In an age of Jihad and political fear-mongering, Jesus said, "I will build My Church" - "among all peoples" - sermon by John Piper

This an excellent missions sermon from Matthew 16:13-26, that is very applicable and timely to today's American Christians and the threat of Islamic terrorism and Jihad and the comments that the Jihadism and terrorism of Islam will cause the true believers to live for His kingdom and stop putting their trust in economic strength and military power and politics.  (in light of the current political circus.)

http://www.desiringgod.org/messages/i-will-build-my-church-from-all-peoples

Please listen to Piper's sermon; he says some convicting things that are not all written out in the print version.  Here is an excerpt from the print version:

I listened to Oscar's message last Sunday by tape as soon as I got home from England. It was, as I knew it would be, a powerful call to make disciples and prepare elders for new churches in the age of Jihad, by avoiding unnecessary controversy, being saturated with the Bible, and throwing yourself into difficult ministry where boldness in the Word is necessary. He said the outrageous truth that Jihad is a gift to the American church. Why?

1. Because it forces the nominal Christian bluff; either we get make disciples and plant churches or we will be converted. Islam is out to take the world.
2. It produces economic instability so we are pressed toward the wartime lifestyle we should have been living all along.
3. It helps us identify with the church in the rest of the world, which has known this threat and instability all along. Now we can learn how to prepare elders for the real church.
4. It presses us to center the discipling of our children in the home, because the church building and Pastor John may be blown up anyway. You can't lean on the building or the preacher.
5. It wakes us up to the glorious truth that in the end what matters is the resurrection with Christ. To live is Christ and to die is gain.

Some of my own general comments, inspired by Piper's sermon:

Jesus said, "I will build My Church, and the gates of hades will not prevail against it."  Matthew 16:18

The "Church" is not a building, as buildings can be blown up by Jihadists.  Jesus' Church is not local churches, although Jesus Church is made up of true believers who are members of local churches.  Christ gave Himself for the Church and purchased the Church with His blood (Ephesians 5:25; Acts 20:28; Revelation 5:9), so though the first church in Jerusalem was local and visible (Acts 2:37-46) and local visible churches were started and built all over the Roman Empire and all through history, Jesus' statement about His Church has to be interpreted in the light of those three key passages.  The apostle Paul described "the Church' in very cosmic and universal terms.  (Ephesians 1:22-23; 2:19-22; 3:8-10; 3:20-21)

This has been proven in history by the fact that many local and visible churches have disappeared from history - especially by the advance of Islam in North Africa and the Middle East and Turkey; and the advance of liberal theology in western Europe and USA.  Liberal churches are not true churches anymore.  The Roman Catholic Church is not a true church anymore, since it condemned the Biblical doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone at the Council of Trent in 1545-1563.  Part of the "rock" of the message is that one must repent and trust in Christ alone for salvation, apart from the merit of good works. (Romans 1:17; 3:28; 4:1-16; 5:1; 10:9-10; Galatians 2:16; Acts 15:9; 16:31; John 5:24; 3:16; 11:25; 20:30-31; Ephesians 2:8-9; Philippians 3:9; Acts 13:38-39)  Christ Himself is the rock and foundation (1 Corinthians 10:4; 3:11); and the apostolic doctrine about Christ (Ephesians 2:19-20).

The Church is all the true believers from all nations and cultures who have been purchased by the blood of Christ, those who are truly born again.  (Revelation 5:9; Ephesians 5:25-27, 32; Acts 20:28)

Hades means death.  Hades does not mean the devil or demons or heresies or false doctrines.  Local churches disappeared in history.  (Revelation 2:1-7)  But the one who perseveres and overcomes, that one will be saved.  (verse 7)

Jesus enters the gates of hades and rescues people out of death, because He has the keys of death and hades.  (Revelation 1:18; 20:14-15)

Jesus promised eternal life out from death to true believers.  John 5:24; 11:25  Spiritual Death in hell (the lake of fire) will not overtake true believers - Revelation 20:14-15.

The rock that Jesus builds His church upon is the firm foundational truth of the doctrinal statement that Peter spoke:  "You are the Messiah, the Son of the Living God."  (Matthew 16:16) That was the apostolic message that was also given to the other apostles and they preached this, and the doctrine of the Deity of Christ and Trinity are natural truths that are implied by the phrase "the Son of the Living God", along with the explanation of more details of many other verses.

Addendum (Monday, Feb. 29, 2016):  To trust in the Messiah, the Son of the Living God alone, means by necessity, not trusting in one's own good works, and not trusting in Mary or prayers to Mary or other saints also.  It carries with it an implicit confirmation of the doctrine of justification by faith alone.  No wonder Luther said statements that were close to this sentiment, "justification by faith alone is the doctrine by which the church stands or falls.".  It means that Roman Catholicism, with it's emphasis on external rituals and the doctrine of faith plus the merit of works in order to be finally saved out of the possibility of committing mortal sin and winding up in hell and out of purgatory after a "good" RC has to have his/her venial sins purged, and the doctrines of the Papacy, is impossible with a full and genuine trust in Christ alone, as the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.

Questions for Walid Shoebat

Walid Shoebat (and other authors at his web-site) have been very critical of Protestantism and Luther (and Calvin) in recent years (as James Swan's posts demonstrate).

The Shoebats (both Walid and Theodore) has also had a few run-ins with Dr. White also in the past few years.

Some of the articles and some of the emphasis is right to expose the problems with violent and Jihadist/terrorist Islam and political correctness.  Also, we should pray for the ancient churches communities (Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Oriental Orthodox) and Christians and other groups such as the Yezidis who are being persecuted and slaughered by ISIS.   The Shoebats desire for justice for those communities is a good one.

He does seem to have converted to Roman Catholicism, although that is not completely clear to me either. He speaks well of the crusades, and emphasizes military action again Muslims, etc. 

Shoebat is very Pro-Israel and was (and still is, it seems, though I don't know for sure) very into Pre-tribulational and Pre-millennial theology and prophesy and Israel coming back as a nation in 1948 as a fulfillment of prophesy.

Years ago, (sometime between 1995-2000 ?), we exchanged a few emails, as we were on an email group of people doing ministry with Muslims, he got really upset with me (on an email group of people in ministry to Muslims), because I questioned his Pre-trib and pre-Millennial stuff that was always such an overemphasis on modern 1948 Zionism and Israel, etc. -  he was very similar to  Hal Lindsay, John Hagee, and Jack Van Impe type of emphasis. He later either left the email group or was kicked out of the email group. (?)

To be clear, I support Israel's right to exist and defend herself against Islamic terrorism, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the PLO.  But that is an issue of justice and fairness, (since it was the Ottoman Turks who were the political entity over Palestine for about 500 years, and they were justly punished after 1918 because of their role in joining Germany in World War 1 (so the argument that Palestine was a formal country is wrong); and the Muslims were always attacking first, and loosing more territory since 1948; and the fact that the Muslims never accepted Israel's right to exist, even the 1948 borders were rejected wholeheartedly by the Muslim world at the time.  

Hamas has quotes from the Hadith in it's charter that speak of 
"there is a Jew behind the rock and tree; come and kill the Jews"  and "fight the Jews until the day of 
resurrection". 

See here also.

 That (support for Israel)  is not an issue of whether 1948 was a fulfillment of prophesy or whether the OT land promises to Israel are still valid.   Galatians 4:26, Revelation 21-22; Hebrews chapter 4 and Hebrews 11:10; 11:16 and 12:22-23; and 13:14 seem to indicate the OT land promises were fulfilled in Christ.  (with Galatians 3:16 )  I still struggle between 2 views of the Millennium in Eschatology: is it "Historic Pre-Millennialism" (post-tribulational rapture) or A-millenialism, although I do lean toward an A-millennial view, with a somewhat positive view of much of what partial-preterism says.  

It is still hard for me to tell definitely if Walid is just supporting the militaristic history of the past of Romanism - Crusades, etc. vs. Islam, or if he really converted to Roman Catholicism (though now that I am looking more closely at his articles, it does seem he has converted.) see his article "Them Damned Catholics" at his website.   But that was in 2013; since that time, there are many more articles supporting Roman Catholicism that I have discovered since looking more at this site.  Wow.  I have not had time to digest these, and just noticed them.  It seems more and more clear that he has converted to Roman Catholicism.  Shoebat defends icons, statues, and the whole incarnational theological justification for bowing down to and venerating icons and statues.  (Sept. 20, 2015) And he defends Russia, the Orthodox church, and Putin too.   Wow.  The more I read, the more I am seeing this, Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, militancy, mixed with end-times events prophesy stuff.

Walid Shoebat - did you convert to Roman Catholicism?  Are you a traditional Roman Catholic?  (one who wants the Tridentide Latin Mass restored to official and obligatory and either considers the Popes after Pius XII anti-Popes or weak or hold to the Sedevacantist position.)    The more I look and read more at your site, the more it seems to indicate that you have converted to the more Traditional strain of Roman Catholicism.

His pre-trib. pre-Millennialism and pro-1948 Israel as fulfillment of prophesy would seem to conflict with eschatological views of Roman Catholicism and the small Middle Eastern Churches that go back to earlier more ancient churches of Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy (Coptic and other Mia-physite / Monophysite churches/ rejection of the Chalcedonian Council and Creed of 451 AD) and Roman Catholicism. (back to 500s - 600s and beyond to the modern era).

Walid, are you still Pre-trib and Pre-Millennial?  and if so, how does that fit with the Roman Catholic Church, which is more A-millennial?

If you look at his web-site, in a 2012 interview with Pat Robertson (! Charismatic, CBN - 700 Club - TV personality, but certainly not pro-Roman Catholic), he gives a fairly in-depth analysis of the connections of key people with the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic terrorism, the history and fall of the Caliphate in 1924, and desire for Muslims to re-establish the Caliphate issues and the Sunni - Shiite connections - Shoebat even predicts that Iran will attack Saudi Arabia and destroy it in the near future.   






Maybe it was sometime after 2012 that he moved more toward Roman Catholicism. That (the prediction that Iran will attack Saudi Arabia) caught my eye, because of the recent tensions between Iran and Saudi going on right now.   

See also the Wikipedia article on the history of Saudi and Iran relations and tensions.

Walid is more credible than Ergun Caner, that is for sure, as he truly does speak Arabic and was born in Palestine-Israel, and Walid is a former Muslim, who was an Evangelical for a while; and now it seems he is Roman Catholic. 

Walid's Arabic and knowledge of individual leaders in the world of Islam and Islamic terrorism seem very credible;

although his claim of being a former terrorist has some doubts and wholes in it, 

and his stuff on the bism-illa (بسم الله ) (In the name of Allah) as the sign of Anti-Christ and 666 is goofy. 

I think Shoebat is basically right in understanding the connections between the Muslim Brotherhood and other Jihadist groups (Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS), the desire for the restoration of the Caliphate, and connections to political Muslims groups in the USA such as CAIR and the Muslim Student Associations on US University campuses.  The founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan Al Banna, inspired Sayeed Qutb, who inspired Osama Ben Laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri (the current leader of Al Qaeda) and Hamas in Palestine/Israel.  Hezbollah in Lebanon is the Shiite version of Islamic Terror against the modern state of Israel. (similar to the Sunni Hamas group.)

Addendum:
After watching the interview that Walid Shoebat did with Pat Robertson again, I noticed several things.  1.  Walid was wrong about Egypt (After the Arab Spring of 2011-2012 in Egypt, Hosni Mubarak was taken down from power, and the Muslim Brotherhood was in charge through Muhammad Morsi's government for a while(June 2012-July 2013), but the people and General Al Sisi rose up and did not want them in charge.)  and 2.  he was making lots of predictions about the Islamic world and tying in Bible passages from Isaiah and Jeremiah (most of which had to do with the era of Assyria, Egypt, and Babylon Geo-politics and wars of that time period.)  Elam is not all of Iran/Persia, although there is a small province in Iran in the south, near Iraq named Elam.   The Elamites were more of Semitic group more closely related to the Arabs in the south of Iraq, but they no longer exist today.  The Persians later conquer Elam.  (Cyrus - 536 BC and forward).   Then later, Islamic conquests (632 AD to 1600s) over the past 1400 years has caused many of the Biblical peoples and boundaries to be changed.  There are Arabs in the south of Iran, but there are also lots of Persians and there is lots of ethnic mix.  I know several Iranians who have an Arab father and Iranian mother, and vice versa, and many Iranians who are Turkish in their ethnic roots.   Isaiah 19:1 and following seems to have been about God judging Egypt through Assyria (the Lord was judging Israel by Assyrian attacks from 738 BC (Tiglath-Pileser) -725-722 (Shalmanesar and Sargon) BC and beyond - trying to take Judah and the south - 701 BC - Sennacherib).  Assyria conquered Egypt in 670 BC (in between the time that Assyria conqured Israel, the Northern Kingdom, and Babylon conquered Judah, the Southern Kingdom, from 606-586 BC - G. W. Crogan, in his commentary on Isaiah, writes, "The fierce king of verse 4 has been variously identified, but there can be little doubt that the most appropriate application is to Ear-shaddon, king of Assyria, who subdued Egypt in 670 BC." (page 126, Commentary on Isaiah, in The Expositors Bible Commentary, volume 6 (Isaiah-Ezekiel), Zondervan, 1986).  Later, Babylonian invasions  -Babylon conquered Israel and destroyed the temple.  (605-586 BC)  Isaiah 19:1 - "The LORD rides on a cloud, coming to Egypt to destroy the idols of Egypt".  The context was the paganism in Egypt at the time and that God, by allowing Assyria to conquer Egypt in 670 BC; and later, Babylon to invade and conquer Judah, the southern kingdom.  Another commentary mentions Persia conquering Egypt for a while in the 500s-300s BC.  God's judgement is described as "riding on a cloud".  That is one of the big concepts that Partial- Preterists use to show that God "came" in judgment on Israel in 70 AD by sovereignly causing the Romans to attack and destroy the temple in Jerusalem.

Dividing Line on Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2015 - keep your balance !

Dr. White keeps a good balance between the power of prayer and the power of the gospel for Muslims;
and
supporting just war/ self-defense principles against the evils of Islamic terrorism/Jihadism.

It is discouraging to see some Christians and conservatives to just have a response to Islam as "Bomb them all!"

We must keep our balance:

1.  Pray for Muslims.  Pray for God to make more and more Muslims disillusioned with Islam and all the violence and evil of the Global Jihadism, and that more and more regular Muslims will be drawn to the true Jesus Christ.
1 Timothy 2:1 says  "first of all" = our first priority should be to pray.  "pray for all men" " 'υπερ παντων ανθρωπων" means "for all kinds of men/people".  (see samples of videos below of prayer for different nations and countries and cultures.)   We usually jump to the praying for leaders and those in authority, but first it says, "pray for all kinds of people".

Matthew 9:36-38 - Jesus' insides turned with compassion for the masses of people that were like sheep without a shepherd; and He exhorted us to pray for God, the Sovereign Lord of the harvest, to send forth more laborers (evangelists, pastors, missionaries, teachers, etc.) into the harvest.

2.  We can be patriotic and desire justice and support just war principles against evil Muslim Jihadist types.

3.  But the gospel is still powerful to reach Muslims, even some who are Jihadist types (though it rarely happens; as their hearts are very hardended; but Dr. White pointed out the guy named Saul in Acts 8-9 who was watching the coats and watching Stephen get stoned.); but more importantly the gospel is powerful to reach other Muslims who are not the Jihadist types; so don't avoid all Muslims and don't think they are all like the Jihadi types.

4.  Don't let fear or anger or prejudice lead you into a heart attitude of "Bomb them all" and hatred and never being willing to reach out to a Muslim.   Remember Matthew 5:21-26 - "If you have anger and hatred in your heart, you are guilty of murder, and liable to go to hell."  "the anger of man does not achieve the justice/ righteousness of God" - James 1:20

"perfect love casts out fear" - 1 John 4:18



In order to understand Dr. White's points, one also needs to read his previous very thoughtful article here.

By the way, it was Marie Harf who said the root cause of the violent Jihad is lack of jobs.  That is not the root cause, (maybe a symptom of why some others join in with them, as in Iraq, the Sunnis were alientated and lost lots of jobs by the Malaki Shiite government, but is the not the root of the leadership of Jihadism, as many Jihadist leaders were rich people - like Ben Laden, Al Zawahiri, the doctors and engineers, who commit suicide bombings, etc.) but liberals in our USA government like to use it as a way of avoiding the religious motivations of people.

Some examples of prayer for other nations by national believers: It is neat to hear people from those countries praying for their own land.   The point is to develop a burden and heart for people and praying for these nations held in bondage by Islamic culture.

Egypt  (there are some Evangelical Coptic Christians)



Iran - many Iranians are disillusioned with Islam today.



Saudi Arabia



See here for many other videos of other countries and prayer for them.

You can pray for places like North Korea, Syria, Iraq, Lybia, Israel, Palestinians, Kurds, Russia, China, India, Ukraine, Nigeria, Somolia, Afghanistan, etc. in the same way.


See also the listing of countries and text information about each country for information for fuel for prayer. 

Turkey

2 articles on the Islamic sources, texts and religion that undergird what ISIS / ISIL / IS does

1.  A very thorough article at the Atlantic magazine.
http://www.dennyburk.com/is-isis-terror-driven-by-religion-the-high-cost-of-ignoring-the-obvious/

The Full article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

2.  Dr. White's analysis:
http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php/2015/02/16/breaking-the-cross-killing-the-swine-truly-thinking-about-isis-and-the-murder-of-21-copts/

Addendum:  "do not be surprised" at persecution for the sake of Christ
http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2015/02/16/tom-schreiner-a-biblical-meditation-on-the-isis-execution-of-21-christians/

Addendum 2:
See my plea for Balance in seeking to understand the conflict within Islam today.  Christians, don't let fear keep you from reaching out to the other Muslims who are not Jihadist types. 

Understanding Dhimmi ذمّی in Islam

The Concept of Dhimmi   ذمّی   in Islam.

Can doctrinal Islam not always seek to "Conquer the world"??

Here is a story on captured Jihadists in Syria being interviewed.  ( I saw this from Dr. White's tweet and link to it, "Hard times ahead for our brothers and sisters in Syria".)  You should read the article and watch the video.  The beginning of the video was confusing to me without context, but the article makes it more organized.

Not all Muslims believe this application of Islam, but this does seem to be the expression of real doctrinal and consistent Islam from Muhammad and the early centuries of Islamic history.  The news reporter seemed like he did not know what with do with the Muslims who were kind of friendly and smiling and open and yet expressed that to follow real Islam, they will make war with Christians and give them the choice of surrendering and paying the Jiziye or the Muslims will fight you to the death, after they take back Israel and Spain and Portugal.

We hope not, but it does honestly seem that the "Arab Spring" and the take-down of dictators like Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muammar Qaddafi of Libya - could eventually result in some kind of Islamist State that seeks to get back to the way Muhammad and the Caliphate carried out aggressive war after 621/622 AD and applied Islamic Law in their lands for centuries.

Caliph is translated from the Arabic word khalifa (خليفة - khalīfah) meaning "successor" (of Muhammad), "viceroy", "substitute", "lieutenant-leader". 

The periods of the Islamic Caliphate - 632 AD - 1924 (after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and World War 1)

1.  Rashidun Caliphate  - The first four "rightly guided" Caliphs - Abu Bakr, Omar (or Umar), Uthman, and Ali - 632-661 AD)  All Salafi and Wahabi (movement named after the basic philosophy behind the state of Saudi Arabia) and Jihadist movements seek to return the Muslim world to the period of Muhammad after the Hegira (622-632 AD) and the Rashidun Caliphate.   "Salaf" means the "pioneer - leaders of old"; it means Muhammad and his companions and successors and the third generation of successors.  It usually does not include the Ummayid Caliphate, as far as I can tell.

2.   the Ummayid Caliphate (661-750 AD).  (headquartered in Damascus, Syria)

3.  the Abbasid Caliphate, (750 - 1258 AD)  Based in Baghdad.  Within the Abbasid period, the Fatimids gained power in North Africa and Egypt and the Hijaz (Mecca and Medina).  (see below)

4.  The Fatimid Caliphate.  (909 - 1171 AD) was an Ismaili Shiite movement that covered mostly N. Africa and Egypt, until the defeat of the Crusaders by Saladin.

5.  The Mamluk period.   They fought the Mongols and drove the Crusaders out of the land of Israel/Palestine.  They are not technically a "Caliphate" period.  (1250-1517)

6.  The Ottoman Empire Caliphate.  (1517-1924)

The Muslims interviewed in the video were very candid and seemed relaxed in saying that a non-Muslim must convert to Islam, or if they are a Christian (or Jew), they must pay the Jiziye tax with willing submission, being humiliated.  This is clear in the Qur'an Surah 9:29 and many Hadith - see one classic Hadith below, and one on the law of apostasy.

Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.  Surah 9:29 

Hadith - Sahih Al Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 59:  Narrated Abu Huraira:
When the Prophet died and Abu Bakr became his successor and some of the Arabs reverted to disbelief, 'Umar said, "O Abu Bakr! How can you fight these people although Allah's Apostle said, 'I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, 'and whoever said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', Allah will save his property and his life from me, unless (he does something for which he receives legal punishment) justly, and his account will be with Allah?' "Abu Bakr said, "By Allah! I will fight whoever differentiates between prayers and Zakat as Zakat is the right to be taken from property (according to Allah's Orders). By Allah! If they refused to pay me even a kid they used to pay to Allah's Apostle, I would fight with them for withholding it." 'Umar said, "By Allah: It was nothing, but I noticed that Allah opened Abu Bakr's chest towards the decision to fight, therefore I realized that his decision was right." 

The Law of Apostasy in Islam - death - based on this Hadith

Sahih Al Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:  Narrated 'Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

The historical reality seems to be, that there has never been much of any other kind of political Islam except either the Caliphate Empires or Dictatorships.  (except for modern Turkey and some other farther east countries like Indonesia) There does not seem to be a "middle ground" of a secular/democratic Muslim country that is not a dictatorship.  (What western liberals seem to think is possible.)   What is there by example between the Islamic Caliphate/Sharia Law/no freedom of religion or speech vs. the secular/Arab nationalists Dictators like Saddam Hussein, Moammar Qaddafi, Gamel Abdul Nasser/Anwar Sedat/Hosni Mubarak or authoritarian monarchies like Saudi Arabia in the Muslim world, except maybe secular Turkey since Mustapha Kemal Ataturk and far Asian countries like Indonesia?

Paul Bilal Williams, the British convert to Islam who looks down his nose in arrogance at all Christians who believe the Bible is true; at his own blog, states that the restoration of the Caliphate is obligatory for true Muslims and he gives a whole page on why he supports the Hizb ut Tahrir in England.  (no longer there, Williams has changed his blog twice (?) in 2014-2015. )

"The Khilafah (or ‘Caliphate’) is an obligation for Muslims and something we took for granted for well over a thousand years, much like the obligation of Salah (prayer) and fasting today which, al-hamdulillah, are not open to discussion and debate."  Paul Bilal Williams

Most of my last comments were banned from commenting on his blog, so I have given up trying to comment or reason with him there.  He couldn't handle me calling him out as inconsistent for not debating Dr. White and saying the reason is because he is a "fundamentalist"; but at the same time, he was debating Chris Green who believes pretty much the same things that I and Dr. White believe on issues of the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, and the inerrancy of Scripture.   Paul Williams thinks I am a "Fundamentalist Christian" like James White and Chris Green.  I asked him a while back, before being banned, if he wants the Caliphate to be brought to England, he said no, that the purpose of Hizb e Tahrir is to restore the Caliphate in Muslim lands.

I guess my question is, then why does Paul and the Hizb e Tahrir operate in England?  Why don't they go to a Muslim country and work to restore the Caliphate there? 

After quoting a Hadith(you can look it up there at his site), Williams writes:

"This hadith holds a meaning that is especially reflective of our times, for in the last hundred years this noble Ummah has witnessed the destruction of her State and with that, due to the colonization of her lands by the colonialists, the crushing tidal wave of Western culture. Western culture completely engulfed her to the point of suffocation. It turned black into white and white into black. Never did the Ummah encounter such cultural strangulation, which left her bewildered and confused about the most basic and rudimentary tenets of her Deen."

Williams and Hizb-ut-Tahrir blame the downfall of the Khalifate on colonialism, but it was Mustapha Kemal Ataturk of Turkey who abolished the Khalifate in 1924.  Ataturk was a secularist but from a Muslim culture.  And the Ottoman Empire was justly punished for siding with Kaiser Wilhelm and Germany in World War I (1914-1917).  The breakup of the Ottoman Empire and Khalifate was the Muslims doing, not the west.  The west just came in and filled the vacuum left by the breakup of the Ottoman Empire and the desire for the Arabs to be free from their Turkish masters.

 He gives a link to Hizb-Ut-Tahrir and says it does not work to re-establish the Khalifah here in the west.  But it honestly does seem to be part of the agenda, if one reads the articles and subjects that Paul writes on and emphasizes.  It honestly seems that they want the west to fall from within because of secular liberalism/socialism/homosexual/abortion/pornographic/materialistic culture, and then the Muslims will be happy to fill the vacuum that left-wing liberalism/secular anti-Christian and pro-homosexual culture is creating.

"Hizb-Ut-Tahrir is a global Islamic political party working to re-establish the Khilafah in the Muslim world. It does this by a political and intellectual method, following the example of the prophet Muhammad (upon whom be peace). Hizb-Ut-Tahrir does not work to re-establish the Khilafah here in the West. It also works to preserve and protect the values of Muslims in the West, and carry a correct understanding of Islam to non-Muslim society."

I am glad they state that they are not working to re-establish the Khalifah in the west, but the statement "It also works to preserve and protect the values of Muslims in the West" is by nature contradictory to that; because in order to have all of consistent and doctrinal and Sharia law Islam all the way in the west would be to seek to destroy western freedom of speech(insults to Islam and Muhammad are forbidden), freedom of religion (apostasy from Islam is punishable by death); and separation of church/ religion/Mosque and state are contradictions in Islam, and free market capitalism (Zakat and Islamic finance law are by nature contradictory to free market capitalism and banking systems in the west.)  Some Muslim articles and speeches offer Islamic law as a moral alternative to the homosexual agenda in the west that the church is failing to fight; and offering Islamic "justice and equality" by the Zakat and Islamic finance instead of, what Islam sees western capitalism is - a kind of greedy, self-interest, Ayn Rand-type capitalism, materialism, and secularism.

If you want to understand the hizb-ut-Tahrir's agenda for seeking to re-establish the Khalifate, see here, where they answer some questions.  It seems clear that if the Khalifate is re-established, they will eventually attack Israel(see the question on how they will deal with Israel.)   Not all questions that westerners have are asked there, and some of the answers need a lot more details, but if someone understands doctrinal Islam from all the Islamic sources - Qur'an, Hadith, Tafsirs, Sira literature, Tarikh (history of Islam by Al Tabari) and the subsequent history of how Islam actually carried out it's agenda of spreading Islam, it seems obvious that if they establish the Khalifate in a part of the Muslim world and then work out from it by Da'awa and then Jihad, they will seek to take back all lands that used to be Islamic - especially Spain and Portugal (Al Andalous) and Israel, and then declare Jihads against the west, atheist Russia, pagan Hindus and pagan Buddhists.

You become like what you worship

My last article here on the will of Allah being higher than the moral nature of Allah , and questions and comments by TUAD, caused me to think more about this, because the article at 9 Marks ministries about evangelism with Muslims also came into the picture; and wrestling with the struggle of those three different approaches to evangelism/apologetics/polemics/debate/friendship evangelism with Muslims.

Civilization Sharia, creeping Sharia, stealth Jihad

“Because I’m an expert and they are not.”
Ebrahim Moosa
Associate Professor of Islamic studies, Duke University

see his comments and context in the video below:



Not only is this pretty arrogant, and similar to Bart Ehrman’s “trust me, I’m the expert” type of argumentation as regards NT scholarship and textual variants, as Dr. James White has pointed out; it is also similar to Muslim reactions when one starts getting deeper into discussions about details in the Qur’an or the Hadith or Islamic issues.

It reminds of the same thing that many Arabic speaking Muslims told me when I was preaching the gospel to them from the NT; and also quoting from an English Qur’an in pointing out inconsistencies, contradictions and basic apologetic issues. Especially that the Qur’an affirms the previous revelations (OT and NT) as from God and true (5:44-48; 5:68; 10:94; 2:136; 29:46); and yet, contradicts them in content and meaning.

They would say: “You don’t understand the deep meaning of the Arabic word.” And “you must go talk to my sheikh” or “come and see the Imam”

Then they would not return my phone calls and then they would avoid me; after we had several good meetings in a hospitable and friendly environment around Arabic coffee or hot tea and fruit, pistachios, roasted pumpkin seeds, shish kebab and rice, pita bread and hummus, cucumber salad, Tabouli, and many other wonderful middle eastern cuisine.

Because Islam is more than a spiritual religion about worship and God; it is a socio-political-military-economic system that controls every area of life; eventually in witnessing to Muslims, politics and laws about punishing criminals and military issues always comes up, many times brought up in conversation by Muslims themselves. They interpret all of our politics and social trends in the west as “Christianity” because their politics and social trends of their cultures are part and parcel of Islam.

This article and video is very interesting about “civilization Jihad” or “creeping Sharia” or “stealth Jihad”.

The laws about lying and deception are clearly a part of Islam.

Everyone should watch the video and read this article at the www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org site

They discuss this book, Sharia, The Threat to America




This part from the article is very significant:
“How could the Professors both have gotten this all so wrong? The answer might be found, once again, in shariah. According to Shafi'i fiqh, as stipulated in the ‘Umdat al-Salik, lying is not only sometimes permissible for a Muslim but actually obligatory.

Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveler), section r8.0, "Lying". Section r8.2, entitled "Permissible Lying," cites the 11th century Islamic scholar Abu Hamid Ghazali:
"When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible....and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory." See also the Qur'anic verses 16:106 and 66:2. See also "Ghazali and the Poetics of Imagination," by Ebrahim Moosa (June 2005) in which he argues that Ghazali's work has lasting relevance today.

Moreover, deliberately misleading infidels holds a special status in Islam and goes by two forms: taqiyyah (deceit or dissimulation) and kitman (lying by omission). Because the defeat and conquest of infidels by jihad is an explicit obligation defined in Islamic law, deceit, dissimulation, and outright lying to infidels in the execution of jihad is also obligatory.

Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller), o9.0 (pg. 599), "Jihad" says:
"Jihad means to war against non-Muslims..." and is scripturally commanded in a number of Qur'anic verses, including 2:216 "Fighting is prescribed for you," 4:89, "Slay them wherever you find them," and 9:36 "Fight the idolators utterly."
This is the complete opposite of what Prof. Moosa told his listening audience during this interview. In response to a listener's question, Prof. Moosa said: "...under no circumstances is any Muslim allowed to lie, because lying is a major sin. And you cannot even lie to a non-Muslim. You cannot lie to a non-Muslim. You cannot lie to a Muslim." “


“The Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al Salik): A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law” ( Sharia in Arabic = شریعه ; Shariat in Farsi = شریعت )



But in Muslim cultures, the ability to “outwit” and trick and deceive the other person is a very highly admired quality, as long as the person doing the deception doesn’t get caught.

Do Muslims trick and lie and deceive, because they worship a god who is the best trickster, liar, schemer, deceiver?

Allah is the best of deceivers” (Qur’an 3:54, 8:30; 10:21)

وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ

Qur’an Surah 3:54 - “And (the unbelievers) schemed/deceived and tricked, and Allah too schemed and tricked, and the best of schemers/tricksters/deceivers is Allah.” (my translation) See all ten English translations. A few come close, but none of them bring out the full significance of the Arabic word, مکر (deception, trickery, guile) http://www.quranbrowser.com/

Especially since the context of Surah 3:54 is the crucifixion of Christ – it is seen as a deception by Allah, along with Surah 4:157-158, that Allah tricked the Jews into thinking that they had crucified Jesus. That means also that all the Christians, and pagan Romans also were deceived. (Yet, the Qur'an claims that the followers of Al Masih (Jesus the Messiah) were full of integrity, helpers of Allah, and believers in Allah, and that Allah would never trick the believers, hence there is a big contradiction in the Qur'an and Islamic theology on this point. (see Surah 5:111; 61:14. Muslims read their theology back into the previous Scriptures. They think the disciples of Jesus were Muslims. Surah 61:14 even says that the believers in Islamic monotheism, the way they interpret who the original followers of Jesus are, (they have to assume that they did not believe in the crucifixion, yet in reality they did; and they assume that they and the first 6 centuries the true believers did not believe in the Deity of Christ, no Trinity; oops, that doesn't work!) The true believers became the "uppermost" - victorious. That contradicts the first 6-7 centuries of Christian history. ) That also means that this deception dominated history for 6 more centuries until Islam came later and “set the record straight” with “40 lonely Arabic words in one verse”. ( I first heard the emphasis on “40 lonely Arabic words" from Dr. James White)

Maybe this is why conspiracy theories are big in the Muslim world. They project onto the west what they know to be true in their own culture and politics. Many Iranians have told me that they think that behind closed doors, the Ayatollahs in Iran, later, Ahmadi Nejad, earlier Saddam Hussein in Iraq (until he got caught) and George W. Bush and Dick Cheney (or Ronald Reagan, pick the leader at the time period) and Tony Blair were together plotting and scheming how to control the world.

We become like in character what we worship. Those who worship false gods become like them. Psalm 115:8

Worshiping the true God of the Bible transforms our character into true goodness, the moral character of Jesus Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:18 (see also Romans 8:29; Romans 12:1-2; Ephesians 4:21-24; Colossians 3:1-17; 2 Peter 1:4)

“And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.” (2 Corinthians 3:18, NIV, 2010)

“But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.” (2 Cor. 3:18, NASB)

And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit. ( 2 Cor. 3:18, ESV)

“keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. . . Set your mind on things above . . . ( Colossians 3:1-3)