Posted on 12/03/2015 11:45:01 PM PST by walford
I am not a Christian nor a Jew, and thus do not have a dog in this fight between them and Muslims on a theological level. From the perspective of an outsider, I offer my views on Islam in its current form and how non-believers should respond to its spread into our homelands:
Those who worship the God of Abraham [Jews, Christians and Muslims] have this history in common: Theological Exclusivism [my God is the only God and my religion is the only valid religion].
Jews do not proselytize and are not obligated to spread their faith. Christians and Muslims are -- and both have histories that involve conversion-by-the-sword on a widespread, systematic basis.
The essential difference is that Christendom abandoned this method of spreading the Good Word centuries ago, while the Islamic World has an unbroken record of wholesale slaughter on a regular basis that continues to the present.
Why?
My interpretation, based upon history and theology, is that Christianity underwent a Reformation, which affected the Western World socially and politically as well as theologically. No longer did political leaders hold power by Divine Right. No longer were Christians permitted to kill in the name of God or conquer and plunder the non-believer.
This development into Theological Pluralism [there are many paths to God] benefited Christians as well as people they subsequently encountered.
Islam has not undergone such a Reformation and hence remains socially, politically and theologically in an infantile stage. As such, unreformed Islam is incompatible with Western civilization; at its core, Mohammedanism is not willing to live in peace with those of other faiths. Hence, in practice, Islam is unchanged at being first and foremost a violent, expansionist political ideology.
The majority of Muslims do not perpetrate atrocities, but the fact is, mass-murder for religious reasons is almost entirely perpetrated by those who hold that Allah is the only God and Muhammad is His Messenger.
If Muslims want to be welcomed and not be subject to justifiable suspicion, it is incumbent upon them to marginalize, and then eliminate the perpetrators of terror within their ranks. Making excuses and claiming victimhood isn't going to cut it.
The Pre-Islamic Middle East had a long and admirable history of being a natural hub for commerce, technology, science, hospitality and the exchange of ideas. If the Islamic World were resolved to live in peace with non-believers and pursue being once again the natural hub it once was, there is a future for them and us all.
Until and unless such a Reformation takes place within the Islamic World, it is up to non-Muslims to at the very least contain its spread from outside its traditional places of origin.
As we have seen repeatedly, it is suicide to invite into our homelands those who do not believe in assimilation and consider themselves entitled to impose their way of life upon others by force, sparing no quarter to women and children.
If the West, in its fashionable self-loathing, continues to surrender to a culture that is backward in every way, civilization itself is at peril.
“If you don’t think you have a dog in this fight you’re blind!”
The quote you cited regarding whether I have a dog in this fight with Islam as do Christians and Jews on a THEOLOGICAL level — particularly whether they worship the same God or Gods. I don’t care.
Regarding whether Islam’s violent expansionism affects me and other practitioners of religions that did not originate in the Middle East, I refer you to comment #12:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3368010/posts?page=12#12
That's a very, very vague and unquantified assertion about Christians. How about some specific detail? Was it four Christians after a night of drinking, or was it vast armies with ostensible theological and legal supports?
Do a little research on who (actually, what) it is that muslims worship.
The Mohammed Factor >>> very tru and that is why this religion needs to always be reference as mohammedanism.
Good luck. You’re going to need it.
Actually, “People of the Book” are allowed to keep their religion IF they agree to pay the Jizya and submit to Dhimmitude with it’s discriminatory restrictions. Non-PotB, like pagans, for instance, had to convert to Islam or die. Exceptions were made, like India, but probably because there were too many Hindus to kill.
If that’s the case, what about Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan, or Bangladesh? They were all originally Hindu.
Stopped right there - that statement is 100% wrong and factually inaccurate.
The muzzies worship satan (aka allah). Their "Book of Satanic Verses" declared war on God and His Judaeo-Christian followers
Any attempt to link the satanic, savage muzzies to God is pure propaganda from an incompetent and intellectually stupid author.
I guess you missed this part of the sentence...
“Not all muslims seem to adhere to their own rules...”
Good grief.
So the fundamental problem with Islam is that it is not Christianity? It would seem that the Muslims are thinking something similar and are demonstrating far more resolve in correcting this problem as they see it. If we’re going to be having a Holy War based upon which form of dogmatism is the stronger, I’m betting on the Mohammedans.
But let me offer this:
When we, as finite beings...
- Presume to know Divine Will and go further to act — and even kill — in the name of God,
- Decide that our religion is the only valid one and the non-believer is by definition damned,
- That the entire purpose of our finite lives is to determine what “place” our immortal souls will reside for all eternity...
Life becomes cheap.
Other people become means to an end.
The mere existence of those who do not share our beliefs is a threat, so we are not only permitted, but obliged to conquer, plunder and slaughter.
Non-believers, being by definition damned, are not entitled to life; they are less-than human in their refusal to accept our God and practice our religion. We can therefore take from them, enslave them, rape them, murder them, because what we do to them here on this Earth is nothing compared to what awaits them on the Other Side.
Such is the nature of theological exclusivism, hence it is the problem, not which religion upon which it is based is the Correct one. The finite cannot claim to know the mind of the Infinite, much less presume to act — and even kill — in the name of God.
Dogmatism is blasphemy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.