QUESTION: I got married last May, and to my dismay, some of our friends started spreading rumors that the reason we were getting married was that my wife was pregnant. This hurt my wife and myself dearly. We were all part of Bible studies, group outings, and camping trips through a Christian organization. The question I have is this, out of the four friends that did this only one friend came to us and asked us to forgive him. We did. The others openly lied to us and only made excuses as to why they spread the rumors. What are we to do? I want there to be forgiveness here but unless there is some kind of want of forgiveness on their side how can I?
ANSWER: Your decision to extend forgiveness is not dependent upon anything the other person does. In Ephesians 4:26-27 Paul said we should not let the Sun go down on our anger. This means we can choose to forgive and forget no matter what the other person does or doesn’t do.
Your desire to rebuild the relationships is admirable, and since you know that’s what the Lord wants, asking for His help in making this happen is praying in His will. Assuming you’ve already asked Him to forgive you for your anger, you can start by asking Him to forgive the other people involved for their actions, and to provide the circumstances which would allow reconciliation to take place. You can’t force another person to ask for your forgiveness, but the Holy Spirit can create situations that will allow you to demonstrate that you’ve forgiven them.
But whether they eventually ask for your forgiveness or not is between them and the Lord. You are only responsible for your own actions.
QUESTION: My son is a Jehovah’s Witness and he wants to talk about our differences. We have gotten on the subjects of Why Jesus is God and KJV Bible vs World Translation Bible. So far we just go round and round. I’m beginning to feel it is futile to do all of this. Is the Holy Spirit the only one who can convict him? Do you have any suggestions as to what I should do?
ANSWER: I don’t believe debates of this sort are productive because we’re trying to apply logic in an emotional situation. Stop debating him and start praying for him. It’s your most powerful weapon in this matter. Study 2 Cor. 10:3-5 for encouragement.
For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
The former chief of Israel Defense Forces intelligence believes the upcoming month of May could be the most dangerous Israel has faced since before the 1967 Six Day War.
“When I look at the month of May, I say there wasn’t a month of May so dangerous since 1967,” said Amos Yadlin in an interview with Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth.
In May 1967, the security situation in the Middle East began to deteriorate as Egypt expelled UN peacekeepers from Sinai and three Arab nations mobilized their forces along Israel’s borders.
Israel eventually launched a preemptive strike in early June and decisively defeated Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.
“In the last Independence Day ceremonies I was reminded of the independence ceremonies of ‘67,” Yadlin said. “The Jerusalem parade, everyone was satisfied, but they didn’t pay attention to the beginning of developments that snowballed into the Six Day War.”
Yadlin also warned against Israeli complacency and overconfidence. He pointed to Israel’s failure to predict the 1973 Yom Kippur War, in which Egypt and Syria caught Israel unaware on its holiest day and inflicted heavy casualties on the Jewish state before being defeated by the IDF.
“When the heads of state talk about Israel as a superpower, it also reminds me of the noises from ‘73,” Yadlin stated. “So let’s be more modest, more careful, and understand where we’re going.”
Yadlin pointed to recent escalations between Israel and Iran in Syria. In February, an Iranian drone infiltrated Israeli airspace. It was later found to be laden with explosives, apparently for a terror attack. Israel retaliated by striking the control center for the drone and Syria’s anti-aircraft system.
Last week, Israel reportedly struck a Syrian airfield also used to control Iranian drones. Iran promised strong retaliation for the strike.
Israel has unequivocally stated that it will not permit Iran to entrench itself along it’s northern border.
Yadlin related the escalation to a recent statement by a top Iranian military official. “The deputy commander of the Revolutionary Guards said that his army can erase Israel and destroy our airforce, and so the only thing we can all do is escape into the sea,” said Yadlin. “From a military point of view he can’t threaten the existence of the State of Israel, he can’t even harm the air force.”
Nonetheless, Yadlin continued, Israel must exercise extreme caution in dealing with Iran.
“A preventive strike doesn’t absolutely have to involve the danger of a full-scale confrontation,” he said, “and I hope the people who sit in the cabinet room and the intelligence and security services know how to differentiate between when to go for the head of the Iranian snake in places that we can’t tolerate Iranian entrenchment in Syria, and on the other hand expelling every last Iranian from Syria. That’s an unrealistic and incorrect goal.”
Yadlin also noted that the Palestinian “March of Return” along the Gaza border will intensify as the Palestinians mark “Nakba Day” next month, on which they lament their failure to annihilate the nascent State of Israel in 1948.
In addition, President Donald Trump will be making his decision on whether to dump his predecessor’s nuclear deal with Iran. This could influence Iran’s decision to retaliate against Israel.
“All these things together enter the month of May,” Yadlin said. “The Israel-Iran issue and the Iranian retaliation, Trump’s decision on the agreement with Iran, and also the Palestinians’ ‘March of Return’ on May 15.”
Just hours after the West’s unilateral strike in response to the horrendous chemical weapons attack in Douma, President Donald Trump took to Twitter, declaring,
“A perfectly executed strike last night. Thank you to France and the United Kingdom for their wisdom and fine military. Could not have been a better result. Mission Accomplished!”
This statement makes me feel deeply uneasy. Trump is not the first Commander in Chief to issue such a claim. Fifteen years before him, President George W. Bush, standing on board the USS Abraham Lincoln, announced that, “major combat operations have ended.”
With a banner hanging above his head, touting the phrase “Mission Accomplished,” it was a speech that would in time come to haunt him. To this day he is still ridiculed and mocked for it. Bush was there that day to declare an end to combat operations in Iraq.
Unfortunately for President Bush, most of the American military deaths in Iraq were still yet to occur, happening long after he had given this “Mission Accomplished” speech. The mission, for the American military in Iraqi, remained far from over.
Skip forward in time fifteen years and one has to wonder how much President Trump really understands about the quagmire that is modern-day Syria. This isn’t over yet, despite his claims to the contrary. Russia, for their part and at the time of this writing, has not yet even responded to these allied airstrikes. And Russia will respond; of that we can be sure.
Most likely, this response will take one of a number of different forms. The British government, for their part, has been very vocal in recent days about their belief that Russia will certainly retaliate at some point in the near future. Boris Johnson, British Foreign Minister, when questioned on television last Sunday, warned that the UK must take “every possible precaution” to protect itself from Russian retaliation following the coalition air strikes on Syria. (1)
Johnson, when asked directly about the possibility of Russian “revenge” attacks, replied,
“You have to take every possible precaution, and when you look at what Russia has done not just in this country, in Salisbury, attacks on TV stations, on the democratic processes, on critical national infrastructure – of course we have to be very, very cautious indeed.”
Indeed, intelligence officers at GCHQ and Britain’s Secret Intelligence Services are on standby, not only for potential cyber-attacks, but also for a “dirty” campaign against the British establishment itself, using the “kompromat” tactics widely used at the height of the cold war. It is believed to be highly likely that Russian hackers will now target British, French and American politicians and VIP’s, with the express aim of finding information that may compromise or smear them in some way.
Equally, it is also highly likely that Russia may launch a series of cyber-attacks on British or allied key infrastructures, like the NHS in Britain, transport or power networks. These attacks, if successful, could potentially bring Britain, or allies, to their knees.
More ominous, though, is what Russia’s response means for the Jewish State of Israel. From a Western and Israeli perspective, the Russian response to the targeted bombings in Syria has been a disturbing one, with Russia immediately seeking to strengthen its ties with Tehran and beginning a rapid process of beefing up the Syrian military.
At the very same time that Western news media was full of stories of Russia’s non-reaction to the Western bombings, Russia was repositioning its heavy strategic Tu-95 and Tu-22M nuclear bombers to bases in Iran, thereby cutting flight time to Syria from Russia by four hours.
At the same time, and in full sight of Western military observers, Russian freighters were landing cargoes of brand new Russia military equipment in Syria, bound for use by the Assad military that the West had just bombed.
Russia has also indicated that they will resume their discussions with Iran, Syria and other nations for the sale of their highly advanced S300 air defense systems, with the aim of protecting their allies against any future US military strikes.
All of this is extremely bad news for Israel. Unlike the West, who limited their attack in Syria to just chemical weapons facilities and associated storage sites, the Russians have made no such promises regarding the scope of their response or retaliation. Everything is fair game to the Russians.
Israel, quite understandably, feels increasingly threatened by Iran’s growing military presence in Syria, and Russia now feels absolutely no inclination to check it, in any way. The US-French-UK airstrikes of Saturday, April 14th, did nothing to address any of Israel’s growing strategic and security concerns in Syria. Indeed, Israel has now been left feeling increasingly isolated by the action, fearing that in the wake of these strikes they may well be left all alone in the event of an Iranian attack against them.
And Israel is right in assuming that Iran may be ready, for the first time, to launch a direct attack of their own against the Jewish State. Hassan Nasrallah, Secretary General of Hezbollah, summed up the strikes quite succinctly, along with the non-impact they have had upon Israel’s enemies:
“Western strikes on Syria had failed to terrorize the army, help insurgents or even serve Israel’s interests.”
And this brings us to the heart of the problem in Syria, and where the real war is, because it certainly isn’t between Russia and the West. The real war in Syria is between Israel and Iran. The recent joint Western strikes did nothing to address any of Israel’s ongoing security concerns, nor did they in any way diminish Iran’s rapidly increasing military presence or the threat they pose to Israel.
Indeed, when President Trump, shortly after the strikes, declared that he would leave Syria and the growing threats there “to others,” Jerusalem determined this to mean that the US was telling Israel, and Jordan by implication, that they must face up to the growing Iranian threats on their borders on their own.
At the exact moment when Israel needs increased US support against Iran, Israel may well not get it. Iran, on the other-hand, is enjoying significantly ramped-up support from Russia because of the strikes.
It is time for a reality check. The Western strikes in Syria have not weakened Assad, nor have they diminished Assad’s illegal chemical weapons arsenal. Neither have the strikes in any way deterred Russia or her allies. Indeed, the opposite is true; the Western strikes have served only to push Russia more deeply into the arms of Iran and her proxies.
Thus, we now reach a point where Israel’s military is at its highest state of alert for years. Israel’s forces on its northern border are at a higher state of readiness now than they have ever been in Israel’s history. This is so because Israel is expecting an attack, at any moment, from Iran. Israel believes that Iran is now on the verge of launching a military operation against them as punishment for their bombing of the Iranian T-4 airbase within Syria just weeks ago, which left eight Iranian Revolutionary Guardsmen and an Iranian Colonel dead.
If this does happen, it will be the first ever direct military clash between Israel and Iran. Israeli intelligence, as cited in national Israeli news publications – which are clearly trying to prepare the Israeli public for an imminent clash with Iran – relayed that various Iranian units in Syria seem to be gearing up for just such an attack.
Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s Defense Minister, put it as follows:
“We are facing a new reality – the Lebanese Army in cooperation with Hezbollah, the Syrian Army, the Shiite militias in Syria and above them Iran – are all becoming a single front against the state of Israel.”
Uncomfortable parallels exist today between the Middle East and Europe immediately prior to the outbreak of World War One. In 1914, it took only one small spark to light a fire that provoked the “war to end all wars.”
The present-day Middle East is the modern-day equivalent of Europe in 1914. Amidst the background of an ever-developing nuclear arms race between Shiite Islam and Sunni Islam, we have the ruined nation state of Syria, which has developed without question into a proxy war between East and West, and which will likely soon culminate in a direct clash between Israel and Iran.
Syria is not a “mission accomplished” scenario, either for the West or for Israel. Indeed, all the signs indicate that the real chaos, between Israel and Iran, is about to begin.
WEBPAGE ADMINISTRATOR: Whilst the 4 part series is a good reference to the Gog of Magog War, Ezekiel 38 and 39, I still feel that the Psalm 83 War will come first, and in fact is right on the brink. Remember Israel does not fight the God of Magog War, they are living in a time of peace; “God fights the War for them”; which means that the World has to be in God’s judgment at that time, i.e. the Rapture has happened, and That is God’s time for “Judgment” on this World.
As the world awaits the release of a Blockbuster movie that involves a “War,” of galactic proportions, let me inform you a a “real” war that is on the verge of commencing. A war written about several thousand years in advance. The Theatre for this war is none othet then the Middle East!
I am referring to the Battle of Gog and Magog. I urge you to read this four-part series for an in-depth analysis of this forthcoming battle:
Any student of Bible Prophecy is cognizant of the fact that the War of Gog/Magog as prophesied in Ezekiel Chapters 38-39 is indeed on the horizon. As we speak, a huge land bridge from Russia to the border of Israel has been established and a strong Russian presence remains in Syria, and which also include their ally: Iran or Persia.
It is now evident that all the pieces are prophetically being put into place. Of the many nations mentioned in the Bible that form a coalition to attack Israel, the three prominent nations foretold to attack Israel in Ezekiel 38-39 (Russia, Iran & Turkey) are now literally setting camp near the Golan Heights.
We already know that Turkish troops have entered Syria to fight Kurdish military forces and are advancing southward towards the Israeli border. It is also fairly evidnt now that Russia is definitively attempting to guard Iranian military forces from an Israeli military onslaught.
This could very well be the next war on the horizon and if it is, then the7 Year Tribulation is set to commence.
Buckle your seatbelts! It’s about to get very interesting the next few months.
GQ SAYS THAT THE HOLY BIBLE IS ‘NOT WORTH READING’ THEN IRONICALLY CALLS THEIR OWN MAGAZINE THE ‘STYLE BIBLE’
The men’s magazine included the religious text at number 12 in a list of 20 books, total, with a write-up on why ‘you don’t have to read’ it by author Jesse Ball, published on Thursday. Calling the Bible ‘repetitive, self-contradictory, sententious, foolish, and even at times ill-intentioned,’ Ball recommended The Notebook by Agota Kristof, instead. Supporters of the Bible voiced their upset over social media, calling the lifestyle magazine ‘irrelevant’ and a ‘total disgrace to the Christian community.’
GQ Magazine has caught backlash for including the Holy Bible in a list of books that aren’t worth reading, in its latest edition which has ironically been dubbed the ‘Style Bible’ on its cover.
“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” Psalm 119:105 (KJV)
EDITOR’S NOTE: How’s this for funny? GQ Magazine thinks the Holy Bible ‘has some good parts’ but in their opinion it’s ‘certainly not the finest thing man has ever produced’. Ironically, they say this in the same issue where they steal the word ‘bible’ and apply it to themselves! They are rejecting Jesus Christ while at the same time calling Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs a ‘legend;. Hmm…and so it is with unsaved man, that’s the level of thinking a lost world will produce for you. Well, Jesus has a message for GQ Magazine.
“Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?” Matthew 21:42 (KJV)
The men’s magazine included the religious text at number 12 in a list of 20 books, total, with a write-up on why ‘you don’t have to read’ it by author Jesse Ball, published on Thursday. Calling the Bible ‘repetitive, self-contradictory, sententious, foolish, and even at times ill-intentioned,’ Ball recommended The Notebook by Agota Kristof, instead.
Supporters of the Bible voiced their upset over social media, calling the lifestyle magazine ‘irrelevant’ and a ‘total disgrace to the Christian community.’
Twitter user Gary L Bauer wrote: ‘The Bible is God’s Word that has transformed lives, changed nations and saved souls. GQ magazine is today’s fashion statement that at this very moment is turning to dust. God’s word is eternal.’
THE KING JAMES AUTHORIZED VERSION HOLY BIBLE: GOD’S PRESERVED WORD
‘The Holy Bible is rated very highly by all the people who supposedly live by it but who in actuality have not read it,’ he wrote.
‘Those who have read it know there are some good parts, but overall it is certainly not the finest thing that man has ever produced.’ Ball went on to suggest the cruelty depicted throughout the Bible may be its best feature.
‘If the thing you heard was good about the Bible was the nasty bits, then I propose Agota Kristof’s The Notebook, a marvelous tale of two brothers who have to get along when things get rough,’ he wrote.
‘The subtlety and cruelty of this story is like that famous sword stroke (from below the boat) that plunged upward through the bowels, the lungs, and the throat and into the brain of the rower.’
Franklin Graham, the President of Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, took issue with Ball’s synopsis.
The Christian Broadcasting Network quoted him as saying: ‘Maybe the GQ editors need to read it again. The subject of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, is Jesus Christ.’
The roundup included a wide range of writing that contributors thought readers could do without, each with suggestions for replacements on readers’ bookshelves.
The Bible technically came in at number 12, but really ranked one spot higher because ‘Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain’ was included twice by two separate contributors, making the list at nine and 10.
Ball, the author of the critique, is a New York native who has written 14 books, with work that has been translated into more than one dozen languages. source
THE POLITICS OF POPE FRANCIS IS GETTING READY TO SPLIT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE
The sheer scale of the Catholic Church strains against the imperative of doctrinal uniformity. As Douthat writes, the Church’s influence over secular politics has declined sharply; the idea of papal states, or even a U.S. president being compromised by his loyalty to the pope, seems bizarre today.
Across every continent, in every country, members of the Catholic Church “find themselves divided against one another,” writes the New York Times columnist Ross Douthat in his new book, To Change the Church.
“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: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.” Revelation 17:4,5 (KJV)
EDITOR’S NOTE: The true history of the Catholic Church begins with the weakening of Rome as a world political power, and it’s hostile takeover of Biblical Christianity in a series of moves beginning with Constantine’s Edict Of Milan in the early 300’s AD. Then in 1054, with the East to West ‘Great Schism‘, the Roman Church split to form the Eastern Orthodox version of Catholicism. In 1517, Martin Luther led a revolt against the Catholic Church with his ‘95 Theses‘ nailed to the church door, and the Protestant Reformation was born. In our day, Pope Francis is working on a split that may just be the biggest one yet, due if for no other reason, the sheer size of the Vatican at roughly 1.3 billion Catholics.
On one side stand the orthodox, who see doctrine and tradition as the best antidote to a changing world. On the other stand the liberals, who yearn for a Church that focuses on pastoring rather than enforcing rigid rules. This “widening theological and moral gulf,” Douthat argues, is potentially “wider than the chasm that separated Catholicism from Orthodoxy, and later from Lutheranism and Calvinism.”
That’s a bold claim to make. After all, the schisms of East and West, Catholic and Protestant, were world-shaking, often bloody events. But in today’s Church—and specifically in this pope—Douthat sees the possibility that the Roman Catholic Church will once again break apart.
Ostensibly, his beef is with Pope Francis, whom Douthat paints as an unyielding and stubborn manager who has spent his five years in Rome failing to clean up the Vatican’s messes, hurling insults at conservative clerics, and pushing radical doctrinal changes without buy-in from major wings of the Catholic hierarchy.
He writes skeptically about Francis’s imagery and rhetoric of mercy, from pictures of the pontiff kissing a man covered in boils to his controversial declaration, “Who am I to judge?” about gay men searching for God. But at its core, Douthat’s book is about a vast, premodern institution’s halting evolution into modern times, and whether it can sufficiently adapt to maintain unified influence over 1.3 billion adherents spanning Africa to Asia to the Americas.
“This is a hinge moment in the history of Catholicism,” Douthat writes. While he is unlikely to change many minds about controversial Catholic issues or reshape people’s opinions of the pope, Douthat is digging at a question present in every aspect of contemporary culture and politics: How can those who primarily wish to preserve their culture live in community with those who cheer for inexorable change?
In a roundabout way, the pope’s pastoral orientation could be read as a response to the rise of nation states, capitalism, and globalization. The sheer scale of the Catholic Church strains against the imperative of doctrinal uniformity. As Douthat writes, the Church’s influence over secular politics has declined sharply; the idea of papal states, or even a U.S. president being compromised by his loyalty to the pope, seems bizarre today. And the role of the bishop of Rome has become marketed “as the globetrotting do-gooder CEO of Catholicism, Inc.” rather than spiritual father, Douthat argues: “Each pope is treated not just as the supreme governor of the church but as its singular embodiment, the Catholic answer to Gandhi or Mandela, the Beatles or the Stones.” Francis’s solution is to embrace a flexible, ecumenical spirit, both within Catholicism and without: It’s no coincidence that he has put rapprochement with Roman Catholicism’s closest cousins, the Lutheran and Orthodox churches, high on his priority list over the last five years. source
Germany, its leadership in particular, is infamous for its persecution of Jews to the extent of attempting the unthinkable under Adolf Hitler’s reign-the final solution. Islam’s alliance with Hitler is much debated and discussed among historians, but seemed to come naturally given Hitler’s actions resulting in the Holocaust. Steve Coll, author of “Hitler and the Muslims” writes: “Germany’s use of Islam during the Nazi period owed less to Hitler’s strategizing than to the legacy of imperial Germany’s use of armed jihadists to undermine its European enemies.” The Hitler-Islam alliance shared a collateral benefit if they conquered the world and Jews were eliminated from it at the same time. Is Germany repeating this history today?
NBC News reports that German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open border policy allowed over a million Muslim “refugees” into the country in 2015-up to 10,000 a day-to a country with a population of some 81 million. According to a Berlin-based non-profit, The Department for Research and Information on Anti-Semitism, the number of anti-Semitic crimes increased 55 percent in 2017, with 2 to 3 incidents a day in Berlin, alone. Violent crimes against Jews in Germany continue to increase. It is no coincidence that the open border policy flooded Germany with Muslims from staunch anti-Jewish strongholds and crime rates against Jews in Germany have skyrocketed. Muslims are committing the crimes.
Merkel commented during an interview with Israel’s Channel 10 about Germany’s rising anti-Semitism. Merkel admitted that anti-Semitism existed in Germany before the Muslim’s immigrated to the country, but her comments underscored her ignorance, intentional or unintentional, about those whose religion instructs them to kill Jews and Christians (for example, the Koran’s Sura 2:190-193, speaking of Christians and Jews, says, “And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter.”). Merkel said, “We have refugees now, for example, or people of Arab origin, who bring a different type of anti-Semitism into the country.” What?
She continued to say, “The fact that no kindergarten, no school, no synagogue can be left without police protection dismays us.” Merkel is dismayed that she allowed 10,000 people a day into her country who likely believe that Jews are less than pigs (also in the Koran) into a country known for its anti-Semitism, and crimes against Jews increases? She is dismayed that the police have to protect Jewish children at their schools? The Lord promises to make Abram and his descendants a great nation. in Genesis 12:3, the Lord says, “And I will bless them that bless you, and curse him that curses you.” Germany and Islam are a modern example of the impact of leadership in relation to prophecy. Think about it.
EMERGING ISLAMIST POLITICAL CLOUT ACCELERATES EUROPE’S SELF-ISLAMIZATION
Forget the beheading videos, the ISIS propaganda on social media, and even the terrorist attacks themselves. Europe, says counterterrorism expert Afshin Ellian, is Islamizing itself. In the process, the Western values on which its democracies are built are increasingly put at risk.
Take, for instance, Belgium’s ISLAM Party, which now hopes to participate in the country’s October local elections in 28 regions. (Its name serves as an acronym for “Integrité, Solidarité, Liberté, Authenticité, Moralité.”)
The party’s ultimate aim: transforming Belgium into an Islamic state. According to the party’s founder Redouane Ahrouch, items high on its agenda include separating men and women on public transportation and the incorporation of sharia law, supposedly as long as it does not conflict with current laws.
Ahrouch’s own behavior, however, suggests that his respect for “current laws” and mores has its bounds. He reportedly refuses to shake hands with women. In 2003, he received a six-month sentence for beating and threatening his wife.
Currently, the Islam Party has two elected representatives in office—one in Anderlecht, the other in Molenbeek—both regions known to be hotbeds of extremism.
Or consider DENK, Holland’s pro-Islam party founded in 2015 by Turkish-Dutch politicians Selçuk Ozturk and Tunahan Kuzu. The party platform, which supports boycotts and sanctions against Israel, also discourages assimilation, calling instead for “mutual acceptance” of multiple cultures.
Non-Muslims, for instance, would apparently be required to “accept” the Muslim extremist father who beats his daughter for refusing an arranged marriage or for becoming too “Westernized” for his taste. It’s his culture, after all.
DENK also calls for a “racism police force” to monitor allegedly racist comments and actions. Those found guilty would be placed on a government “racism register” and banned from government jobs and other employment.
So far, such pro-Islamist views have served the party well. In local Dutch elections last month, DENK (which means “think” in Dutch) gained three seats in Rotterdam, totaling four seats among 45 total and edging out Geert Wilders’ far-right Partij voor de Vrijheid (PVV), which fell from three seats to one.
In Amsterdam, which also has 45 seats, a full 50 percent of Dutch-Moroccans and about two-thirds of Dutch-Turks gave the party a three-seat win in its first election. Many of these voters, according to post-election analyses, moved to DENK from the center-left Labor Party (PvdA), clearly feeling more at home with a more overtly pro-Muslim politics.
Similarly, France’s Union of Muslim Democrats (UDMF) has taken a number of voters from the Green Party by promising to defend Muslims. UDMF’s online program statement condemns burqa and headscarf bans. What’s more, in its pretense of supporting what it calls the “sweet dream of Democracy, Union, and Human Rights,” the party loudly (though rightly) condemns “anti-Muslim speeches” that “lead the most psychologically fragile people to commit acts of unprecedented violence.” Examples of such “unprecedented violence” follow: a German white supremacist who killed an Egyptian woman wearing a veil in 2009 and the stabbing of a French Muslim in Vaucluse
What the party statement does not mention anywhere are the attacks by Muslims in Paris and Nice that together killed 240 people between January 2015 and July 2016; the attack by a Muslim extremist on a Jewish school in Toulouse in 2012; and the kidnapping and heinous torture of Ilan Halimi, a 23-year-old Jew, in 2006. These are among other acts of “unprecedented violence” committed by Islamists.
UDMF also calls for protection of the family and its “essential role in the education of children,” while citing Article 14 of the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, which calls for respecting “the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.”
From here, the party demands the “right and duty of parents … to guide the child in the exercise of the above-mentioned right.” Implied here is the demand that parents be allowed to treat their children as they see fit according to their religious beliefs—including to beat daughters who refuse an arranged marriage, become “too Westernized,” and so on.
Most disturbing are the large numbers of Muslims who have flocked to parties like DENK and UDMF throughout Europe. Rather than moving towards more secular, traditionally democratic political movements, Europe’s Muslims are appear to increasingly distance themselves from the “European” side of their identity, and identify more with Islam and the Muslim community. And this too is part of Europe’s “self-Islamizing,” the result of taking too unsure a hand, too ambivalent a position, on the issue of assimilation.
Indeed, as Ellian points out, European institutions have enabled this cultural separation. Photographs taken last November during a meeting of the Muslim student union at Amsterdam’s Vrije Universiteit revealed that men and women sat on opposite sides of the auditorium aisle. Such events are common, according to journalist Carel Brendel, who first reported the incident. “Yet the administrations [of these schools] do little or nothing about it, despite the fact that their own rules forbid” such gender separation, he told the Investigative Project on Terrorism.
Brendel has also exposed links between the Amsterdam police and Abdelilah el Amran, a Muslim Brotherhood-connected imam invited by the police department to lead last year’s annual Iftar dinner marking the end of a day’s fast during Ramadan. Amran, Brendel said, also oversees a group of interconnected organizations, including an Islamic school that came under investigation last year for having separate entrances for boys and girls.
Worth noting about the event, according to Brendel, is that no other government body sponsors a religious ceremony. Nor does any Dutch government agency, let alone the police, host a Passover Seder or observe any other religious event with the public.
In addition, and perhaps more alarming, a spokesperson for the Rotterdam police posted to Twitter on the day of the event that “police will be difficult to reach tonight due to various Iftar meals.” City security and the safety of citizens, in other words, was being compromised in the name of a religious celebration.
Elsewhere, other signs of self-Islamization can be found in the rise of other Muslim parties in Austria, as well as a failed effort in Sweden; a proposed ban on the British press identifying terrorists as Muslim; the proliferation of sharia courts in the UK; and the repeated efforts by some Canadian officials to legalize sharia—a debate that recently has been revived.
While all of this involves political movements, it stands as a reminder of what the ideology behind the “war on terrorism” is really all about: an attack on Western culture. We need to do better at protecting it.
WILL CALIFORNIA GO FROM BANNING RELIGIOUS BOOKS TO BURNING THEM?
Two weeks ago, we warned you about the implications of California’s “Must Stay Gay Bill”. Now others are sounding the alarm about the full weight of this onerous bill, which could literally mean the banning of certain religious books. If we don’t stop this, what’s coming next?
On April 17, David French noted that this bill “would actually—among other things—ban the sale of books expressing orthodox Christian beliefs about sexual morality.
“Yes, ban the sale of books.
“Assembly Bill 2943 would make it an ‘unlawful business practice’ to engage in ‘a transaction intended to result or that results in the sale or lease of goods or services to any consumer’ that advertise, offer to engage in, or do engage in ‘sexual orientation change efforts with an individual.’”
In other words, it would be illegal for a bookstore to sell my book, Can You Be Gay and Christian? And that would apply all the more if the book was sold to someone with unwanted same-sex attraction. Yes, it would be illegal. Against the law. Punishable by the law.
With no hyperbole (really, with some understatement), French wrote: “This is extraordinarily radical.”
You say, “But no one in their right mind would consider voting for such a bill. That’s totally insane.”
Well, think again.
An April 19 headline on the California Policy Council website announced, “Assembly votes to violate the 1st Amendment.”
Yes, “AB 2943 bans books, conferences, counseling advocating Muslim, Jewish, and Christian views on gender and sexual orientation.”
As the story explains, “The California Assembly approved a bill today 50-18 that tells churches and others with traditional beliefs about gender and sexual orientation that advocating for their views could get them sued. AB 2943, declares ‘advertising, offering to engage in, or engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with an individual’ is illegal under state’s consumer fraud law.”
And note the carefully the vote in the Assembly: 50 to 18 in favor of the bill. Talk about insane!
As many have made clear in the weeks leading up to this vote, the bill is wide-ranging in its scope and intention, which is why I dubbed it the “Must Stay Gay Bill.” (It could also rightly be called the “Must Stay Gender Confused” bill, but that is not as pithy as description. Either way, the bill is a nightmare.)
To be totally candid, part of me wants to say to California and the nation, “Go ahead. Pass your radical bills. Outlaw our most fundamental freedoms. Consign struggling people to their struggles. Muzzle our religious rights. Go ahead and do your thing, and we’ll watch the whole country crumble.”
Perhaps then the church (and other people of conscience) will wake up. Perhaps then they’ll understand why we’ve been warning for years that those who came out of the closet want to put us in the closet. Perhaps then they’ll see the utter intolerance of the radical left.
But at what cost?
At what price to our kids and grandkids?
At what expense to the very fabric of our country?
Some things leave irreparable damage in their wake.
So, while one part of me says, “Go ahead and ignore our warnings,” another part of me says, “Don’t let it come to that! It’s not too late to stand and act. It’s not to late to debunk the myth that homosexuality is innate and immutable. It’s not to late to expose the lies that there is no such thing as ex-gay (or ex-trans). It’s not too late to get the truth out to the world.”
Yes, it’s not too late – but it is getting later by the second. The window is closing rapidly.
Of course, I already hear the mockers who say, “You’re a nutcase! You’re a religious fanatic! No one is going to burn your silly books!”
I remind these mockers of four things.
First, these same mockers once said to me, “No one wants to put you in the closet.” A few years later, they changed their mantra to, “Bigots like you belong in the closet!”
Second, these same mockers rejoiced when Kim Davis was put in jail, saying she got what she deserved.
Third, these same mockers have likened Christian conservatives to ISIS and the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and the Nazis, holding signs saying that we should be thrown to the lions.
Fourth, and most tellingly, these same mockers think this new California bill is a great thing.
CALIFORNIA AND THE NATION, IT’S TIME TO WAKE UP! YOU IGNORE THIS BILL AT YOUR OWN PERIL.