W W W W  World Wide Web Witness Inc.  Home Page    Contents Page for Volume  What is New





News 453

The Daily Caller, Dec. 1, 2011



It seems that more and more often, we have that age-old desire to invent religions, presented in the news. The method now in vogue is this: merge them. There is little difference. What the heck! Get on with it and do something useful, you religionists. That at least appears to be something of the spirit of a survey article found in newspapers from time to time. In News from The Daily Caller, Dec. 1, featured at this link - http://news.yahoo.com/democrat-leaders-merge-religion-party-201803608.html, we have something to learn.

"Top Democratic legislators are promising to harness religion to help them win 2012 voters,
and are also declaring that the Democratic Partyís actions are the expression of their religious obligations."

We find in the same site,   some talk of the fundamental similarity of all the great religions, as if they were all benign in outlook to others, or even believed in the God who speaks, so that WHAT is to be the criterion for loving your neighbour as yourself might appear. If militant domination is the agenda, then you love him, perhaps,  by letting your beloved neighbour see how wonderful your religious will is, when you proceed with might and main to conquer everything ? If actions speak louder than words, and multiplied arms of a religion indicate its aims, what then of this ? and if its text*1 , in this case, the Koran, speaks not a little in the same mode, what of that ? Harmonious ? the same as by meekness possessing the earth of God's creation ? Victory till only Allah is named, none able to speak differently: this is how the meek inherit the earth ? DId Christ murder or instead, did He subordinate all for His mission, ending in gaunt death, ghastly torture, mocking and mimicry, and death, leaving only the option of resurrecting that mauled body, as predicted, on the third day. It was like a laboratory work; but it did not slaughter. This is not the day of judgment, and what a day of mercy it has already been, these two millenia, towards the Lord!  ?

DId HE then murder and trample in lordly victories and tell others to do the same in order to have a nice time in heaven! Strange if anyone should think so: for it is always presented as dying, not vying, being a sacrifice, not making a sacrifice of other people! Does it take great scholarship to see that! Are these trifling differences of just two religions, unnoticed then ? Is the centre insignificant (Galatians 6:14)!

In fact, when Christ made His statement about loving your neighbour as yourself, it was in a CONTEXT where even the smallest letter or part of a letter of the law then extant, would be fulfilled. It was not stated in a void.

In the word of Christ in the Bible concerning loving the neighbour as oneself, the God of CREATION, being ALL-POWERFUL and PERSONAL, and having made each person for a purpose, informing man with reason, and having shown to him the entire structure of morality and reasons for it, is speaking in summary. It is not an astral statement made into an unknown void re an unknown or non-existent or guessed at God. Here the premisses for the evaluations which underlie this horizontal morality,  are all understood, as He moved first to the Jewish people. So far from rescinding or amending the law, as He declaimed, He fulfilled it. The second law was subject to the first, to love God with ALL your heart and soul and mind and strength. Only then does the second law apply: and then it is defined in a context of nil ambiguity, subject to no contrary applications!

Golden rules about survival comfortably are very different from those about setting truth into a world to be met by the Redeemer, and forwarding His appeal, that men might find eternal life personally, and avoid devastating judgment for their intemperance,  arrogance and fancies of the mind and heart, despising the very reality of God for gods which they make.

In these terms, some regard Christ as a problem, since He is the truth (John 14:6), and this is embarrassing to others who, while not being the truth, or in some  cases even knowing how they might find it amid the nugatory and indescribable, have ideas they want to be given equal weight. Hence, and for other reasons no doubt, they do not follow Him, but talk about following the rules of Him and of others: which they can scarcely do, since He declared, "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you," John 6:53. Again, If you do not believe that I am He {the Messiah}, you will  die in your sins (John 8:24), and as to that, there is Mark 9 for accord, if hell is where it is to be found...

Hence Christ is OUT for such people in their synthetic assimilation program, but a few words of His out of the total context starting with GOD, are in. How ludicrous! Your doctor tells you to breathe deeply each night, and to take the following six tablets if you want to stay alive. You do the breathing, note that many others in the health industry say just the same, and then add that they all really ... have much the same idea.

To say that this is a monstrous distortion is to be mild!

Again, are the major religions really basically near to identical, fashioned in much the same way, a matter of comparative indifference in various proposed mergers ?



Do they have in common the subjugation of women, often treated as chattels, the enthronement of superiority, so that others outside that religion are subjected to second class, special tax-paying subordination, death penalties for changing religion and subservience, jihads for eliminating what resists or annoys the sublimity of arrogance, one with entire lack of evidential support in terms of test, verification and validity. Nor can it show the presence of One who according to prophecy duly fulfilled down to the date of sacrificial death as forecast (Christ the Citadel ... Ch. 2), came and showed the reality in the flesh, that man might be mindful of the mind of God and not servilely submit himself to the slaveries of his own prodigiously important pronouncements. 

Do they all worship the Creator ? do they all have a rational respect for this Creator, or do some scrub Him out, in favour of systems from nowhere, that kick about, and undefinable somethings that never make it to the cognition of man ? Do all regale poverty of spirit, rather than victory leading to heaven, over enemy forces ? Do all indite the sin of man and provide salvation not only from its guile and guilt, but from its rewards ? Do all clean the soul and make man straight who was crooked, and worship their Maker on the basis of His verified word and authorised remedy ?

Some religions have God; some do not. Some have God speak. Some do not.  Some have salvation. Some do not. One has the Saviour who is God as man, verifiable, validated*2, others do not. One is testable to the uttermost; others are not. One starts with the beginning of creation and proceeds with records, others do not. One slams sin from the start as a fall, and invokes salvation to come from the first, as a necessity, tracing the aggregating depiction of what would at last be His coming, the One who saves; others do not. One traces events to come in detail and without failure; others do not.

If however truth does not matter, why burden 'religion' with the fiasco. If it does, why ignore its application to religion! If it cannot be found, why legislate what we truly should do ? If it can be, why not follow it. These 204 volumes show that it not only is, but is demonstrable, and the method is provided often enough (cf. What is the Chaff to the Wheat ? Chs. 3    -    4, Christ not Culture .... Ch. 1, esp. as marked, Serenity Not Serendipity ....Ch. 6). If now God simply does not matter, then why not make by the same purely human fiat, this time, the human spirit not to matter, the human values not to matter, and so all this chatter about having religions with supposedly similar values being junked them, not to matter. Who precisely IS this new god who tells gods what to do ?

Who is this who would bind them together in some inconceivable manner, like joining decapitated heads and arms from various bodies, making them fit: why not make this unimportant too ? If it is all unimportant, why set up to be important in some new idea of old ruin ? If on the other hand, it is MOST important that the religions get together, then the REALM is important, can be treated knowledgeably, and hence must be considered with no less precision and care than income tax, marriage and employment, nay more, since it includes the conditions for all of these, being subject to none.

Junking God in some realm of human manipulation for convenience is a responsible choice for any race or person; and if you follow it, why be surprised if the same result comes to you, junked because junking,  responsible for being irresponsible, a mash because awash with watery and woeful unreason, slapping in whatever seems convenient ... for WHAT ? To survive ? that is a characterless meaningless acceptance of mess status. Why seek to impose it on others ? Is it not enough if you choose it for yourself ? To get the best ? but how could you hope to do this by such fiats of fancy! Where is the good if you invent the means to find it in merely cavalier disregard of fact! You deal in fact ? Then on what basis did you find it ? It was out of your own mind and its preferences, now falsely if not delusively determining what does and does not matter, is good and is not, because it so fancies itself to be lordly, and   on its own basis, it is seeking for a summit when it does not even have a ground.




See Divine agenda Ch. 6.

See also:

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam ... by Robert Spencer.

This  volume of Spencer's has done a sound work in exposing the systematic use of violence in the text back of Islam, ignorance of which, in whatever language, can not be dressed up as academic fidelity. This remains so, whatever attack be made by the cultural tic which distorts the face of data for the sake of desire or governmental appearance, as it often does, when political dynamic surges into its midst. It has not been left to Spencer to show this dynamic of force that is so often ignored, except in practice. Yet he has done well in being wide-ranging. If this aspect of Islam is too transparent  to  need more; yet the furore of competing aims and hopes has made sustained truth necessary,  here provided to the point, with some acuity and assiduity. Thus his contribution is welcome in a well presented book of data.

In Jesus Christ for the People but Not for the World,  Epilogue, we find this:

Indeed, this week, in a local paper, the Messenger, in Adelaide, one reads that around 4 million people in Britain are church-goers, about 1 million active Muslims, and that on current trends, in a few decades, there could be more Muslims at mosques or meeting places than Christians (at least seen to be) in Church in England! To THIS WORLD, the Church of Jesus Christ CANNOT be wedded. IN this world, the love of power or pomp or romp or self-will or parade evilly surpasses any spirituality with substitutes either slithery or rampant. Sedition ends in perdition (Luke 9:26, II Cor. 11, Jude). Synthesis is a mere strategy for relegation on the one hand, and eventual proclamation on the other, of the humanly manufactured and elected religion to last a day before judgment! (II Thessalonians 2); more ? but not long.

IT is welded to confusion, deception and power. Indeed, to take an example in a recent work,
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades, a well-established author (Robert Spencer) exhibits in highly commended scholarship, just now much violence is to be seen in both history and the Koran, and how much it has been used from the invasion of Mecca on.

The God of glory did not INVADE Jerusalem, for that city crucified Him in His non-violent ways. NOTHING could be further apart than these two religions, one appealing to man to repent to the free gift of salvation, and the other appealing to works and war for its ends (John 18:36 cf. More Marvels ... Ch. 4, Divine Agenda ... Ch. 6).



The position of the Bible in this respect as singularly positive amid all religions is seen, for example,  in

1) SMR with TMR

2)  Deity and Design,  Designation and Destiny and especially





Bible or Blight, Christ or Confusion:
The Comprehensive Resolution of Man's Intractable Problems
is Found Only in the Bible, the Word of God.

The primacy of Christ is seen in the Bible, in history (cf. SMR Chs. 5-6,10, Christ, the Wisdom... Ch.  8, Repent or Perish Ch. 2with further aspects in The Lie Has a Limited Shelf-Life Ch. 5), for it is both backed by thought, verified by test, validated in quest and in this unique past even  any comparison. Its logical position has no equal, nor is there other source for the criteria which accord this to it. See for example,  What is the Chaff to the Wheat ... Chs. 3 and 4, Waiting for Wonder Appendix.