- What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam and that Muslims must, sooner or later, demand to live under an Islamic government.
- The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader.
- Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book” — Jews and Christians — but to replace them, after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible.
- Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and it relies on government enforcement to do so.
- Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?
Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said that President Donald Trump’s 90-day ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries is “a religiously based ban,” and “if they can ban Muslims, why can’t they ban Mormons.” This has become the position of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, which has influenced not only the American public but has convinced the majority of the world that America is “bad.” How can we blame the world, and even a good segment of American citizens, for hating America when such disingenuous and misleading claims are aired to the world from US officials and broadcast by American television channels? Read More
If you know anything about herding sheep, you’ll know it isn’t as easy as it looks! The shepherd must work hard at keeping the sheep together and when it is time to lie down they must make sure that the conditions are just right regarding proper food and water. Apparently sheep also have a tendency to wander away and get lost, leading to a vulnerability for predator’s such as coyotes or wolves.
Now this author is not a sheepherder but he knows the Shepherd. After watching a lesson from a sheepherder via “youtube” an experienced herder simply leads the sheep and beckons them gently to follow him. They follow him because they know his voice and if anyone else would call out to them they would not follow.
In first century Israel, there were shallow caves called sheepfolds where the shepherds would house the sheep at night. The sheep were protected on all sides except for the entrance. Most entrances did not actually have doors or gates but the sheepherder would lie down at the gate and sleep.
Within that sheepfold, the sheep feel the safety and security of having the shepherd at the door.
In the gospel of John, Jesus calls Himself the Good Shepherd in 10:14. The first 21 verses are comforting music to one’s ears and soul. Jesus begins the story about Himself by saying if anyone comes into the holding area of sheep other than the door, they are thieves and robbers. The one who enters by the gate or door is the shepherd.
The entire chapter 10 of the gospel of John is deep and meaningful but in the first 21 verses we see two major points. The first is that Jesus is the Good Shepherd and He knows whose are His and the sheep know who He is.
Jesus says something in verse 16 that has been misunderstood for years but needn’t be. He said; “And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd” (ESV).
Jesus is simply saying that not only will Jews believe in Him for salvation and be welcomed into eternal life but so will Gentiles. He is not referring to Mormons or saying there is more than one way to heaven but that the Old Testament would be fulfilled hearing about Jesus and believing in Him for eternal salvation.
Jesus did not come only for the Jewish nation but the whole of creation. Isaiah the prophet mentions that the Savior of the Jews would be a “light to the nations.” This goes beyond the idea that Jesus is only a Jewish Savior, but actually the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham in the book of Genesis. The idea of the Gentiles being included along with Israel, came long before Israel was settled.
And with Jesus being the door or gate to the sheepfold, He is saying that He is the only way into the “green pastures.” There is no other way to the Father except through Jesus and this is clear here and later in John 14:6 where Jesus tells His listeners that He is “the Way and the Truth and the Life and no one comes to the Father except through me.”
Peter tells the Jewish leaders as he stood before them: “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
In his letter to the church at Ephesus, Paul the apostle writes that the wall that existing between Jews and Gentiles is now broken down. There is one way for all to be saved and that is through what Jesus accomplished upon the cross.
Jesus is the Good Shepherd and He beckons all to come to Him, however, only those who hear and respond to His voice will be saved. How does one know the voice of Jesus? If you are thinking about Jesus right now as you read this, it is a very good indication that He is calling to you.
Four major religions claim to be the one true religion: Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Christianity. And of those, only one has God coming to man and not man going or trying to get to God. Only Christianity offers grace and simply what that means is there is a great chasm between men and God that man cannot bridge. God bridged it Himself by sending His Only Son so that whoever would believe in Him would have eternal life.
If you are working your way to God, do you know how many good works you have to do to be accepted? If you want your good deeds to exceed your bad deeds to enter heaven or paradise; how do you know if the good has exceeded the bad? What is the scale that is used to determine the good works or deeds verses the bad?
Honesty would confess that you do not know if you have done enough to gain God’s approval. God knows this and this is why He came to earth so that “all” men would have opportunity to enter heaven or paradise.
The Good Shepherd is calling out to you, do you hear His voice? If you do, will you follow? God has made it simple – he who believes in Jesus has life. Those who come to Him will never be cast out but drawn into His everlasting arms.
Sometimes things happen that challenge our beliefs, undermine our faith and at times, even lead us astray. There are many paths away from God, all well-worn from frequent travel, but the choices we make to help us get to God sometimes lead us astray as well.
Christians inevitably lean toward forgiveness, always willing to permit a fresh start for those who repent and return, however what if there is no real repentance and the return isn’t for fellowship but for destruction? So it is with Islam.
In such cases, the Christian would be wise to exercise caution, born of discernment.
Sure, we all wish for harmony between religions and peace between nations, but we also wish to win the lottery and live a stress-free life. Clearly we don’t base our daily household decisions assuming lottery millions are just around the corner, so why then do we base our fellowship decisions on an assumption of enduring peace and harmony?
Especially since there has never been a time in human history where such a period existed; certainly not since Mohammed launched his club.
Given this uncomfortable reality, watching the bubble of ecumenism swelling more rapidly with each passing month causes the prudent to question how long the bubble will hold before explosion and collapse; and how many lives it might take when it does.
The Muslim invasion of Europe (disguised as a refugee crisis) has already strained European society to the breaking point. Ordinary citizens are watching their birthright handed to interlopers in the name of “tolerance” and unity.
The already increasingly secular societies of the European Union fail to grasp the significance of importing millions of people who don’t view their religion as a quaint anachronism, but rather as an obligation, a duty upon which their very soul depends.
Even those charged with spreading the Gospel and guarding the truth are bastardizing the foundational tenets of faith in order to accommodate the heretical and brutal beliefs of their new Islamist neighbors.
Neighbors for now, overseers later. The governments of Europe are no longer defending their own people from the predations of the uninvited. They are indeed making insane allowances for the criminal behavior of Muslims while prosecuting the least instance of resistance by native citizens.
The Church is not innocent by any means. Pope Francis has embraced this weak-kneed schoolgirl ecumenism with a zealot’s heart, going so far as to wash, dry and kiss the feet of Muslim “refugees” during the Maundy Thursday ceremonies meant to commemorate Christ’s washing of the Apostle’s feet.
This ceremony has always been reserved for the Catholic faithful, until now, when Francis unilaterally changed the rule to permit anyone of any faith to participate. Acting as a true social justice warrior, the Pope has taken a sacred ceremony of worship and turned it into an annual politically correct photo-op. The world is a bleaker place for it.
So what of it? Is the world really worse off for the Pope connecting with a wider group of human beings?
Well, that would depend on the human beings, wouldn’t it?
Islam doesn’t exist to reach comfortable accommodations with other faiths. Islam doesn’t exist to stand side by side with non-Muslims. Islam exists to subjugate the earth, and all in it, to Allah. Either Islam reigns supreme, or Islam fights.
To do as Pope Francis, is merely illustrating weakness and foolishness to the Muslim mind. There is no admiration of Western culture among Muslims; they dismiss our successes as the benefits accruing to those who serve Satan.
There is no desire to assimilate with Western societies, because that would mean assimilating into a coven of worship with which their Prophet has commanded them to subdue and destroy. No amount of foot washing or ecumenical interfaithery will ever change that. It only facilitates it by opening doors better left shut and leaving foxes in charge of the hen house.
Islam is growing enormously. From 100 Mosques in America in 2001, we now have 2300+ in 2016. An average of one new Mosque every month for 15 years. From the days of Mohammed until today, Islam remains the same; an immensely dangerous, anti-human form of slavery conducted in the name of a false god.
Don’t be deceived.
doing something about it is hard.
Islam is a religion, and Muslims are those who follow that religion. Islam isn’t a race or ethnicity; it is entirely different. All religions form some sort of congregation, a place where their followers may gather to worship, but Islam goes much further. Islam requires the formation of a state, a political entity to govern Allah’s (the god of Islam) kingdom on earth.
This kingdom is to be ever-expanding until it encompasses all of the earth and everything in it. It is this aspect of Islam that takes it from religion to theocratic political system, and the unyielding requirement to spread Islam by any means necessary renders this theocratic/political construct dangerous – even lethal – to the rest of the non-Muslim world.
Muslims are called to fight to establish that theocratic kingdom in which Muslims will be the first class citizens and all will be governed by Allah’s given law – Sharia. A Muslim must continue this fight until it is unconditionally successful. This struggle, known as Jihad, is the highest calling, and most rewarded behavior in all of Islam.
Some Muslims choose to answer that call with brutal violence in furtherance of their kingdom, fighting and dying in service to the cause, believing they are securing their salvation, while other Muslims support the cause in less lethal ways, through propaganda and political scheming.
Still other Muslims ignore the call almost entirely, leaving the task for other Muslims to perform. This doesn’t necessarily mean they are opposed, just simply unwilling to exercise that level of devotion to their religion.
Muslims who answer the call of Allah to establish Allah’s kingdom on earth are described in the west as “radical” Islamists, yet they are only pursuing the full call of their religious devotion. They aren’t radical, they are devout.
The issue is at once complex and simple…there is no guarantee that the less devout Muslim (who pose no present threat) will not grow in their devotion, becoming dangerous and violent as the American-raised attacker in San Bernardino. The establishment of Allah’s kingdom on earth is preached and taught in every Mosque in America – indeed, in the entire world – and these less devout Muslims feel the burden of constant guilt for falling short in their devotion to their god.
In Islamic doctrine, sin is cumulative. The missed prayer, the sipped beer, will all be remembered and punished in eternity unless expunged. Mosques all over the world place heavy emphasis on this concept.
In Christianity, Jesus’ blood was shed in a “once for all” sacrifice to redeem believers from sin, cleansing us in preparation of an eternity spent with God.
In Islam (where a great deal of doctrine is a mirror opposite of Christianity) the Muslim is told to shed the blood of others to be free of the soul-crushing weight of all those sins accumulated in life.
Why did the 9/11 terrorists spend their final night engaged in heavy drinking and debauchery at a strip club? They were devout Muslims and this behavior is haram (unclean, forbidden) in Islam.
Because they knew the next day they would be cleansed of those sins by flying planes full of innocent people into buildings full of innocent people. This act of jihad in service to the establishment of Allah’s earthly kingdom was their “Allah-approved” path to salvation.
This is why you see worldly Muslims suddenly turn to vicious acts of barbarism (like the young female suicide bomber in Paris). They are seeking to redeem their souls.
Imams frequently take misguided and troubled Muslim youth, adrift in permissive western societies, and convince them that only jihad can save them from the eternal fires of Hell.
This is what we fight. Redemption from sin is the prize dangled before the Muslim, and martyrdom through Jihad is the path to salvation.
We aren’t fighting radicals within the religion of Islam, we are threatened by increasing devotion within the religion of Islam.
It is an essential distinction to understand, and we can no longer afford to recoil from the sad realization that Islam, as taught and practiced today, is wholly incompatible with a free society. Before we can have a fruitful discussion of the subject, we must first accept the truth.
A reflection on recent German history
Germany, Europe’s largest economy, is expected to take in up to a million “refugees” this year alone, sparking anger among native Germans and spawning the rise of the PEGIDA movement (“Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the Occident”).
We have all heard of the “refugee crisis” in Europe, as it is described by state-run media and communication organs with a vested interest in increased immigration. Germany is an industrialized society, yet due to decades of social engineering and “family planning” slavishly dedicated to protecting the environment by having fewer children, the number of able-bodied Germans of working age has been dramatically reduced.
Their economy has grown since WWII, but their native-born population has decreased steadily until they now find themselves with a shortage of workers that endangers their competitive economic standing. Simply stated, they need people.
The government of Germany has tried to incentivize the birthrate by offering generous cash payments to those who opt to have children, but as with all government programs, the unintended consequences of the policy are undermining the intended effect.
Because the government makes no distinction between a live birth of a native German and a live birth of a refugee, the cost of these programs has skyrocketed beyond sustainability and has actually begun to serve as an inducement to immigration. The birthrate of Muslim immigrants to Germany is roughly 5 times that of a native German. That can’t go on for too many generations before an irreversible cultural shift occurs.
PEGIDA is an entirely natural response from the German people to what they view as government malfeasance. Recognizing the reality that Islam is wholly incompatible with a representative republic, PEGIDA is calling for a halt to immigration until better means of assimilation are devised.
This is common sense by any definition, yet as we see so often in our modern media, it is decried as xenophobia or cultural nativism. Germany is a populous nation by European standards, but in real terms the influx of a few million unassimilated foreigners represents nothing short of an invasion-level event.
The Left has declared borders to be xenophobic and self-defense to be aggression. The Germans of PEGIDA are fully aware that their government is abandoning them to the predations of a supremacist ideology in the name of multiculturalism. Islam doesn’t come to get along…it comes to dominate. It is axiomatic, a central tenet of their worship, as binding upon the Muslim as following Christ’s “Great Commission” is to the Christian.
PEGIDA rallies have drawn tens of thousands to the streets in major German cities, demanding their government cease their ritualistic civic suicide. Counter rallies have been organized as well, featuring larger numbers of protesters than the PEGIDA rallies they oppose.
This is not indicative of German public opinion however as the counter rally crowds are made up of a majority of immigrants themselves brought in by government organizers, supplemented by government employees required to attend as a condition of continued employment.
Of course the European media is as ignorant and biased as American media and merely report that more people stood on the line for wanton Muslim immigration than stood against it. The government has gone so far as to sanction PEGIDA organizers, attempting to bring charges against them for crimes such as “racism” and “incitement.”
We hear the word tyranny bandied about with regularity from this aggrieved group or that oppressed minority, but rarely is it actual tyranny, but rather mere annoyances stemming from perceived insults. Real tyranny is the bastard child of government. It knows it is the heir of power and uses that status to wreak havoc, impressing its will arbitrarily. This is the tyranny the German people now face.
Their government has turned on them (as ours is turning on us even now) and has chosen path forward that cannot be reconciled to the traditions and heritage of the German nation. But, if the Left has shown anything in their decades of tantrum-like governing, it is an utter disregard for tradition, history or heritage.
Watch Germany in the coming months. Just as in Britain and already in France, the fruits of a religious devotion to the equality of cultures is in full harvest, and the fruit is poisonous indeed.
Ben Carson isn’t a bigot – he is absolutely right. A Muslim should not be president of the United States. If Islam were merely a religion, then Dr. Carson would indeed be misguided, but Islam is so much more. Islam is everything to the Muslim.
Islam is a way of life – a political and judicial system all its own, encompassing every aspect of the Muslim’s life. It orders his activities based on the strictures of Islamic law – modeled on the actions and beliefs of the perfect man of Islam, Mohammed, not some corrupt social construct of the kafir (infidels).
Of course, in America, that “corrupt social construct” is the Constitution, and we recognize it as the supreme law of the land. However, a Muslim cannot do so without rebelling against his/her own faith. Islam is indeed wholly incompatible with the governance of a constitutional republic.
This reality will not stop the left from losing their collective (and collectivist!) minds over the whole subject. We know that truth will never deter a liberal from pushing an agenda, despite overwhelming evidence that their agenda is a catastrophe looking for a suitable disaster area.
CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), the self-described Muslim civil rights advocacy group, has already weighed in, calling for Carson to withdraw from the presidential race. In doing so, they may have become a bit too clever, as their status as a 501(c)(3) is now in jeopardy, what with their becoming involved “either for or against any candidate for public office.”
Will the Obama politicized IRS pursue the revocation of CAIR’s non-profit status? I have a greater chance of being appointed ambassador to the Milky Way galaxy than America has of seeing anything resembling justice coming from this “Justice” Department.
Whether you believe that Dr. Carson is a good choice as leader of the free world or not, we all owe him a debt of gratitude for mentioning the unmentionable: Islam is the problem, and because of the teachings of Islam, its adherents cannot be entrusted with the responsibilities of high office.
You see, delusion is a mental defect that compels those who suffer from it to ignore reality in favor of fantasy. Political correctness is an advanced form of delusion that compels those who suffer from it to force everyone else to adopt the same fantasies…or else.
Dr. Carson has broached the subject in an honest manner and will soon become a test case for America’s tolerance for truth – a reagent if you will, to test our society for the depth of our delusions.
I wonder if we can pass the test.
The cycle of violence is fed not by injustice or fresh new assaults on sovereignty, but rather pre-exists in the heart of the Muslim world, fueled by their fundamental organizing principle of Islam.
There are no places on earth where a significant population of Muslims are present that does not also live with violence and disruption with regularity. This applies to both Muslim enclaves in Western democracies and to Muslim-dominated nations around the world. Where Islam is, violence soon follows.
It is this “supremacist” aspect of Islam (note: aspect of Islam, not perversion, or interpretation of Islam) that ensures the renewal of violence even after defeat or victory. It is the battle that is the aim, the jihad that cannot rest until the earth has submitted entirely to Islam.
Are all Muslims like this? No, just as all Catholics don’t abstain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent; there is a continuum of adherence to the principles of religions that is found in Islam as it is in Christianity and Judaism. However, there are core elements that are universally accepted in each religion, commonly shared tenets of each faith that are ubiquitous to the faith.
In Christianity, one such tenet is the concept that Jesus is the Son of God. For Muslims, the principle of subjugating the rest of the world to Islam is equally ubiquitous, and it is this supremacist dictum that lies at the root of why violence follows Islam as night follows day.
What does this mean for the United States? The Obama administration is pledging to accept tens of thousands of “refugees” from Syria and Iraq. The United States has already accepted hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants from around the world, and to date, their assimilation into American society is proceeding at a snail’s pace, if at all.
Warnings have been issued by European governments that terrorists (elements of ISIS and al-Qaeda) have inserted themselves into the stream of Muslim migrants currently invading Europe. This warning, while important, misses the larger issue entirely; that being the importation (enmasse) of an ideology bent on the destruction of the host nation. Islam doesn’t arrive to “blend in.” It arrives to take over.
By some estimates, the composition of the “refugee” arrivals is upwards of 70% males of military age. Clearly, war refugees flee their countries with both wives and children, while migrants traveling for economic opportunity typically send a father or son ahead to prepare the way for the rest of the family to follow.
There are certainly some war refugees amid the masses currently flooding Europe, but they are just as certainly a minority of the whole, and the likelihood that these Muslim men, coming from Muslim-dominated nations intend to culturally assimilate into the societies of Europe is statistically nil.
Over the coming months, America will be asked (then told!) to accept “our share” of “refugees.” Incomprehensibly, these “refugees” will be almost entirely Muslim, despite the fact that it is the Christian and other non-Muslims of the region who are truly in danger, with tens of thousands already slaughtered and enslaved as a part of the Islamic subjugation.
It has been said that just because a group of Sunni Muslims is fleeing extermination from a group of Shia Muslims – or vice-versa – doesn’t mean that either is innocent in the conflict. Should the pursued become more numerous than the pursuers, they will immediately turn and put their former tormenters to the sword. Both flee from each other, but neither is really a “refugee.”
If you are a regular follower of the Global Faith Institute, then you understand “civilizational jihad,” the process by which Muslims seek to overwhelm host nations through immigration and the exploitation of western values of religious tolerance and liberty.
We screen new arrivals at the border for diseases because we don’t want to permit the importation of infections for which we have little or no natural immunity. In the case of Islam, we are indeed importing the infection itself, subsequently refusing to quarantine the carriers from the native population out of a misguided sense of tolerance.
Germany has committed to accepting millions of Islamic “refugees” over the next 10 years – 800,000 this year alone, followed by half-a-million more each year thereafter – in the hopes that the infusion of new laborers can offset the ridiculously anemic birth rate of native Germans. Combine migration at such extreme levels with a government so enamored of multiculturalism that they will prosecute their own citizens for speaking against the policy, and you have the stuff of an invasion.
Under what circumstances has any nation permitted an influx of a different culture at such extreme levels and remained sovereign? I’ll give you a hint… it hasn’t ever happened. Ever.
Unless Germany reverses course, they will become a Muslim nation within 15 years and native Germans will live under the rule of their new Muslim overlords, dhimmis in their own land.
Remember, someone asking for political asylum is not guaranteed to be deserving. Each of the perpetrators of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing were asylum seekers when they arrived on our shores. How’d that work out?
The primary season is about to officially kick off here in the United States, inaugurated by the Republican Party debate this month. Remember, it is still more than a year until the actual Presidential election. One of the topics is sure to be radical Islam, a term that has been tossed around and denied by different sections of the populace.
As one listens to talking heads throw around the term “radical” like parade candy, one can be forgiven for suspecting they do so in order to make the message of mainstream Islam appear more tolerable.
When one talks about being “radical,” negative images come to mind and the issue denigrates into assertions that every religion has its “radicals.”
And they would be right, except for the negative characterization. For one to find what is radical in Christianity, a good place to begin is in the gospel of Matthew, Ch. 5. Here we find what is called the beatitudes; really they can be called the characteristics of Jesus. If one is to follow the example of the most perfect person of their respective religion then you have to look to the best example.
For Islam one would look to the person and nature of Muhammad, just as you would look to Jesus and His nature to fathom the ideal within Christianity.
Jesus spoke to His disciples and the crowds in the Sermon on the Mount; “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3, ESV). This is likely not what the crowd was expecting to hear, immediately after seeing the mighty miracles done by Jesus. They may have been expecting a crash course on how He healed all the people and how they too could draw huge crowds around them.
But no, Jesus taught them to completely depend on God for all things in their life. Wait, what? Totally deny yourself, is that what radical following of Jesus is? In short, yes. “When you lose, you win; that’s the way it is with Him,” (Thanks Rez Band for those lyrics!).
Jesus said it of Himself in John 5:19; “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of His own accord, but only what He see the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.” And later on in the same chapter Jesus says this; “I can do nothing on My own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not My own will but the will of Him who sent Me” (John 5:30, ESV).
Jesus was completely focused on the Father’s will for Himself. If one would read the Christian Scriptures of the New Testament, they will find that Jesus never did any wrong/sin, and as a worthy and pure sacrifice, would die in our place so that the person who believed in Him would have eternal life.
So radical Christianity is not taking vengeance upon those who you consider your enemy, but following Jesus and focusing upon His perfect life. And when someone slaps you on the right cheek then turn to him the other also (That’s also from Jesus).
In coming to faith in Jesus and believing in His name, we have the peace of God and peace with God. Vengeance is not for us to take because we are flawed human beings. We are to trust God because He is faithful and perfect in all He does.
How should a Christian look upon Islam? Just as Jesus did:
No need for ‘violent jihad’ with this in their arsenal
If Islam were just another religion, the rise in Muslim immigration might not pose a problem.
But many conservative scholars who have studied Islam for years say there is more to Islam than its daily call to prayer and its dietary rules against pork and alcohol.
Dr. Mark Christian told WND that the Muslim Brotherhood strategy from 1966 forward has been to avoid confrontations with American power. Instead, he says, the Brotherhood attempts to coax the U.S. into using its power for the Brotherhood’s own benefit.
The Brotherhood’s strategy is three-pronged, he said. It uses its front group CAIR to influence the government and military life, while ISNA works to foster “interfaith” dialogue with major Christian denominations and Jewish organizations. A third front group, the Muslim Student Association, or MSA, focuses on influencing K-12 and university education.
It is through these three groups that the Brotherhood wages “cultural jihad,” or what Christian calls “stealth jihad.”
“They want to influence the whole United States,” Christian said. “They see the U.S. as three things – it’s a government, it’s a religious institution and it is colleges and education; so we have three organizations and all are designated to each one of those things.”
ISNA concentrates mostly on outreach to Christian and Jewish religious groups.
“They say they are building bridges, but in reality they are building death tracks for these churches, watering down their theology, trying to influence the Christian teachings of the Bible and find common ground with Islamic teachings,” Christian said. “Basically they are trying to find common ground so they can kill it.”
Many are familiar with the concept of revisionist history — the rewriting of past events to reflect a particular bias — but there is a contemporary example that receives far too little attention in our American media, that being the history of Jews in the Middle East.
Palestinian apologists have made a major industry out of creating a past for themselves by distorting the archeological record. What cannot be distorted is ignored, and what cannot be ignored has, in some cases, been destroyed. Not surprisingly, this particular form of historical reconstruction invariably finds the lowly Jew to be an interloper in the Middle East — not only now, but throughout all of discernable history.
One such apologist, Mr. Maen Rashid Areikat, “honored” our fair city of Omaha, Nebraska recently when he spoke at the invitation of the Global Studies Conference at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. Mr. Areikat is the director-general at the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Negotiations Affairs Department and a close advisor of Mahmoud Abbas. He is presently the chief representative of the PLO delegation to the United States.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently described Iranian leader Hassan Rouhani as “a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” He might wish to apply that description to Areikat, a man for whom the phrase may well have been coined.
Mr. Areikat’s message is a simple one. Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinians and, by extension, to Islam. Of course, his message has far fewer sharp edges when he delivers it to non-Muslims. He adopts a folksy, world-weary tone when calling for a Palestinian state, as if he has been single-handedly standing up to the recalcitrant Israeli leadership, and while desperate for help, he remains too humble to ask.
In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal last year, Areikat presented the case that a Palestinian state is in Israel’s best interests. He championed the preferred narrative of the anti-Israeli left with a deftness born of mindless repetition, repeating the long-debunked argument that the Jewish claim to Jerusalem is no stronger than that of the Palestinians. He goes on to contrast the “brutal” Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza against the Palestinian Authority’s altruistic efforts to normalize relations.
When he is not as guarded in his speech, Areikat reveals the white bone of Islamic inflexibility. Asked in an interview if the Jews ever had a Temple in Jerusalem, he demurred, saying only, “I’m not an historian.”
When pressed, he doubled down on his newly minted understanding of history, asserting that Jews were never part of Jerusalem — that the “Jewishness” of a place known for millennia as the “City of David” is in fact a myth, despite literally thousands of years of archeological evidence putting the lie to his self-serving construct.
While the concept of a historically non-Jewish Jerusalem is increasing in popularity among the anti-Semitic left, it remains curious that Arabs continue to demand control over Jerusalem, when it’s abundantly clear from the Koran itself that neither Allah nor Mohammed ever intended it for Muslims in the first place. As far as the Koran is concerned, Muslims have no more claim to Jerusalem than Jews have to Medina.
Jewish authority over Jerusalem should come as no surprise to Islamic scholars. In Surah 2:144-147, the Koran describes Allah’s gift of Mecca to Mohammed. In this passage, we find Mohammed pouting that he had been mocked by the Jews for making use of their city, Jerusalem, as a focus of worship. He didn’t deny Jewish authority over Jerusalem; he simply fumed that Islam had no place of its own — an unfortunate situation that Mohammed (er…I mean Allah!) moved to remedy posthaste.
From the very beginning, Mohammed appropriated much of Jewish and Christian tradition for inclusion in his new religion, but Islam was not yet complete, as it lacked a “Holy City” — a deficit that spawned a sixth-century version of “keeping up with the Joneses,” if you will.
According to Islamic tradition, Allah sent the angel Gabriel to “re-orient” Mohammed during prayers, pointing him toward Mecca. From a purely logistical standpoint, early Muslims could count themselves lucky that Mohammed assumed that Allah meant to give them Mecca and not, say, Zanzibar, which lay in the same direction, only a scant two thousand miles farther.
The point being, not only did Allah and his prophet Mohammed show clear deference for the Jewish claim to Jerusalem, but this reality was confirmed and continued under “Omar the Conqueror,” Mohammed’s successor and the most powerful and influential caliph in Islamic history.
While Omar is widely known as the conqueror of Jerusalem, what is not so well-known is that after he conquered the city he promptly repopulated Jerusalem with Jews, repatriating them from the Arabian Peninsula, providing an ironic prefiguration of the establishment of the modern state of Israel centuries later.
Clearly, Omar felt that Jerusalem was a city for the Jews and encouraged their residence in a homeland they hadn’t seen since the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. Omar constructed a small mosque in Jerusalem, allowing him the ability to maintain the spiritual health of the Muslim garrisons left to defend Jerusalem from the Romans, but otherwise granted Jews authority over their spiritual and ancestral home. Omar, successor of Mohammed, believed that the Jewish claim to Jerusalem was absolute, transcending five centuries of exile.
All this brings us full circle to Mr. Areikat, and his creative revisionism of long-established historical record. In the spirit of fairness, the level of silliness that has come to hallmark the Islamic attempts to write themselves into a history they themselves never experienced cannot be laid solely at the feet of Areikat. He simply parrots the narrative du jour, embellishing as needed to tailor the story to his audience.
To the uninitiated, Areikat’s words have a soothing quality, coaxing a long-ailing sense of hope from the listener, stirring a belief that at long last they may have encountered an authentic negotiating partner. It is important for us to realize, however, that Areikat is powerless without the hope harbored by non-Muslims that perhaps an acknowledgment of his viewpoint may herald a break in the present impasse.
It is the sanitized version of Maen Rashid Areikat our students heard speak in Omaha on the 3rd of October, 2013. It is Areikat’s revision of history that they carried away with them, greatly misinforming their view of the Mid-East conflict.
It’s regrettable that the students didn’t learn the unedited plan for the Middle East sought by Areikat — the version that declares any future Palestinian state must be “Jew-free,” requiring the forced removal of all Jews as a condition of Palestinian sovereignty.
Despite his rhetoric, perhaps even Areikat himself senses the weakness of his own argument. When asked about the decline of social interactions between Jew and Arab, he lets slip a glimpse behind the veils of obfuscation and fantasy that have characterized the “history” of the “Palestinian people.”
I remember when I traveled to Europe in the late ’70s, and to the United States in the early ’80s, yes, we thought of ourselves as Palestinians, but we were traveling with Jordanian passports. Publicly we are Jordanians, but deep inside we are Palestinians.
Therein lies the truth Areikat himself has tried so hard to conceal: there is no such thing as a “Palestinian.”
The Global Faith Institute