-
Telling It Like It Is
March 31, 2012 | 4 comments
-
A Guide To Lay Holiness
January 9, 2012 | 396 comments
-
P.S. 1984
July 12, 2011 | 52 comments
-
A Gentle Man
February 28, 2011 | 39 comments
-
The Future Is Now
August 17, 2010 | 132 comments
Buy the Book
Faith Without Reason
A review of Robert Reilly’s The Closing of the Muslim Mind.
The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide
Created the Modern Islamist Crisis
By Robert R.
Reilly
(ISI Books, 240 pages, $26.95)
Robert R. Reilly has written a book that may offer the key to both understanding and perhaps defeating the ongoing war of terror against the West. The book is entitled The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis. As Angelo Codevilla’s jacket blurb puts it: “Reilly shows what happens to a civilization when it fails to give reason its due. This book teaches and warns. Read it.” Paul Eidelberg describes it as “a book surpassing in depth even the best efforts of Bernard Lewis. You will not only be enlightened, but you may also see how the West might prevent a new Dark Ages.”
Reilly is a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council and a well-published writer with substantial government service, including a stint as director of the Voice of America and senior adviser to the Iraqi Ministry of Information in 2003. As a sideline, he is also one of our finest classical music critics.
In this book Reilly explains “why the restoration of reason to Islam is the only antidote to the spiritual pathology driving young men to attempted terrorist acts.”
The Closing of the Muslim Mind comes as we ask ourselves what in the world we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan nine years after the attacks of 9/11, spending billions of dollars taken from the American taxpayers and sacrificing thousands of American lives, not to mention the perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan lives. Are we there to save the Arab and Persian world by imposing democracy à la Woodrow Wilson and George W. Bush and his advisers (with disastrous consequences so far)? Are we simply acting as a republic intent on defending our own shores? Or are we (as our enemies view us) perhaps an empire trying to extend our power to protect our “interests,” whatever they are?
Are we merely trying to exterminate al Qaeda, the Taliban, and all forms of jihadist Islam, or are we, in the tradition of an eye for an eye, seeking payback for the almost 3,000 Americans who died in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?
Although the answers to questions such as these do not lie in Reilly’s work, he marshals convincing historical evidence of the likelihood that the Christian West and the Muslim countries will remain incompatible, because we believe in man’s power to reason — and they don’t. And barring some sort of Islamic Reformation (which theologians such as Michael Novak do not rule out as impossible), jihadist Islam and the Christian West will remain in mortal conflict, as we have intermittently in the past. The difference now, however, is that Islamic nationalists may already be capable of using nuclear weapons, or else are on the verge of that capability, whether in war or as instruments of terror. Most worrisome, they have the will and the irrational theology to use them. In short, dialogue is not possible with those who are incapable of religious tolerance.
At the heart of Reilly’s book is his argument that the
denigration of dialogue is due to the demotion of reason that took place in the ninth-century struggle between the rationalist theologians, the Mu’tazilites and their anti-rationalist theologians, the Ash’arites. Unfortunately, for those who prefer dialogue, the Ash’arites won.
The Ash’arites’ position was that reason is so infected by men’s self-interest that it cannot be relied upon to know things objectively. What is more, there is really nothing to be known because all created things have no nature or order intrinsic to themselves, but are only the momentary manifestations of God’s direct will. Since God acts without reason, the products of his will are not intelligible to men. Therefore, in this double disparagement, reason cannot know, and there is nothing to be known.
All of this may prompt memories of the Islamic world’s outrage when the just-elected Pope Benedict XVI told his audience in Regensburg, Germany, that not only is violence in the service of evangelization unreasonable and therefore against God, but that a conception of God without reason or above reason leads to that very violence. The then-Cardinal Ratzinger in his 2005 Subiaco address said:
From the beginning Christianity has understood itself as the religion of the “Logos,” as the religion according to reason. In the first place, it has not identified its precursors in other religions but in the philosophical enlightenment which has cleared the path of tradition to turn to search of the truth and toward the good, toward the one God who is above all gods.
Reilly writes, “Ultimately this theological view developed into the realist metaphysics of Aquinas which became the metaphysical foundation of modern science, as Fr. Stanley Jaki, a Hungarian theologian and physicist, explained in his voluminous writings on the origins of modern science. Jaki laid out, as well, the reasons modern science was stillborn in |the Muslim world after what seemed to be its real start.” Fr. James Schall of Georgetown University states that “Jaki saw much of the rage in Modern Islam as due to its failure or inability to modernize itself by its own powers.”
Reilly asks, “Are [the Islamists of today] something new or a resurgence from the past? How much of this is Islam and how much is Islamism? Is Islamism a deformation of Islam? If so, in what way and from where has it come? And why is Islam susceptible to this kind of deformation?” You will have to read his book to find the answers.
THE CLOSING OF THE MUSLIM MIND also draws on British author Hilaire Belloc, who is increasingly being rediscovered as a prophet for our times in areas including economics, marriage, and family, but most notably here in foreseeing the return of militant Islam.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (62) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Matthew Kenefick
More Articles From Buy the Book
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/10/28/faith-without-reason
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Booger | 10.28.10 @ 6:46AM
A Brief Statement from the Counsel on American-Islamic Relations and Free Speech:
From the desk of CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad:
Dear Mr. Murdoch,
It is with great displeasure that I have received the news that you infidel dogs at Fox News have hired that Islamophobic son of a jackal Juan Williams to serve as a mouthpiece for your vile propaganda against the Holy Prophet (peace be upon his name) and Allah. Now I have learned that not only did you hire that craven spawn of a goat to spew forth his bigoted bile upon your network, you actually provided him with a considerable increase in his remuneration for his blasphemous bloviations. I must admit that I find it incredible that even such a hell-spawned son of a monkey as yourself would provide this simpering dog with a two-million dollar contract, especially in the midst of this Great Recession with which Allah (peace be upon his name too) has so justly cursed your heathen nation.
Why have you failed to learn the lesson of Comedy Central? Those misbegotten children of serpentine harlots recognized the error of their feeble imaginations and repented and renounced their intention to blasphemously portray our Most Holy Prophet (peace be upon his name again) in their insipid animation. Likewise, that jewess, she-dog harlot who runs NPR was grateful for the chance to justly humiliate herself before our demands, and no doubt will make a fine dhimmi until the day she is rewarded by her just stoning. Doubtless she will humbly prostrate herself before our mighty blows, knowing that is her rightful judgment for having the temerity to be born a jew and then show her uncovered head in public.
But no, you had to go and multiply your transgressions against the Most Holy Prophet (another piece of peace upon his name) and Allah (yeah, more peace for him as also) by providing employment to that baboon Juan Williams. Beware, infidel, for your judgment is at hand! We are prepared to file lawsuits against you in Great Britain, Brussels, Amsterdam and The People's Court (we really miss Judge Wapner). We will sue you in every jurisdiction on the entire globe. We will obtain judgments against you from our brethren with the Somali Maritime Law League. Allah (alright, more peace on his name already) will deliver you into the hands of our invincible law brigades.
Soon you will join that harlot Molly Ivins in exile, hiding your miserable face and cursed name, but the servants of the Most Holy Prophet (peace cubed plus infinity upon his name) will find you wherever you go. We will sue you and sue you and sue you some more. We will bury you alive under a mountain of subpoenas. Your doom is assured. Allah (many more pieces of peace upon his name) has decreed it, so shall it be.
On the other hand, if you find it preferable, you could simply hire me and a couple of my friends as Fox News Contributors. We will be happy to work for a contract only slightly larger than the one you have provided to that bigot Juan Williams. In addition, we require that all food in the green room be halal, and that your hot anchor babes appear along with us in harem girl outfits. Remember, it's either this or the Wrath of Allah (peace, dude! upon his name).
Sincerely,
CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awa
amg| 10.28.10 @ 8:38AM
ROFLMAO!
Sheila| 10.28.10 @ 12:10PM
Good one, Booger. One change to suggest - one of my favorite bloggers is always careful to write "P*ss be upon him - an amusing emendation, I find.
Cabermon| 10.28.10 @ 3:46PM
I dream of driving an M1A2 Abrams tank through CAIR headquarters, shouting ALLAHU FUBAR!
Alan Brooks| 10.28.10 @ 12:10PM
Madrassas are better than America's skools-- or at the very least less expensive. What do we spend on skools per annum here? half a trillion?
Alan Brooks| 10.28.10 @ 2:38PM
I'm so dumb I amaze myself! I am overwhelmingly stupid!
AvengingAngel| 10.29.10 @ 12:31AM
ALAN BROOKS QUOTES:
God is a woman, and Jesus is Her daughter.
God is a necessary fiction, because most people are superstitious.
God was a woman, and Jesus was gay: he hung out with male disciples, he wore a gown, and he said to forgive thine enemies.
Now, if that's not being a metro, then what is?
Alan Brooks is worse than an atheist. He is a blasphemer and a God-hater.
"Madrassas are better than American skools." Has there ever been a more stupid comment?
Margie| 10.29.10 @ 12:46AM
Alan Brooks simply needs to get saved.
Jn. 3:3, Rom. 10:9, Jn. 1:12.
Remember Saul of Tarsus. (Paul the Apostle).
There is yet hope.
AvengingAngel| 10.29.10 @ 1:10PM
Yes, Margie, there is hope for Alan Brooks. "But for him who is joined to all the living there is hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion." Eclesiastes 9:4. Alan Brooks is a dog and is fortunate to be still breathing. He likes to shock conservatives with his absurd comments. Kind of like the queer men in a Gay Pride parade who gring on each other and kiss each other in public to shock the bystanders. I picture poor Alan sitting in his basement in the dark, typing furiously as his mother yells at him from upstairs. He'll be one of the first to die when the Muslims take over. The madrassas that he is so fond of teach Muslims to kill idiots like him.
davelnaf| 10.28.10 @ 8:01AM
By now many Westerners have the suspicion that Muslims are not so much prisoners of their religion’s call to Jihad—and to murder, but that it gives some of them justification for what they seek to do anyway. If you have spent any amount of time in any Muslim country you get the impression that Muslims are not so much live and let live as ‘I have more important things to do that do Jihad’ at this moment or at any time.
If Westerners took the best of Western philosophy and added the Bible and told people that this is the way you have to think would this be such a bad thing? Of course it would not be. But in the case of Islam the guiding tenet is ‘you kill for Islam and you get to keep what you kill.’ Islam has a long way to go. Its version of the fundamentalist interpreter of the Koran needs to go first.
Will Islam have its own Enlightenment some day? One hopes so. Our reaction to 9/11 was proportional at the beginning and calibrated to what the public wanted done. Something worse than 9/11, particularly if a nuclear weapon is involved, would see world public opinion, as well as our previous sense of restraint, thrown out the door.
Patrick| 10.28.10 @ 1:02PM
Your optimism in this matter is unwarranted. If Iran or Pakistan, or any other Islamic nation will become nuclear actually drops the bomb, the whining and kowtowing will increase exponentially, and gullible Westerners will lap it up as always.
There simply are FAR far too many fellow travelers with Islam. Of course, were sharia instituted, most of those fellow travelers would be stoned for their numerous and sundry perversions, but that is another matter.
Fred| 10.28.10 @ 8:46AM
The question is: are Arabs, Persians, "Stanis," etc. irrational savages because the enemies of reason won or did the enemies of reason win because those peoples are savages? If it's the latter (and I suspect it is) then there is no hope to reform them without uprooting their culture altogether, not a very likely event.
Patrick| 10.28.10 @ 1:13PM
The irrational savages won, and will always win because Islam is irrational. That some group decided to try and make a religion formed from banditry, slavery and rape into something rational was doomed from the beginning.
There will be no renaissance, reformation or enlightenment for Islam. The only options are submission, proselytism, or annihilation. Not a pretty picture.
Bill| 10.28.10 @ 9:18AM
Reilly's book demonstrates in clear and accessible ways the reason why Islam and the rest of the world, particularly the West, are incompatible with one another. Unless something like an Age of Enlightenment occurs in the Muslim world, there can be no common ground between Muslims and the rest of the world.
Reilly's book tells us how different our world is from the Muslim world and why the two visions of the world cannot possibly accommodate one another. One of these two worlds must give way before the other.
PJ| 10.28.10 @ 9:18AM
I believe Islam will evolve out of existence. Any religion that encourages violence on innocent people (like human sacrifices) will either undergo a transformation or will die. We saw that in various ancient, pagan religions.
There are many evangelicals out there like Joel Rosenberg, who sincerely believe based on there travels in the Middle East that many Muslims (Some say 10s of 1000s.) are converting to Christianity secretly. They do not openly proclaim their new beliefs for fear of violent reprisals.
Patrick| 10.28.10 @ 1:23PM
So long as there is an enemy, especially one appraised to be weak, there is vigor in Islam. The supposed miracles of Islam are success by the sword. If the long sword fails, they will use the short sword (aka. out breeding). A tremendous failure from which there is no possibility of revenge would be a necessary tipping point.
While the matter is kept quiet, word from the Catholic end is quite similar concerning conversions. Of course, unless converts are prepared to move and reestablish their identities as Christians (and not apostate Muslims), or accept bloody martyrdom, the matter is academic.
John McG| 10.28.10 @ 9:54AM
Reilly's book looks excellent but it seems to cover much of the same ground as Lee Harris's earlier "The Suicide of Reason." It would have been interesting if the reviewer had compared their theses.
John S| 10.28.10 @ 2:23PM
John, I think they are very different, though I have not yet read Reilly (it's on the list).
Based on this review, the Suicide of Reason that Reilly sees is the abandonment of reason within Islam leaving a faith that is fundamentally intolerant and incapable of change.
Harris' Suicide of Reason is twofold: First is the elevation of tolerance by the left to the point where they are incapable of defending themselves against the intolerant tribalism of the Islamic world. This represents an elevation of faith in reason to the point that all people are viewed as reasonable, their actions to the contrary notwithstanding, and that all we need to resolve the issues between us is dialogue. This aspect of Harris' "Suicide of Reason" seemed to me a retelling of his earlier "Civilization and Its Enemies." Second, Harris warns against the West rejecting tolerance entirely and adopting its own tribal outlook. Harris is under no doubt that in the resulting cataclysmic clash between these two competing tribal groups, the geographic West would win, though at great cost to the tolerance and reason that make the West what it is.
Ultimately I found Harris' "Suicide of Reason" somewhat disappointing for its lack of any suggestions for how to walk the line between surrender and nihilistic destruction.
One has to hope that the path exists, right?
Cheers
Old Soldier| 10.28.10 @ 10:27AM
Bill / PJ:
Wishful thinking. Both the Christian and Muslim faiths went through a Reformation (a return to the true teaching and texts of the religion) about 1400 years after they were founded.
The Protestant Reformation began with Martin Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses in 1517.
The Muslim Reformation began with the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. Like Martin Luther, the Brotherhood depends on their holy texts as the “sole reference point for ... ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community ... and state"
Also like the Lutherans, the Brotherhood spawned many similar reformed denominations such as Al Qaeda, Hamas, Wahhabism, and Hezbollah.
Accept that Islam is not going to fix itself. Then perhaps we can make some logical decisions.
PJ| 10.28.10 @ 10:47AM
I correct myself: a transformation into a peaceful religion.
Btw, Wahhabism started in Saudi Arabian pennisula in the mid 1800s.
Old Soldier| 10.28.10 @ 11:36AM
I correct myself - part of the same wave however.
PJ| 10.28.10 @ 1:00PM
Agreed, but w/much Nazi influence. The influential, Mufti of Jerusalem was a good friend of Hitler.
Patrick| 10.28.10 @ 1:25PM
Perhaps then Wahhabism is the Hussitism of Islam then?
Old Soldier| 10.28.10 @ 2:01PM
Sure - minus the cool war wagons.
Vern Crisler| 10.28.10 @ 3:32PM
Sorry, but this comparison of the Protestant Reformation with the Muslim Brotherhood is pure claptrap. It reminds me of the old Roman Catholic chauvinism that sees everything except itself as a heresy.
Apologists for Rome always claim their opponents reject reason -- and this comes from an institution that after all these years is still mired in superstition and corruption.
And BTW, speaking of violent, non-rational religions, which institution invented the Inquisition?
Old Soldier| 10.28.10 @ 3:48PM
By comparing the two religions, I was also contrasting them. A Muslim who rejects current beliefs and depends solely on the Prophet's words for guidance becomes more violent and more radical.
The Christian Reformation was not always peaceful but it did eventually break the Feudal system in Europe. An Islamic reformation would have the opposite effect.
Vern Crisler| 10.28.10 @ 7:11PM
As any Lutheran will tell you, they do not believe in solo-scriptura but sola-scriptura. Also, Muslims have a wholy different attitude about the Koran from the way Lutherans or Reformed Protestants view the Bible. A more apt comparison would be with certain extreme KJV-only types. As far as I know, regardless of how they view the authority of the Bible, neither Lutherans nor Protestants in general make a regular practice of using the Bible to incite violence.
Roy| 10.29.10 @ 1:06AM
You two are talking past each other. We get it, you're both no-popery types who think the Reformation was a "return to the true principles" and that is is just an amazing coincidence that since then the public significance of Christianity has steadily declined.
The point is, if that's what a "Reformation" is, then obviously a "Reformation" of Islam is not what we're after. It's not what most people mean when they say they want a "Reformation", either. What they really want is for Muslims to pay less attention to their religion, so therefore what they want is more along the lines of an "Enlightenment".
Roy| 10.29.10 @ 1:07AM
And by the way "sola scriptura" means what it says and says what it means("the Bible alone"), while "solo scriptura" means nothing whatsoever except for that the speaker has bad grammar.
Vern Crisler| 10.29.10 @ 2:19AM
Roy, I was responding to the invidious comparison of Lutheranism with Islam. Only a Roman Catholic chauvinist would make such a comparison.
Also, technically, solo and sola mean the same thing, but Protestant theologians use the terms to mean different things -- as a way of distinguishing the true Protestant principle of biblical authority (sola scriptura) from Roman Catholic straw man attacks (solo scriptura).
Radegunda| 10.30.10 @ 12:54AM
You're reading things into Old Soldier's comments that really are not there, even implicitly. His point is that the Muslim Brotherhood represents a return to first principles, so that's as good as it will get if you're looking for an Islamic "reformation."
The comparison he's making to Protestantism can be summed up in his phrase "a return to the true teaching and texts of the religion." It's hard to see how that description could be read as invidious toward Lutheranism, unless you don't like the Bible.
With Islam, the foundational texts are very different, and thus the results of "reformation" are quite different. As Old Soldier clearly says, his comparison is also a CONTRAST.
Only a pigheaded curmudgeon would keep insisting that his analogy makes him a Roman Catholic chauvinist.
Margie| 10.28.10 @ 6:03PM
"And BTW, speaking of violent, non-rational religions, which institution invented the Inquisition?"
It was the Catholic church.
And the Reformation was about Christians (Bible believing), turning away from Catholicism.
Tim*| 10.29.10 @ 1:43AM
Troll Alert !
Anti-Catholic Apocalyptic Crank Lady Is In The Building.
victor| 10.29.10 @ 2:41AM
Cardinal Tim* of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is in the building.
All those who can rise, please stand.
Otherwise please keep your place on the rack.
Margie| 10.29.10 @ 2:29PM
Timmy* Toddard Boy says I'm a Troll.
Yet Timmy* Toddard lies, curses, slanders, and hates Bible believing truth speaking Christians.
Protecting a Religion with its false doctrines.
Nothing I said in my above post was untrue.
And a simple search of history will prove it.
Now~ who is the Troll?
Bill| 10.29.10 @ 9:21AM
In reading Reilly's book, I was struck several times by the parallels between Ash'arite thinking and early Protestant thought. The Ash'arite Muslims believe that all of the universe exists as an expression of Allah's will on a moment-to-moment basis and that, as a result, all of existence depends on Allah's ongoing grace for its existence (and humans, for their salvation). For Ash'arite Muslims, all depends on the will of Allah. If you substitute the term "will" with the term "grace," you aren't very far from the most fundamental Protestant distinction between Catholicism and Protestantism. Not that Protestant Christianity isn't infinitely more to be preferred, since Protestant Christianity endorses the use of human reason (something the Ash'arites don't), but there ARE some parallels in the area of dependency on God's will for salvation.
Bill| 10.29.10 @ 12:24PM
Old Soldier, I didn't mention a Muslim version of the Reformation; I was talking about a Muslim version of the Age of Enlightenment. The two things aren't the same.
PattyMor| 10.28.10 @ 10:47AM
The American Thinker had a article a while back, stating that Marco Polo complained about the violence of Muslims. The violence spread Islam and is an intregal part of the religion. The silence of the majority is silent approval . They celebrate
the death of their sons as martyrs. Unless we wake up, we are doomed.
Doctor Right| 10.28.10 @ 10:55AM
"Disastrous consequences"???
9/11 was a "disaster" brought about by inaction, stupidity, and showing weakness in the face of oiur enemies.
Iraq is a Democratic ally in an un-Democratic part of the world, and Afghanistan did NOT start to unravel until Obama and the Dems took over (Surprise!) Regardless, it knocked the Taliban off their feet, and seriously wounded Al-Qaeda.
What would you have had us do, Mr. Kenefick? Pursue the Clinton-era policies of "dialogue" with our enemies? Yeah...that worked out well, didn't it?
If one wanted to criticize our efforts in fighting terrorism, perhaps a key criticism would be that we chose (inexplicably) to NOT go after Iran.
But to call Iraq and Afghanistan a "disaster" sounds positively Reid-ian.
Patrick| 10.28.10 @ 1:31PM
The greatest sin an infidel can commit in the eyes of the Muslim is to show weakness.
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.28.10 @ 11:24AM
Mr. Kenifick,
I quote you then answer you.
""Unquestionably, there are millions of adherents of worldwide Islam willing to die for their faith. In what is left of the once Christian West, are there as many? I have my doubts.""
General Patton once told his men that he didn't want them to die for their country...he wanted the enemy to die for his country.
I just completed a novel www.texassaidno.com
(for the foreword and chapter one)
What we in the west have essentially done is take an arm full of loaded pistols and placed them all over the floor in a room full of angry toddlers.
With our own developed tools of war, they plan on subjugating us.
I often wondered just what the terrorists ...were terrorizing toward. Actually thinking it through while writing the book, I figured it out.
You won't enjoy it, but you will finally understand it, and our leaders must understand it too...and man up...or we are toast.
Vern Crisler| 10.28.10 @ 1:04PM
I disagree with the argument. Muslims were conquering the world long before any 9th century rejection of reason. Islam is what it is because of its doctrine of holy war. This principle places a premium on violence and rules out reason from the very start.
So Islam was always a religion of violence, and whatever part "reason" may have played in the 9th century, it could only have been a temporary lull in the perennial Muslim pursuit of violent conquest.
Albert| 10.28.10 @ 1:16PM
I agree completely. Islam is based on the Quran which is based on Mohammed. And Mohhamed preached and practiced violence. There is no "peaceful" version of Islam for Muslims to turn to for any reformation.
Old Soldier| 10.28.10 @ 2:29PM
Correct - to my earlier point. "Reformed" Muslims are more violent, not less.
John Schuh| 10.28.10 @ 6:57PM
Islam was a desert faith that conquered both the Persian and Greek kingdoms on the borders of Arabia. Unlike the Germans, the Muslims did not adopt the intellectual norms of their subjects and develop a theology compatible with the science of these civilizations.
Albert| 10.28.10 @ 1:14PM
"And barring some sort of Islamic Reformation (which theologians such as Michael Novak do not rule out as impossible), jihadist Islam and the Christian West will remain in mortal conflict..." Of course there will be no Islamic Reformation. Indeed such a reformation is impossible. For a Muslim to seek reformation would be to turn away his holy book, the Quran. Even if such were to happen, there would always be counter-reformers who would turn to the Quran for guidance BACKWARD and away from a reformed Islam. The Protestant Reformation was not a reform away from the Bible, it was a RETURN to the Bible and its teachings, and away from many teaching of the Church at that time which were antithetical to actual Biblical text. A Muslim "reformation" just ain't gonna happen.
Margie| 10.28.10 @ 5:13PM
Exactly. How can they return to a false god? They need conversion, and that to Christ.
WAKE UP | 10.28.10 @ 6:49PM
"The difference now, however, is that Islamic nationalists may already be capable of using nuclear weapons, or else are on the verge of that capability, whether in war or as instruments of terror. '
When I first said, "A culture that couldn't invent the aeroplane should not be allowed to board one" , some people thought I was joking.
TeaRex| 10.28.10 @ 10:38PM
Those who talk of an Islamic reformation seem to be willfully ignorant of the facts that brought it about in Christianity.
First, the Christian leaders of the day had departed from the faith, and had brought in hearsay to proclaim power and riches for themselves. They took advantage of the ignorance of most of the common folk.
Second, the increase in literacy among the peoples of Europe, the translation of the scriptures into their native tongues, coupled with the invention of the printing press, allowed the people to do as the Bereans in the book of Acts (17-11). They searched the scriptures daily to see if what their leaders told them was true.
Literate Christians like Martin Luther showed the people all the the things that were wrong with what they had been lead to believe. They backed up their accusations with scripture.
If anyone takes the time to read the Koran, it is easy to see that the jihadies are acting correctly according to their scripture. They are not mislead by power seeking radicals due to their collective ignorance of their faith. So how do you think one can bring about such a reformation?
Roy| 10.29.10 @ 1:18AM
What most people have in mind when they say they want a "Muslim Reformation" is history as taught in the public school system. In that system, the more traditional Christian is always wrong. So first there was the evil fundamentalist obscurantist anti-rational Catholic Church. Brave, bold, daring rebels such as Martin Luther defied it and set up other churches, which were better in that they didn't listen to the Pope, but only to their private interpretation of the Bible. This was the first necessary step. The logical next step was for brave, bold, daring heroes such as Voltaire to say "Uh, if we're not going to listen to the Church, why bother with the Bible, which still says to do a bunch of things we don't want to do?" And their brave, bold, daring successors today are the ones asking why we shouldn't be marrying houseplants.
From this perspective, a "Muslim Reformation" is the first step toward Muslims turning into relativistic self-indulgists who won't care enough to suicide-bomb anybody.
Your hardcore Protestant today buys into the liberal storyline up the the part about Martin Luther, but no further. I reject the whole freakin' thing from beginning to end. But your average newspaper columnist buys into the whole thing.
Vern Crisler| 10.29.10 @ 2:27AM
This whole article, and some of the comments, involve an undertone of anti-Protestant bigotry. The idea that the Reformation led to Enlightenment irreligion is just Roman Catholic propaganda. It makes as much logical sense as saying that Eli Whitney was the cause of the American Civil War.
Bill| 10.29.10 @ 9:29AM
You ask, "So how do you think one can bring about such a reformation" among Muslims.
First, Reilly's book claims (credibly) that the abandonment of human reason as a way to know God among the Ash'arite school, particularly as popularized by Abu Hamid Muhammed al-Ghazali in his book The Incoherence of the Philosophers (in which he denigrates the Greek philosophers and their call for reliance on reason), became the dominant school of thought among the Sunni sect of Islam. There are still the Shi'ites and the Sufis, who have not entirely ruled out the use of reason. Also, among Sunnis, there are those who are not committed to al-Ghazali's position.
So I draw some hope for Islam because it seems to me that the use of reason is pretty much inescapable, one way or the other, and Muslims may well re-think the progress of their religio-cultural regression over the past 1000 years and make some progress in the world.
Tony in Central PA| 10.29.10 @ 9:39AM
Tea Rex, I have heard and read the assertions you posted repeated ad nauseum. Over the last decade or so, I actually investigated their historical accuracy. This led me to convert to Catholicism this year.
TeaRex| 10.29.10 @ 8:47PM
Are you telling me that what happened to William Tyndale is an assertion? He wasn't really burned at the stake for translating the New Testament from German into English?
Dean from Ohio| 10.28.10 @ 10:58PM
The darkness of Islam is fundamentally spiritual and involves embracing a false knowledge of the true God, and therefore is idolatry.
"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God." --Paul's letter to the Galatians, chapter 5
And that was just in the first years of Islam.
PELLIGRINO| 10.29.10 @ 12:15AM
Right on, Dean.
And that is the plain truth: Islam is not like dealing with Stalin & Khruschev's version of Marxism and Communism.
Both are NEVER good; both are ALWAYS evil.
Thankfully we nibble away at countering the tsunami advances of Islam ...but so far we're only doing the nibbling mostly on the basis of law enforcement or national security.
This is WOEFULLY small, delusional thinking.
Islam is evil. It is not a religion. It is a never-ending call to arms and destruction of what lies in its path.
It is pure subjugation. It paralyzes.
Right now we win a few scirmishes but we are losing the campaign.
Unless we WAKE UP and slay the evil, we're toast.
(you'll be living in a despotic society where illiteracy is 89% for all males and 100% for all females, schooling with only be for the few, there will be nothing like a Bill of Rights or any other Western right to anything. Freedom of choice? Self determination? Family values?)
Islam is Satan's tool. (And it is already in a mosque near you.)
Our problem: The secular humanists that populate the cities and countrysides of our allies around the world, up in Canada, and right here in our Republic are more willing to allow Islam's steady encroachment than to ally with the minority Judeo-Christian ethic to do the 'combat.'
They don't understand that all they have & enjoy, ALL of it, comes from our advances and advantages rooted in the God of the Bible and Judeo-Christian principles.
All of it.
(And that the Christian and Jew freely permit non believers to do and speak and move as they please; the Muslim CANNOT permit this.)
But the egos, delusion, and blindness of the humanists will triumph, and we will all lose as Islam's tidal wave crushes everthing in the path.
Roy| 10.29.10 @ 1:22AM
"The secular humanists that populate the cities and countrysides of our allies around the world, up in Canada, and right here in our Republic are more willing to allow Islam's steady encroachment than to ally with the minority Judeo-Christian ethic to do the 'combat.'"
I fully agree, minus the overly complementary title of "secular humanists", which should be "relativistic self-indulgists".
However, I don't agree that Islam will win. Let Islam come up against something the Left really cares about(like adultery) and the Left will crush them like bugs. Right now the Left puts up with them because they are allies against the real threat, Christians.
Tony in Central PA| 10.29.10 @ 9:29AM
Norman Cantor, in his " Civilization of the Middle Ages ", notes scientific inquiry was dead in the Islamic world after 1200. I suppose a reformation of reason is possible, but very hard to imagine. The problem is that there is no authority in Islam. Khomeni wanted to be something of an " Islamic Pope ", but that didn't work out and just as well. For every pious and holy person like Ali Sistani, there are hundreds of OBL wanna - be's.
The author also describes the " Christian West ". This certainly no longer applies to Europe, at least.
Phil Ferguson, O.P.L.| 10.29.10 @ 7:55PM
The Islamist mind set is, "What is ours, is ours; what is yours is negotiable or to be destroyed."
Bill Buckley, as I recall, never had a true Marxist on his "Firing Line." How, he said, can you dialogue with a person, whose philosophy is to destroy all philosophy except its own.
Bill Sundling| 10.30.10 @ 10:53PM
The Muslim mind has never been open. Their goal has always been to take the world for Allah. There is no moderate Islam in the Middle East.
mzk1| 11.1.10 @ 10:10AM
I find the quote interesting, from a Jewish perspective. So Christianity does not take its faith from the Mosaic tradition, but from philisophy? In Judaism, the two approaches exist, but the former approach basically won out because it was more successful. Also, philosophy keeps on changing.
As far as a conception of the Creator, I guess we are with Islam. We do not consider that God Himself is knowable in any way at all - we can only know him through his actions, and perhaps make statements about what he is not. (Through His actions, we know He is good; and he is One because He is not multiple.)
I've always felt theology was basically a Christian discipline. The closest thing Judaism has is the Kaballah. (Ironically, when Jews did write thoelogy, it was generally written in Arabic.)