One of the most important and widely-argued issues within the Counterjihad concerns moderate Muslims (or as the 910 Group prefers to call them, “Free Muslims”). Do they really exist? Are they all practicing taqiyyah? Should we take them into consideration, or are they not worth bothering about?
The “Free Muslims” really do exist; Stop the Project has a list of their organizations. They don’t get much publicity, because the MSM, in its tacit alliance with Islamofascism, prefers to focus on CAIR and similar organizations.
But these brave people put their lives on the line every day to speak out on behalf of non-violence and religious tolerance, while still remaining Muslims.
This morning I received an email from a friend of ours who has noticed the nuke-the-ragheads mentality which so often rears its head in Gates of Vienna comments:
A couple of your commenters have got Islam so deeply on the brain, they think the only good ay-rab is a dead ay-rab. People who can’t distinguish individuals from groups are by definition prejudiced.
And indeed they are.
In fact, what they are doing is arguing for the assignment of collective guilt. They believe that innocent people within a group defined as “the enemy” should not be spared the fate of the group, deserve no sympathy, and should be disregarded.
I hesitate to cite the most notorious earlier examples of such an ideological stance, for fear of invoking Godwin’s Law upon myself. Suffice it to say that these folks have some unsavory ideological companions among the blood-soaked regimes of the previous century.
Scripture provides some illumination on this topic. Genesis 18:20-33 describes Abraham’s intercession with the Lord on behalf of the “moderates” (the Bible calls them “righteous”) in Sodom and Gomorrah:
And the LORD said, “The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave.
“I will go down now, and see if they have done entirely according to its outcry, which has come to Me; and if not, I will know.”
Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, while Abraham was still standing before the LORD.
Abraham came near and said, “Will You indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked?
“Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city; will You indeed sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous who are in it?
“Far be it from You to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous and the wicked are treated alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?”
So the LORD said, “If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare the whole place on their account.”
And Abraham replied, “Now behold, I have ventured to speak to the Lord, although I am but dust and ashes.
“Suppose the fifty righteous are lacking five, will You destroy the whole city because of five?” And He said, “I will not destroy it if I find forty-five there.”
He spoke to Him yet again and said, “Suppose forty are found there?” And He said, “I will not do it on account of the forty.”
Then he said, “Oh may the Lord not be angry, and I shall speak; suppose thirty are found there?” And He said, “I will not do it if I find thirty there.”
And he said, “Now behold, I have ventured to speak to the Lord; suppose twenty are found there?” And He said, “I will not destroy it on account of the twenty.”
Then he said, “Oh may the Lord not be angry, and I shall speak only this once; suppose ten are found there?” And He said, “I will not destroy it on account of the ten.”
As soon as He had finished speaking to Abraham the LORD departed, and Abraham returned to his place.
Note that Abraham is arguing a moral issue with God. Abraham is using the Lord’s own moral laws to intercede with Him and deter Him from indiscriminate retribution.
Can you imagine an Islamist supporting such a dialog with Allah? It would be, by definition, heresy.
This is what separates us from them. This is why we are different. This is why what we have is worth fighting for.
We can chew gum and walk. We can fight the vampires of Islamic fascism while supporting those Muslims who have the courage to speak out on behalf of values we share. Both jobs can be done.
If there be but ten righteous, let the city be spared.
Cross-posted at Gates of Vienna and The 910 Group Blog.
3 comments:
Thanks, Baron. Great post.
As a rabidly atheist anti-Christian, I feel your disclaimer to the secular at the beginning was wrong. It is exactly the secular minded that need to read and understand your message. Stories like Abraham arguing with God using reason that makes Christianity and Judaism tolerable to live with compared to Islam. I would suggest to any secularly minded person who would object to your post to seriously consider what the alternatives are.
Also, secularists should keep in mind that telling stories is what is to be human, and that as much the Bible is stories--very old stories--we can participate in using the Bible as stories. No secularist is able to object too strongly to books like Job, Ecclesiastes, Jonah, or many segments of Genesis like the one you quoted. The authors of those books shared values similar to Enlightenment values. We should delight in their ancient teachings rather blindly rejecting anything that happens to be in the Bible. We should even admit that our Enlightenment values come equally from stories like this one in the Bible as from the Greek tradition.
I suppose these comments are my way of saying your interpretation of Genesis was excellent.
On the other hand, I have my doubts that in an era of easily available nuclear weapons that we can be as generous about a regional population as Abraham was about Sodom. It's not that I don't want to be merciful. It just that the possibility of disaster has become too great.
Baron:
"Note that Abraham is arguing a moral issue with God. Abraham is using the Lord’s own moral laws to intercede with Him and deter Him from indiscriminate retribution."
Snouck:
I think so too. I would say that "Sodom" teaches that we can argue with God and at the same time that we do not have to avoid "collateral damage" 100 percent.
Finally the story of Sodom seems to argue that capital punishment is allowed despite the fact that there will be occassional miscarriages of justice in trials.
Furthermore it would appear to me that in the book of Job God questions Job's right to argue with God. The matter therefore seems to stand devided as far as Christianity is concerned.
Regards,
Snouck
Post a Comment