DOES THE HEBREW BIBLE PROPHECISE JESUS?

The 'Pooh Perplex' is a book written in 1963 by Frederick Crews. It takes the form of 12 essays supposedly written by 12 fictitious critics of different backgrounds such as a psychiatrist, a communist, or a philosopher. It is a satire on literary criticism  'Winnie-the-Pooh' is just an anthropomorphic teddy bear character in a series of children's story books. The Pooh Perplex shows how people can over-analyse something that simply isn't there, all because they observe through their own coloured lenses. It is a demonstration of cognitive bias.

Two words apply specifically to the interpretation of Biblical texts - exegesis and eisegesis. Exegesis is drawing out a scriptural text's meaning in accordance with the author's context and discoverable meaning. Eisegesis is when a reader imposes their own interpretation of the text. Thus exegesis tends to be objective; and eisegesis, highly subjective or biased.

The prologue serves to explain why orthodox Jews and Christians (both Jews or Gentiles) tend to read certain texts in the Hebrew Bible, or Tanakh, differently. Christians tend to read Jesus into the Tanakh, pointing out the various verses that prophecised Christ the Saviour. But does it, actually?

When interpreting scripture, amongst many other things to keep in mind, is the importance of context and the fact that ancient writings are often in metaphorical form. 

Isaiah 7:14:

"Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel."

"Immanuel' means 'God with us'. Christians see the word 'virgin' and knee jerk reaction is to interpret this as describing Jesus who comes 700 years later. Isaiah was writing in the time of King Ahaz in the Southern Judean Empire. Isaiah chapter 7 was about God's assurance to King Ahaz who despaired when the armies of Syria and Northern Kingdom of Isreal were planning to attack Judea. Isaiah was sent to assure Ahaz of God's intervention. The reference to Immanuel is assurance God is with Judea. Isaiah did make a prophecy in this chapter which is about Judea's eventual subjugation by the Babylonians 100 years later.  

Isaiah 9.6-7:

"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

Isaiah Chapter 9 is about the anger of God on Israel. It's the familiar theme of divine justice, the consequences of disobedience, and the promise of a future redemption and restoration through a divinely appointed leader. Christians see this as a reference to Jesus, Jews see a future Davidic king in the context of Isaiah's time. 

Zechariah 9.9:

"Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion! Shout, Daughter Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and victorious, lowly and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey."

Zechariah 9.1-8 is about God's judgement on the enemies of Israel. Remaining 9.9-17 is a message of hope and salvation with a prophecy of the coming of a righteous king. Christians see Jesus' triumphal entry on the donkey into Jerusalem. Jews tend to see a historical Davidic King in the near future timeframe of Zechariah's time.

Micah 5.2:

"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

Both Christians and Jews believe this is a prophecy of Bethlehem as the birth place for the messiah that is to come. However, again Christians believe this refers to Jesus while Jews believe it is a messiah that is yet to come.

Psalm 41.9:

"Even my close friend, someone I trusted, one who shared my bread, has turned against me."

Christians think this is a prophetic warning of the betrayal of Judas. In the New Testament, Jesus referred to this verse in John 13.18: "I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. But this is to fulfill this passage of Scripture: 'He who shared my bread has turned against me.'"

However, a careful reading of Psalm 41 we come to verse 4 which says : "I said, “Have mercy on me, Lord; heal me, for I have sinned against you.” ". The speaker of verse 9 is here saying in verse 4 that he has sinned. Clearly, Psalm 41 is not about Jesus, for surely to say Christ is a sinner would be sacrilegious.

Hosea 11.1:
"When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son."

According to Christian tradition, after the birth of Jesus, Herod ordered all babies below the age of 2 be killed. Joseph had a dream where an angel warned him to flee with Mary and baby Jesus to Egypt. After the death of Herod, Joseph took the family from Egypt back to Galilee and then Nazareth.

Matthew tried to bring Jesus into the Torah by writing in Matthew  2.15 "where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.”  "

Matthew asserted the 'son' in Hosea 11.1 refers to the 'Son of God', a title of Jesus. Thus was fulfilled the prophecy in the Tanakh. Matthew made an obvious error here. God calls Israel 'my son' or 'my sons' in many instances in the Tanakh which reflects his paternalistic relationship. Clearly, Hosea was not referring to Jesus. Hosea was writing about the Exodus.

Jeremiah 31:15-17

(15) "This is what the Lord says:

"A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more."
(16)This is what the Lord says: "Restrain your voice from weeping and your eyes from tears, for your work will be rewarded," declares the Lord. "They will return from the land of the enemy. 

(17) So there is hope for your descendants," declares the Lord. "Your children will return to their own land." "

In the same chapter 2 on Joseph's escape to Egypt, Matthew further distorts that a prophecy of Jeremiah was fulfilled with the scene of Rachel crying for babies killed by Herod. Matthew 2: (17): "Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled; (18) "A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.” This is an obvious mistake or manipulation by Matthew. Jeremiah is known as the weeping prophet. He wrote about Rachel who was weeping not for the dead, but for the children taken into captivity by the Babylonians. 

Isaiah 53

(1) Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

(2) He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

(3) He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

(4) Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.

(5) But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.

(6) We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

(7) He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

(8) By oppression and judgment he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished.

(9) He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.

(10) Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.

(11) After he has suffered, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.

(12) Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

This chapter is the icing on the cake, too seductive for any Christian to not exclaim "Eureka", the Tanakh definitely mentions Jesus. Indeed, many are convinced this is the unequivocal evidence. However, a careful reader would ask, who is this 'He' being spoken of? The answer is in verse 11 - 'my righteous servant'. Coming off chapter 52, one can easily see God was referring to Israel. In the Book of Isaiah, 'my servant' or plural form 'my servants' is used often to refer to Israel or the remnants of Jacobs descendants, example Isaiah 45.4: "For the sake of Jacob my servant, of Israel my chosen, I summon you by name and bestow on you a title of honor, though you do not acknowledge me." This underlines the special role of Israel in God's redemptive plans for humanity. Jews believe God will make Israel the spiritual leader of the world, a light to all nations, and people will come to know God and follow Him. This is prophesied in Zechariah 8:23: "This is what the Lord Almighty says: 'In those days ten people from all languages and nations will take firm hold of one Jew by the hem of his robe and say, "Let us go with you, because we have heard that God is with you."'"       

Daniel 9.24-27

(24) “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.”

(25) “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.”

(26)“After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.”

(27) “He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple, he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.”

Chapter 9 is Daniel in captivity in Babylon praying and confessing the sins of Israel and seeking God's redemption for Jerusalem. The angel Gabriel appeared to give him some insights of God's future plans.

Both Christians and Jews see these verses refer to a messianic prophecy. However, Christians see Jesus and his sacrificial death prophesied, but Jews believe it does not refer to Christ but a historical Davidic King.

The 'sevens' are believed to be sets of 7 years. The math does not add up:

Verse 24 says 70 sevens to suffer for their transgression, which is 490 years. The Jews were taken into Babylonian captivity when Jerusalem fell to Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II in 586 BC. But Cyrus The Great released them in 538 BC, that is only 4 sevens in captivity. 

Verse 25 says after the word goes out to restore Jerusalem there is a 7 sevens and 62 sevens. The decree to release the Jews by Cyrus was 538 BC. Thus 69 sevens bring us to 54 BC, the time of Roman rule.

Verse 26 says the Anointed One will be put to death. If Jesus is the 'Anointed One' here, the prophecy is Jesus will be killed after 54 BC, technically correct but 87 years off since Jesus was born around 1 AD or thereabouts. "The ruler who will come to destroy the city" is Pompeii who came in 63 BC.

Verse 27 makes no sense. If the 'He' is Pompeii, the 'covenant' is not clear. After the Maccabean Revolt against the Greek King Antiochus Epiphanes in 167 BC, Israel was ruled by the Hasmonean Dynasty. At the time of Pompeii's arrival, there was a power struggle of brothers Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II after the death of their father King Alexander Jannaeus in 67 AD. Both brothers sought the support of Pompeii who favoured Hyrcanus II. Aeistobulus II took up defensive position in Jurasalem. The Romans went on the offensive against Jerusalem and defeated Aristobulus. That was when Pompeii entered the Holy City and the Temple grounds , which was considered a sacrilege. The 'abomination that causes desolation' mentioned here is confusing. Which is the one prophesied here? The one commonly understood historically as the abomination of desolation is when Epiphanes replaced Jewish practice of daily offerings at the Temple with pagan sacrifices. Pompeii's intrusion into the sacred Temple grounds was also considered an abomination. The Greek Gospels also referred to Jesus' warning of a devastating abomination. Mark 13-14:“When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains." Mark 13.19: "...because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again." Quite clearly, Jesus' abomination refers to the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD by Roman General Titus. 

The debate continues. Christians generally, and many Christian scholars, would love to see Jesus in the Tanakh. There are also many Christian scholars who say the evidence is just not there. One example is John Dominic Crossan, co-founder of Jesus Seminar, a group of scholars focused on the historical Jesus. Crossan argues that many Hebrew Bible passages traditionally seen as messianic prophecies about Jesus, such as the various verses mentioned above, are unrelated to Jesus and New Testament writers have misinterpreted them.

The absence of a Jesus messianic prophecy in the Hebrew Bible has no bearing on Christianity as that is not a foundational pillar of the faith.
 

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.

I WAS RIGHT AGAIN ABOUT THE TRUMP 'HUSH MONEY' TRIAL

 
Last Friday June 21 the Supreme Court of the US ruled on  the Erlinger vs US case which has a huge positive implication for the 'hush money' case of Trump for which he has been convicted and awaiting sentencing. There is hardly a whimper in media which is not surprising given the leftist media has no appetite for any good news on Trump.

This ruling by SCOTUS is interesting at a few levels which I will explain in a bit. I just want to emphasise I am not a lawyer but that does not preclude one from trying to ply through legalistic mumbo jumbo with a reasonable mind.

The case of Erlinger vs US is basically about recidivism punishment, ie punishment for earlier crimes. Paul Erlinger was found guilty of burglary which carries a maximum term of 10 years in prison. Due to certain circumstances, the judge said he would have handed him a 5 year term. However, he had several cases of burglary some 26 years ago. Under the federal Armed Career Criminal Act, 3 and more episodes of the crime carry a mandatory minimum 15 years, so the judge had no choice. Erlinger appealed. on grounds his previous burglaries constituted one single violation and the judge cannot sentence him for those previous cases without his right to jury. The apellate court agreed with the lower court's opinion and the 15 year sentence stayed. However, the apellate court felt a writ of certifiori was necessary. This is a request for a higher court to perform a judicial review. It is a mechanism to allow SCOTUS to cut the queue to review important cases. SCOTUS may choose to ignore writs of certifiori. They take up only cases that are important from the point of view of settling the laws involved.

SCOTUS accepted the case, and deemed it important enough that they had an amicus, which is a 'friend of the court'. It is someone not involved in a case but engaged to present arguments of the case. Last Friday, SCOTUS ruled on the case. In a 6-3 decision the court vacated the decision of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings. In other words, SCOTUS asked for a retrial. For the purpose of the Armed Career Criminal Act, the lower court has to comply with the 5th and 6th Amendment to determine whether Erlinger's past offences were one single episode, or committed on different occasions. 

The 5th Amendment protects against abuse of government authorities in a legal proceeding, and 6th Amendment guarantees the right to a fair and speedy trial by jury. 

In the 6-3 decision, the majority view was held by 3 of the 5 conservative, and 3 of the 4 liberal, judges. It shows that for non-politically related cases, the US judiciary system functions remarkably well. The lone liberal with dissenting view was the new progressive justice Ketanji Jackson Brown, the one appointed by Biden and who cannot define what a woman is.

Essentially, what this ruling boils down to is (1) sentence enhancement cannot be arbitrarily done by judicial fiat; (2) a defendant in court is to be judged by a jury from his own community with the time-honoured requirement of a unanimous decision in the case of a felony. Point (2) has been covered many times, and as recently as in 2020 when SCOTUS, by another 6-3 decision, struck down a 1972 ruling in Louisiana that allows accused criminals to be convicted of serious crimes without a unanimous vote of the jury. 

What does this SCOTUS decision have to do with the Trump 'hush money' case? There are many issues Trump's lawyers will raise in their appeal, one of which is to do with the fact there was no unanimous jury decision. In his instruction to the jury, Judge Merchan said:

"You can all disagree on if the crime was committed so long as you agree Trump committed any crime, lock him up."

What does this mean? Trump faced 34 counts on 3 charges, namely:

(A) Falsifying records - by paying to his lawyer, the accountant posted the transaction to "Legal Fees Account". (If not this account, then what account? Even so if incorrect, it is just a very minor misdemeanor, not a felony).
(B) Tax violation - the wrong accounting is a violation of tax regulations (again a very minor misdemeanor, not a felony.)
(C) Federal election campaign - by causing (A) and (B) Trump's intention was to hide the payment to Stormy Daniels and this is a crime because it is trying to influence his election campaign.

Because of the intention of (C), the acts of (A) and (B) are no longer misdemeanors, but they become felonies. Thus intent is a key factor in the case.

Each of the 34 cheques Trump signed broke these 3 laws. That is the fact of the case for the prosecution.

So what Judge Merchan instructed was the jurors need not all agree on all 3 charges, so long as they all agree Trump was guilty on at least one of the charge, he will consider the decision unanimous. In other words, it will only be non-unanimous if none of the jurors found him not guilt on any one of the charges.

For example, Judge Merchan will consider the decision unanimous if the number of jurors found him guilty on each of the charges thus:

(A) x 6; (B) x 5; (C) x 1.

For a unanimous decision, the sc6re should have to be (A) x 12; (B) x 12; (C) x 12 for him to be guilty on all 3 charges. The jury did not deliver such a verdict.

In my previous blog "Democrats' gotcha moment in rigged trial of Trump in New York" I indicated there was no unanimous decision and will almost likely be vacated on appeal up to the Supreme Court. The irony is that this being a political case where liberal judges tend to be partisan, 3 of the 4 progressive judges of the Supreme Court have already ruled in the Erlinger vs US case which is in favour of Trump. 

The key contention is the 'intention' of Trump in charge (C). As I mentioned in my earlier 'Rigged' blog, the prosecution never proved intent. (C) is a federal crime for which the courts of Manhattan has no jurisdiction.

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.

BETRAYAL OF THE INTELLIGENTSIA

You cannot not care about politics, locally or around the world, and then one day to ask why the cost of bread has gone up. It's an interconnected world and the cause and effect of karmic acts touches all including the most apathetic. 

Social-economics, cultural and political landscape is always in a state of flux. Changes often follows with a change of the elected class. Changes are inevitable as societies redefine how they wish to conduct they way they live. But once in a while, history records upheavals when seismic shifts occur, such as in the Enlightenment, French Revolution, October Revolution, and World War II. These tumultuous events germinated from seeds, thoughts or ideas out of great philosophical minds. Such abstracts require implementers or revolutionaries to organise and bring to fruition. Example the socio-economic ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels had revolutionaries in Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Mao Tse Tung, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro to turn their countries red.

The populace for the most part, do not really have a full picture of what's going on. Even by today, how many really understand the difference between Marxism and Lenism, or Stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism for that matter. There is the notion of 'sagesse oblige' which is that those endowed with wisdom, learning and understanding, have a moral imperative to comment on these thoughts and developments. With higher education, comes higher ethical and moral responsibility. It is through them that socio-economic thoughts of the day are shared with the public at large. These class of people must engage in non-partisan, robust debates to share, educate and help social-economic evolution for the betterment of their community.

In 1927 French philosopher Julien Benda wrote “La Trahison des Clercs” which translates to "The Treason Of The Intellectuals". This was the interwar period where Europe was making a seismic socio-political shift to the extreme Right. The zeitgeist, or prevailing spirit, in most countries is best described in another German term, 'volksgeist'. This is the idea of a national spirit, where a particular group of people share some common mental, intellectual, moral, and cultural traits that define them as a tribe or nation. This volksgeist at the time was driven by several key factors, top most was the Central Power that lost World War I (Germany, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires) felt the Versailles Treaty was unjust in the harsh reparations and territorial losses which caused great humiliation and instilled a desire to restore nationalistic pride. With many territorial disputes going on, revanchism and irredentism drove nationalistic fervour. A fear of the rise of communism caused people to close ranks to protect their tradition and culture. Wilsonanism, the self-determination principles promoted by President Woodrow Wilson on the break-up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Ottoman Empire, inspired sovereign nationalism 

Popularism was pushing Europe towards national socialism and eventually militarism. Thus the inevitable rise of fascism in Italy and Germany. Julien Benda was arguing that intellectuals must stick to the universal values of objective truth, impartial truth, rational thought and reasoning, humanism and maintain their moral integrity. Benda's point was intellectuals should work towards universal betterment of humanity and not towards some national agenda.

The 'Treason' Benda's book referred to was intellectuals not adhering to their universal roles but were seduced by political and nationalistic arguments. That German intellectuals were corrupted is evident in the way the vast number supported Hitler and their war efforts.

Julien Benda's book was prophetic in hindsight after WWII.

In our current times, another great social-cultural and socio-political seismic shift is taking place. The populace is aware of the chaos going on in the Western world but how many are able to shift through the misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy claims and counter-claims to understand what is going on. In very basic terms, we are seeing another great ideological shift to the extreme, but this time, to the Left. Only this time, it is not just Europe. The US is leading the move to the extreme Left, and Europe, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are onboard.

It is the same universal classless ideology of Marxism and Trotskyism hiding behind the Liberal mask. Karl Marx saw a universal classless society which of course is impossible as someone needs to run the show. So Lenin has his Bolsheviks, the governing body of the proletariats. Of course we know how the story went. The pigs gained control of Animal Farm. So the Bolsheviks became the ruling class in their classless society.

In Marxism 2.0 there is no Bolshevik party, but the techno-oligarch elites. The class that meets once every year in Davos under the banner of World Economic Forum, are the pigs who are ready to take over the farm. The New World Order is going to be George Orwell's Animal Farm.. 

So one may ask what has the New World Order got to do with the chaos in the Western world? The DEI (diversity, equality, inclusion), transgenderism, LGBTQ+++, anti-Christianity, open-borders, pro-criminal, anti-conservatives, anti-gun, pro-abortion, anti-farmers etc are all destructive and divisive policies. Why are Western countries all pursuing these same policies? Surely the governments know of the damages these policies are causing. In addition to these, there is the fear mongering of pandemic, climate change, the evil China, perpetuating the Ukraine-Russia war. What is the purpose for all these?

In Marx's time, the class war was between the bourgeoisie, those that owns capital and production, and the proletariat, those that sells their labour for wages. Today the Left is cunningly using  any divisive line by identity politics. The father of this in the US is Obama, but the idea came out of Critical Race Theory from the intellectuals of the Frankfurt School. The aim was to develop Marxist studies. Founded in 1923, it was originally housed in the Institute for Social Research in the Geothe University, Frankfurt, Germany. It was closed by Hitler after 1933 which was no surprise as communism is a great enemy of Fascism. The school moved to the US under the auspices of Columbia University in New York City. What came out of Critical Race Theory is Cultural Marxism.

Google 'Cultural Marxism', or 'Critical Race Theory', and one will see misinformation on full display. The Left dis-associates the Frankfurt School from critical race theory and puts it down as conspiracy theory of the Right, the typical mirror politics of Communists - always blame the other side of what they themselves are guilty of. What is cultural Marxism? In a nutshell, it is using any cultural division then own it by taking one side. The logic is very simple. Take abortion. The Democrats take one side, pro-abortion. If that is a 50-50 issue, the Democrats have 50% of the votes. Of the other 50%, probably 10% can be convinced. Result - Democrats win 55%. Barrack Obama mastered this technique tutored by Saul Alinsky, a community activist and  political analyst. In Alinksy's famous "Rules for Radicals", his point 13 reads:

"Pick the target, freeze it, personalise it, and polarise it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people, and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions."

The woke culture, the cancel culture, the lawfare, the racist accusation if one is not on their side, all the social divisiveness - where do they come from and who started all these? It had its beginnings with Obama's political correctness, 

In my 2022 blog on Operation Spectrum I mentioned how Lee Kuan Yew kicked one Ron Fuyiyoshi out of Singapore. Fuyiyoshi was an assistant that Saul Alinsky despatched to Singapore at the request of the East Asian Christian Conference to help organise their community outreach programme. LKY had far visions and will tolerate none of Alinsky's rules for radicals.

It all boils down to the need for control. Western countries are all developed with high middle class demographics, where people has a generally good standard of living. It is not possible to disenfranchise a generally satisfied population to the extreme Left. To rebuild society, one first has to destroy existing institutions and traditions. Hillary Clinton once explained how traditional values must be re-evaluated. The middle class is being decimated, farming is increasingly problematic with the banning of nitrogen fertilisers, insane policies such as minimum wages and lack of law and order has driven retail stores and food chains to close, identity politics has driven families and neighbours against each other. Create chaos, drive people to a level of dependency, instill fear, and they will trade their rights for security. The politics of hate of the Liberals are doing a fine job.

In December 2023, Sir Nigel Ferguson of Harvard University, wrote an article of the same title "Treason Of The Intellectuals". He wrote that a century after Julien Benda's book, American academia has gone in the opposite direction - leftward instead of rightward - but has ended up in much the same place, which is a creep towards totalitarianism. But this time, he "witnessed the willingness of trustees, donors, and alumni to tolerate the politicization of American universities by an illiberal coalition of “woke” progressives, adherents of “critical race theory,” and apologists for Islamist extremism."

Sir Niger has expanded Benda's 'intellectuals'. I have gone further to lay the betrayal on the 'intellegentsia' which includes intellectuals, scholars, academics, teachers, journalists, writers, professionals, eminent industry leaders with specialist knowledge, and the leadership in various public agencies. All these people are well endowed with intellect and insight, and often with platforms to teach, but they have allowed political activism to pervade into their domain.

In fact, the situation is much more toxic. The Left has monetised social influencers in social media and entertainment industry to promote their narratives. These however, are just demagogues and pedagogues promoting the narratives of the intellectuals. The likes of Robert de Nero is for all to see -- he needs a better mouth-wash so maybe then he can articulate something intelligent.

The Age of Enlightenment in the 17th century took Europe out of the Dark Ages of dogmatism. Enlightenment came but has largely left Roman Catholicism intact. As long as one side retains respect for authority and the other side exercising authority remains confident, such socio-cultural changes should not tear the system apart. Society would retain its legitimacy. But when the corruption of intelligentsia with their participation in political activism takes place, societal upheaval is inevitable.

The concept of  'thought' and 'non-thought' by Alain Finkielkraut, a French philosopher, is most instructive. 'Thought' are the ideals of intellectual independence, commitment to truth, and the defense of universal core values of Enlightenment of reason, individualism, skepticism, progress, secularism, liberty, humanism, and equality. There must be engagement in critical thinking with intellectual rigor. "Non-thought' is when intellectuals conform to dominant ideologies and simplistic narratives. This is a threat to the quality of public discourse, education, and culture.

Finkielkraut feels that education has a crucial role in fostering the kind of reflective and independent thought necessary for a healthy and vibrant intellectual culture. Unfortunately, in the words of Sir Nigel:

"Anyone who has a naive belief in the power of higher education to instill morality has not studied the history of German universities in the Third Reich."

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.

THOSE THAT GOD BLESSES AND THOSE THAT GOD CURSES

On 13 Apr 2024, Iran launched a massive air strike on Israel. It was the first direct attack by Iran on Israel in what was the biggest drone strike against any nation. Israel's air defence system, together with Jordanian and US forces, took out 99% of the drones. Eight Iranian missiles hit Israel's Nevatim Airbase which remained operational. On 18 April Israeli airforce retaliated with a limited strike deep inside Iran.

One month after ordering the attack on Israel, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi perished in a helicopter crash. Just as he brought terror and destruction to rain down on the nation of Israel from the air, death came to him in the horrors of an air crash. Raisi, known as the 'Butcher of Tehran' for his harsh treatment of protestors against the Islamic regime, is yet another casualty of divine predictability that enemies of Israel ignore at their peril.

Genesis 12:3:
And I will bless those who bless you, And the one who curses you I will curse. And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.

This was the covenant of God to the children of Abraham, one that seems to have been sustained through biblical, ancient and modern times.

Pharaoh of Egypt:

According to biblical account, Joseph's siblings sold him into slavery. He ended up in Egypt where he came into prominence due to his ability to interpret the King's dreams of an impending famine. Promoted to an administrative position of power, he helped the king to govern through seven years of famine. The Exodus story took place either in the Middle Kingdom or possibly during the Hyksos period. The Bible does not name the pharaoh at the time. It is believed to be Thutmose III, Amenhotep II or Ramesses II. By the time the new pharaoh came to the throne, the Hebrew tribes had gained substantial political power. To rebalance the power structure, the pharaoh ordered all new born Hebrews to be killed and threw the rest to hard labour. By the time Mosses came into leadership role, God demanded the pharaoh to release the Hebrews from slavery. When the pharaoh went against the wishes of God, the Eqyptians suffered 10 plagues which caused severe hardship and deaths before the pharaoh agreed to release Mosses and his people.

The Assyrian Empire:

After Exodus, Abraham's children had settled into the norther kingdom of Israel and southern kingdom of Judea. The 2 tribes of Judah and Benjamin settled in Judea and were known as Jews. The other ten tribes settled in Israel and were known as Israelites.

In time the Israelites lost faith with God and went pagan worshipping. According to Biblical tradition, God used the Assyrians to punish Israel,  In 722 BC the Assyrians defeated the Israelites and took over the region of Samaria. The Assyrians displaced the Israelites into various locations of their empire and the ten tribes of Israel were lost to history. The Assyrians populated the Samaria region with other races of territories they  conquered. These newcomers intermarried with those Israelites who had remained behind. The new inhabitants became known as Samaritans. Some of the Israelites repented and moved south to Judea and were assimilated as Jews.

But Assyrian ambitions went beyond God's intention of punishing Israel. They assumed their conquest was due to their own capabilities. not God's design. In 701 BC, Assyrian King Sennacherib attacked Jerusalem but was unable to defeat King Hezekiah who had the counsel of prophet Isaiah. The story (2 Kings 19.35) tells of how God struck down 185,000 Assyrian soldiers during the night. Unable to continue his attack on Jerusalem, Sennacherib returned to Nineveh where he was later assassinated by his own sons. The Assyrian empire ended in 612 BC when they fell to the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II, as prophesied by Isaiah and Jeremiah..

Note: After I had completed writing thus far, I went to bed. Early next morning, as if by providence, I read a breaking news story of researchers finding what they believed to be the campsite of King Sennacherib's army.

"Proof of Bible story about angels killing 185,000 soldiers in a night is uncovered after 2,700 years" ...Daily Mail UK

The Babylonians:

After Israel was no more, Judea soon fall out of grace with God as moral decay and pagan practice returned. There was much social injustice. It was a time when great prophets Isaiah, Ezekiel and Jeremiah tried to persuade Jews back to the righteous path. Jeremiah prophesied the fall of Judea and captivity in Babylon as God's punishment. Biblical tradition is God raised Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II up and used him as a means to punish Judea. In the Bible, God refers to Nebuchadnezzar as "My Servant". Nebuchadnezzar's reign was the golden age of Babylon. Initially he made Judea a vassal state in 598 BC, but after a rebellion, Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem in 587 BC. He razed Solomon's Temple to the ground, carted off temple treasures, and took thousands of Jews into slavery. That was the First Temple destruction. Daniel was one of those taken away to Babylon.

Nebuchadnezzar was a wise king who allowed the people whom he defeated to retain their culture and religion and he made use of their intelligentsia in his administration. Daniel gained the king's favours when he was able to interpret Nebuchadnezzar's famous dream of a statute with head of gold, breasts and arms of silver, belly and thighs of bronze, legs of iron, and feet of iron mixed with clay. For that, the king praised Daniel's God Yahweh. Over time. Nebuchadnezzar fell away from and showed disrespect to the Hebrew God. The Bible account had it that God caused the king to go crazy and eat like a wild animal. He was made to suffer like a stray animal for 7 years as punishment. History actually records that Nebuchadnezzar II disappeared for a few years towards the end of his reign. After he repented, God restored him and he reigned till his death at 562 BC.

Four kings that came later were not capable, despotic, and had short reigns. In Bible account, the last king, Belshazzar, held a grand banquet for his nobles. For the occasion he did the unthinkable of arrogance and desecration of holy artifacts by having everyone drink from the golden and silver goblets Nebuchadnezzar had looted from Solomon's Temple. The fingers of a hand suddenly appeared and wrote these words on the wall :

MENE, MENE, TEKEL, PARSIN

None could interpret the meaning and finally Daniel was called for. Daniel explained the king had not learnt from the punishment Nebuchadnezzar suffered living as a wild animal for his arrogance towards Yahweh. The words meant 'number, number, weigh, Medes and Persia'. Daniel explained the inscription meant God had numbered the days of his reign, he had been weighed and found wanting, the empire will be taken over by Medes and Persia. That night, Belshazzar was assassinated and Cyrus The Great entered Babylon without resistance.

Cyrus The Great, the Medio-Persian king, added Babylonia to his Persian Empire in 539 BC as prophesied by Isaiah. The biblical account, Nabonidus Chronicle (cuneiform writings on clay tablet discovered in 1879), Cyrus Cylinder (cuneiform writings on clay artifact discovered in 1879) and Greek historians Herodotus and Xenophon, all 5 accounts are not corroborations. Modern historians discount the Greek versions. The cuneiform records have the last Babylonian king as Nabonidus, the Bible say it was Belshazzar. The cuneiform records have the Babylonian top god Marduk as the one that allowed Cyrus to take over, the Bible says it was Yahweh.

Nabonidus was indeed the last king. He had his interest elsewhere, in archaeology and construction of older architecture. He was in fact known as the First Archaeologist. He was a religious reformer who tried to install the sun god Sin to replace the Babylonian matron god Marduk. This background perhaps explains a few key points. Narbonidus' favour of the god Sin probably put him in conflict with the Marduk priesthood, thus palace conspiracy led to an easy victory for Cyrus The Great in the capture of Babylon without a fight. Belshazzar was the son of Nabonidus who acted as Regent as his father was absent on the throne for long periods of time. Belshazzar was practically the king, that being so, the Bible's account is once again proven correct.

Cyrus The Great released the Jews from captivity. For that, he has special place of honour amongst Israelis of today.

Haman, the First Anti-Semite (Book of Esther):

During the neo-Persian empire in the court of King Ahasuerus, there was a prime minister called Haman the Agagite. Haman had grown so powerful that by decree all court officials had to bow to him. A Jew by the name of Mordecai, was advisor to the Queen Esther. Mordecai refused to bow before Haman which drew the wrath of the minister. He plotted to have Mordecai and all Jews in the empire killed. Haman managed to convince the King. Haman then cast a date and constructed a very high gallow to carry out the execution. Mordecai sought the help of Esther. The Queen, who had concealed her Jewish lineage, pleaded with the King who determined Haman's wickedness and had him hanged on the very gallows he had constructed.

The historicity of the characters are in doubt. Ahaseurus was thought to be King Xerxes I, but his wife was Queen Amertris. Haman is supposed to be descendants of Agag, king of Amalekites, ancient enemies of Israelites. The Hebrew Book of Esther has no mention of God throughout. The Greek version has additional verses which mentions God. The canonicity of the book is controversial. It is generally acknowledged the Book of Esther is just a story. Nevertheless the Book of Esther is canonised with protestants dismissing the Greek additions.

The Book of Esther is basically held to show God working out of view. The Jews practice to this day the Festival of Purim (the day of the proposed execution) when the Book of Esther is read.

The Seleucid Empire:

After the death of Alexander The Great, his empire was split into 4 parts under each of his generals. Seleucus Nicanor took the Mesopotamia region which includes the present day Palestine area.

Antiochios IV Epephanes ruled from 175-164 BC. He instituted the Helenisation of Judea and Samaria by wiping out Jewish cultural and religious practices. He stopped the practice of Jewish sacrifices at the Second Temple and installed the Greek god Zeus. This was the time of 'Abomination of Desolation' of the temple prophesied by Daniel. It triggered the Maccabean Revolt by the Maccabees who took control of Judea and ruled as the Hasmonean Dynasty from 167 BC to 34 BC. In trying to wipe out Jewish culture, Antiochios lost Judea to the Jews.

The Roman Empire:

There existed tensions between Romans and Jews which broke out into the First Jewish-Roman War (66-73 CE). Rome sought to destroy Jewish identity by renaming the province from Judea to Syrian Palestina. In 70 AD Rome totally destroyed the Second Temple, leaving only the Western Wall standing. A temple dedicated to Zeus was constructed on the site of the temple. With the temple gone, Jewish sacrificial rites ceased. To this day Jews changed their religious practice to what is called Rabbinical Judaism.

After the death of Christ, Rome persecuted both Jews in Judea and Christians in the Roman Empire, especially under Emperor Nero. But what happened was the Christianisation of the Roman Empire. This culminated in the legalisation of Christianity with the conversion of Emperor Constantine in 312 AD.

The Christianisation of the Roman Empire is an incredible story of missionary activities by key figures like Paul and Peter, the presence of an existing Jewish community, the dedication of early converts, and the resilience of believers amidst persecution. There were no social media and internet. People met in secret in house churches under extreme threat of severe punishment, even death. If there is a lesson to be learnt, it is human resilience is impossible to stop when there is faith and conviction. The way Christianity grew in the Roman Empire is exactly what is taking place in Iran, China and Islamic countries in Africa and elsewhere. 

Nazi Germany:

Much has already been written on Hitler's Final Solution to the Jewish Question and the consequential holocaust where 6 million Jews were gassed in the concentration camps. Hitler tried to wipe out the Jews in Europe but ended up destroying the German Republic and indirectly helped create the condition that led to the Balfour Declaration and the return of the Jews to Palestine and creation of State of Israel in 1948.

Idi Amin of Uganda:

Idi Amin was a ruthless President of Uganda from 1971 to 1979. Initially he was pro-British and pro-West and pro-Israel but eventually switched allegiance to militant Islamist states,USSR and East Germany. In 1976, Palestinian and German terrorists hijacked an Air France plane at Athens airport. It was commandeered to Libya and then Uganda where Idi Amin personally welcomed the terrorists. The group enjoyed support from Idi Amin who placed more than 140 soldiers to guard the plane and hostages at Entebbe Airport.

Most of the non-Israeli passengers were released. The airline crew and Israeli passengers were kept hostage. Amin was uncooperative and attempts at diplomacy and negotiation via Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Palestinian Liberation Organisation failed. Amin refused to cooperate with an Israeli Mossad official he was on personal terms with. With time running out, Israel carried out a daring commando raid with Kenya opening airspace for them. In the rescue operation Israeli force commander Lt Colonel Yonatan Netanyahu, the elder brother of Prime Minister Benjamin was fatally shot by Amin's soldiers. 102 hostages were rescued. 2 had been killed earlier. In retaliation, Ugandan authorities murdered Israeli hostage Dora Bloch who was at a hospital at the time of rescue. Amin went on a rampage against Kenyans in Uganda, killing 240 of them and causing thousands to flee Uganda.

In 1978 Idi Amin tried to annex a region of Tanzania. The Tanzanian army launched an offensive in 1979 and captured Kampala, forcing Amin to flee the country. The Ugandan dictator lived in exile in Saudi Arabia till his death in 2003.  

The Soviet Union:

Stalin held extreme hatred for the Jews. In 1939 when Stalin agreed to work with the Nazi axis, he threw out all Jewish workers in public service and was targetting Soviet nationals with Jewish names. Following WWII, Stalin pursued policies of anti-Semitism, including restrictions on Jewish religious practices and cultural expression. According to Nikita Kruschev, at the time of his death, Stalin was fomenting what was called 'Doctor's Plot'. It was a state-sponsored anti-semitic campaign built on a conspiracy theory that a group of mostly Jewish doctors were planning to assassinate Soviet political leaders. A lot of Jews were rounded up, tortured and jailed, and equally many others lost their jobs. A few weeks after his death, the campaign was discontinued and the government declared there was no evidence against the Jews.

The Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991. Out of the ashes came many independent republics and greater freedom for Jewish communities within the former Soviet states.


And now in 2024, we had Iranian President Raisi. Oh when will they ever learn!

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.

The no-big-deal blog FB don't want you to see

 

There is no mis-information or dis-information in a recent blog of mine. Facebook has blocked it on several tries. Click on the image for the link and you can check for yourself whether it is fact-driven. Contents may be inconvenient for some, that's all. 

ON JUDGEMENT DAY ACCOUNT, QURAN AND HADITH POINT TO JESUS AS GOD

Muslims revere Jesus as a prophet. Isa, as Jesus is known in Arabic, is mentioned by name 25 times in the Quran while Muhammad is mentioned only 4 times. Muslims are taught Jesus is of virgin birth, but merely a man. The Quran mentions several times that Isa is just a prophet and not God. Examples :

Surah5.57:
The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him.
Surah 4.171:
The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers.

Muslims always renounce Christianity on one of their several usual claims. First and foremost, the claim that Jesus was not a God. In this blog I show Jesus is God based on what the Quran and Hadith actually say concerning the Day of Judgement.

Surah 22.6:
This is because Allah alone is the Truth. He alone gives life to the dead, and He alone is capable of everything.
Surah 22.7
And certainly the Hour is coming, there is no doubt about it. And Allah will surely resurrect those in the grave.

These verses relate to Yom al-Qiyamah, that is, the Day or Judgement or Resurrection. There are several claims here that no one else, no prophet or messenger, except Allah, can make. These are His attributes, which are also some of His 99 names by which only He can be called. He is Al-Haqq (The Truth), Al-Muhyi (Giver of Life), Al-Qdair (Omnipotent- capable of everything), and Al-Ba’ith (Resurrector). Here the Quran says Allah has power to bring the dead back to life, and that on the Day of Resurrection, he will raise the dead. No one else, except Allah can perform these deeds.

John 5.21, 26, 28, 29:
(21) For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes
(26) Truly, truly, I say to you an Hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.
(28) Do not marvel at this, for an Hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice.
(29) and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed evil a resurrection of judgement.

John 14.6:
Jesus said to him: "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father but through me."

John 6.40:
For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.

Six hundred years earlier, Jesus said he is the Truth (Al-Haqq), he has the same power as the Father to bring the dead back to life (Al-Muhyi) and it's His job to raise the dead on Judgement Day. He also said He is the Light (An-Nur) and the Way (Ar-Rashid) which are also other names of Allah. If the Quran says all these are attributes of Allah, then the good book must surely mean Jesus is also God.

If Jesus was just a messenger of Allah and he made those claims of divinity, then surely Allah would not have permitted that. 'Islam' means total subjugation to God. Allah permits no disobedience from believers and his prophets. This is summed up in Surah 69.44-48.

Surah 69:44-47:
(44) And if he (the Prophet) had made up about Us some [false] sayings,
(45) We would have seized him by the right hand;
(46) Then We would have cut from him the aorta.
(47) And there is no one of you who could prevent [Us] from him.

In reference to His messenger, Allah promises He would surely cut Muhammad's aorta for lying which means the certainty of death. Surely Allah would have treated His other prophets such, as Jesus, in similar manner for making false claims? Surah 4.157 describes how Allah, the great deceiver, saved Jesus from crucifixion by using a dopelganger in his place which deceived the Romans and Jews. In Surah 4.158: "Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise." Apparently Allah does not consider what Jesus said in those verses in John as false sayings, which therefore is to say, the Quran implies Jesus is God after all.

To Muslims, Quran is the actual words of Allah revealed through Muhammad and hadiths are the words and deeds of the prophet transmitted through a chain of narrators. Hadiths rank second in importance to Muslims and it is a source for religious and moral guidance formulated in the Sunnah. It is the hadiths, not the Quran, that principally shape Islamic jurisprudence known as Sharia and Islamic traditions and practices. This is the reason why non-Muslims are sometimes confused to think Muslims hold greater reverence for the Prophet than Allah. 

Hadiths are records of what Muhammad's companions or family said they heard from Muhammad or saw what he did, and also records of what someone who heard from these companions and family members. Contentions arise amongst Muslims over these hadiths and the schism gave rise to the various sects in Islam same way as Protestantism in Christianity. Hadiths are classed by its authenticity into sahid, hasan, or da'if (authentic, good or weak). 

Hadith Qudsi is a special collection of hadiths which Muslims believe are the words of Allah as narrated by Muhammad. The Quran are the words of Allah ad verbatim. Hadith Qudsi are words of Allah expressed by Muhammad and these are not included in Quran. Qudsi means 'pure' There are many such 'pure' hadiths, depending on which publication.

AnNawawis Forty Hadith Qudsi 18: :

On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: Allah (mighty and sublime be He) will say on the Day of Resurrection:

O son of Adam, I fell ill and you visited Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I visit You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so had fallen ill and you visited him not? Did you not know that had you visited him you would have found Me with him? O son of Adam, I asked you for food and you fed Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I feed You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so asked you for food and you fed him not? Did you not know that had you fed him you would surely have found that (the reward for doing so) with Me? O son of Adam, I asked you to give Me to drink and you gave Me not to drink. He will say: O Lord, how should I give You to drink whin You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: My servant So-and-so asked you to give him to drink and you gave him not to drink. Had you given him to drink you would have surely found that with Me.
It was related by Muslim.

This is about the Day of Judgement where Allah considers the righteousness of  Muslims. Those who have not done right by his neighbours, have not done right with Allah. Only the righteous are allowed to exit Hell. This hadith seems remarkably familiar to something spoken 600 years earlier . 

Matthew 25:31-46 (KJV):

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

In Christianity, Jesus is the King on the Day of Judgement, the Malik Yom Hadin.  He sits to judge the nations and this is what He will say to the righteous and the un-righteous. 

Why then did Muhammad say that on Day of Judgement, Allah will say what Jesus will say on that day?  To put it another way, why did Jesus said 600 years earlier, that He is the Malik Yom Hadin and when He judges the nations He will say what Muslims say Muhammad said God will say?

The escape hatch for Muslims in this kind of conundrum is another of their common polemic - the Bible has been corrupted. Now let's just go along with this, and I am not saying Bible is corrupted, but just assume it is. How can the corruptor of Matthew's write what Jesus will say that 600 years later Muhammad will say Allah will say on Judgement Day?

The only conclusion is either Muhammad was a plagiarist, or Islam confirms Jesus is God.    

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.

ON JUDGEMENT DAY ACCOUNT, QURAN AND HADITH POINT TO JESUS AS GOD

Muslims revere Jesus as a prophet. Isa, as Jesus is known in Arabic, is mentioned by name 25 times in the Quran while Muhammad is mentioned only 4 times. Muslims are taught Jesus is of virgin birth, but merely a man. The Quran mentions several times that Isa is just a prophet and not God. Examples :

Surah5.57:
The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him.
Surah 4.171:
The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers.

Muslims always renounce Christianity on one of their several usual claims. First and foremost, the claim that Jesus was not a God. In this blog I show Jesus is God based on what the Quran and Hadith actually say concerning the Day of Judgement.

Surah 22.6:
This is because Allah alone is the Truth. He alone gives life to the dead, and He alone is capable of everything.
Surah 22.7
And certainly the Hour is coming, there is no doubt about it. And Allah will surely resurrect those in the grave.

These verses relate to Yom al-Qiyamah, that is, the Day or Judgement or Resurrection. There are several claims here that no one else, no prophet or messenger, except Allah, can make. These are His attributes, which are also some of His 99 names by which only He can be called. He is Al-Haqq (The Truth), Al-Muhyi (Giver of Life), Al-Qdair (Omnipotent- capable of everything), and Al-Ba’ith (Resurrector). Here the Quran says Allah has power to bring the dead back to life, and that on the Day of Resurrection, he will raise the dead. No one else, except Allah can perform these deeds.

John 5.21, 26, 28, 29:
(21) For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes
(26) Truly, truly, I say to you an Hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.
(28) Do not marvel at this, for an Hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice.
(29) and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed evil a resurrection of judgement.

John 14.6:
Jesus said to him: "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father but through me."

John 6.40:
For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.

Six hundred years earlier, Jesus said he is the Truth (Al-Haqq), he has the same power as the Father to bring the dead back to life (Al-Muhyi) and it's His job to raise the dead on Judgement Day. He also said He is the Light (An-Nur) and the Way (Ar-Rashid) which are also other names of Allah. If the Quran says all these are attributes of Allah, then the good book must surely mean Jesus is also God.

If Jesus was just a messenger of Allah and he made those claims of divinity, then surely Allah would not have permitted that. 'Islam' means total subjugation to God. Allah permits no disobedience from believers and his prophets. This is summed up in Surah 69.44-48.

Surah 69:44-47:
(44) And if he (the Prophet) had made up about Us some [false] sayings,
(45) We would have seized him by the right hand;
(46) Then We would have cut from him the aorta.
(47) And there is no one of you who could prevent [Us] from him.

In reference to His messenger, Allah promises He would surely cut Muhammad's aorta for lying which means the certainty of death. Surely Allah would have treated His other prophets such, as Jesus, in similar manner for making false claims? Surah 4.157 describes how Allah, the great deceiver, saved Jesus from crucifixion by using a dopelganger in his place which deceived the Romans and Jews. In Surah 4.158: "Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise." Apparently Allah does not consider what Jesus said in those verses in John as false sayings, which therefore is to say, the Quran implies Jesus is God after all.

To Muslims, Quran is the actual words of Allah revealed through Muhammad and hadiths are the words and deeds of the prophet transmitted through a chain of narrators. Hadiths rank second in importance to Muslims and it is a source for religious and moral guidance formulated in the Sunnah. It is the hadiths, not the Quran, that principally shape Islamic jurisprudence known as Sharia and Islamic traditions and practices. This is the reason why non-Muslims are sometimes confused to think Muslims hold greater reverence for the Prophet than Allah. 

Hadiths are records of what Muhammad's companions or family said they heard from Muhammad or saw what he did, and also records of what someone who heard from these companions and family members. Contentions arise amongst Muslims over these hadiths and the schism gave rise to the various sects in Islam same way as Protestantism in Christianity. Hadiths are classed by its authenticity into sahid, hasan, or da'if (authentic, good or weak). 

Hadith Qudsi is a special collection of hadiths which Muslims believe are the words of Allah as narrated by Muhammad. The Quran are the words of Allah ad verbatim. Hadith Qudsi are words of Allah expressed by Muhammad and these are not included in Quran. Qudsi means 'pure' There are many such 'pure' hadiths, depending on which publication.

AnNawawis Forty Hadith Qudsi 18: :

On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: Allah (mighty and sublime be He) will say on the Day of Resurrection:

O son of Adam, I fell ill and you visited Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I visit You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so had fallen ill and you visited him not? Did you not know that had you visited him you would have found Me with him? O son of Adam, I asked you for food and you fed Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I feed You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so asked you for food and you fed him not? Did you not know that had you fed him you would surely have found that (the reward for doing so) with Me? O son of Adam, I asked you to give Me to drink and you gave Me not to drink. He will say: O Lord, how should I give You to drink whin You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: My servant So-and-so asked you to give him to drink and you gave him not to drink. Had you given him to drink you would have surely found that with Me.
It was related by Muslim.

This is about the Day of Judgement where Allah considers the righteousness of  Muslims. Those who have not done right by his neighbours, have not done right with Allah. Only the righteous are allowed to exit Hell. This hadith seems remarkably familiar to something spoken 600 years earlier . 

Matthew 25:31-46 (KJV):

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

In Christianity, Jesus is the King on the Day of Judgement, the Malik Yom Hadin.  He sits to judge the nations and this is what He will say to the righteous and the un-righteous. 

Why then did Muhammad say that on Day of Judgement, Allah will say what Jesus will say on that day?  To put it another way, why did Jesus said 600 years earlier, that He is the Malik Yom Hadin and when He judges the nations He will say what Muslims say Muhammad said God will say?

The escape hatch for Muslims in this kind of conundrum is another of their common polemic - the Bible has been corrupted. Now let's just go along with this, and I am not saying Bible is corrupted, but just assume it is. How can the corruptor of Matthew's write what Jesus will say that 600 years later Muhammad will say Allah will say on Judgement Day?

The only conclusion is either Muhammad was a plagiarist, or Islam confirms Jesus is God.    

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.

OPEC PRODUCTION INCREASE: HOW LEFTIST MEDIA DISINFORMS BY LIES AND OMISSIONS

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"
(Sir Walter Scott)

If you have the patience to go through this MSNBC news clip, great. If not, here is the brief. MSNBC is making a hero out of an octogenarian who poops in his pants on the world stage. It's not his fault. It's the bagful of medication he is fed to keep him lucid in public. Last week, OPEC+ announced they will increase crude oil production, which means prices can be expected to fall. MSNBC is now making Joe Biden into the greatest oil trader of them all. When oil prices were high, Biden had released 5 million barrels of oil from US strategic reserves to the local market in order to bring pump prices down. With this latest OPEC move, Biden can rebuild reserves inventory at cheaper prices, thus making hundreds of millions of dollars in profit.  MSNBC is deliriously selling to voters pump prices will fall, thanks to Biden.

MSNBC's title tells it all. Unabashed dramatization for an event the US had no role in. This is typical activist journalism of leftist mainstream media. A Trump-hater in a blog site I participate in brought up this propaganda piece and I had to refute to bring clarity. I thought this is a good story to share as an example why we can no longer take leftist mainstream media at face value.

Back in 2021, Biden had to beg OPEC to increase production to bring prices down. Forbes' headline says what the oil cartel thinks of Biden. He was told to go pound sand. far from what MSNBC tells their neolib viewers.

To ease pump prices, Biden sold from US strategic oil stockpile to local refineries. But here's what MSNBC didn't tell their neolib viewers.

Firstly, pump price increase was the consequence of Biden's energy policies. Trump had brought US energy independence. But Biden's first Executive Order was to cancel Keystone gas pipeline project and shutdown the fracking industry. Biden turned US from net gas exporter to net importer and caused an increase in energy prices all over the world.

Secondly, Trump had strengthened US military readiness by increasing the strategic oil reserves stockpile which Obama neglected. Without the buy-in by Trump, there wouldn't be any buffer inventory for Biden to sell.

Thirdly, strategic reserves is not buffer stocks for use as mechanism to influence price. It is for strategic purposes, such as in the event of war, or a break in the supply chain. In any case, there is never enough reserves to sustain a long term impact on prices. Biden undermined military preparedness for political gains in an effort to bring short term and temporary easing of high pump prices he himself caused.

Fourthly, if it was a matter of profit objectives, Biden could have sold physical stocks and hedged with a futures since the futures market was at a discount, that being the supply-demand expectations at the time. OPEC decision would not have mattered.

In the past two years, market conditions forced OPEC+ to decrease production output to support price levels. That agreement was to hold till second quarter 2024 and scheduled for review last Sunday. Going into the OPEC+ meeting, the world wondered what would the outcome be. But OPEC+ had already provided the hint much earlier. They see demand as still weak in the longer term but expect the Summer months to have a bump up increase as more people travel. In the last 2 years, OPEC+ countries have been compliant with agreed production levels while non-member countries increased output for more export dollars. The Sunday meeting expected OPEC to increase production to regain market share.

The production increase is simply the response of OPEC+ to market supply and demand conditions. It had nothing to do with Biden.

MSNBC is delirious the increase in production by OPEC+ will mean a downward pressure on oil prices leading to lower pump prices, just in time to buy Biden votes in November 5. How wrong can they be. OPEC's new increased production levels is effective in October 1. As crude oil prices drop, it will take another few months before it impact pump prices. There is a matter of production, delivery and refinery. Too late to sell to voters.

MSNBC also did not inform viewers that of the 5 million barrels released from strategic reserves, 950,000 barrels were sold to a Chinese oil trading company called Unipec. This is a subsidiary of Sinopec, a CCP wholly-owned company. BHR Partners, a private equity firm Hunter Biden cofounded in 2013, bought a $1.7 billion stake in Sinopec Marketing in 2015. Hunter at one point owned a 10 percent stake in BHR Partners through his wholly owned firm, Skaneateles LLC. According to Washington Examiner’s 9 Mar 2022 report, Hunter claimed he has since divested his shares and DCRA shows Skaneateles has been ‘revoked’. However, China’s National Credit Information Publicity System still shows Sinopec is 10% owned by BHR. Whatever the status of Hunter’s ownership is, the sales of strategic reserves oil to a CCT-owned company which had dealings with the president’s son, is fishy.

To a lesser-informed, Biden is a hero as portrayed by MSNBC. To those with an independent mind, MSNBS' video clip is a fawning piece of work by liberal activists disguised as journalists, who collect multi-million dollar pay cheques.

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.

SINGAPORE ELECTION AND IDEOLOGIES OF POLITICAL PARTIES

Singapore general election is in the air. My bet is it will be in August/September. Except for the 60s/70s, Singapore’s general elections have been generally tame affairs compared to other countries. The coming election is unlikely to be any different event though it will be significant not just in a changing of the guard from third to forth generation leadership, but the exit of the Lee dynasty.

Some are expecting high cost of living and policies that seem to neglect interest of Singaporeans to make a serious dent on the ruling People's Acton Party’s majority. The timing of the court case of opposition Minority Leader Pritam Singh, for lying under oath, is seen as a political move by PAP. On the other hand, the political, social and cultural upheavals in the Western world, escalation of the Israel-Hamas conflict and Russo-Ukraine war, as well as the China-Taiwan tension, paint a very apprehensive landscape on the economic horizon for Singapore. The unnerving externalities should bear more heavily on the minds of practical Singaporeans. In times of great uncertainties, it’s natural human behaviour to cling to the familiar.

How familiar are we actually about the choice of political parties we have? What do we know of their ideologies, goals, and policy priorities? The labels of party types readily helps one to have a sense of what an organisation is all about.

Communist Party:
They believe in public ownership of properties and means of production, a classless society working for the government which is owned by them, no suffrage and a centrally planned economic system. Klaus Schwab’s ‘own nothing and be harpy’. Communist Party of China of often quoted as an example, but they have evolved and no longer recognisable as such.

Socialist Party:
They believe in social justice, economic equality, and the welfare state. Policies are wealth redistribution, universal healthcare, and workers' rights. Tend to have large government (because they get involved in running in people’s live.) Sometimes they add ‘Democracy' to their name to ‘Socialist Democratic Party' to let it be known they are not full-fledged communists. Labour Party is an example.

Liberal Party: Basic ideology is a belief in individual rights, freedoms, and equality. Policies skew towards democratic governance, free market balanced with various social support systems. The Democrat Party of US is an example.

Libertarian Party:
Very strong on individual liberty, limited government, and free-market, tending towards laissez fare. One could say more idealistic inclination.

Conservative Party:
Conservatives are all for tradition, order, and stability. They advocate free-market competition, small government, support social conservatism and generally get out of the way how people live their lives and run their business. An example is the Republican Party in the US.

Nationalist Party:
They prioritize national sovereignty and cultural identity. Policies tend to be protectionist and race or religion biased. An example is the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India.

Fascist Party:
Their ideology is subordination of individual interests for the betterment of the nation or race. It manifests in a dictatorial, military regime, regimental society and forceful and violent suppression of opposition. This form was popular in 20th century Europe. Example was Mussolini's National Fascist Party.

The political spectrum is a presentation of the labels comparatively. In the Left-Right presentation, Left-wing politics seek for social equality and egalitarianism; Right-wing politics want certain social orders based on laws, tradition or religion, accepting inevitable hierarchies and inequality.

Labels provide basic understanding, but in reality, all parties have some components of other parties. Foremost is the fact parties all naturally have a national sovereign interest. And within each party there is a spectrum of Centre, Left and Right. For example, for Liberals, going more to the Left means more towards Socialism and a controlled society, ie totalitarianism. Going to the Right is a move towards lesser government controls ie smaller government, more capitalistic. This Leftist, Rightist and Centrist friction is a source of internal power struggles.

The Fascist party is a nasty label no party will name themselves that because of its association with Adolf Hitler. It is a label that others will accuse a party of. In the mirror politics of the US, the Democrats and Republicans accuse each other of being Fascists. But neither are correct. Fascist is a combination of Socialism and Ultra nationalism. In fact, Adolf Hitler’s party was National Socialist German Worker’s Party. Nazi is short form for Nationalsozialistische (National Socialist). Republicans are averse to Socialism. The Democrats are anything but nationalists as evidenced in their anti-American policies such as open borders. The diatribe is Democrats insist Trump is dictatorial and his MAGA supporters are similar to Mussolini's blackshirts (disregarding Trump has been in office for 4 years and he sent no political opponent to jail), whilst on the other hand, the Biden admin is veering towards dictatorship with suppression of free speech, lawfare against Republicans and their supporters, anti-Christian policies, etc.

Three other party labels have not been mentioned. These are the Green Party which is simply a party of environmentalists, Religious parties such as India’s BJP and Race parties such as Malaysia’s UMNO. Religious and Race parties are in the nature of ultra-nationalists.

In our part of the world, political parties are not in the main born out of ideological convictions in the political spectrum but more on racial, religious, and tribal loyalties, and personality cults.

Coming back home to Singapore, which label best associates each brand of political party. We can only do so based on actions and speeches made.

Statism is a doctrine that political authority of the state is legitimate to some degree. Meaning in the people's relationship with the state, the government has the right to impose obligations on citizens, by coercion, if necessary. On the spectrum of statism, PAP is on the extreme right as it believes a strong, authoritative state is necessary to enforce moral and cultural values. Thus the party has a tendency to swing more to the Authoritative Right of the Political Spectrum.

PAP ideology is democracy with a hierarchical society based on meritocracy. He who plants the corn gets to eat it. This comes with the acceptance inequality is inevitable but which is mitigated by social safety nets. Hard work and education is seen as a leveler.

PAP supports open market capitalism. In a capitalistic market, almost all governments play a regulatory and interventionist roles to make sure all players behave. PAP practices a form of economic statism called dirigisme which is a doctrine where the state goes beyond regulatory and interventionist roles. It plays a directive role over the market economy. It plans the direction for the market and incentivises market participants to fulfill state objectives. This means dishing out billions of dollars in grants and subsidies as well as spending massively on building the infrastructure to attract market players. These policies often meant substantial investment in setting up state corporations in strategic domestic sectors.

On the political spectrum I would put PAP to the right of the Conservative Party towards Authoritarianism. But it presents some conflicting nature. It tends to the right but it evolves bigger government due to dirigisme that requires more state participation in the market.

The opposition parties are unknown quantities. I would think Workers Party, Progress Singapore Party and Singapore Democratic Party are pure Socialist parties. Chee Soon Juan's SDP possibly has a liberal streak. The Reform Party, People’s Power Party, and People’s Voice I see more as activist groupings. The other parties I have no idea at all.

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.