Western Civilisation was and is superior to anything Islam has developed. Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam. Raising the alarm about the fascism called Submission since 2000.
In the anti-Catholic world of today, where a bronze-age inspired moon cult fascism named Submission, is lauded as 'religious', the revisionist history of Atheists and Secularists – resplendent in ignorance especially in English speaking countries – is being dismantled, by facts and history. The glory of the Catholic Church, as well as its errors, sometimes corruption, mistakes and infirmities, is being brought into focus, during the past 100 years [starting with Duhem, an apostate from the Atheist-Marxist revisionist school].
No longer is there a 'dark age', from 500-1000 AD, but an age of survival against the Moslem Jihad, the Viking-Moslem slave trade, the Viking raids, the Magyar-Hun irruptions; and the turmoil associated with the transition from the debilitated and deformed Roman world, to the modern [History Channel and other panegyrics to the 'glory of Rome' notwithstanding]. Gone is the idea that nothing happened, nothing was invented, and science and math did not exist. Only the wretchedly uneducated believe in such fairy tales.
In a very interesting book, 'Galileo goes to jail, and other myths about Science and Religion', there are chapters devoted to the mendacity that there is a conflict between science and faith; or that religion retarded inquiry. The opposite is of course true. Without the Catholic Church there is no modern world – from dissecting the human body and religion; from calculus to the cosmos; from optics to higher math; from blast furnaces to cathedrals; the poorly named Middle Ages were full of social, political, intellectual and scientific creation – all in the name of God and understanding the wonders of his design. In this vein there is no 'science', today the cult of warm, Darwin, monkeys to men; and other apocrypha all serve, and all are viewed through the prism of naturalism. There is no independent scientific establishment.
We know for a fact that the Church was the biggest financier of science in history until modern times. From 'Galileo goes to jail and other myths.....'
“Catholic church has been probably the largest single and longest-term patron of science in history, that many contributors to the Scientific Revolution were themselves Catholic, and that several Catholic institutions and perspectives were key influences upon the rise of modern science.”
Newton was not a deist, but a profoundly religious Christian:
“...philosophes of the eighteenth century created their own view of Newton as the apotheosis of the kind of secular reason that they advanced to replace Christianity, and an active God did not fit into their picture...”
“The notion of the world's being a great machine, going on without the interposition of God, as a clock continues to go without the assistance of a clockmaker; is the notion of materialism and fate, and tends, (under pretence of making God a supramundane intelligence,) to exclude providence and God's government in reality out of the world.”
“Newton was well read in Rene Descartes (1596-1650) and other mechanical philosophers, who sought to explain phenomena in terms of matter and motion. He was a mechanical philosopher himself, but he found Descartes' specific picture of the world as nothing but matter and motion theologically dangerous-where was there any room for free divine activity...”
Another example of mendacity: the Jesuits did not obstruct Galileo or any of the other 'scientists' of the 16th or 17th century, quite the contrary:
“Jesuits (officially called the Society of Jesus). Formally established in 1540, the society placed such special emphasis on education that by 1625 they had founded nearly 450 colleges in Europe and elsewhere. Many Jesuit priests were deeply involved in scientific issues, and many made important contributions. The reformed calendar, enacted under Pope Gregory XIII in 1582 and still in use today, was worked out by the Jesuit mathematician and astronomer Christoph Clavius (1538-1612). Optics and astronomy were topics of special interest for Jesuits. Christoph Schemer (1573-1650) studied sunspots,... “
Likewise the 'fat' friars and monks were indispensable to preserve, than extend science:
“...during the Scientific Revolution, Catholic monks, friars, and priests in missions constituted a virtual worldwide web of correspondents and data collectors. Information on local geography, flora, fauna, mineralogy, and other subjects as well as a wealth of astronomical, meteorological, and seismological observations flooded back into Europe from far-flung Catholic missions in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. The data and specimens they sent back were channeled into natural-philosophical treatises and studies by Catholics and Protestants alike. This massive collection of new scientific information...”
Universities – a Catholic invention – soon built up specialized skills and created academies or organizations to reflect that focus. An example is the scientific focus of the Catholic university of Paris:
“Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris, founded in 1666 and probably the most stable and productive of all early scientific societies, had a majority of Catholic members, such as Gian Domenico Cassini (1625-1712), famed for his observations of Jupiter and Saturn, and Wilhelm Homberg (1653-1715), a convert to Catholicism and one of the most renowned and productive chemists of his day. Four of the early members were in orders, including the abbe Jean Picard (1620-1682), a noted astronomer, and the abbe Edme Mariotte (ca. 1620-1684), an important physicist.”
From the Middle Age milieu of inquiry, faith, reason and honest assessment of facts and observations, we have the rise of modern science:
“...catalog of Catholic contributors to the Scientific Revolution would run to many pages and exhaust the reader's patience. Thus it will suffice to mention just a very few other representatives from various scientific disciplines. In the medical sciences, there is Andreas Vesalius (1514-1564), the famous anatomist of Brussels; while another Fleming, Joan Baptista Van Helmont (1579-1644), one of the most innovative and influential voices in seventeenth-century medicine and chemistry, was a devout Catholic with strong mystical leanings.' In Italy, the microscopist Marcello Malpighi (1628-1694)... Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543), was not only Catholic but in Holy Orders as a cathedral canon (a cleric charged with administrative duties). And lest it be said that he was simultaneously persecuted for his astronomical work, it must be pointed out that much of his audience and support came from within the Catholic hierarchy...”
Copernicus famously stated that he waited so long to publish his heliocentric work, due to the howling madness of academics invested in the Ptolemy's geocentric model. He was right. The Catholics were in the main happy with heliocentricity since it lifted the earth from the center, which according to scripture is dirty, unworthy and full of refuse, into an enlightened plane, further justifying faith and the belief in man's unique planet and creation. The problem with Copernicus was that his math did not support elliptical orbits – a fact that Jesuit astronomers had proven. It was another Christian Kepler who provided the math [not Galileo, who maintained weirdly that tides proved heliocentricity....]
In any event a list of Catholic scientists does indeed run to many pages. But of course Atheists and Moslems will invent Moslem and Arab names, link them to Cordoba of the 9th or 10th century, and state emphatically with no proof, 'without Islam, there is no Catholic scientific revolution...' Whatever.
Islam must be peace and love. Since 9-11 there have been some 25.000 moon cult 'terrorist incidents', created by 'lone wolf' Moslems, many suffering from 'mental illnesses', or 'being denied a mortgage', or perhaps 'integration' issues. Some were galvanized to murder innocents from 'Western aggression', and 'Islamophobia'. Or so the big brains in the MSM and within the political elite [the Liliputians], inform the peasantry. Moslem atrocity, Jihad, rape, sex-trading, polygamy, thieving, murder, gang warfare and pimping has nothing to do with Mein Koran or Suras such as the following from 'The Ants' right?
Such a peaceful ode to tolerance and diversity. Just like this one:
Christians are polytheists. They 'shirk' or reject the 'Oneness' of Baal the moon cult idol of Mecca. For that 'sin' [Mount Sinai is the Mount of Sin or Baal the moon deity], they must die. This is called religious inspiration by smart people.
In fact there are 11 verses of violence in this Sura, which of course confuses the multi-culti, who then twist violence into peace; hate into love; a cult into a religion; a fascism dedicated to the extermination of the 'Other', into a boy-scout jamboree.
Really clever people also now equate the Moslem Baal with the Christian idea of God. Your pet rock is likewise a God, so too was Chinghis Khan's 'Tengril'. Baal is the anti-thesis of the Christian concept of the godhead. The two ideals share nothing in common.
Sura 27 or 'The Ants' as a theological or philosophical elucidation, is completely inane and presents nothing which is coherent or mildly interesting. The thrust is that non Moslems will be crushed like Ants underneath the sandaled foot of Allah's warriors, much as Solomon supposedly crush Ants who did not follow his kingship. I have no idea what Solomon – a bad King in many ways – has to do with the Meccan moon cult which appeared some 1500 years after he eviscerated Israel through profligate spending and internal rancor through polygamy and the attendant worship and enshrinement of pagan idols.
We can understand however, why Mein Koran uses Ants to describe Christians and non-Moslems. Ants are low born creatures, crawling, biting, pulling, unworthy of much appreciation, and easy to destroy. Thus will the Meccan moon cult deal with Christians and those who oppose Mein Muhammadism. Crushed under the armies of Jihad.
Perhaps as well King Solly and friends were baying at the moon idol Baal, represented in the ancient world by the golden calf. This indeed would please Mein Koran devotees, providing a linkage back to the Jewish empire which pre-dates the Moslem Jihad by 1600 years. It is certainly possible, given the general insanity of Solomon in the last 1/4 of his life, that he would have built a pagan temple to Baal. But this conjecture does not excuse the execrable Sura from its own poor organization, incoherency and intolerance.
dead from a Moslem attack in the center of Paris. Moslems with
machine guns screaming
Allahu Akhbar, which means Allah or Baal the moon deity is the
greatest amongst the gods. MSM, Politicians and Moslems will all
scream about Islamophobia, racism, how Islam created civilization,
and why Europe needs to feed 10 million hungry
refugees, moon cult members and Jihadis,and self-immolate.
“‘I Saw Bodies’ in Paris’s Night of Terror,” by Dana Kennedy, Michael Weiss and Justin Miller, The Daily Beast, November 13, 2015: Suicide bombers and gunmen struck the capital of France in one of the worst attacks in the West since 9/11.”
It is high time that Western states stop all Moslem immigration.
All Mosques must be investigated, cleansed, shut down if they are preaching Mein Koranic fascism.
Any Moslem associated with any activity that is treasonous, racist or violent needs to be deported at once.
But the witless worms – the cultural Marxists, Muzzie apologists, the raving mad Moslem supremacists, the media, the politicians – will all call for the opposite.
Sura 26 or the Poet, just confirms that the supremacist and dialectical 'we are the last and most supreme ones', of Mein Koran wears thin after about 100 repetitions. Mein Koran claims that all of the Hebrew Prophets were actually devotees of Baal, the moon god of Mecca, called Al Lah – the Lord. This is the main idea of Sura 26. Yawn. Heard that already. Baal is of course the antithesis of the Hebrew philosophy espoused by the Old Testament Prophets.
I have a hard time envisaging the genius of Isaiah in 700 BC, one of the great thinkers and seers in history, being a member of the Babylonian Sin or Baal cult. Every aspect of Judaic monotheism was opposed to the celestial worship and attendant barbarities of Near Eastern cults, including that of Baal. It does the Arab world no justice, that its main export – the cult of Submission – is a Bronze age relic and barbarism.
The hate of Islam, or rightly Muhammadism, toward the Unbelieving 'Infidel', or Other is expressed candidly in the Poets:
“They [non Moslems], they will be thrown headlong into the (Fire), - they and those straying in Evil,” [26:94].
So you the human slave of Allah must fear the great deity,
“So fear Allah and obey me.” [26:126]
This is repeated 8 times in this Sura. Fear the moon deity and obey its whims as constructed in the Koran, and propagated by the illiterate warrior Mad Moh. Obey and fear. This sums up Islam. A system of fear, repression, with an anti-human animus.
“So they rejected him [the Messenger], and We destroyed them. Verily in this is a Sign: but most of them do not believe.” [26:139] And, “But the rest [who did not believe] We destroyed utterly. We rained down on them a shower (of brimstone) and evil was the shower on those who were admonished (but heeded not) !” [26:173, 174]. “So fear Allah and obey me.” [26:179].
Feel the joy, the animated spirit, the tolerance, the benevolence to those who wish not to worship celestial objects, but engage in a true practice of real faith.....
18% of this Sura advocates hate speech and violence against non Moslems. This Sura is particularly concerned with the message that to be a good member of the cult, you must 'fear Allah and obey me', mentioned no less than 11 times [11, 108, 110, 124, 126, 131, 144, 150, 163, 179, 184]. Fearing Allah and acting like his slave is hardly conducive to free-will, thinking, independence and inquiry. But then we have the violence.
Deny the 'truth' of Mein Koran and off with your head. 'Invoke' the Christian Trinity and you will be annihilated. Not much in the way of multi-culti piety and tolerance.
If Islam is a religion, so too are other intolerant cults of supremacism such as Atheist Nazism, or Atheist Communism.
The 'other side' of the Monkish orders. Monks were indispensable to saving and extending civilization. Everything from the preservation of classical authors, unbelievable art and literature, including the first histories of many nations, on to brewing, artesian wells and water milling, can be traced to the energy and often-times sheer genius of monks and their religious orders. As Jones and Ereira write of the amazingly productive Cisterian order, who in some 30 years went from 1 Abbey to 350 scattered across Europe:
“Cistercians were natural businessmen. At Fountains Abbey in Yorkshire they turned wool production into a major money-spinner, breeding a super-sheep that produced the highest-quality wool in Europe. By the end of the century they were responsible for most of the wool exported from England. Meanwhile, at neighbouring Rievaulx the monks moved into heavy industry, developing mining and iron-smelting technology that put them way ahead of their time..”
The Monks were indeed businessmen, as well as warriors for the faith, both in spirit and in arms. But over time there came to the fore, the secularization of the Monkish orders. In summary, they were bought off by the well-to-do, the Kingly, the elite. The image of the fat-beer drinking priest, is perhaps exaggerated but likely based on the truth, that Monks ate and drank extremely well – some 7000 calories a day it is calculated in some cases, which is twice what you need.
William the Conqueror did not initiate the process of the state using monasteries for its own ends, but he helped it along, by giving 1/4 of the land in England to the Church, mostly in the forms of abbeys in which monks would pray for the salvation of Norman warriors, including himself. The idea was that in a violent age, the souls of fighting men needed saving.
“It became the custom for rich people and fighting men like the Norman soldiers, whose ways of life put their souls in such great jeopardy, to pay monks to do the praying they were too busy to do for themselves. This had one profound effect: prayer became a commodity. It gained a commercial value and this was eventually to prove the undoing of the whole system...”
Ereira and Jones are right. Once you price a prayer, the entire system can be bought. And it was. Monasteries became fabulously wealthy, many with running hot and cold water, and waste removal – luxuries not seen since Rome - all due to secular patronage. Bishops became more like Kings of the flesh, than Kings in Christ. The usual assortment of debasement and corruption naturally followed the money. I remember reading that Wilifred the great 7th century Bishop had a gold throne and his coronation included 12 monks lifting him up on the gold throne, to signify perhaps, that he was as mighty as Christ, or at least as any secular King. These men were politicians, not priests.
“The most powerful bishops and archbishops were career politicians, with little or no theological training. For them the Church was a political and economic power base...”
Various revolts including the poorly named 'Peasants revolt' of 1381, stemmed from Church and monastic corruption. Wyclif, the Oxford doctor, who initiated the 1381 irruption, mightily declaimed against this corruption of the faith. From 1200-1500, monks and abbeys, including rich Bishops and fat priests, were targets of mobs, attacks, violence and loathing. Many of the monks and Church elite, were secular men, faintly familiar with Christianity, and certainly more interested in worldly power, than spiritual grace.
The image of the fat priest, devouring mutton, whilst somewhat oblique, is based it appears on reality. Once the monastic orders put their spiritual offerings up for sale, the end result was inevitable.
An entertaining and elucidating work, based on the popular TV series, which seeks to debunk the myth of the 'dark, savage, ignoble', Middle Ages. Some of the greatest art, architecture, literary output and scientific achievements come from the era 500-1500, not to mention ambitious and far-reaching technological advancements in warfare, agricultural cultivation, civic life, medical care, capitalism, trade and social institutions. Simply put, the propaganda issued against the Medieval period, on-going since the 'Rebirth' era, is based on prejudice and ignorance, not fact.
To whit, the glaring stupidity of the 'flat earth' lie:
“There is no doubt that intelligent people in the Middle Ages knew perfectly well that the earth was a globe. Aquinas, in the thirteenth century, wrote that, ‘the astronomer and the natural philosopher both demonstrate the same conclusion, such as that the world is round; yet the astronomer does so through mathematics, while the natural philosopher does so in a way that takes matter into account.’ Roger Bacon, living at the same time as Aquinas, had been taught that Greek mathematicians had measured the earth’s circumference. It was obvious that it was round – for how else did things disappear..”
From the 5th century AD, one can read Christian accounts of the sphericity of the earth, and many attempts to either confirm or refute Eratosthenes' calculation of the earth's circumference. Anyone who sailed a ship knew that the earth was not flat. The Medieval Europeans possessed some of the finest navigators in world history. Many nations lived off of the sea trade, including fishing. No one believed that the earth was held up by Atlas, or that it was flat, layered between heaven and hell.
In fact flat earth societies were only started and flourished at the time of Darwin – mostly to spite the sneering pomposity of the professorial elite [sound familiar?]; and to mock their sense of 'certainty' and of course to ridicule their 'science'. The most famous was that of Parallax an educated doctor, who to spite the ridiculous arrogance of 'scientists', gave public lectures using scientific calculations, as to why the earth was flat. Many thousands paid good money to hear him speak – and watch him quickly disappear after the lecture.
According to 'Enlightenment' [abiogenesis, phlogiston, witch burnings] propaganda, it was Newton and Galileo who rescued man from darkness. The Galileo myth is as factual an account of real science as the Grimm Fairy tales. Newton was an alchemist and Biblical scholar, and many of his ideas were being discovered and worked on 500 years previously. Bacon for example some 400 years before Netwon, discovered the spectrum embedded in light. He was an optics expert.
“Bacon’s inquiries were essentially inspired by religion; the pope supported his work and was eager to read what he wrote. He was also doing what we think of as real science, and alarmed his students by breaking white light up into the spectrum of colours: ‘The experimenter considers whether among visible things, he can find colours formed and arranged as given in the rainbow.’ When Bacon created a rainbow by passing light through some glass beads he was 500 years ahead of Isaac Newton – especially when he measured the angle of displacement of the beam correctly. He was demonstrating that... “
“Bacon was based in Paris, and thirteenth-century Paris was throbbing with new ideas about philosophy and theology. At the heart of the ferment was the study of Aristotle’s writings, and the way his ideas were being handled in a Christian context by scholars like Thomas Aquinas. One establishment response was the so-called ‘General Condemnation of Philosophy and the Sciences’ by the bishop of Paris in 1277. This has traditionally been described as an attack on reason – which is rather misleading. The Church was trying to resist a new dogmatism of rational certainty which seemed to challenge...”
Today we have the dogmatic cult of 'science'. Whatever science might mean. It certainly is a step backwards.
Roger Bacon is just one example of mathematical and scientific curiosity which can be traced back into the 11th-13th centuries. Alchemy, which has received plenty of calumny, was the precursor to modern chemistry. Without Medieval alchemists, we would not have our modern understanding of chemistry. The alchemists in Europe experimented and discovered a variety of new compounds, gases, acids and processes which had a measurable impact on chemical understanding, leading to improved medicines in some cases, or better processes in the manufacturing of various compounds which could be put to good social usage. The idea of turning lead into gold might sound odd to the modern mind, but it was the basis for a wide range of important discoveries, that later eras could build upon.
Without Christianity the German takeover of the decrepit, irrelevant, despotic and bankrupted Western Roman Empire, would have resulted in a permanent destruction of civilization. We owe nothing to Islam for civilization, medieval Europe having to endure and somehow survive the endless moon cult Jihad which would have effaced all progress, as much as it did everywhere the green and black flags of Islam are raised. The myth of the Islamic golden age, is seemingly only held by politicians and academics.
It was the Church which swept up the pieces of Greco-Roman culture and merged them into the Christian. Out of this synthesis, epitomized in the writings of various Christian sages such as Augustine [who Christianizes Plato]; or Aquinas [who Christianizes Aristotle]; we see civilization advance forward. There is no corollary within Islam, which accepted either Koranic supremacism [the merger of church and state]; or ancient Greek philosophy in-toto, essentially unchanged [Averroes, Avicenna].
Thatcher's book is in the main a very good one about the Medieval era. The exception being the usual academic homage to the non-existent, or at the very least, the grotesquely exaggerated Moslem 'golden age'. The usual exotic and quite purblind Oriental attractions suffuse Thatcher's mythical account of Islam. Nary a word about Jihad, rape, sex slavery, the destruction of 30.000 churches, the endless pirating, raiding or intolerance toward Jews and Christians. There is a chapter – apocryphal – about Muhammad and Islam. Just skip it, lest it infect your common sense.
Thatcher does not know much about Islam. Kindi for example who was not a scientist [as declared by Islamophiles], scorned the Meccan moon cult, and his tepid observations and critique of the Koran made his works harem, or forbidden for Moslems to read. So much for free will and inquiry, the linchpins of reason and progress. Fascisms do not create, they destroy.
Beyond that, the book is of interest. He does know a lot about medieval Europe. One area that he emphasizes which is clearly of import to anyone who wonders 'how did Europe advance so quickly, and so far', is his description of the utility of monasteries, the religious orders and the base fact, that they not only saved the world from barbarism, but created much in the way of secular technology, including practical industry and agriculture, education and hospitals and medicine. Homeopathy for example was a medieval monkish creation, long before the current modern fad of using natural ingredients.
“Monasticism furnished the missionaries who Christianized western and northern Europe. The monks were also the civilizers. Every monastery founded by them became a centre of life and learning, and hence a light to the surrounding country. They cleared the lands and brought them under cultivation. They were the farmers and taught by their example the dignity of labor in an age when the soldier was the world’s hero. They preserved and transmitted much of the civilization of Rome to the Barbarians. They were the teachers of the west. Literature and learning found a refuge with them in times of violence.
There are no monks within Islam. There are no centers of work, culture, learning, education and care for the sick. There is no separation within the Meccan moon cult, of the church and state. There are no religious orders dedicated to work, worship, helping others and self-denial. None. Thatcher:
“Their monasteries were the hotels of the Middle Age and they cared for the poor and the sick. They were the greatest builders of the Middle Age, many of the great churches of Europe being their work. Monasticism was an excellent thing for the world in those days. It was fitted to do a great work.”
Monasticism radiated out from the British Isles, and in particular Ireland and Saxon England to cover the Continent. Pope Gregory the Great's signal contribution to the Western world was the conversion in the early 6th century of the Anglo-Saxons to the Roman Church. Ireland, converted by St. Patrick and others in the 5th century was also firmly in the vanguard of the faith. It fell to the Irish and English monks to re-colonize the Continent with their faith and works.
Monasticism soon gained a reputation for learning, labor, intelligence, honesty and charity, in a violent age, full of civil and secular strife. The rich placed their sons into the care of the monks, along with land and money. The movement spread, the centers grew and their influence was a prime reason why Europe by 1000 AD was on the path to world mastery.
Islam or Submission, like all Fascisms, merges church and state, or in the case of the Meccan moon cult, pagan barbarism with political control. If you have read Hammurabi's 1750 BC codex on Bronze age 'laws', you will see more than faint echoes of the same in Muhammad's Mein Koran, which was put together in its incoherent and execrable form some 2600 years after the Babylonian effort. Who said the Bronze ended ? It lives on in der cult namens Islam.
Sura 25 is named 'Criterion'. The main purpose is to Hammurabify Mad Muhammad and link him directly and personally to the Meccan moon deity or Al-Lah, Baal. Baal is of course a Babylonian invention of celestial worship. A secondary objective in 'Criterion' is to allow, through the grace of the moon deity, all violence imaginable against those who oppose Muhammad and by extension, his Lordship or Al Lah. In fact this chapter clearly outlines why Moslems must conquer the world to appease mad Muhammad and his moon friend.
“And We commanded: “You both go, to the people who have rejected our Signs:” and those (people) We destroyed with utter destruction.” [25:36].
All signs – including natural phenomenon – come from Allah. Reject any of them and you reject nature, life and creation itself. You therefore must die.
In this intolerant vein, Christians who are polytheists in Koranic hate speech, Jews and other non-Moslems or Infidels [a word which is intended to degrade the human to a form akin to pigs or dogs], will simply be eradicated by the 'righteous' and Sharia following believers in Mein Koran.
The above are clear. Moslems are supreme [25:26], Christians worship false idols and will be punished in this life and the next [25:19]; any who do not follow Moh's cult will be annihilated in this life and the next [25:34, 77].
There are no mistranslations. Mein Koran is simply Mein Koran. Supremacist, absurd, incoherent, illogical, illiterate, fascistic and violent. No wonder Islam has 'bloody borders' and 1400 years of endless warring, Jihad, slavery, misogyny, and hate to its credit.
Anselm's and his import on European thinking and philosophy was built upon from the efforts of many who both previously and contemporaneously, developed a rational exploration theology, including curricula taught at Universities – another medieval European invention. Anselm in the 11th century and Peter Lombard in the 12th are examples of the inquiring mind using reason to achieve faith; or using reason to amend faith.
There never has been, and never will be, a conflict between true faith [as opposed to a cult]; and reason. Atheist cults such as Nazism [socialist, evolutionist]; Communism [socialist, evolutionist], or Fascism [ibid, ibid]; deny reason. They are cults not of faith, but obedience, intolerance, hate and irrationality. Islam, a barbaric bronze age centric cult merging the spiritual into the political, is likewise similar in design and output to other fascistic philosophies. There is no reason within Mein Koran. Christianity is suffused with logic and reason.
St. Augustine the ne'er do well, turned Saint and Catholic philosopher of the highest caliber, published many works which could be summarized as 'understanding through faith'. The City of God, was of a different plane of existence than the City of Man. By having faith, the Augustinians would argue, you have an opportunity to engage in true reason and logic. Anselm approaches the issue of faith differently. He does not assume God exists, he first sets out to prove it, with an ontological statement. This logic is clear, and though non-believers will never be convinced by it, there is no sound logical argument against it.
In essence Anselm attempted to show that the doctrine of God belief is eminently rational. It certainly appears more reasonable than the naturalist who sees order arising out of chaos [it never does] or that chance, or processes which offend basic laws of physics and bio-chemistry, somehow created all the vast complexities of life on Earth [chance and time mean nothing, a cat will always be a cat].
Anselm uses logic to defend the incarnation and the atonement in his work "Cur Deus Homo ?" [Why God became man]. The book is a rational approach to the natures of Christ [man and God], his birth, his death and resurrection and why it all happened. There is no fundamental 'sola scriptura' one sees later from the Protestants. Anselm uses the Bible, but not as the 'answer', he uses scripture as part of the process of analysis and logic, to examine the proof, or reasonableness, that God became man.
Anselm's approach back in the 11th century, whilst not strictly confined to himself, defined an important movement within Christendom. He was a man of faith, an Archbishop of Canterbury, a man of substance, power and influence. Yet he uses not power, scolding, or thumping of text to win people over, but quiet logic. He demonstrates an assurance and a complete confidence, that through reasoned discussion one can prove; "that all things we believe concerning Christ must necessarily take place."
Most importantly Anselm presents a positive, engaging approach, in using reason to support faith, and using faith to better understand our reason.
The Dark Ages never existed. It is an oft stated myth. The real darkness lies in our rather thin knowledge of the era from 500-1000. This is not due to the fact that the post-Roman world, was barbaric or illiterate. Thousands of tonnes of written documents, including some of the finest literature in history, come from this period. Beowulf, Bede's History of the English, Roland's Song, the Lindisfarne Gospels, the Book of Kells and much more, emanate and radiate, from this period. The 'darkness' of this period was in the wars, the Vikings, the Moslems, the Avars, the Turkish tribes [Huns, Magyars], the violence, the lack of accountability and at times justice, the Roman ideal that might makes right and power rules; this made the age one of combustion and upheaval. Without the Church the post Roman European world would have been anarchic and in the face of Islam, quite dead.
Another oft stated myth is that early Medieval man never reasoned or ratonalized. Considering that modern mathematics, science, physics and astronomy come directly out of this era, this claim has no merit. Galileo purloined most of his ideas from those who came before and sphericity was written about and accepted by Boethius, Alcuin and Pope Sylvester II amongst others. No one believed in a flat earth, any more than they believed there was life on the moon [the word lunatic comes from this 19th century belief].
Another myth is that there was no debate on or about 'God'. There was plenty of discourse on everything to do with Christ, the Holy Spirit and God. Everything was hashed out oftentimes in quite public displays. The myth that toothless, self flagellating medievals spent their time pondering how many angels danced on the head of a pin, is pernicious propaganda. There is not one single real world reference or example of any medieval scholar or church figure, obsessing with dancing angels on pin heads. Not a one. The propaganda alludes to the extraordinary examination the entire Christian faith went through during the medieval era. Everything was hammered out from the resurrection and transubstantiation, to the nature of man and his world. Nothing was left unexamined. Angels don't dance on pin heads, but pin heads will make sarcastic propaganda, justifying their own cult or their own liturgical beliefs.
God was criticized and debated. Not only the nature of God, or a creator, but if it such a being or force existed at all. From this debate, we see the formation of much of modern thought around facts, cause and effect explanations, sound argumentation and demands for proof, not just faith.
The medieval mind, in an era of secular violence, pagan Moslems, Islamic slave trading, misery, poverty and famine, the destruction of Christianity by Moslems from Arabia to France, needed proof of God's existence. The claims of the early Church fathers and St. Augustine whilst powerful and relevant, had grown weary and tired in their long journey from the early days of the Church towards the year 1000. Many questioned how and why God would exist. The myth of the unthinking medieval mind is as erroneous as the myth that modern minds are so clever and advanced.
A reorientation and rejuvenation in thinking started in the 11th century. It began with Saint Anselm (1033-1109), Archbishop of Canterbury in England who proved with cold logic, that God must exist. It is now called an 'Ontological argument'. Anselm's logical dissertation did not, and never will convince a non-believer. It was formulated entirely for a Catholic audience whose faith may be wavering. Importantly he never appeals to the Bible. He simply uses logical induction and reaches a conclusion that God must exist.
His argument is the following:
“God is that than which no greater can be conceived.
If God is that than which no greater can be conceived then there is nothing greater than God that can be imagined. Therefore:
There is nothing greater than God that can be imagined.
God does not exist then there is something greater than God that can
The first premise of this argument, (1), is Anselm’s conception of God. (2) is a simple logical truth; if God is the greatest conceivable being then there is no greater conceivable being. (3) follows simply from (1) and (2).
Anselm argues in support of (4) by comparing a non-existent God with an existent God. An existent God, says Anselm, is greater than a non-existent God. If God were non-existent, therefore, then we could imagine a God greater than he, namely an existent God.
(5) follows simply from (3) and (4).”
The logic is clear and sensible. There is no rational objection to it.
Anselm had thus started a movement in medieval universities to use logic first to understand the world. It was only in Christian Europe that universities arose. These places injected free will and debate into society and rejected unreasonable argumentation. It was not the sola scriptura of the Protestants, a blind faith that by 'believing', or in the case of most Protestants, pretending to believe, you are thus saved. Anselm and others developed a logical system based on Aristotle’s works and our own terms used today in logic, are all derived from this medieval innovation, in order to support and justify faith. These medieval philosophers were either nominalists (the name of an object refers the object and no more) or realists (where the name of the object refers to the properties of the object rather than just the object itself).
These two groups fought over the nature of reality, and the use of words to describe that reality and the objects, or subjects within it. It was an important debate and not arcane. It cuts to the heart of reality. Is the world real? What is the purpose of life ? Why are there 2 million flora and fauna ? How do we describe them ? In many ways the same debate rages today in for example 'genders' [what is a boy?], 'orientations' [56?], 'science' [what is science, what is metaphysics and story telling?], words in general [do any words have a valid meaning ?], and even reality [are there many realities and parallel universes ?]. Not much has changed in 1000 years, except human judgment seems to be far more clouded and opaque and less rooted in reality.
The chapter is called 'The Light' because “For any to whom Allah does not give light, there is no light!” [24:40]. This is pre-destination – in Lutheran-Protestant Christianity it is a medieval relic of fundamentalist intolerance from men such as Luther or Calvin, who believed that you do not need good works or deeds to be 'saved', but that you are 'predestined' and must simply follow sola scriptura, or the literal words contained in the Holy Bible. Protestantism at its base, is thus as corroded and deformed as Islam and such pre-medieval strictures still dominate Islam today. Thus being a Moslem, in and of itself, ensures a salvific journey and a superiority in this life and the next. It leads to violence and hatred of the Infidel.
Nur or light is the path of Allah. He 'guides who he wills'. This is clearly pre-destination negating free-will. If you disbelieve you are in the darkness of a great sea – lost:
Allah will decide who can or cannot see his 'Light' or the light of 'his' shining path. It is at odds with humanism, free will and responsibility. All cults are based in part on such 'supernatural' powers to decide who is chosen and who is condemned. Only the God[s] shall decide who is a part of the superior caste.
Islam negates free-will, thinking, and rationality. The above explanation proves why the scripture of Mein Koran will lead Moslems to the opposite path of what creates civilization.
Sura 24 is also where one finds the Koranic commandment to women to cover up:
Moslem women are slaves to their men. Polygamy makes this an obvious fact. Moslem males cannot control themselves when confronted with female 'adornments' that do not lie hidden under layers of bedsheets. If women show their 'meat' they can be raped, as many Moslems in Western cities maintain. In most of Europe Moslems account for a majority of rapes.
What of Moslem men ? Simply follow Mein Koran and Fuehrer Muhammad. Make sure you attack and defeat the Infidels. Spread Moslem rule. Fight in the way of Baal. If any 'disbelieve', Fitnah or trials and punishments will be visited upon them by the Lord of Mecca or Baal.
24:63: “Make not the calling of the Messenger (Muhammad SAW) among you as your calling of one another. Allah knows those of you who slip away under shelter (of some excuse without taking the permission to leave, from the Messenger SAW).And let those who oppose the Messenger's (Muhammad SAW) commandment (i.e. his Sunnah legal ways, orders, acts of worship, statements, etc.) (among the sects) beware, lest some Fitnah (disbelief, trials, afflictions, earthquakes, killing, overpowered by a tyrant, etc.) befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them.”
So from the above we can conclude the following from Mein Koran.
Women are inferior
Islam denies free-will, reason and debate
Moslem males must follow everything Muhammad said, and did.
Even Mein Koran acknowledges the insanity of the Meccan-Baal project and its 'founder' the quite mad Muhammad. Sura 23 is famous for its 'denial', that Muhammad was mentally ill. It rebukes the 'Infidel' for spreading this belief, and demands as usual, punishment, torture and violence against non Moslems.
23:25 "He is only a man in whom is madness, so wait for him a while."
Note: This is used to demonize Unbelievers, for not believing that Muhammad was a prophet is a sin in Islam.
23:70 “Or say they: "There is madness in him?" Nay, but he brought them the truth [i.e. "(A) Tauhid: Worshipping Allah Alone in all aspects (B) The Qur'an (C) The religion of Islam,"] but most of them (the disbelievers) are averse to the truth.”
Nay, no madness in Mein Koran, or the totalitarianism of Mein Fuehrer Muhammad's rule. If you believe that the Meccan cult of submission is nothing else other than the usual litany of Oriental despotism and bile; than the Lord of Mecca, Baal or Allah, will punish you. As 23:70 states, only Islam is the truth, and if Mein Koran says Muhammad is the world's most important human, than that is all you need to know.
In this regard 21% of Sura 23 preaches violence against non Moslems. The multi-culti and Islamophiles regard this as 'moderate', proving that Islam or 79% of it, is peace and love. The 79% simply demands obeisance, there are no immanent rules of tolerance or ethics, and the golden rule never makes an entrance. The violence against non Moslems is palpable, vibrant and dominant. They will be utterly destroyed.
23:41 “So As-Saihah (torment - awful cry, etc.) overtook them with justice, and We made them as rubbish of dead plants. So away with the people who are Zalimun (polytheists, wrong-doers, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah, disobedient to His Messengers, etc.).”
Christians are polytheists who are rubbish. Jews are non believers who are as alive to Moslems as dead plants. Once they were Moslem, now they are doomed.
23:44 “Then We sent Our Messengers in succession, every time there came to a nation their Messenger, they denied him, so We made them follow one another (to destruction), and We made them as Ahadith (the true stories for mankind to learn a lesson from them). So away with a people who believe not.”
It is not only a supremacist ode to violence but a quite mentally-ill view, that a moon cult from Mecca, is somehow the 'parent' of Judeo-Christianity, appearing as it did, 2600 years after Judaism and 600 years after Christianity. Islam's claim that the Abrahamic theologies all derive from the Lord of Mecca, or Baal, is about as intelligent as stating that AmerIndians discovered Europe; or that Chinghis Khan's Mongolian culture, created ancient China. It is beyond absurd [though no doubt many Phds have been printed supporting such views].
In this Koranic make-believe world, the Jews and Christians are wayward Muslims who must be re-converted to the moon cult 'path' of ritualised obedience, or punished, “If We had mercy on them and removed the distress which is on them, they would obstinately persist in their transgression, wandering in distraction to and fro. We inflicted punishment on them, but they did not humble themselves to their Lord, nor do they submissively entreat (Him)! [23: 75,76]
Why is Islam supremacist, violent and so intolerant ? Read Mein Koran yourself including Sura 23 the 'Believers'; don't listen to the media or politicians explain away Moslem fascism.
Hundreds of Moslems in the 2015 ritual of oblation to the moon deity [Al Lah] and Muhammad [Al Lah, or the Lord] found themselves dead, beaten, robbed, raped or assaulted. It is a fitting if sordid derivative of an enforced tribute to Mecca, and Muhammad, a city he conquered at the head of a 10.000 man army – which immediately makes him a man of peace for Western academics and 'experts'. Muhammad's return to Mecca is matched only in importance by the great man Obamed and his journey from Chicago to Washington. Muhammad smashed all other idols, keeping only Baal the Al Lah of Mecca as the symbol of 'God', or himself. Obamed smashed the American Constitution and 200 years of history, in his attempt at National Socialist tyranny.
Sura 22 or the Pilgrimage, is a chapter dedicated to Muhammad's seminal event – the takeover of Mecca. It contains of course the usual multi-culti bromides of love and fellowship such as 22:39: “Permission to fight is given to those (i.e. believers against disbelievers), who are fighting them, (and) because they (believers) have been wronged, and surely, Allah is Able to give them (believers) victory.” Or, 022:017 URL “Verily, those who believe (in Allah and in His Messenger Muhammad SAW), and those who are Jews, and the Sabians, and the Christians, and the Magians, and those who worship others besides Allah, truly, Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection. Verily! Allah is Witness over all things.” Such benign tolerance, infallible flexibility and acceptance.
The Hajj is a duty, one of the 6 pillars of Submission, issued by the moon deity through his military commander Muhammad, incumbent on all cult followers. It enriches Mecca. It impoverishes the assets and minds of the cult's devotees. It signifies Meccan-Arab imperialism. All Moslems must worship Mecca and its Kabaa shrine of Al-Lah, or the Lord of Mecca, who was of course Baal, the moon deity. There is nothing in the modern world which is so primitive, so ridiculous, as Moslems from non Arab countries paying homage to Arab fascism.
If you don't participate in this pagan festival at least once in your Moslem life, you are damned. You have no choice but to make the trip. Hitler had planned similar decrees for the promised Nazi shrine at Linz. Moslems seem blissfully unaware of the similarities between Muhammadism and Hitlerism.
Jews and Christians are of course cursed in this Sura, though the MSM and quackademics, who have never read the Koran, would have no idea about this:
Perhaps Western politicians might want to read the above and many other verses from this Sura and become acquainted with the 'real Islam', before sounding off like morons, with grade 5 platitudes about Islam representing blue skies and butterflies. In any event the Hajj is simply another Bronze age artifact which tells the sentient and the alert, everything they need to know about the moon cult of Mecca.
The propagated myth by modern academics and atheist 'humanists', is that post the German takeover in the 5th century of the decrepit, totalitarian, bureaucratic and despotic nonsense named the late Roman empire; all became 'dark' and all of the 'great' classical learning was lost. No science, or math was performed until the Catholic Galileo came strutting orb of light in hand, to rekindle the verities of science. The Galileo myth is as obnoxious as the age of darkness myth from 500-1500 AD. The Catholic church always exalted and funded reason together with faith, and some of the greatest scientists in history were Christians funded by the church searching for the truth of God's miraculous creation and the physical and natural laws – so perfectly developed and in such harmonious balance and ratio – that saying otherwise denotes ignorance and bigotry and leads to Churchophobia.
The truth of course is the opposite. The Roman empire for all its advances in engineering, literature, aspects of governance and perhaps law [the Justinian codex was a 6th c. product, at the beginning of the so-called Dark Age, and created by the Byzantine or Eastern Roman empire, not the Western Roman]; was a force for retrogression long before it fell. Once released from the tyranny, the inflation, the over taxation, the endless wars and strife from Rome, Europe finally began to develop institutions, trade, technology, agricultural progress and faith; which eventually led it 1000 years later, to world mastery.
Today tourists gawk and gape at the wonders of Middle Age architecture and practical engineering. How would a dark age produce 10.000 functioning water mills in England circa 850 AD, when under Roman rule there was not one? What is dark, is the propaganda declaiming against a period, in which mostly Latin was used, or early forms of the vernacular, neither of which is accessible today, or understood by 'historians'. Literally thousands of tonnes of documents still exist that have yet to be exhumed and analyzed. From a society which believes in general, that plant food, a trace chemical which is a rounding error element, and which falls out of the hydrological cycle, causes climate; disparaging an older civilization, which for 400 years fought for its life to survive against almost insurmountable odds, is rather dark.
We can state that the medieval period for all purposes laid down the foundations of modern science. When the Moslem Jihad cut off papyrus from Egypt, the medieval mind of genius discovered the incredibly rich process of producing vellum from cow and sheep skin. Books, copied laboriously by monks, from the ancient world and the medieval, were preserved. Biblical narratives such as the Lindisfarne gospels or the Book of Kells are amongst the masterpieces in world artistic history. Likewise we see that alchemy which leads directly to chemistry and also metallurgy reached a high point of development in the early Medieval period. Eyeglasses were invented in the 13th century, and before that independently in both Catalonia and Sweden the first blast furnaces had appeared by the 11th. The first mechanical clocks were invented in England during this time along with higher mathematics, mean speed theorems and geometry. The Medievals also understood the principles of engineering statics magnificently demonstrated in the great Gothic cathedrals of Europe which still stand 800 years after they were constructed. Not one single European in the Medieval world believed the world was flat. Flat earth societies would only appear in the age of Darwin and the middle of the 19th century.
The Roman Catholic Church to this day believes that Divine Revelation can be known and understood by faith and reason. The things of nature were believed to be revelations of the Divine nature itself. Nature can be known by reason alone but the Church taught that with faith, this process of knowing was made more perfect as “faith seeks understanding.” Thus, there never has been a conflict between faith and reason. Indeed without faith, there is oftentimes precious little reason, as witnessed by 'scientific' cults such as evolution, Nazism, Communism, or Gaia worship, or Bronze age artifacts such as Islam. All are in the main, anti-human death cults, dedicated not to salvation or reason, but destruction and violence.
The Renaissance, starting in roughly 1450, or Rebirth of obeisance to all things pagan and ancient, produced many ill effects. One was a ribald acceptance by late medieval society, of immorality, savagery, and a diminution of personal responsibility, ethics and social cohesion. We see this all over Europe – a basic reduction of all standards related to conduct, mores and social interaction.
Savonarola, the fiery, intemperate Dominican monk who rose to power in Florence during the latter part of the 15th century, was an expression of the widespread disgust with the Renaissance. Most of the lay population were not only revolted by Church, secular and political oppression and immorality; they were oftentimes the victims of the same. Unbridled corruption of the Church, of 'intellectuals', and of political life undermined public and private morality as well. The 'peasants' began to imitate their 'superiors'. Uncivilization was the result in many places, with the Medici in Florence, and the Borgia in Rome, at the forefront of this immoderate explosion in despotism and unenlightened narcissism.
Machiavelli lived during the reign of the Borgia Pope Alexander VI, easily the most debauched, lecherous, conniving, sinful, lustful, depraved holder of the Papal chair in history. His son Cesar was an outright demon, a brigand, military commander, sadist, psychopath and blood-letter of the highest order. The two of them so besmirched and ridiculed the church, that one can trace a straight line from the reign of Pope Borgia, to the 1517 proclamation by Luther against not only Church indulgences, but the general cesspit of corruption it had sunk into. Borgia is the apex of the Church's descent into madness and secular concupiscence.
Machiavelli was a man of Florence, dominated by the Medici. But it was not the Medici who were the templates for Machiavelli's bizarre theory termed 'realism', though it had precious little to do with realism, and plenty more to do with sadism, fraud, mendacity and an ethical program developed by Satan. Machiavelli was no more a 'political philosopher', than the naturalist philosopher Darwin was a scientist. Words do indeed have meaning. Machiavelli was first and only, an admirer of the Borgia, a ruthless gangster family from Spain which usurped in the guise of Borgia the elder, the Papacy and political-military control of vast swathes of Italy. Alexander the VI or Borgia the elder, was no more a Pope, than Richard Dawkins is an apostle of reason or science.
From Mallett, and his history named 'Borgias': “....Later in July, in one of the lightning military moves for which he was famous, Caesar [Borgia, son of the Pope] swept into the duchy of Urbino and conquered it almost without firing a shot. It was soon after this that Niccolo Machiavelli of Florence joined him, becoming his great admirer and making him the generally recognized model for 'the prince' in famous and evil book on politics...” 
Machiavelli's evil admonition that all princes, real or aspiring, and all claimants to power or influence real or aspiring, must ape and mimic a fantastically insane example such as Caesar Borgia, is an expression of insanity, not political philosophy. There is nothing intelligent, elucidating, attractive or even benign in such an assertion, nor in such a man as Caesar Borgia. Yet 'historians' credit Machiavelli with 'insights', with his loathing of humans and of the world at large, somehow making 'political philosophy', more 'scientific' and real. All Machiavelli did was to enshrine as divine, the savage barbarism of Caesar Borgia. What is the 'rebirth' of knowledge in such a claim ?
Machiavelli was like many others – Lenin, Bonaparte, Rousseau, Hume, Marx, Freud, Darwin and too many others to list – a product of his times, with his own peculiar and quite deformed personality, finding succor and 'proof', in his philosophy. As with the Phd in gender studies justifying their 10 years of 'research', or their own sexual deviancy's, so one can see the deformed, twisted, sick, pathological ill Machiavelli resplendently reflected through his hero, the savage and barbarian Borgia, and his ode to immorality, 'the prince'. Machiavelli was not a scientist, not a philosopher, not a man who was reborn or enlightened. He was just another product of evil and just another example of a mental illness parading as the rational.