Friday, November 21, 2014

Question Whose Authority?

An interesting article from about authority in America. This follows this post about the direction of America. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.
I am leaving TWITTER SOON. Please continue to follow me here.

Question Whose Authority?

Printer-friendly version

Questioning authority has been a human activity for a long time. But have you ever wondered just whose authority should be questioned?

1968— The vehicle ahead of you in the university town traffic is a Volkswagen microbus that sputters and weaves away from the traffic light. Out the driver's window a whiff of odd-smelling, unhealthy smoke wafts its way back to your nostrils.
Psychedelic paintings of flowers, long-haired men and glazed-eyed girls bedeck the sides, but the item that catches your eye is the bumper sticker bearing the mantra of the college-age subculture of the hippie era: "Question Authority."
2005— The vehicle ahead of you in traffic is an old Volvo. It doesn't drive any straighter, but it doesn't sport the weird paintings of the driver's VW microbus of the '60s. Still the bumper sticker proclaims the same student-now-professor's motto: "Question Authority."
But just what do you mean, question authority?
"Question Authority" as a motto in the 1960s and today means to challenge traditional authority—of the government, corporate and religious "establishment" and particularly to question the authority of God and the Bible. For decades this philosophy has epitomized the dominant force within higher education and the culture of the bulk of America's and the rest of the world's universities. Increasingly, it has trickled down to secondary and even elementary schools.
Enter college or university and your mind and moral values will certainly face the onslaught of this aggressive mind-set. Enter the halls of higher academia and you enter a cultural and moral war zone.
How solidly grounded are you in the true culture of the Bible right now? How will you fare after four years of college? Want to obtain a useful education and remain spiritually strong? Then you'll need to get a different bumper sticker.
Hippies, sex and drugs
A portion of the 1960s and early 1970s youth viewed themselves as a generation in rebellion. They spawned acid rock music and all its subsequent versions as angry battle hymns for their rebellious mood, spirit and actions, including the antigovernment and anti-Vietnam War riots of the late '60s.
But another, darker rebellion fueled what came to be known as the hippie movement: the drug and sexual revolution. It forged acceptance within mainstream culture of the recreational use and abuse of mind-altering drugs—a cultural character of the youth of every decade since.
The sexual revolution was also called the "free-love movement" —but read "lust" for "love" to understand the real meaning. This rebellion attacked God's law of sexual morality. It gave us bad news galore: soaring divorce rates for those who bothered to marry, social acceptance of unmarried couples living together and the many miseries of multitudes of unwed single mothers.
Aided by the militant feminist movement and other dark forces in society, the hippie movement has brought us today to a frontal attack on traditional marriage and the social acceptance of virtually any form of sexual perversion.
This profound cultural sea change came from following a 1960s proverb: "Think for yourself and question authority." It was coined by American psychologist, author and advocate of the psychedelic drug and sex culture Timothy Leary, who provided the voice of the misguided, odious bumper sticker message.
The shapers and molders of today's college professors wanted their students to question all forms of traditional authority, but specifically to question the authority of the Bible and the existence of God.
The April 8, 1966, cover of Time magazine echoed this approach with what was then a shocking headline: "Is God Dead?" The cover article referenced the proclamation of late 19th-century philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who adamantly proclaimed, "God is dead."
If you don't know who Nietzsche was, you will. He was perhaps the key foundational thinker for what became the hippie subculture and for much of higher education today. The "God is dead" thinking is the core of the "question authority" movement.
Think for yourself
When the politically correct educators in college culture today tell you to "think for yourself," be advised— they don't mean it. As a vertical thinker using your sure knowledge of God's existence and His law, if you thought for yourself, you would see right through their faulty arguments advocating all sorts of sinful behavior.
As the great King David of old sang to God in his youth: "You, through Your commandments, make me wiser than my enemies; for they are ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers, for Your testimonies are my meditation" (Psalm:119:98-99).
Many of your teachers and professors view themselves as the enlightened ones and view you, the true Christian, as the gullible, shackled, restricted and foolish one. They have much to learn!
A blatant statement comes from a Web site of a 21st-century advocate for the nonbiblical, postmodern, liberal lifestyle. His claim for the course he teaches summarizes the bumper sticker only too well:
"In this course, we will explore challenges to authoritarianism and work towards the creation of the 'Question Authority Coalition and Education Project' . . . We will evolve new statements for public dissemination. We will leave the class prepared to soundly thrash the Bible thumpers while defending their freedom to be stoopid" (
But we must ask this: Who made this world's postmodern college professors boss? No one did. As rude a shock as it may be to many of them, they are not the governors of our morality, arbiters of our faith or the gurus of our biblically guided opinions.
There is One who is our "Boss"—and He died for our sins and the sins of our teachers and classmates to become that Boss—or Lord and Teacher (John:13:14-15). He has set you and me a perfect example—that we should think as He thought and do as He did.
The true values
As vertical thinkers, we strive to see things as God sees them. We shape our opinions with the objective truth of God's law and Word. Our motto could be expressed as "Recapture true values." And here is a basic list of key true values taught in the Bible that you will hear questioned and challenged during your higher education.
God is sacred. Atheistic evolution was a critical first step in creating a culture of sexual and behavioral abandon. Their thinking is: If there is no God, then there is no moral law, no evil and no guilt. In short—anything goes. A related concept, the practice of elevating "mother earth" or "the environment" to be virtually and actually worshipped, is also wrong. Yet that's exactly what many militant environmental activists do.
Human life is sacred— as clearly taught by the Sixth Commandment, "You shall not murder" (Exodus:20:13). Abortion and euthanasia are in direct conflict with divine law. Likewise, mankind is the only life form made in the image of God (Genesis:1:26-28). Thus, to elevate animal life to be equal in value to human life is wrong. Yet that's what militant animal rights activism stands for.
Marriage is sacred— as in one man married to one woman. In Christ's own words: "He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh' . . . Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate" (Matthew:19:4-5). Anything other than the divine formula for marriage is wrong.
Human sexuality is sacred— and that sexuality is to be expressed only in divinely sanctioned marriage, not before or outside of marriage. Sexual expression is expressly forbidden by God in any variant (1 Corinthians:6:18-20), except within the divine institution of marriage, and there He commands it (7:2-5)!
Divine law is sacred— and is called "holy and just and good" (Romans:7:12). Yet higher education "experts" ridicule God's law as evil, arbitrary and restrictive. And what do they propose as rules for society? Answer: Their own law of political correctness. But, we ask again, who made them boss so that they should get to make the laws? From where is their moral superiority over the rest of mankind?
Truth is sacred. As a prudent, dedicated and faithful young person, you are being set apart (sanctified) by the truth of God's Word (John:17:17). Truth is truly objective. But beware—today's philosophy of "postmodernism" says that truth is relative, that each person has his own "truth" and that each one's truth is as good as another's truth. Wrong!
So why is the truth of the Bible considered "stoopid" as compared to the postmodern professor's truth? It's like saying all men are created equal, but some are "more equal" than others!
The history of our time told 2,000 years ago
How does a culture lose its moral compass so completely? How can those paid to educate young minds so lose their grip on true wisdom and common sense? Answer: Question Authority—as in reject and deny divine authority.
God gave one great educator, Paul the apostle, the insight to chronicle long ago how a culture collapses. The last half of Romans 1 tells how people "suppress the truth in unrighteousness," and bring about a dark age of immorality (verses 18-32). Here is the step-by-step formula:
1. Deny the existence of God.
2. Deny the authority of God—say there is no objective moral law to tell right from wrong.
3. Make new gods of oneself and nature.
4. Promote "freedom" for any kind of sexual activity in opposition to marriage, which God created and established for our good.
5. Exert tyrannical ridicule and pressure on any who question the new, postmodern authority.
6. Suffer the consequences of sexually transmitted epidemics and the pain of murderous misery launched by nations with no moral conscience.
The result is that everybody does what is right in his or her own eyes. True values are categorically rejected. And today, leading this charge into an age of futility and tyranny is a devastating proportion of higher education. As this reprobate culture gains momentum, there will be only one solution. And that good news is the soon-coming, "vertical" event when Jesus Christ descends from heaven to salvage and save humanity!
Question whose authority?
In the meantime, you have an education to obtain and a life to live. Navigate your way through school via a close relationship with God through daily prayer and a clear knowledge of His law in your mind from the study of the Bible. Totally defeat false moral arguments with the power of divine authority and godly logic.
And when you see the next postmodern, professorial "Question Authority" bumper sticker, create a new one in your own mind: "Question Whose Authority?" Question theirs. VT
Nobody has commented yet. Be the first to kick off the discussion!
Login/Register to post comments

The Lawless President, Salting The Fields

A timely post about from about the lawless president. This follows this post about Obamacare and Medicaid.

You can follow me here.

The Lawless President, Salting The Fields

Thursday, November 20, 2014  |  posted by Hugh Hewitt

Pete Wehner is exactly right: “Mr. Obama is about to commit an act of constitutional infamy. This is a stain that will stay with him.”
Wehner also points to another of the Beltway’s very smart, very restrained observers, Ron Fornier of The National Journal, who said of the president in a discussion not of the immigration lawlessness but of the breakdown and patchwork fixes concerning Obamacare that “the central attribute you have to have as any leader, in any walk of life and certainly in government is trust and this president has destroyed the credibility of his administration, himself and government itself.”
Lawless.  Infamous. Untrustworthy.  Echoes of how 1974 must have sounded to folks living in the nation’s capital.
Contrast those descriptions with that given by New York Times essayist Mark Leibovich to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie this very day: “[Christie] has a preternatural talent for appearing blunt and insistent when he is being cute and obfuscating. He is also a savvy tactician.”
When I was a young lad, I caddied. $4 a round. $6 for a double.  Three rounds a day on the weekends.  With tips you could make $25 in a day. Not bad for a 12 year old in 1968.
But there were jobs which, with sufficient seniority, you’d skip, even if it was the last bag of the day.  Crazy Lou –who was given to every newbie because he yelled at you.  A particular doctor who played worse then than I do now.  And Mr. D.
Mr. D was a cheater.  It was ignominious to be associated with him.  Everyone knew he was a cheater.  Everyone he played with.  The pro shop staff.  And of course the caddies.  Everybody knew.  He was disreputable.
So Mr. Obama has become, and so he will inalterably remain after 8 PM tonight.  And not just to the Wehners and Forniers inside the Beltway, or me and my colleagues on the airwaves, or the GOP opposition within Congress.
No, Mr. Obama will be known to be a cheater and a fraud to his own party base, and especially to the people he purports to help.  The people in the country illegally will know shortly that this stunt tonight does not help them and may in fact hurt them –badly.  The collision of what is in essence a letter of recommendation from the president to employers with their genuine worries about liabilities under  state law and about their fiduciary duties to their customers is going to be instant, and not to the good of the illegal population.  Employers are going to flee the president’s testimonial that, if he were king of the forest, not queen, not duke, not earl, he’d let this person have a green card.  Because he’s not king, he cannot bless this person’s employment in the real world of tort liability and state law.  He cannot solve the issue of Social Security and unemployment insurance withholding.  What he can –and will do tonight– is mark the illegal as someone not worth the trouble of hiring.
The president simply cannot bestow a green card.  Just a blessing.  An Obama blessing.  The blessing of a cheater.
The president’s lawless act will have the apparently contradictory impact of both making life harder for “those in the shadows” by increasing the reluctance of employers to hire the obviously illegal, while at the same time attracting millions more north across the fenceless border.  Employers are simply going to be less willing to hire the obviously illegal because of a host of other laws the president cannot change, but the underground and top line messaging of the president’s act will be an amplified “Olly olly oxen free” to the millions who wish they were in America and not living in their own country.
Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu is of course the first and biggest loser.  This assures a much larger turnout in her run-off against Congressman Bill Cassidy on December 6, and they won’t be rushing to support the cheating president’s close friend Mary who couldn’t even get six of her cheating president’s pals to support her on the pipeline vote.
Other losers are those who would see a common sense reform of the immigration laws.  Whatever people think of immigration reform –and I am for it– they don’t much cater to diktats from D.C.’s first citizen as opposed to deals worked out among competing interests.  That the president is an increasingly powerless lame duck makes the insult more pronounced.  “How dare he?” is on not a few minds.  Democratic minds.  Hillaryworld minds.  Hillary’s mind.
Oh there will be golf claps over at MSNBC, and a few of the professional immigration reform activists –those who aren’t serious about getting a real bill with real reform through a Congress that might have done so, which I hope still will do so but which is increasingly unlikely to act because of the risk of rewarding the president’s lawlessness.
That lack of regard of the institutions of the constitutional government we have is why Senator Lindsey Graham and I disagreed about whether the Senate ought to restore the judicial filibuster anytime soon.  (Graham wants the 60 vote rule patched up and put back right away; I want it kept at 50 at least until we see if a GOP president is elected in 2016 so he or she can have two years of 51 vote confirmations of judges. (National Review’s Ed Whelan agrees with the “punish the Democrats” school. )  It will also be why many immigration reform-minded legislators will slam the door now.
“That which gets rewarded gets repeated” will be their mantra.  They know that a “regularization” –not citizenship– of most of the illegal population, preceded by construction of a long, strong, double-sided fence the completion of which triggers a guest worker program and non-citizens status for most of the illegal population is a good thing.  They learned –again– from 2013’s misfire, just as they learned from 2006’s misfire, to seek the middle way between amnesty and continuation of the status quo.  They were in a position to act in early 2015 –until the president’s wrecking ball swings tonight.
That may be the president’s goal in fact, to wholly wreck a modest but effective border fence/regularization/guest worker program.  Good legislation, easily written.  Short, comprehensible, flexible –a political and policy victory for 70% of the people who care.  The president couldn’t have a GOP Congress doing in a couple of months what he could not yammer his way to in six years, so he is preemptively attempting to destroy the common ground on which Republicans and Democrats could walk on this issue: fence/regularization/guest worker program.  President Obama is salting the fields.
And he is setting himself up in his mind for some post-presidency symposia and thunderous applause moments from increasingly hard-left groups.  Fine.  He will veto the Keystone XL: pipeline when it comes his way as well because he’s counting on Mr. Steyer to take care of him come 2017.
That’s where we are: A widespread recognition that the president cheats, and that he dissembles.  He may outright lie tonight –we will see.
But no one not in love with him as family or a close friend knows other than the truth: He is about to do a very, very bad thing, a disfigurement of the Constitution which will lead to future disfigurements.  Wait until the environmentalists learn that a GOP president can suspend enforcement of their beloved if crazy Endangered Species Act.  Wait until all sorts of special interests realize that their special interest legislation can be suspended at a stroke of a pen.
D.C.’s permanent class may feel an involuntary shudder tonight, when it realizes all that they sell –their access and their ability to deliver lines of law in lengthy bills– is at best fragile.  It is a big night for the president, and a disastrous one for the Constitution.

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Make Up Your Mind, America!

An interesting article from about the direction of America. This follows this post about Muslim hostility towards Israel. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.
I am leaving TWITTER SOON. Please continue to follow me here.

Make Up Your Mind, America!

Printer-friendly version

Is America a diverse culture of numerous religions that all worship the same God? Is it a secular or a Christian nation? Keith Ellison ignited an explosion of controversy by choosing the Koran as the book to hold during his ceremonial swearing in to the 110th U.S. Congress. There is an underlying issue involved that you will not read of in the mainstream media: America doesn’t know its identity!

Americans "on the whole [are] ill-bred, provincial, sullen and frightened. They are...susceptible to mere rhetoric and responsive to arguably bogus appeals to values, no matter what the facts" (Clark Judge, "Words That Work,", Jan. 23, 2007, citing Frank Luntz's book by that name).
He wasn't speaking of America's reaction to Keith Ellison's swearing in, but these brutally frank words apply to the controversy swirling around this first Muslim member of the U.S. Congress.
Ellison's announcement that he wished to be sworn in with a copy of the Koran spawned a heated debate in the country about whether that was appropriate or even legal.
Actually, what Ellison was talking about was only a ceremonial act, as the official swearing in occurs as a group in the House Chamber. Congressional representatives who wish to pose for photographs may do so in a later reenactment, and there is no law prohibiting the use of the Koran for this.
Nonetheless, it is an unusual time in American history to want to be sworn in to a government office on a Koran! Why would Ellison do this? "It send a message to the American people," opined columnist and radio host Dennis Prager ("A Response to My Critics—and a Solution,", Dec. 5, 2006).
If that is true, people are hearing different messages. Some see it as an affront to America, whereas others see it as an affirmation of American diversity.
World News and Prophecy has an entirely different take on the issue—that it shows that Americans do not know who they are.
Ellison appeared to sidestep some controversy by choosing a unique copy of the Koran, one that had been owned by Thomas Jefferson, which the former president initialed. The picture of Ellison being sworn in on this Koran by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi drew more media than any similar photo op in the history of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Was it a "PR masterstroke," as some called it, or did choosing Jefferson's copy of the Koran only obscure significant questions?
"It's diversity," say some
Supporting Ellison's decision, Democratic Congressman Jim Moran said that it underscored the fact that Muslim Americans are " integral part of American society. Our country is a melting pot of different cultures and beliefs. This diversity is a strength, not a weakness" (Askia Muhammed, "Rep. Keith Ellison: First Muslim in Congress,", Jan. 20, 2007).
James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute (and brother of pollster John Zogby) echoed the diversity concept, taking a swipe at the congressman's critics: "America's founders had a more profound respect for religious diversity than many of their latter-day disciples."
Zogby also praised Ellison's election to Congress and his choice of the Koran for the ceremonial swearing in. "An African American, descended of slaves, was sworn into the 110th Congress using Thomas Jefferson's own Qur'an. That, if anything, is a great American story. It deserves to be celebrated. It is now part of our nation's history" ("Ellison and the Qur'an—a Great American Story," , Jan. 17, 2007, emphasis added).
"It's a Muslim Trojan horse," say others
Not everyone is celebrating. Opposing views range from calling for Ellison to be barred from the Congress altogether (Judge Roy Moore) to a chorus of warnings that his Muslim beliefs will conflict with the congressman's duties to the United States. Those who researched Ellison's background report that the idea to use Jefferson's Koran wasn't the congressman's. It was the idea of Madhi Bray, executive director of the Muslim American Society, which is the American operation of the radical terrorist Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt.
WorldNet Daily reported on Dec. 6 that "...within days of being elected, Ellison held a workshop on politics for [yet another] group closely affiliated with a radical Islamic school that preaches no Muslim can pledge loyalty to the [U.S.] Constitution or make laws outside the laws of the Quran, which the school's leaders assert is the ‘supreme law' of the land, trumping all man-made laws including the U.S. Constitution" ("Doubts Grow Over Muslim Lawmaker's Loyalty," p. 1).
Ellison met with the group's leader, Omar Ahmad Shahin, later the same day. Shahin lectures at the American Open University, which is known to law enforcement as "Wahhabi Online" (ibid.).
Lastly, the article reported a pattern of Ellison's disregard for U.S. laws, including failure to pay taxes and over 40 parking and traffic tickets. In addition, he's been fined heavily for violating campaign finance regulations.
Zogby slammed those who dare to raise these questions, calling them "ignorant of our nation's history." In fact, Zogby may be the ignorant one, for the reason Jefferson had a Koran wasn't to celebrate diversity. See the inset article, "Jefferson Studies Koran to Fight War on Muslim Terrorists."
However, there truly is a "great American story" behind this issue—although not in the way that James Zogby claims.
"My people," says the Creator God
There is an intriguing parable in Isaiah's prophecy: "The ox knows its owner, and the donkey its master's crib; but Israel does not know, My people do not consider" (Isaiah:1:3). A domestic animal knows its way home to where it is sheltered and fed. However, God said through the prophet, "My people" don't have the sense that a "dumb" animal does! They do not know their owner, that is, their Creator.
Who are God's people in this prophecy? The prophet's message mentioned the Israel of the time, several hundred years before Christ, but it is an end-time prophecy. Who today are included in "My people"? Are Americans among them?
The "celebrate American diversity" crowd would howl in protest at the suggestion, decrying it as too provincial and prejudicial. It excludes many ethnic groups, rather than includes all, which is "the American way."
Yet, that ignores the fact that God Himself narrows matters down by referring to "My people."
"All the great religions worship the same God," continues this diversity reasoning. James Zogby included in his rebuke of Keith Ellison's critics, "If they had taken the time to read this book [the Koran], they would have found, for example, that the God of the Qur'an is the same as the God of the Old and New Testaments" (op. cit., Zogby).
He's wrong! If the same God inspired the Bible and the Koran, the books would be in perfect agreement, rather than forming the basis for a centuries-long conflict that is now sharper than ever!
Nonreligious Americans would take the middle ground, saying the question of whether they are part of "My people" is immaterial, for they do not take religion literally. In spite of the fact that a majority of Americans profess Christianity, this "don't-take-religion-literally" perspective describes most of them.
The "religious view" is wrong
On the other hand, many religious people would say that Americans are part of "My people," because the nation is Christian. If you are a believer, this might sound correct to you, but there is a major flaw in this thinking.
It's viewing "God's people" in a spiritual sense alone. Indeed, God draws people from all ethnic backgrounds into His spiritual Church today, and they are then His people. The apostle Peter verifies this: "But you...who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy" (1 Peter:2:9-10).
However, God is working on two tracks, the first with the spiritual "people of God" and the second with specific physical nations that are also "His people." Most readers will react by saying, "Yeah, that's the Jews, the state of Israel." However, they would be only partially right, for Jews constitute only a fraction of those who are Israel today.
The Jews are the descendants of the ancient Israelite tribe of Judah, which was only one of 12 tribes. For several decades, the 12 tribes were a single kingdom under three monarchs, including the famous biblical David. Yet they split shortly after the reign of another famous king, Solomon, into two kingdoms, Judah and Israel. One large tribe, Joseph, became two (Ephraim and Manasseh), making 13 tribes. Three tribes combined to comprise Judah; 10 combined to become the new kingdom of Israel.
The kingdom of Israel was eventually carried into captivity in the Assyrian Empire—coincidentally, encompassing some of the territory that is modern Iraq. Over the centuries, they migrated across Europe, known to history partly as Scythians. Two of the 10 tribes that wandered eventually became a community or commonwealth of nations and a single, powerful nation. Those unique nations today are the former British Empire (Great Britain and its Commonwealth) and the United States.
Americans need to learn who they are
Think closely about the people Isaiah described. These aren't the godly people later spoken of by Peter, for they don't know God! They are scoundrels, spiritual rogues! The context of that Isaiah prophecy speaks not of people whose hearts and minds are devout, but rather rebellious, corrupt, breaking the divine laws, instead of obeying them.
"Alas, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters! They have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked to anger the Holy One of Israel, they have turned away backward" (Isaiah:1:4).
The purpose of the prophecy is to warn these people that they have forgotten their identity—and with it, their responsibility to their Creator.
Are Americans included in the "My people" of Isaiah:1:3-4? Yes, they are, but not because of a converted heart.
Americans are indeed ignorant of their history, but the lack of knowledge goes far beyond the politically tainted debate of the multicultural left and the religious right. They need to investigate their roots, much as adults who discover they were adopted as children search out their birth parents. They need to embrace their identity and the awesome responsibility it entails.
Trace those roots for yourself, both from the Bible and from history, using our booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy. WNP
Nobody has commented yet. Be the first to kick off the discussion!
Login/Register to post comments

Mitch McConnell's Time to Shine ‏

An interesting article from about calling on Mitch McConnell and John Boehner to respond to the President's Executive Amnesty. This follows this post about shutting down the government to stop Executive Amnesty. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
I am leaving TWITTER SOON. Please continue to follow me here.

Mitch McConnell's Time to Shine‏

Yesterday, we learned that President Obama is going to announce his plans for executive amnesty this evening in a live address to the nation from the White House.

After the American people soundly rejected his policies on November 4th, he has the audacity to address us in prime time fashion to announce his plans to defiantly enact executive amnesty.

This is the moment we anticipated happening.
The American people have chosen a new path - one in which Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have been trusted to lead. Today is their moment to step up to that task.

Call to Action:
Today we are asking Senate Majority Leader-Elect Mitch McConnell to come out publicly - before the President addresses the nation - to announce that if the President moves forward against the will of the American people the Senate will reject every single nomination or appointment that the President puts forward for the next two years - except for critical national security positions.

Likewise, we are asking Speaker John Boehner to come out publicly and commit to not funding any portion of the President's plan.
This is the moment the American people feared and this is the reason why Republicans were given control of Congress. Let's call today and encourage them to do the right thing!
 (844) 397-2146​
 Send a Tweet
 Send an Email
 (844) 397-2152
 Send a Tweet
 Send an Email

In Liberty,
Jenny Beth Martin & Tea Party Patriots National Support Team

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Why Is Israel the Focus of Muslim Hostility?

An interesting article from about Muslim hostility towards Israel. This follows this post about the claims of the Pope's authority. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.
I am leaving TWITTER SOON. Please continue to follow me here.

Why Is Israel the Focus of Muslim Hostility?

At the heart of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East is ongoing hatred among Muslim nations toward Israel and the Jewish people. What are the underlying causes? 

Why Is Israel the Focus of Muslim Hostility?
Source: Wikimedia
The conflict between the Israelis and surrounding Muslim nations has been raging since the Jewish state's inception —and the origins go back much further. Today the hostility is growing in openness and intensity, making the prospects for peace in the Middle East dim.
The Arab Spring uprisings throughout the region are allowing the wider expression of popular sentiments among the Muslim masses—inflaming the ancient animosity.
While not all Muslims feel antipathy toward Jews and Israel, there is widespread dislike and resentment by the majority, as repeatedly borne out in polls and surveys. The Pew Global Attitudes Project survey conducted last summer found that almost no one in the Muslim Middle East thinks positively toward Israel and the Jewish people.
"Ratings of Jews are dismal in the seven predominantly Muslim nations surveyed" (Pew Research Center, Common Concerns About Islamic Extremism: Muslim-Western Tensions Persist, July 21, 2011, p. 22). In the six of these nations that are in the Middle East or adjacent to it, only 2 to 4 percent express favorable opinions of Jews.
It is amazing that the small nation of Israel, composed of only about 8,000 square miles of land—roughly two times the size of Rhode Island—generates so much ill feeling.
Israel's territory is only about one-sixth of one percent that of the 22 hostile Arab nations that are 640 times her size. And they have 45 times more people than Israel—340 million Arabs versus 7.7 million Israeli citizens (more than a million of whom are themselves Arab).
Yet fiery rhetoric calling for the destruction of Israel can be heard in political speeches and mosque sermons throughout the Muslim world, from Iran to Libya and in other places around the globe—including Western nations.
An example of the growing hostility toward Israel can be found across its southern border in Egypt with the increasing influence there of the Muslim Brotherhood. This organization has sired 86 branches across the Islamic world since the 1920s. The more dominant ones are in Egypt, Jordan, Syria and the Palestinian territories (the branch in the latter being the terror group Hamas, which now runs Gaza).
Comments like the following from Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Kamal al Halbawi, made while speaking at an official visit to Iran in July 2011, are all too common: "Both nations [Iran and Egypt] underline the necessity for Muslim nations to maintain solidarity and unity to annihilate this cancerous tumor (Israel) . . . Every night when I go to bed, I pray to wake up the next day to see Israel is wiped off the map" (quoted by "ADL [Anti-Defamation League] Report: Muslim Brotherhood's Open Hostility to Israel Could Play Destabilizing Role In Egypt And Region,", Sept. 19, 2011).
Let's consider the root causes of such widespread Muslim animosity against Israel.

Indoctrination and propaganda

Conflict between Muslims Jews, and Christians has been around since Islam began in the seventh century A.D. But it's been exacerbated in recent times by an indoctrination of religious intolerance and anti-Semitic propaganda in the Muslim world.
The indoctrination is led by Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam, which has been asserting itself as the world's authoritative voice for the religion. An important avenue for its gaining influence has been through Saudi charities funding Wahhabi madrassas (schools) and mosques in many nations (Wahhabism being an extremist form of Islam embraced by terror groups like al-Qaeda).
An illustration of the ongoing indoctrination is furnished by a 2006 study by theCenter for Religious Freedom and the Institute for Gulf Affairs: "As demonstrated by excerpts from the dozen current Islamic studies textbooks analyzed in this report, the Saudi public school religious curriculum continues to propagate an ideology of hate toward the 'unbeliever,' that is, Christians, Jews, Shiites, Sufis, Sunni Muslims who do not follow Wahhabi doctrine, Hindus, atheists and others.
"This ideology is introduced in a religion textbook in the first grade and reinforced and developed in following years of the public education system, culminating in the twelfth grade, where a text instructs students that it is a religious obligation to do 'battle' against infidels in order to spread the faith" ("Saudi Arabia's Curriculum of Intolerance," 2006, p. 10).
That's what the study found after the Saudi Arabian government said it had reformed its school system and textbooks to be more tolerant. The study goes on to provide numerous excerpts that make the point, like these from an eighth-grade schoolbook:
"'They [the Jews] are the people of the Sabbath, whose young people God turned into apes, and whose old people God turned into swine to punish them.' 'As cited in Ibn Abbas: The apes are Jews, the keepers of the Sabbath; while the swine are the Christian infidels of the communion of Jesus'" (p. 24).
With such ideology exported to madrassas around the world, a great many Muslims everywhere have been using textbooks with the same perspective and approach.
One might wonder why the Saudi government would sponsor the radicalization of Islamic education. It appears the strategy has been to direct the hatred of the native populace toward Israel and Western nations and away from dissatisfaction with the local national government, which might lead to rebellion.
The same has been true in other Muslim states, where government-controlled education and press have incited populations against the Israelis, Americans and other Westerners. Again, the focus is thereby taken away from dissatisfaction with local regimes.
The Arab Spring has brought the focus back on local government, but the instilled misperceptions and hatred of Israel and the West remain (with many wanting to strike out in contrast to the inaction of past regimes).
On top of the damage of formal education in this regard is a steady onslaught of media propaganda poisoning Muslim minds against the Jewish people from a young age. Arab cartoons and other children's shows typically portray Jews as evil and bloodthirsty, and some present suicide bombing against them as heroic. A TV show for Palestinian children was hosted by a Mickey Mouse–style character calling for war against the Israelis—until he was depicted as being killed on the show by "terrorist" Jews!
Such incessant indoctrination and propaganda has had a real impact. In the Arab countries surveyed by the Pew Research Center, large majorities of Muslims who say some religions are more prone to violence consider Judaism to be the most violent religion by 77 to 97 percent (p. 23). This despite the fact that it's the Jewish Israelis who've been repeatedly attacked by Muslims and Muslims themselves who have killed hundreds of thousands of other Muslims in conflicts and wars during recent decades!
Add to all this a left-leaning media in the West that looks on the Jewish state as a past partner in perceived U.S. imperialism abroad, as a nation basing its right to exist on what they see as the antiquated and foolish notion of biblical authority, as an "occupier" and "oppressor" of the Palestinians, and as the intractable main obstacle to Middle East peace, and the hatred of Israel seems further justified to many of the Muslims in Western nations.
Then there's the semblance of legitimacy to condemning the Jewish state lent by the United Nations General Assembly, which has been anti-Israel for years. This body represents the nations of the world, but many of them are Islamic and thuggish dictatorships trying to direct focus away from their own atrocities and misrule—Israel providing a convenient target of scorn and censure.

Distortion of the refugee issue

No doubt, the principal issue over which the state of Israel has been criticized is that of the Palestinians—the refusal to allow refugees their "right of return" and the "occupation" of Palestinian lands both garnering region-wide and worldwide sympathy. Israel's supposed recalcitrance is blamed for the ongoing failures of the peace process—leading to widespread condemnation and bitterness.
Yet here, too, propaganda is a major factor. Ignored is the fact that this situation exists because the Arab states attempted to destroy the state of Israel at its founding in 1948 and later in the Six-Day War of 1967.
The League of Arab States, or Arab League, was formed in 1945—mainly to unite Arab countries in opposition to the emergence of a Jewish state. Then, in 1948, five nations of the newly formed Arab League took up arms against the state of Israel following its U.N.-mandated independence.
Arabs in territory allotted to Israel who joined the invaders at that time ended up fleeing or were driven out. They became refugees in surrounding Arab states, and these states have refused them settlement, preferring to keep them in refugee camps to maintain political pressure against Israel—to get the Israelis to accept their right to return.
The Israelis, however, recognize this is a strategy to destroy the Jewish state by flooding Israel with millions of descendants of those original Arab refugees who will use Israel's democratic form of government to transform it into just another Arab state.
Following the Arabs' blockade of Israel that led to the 1967 war, the Israelis took possession of the Jordanian territory known as the West Bank, of the Syrian territory of the Golan Heights, and of the Egyptian territories of Gaza and Sinai (eventually returning Sinai and withdrawing from Gaza). Besides the fact that the West Bank is really the ancient Israelite homeland of Samaria and Judah, the Israelis took over and have maintained control of this territory principally as a defensive measure—since without this buffer territory Israel is less than 10 miles wide at some points.
It's interesting to note that it was in 1964, well before the 1967 war, that the Arab League established the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), whose charter states that "the liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national duty." This was before Israel's acquisition of the West Bank and other territories in the Six-Day War. While Israel had made small territorial gains in 1948, it's important to see that in Arab eyes, the intended area of "Palestine liberation" was the entire area of the state of Israel.
And just who has and has not been willing to negotiate? Following the 1967 War, the Arab League issued the Khartoum Resolution with its "Three No's": "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it."
For many years the PLO under its longtime chairman Yasser Arafat was basically a terrorist organization. After he and the group were eventually legitimized in the sight of the Western world, negotiations were entered into. But these did not lead to peace—only more intifadas or uprisings.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered extreme concessions, eventually 91 percent of the West Bank, but it was not enough for Arafat. It's been speculated that Palestinian leaders did not then actually want self-governance, as they would've needed to spend the large amounts of aid sent to them on national infrastructure and could no longer blame the plight of their people on the Israelis.
Not much changed when Mahmoud Abbas succeeded Arafat as president of the Palestinian Authority. Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recalls a personal one-on-one meeting in 2008 with then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert:
"Olmert started talking again. 'I know what he [Abbas] needs. He needs something on refugees and on Jerusalem. I'll give him enough land, maybe something like 94 percent with swaps. I have an idea about Jerusalem. There will be two capitals, one for us in West Jerusalem and one for the Palestinians in East Jerusalem'" ( No Higher Honor: A Memoir of My Years in Washington, 2011, p. 651).
In addition, Olmert was willing to put an international body in charge of holy sites and allow 5,000 Arab refugees to settle in Israel.
Rice says that while Abbas started negotiations right away, his insistence that a larger number of refugees and their descendants be allowed to settle in Israel under the right of return became a deal breaker.
Over the last few years the Palestinian Authority has, with one short exception, avoided direct talks with Israel. Instead, this past September Abbas took a request for statehood to the United Nations, effectively bypassing the direct negotiations required by the 1993 Oslo accords signed by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
So the idea that Israel is the hindrance to peace negotiations really doesn't hold water.

A worldview of expansion with no retreat

Key to all this is a critical factor many fail to understand. Underlying the Palestinian conflict and Muslim attitudes toward Israel is the fact that the very existence of the Jewish state is intolerable from the perspective of many Muslims.
The establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 and the ensuing defeat of the invading Arab armies was seen by the Arabs as a disastrous humiliation—known as the Nakba or "catastrophe." Later defeats and the fact that Israel still exists magnify the disgrace.
Yet it was not a mere nationalist humiliation. This was a catastrophe because it was a shaming affront to their religion—striking at the very heart of Islam.
What needs to be realized is that, in Islamic theology, the world is divided into two great spheres of influence. One is Dar al-Salaam, meaning "Abode of Peace," a term used to describe Muslim-controlled lands (sometimes also called Dar al-Islam, meaning "Abode of Islam").
The other is Dar al-Harb, meaning "Abode of Struggle" or "Abode of War." This term is used to denote all other lands. By this very terminology, all non-Muslim lands are defined as areas where Islam must struggle or war so that these areas may be converted to Dar al-Islam, lands ruled by Islam—the ultimate objective being the entire world brought under the rule of Islam.
It's important to understand that, in the thinking of millions of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims, it is an abomination for any land that was once Dar al-Islam, territory controlled by Muslims, to become Dar al-Harb, "Abode of Struggle," in which Muslims have lost control and seen it revert back to rule by non-Muslims (infidels). This goes directly against the Koran and other teachings of Muhammad, which avow that ultimately the entire world is to be under the control of Islam (see "Does the Koran Promote Peace and Cooperation?").
Because these concepts are so foreign to Western thinking, these distinctions are lost on most Westerners—and, tragically, particularly on their governments and leaders. Yet it explains why, in more than a dozen nations across the globe, Muslims are waging war along the edges of the Islamic world to convert more lands to Dar al-Islam.

Israeli territory claimed to belong to Muslims

It also explains why most Muslims in general, and Arabs in particular, are fundamentally opposed to the existence of a Jewish state of Israel. They don't want a two-state solution, unless it is only as a temporary measure. They want a single Palestinian state "from the sea to the sea" as they define it—from the Dead Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, with no place for Israel at all.
Israel, you see, is an "infidel" country sitting on land that was once Dar al-Islam, the land of Islam, and thus its existence is an abomination. We can see this ideology plainly set forth in the charter of the Islamic Resistance Movement, better known as the terrorist group Hamas (the same group that controls Gaza, from which rockets and mortar shells are regularly fired into Israeli towns):
"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine [which in Hamas' perspective includes not just Gaza and the West Bank but the entire state of Israel] is an Islamic Waqf [inalienable endowment] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up.
"Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day. This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Moslem generations till Judgement Day?
"This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Moslems have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement...This Waqf remains as long as earth and heaven remain. Any procedure in contradiction to Islamic Sharia, where Palestine is concerned, is null and void" ("Hamas Covenant," Aug. 18, 1988, Article 11).
Given this underlying ideology, it's no wonder that the Arab nations formed the Arab League to oppose the emergence of the Israeli state. This explains why the failure to prevent its establishment was viewed as a humiliating catastrophe. And we can clearly see why the "liberation of Palestine" is considered an Arab national duty. After all, the validity of Islam itself is at stake!
But there's more to it still. Worse than being a tiny infidel nuisance, Israel is a major power in the region—largely because of support from the West, particularly the United States and Great Britain. Indeed, Israel is seen as an agent of the United States in the Muslim Middle East. The Jewish state and Britain have been referred to as "the Little Satans," while America is labeled "the Great Satan." Thus, the Great Satan is perceived as having a foothold amidst Dar al-Islam.
According to a recent Zogby International poll conducted in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates—sponsored by the Arab American Institute Foundation—"when asked to choose 'the greatest obstacle to peace and stability in the Middle East,' once again the 'occupation of Palestinian lands' and 'U.S. interference in the Arab world' rank as the top two concerns" ("Arab Attitudes, 2011," p. 5). Probably the real concern is these posing a threat to Islam—upsetting the Dar al-Salaam ("Abode of Peace").
Indeed, as the United States and Britain are predominantly Christian, their interference in the Middle East and presumed use of Israel as a proxy are seen by many Muslims as, effectively, a continuation of the Crusades (fought a thousand years ago between professing Christians and Muslims for control of the Holy Land). Yet, while the Christian powers are next in line to be dealt with in the thinking of many, Israel, because of proximity and its occupation of formerly Muslim territory, is seen as the immediate threat in need of elimination.
All this is a major part of why Israel has had to fight five wars for survival in a little over 60 years of existence and suffers from continuing terrorist bombings and rocket attacks. And it's a big reason Israel's continued existence is an ongoing intolerable disgrace to fundamentalist Muslims around the world, with a number perpetually calling for it to be wiped from the map.
Yet the irrational hatred goes even deeper.

Ancient family feud and evil spirit influence

The origins of the strife we see today between many Islamic Arab people and the Jews in Israel can actually be traced back nearly 4,000 years.
The Bible records that God appeared to a man named Abram, later renamed Abraham, and promised him a son whose descendants would become a great nation. When his wife Sarai could not afterward conceive a child, she suggested that Abram take her Egyptian servant girl Hagar as a surrogate mother. And Hagar bore a son named Ishmael.
God gave Hagar this prophetic promise: "I will so increase your descendants that they will be too numerous to count . . . You are now with child and you will have a son. You shall name him Ishmael ['God hears'], for the Lord has heard of your misery.
"He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers" (Genesis:16:10-12, New International Version, 1984, emphasis added throughout).
Some 12 to 13 years after Ishmael was born, God appeared again to Abram with another promise: "As for Sarai your wife...I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her'" (verses 15-16).
God changed her name to Sarah. She had been barren all her life and was past normal childbearing age. Through God's miraculous intervention she bore a son, Isaac. His descendants would become the 12 tribes of the nation of Israel, which included the tribe of Judah—predominately today's Jews.
Ishmael, God said, would father 12 princes and become a "great nation" (verse 20), though God's greater blessings and covenant would be with Isaac. The Arabs acknowledge Ishmael as their progenitor.
Ishmael and his mother were eventually sent away from the family. And another divide in the family came when Isaac's son Jacob (later renamed Israel) schemed against his brother Esau or Edom. The divisions in the family—between Israelites and Ishmaelites and between Israelites and Edomites—would persist until the last days, with hostility increasing, as God foretold.
For more details on what happened and how this family division has continued over the ages, request or download our free booklet The Middle East in Bible Prophecy .
And besides the family dynamic and specific prophecies God has given, another underlying reason for the hatred of Israel among Muslim nations is no doubt the same one that exists for virulent anti-Semitism around the world. As the level of hatred and antagonism is completely irrational, we should recognize in it a spiritual cause.
The world is ruled over and deceived by a spirit being, Satan the devil, and his demonic cohorts, who hate God. And they have incited people to hatred against God's people throughout history. Moreover, the preservation of the Jewish people and their return to the Holy Land to establish a state is a validation of the promises and prophecies of the Bible—a great frustration to enemies of God's Word.  

Hostility builds at the time of the end

What all this adds up to is these under-lying forces continuing to generate Muslim hostility towards the Jews and Israel, growing in intensity as we approach the end of this age.
Psalm 83 contains an intriguing prophecy that reveals this growing hostility will play out in a confederation of Muslim peoples determined to eliminate Israel as a nation:
"They have taken crafty counsel against Your people, and consulted together against Your sheltered ones. They have said, 'Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation, that the name of Israel may be remembered no more'" (verses 3-4).
This prophecy goes on to mention specific areas and peoples that will be involved. Our research reveals that some or all of the following will likely participate in this anti-Israel alliance—the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, northern Iraq, and Arab states throughout the Middle East and North Africa.
Out of this group of nations will likely come the end-time leader Daniel the prophet calls the "king of the South." He will arise from the Muslim world and set in motion a cascade of events that will lead to unimaginable carnage in the final world war before Jesus Christ returns (Daniel:11:40).
This confrontation begins with some aggressive move of the king of the South toward what Daniel calls the "king of the North," an end-time European-centered superpower that will then occupy parts of the Middle East, including Israel.
The entire world will eventually be pulled into this developing maelstrom. Jesus Christ called the time of this final world war the "great tribulation" and said He would have to intervene to save humankind from total annihilation (Matthew:24:21-22).
The good news is that peace between these hostile peoples will finally come as former enemies learn the way of peace from the Prince of Peace. Hatred and violence will at last be no more!