Nonie Darwish: Everything in Islam is Opposite to Biblical Values

On August 21 the American Freedom Alliance sponsored a conference in Los Angeles, “Islam and Western Civilization: Can they Coexist?” One of the featured speakers was Nonie Darwish, an Egyptian-American writer, an apostate from Islam, and the director of Former Muslims United.

Many thanks to Henrik Clausen for recording, and to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

Previous posts about the American Freedom Alliance event in Los Angeles:

2016   Aug   22   Silence is Still Not an Option
        25   “You’re Living Under the Sharia, and You Don’t Even Know It”
        27   Stephen Coughlin: Yes, the Truth May Constitute Hate Speech
        28   Daniel Greenfield: The Lie is Coming Apart
        28   ESW: We Need to Reclaim Our Right to Speak Freely
        29   John Bolton: We’re in a Deep Hole
        30   Guy Millière: I Want to Fight Where it’s Not Too Late
        31   Islam and Western Civilization: Can they Coexist?
        31   Andrew Bostom: Honesty About Islam is the Solution
    Sep   1   Ace Lyons: This Borders on Treason
        1   Wafa Sultan: All Islam is Radical

7 thoughts on “Nonie Darwish: Everything in Islam is Opposite to Biblical Values

  1. Yeah! I’ve never heard the difference explained so simply and clear-cut, using the BEHAVIOR of Islam–not ideology. The two religions seem to be the opposite.

    @5:30. RE women: That’s born out by the way countries like Saudi Arabia doesn’t allow women any civil rights, like driving or freedom of dress or association.
    @7:25. RE: democracy: Sharia not compatable with democracy.

    Our sin–Other peoples sin

  2. I can’t help but notice that the other side in the Book of Revelations bears some resemblance to Islam. I am not the first to notice that. I don’t know what my actual knowledge of Satanism is but my understanding is it perverts and mocks the Bible while today many just do that and claim they are really humanists. If Islam is the opposite of the Bible and Satanism mocks it. What are the differences?

    • Islam is in fact a mirror image of JudeoChristianity in that it pretends evil is good and good is evil and the goal is for you not to know. The wicked stepmother is clearly wearing a burka … and satan wants the last laugh, eg. annihilation of consciousness altogether. He hates that much.

      What we call “satanism” is a joke. It knows it’s bad and is openly rebellious/ psychopathic. That’s why it’s not a mainstream “religion” and is only a fringe, attention-seeking part of our societies. The closed-mindedness of many Christians (see below) historically caused all sorts of groups to be defined as “Satanic” when they were just different because that scared people. Ultimately, when you knowingly act in a way that’s against the teachings of Jesus, eg. exact revenge, kill, steal, act against your own good conscience, using whatever power you have at your disposal, you’re being “satanic” and you know it. Good thing He’s there to forgive you when you come to your senses.

      Then there’s Soros. The best of both worlds lol

      • In other words, Islam attacks the unconscious, the feminine, water, moon, esoterically. That’s why Islam’s symbol is venus and the moon, the symbols of the feminine in the old mystery religions (and esoteric christianity …) When you’re in those waters, you don’t know and you can be manipulated because all that is good and true, namely sexuality, femininity (whatever that mystery means anyway ha …) and more lately the cornerstone of masculinity, eg. the right to earn status and create security, desire to protect, provide, compete, as well as gender itself. All these things are the “feminine”, instinctive parts of ourselves and we need them to function the way they/we were designed naturally. You gain power over that, you have real power. Witness fashion, advertising. etc. Teens and enthusiastic college students are particularly susceptible to distortions.

        Satanism, as we think of it, is consciousness acting badly. It knows it’s wrong but it doesn’t care. It’s easy to judge.

        The goal of counterjihad/left movements is to bring the unconsciousness into consciousness. And we’re at the point, consciously, where we have Nonie speaking perfect sense and we think, gee, why didn’t anyone say this before? It’s so obvious, simple and true. Many followers of allah, like paedophiles, are unreachable and require a singular, succinct mercy. The ones we hope for, the lost liberals of the west, instinctively hate the Bible and can only be reached through emotional appeal, which is why the Bible says God sorts it out. The idea of Nonie’s book will only make them furious. I wonder what the current crop of Lutherans and Catholics will make of it. I do hope she requests reviews.

  3. Back when I read the koran (1984 or 5), I noticed the opposite that it has to the elements of the Bible. That was the one and only time I will ever read it. It’s fire starter (in more ways than one) to me now.
    I have since those days held the belief that islam is the preaching of Satan, and Mohammed was the anti-Christ, allah of course, is Satan.
    If I could suffer through Satanic Verses, I would pick it up again and attempt to read it, but it is such insufferable bovine excrement, I can’t stomach the words written therein.
    I fear the day will soon come when the “sons of God”, will need again to go unto the “daughters of Man”, and once again, make things right, and righteous.

  4. Mohammad in Vatican II
    St.Alphonsus Liguori said Mohammad is in Hell. He has gone there like other Muslims. The popes and the other saints said the same.Vatican Council II also says that ‘all’ need ‘faith and baptism’ for ‘salvation’.Everyone needs to enter the Catholic Church, ‘as through a door’ (Ad Gentes 7). Mohammad did not have faith and baptism at the time of death.
    Being saved with the baptism of water in the Catholic Church is the ordinary means of salvation.The Church is ‘the ordinary means of salvation'( Redemptoris Missio 55).In general all Muslims need to be visible members of the Catholic Church for salvation; salvation with ‘faith and baptism’ (AG 7, LG 14).
    We cannot say that Mohammad or a Muslim was saved with the baptism of desire or in invincibile ignorance. Since they are not the ordinary means of salvation.They cannot even be the extra ordinary means of salvation since there are no such known cases in our reality. They cannot be relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus since they do not exist for us humans in 2016.
    If a person in invincible ignorance is to be saved,God could send a preacher to baptize him with water. So there are only Catholics in Heaven. They are there with the Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
    To be saved with the baptism of desire etc is a possibility known only to God.There is no such known case in reality, defacto, in 2016.So there cannot be any exception in reality to Ad Gentes 7 or Lumen Gentium 16.
    So we cannot meet someone who will be saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance. Since the ordinary means of salvation is entering visibly in the Catholic Church (with faith and the baptism of water ).For us the baptism of desire refers to something hypothetical, accepted only in theory, in principle.It is speculative.
    We cannot say that Mohammad was saved in invincible ignorance because the only way to go to Heaven is with the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. It is given to adults who have Catholic Faith.Mohammad was not baptised.
    Mohammad also was not ignorant of the Catholic Faith. The Qur’an indicates that Mohammad knew about Jesus and the Church.He chose not to enter. The Second Vatican Council (LG 14), says that those who know about Jesus and the Church and its need for salvation and do not enter are on the way to Hell.
    The Second Vatican Council (AG 7) is cited in the Catechism of the Catholic Church under the title outside the Church there is no salvation.
    Ad Gentes 7 is in accord with the defined dogma, Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.The dogma is based on John 3: 5 and Mark 16:16.
    There are no exceptions mentioned in the Second Vatican Council to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The Council does not contradict the dogma as it was interpreted by the 16 century missionaries or Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
    In the present times we do not know anyone who has received salvation through ‘good and holy things in other religions’ (NA 2) and without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. It is not possible to greet someone on the streets of Rome who has received salvation with ‘the seeds of the Word’ (AG 11) and without ‘faith and baptism’. I cannot see someone in Italy or in Heaven who has been saved in invincible ignorance or with a good conscience(LG 16). Therefore, these references (hypothetical cases) are not exceptions to the dogma extraecclesiam nulla salus as they are often mistaken to be.
    Everyone needs to convert into the Church through faith and baptism, all need to be visible members of the Catholic Church to go to heaven and avoid hell (for salvation). The Second Vatican Council is in agreement with the popes and saints when they said that Mohammad is in Hell. The official teaching of the Catholic Church, like the magisterial documents, before and after the Second Vatican Council, and including Vatican Council II has the same message.Nothing has changed.
    Islam is not a path to salvation. (CDF, Notification, Jacques Dupuis, SJ, Dominus Iesus 20, the Second Vatican Council, AG 7, LG 14 etc.). Muslims need to visibly convert into the Catholic Church to avoid hell. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 845.846, Ecclesia in Eucharistia, Cantate Domino, the Council of Florence in 1441, extra ccclesiam nulla salus etc.).
    The founder of Islam, a religion which has good and holy things and which politically is one of the “great religions” like Judaism, was oriented to Hell.
    This is a truth of the Catholic Church.
    The Catholic Church still proclaims and teaches exclusive salvation. Since there are no known cases of Muslims or other non-Catholics, saved outside the Church .
    Since there are no visible exceptions,there is no basis for a theology of religions or a new ecclesiology.
    The ecclesiology of the Catholic Church today, based on the Second Vatican Council (LG 14, AG 7) is still exclusivist .
    Vatican Council II has an exclusivist ecclesiology when references to implicit cases are not mistaken to be explicit, when hypothetical cases are not assumed to be objectively visible in 2016 and when LG 16 for example, refers to someone who is invisible and not visible.
    Exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, according to Vatican Council II, does not mention any exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or to Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation).
    So we need Catholic Mission based on the Second Vatican Council.This is not only a personal opinion. Cardinal Angelo Amato, as Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, in an interview with the daily Avvenire, called for mission based on Vatican Council II, which for him is missionary .He specifically mentioned Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7.
    -Lionel Andrades

Comments are closed.