Joshua Winston – Janice, for the most part, the majority of world religions live side by side in peace, with occasional clashes. Are you seeing that Islam is the only religion which seems unable to live in peace and harmony with anyone without demanding special status and privileges far outweighing its percentage of the population or the contribution Muslims make within their host country and culture?
Janice Atkinson – I think the problem with Islam, as reinforced on the BBC recently by a Sikh priest, is that they work on ancient scriptures that they take as literal and convey this to uneducated and therefore vulnerable people. Literal interpretations take no account of the modern world. But that suits many jihadist imams for their own political and jihadi aims. If you can keep the poor and uneducated masses joined by a medieval doctrine, you have a ready-made audience, a united audience, united in hate and mistrust. Look at Pakistan and the case of Christian woman Asia Bibi. The uneducated masses are calling for the death sentence by stoning to death. The saddest part of this is that Western governments were not prepared to offer her asylum because they are afraid of upsetting the uneducated Pakistanis in their own countries, particularly the UK, where I feel so ashamed that my government have pandered to a loud, intolerant and hateful minority.
We have allowed this minority to exist in their own multicultural bubble which has festered hate, mistrust, misogyny and abhorrent practices such as FGM, child marriage, arranged marriage and Sharia law. And, of course, child sexual grooming, which is conducted by 80% Pakistani/Pakistani heritage men.
JW – You have correctly broken down all of the crime statistics caused by migrants in your last book, and you’ve spoken of the sectarian violence that certain cultures bring with them. This violence would still occur in a Muslim-dominant, Sharia-compliant world. It’s also right to note all of the Muslim-majority countries that are not living in, or knowing, peace in this period of time today. Why are Muslims blind to the fact that their ideology does not, never has, and never will work, and yet they seek to recreate it, whilst claiming to be running from it, in every land in which they settle?
JA – The Middle East is a complex place and competes for dominance for particular Muslim sects. The UAE is tolerant of Westerners because they chose to be economically, it works for them. However, as Westerners, we know the rules and obey them. In other states, it is a cruel and barbaric system. However, what amazes me is that they migrate to Western countries, presumably to live a free existence for their families, but then revert to living under Islamic rule. This is unacceptable, and Western governments should be clear on this. Sharia is unacceptable under any circumstances, the rule of law of the host nation has supremacy. If not, there are many Sharia-compliant countries that they could live in.
JW – I always say that Islam is the liberal left’s viagra. It’s the thing that gets them the angriest and sees them rise up en masse. I believe that the left are the true racists. They use Islam as a political tool. Many a rally I’ve been to, and I recall one where a man told me that Christians have the Ten Commandments (love thy neighbour [which is actually from the Great Commandment], don’t covet your neighbour’s wife, etc.), and this was his way of telling me that Sharia (stone your wife) is simply Islam’s Ten Commandments. For me, there seems to be a disconnect in the left’s brains. Reason, reality, facts and logic seem to play no part in their agenda. Any thoughts?
JA – It’s the left’s voter base. They courted the Muslims decades ago when they first arrived here, and to be fair, they have been loyal. I find it deeply troubling that the left are not standing up for Jews, and the anti-Semitism is sickening and frightening, so much so that British Jews are leaving the UK, as indeed they are across Europe. The left choose not to see the link between national socialism and Nazism, which is the same thing, that they are supporting. The left’s women disgust me. They march against Trump, Brexit and populism while sipping their organic chia lattes, in their designer pussycats, marching in designer trainers, with the kids in tow, or they leave them at home with the cheap immigrant nanny. Yet these feminazis are silent on the crimes committed by Muslim men in the name of religion. Where is their voice against child sexual grooming, FGM, child marriage, stoning and forced marriage? They are sickeningly silent and complicit. Let’s get outraged about pink clothes for little girls, blue toys for boys, or sexy underwear advertised on the subway. Yet let’s stay silent on barbaric Islamic practices. I detest them.
JW – I came across a new world recently – Islamo-denier. Would you call yourself an Islamo-denier, meaning that you don’t believe Islam is a religion at all? We’ve all been beaten over the head with the word ‘Islamophobia’, and I’ve heard several people use the term ‘Islamophilia’ (which means an irrational urge to coddle and care for and adhere to and protect Islam). Do you like the word ‘Islamo-denier,’ and is it a word that might be capable of combating all of the -isms and -phobias that the media throw at and accuse us of?
JA – I hate the branding of ‘isms’ and phobias. Again, it is a made-up construct as part of our cultural wars which are raging at the moment. Yet what we are fighting for is our culture, history and way of life. The majority in this country are sick and tired of these attacks from the left calling everyone who would like curbs on migration and Muslim migration and support controlling our borders and leaving the EU as racists and xenophobes. The so-called Conservatives and the UK socialists do not understand, and that is why they are losing votes to the so-called ‘populists.’ There is a quiet revolution going on. We are at a tipping point in this country; we have to win the culture wars and go back to common sense. We have to ditch the hate crime laws, brought in by Blair and being reinforced by the UN, EU and other supra-national organisations, which are all designed to dilute our culture and language. They have to learn that people are decent, sometimes they make mistakes, but to imprison and fine people for joking about a religion is a very slippery slope.
JW – And lastly, is Britain sinking, and not just because of Theresa May and her Brexit sellout? Is Islam the iceberg that will break us? What is your vision for the future of Britain? Living in London, all I see are different cultures spending 30 years and more building up their own enclaves. Muslims are political animals, and they push for Sharia wherever they are in positions of power, and their positions of power are rising in the UK, with more and more self-identifying Muslim MPs and mayors and councilors. If you have enough people voting for a thing, then you’ll have to give it to them, and the rest of us will have to live under it. I see Britain being divided – Sharia to the left, rule of law to the right. Do you see the UK as sinking? Is there a solution for the UK in relation to living harmoniously, if at all, with Islam?
JA – Sinking? We are sinking under the weight of Brussels’ bureaucracy, high taxes, green taxes and identity politics. Mrs May does not have a vision for our country, and she is a proven liar on Brexit. She was a disastrous Home Secretary, again caught out by lying; she let the police and border force down by forced redundancies, and the Conservative party should not have vote for her as Prime Minister. The writing was on the wall when the police booed her at their conference. When you do not have the support of the emergency services, and policing is by consent in the UK, that should have been obvious that she was not suitable to be PM. I don’t blame the Muslims for seeking office, they at least like to take part in shaping our country, it’s just that it’s shaping it in the wrong direction. Voter fraud is rife in their communities — as demonstrated in Tower Hamlets — that’s why the left are so opposed to voter identity at elections.
Islam, if not curbed, will be a huge problem. We should halt all new mosques; shut down those financed by Saudi Arabia, deport hateful Imams and tell the adherents that they have to live by the law of our land, not Sharia. We should also consider a ban on Muslim migration from countries like Pakistan.
London is a big issue because of migration. Knife crime and murders are rife, mainly committed by migrants or the children of migrants. We have imported the third world, and are now suffering from third world practices. Tower Hamlets is Sharia-compliant and burkas are de riguer. No one asked the people of London, or indeed, the UK, whether we wanted to have apartheid in our towns and cities. No one asked us if we wanted our culture and way of life destroyed, so much so that British people — black and white — have moved out of these ghettos. Our London Mayor, Khan, is presiding over this. At today’s count, we have seen 119 murders of young people in London since the beginning of the year. The rogue roll call shows migrant children with machetes, guns and knives. There were always violent criminals, but this has taken it to a new level. With the left and even the so-called Conservatives calling for an ‘holistic’ and healthcare approach to the problem, they are admitting defeat. That’s not what I want as a Londoner, and neither do the majority of decent people. We want effective policing, more police who will take the drug dealers, the gang members and their useless parents off the streets to keep us safe. We need a Mayor Rudy Giuliani; instead, we have a spineless Mayor who likes a photo call with meaningless platitudes. To label these crimes as a ‘healthcare’ issue is abrogating responsibility from the parents, making excuses. There have always been poor people who live in deprived areas, but they didn’t take up arms against each other as normal in our schools, public transport system and estates. There is right and wrong, the parents have lost control, there are not enough police and prisons. Machete attacks are not the result of being poor.
My future for Britain would be an off-shore Singapore-like country. Very low taxes, prisons that work, death penalty for jihadi terrorists, an increased police, border and armed forces, a country that chooses its migrants on merit, an attractive place for business with low corporation tax, a reformed NHS that works for the people, not the consultants and healthcare tourists, to provide housing and support for our armed forces and veterans who will take priority over immigrants, abolish Foreign Aid, and instead contribute to educational and water projects and emergency disaster relief, to care for our elderly in dignity, an education service that excels in STEM subjects and trains our own engineers, scientists and health staff, to abandon transgender teaching in schools and public servants, so we will not see the spectacle of our police in painted nails and high heels, and our children not tainted by sexual abnormalities and persuaded they are transgender when they are little children, to ban halal slaughter and the export of live animals, to believe in Britain and Make Britain Great Again.
mortimer says
Migration without ASSIMILATION = INVASION.
This is the right question to ask, namely, who said we want our CULTURE and OUR POPULATION to be REPLACED with THIRD WORLD JIHADISTS who HATE US and OUR ENTIRE PHILOSOPHY & CULTURE?
The only result of mass Muslim migration can be the IMPOSITION OF SHARIA LAW in UK (or US, Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, Canada, Australia, etc.)
If the MASS MUSLIM IMMIGRATION CONTINUES eventually SHARIA WILL PREVAIL AND MASSIVE PERSECUTION WILL ENSUE.
J D S says
To the British citizen:
As I asked in a previous topic..HOW LONG?????
Richard says
Mortimer: You are absolutely right, of course.
While I generally agree with Ms. Atkinson, I do take exception to her statement that Islam is outdated and must be modernized. it CANNOT be modernized. If a religion is real, everything about it must be real. If it has even a single error, the whole thing is a lie. It is like the question from the attorney in the movie Witness for the Prosecution: “The question is: Were you lying then? Are you lying now? Are you not a compulsive and habitual liar?” I believe Mohammed was the latter. She writes about making Islam work. The whole problem is that Islam, as it is now and has been for over a thousand years, does work magnificently. Just look the the rapidly shrinking number of Christians in Islamic countries from the time of Mohammed to the present. Every day, we read about more massacres by Muslims all over the world. Non-Muslims under benevolent Muslim rule have four options: Live as a lowest class subject, move, convert, or die. This is great … for the Muslims. Especially if you are a Muslim rapist, as so very many of them seem to be. Sending these people back to their Islamic nations would be only a temporary respite for the West. They are now busy building atomic weapons. They are not planning on using them as fireworks displays.
Jaladhi says
Surprise, surprise — you are waking up now!! Maybe it is still not too late to take your country and culture back from these imbecile politicians!!
Roger woodhouse says
Imbecile politicians indeed but look who keeps voting for them.The outcome of the Brexit fiasco will test the true makeup if the Britush people.We are approaching the ‘end game’.If Treason May survives to see through her smoke and mirrors agreement through parliament we can expect the demise of democracy as we knew it here.With it a new party like UKIP will emerge and hopefully restore a real democracy in which the people can participate.Out with these career politicians and self serving bureaucrats.Ban Islam and deport those unable to live without it..Promote ONLY British culture..End this multi cultural nonsense.Its apartheid by another name.
Rouge1 says
The Pedo queen runs the UK. The people have no say.
Emilie Green says
“No one asked the people of the UK if we wanted our culture and way of life destroyed”
Because the leftist “leaders” knew the answer they’d get. Therefore, because they were so much more superior than the riff-raff citizens-on-their-way-to-becoming-subjects, this was forced on them.
Force – the hallmark of the left, and of tyrants. Deprived of just power.
“endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”
Angemon says
Why ask when the answer is known beforehand?
Renate says
I saw a video with a Swedish woman complaining that Swedes had not been asked if they wanted to be overwhelmed by Muslims flooding into Sweden. I think it’s the same in every country. The citizens were not asked or told about these invasions. The Leftist politicians made all the decisions for the people. In Canada, I know nothing about this was ever put to the people in a referendum. No political party ever ran on flooding the country with immigrants. Leftists infiltrate Liberal or Democratic parties and from there, they just go ahead and dictate what will happen next and the people can get lost if they don’t like it.
Terry Gain says
October 2019 is Canada’s referendum on Islam, even if it is not proper to discuss the issue in polite company and even if Andrew Scheer is deathly afraid that he will be Kellie Lynched if he campaigns on the issue.
Renate says
Trudeau is so desperate that he is now trying to rig even that election. He is absolutely shameless.
abad says
Leftism teaches the masses what to think, not how to think.
And this is why the western world is going into the sewer, the liberal elite wants Islam to win, they want Islam to dominate.
Renate says
It’s little wonder the Left wants Islam to win. In Islam, nobody thinks. They all just unquestioningly believe what they’re told to believe. What the Left overlooks with Islam, is that if they do win, their next target will be the Leftists that helped them win in the first place.
eduardo odraude says
I gather that’s what happened when Khomeini led the revolution in Iran some decades ago. Leading up to and during the revolution, the leftists were allied with the Islamic parties, and then when Khomeini took power, the leftist leaders were all locked up or murdered, now that their usefulness was at an end.
Renate says
Apparently that is the way it happened. Islamists would not hesitate to do it again either.
Older Canadian says
Unfortunately.so true.
Kepha says
Re Islam and the Left in Iran: I recall those days, even though I was just a student Stateside. The odds-on favorites were the Tudeh and the rest of Iran’s Communist Left; only Khomeini and his crew did an end-run around them. This caught all the smart money and the American intelligence an d foreign policy institutions flat-footed.
gravenimage says
True, Renate.
ConanKong says
It boggles the mind how the people who invented the effective fighting styles of bare knuckle pugilism and Lancaster catch would just lay down without a fight.
Wellington says
Yes, Islam is a disaster in the Western world. Denying this is to deny reality.
One point of contention I have with Janice Atkinson and that is her statement about how uneducated Muslims accept a literal, medieval view of the Islamic texts. Well, so do a hell of a lot of very well educated Muslims, so this is not just a matter of education.
The chief problem here is that the Koran et al. are MEANT to be taken literally for all time. Not to do so would mean being a bad Muslim and believing in a fantasy version of Islam that does not exist. Just as Mein Kampf cannot be treated with figuratively, non-literally, so is it the case with the Koran. Put another way, Nazism cant be reformed. Neither can Islam. You can’t reform a totalitarian ideology and Islam is certainly that as are Nazism and Marxism.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Wellington. But Atkinson is still over all more right than wrong here–and also brave enough to say so, which is an even bigger rarity in Britain these days.
Older Canadian says
Wellington. This has to be one of your best post ever. Succinctly said and didn’t miss a beat.
R Russell says
Our culture and way of life is based on knowing as a person the Jesus found in the Bible.
We wont get our culture and way of life back until we get back to basics
revereridesagain says
Dismissing those of us who do not share your belief in the Jesus myth is a curious way of expressing solidarity against the irrational Dark Age horde of Islam (“educated” or not). Would you round us up and throw us to the rabid wolves hunting down poor Asia Bibi — a harmless woman who has “insulted” their savage, primitive sensibilities — since they hate us just as much?
Clear-sighted MEP Atkinsnon gives a description of the danger facing the West from Islam rooted in “reason, reality, facts, and logic” indeed. I agree with Wellington about her curious emphasis on the uneducated. Far too many educated Muslims have unplugged their brains, drunk on the dream of power Islam (like Marxism and Nazism) promises. She clearly recognizes that the Left’s rejection of Western values in favor of cultural Marxism has provided the fecallized soil in which Islam can grow. How I wish we had someone like her in Congress!
Terry Gain says
Would you round us up and throw us to the rabid wolves hunting down poor Asia Bibi — a harmless woman who has “insulted” their savage, primitive sensibilities — since they hate us just as much?
……….
Christians are insulted daily and don’t resort to throwing anyone to the rabid wolves. I don’t agree with R Russel’s contention but your comment betrays complete ignorance about Christianity. It is Christians who have to date saved the world from Islam. It remains to be seen whether you atheists have the right stuff. So far, as Christianity has declined and atheism has risen so has Islam.
R Russell says
You seem to be quite good at putting words in another’s mouth – in this case, mine.
You have made a straw man argument which quite frankly isn’t worth addressing.
What I will address is your erroneous assertion that Jesus is a myth.
The Jesus found in the N T and other secular writings of the time is very much alive.
Those who do not acknowledge the existence of the spiritual realm leave themselves at a great disadvantage. Jesus has made himself known to millions over the centuries and will still make himself known to those who are prepared to develop a friendship with him in the spiritual realm. However that is for the individual to make their choice…….
I wonder if in considering Jesus a myth you have examined the evidence of others who have started out from where you appear to be at present.
Two books come to mind. The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel and Who Moved the Stone by Frank Morison. Legal backgrounds and examining the evidence of which there is much.
Wellington says
Just out of curiosity, R Russell, and putting aside those (like me) who don’t necessarily acknowledge the existence of a spiritual realm (all the while admitting {like me} its possibility), exactly how do you and those who think like you demonstrate conclusively that there is a spiritual realm? In short, what is your proof here?
Arguably, what is called the spiritual realm by Christians and other religious folks is nothing more than aspects of a vastly complex material universe that we are not even close to figuring out and so we assign what we don’t know about this vastly complex material universe to some vague “spiritual realm.”
And, btw, try reading a work like Michael Grant’s tome, “Jesus: An Historian’s Review of the Gospels.” As for Strobel’s and Morison’s works, they are highly tendentious and do not, as you and they contend, provide extensive evidence for their conclusions.
In the final analysis, the great Danish philosopher, Soren Kierkegaard, was correct (and keeping in mind too Immanuel’s Kant destruction of every logical proof for the existence of God because existence is not necessarily a category of an idea), all the Christian has is faith. It’s a very big “all,” but there is no definitive evidence for the Christian’s’ assertion that Jesus was God on earth for some third of a century and died a horrible death to save mankind from God’s own creation.
After all, if you had definitive proof of this, then what need is there for faith? It’s a “dilemma,” actually a contradiction, that all people of faith “exhibit,” i.e., on the one hand people of faith contend that positive proof exists that what they believe in can be demonstrated, while at the same time requiring faith. Why? Science and philosophy don’t err in this regard but religion does. Surely you can see the “contradiction” here. No?
Your turn.
gravenimage says
*All* of us need to stand against the threat of Islam.
R Russell says
Wellington.
There doesn’t seem to be any point in discussing the matter with you. You say you don’t dismiss the spiritual but then go on to dismiss it. You then want me to debate from your worldview and not my own.
You have chosen your path and it would appear are happy with it at present. If at some future time you wish to pursue a friendship with the Bible Jesus on his terms, you will discover along with the billions of Christians alive and dead, that he is a wonderful friend – and as well, that he is God; YHWH God, the Son. Totally God and totally man.
Incidentally, after Jesus was crucified, he rose from the dead. The sky went black for 3 hours, whilst he hung on the cross, proving it couldn’t have been an eclipse. The phenomenon was so strange it was recorded by other secular chroniclers.
Mark Swan says
R Russell,
What really happened at Jesus’ death was both amazing and well-documented—but it was no mere solar eclipse!
Based on the “solar eclipse” theory, many attempt to date the Crucifixion to either 29ad or 33ad because of known solar eclipses in Judea in those years. As one article notes, “Some historians tie the crucifixion to a one minute 59 second total solar eclipse that occurred in the year 29 C.E., while others say a second total eclipse, blocking the sun for four minutes and six seconds, in 33 C.E. marked Jesus’ death.” Even NASA lists 29ad and 33ad as possible years of the Crucifixion of Christ on their list of “Solar Eclipses of Historical Interest.”
But neither a “solar eclipse” event, nor the 29ad or 33ad dates match the biblical account. Additionally, according to NASA and NOAA, the longest duration of a solar eclipse is just over 7.5 minutes. But the darkness that fell at Jesus’ death was three hours long! As Mark 15:33 reads, “Now when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.” Again, that was a full three hours! While God could make an eclipse last three hours, this is not what happened when Jesus died.
Notice an ancient account that precisely matches the Gospel records. Here, a third-century historian named Sextus Julius Africanus quotes an earlier historian named Thallus, who wrote around 52ad. Africanus records Thallus writing the following: “…in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth—manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? …But it was a darkness induced by God, because the Lord happened then to suffer” (The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Translations of The Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325, p. 137).
Notice that Thallus points out that the “eclipse” occurred during the time of a “full moon”—and that it was no normal eclipse—it was “a darkness induced by God.” Thallus understood well, as anyone with a basic understanding of how a solar eclipse works should understand, that an eclipse of the sun cannot occur during a full moon. In ancient Greek, the word translated as eclipse does not always mean that the moon has blocked out the sun. The word simply means “to fail” or “to come to an end,” such as in Luke 22:32, where Jesus said: “But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail….”
As the Gospel records, and as other ancient histories make clear, the Crucifixion occurred during the Passover season, and that is always at the time of a full moon. A full moon occurs when the earth is between the moon and the sun. But during a solar eclipse it is the opposite—it is the moon that is between the sun and the earth. Thus, the darkness occurring at the time of Jesus’ death could not have been caused by an eclipse!
The “solar eclipse theory” is a lie that has been propagated by the father of lies—the Devil (John 8:44), who attempts to attack the inerrancy of Scripture and the divinity of Christ (1 John 4:3). When the Savior of the world died, the entire creation groaned at His death, the temple veil tore in two, and many graves were opened (Matthew 27:51–53). When the Messiah died, the Father marked that death with awesome signs—no mere routine solar eclipse!
R Russell says
Mark Swan,
you may have misread what I wrote.
I stated it could NOT be a solar eclipse. (eclipses do not last for 3 hours)
I didn’t give any more of the details eg the full moon at Passover etc because I judged it not as an enquiry but as sense of superiority. Thus I considered Matthew 7 appropriate.
However you do not fall into that category and you have spent a lot of time writing out your reply. You are to be commended for that.
When I have extra info to give, I am usually a bit lazier – giving a link, like the one below.
.https://creation.com/darkness-at-the-crucifixion-metaphor-or-real-history
Many thanks for your contribution.
Wellington says
Mark Swan: With respect, the said darkening is not well documented. Indeed, it is not contemporaneously documented at all outside of the New Testament (and Thallus aside). Matthew and Luke borrowed it from Mark (as these two Gospels did many other matters from Mark) and so the author of Mark originated this and it was probably just a literary invention to add drama to the Crucifixion.
Many possibilities present themselves. For instance, perhaps it got dark the day of the Crucifixion for a short while as many days get dark for a short while and by the time Mark was written around 70 A.D., some forty years after the Crucifixion, matters were embellished by the author of Mark just as religious literature from many religions embellish an event that has some basis to it but not very much. As another example of such embellishment, Moses may have led the Jews leaving Egypt though some swamp area that existed then but not now and by the time the Pentateuch was finally written down in the form we have it, about 425 B.C., which is some 800 hundred years after Moses would have lived, voila, we have him parting the Red Sea.
As the great Scottish philosopher, David Hume (1711-1776), noted, the only way a miracle can be accepted is if the natural explanation for the event or action in question would be even MORE remarkable than the miraculous explanation. Using this rule by Hume it is possible to argue for a natural explanation for every supposed miracle to be found in the Bible (and other religious texts or in present day life) that is never more remarkable of an explanation than the miraculous one.
Of course, one can have faith in a miracle occurring and indeed maybe that miracle did occur but, per Hume, there is no way of proving that. The great Danish Christian thinker, Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855), grasped what Hume had written as he also grasped Immanuel Kant’s evisceration of all logical arguments for the existence of God because existence is not necessarily a category of an idea and came to the realization that faith alone is all one has—and Kierkegaard had it.
R Russell thinks I was trying to be irreverent or something along these lines when all I wanted to do was point out the veracity of Kierkegaard’s thought, ditto for Hume and Kant. I don’t dismiss the possibility of a spiritual realm though my hunch is that it is a legend, but hunches are often wrong as I could be. If I am, I hope the God you believe in won’t hold it against me for I have tried my poor best to reach the conclusions about ultimate reality that I have and, as I think you know by now, I consider Christianity (Judaism too) an enlightened religion because of its ethical aspects while I find Islam’s ethics hideous.
Hope you had a memorable Thanksgiving. Take care.
Mark Swan says
No one borrowed any thing from anyone The Writers of the so called Gospels did all there work, as they were inspired by God.
No servant of God would dare literary invention, so it was probably not just a literary invention.
Mark could not have embellished anything He was chosen by God to write what He
did write—only very minor discrepancies exist in any of his writing—they do not
detract from what he meant—he seems the most plain and concise of the four.
I nor you neither were there when God, not Moses parted the Red sea, I am willing
to concede that Moses’ account is correct, of the millions of Israelites with Him no
one told a different story that I am aware of.
Mr. Hume has said a great many things that he himself believes based on his
understanding—Mr. Hume also realized that he would want to see a miracle.
Thank you for putting this in— “faith alone is all one has”—as a believer in God
I know faith comes by hearing the word of God.
When God knows we are sincere—he will give us faith.
As former angels—creatures who once had access to God’s throne in heaven—the demons have absolutely no doubt about God’s existence. Yet their belief does not
cause them to be faithful to the God of whom they believe in.
This is where the full requirement of faith becomes important.
One who believes God “is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him” believes that what we do—how we live our lives—matters to God. This understanding connects our belief to our action. God will increase our faith as we sincerely practice what he reveals
through His word.
Wellington one of the basic faults of all of us humans, is we fail to actually acknowledge
the true observable qualities of the other, even when we have had a chance to do so—
I know you to be an open and honest Man, you let known your feeling on any topic that
catches your interest, you are never just trying to be provocative. Nothing will change here.
Yes, the Thanksgiving I had was memorable, since my wife of 40 years died last September, I have married Her sister, we both take a lot of pleasure in fixing good
food for my Handicapped Daughter (who is a perpetual 10 years old from being hit by
a car at that age, more than 20 years back) she is a very healthy, bright and happy child always, and can eat you or I under the table and then have desert.
I also hope you had a memorable Thanksgiving—take care.
Wellington says
Mark Swan: Thanks for your reply.
I am so sorry to hear about your daughter as well as about your wife passing away (I had not known about this before—perhaps I should have but I did not).
May you and those who surround you with love and affection, as I am sure you do them, be a continual sustenance to you, as obviously your faith is as well. Take good care.
Kepha says
Dear Wellington, with all due respect, one aspect of faith is that it accepts that if God is to be known, he must make himself known. For us to comprehend God solely by our own intellect would be harder than measuring all the liquid in the universe with an eye dropper. After all, God is infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, justice, goodness, holiness, and truth. While I firmly believe that human knowledge, righteousness/moral sense, and holiness/sense of the divine are the divine image in man, they are very poor things compared to the wisdom, righteousness, and holiness of God.
But God has revealed himself in a series of saving acts in the history of mankind, including the Exodus from Egypt, the return from Babylon, and the work of Jesus Christ. This last does not end with the crucifixion, but includes as well Jesus’ resurrection on the third day. Indeed, the whole reason for the Christian observance of Sunday as the Lord’s Day rather than the Old Testament sabbath is the resurrection. Paul the apostle himself declares that if the resurrection did not occur, our faith is in vain (I Corinthians 15). I freely admit that the resurrection of Jesus–which presupposes his actual death on our behalf (Heb. 2, Mk 10:45, etc.)–is one reason why I also believe that Islam is not the true religion, but a fearful judgment of God on a church (seen as all professing Christians; not the Roman hierarchy) that has not done its job. If God might use a greedy Assyrian king in the 8th century B.C., he can use the delusions of a 7th century Arab warlord in the period between 622 A.D. and the present (cf. Isaiah 10).
As for the Gospels and what they offer, I admit to belonging to the minority that holds which one was written first is an open question; although the evidence for Luke drawing on Matthew and Mark is pretty convincing. However, Luke-Acts (two parts of one extensive work) ends on a rather upbeat note; knows nothing of the destruction of Jerusalem as a fait accompli, and knows nothing of the impending martyrdom of its hero, the apostle Paul. For these reasons, it seems to date from the early 60’s; thus forcing Mark and Matthew further back. But, after a recent re-reading of the Gospels in Greek, I am beginning to wonder if Mark might not credibly be seen as either an abridgement of Matthew, or it and Matthew may be two semi-independent accounts, with the similarities explainable if Papias (as preserved in Eusebius) is correct in seeing in Mark Peter’s recollections and Matthew recording his own, but preferring to focus on discourses of the Lord as well as his passion and resurrection.
John gives a knottier problem, since it is the richest in topographical description, and, in terms of what we know of ‘Eretz Yisroel, especially Judaea and Jerusalem prior to 70A.D. via archaeology, his descriptions are remarkably accurate.
Yes, I would put at least three of the Gospels far further back in the first century than the common scholarly consensus would put them; and even J.A.T. Robinson and C.H. Dodd (among the scholars of the last century), admitted that the scholarly consensus that the Gospels date from between 70-90 was itself an uneasy compromise from the discredited Tubingen School’s 2d century dating and the traditional dating.
But, back to faith. I do not accept Kierkegaard’s “leap in the dark” view of faith. I see it more as a traveler lost in the dark, foggy mountains hears someone telling him that there is a ledge a few feet below him where he can jump onto and wait until rescue in the morning–with the traveler also learning that the voice belongs to a local familiar with the place, and noting that the voice is in a local accent (perhaps a few other evidences).
This being said, I actually sympathize a bit with Kierkegaard’s revolt against the prevailing Hegelianism of his times.
There is enough in the New Testament for us to see it as a “witness from below” that fits with first century history (usually described “from above”[socially]). Indeed, there is also so much of the Old Testament that “fits” with the times supposedly described therein.
As for the “natural morality” in which the thinkers of the enlightenment trusted (I see them as taking the ball from Romans 2:14 and Eccl. 3:11 and running a little too far with it), Alasdair MacIntyre justly noted that Kant’s looks suspiciously Lutheran, Hume’s suspiciously Calvinist, and Diderot’s suspiciously Roman Catholic. I would add that Spinoza’s is still rather Jewish.
Further, Christ did not come to rescue us from God’s creation. Rather, Jesus Christ begins a process of redemption which ultimately has the creation subjected in hope that its bondage to corruption will end. “For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselve, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body [at the manifestation of the sons of God in the final judgment]” (Rom. 8:18-25). This, I believe, speaks of the ultimate redemption of the whole of God’s creation; not merely the souls of the human creation.
The spiritual reality is not an aspect of the visible reality, but a greater reality that envelops and contains the visible/empirical reality. Spiritual does not refer to the non-material part of man primarily, but to the Spirit of God. Perhaps this is a point where we may not understand each other. For in him [God] we live, and move, and have our being, as Paul told the Athenians, quoting the poet Epimenides in doing so (Acts 17:28).
I see you are open to a “spiritual reality”. That ultimate spirituality is not one we master through our own wills and intellects, but which breaks in on us.
I hope this is not spammed.
Wellington says
Kepha: Thank you for your thoughtful assessment of sundry but related matters. I do think that it is possible to be reasonable and reject the conviction of Christians that Jesus was God personally present on earth for a third of a century and after his crucifixion rose from the dead. That Jesus MIGHT have done this I concede, but all kinds of religions make extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence. Ant this gets to the nub of the matter, i.e., you believe there is enough evidence to conclude as you do and I do not think there is enough evidence (and about many other events in the Bible, both Old and New Testament).
As for using one’s intellect alone to see if a higher power can be ascertained, I think even you would concede this is a noble quest, a philosophical exploration and not a theological one, but for reasons I already mentioned related to Hume and Kant all such proofs, and some of them are clever, ultimately fail. So, one is thrown back on faith, which you have and I don’t. As I ran things past you before, it is my “hunch” that whether one is religious or not to some extent depends on one’s biochemical make-up—you either have a religious gene or some such thing or you don’t. You do, I don’t. If I’m right about this and you are right about Jesus, it’s odd that Jesus would not have alluded to this in some way, all the while, in effect, being prepared to exculpate those without the “proper biochemistry.” Didn’t happen though.
One thing is for certain and that is that if there is both a material and spiritual existence as opposed to a material existence alone, then this means that the universe (multiverse?) is even more complex than if only a material universe exists. Invoking Occam’s razor, I lean to the “simpler” universe.
As for God per se, either God created man or the other way around. If God does exist, and I readily concede the possibility, I like what Malcolm Muggeridge, who died in 1990, said about God (and perhaps you are familiar with this quote): “God is not only stranger than we can know, He is stranger than we can even imagine.”
Good to have this back and forth with you. Take care.
Prabh says
Around the time the second world war of the previous century ended, the various communities hailing from the Greater Historical India Regions were told there were massive labour shortages throughout the entire Commonwealth and Anglosphere. Immigration was encouraged by various governments.
Greg says
I lived in KSA and the middle east for almost 5 years, until I could take it no more. Easily the most intolerant people. Most are very friendly and good friends. Others…… UAE is fairly tolerant, up to a point, that should not be pushed.
Phil Copson says
Wrong description – they don’t live in a “multi-cultural bubble” – far from it.
It’s the Liberals who live in a fantasy “multi-cultural bubble”, while the Hard-Left and the Jihadists work to construct a mono-cultural wrecking-ball with which to destroy the society in which the rest of us live.
dan christensen says
In March, 1945, The German dictator issued his Nero Decree, ordering a scorched earth policy in both Germany and its occupied territories. The plan included forcing millions of people on a trek without food or supplies which would have resulted in a “hunger catastrophe”; The dictator had no compunction about this, believing that only the “inferior ones” would have survived the battles of WW2.
Sometime, before 2020, The European Elites will issue a Nero Decree, ordering a scorched earth policy in the islamic occupied EU countries. The plan includes forcing millions of Europeans to gradually surrender to islam their wealth and culture which will result in a “cultural catastrophe”; The European Elites has no compunction about this, believing that only the “superior ones” will convert to islam voluntarily.
Terry Gain says
It is extremely naive to expect Muslims to leave their “religion” at the border. Even if the first generation of immigrants does moderate or pretend to moderate, we have seen instances where the second generation reverts to fundamentalist Islam, which is violent and barbaric, The doctine is incompatibe with western values and they believe that the doctrine is the word of God.
Islam is supremacist, imperialist and totalitarian. Islam has a need to dominate and does not qualify for acceptance in pluralistic societies.
A prescription for peace is to let Muslims have their area of dominance and the rest of us shall have ours.
Keep them out.
James Lincoln says
Absolutely true, Terry.
For example, Poland and Hungary want nothing to do with Islam and are on record as stating that they are Christian countries.
Both countries are safe and thriving.
Wellington says
Yes indeed, Terry. Keep the Buttlims out. Find any legal pretext to do so.
Problem is they want all the world to be dar-al Islam with no more dar-al harb left at all. We must deny these religious cretins this “aspiration.” If we don’t, then a darkness will descend upon mankind, and most especially the West, the likes of which has never been known before because Buttlims will dispose of Western freedom while at the same time appropriating Western technology to do so (what occurred on 9/11 is a particularly notable example of these two “characteristics” of Islam).
Islam is surely a parasite twice over: It uses freedom to destroy freedom and it uses the technological achievements of others, all the while claiming such technological advancements as their own, all the more to destroy anyone or anything opposed to Mo’s warped creed.
Nothing sicker than Islam over the longest period of time. Nothing.
Terry Gain says
Wellington
The bigger problem is not what they want – our countries- but our unwillingness to take even non-violent measures to deprive them of what they want.
We need to start with an acknowledgment that their ideology of Muslim supremacism is incompatible with our ideology of equality of citizenship.
A requirement that all future immigrants must agree that they accept the basic values of America: separation of church and state, equality of citizenship, freedom of speech, religion and conscience, and equality of the races and genders would go a long way to keeping Muslims out.
Wellington says
Agreed. Accurate exposure is paramount. Thereafter (a very big “thereafter”), matters will take care of themselves in still free societies, respecting which societies Islam wants none of them to continue.
Rufolino says
A recent survey in Germany very clearly demonstrated that, contrary to expections, second and third generation immigrants were generally MORE RADICAL in their beliefs than their parents !!
Conclusion: “assimilation” is not happening !
Older Canadian says
Terry. Great post. Thanks you for your contribution of commonsense and reason.
Anne says
After chatting with another mother about the realities of Islam in America and other Western countries, she was shocked. Finally she said, “Wow! It’s like they brought their culture with them.”
Ya Think?
Terry Gain says
Was she kidding or is she a Democrat?
🙂
Wellington says
That was funny. My compliments, Terry.
somehistory says
There was a governor…possibly with the election he is out now…who told the people in “his” state that if they didn’t like the many, many,, many moslims coming in, they…the citizens…could leave the state. And a great majority of the moslims in “his” state said they wanted their “law”(islam’s code of lawlessness), and not the State or U.S. Federal law.
Those in positions of power…misuse that power to do as they please…and if the people that are under their control don’t like it, well they can just ….
gravenimage says
I remember that, Somehistory–I just can’t recall which governor it was. Appalling, in any case.
Older Canadian says
Somehistory. It was Mark Dayton, Minnesota in 2015. You can see it is working out quite well.
gravenimage says
UK MEP Janice Atkinson: “No one asked the people of the UK if we wanted our culture and way of life destroyed”
………………….
Good for Janice Atkinson!
Merkexit says
Yes
Yes
Yes
Ban islam Now
BIN it!
Mr. Maxwell S. J. Fenton says
Islam migrates or invades, the two are synonymous.
Once enclaved they strive and struggle (jihad) to force their vile pagan lifestyle upon a host culture.
They lie, deceive and violently oppose all and any opposition as their entire history shows and highlights only too well and is disovered in any contemporary Islamic community today.
The West are either asleep and remain incredulous to this existential threat to their entire existence, or, those in power want it thus.
Either way there’s war ahead.
No Muzzies Here says
Theresa May is catering to Muslims and not holding them to account for their violent actions. This is to keep a hold on to political power. Makes no difference if innocent British subjects are raped or killed.
Miker says
for those who do not know look to Canada. The PM Trudeau has embraced Muslims. His immigration person is a Somalian. This guy is planing to bring in millions of Somalian into Canada. ISIS has said they will us Canada as a jumping off place to destroy the USA. look out people it’s to close
Older Canadian says
Yep thats the rumor, but the actual numbers stated by the liberal canadian government is one million by 2020. Please understand they can’t do it faster as we do not have the housing required for more. Canada although in land mass is huge, we currently only have a population of around 37 million, and housing currently is extremely tight.
patriotliz says
As far as Islamization of Europe is concerned….”the Die is cast”…they came, they saw, they conquered.
Once Europe determined it’s OK to tolerate the intolerant, they lost their country.
The leaders did this deliberately to establish a borderless NWO via population replacement w/ the uneducated Turd world or they were super ignorant of the history and culture of IslamoNazism. Either way the citizens still don’t fight back except for the precious few patriots who risk being imprisoned.
It’s like the citizens keep drinking the cyanide-laced Kool-aid and have to believe that it’s good for them because they want to show they don’t fear dying.
patriotliz says
It’s not “Islamo-deniers”…since we don’t deny the existence of Islam.
It’s referring to Islam as “IslamoNazism” emphasizing it’s fascistic, totalitarian political ideology.
That phrase or IslamoFascism will likely get you banned on Social Media.
FYI says
It was Tony Blair who opened the floodgates.
Tony Blair,The UK’s version of Ephialtes of Trachis,betrayer of the Greeks at Thermopylae.
The same Tony Blair who initiated a FAKE globalist-agenda war with Iraq using 9-11 as an excuse.
The same Tony Blair who said..
“To me,the most remarkable thing about the koran is how progressive it is.The koran is inclusive.
It extols science and knowledge and abhors superstition.It is practical and far ahead of its time in attitudes towards marriage,women and governance”
A Battle for GLOBAL VALUES
Foreign Affairs jan-feb 2007
Progressive?
inclusive? “Oh ye who believe!Take not the Jews and Christians for friends” koran 5 v 51
Extols science,knowledge and abhors superstition?Did he miss the bit about muhammed splitting the moon?
far ahead of its time in terms of……
attitude to marriage?A man can have 4 wives koran 4:3 but.. a muslima can’t have 4 husbands
attitude to women?The Legal Testimony of a woman=HALF that of man koran 2:282
A son’s inheritance=TWICE that of a daughter koran 4:11
governance?Like islamic state?Iran run by the insane mullahs?Pakistan the pariah under imran khan?
It seems Tony didn’t actually read the koran:I though fraudulent francis was bad with his “proper reading of the koran shows it to be opposed to every form of violence”.And those 164 Jihadist verses francis??
Note that Smiley Tony’s comment about the koran comes from an article called “The battle for Global values”:the GLOBALIST agenda needs to keep alive the fiction that islam is a religion of peace and silence dissent using that contrived “islamophobia” trick.
Ira Edwards says
Almost universally ignored in the West is the basic doctrine of Islam.
They claim that the Koran is the direct, unchangeable word of the creator of the universe.
To ignore the Muslim superiority, violence and sexuality literally proclaimed takes mental manipulation that truth-seekers cannot do
Moderate Muslim have their ways, but they can’t fool those who believe the Koran and act on it.
FYI says
In these times,people of ALL Non-muslim religions and people who don’t subscribe to any,should work together.
islamic teachings give 3 options to non-muslims:{SAHIH MUSLIM book 19 no 4294}
#1Convert to islam
#2 Be subjugated by islam:pay the JIZYA tax
#3 Be killed
If you are a non-muslim THAT is your choice:we see this in 1,400 years of islamic invasions from India to Europe.If you are a non-muslim YOU are an infidel:to be subjugated.This will never change.
If you are an Atheist,you must know that islam does not tolerate your non-belief.Atheists are persecuted and killed in the islamic world.But people must be free to believe what they want!
Many people have no religious beliefs.But so what?islam doesn’t respect non-belief.
It is perfectly reasonable to be an Agnostic.
islam doesn’t tolerate that either.
islam does not tolerate secular humanism.
If you are a Buddhist,Hindu,Jain,Sikh,Jew or Christian the same applies.You cannot pretend otherwise.
islam is at war with you!You are an infidel.We in the West,the DAR AL-HARB are to be subjugated and that includes all non-muslims living in the West.
We have a heritage in the West that is both Judeo-Christian{religious} and secular{non-religious}
Freedom to be an Atheist or Agnostic,The right to be free of religion and indoctrination,separation of religion and state are all fruits of that and we MUST preserve this despite the RED-GREEN-DHIMMI axis and the Globalist agenda{The Left accomodates islam,the islamists take advantage of that to gain POLITICAL power so they can have their immoral and perverse sharia law and the naive dhimmi Christians and Jews stupidly facilitate it all in the name of ‘multiculturalism’,’diversity’ etc}meanwhile the Globalists,the UN,mr soros et al are busy with their mass-immigration social-engineering plans that are systematically destroying our Western culture.
May I suggest that JW readers realize the common enemy of the West is islamic supremacist ideology which does not respect either our Judeo-Christian Religious heritage OR our secular values.
In the absence of any proper leadership within Christendom{thanks to a pro-islam,pro-mass immigration,pro-NWO “pope”}perhaps catholics and protestants could work TOGETHER.
“Divide and conquer” makes it much easier for an enemy to gain victory!
The Jews are under ferocious assault both in the EU and in Israel:we must support them too and the right of Israel to exist in the face of islamic tyranny.This “palestinian” narrative is used by the Left and the antisemitic media to impugn Israel,a democracy that shares our Western values.