Skip to comments.ISLAM'S FUTURE
Posted on 08/13/2002 1:41:35 AM PDT by kattracksEdited on 05/26/2004 5:08:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
August 13, 2002 -- 'I AM surprised at your lack of courage, Mr. Pipes," one reader scolded me. "Your point of view is for people who believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus," opined another. "You really dropped the ball on this one!" "I hope you are not beginning to lose your nerve." "Totally wrong." Or, more charitably: "Maybe your hope is overshadowing your understanding of the truth."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Why is that, Mr. Pipes? Why indeed?
They've had over a dozen centuries to "modernize"; hasn't happened yet.
To what do you attribute this belief that they must adapt? All I see from the Muslim world is an intense desire to remain in the 7th century and kill anyone who doesn't share their views.
At the rate they're going, the only thing they'll "adapt" to is annihilation.
Finally a more reasonable approach to be heard.
The light dawns. But, it is too frightening for Pipes to contemplate.
My approach has the benefit of offering a realistic policy to deal with a major global problem.
The triumph of fear and appeasement over judgement.
In conclusion, a reflection: Americans have acquired an impressive knowledge of Islam. Contrary to the incessant bleating by apologists for militant Islam about American ignorance of this topic, my readers know what they are talking about. Their critiques are sometimes erudite .... sometimes eloquent .....
These readers, surely, are not typical of American opinion, but their informed antagonism to Islam bears remarking. It is likely to have a larger political role as Islam ever-more becomes central a topic of discussion in the West.
As the Germans say Wissen ist Macht -- knowledge is power.
Islam's past and present are horrifying, almost too awful to contemplate. Despite what some have said here and elsewhere, it presents no parallel with Christianity, which never animated a program of continental conquest. The Inquisition was a fleeting blot on Christianity's escutcheon, and is regretted universally today. The Crusades were a response to the Muslim penetration of Eastern Europe, a matter which Dr. Pipes would appreciate. That that response was overenthusiastically endorsed by temporal rulers anxious to export their domestic brigands to some faraway place has nothing to do with the religious matter.
Dr. Pipes would have us judge Islam not on its past or present, but on its potential future. Yet the events and trends of the day give us no reason to believe that Islam will become anything other than what it currently is: a brutal, misogynistic, totalitarian code that explicitly obstructs both material and political progress.
Either Islam is impeding the development of the cultures it dominates, or it provides a rationale under which they can refuse to accept their backwardness. In either case, it stands in the way. As practiced and interpreted from its sacred documents, neither of these influences can be corrected. Therefore, the question before us is not whether Islam can be reformed, but whether it can be replaced.
What would replace it?
Whatever religion might supplant present-day Islam -- and it might go by that name -- to make it fit for human consumption, it would have to share the fundamental moral underpinnings of Judaism and Christianity: basically, the Ten Commandments. It would have to inform its adherents that they are not superior to non-adherents, nor possessed of superior rights, simply because they accept it. To become the full moral equal of the other great faiths, it would have to incorporate the ethic of benevolence, the desire to see good in and do good to all men, provided only that they respond in kind: Christ's version of the Golden Rule.
Have I said that it must become Christianity? Not quite. Christianity incorporates certain doctrinal requirements about the divinity of Christ and His purpose in becoming a man. Though illuminating and inspiring, these tenets are not necessary to the detoxification of Islam. (In fact, the Trinitarian assertion was the entering wedge by which Mohammed established his new creed, since the Monophysite Christians among whom he preached did not accept the triune nature of God as proclaimed by orthodox Christianity.) Christ did not come to Earth to proclaim a new Law, but to remind us of the old one. He said so Himself: "I come not to overthrow the law, but to fulfill it."
If Dr. Pipes envisions some other transformation of Islam that would render it a safe neighbor for us of the Judeo-Christian West, he'd better make it explicit. For my part, I doubt that any other satisfactory evolution is possible.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com
I agree."We wrestle not against flesh and blood but against rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."
Those evil powers have used earthly powers to 'form' Christianity and most of it is man-made religious organization. systems of activity that come from man with the help of evil forces.
The Father did not have this in mind for the Church. The Church is governed by the Holy Spirit....HIS Holy Spirit and we are doing a poor job today of listening to Him.
I hope so!
Well, islam has not changed in 1300 years! Why would it change now? To protect the "feelings" of teary-eyed, bleeding-heart, left-wing liberals and modern mores?
NOT A CHANCE!
Christianity was not really founded or intended by ANYbody on Earth, it seems. It just came to be because it was needed so badly. It is a spontaneous growth becuase Greco-Roman, European culture needed a religion so badly, and so does it now, for that matter, and had better get back to its foundation.
America without Christianity is something that the Jews who have been willing that, will not like to see, let us hope they do a 180 in time.
A cursory examination of Spanish history under the scimitars of the muslim slavemasters will enlighten you otherwise.
Screwing female children (ala the prophet Mohammed) wasn't a part of Christian culture. (Priests screwing male children is a sinister manifestation of Vatican II-and to the delight of the proponents of a homosexual agenda- when the Church heirarchy conspired with satan to make sweeping changes that included allowing gaggles of homosexuals into the priesthood.) Islam and the homosexuals belong in the same category.
Your statement is, in total, false.
Islam can be reformed, but tough love may be needed. When many of the Islamist maniacs who are killing innocents now are hunted down and destroyed, you might see a modernization of other Muslim societies. It won't be easy, but I refuse to believe that all Muslims are evil. If you knew my ex-professor, you'd know that to be true.
Ahh, but it is. Military defeat, loss of an empire, and military invasion of the heartland tend to open one's mind to new paradigms.
I submit for your consideration that God is life and life is sacred. The opposite of God is Satan. Satan is death and death is sacred. Those who believe it is in dying that they achieve God's purpose are following a mistaken theology. Dying is easy. Living is the challenge. Living is jihad. Those who seek to kill and destroy are serving their god and will live eternally in his presence. Those who serve life, serve their God and will live eternally in His presence. There is no middle ground.
Until all mankind reveres and holds sacred the gift of life, there will be no peace. Until mankind makes the enemies of God their footstool, there will be no return of Goodness. Until all adherents of one God stand together against evil, this horror will continue, and that, my friends, is what Satan counts on most. His time is up when we figure it out and implement the belief.
The religion must adapt to modern mores.
This can be done. One recent example: In May, the Turkish religious authorities ruled - completely contrary to Islamic custom - to permit women to pray next to men and to attend mosque services while menstruating.
Anyone want to have a stab at what century of civilization they have entered with such a grand gesture?
And to think that some American parents got upset about a surprise "thong check" for violations of a school dress code.
The two biggest tasks for arab nations to consent to are open practice of other religions and conversion from islam to other religions.
Anything else betrays the notion of islam being a peaceful religion. If the citizens are not free to choose their faith and exercise it (under penalty of death) then they are not free. Their religion dominatates that freedom.
Sounds like the reasoning of a lib who refuses to accept a fetus as being a living being. It's much easier to solve the problem of unwanted or improper pregancies if we just take that concept off the table.
1. Usama ibn Laden is a practising Muslim, and thus, our brother in Islam. He has made many sacrifices for the Deen, in particular, the Jihaad of Afghanistan. While we respect him for this, we do not raise any person to any position, except that which Allah Ta'ala wishes.
2. He himself has denied involvement. Why should we then doubt him? Even if a billion Kuffaar say the opposite, the word of a single practising Muslim is more acceptable to us.
3. It was an Islamic duty for the Taliban to have destroyed the idols.
Don't think that they respect our Christian monuments/sites/buildings/etc. any more than the Buddahs.
Remember that hostage situation at the Church of the Nativity?
Their calendar isn't much farther ahead than that figure either...
Or do you knock out the leader. Kill their followers (the ones who empower them) and instill your own reforms?
1 And the dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. He had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on his horns, and on each head a blasphemous name.
2 The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority.
It's a family feud,
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, on down to David and to Yeshua.
Abram, Ishmael, on down to Muhammad and to...
So far (nearly a year later from 9/11) I have yet to see/hear/read any PR campaign from the muslims distancing themselves from the Islamists. I'd heard a few people say that it is just the actions of a few individuals but there has been no denouncement of the actions of the Islamists.
I've been exposed to PR campaigns that the Palestinians children just want to grow up to be wonderful people like Albert Einstein, Charlie Chaplin, John Lennon, and Ghandi but they can't because of violent Jews. I've been exposed to PR campaigns that the arab states want peace if only Israel would come to the table and sign their treaty. I've been exposed to PR campaigns that "I am an American".
Nothing to say: "We do not support the destruction of the ancient buddah statues". "If my nation goes to war, I'll fight side by side with you against the Islamists".
They can't hate us any more than they already do...
There may have been some principles of nazism that were "positive" but I'm not going to go looking for them. Some socialists would be proud of the notion of improving transportation (and creating the "peoples" car), funding state sponsored arts, etc..