HOLLYWOOD, FL – Some of the most prominent of the world’s religious leaders seem bent on convincing the people of the world that formation of a one-world religion, by unifying adherents of disparate ideologies, is inevitable.
The Pope’s having invited Islamic leaders to engage in public prayers at the Vatican is just one small bit of evidence in support of the idea that such a movement is under way.
The Pope’s having advised followers of Mohammad to seek comfort in the Qur’an is another. The Pope sends the message that a moral equivalency exists between the teachings of the Holy Scriptures and the Noble Qur’an (as they call it). And the Pope’s advocacy for Islam as a religion of peace is nothing if not politically correct rhetoric in support of a program of tolerance for the intolerable.
But the Pope is just one example of religious leaders who seek unification with Islam. Rick Warren, an American religious leader, pastor and founder of Saddleback Church, also supports unification with those whose ideology calls for the annihilation of all who reject Islam, Sharia, and Mohammad. And enough of their kind exist that the movement even has its own name: Chrislam.
Although some sources seem to suggest that Rick Warren does not support Chrislam, he certainly does not criticize it. He is tolerant, it seems. But the thing about tolerating Islamic beliefs is that they espouse a false gospel, about which the Apostle Paul, in the first chapter of his 1st Century letter to the Christians in Galatia, wrote:
“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.”
Paul seems adamant about the need to keep false doctrines out of the Christian assemblies.
What, someone might ask, is the false gospel espoused in Islam? That’s a great question. It is comprised of several elements.
The Christian gospel, basically, involves the news that Jesus Christ, described as God’s Son, was put to death on a cross, later resurrecting from the dead, in order to serve as a sacrifice to cover the sins of those who would repent of their sins, following Jesus, and thus escape eternal punishment due to God’s grace. The false Islamic gospel contradicts every aspect of that gospel.
The Qur’an states that God has no son; that it is blasphemous to say that God has sons; that Jesus is not God’s Son; that Jesus was not sent to die for sins; that Jesus did not die on the cross; that Jesus did not rise from the dead.
So while Rick Warren and other prominent Christian figures may tolerate Islamic doctrine, it is clearly in direct opposition to biblical, Christian doctrine, on this and numerous other points.
Chrislam is a movement to unify adherents of Christianity with those of Islam, which was born in Africa in the early 1980s, and has been imported into America. Proponents of Chrislam believe it is possible for those of diametrically opposed spiritual orientations to unify in worship of God.
Although the basic concepts of coexistence, mutual toleration, and worship of one deity reflect a compelling worldview, and socially minded attitude, the Chrislam movement is utterly doomed to failure. Christianity and Islam are so distinct, so incompatible, and so diametrically opposed that nothing could unify them, unless in the process one or the other vanished.
The only way to convince adherents to Chrislam, or anyone else, that it’s possible to unify such opposed ideologies would be to obviate their starkly opposed tenets, in order to convince people that a non-existent harmony existed between them, and that coexistence were possible, even though extermination of unbelievers is called for by the sacred texts of Islam.
It would be the greatest of miracles, and of tragedies, if adherents to Islam and those to Christianity found a way to unify their religious systems. It would require excruciating effort, tinged by the greatest cognitive dissonance, to constantly deny certain irrefutable realities regarding the irreconcilable differences of the two ideologies. Such denial would have to form the foundation of that unification; a foundation doomed, from the moment of being laid, to crumbling, leading to the complete collapse of the edifice built upon it.
In the real world, beyond the house of cards known as Chrislam, Islam is designed to destroy all that is not found in Islamic ideology. And in reality, although adherents to Islam claim to revere Jesus as a prophet, they contradict his teachings in word and action; they persecute and murder his followers; and they burn churches. Such things would tend to hamper unification efforts.
When it comes to researching the issue of one-world religion, one must patiently sift through many sundry reports published on the internet in order to separate the less ideologically colored ones from the more journalistic ones, or those reflecting more secular opinion. Among them one might find commentary by Robert Montenegro, a writer who contributes to Big Think and Crooked Scoreboard. He lives in Washington, DC, and is a graduate of Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.
Montenegro certainly appears to be in favor of the one-world movement, which he sees at work in the United Nations. In his commentary titled “We Need A United Nations Of World Religions,” he writes:
“Despite its many weaknesses, the U.N. has been successful in one of its main pursuits: linking the countries of the world in a way that promotes peace. Could a similar model work for religion?”
Then he goes on to mention how Israel’s Shimon Peres has been a proponent of the one-world movement, recommending efforts in that regard to world leaders.
But in reality, the goal of the one-world movement is to shift allegiances to a one-world governmental-religious complex, in order to exercise totalitarian control over the entire Earth. Part of the agenda is to exterminate whomever resists the planned order. But that presents no obstacle to its religious proponents.
Those to whom such a statement seems like an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory might want to consider the first of ten laws, engraved in many languages on 16-foot-high, 20-ton, polished granite monoliths that were erected in Elbert County, in the State of Georgia in 1980, at enormous cost, by as yet unidentified agents. That law, found on the Georgia Guidestones, reads:
“Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.”
Cutting to the chase, what this law suggests is that more than 90% of the world’s current population is superfluous, expendable, and subject to elimination. Who would be capable of carrying out such a pragmatic agenda?
Anyone might gag at the idea that anyone in this modern era would think of carrying out such massive slaughter; anyone, that is, who has ignored the history of the world, particularly that of the last 100 years, and that of ideologies that openly espouse mass extermination of humans.
Hitler, Mao, and Stalin were notable individuals, under whose administrations no less than 100 million were subjected to democide. Survival of the fittest took on new meaning, thanks to them. But there have occurred since the end of World War ll several dozen lesser genocides. Since the beginning of the 20th Century, approximately a quarter billion have been murdered by agents of the governments that, presumably, existed to secure their rights.
Let’s not forget that although the regimes responsible for democide during the last century were ostensibly atheistic, Karl Marx, the founder of Communism/Socialism was a devotee of Satan the devil, judging from his poetry that he dedicated to the devil. It may be imagined that they who love Satan must be aware of the existence of God, as well. So there would appear to be a real spiritual and religious element to “atheistic” Communist regimes.
And it would be unfair not to recall that other religious organizations throughout history, other than Islamic ones, have also lent themselves to mass slaughter, though their contributions to population reduction pale in comparison with the incredibly bloody feats of jihadis, perpetuated with few lulls ever since Mohammad first instituted the ceaseless jihad mission in the early 7th Century.
Islam is regarded by many as an Abrahamic religion, the implication being that the Jews, Christians, and adherents to Islam all worship the same God. So it seems mystifying to some that followers of the three religions have failed to establish peace on Earth. But all of this is fraught with misconceptions.
The Presbyterian Church USA is one of those organizations who have fallen prey to the falsehood that the God of Judeo-Christian worldview is the same deity as the god known as Allah. And for that reason the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church USA conducted prayers to Allah, reported three years ago by several sources.
In fact, Allah could not possibly be the same deity as the God of the Bible, whom Abraham worshipped, and whom Jesus referred to as his Father. Very simply, both the Old Testament and New Testament assert that God has sons, while the Qur’an stridently insists that Allah has no son, at all.
Regardless of anyone’s metaphysical beliefs, it is merely only a logical conclusion that God, or anyone, for that matter, either has or does not have one or more sons. Since Allah has no son, at all, while the God of Abraham has sons, they cannot possibly be the same entity.
And yet the Presbyterian Church USA, and the Pope, and Islamists, and the United Nations, and so many other misinformed or deceptive people and organizations, insist, in defiance of facts and reason, that all worship the same God. But they clearly do not.
There exist more than one god. Not all gods demand adherence to the same beliefs, or the same standards of moral behavior. And so we see the glaring dichotomy between the moral standards of the Bible and those of the Qur’an; and between those of Allah and those of the God of Abraham.
Misinformed people find those two sacred texts to be similar. Any similarities are simply superficial. Extensive examination reveals clearly irreconcilable differences. And these differences scream that there could never exist peaceful coexistence or unity of worship between Mohammad’s followers and anyone else.
The movement to create a one-world religious-governmental institution will continue to grow. There will be a great international bureaucracy that exercises monstrous totalitarian control over the Earth.
But what will not take place is a true unification of the people of the world in worship of the God of Abraham as a result of the movement to create one-world religion. Such a unification would be no more real than the notion that a transgender individual belonged to the gender of their imagination.
There will be peace and justice on Earth. Of course there will. But not as a result of the efforts of the United Nations, or those of corrupt politicians, or of others who reject God.
This has been a bit verbose. It really is only an abbreviated consideration of the topic. Personal study is recommended of the points here mentioned briefly.