Collated with editorial comments by B. Michael Bigg (MB)
To start on a lighter note, “According to genetic scientists, redheads are becoming rarer and could be extinct in 100 years” due to “global intermingling, which broadens the availability of possible partners” With “an estimated 40% of Scots carry the red gene and 13% actually have red hair”, the news.com.au article recommends that if “gingers … want to save themselves they should move to Scotland”. However …
The first terrorist act in Scotland since the 1988 Lockerbie bombing occurred on 30 June 2007, when a vehicle “rammed into Scotland’s largest airport … and burst into flames in a terror attack that police linked to a foiled car bomb plot in central London the previous day. Two people were arrested—one of them on fire—and five bystanders were injured”.
Persons held and charged over the bombing include numerous healthcare workers, including several doctors. A BBC news article on 2 July observed, “Recently-intercepted conversations, known as ‘chatter’, had already alerted them that jihadists were hoping to attack Britain, most probably in a place where many people congregate. But government officials in Whitehall insist there was no ‘predictive intelligence’ prior to the attacks”.
In response to the Glasgow airport bombing, “British Muslims are leading a new campaign condemning the recent attempted car bomb attacks”. The campaign, “emphasises ‘the Muslim community’s rejection of any attempts to link any such criminal attacks to the teachings of Islam’ … Muslims from various professions have backed the campaign, including doctors”. Quoting the Qur’an, the campaign advertisements include verses stating, ‘Whoever kills an innocent soul, it is as if he killed the whole of mankind. And whoever saves one, it is as if he saved the whole of mankind’” And though such statements and quotations might be correct, one is forced to question what such quotations really mean when Islam only regards Muslims as being innocent, and non-Muslims as being anything but? So too with the “rally against terrorism in Glasgow, organised by mosques and Islamic groups”. Is this but a case of being seen to be doing the right thing?
A soon to be aired documentary in the UK is to portray Jesus as Muslims see him. The documentary is to show “no manger, Christ is not the Messiah, and the crucifixion never happened … With the Koran as a main source and drawing on interviews with scholars and historians, the Muslim Jesus explores how Islam honours Christ as a prophet but not as the son of God. According to the Koran the crucifixion was a divine illusion. Instead of dying on the cross, Jesus was rescued by angels and raised to heaven”. The documentary’s director and producer, “Irshad Ashraf, said the film was an attempt to shift the focus away from extremism to the spiritual side of Islam. ‘Jesus is loved and respected by Muslims and he’s one of the most important prophets in our religion.’”
Fortunately though, the source article’s author interviewed “Patrick Sookhdeo, an Anglican canon and spokesman for the Barnabas Fund, which works with persecuted Christians, [who] accused broadcasters of double standards. Mr Sookhdeo, who was born a Muslim and converted to Christianity in 1969, said: ‘How would the Muslim community respond if ITV made a programme challenging Muhammad as the last prophet?’ The Koran’s denial of Jesus’s divinity was ‘unacceptable’. ‘On the last day the Koran says Jesus will destroy all the crosses. How can we praise that?’”
But, the so-called “spiritual side of Islam” is overshadowed—not just in dramatic terrorist activities such as the Glasgow bombings—but by the fact that “Metropolitan Police have … [had to step in] after Commissioner Sir Ian Blair said many Hindus felt neglected by Scotland Yard”. Why? Because “Muslim extremists … [have attempted to] force teenage Hindu girls to convert to Islam. The recruiters—often paid £5,000 for each success—are stepping up ‘aggressive conversion’ tactics, especially around universities, religious leaders believe … Some young students have been beaten up and forced to abandon their courses by extremists, Hindu leaders told a security conference”. The girls are invited out “on dates before beginning campaigns of ‘terrorism’ until they converted … ‘Extremist Muslims make life miserable for Hindu girls. Some are petrified; they feel these men have complete hold on them. One girl was beaten up in the street and others have been forced to leave university’”.
Picture a black and white mouse, in a suit jacket, white gloves and big ears and squeaky voice. Who is it? Well if you thought it was Walt Disney’s Mickey Mouse you are wrong … it’s none other than Farfor “the star of a weekly children’s program called Tomorrow’s Pioneers on the official Hamas TV station” (Al-Aqsa TV) since mid-April 2007. Unable to create a character that universally appeals to children Hamas copied the Mickey Mouse wannabe to spread Hamas’ message that “Islam will ‘dominate the world’”, “‘… hatred of Israel and the US and support of ‘resistance’ – the Palestinian euphemism for terror.’”.
Fortunately there was such media attention and outcry given to the Mickey knock-off, and outrage over its inciting message of martyrdom (though “Mohammed Said, manager of the production department at al-Aqsa satellite channel, which created the series, denied that the show was meant to incite”) that “the show was ending because of international pressure”. I guess Hamas will just regard Farfor as a mouse-take.
In his final episode on Tomorrow’s Pioneers, the producers have Farfor “beaten to death by an actor portraying an Israeli trying to buy his (Farfor's) land. The teenage presenter on the show called Farfor a martyr.”
Because of the furore over Farfor, it seems that Hamas has decided to try a different tack … a bee this time. Maybe if they don’t infringe on anyone’s sentimental toes they can continue with their murderous indoctrination. “Now the show is back, minus Farfour but with the same propaganda, this time a 1.8m tall bee called Nahoul—the mouse’s “cousin”. ‘I want to continue in the path of Farfour‚the path of Islam, of heroism, of martyrdom,’ the squeaky-voiced bee tells Sara’ [the teenage presenter] ‘We will take revenge upon the enemies of Allah, the killer of the prophets and of the innocent children.’Sara replies: ‘Welcome, Nahoul.’” And despite the outrage over Farfor and his terroristic message, Nahoul has received anticlimactic coverage, as if to ‘finalise’ the story. Nevertheless, the same message is being preached, the rhetoric and the same doctrine. But where is the ongoing concern … ah, doesn’t matter, that’s old news right? Let’s move on to the next ‘big’ thing.
Like all mediums, be it print, radio or television, the internet, likewise, is neutral: it is used by all sides of different arguments and perspectives. For every pro-abortion website there is an anti-abortion website, for every atheistic website there is a religious (or pro-God) website. And, for every Christian apologetic website there is an Islamic apologetic website. One of the most popular internet mediums today is YouTube, where anyone, can be a producer and broadcaster. A search on YouTube for “Muslim converts to Christianity” returns a result list count of over 800 videos. However, not all is as it seems.
Though the testimonies of Muslim converts to Christianity are included in the result list, so too are fake testimonies—or more to the point—Islamic propagandists and apologists who use such titles to get the unsuspecting to listen to their pro-Islamic/anti-Christian/anti-Bible messages. Producing such videos includes Muslim clerics, disciples of Islam, both those who were born into Islam and those who have converted to Islam, including Catholics, Protestants, Evangelicals—and supposedly, including those who were priests or pastors. And, to the undiscerning some of their arguments may seem convincing.
But, this is where Evangelical Christianity has allowed the devil to play havoc with the church. Utilised in some videos are the false claims and prophecies by the money preachers, and news videos, reports and excerpts of the fall of Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggert and others. Some pro-Islamic video clips include the claim that no Muslim conversions to Christianity exist; however, in a YouTube posted video clip of an Al-Jazeerah (Arabic News Channel) interview with Sheik Ahmad Al Katani and Maher Abdallah, the issue of six million Muslim converts per year to Christianity was discussed.
Though it is good to see people come to Christ, conversions—as a statistic—mean nothing. From Islam, to Buddhism, to Hinduism, to Judaism, to Catholicism, to Christianity, all can make claim to conversions and “growth”. We should not over-emphasise claims. Beware!
One interesting “conversion” story—posted on YouTube—is a current affairs program interview with Angela Collins, a blonde-haired blue-eyed California girl who converted from Catholicism to Islam shortly after September 11. Angela has also been interviewed by CNN[. But, where in California does she live? Why the city of Mission Viejo in Orange County of course … which neighbours the city of Lake Forest where Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church is located. A few interesting pieces of information uncovered include a 11 September 2006 statement in which Ms Collins says, “At the age of 14, I refused the trinity concept and narrowed what I saw as a complicated tale of ‘three in one’ down to ‘two in one’ and started attending a Baptist church”, though which one is not stated. And, “Angela Collins, 30 … converted to Islam because she felt she missed some-thing growing up as a latchkey kid, and the religion filled a void that existed since her parents divorced when she was 5. ‘As I’m reading [the Koran], I almost feel as if I am being parented.’ Well, she may have felt parented, but she also felt violence:
‘In 2003 she married a Kuwait-born Muslim, but their marriage was rocky. They are currently going through a divorce, and she had to obtain a restraining order.’ Restraining orders are not exactly a very attractive feature for joining a religion.”
As for Ms Collins’ marriage, divorce and apparent domestic violence problems, I have not been able to verify it through other sources. Nevertheless, it does raise the issue of a sanitised form of Islam Ms Collins might be indoctrinated with, compared to the Islam of Muhammad’s Arabian Peninsula.
On the 4th June 2007, The New York Sun newspaper reported, that US Federal prosec-utors have named “three prominent Islamic organis-ations in America as participants in an alleged criminal conspiracy to support a Palestinian Arab terror-ist group, Hamas”. The article also notes that,
Prosecutors applied the label of “unindicted co-conspirator” to the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR], the Islamic Society of North America, and the North American Islamic Trust in connection with a trial planned in Texas next month for five officials of a defunct charity, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development … A court filing by the government last week listed the three prominent groups among about 300 individuals or entities named as co-conspirators. The document gave scant details, but prosecutors described CAIR as a present or past member of “the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations.” The government listed the Islamic Society of North America and the North American Islamic Trust as “entities who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.”
And,
“The inclusion of the Islamic groups on the list of alleged conspirators could give ammunition to critics of the organizations. CAIR, in particular, has faced persistent claims that it is soft on terrorism. Critics note that several former CAIR officials have been convicted or deported after being charged with fraud, embargo violations, or aiding terrorist training. Spokesmen for the group have also raised eyebrows for offering generic denunciations of terrorism but refusing to condemn by name specific Islamic terrorist groups such as Hamas or Hezbollah.”
Author and contributor to FrontPage Magazine, Patrick Poole, on his web log (blog) site observes, “CAIR is also responding to the news of its being named as an unindicted co-conspirator, not by answering the charges, but by attacking their critics.”
In CETF 39 (Mar 2007) we referred to a 28 Nov 2006, Washington Times’ report in which, “Muslim religious leaders removed from a Minneapolis flight last week exhibited behavior associated with a security probe by terrorists and were not merely engaged in prayers, according to witnesses, police reports and aviation security officials”. Further, I wrote in CETF 39, concerning the said article that, “If I was a pessimist, I might consider suggesting that such action was intentional, just as provoking the expected response was; all for the purpose of getting profiling banned on US flights.”
We now note a 2nd Aug 2007, Washington Times’ article in which,
“A religious-freedom advocacy group yesterday asked a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit against airline passengers who reported suspicious behavior of a group of Muslim imams that resulted in their removal from a US Airways flight… ‘The case against the John Does should be dismissed because no law could or should be construed to punish them for reporting a possible terrorist attack to airline authorities,’ the Becket Fund, a nonprofit legal organization that litigates religious-liberty cases, said in the court filing. ‘These citizens attempted to protect themselves, their loved ones, and their fellow passengers. For this, they are dragged into federal court and threatened with humiliation, expense, and liability,’ the papers said. ‘This harassment is nothing less than legal terrorism—an attempt to change public behavior by threatening to impoverish and destroy at random the lives of those whom plaintiffs see as their enemies. These claims should not be entertained.’” In response to proposed laws which would give airline passengers legal immunity from being sued for reporting suspicious behaviour, the article notes that, “Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), said he ‘does not think this legislation would prevent that lawsuit because there is a good faith provision in the legislation.’ … ‘And to determine whether the reports are made in good faith, you might still have to ask them in a court of law,” Mr. Hooper said on MSNBC.”
What can we say? ‘To report suspicious activity and possibly be sued by the likes of CAIR, or not to report suspicious activity and take the chance of being blown up’, that is the question.
It is claimed by many Muslims that the Bible is corrupt, or has been corrupted. However, “Christianity can claim more than 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, 10,000 Latin Vulgates and at least 9,300 other early versions, adding up to over 24,000 corroborated New Testament manuscripts still in existence (McDowell 1990:43-55), most of which were written between 25-400 years after the death of Christ (or between the 1st and 5th centuries) (McDowell 1972:39-49)” and in this way we can show that the Bible has not been corrupted. So now it is up to Muslims to regard the words of their own Qur’an which refers to and/or tells them to go back to the Bible: Surah 4:136; Surah 5:46-47, 68; Surah 10:94; Surah 29:46. So whom do they believe? Modern day clerics or their “holy book”?
And in their footsteps, We sent ‘Îsâ (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), confirming the Taurât (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurât (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqûn (the pious—See V.2:2).
Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allâh has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fâsiqûn [the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree)] to Allâh.
And judge we have that which is true and that which is false. And remain true to the Word of God as He has given us in the Bible shall we remain!
Therefore, since we have this ministry, as we received mercy, we do not lose heart, but we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For we do not preach ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your bond-servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who said, “Light shall shine out of darkness,” is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ (2 Corinthians 4:1-6 NAU)
