Cardinal Robert Sarah Warns That “Islam Will Invade The World"

a reply to: ntech

That's not proof. Just another self-made conclusion from a broad prediction. No offense, but you can go around and do that to many religions and predictions.

Just go to beforeitsnews.com - there is a bold prediction from some past source on there every day. Without definite timelines and statements, it's easy for people to draw multiple conclusions from a prediction.

originally posted by: lordcomac
Isn't world domination kind of the goal of religion?
That one specifically seems to have really taken to spreading like wildfire in the past decade.

Yes but in the modern Christian Church has decided that the path to "salvation" must be freely chosen. That other religion hasn't been reformed yet and has the great fortune (to the misfortune of all others) of going through its Crusade phase in the era of sociopathic globalism. They have planes, guns, welfare healthcare, and twitter that will help them conquer the globe.

Even if that prediction about the three world wars, by Crowley or whomever, is fake, it is still spot on.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: shawmanfromny

It was Communism a few decades ago now it's Islam thats the Bogeyman , the more things change the more they stay the same.

Communism has been a threat to the West for over a century now. Islam has been a threat to the West - and everyone else - for 1300 years. Collectively, they've probably murdered over a billion people (probably way more). They just continuously compete for a spot in the top place.

originally posted by: abe froman
Yeah except communists weren't chopping off people's heads for not believing in communism.

I am sure the tens of millions of victims of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and other communist dictators would beg to differ.

Our 7 day week is based on God creating the world for 6 days and resting on the 7th.

The u.s. was built on one nation under God.

Christians do more donating and volunteering then any other group in the world

a reply to: Bloodworth

Would be nice to see people like Benny HInn and T.D. Jakes standing up and saying more. But we all know that's never going to happen.

originally posted by: JDmOKI
so Jesus and the Buddha called for genocide? How much land did Jesus and the Buddha conquer with their armies compared to Muhammad?

I've never heard of any violence from buddhism, no. Still dumb.

Also, jesus wasn't violent. God is Allah though. Same exact sky wizard, just barely different books and #merica God is absolutely as violent and brutal as when his name is pronounced in Arabic.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Umm … duh … correct me if I am wrong, but Islam already HAS invaded the world, and is colonizing a large part of it as we speak.

A little late there, Cardinal? Blind much, Pope?

However nice it may look the position of card. Sarah on immigration, let not forget that is only ONE of his MANY DISAGREEMENTS with pope Francis. Card. Sarah is the spearhead of a wide opposition of any reform. Even more than that. The ultraconservatives want to return the status quo from before the last Vatican II council (1962–65) that opened up the Catholic Church to the world.

I myself do not agree with the position of pope Francis on immigration. However, that is not the cause to cancel everything he wants to reform. Moreover, the pope speaks but no one listens. Not everything John Paul II said was implemented by politicians too. In a way, Sarah throws pieces of truth in order to advance his agenda and win popularity among secularized society.

Perhaps his supporters already envision him as the next pope. Only, there is a small problem, the conservatives are a minority, most cardinals are not on that side. Does it mean, two popes will be elected after pope Francis departs? One pope of the majority (the canonically elected one), and another one, most likely card. Sarah, who will probably reside in Cote d'Ivoir where the biggest church on earth has been built...

For more, pls read Ultraconservative cardinal Sarah launches wide scale attack on pope Francis' reformswww.abovetopsecret.com...

really digging the 50's paranoiac scifi imagery they're going for here. Extremely subtle.
FACE EATING ALIEN INVADERS FROM BEYOND THE STARS

CULTURAL ORTHODOXY IS YOUR ONLY CHANCE


OBEY AUTHORITY




GIVE YOUR MONEY TO THE CHURCH
GIVE YOUR MONEY TO THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
THE OLD MEN WHO CERTAINLY HAVEN'T #ED THE WORLD FOR GENERATIONS WILL LOOK AFTER YOU

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Islam Will Invade The World.

WRONG.

Islam already invaded into people's mind and it's winning.



Bwahaha!

Islam (/ˈɪslɑːm/) is an Abrahamic monotheistic religion teaching that there is only one God (Arabic: Allah), and that Muhammad is the messenger of God. It is the world's second-largest religion with over 1.8 billion followers or 24% of the world's population, most commonly known as Muslims.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Wish every lib and SJW could read your post.

It's the death by a thousand cuts, and the world has been handed over to Islam (Don't believe me? Tell me how Europe's doing lately.) They were able to sneak right in under the guise of terms like 'Islamaphobe' and 'racism.'

They are shielded by the SJW/lib agenda. They are clearing the trail that leads to the doom of the western world.

Don't defend your way of life from a culture determined to conquer because of those scary words though. Those words are much more fearsome than anything they want to do to us.

Jeez I hope my liver gives out before the public beheadings of infidels starts in my hometown. I've been saying for years it's coming, and it really is.

I will bow down to no one.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: shawmanfromny

It was Communism a few decades ago now it's Islam thats the Bogeyman , the more things change the more they stay the same.

Too bad the Muslims, Christians, Jews, Atheists, Spaghetti Monsterists, etc. don't all band together and fight the true enemies of humanity: the Power Elite pulling the strings of the world economy, healthcare, energy, drug and sex trafficking, fomenting and training of terrorism, etc.

Rid the world of the true bad guys by getting along and peeling back the curtain and my guess is, in the newly non-oppressed world, terrorism would fizzle out with nothing left to whine about, various religions would realize their gripes and differences don't matter, and we could all bask together in the warm glow of an era of peacetime surplus.

And triple rainbow unicorn farts, but hey, a guy can dream!

Stupid, dumb world.

At this point, you'd have to be an idiot to side with either end of this argument... Both Islam and Christianity and all those in between are merely a many-sided roll of the very same die, which is quite apt because that is all that happens to humans throughout history that have answered the differing but same rallying calls... SAME OLD SH*T Fear as a tool, today it's those that differ from your own faith instead of the old fear Sin and the Devil, Heaven and Hell.

DENY IGNORANCE

a reply to: blueman12

Finally a good, thoughtful and educated response in this thread.

I completely agree with you that Christian nations are generally more prosperous and are therefore more modern and civilised.

Do all these individuals posting hatred and fascist nonsense, including this religious guy called Sarah (???), really believe that the West will be taken over by Islam?? Not going to happen.

There was an influx of Muslim Maroccan and Turkish migrants to Germany and the Netherlands in the 70s. From my understanding these countries are still Christian nations with well integrated Muslim communities.

Stop spreading fear and hatred for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Sarah has to stop spreading this nonsense too, as a senior in a religious community she should know better.

a reply to: abe froman

Riiiiiight, they just went with the much gentler approach of gulags. I'm willing to bet if you averaged it out communism's body count per day is higher than islam's per year.

originally posted by: shawmanfromny
...
Content from an article that was published today:

“The Brussels Commission thinks only about building a free market in the service of the great financial powers,” he continued. “The European Union no longer protects the pThe Cardinal also blamed the European Union for its “desire to globalize the world, ridding it of nations with their distinctive characteristics,”peoples within it. It protects the banks.”

www.infowars.com...

Nationalism has always been popular within the Roman Catholic Church (or other religions), as some people contrast it to globalism. A poor contrast cause the 2 often go together:

Trump: ‘I’m A Nationalist And A Globalist. I’m Both.’ – Talking Points Memo

From a comment I made recently in another thread:

The Bible says that people receive “the mark of the wild beast” because they follow it “with admiration,” to the point of worshipping it. (Revelation 13:​3, 4; 16:2) They do this by giving worshipful honor to their country, its symbols, or its military might. As The Encyclopedia of Religion states: “Nationalism has become a dominant form of religion in the modern world.” (See also Nationalism in a Global Era, page 134, and Nationalism and the Mind: Essays on Modern Culture, page 94.)

News columnist Joseph Kraft wrote concerning Einstein’s views on nationalism: “[Einstein] set an example in renouncing nationalism. ‘I never identified myself with any particular country,’ he once wrote. He called nationalism ‘an infantile disease . . . the measles of the human race.’” Nearly everybody gets it at one time or another, and it continues to spread. Back in 1946, British historian Arnold Toynbee wrote: “Patriotism . . . has very largely superseded Christianity as the religion of the Western World.”

Similarly, in a letter to the editor of Bombay’s “Indian Express” newspaper, an Indian man stated: “I do not believe in patriotism. It is an opium innovated by the politicians to serve their ugly ends. It is for their prosperity. It is for their betterment. It is for their aggrandizement. It is never for the country. It is never for the nation. It is never never for common men and women like you and I. . . . This sinister politician-invented wall shall divide man from man​—and brother from brother; till one day it shall bring about man’s doom by man. Patriotism or nationalism, to my mind, is an idiotic exercise in artificial loyalty. . . . I take no hypocritical pride in being petty this or that. I belong to mankind.”

Philippine educator Primo L. Tongko observes that “national anthems and national flags have frequently given rise to a very questionable human motive of extreme or blind love of country, they have tended to make people fanatically nationalistic, so much so that sometimes they have not been ashamed even to say, ‘My country right or wrong.’”

One dictionary defines nationalism as “a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations.” Ivo Duchacek, a professor of political science, observed in his book Conflict and Cooperation Among Nations: “Nationalism divides humanity into mutually intolerant units. As a result people think as Americans, Russians, Chinese, Egyptians, or Peruvians first, and as human beings second​—if at all.” A former UN secretary-general wrote: “So many of the problems that we face today are due to, or the result of, false attitudes​—some of them have been adopted almost unconsciously. Among these is the concept of narrow nationalism​—‘my country, right or wrong.’”

“Nationalism’s chief symbol of faith and central object of worship is the flag, and curious liturgical forms have been devised for ‘saluting’ the flag, for ‘dipping’ the flag, for ‘lowering’ the flag, and for ‘hoisting’ the flag. Men bare their heads when the flag passes by; and in praise of the flag poets write odes and children sing hymns.”​—What Americans Believe and How They Worship (1952), by J. Paul Williams, pages 359, 360.

“Twenty-five years ago this June,” observes the Catholic Jesuit magazine America, “Americans piously inserted the phrase ‘under God’ into the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.” In reflecting on the reason for this move, America says that “most who supported the change in wording (and there were few who did not) frankly admitted that the inclusion of God was a political, not a religious, act.” In those days of fervent anti-Communism, notes the article, “the Catholic War Veterans of Wayne County, Mich., resolved that letting God into the Pledge would give ‘additional meaning to the spiritual defense of our nation.’ God . . . was being recalled to active duty.”

The significance of this was expressed by one religious writer of the time who said that, by putting God into the pledge, America was “adopting a God of war who appears as a nationalistic deity directing bombs and bullets into the hearts of our enemies.” Observes “America”: “Quite simply, the nation was afraid of the future, and it tried to meet this fear by having its children parrot in singsong fashion just how good it actually was. The Pledge was to be a spiritual boot [military training] camp for babes.”

Do you want your children to learn about a nationalistic “God of war” or, rather, about the “God of peace” as revealed in the Bible? (Phil. 4:9) “America” draws this conclusion: “The phrase ‘under God’ is the concrete symbol of what was, 25 years ago, and may still be, the established American religion: worship of the state. We ought to drop it.”​—June 9, 1979, pp. 469, 470.

Nationalism and religion often go together. Wrote Dr. Robert L. Kahn, a rabbi: “Religion and Nationalism always tend to go hand in hand. In times of war, particularly, . . . ‘For God and Country’ becomes a sort of battle cry. This has always been so. [In World War II] one of the popular songs was the war-whoop of a chaplain, ‘Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition.”’

How is the mark of the beast placed on someone’s right hand or forehead? (Revelation 13:16) Regarding his commands to the nation of Israel, God said: “Bind them as a reminder on your hand, and they should be like a headband on your forehead.” (Deuteronomy 11:18) This meant, not that the Israelites were to mark their literal hands and foreheads, but that God’s words would guide all their actions and thoughts. Likewise, rather than being something literal such as a microchip, the mark of the beast symbolically identifies those who let the political system rule their lives. Those with the mark of the beast place themselves in opposition to God.​—Revelation 14:​9, 10; 19:19-​21.

Historical evidence indicates that the first Christians did not involve themselves in political affairs. As Jesus said of them: “They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world.” (John 17:16) Rather, they shared a common allegiance to a heavenly government, God’s Kingdom. New York educators Eugene A. Colligan and Maxwell F. Littwin said regarding them in the book From the Old World to the New: “They preferred the Kingdom of God to any kingdom that they might serve on earth.”

originally posted by: Bloodworth
The u.s. was built on one nation under God.

Actually, the nation's unofficial motto was E Pluribus Unum until the religious wacknuts in the 1950's decided it needed to be changed.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Bloodworth
The u.s. was built on one nation under God.

Actually, the nation's unofficial motto was E Pluribus Unum until the religious wacknuts in the 1950's decided it needed to be changed.

Description E pluribus unum —Latin for "Out of many, one"

Interesting that that ideology, to me, really has nothing to do with religion.

originally posted by: InTheLight
Interesting that that ideology, to me, really has nothing to do with religion.

No kidding.

But muh Christian nation.