Darvish Intelligence

Friday, April 4, 2025

From Hezbe Sumka to Christ: Why Islam Is the Problem, Not the Jews

By Bobby Darvish

I was born into a Muslim family—proudly Iranian, deeply entrenched in Islamic identity. My family had strong political roots. They were members of the Iranian Nazi Party known as Hezbe Sumka, a fascist organization founded in 1951 that drew inspiration from Hitler’s National Socialist ideology and sought to blend it with Islamic and Iranian nationalist elements [1]. Our alliances extended beyond Iran, including ties with Bosnian, Georgian, and Ukrainian Nazi collaborators, both Muslim and non-Muslim.

As I reflect on those roots, and on the transformation I’ve undergone since becoming a Christian in 2013, I feel compelled to speak truthfully—even if it offends. The problem is not the Jews. The problem is Islam itself.

Islam’s Obsession with Jews

There are approximately 13 million Jews in the world today—about 0.2% of the global population [2]. Muslims number over 1.5 billion, yet in mosque after mosque, book after book, video after video, Islamic scholars and preachers teach that Jews are the source of global corruption. Entire Friday sermons are dedicated to vilifying Israel, blaming Jews for wars, diseases, and even natural disasters.

This isn’t new. The Quran and Hadith are filled with explicit condemnations of Jews, such as:

"Indeed, you will find the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers [to be] the Jews..." — Quran 5:82

"The Hour will not be established until you fight the Jews..." — Sahih Muslim 2922a [3]

This hateful obsession isn’t just wrong—it’s pathetic. You outnumber the Jews by more than 100 to 1, yet you spend your lives blaming them for your own failures. That is weakness. That is spiritual cowardice.

Jews Thrive, While Islamic Nations Crumble

While Islamic nations are plagued by violence, censorship, economic instability, and intellectual stagnation, Jewish communities around the world continue to thrive. Israel, a country of less than 10 million, leads in medical research, cybersecurity, agricultural innovation, and high-tech industries. Why? Because Jewish culture emphasizes education, personal responsibility, and moral law—values rooted in the Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament of the Christian faith.

Meanwhile, in the Muslim world, apostasy is punishable by death (Sahih Bukhari 9:84:57), women are treated as second-class citizens (Quran 4:34), and freedom of speech is virtually non-existent. How can a civilization advance when it is shackled by the chains of 7th-century tribal laws?

Islam: A Religion of War and Death

I once worshipped the god of Islam—Allah—but I now recognize that this god is not the God of the Bible. He is a god of war, coercion, and fatalism. The Quran encourages war against nonbelievers (Quran 9:5), and Muhammad, far from being a man of peace, led dozens of military expeditions, married a child bride (Aisha), and personally ordered assassinations.

Jesus Christ, by contrast, never raised a sword. He taught love for enemies (Matthew 5:44), forgiveness (Luke 6:37), and grace (John 1:17). He didn’t command armies or seek political power—He conquered sin and death itself through the cross.

The Christian Path: Freedom, Not Blame

When I became a Christian, I stopped blaming others for the problems of the world. I accepted that evil comes from the human heart (Jeremiah 17:9) and that redemption is only found in Jesus Christ. I stopped being a slave to a tribal ideology and became a child of God.

To my Muslim brothers and sisters, I urge you to stop blaming the Jews. Stop blaming the West. Stop blaming America. Look inward. Islam has destroyed more of our people than any foreign power ever could. Look at Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan—wherever Sharia is implemented, the result is not paradise, but misery and chaos.

Conclusion

It’s time to be honest. The failure of the Muslim world is not a result of Jewish plots—it’s the result of Islam’s own violent, regressive teachings. If 1.5 billion people can’t outperform 13 million, the fault doesn’t lie with the Jews—it lies within Islam itself.

And if you're ready to stop hating and start healing, there is only one path: through Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace, the Son of God, and the Savior of all mankind.

References

Ramin Ahmadi, “Hezbollah and Hezbe Sumka: Iranian Fascism and Islamism”, Middle East Forum, https://www.meforum.org/
World Jewish Population 2023, Jewish Virtual Library, https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/world-jewish-population
Sahih Muslim 2922a – Book of Tribulations and Portents of the Last Hour, https://sunnah.com/muslim:2922a
Sahih Bukhari 9:84:57 – Killing apostates, https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6922
Quran 9:5 – The Verse of the Sword, https://quran.com/9/5
Quran 4:34 – On beating wives, https://quran.com/4/34
Matthew 5:44 – Love your enemies, https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-44.htm
John 1:17 – Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, https://biblehub.com/john/1-17.htm

The Perils of Romanticizing Islam: A Christian Conservative Response to Lily Jay

By Bobby Darvish

In recent times, social media platforms have become arenas where individuals express and propagate various ideologies. One such figure is Lily Jay, an Australian social media influencer who has garnered attention for her enthusiastic promotion of Islam and, by extension, aspects of Islamism. While personal religious choices are a matter of individual freedom, the public endorsement of a belief system warrants critical examination, especially when it involves romanticizing elements that are fundamentally at odds with the values of freedom, equality, and human dignity.

The Allure of Idealism vs. The Reality of Doctrine

Lily Jay's portrayal of Islam often emphasizes its perceived beauty, community, and spirituality. However, this idealized depiction frequently overlooks or dismisses doctrinal and historical realities that are incompatible with the principles of a free and just society.

1. Women's Rights and Status

While Lily Jay may highlight narratives of empowerment within Islam, it is imperative to acknowledge the doctrinal positions that have historically subjugated women. The Quran explicitly states:

"Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other..."
— Quran 4:34, Sahih International

This verse has been traditionally interpreted to grant men authority over women, leading to systemic inequalities in legal rights, inheritance, and personal autonomy. Such doctrinal stances starkly contrast with the Christian understanding of the inherent equality and worth of all individuals, as exemplified in Galatians 3:28:

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
— Galatians 3:28, NIV

2. Freedom of Religion and Apostasy

The romanticization of Islam often ignores the severe restrictions placed on religious freedom within Islamic jurisprudence. The Hadith, considered a primary source of Islamic law, records:

"Whoever changes his religion, kill him."
— Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 6922

This directive has been used to justify harsh penalties, including the death penalty, for apostasy in various Islamic contexts. Such a stance is irreconcilable with the Christian principle of free will in matters of faith, as emphasized in Revelation 3:20:

"Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in..."
— Revelation 3:20, ESV

3. The Concept of Jihad and Violence

While proponents like Lily Jay may present Islam as a religion of peace, it is crucial to confront the scriptural endorsements of violence found within its texts. The Quran commands:

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah... until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled."
— Quran 9:29, Sahih International

This verse has historically been interpreted to sanction military action against non-Muslims, leading to centuries of conflict and forced conversions. In contrast, the teachings of Jesus Christ advocate for love and forgiveness towards one's enemies:

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you."
— Matthew 5:44, ESV

The Danger of Selective Representation

Lily Jay's approach exemplifies a broader trend of selectively highlighting the appealing aspects of Islam while neglecting its more troubling doctrines and historical applications. This selective representation not only misinforms her audience but also does a disservice to the countless individuals, particularly women and religious minorities, who have suffered under oppressive interpretations of Islamic law.

Conclusion

As Christian conservatives, we are called to approach such matters with both truth and love. While respecting individual freedoms, we must also be vigilant in discerning and challenging narratives that gloss over the harsh realities embedded within certain ideologies. The romanticization of Islam by figures like Lily Jay demands a thoughtful and informed response—one that upholds the values of freedom, equality, and the inherent dignity of every human being as created in the image of God.

Citations

The Quran, Surah 4:34, Sahih International.
The Quran, Surah 9:29, Sahih International.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 6922.
The Holy Bible, Galatians 3:28, NIV.
The Holy Bible, Revelation 3:20, ESV.
The Holy Bible, Matthew 5:44, ESV.

Muhammad, Zayd, and Zaynab: A Controversial Episode of Desire, Revelation, and Redefinition

By Bobby Darvish

The story of Muhammad, his adopted son Zayd ibn Muhammad, and Zaynab bint Jahsh remains one of the most revealing and controversial accounts in Islamic history. At the heart of this episode lies a deeply personal and ethically questionable situation that—according to Islam’s own sources—resulted in the so-called "divine" abrogation of long-standing cultural norms. To the Christian conservative, this incident serves as further evidence that Muhammad’s revelations were often tailored to suit his personal desires rather than reflecting divine truth or moral consistency.

The Background: Zayd, the Adopted Son

Zayd ibn Harithah was a freed slave adopted by Muhammad, and he was so close to the Prophet that he was often referred to as Zayd ibn Muhammad—Zayd, son of Muhammad. In pre-Islamic Arabia, adopted sons were legally considered as real sons, with all the corresponding rights and taboos. Among these taboos was the cultural prohibition against marrying the ex-wife of one’s adopted son, a rule rooted in decency and respect for family boundaries.

Zayd married Zaynab bint Jahsh, who was Muhammad’s cousin. The marriage, however, was reportedly troubled from the start. According to Sahih al-Bukhari, Zaynab held herself in higher regard due to her noble lineage and looked down on Zayd, who had been a former slave.

Muhammad's Attraction to Zaynab

According to early Islamic biographies and hadith literature, the turning point came when Muhammad visited Zayd’s home and saw Zaynab, unveiled. The Tafsir of al-Tabari, based on reports from Ibn Sa’d and others, claims that Muhammad was struck by her beauty and exclaimed, “Praise be to Allah, who turns the hearts.” Zaynab heard this, and when Zayd returned, she told him about Muhammad’s visit. Zayd then offered to divorce her so that Muhammad could marry her, though Muhammad initially refused—possibly out of concern for public perception.

"And [remember, O Muhammad], when you said to the one on whom Allah bestowed favor and you bestowed favor, 'Keep your wife and fear Allah,' while you concealed within yourself that which Allah is to disclose. And you feared the people, while Allah has more right that you fear Him. So when Zayd had no longer any need for her, We married her to you..."
— Qur’an 33:37, Sahih International

This verse essentially justifies Muhammad's marriage to Zaynab, portraying it as a divine act to remove cultural taboos about adoption. However, the text itself admits that Muhammad was concealing his feelings and feared what people would say. This deeply human moment—of a man attracted to another’s wife, then justifying the eventual marriage through revelation—is troubling for anyone who believes a prophet should exhibit the highest moral integrity.

Islamic Sources Confirm the Incident

Sahih al-Bukhari (Hadith 7420) confirms the marriage and includes commentary on Zaynab boasting, “You (plural) married your women, but I was married by Allah from above the seven heavens.”
Tafsir al-Tabari, as well as Ibn Sa’d's Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, include reports that support the story of Muhammad’s attraction to Zaynab and the subsequent events leading to her divorce and remarriage.
Sahih Muslim (Hadith 1428) and others record the process of abrogating adoption customs, essentially nullifying the legal and familial status of adopted children in Islamic law.

The Abrogation of Adoption

This event became the basis for a significant change in Islamic social law. The Qur’an later declares:

"Allah has not made for a man two hearts in his interior. And He has not made your adopted sons your [true] sons. That is [merely] your saying by your mouths, but Allah says the truth..."
— Qur’an 33:4–5, Sahih International

The result was that adoption, as it had been understood in pre-Islamic Arabia (similar to legal adoption in the West), was abolished in favor of "guardianship." Adopted children would no longer take the family name or be treated as blood relatives.

To the Christian worldview, this represents a dramatic departure from the values of family, stability, and the protection of the vulnerable. Adoption is a noble act—rooted in love and grace. Romans 8:15 teaches that Christians are “adopted as sons by which we cry, ‘Abba, Father.’” Adoption is at the very heart of the Gospel.

Theological and Moral Implications

From a Christian conservative perspective, this episode raises several moral concerns:

Desire Over Discipline – A prophet of God should be above manipulating circumstances for personal gain. Instead, Muhammad's desire led to a revelation that justified what would otherwise be seen as unethical.
Revelation Serving Personal Interest – Muhammad concealed his attraction and feared public opinion (Qur’an 33:37), yet later claimed divine approval. This raises serious doubts about the divine origin of his revelations.
Destruction of Adoption as a Virtue – Rather than promoting the protection and honor of adopted children, Muhammad’s actions led to the abolition of adoption, stripping countless children of legal security and familial love.

In contrast, Jesus Christ upheld the sanctity of marriage, purity of heart, and self-sacrificial love. He never married, never sought personal pleasure, and never claimed divine revelation to satisfy human desire. His mission was entirely focused on saving others, not serving Himself.

Conclusion

The story of Muhammad, Zayd, and Zaynab is not merely a historical footnote—it reveals the fundamental differences between the life and teachings of Muhammad and those of Jesus Christ. Where Jesus calls us to holiness, purity, and sacrificial love, Muhammad's actions—as recorded in Islam’s own texts—reflect a man driven by personal desires and self-interest cloaked in divine approval.

A faith founded on such contradictions cannot offer the consistent moral foundation or spiritual transformation that Christianity provides. Jesus is the sinless Lamb of God (2 Corinthians 5:21), while Muhammad was a man who rewrote laws to suit his personal situation. The difference is not just theological—it is eternal.

Citations

Qur’an 33:37, Sahih International.
Qur’an 33:4–5, Sahih International.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 7420.
Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1428.
Tafsir al-Tabari, Commentary on Surah 33:37.
Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, Volume 8.
The Holy Bible, Romans 8:15, 2 Corinthians 5:21.
Guillaume, Alfred. The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, Oxford University Press, 1955.

Christ or the Sword: The Stark Contrast Between Jesus and Muhammad

By Bobby Darvish

There is a profound and undeniable difference between the early years of Islam and Christianity, particularly when comparing the lives and actions of their founders—Jesus Christ and Muhammad. These differences are not just historical facts; they have deep spiritual and moral implications for how each religion shapes its followers, its culture, and its vision of God.

Jesus Christ: A Life of Love, Mercy, and Sacrifice

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, lived a life completely free of violence. He never raised a sword, never ordered a killing, and never led an army or ruled a city. Instead, He healed the sick (Matthew 8:16–17), fed the hungry (Matthew 14:13–21), forgave sinners (John 8:10–11), and taught His followers to "love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you" (Matthew 5:44). He rebuked violence even in His own defense, telling Peter, "Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword" (Matthew 26:52).

Jesus willingly submitted to death on the cross, not as a victim of political defeat, but as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36), and His message was one of peace, grace, and salvation through the love and mercy of God (Romans 5:8; Ephesians 2:8–9).

Muhammad: A Life of War, Conquest, and Theocracy

In sharp contrast, Muhammad’s life was marked by warfare, political conquest, and coercion. According to Islamic sources such as Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and the Sirat Rasul Allah by Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad personally led or commanded at least 27 military expeditions (ghazawat), including offensive raids and battles such as Badr, Uhud, the Battle of the Trench, and the conquest of Mecca.

Muhammad ordered assassinations of critics, including poets such as Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf (Sahih al-Bukhari 4037), and condoned the beheading of hundreds of Jewish men from the Banu Qurayza tribe after their surrender (Ibn Ishaq, pp. 461–464; al-Tabari, vol. 8, pp. 35–36). He allowed and participated in the taking of women and children as slaves (Sahih Muslim 3371) and took concubines from among the captives (e.g., Safiyyah bint Huyayy, Sahih Muslim 1365).

Muhammad established a theocratic state in Medina where religious dissent was punishable, and Islamic law governed all aspects of life. Faith was often spread not only through preaching but also through military expansion and dhimmi systems that enforced second-class status for non-Muslims (Qur'an 9:29).

Why This Difference Matters

These stark differences between Christ and Muhammad are not trivial—they reflect the nature of the faiths they founded. Christianity, rooted in the teachings and sacrifice of Jesus, produces a spiritual transformation based on love, humility, and forgiveness. Islam, founded on the example of Muhammad, often reflects political power, legalism, and conquest.

A religion founded by a man who forgave His enemies from the cross (Luke 23:34) will lead to peace and redemption. A religion founded by a man who used the sword to silence opposition and establish dominance inevitably perpetuates systems of coercion. This is not merely a critique of history—it is a call to truth.

As Christians, we follow the Prince of Peace—not a warlord. The Spirit of Christ brings life, liberty, and salvation—not fear, subjugation, or bloodshed. The lives of Jesus and Muhammad could not be more different—and that difference defines the destinies of their followers.

Citations

The Holy Bible, Matthew 5:44; Matthew 26:52; John 8:10–11; John 18:36; Romans 5:8; Ephesians 2:8–9.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 4037.
Sahih Muslim, Hadith 3371, 1365.
Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, trans. A. Guillaume, Oxford University Press, pp. 461–464.
Al-Tabari, History of the Prophets and Kings, Volume 8, trans. Michael Fishbein, SUNY Press, pp. 35–36.
The Qur’an, Surah 9:29, Sahih International.

The Genocide of Banu Qurayza: Exposing the Atrocity Committed by Muhammad

By Bobby Darvish

The massacre of the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza stands as one of the most brutal and disturbing events in early Islamic history—one that exposes the violent and unjust foundations of Muhammad’s political and military leadership. Far from being a model of mercy or divine justice, this event was a calculated act of genocide, sanctioned and approved by Muhammad himself, according to Islam's own most authoritative sources.

Background of the Siege

In the year 627 AD, during the Battle of the Trench (Ghazwat al-Khandaq), the Muslim city of Medina was under siege by a coalition of Meccans and other tribes. The Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza, who lived in Medina, were accused of conspiring with the Quraysh, though no direct attack by them occurred. This accusation, largely based on hearsay and strategic deception by a recent Muslim convert, Nu’aym ibn Mas’ud, was used by Muhammad to justify the complete annihilation of the tribe once the external threat had passed.

Muhammad’s Role and the Mass Execution

After the retreat of the Meccan coalition, Muhammad turned his attention to Banu Qurayza. According to Sahih al-Bukhari and Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah—Islam’s earliest and most trusted biography of Muhammad—the Muslims laid siege to the Qurayza stronghold for 25 days, until the Jews surrendered unconditionally. Rather than offering clemency, Muhammad handed over judgment to Sa’d ibn Mu’adh, a Muslim ally who had been wounded in the recent battle. Sa’d declared that all the men should be executed, and the women and children enslaved.

“Then the Messenger of Allah commanded that ditches be dug. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those ditches as they were brought out to him in batches.”
— Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, translated by Alfred Guillaume, p. 464.

According to Islamic historians, between 600 and 900 men and boys were beheaded in a single day. The Chronicles of al-Tabari confirms this number and adds that the Prophet was present and approved of the slaughter.

“The Messenger of God commanded that trenches be dug… The Prophet sat and watched as their heads were struck off.”
— Al-Tabari, History of the Prophets and Kings, Volume 8, p. 35-36.

The women and children were taken as slaves. One woman, according to Sunan Abu Dawud, was executed for allegedly killing a Muslim in battle—making her the only woman murdered in this event. The remaining women and children were sold into slavery in exchange for horses and weapons, often sold back to other Jewish tribes, like Banu Nadir.

Moral Implications

This was not a battle—it was a genocide. The men had surrendered. There was no trial, no investigation, no clemency. Instead, there was a mass execution and the enslavement of an entire community, based on an alleged betrayal that was never proven in any fair way. This event is proudly recorded in Islamic tradition—not hidden or denied. Worse still, modern Islamists defend it as "justice," using verses like Qur’an 33:26:

“And He brought down those of the People of the Scripture who supported them from their fortresses and cast terror into their hearts, [so that] a party you killed, and you took captive a party.”
— Qur’an 33:26, Sahih International.

This verse is interpreted by many classical and modern Muslim scholars as referring directly to the Banu Qurayza massacre. That means the Qur’an itself justifies the slaughter and terrorization of Jews who opposed Muhammad politically.

A Christian Contrast

Jesus Christ taught:

“Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”
— Matthew 5:44.

He forgave even those who crucified Him, offering salvation to all who repent. There is no instance in the life of Christ where He ordered the killing of anyone—let alone hundreds of prisoners of war or the enslavement of women and children. The difference could not be clearer.

Muhammad’s actions against Banu Qurayza are not examples of divine justice or holy leadership—they are the actions of a violent warlord. They reflect a moral code that is incompatible with the Gospel of peace and the dignity of every human life. The Banu Qurayza genocide must not be whitewashed or dismissed—it must be acknowledged as the atrocity it was.

Citations

Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, trans. Alfred Guillaume, Oxford University Press, 1955, pp. 461–464.
Al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, Volume 8: The Victory of Islam, trans. Michael Fishbein, SUNY Press, 1997, pp. 35–36.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 3044; Book 56, Hadith 163.
Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 2671.
The Qur’an, Surah 33:26, Sahih International.
The Holy Bible, Matthew 5:44, KJV.

Muslim Man Returns From Death With A TERRIFYING Truth About Jesus - NDE

I had two NDE's similar to this...

Thursday, April 3, 2025

The Word of Wisdom and the Fallacy of Forced Obedience: A Conservative LDS Perspective Rooted in Joseph Smith’s Revelations

By Bobby Darvish

The Word of Wisdom (WoW), as revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith in Doctrine and Covenants 89, was never intended to be a mandatory commandment in its original form. Joseph himself referred to it as a “principle with promise,” not a law with penalty. The 1833 revelation was given “not by commandment or constraint” (D&C 89:2), a crucial phrase often overlooked in modern discussions. Early Saints, including Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, drank beer and mild alcoholic beverages, used tobacco, and enjoyed coffee and tea in moderation. The implementation of the Word of Wisdom as a requirement for temple worthiness came not by divine mandate but by vote among Church leadership and sustaining from the general membership, decades after the original revelation.

Historical context shows that Church leaders debated the interpretation and enforcement of the Word of Wisdom extensively. During the U.S. Prohibition era, the Church took a stricter stance against alcohol, in part to align with the national climate. Previously, it was understood that beer, being mild barley-based drink (D&C 89:17), was permissible. It was only after prolonged debate among the Twelve Apostles that all alcohol was eventually banned, with the hope that if the law ever changed, beer might be reconsidered. There was even a time when vegetarianism was on the table, promoted by some leaders, yet the majority, many of whom operated breweries and consumed beer, voted against it. This shows that Church policy has always had a human and procedural element, guided by debate, majority consensus, and not always a direct revelation from God.

Further inconsistencies appear in how “hot drinks” were interpreted. Initially, “hot drinks” included all hot beverages, but later it was narrowed down—only black and green tea were prohibited, while herbal teas became acceptable. Curiously, the Word of Wisdom never mentions drugs, yet illicit drugs and even medical cannabis are now grouped into the health code. Members were even told to vote against medical marijuana in Utah, despite the fact that D&C 89 encourages the use of “herbs and mild drinks” for health. Ironically, Church-affiliated investment firms have had financial ties to synthetic marijuana companies, creating a conflict between policy and practice.

What most members do not realize is that Church policy is often formulated by debate among the Twelve Apostles and First Presidency, with the Prophet acting as the final arbiter. Brigham Young wisely cautioned the Saints not to follow prophets blindly, declaring, “I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him” (Journal of Discourses 9:150). He warned that very little of what comes from the mouth of a prophet is directly from God, and that members are responsible to seek the Spirit for confirmation. This aligns with the core LDS principle of personal revelation and agency.

The reality is, very few members truly follow the full Word of Wisdom. Most cherry-pick the parts required to maintain temple worthiness, creating a culture of checklist obedience rather than true discipleship. This is not what Joseph Smith intended. Joseph emphasized liberty, personal growth, and revelation—not compulsion. Making the Word of Wisdom mandatory was not born of divine revelation, but of democratic policy and cultural pressures. In upholding our Christian conservative principles, we must return to Joseph Smith’s original vision: that the Word of Wisdom is a voluntary spiritual guideline, not a binding checklist for worthiness.

Citations

Doctrine and Covenants 89
Journal of Discourses, Brigham Young, Vol. 9, p. 150
Leonard J. Arrington, Brigham Young: American Moses, 1985
Thomas G. Alexander, “The Word of Wisdom: From Principle to Requirement,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 14, No. 3, Fall 1981
Michael W. Homer, “The Word of Wisdom in Historical Perspective,” Sunstone, Issue 100, 1995
Utah Medical Cannabis Act, 2018 Ballot and Church Position (newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org)

Trump Is My Ragnar: A Christian Conservative's Response to the Cowards Who Block Patriots

By Bobby Darvish

I find it absolutely hilarious when self-proclaimed “Vikings” on social media run crying to the block button the moment they see someone proudly standing with President Donald J. Trump. These folks love to post runes, Thor’s hammers, and quotes from Ragnar Lothbrok, yet the second they’re confronted with real strength, they recoil like frightened sheep. Let’s be honest—most of them aren’t warriors. They’re farmers. And worse, they’ve forgotten what it means to stand for truth, family, God, and nation.

You want a modern Ragnar? I’ve found him—and his name is Donald J. Trump.

Just like the legendary Norse warrior who defied kings, raided the corrupt, and struck fear into the hearts of empires, Trump stood against the globalist elite, the Marxist media machine, and the degenerate leftist establishment. While spineless politicians bowed to internationalism and sold out our sovereignty, Trump put America first. He didn’t apologize for his strength. He didn’t bend the knee. He fought for the people with raw courage—economically, spiritually, and politically. That’s not just leadership—that’s Viking spirit in modern form.

The Left tries to mock Trump by calling him a “felon,” forgetting that some of history’s greatest heroes were imprisoned, exiled, or slandered for standing up to corrupt regimes. The Apostle Paul wrote most of the New Testament from prison (Acts 16:23-40, Philippians 1:12-14). Jesus Christ Himself was crucified by a political establishment that feared the truth. Trump is being politically persecuted not because he’s a criminal, but because he’s a threat to their demonic agenda.

The Democrats have weaponized the justice system to punish their enemies, undermining every principle of fairness and due process. They call it “democracy,” but it’s the rule of lawfare and mob rule. Meanwhile, Trump keeps marching forward. Indicted or not, silenced or not, he leads millions with courage, resolve, and faith. Just like Ragnar walked into England’s strongholds undeterred, Trump walks into every courtroom and rally with his head held high. That’s the kind of man I will follow—not these soy-drinking, rainbow-flag waving pseudo-Vikings online.

The real irony? The same people who scoff at Trump as “unfit” are often the ones who abandon their children to the state, who can’t define what a woman is, and who scream about “tolerance” while silencing every dissenting voice. They are not the heirs of Norse warriors or Christian knights. They are ideological slaves.

I stand with Trump because I believe in God, country, family, and strength. Trump is my Ragnar because he dares to lead when others cower. He faces the storm head-on, not for gold or power, but to give the people back their voice. That is why we, the modern Christian warriors of America, rally behind him—not as sycophants, but as soldiers of truth.

Let the cowards block us. Let the weak call us names. We know who we are. And we know who leads us.

Trump is our Ragnar. And we are ready.

Citations:

The Holy Bible, Philippians 1:12-14 (Paul imprisoned for the Gospel).
The Holy Bible, Acts 16:23-40 (Paul and Silas unjustly imprisoned).
"Donald Trump indicted: Political persecution or legitimate accountability?" – The Federalist, 2023. https://thefederalist.com
Hanson, Victor Davis. The Case for Trump. Basic Books, 2019.
"How Trump Changed the Republican Party Forever." – National Review, 2020. https://www.nationalreview.com

Wednesday, April 2, 2025

Ragnar Lothbrok Was a Pagan King—Trump Is a Christian Viking President

By Bobby Darvish

In our modern world, it’s increasingly popular among Westerners—especially disillusioned young men—to revere pagan Vikings like Ragnar Lothbrok as masculine role models. I understand the appeal. Ragnar was a warrior, a conqueror, a rebel against tyrannical kings, and a man of action in an age of chaos. He stood boldly against overwhelming odds, leading his people with vision, cunning, and a relentless will to survive. But while we can admire Ragnar’s strength and courage, let’s not forget: he was a pagan king, not a Christian president.

Unlike Ragnar, Donald J. Trump is not a mythic legend—he’s real. He’s not a pagan warlord—he’s a duly elected president who champions American values rooted in Christian civilization, constitutional order, and individual freedom. Trump is not trying to burn down churches or sacrifice to Norse gods. He’s defending Christian churches from being closed, freedom of speech from being canceled, and our nation from Marxist globalism and Islamist infiltration.

It is ironic that so many of these Viking-obsessed men, often with cross tattoos or pagan symbolism, forget that the very society that made the Vikings into legends was ultimately one transformed by the power of Jesus Christ. The Norsemen eventually converted—not by force of arms, but by the sword of the Spirit and the truth of the Gospel. Many of their descendants went on to become the fiercest defenders of Christian Europe, like the Normans in England or the crusaders who stood against Islamic invasions.

Trump, in a very real way, embodies the strength of the Christian Viking spirit, but he channels it through modern Christian values. He doesn’t raid monasteries—he protects religious liberty. He doesn’t rule as a pagan king—he leads under the rule of law. He doesn’t seek glory for glory’s sake—he fights for “We the People,” the Constitution, and faith in God.

It’s also worth pointing out that Ragnar, for all his fame, was not elected. He ruled as a warrior-king. Trump, on the other hand, was elected by millions of Americans, and remains a symbol of democratic resistance to tyranny—a true champion of the people. His fight is not to restore some imagined pagan past, but to defend the Christian foundations of Western Civilization.

So yes, it’s fine to admire Ragnar’s courage or the aesthetic of Viking resilience—but don’t confuse that with a vision for America’s future. The Viking spirit without Christ becomes nihilistic rage. With Christ, it becomes righteous strength. And in Trump, we see that spirit—not as a godless berserker—but as a Christian lion, roaring against the darkness.

Thank God for President Trump, a modern Christian Viking standing firm in the face of corrupt elites, globalist traitors, and leftist mobs. He’s not trying to return us to Valhalla—he’s standing for a Christian America under God.

Citations:

Winroth, Anders. The Age of the Vikings. Princeton University Press, 2014.
Ferguson, Robert. The Vikings: A History. Penguin Books, 2009.
Christiansen, Eric. The Norsemen in the Viking Age. Wiley-Blackwell, 2002.
Trump, Donald J. A Letter to the American Church, 2024 Campaign Speeches.
Dreher, Rod. The Benedict Option: A Strategy for Christians in a Post-Christian Nation. Sentinel, 2017.
Biblica. The Holy Bible, ESV. Psalm 144:1 – “Blessed be the LORD, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle.”

Why This Iranian-American Ex-Muslim LDS Christian Will Never Give Up Persian Tea – And Why the LDS Church Needs to Be Restored to Joseph Smith’s Original Vision

By Bobby Darvish, Iranian-American Ex-Muslim, Christian LDS Conservative

Tea is not just a drink in Persian culture—it’s a sacred ritual, an offering of love and respect. As an Iranian-American, and as someone who has traveled the long road from Islam to Christianity, and eventually to the restored gospel of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I have found immense beauty in both my cultural heritage and my Christian faith. But there are some hard truths we need to confront, particularly within the modern LDS Church—truths that, if left unaddressed, risk alienating converts, driving members away, and betraying the very vision Joseph Smith had when he founded the church.

In Persian culture, tea is an extension of hospitality. When you visit someone’s home, you must drink tea—it is an ancient custom, just as sacred as it is in Russia, Japan, India, China, or the Arab world. Refusing tea when it is offered is considered deeply offensive, a rejection of the host’s friendship and goodwill. Offering tea is part of our soul as Persians; it transcends religion. I grew up seeing this hospitality in both Muslim and Christian homes across Iran and the diaspora. It has nothing to do with drugs or addictive substances. It is a tradition of peace, kindness, and social bonding.

And yet, the modern LDS Church has taken what was once an optional health suggestion—the Word of Wisdom—and turned it into a rigid law that bars members from temple worship. Joseph Smith never intended for the Word of Wisdom to be a commandment. When it was received in 1833, it was explicitly described as a "greeting; not by commandment or constraint" (Doctrine and Covenants 89:2). It was a wise guideline, a counsel for healthy living, not a temple worthiness test.

Even the earliest Saints understood this. The Prophet Joseph himself drank tea, coffee, and wine. Church historian Thomas G. Alexander notes, "The Word of Wisdom was not enforced as a commandment during the early years of the Church. Joseph Smith and many early leaders, including Brigham Young, consumed substances later interpreted to be forbidden" (Alexander, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1981).

To put it plainly: I will not give up my tea or coffee for a misinterpreted health code. Nor will I attend the temple until the Word of Wisdom, compulsory tithing, and enforced chastity are restored to their original, optional form as intended by Joseph Smith.

Let me be clear: I believe in Christ. I believe in the Restoration. But the Church today, in its obsession with commandment-keeping and worthiness checklists, has become more like a Pharisaical synagogue than a grace-filled Christian fellowship. Jesus never turned away someone because they didn’t follow a dietary code. He welcomed all—tax collectors, sinners, and Samaritans—not based on their outward performance, but because of their inward faith.

Likewise, tithing in the New Testament was never about being compelled to pay 10% or lose your temple recommend. Paul writes, “Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver” (2 Corinthians 9:7). The same can be said for chastity: purity is a matter of the heart, not of arbitrary dating rules and worthiness interviews.

I have seen a few Persian Latter-day Saints give up tea, coffee, and even wine to be considered "worthy" in the eyes of the modern institution. But I also know many like myself who refuse to betray our Persian identity and the Christian tradition of liberty for man-made commandments.

And ironically, if the LDS Church is serious about being the "restored" church of Christ, then perhaps it needs to be restored again—back to the freedom and original structure given by Joseph Smith. Joseph’s church was full of visionary thinkers, mystics, and Christians who were led by grace, not obsessed with law.

I’m not alone in this frustration. Many Latter-day Saints—particularly converts and international members—have quietly left the church but stayed Christian. Why? Because the heart of the gospel is being eclipsed by rigid policies that were never meant to be salvific. And unless we change course, many more will follow.

If this church is truly led by Christ, then it must reflect His love and grace—not just in word, but in deed. And until that happens, I, for one, am prepared to remain a Christian in exile. I would rather walk the ancient path of my Crusader and Persian ancestors—whether Orthodox or Catholic—than trade in my tea and my soul for a gospel of bureaucratic worthiness.

The LDS Church must ask itself: Are we following Christ—or have we started worshiping the handbook?

Citations:

Doctrine and Covenants 89:2 – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/89
Alexander, Thomas G. “The Word of Wisdom: From Principle to Requirement.” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1981. https://www.dialoguejournal.com/articles/the-word-of-wisdom-from-principle-to-requirement/
2 Corinthians 9:7 – https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Corinthians+9%3A7

Proto-Crusaders of the North: The Christian Viking Varangians and Their Sacred Duty

By Bobby Darvish

In the shadowed mists of medieval Christendom, when the Church stood as the beacon of light against the encroaching darkness of paganism and Islam, there emerged a band of warriors unlike any other. These were the Christian Vikings—the legendary Varangians—men of the north who pledged their swords not for gold alone, but for the cross of Christ and the defense of Christian civilization. In their story, we find the seeds of the Crusading spirit: the devotion, the zeal, and the righteous fury that would later define the great Christian holy wars against the enemies of God.

From Pagan Raiders to Christian Knights

The Varangians, initially Norsemen from Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and later Anglo-Saxon exiles from England, began their journeys as fierce pagans and sea-raiders. Yet, over time, many of them encountered the Gospel, repented, and embraced Christianity. These once-barbaric men became “soldiers of Christ,” wielding their swords in the service of faith and empire. They were no longer raiders for plunder but knights of the cross, guarding the spiritual heart of the Eastern Roman Empire—Constantinople.

When they entered the service of the Byzantine emperors, the Varangians formed the elite Varangian Guard, a unit so trusted that it served as the emperor’s personal bodyguard. These warriors saw themselves not as mere mercenaries, but as guardians of Christendom. Their loyalty was legendary, and their code of honor—rooted in Christian brotherhood and loyalty to the Empire—distinguished them from the morally bankrupt mercenaries of later centuries [1].

Fighting the Enemies of Christ

What made these Christian Vikings unique was their role in battles that mirrored the later Crusades. In Sicily, they fought against the Muslim Saracens who had plagued southern Europe and the Mediterranean. These Islamic invaders sought to dominate Christian lands and impose their sharia tyranny, but the Varangians—converted warriors from the icy north—met them with steel and Christian resolve [2].

In the Balkans, the Varangians fought the Pechenegs, a brutal pagan Turkic people who routinely raided Christian villages, destroyed churches, and trafficked in human slavery. The Pechenegs’ terror was answered by the holy wrath of these Viking converts, who saw their campaign not merely as military engagement, but as a righteous struggle to protect the innocent and uphold the faith [3].

Moreover, the Varangians did not hesitate to put down internal rebellion, especially when treacherous Orthodox nobles sought to betray the Christian Empire for personal gain or foreign favor. Loyalty to Christ and emperor bound them in sacred duty to suppress treason, which they did with swift and brutal efficiency. They were not political pawns—they were defenders of sacred order, Christian knights in a pagan and treacherous world [4].

Proto-Crusaders in Spirit and Action

Long before Pope Urban II called for the First Crusade in 1095, the Varangians had already lived out the Crusading ethos. They offered their swords not in pursuit of personal glory or loot, but to defend the bastions of Christian civilization against both internal corruption and external threat. They were proto-Crusaders in every sense—Christian warriors who understood that faith without action is dead, and that sometimes, the Gospel must be defended with sword and shield.

Their legacy would inspire generations of Christian knights. In fact, some historians argue that the ideal of Christian knighthood—the blend of piety, loyalty, and martial valor—found its earliest expression in these northern warriors who stood guard over Constantinople, the Queen of Cities [5].

Lessons for Today’s Christians

In our own time, where Christianity is mocked, persecuted, and under siege both spiritually and culturally, the example of the Varangian Guard calls us to remember what true Christian courage looks like. These men gave their lives not for comfort, not for wealth, but for a Kingdom not of this world. In an age of lukewarm faith and moral compromise, we need more Varangians—men and women who will stand firm, who will take up the full armor of God (Ephesians 6:11), and who will not bow before the idols of secularism, Islamism, or globalism.

The Christian Viking did not fear death, for he feared God more. He did not live for the praises of men, but for the smile of Heaven. May we, too, become warriors of such faith.

Citations:

Shepard, Jonathan. The Viking Rus: Studies on the Presence of Scandinavians in Eastern Europe. Ashgate Variorum, 2006.
Loud, G. A. The Age of Robert Guiscard: Southern Italy and the Norman Conquest. Routledge, 2000.
https://www.routledge.com/The-Age-of-Robert-Guiscard-Southern-Italy-and-the-Norman-Conquest/Loud/p/book/9781138179513
Golden, Peter B. An Introduction to the History of the Turkic Peoples. Otto Harrassowitz, 1992.
Haldon, John. Byzantium at War, AD 600–1453. Osprey Publishing, 2002.
https://ospreypublishing.com/us/byzantium-at-war-ad-6001453-9781841763606/
Angold, Michael. The Byzantine Empire 1025–1204: A Political History. Longman, 1997.