Friday, June 17, 2011

Say What?

Sheila we cannot say that there Islam and Christianity are comparable.  Yes, I know we want to give all sorts of crazy names to people "Christian Militants" for example.  Or attach the word "radical" to Islam.  The thing is we do not have to do that.  We need only look at the fundamental tenets of the Religions to determine whether one acted in accord with them or not.  When one acts in accord with the tenets laid down in the doctrine of the faith, he is faithful.  When he acts in discord with the doctrine of the faith he is a sinner, a heretic, an apostate, or an infidel.

The fundamental doctrine of Christ is love and mercy.  When a Christian claims to bomb anything or kill any innocent person the name of Christianity, he has at the very least sinned against the Lord.  He has by his own free choice severed the bond of love between himself and God and exited the relationship.  There is no Christian doctrine that allows or encourages a Christian use physical force to impose the beliefs of Christians. If you have to force someone to love God or you for that matter, they are no longer free, and it is no longer love.  Pretty simple.  The bomber who claimed to bomb the abortion mill in the name of Christianity, was acting in his own name not then name of Christ and he certainly did not represent the Christian Church.  He misrepresented himself.  Just because I happen to be a Christian does not, even if I claim that they are, make my acts the will of God.  Nor does it make them in the name of Jesus Christ.  If you understand the Christian spiritual life, than you understand that when you are in Christ, you participate in His divine life.  Therefore, any act preformed contrary to the love and mercy of that divine life, is contrary to the faith He revealed, and gives you the grace to participate in.

On the other hand, the same argument cannot be made for Islam.  Islam is in fact the religion of the sword.  It rejects the free will of the faithful and reduces the relationship of Allah to his subjects to a slave owner and his servants.  You do as you are commanded.  The command given from its inception is to make muslims out of the entire world.  The difference is the Koran authorizes the use of force to coerce conversion.  Mohammed himself, was the great warrior prophet who heard every word written in the Koran directly from Allah. Here is the problem. The difference Christianity seeks conversion through love and living a life of joy and peace.  Islam seeks it through the use of force to implement the moral law if and when they meet resistance.  

The Koran is said to complete the New Testament, however,  I can't find a single prophet in the Old Testament that lights a path for Mohammed and the Koran.  While the Old Testament does make way for Jesus, it gives us no reason to believe that there will be another prophet after Jesus to fill in the blanks.  Mohammed denies the divinity of Christ calling him a prophet.  Which make  me wonder if he has ever read the New Testament.  Because Jesus declares Himself divine: "I glorified you on earth having accomplished the work which you gave me to do; and now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory which I had with you before the world was made "(JN 17: 4-5). Jesus Himself reveals that he is revealing the will of the Father for our salvation.  A morsel rejected by Mohammed.  Jesus Himself says that there will be no more until he comes again in glory seated at the right hand of the Father.  The point is that Mohammed either never read the New Testament, wasn't thinking rationally when He wrote the Koran, or flat out lied.

The point is that when a Muslim says that he destroyed an entire tower of people by crashing a plane into and destroying the building and all that is inside.  The doctrinal tenets and the founding prophet of Islam concur that this is a holy and righteous deed that fulfills the will of Allah.  In other words, according to the doctrine there is nothing radical about it.  It is common.  When a baptized Christian bombs an abortion clinic in the name of Christ.  He has gone off the rails!  There is not doctrine of Christianity to support his claim.  He has aborted his faith, left it behind, ignored the will of God, and become his own man.

Christian Ethos
Having hopefully made some distinctions above.  I want to say clearly that it is beyond a stretch and ok..I'll say it ridiculous! There is no reasonable person that would accept her case comparison. "Christian militants" cannot undermine the country, because they simply do not exist.  If I ran around telling everyone I was a carpenter, it would not make it so. I promise you, you would regret the day that you hired me to frame your new house. Calling myself a master carpenter would not change the fact that I have know idea what the first principles of carpentry are.  And if I started a band of crazy abortion clinic blowing up, "Carpenter militants"  It would not mean that the principles of carpentry supported as common this behavior. So, no Sheila, we cannot say that we should broaden our scope.  That is actually quite unreasonable.  If I may remind you the structure of law in this country, those are based on Christian principles.  It seems to me that when someone broke one of them, it would be slightly obvious to you that he was not acting in accord with the Christian ethos.  But what do I know?  I am just a dumb kid from Janesville, WI.  

No comments:

Post a Comment