This is a joint article written with some input from John Ward, my blogging mentor. For the record, I have never been particularly religious, though of course I have realised that the universe was created and didn't just come into being spontaneously. It is far too well structured for that to be possible! More recently I have been learning more, and coming around more to the Christian way of thinking, though I still haven't formally adopted any specific belief system.
There has been an interesting article and comments thread running on Conservative Home today concerned Islam and how we perhaps ought to look upon it.
A large part of both the article itself, and in particular the comments that have been posted to it, has got itself wrapped up in what was done by some in the past, purportedly in the name of Christianity, and used this as a way to more-or-less accept the equally violent aspects of today's Islam. It doesn't say so in as many words, but the meaning of what has been written is clear enough.
What has resulted is an inward-looking and unproductive debate about nothing of value for the twenty-first century, only a condemnation of men's evil in century gone by. Note that the evil has been done by men, those not heeding God's own word and probably (in most if not all cases) having been influenced by the devil.
One way or another, they were doing Satan's work, and obviously so!
It is plain to anyone with a functioning brain that the universe wasn't created so that some of God's creations would be appointed to harm others. It is in the bestial nature of man's biological origins that we act so if unchecked by God's own Word; and he realised this himself and provided an outlet by allowing us to hunt animals for food once it was safe for us to eat their flesh. All very pragmatic...
Therefore we know that that any purported faith that seeks in any way to commit any kind of sin against God's other human creations is not, and never can be, God's will. It is an absolute. Islam apparently teaches that it is okay to lie to the kuffar and even to kill them, so this is clearly not the Word of God! It's obvious, really; and the lesson of history is that sub-dividing humanity in order to provide the framework for conflict is also not God's will.
On occasions where biblical records show that there has been conflict (probably unavoidable, one way or another), God has always sought the lesser harm and the longer-term solution when advising his people on how to act. He always provided a unique solution, whether by plague, parting of a sea, or stamping around the walls of a city. Never was there a generic permission to go around killing others, and he was careful to ensure that we have no plausible excuse for misinterpreting these historic events to suit the agendas of evil men.
When the Jews separated themselves from everyone else whom they called Gentiles, God worked with this and sent two messengers out to preach the Gospel (i.e. "good news") to the world – St Peter to the Jews and St Paul to the Gentiles. Interestingly, it was the Gentiles who listened to God, and the Jews who refused to accept Jesus Christ despite all their own recorded prophecies. Instead they decided to remain B.C. and work with just five books of the Holy Bible. There are sixty-six books in the Bible, not counting the Apocrypha!
Well, that's their choice of course, and at least it isn't harmful to the rest of us.
Islam, on the other hand, is rapidly becoming predominantly a hate-filled and violent agent of Satan, couched in the form of a religion that might once have been genuine (though not necessarily: historically it doesn't fit in with God's method of communicating with a number of unconnected people, for a start).
Instead of dwelling on our own nation's past, we should be facing up to the absolutes of God's own code of behaviour that he has provided to us on various occasions, and especially in his New Covenant. He has never distinguished between peoples to a greater extent than having his chosen people have their own nation. If it's an either/or, he has tended to favour them, but even then tecahing lessons where necessary.
It is never for men, under any guise, to set themselves above any others. God would do that himself if he ever felt so inclined, and it is completely against his nature to appoint any of us to make or further any such distinction and to harm those others for any reason.
Of course, the Islamists' agenda is to hide the real nature of God from their followers, so that they can pursue their own corrupt ends on behalf of their true master, Satan. In this they are ably aided and abetted by the political Left, whose entire existence nowadays is predicated on an anti-Christian non-morality, which is why all the Left are (whatever their individual claims) effectively Satanic in nature, as has now surely become obvious via the hugely-slanted legislation that operates in Britain today as a result of Labour's years in government.
It's all very well documented in various places, and doesn't need us to list and reference (it would make this post far too long!) though one of us might do so as a separate exercise one of these days, just for the record...
Ultimately, if human society is to survive and thrive in any recognisable form, rather than becoming completely subsumed into the dictatorial and violently repressive anti-God sham that the Islamists and their equally nasty collaborators within the political Left seek, then we need to concentrate on the principles of a good and moral society.
That can never be achieved while Islamists and their excusers (and that includes Bilderbergers, Fabians, Common Purpose and the rest of the corrupt power-brokers) have any influence and gain any kind of foothold, as they have already done. Instead, they must all be taken out of the field of power and influence, and society permanently protect itself from such malign organistaions and individuals in future.
That would be the right conclusion for Paul Goodman's article and comment thread at ConHome, but it looks like it probably won't be...