I have no hope of being wrong. I’ve read the Koran, I’ve read Islamic history. I’m not wrong. I do have hope that we will win. But only time will tell. I do think that if and when the Islamic tyrannies fall and are replaced by democracies that we will find that those 100% Muslim population numbers fall through the floor. As proselytizing of other religions is legalized and people no longer face death for converting away from Islam or even expressing any other opinion we will find that there are far fewer Muslims than we now see. You may want to look into Ibn Warraq’s writings for more on that and an inside look at Islam.

Evangelical preachers are about the only Christians left with the guts to speak the truth about Islam. “Major Christian theologians” are all firmly ensconced in PC politics, relativism related to religion, if not morality, and are too deceived and entranced by higher criticism to really believe the Bible’s claims – i.e. they’re no longer Christian. As I explained above: they don’t actually believe in Christ, so in what sense can they be called “Christian?” How exactly all of this came about is beyond me. Maybe they just spent too much time trying to define and describe God and neglected worshiping Him until they lost their faith. The desire to keep a job and advance a career, get a book deal, etc. also has much to do with it, I’m sure. Very sad. The Truth suffers.

We’ll also have to agree to disagree about Shintoism. I stand by what I said and how I said it.

Until next time, God bless.

So we reach the crux of our differences: You believe Islam is fundamentally evil. I believe there is evil in Islam, but it’s not fundamentally evil.

Based on your assertion, you believe Islam cannot evolve, and so must be destroyed. Based on my assertion, I believe Islam can evolve, and so there’s no need for its destruction -only its maturation.

There’s no point to arguing this any further, as it’s plain to see we won’t be moved. I guess only time will tell who is right and who is wrong. But given that the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life just came out with an extensive report which stated that 23% of the global population (1.57 billion) calls itself Muslim, you better hope you’re wrong!

I do wonder, if Islam is so intrinsically evil, why is it that, besides a few evangelical preachers, no major Christian theologian has come out and said this?

A final note, I don’t buy your notion of “non-Islamist” Muslims. I guess to you, any Muslim living in peace is, in fact, not practicing Islam. Your focus on Islam’s militancy ignores all other aspects of Islamic life. Forget the notion of belief in a single God, of reading holy texts, of living a virtuous life, of repentance of sins, or being charitable… To me that’s like saying a Christian who isn’t actively proselytizing is actually not practicing Christianity.

Similarly, I’m unmoved by your explanations regarding the non-dead “dead” Shinto religion. Dead is dead, not diminishing, dying, etc. Perhaps you should take more care in phrasing your arguments, so as to avoid ambiguity. You know, written text has a long history of being misinterpreted….

So we’ll have to leave it at that, and agree to disagree. It’s been interesting, Logos, but interest fades with repetition. I’ll see ya.

This issue is not comparable to minor disagreements among Christians about various issues related to worship, etc. This is about the fundamentals of a religion without which the religion becomes something else entirely (more on this below.) This isn’t even comparable to Christian sects condoning homosexuality – which is clearly heresy and clearly at odds with NT teaching. (“Interpretation” has nothing to do with it: Rom. 1:26-27 condemns homosexuality, period.) It’s more basic even than that. This would be akin to someone calling himself a Christian and then saying Christ is not God in the flesh, did not die for our sins, did not rise from the dead. Well, call yourself a fish if you want, you still can’t breathe under water! That’s what I’m talking about. Islam has ALWAYS been a martial religion because THAT IS WHAT THEIR SCRIPTURES COMMAND! And for the same reason it ALWAYS WILL BE. THERE IS NOTHING FOR IT TO EVOLVE TO. THAT’S WHAT IT IS! FUNDAMENTALLY Islam is evil and martial and murderous and dishonest (taqiyya) and MUST GO.

Okay. That really is all that can be said on that subject. To quote The Hudsucker Proxy, “I’m getting off this merry-go-round!”

So far as Shintoism is concerned I will clarify my thoughts, what I was trying to say and my original POINT and then get off that merry-go-round too. Shintoism, fundamentally, was ABOUT emperor worship and the belief that the Japanese people were THE sacred race descended from the gods. Thus in Japanese militarism the conclusion was that they were destined to conquer the world. It is THAT that was destroyed overnight by two atomic bombs. Certainly some people were not able to give up the traditions and rituals they had grown up with. But I stand by my assertion that the religion died overnight because a) its FUNDAMENTAL beliefs were overthrown instantly and b) they were unable to pass on even the rituals to the next generation. From virtually the entire population being Shinto in 1941 to now only three percent (almost entirely the remaining WWII generation) calling themselves Shinto: that is in my opinion the overnight death of a religion. If you wish to disagree, God bless. What is left – the traditions, the relics (like Christmas trees) of the past – yes those will endure for decades, perhaps even centuries to come, who knows. But the Shintoism of 1941 IS DEAD: it died at Nagasaki, and it isn’t coming back. And my POINT was that evil CAN be conquered, even something as enduring as religion can cease to exist, the Truth CAN overcome, and therefore we have some hope of destroying Islam just as we have destroyed other evil religions and systems in the past. Again, I don’t know if we WILL. Only God knows that. But we must try. There is no other way. I’m sorry. You cannot make something other than what it is. Call yourself a fish – you won’t grow gills.

The Burqa was not common in India until recently. During the Kargil war in 1999 in Kashmir, Hindu, Sikh, and Muslim Indians fought shoulder to shoulder together against the Pakistani aggressor. That must be considered a good development, a future workable template.

China has been very successful with her government-enforced population control. India, however, a country with the best voluntary population control program in the region, if not the world, has been thwarted by their growing Muslim population, which fertility greatly outpaces the Hindu population. Given the history of Islam in India, this brings great concern and worries to non-Muslims in the subcontinent.

This high fertility rate is the same for Muslim all over the world, with the more Islamic the country, the greater its populations growth, such as Iran, Jordan, and Libya. Pakistan has the greatest fertility rate in the region, doubling its population every 24 years.

Of course, this is of great concern for Israel where, Hasidic Jews notwithstanding, Israeli Arabs outpace Israeli Jews in fertility 5 to 3.

One may wish that Islam, like communism recently, implodes. This would be a lucky development. It looked that that was starting to happen a few years ago, before the recrudesce of Islamism towards the end of the 20th century. Still, it is possible that in India conversion out of Islam be promoted since there are several spiritual options available. In Europe, similarly, it is hoped that secularism and modernism takes the best of the new Muslim generations.

I think we’re starting to go around in circles, but here we go, one last time (I’ll try to keep it short):

Are you contradicting yourself??

You originally said, Islam “MUST be utterly destroyed.” And, “Islam is a frankly evil and intolerant religion that is completely incompatible with a safe, peaceful, free and just society. Therefore, if we are ever to have a safe, peaceful, free and just society Islam MUST go” (my emphasis). “Must” implies no other solution can be accepted. As you said, “Islam CANNOT be lived with, it CANNOT be tolerated” (my emphasis).

Now you say, “But if some people do want to live peaceful lives while calling themselves Muslims, let them.” Yo, Logos! A Muslim by definition is one who practices Islam! But didn’t you say Islam MUST go? Now some of those practicing Islam, which is “incompatible with a safe, peaceful, free and just society” can STAY? This is inconsistent with your argument! You can’t say Islam MUST be “utterly destroyed,” then turn around and say, some Muslims can be allowed to continue practicing Islam. You wouldn’t say we MUST stop illegal aliens, and then turn around and say, well, if some of them are peaceful, sure, let them in.

Then you say, ” I just think it is more honest to tell them frankly that they are wrong and to prove why…. I just think we should call a spade a spade and let the chips fall where they may.” Indeed! We can reason with them, show them why we think their religion is not the best. And if some convert, great! But your original argument (Islam MUST go) doesn’t imply chips falling where they may, it implies chips must fall AWAY from Islam.
If you’d said “I believe Islam is evil. We should do all within our power to talk as many as we can out of it, and hopefully the religion will fade away as more and more realize how terrible it is,” it would’ve been difficult for me to extrapolate (in fact, I’d probably go along with you). But in asserting the absolute NEED for Islam to disappear, all I have stated regarding persecuting believers, even non-violent ones, logically follows. It’s not an “annoying habit,” it’s what would NEED to happen to implement you statement that Islam must be “utterly destroyed.” But now you seem to have backtracked, stating some Islamists would be allowed to continue practicing this religion that could not be “lived with.”

“All of this garbage about Islam being peaceful and essentially equal to other peaceful religions is just political-correctness; it isn’t based on a historical and scriptural study of Islam, the Koran and Sharia.”

Read carefully what I wrote, please! I didn’t say Islam IS a peaceful religion, I said it could EVOLVE to become peaceful. I asked a question: “Is there no other possible interpretation than violence/forced conversions?” I said, “The Quran is not NECESSARILY evil (as you claim), it MAY be purposefully misinterpreted by those who wish to commit evil.” (emphasis added) I also said that “I believe my vision, AFTER MUCH STRUGGLE, is feasible. Doing away with Islam is impossible.” Even YOU now seem to imply doing away with Islam is impossible, and would allow some to continue practicing.

Bottom line: I’m not sure if it CAN become a wholly peaceful religion, but I think there’s a chance (you don’t). I’m fully aware of Islam’s history, but the past does not equal the future.

You imply the Quran is an evil book. I say there is much in it that can be interpreted as promoting violence, but there MAY be a chance that it is not wholly so. Hell, if Episcopalians and “reinterpret” the Bible as NOT condemning homosexual love, I think there’s room for Muslims to reinterpret their book as well. Here’s an interesting quote on the subject:

“Today, those who assert that the Qur’an advocates war against non-Muslims are also notoriously selective. Take for example the use of 4:74, which states that those who fight in the cause of God will be rewarded. And the quote often conveniently stops there. But the following verse (4:75) explains that Muslims are only allowed to fight those oppressors who directly attack them, especially those who oppressing the most vulnerable among them; old men, women, and children. ”

“For the last 1400 years, Muslims and their religious scholars have dealt — and are still dealing — with the important question of how much of the Qur’an is binding on Muslims at all times and how much of its teachings apply only to the age of the Prophet Muhammad and the particular circumstances in which he and his followers lived.”

http://www.mediamonitors.net/elmasry31.html

“You don’t seem to realize that words and documents have real meanings that can be clearly understood by honest people.” If it were so easy, tell me why we have over 1500 Christian denominations in the US, and an estimated 38,000 worldwide?

You say the Bible was always right, and historically, those interpreting it were wrong – and now that we are educated, and can all read, we know why they were wrong. And exactly how educated is the “Muslim street”? I’m sure some educated, intelligent Muslims have been indoctrinated into hating us “infidels,” but I’m also sure many of those chanting in the street are rather uneducated, and follow what their respective Imam says, much like Catholics of yore.

You can say the Word of God is perfect, that it is men who are imperfect (and so will no doubt misinterpret some of it), but that is as true today as it was 500 years ago. How can you be sure that all our current interpretations (e.g. regarding women, homosexuality, etc.) are right? Perhaps we are more “enlightened” in our interpretation, but that is not to say we understand it completely, and that interpretations -at least on some issues- will not continue to change. I stand by my comment that this same process COULD be occurring with the Quran, that it is not necessarily evil, and that interpretations can continue to change -perhaps for the better.

You argue we are no longer bound by the Old Testament because we’re not Jews. O.K. fair enough, let’s say you’re right. But what about the Jews, then? Would they not still be bound by the Laws of Moses to kill adulterers, fornicators, homosexuals, or those who strike their parents? Is this not written in the Torah? Yet they don’t do this any more…. So why claim allegiance to Torah and the Laws of Moses if they do not agree with them? Obviously, they have not fallen into your “accept/reject” dichotomy. They have either understood these passages were only relevant in their historic context, or understand that other passages supersede these. The same COULD happen in Islam.

You may consider my position -wishing for Islam’s evolution- to be disingenuous, but I think it’s practically inevitable. Most societies, as they modernize, become less conservative, and more open. Consider the Gulf States, or Turkey. Interpretations tend to shift with the times (hence Episcopalians blessing homosexual marriages). This will no doubt occur amongst Moslem nations.

And yes, I do consider your original position, that Islam MUST be destroyed, to be untenable. I’m surprised how easily you now slip in the caveat that “some” will be allowed to practice. Sorry Logos, you can’t have it both ways. Either Islam is “utterly destroyed,” or it’s not. Take your pick. Given your caveat, I assume even you’ve come to the conclusion that erasing Islam from the world is impossible without severe violence, which has been my point all along.

Ah, the pesky Shinto micro-debate:
“the “sources” you use to discount my claims about Shintoism… my personal sources pertained to the present day (2009).”

Let’s review your “claims”:
A) Shinto is “dead as a doornail.”
B) after WWII, “The ancient religion of Shintoism died almost overnight.”

THIS is what I was out to disprove. And as I stated “I’ll grant you that Shinto is probably not as prevalent as some claim it to be, but it’s certainly not ‘dead as a doornail.’”

I used several sources, to show there are differences in opinion as to how followers are counted. (And though you may have found it amusing, I included the last source to demonstrate an honest picture of what I found.) The common denominator of all these sources is that: at the very LEAST, there are 3-4 million people PRACTICING Shinto. Helooo! That’s not DEAD. And though old, the data from the 70s was taken 30 YEARS after WWII.

So A) Shintoism, though diminished, is NOT dead. And B) Diminishment did NOT occur “almost overnight.” Using 2009 data wouldn’t support this anyway, unless you consider 60 years to be “overnight.”

If you want to claim Shinto has substantially diminished over time, fine. But that’s not what you wrote. And diminishing over time, in any case, does not support your thesis that the US victory destroyed Shinto. The US victory destroyed the worship of the emperor, but not Shinto. That took time, and probably had as much to do with Japan’s modernization than the US victory. There are few who actually practice Christianity in France, yet that had nothing to do with US or German invasions.

Hmm… So much for keeping this short….

Just because someone can say something doesn’t mean it is now a serious position to be considered equal to all others on the same subject. So some people thought the New Testament condemned Jews: THOSE PEOPLE WERE WRONG. You don’t seem to realize that words and documents have real meanings that can be clearly understood by honest people. There is a real meaning behind the words of the NT. For those who can’t or won’t read them for themselves that meaning is easily deduced by the history of the religion itself. The same is true of Islam. You don’t seem to allow for the fact that people can be dishonest both with themselves and with others. (In this vein see what Ibrahim says about the Muslim DOCTRINE of taqiyya.) As I said before: Christianity didn’t evolve. What happened was that some were distorting it for their own political and financial gain. They were able to do this because NO ONE KNEW WHAT THE NEW TESTAMENT ACTUALLY SAID. Most people were unable to read at all. For those who were it was illegal to translate the Bible into the vernacular languages. There were always those like John Hus and Martin Luther who spoke out against these forces but they were able to do very little until Tyndale and others began translating the Bible for the people – at the cost of their lives – and the printing press made it widely available. Then the whole facade collapsed. In a way this perversion of Christianity represents yet another religion that collapsed totally and very quickly once the Truth became known. As Christ said, “…the Truth shall set you free.” (John 8:32).

Christians don’t follow the dictates of the Old Testament because we’re not Jews. We don’t “reject the Old Testament” because it’s part of God’s Word. The Abrahamic covenant was fulfilled in Christ. With Him those rituals and laws became unnecessary (you don’t put new wine into old wineskins (Matthew 2:22). Then a NEW covenant was established. This is why Christians don’t eat kosher, rest on the sabbath, etc. etc. It has nothing to do with placing anything in a “historical context” per se. We simply are not bound by the old covenant, which has been fulfilled. It is akin to a modern lease agreement: if I sign a three year lease and the three years pass I am no longer liable to pay the rent – the lease has been fulfilled: not negated, not abandoned or violated, just fulfilled. It’s over. This is not true of any part of the Koran for Muslims, therefore no part of the Koran can simply be discounted as “that old stuff.” It isn’t. It applies here and now.

Comparing David to Mohammed is as false as comparing Christianity to Islam. David was a good man who made mistakes – yes, serious ones, but mistakes nonetheless. His sorrow and repentance once these were brought to light shows the character of the man. Show me the passage where Mohammed mourns his slaughtering of the Jews of Medina after he made a peace treaty with them. Oh, can’t find it? Okay, show me ANY passage where he expresses regret for his plethora of evil deeds and turns away from them. There’s just no comparison between the two men. This is just more PC crap that you seem to have swallowed hook, line and sinker. Very sad.

I find it hilarious that the “sources” you use to discount my claims about Shintoism actually prove my point more than yours! I’ve had this happen on a few occasions and it always cracks me up. What are you thinking! One source estimates the religious adherents numbers being between 3 million and 107 million?! That doesn’t send up a red flag?! One is from 1974?! Sorry, I didn’t specify: my personal sources pertained to the present day (2009. They celebrate holidays with “Shinto roots?” That’s like saying Celtic Paganism is alive and well – after all we use “Christmas trees” in our celebration of Christ’s birth! Is it really credible to quote Shinto shrines when they say essentially that all Japanese are Shinto whether they know it or not?! Come on! Be serious! You can’t really think any of this would persuade me.

No, I’m not going to quote my sources. I’ll admit this is a bit inappropriate but I will say two things in my own defense: 1) I’m not digging through all my boxes of books to get the sources and page numbers when your own sources are so flawed that they support my own case quite nicely, thank you; and 2) even though you don’t know my friend and his wife, first hand testimony is generally considered credible evidence in a court of law (and the juries don’t know the witnesses) and I submit such evidence as valid here. The Japanese certainly carry on traditional rituals that have roots in there ancient past as do we. But this doesn’t mean that Shintoism has survived any more than it means I’m a Celtic Pagan. These are relics. The Japanese people no longer believe that a) the emperor is a god or b) their race is descended from the gods (and these were the major tenets of Shintoism) because the Truth DESCENDED on them in the form of a gigantic American boot in the ass. Some of the older generation hung onto the traditions that they grew up with, and I suppose a few passed these on to their children. But essentially the religion per se died after WWII and is dying out with the WWII generation. I stand by my position. You should do some real (and up to date) research with PUBLISHED sources (as in a REAL library) if your really interested; otherwise, try just reading the sources you already have (excepting WikiBS) with open eyes.