Advent: The Struggle and Beauty of Waiting This Advent season holds new meaning for our family. Right now, McKenna and I are in the hospital, praying and waiting for the hopeful arrival of our second daughter after McKenna’s water broke early. It’s not the kind of waiting we would have chosen, but it’s the kind we’ve been given. While sitting in the hospital chapel earlier this week, praying for McKenna, our daughter, and our little family, I noticed the Advent candles lit on the altar. Their glow caught my attention, and I was reminded that Advent is a season of waiting. Those candles represent hope, faith, joy, and peace—all the things we cling to when waiting feels heavy. In that quiet moment, I found a new perspective: this season of waiting isn’t without purpose. Advent is all about waiting—waiting for light in the darkness, waiting for hope in the midst of fear, waiting for promises to be fulfilled. For centuries, God’s people longed for the Savior, enduring pain, silence, and uncertainty as they trusted that God’s timing would not fail. Waiting isn’t easy. It’s uncomfortable, it’s uncertain, and it often feels like it stretches you beyond what you can handle. McKenna and I are living in that tension right now. We are waiting and praying for weeks to pass, for our little girl to grow stronger, and for the day we finally get to meet her. The waiting feels fragile, and some moments are heavier than others. But this is where Advent gives us hope. It reminds us that waiting is not wasted. In the waiting, God is present. In the waiting, He is preparing us for the joy that is to come. It’s in the waiting that we grow, even when it’s painful, because we learn to trust Him more deeply. Mary understood this kind of waiting. She carried the Savior of the world with fear, pain, and anticipation. She knew the struggle of waiting for a promise to unfold, and she also knew the overwhelming joy of its fulfillment. At Hard Faith, we believe in telling stories that face the brokenness of this world honestly, while pointing to the hope that never fails. Advent is a story like that. It’s a season that reminds us that our struggles, our fears, and even our pain have meaning because they’re held by a God who is faithful. This season, as McKenna and I wait for the birth of our second daughter, we’re leaning into that truth. We’re holding onto the promise that even in the tension, God is at work. And as we wait, we’re reminded that the joy of what’s to come will make every moment of uncertainty worth it. Wherever you are this Advent season—whether you’re waiting with hope, waiting with pain, or waiting with questions—may you know that God is with you. Emmanuel means “God with us,” and that promise is true no matter how long the waiting feels. Please keep us in your prayers during this season. Pray for McKenna’s strength, for our daughter’s health, and for peace as we trust God with the days and weeks ahead. Telling stories that liberate, Spencer Folmar

In a lecture delivered in Sydney, Dr. Jordan Peterson tries to answer the frequently asked question about his faith. At first glance, there doesn’t seem to be a wrong answer to this question — you will probably know, what you believe in… Nevertheless, as a believer, I disagree with his answer. To understand this criticism, we must first gain clarity about the concept of the Christian faith.Faith — an Attempt at a Personal Explanation Do I believe or do I just imagine? The question of my faith often brought me to the point of despair. Testing my faith for vitality in the way of a pulse measurement never led to good results. Faith cannot be measured nor derived. You cannot force faith. I realized only recently that the difficulties I had in answering the question, have their root cause in my lack of understanding of what faith constitutes. What do I mean when I speak of faith? A look at the lexicon reveals that the Middle High German origin of the word believe is the word gelouben. Among other things, the word pledge is a direct derivation of this old verb. So the meaning seems to be associated with a bond that one enters actively and deliberately. But what do we bind ourselves to and, above all, why?The Two Sides of Faith John 20, 29 — Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed. Unfortunately, my life does not consist of a series of experiences of God. But experiences have to be experienced. They exist only for the moment. The memory of an experience is not the same as the experience itself. For the faith, this means that even the most intense experience of God’s closeness fades in memory and the doubt whether it is nothing but wishful thinking, can gain the upper hand. The experience of God is central to my faith. However, it cannot fully describe it. I want to hold on to this experience, but I’m no more able to do this than Mary Magdalene could hold on to Jesus: John 20, 17 — Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father A little side note: Is it enough for you to know that a loved person (in and of itself) exists or would you like to see him or her more often? One of my best friends asked me more than once the question of what distinguishes the Bible from any other exciting, good book. He did not doubt that the Bible has to tell us a lot and is the source of countless valuable ethical rules. But there are some good books of this kind out there. In the pursuit of understanding my faith, an answer has emerged. The ethical guidelines of the Bible give us orientation in the seemingly God-forsaken world when we lack the experience of God. However, the center of the biblical texts is God. Without God, the rules are no longer valuable, but worthless in the deepest sense. Without God, the Bible is indeed replaceable by any other ethical book. The Bible is not a founding work of an ideology. Their texts are not universally valid but must be reconsidered for each situation individually. Deriving a direct guide to action for all possible situations from the rules of the Bible in a kind of mental exercise is not feasible for the believer. Rather, the believer hopes that in the concrete situation, a sentence of the Bible will have a concrete meaning and thus contributes to decision- making. So the believer hopes for God’s (holy) spirit and not that his life will be regulated by the words of a book. The Bible is not God’s Word, but it can become God’s Word. When we read the Bible, we open the door for God. That’s why the bible demands to be studied. From us Christians, it demands that we take it more seriously than any other book — also and especially if we do not experience God’s nearness. That’s our part of the faith. The meaning of the word faith is thus divided into two parts. On the one hand, it is justified trust, which comes from the experience of the nearness of God. On the other hand, faith also means the naivety that small children bring to their parents — whom they absolutize, as we should do only with God: If Dad says so, then it is true! We have God’s promise that this childlike trust will not be in vain.You Will Seek Me and Find Me Jeremiah 29, 13 — when you seek me with all your heart. I will be found by you True faith does not come out of us but into us. A Believer is called the one who experienced this and has made a conscious decision for God. Seeking God, if we do not see him, trusting in God, if he does not seem to be there, reading the Bible, even though we doubt that it has to tell us more then certain psychological findings — that is the active part of the faith. But without the experience of the nearness of God, this so important part will soon degenerate into pure superstition and preoccupation with ourselves. The experience of God — the passive part of faith — is the foundation and goal of the active part. This answers the initial question of the why of the faith. I believe because I have experienced God’s closeness. But faith itself includes my response to God: Lord, I vow to you loyalty! This includes the realization that the times of absence of experiences are not times of unbelief. I have learned that neither side of faith is viable alone in the long term. Only in this duality does faith become truly sustainable. Markus 9, 24 — I believe; help my unbelief! The final answer which I gave my friend on his question about the Bible, is the following: Imagine that we Christians were right.The Freedom of Faith For centuries, the Church has misunderstood and abused faith. The notion of achievement that exists in every society, has been extended to the faith. "I can earn God’s love" was the fundamental precept. In the Middle Ages, you could even be freed from all your sins by paying money. God was the almighty judge, who then let himself be appeased if one did what the church leaders wanted. The relationship between God and man was that of a judge to a defendant. Does a mother love one of her children more if he follows her well-intentioned advice more than the other? Or does she just suffer more because the naughty child will have a harder time in life? Martin Luther has recognized that the relationship between God and man is a love affair. I recognize two things. For one thing, I faintly realize that I can’t come to God. I cannot earn his recognition. Secondly, I recognize thankfully that God loves me. He comes to me. Opening the door for him and letting him enter is the only requirement to be fulfilled. Luke 15, 20 — But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion, and ran and embraced him and kissed him. The unmodern word sin is a relational word. Sin is everything that separates two who live in a relationship. The Easter message is God’s promise that, no matter how much we hurt him, how much he suffers from us, he will always be there for us. The forgiveness of all sins through the crucified Jesus is nothing less than the greatest declaration of love in the world. The lover cannot come any closer to the loved one without pushing him. This promise of God is the foundation for the liberation of the believer. It frees him from the idea of achievement. The believer does not have to earn God's love through good deeds. And he does not pose as a saint above others. Completely freed from the fear: What will the great judge say at the end? the believer can devote himself entirely to life in the world. In the struggle for truth, he is therefore not blocked by thoughts of the consequences, this or that decision will have for him eventually. With the knowledge that wrong decisions, sins, are already forgiven, he can use his full potential to make as many right ones as possible. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letter to Eberhard Bethge, 21.7.1944 One must abandon every attempt to make something of oneself, whether it be a saint, a converted sinner, a churchman (the priestly type, so-called!) a righteous man or an unrighteous one, a sick man or a healthy one. This is what I mean by worldliness — taking life in one’s stride, with all its duties and problems, its successes and failures, its experiences and helplessness. It is in such a life that we throw ourselves utterly in the arms of God and participate in his sufferings in the world…Experiences of God It is intentional that I have not written anything about my experiences of God at any point in the text. Experiences are very subjective. I can not even say if, that which my brain makes out of the nerve signal from my eyes when they see the color red, is the same thing that any other human brain makes out of it. How much more difficult is it to convey a God experience? My experiences of God are not a template for others. I can not claim: This is what experiencing God looks like and nothing else. Nevertheless, I don’t want to remain completely silent on the matter. There is a basic trust in God, which is not of the same nature, as the active faith described above. It should be clear from the context that basic trust does not mean, that it is permanently there in the same intensity. And then there are situations in which I have a sort of perspective that conveys a clarity which is neither rational nor otherwise justifiable. I then know what is right and wrong. It is important to note that the distinction between right and wrong is different from the distinction between good and bad in that it is contextual in the narrowest sense. To prevent greater suffering, it may be right to kill a human being. Yet no one would speak here of a good deed! The struggle of the Hitler assassins around Dietrich Bonhoeffer with the fifth commandment is cited here as an example.Peterson’s Statements Let us go back to Peterson’s lecture in Sydney. In the beginning, he pointed out the problems involved in asking the question about one’s personal belief. What is the intention behind asking: Do you believe in God? Moreover, what are the implications of the statement: I do believe! Some people, Peterson criticized, would state I do believe and actually mean I am good. Then he arrives at a point, where he states, that it is almost impossible for a man to say the words: I do believe. By citing Nietzsche: …there was only one Christ, and he died at the cross. he eventually follows the wrong route of the philosopher and the medieval church. They believed that you have to earn God's approval by doing good. As a Christian, I disagree! I say I do believe and I know very well, that this does not mean I am thoroughly good (in the sense that everything I do is good). In fact, both statements cannot be said simultaneously. To say it with Martin Luther: Martin Luther, The Freedom of the Christian Good righteous works never make a good righteous person, but a good righteous person does good righteous works. Bad works never make a bad person, but a bad person does bad works. Close to the end of the lecture, Peterson explains the benefits of confessing to faith. From a psychologist’s perspective there seem to be some good arguments for the lifestyle of a believer. But again, I have to disagree! We can not convince ourselves to believe. We don’t come to God —God comes to us. This does not mean that we are completely left out of the process. It is our task to actively decide in favor of the coming God. However, we do not make that decision based on weighing alternatives. The only reason for the faith — and that distinguishes the believer from one who follows ethical guidelines — is God.The Wrong Direction — Again I grew up in the GDR and was brought up as an atheist. The teachers in my school tried to explain faith and how we will overcome it: “In the past, people could not explain the physical world and have assigned gods to the inexplicable phenomena. So, e. g. the god Thor was the reason for lightning and thunder. But mankind grew up. These days we have science. Some people — the Christians — still struggle with the world and need to imagine their god. But science and socialism will make heaven on earth possible so that no one has to imagine a God any longer.” Here we see the same wrong direction (man imagines God) as in the essence of Peterson’s explanations. Surely, he does not make a statement about the pure existence of God. But, at the end of the day, to him, it doesn’t seem to make any difference whether God exists or not. You just have to live your life as if he did exist.The Most Dangerous God — Me Peterson’s statements are in opposition to the Christian faith. I do not become a Christian by performing good deeds and thus approaching a Christian ideal (however it is defined - and whoever it defines!). Rather, I acknowledge God, allow him into my life and can then hope that he will guide me and tell me how I should act. And I am well aware of my mistakes. The highest wisdom at which a Christian can arrive is to know that he is (and will be) a sinner. There is a wonderful German poem by Wolfgang Borchert. This is the best translation into English I have found: I’d be a light in stormy night for boats and cods and smelties – but I’m a skiff against the odds myself in difficulties! The efforts to become better than we are, to burn the dead wood, are admirable. But, in the long run, this endeavor far exceeds our power. To say it with Paul: 2. Corinthians 12, 9 — But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. In other words, it is not our power, our conviction or dedication that will bring god to our life. On the contrary, we should realize that the divine word comes into us and not out of us. This can only happen if we do not see our own convictions and actions as the decisive factor, but instead seek God again and again. Ask Him and trust in Him. We must become weak so that He can work strongly in us. Peterson says that the statement of the believer must have strong implications in his life. As a Christian, I say that the statement “I believe” will have strong implications if it is said honestly and with the whole soul.  Peterson rightly points out that we have to take responsibility. Not society or anyone in particular is to blame for our misery — at least not in the first place. And trying to get better should be the goal for all of us. Still, this won’t bring us any closer to God. There is no way, in which we can come to the lord. Establishing the connection is his part. On the other hand, turning ourselves into gods (which for this part means that you are sure you know what is good and bad) is one of the most dangerous things for ourselves and society. It is as destructive as absolutizing an ideology. No one is to absolutize but God alone! This is a fundamental part of the first commandment. It is highly probable that the reason for most of the suffering in history is that people tried to be God. In fact, from a biblical perspective, it is the reason we do not live in paradise. The original sin of Adam and Eve will be the topic of a whole article. It is possible, that Peterson’s thoughts are much closer to mine than it appears. Human communication is a complicated and more than ambiguous issue. In the pursuit of truth, however, I have to assume the worst interpretation of his words. Nevertheless, I do not doubt the good intentions in his statement: I try to live as if God exists. And those who agree with it may argue, that this is all we can do. Otherwise, we are fully helpless. But involving God in the sentence includes a dangerous solution to our helplessness. Reformulated, the statement reads as: I know what is right or wrong! I do not need God for this. (And I am a little afraid he really exists.) And here it is again — the original sin. And it is even worse. Adam and Eve still believed in God. They still listened to God. But, the statement "as if God exists" does not even care about God. The question of the faith is thus reduced to a purely philosophical question about the existence of a transcendent being (and the possible consequences). Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Akt und Sein, postdoctoral thesis 1929 God does not exist — in and for itself! God is a personal counterpart for every single person. As a Christian, I believe in the living Jesus. I believe that a word of the bible — a book thousands of years old — can come to life in a concrete situation. So, the question Do you believe? is not a question about the personal opinion on an undecidable issue. In the first place, it means Did you experience the personal God?Peterson’s Daemon I do not know if Socrates’ famous Daimonion is the same as the inner voice of which Peterson speaks. However, I know the latter very well. As an almost objective observer, my inner voice looks underneath the surface of my words. It confronts me with the real reasons for my actions. It is a part, if not the center of myself. On the other hand, the Holy Ghost is the way God communicates with us. Thus it is no part of us and should strongly be distinguished from the inner voice. And it is far from being permanently present. Not for nothing, is the Holy Ghost compared to the wind. I felt the need to make an explicit distinction between these two terms in order to clarify once again the difference between Peterson's idea of faith (which essentially comes out of us) and the Christian belief in the living God.My Answer My answer to the question of faith is momentous. I feel like someone walking through a forest in the twilight during a thunderstorm. Now and then there is a flash and I recognize my surroundings in a clear light. Most of the time, however, I have to choose between two different interpretations of my impressions of the world around me. Is this an attacker who is standing right in front of me or someone who, like me, is largely helpless in this storm? These two views represent two sides of myself. One driven by fear and anger and one that recognizes the other person as a child of God — just as I am. In this way, Shoulder Angel and Shoulder Devil (in the Bible: Diabolus — the Slanderer) are playing their game with me and I have to decide whom I believe, over and over again. I have experienced how much my life gets mixed up when I let myself be guided by fear and anger. And I have experienced the peace that settles in me when I look at others with a loving eye. I want to recognize my fellow humans as often as possible in the latter way. Due to my inner resistances, this is extremely exhausting. In the long term, it only seems possible when I experience the nearness of God. That’s why I pray: I believe; help my unbelief!

The decline in the share of Christians in the US population appeared to have stopped, according to a major new survey. This is notable because it seems to contradict the thesis that the decline of Christianity in Western countries is inevitable and irreversible. The survey, from the Pew Research Center, says that the proportion of Americans identifying as Christians has stabilised at around 62pc. The figure was 78pc in 2007 but has stopped falling over the last five years. The study, involving more than 100,000 respondents, finds that self-declared Protestants make up 40pc of the U.S. adult population, while Catholics account for 19pc. Of course, saying you belong to a particular religious group does not make you actually practice that religion. Meanwhile, the religiously unaffiliated, often referred to as “nones” (atheists, agnostics, or those who identify as “nothing in particular”), now constitute 29pc of the population. After a long period of growth, this group has also stabilised in recent years. Other measures of religious practice indicate stability. The percentage of Americans who pray daily has remained between 44pc and 46pc since 2021, while regular religious service attendance (at least monthly) has held steady in the low 30s since 2020. However, there are notable generational differences: younger adults (18-24) are significantly less religious than older adults (over 74). Only 46pc of the youngest adults identify as Christian, compared to 80pc of the oldest cohort. Additionally, 27pc of young adults pray daily, compared to 58pc of seniors, and just 25pc of younger adults attend religious services monthly, compared to 49pc of older adults. Family size also varies by religious affiliation. Christians of the age group 40-59 have more children (2.2) than the religiously unaffiliated (1.8) and non-Christian religious groups (1.8). However, Christians are less likely to have minor children at home due to their older average age. Just 42pc of Christian respondents are within the prime child-rearing ages of 25 to 54, compared to 60pc of the religiously unaffiliated and 56pc of those from other religious traditions. These figures reflect self-identified Christian respondents, but the survey does not look at the number of children people have based on religious practice. Generally, fertility rates tend to be higher among those who attend religious services more frequently. Demographer, Lynam Stone, has shown that Americans who attend religious services weekly or more, have about 2.2 children on average, compared with just 1.35 or so for those who never attend. A new paper from The Iona Institute examines the positive correlation between religious practice and larger families. Women remain more religious than men, though the gender gap is narrowing, especially among younger generations. Among parents with under-18s at home, 42pc report engaging in religious activities such as prayer or scripture reading with their children. Changing religious affiliation is common in the U.S., with 35pc of adults identifying with a different religion (or no religion) compared with in childhood. Christianity experiences significant losses, with six former Christians for every new convert. Catholicism is particularly affected, losing 8.4 people for every convert. Religious affiliation continues to correlate with political and social attitudes, according to the survey. Highly religious Americans are more likely to lean Republican and hold conservative views, while less religious individuals tend to align with the Democratic Party and support liberal policies. Among ideological groups, liberals have experienced the most dramatic shift. In 2007, 62pc of self-identified liberals were Christian; by 2024, this number had dropped to 37pc. Conversely, the percentage of liberals with no religious affiliation rose from 27pc to 51pc, making religious “nones” the dominant group among liberals. Conservatives have also seen a decline in Christian affiliation but to a lesser extent, and a majority still identify as Christian.

Every time there is an election, I get to watch the worst behavior in America. I get to see a repeat of all things Old Testament when it comes to seeing the response of those who didn’t get what they wanted. As King Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun.  Seeing the anti-Trump (or anti-Biden) response from segments of society is old stuff.  Here is our history, as well as what I think is a better and certainly a healthier response.  In the book of Judges, we watch a series of disasters as the people of Israel choose not to go to God for guidance on right and wrong. Instead, they select men and elevate them above everyone else. In all the stories, we read how these men were not better than everyone else but were all trainwrecks in their own way. Some did evil.  Some did well.  Some came from a shady background and had shady life experiences.  In the end, they were always replaced.  Sounds familiar? Jephthah is one such character.  He was the son of a whore.  He was attacked and people tried to drive him out of his home.  People hated him.  He was nearly as bad as UNC’s basketball team in the eyes of many.  OK, that was an exaggeration.  He wasn’t that bad. However, the people could see that there were evil forces in the world, and the people wanted a leader who had the testicles to combat the evil and not give a crap about what others thought of him.  Jephthah dealt with land ownership and borders on day 1 of office.  He killed the real enemy of God’s people, but he had a horrible end to his story, as he had to kill his daughter to keep an oath he made. He fads out of the story, and no one since really talks about him.   Yes, I voted for Trump unapologetically, but I can respect the people of this land who treat him as Jephthat or a son of a whore.  I would have done this same activity if Harris had won.  But I suggest this as an encouragement for you to see the good that has already come to pass.  You need to be proud of the good as the new leader discarded public opinion and addressed the core of the evil upon our land. 1)      He defunded Planned Parenthood.  If Biden’s administration was correct in concluding that life begins at conception, and the geneticists who study DNA are correct in demonstrating that the baby is different than the mother and not a part of the mother’s body, then we just saw a major step into ending the 21st century’s equivalent of Auschwitz.  History will not look well upon government-funded euthanizing of the innocent. We got to witness that stand against evil, even though the media won’t acknowledge it.  Own that “good” as part of your life experience. 2)      He recognized boys as boys and girls as girls.  The evil associated with those who have challenged this cannot be overstated.  We saw a win, and we need to own it, with pride. 3)      He restored a segment of Genesis 2 order.  Fish are no longer more important than humans.  4)      He used common sense to address our perimeter.  Biologists, since before any of us were born, have taught us to understand the great mystery of sustained life in a dangerous world.  The skin of a mammal (macroscopically) and the cell membrane (microscopically) demonstrate a trait in nature unique to successful life forms.  Borders must be semi-permeable for the organism to survive.  As everyone has acknowledged, our previous lack of border security was killing the organism.  As an offspring of immigrants, I love the original design of a semi-permeable membrane that discriminates what comes through.  My ancestors came through Ellis Island legally.  Yet, there is another part about the discoveries of biology- the outside invader doesn’t get to decide if it can enter the organism!  Those that do are called viruses, and many countries around the world are experiencing viral outbreaks.  I was in Norway, and I got to see for myself how horrible uncontrolled immigration has been for that culture.  They have it worse than the USA does.  5)      He replaced DEI with healthy meritocracy.  For those jobs where competence is important, he got rid of the biggest barrier that prevented competence from rising to the top.  I believe that many jobs in a services-driven economy do not, in fact, require competent employees.  A body sitting in front of a keyboard who knows how to use a search engine and can cut and paste is good enough for far too many American jobs.  However, some jobs do require competence.  We want those who are most competent to get those jobs.  Meritocracy is again considered progressive.  We got to see this social restoration that made Western Civilization into the force that it is today.   I am not blind.  Oh, don’t get me started on the “evils” that this judge and the ones who have come before him have done. I feel like if we had discovered life on Mars, Biden would have sent them money as a welcoming gift—as he sent money to everyone else.  Bush had his evils, as did Obama.  My challenge to you is to take off your blinders of ingratitude and see the good.  In Hebrew, the word for “Gratitude” isn’t a word, actually.  It is a combination of two words.  It literally translates as “the cutting to the good.”  Cut through the evil that the media is showing you, as well as social media, and look at the multi-generational good happening in front of you.  And do this every time we have an election!  Gratitude is a better contagion than the bitterness that seems to live the loudest these days.

The statistics in this article are at least 17 years old and given the ongoing forced “immigration” into the Western World by Third World (and especially Muslim) people, we can assume that the numbers shown here are much lower than they are today. How much lower, I don’t know, but given that the statistics prove what happens as the numbers increase it really doesn’t matter. It is more than correct to assume things have only gotten worse – much worse! And so, here is how Islam works to destroy anything that it does not control. To begin with, Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components. Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called 'religious rights.' When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to 'the reasonable' Muslim demands for their 'religious rights,' they also get the other components under the table.  Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007). As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness: United States – Muslim 1.0%  Australia – Muslim 1.5% Canada – Muslim 1.9% China – Muslim 1%-2%  Italy - Muslim 1.5%  Norway – Muslim 1.8% At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs: Denmark – Muslim 2% Germany – Muslim 3.7%   United Kingdom – Muslim 2.7% Spain – Muslim 4% Thailand – Muslim 4.6% From 5% on, Muslims exercise an inordinate influence in proportion relative to their percentage of the population. They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food similar to the Jewish concept of kosher, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims and demanding that large food stores employ them. This will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves – along with threats for failure to comply. (This has already happened in the United States). France – Muslim 8% Philippines – Muslim 5% Sweden – Muslim 5% Switzerland – Muslim 4.3% The Netherlands – Muslim 5.5%  Trinidad &Tobago – Muslim 5.8% At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the entire world but to establish Sharia law over that world. When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris – car-burnings). Any non-Muslim  action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats as happened in Amsterdam over Mohammed cartoons. Guyana – Muslim 10%  India – Muslim 13.4% Israel – Muslim 16% Kenya – Muslim 10%  Russia – Muslim 10-15% After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and the burning of synagogues and churches. Ethiopia – Muslim  32.8%At 40% you will find widespread massacres,  chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:Bosnia – Muslim 40% Chad – Muslim  53.1% Lebanon – Muslim  59.7% From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, a tax placed on infidels that must be paid for them to remain in the country involved. Albania – Muslim 70%  Malaysia – Muslim 60.4% Qatar – Muslim  77.5% Sudan – Muslim 70% After 80% one may expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide. Bangladesh – Muslim 83%  Egypt – Muslim 90% Gaza – Muslim  98.7% Indonesia – Muslim 86.1% Iran – Muslim 98% Iraq – Muslim 97% Jordan – Muslim 92%Morocco – Muslim 98.7% Pakistan – Muslim 97% Palestine – Muslim 99% Syria – Muslim 90% Tajikistan – Muslim 90% Turkey – Muslim 99.8% United Arab Emirates – Muslim 96% If the nation involved is 100% Muslim, this is supposed to usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam' – the Islamic House of Peace; that is, there is supposed to be peace because everyone is a Muslim: Afghanistan – Muslim 100% Saudi Arabia – Muslim 100% Somalia – Muslim 100% Yemen – Muslim 99.9% But this is not the case. For there is the ongoing “religious war” among the various “sects” or “branches” of Islam including: Sunnīsm, Shīʿīsm, Ibadism, Quranism, “Non-denominational” Muslims, Mahdavia, Ahmadiyya, the “Nation of Islam” and Sufism. Because Muslims are by both creed and nature “warlike,” despite a nation or area being 100% “Muslim,” the above groups will then wage war on each other. Indeed, their creed is found below regarding their philosophy of life: 'Before I was nine, I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world and all of us against the infidel.'   Leon Uris, 'The Haj” It is good to remember that in many countries, such as France, Muslim populations are centered in ethnic ghettos; they do not assimilate into the community at large They don’t want to assimilate; they want to rule. But because they consolidate in geographic areas, they exercise more power than their  numbers would indicate. This is especially true as they knowingly choose locations where they are able to dramatically affect local and regional governments. And yet, knowing what is happening, we continue to cater to these “invaders” (not immigrants!) dealing with them in a “politically correct” way so as not to “offend.” But if we do not learn to defend our own heritage, it will indeed become a “Muslim” world.