apparent that those who claim to be the successors to the Apostles are NOT because they are neither practicing what Jesus (Yeshua) and his Apostles did, NOR are they teaching what Jesus (Yeshua) and his Apostles were.
Now, the Catholic church claims "the keys" were entrusted to the Apostle Peter, but what does the Bible show with respect to the "the keys" and what they were? Let's go look at the Bible evidence on this subject. First, the Biblical verse in question so all will know what is being referenced to, Matthew 16:18-20," And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ."(DRCB). The Catholic church claims that when Jesus (Yeshua) said, "thou art Peter," and he was the 'rock' on which the church was to be built, but as previously shown, the 'rock' was Christ himself, and the expression 'thou art' was a common method of expression, then, as shown at John 1:49 and many other places, " Nathanael answered him and said: Rabbi: Thou art the Son of God. Thou art the King of Israel"(DRCB).
Revelation 3:5-8 actually makes certain just who "the key" is when Jesus (Yeshua) is shown as referring to the symbolic key used to open up privileges and opportunities to humans as himself, Jesus (Yeshua), and he only used the Apostle Peter as his agent to open up the way for the Gentiles, " He that shall overcome shall thus be clothed in white garments: and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life. And I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels. 6 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches. 7 And to the angel of the church of Philadelphia write: These things saith the Holy One and the true one, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and no man shutteth, shutteth and no man openeth: 8 I know thy works. Behold, I have given before thee a door opened, which no man can shut: because thou hast a little strength and hast kept my word and hast not denied my name."(DRCB). [Brief detail on the Law of Agencies which is basically as follows, "Jesus (Yeshua) was God's (YHWH's) appointed agent in accordance with the 'Biblical law of agency' described as, "Scripture mentions something being done by Person A, whilst another mentions it being done by Person B. This is best understood when we grasp the Schaliach Principle, or the Jewish Law of Agency, which is expressed in the dictum, "A person's agent is regarded as the person himself." Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principle." (The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, R.J.Z. Werblowski and Geoffrey Wigoder)].
Now, the Apostle peter was entrusted by Jesus (Yeshua) to open up to the Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles, the opportunity to receive God's (YHWH's) spirit with a view to their entering the heavenly Kingdom as shown by Acts 21:14-39, " But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you and with your ears receive my words. 15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day: 16 But this is that which was spoken of by the prophet Joel: 17 And it shall come to pass, in the last days, (saith the Lord), I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy: and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams. 18 And upon my servants indeed and upon my handmaids will I pour out in those days of my spirit: and they shall prophesy. 19 And I will shew wonders in the heaven above, and signs on the earth beneath: blood and fire, and vapour of smoke. 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness and the moon into blood, before the great and manifest day of the Lord to come. 21 And it shalt come to pass, that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him, in the midst of you, as you also know: 23 This same being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the sorrows of hell, as it was impossible that he should be holden by it. 25 For David saith concerning him: I foresaw the Lord before my face: because he is at my right hand, that I may not be moved. 26 For this my heart hath been glad, and my tongue hath rejoiced: moreover my flesh also shall rest in hope. 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell: nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life: thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Ye men, brethren, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David: that he died and was buried; and his sepulchre is with us to this present say. 30 Whereas therefore he was a prophet and knew that God hath sworn to him with an oath, that of the fruit of his loins one should sit upon his throne. 31 Foreseeing this, he spoke of the resurrection of Christ. For neither was he left in hell: neither did his flesh see corruption.
32 This Jesus hath God raised again, whereof all we are witnesses. 33 Being exalted therefore by the right hand of God and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath poured forth this which you see and hear. 34 For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy enemies thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. 37 ¶ Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? 38 But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call."(DRCB); and Acts 8:14-17, " Now, when the apostles, who were in Jerusalem, had heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John. 15 Who, when they were come, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost. 16 For he was not as yet come upon any of them: but they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands upon them: and they received the Holy Ghost."(DRCB).
And Acts 10:24-48 highlights this, " And the morrow after, he entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius waited for them, having called together his kinsmen and special friends. 25 And it came to pass that when Peter was come in, Cornelius came to meet him and falling at his feet adored. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying: Arise: I myself also am a man. 27 And talking with him, he went in and found many that were come together. 28 And he said to them: you know how abominable it is for a man that is a Jew to keep company or to come unto one of another nation: but God hath shewed to me, to call no man common or unclean. 29 For which cause, making no doubt, I came when I was sent for. I ask, therefore, for what cause you have sent for me? 30 And Cornelius said: Four days ago, unto this hour, I was praying in my house, at the ninth hour and behold a man stood before me in white apparel and said: 31 Cornelius, thy prayer is heard and thy alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God. 32 Send therefore to Joppe: and call hither Simon, who is surnamed Peter. He lodgeth in the house of Simon a tanner, by the sea side.
33 Immediately therefore I sent to thee: and thou hast done well in coming. Now, therefore, all we are present in thy sight to hear all things whatsoever are commanded thee by the Lord. 34 And Peter opening his mouth, said: in very deed I perceive that God is not a respecter of persons.
35 But in every nation, he that feareth him and worketh justice is acceptable to him. 36 God sent the word to the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all). 37 You know the word which hath been published through all Judea: for it began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached. 38 Jesus of Nazareth: how God anointed him with the Holy Ghost and with power, who went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. 39 And we are witnesses of all things that he did in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem: whom they killed, hanging him upon a tree. 40 Him God raised up the third day and gave him to be made manifest, 41 Not to all the people, but to witnesses preordained by God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him, after he arose again from the dead.
42 And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that it is he who was appointed by God to be judge of the living and of the dead. 43 To him all the prophets give testimony, that by his name all receive remission of sins, who believe in him. 44 ¶ While Peter was yet speaking these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word. 45 And the faithful of the circumcision, who came with Peter, were astonished for that the grace of the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speaking with tongues and magnifying God. 47 Then Peter answered: Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Then they desired him to tarry with them some days."(DRCB).
Now did heaven wait on Peter to make decisions and then follow his lead? Not hardly as clearly shown by Acts 2:4, " And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost: and they began to speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak." And Acts 2:14, " But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you and with your ears receive my words."(DRCB). And Acts 10:19-20 follows up with, " And as Peter was thinking of the vision, the Spirit said to him: Behold three men seek thee. 20 Arise, therefore: get thee down and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them."(DRCB); and Matthew 18:18-19, " Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven."(DRCB).
Now, is Peter the judge as to who is worthy to enter the Kingdom as claimed? Well 2 Timothy 4:1-2, explains that the judge is NOT the Apostle Peter, but Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, himself, " I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming and his kingdom: 2 Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine."(DRCB). This Biblical fact that Jesus (Yeshua) is the judge and not the Apostle Peter is highlighted even further at 2 Timothy 4:8, " As to the rest, there is laid up for me a crown of justice which the Lord the just judge will render to me in that day: and not only to me, but to them also that love his coming. Make haste to come to me quickly."(DRCB).
HI EVERYONE
ONE MUSLIM APOLOGIST IS PUTTING FORTH PURE HOGwash NONSENSE AS FOLLOWS:
(QUOTE) “There will never be an end to extremism and terrorism as long as Muslim children keep on attending state schools with non-Muslim teachers. Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers during their developmental periods. Muslim children must develop their cultural, spiritual and linguistic identities before they are exposed to wider world,” (QUOTE)
BUT REALITY SHOWS QUITE THE CONTRARY. CHILDREN OF MANY OTHER RELIGIOUS AND ETHNIC GROUPS SUCH AS HINDUS, SIKHS, JEANS, ZOROASTRIANS, ARMENIANS, ETC. WHO HAVE MIGRATED TO THE UNITED KINGDOM (uk) NEVER REVERT TO EXTREMISM AND TERRORISM AS DO MANY MUSLIM CHILDREN, BUT ATTEND THE SAME PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THIS IS PROOF POSITIVE THAT WITH RESPECT MUSLIM CHILDREN OTHER CAUSATIVE FACTORS ARE AT WORK. WHAT ARE SOME OF THESE CAUSATIVE FACTORS? THEY ARE HOME TRAINING, MOSQUE TRAINING, AND TRAINING BY ACQUAINTANCES. SO IF WE WANT TO END HATE AND TERRORISM THESE CAUSATIVE FACTORS MUST BE DEALT WITH AND ELIMINATED.
AN ANOTHER ITEM TO CONSIDER, MUSLIMS NOW HAVE A COMPLETE MONOPOLY ON SUICIDE BOMBERS AND HAVE HAD SINCE THE 1940S. YES, THERE WAS ONE SUICIDE BOMBER BACK THERE WHO WAS NOT MUSLIM. NOW HARDLY A DAY GOES BY WITHOUT A MUSLIM SUICIDE BOMBER BLOWING HIMSELF UP TO KILL OTHERS. THIS CAN EASILY BE CHECKED BY A DAILY READING OF THE WORLD NEWS.
THE BIG QUESTION IS WHY MUSLIM AUTHORITIES CONTINUE TO PERMIT TERRORISM AND SUICIDE BOMBERS. LET’S DEAL WITH THIS DYSFUNCTIONAL SITUATION USING FRANCE AS AN EXAMPLE:
Spotlight: Jihad in France
The terror attack on the Paris offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, which left ten journalists and two policemen dead, was many years in the making. As Middle East Forum staff, fellows, and publications have underscored, the growth of Islamism in France is driven by the size of its Muslim minority (the largest in Western Europe), the failure of immigrants to assimilate into French society, the cradle-to-grave welfare system that encourages youth idleness, and an unwillingness to take seriously the threat of Islamist ideology [source - retrieved from http://www.meforum.org/ on 2/9/2015]
Islam in France: The French Way of Life Is in Danger
by Michel Gurfinkiel
Middle East Quarterly
March 1997, pp. 19-29
rfinkiel is editor in chief of Valeurs Actuelles, France's leading conservative weekly newsmagazine. A specialist in international affairs, he has recently written Israel: Geopolitique d'une Paix (Michalon, 1996) and Geopolitique de la Criminalite (La Documentation française/Institut des Hautes Etudes de la Securite Interieure, 1996).
American visitors to Paris or other major French cities often are amazed when they see how the multiethnic way of life there resembles that in the United States.
Some see this as positive: in a Newsweek cover story, John Leland and Marcus Mabry assert that a "new creative energy -- in terms of art and music -- is bursting out of the multiethnic suburbs" of France.1 Others are more pessimistic, pointing to La Haine (Hate), a movie about immigrant or minority teenagers in Marseilles that tells a story of street violence and confrontation with the police that brings the 1992 Los Angeles riots to mind.
But multiethnicity in France goes beyond that in the United States, for it includes a religious dimension in addition to racial and ethnic differences. If the most important minorities in the United States (the black and Hispanic) are overwhelmingly Christian, French minority groups are largely Muslim. American minority groups share many basic values with the rest of the country; in contrast, French minority groups tend to have alien values, to think of themselves as a new nation, and even to have hopes of superseding the present Judeo-Christian nation of France.
WILL FRANCE REMAIN FRENCH?
Nor is this Muslim aspiration a pipedream. Jean-Claude Chesnais, one of France's leading demographers at the National Institute for the Study of Demographics (Ined), is very blunt:
Migration trends are to intensify over the coming thirty years... . All developed countries will be affected, including East Asia and the former communist countries. There will be an overall mingling of cultures and civilisations that may lead, as far as France is concerned, to the emergence of a predominantly African population and to rapid Islamization."2
Today, France's immigrant population amounts to 15 percent of the total population, with lower figures for the Muslim community: hardly a tidal wave. It is also true that France remains an overwhelmingly Roman Catholic country, with a Catholic baptism rate of 84 percent in 1990. In addition, France is one of the oldest, if not the oldest, nation-states in Europe, and it can claim one of the world's great and most attractive cultures; these attributes have helped it absorb and thoroughly assimilate large numbers of immigrants during the past century or so, including Belgians and Germans, Italians and Spaniards, Poles and Portuguese, Jews from Eastern Europe and North Africa, Armenians, and West Indian blacks, plus Asians from Indochina, China, and India. Why should not the same pattern prevail throughout the twenty-first century as well?
Still, the prospect of the French's converting en masse to Islam and France's turning into an Afro-Mediterranean country is not to be dismissed. Mass conversion and ethnic transition are not rare in history. The Roman Empire, one the world's most formidable and enduring polities, was transformed in the half-millennium between the first century B.C.E. and the fourth century C.E., as ethnic Romans were replaced by neo-Romans of many ethnic or racial stocks and various parlances, from proto-Berber North Africans and Arabs to Slavs and Germans, not to speak of Greeks and Hellenized easterners. Simultaneously, while Christianity abruptly replaced the sophisticated pagan culture of Rome.
To assess the chances of the French's converting en masse to Islam and France's turning into an Afro-Mediterranean country is not to be dismissed.
To assess the chances of France's Islamicization over the coming thirty to fifty years, we look at four factors: the high demographic rates of French Muslims, their aloofness from mainstream society, their increasing religious assertiveness, and the growing appeal of Islam to non-Muslims.
I. Demographic Disparity
As in the United States, there are no accurate population figures on religious affiliation in France, for French law prohibits a census along religious lines in almost all circumstances, even of foreigners.3 Polls and surveys do exist but vary widely in scope, methodology, and results.
The Ministry of Interior and Ined routinely speak of a Muslim population in France of 3 million. Sheikh Abbas, head of the Great Mosque in Paris, in 1987 spoke of twice as many -- 6 million.4 Journalists usually adopt an estimate somewhere in the middle: for example, Philippe Bernard of Le Monde uses the figure of 3 to 4 million.5 The Catholic Church, a reliable source of information on religious trends in France, also estimates 4 million.6 A French-Arab journal published in Paris provides the following breakdown: 3.1 million Muslims of North African origin, 400,000 from the Middle East, 300,000 from Africa, 50,000 Asians, 50,000 converts of ethnic French origin, and 300,000 illegal immigrants from unknown countries.7 This brings the total to 4.2 million. One can state with reasonable certainty that the Muslim population of France numbers over 3 million (about 5 percent of the total French population) and quite probably over 4 million (6.6 percent).
Perhaps more important than exact numbers is the spectacular rate of growth since World War II. Muslims in France in 1945 numbered some 100,000 souls; fifty years later, the population has increased by thirty or forty times.8 It continues to grow at a rapid clip, through further immigration (illegal but until now poorly suppressed), natural increase (immigrant Muslim families retain a comparatively high birthrate), or conversion (either as the result of intermarriage or out of a personal religious quest).
If birthrate figures cannot be precisely computed, enough data exists to make educated estimates. Algerian women in France in 1981 had a fertility rate of 4.4 births per woman; in 1990, it had declined to 3.5 births. (Comparable figures for Moroccan women in France are 5.8 and 3.5; for Tunisian women, 5.1 and 4.2.) While declining, the birthrate of immigrant Muslims remains three to four times higher than that of non-Muslim French, which is estimated at 1.3 percent. There is no specific reason to believe that the Muslim rate will eventually parallel the non-Muslim one. It is noteworthy that while in 1981 Tunisian women in France had a slightly lower birthrate than their counterparts in Tunisia (5.1 against 5.2), nine years later it had grown higher (4.2 against 3.4). The reasons for this growth are not clear, but they could include the higher welfare payments in France or the relative ease of family planning, including the choice for a large family, in democratic France compared to semi-authoritarian Tunisia.9
In all, the 1992 fertility rate in France was 1.8 births per woman, a figure slightly above those of Germany (1.3), Italy (1.3), and Spain (1.2) but well beneath that of the United States (2.1).10 France's demographic advantage over other European Union countries is due largely to its larger percentage of Muslims and their higher birthrate.
Extrapolating from these numbers, the low Muslim-population scenario (low immigration, diminishing birthrate, few conversoins) results in a 50 percent increase over twenty years; between 4.5 and 6 million Muslims in France by the year 2016, out of 60 million French, or 7 to 10 percent of the total population.11 The high-number scenario (rampant immigration, higher birthrate for Muslims than for non-Muslims, and a higher share of young people in the Muslim population than among non-Muslims) points to a 100 percent or even a 200 percent increase: 6 to 12 million Muslims by 2016, or 10 to 20 percent of the total population. Then there is the superhigh scenario, in which a rapidly expanding, young, and assertive Muslim community simply outpaces a declining, aging, and unsure non-Muslim community.
According to the interior ministry, two thirds of Muslims in France live in major urban areas: 38 percent in the Ile-de-France (Paris and its region), 13 percent in the Provence-C"te d'Azur (Marseilles and Nice, as well as the Riviera), 10 percent in Rh"ne-Alpes (Lyons and Grenoble), and 5 percent in Nord-Pas-de-Calais (around Lille). To get the full measure of Islam's impact on French society, those figures must be translated into numbers and then related to the size of the local population: 1.37 million Muslims in Ile-de-France out of a total population of 11 million (10 percent); 471,000 Muslims in Provence-C"te d'Azur out of 4.3 million (11 percent); 363,000 in Rh"ne-Alpes out of 5.3 million (6.8 percent); and 181,000 in Nord-Pas-de-Calais out of 3.9 million (5 percent). The Muslim presence is much greater in key areas than the overall figures would suggest. Many cities or neighborhoods in France have turned into all-Muslim territories.
The birthrate of Muslims being three to four times higher than that of non-Muslims, the proportion of children, teenagers, and young adults in urban France is not 5-11 percent but a very impressive 33 percent or so.
II. Outside the Mainstream
Are Muslims in France subject to racism or discrimination? In a 1996 CSA poll, 56 percent of foreigners living on French soil and 61 percent of naturalized French citizens deemed racism "a threat." Indigenous French citizens do not share this concern: only 27 percent of them mentioned racism as a major threat; they found unemployment, poverty, and AIDS far more worrisome (74, 53, and 50 percent, respectively). Despite this difference of view, a wide consensus exists that North African Muslims are the main victims of racist behavior: over two-thirds of all French citizens agree about that.12
The picture is not all negative. A 1995 Louis Harris poll for Valeurs Actuelles shows an astounding 71 percent of all Muslims living in France, foreigners and citizens alike, feel "welcomed" by the French.13 Many French Muslims are middle class or even upper class. A growing Muslim presence is felt in the liberal and learned professions, particularly medicine (Dalil Boubakeur, head of the Great Mosque in Paris, is a respected physician). Some Muslims have made their way well into France's ruling elite, the Grands Corps de l'Etat and the Conseil d'Etat. Djamal Larfaoui, an Algerian-born French Muslim, was sousprefet (local governor) of Nanterre, a vibrant and densely populated city in the Paris area, until his sudden death in December 1996; he was granted a state funeral. Others are senior executives in major corporations, such as Yazid Sabegh, chairman of the high-technology Campagnie des Signaux, or Lofti Belhacine, founder of the leisure and vacation company Aquarius and the airline company Air Liberte. This upper crust of French Islam mixes freely with non-Muslims and does not stick to its own neighborhoods. Indeed, no case of housing discrimination against upper- or middle-class Muslims has ever been reported.
Many working-class Muslims also follow this pattern and mingle with non-Muslims; that was particularly the case with immigrants who came in the 1950s and 1960s. Arriving as single men, they frequently intermarried with non-Muslim women, French-born or immigrant, and were quite easily absorbed into mainstream society. Isabelle Adjani, the famed actress, is the daughter of an immigrant Algerian Muslim father and an immigrant German Catholic mother. Ali Magoudi, a well-known psychoanalyst, was born to an immigrant Algerian Muslim father and an immigrant Polish Catholic mother.
But a very high proportion of French Muslims are in the underclass, that segment of the population that relies not so much on education and work as on welfare and predatory activities. Most members of this underclass tend to be Muslims who arrived in France as whole families, including Harkis14 and post-1974 immigrants. Their condition is not that different from the underclass of blacks and Hispanics in the United States, though there is one striking geographic difference: the American underclass concentrates in the inner cities, while the French is found in the new and dull public-housing neighborhoods that mushroomed at the cities' peripheries. Suburb and suburbanite have precisely the opposite meaning in France from what they have in North America.
According to Lucienne Bui-Trong, the officer in charge of the Towns and Suburbs Department at the Renseignements generaux (general intelligence) of the French police, no less than one thousand Muslim neighborhoods are under monitoring throughout France, which means that the National Police keeps more personnel there to prevent public disorder. Violence and crime are rampant in those areas. Seven hundred Muslim neighborhoods are listed as "violent"; four hundred are listed as "very violent," meaning not just that organized crime and firearms are present but that residents have a systematic strategy to keep the police out. The Ile-de-France has 226 violent neighborhoods, Provence-C"te d'Azur has 89, Rh"ne-Alpes 62, and Rh"ne-Pas-de-Calais 61.15.
Unemployment is rife in these suburbs, with 470,000 registered unemployed adults in 1993, or roughly one third of the total adult manpower.16 Violence ranges from theft and looting of cars (58 percent of all offenses) and street fighting to assault on teachers and civil servants (10 percent). Perhaps most distressing are the high numbers of assaults or rebellions against the police (19 percent).17 Periodic outbursts of large-scale unrest or rioting sometimes occur. The first major riots occurred at Vaulx-en-Velin, a Lyons suburb, in 1990; since then, further riots have taken place in the Paris suburbs. In addition, riots have even taken place at the seaside or mountain resort sites where suburbanite youngsters are sometimes placed for government-sponsored vacations.
As the notion of a government-sponsored vacation suggests, French suburbs have hardly been neglected by the authorities. Since the riot there in 1990, Vaulx-en-Velin has benefited from a $50 million program financed by the central government since 1990: each of the town's 45,000 inhabitants has had $1,000 spent on him for parks, sport facilities, underground parking lots, public libraries, and kindergartens. The money even goes for museums, including France's most modern planetarium and a Permanent Exhibition Center for Minorities. At the national level, $3 billion has been earmarked in French fiscal year 1995 for "urban policies" (a euphemism for ghetto rehabilitation).18
And yet, the government has little to show for its expenditures: crime and unrest are both sharply on the rise at Vaulx-en-Velin and everywhere else. The basic assumption underlying this welfare policy -- that unrest is the result of poverty and a shabby urban environment -- would seem to be proven wrong.
In fact, as many sociologists -- including Muslim ones -- acknowledge, an almost symbiotic relationship exists in the ghettoes between the underclass way of life and ethnic/religious separatism. Conservative Muslims see the ghettoes as a way to benefit from immigrating to France without having to assimilate into French society. Some level of violence has the advantage of ensuring separation from the outside world and can be used as a bargaining tool with the authorities to get more de facto autonomy -- meaning that Muslim enclaves are ruled only by Muslims according to Islamic law and mores -- as well as to obtain more funding. It also serves as a social control tool against liberal-minded Muslim individuals, for conservative Muslim leaders can easier exert pressure on liberal-minded Muslims -- for instance to compel females to don the veil -- within the context of the ghettos' violence.
III. Increasing Religious Assertiveness
Just how Islamic are French Muslims, how religious and how orthodox? The breakdown of Muslim religious practice according to gender, age, ethnicity, and geographic origin is worth noting. Muslim men are less religious than Muslim women (26 percent of whom pray at least five times a year), in large part due to very low attendance among the main male group, French-born young males of Algerian origin (under 6 percent). Turks -- many really Kurds from Southeast Anatolia -- are quite religious (36 percent), followed by Moroccans (27 percent).19
Nowadays, one thousand mosques are said to operate in France, almost all of them built or organized during the past thirty years. Eight of them, including the Great Mosque in Paris, are "cathedral mosques," large monumental buildings with a capacity of more than a thousand worshippers. A further hundred mosques are quite large structures, with a capacity of several hundred worshippers. The rest are small, accommodating from thirty to one hundred worshippers -- not entire buildings, but simple rooms at factories or in the basement of public housing units.20
Though the demand for mosques is growing, attendance is not high: Ined reports that just 23 percent of Muslims in France join public prayer at least five times a year. Still, this is slightly higher than Catholic attendance at seasonal high services (Christmas, Easter, All Saints Day), which is 20 percent. But is regular mosque attendance the true hallmark of Islamic religious practice? Perhaps more significant is that some exceptional holidays, such `Id al-Adha (Feast of the Sacrifice), draw thousands of worshippers not just into the mosques but outside as well.
In principle, public funding is not available for mosque building because of the 1905 Law of Separation of Churches and State, according to which the French Republic "neither recognizes nor funds" any religious organization. Various ways have been devised, however, to circumvent these laws, to the point that any Islamic congregation with a sound building project can count on extensive public help, either in cash or credit. Most mosque projects include not just the house of worship but also baths, clinics, and bookshops. The demand for Islamic schools is also growing: according to the 1995 Louis Harris poll, 76 percent of all Muslims in France would like to send their children not to secular schools but to Islamic schools run under the benign supervision of the state and with its financial help, the same arrangement that Catholic and Jewish schools have.21 The same applies to ritually acceptable (hallal) food: the government has no choice but to extend to Muslims the same slaughtering and processing privileges customarily granted to Jews. As for Ramadan observance, also on the increase, the government takes it into account in the case of Muslim civil servants.
Several facts point to a gradual shift among French Muslims toward increased identification with religion and a more rigorous practice of the faith. Women and teenage girls are wearing the Islamic veil, even in public schools. Immigrant groups with a secular agenda, like Arezki Dahmani's France Plus (a group concerned with civil liberties and civic rights for North African immigrants, aiming at organizing the North African vote to support the conservative parties), associate with Islamists to retain their constituency. Mosques or other institutions run by mystical brotherhoods (tariqat) from distant Egypt, Turkey, or Pakistan tend to take over "immigrant mosques" run by North African imams closely associated with their home governments.
There is no central religious organization of Islam in France; each local congregation is registered as a separate entity under the 1901 law on nonprofit organizations. Several attempts have been made in recent years to place Muslims under the authority of a national Islamic federation,22 modeled somewhat on the Jewish Consistoire. All these efforts failed, in part because they sought to absorb French Muslims in mainstream French society. The French government hopes to exert more control over French Islam through an established Islamic "church," while Muslim groups tend to see this as a way for Islam to be recognized as an autonomous group within the French body politic. Fundamentalist leaders state this aim unabashedly, moderate leaders do so in a more subtle and astute way; all claim full adherence to orthodox Islamic laws and teachings regarding relations with non-Muslim powers.
In this context, it is worth quoting Dalil Boubakeur, the French-born and thoroughly gallicized head of the Great Mosque and the driving force behind the Representative Council of French Muslims (CRMF). In January 1995, he presented a Platform for Islamic Worship in France (Charte du culte musulman en France) to Minister of the Interior Charles Pasqua, a document (and its elaborate commentary, also by Boubakeur) subsequently accepted as a French-Islamic manifesto of sorts. Article 32 asserts:
The Muslims of France, in close association with other believers, intend to develop a concept of secularism that establishes harmonious relations between the religions and the state.23
Now, this is not secularism as the French have understood it since 1905 -- the complete separation of church and state -- but a situation reminiscent of the Ottoman Empire under the Tanzimat regime, in which all religions enjoy public recognition and varying degrees of autonomy within the state. The word "concord" refers to the old Catholic practice of concordats, full-fledged bilateral treaties between the Vatican and sovereign powers delineating the powers and privileges of the church and state. Boubakeur seems to be saying that the French Republic should write a treaty with Islam regarding the Muslim community in France.
Boubakeur makes clear in his commentary that "according to the Shari`a [Islamic sacred law], a non-Muslim country is not to be seen any more as Dar al-Harb [house of war] but rather as Dar al-`Ahd [house of covenant]"; and "the Platform is an expression of such a covenant."24 Fully aware of the legal or constitutional difficulties implied in such a statute of covenant, the platform refers to a de facto revision of the 1905 law of separation: "Islam did not emerge as one of the major faiths of France before the second half of the twentieth century, long after the 1905 law. ... Muslims look forward to a friendly interpretation of the law ... enabling them to join harmoniously into the French society and the French state."25
IV. Islam's Appeal to Non-Muslims
Some fifty thousand French Muslims are said to be converts of non-Muslim origin. Their numbers include well-known intellectuals and artists, including Maurice Bejart, the world-famous choreographer who has settled for a low-profile brand of Sufism; and Roger Garaudy, a former communist philosopher who is leader of the Spain-based International Islamic Center. Quite a few converts have achieved positions of leadership within Islamic circles: Daniel-Youssouf Leclerc, the leader of the strictly orthodox Sunni group Integrite and the only European-born member of the World Islamic League's High Council; Ali-Didier Bourg, the founder of the Islamic University in Paris (a part-time seminary rather than a university but still very influential); and Jacques-Yacoub Roty, who was rumored in the early 1990s to be the next head of the Great Mosque.
Formal conversion is only the most visible manifestation of a much wider move toward Islam. For one, Islam (unlike Judaism or Catholicism) does not insist on conversion in a mixed marriage but makes do with the children's being raised as Muslims. And they are; a rather significant and growing proportion of Muslim children in France were born of non-Muslim mothers or even of non-Muslim fathers.
Secondly, interest in Islam has become politically correct in France, notwithstanding a very real concern about fundamentalist Islam. In part, this reflects a taste for the religiously exotic that has been apparent in European and American culture for well over a century. But today it fits into a new paradigm: intellectuals, academics, even priests are not supposed to see Islam as something worthy and alien but as part of a common heritage. In great measure, Islam has become a second Judaism in France: another non-Christian faith and culture with intimate relevance for the Christian world.
This new approach gains in importance by virtue of its surprising endorsement by the Catholic Church. As Alain Besancon, a leading Catholic intellectual, has noted, "It is syncretism in the guise of oecumenism." To posit the Qur'an as a sacred book "rooted in Biblical Revelation," as do many contemporary Catholic authors or preachers, or even as a late "Biblical book" runs not just against Catholic theology (which knows only of the canonical Bible) but aligns the church with the Islamic theological notion according to which Qur'anic revelation includes all previous revelations. As Besancon puts it, the Christian ministry is gradually shifting to a crypto-Islamic ministry: "De propaganda fide islamica."26 In contrast, it bears noting, Muslims are not in the least reciprocating, not retreating from their own indictment of the Torah and the Injil (Christian Revelation) as adulterated or falsified versions of God's word.
Why has the church succumbed to such syncretist trends? Besancon draws a telling parallel with an earlier infatuation, that with Marxism. Christianity may be so weak in contemporary France (and probably throughout much of Europe) that it must to look to other religions, either the apocalyptic church of Revolution or para-biblical Islam, to rejuvenate and survive. Indeed, the Catholic Church is far weaker in France today then it was in the heyday of communism in the years after World War II.
Observant Catholics (Catholiques pratiquants), a quarter of the French population in 1950, well-entrenched, and highly visible, have dwindled into a remnant (less than 5 percent in 1995). Moreover, the substance of Catholic observance has been so modified that to be fully observant today equals the lukewarm religiosity of yesteryear. Observant Catholics once would go to church on Sunday to attend services in Latin, send their children to Catholic schools or Catholic youth organizations, vote for Catholic parties, support Catholic unions. They insisted on strict sexual behavior and severely opposed divorce. Their families would be two to three times larger than the national average. Almost none of this is found today: church-going is marginal, services are in French, Catholic schools hardly differ from others, Catholic political parties or unions have been secularized, Catholic sexual mores are like everyone else's, large families are rare, and divorce is rampant.
The decline of the Catholic clergy is even more dramatic: from 200,000 priests, monks, and nuns in the 1950s, many of them young, to less than 100,000 today, most of them over sixty-five. Clerical scarcity has in turn led to a growing involvement of less educated laymen in the ministry, plus heavy recourse to foreign clerics, especially from the Third World. Black African priests can be seen today throughout the country, even in rural areas of France; a black Zairian priest held mass for President Jacques Chirac in mid-1996. Female religious communities are, if anything, even more foreign: a substantial number of French nuns under thirty are of African or Asian origin.
A declining church seems to take comfort in the assertiveness of other faiths. French Catholics have over the years sought inspiration not just from Islam but from a wide range of non-Catholic religions: the study of Judaism, both Biblical and post-Biblical, is encouraged, as well as the imitation of Jewish ritual; Protestant revivalism has been cloned into the church as "Pentecostal," "charismatic," or Renouveau ("Renewal") Catholicism; monasteries are remodeled after their Hindu or Buddhist equivalents; yoga and Oriental meditation are frequently fusioned with Christian prayer and other spiritual exercises. But Islam as a role model is growing, for it offers the best and closest example of a "living religion": a religion that appears quite close to Christianity in some terminology, that serves the masses and the elites alike, and whose adherents really believe in God and His law.
That said, a growing number of Catholic leaders have expressed concern and dismay about the rise of Islam in France and the church's pro-Islamic tendency. Archbishop Jean-Marie Lustiger of Paris, the chief Catholic authority of France, has publicly opposed the establishment of a state-supported central Islamic organization:
It is not the job of the French government to set up a French-flavored Islam. One should not mistake the twentieth century for the Age of Louis XIV or Napoleon, when worship could be regulated by decree. There is no other alternative but to enforce the law of the Republic in a wise and gentle way, and to wait for some thirty years or two generations, until Muslims with French citizenship will regard themselves and be regarded as French people of the Islamic faith.27
Archbishop Lustiger -- himself a converted Jew -- evidently takes seriously the potential dangers involved in the combination of growing Muslim demographics, growing Islamic assertiveness and declining Catholic morale. His strategy to check Islam's growth is apparently a strict enforcement of laicite, the separation of church and state, while rebuilding Catholicism from within; for example, he has despaired of the standard Catholic seminaries and set up parallel, more conservative training colleges for the clergy.
As Besancon points out, "Muslims already outnumber observant Catholics" in France,28 and this trend seems likely to continue. Why should the average French of Catholic origin not forsake a dying African-ministered religion for an expanding, living religion that is anyway described as Christianity's younger sister?
Other Factors
Other factors may also come into play. We note two briefly: the sharp decline in the French nation-state and the growing power of Muslim voters.
Decline in the French nation-state. It was one thing for France to absorb large numbers of Italians, Spaniards, Portuguese, Poles, Jews, Armenians, and Asians29 into a highly centralized, well-managed, and fully sovereign state, with a unified school system, a strong police, and compulsory military service for all male youth, as was the case until the 1960s. It is another thing altogether to absorb yet larger numbers of Arabs, Berbers, Turks, and black Africans into a much weaker state, with many powers devolved to the local authorities, a less powerful police, a dismembered school system, no draft, and the prospect of merging into the European Union.
Corsica, the birthplace of Emperor Napoleon and of untold numbers of French soldiers and civil servants, once a peaceful island departement off the Riviera, has over the past twenty years gradually slid into anarchy, terrorism, and then into separatism, all without eliciting a credible response from the national government. This precedent cannot be lost on Muslim activists.
At the same time, sovereign attributes -- money issuance, border control, and much else -- are being transferred from the French state to the European Union: radical French Muslims may wonder why they should come to terms with the national government in Paris rather than the supranational authority in Brussels.
The Muslim vote. The routine process of French politics may accelerate Islamization. Almost 50 percent of Muslims living in France today are French citizens and eventually nearly all of them will become French citizens. France has an extremely generous naturalization policy, one that permits all legal residents to apply for citizenship after five years in France and every child born on French soil to apply for citizenship, even if his parents are in the country illegally. (In this, it is very like the United States and very unlike Germany, which rarely bestows full citizenship to resident foreigners, even those born in Germany.)
In the longer term, as Muslims become citizens, their vote will be as crucial in many elections as the observant Catholic vote used to be; to win it may mean having to woo it, notably by allowing for further immigration and the consolidation of Islam in French society. Along these lines, one might also wonder whether Jacques Chirac's pronouncements in late 1996 strongly favoring an independent Palestinian state and the lifting of the embargo against Iraq were not intended to garner the Muslim vote in France.
Conclusion
In sum, a growing proportion of non-Muslim French find the prospect of Islamization less shocking than would have their more patriotic-minded forefathers. On the other hand, the scope of the immigration and Islamization process may bring about a backlash. According to a December 1995 survey carried out by CSA and published in La Vie, a liberal Catholic weekly, 70 percent of the French are "afraid of religious fundamentalism" and a further 66 percent think that "fundamentalism is more prevalent in some religions than in others." As even La Vie's editors had to recognize, perhaps reluctantly, the issue here is not fundamentalism as such but Islam, both fundamentalist and moderate: "The French do believe today in a specific political-religious threat. And Islam, quite probably, is what first comes to their minds."30 Concern about Islamization is an important element in the rise of Jean-Marie Le Pen's far-Right party, the National Front, but is much broader in scope and has compelled the mainstream parties to echo portions of Le Pen's program (he calls for the deportation of all aliens, they call for a tightening of the very liberal immigration or naturalization laws).
Every community has the right to uphold and protect its way of life, so long as minorities' rights are protected as well. Not so long ago, this consideration applied primarily to colonial areas threatened by the industrial West. Arguably, it applies to Western industrial nations as well, should they be threatened by mass immigration. In the case at hand, the main point is not whether mosques may be built or if hallal food may be distributed; but whether polygamy is to be tolerated and the police to operate in Muslim neighborhoods. In other words, Islam ought to adapt to the traditional French way of life, with its emphasis on individual freedom and secularism, rather than the reverse.
The current debate about immigration in America is much more about ethnicity and language than about religion. Still, many lessons may be drawn from the case of France.
Muslim Immigration to France
Most Muslims living in France are either North African immigrants or their offspring. Their presence in France results directly from French colonial rule over the three Maghreb countries (Algeria from 1830 to 1962, Tunisia 1881-1956, and Morocco 1912-1956).
Although a few Muslim subjects immigrated to France even before 1914, substantial numbers came only with the Great War. Three hundred thousand North Africans were drafted, two-thirds as soldiers in various units of colonial troops (Chasseurs indigènes, Infanterie de Marine, Tirailleurs Sénégalais, Tirailleurs Algériens, Tirailleurs Marocains, Spahis) and one-third as workers in the armament industry. Many were killed or died of disease, others were forcibly sent home after 1918, but more than eighty thousand stayed in France. Their presence won symbolic recognition in 1920, when parliament passed a law funding a Great Mosque in Paris (a law that, incidentally, directly contradicted the 1905 law prohibiting public funding for religious organizations).
In 1936, the Socialist-led government of Léon Blum lifted all limitations to travel and residence for North African Muslims, leading to an influx of immigrants from there. World War II repeated the Great War's pattern, especially after the Allied powers took North Africa in 1942; some one hundred thousand Muslims were drafted into the Free French Army in Italy, many of whom ended up in France. Right after the war, Algerian Muslims arrived to take industrial jobs. In 1962, when Algeria, the oldest and the largest territory of French North Africa, achieved independence, France had a Muslim population of 400,000.
In less than ten years that number doubled. First came the Harkis, or the Français-Musulmans of Algeria, 250,000 draftees in a Muslim auxiliary force who served in the colonial war against the Algerian National Liberation Front (FLN) from 1954 to 1962. Most of those unfortunate loyalists were simply left behind in 1962, a deliberate and dreadful decision that meant torture and death for them at the hand of the winners. Some 20,000, however, were transferred to France, along with their families: almost overnight, French Islam acquired a new community of 75,000 souls. Housed in distant rural villages, secluded both from the mainstream Muslim immigrants and the French but legally deemed to be full-range French citizens, the Harkis doubled their numbers by the end of the decade.
Secondly, some former FLN fighters, either Berber-speakers from the Kabyles or disenchanted members of the new elite, were also allowed to settle in France as (most ironically) "repatriated citizens." In 1967 alone, no less than 127,000 Algerian Muslims came to France to stay permanently. Clearcut provisions of citizenship and travel were not defined until 1968.
Thirdly, in 1962-1974, with government approval and under government supervision, a booming French industry hired half a million migrant workers (travailleurs immigrés), chiefly from Algeria and Morocco but also from Tunisia. Almost to a man, they stayed in France. French corporations saw this economic immigration as a tool to keep industrial wages low; the French government used it as a bargaining chip in relations with the North African states, particularly oil-rich Algeria. More emigrants to France brought them two advantages: less pressure in an already depressed employment market and a sustained flow of remittances in hard currency.
By 1973, the total North African population of France in all probability had exceeded one million. When Valery Giscard d'Estaing became president of the republic in May 1974, right after the Yom Kippur War and the oil shock, he was quite concerned about this number. He earnestly tried to reverse the trend, first by formally putting an end to the economic immigration policy, then by initiating a policy to repatriate (or "reemigrate") the migrant workers from North Africa. He failed miserably in both efforts, however, for the utter ideological incorrectness of these policies, in terms of both domestic politics and foreign policy, required so many qualifications that the entire scheme was rendered unworkable. For instance, the measures of July 3, 1974, were articulated in such as way as to infringe neither on human rights nor family rights: however unwelcome they were, migrants actually received new subsidies for housing, welfare, and education. They also won permission to bring in their relatives -- even polygamous wives.
The efforts of Giscard d'Estaing brought about another dramatic increase in Muslim population, so that by 1981, when François Mitterrand became president, some 2 million North African Muslims lived in France. For the most part, they were either French citizens themselves or the parents of French citizens. In retrospect, French Islam reached a critical mass at this time, becoming a permanent element of French national life.
The Muslim numbers continued to grow during Mitterrand's presidency, 1981-1995. Some attempts were made to curb illegal immigration more effectively, but by then the Socialists and Conservatives feared that too much posturing on this issue would further fuel the rise of the far Right, namely Jean-Marie Le Pen's National Front. Immigration from Morocco and Tunisia stabilized or dropped, as citizens of these countries increasingly went to other European countries (especially Spain, Italy, and Belgium). In contrast, immigration from Algeria to France increased with the economic and political difficulties of that country. Immigration, legal and not, from other Muslim countries also increased, particularly from the former Senegal, Mali, the Comoros, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan. Natural increase was more important than immigration, however, for "reunited" families now outnumbered single males.
1 Newsweek (Atlantic Edition), Feb. 26, 1996.
2 Interview with Jean-Claude Chesnais, Valeurs Actuelles, Oct. 6, 1996. Similar anxieties are voiced by Jean-Claude Barreau, a former government official in charge of immigration and the author of books on Islam and the Middle East, in La France va-t-elle dispara?tre? (Paris: Bernard Grasset, 1997).
3 The German system of state-sponsored churches remains in effect in the three departements of the former Alsace-Lorraine (Bas-Rhin, Haut-Rhin, and Moselle) but it provides religious statistics only for the pre-1918 "established" faiths, i.e., Christianity and Judaism; Muslims and other post-1918 communities are not counted.
4 Valeurs Actuelles, Sept. 1987.
5 Philippe Bernard, "M. Pasqua reconnait un Conseil representatif des musulmans,"Le Monde, Jan. 12, 1995.
6 "L'Eglise catholique de France, sa mission, ses organisations," LES. [TB: something wrong here?]
7 Arabies, Oct. 1996.
8 Rene Gallissot, "Le mixte franco-algerien," in Les Temps Modernes devoted to L'Immigration maghrebine en France, vol. 40, nos. 2-3-4, Mar.-May 1984.
9 Y. Courbage, "Demographic Transition in the Maghreb Peoples of North Africa and among the Emigrant Community," in Peter Ludlow, ed., Europe and the Mediterranean (London: Brassey's, 1994).
10 Ibid.
11 The World Bank Atlas (Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 1995).
12 Nathan Keyfitz and Wilhelm Flieger, World Population Growth and Aging (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1990), p. 262, project 60 million as the population of France in 2020.
13 Le Nouvel Observateur, Oct. 17, 1996.
14 Harkis were Algerian Muslims loyal to French rule in Algeria who, to avoid persecution by the new Algerian government in 1962, precipitously had to flee their homeland; their numbers in France then numbered some 75,000. Today, Harkis and their descendents number about 500,000.
15 Jean-Marc Leclerc, "Ces banlieues du non-droit," Valeurs Actuelles, Mar. 4, 1995.
According to the French Ministry of Interior and Ined, quoted in Liberation, Sept. 20, 1995. See also Hubert de Beaufort and Jacques de Zelicourt, Pourquoi la crise et comment en sortir (Paris: Mame, 1993), an innovative book with additional figures about illegal immigration.
Leclerc, "Ces banlieues."
Eric Branca, "Ramener l'Etat dans les cites" (an interview with Eric Raoult, Minister of Social Integration), Valeurs Actuelles, Oct. 14, 1995.
Ibid.
Ined and Ministry of Interior, quoted in Liberation, Sept. 20, 1995.
Valeurs Actuelles, Mar. 4, 1995.
Notably the Council for the Future of Islam in France (Corif), the National Coordination of French Muslims (CNMF), the Representative Council of French Muslims (CRMF), and the Muslim High Council of France (HCMF), all created under the aegis of the minister of interior. The first one under Pierre Joxe, a Socialist, in 1990, the second and the third under Charles Pasqua, a Conservative, between 1993 and 1995, and the fourth one in 1996 under Jean-Louis Debre, a Conservative too. The National Federation of French Muslims (FNMF), founded in 1985, is largely a Moroccan lobby, while the slightly older Union of Islamic Organizations in France (UOIF), founded in 1983, is seen as a front for the Muslim Brotherhood.
In French: "Les Musulmans de France, en communion avec les autres croyants, entendent oeuvrer au developpement d'une expression de la la?cite qui instaurerait entre les religions et l'Etat une situation de concorde." Charte du Culte musulman en France, Presentation et commentaires du Dr Dalil Boubakeur (Monaco: La Mosquee de Paris/Editions du Rocher, 1995), p. 57.
Ibid, p. 34.
Ibid, p. 56.
Alain Besancon, Trois Tentations dans l'Eglise (Paris: Calmann-Levy, 1996), p. 201.
Franois Devinat, "Ce n'est pas … l'Etat de creer un islam francais" (interview with Archbishop Jean-Marie Lustiger), Liberation, Nov. 14, 1995.
Besancon, Trois Tentations, p. 211.
Meaning some 400,000 Vietnamese, Laotians, Cambodians, Chinese from China, Hong-Kong, and Macao, ethnic Chinese from Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, and Tahiti, Indians from India, French citizens of Indian origin from the former French dependencies in India, ethnic Indians from Indian Ocean countries, Sri Lankese, and even some Japanese and Koreans.
Related Topics: Muslims in Europe, Muslims in the West | Michel Gurfinkiel | March 1997 MEQRECEIVE THE LATEST BY EMAIL: SUBSCRIBE TO THE FREE MEF MAILING LISTThis text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.
[source - retrieved from http://www.meforum.org/337/islam-in-france-the-french-way-of-life-is-in on 2/9/2015]
THE DANGER MANY MUSLIMS ARE PRIMA DONNA RACIST BIGOTS AND HERE IS PROOF – THIS IS A WAKEUP HEADS-UP:
One Muslim apologist said the following proving that many Musllims are racist bigots that think they are better than others. He said the following that proves this,
<<[ This is one of the main reason why India was divided in 1947. Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods ]>>
Now let’s consider reality:
FIRST, Let’s face it, the only so called religion in the world which teaches many of its members hate, the love for violence, and the disrespect of non-Muslims person and property is Islam. Who has ever heard of radicalized Catholics, Methodist, Quakers, Anglicans, etc. going and being suicide bombers, bombing subways and buses, flying airplanes into buildings to murder people and destroy buildings, attacking newspapers, etc.? Nor do other religions form rape gangs in Europe, behead people on London streets and in New Jersey towns and elsewhere!
NO only members of Islam do things like this as part of their standard operating process against others! To see how absurd this religion is, many of its members actually severely criticize others for trivial indiscretions such as binge drinking by a few in-mature college students, which is pure nonsense when compared to their wicked acts. They even have the audacity to propose preposterous Muslim faith based schools – only for Muslims – funded with public money – to aid in spreading hate, a love for violence, and a disrespect of the person and property of non-Muslims, the results made vividly clear by ISIS.
The recent attack and murdering of many at Charlie Hebdo (Brown) in Paris only illustrates the effectiveness of this wicked education of some Muslims. Clearly, Islam is the enemy of all others, and is responsible for over 95% of the religiously inspired violence in the world as shown by current events.
REALITY CHECK – Let’s face it, Islam is responsible for over 95% of the religiously inspired violence and intolerance in the world today. If there were no Islam, there would be no Paris attack on Charlie Hebdo (Brown), no London Subway or Bus Bombing, no murder of over 3,000 and destruction of NYC, World Trade Center, beheading of British soldier in London, no ISIS, no Taliban, and the world would be much more peaceful.
Solution – dissolve Islam and have a much more peaceful world. For more details, go to, http://w11.zetaboards.com/ReligiousTruths/topic/9012380/4/#new and read reality.
LET’S FACE IT ISLAM IS A WICKED FALSE RELIGION THAT SEEKS WORLD DOMINATION:
One of my correspondents who does statistical research found the following evil goals of the wicked false religion of Islam and ordered them out so all could see their evil reality goal clearly.
<<[ Islam in a Nutshell
Islam, not the Chinese nor the Russians, represent the greatest threat to the world and might be the fulfillment of the book of Revelation in the Holy Bible. This is very disturbing for a Christian to read, but read it and be educated.
Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat
Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.
Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.
Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.
When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the
other components tend to creep in as well.
Here's how it works:
As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:
United States -- Muslim 0.6%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1.8%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%
At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%
>From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law.
The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. . Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in:
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%
After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian
churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%
At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:
Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%
>From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:
Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%
After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and is on-going in:
Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%
100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:
Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%
Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.
'Before I was nine, I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj'
It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.
Today 's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates are higher than the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.
Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse.
The wolves will be herding the sheep!
NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant...? Just wondering.
Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions?
Doesn't this make you feel safer already??
That should make the United States much safer, huh!!
Was it not "Devout Muslim men" that flew planes into U.S. buildings only 10 years ago?
We must never forget this..
Was it not a Devout Muslim man who killed 13 at Fort Hood ? (He killed "From within" -don't forget that).
Also: This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to finish. Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out about any atrocities. Can a good Muslim be a good American? This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:
Theologically - no . . . Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon God of Arabia
Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)(Koran)
Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran.
Geographically - no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day.
Socially - no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews..
Politically - no.Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan.
Domestically - no. Because he is instructed to marry four Women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34)
Intellectually - no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.
Philosophically - no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression.. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.
Spiritually - no. Because when we declare 'one nation under God,' the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names.
Therefore, after much study and deliberation. ... Perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. - - - They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and good Americans. Call it what you wish, it's still the truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The war is bigger than we know or understand.
Can a Muslim be a good soldier???
Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire at Ft. Hood and Killed 13. He is a good Muslim!!!
Footnote: The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within.
SO FREEDOM IS NOT FREE, THEY WILL DESTROY FRANCE FROM WITHIN.
[Sourc - retrieved from email on 1/24/2015]
ISLAM WANTS TO REMOVE YOUR FREEDOM – READ REALITY:
Islamism choking freedom everywhere
Updated January 16, 2015 8:33 PM
By QANTA A. AHMED
The Charlie Hebdo massacre demands that we at last acknowledge that the secular pluralistic democratic world is imperiled by Islamism, the dastardly impostor of Islam.
Painful scenes have transfixed us as we watch in dismay our tongue-tied administration unable to name our nemesis. Owning the narrative is key in any ideological battle, and as President Barack Obama's administration struggles to name our enemy -- oscillating between "radicals," "extremists" and "terrorists" -- Islamism in its variegated forms shows neither fear nor hesitation in declaring war.
In contrast, Egypt's President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi calls a spade a spade. Putting into words what all Muslims have long known, Sisi has confronted clerics at Cairo's Al-Azhar University, appealing for their help in slaying Islamism, the parasitic ideology that imperils the world and Islam.
BOOK EXCERPTExcerpt from Qanta A. Ahmed's 'In the Land of Invisible Women'EDITORIALEditorial: An intolerable attack on civilizationVIDEODavies responds to the Charlie Hebdo massacre
Islamists -- whether violent as the Islamic State, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, Hamas and Hezbollah, or nonviolent as institutional Islamists -- do not represent Islam. By exposing them, Islam is shielded from blame for their heinous acts, an unwanted burden the faith has borne. (Those straitjacketed by politically correct aphorisms struggle to convince us otherwise.) In avoiding the term Islamism, we shelter it within Islam's bosom.
Understanding the Quran as two documents -- a historical account which must be read in the context of its revelation, and a contemporary document agile enough to move through the ages -- I and many other Muslims understand that "jihad of the sword," though mentioned in the Quran, holds no place in our modern world, or in our modern Islam. But distorting jihad is far from the only deception Islamists achieve.
Islamists seek war on secular democracy. From Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's 1989 Valentine's Day Fatwa on Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" to the stabbing of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh in 2004 to the 2006 protests of Danish cartoons of the prophet Muhammad to Charlie Hebdo today, freedom of speech has been collapsing under Islamist assault across continents.
The time to set aside our disbelief has arrived. It is time to believe. Islamism is global. And for liberal secular democracies, Islamism is very much here.
OpinionCartoons: Attack on Charlie Hebdo
Muslim scholar Bassam Tibi has devoted his 40-year career to studying Islamism. Tibi must become mandatory reading for U.S. political and military leaders, foremost his sentinel book, "Islamism and Islam." Avoiding ideological content in the guise of religion, while understandable, and now a hallmark of the Obama administration, has emboldened the Islamist position because of the lack of challenge to its authenticity and ideals.
Tweets from @sguzik/newsday-editorial-board
Tibi defines Islamism as Islamists define themselves. Islamism comprises several foundational principles:
Islamism seeks to restructure the world order into a global caliphate or "dawla" (state).
Islamists insist Islam can exist only as an Islamic caliphate, a fictional deceit appearing nowhere in the Quran or in the history of Islamic civilizations.
Islamism demands Islamists hold in cosmic enmity all Zionist and Jewish entities, disregarding the Quran's mandate that Muslims revere Moses, Aaron and the Torah and recognize the Jews and "People of the Book." Harboring genocidal anti-Semitism, not mere judeophobia, is a paramount founding principle of Islamism.
OpinionDavies responds to the Charlie Hebdo massacre
Islamists pursue their caliphate through barbaric conflicts evolving jihad from Islam into terrorist jihadism -- think the Islamic State in Syria.
Islamists pursue their ideals through democratic organs -- such as parliamentary elections, constitutions, and legislation sympathetic to their values, for example, blasphemy laws -- which they will exploit for their own purposes and to which they deny access to opponents.
Too long, those of us, whether Muslim or not, who value the secular pluralistic democratic world have remained subdued in the shadow of the Islamist viper. Defeating Islamism will require we meet its venomous stare, a defeat which will never be wrought without engaging true Islam and its followers.
Who will do this work? Tibi sees liberal civil Islam as a ray of hope. Conferences in Morocco and Indonesia have been held on "Progressive Islam," which seeks separation of mosque and state.
There are opportunities for others in secular democracy to step up to the challenge. Islamism claims enmity toward the fundamental guarantor of human rights -- the liberal democracy. It is time we mounted a defense of our values, which are core to pluralistic democracy -- freedom of speech, self expression and religious identity.
In their book, "Silenced," exami
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
