Posted on 04/15/2005 7:11:19 PM PDT by CHARLITE
I am on the mailing list of several Islamic publications and almost without exception there was veritable glee over the liberal hue and cry from leftists for a more liberal pope.
If you read between the lines, you can very clearly see what these Islamics are hoping for: more moral decay in the already evil and decadent West. This evilness would then be used as the reason for the mass slaughter that lies ahead. Allah has demanded that the evil and sinful Christians be sent to the fires of hell and if Islamics are convinced that all Christians are evil, the followers of Mohammed can kill with a clear conscience.
The Quran already states that “all Christians will be burned in the fire,” but many moderate Muslims sensibly ask, “Why?” These non-violent Muslims must be whipped into shape for the battle, and time is short.
As Mohammed sat scratching out the Quran, he knew his biggest threat was then, and would be in the future, the followers of Jesus--Christians. Mohammed couldn’t just disregard Jesus, however, for he was too important. So he cleverly managed to make only the followers of Jesus evil while elevating Jesus to the rank of a prophet. The paradox is that the man was good, but his followers were bad. This is an interesting and unexplainable conflict.
Mohammed had to convince people that Jesus was not the Son the God. If Jesus was the promised Messiah, there would have been no need for another prophet and no need for Mohammed because the prophecy would have been fulfilled.
Mohammed referred to Christians often and always with venom and hate. This is just a few of the lines from the Quran that refer to Christians: “Allah will tear Christians apart for ascribing partners to him.” “Allah will taunt the Christians in hell, saying: Where are all my partners that you used to believe in?” “Allah cast fear into the hearts of the disbelieving People of the Scripture. Their home in the Hereafter will be the Fire.”
Mohammed tried to convince the Jews that he was their promised Messiah, but they didn’t believe him. Jews became the hated ones. Jews rejected Mohammed and they quickly felt his wrath. This blind hatred continues to this day. While Islamics hate the Jews, they don’t see the Jews as a collective threat to Islam. Jews are just used for target practice. The war with the Jews is just a prelude for what is to come.
Christians, however, were a lost cause right from the start. Christians had already accepted Jesus as the promised Messiah long before Mohammed was even born. History told Mohammed that Christians were a stubborn bunch. They had been fed to lions, tortured, crucified, beaten, and still, Christianity thrived and grew. Even the powerful Romans could not stop them.
There was a time when Mohammed and his handful of followers hid among Christians from enemies who wanted to kill him. It was during that time that he selectively picked from Christianity those features that he felt suited his purposes and he discarded the rest.
In fact, in the beginning Mohammed was quite fond of Christian monks. He said of them in the beginning of the Quran: "You will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those ... who say: We are Christians; there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly." As time passed, his opinion of the solidly Christian monks and priests changed considerably. Mohammed later told his followers not to listen to them because they would lead them "from Allah's way." Translation: Christians won’t follow me so they are now the enemy.
The seeds of hatred for Christians and Jews were planted early and often in the minds of Muslims.
When many Islamic leaders came to pay homage to Pope John Paul II, the radical element of Islam was outraged. They seemed to say: How dare Islamic leaders show respect to the leader of the enemy! While the pope is the leader of the Catholic Church and not all Christians, many in Islam know that when the final battle begins, Christians will close ranks and they will look to a single leader to guide them. More than likely, it will be the pope. After all, many people believe that every Christian religion is a splinter group of Catholicism. We all believe that Jesus was the Son of God. That belief will unite us.
Islam has no central leader to look to for guidance. It is fragmented and disjointed. In short, Islam has pope-envy.
Islamics know there are not enough Jews in the world to stop them, but Christians, now that is a different story. I have found it fascinating that Mohammed paid little attention to Buddhists and Hindus. Both existed long before Islam. Is it that Mohammed didn’t have much contact with anyone other than Jews and Christians, so they were just ignored by the all-knowing and all-seeing Mohammed? Mohammed seems to have overlooked millions of people who have no desire to follow the teachings of Islam.
Islamic hatred is directed right at the group of people that Mohammed knew would be the people to stand up to Islam and defeat his followers someday: The followers of Jesus Christ. In fact, that defeat has been predicted.
St. Malachy, an Irish Bishop who died in 1148 A.D., left behind a list of the popes to come. He gave them all one identifying line. Historians who have studied St. Malachy’s list have said that he was remarkably accurate. What is unsettling is that there are only two more popes on his list.
The new pope, whose identity is still unknown, has been predicted not only by St. Malachy, but St. Benedict as well. St. Malachy identified the next to last Pope to lead the Catholic Church with the line, “The Glory of the Olive.” St. Benedict stated that this as yet un-elected pope would be from his order, which interestingly is also known as the Olivetans. Frankly, I don’t see a conflict in their predictions. Both stated that this pope would be the one who would make the stand and lead Christians into the final fight against evil--a fight that they predicted Christianity will win.
Centuries ago, Mohammed heard a voice in his head. Whether it was his own voice he heard or that of someone--or something--else, we do not know. What is obvious is that the warning was clear: Beware of the Christians.
I have no doubt that Islamic leaders will be watching to see who is chosen to lead the world’s Catholics and perhaps, ultimately, all Christians. I am sure they are hoping that a weak, liberal pope will take the reins of the only real threat to Islam. A weak pope will allow the decadent West to move even farther from the teachings of Christ.
I also have no doubt that this will not happen. If the cardinals make the wrong choice, it will be corrected just as quickly as it was when they made the wrong choice prior to Pope John Paul II. Humbled, the cardinals will return to bury yet another pope and then pick the correct man that is destined to be pope.
If the end-time is coming, and I have no idea if it is, and the duel prediction of two saints is true, the dye is already cast. The future is already in motion around us and it will be up to the followers of Christ to face the followers of Mohammed. How long it will take and how many will die, I have no idea but I have no doubt as to the outcome. God cast out the devil once. He will do it again, with, or without us.
Comments: dickens502003@yahoo.com
btt
Scholars Scrutinize the Koran's Origin: (snip)
http://www.corkscrew-balloon.com/02/03/1bkk/04b.html
"For example, the famous passage about the virgins is based on the word hur, which is an adjective in the feminine plural meaning simply "white." Islamic tradition insists the term hur stands for "houri," which means virgin, but Mr. Luxenberg insists that this is a forced misreading of the text. In both ancient Aramaic and in at least one respected dictionary of early Arabic, hur means "white raisin."
Mr. Luxenberg has traced the passages dealing with paradise to a Christian text called Hymns of Paradise by a fourth-century author. Mr. Luxenberg said the word paradise was derived from the Aramaic word for garden and all the descriptions of paradise described it as a garden of flowing waters, abundant fruits and white raisins, a prized delicacy in the ancient Near East. In this context, white raisins, mentioned often as hur, Mr. Luxenberg said, makes more sense than a reward of sexual favors..."
Did I ever tell you the joke about the three arabs and a camel?
Sure, Mohammed rejected Jesus as the Son of God, but so did the Jews. At Jamnia, in 90 AD, the rabbis ordered Jews to curse the name of Jesus of Narazreth for all generations. That is conveniently "forgotten" nowadays.
Chirstianity was not united when it came to resisting Islam. Most of the Crusades ended up plundering and killing other Christians. When the Orthodox Christians resisted the Ottomans, the Catholics sat and did nothing -- until the Turks showed up before Vienna.
Grammatically and historically incorrect. Welcome aboard.
bump for later read
No doubt. Spot-on indeed. But there is a difference between what Judaism teaches and what Christianity teaches, too. Almost as big a difference as between Islam and Christianity. The God of Judaism is not everyone's God, but theirs, and he is not full of kindness and love for all. Their God kills -- in drones. It's night and day, whether it's Islam or Judaism.
There are many differences between Judaism and Islam...but I'll just mention a few obvious ones.
Judaism is practiced by "choice" and they have the freedom to walk away or reject it without their heads being chopped off.
Jews aren't threatening to take over the world and force ALL to practice their religion and they aren't flying airplanes into buildings to kill off all the infidels.
Judaism is NOT a threat to the safety and security of this Country! Can you say THAT about Islam?
I agree with appalachian_dweller that satan is the author of the koran.
As for your observations, (1) Islam is also practiced by choice, as all religions are. In fact, "becoming" a Muslim simply requires affirming that Allah is the (only) God and that Mohamed is his prophet, three times, and believe it.
(2) Judaism is practiced by less than 25 million people on earth. It is really a very small religion numbers-wise. American Jewish community is 2 or 3 % of the total population -- maybe 5 million. In Israel's 6.8 million people, about 5.2 million (77%) are Jewish by religion. All in all, in a world of almost 2 billion Christians and over 1 billion Muslims, Judaism is prominent only because it is at the root of both of these religions.
(3) Jews used terrorist tactics against the British, killing both the military and civilians in the process. So, it's not that they are "above" that; it simply means they have no need for it.
(4) Islam is a threat because of its numbers. Let's not forget that we as a country supported Bosnian and Kosovo Muslims and have made it possible for the extreme Islamic operatives to gain a foothold in that part of Europe. Apparently, our attitude towards Islamic threat is mixed: we maintain cordial relationships with all sorts of undemocratic Islamic regimes, one of which -- Saudi Arabia -- is a cesspool of Islamic radicalism.
Man, I hope and pray you're right.
Islam is a threat because of its numbers.
Islam is a threat because it is a murderous cult that wants to dominate the world. The fact that it is growing so rapidly just makes it an imminent threat that must be taken seriously, exposed and destroyed. (IMHO)
We will in fact find that our political correctness and our tolerance will become our undoing.
I posted a similar thought on a thread yesterday!
I will repeat again...the ACLU and the leftist liberals are as much an enemy of this Country as Islam is.
The Muslims claim that the Christians distorted the New Testament and likewise that the Jews distorted the Torah.
So they feel free to discount any inconvenient citations.
And just how do you propose this should be done?
Yes, that's the same technique that everyone uses when there is a verse/command they don't like.
First off - let me say I have known and worked with and liked personally many Muslims and that while I haven't read the Quran, I have done some reading on Islam written by Muslims. Those writings were positive toward Islam, I read with an open mind thinking Islam wasn't necesarily bad, just that it had some bad followers. After reading that,I subsequently changed my mind - and although there are some aspects which are OK, I think the basic tenets of the religion are deeply flawed and potentially dangerous. Unfortunately, we've only seen some of this potential danger realised - there's a lot more scary potential left untapped. So in summation, I don't like Islam, at all.
On the other hand... I don't agree that "our tolerance" will be our undoing. Rather than taking a religious stance, I rather support the freedoms and liberties that Western society has - some of this the result of Enlightenment thinking, some of this the result of the Protestant struggle.
When we deny liberties to others, we deny them to ourselves. If we support the extension of fundamentalist Christian views onto society at large (e.g. denying others choices based on someone else's doctrine), then we are giving aid and succor to fundamentalist Islam.
I see two distinct, but entangled threats to my liberties and freedoms. 1. The growing tide of fundamentalist Islam. 2. The reactionary elements of the Christian right who seek to deny me many of the same liberties that fundamentalist Islam would, e.g. free speech, freedom to live my life largely by my own moral code (within the law), freedom to NOT worship and freedom to seek the truth as I see it based on science and empirical, rational objectivity.
I was hoping you had the answer to that one!
It's late...how about we pick this up tomorrow...unless someone else solves it tonight!
I have had this debate with a FRiend here and I do understand your position. I agree with you more than you think.
In what ways are Christians attempting to deny you free speech,freedom Not to worship etc?
As a Christian I have NO problem with any of the things you mentioned in point #2 of your post.
As for Islam you said; we've only seen some of this potential danger realized - there's a lot more scary potential left untapped.
So I'm trying to understand your position? If we have a known enemy of this Country, we are to "tolerate" it, because its citizens don't want to lose their own civil liberties? I may have completely misunderstood what you were saying, and if so I apologize.
One thing I do know...if Islam accomplishes what it has set out to do, this Country will become a dhimmi Nation, or worse, and we won't have to worry about civil liberties... we won't have any liberties. That, is what I want to prevent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.