Theocratic Reformation from Judaism to Islam – Christians 4: Jews 5: Muslims: 0

jesusgunnedOk, we can all agree that Pat Robertson was a dork of stellar magnitude, and the Phelps Family are supernovae in that particular area called theocracy.

 That said, before we submerge a crucifix in urine let’s give the Abrahamic tree a second look, and examine the fruit it has borne.

The Jews never had a drive to spread over the Earth. Their scriptures taught them that certain lands were given them by God; so they took them, enough said, this was 6,000 years ago after all. But after that they lost any territorial ambitions. But, the Persians and Romans proceeded to push them this way and that; being rather fanatical, they pushed back. After the destruction of the 2nd Temple and the Judean Diaspora the centuries have seen Judaism become a religion withdrawn into itself. Having lost the arrogance of the Temple but retained the Love of God and intellectual tradition they became a creative yeast in their host cultures.


The Jews never expected to take over the world; at most they expected, and some maybe still expect that the world will join them. Not by the sword, but by the Love of God. One of the best aspects of the Jewish religion is its focus on the Love of God and a Love for God in each moment of a person’s life.

But along came Jayzus!

Things started out ok, Yesuah merely echoed and extended the teachings and philosophy of Hillel. It expanded organically and gently; converting mostly people otherwise considered “unworthy” of membership in one of the more respectable religions, then into the idle upper-class (often by way of religiously adventurous wives discontent with being the ornament on a rich man’s arm.

 But then Paul and Constantine came to deal the Judaic Chrestians, and then, later, the mild original “Greek”, a double death-blow of politicization.

St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre

St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre

After several centuries of defending themselves from the fanatically imperialistic Islam Christianity began to model all sorts of the worst of the Islamic “innovations” in religion and took on an expansionist, aggressive attitude of its own.

But, it is inherent in a religion mostly based on the teachings of Jesus that every now and then people would remember what their religion was supposed to be about. Christianity may have done much more good during those periods than it did evil during its more cognitively-dissonant times.

Since the Enlightenment the swings of the pendulum between arrogant fanaticism on one hand, and humble servitude to God on the other seem to have gotten gentler. Christianity also seem centered more and more toward the liberal side of the equation; i.e. Fred Phelps, not Qaradawi.

Christianity may one day even manage to have more people who follow it for the right reasons than fools-in-lambs-clothing who use religion in unhealthy ways, or merely for social reasons.

Christianity has a core in its teachings and scripture that is there for all to see; one of Love. It today can be, and always has been, a potentially dangerous religion (I.e. Fred Phelps, Torquemada) but is not inherently so by the structure and teachings of its chief scriptures.

I do think that, despite the quantum jump that The Enlightenment enabled in society’s evolution, Christianity has shown a definite tendency to speed humanity’s growth due to the focus of many of the faithful being on Jesus’ ministry rather than the “died for your sins” part.


Now, about Islam.

tolerantislamIslam teaches much about peace and love. There are verses equal to any in the other Abrahamic writings. I will not comment here about those who feel it was the work of someone passingly familiar with both religions. But Pat Robertson did get one thing right; Islamic theology IS inherently aggressive.

The Islamic scriptures consist of three parts:

The Qur’an, the Sunnah –basically a biography of Mohammed’s life, and the ahadith – stories about Mohammed from people who knew him. If you read it all it is clear that there can only be peace when everyone has submitted to Allah.

Even the most fanatical religion tends to mellow over the years; people are basically families, people who want to live and work and laugh and have the space to find God before they die. Even individuals attracted to a “religious” life for evil reasons can be shocked to learn that Love of God and Love BY God can blossom in their hearts; that is the core of any religion.signe

Islam unfortunately is working uphill in the all so human battle against hubris while trying to find truth. But, by having such an aggressive set scriptures; by having so much to draw from that feeds the darker hungers of man, Islam will, I believe spend more time orbiting around radical aggression before submitting finally to that peace and love that is God, is Allah.

Islam is inherently dedicated by its self-declared scriptural doctrine to naturally one day  rule the world by TAKING control of it and forcing Dar al-Harb(‘House of War’) (Non-Muslim controlled regions) into Dar al-Islam(‘House of Islam); then all people will be free, in the Islamic view, to “choose” the “right” religion.

Sadly, it is not hard to justify all sorts of atrocities on infidels (non-Muslims) with the Qur’an; by contrast there are very few Samaritans or Philistines around for Jews or Christians to use their scripture as an excuse to start a pogrom against.

In Islam it does not matter that reformist Imams do not support something. In fact it is literally forbidden in Islam to use your ‘conscience’ as a guide in a religious dilemma; the only proper way to get an answer is to ask the proper authority, and then submit to the “truth.”

In Christianity, the violent books and verses are all somewhat shielded by being in the OT and considered to be superseded by the Love of Jesus when any conflict occurs. Islam does not have a NT to mellow its hard edges, though it does recognize the concept of abrogation (what a prophet says later is ‘rock’ to the ‘scissors’ of any earlier pronouncements or doctrines).


This makes “insulting” Islam dangerous at times in the modern world of high tech, and horrific weapons that you can make in your garage.


butcherinnameofislamI mostly find it sad that the bulk of Muslims are not more vocal about denouncing their radical Brethren in both the private and the public arena. It is every person in the world’s duty to restrain the fundies of all aggressive religions until they grow up. Until a religion’s devout – highest clergy to clueless souls just born in it – recognize to their core’s that it is ok to DIE because of your religion but, that it is NEVER anything but evil to use religion as an excuse to KILL, that religion should be watched, and kept on a leash in polite company.

Islam has yet to show that it can stay grown up. They are younger though, lets give them time…but, keep the rolled up newspaper ready to smack their noses if they sh*t on the rug. We have too many permanent stains from Christianity and its messes; AND the Islam’s’ earlier messes. Of course Christianity STILL pees on the floor now and then. We just have to be patient and rub their noses PROMPTLY in their messes; but, we don’t have to worry about them eating the neighbor’s cat anymore.

I am not too PC to call a club a club (well, I can’t say spade anymore can I?); religion can be very wonderful but, people need to get over their BS and realize that the basic code of ethics that most religions have can also be formulated by simple common sense and an understanding of psychology and social dynamics. Go read a little about Neuro-Linguistic Programming and such. Real secular morality is what the world needs, not the Fascist pretend kind, only then can religion truly flourish; when we get over all this bickering on who is actually the only ones in touch with the “ONLY source of Morality™”; which they cannot even prove exists.

Faith is the problem; submission to something you do not feel yourself is the problem. Beliefs have reasons, sometimes bad ones but, reasons that can be ‘reasoned with’; faith has no reason therefore the most reasonable argument does no good, your head still rolls on the floor.

Have faith in Jesus of Mohammed; I will Believe in Bugs Bunny!bugslastsupper1

Is this the “logic” taught in college today?

(HH Here: Sometimes I ponder on just what goes on in the minds of people who are able, seemingly with no effort at all, apply ethical rules to others that they never apply to themselves. What does it feel like to live behind eyes that see no problem with denying others the rights they feel are essential to their very existence? Let us venture behind the corneas of Monira Gamal-Eldin, President of the Temple University Muslim Students Association and see what we find there.

Geert Wilders is a controversial Conservative Dutch politician who speaks about the threat from Muslim immigrants who refuse to assimilate and are changing the egalitarian countries of Europe to resemble more the tribal societies they “fled” from. Wilders is anti-racist and pro-Jewish but suspicious of conservative Muslims and their political agenda in the West.

The Muslim Students Association is well known for sponsoring blatantly hateful anti-Semitic speakers and events that actually promote violence and genocide. What we have here in the email below is a case of the pot calling itself clear glass and the glassware black:)

“From: Monira Gamal-Eldin
Date: Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:52 PM
Subject: Statement from the Muslim Students Association on Geert Wilder’s visit
October 14, 2009

The Temple University Muslim Students Association (MSA), one of the largest, most active and socially conscious student organizations on Temple’s campus, is issuing this public statement of protest concerning the invitation of Geert Wilders to address the Temple community on October 20, 2009. “

(HH: Right off the top we see the egotism of this gentle lady. The other student organizations are, in her words, smaller, lazier and not as “good” as the MSA and so it behooves the above addressed to listen up to what this noble organization has to say. Does this young lady really think the other groups all consider themselves to be NON-socially conscious? Or does she just feel that to be socially conscious and not agree with her is an oxymoron? Point of advice my dear, if you don’t want people to think you are putting them down say something like “ …(MSA) an organization with substantial membership that strives to be active and socially conscious.” See? You get the same info across without making yourself sound like you think you sweat perfume.)

“Geert Wilders is a far-right Dutch MP who is infamous for his anti-Islamic rhetoric and extreme hatred towards Muslims. A person who has been tried in the Netherlands Supreme Court for his hate speech concerning Islam,…”

(HH:That is a lie, there has been no trial as of yet and the prosecutors had to be ordered to take on the case. It is not expected to end in conviction. Stay tuned, but to say he has been TRIED is false)

“banned from the United Kingdom due to the threat he poses to community harmony,”

(HH: Another falsehood, the ban was because of threatened violence by OPPONENTS of Wilders and it has since been overturned and declared baseless.)

“…and is concurrently being charged for violating anti-hate laws in the European Union, should not be allowed to address the Temple community.

Temple MSA speaks for the many Muslims and socially conscious students and faculty on campus when we say…”

(Hold the phone!!! MSA claims to SPEAK FOR ALL MUSLIMS on the campus? Have you polled ALL the Muslims and received their endorsement as their spokesperson? Do you have their PERMISSION to speak ex cathedra from your navel on their behalf? Do you also have some sort of special political x-ray glasses that enable you to see that any students and faculty who are not Muslim and do NOT agree with you cannot be “socially conscious”?)

“…that the presence of Geert Wilders on our campus is a breech of Temple University’s pledge to ensure the wellbeing and safety of all students and faculty on campus.”

(In just what way is the “wellbeing and safety of ANYONE being threatened by Mr. Wilders presence?)

“The Muslim population at Temple feels attacked, threatened, and ultimately unsafe that Mr. Wilders has been invited to voice his hate-driven opinions.”

(this is just amazing considering the hateful venom spewed across campuses all over America by MSA’s invited guests! Or are you renouncing your welcome to supporters of Hamas and Hezbollah and those who justify suicide bombing and especially those who condone the killing of Jews. Do you intend to take this stand with the next CAIR endorsed apologist for Sharia wants to come speak on how Israel must be eliminated for peace to reign? No? I didn’t think so but I had to give you the benefit of the doubt. )

“The fact alone that backpacks are prohibited for entry to this event reinforces our argument that this creates an unsafe atmosphere where prejudiced, racist and vehemently hateful words will be disguised under the veil of academia…”

(Excuse me while I wipe up some water and blow my nose. I haven’t laughed that hard in years. Are you REALLy saying: ‘The MSA intends to foment protest that might well become violent (HH: as they have at other MSA events at Temple and other campuses) and feels it is the fault of the administration for allowing a speaker that makes us so mad we cannot control ourselves as sane adults. We feel that to ban backpacks that might contain weapons with which our zombies MIGHT attack Mr. Wilders [as we have threatened] just shows how provocative he is! If there is violence it will be HIS FAULT that WE commit it! Can’t you see that you must ban him to SAVE US from his all –powerful ability to make us feel so scared and threatened that we must riot.”}

(HH: The sound you now hear is Thomas Jefferson gagging.)

…”Temple MSA deplores the decision made by Temple College Republicans, The David Horowitz Freedom Center, Temple University Purpose, Temple Student Activities, and Temple University as an institution of higher learning, for welcoming Geert Wilders when so many have found his speech to be repugnant to society as a whole.”

(HH: And just when did having controversial speakers at a college become forbidden or even unusual? It surely wasn’t when YOUR last speaker came by now was it? But again, maybe I am being unfair. I guess that if a Jewish student group felt that one of YOUR speaker’s message was, how did you put it again? Here it is: “repugnant to society as a whole.” then you would cancel said speaker, right? Would you? Again you say no. Well, you can’t say I am not giving you all the rope you need. )

“We condemn Temple University for being the first university in the United States to allow Mr. Wilders to address their population and hope that the administration realizes the reputation and ideologies they are fostering not only to the Temple community, but to the world…”

(HH: Are you SURE you want to go there? After all if the admin start thinking about the reputation and ideologies YOUR group fosters you might find not only your speakers but your entire organization banned instead of Mr. Wilders.)

“The decision to allow Mr. Wilders to share his viewpoints is a danger not only for the public safety of Muslims and the honor of the core principles of Islam, but also for academic integrity and objectivity on campus…”

(HH: A man speaks and the “public safety” of MUSLIMS is in danger? I guess you are worried about one getting hurt in the riot they hope to start when Wilders speaks. So stop inciting them to violate the law and there is no problem, right? And as to the “honor of the core principals of Islam” WHO THE HECK CARES? This is not Saudi Arabia my dear, the so called honor of the core principals of ANY religion has no protection under the law. Here let me prove it to you. Jesus SAVES, he dribbles down court, he shoots, he scores! Why did it take God 40 years to lead the Jews through the desert? Ans: Do you know how long it takes to get 300,000 women through two porta-potties? Famous Koranic Mistakes: Mixing up the words for ALCOHOL and CAMEL URINE. See? No lightening from the sky, no sirens of the thought police approaching. Get with the program; no university worth the name will suppress free speech simply because you are thin-skinned about the weaknesses of your personal faith.

And if that wasn’t enough, in a final burst of silliness you claim that if the college does not discriminate in ways you define it cannot be objective. Orwell could have written TWO books about your political “morality”.)

“We strongly urge that his invitation be rescinded immediately in order to foster appreciation of free speech that is not based on hatred and discrimination.

(HH: Free speech is not based on anything but the idea that ALL speech that does not directly incite violence is protected; ESPECIALLY when the majority find it objectionable.

The West has never confused religion and politics quite as thoroughly as Islam has but what it did do in that direction began to be rooted out of our culture about 300 years ago by The Enlightenment and was killed dead two hundred years ago by the First Amendment. We protect the speech of not just “socially conscious” citizens but Neo-Nazis, Klu-Klux Klan members and even the most hateful of all, the ones that shamelessly promote the total enslavement of the human world; ISLAMISTS. Yes, even your bloodthirsty heroes can say their say in America. Ain’t it grand?

I hope you enjoy Wilders’ speech. Try not to get arrested too early and miss it!)

“Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter.
Monira Gamal-Eldin
President of the Temple Muslim Students Association”

(HH: Parting Shot: You might try enrolling in Logic 101 as well as any Western Civ. course not taught by a Marxist. In any case good luck with your career with CAIR.

Head Heretic from Heretics Crusade)