Nov 29, 2023·edited Nov 29, 2023Liked by Sam Charles Norton
If you look at Osama bin Laden's Letter to America it has a number of direct quotes from the Koran calling for war and vengeance against unbelievers - and, as you say, there has been no outcry from the Islamic community at large protesting these alleged distortions of Islam.
It seems to me that any real Christian opposition to Islam must include statements, made in the right place, and in the right way, and at the right time, stating that Islam is not a true book of God, and Mohammed does not show the way to God. Of course that, if well known, would be met with violence, and then the Christians would be accused of stirring up hatred. In many cases it would even bring about legal sanctions not against the people who reacted violently, but against the people who offered simple statements of belief.
The whole system of freedom of religion in the West was designed with Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and various secular philosophies in mind. It was not designed for a religion that deliberately seeks to silence authentic debate.
If you don't think Christians in earlier centuries didn't silence each other, go back and learn your history.
Early Christians brawled in the streets over whether Christ was created or uncreated.
Every Church Council convened led to the silencing of an alternate opinion as heresy, and the aftermath of the Cs. of Nicaea and Chalcedon
led to upheaval and violence.
The Great Schism was over papal power, but also over details like unleavened bread and a single word added to a prayer...massacres happened in its wake.
The Albigensian Crusade killed hundreds of thousands, entire cities were put to the sword,and the Inquisition established.
The Reformation was just one big long intra-Christian battle. The anti-Catholic laws after the breakaway of Anglicanism, and Protestant sects.
The Protestants then went on to kill each other...Anabaptists and Quakers put to death... riots over icons.
The reason we now have secularism now is NOT because Christians were inherently more reasonable, but because we got sick of the chaos and new philosophies arose....and we spent the next 3 centuries killing each other mostly over those, instead.
(1) Why is it, then, that you can criticize Christianity freely, but you cannot criticize Islam freely and even risk your life if you do? In some places you will certainly be killed. We are not talking about the problems of a thousand years ago, we are talking about the problems of today. Times change, you know.
(2) The Bible teaches that human nature is inherently sinful. This is why in religious societies there is religious violence, and in secular societies there is secular violence, as you pointed out. Christianity does not promise a paradise on earth (short of the return of Christ). "Straight is the gate and narrow is the way and few there be that find it."
(3) Christian religious violence was in direct violation of many clear religious commands (there are many verses in the Bible about this), whereas Islamic violence is sanctioned and even praised and encouraged (there are many verses in the Koran about this).
(4) Many Christians over the centuries paid more attention to the teachings of Christ and were not involved in the things you mention. Countless millions of Christians over many centuries and in many countries have never brawled over whether Christ was created or uncreated, which was nothing but evil and wickedness. Paul rebuked for church at Corinth for dividing into factions.
(5) As to the great schism being over papal power, I have nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church, and believe the Roman medieval church was a false church completely contrary to the New Testament ideal of the church. The Albigensian Crusade and other crusades, the Inquisition, all of those were nothing but sin and complete denials of Christ by evil men completely corrupted by power.
(6) You know a lot about the faults of the church. Do you know about the church at its best? The countless Christians who have sincerely if imperfectly attempted to follow the example of Christ and have never hated, brawled with or killed anyone?
(7) Do you know much about Christ's teachings, you who are an expert in the failings of others? Do you know he said "Why do you call me Lord, Lord and do not the things which I say?"
(8) Your false and cartoon-like characterization of the Protestant Reformation ignores the fact that it ushered in an extended period of religious and political liberty such as has never been seen anywhere else in the world. The anti-Catholic laws had serious political reasons behind them. For example, when the Pope declared Queen Elizabeth a heretic in 1570 the possibility of Catholic revolutions and assassinations was very real. Remember the Spanish Armada?
Just one comment on this - I don't think there is such a thing as a 'pure church', and the desire to separate in order to create one (as opposed to purifying oneself as the exclusive focus) was condemned as a heresy in about the 5th C (Donatism). So I am content with the idea of criticisms of church(es). You're mostly right in what you say here, imho.
The churches are certainly not above criticism. If someone with Paul's authority and insight could write to the modern Bible-believing churches as he did to the church at Corinth, who knows what faults might be pointed out.
Aleksandr Sozhenitsyn has the best modern quote on that, I won't quote in full as I'm out running errands but it begins "If only there were some evil people out there...and all that were necessary were for us to separate ourselves from them...but the line between good and evil runs through every human heart..."
I have zero issue criticizing Islam...or Judaism... or Hinduism.
I could easily have asked instead why Hinduism in the last century produced a pacifist Gandhi and a militant Hindutva.
But having those answers would be of only marginal help in rebuilding a Christianity that can withstand the dual onslaught, and apparent merging, of two militancies...Wokism and Islamism. And withstand it without becoming a monster of it's own. Be careful when you look into the Void, it looks back.
The worst fault of every religion is Pride. When you can only look at the best of your religion, and become angry when someone points out that it has had bad periods also, you go right down the same path as Islamism is dragging Islam. One so prideful that it can never imagine it could do evil, and will slit the throats of anyone who raises the mildest criticism.
It's not easy, as we all feel the sting of Woke, which turns pride inside out into self-hatred and can see no good in Christianity...even to the point of making up lies.
But how can we contest the lies if we take what is the historic record and attempt to deny that. People who ate not Christian need only open any history book, or even Wikipedia, and will then conclude that Christians simply lie whenever it suits them.
Yes. I think the mountain of Christianity rises higher than that of Islam, but I also think that many muslims are much higher up their mountain than most Western Christians are up theirs!! Agree with the woke point -that will be incorporated as we go on.
I agree no religion or philosophy should be exempt from criticism – including Darwinism, Islam, transgenderism and BLM.
If the purpose in criticism is in rebuilding Christianity so it can withstand the two militancies of Wokism and militant Islam, constructive criticism is always welcome – but such criticism should include specific faults in today’s churches, such as Paul gave to the church at Corinth.
True, pride is a fault and it is not constructive to look at only the best of any religion. Neither is it constructive to harp on only the worst, and completely omit the positive which is what you did in your previous post. You made Christianity look like an evil religion of violence, cruelty and murder. Was that honest? Or was that a lie?
As to the comment “slit the throats of anyone who raises the mildest criticism,” I can think of one religion that is much more intolerant of criticism to the point of forbidding it and even making it punishable by death.
As to the point of being stung by Woke to the point of making up lies, that is a very bad thing. The Bible says liars will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. I do not believe there were any lies in my response to you.
You ask “how can we contest the lies if we take what is the historic record and attempt to deny that?” I did not deny the historic record. I did not deny your facts. What I did say was that those abuses were in violation of many plain teachings and not inherent in Christianity. This is proven by the fact that some of them came a thousand years after Christ. If you like I will give you some verses.
And it is a fact that Islam encourages and practices violence in a way that Christianity does not. We need only compare the lives of Christ and Mohammed. Of course there are Christians who do bad things. No one has ever denied it.
“People who are not Christian need only open any history book, or even Wikipedia, and will then conclude that Christians simply lie whenever it suits them.”
That depends on how you define Christian. Do you think a Christian is everyone who lives in a Western country? The Bible places liars with thieves and murderers and says they will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.
Actually... there's a quote from Girard that I love, to the effect "it is not that the development of science stopped us from burning witches, but that our stopping burning witches is what allowed science to develop". I'm going to do quite a bit about violence, and whether violence is intrinsic to Islam/ Christianity/ religious faith generally.
I once read a quote, "The Qur'an is the mirror to the believer. Whoever finds (the excuse to do) evil in it has brought the evil with him." Sadly I've not come across it again and don't know the source.
It sounded lovely phrased like that, but if a holy book is nothing more, and has no ability to change a person, or challenge the evil in them, then in what way is it holy?
But one can sadly make the same arguments about Christianity. How does the same book produce Arnoud Amalric (Kill them all. The Lord knows those that are his.) and the Amish?
Does Christianity have the internal resources to withstand rising Christian Nationalism, people secretly teaching racism st Christian schools, and large numbers of recent converts/reverts, some of them angry people returning to the fold out of fear of Islamists rather than love of Christ?
As you said in the first Resisting Post, one of the jobs of Christians may soon be to protect people from Islamists and Leftists but also to protect innocent Muslims from reactionary Westerners...who may also believe themselves to be Christians doing what is right by attacking them. Even without a huge influx of neophytes, do most churches do much to instil such a level of spiritual discipline?
Decades of peace and religious rights have allowed Christians to become lax in these areas. What would rebuilding a spiritual discipline curriculum consist of? And I suspect most churches are not willing to hear that they ought to begin because they hope the troubles will pass and we'll go back to normal (when periodic outbreaks of strife are the historic norm).
Is it left to lay Christians to start 'Christian Spiritual Discipline and Resistance' groups themselves? And what resources to use?
These are exactly the questions that I plan to deal with as time goes on as they are very important. You put your finger on it in asking "do most churches do much to instil such a level of spiritual discipline?" In the Modern West the answer is clearly 'no'.
If you look at Osama bin Laden's Letter to America it has a number of direct quotes from the Koran calling for war and vengeance against unbelievers - and, as you say, there has been no outcry from the Islamic community at large protesting these alleged distortions of Islam.
It seems to me that any real Christian opposition to Islam must include statements, made in the right place, and in the right way, and at the right time, stating that Islam is not a true book of God, and Mohammed does not show the way to God. Of course that, if well known, would be met with violence, and then the Christians would be accused of stirring up hatred. In many cases it would even bring about legal sanctions not against the people who reacted violently, but against the people who offered simple statements of belief.
The whole system of freedom of religion in the West was designed with Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and various secular philosophies in mind. It was not designed for a religion that deliberately seeks to silence authentic debate.
If you don't think Christians in earlier centuries didn't silence each other, go back and learn your history.
Early Christians brawled in the streets over whether Christ was created or uncreated.
Every Church Council convened led to the silencing of an alternate opinion as heresy, and the aftermath of the Cs. of Nicaea and Chalcedon
led to upheaval and violence.
The Great Schism was over papal power, but also over details like unleavened bread and a single word added to a prayer...massacres happened in its wake.
The Albigensian Crusade killed hundreds of thousands, entire cities were put to the sword,and the Inquisition established.
The Reformation was just one big long intra-Christian battle. The anti-Catholic laws after the breakaway of Anglicanism, and Protestant sects.
The Protestants then went on to kill each other...Anabaptists and Quakers put to death... riots over icons.
The reason we now have secularism now is NOT because Christians were inherently more reasonable, but because we got sick of the chaos and new philosophies arose....and we spent the next 3 centuries killing each other mostly over those, instead.
(1) Why is it, then, that you can criticize Christianity freely, but you cannot criticize Islam freely and even risk your life if you do? In some places you will certainly be killed. We are not talking about the problems of a thousand years ago, we are talking about the problems of today. Times change, you know.
(2) The Bible teaches that human nature is inherently sinful. This is why in religious societies there is religious violence, and in secular societies there is secular violence, as you pointed out. Christianity does not promise a paradise on earth (short of the return of Christ). "Straight is the gate and narrow is the way and few there be that find it."
(3) Christian religious violence was in direct violation of many clear religious commands (there are many verses in the Bible about this), whereas Islamic violence is sanctioned and even praised and encouraged (there are many verses in the Koran about this).
(4) Many Christians over the centuries paid more attention to the teachings of Christ and were not involved in the things you mention. Countless millions of Christians over many centuries and in many countries have never brawled over whether Christ was created or uncreated, which was nothing but evil and wickedness. Paul rebuked for church at Corinth for dividing into factions.
(5) As to the great schism being over papal power, I have nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church, and believe the Roman medieval church was a false church completely contrary to the New Testament ideal of the church. The Albigensian Crusade and other crusades, the Inquisition, all of those were nothing but sin and complete denials of Christ by evil men completely corrupted by power.
(6) You know a lot about the faults of the church. Do you know about the church at its best? The countless Christians who have sincerely if imperfectly attempted to follow the example of Christ and have never hated, brawled with or killed anyone?
(7) Do you know much about Christ's teachings, you who are an expert in the failings of others? Do you know he said "Why do you call me Lord, Lord and do not the things which I say?"
(8) Your false and cartoon-like characterization of the Protestant Reformation ignores the fact that it ushered in an extended period of religious and political liberty such as has never been seen anywhere else in the world. The anti-Catholic laws had serious political reasons behind them. For example, when the Pope declared Queen Elizabeth a heretic in 1570 the possibility of Catholic revolutions and assassinations was very real. Remember the Spanish Armada?
Just one comment on this - I don't think there is such a thing as a 'pure church', and the desire to separate in order to create one (as opposed to purifying oneself as the exclusive focus) was condemned as a heresy in about the 5th C (Donatism). So I am content with the idea of criticisms of church(es). You're mostly right in what you say here, imho.
The churches are certainly not above criticism. If someone with Paul's authority and insight could write to the modern Bible-believing churches as he did to the church at Corinth, who knows what faults might be pointed out.
Yes!! I think there would be swearing...
Aleksandr Sozhenitsyn has the best modern quote on that, I won't quote in full as I'm out running errands but it begins "If only there were some evil people out there...and all that were necessary were for us to separate ourselves from them...but the line between good and evil runs through every human heart..."
I have zero issue criticizing Islam...or Judaism... or Hinduism.
I could easily have asked instead why Hinduism in the last century produced a pacifist Gandhi and a militant Hindutva.
But having those answers would be of only marginal help in rebuilding a Christianity that can withstand the dual onslaught, and apparent merging, of two militancies...Wokism and Islamism. And withstand it without becoming a monster of it's own. Be careful when you look into the Void, it looks back.
The worst fault of every religion is Pride. When you can only look at the best of your religion, and become angry when someone points out that it has had bad periods also, you go right down the same path as Islamism is dragging Islam. One so prideful that it can never imagine it could do evil, and will slit the throats of anyone who raises the mildest criticism.
It's not easy, as we all feel the sting of Woke, which turns pride inside out into self-hatred and can see no good in Christianity...even to the point of making up lies.
But how can we contest the lies if we take what is the historic record and attempt to deny that. People who ate not Christian need only open any history book, or even Wikipedia, and will then conclude that Christians simply lie whenever it suits them.
Yes. I think the mountain of Christianity rises higher than that of Islam, but I also think that many muslims are much higher up their mountain than most Western Christians are up theirs!! Agree with the woke point -that will be incorporated as we go on.
I agree no religion or philosophy should be exempt from criticism – including Darwinism, Islam, transgenderism and BLM.
If the purpose in criticism is in rebuilding Christianity so it can withstand the two militancies of Wokism and militant Islam, constructive criticism is always welcome – but such criticism should include specific faults in today’s churches, such as Paul gave to the church at Corinth.
True, pride is a fault and it is not constructive to look at only the best of any religion. Neither is it constructive to harp on only the worst, and completely omit the positive which is what you did in your previous post. You made Christianity look like an evil religion of violence, cruelty and murder. Was that honest? Or was that a lie?
As to the comment “slit the throats of anyone who raises the mildest criticism,” I can think of one religion that is much more intolerant of criticism to the point of forbidding it and even making it punishable by death.
As to the point of being stung by Woke to the point of making up lies, that is a very bad thing. The Bible says liars will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. I do not believe there were any lies in my response to you.
You ask “how can we contest the lies if we take what is the historic record and attempt to deny that?” I did not deny the historic record. I did not deny your facts. What I did say was that those abuses were in violation of many plain teachings and not inherent in Christianity. This is proven by the fact that some of them came a thousand years after Christ. If you like I will give you some verses.
And it is a fact that Islam encourages and practices violence in a way that Christianity does not. We need only compare the lives of Christ and Mohammed. Of course there are Christians who do bad things. No one has ever denied it.
“People who are not Christian need only open any history book, or even Wikipedia, and will then conclude that Christians simply lie whenever it suits them.”
That depends on how you define Christian. Do you think a Christian is everyone who lives in a Western country? The Bible places liars with thieves and murderers and says they will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.
Actually... there's a quote from Girard that I love, to the effect "it is not that the development of science stopped us from burning witches, but that our stopping burning witches is what allowed science to develop". I'm going to do quite a bit about violence, and whether violence is intrinsic to Islam/ Christianity/ religious faith generally.
But the question would still remain...what changed us, so that we stopped burning witches? (And heretics)
And why did we start all that violence in the first place after Christ's mostly meek example?
Girard says that it is a consequence of the profound impact of the gospel (ie it took us a thousand years to start realising what Jesus was up to)
PS Person of No Importance -
Do you believe the Quran was delivered by the Angel Gabriel to Mohammed and is a true book from God?
Of course not, or I would be Muslim.
I once read a quote, "The Qur'an is the mirror to the believer. Whoever finds (the excuse to do) evil in it has brought the evil with him." Sadly I've not come across it again and don't know the source.
It sounded lovely phrased like that, but if a holy book is nothing more, and has no ability to change a person, or challenge the evil in them, then in what way is it holy?
But one can sadly make the same arguments about Christianity. How does the same book produce Arnoud Amalric (Kill them all. The Lord knows those that are his.) and the Amish?
Does Christianity have the internal resources to withstand rising Christian Nationalism, people secretly teaching racism st Christian schools, and large numbers of recent converts/reverts, some of them angry people returning to the fold out of fear of Islamists rather than love of Christ?
As you said in the first Resisting Post, one of the jobs of Christians may soon be to protect people from Islamists and Leftists but also to protect innocent Muslims from reactionary Westerners...who may also believe themselves to be Christians doing what is right by attacking them. Even without a huge influx of neophytes, do most churches do much to instil such a level of spiritual discipline?
Decades of peace and religious rights have allowed Christians to become lax in these areas. What would rebuilding a spiritual discipline curriculum consist of? And I suspect most churches are not willing to hear that they ought to begin because they hope the troubles will pass and we'll go back to normal (when periodic outbreaks of strife are the historic norm).
Is it left to lay Christians to start 'Christian Spiritual Discipline and Resistance' groups themselves? And what resources to use?
These are exactly the questions that I plan to deal with as time goes on as they are very important. You put your finger on it in asking "do most churches do much to instil such a level of spiritual discipline?" In the Modern West the answer is clearly 'no'.