RAPID RESPONSE REPORT

DEFENDING HISTORIC CHRISTIANITY IN A POSTMODERN WORLD

 

SPECIAL ISSUE:  Western Civilization Under Attack

 

“What is at stake today is nothing less than the survival of our civilization.” B. Netanuahu

 

10/1/2001 #13

 

Editor: Bill Crouse

 

IT’S A POSTMODERN WORLD AFTER ALL, ISN’T IT?

 

The sinking of the Titanic became a metaphor for the 20th Century.  Its very name was significant.   The Titanic, the unsinkable, sank!  The 19th Century ended with incredible optimism about the growing industrial might of the West and the subsequent trust in science and technology to solve all man’s problems.  Now we know that trust was ill-founded as the 20th was one of the bloodiest in history as Nietzsche predicted it would be.  The 21st also began with PM hope that somehow out of the diversity of peoples on this planet we would become one people (”One People, One Planet, Please!”)  In this first year of the new century the question now arises:  Will the destruction of the World Trade Center by terrorists become a metaphor for the 21st Century?

 

Like most of you I have been glued to the TV, radio and computer since 9-11, and like you, I was asking a lot of  “Who?” “What?” “Where?” “Why?” “Now what?”  kind of questions.  One of my first questions had to do with motive.  Most of the media seemed reluctant at first to deal with it, but by the end of the week some were timidly seeking the answer.  As one who thinks and writes about PM I felt it my duty to listen acutely to what was being said.  For instance, in this world of relativism and multiculturalism would anyone make a moral judgment about these acts of terrorism?  Prior to this, the only thing relativists would admit was an outright evil was the holocaust.  President Bush (no surprise there) took the lead and called it “evil.”  However, all over the Middle East, in Cairo, Damascus, Baghdad, and Palestine it was looked upon as a “great victory.”  Stephen Jukes, Reuters’ head of news said:  “One man’s terrorist is another man’s Freedom fighter.” He then ordered his news people not to refer to the terrorists as terrorists!  CNN followed suite.  Initially most networks referred to the terrorists as Islamic terrorists but after several days the reference to Islam was dropped for fear of being  perceived as ethnocentric, a big no-no to PM.  Other newsmen, (Dan Rather, for one) declined to wear an American flag because it might harm their neutrality!  The reality is, we are now One Nation under gods! And neutrality is a myth.

 

By the second week, as the workers searched the wreckage for human remains, reporters, professors, and pundits searched libraries and the web for information about the religion of Islam.  Who are these people, and what do they want?  Our own website was inundated (still is) by the downloading of our briefing on the religion of Islam  We still recommend it as a first read since it is brief and summarizes the beliefs of a religion  (read worldview) that we predicted at the time would become one of the West’s biggest security problems in the next decade or two.  In the last several days we have found some articles that are absolutely must reading.  If you decide to only download one article, I’m recommending this article by Paul Johnson, one of the greatest living historians (Modern Times, et. al).  The article is entitled “Relentlessly and Thoroughly.”  Found in National Review.    I can’t overestimate how provocative this article is!  The position he takes on the Crusades is not going to be the standard view we’ve heard all these years in our schools and colleges!  He points out that the word “Islam” does not mean “peace” but “submission.”  Johnson declares that it is for this reason that Islam is an imperialist religion.  He finds his support in the Koran:  “Strongest among men in enmity to Believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans.” (Sura 9, Vs. 5)  “Then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them. And seize them, beleaguer them and lie in wait for them, in every stratagem [of war].”  Then nations, however mighty, the Koran insists, must be fought “until they embrace Islam.”  For another fine article delving into the early history of Islam, see Political USA The Myth of Mecca, by Jack Wheeler.  At this particular time it took nerve to publish this!  Wheeler boldly says the facts about the early history of Islam are simply not true.  For example, he notes that the earliest history of Mohammed was written well over a 100 years after his death, and the earliest copies of this manuscript date to 350 years afterward.

 

There are many good websites about Islam.  Perhaps the best Christian site is Answering Islam.  This is one of those sites that includes all the links and sources you’ll ever need.  There are two Christian books also highly recommended:  The Islamic Invasion: Confronting the World’s Fastest Growing Religion, by Robert Morey.  Morey is almost without peer in the field of cults and religions.  The other is by Norman Geisler and Abdul Saleeb.  The book’s title is: Answering Islam: The Crescent in the Light of the Cross.

 

Muslims also are very computer savvy and you will find many sites defending Islam.  To find them, just use a good search engine.  They are very adept at doing their own apologetics, as well they should be.  Muslims are not PM!  Not unlike Christians, they believe Islam is a metanarrative, that is, it’s worldview is the true explanation for all that is, and that it’s teachings should be applied by all adherents in every sphere of life.  They also have books which attempt to show the falsity of Christianity and the truth of Islam.  The most notorious of these is The Myth of the Cross.  This book is not a calm reasoned defense of Islam!  It is more on the order of the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion.  Anyone engaging in serious Muslim evangelism must be familiar with this book.

 

HOW IN A MULTICULTURAL WORLD SHOULD A CHRISTIAN ACT?

 

The events of our country’s new day of infamy have sparked many a discussion in churches and Christian homes all around the country.  Questions like:

 

(1)If we are in a war (and we are; we’ve been attacked) who is the enemy?  Among the answers I have heard are: the crazed terrorists, medieval, or fundamentalist Islam, third world poverty, the United States (Noam Chomsky), and various conspiracy theories.  The consensus is that one man, Osama bin Laden was the mastermind and there is a steady chorus of others who believe he had state sponsorship.  Netanuahu says, “There is no international terrorism without the support of sovereign states.”  He’s the expert on terrorism and his article in the Chicago Sun-Times is worth your time.  Biographers and those who have studied bin Laden believe he wants to overthrow the House of Saud because they have desecrated the Holy land (Saudi Arabia) when they allowed the infidel American Armed Forces on Saudi soil.  Others say he envisions himself as modern-day Saladin who wants to unite and purify Islam under theocratic rule where the Koran is the only constitution.  I also believe he was embolden by his success against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and if they can bring the Soviet Bear to its knees why not the U.S. with the help of Allah!  Remember Islam believes it is ultimately predestined to rule the world.  Bin Laden, I believe, is hoping that his actions will spark a world-wide conflict that will bring down the Great Satan and moderate Arab regimes, and into this vacuum will come a purified Islam with himself as the new Caliphate.  There have been several good biographical pieces on his life.  Here are several: The Daily Telegraph Bin Laden’s Secret Goal is to Overthrow the House of Saud;  Newsweek Inside the Mind of Osama bin Laden; The Weekly Standard What Our Enemies Want; UPI The Potentate of the Super-Stans

 

(2)What does the enemy want, or what is the motive for the attack?  Why do they hate us?  The purpose of terrorism is to inflict fear, mainly fear that the government can no longer provide security for its people and thus ultimately undermine that government body.  The Islamists, as the fundamentalists are now being called, believe that our freedom is the cause of decadence.  They believe a society should be rigidly controlled as in the Taliban.

 

(3)What is the Biblical response of the Church?  The church has the responsibility of sending missionaries and incorporating all peoples into the Body of Christ.  But at the same time we can legitimately back our government in a war against another culture when that culture threatens the security of our own.

 

(4)What is the Biblical response of the believer?  Really this is a no-brainer; we are to be neighbors to all peoples.  We are to love and show compassion regardless of their culture or worldview.  We are to create thirst and share the Water of Life.  Some of the sources and books mentioned above give excellent advice for sharing the Gospel with Muslims.

 

(5)Where is Israel in all this?  Netanuahu and others are adamant that even if Israel is removed from the equation the Islamists would still be at war with America and the West.  They hate Israel and want to see her demise, but they believe the only thing keeping her in existence is America’s financial support (some say rich American Jews).  See this fine article in the Wall Street Journal Israel Isn’t the Issue, by Norman Podhoretz

 

(6)I suppose one of the biggest questions is:  Can PM America win this war?  There have been several good articles debating this issue.  It boils down to: can we attack another culture without being ethnocentric?  George Will, always very insightful, picked up on this in a recent column.  He admitted that perhaps we can win but we would have to be culturally ruthless!  Harvard professor, Samuel Huntingdon  may be exactly right when he said that the clash of civilizations that dominated the 20th Century were essentially “Western civil wars, while this century will be dominated by conflicts between the West and other civilizations, primarily the Islamic World.  U.S. News and World Report asks the same question:  “Has a ‘clash of civilizations’ threatened ‘the end of history?’”  Quoting from Huntingdon’s book they opine: Where once ideologies had been the points of conflict, now religion, ethnicity, and culture values were most important.  …And none loomed more menacingly than the one between the West and the Islamic world.” This article is definitely worth your time.  We’ve been telling you it’s a PM world!  One final sentence from this article:  If the United States and other nations do not help the traditionalist Muslims win the theological struggle within Islamic civilization, then the West may face what the extremists want: a real and possibly cataclysmic clash between civilizations.” I think this writer is right on the money.

 

OTHER ARTICLES OF NOTE RELATED TO 9-11

 

The New York Times Magazine  The Education of a Holy Warrior, by Jeffery Goldberg.

This article is long, but if you want to get a feel for how fanaticism is born, take the time to read this.  It was written by a Jew who enrolled in a fundamentalist seminary (a madrasa) in Pakistan.  He should be awarded a Pulitzer for this piece!

Washington Post  Ethnicity Now, by Patrick Moynihan.  Moynihan is always interesting.

PBS  Many World Orders.  This is a transcript of an interview of Prof. Samuel Huntington by David Gergen.  The interview centers around Huntington’s book mentioned above.

Imprimis Multiculturalism: Fact or Threat?  By Dinesh  D’Souza.  He has also written a good book on the subject.

National Review  What If? By Victor Davis Hanson.  This article speculates what would have happen if Edward R. Murrow’s column the day after Pearl Harbor had been written differently.  In other words, what if Murrow had been a PM?  This piece is incredible!

World Net Daily Deception for Dollars, James Sanders & Jack Cashill.  I hesitated to include this because it tends to be a little conspiratorial, but in the light of what just happened, maybe we’d better take another look.  I am referring to the TWA #800 that exploded in mid-air in 1996.  Ninety-six eyewitnesses testified that they saw a missile hit the plane!  What if you were the president and you knew the truth. Would it not be prudent to keep this quiet so as not to panic the public about public air transportation?

 

For Christ and His Kingdom

cim@fni.com  www.fni.com/cim/rapid.html