You are here . on the pale blue dot

Blog notes

Anonymous comments for publication must include a pseudonym.

They should be 'on topic' and not involve third parties.
If pseudonyms are linked to commercial sites comments will be removed as spam.
The blog owner is unable to ‘unfollow’ Followers.

Friday, 26 April 2013

"Christianity, Islam, and Atheism"

Three potential bombers have been sentenced today with another eight members of the terror gang awaiting sentence. The ring leader was born and educated in this country! In Canada another suspected terrorist accused of plotting to derail a New York City-to-Toronto train declared during a court appearance in Toronto that Canada’s criminal codes were "just written by a set of creations and the creations are not perfect because only the creator is perfect”, a belief with which the 'Boston bombers' would no doubt share great sympathy. The common thread? The belief in a higher authority than the state and man-made laws.

From Frontpage Mag (see also an earlier CNA review here):
"Now that the Boston bombers have turned out, contrary to the fervent hope of the left, to be not Tea Partiers but Muslims, the media are spinning the terrorists’ motive away from jihad and shrugging, helplessly mystified, about the “senseless” attacks. And so our willful blindness about Islam continues. ... William “Kirk” Kilpatrick’s new book Christianity, Islam, and Atheism opens with a section titled “The Islamic Threat,” in which Kilpatrick describes the rise of supremacist Islam and our correspondingly tepid defense of Western values. Our collapse in the face of Islam, he says, is due in large part to our abandonment of Christianity, which has led to “a population vacuum and a spiritual vacuum” that Islam has rushed to fill. “A secular society… can’t fight a spiritual war,” Kilpatrick writes. Contrary to the multiculturalist fantasy dominant in the West today, “cultures aren’t the same because religions aren’t the same. Some religions are more rational, more compassionate, more forgiving, and more peaceful than others.” This is heresy in today’s morally relativistic world, but it’s a critical point because “as Christianity goes, so goes the culture.”

Kilpatrick notes that Christians today have lost all cultural confidence and are suffering a “crisis of masculinity”, thanks to the feminizing influences of multiculturalism and feminism. He devotes significant space to encouraging Christians to, well, grow a pair, to put it indelicately, in order to confront Islam, the “most hypermasculine religion in history”:

On the one hand, you have a growing population of Muslim believers brimming with masculine self-confidence and assertiveness about their faith, and on the other hand, you have a dwindling population of Christians who are long on nurturance and sensitivity but short on manpower. Who seems more likely to prevail?

Kilpatrick devotes a chapter to “The Comparison” between Islam and Christianity, in which he points out that Christians who buy into the concept of interfaith unity with Muslims would do well to look more closely at our irreconcilable differences instead of our limited common ground; he demonstrates, for example, that the imitation of Christ and the imitation of Muhammad lead a believer in radically different directions. ... What are his recommendations for mounting a defense of our values against the aggressive spread of Islamic ones? Reviving the commitment to our own Judeo-Christian values for starters, and then, “instead of a constant yielding to Islamic sensitivities, it may be time for some containment. Sharia… should not be allowed to spread through Western societies.” He touches on immigration, noting that it’s a problematic issue but suggesting that it’s reasonable to question the motives and agendas of immigrant groups. The message we must send? “Islam will not prevail. The West will not yield. You must accommodate to our values and way of life if you choose to live among us.” "

The family of the "Boston bombers" said that they watched the breaking news of the murderous scheme in disbelief that their family could be involved in such an outrage. The boys' parents continue to be in denial. Much closer to home, the recently convicted Muslim convert Richard Dart who was said to have come from a 'wonderful family' of 'very nice people' refused to stand for sentencing saying: "I don't wish to stand up, I believe ruling and judging is only for Allah.'' A film broadcast on BBC Three in 2011 featured Dart having close contact with hate preacher Anjem Choudary and declaring that he backed sharia law to eradicate evil in UK society. In the broadcast he is also seen preaching in Weymouth town centre and complaining that British culture was becoming 'more homosexual' with 'men dressing like women'. He also bemoaned the fact that people are walking around 'half naked'. Back in London, he is seen telling another white Muslim who has just come to Britain that there are ''many misconceptions'' about al Qaeda. Dart says: ''The worst of the Muslims is better than the best of the kuffar (non-believers), that's a fact. ''That's why the kuffar will be in hell fire for eternity.''

This attitude serves to highlight the problem of recognising authority in different cultures. To their credit someone in the Muslim community in Canada tipped off the authorities emphasising the fact that not all Muslims are bad but that is too often used as an excuse for inertia or even impotence in defending Christianity against militant Islam (see previous entry and postscript). If Christianity is to survive we abdicate responsibility at our peril.

No comments:

Post a Comment