“The Truth Shall Set You Free”

Part 14


In the last few segments I have offered evidence suggesting the Roman Catholic Institution created Islam for specific reasons. The corroborating data strongly supports this fraud has been perpetrated upon the world by the satanic Vatican. In September, 2015, reporter Bob Unruh of ‘World Net Daily’ posted a story on the WND website, entitled “Did Quran come before Muhammad?” My reaction was to grab the story for my files.


The words of Bob Unruh are repeated here for another reason: to expose the goal of world dominion by the Roman Catholic Institution by using and fronting the Islamic faith as a force to depose their so-called “Infidels”.


“An expert on Islam is warning that the whole premise of Islam, the idea that Muhammad got the Quran from Allah, recited it, then it was written down – all of that might be based on a faulty assumption and that is that Muhammad was around before the Quran.”


In fact, Robert Spencer, whose “Jihad Watch” website provides an authoritative source for the impact of Islam, says it’s possible “some other individual or group used texts that were already in existence and shaped them to fit their own political and theological agenda.”


Spencer cites a recent report in the ‘Daily Mail’ which described how several pages were carbon-dated by experts at Oxford, who found not only some of the pages were likely from the oldest Quran in the world, they were possibly created between 568 A.D. and 645 A.D.


The dates given for Muhammad’s life are often 570 A.D. to 632 A.D., meaning the fragment could have been in print (hand-written on parchment) two years before Islam’s founder was born.

“On July 22, I wrote this about the same Quran manuscript,” said Spencer citing his earlier posting:

“So if this is a fragment of the Quran as it now stands…and yet it could date from as far back as 568 A.D., two years before Muhammad is supposed to have been born, it might not be a fragment of the Quran at all. It could instead be a portion of some source that later became part of the Quran.”


He pointed out then that “the Quran, according to Islamic tradition, was compiled in its definitive form in the year 653 A.D. by the caliph Uthman, who ordered all variant texts burned and the canonical version distributed to all the provinces within his domain.


He said that story doesn’t really hold water, as “If the entire Islamic world had copies of the Quran by the mid 650’s, why is it that not until the latter part of the seventh and early part of the eighth century do mentions of the Quran begin to appear?”


Get Robert Spencer’s “Did Muhammad Exist?” full story for details about how the story of the Muslim prophet starts to crumble on close examination. The ‘Mail’ had the details on the scraps


The oldest pages were found “bound” within the pages of another Quran from the late seventh century … Written in ink in an early form of Arabic script on parchment made from animal skin, the pages contain parts of the Suras, or chapters, 18 to 20.


It noted that “several historians have said that the parchment might even predate Muhammad.”


Reported historian Tom Holland noted, “It destabilizes, to put it mildly, the idea that we can know anything with certainty about how the Quran emerged – and that in turn has implications for the history of Muhammad…”


Keith Small, from Oxford’s Bodleian Library, was blunt, “This gives more ground to what have been peripheral views of the Quran’s genesis, like that Muhammad and his early followers used a text that was already in existence and shaped it to fit their own political and theological agenda, rather than Muhammad receiving a revelation from heaven.”


The report said the fragments were found inside another Quran. The documents were collected nearly a century ago by Alphonse Mingana, a priest who collected Middle East documents during expeditions sponsored by Edward Cadbury, a scion of the chocolate dynasty.


The book was in the library where it was untouched more or less until the recent carbon dating tests.


Spencer said, “Suras 18 and 20, with their long stories of Moses (very odd ones in 18, along with material about Dhul Qarnayn, who is usually assumed to be Alexander the Great, and the Christian story of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus), and Sura 19, with its extended retelling of the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ, as some of the most obviously derivative sections of the entire Quran – reinforcing the impression that this could be a fragment of a source of the Quran, not the Quran itself,” Spencer wrote.


“And indeed, it is not the Quran itself, we are finally told, for ‘the verses are incomplete, and believed to have been an aide memoire for an imam who already knew the Quran by heart, but the text is very close to the accepted authorized version.”


“Very close is how close. Any deviation could just as easy be not an aide memoire for an imam, but evidence of editing and change, as Islam was being developed in the latter part of the seventh century and the early part of the eighth,” Spencer said.


The reason this report is important becomes obvious when we consider the evidence that continues to grow and corroborate the report by the late Jesuits Fr. Malachi Martin and Fr. Alberto Rivera, who died mysteriously from poisoning. Fr. Rivera said the Vatican helped to finance the building of the massive Islamic armies in exchange for three favors:


  1. Eliminate the Jews and Christians (the latter were regarded as true believers, which they (the Roman Catholic Church) called infidels.

  2. Protect the Augustinian monks and Roman Catholics.

  3. Conquer Jerusalem for “His Holiness” in the Vatican.


I viewed a YouTube interview between Tom Holland and a reporter of an Australian television station, and the substance of the interview raised serious question about the origin date of the Koran. Its authorship is questionable, thereby bringing further queries into focus pertaining to its history rather than its theological origin. Mr. Holland challenges the basis of the Koran being a genuine document on the origin of Islam. There are several YouTube videos that bring into question the Koran being the word from God. In another video presentation by Dr. Jay Smith, a serious issue exists because the writings, sayings, etc. not recorded by first hand Islamic scholars for at least 240 to 300 years of oral tradition before written down. His video shows major discretions in geography, history, and documentation. This damaging evidence leaves huge doubts the entire story of Muhammad. So much of the Islamic tradition is based upon oral tradition and lacks credibility to historical facts and suggests a massive fabrication.


Tom Holland’s book, ‘In the Shadow of the Sword’ is the definitive study on Islam today. Believe it or not, it outsells the Koran. Should anyone wish to view this it is on YouTube, the presentation watch is by Dr. Jay Smith, titled ‘Historical Discrepancy of Quran in Geography and Times’. Dr. Smith shares information that the oldest Koran in existence only dates to the 8th century. Furthermore, Islamic experts explain that the oldest Koran is filled with over a thousand variants, involving spelling, writing that contradicts the Koran. All this documentation and evidence raises questions about the date of the manuscripts. Dr. Smith said that Islamic scholars date the Koran to the late 8th century and Muhammad had nothing to do with the Koran. Seventy percent of the Koran is borrowed from Christian and Jewish sources. Of 11 different Korans dating to the eighth century, there are 15,000 variants and Islamic scholars now admit the manuscripts are redacted. Dr. Smith’s conclusion is that Muhammad had nothing to do with the Koran’s creation.


This information does not prove that Roman Catholic Bishop Saint Augustine was responsible for the Koran, however, it shows how that the Koran was not even written, published or bound until 200 years after the death of Muhammad. It clearly does bring into question the reliability of the Koran. The presentation proves that it was possible for the Koran to be corrupted by sources outside of Islam. The authenticity of the Koran is refuted as the Word of God.


No smoke screen religious claims, ecumenical projects, charity work, school programs, media control, finger pointing, history falsification can undo the crimes for which these people are responsible. No other organized crime network has done so much damage to the people on this planet as the Vatican-Jesuit-Masonic mafia network has done!


It can all be traced back to a conspiratorial plot to rule by any means sovereign of this world. It is going to take the awareness of a large group of people to stop this sick and sad group of people, who ultimately can't love themselves or others, knowing what they have done.
 

We are witnessing the destruction of Bible-believing Christians in Europe by the satanic Islamic hoard, with the Vatican’s blessings. Unless you have been a serious Bible scholar focus on Church history, you are being systematically blinded by the image of secular humanism and the Vatican’s fake ecumenism. On December 9, 2016, for the first time in Dutch history, a court criminalized freedom of expression: “The truly heroic Dutch Member of Parliament, Geert Wilders, was found guilty of the "crimes" of "inciting discrimination and insulting a minority group." This is utterly shocking and devastating.


After the Second World War and the horrors of Nazism and Stalinism, a central tenet of Western democracies has been that you can put people on trial, but not ideas and opinions.  Europe is now allowing dangerous "human rights" groups and Islamists to use tribunals to restrict the borders of our freedom of expression, exactly as in Soviet show trials. 


The prominent French philosopher, Alain Finkielkraut has predicted "Militant anti-racism will be for the 21st century what communism was for the 20th century". This is what is coming to America next unless the public wakes up and stops this incredible deception being waged by the Vatican, using Islam as its army.


Journalists, novelists and intellectuals throughout Europe are now told to raise their right hand before a judge and swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth -- as if that were not what they were doing all along for what they are now being prosecuted.  It is an alarming but very common sight today, where "hate speech" has become a political weapon to dispatch whoever may not agree with you. The Jesuit-controlled Vatican has been trying to re-conquer the temporal and religious world for five centuries, and is short from achieving its goal. Who would have thought “hate speech” would be the instrument by which the Roman Catholic Institution would use to bring its global agenda for a One World Government.


It is not the right of a democracy to quibble about the content of articles or cartoons. In the West; we paid a high price for the freedom to read and write them.  It is not up to those who govern to grant the right of thought and speech that belongs to the free initiative in the democracies.  The right to express our own opinion was paid for dearly, but if it is not exercised, it can quickly disappear.


A grotesque new legal front was just opened in Paris. The French philosopher Pascal Bruckner began his trial, opened his defense with a quotation from Jean-Paul Sartre: "The guns are loaded with words".  Bruckner, one of France’s most famous essayists, is on trial for having spoken out against the "collaborators of Charlie Hebdo's assassins". "I will say the names: The organizations 'The Indivisibles' of Rokhaya Diallo and 'The Indigenous of the Republic', the rapper Nekfeu who wanted 'a bonfire for those dogs' (Charlie Hebdo), all those who have justified with ideology the death of the twelve journalists".


Countless witnesses testified in defense of Bruckner: the editor of ‘Charlie Hebdo’, “Ris”; the political scientist Laurent Bouvet; the former president of “Neither Whores nor Submissives,” Sihem Habchi; and the philosopher, Luc Ferry.


Bruckner used the term "collaborator" for "those newspapers which justified the liquidation of the Résistance and the Jews" during the Second World War. Sihem Habchi spoke of the danger of a "green fascism", Islamism.


Bruckner's verdict will be announced on January 17. "Bruckner brought his voice before the 17th Chamber [court], too often a grave-digger of freedom of expression," commented the important and courageous Riposte Laïque.


These political trials about Islam started in 2002, when a court in Paris considered a complaint against Michel Houellebecq, who, in the novel ‘Platforme’ called Islam "the stupidest religion." The writer Fernando Arrabal, arrested for blasphemy in 1967 in Franco's Spain, was called by Houellebecq to testify in court.  Few people can comprehend what is taking place right before their eyes.


"What a joy to be in a trial for crimes of opinion," Arrabal said in Paris. "Zaragoza, Valladolid, Santander," the playwright named a number of Spanish cities. "This is the list of the prisons where I have been for the same crime as Houellebecq."


Later the satirical weekly, ‘Charlie Hebdo’, and its editor, Philippe Val, targeted by Islamist organizations, were also forced to appear in court.


The death sentence against Salman Rushdie in 1989 by Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini looked unreal back in 1989. The West did not take it seriously.  That was their first major mistake.


Since then, however, this ‘fatwah’ has been assimilated to such an extent that today's threats to free speech come from ourselves. It is now the West that puts on trial writers and journalists. It has become almost impossible to list all the journalists and writers who have had to defend themselves in court because of their ideas on Islam. 


To quote the French-Algerian writer, Boualem Sansal, the author of the novel ‘2084,’ from an interview with Libération: "We are aware of the danger, but we do not know how to act for fear of being accused of being anti-immigrant, anti-Islam, anti-Africa... Democracy, like the mouse, will be swallowed by the serpent". And it will be turned into "a society that whispers".


Journalists are now prosecuted even if they question Islam during a radio debate. That is why today most writers and journalists are only whispering about the consequences of mass migration in Europe, Islam's role in the terrorists' war on democracies and the sultans' offensives on freedom of expression.


The Red Brigades, the Communist terror group which devastated Italy in the 1970s, coined a slogan: "Strike one to educate one hundred." If you target one, you get collective intimidation. This is exactly the effect these political trials about Islam have on public freedoms. The debate is rapidly closing.


In the Netherlands yesterday, the trial for the "crimes" of "inciting discrimination and insulting a minority group" against Geert Wilders was concluded.  The brave Dutch politician had asked supporters if they wanted "fewer Moroccans" in the country. Convicting Wilders yesterday, a court criminalized freedom of expression for the first time in Dutch history. (Wilders was acquitted five years ago in a similar trial).


This story got the attention of the Hal Lindsey Report of December 16th, 2016. The matter of the Islamic invasion of Europe has become such a hot button issue the entire European Union is crumbling before the world’s eyes.


“Mr. Geert Wilders leads the main opposition party in the Netherlands parliament. It is growing so rapidly that it is possible Wilders will be Holland's next prime minister.


In other words, Geert Wilders is an established, well-known, respected public servant in the Netherlands.


Last week, a Dutch court made Wilders a convicted criminal. It convicted him of what amounts to "hate speech." It was the first time in that nation's history that a court ruled against freedom of speech.


It's true that Mr. Wilders has said controversial things throughout the years, especially regarding the dangers of Islam. In fact, we have extensively reported his remarks on this program.


What did he say that was so horrible? Remember, Wilders is a prominent politician speaking to a crowd on the topic of immigration -- definitely an important aspect of public policy that affects all Dutch citizens.


Wilders asked the group: "Do you want more or fewer Moroccans in this city and in the Netherlands?"


For asking that question, he was charged with and convicted of "hate speech."


Keep in mind, it's not "racism." Moroccans aren't a race. But even if he had said something that almost everyone considered deplorable, he should still have the right to say it -- then bear the resulting recriminations and criticism, if need be.


But all of us should be concerned when a western nation's government can convict a member of the political opposition for saying something the present regime does not like.


Once a government can silence you because what you say is inconvenient for them or at odds with the official position, there are then no more checks and balances. And that means there are no more practical legal limits to what a sitting government can and will do.


It's the same with so-called "fake news." It is true that there are websites that purposely invent things that they think either conservatives or liberals will click on and read (mostly so they can sell advertising that targets those audiences).


But when the government decides what is and is not "fake news," then it can shut down anything or anyone who expresses opinions it doesn't like. Had the government been able to officially brand reporting on Watergate or Monica Lewinsky as "fake news," those activities by sitting Presidents would never have been finally exposed.


If today the government can shut down "fake news" sites, then tomorrow it can use the same pretext to shut down Fox News or MSNBC.


Further, people who do not believe the Bible will call the miracles of Jesus "fake news" and forbid discussion of them. They will call the Bible's condemnation of sin "hate speech."


For a free society to remain free, government must not be allowed to regulate the discussion or presentation of ideas and information.


Political correctness has made Geert Wilders a condemned man. It has turned Amnesty International into Amnesty Hypocritical.


It is ironic that Islam is probably the greatest beneficiary of political correctness. Yet Islam is hostile to the main tenets of political correctness.


Homosexuals once held the highest level of "protected status" among the politically correct. But it now seems that the gay community's "most protected" status has been replaced by love of Mohammed.


His religion despises, outlaws, and punishes gays. It regards women as commodities, to be bought and sold with the goats. But the PC people don't care about that, and apparently, neither does Amnesty International.


The once highly respected human rights group has apparently decided to cast its lot with Islam. It promotes and supports individuals who are not only sympathetic to Islam and its many terror organizations, but who actively associate with and campaign on behalf of those terrorist organizations. It now even fires its officials who point out the incongruity.


So for a preeminent "human rights" organization to champion the world's most intolerant religion, one that suppresses and abuses human rights, virtually shouts "hypocrisy," at the least, and "insanity" at worst.


Theirs is the confused thinking of a world at war with God.


The Bible warns time and again that when people throw away the knowledge of God, they can't even think straight. They cannot see the contradictions in their own thoughts.


By defending a warped version of human rights, Amnesty International helps destroy real human rights.


Romans 1:28 says, "Just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind." This means their intellects become so corrupt they can't even think in their own best interest.


Europe was once considered Christian. Today, the powers-that-be have made Islam the continent's favored religion. It gets special protections and privileges. That makes no sense. Long term, Islam will utterly destroy the current liberalism of the continent and replace it with a rigid, hard-nosed theocracy -- hardly the ideal of the global elites.


But they have become so Godless, they don't even realize the danger they have allowed in.


It may seem a funny thing, but during the primaries, many Christians opposed Donald Trump because he wasn't "Christian" enough. But since he won the presidential election, some of those Christians have decided that these may not be the end-times after all.


They place so much hope in President-Elect Trump that they foresee only good things happening in the United States and the world. And it's true that some positive things have already taken place.


Now, I don't know how the President-Elect will do as President. I sincerely hope he does well. But I believe we will continue moving toward a soon-Second Coming of Jesus Christ.


In Matthew 24:8, Jesus compared the signs of His coming to "birth pangs." To relax now is a little like a first-time mother confusing one of the first contractions of childbirth with the last one. After each contraction, she feels better, but it's not over. More contractions are coming.


Birth pangs come and go. So do the signs of Christ's coming. One minute the world is in the midst of intense labor pain. Then the contraction subsides. But until the birth takes place, we can know for certain that more will come. And they will come with greater frequency and intensity.


So now is not the time to relax. We must be diligent and watchful. Be in constant prayer for our new President, that God will grant him wisdom, courage, and personal safety.


His election, the turmoil it has caused, and the hope it promises are surely a "birth pang" in the process carrying us to the soon return of Christ. It places us in the center of some amazing events and on the threshold of that great event -- no matter who serves as President.


Finally, this week I want to continue my recent discussion regarding the Church and, specifically, the believer.


There is an exclusive description given in the Bible only to the believer in Christ. It is a simple prepositional phrase that is repeated some 165 times in the epistles. It is variously stated as "in Christ," "in Jesus Christ," "in Him," "in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." These phrases describe the eternal, inseparable, personal union that each believer has with the Lord Jesus through the baptism of the Spirit.


Virtually every benefit of salvation that the Heavenly Father bestows upon the believer is transmitted through this union with Christ.”


In France Ivan Rioufol, one of the most respected columnists of the newspaper, ‘LiFiguero’, had to defend himself in court against the "Collective Against Islamophobia." 


The writer Renaud Camus, who has expounded on the "great replacement" theory, which holds that France is being colonized by Muslim immigrants with the help of mainstream politicians, was charged with "hate speech." 


Marine Le Pen also had to appear in court. In Germany, there was the case of Jan Böhmermann, a comedian who satirized Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on television. German judges then put on trial Lutz Bachmann, the founder of "Pegida," the anti-Islamization movement. 


In Canada essayist and journalist Mark Steyn was charged with "flagrant Islamophobia" by a "Human Rights Tribunal" (and later cleared). Lars Hedegaard, the president of the Danish Free Press Society, was also charged with "hate speech" (and later aquitted) for comments critical of Islam.


It is fundamental that these writers and journalists are acquitted. But the goal of these trials is not to find the truth; it is to intimidate the public and to restrict freedom of expression on Islam.  We are seeing this intimidation being applied already in the United States, in a variety of ways. These are purges to "re-educate" them. Sadly, as we see from the Wilders trial, they have often been effective.


The website Jihad Watch reports daily on the atrocities and abuses of local governments against citizens by Islamic groups. The San Diego, CA school board voted 4-0 to require Islamic religious lessons of all students and safe places for Islamic students confronted with Islamophobia. There is a level of accommodation to the Islamic terrorization of women that would never be permitted under former regulations. The level of rape prosecutions is tragic by the judicial system. It is as if the judicial system lives in fear.


After the Russian invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, Milan Kundera's novels disappeared from bookstores and libraries. The intelligentsia lay in sterility and isolation. Cinemas and theaters offered only the Soviet performances.  Radio, newspapers and televisions streamed only propaganda. The Russians rewarded the bureaucrats who pressured writers and journalists, and punished the rebels. Those who spoke out were often obliged to work as unskilled laborers. Restless and concerned, Prague became silent and whispering. In Europe now, the same iron curtain is descending.


Yes, all of this is occurring in Europe and does not impact me you postulate, but daily reports appear on the Internet where our freedom of speech is suppressed or squashed. Wake up before you find that you cannot speak your mind. Europe has been stifled by the Roman Catholic Institution using a surrogate army of Islam to bring about its iron-clad control of society through the political maneuverings under the guise of “hate speech”. Wake up, wake up before it is too late! The Papacy has not spoken strongly against the persecution and murders of hundreds of thousands in Syria by ISIS/ISIL. Whatever he has to say has been dismissed as the babblings of an old fool.

Pastor Bob

EvanTeachr@aol.com





11