I’ve written much on Islam over the past years, and thought to summarize it.
For starters, the Crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a direct response to Muslim aggression – an attempt to turn back or defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands.
With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed’s death.
It’s history and current events flatly say “no.”
Islam’s religious intolerance starts from it’s inception, and continues to this day, not because of fanatics who pervert its teachings, but because its foundational teachings are violent, racist, and produce a culture of oppression and control through fear, not of God, but of mortal violence from other “believers.”
When I contend that Islam is inherently racist and murderous, I often hear the counter that if I am right, why are there so many nice Muslims? I certainly confirm that the Muslims I know and work with are gentle, beautiful and sometimes pious people. So what could explain these seemingly contradictory evidences?
There are simple answers to why there are nice Muslims despite the violent and hateful teachings and life of Mohammed:
1. Mohammed copied in many positive morals from Judaism and Christianity – so to some extent, any good found in Islam may not have arisen with Mohammed. In fact, since it claims that Abraham, Moses, and Jesus were prophets, this is to be expected.
2. Mohammed began with positive teachings, but digressed into hateful, murderous teaching as he was persecuted and as his power as a warlord grew. This mix of teaching allows Muslims to choose to ignore or hide his more hateful acts and teachings and convince themselves (and some others) that Islam is peaceful.
3. Here’s the main reason – people are born with a conscience, and their own humanity teaches them that certain acts and perspectives are evil. Most Muslims, like most humans, want to live in peace and in harmony with their neighbors, and anyone with a little maturity realizes that our perspectives change over time, and we want to give others the freedom to choose that we ourselves would want.
So most Muslims are nice, not because Islam lacks violent and hateful tenets, but because their humanity causes them to want to avoid and ignore these things.
The only way one can adopt the total perspective of Mohammed is to (a) give themselves over to hate and murder against their better judgment, or (b) convince themselves, as many Germans did under Nazism, that what they are doing, like killing Jews or non-Muslims, is good for society and mankind, or good because Allah commands it.
Often, people bring up the argument that atheism or religion lead necessarily to evil. Here, I assert that both history and logic support the arguments that atheism and certain kinds of religion (Divine Command religion, specifically), combined with man’s predilection for abusing power, DO lead to violence, both logically and evidentially.
However, Christianity, in a form that does not involve a commitment to Divine Command theory (such as St. Thomas Aquinas‘ view), does NOT lead necesarrily to evil, and perhaps necessarily to GOOD.
Further, this contention is supported by both logic and historical evidence, with exceptions, of course (we argue from the norm, not the exception). Syllogisms examined below.
Essayist Fjordman has written another whopper of a post over at Dhimmi Watch entitled Why the European Union Must be Dismantled. It’s a little long, so let me select a few choice passages, as well as some passages from his response to angry commenters.
I must repeat that Islam is the primary contemporary enemy of freedom and peace in the world - a mix of racism, belligerence, institutionalized hatred, misogyny, and religious sickness that is more insidious and threatening to humanity than Nazism or Communism. While many Muslims have not succumbed to Islam’s wicked and awful teachings, too many have, and we need to face the facts and resist it. I wish I could say it more strongly, but the more you look into the face of evil, seeing the putrid depths of its roots, while everyone else is deceived by its wiles, the more you get incensed.
The more I ready about incidents like that of the Nigerian teacher whose home was burned to the ground for disciplining a Muslim student, or any of the other ways that "radical" Islam is trying to intimidate the free world, the more I keep asking myself, what would I do if they were coming for me?
I’ll tell you what I would not do – I would not let myself be slaughtered like a sheep. I keep thinking of the movie The Mission, where Jeremy Irons and Robert Deniro play two Jesuits who have to choose to fight or passively resist – tough choice – it shows the value of both positions (and I think both are valuable and "right.")
I am excited to have just discovered Dr. Peter Hammond, "the Founder and Director of Frontline Fellowship and the Founder and Chairman of Africa Christian Action. Over the last 21 years, Peter has been dedicated to assisting persecuted Christians and to working for Reformation and revival in Africa." His work in Sudan in confronting Muslim aggression has earned him death threats, and this latest article, The Challenge of Islam According to the Reformers, won’t make him any Muslim friends. Below, I discuss the article, but check out his other books, which include Slavery, Terrorism & Islam, Biblical Democracy, and Character Assassins, which looks really interesting.
Muslim suicide bombers in Britain are set to begin a three-day strike on Monday in a dispute over the number of virgins they are entitled to in the afterlife. Emergency talks with Al Qaeda have so far failed to produce an agreement.
The unrest began last Tuesday when Al Qaeda announced that the number of virgins a suicide bomber would receive after his death will be cut by 25% this February, from 72 to only 60. The rationale for the cut was the increase in recent years of the number of suicide bombings and a subsequent shortage of virgins in the afterlife. Read more
There are three ways to reform bad religion. These methods of reform may be described as modernization, restoration, and liberalization.
Modernization, in a religious context, is to discard exterior traditions while keeping the original, internal content and intent of the moral code. It is to change the outer forms of our communication and practice while still holding to the timeless inner truths they are meant to communicate. Modernism introduces much needed cultural relevance and modern means of communication (both language and technology) by which to deliver timeless, objective truths. While liturgy and tradition are of some value, in and of themselves they are not sacrosanct to a healthy faith (sacraments excluded), and may be abandoned in order to convey the timeless truths they represent.
Restoration addresses the reform of the internals of a faith. Restoration is not so much concerned with outer practices, but rather the internal, timeless truths that have been abandoned or warped by liberalism, fundamentalism, or any other kind of -ism that skews the balance of truth, returning to the original foundation of the faith. Of course, restoration only makes sense if the original foundation was sound in the first place.
Liberalization also addresses the inner truths of faith. Liberalism, however, discards or dilutes the content and/or intent of the original moral code for a new moral code that is usually less strict. And while liberalization is often accompanied by modernization or restoration, it differs in that it modifies the truths considered foundational to a religion. Liberalism rejects foundational objective truths by replacing them with "modern" truths, usually based in subjective morality, thereby throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
One note on liberalism’s opposite analog, fundamentalism. Fundamentalism can skew both the outer and inner expressions of faith – it can prescribe or prohibit outward forms, and it can also warp the inner truths of faith by making them harsh, not balancing truth with love, and misapplying truth in hurtful ways.
Here are some examples of modernization, restoration, and liberalization.
Whoopi and Joy from the daytime show The View walked off the set when Bill O’reilly said that Muslims attacked us on 9/11 – he ‘forgot’ to say ‘radical’ Muslims (video below). But as I’ve said many times previously (Why there may never be a vibrant moderate Islam, There are no moderate Muslims), the problem is not radical Muslims, but the Koran itself, which they are following faithfully, not in a twisted manner. Here’s my letter to Bill, who is missing this:
Today, the Purposeful Association of Not So Intimidating EvangelicalS (PANSIES) announced that they have rejected the authority of the scriptures in which Jesus uses offensive name-calling when dealing with his religious detractors. Read more
In light of the whole Times Square Mosque, I thought to remind us that perhaps we need another kind of memorial – like the heads of our enemies enshrined in stone – on pikes.
Ok, I’m being a little overzealous and brutish, but I just wanted to give some perspective on our contemporary overcompensation towards ‘tolerance.’ Our lack of ability to label evil as evil (read “Islam as evil”) is foolishness masked as fairness, submission masked as tolerance.
Doug Phillips, President of Vision Forum, a ministry that aims to “rebuild Christian family culture” through publishing home schooling and historical materials (among other things), has published an article entitled Our most politically incorrect Founding Father.
What was so incorrect about him? Well, only that he was an ardent and outspoken Christian, statesman, and warrior. In fact, his exploits in war were so impressive that the original John Smith Memorial monument, shown here, was adorned with sculptures of three severed Turk heads, memorializing one of his great battles. Now THAT is politically incorrect.
I didn’t know he was lost. Seriously though, if they found him, I can tell you where. Supposedly, his body is buried in the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina. However, the point is, he is dead, but Jesus rose from the dead. And may I add, Momo’s words bring death, but Jesus’ bring life.
Not sure that Jesus actually rose from the dead? You can always listen to William Lane Craig or Lee Stroble defend that proposition.
One of my favorite movies, panned by the easily offended leftist critics, was An American Carol, a mocumentary making fun of Michael Moore (played hilariously by Kevin Farley, Chris Farley’s brother). Watching it again, I re-enjoyed the mini-mocumentary buried in the Bill O’Reilly interview, in which people are subject to long lines at airport security due to the Christian fundamentalists.
As people have to strip down to their skivvies, and other’s have cavity searches, two passengers complain about the reason – the Christian “underwear bomber.” Who knew that some crazy Muslim (redundant?) would actually do exactly that. Enjoy the predictions of Islamic idiocy, couched in liberal anti-Christian idiocy.
One of the most annoying voices on conservative talk radio is Mark Levin, author of the bestselling Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto. However, it's all I've got some days, and once in a while, he has an interesting guest rather than the lowbrow callers that frequent the more rant-ridden types of shows.
Today, he had Norman Podhoretz, author of the controversial new book Why Are Jews Liberals?
You can listen to the 10 minute interview I've excerpted from the Levin archive. But the main interesting points I got from the interview were:
- In the mid 19th century, it was liberalism that defended Judaism from the threats of fascism.
- In 1967, a great shift occurred in American politics. The left became increasingly anti-Zionist to the point of being anti-Semitic, while the right, esp. the Christian right, began seriously taking up the cause of Israel.
- However, Jews did not become conservative because
(a) Converting or turning to conservatism in Jewish culture is as objectionable as converting to Christianity, and most Jews abhor both.
(b) Liberalism has replaced the values of the Torah for most Jews – where the two disagree, most Jews now side with liberalism and NOT the Torah. That is, liberalism is now the predominant religious stance of most Jews.
There's much more great content in the interview, including Jews' support for Obama. Enjoy.
The Christian Muslim Forum, an interfaith group, has released what it calls Ethical Guidelines for Christian and Muslim Witness in Britain (PDF). Interestingly, some more conservative Christians don't like a couple of the provisions because they fear that it could be used to stifle criticism or even moral condemnation of spirituality that contradicts what some would call basic human rights.
If you'd like to hear a spirited debate about the guidelines between a moderate Christian, a moderate Muslim, a Hindu, a Buddhist, and a conservative Christian, check out the excellent debate at Muslim, Christian, Hindu debate on evangelism.
What some are calling Ten Commandments of Mission? are after the jump, with my highlights and brief commentary.
According to the alarming video below, most of anglo Europe is close to negative population growth, and so low that it won’t recover it’s population anyway for over a century even if it does bring up it’s birth rate. Worse, the populations of these countries are growing from Muslim immigration, and at the current rate, most of Europe will be majority Muslim before the decade is out.
What caused this problem? Liberal, selfish individualistic, anti-child values keep the child count low, and abortion on demand kills 4000 children a day here in the states – I’m not sure how many are murdered in Europe.
He is not a false person who through al-tekeyya settles conciliation among people, supports good or says what is good.
While lying to the Nazis to protect the Jews your are hiding might fall into this category, unfortunately, in this case, the Nazi-like aggressors are the followers of Islam, and they lie to gain the trust of unsuspecting multicuturalists so that we can all live under Sharia Law and convert, pay the jizzya, or die.
And no one does it better than the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Good thing that brave people are infiltrating corrupt organizations like Acorn, Planned Parenthood, and now, CAIR. Chris Gaubat, after working for six months inside of CAIR's Washington D.C. office, contributed to Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that's Conspiring to Islamize America.
You can read a review at jewkey.com. And as a bonus, there's some bonus CAIR video after the jump.