Opus 2014-227: Turning the Cheek and Bearing the Sword

Last year I was reading a book called Blindsided and it made me wonder how we can give a rational response to the challenge of Islam.  What we are seeing in the headlines today just reinforces my concern.

As a Christian, my standards of behavior are molded by the words of the Bible.  In my personal relationships I am guided by the words of Jesus which can be summed up with,

(Matthew 5:39 KJV)  But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

As a general principle of life this is very important.  The concept of forgiveness and patience is built into the American philosophy.  The problem is the perpetual, misguided and possibly insane bully that looks on forgiveness and patience as a sign of weakness.  That bully, personal or national, ramps up the violence in the face of Christian virtue.

That is why we need to balance a partial teaching of the Bible with a more extensive examination and use our God given ability to reason as we look for solutions.  The Bible also tells us,

(Romans 13:4 KJV)  For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

You don’t need to read that many times to see that one of the functions of government is to use the sword to deal with evil.  The sword has to be carried by someone.  They can, if motivated and guided properly, be doing God’s work.

We are faced with a great evil.  We have a large group of bullies who are using their big muscles, lack of good will and repeating rifles to extend, expand and execute evil.  They say it is in the name of God.  If they were Christians making this claim I could refute them with our holy book, the Bible.  Since it is Muslims and their holy book is the Koran, I cannot do that.  Neither can other Muslims because the teaching of the Koran allows this kind of behavior and if they speak out against it they are tortured and murdered.

The problem is not going to just go away while the president takes vacations, plays golf and takes advantage of photo ops.

My fear is that maybe a rational response is impossible.  It may be the only way we can fight this evil is to get people so stoked up that they lash out at those who want to destroy us.  A reasoned response isn’t in the cards.  You don’t fight bullying with reason, you fight it with force.

I continue to hope for either another answer or a waking up to the danger.

Youssef, Michael, Blindsided, No City:  Kobri, 2012.

homo unius libri

Opus 2012-305, Discernment Watch: Continued Religious Ignorance

Every time I read something in the Progressive Press that refers to Muslims I have a question that forms in my mind, “What kind of Muslim are we talking about?”  The press refuses to give the details that make a difference.  There are two distinct errors.

The biggest problem is that the media refuses to recognize the difference between Muslim and Black Muslim, between Islam and the Nation of Islam.  These are two totally different groups.  One is basically a racist religion, white is evil.  The other is a world wide religion that embraces people from all races and cultures.  It makes a difference which one you are talking about.  This difference may be coming to an end.  I didn’t mark the page, but in reading Michael Youssef’s book Blindsided, it seems that the two groups have temporarily patched up their condemnation of the other in order to pursue jihad.  That then makes them part of the second error of the media.

The second problem is the simplification that projects a monolithic Islam.  Islam is as divided as Christianity.  The two big divisions are the Sunni and Shia, just as Christianity has Protestant and Roman Catholic.  This is a historic, obvious difference that demonstrates the ignorance of the press.  They mention the existence of the two but don’t seem to understand how deep the divide is.  When you mix in the Wahabi and Sufi it gets even more confusing because they overlap. 

Most reporters and talking head have never read the Koran.  They know a few quotes provided by either true believers, deniers or haters.  None begins to shed light on what motivates these people.  Ignorance is dangerous.  Those who are paid to inform us come in two flavors.  One is ignorant from laziness.  The other is informed but wants to keep us ignorant.

So ask questions.  Are we talking about Islam or the Nation of Islam?  Mohammed or Farakan?  Are we talking about Sunni or Shia?  Are we talking Arab or Persian or Turk?

Read the Koran.  You can do it.  I urge you to read it and I am a Christian.  I will take the risk that it will convert you.  It isn’t that long.  Don’t take anyone’s word for what it says, even mine.

Youssef, Michael, Blindsided, No City:  Kobri, 2012.

homo unius libri

Opus 2012-300: History Repeats Itself

In reading the Koran it became clear to me that Mohammed was only familiar with heretical forms of Christianity.  For instance I noticed that he quoted the gnostic Gospel of Thomas and seemed to believe it represented orthodox Christianity.  I recently came across something that verified my observation.

Michael Youssef, in his book Blindsided, was writing about why the Arabian Peninsula was resistant to Christianity before the preaching of Mohammed.  One of his points went like this,

“...Arabian Christianity in the seventh century was corrupted and distorted by Gnostic heresies and diversions over the nature of Christ.  Some of these heresies taught that Jesus was a mere human being who achieved divinity through mystical knowledge.  Though some Arab Christians revered the New Testament as God’s revealed Word, many embraced the Gnostic heresies, so that the ‘Christianity’ they practiced was weak and unbiblical.  So the Christianity of Arabia had little appeal to the pagans in that region.” page 49

It is nice to have my observations endorsed by someone who is much more familiar with the area than I am, but that is not what jumped out at me.

I saw a parallel between Arabia of the sixth century and America of the 21st century.  The Christianity that was being lived and taught he calls “weak and unbiblical.”  I think that same phrase could be used to describe what I see in the church of America today.

American churches are into being “user friendly” and not “Godly obedient.”  They are more concerned about offending the visiting pagan than the eternal God.  Paul said,

ROM 12:2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

The modern church has dropped out the “do not” and made conformity a requirement.

If the church wants to impact the world, it will need to return to being the church.

Youssef, Michael.  Blindsided.  No City:  Kobri, 2012.

homo unius libri