WAKE UP CALL!

This just in from Reuters: Muslims are now more numerous than Roman Catholics. Until 2006, the Roman Catholic faith was the single largest denomination in the world, at about 1.13 billion people. Islam is now estimated to hold the allegiance of 1.3 billion.

This is not to say that Catholicism is losing membership. The article points out that, as a percentage of the world's population, Roman Catholics still account for about 17.4%, as they have for years. What accounts for the difference is a much higher birth rate for Muslims.

Christianity as a whole, still counts for 33% of the population, or about 2 billion people. Islam, however, is growing fast.

All things being equal, this news shouldn't cause too much alarm. We here at Montag's World are all about religious tolerance. Hey, you can believe in anything (or nothing) you want, so long as you don't try to force your beliefs on me or mine.

Which is where the problem with Islam comes in. Tolerance is not exactly one of the virtues of Islam. Nor do the fundamentalists among them have any love for such niceties as "separation of mosque and state", religious freedom, representative government, gay rights, women's rights, or just about anything else we in America take for granted.

In short, all things are not equal. We are looking at a faith whose mindset dates back almost 1,500 years and which is bent upon world domination, or The Global Caliphate.

If you doubt me on these points, then read the works of Mark A. Gabriel. Personally, if I were to take any one's word on the subject of Islam, it would be Prof. Gabriel's. The man was once a scholar of the Qu'ran in Egypt, until he had a crisis of faith involving matters of Jihad and terrorism. When he converted to Christianity, he had to flee Egypt and take his current name, both for his own protection and that of his family back home. He details how the Qu'ran commands the faithful, in no uncertain terms, to "slay the infidel" (that would be you and me, folks!) or make them "submit" (which is the actual translation of the word "Islam") to Islam through either conversion or a tax so steep that it is only just short of death.

Then again, you can read Craig Winn's excellent book, Prophet of Doom, online. Winn insightfully blends four or five different translations of the Qu'ran, the Hadith, and the Sunnah, or the recorded history of Mohammad and his "religion" written by Bukhari, Mulim, Ishaq, and Tabari. These aren't rabid bigots, or "virulent" Zionists casting false accusations against Islam. These are the earliest and the most trusted sources of the faith.

Let's put aside Political Correctness and get honest here. Islam has been at war with the world (indeed, even with Muslims themselves) ever since Mohammad came down from his mountain. As Mr. Winn writes:

Islam is a caustic blend of regurgitated paganism and twisted Bible stories. Muhammad, its lone prophet, conceived his religion solely to satiate his lust for power, sex, and money. He was a terrorist. And if you think these conclusions are shocking, wait until you see the evidence.

The critics of this work will claim that Prophet of Doom is offensive, racist, hatemongering, intolerant, and unnecessarily violent. I agree - but I didn't write those parts. They came directly from Islam's scriptures. If you don't like what Muhammad and Allah said, don't blame me. I'm just the messenger.

That's right, folks! This is the Qu'ran and Islam's oldest, "holiest" writings saying these things.

Being that the Qu'ran calls Jihad the most important work of the faithful (and no, Allah isn't talking about "the spiritual fight of the inner soul", as many apologists speciously claim) it is absolutely reasonable that this heightened birth rate can be construed as "Jihad by other means". In other words, where they can't slay us outright, they merely breed faster than we can. Either way can further Islam and bring about the Global Caliphate.

I don't pretend to know the answer. After all, how can you fight 1.3 billion people? Is the rest of the Western World even aware of the danger that this burgeoning "religion" represent? Will we in America have the stomach to face this peril?

There is one thing, though, that we can -- indeed, we must -- do. We must recognize the truth of the enemy. Saying things like "Islam is the religion of peace", like we were some kind of Miss America contestant, is merely hiding our collective head in the sand. What "religion of peace" kills victims of rape because they dishonored their families? What "religion of peace" stages violent protests against mere cartoons?

Ann Coulter once famously said, "Muslims are the only group who kill because they're angry people have called them violent."

That woman is so right in so many ways!

Copyright March 30th, 2008

A Review of "The Irrational Atheist"

Normally, I steer clear of theological issues, except as to the Quran and its scriptural basis for modern terrorism. However, a book by Vox Day, "The Irrational Atheist", is a prime subject for this forum.

Vox Day is a columnist for World Net Daily as well as a computer game designer and a musician. Right there, I have to say I like the guy, since I have been known to play a few computer games, I play in a rock and roll band, and you are reading this column. If that weren't enough, he describes himself as "Christian Libertarian and Forensic Atheologist". Anyone who knows me knows that Libertarian philosophies are very close to my heart.

What Mr. Day has succeeded in doing, in writing "The Irrational Atheist", is totally demolish the arguments for atheism by such luminaries as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Michel Onfray. What is even better, he does it without relying on Scripture to back his arguments, although he does quote the Bible towards the end. Still, if he left out the Bible quotes, his refutation of atheism, in all its forms, would stand.

Mr. Day begins with cataloging the many instances of mass murder carried out by atheists and their governments compared to the relative nonviolence of religions everywhere. He then proceeds to note the almost autistic way in which modern atheists have to confront and attack theists, even agnostics, at every opportunity, noting that many atheists score relatively high in tests for Asbergers Syndrome. He offers the following hypothetical exchange to illustrate his point:

Agnostic: I don't believe there is a God. Because I haven't seen
the evidence.

Atheist: There is no God. Because I'm an asshole.

Yes, this a serious discussion of atheism and theism, but, being that we are concerned with human beliefs, there is more than enough room for humor.

Mr. Day draws on innumerable sources, from history to sociology even to science fiction, to bolster his arguments. In particular, I like his references to "Accelerando" by Charles Stross, since I am also a fan of science fiction.

One of the best illustrations that Mr. Day makes is when he answers the paradoxes of God's omniscience and omnipotence vis a vis humanity's free will. How can an omnipotent -- and, hence, omniscient God -- exist where there is free will?

He looks back on his career as a computer game designer, specifically the experience of a friend, nicknamed Big Chilly, who finds himself surprised and shocked at the actions of his own AI creations in a computer game he had designed. In the context of this game, Big Chilly was, for all intents and purposes "god" to the various characters protrayed by his various AI's. He was capable of "knowing" everything they could possibly do. And yet, his AI's managed to almost outwit him, sneaking around behind him in this First Person Shooter game.

The points of similarity between the game scenario and Man's relation to God are obvious, yet Mr. Day's genius is to bring them into such clarity with a real world example.

Smart, funny, irreverant, devastating -- all are words to describe "The Irrational Atheist". In case I haven't made myself clear, I wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone -- atheist, agnostic, theist, or what have you.

One minor quibble, however, must be adressed. Mr. Day does a wonderful job demonstrating that religion, on the whole, is not the cause of war and violence in the world. However, he gave short shrift, in my opinion, to an examination of Islam and its scriptural basis for Jihad. The following e-mail exchange should illustrate the most satisfactory resolution of this question:

Montag:

Hello, Mr. Day.

I have been reading your book, The Irrational Atheist, and I must say that I find very little that I can disagree with. However, I have one question.

On page 230, you wrote that religion "...can only be used as a scapegoat, because it does not provide the primary motivation or the means for crime, for war, or for repression and massacre." Not to question your knowledge in these matters, but Mark A. Gabriel make a rather compelling case that the Quran actually demands that the faithful wage war, not only on non-Muslims, but on those Muslims who do not adhere to the strictest interpretations of the teachings of Allah and his prophet, Muhammed. I was wondering if you could spare a few moments and share your thoughts on this matter.

For myself, while I do recognize the military, political and governmental aspects of Jihad, I can't seem to overlook the scriptural basis for such warfare.

Thank you for your time. I'd appreciate if you could get back to me on that. And if I haven't already made it clear, The Irrational Atheist is one great book! Keep up the good work and I hope to talk to you soon, my Friend!

Vox Day:

Hi Gregory, I'm perfectly willing to grant Islam being an exception to
the rule for the very reason you provide. I hint at this when I point
out that one historically recent religion has caused more than half of all
religious wars in recorded history despite only being around for one-third
of that history. But that's a particular quirk of Islam alone, it's not inherent
to it being a religion, and even that aspect of Islam has been resisted for a
good part of Islamic history.

All in all, "The Irrational Atheist" is a compelling and entertaining read, well worth the time for anyone -- theist, atheist, agnostic or whatever.

Copyright Feb. 10th, 2008