Tag Archives: Islamic

THE ECLIPSE OF THE CHURCH

I lost a good friend this week.

We worked together a long time ago.   For many years we’ve been hundreds of miles apart, but we were always able to see each other, with our wives, at our annual church conference.

That is, until the latest split took place.   He and his wife went one way and we went the other.   So, for the last few years of his life, we did not get together.

Church splits can be devastating on relationships.   Even marriages have fallen apart when partners don’t see eye to eye on church affiliation.   More than one church I know of teaches that its followers should have nothing to do with people in other church organizations, even when they are family.

It’s ironic when you consider that Jesus Christ said:  “By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, that you love one another” (John 13:35).

Unfortunately, churches are not immune from selfish ambition, differences over administration or doctrinal disagreement, three of the primary causes of splits.

True Christians will always strive to fulfill the words of Jesus Christ; even as others in their midst will deliberately cause division, believing that God is on their side.

One of the root causes of division is that people have a tendency to follow men.   The Apostle Paul wrote about this in I Corinthians where some were following Apollos, some Peter and some Paul.   As Paul said elsewhere, we should only follow one man and that man is Jesus Christ.   That means we should all live in accordance with His words.   What a novel idea!!!

—————————————————————————

ECLIPSE OF THE CHURCH

Church splits are one reason why churches are in decline.   This is true of all churches, including mainstream Catholic and Protestant churches.   The vacuum is often filled by other religions. Note the following headline from the Gatestone Institute:

Londonistan:   423 New Mosques; 500 Closed Churches          by Giulio Meotti  •  April 2, 2017

Londonistan is a term often used to describe contemporary London, Britain’s capital.   It is, like many cities in the UK, becoming increasingly Islamic.   But that’s not the only problem churches face, on both sides of the Atlantic.

“For most of the country’s history, white Christian America —the cultural and political edifice built primarily by white Protestant Christians—set the tone for our national conversations and shaped American ideals.   But today, many white Christian Americans feel profoundly anxious as their numbers and influence are waning.    The two primary branches of their family tree, white mainline and white evangelical Protestants, offer competing narratives about their decline.   White mainline Protestants blame evangelical Protestants for turning off the younger generation with their anti-gay rhetoric and tendency to conflate Christianity with conservative, nationalist politics.   White evangelical Protestants, on the other hand, blame mainline Protestants for undermining Christianity because of their willingness to sell out traditional beliefs to accommodate contemporary culture.”   (“The Eclipse of White Christian America,” Robert P. Jones, The Atlantic)

Many people still believe in God – they just don’t want to join a church.   Consequently, churches are becoming irrelevant, arguably the worst thing that can happen to a church.

One reason for irrelevancy is that churches have failed to understand the dramatic changes that have taken place in the western world in the last few decades.

The writer and former atheist Peter Hitchens, now a deeply religious man, wrote an interesting book in the late 1990’s, showing how much Britain had changed in one generation.   The book “The Abolition of Britain” compared the United Kingdom at the time of Churchill’s funeral (in 1965) with the country at the time of Princess Diana’s funeral, in 1997.

Whereas the people who witnessed Churchill’s funeral were little changed from those who stood in the crowds at Victoria’s funeral in 1901, by the time of Diana’s funeral the mourners were a nation of emotional basket-cases, rather like Diana herself.   In the interim, churches had been replaced by psychiatrists, prescription drugs, mental health workers, television, movies and celebrities.

At the same time, we have witnessed the collapse of the traditional family.   Many people today don’t even know what a family is – they call friends family and won’t even speak to people to whom they are related.

All of this shows a crying need for churches, for the restoration of basic Christianity and biblical teachings on marriage and the family.   (Forget the doctrinal differences that separate Christians from one another.)   Yet churches are not comfortable with the “un-churched.” That was not a problem with Jesus Christ.   Note the following from Matthew 9:10-13:

“Now it happened, as Jesus sat at the table in the house, that behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Him and His disciples.   And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to His disciples, “Why does your Teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”  When Jesus heard that, He said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.  But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’  For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

This passage of scripture could be speaking to us today.   Many of Christ’s followers were appalled that He was mixing with “publicans and sinners.”   But those publicans and sinners needed Christ and His healing.

Just like people today.   Only today, the problems are different.   It’s unlikely that anybody joining a church today will not have an addiction, whether it be an eating or mental disorder, a sexual or drinking problem.   Each of these requires professional help from outside of the church; but there’s also a need for spiritual healing, to remove the cause of the problem.   This can only come from the Great Physician, Jesus Christ.

The need for Christ has never been greater.   It’s churches that are at fault – many Christians will judge and condemn, when what’s needed most is love and compassion, two qualities sadly lacking today.

———————————————————————

CHURCH AND STATE

It’s not just churches that are divided.

Our countries are also seriously divided, perhaps more so than ever before.   This is especially true of the United States and the United Kingdom.

The British historian Paul Johnson, now 88, observed in his 1972 book, “The Offshore Islanders,” that “disunity has always been fatal for the island nation.”

The book was about Britain’s relationship with the European continent – ironically, that’s the issue dividing the country today.   Although the majority of voters want to leave the EU, there’s a solid hardcore that will stop at nothing to remain in the organization.

A different division exists in America.   There are those who are very loyal to Donald Trump, but others who will seemingly stop at nothing to get him removed from office.

The “antis” on both sides of the Atlantic do not care how much damage they cause – their hatred and anger knows no bounds.   Our countries are in danger of falling apart.   Once again, selfish ambition and greed are at the core.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

BORIS JOHNSON MAKES BREXIT MORE LIKELY

Boris Johnson

Donald Trump has a new rival, a fellow New Yorker no less.  Like Mr. Trump, the newcomer is causing just as much turmoil in political circles. He can even rival The Donald with his famous hair.

Boris Johnson (born 19 June, 1964, in New York) is a British politician, popular historian and journalist who has served as Mayor of London since 2008 and as Member of Parliament (MP) for Uxbridge and South Ruislip since 2015.  Mr. Johnson is a popular figure in British politics.

Mr. Johnson attended the same exclusive private school that Prime Minister David Cameron attended.  Later they both attended Oxford University at the same time.  They are two members of Britain’s elite and have been best friends for decades.  That could change now.

While Mr. Cameron is fighting to keep Britain in the European Union (EU), Boris Johnson on Sunday declared himself opposed.  Mr. Johnson will support the “Leave” campaign.  He is in favor of a Brexit, a British exit from the organization.

As the Wall Street Journal put it:  “Mr. Johnson is the most prominent politician to break with the prime minister ahead of the June 23 referendum.”

It should be noted that if the vote goes against Mr. Cameron, he will likely face a “No Confidence” vote in parliament.  If he loses, Mr. Johnson could be his replacement as prime minister.  Unlike Americans, the Brits don’t have laws precluding those born overseas from holding office.  Besides, Mr. Johnson’s parents were both upper middle class English.   Mr. Johnson recently wrote a biography of fellow Conservative Winston Churchill, a predecessor who also had definite American connections.   (His book, “The Churchill Factor” is well worth reading.)

If this sounds awfully like the 1930’s all over again, there are definite similarities, though nobody is threatening violence this time, not right now anyway.

The pro-European faction in parliament is led by Mr. Cameron.  He returned from Brussels late on Friday, promising the equivalent of Neville Chamberlain’s “peace in our time.”   The prime minister announced that agreement had been reached with EU leaders that will serve Britain well.  Consequently, Mr. Cameron will recommend Britain remain a member of the European club.

It came as a surprise on Sunday when Boris Johnson came out publicly against continued membership.  Like Mr. Churchill in 1938 he is concerned to protect Britain’s sovereignty in light of European developments toward a trans-national super-state.  This time it’s not Berlin that concerns him so much as Brussels, the capital of the EU.   But Berlin is a factor as the European project is dominated by Germany.

The European Union began with the 1957 Treaty of Rome, which pledges member countries to form “an ever closer union.”   This does not mean a United States of Europe along USA lines. This could never happen, as the dynamics are very different.   What is far more likely to emerge is something akin to the Holy Roman Empire, which lasted for a thousand years until it was broken up by Napoleon in 1806.

Dictionary.com defines the Holy Roman Empire as follows:

“a Germanic empire located chiefly in central Europe that began with the coronation of Charlemagne as Roman emperor in AD 800 . . . and ended with the renunciation of the Roman imperial title by Francis II in 1806, and was regarded theoretically as the continuation of the Western Empire and as the temporal form of a universal dominion whose spiritual head was the pope.”

The EU has been working toward something similar since its inception almost six decades ago.   It’s already the world’s biggest single market and trading power.   The common currency called the euro rivals the US dollar as a global currency.     Politically it’s more united than ever and there is some progress toward a European military.

For Britain, all this is bad news.  Not even the pro-EU politicians want the UK to be a part of a European super-state.  They want to keep their independence or, rather, what’s left of it.  They want to stay out of the euro and do not want to go any further toward an “ever closer union” or join a European military force.  Mr. Cameron received assurances from the other 27 members of the EU that Britain can stay out of all three.  He was also given some relief on the financial costs to British tax-payers having to pay benefits to EU migrants from the East, but only for seven years.

But anti-EU politicians and members of the public are still insecure about the future.

It’s not surprising really when you consider Britain’s history.  For centuries Britain looked beyond the seas to its colonies and, later, the Commonwealth and the United States, remaining outside of Europe, only getting involved when threatened by a Napoleon, the Kaiser or Hitler.

In 1962, former US Secretary of State, Dean Acheson, observed that: “Britain has lost an empire and not yet found a role.” In the same year, US President John Kennedy expressed his support for Britain joining what was then called the Common Market.  Canada’s Prime Minister, John Diefenbaker, was very much against Britain joining, expressing his concern that it could mean the end of the Commonwealth of which Canada was a founding member.

America wanted Britain “in” so as to have a reliable pro-American voice in the European club.  The US also wanted free trade to boost American exports to Europe.

If the United Kingdom votes to leave the EU, there will likely be far greater repercussions than can presently be seen.  These will not just be economic.  44% of Britain’s exports go to other EU nations – a “no” vote could jeopardize these exports as tariffs exist on imports from non-member countries.

Other repercussions could include the following:

  1. The EU could be less co-operative with the USA.
  1. A British exit from the EU could encourage a Scottish exit from the UK, as it seems most Scots want to stay in the EU.
  1. Ireland would be negatively affected, with 40% of its imports coming from the UK and 17% of its exports going to Britain.
  1. Germany will become more dominant.  Only Britain and France are big enough right now to restrain the central European giant.  Take away Britain and it’s down to France.   France’s priority right now is Islamic terrorism. Germany will be able to go full steam ahead toward its dream of a revived European empire, already referred to by some as the Fourth Reich.  The Holy Roman Empire was the first reich (or empire), that lasted a thousand years; the Kaisers were the second reich; Hitler promised his Third Reich would last a thousand years like the first one, but it only lasted twelve.
  1. There will be a lot of bad feeling if Britain leaves.  Other EU members will not be inclined to bend over backwards to help the Brits through a difficult transition period.   Concessions on trade will be unlikely.  It could also end shared security arrangements at a time when there are increased security risks with Islamic militancy.
  1. International companies operating in Britain could move to other countries.  Many companies have based themselves in the UK to gain advantage in selling goods to other EU countries.  Faced with high tariffs to keep out non-EU goods, they are likely to move elsewhere, leaving greater unemployment in their wake.
  1. There is also a possibility that some other EU members may follow Britain out the door.   Whereas countries at the center of Europe have a long history of strong government from the center, those on the northern periphery have not.  Although some may sympathize with the British position, they may decide it’s not economically feasible to leave as trade with Germany and other nations is too great.

Some of the southern members may also opt to leave so that they can print their own money and boost employment.

Bible prophecy shows that a revived European super-state will include ten nations.

“The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.  These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.” (Revelation 17:12-13)

However, this does not rule out the possibility of other countries being closely tied to the ten.  This would be very similar to the Holy Roman Empire where some territories were ruled directly from the center, but others were more loosely attached.

Additionally, dozens of countries around the world are tied to the EU through the Lomé Convention, named after the capital of Togo.  The agreement came into being a couple of years after Britain joined the EU.  It tied British former colonies to the European trading system, along with French, Belgian and Portuguese.  The EU is by far the leading world trading power.

It’s surprising then that there’s little interest in the outcome of the British referendum in the American media.  Any mention of the European Union solicits a big yawn.  But the reality is that Boris Johnson may out-Trump Donald Trump in the upheaval he may cause across the pond!

—————————————————————-

TRAGEDY IN KALAMAZOO

Kalamazoo is a big city that’s only an hour’s drive from where we live.  Saturday night it fell victim to the latest American mass shooting, when a 45-year-old Uber driver shot dead six people and seriously injured two others.  In between killing people, he picked up and drove passengers to their destinations.

The lack of motive is disturbing.  So is the following paragraph from the BBC’s website:

“One of the seriously injured, a 14-year-old girl, was believed to have been dead for more than an hour when she squeezed her mother’s hand as doctors were preparing to harvest her organs, police officer Dale Hinz told Michigan Live.”

 

 

OUTSIDE OF THE US

EU Flag

During a US presidential year, it’s possible for people living in the United States not to realize anything is happening outside of the country.   News programs, including even 24-hour news channels, seem to talk about nothing else but the election.

Watching CNN, Fox or CBS (which now has a 24/7 internet news channel) a viewer would have no idea of what’s going on in Europe at this time.   Mention of the Middle East would only be covered briefly when talking about America’s role.   America is fixated on itself – and it happens once every four years!

Al-Jazeera has given up and is closing its US channel.  You would think Americans would be very interested in news from the Middle East, having played a major role in the region in recent decades.  Not so.   Now there will be one less source of news for those who are interested.

Few people, a very few, will be aware that Washington wants Britain to remain in the European Union.   Even fewer will be aware that President Kennedy pressed British Prime Minister Harold MacMillan to join the EEC (predecessor of the EU) over 50 years ago.   The United Kingdom applied to join but was turned down when French President Charles de Gaulle uttered his famous “Non!”

After de Gaulle, Britain applied again and was accepted.   The EU went from six to nine members on January 1, 1973.   Now it’s 28 member countries.  It might soon be 27 if negotiations between the UK and the rest of the EU don’t go well.  Today, Friday the 19th of February, is a crucial day for talks between the parties.   British papers this morning show that Mr. Cameron is not doing well in trying to achieve his demands for Britain to remain a member.

The European Union is a big government project, with increasing numbers of well -paid bureaucrats who pay no attention to what the people want.   Although members have to be democracies to join, there’s little democracy in the organization itself.   The people have no more say in government than they did in feudal times, although they can now move around from country to country thanks to the EU’s Schengen Agreement.  Even that may go in order to deal with the massive flow of migrants.

Americans would not like to be subservient to foreign bureaucrats, so why are they so keen on keeping Britain in the EU?  The answer is the same as it was when Kennedy and MacMillan were in power.  Americans want a pro-American voice in the EU.  They also want free trade, which Britain encourages, rather than the more controlled economies that the French and Germans prefer.

In theory, the British people could reject the proposals put forward today.   However, it’s not just the British voting.  There are millions of migrants from the continent of Europe who live in the UK – they will vote to support continued membership, regardless of the terms. Many of them depend on generous British welfare payments.   There’s also millions of voters from outside of the EU who have no knowledge, understanding or appreciation of British history.

This is a mess – but it’s a mess the British themselves made when they decided to turn their backs on the Commonwealth and seek economic salvation courtesy of Germany and France.   History should have taught them the folly of such an enterprise.

The Bible shows that a European super-power is coming.   “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.  These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.  (Rev 17:13-14)

This will inevitably be led by Germany.   This is likely to resemble the Holy Roman Empire more than the United States.   Britain was never a part of the HRE.   That might be an indicator of Britain’s future role, or non-role, in the new Europe.

Germany is key here.  The front page headline in The Mail on Sunday summed it up well:   “Germans:  You can’t survive without us!”   Intimidation, anyone?

—————————————————————–

Europa Rape

Nationalism is on the rise in Europe.   The cover of a Polish magazine this week has brought condemnation from around the world.   It shows an attractive white woman dressed as “Europa” being groped by  dark skinned men, representing the male Islamic migrants who have moved into European countries in the last few months.   Reports of sexual assaults on white women have been a constant in the daily papers from various European countries.

At the time of the migrant crisis, television news programs implied that most refugees were women and children; it turns out that most were actually young men who left the women and children behind in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

Now those young men, brought up in a culture where women have to cover themselves from head to toe, are taking advantage of the West’s more liberal ways.   From their religious perspective, women exposing a lot of flesh are “whores.”  They have no respect for them and will take advantage whenever they can.

It’s a classic example of a clash of cultures.   The only way to solve the problem is to keep the cultures separated.  Rather difficult now, when so many western leaders are bending over backwards to accommodate them all.

———————————————————————

Donald Trump is clearly more supportive of the idea of separation, so much so that he advocated building a wall between the US and Mexico.  Pope Francis, visiting Mexico, made some negative comments about the wall.   He expressed the opinion that Donald Trump, in advocating a wall, showed he cannot be a Christian.

It should be noted that the one square mile Vatican City has a high wall around it!

———————————————————————-

Last week, I included the name of the man who attacked four diners with a machete in Ohio.

I love the following comment from Mark Steyn looking back on the week’s news:

“On Thursday a machete-wielding man called Mohamed slashed four diners in an Israeli-owned restaurant in Columbus, Ohio. As is traditional, police professed to be utterly baffled. “ (Steyn Online, Sunday)

PARIS – THE NEW NORMAL

Spectators invade the pitch of the Stade de France stadium after the international friendly soccer France against Germany, Friday, Nov. 13, 2015 in Saint Denis, outside Paris. At least 35 people were killed in shootings and explosions around Paris, many of them in a popular theater where patrons were taken hostage, police and medical officials said Friday. Two explosions were heard outside the Stade de France stadium. (AP Photo/Michel Euler)
Spectators invade the pitch of the Stade de France stadium after the international friendly soccer France against Germany, Friday, Nov. 13, 2015 in Saint Denis, outside Paris.  Two explosions were heard outside the Stade de France stadium. (AP Photo/Michel Euler)

Whether we like to admit it or not, what happened in Paris on Friday could happen in any western city at any time.   In fact, it certainly will.

For once, we’ve been spared statements from the Presidents of France and the United States and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, to the effect that “Islam is a religion of peace.”  It’s now too much to expect anybody to believe such an outrageous claim.   Millions of people on social media witnessed Muslims around the globe celebrating the carnage in Paris.  Noticeably absent after yesterday’s attacks was any condemnation from “moderate” Muslim clerics.

129 people were killed and 352 injured, 99 of them critically, meaning they could still die or will be maimed for life.   Not all were French.   This was Paris on a Friday night – a lot of tourists from different countries will be amongst the casualties.   British Prime Minister David Cameron told fellow countrymen they could expect British victims.

One television news commentator observed “they are getting better at this,” listing a number of recent terrorist attacks perpetrated by ISIS — Libya, Tunisia, the Russian  plane blown up over Sinai just two weeks ago, Beirut on Thursday and Paris on Friday.  Not just better, more frequent, too. Mr. Cameron called a security meeting Saturday morning – London could easily be next.  President Obama did the same in Washington, faced with the sobering realization that US cities could be the next target.   The attacks on the French capital followed an assurance from the US president that ISIS has been contained.

The reality is that ISIS is spreading, its ability to stage terror attacks now reaching around the world.   Big attacks and small ones, like the “lone wolf” who stabbed four students at a university in San Diego just a few days ago.

Western intelligence services are, understandably, overwhelmed. The French intelligence service did not see Friday’s attacks coming. Six attacks may be thwarted, maybe more, but eventually one will succeed.   Little can be done if western countries are to continue to enjoy the freedoms that have been acquired over hundreds of years.

“Snowden has a lot of this blood on his hands”, said US Ambassador R. James Woolsey on Fox News Saturday.   Ambassador Woolsey is a former Director of the CIA and is now Chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.   He was talking about the damage that Edward Snowden did to western intelligence when he went public with a massive amount of intelligence.  This betrayal could be fatal to western interests at a time when the very survival of the West is at stake.

A friend in another state called me recently.  At some point we got onto the subject of world affairs and Bible prophecy.  He made the comment that “nothing seems to be happening in Europe at this time.”   This comment was made before yesterday’s events.  I expressed the opinion that a great deal was happening in Europe.   The massive influx of refugees and asylum-seekers is radically changing the social fabric of European countries.  Nations are losing their individual unique identity, as hundreds of thousands of Muslims from the Middle East and Africa pour in.

One of these, carrying a Syrian passport, was one of Friday’s attackers.  Other attackers included some who were born and raised in France and went to Syria to train with ISIS, returning to their home country to stage acts of terror.   Their loyalty to their Islamic beliefs trumped everything else.

Expect more of the same.  After forty years of division between East and West, Europe’s brief interlude of peace accompanied by great strides toward “an ever closer union,” has now become the battleground between North and South, between the European Union and Islam, between democracies and failed states.

Not all the refugees who arrive in Europe are Muslims.   The three biggest numbers of people come from Syria, Eritrea and Afghanistan, all Muslim countries that are racked with internal sectarian divisions, corruption and despotism.   Others come from democracies like Nigeria, Ghana and Sierra Leone, seeking a better life and the welfare benefits European governments will give them.

It’s no wonder that David Cameron wants to end the system, but cannot do so within the strictures of the EU.   A few days ago, he published the four demands he is making of the EU.   If the EU can’t deliver, then he will recommend the United Kingdom leaves the 28-nation grouping.   One of his demands is that the free movement of people within the EU be ended and that no new arrivals in Britain from the EU should be entitled to welfare benefits for the first four years.   They would have to work first before they could receive anything.   British papers are claiming that 43% of new European arrivals are receiving benefits.   This amounts to 350 million pounds per week ($530 million), during a period of austerity imposed on the British people.

In addition, there’s the hundreds of thousands from outside the EU, from the Mideast and Africa.   All these arrivals are supported financially by UK tax-payers.   Inevitably, some will be agents of ISIS.

No western leaders show any sign of doing anything about this massive influx of potential terrorists.

After the January attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices, Germany’s Angela Merkel and France’s President, marched arm in arm through Paris in defense of western freedoms.   A few months later, Mrs. Merkel led European governments to open their doors to refugees and asylum seekers.   Germany itself is taking in one million people this year.

This can only mean one thing – there will be more terrorist attacks like those yesterday.

As Daniel Pipes observed, each terrorist attack results in the common people moving to the Right politically, while the Establishment moves to the political Left.   (“Why the Paris massacre will have limited impact.” Nationalreview online, November 14th).   Mr. Pipes’ article also pointed out that the number of terrorist attacks by Islamists, since 9/11, is now 27, 269.   The figure was compiled by an organization called “TheReligionofPeace.com.”   Put another way, that’s five attacks per day.

It’s not surprising France’s President Hollande described Friday’s attacks as “an act of war” from ISIS.

All of this does not absolve the West of its responsibility.   “In an official statement claiming responsibility, ISIS carefully listed its targets, couching its choice as one determined by its moral and theocratic superiority.  Paris, it said, was a capital of “abominations and perversion.”   (“Paris attacks:  Bloody atrocity signals shift in ISIS strategy,” Financial Times, November 14th.)   The Christian Holy Book, the Bible, says that “righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people” (Proverbs 14:34).   In the same book, God warned the ancient Israelites that disobedience to God and His Laws would result in terror coming upon the nation (Deuteronomy 28:66):   “and you shall be in terror day and night and shall be afraid of your life”  (Darby Bible Translation).   Western countries need to examine themselves in the light of these verses – changes can be made that would result in less hostility toward the West.

Paris is the new normal.

LIES, FALSEHOODS AND MISTAKES

Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem
Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem

The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem claimed on Sunday that there was never a Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount.   He went so far as to claim that the “Al-Aqsa mosque was an Islamic mosque since the world was created . . . It was never anything other than a mosque.”

The Grand Mufti is the senior Islamic cleric in charge of Islamic holy places, including the al-Aqsa mosque.

A predecessor of his has also been in the news recently.   The Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seemed to blame Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti at the time of World War II, for the Holocaust.   Al-Husseini fled to Germany in 1941 and met with Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Joachim Von Ribbentrop and other Nazi leaders.   He wanted to persuade them to extend the Nazis’ anti-Jewish program to the Arab world.   The implication in what Netanyahu said is that Hitler simply wanted to expel the Jews (to Palestine), but the Grand Mufti said they should be destroyed.

However, the German government issued a statement claiming full responsibility for the Holocaust, although it’s good to remember that Adolf Hitler was an Austrian.

Anyway, over seventy years later, the Muslim leader of Jerusalem, having learned nothing from history, is claiming the Jews have no historical rights to Jerusalem or anything else in Palestine.

As it happens, I’ve been studying the Old Testament prophetic books of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.   These three men prophesied to the Jews in the post-exilic period.   The Jews, you will remember, were taken into captivity by Babylon’s King Nebuchadnezzar at the end of the seventh century BC and remained there for seventy years.

In 539 BC, Babylon fell to the Persians, who let those who wanted to, return to the Promised Land.   There, they helped rebuild the 500-year-old Temple of Solomon.

Haggai was very precise in his writings. In chapter 1, verse 1, he writes “In the second year of King Darius, in the sixth month, on the first day of the month……”   Bible commentaries and marginal notes will tell you the exact day this was written, in our Roman calendar.   It was August 29th, 520 BC.

In the second chapter, again he was very exact.  ”In the seventh month, on the twenty-first of the month, the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet…”   This equates to October 17th of the same year, 520 BC.   Haggai then asks the “remnant of the people” (those who had returned from captivity):   “Who is left among you who saw this temple in its former glory?”   It is thought that Haggai himself remembered the temple prior to its partial destruction by Nebuchandnezzar’s conquering army.   He now appealed to the people to help rebuild it.

None of the above is likely to convince the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem that there was a Jewish Temple centuries ago.

However, it should be pointed out to him that, amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls found shortly after World War II, were fragments of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.   All were dated from the second and first centuries Before Christ.

Islam did not come on the scene until the seventh century After Christ (A.D.)   Arabs took control of Jerusalem in 638 and built the Al-Aqsa Mosque in 705.

The claim that the Al-Aqsa mosque has been there since creation is ridiculous.   It’s also political – the real aim here is to “prove” the Jews have no historical claim to Jerusalem!

____________________________________________________________________

It’s just been announced that Paul Ryan is to be the next Speaker of the House.   Except for one, all eight of the last speakers have been Catholics.   One, Newt Gingrich, converted to Catholicism after his period in office.   Mr. Ryan, aged 45 and the youngest speaker since 1869, takes his religion seriously – before accepting his new office, he wanted a commitment that his new responsibilities would not interfere with his family time.   He goes home every weekend to spend time with the family and to attend church.   He will be sworn in using his personal copy of the New American Standard Bible, which he reportedly uses at weekly Bible studies.   Others should follow his example! (see below)

______________________________________________________________________

“If the public were paying attention, they probably wouldn’t care if Hillary Clinton lied about Benghazi or her emails.   The bar for honesty among politicians is so low that it is no longer news when politicians lie, only when they tell the truth.”  (“Clinton escapes again – with help of committee.”   Cal Thomas, Lansing State Journal, October 30th.)

__________________________________________________________________________

CNN International broadcasts “International Desk” every weekday from 10am Eastern time.   The program comes out of London.   Today’s anchorwoman twice referred to problems on the Slovenia-Australian border.   Who moved?  Slovenia or Australia?   The two mistakes were made either side of a commercial break.  You would think that somebody at CNN would have noticed the mistake and told her before she came back on air.   I can only conclude that nobody at CNN actually watches the channel.   This, of course, could be a very good thing!

Meanwhile, millions of people around the world are left unaware that there is a major problem involving refugees on the border of Slovenia and Austria!

WHAT’S BEHIND THE MIGRANT CRISIS?

Immigrants

Hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens have either arrived in Europe in recent months, or will do soon.

There are daily reports of migrants dying in great numbers.  Just today, 71 deaths were reported after an abandoned truck was forced open in Austria.   This number included four children.  It is thought they all suffocated.  It is also thought they came from Syria. Also today, 200 are feared dead after their boats capsized off the coast of Libya.

There has always been a trade in human beings.   The end-time economic system called Babylon, prophesied in Revelation 18, lists the trade in the “bodies and souls of men” as one of the thriving businesses (v.13) that make up the final economic system.  One aspect of this trade is the millions that are being made from “helping” people escape war-zones and get into Western Europe illegally.   There are plenty of people willing to cash in, trading in human misery.

Under international agreements on refugees, people fleeing dangerous situations should go to the nearest country where they can seek help.   Instead, they are routinely going through a number of countries to reach the wealthy, welfare-generous nations of Western Europe.

Not all these arrivals are fleeing from war and upheaval.   Many interviewed on TV news programs are coming from democratic nations that have a free enterprise system.   There is no reason for them to migrate, except the desire to better themselves, by taking advantage of all the freebies available in their new country.

However, some are fleeing from war.   Their lives are at risk.

Although the US is not directly affected by this migrant surge, the wars can be blamed on America.   The refugees are escaping from the continuing carnage in Iraq and Syria, with lesser numbers from Afghanistan and Somalia.   All four of these countries are Islamic – there are plenty of Islamic countries they could migrate to, but instead they want to go to Europe or Australia.

The naïve assumption that American style democracy could be introduced into Islamic countries divided by religious hatreds that go back centuries and with no tradition of tolerance or freedom has bequeathed today’s migrant disaster upon the European continent.

But, naïveté  is not restricted to America.   Many Europeans seem to think they can take in all these refugees and assimilate them into their irreligious social democracies.   This is not going to happen.

What is more likely is that the post-World War II social order in Europe will start to unravel.   Xenophobic right-wing parties are gaining strength with the new arrivals.   Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel was booed when she went to speak at an arrival center for migrants, a center that was earlier burnt down by extremists opposed to their arrival.

European governments seem incapable of handling this crisis, due to the sclerotic administrative structures that comprise the European Union.   Added to which are human rights laws that make it almost impossible to turn anyone away.

But people are starting to demand change.   Anti-immigrant parties are seeing increased support.   The Sweden Democrats are now the largest party in Sweden, the country that has been the most generous in taking in Syrian migrants.   UKIP, the United Kingdom Independence Party, won over 13% of the vote in the recent British election.   France’s National Front is expected to do well in the next French election.

It should be noted that Donald Trump is capitalizing on similar anti-immigrant feeling in the US.   People in many western countries feel their way of life and culture are threatened with so many migrants.

When Jesus Christ said of the end-time that “nation will rise against nation” (Matthew 24:7), He was predicting increased ethnic conflict. The Greek word for “nation” is ethnos, a reference to ethnic groups rather than political entities.

The primary causes of migration are ethnic and religious conflict; in turn, the migrants are bringing ethnic and religious tensions into their new countries.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECORD NUMBERS OF REFUGEES REACHING EUROPE

Syrian refugees in London

One of the great ironies of the last fifty years is that the peoples who supposedly rose up against their colonial masters and achieved independence have been moving en masse to the very countries they rebelled against!

This exodus of people from Africa and the Middle East has increased in recent months with increased turbulence in Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Syria and Iraq.   Eritreans are also moving to Europe to get away from that country’s brutal dictatorship.   Many flee by land to Libya, then cross to Italy by sea.   Over 400 died today when their boat capsized, a fairly regular occurrence.

The Europeans, it seems, cannot do enough to help resettle all these refugees.   The United Nations is criticizing, claiming they are not doing enough.   It should be realized that the U.N. is dominated by people from the same areas of the world as the refugees.   As failed states rapidly fall apart, people want to seek refuge in western Europe.

It should be noted that the six countries all mentioned above are Islamic.   The problems these countries face are deeply rooted in the Muslim religion.   People flee from these lands, but when they arrive in their new countries, what do they want to do?   They want their new countries to embrace Islam!   They have clearly learned nothing. At the same time, they want to make everybody else’s lives miserable.

So, what should western countries do?

The first priority of every government is national security.   Who is to say that, amongst all those fleeing Islamic lands, there may be some who want to get to Europe, North America and Australia, in order to stage terrorist acts?   It’s not only possible, it’s actually quite likely.

The perception of increased threats to security is fueling the growth of right-wing political parties in some European countries.   This poses a serious threat to liberal democracy and the cohesion of the western alliance.

At the same time, the sheer numbers of people in transit constitutes the equivalent of an invading army.   If the cultural identity of nations is to be preserved, something must be done to stop the invasion.

But what?   What can be done?

Clearly, European rule of these nations cannot have been so bad, if the native peoples are now moving to the former rulers for “freedom.”

Perhaps a solution is for those same western European nations to seize a small coastal area of the troubled countries, establishing an enclave, or “colony,” which would enable those citizens who want to flee to the West to remain and live under western rule?   This is, after all, what Hong Kong was all about.

Of course, this is not going to happen.   The United Nations would throw a fit, screaming “colonialism.”   As they cannot say anything positive about any of the countries taking in the refugees, perhaps they should open up the United Nations building and all available surrounding land to house them and feed them – at their own expense, of course.