There is always a moral asymmetry between the free West and its enemies. The West is meant to play by the rules, and it usually does. It seeks to conduct its affairs within a moral framework, and certain things are simply off limits. But the enemies of freedom and democracy know no such compunctions. They are quite happy to use any means, including the exploitation of freedoms in the West, for their own purposes.
A classic case of this occurred during the Cold War. The Communists were quite adept at using the benefits and freedoms of the West to undermine it. Marxist morality dictated that the end justifies any means. Thus anything was permissible in the war against the West.
Islamic jihadists likewise seek to use and abuse the Western system for its own ends. They are happy to exploit Western freedoms, tolerance and openness to achieve their aims of a global caliphate and the submission of everyone to sharia law.
One way they seek to do this is by exploiting Western immigration laws and procedures. The West, ever keen to appear to be tolerant, compassionate and inclusive, is quite willing to allow Muslims of all stripes into their lands. Now the majority of these Muslims are usually not too problematic. But a healthy minority are. Radical Islamists are using our openness and porous borders to enter our lands, only with the aim of overthrowing the West from within.
Consider a case making headlines in today’s press. Here is how one news report covers the story: “A follower of a radical Islamic movement that seeks to introduce sharia law and has been linked to terrorist groups is being granted asylum in Australia. The Refugee Review Tribunal has recommended a protection visa for an Egyptian man, who is a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamic political group with links to al-Qaida. The Muslim Brotherhood has been outlawed in several countries, including Egypt. It seeks to establish a pan-Islamic state ruled by sharia law and is committed to the destruction of Israel.”
A spokesperson for the Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs Council, expressed these concerns: “The Muslim Brotherhood has been banned in many countries for good reason. It’s not just its attitude towards Israel that’s of concern. It has strands that are very sympathetic towards terrorism.” The Federal opposition immigration spokeswoman said she would write to the Government, asking to have the decision overturned.
Modern Day Trojan Horse: Al-Hijra, the Islamic Doctrine of Immigration, Accepting Freedom or Imposing Islam?by Solomon, Sam (Author), Maqdisi, E Al (Author)
If this were just an isolated incident, a one-off event, then not much more should be said. But if this is part of a much bigger picture, and just one example of a recurring pattern, then we should all be very concerned indeed. And that in fact seems to be the case. In fact, it is the very point being made in several new books.
For example, Sam Solomon and Elias Al Maqdisi make this case in Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration. Both authors are experts on Islamic thought, but Solomon is especially crucial here, since he used to be a professor of sharia law, but has since converted to Christianity.
The pair examine how a small presence of Muslims in a Western nation eventually builds to a critical mass, with the eventual aim of implementing sharia law, and taking over the host culture. Even seemingly benign measures, such as the building of mosques, can be used for these greater purposes.
Indeed, an earlier volume by the same two authors argued how important the mosque in Western nations is to this overall process. In The Mosque Exposed, they highlight how the Islamists use the mosque to teach, foment and recruit for violent jihad.
In their newer book they document how Western immigration policies are being exploited by these radicals, and how they use such things as taquiya, or deception, to achieve these aims. They seek to hide behind religious devotion and practice as they attempt to wrest control of lands belonging to the kuffar (non-Muslim).
The slow but steady process of Islamisation of Western lands is taking place in many areas, with any attempts to impede this progress met with shouts of discrimination and Islamophobia. And the West is so concerned about not treading on anyone’s toes, that the radicals are making great gains in realising their goals.
Other new books also describe this process. For example, Christopher Caldwell’s new book, Reflections on the Revolution In Europe: Immigration, Islam, and the West, examines how changing demographic patterns in the West, especially Europe, are part and parcel of this greater strategy of Islamic hegemony.
Caldwell documents how Western governments are squeamish about appearing to be intolerant or unwelcoming, so they often become their own worst enemies, by allowing the detractors of the West to freely enter their lands, set up shop, and work out their long-term plans.
He documents how the West tends to encourage the ghetto-isation of Muslim arrivals, instead of aiming for their assimilation and integration. This is a recipe for disaster, and we have seen it played out numerous times, especially in major European cities.
Other recent books might be cited, but the message should be clear. Just as Lenin once quipped about how the West would sell the Communists the rope with which to hang itself, so too modern democracies are sowing the seeds of their own destruction, by being naive or ignorant about global jihad, and how the radicals are using the West and its freedoms to in fact bring it to its knees.
To raise these issues is of course not to accuse all Muslims of treachery, jihad and anti-Western crusades. But a clear minority at least of Muslims are using the privileges and benefits of the West to promote Islamic jihad, and bring about the destruction of the West. Vigilance, as always, is clearly the order of the day here.
11 Replies to “Western Immigration and Global Jihad”
“There is always a moral asymmetry between the free West and its enemies. The West is meant to play by the rules, and it usually does.” Where exactly have you garnered this pearl of wisdom from? Have you perhaps heard of the Bush Doctrine which was widely considered a fragrant breach of international law? You have missed the point of what is occuring where these radicals are emerging from, the majority are not religiously motivated but rather there is a deep seated cultural malaise towards the west, whose actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have clearly been intrusive and some would say imperalistically underscored. It is bizarre to say we should remain vigilant of this “healthy minority” I agree we should remain vigilant of all people who are willing to perpetrate violence and hate, but our laws already do this. The Australian Anti-Terrorism Act 2005 introduced by John Howard was critised on the basis that it covered areas of law already covered by criminal law whilst impinging on civil rights long held at the cornerstone of society. Whilst I understand this is a society which you are not particularly pleased with it is bizarre to nitpick at one particular group of people, the issue is with the violence perpetrated not the religion.
Michael Wentburg
Thanks Michael
It is always interesting when a commentator comes along and nicely exemplifies the very thing I have been talking about. Here we go again with more moral equivalence. ‘Yes those nasty terrorists are bad news, but so too is (insert your enemy of the week: the US, Bush, the West, etc).’ Sorry I am just not buying this moral equivalence. Nor am I buying this foolishness that Islamic terrorists are basically nice chaps who have been driven to murder and terror because of those nasty Americans. They already have an ideology and belief system of hate which sees the West – and all unbelievers – as the enemy.
Thus you miss the point altogether – Muslim terrorists are killing in the name of their religion. They are killing because of their religion, not in spite of it. That is exactly the problem. They would certainly not regard themselves as being aberrational, but in fulfilling their faith to a T. Indeed, they can find full justification for doing what they do by the life and teachings of Muhammad, Islamic history, and the hadith. Making excuses for terrorism helps no one here.
What are the credentials of the members of the Refugee Review Tribunal?
Dawn McGregor
Ralph Winter (missionary statesman and founder of the US Centre for World Mission in Pasadena) talks in one of the articles in “Perspectives on the World Christian Movement” about how Scandinavia was evangelised. In a nutshell, the French, Germans and English had had the Gospel for many centuries, but minimal effort was made to bring that Gospel to the bizarre and backward cultures to the north. As a result, when the scandanavian countries decided to expand (as the vikings) they did so ruthlessly, having had no influence in their culture which would have blunted some of the violent excesses to which they were prone (this is in contrast to the barbarians that sacked the Roman empire upon its fall, as they had had some exposure to the Gospel/Christian values through the heretics that had been expelled from the empire over preceding centuries. But I digress.)
By various means (including the kidnapping of slaves who were Christians) this invasion exposed the scandanavian lands to the Gospel, to the extent that within a few generations those parts had been largely exposed to the Gospel. Winter calls this evangelism by invasion.
Fast forward to the time and issue we are considering here, and consider that less that 0.1% of finances given to Christian causes go towards reaching the unreached (even less to reaching the Muslim world) and that, while there is 1 missionary per 1000 people in Israel (as an example) there are fewer than 1 missionary per 100,000 people in the Middle East and North Africa.
I don’t see Muslim immigration as a threat, I see it as an opportunity to reach large numbers of people with the Gospel in ways that would be extremely costly and often not possible in their home lands. Muslim immigration? Bring it on! The church just needs to awaken to the reality of the opportunity before us, and put some effort into consistent, culturally sensitive and relevant ways of reaching Muslim neighbours with the Gospel.
Bill I hear what you’re saying and I don’t disagree entirely, but the emphasis is in the wrong place. Are we that scared that Muslims are going to transform our society as a vocal an militant group making up less that 3% of the population? They could, but only if the church stands idly by in the face of an extraordinary opportunity to reach Muslims for Christ.
What happened to the God who gave us a Spirit of love, power and a sound mind?
Mark Burnard
Thanks Mark
Islam is indeed a threat – but it is an opportunity as well, as I have written elsewhere on this site. So in many respects I agree with you. The truth is, we are citizens of two kingdoms and have responsibilities to both – this world and the next.
In this world we need to be vigilant and seek to protect God-given freedoms where possible. Governments do have a divine mandate to promote what is good, defend justice, and deal with evil (Romans 7, eg.). Not all forms of government are equal, and some are clearly better than others, at least in a fallen world. Western democracies on the whole are superior to Islamic theocracies.
Having said that, yes by all means, we have obligations to reach everyone with the Gospel – Muslims included. And yes, it is hard to get into many Muslim nations to share the Good News, so I believe God has sovereignly been bringing Muslims to the West. But if we do not evangelise them, remember, they too are an evangelistic religion, and they will evangelise us.
So it is fine to say that God has brought Muslims here to be evangelised. I believe that. But the real worry is – is the church in fact doing its job, or is Islam on the ascendency in the West, including all the downsides – the imposition of sharia law, the destruction of freedom and democracy, and so on? How we respond to the huge influx of Muslims is the real question, as you also mention. Either we capitalise on this God-given opportunity, or we become victims of this very real threat. In many ways the choice is up to us.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Mark, it would be a good idea to read: “the Crusades in Context” by Dr Paul Stenhouse, Chevalier Press, 2007. Did you realise that the countries around the Mediterranean were once Christian? Now most of them are Muslim. Furthermore, Muslims occupied parts of Europe for about 800 years. They were eventually beaten back, but are now launching their second assault Sadly, Christianity is either unwilling or unable to defend itself this time around.
Dunstan Hartley
From its very early days Australia has accepted people of many cultures, including Muslims. Some were the Afghan camel drivers in the Northern Territory. What is significant about these early Muslims is that they have been fully integrated socially into the Australian culture. But this has not been the case with more recent arrivals, mainly because the Australian government has agreed to give permanent residence (and citizenship) to imams who claim to ‘lead their flocks’. The first imams were only given temporay (work) visas (eg Imam Hilaly) However, the result is enclaves of Muslims who tend not to integrate; As an ex-migration officer responsible for the development of settlement services, I was very much aware to one condition of being granted permanent residence in this country was that newcomers had agreed to integrate socially after their arrival. Also that they would not bring with them old hates and/or animosities from their former overseas lives. This worked well until recent times and I continue to wonder why the present situation has been allowed to develop? Surely if cultural groups are not integrating (in a reasonable time), we should be asking the government why we are continuing to accept these people for permanent residence?
Peter Rice
Mark,
Please get real. We are not talking about the old stalwart Christian Europe. In its current lifeless spiritual state, Europe itself needs the gospel first, before it can even think of evangelising people of other faith.The danger is that the European people might even freely embrace other beliefs or just remain indifferent to the spread of Islam in Europe. No Mark, you can’t bring it on, you’ll be swallowed up like a piece of cake.
Barry Koh
Hi Bill, I intended to respond to your reply more quickly than this but was interrupted… seems like a good thing now as others have added to the discussion. My response was going to be that I appreciate your balanced reply. My first post was really just to comment that I see a lot of Christians talking about the threat of Muslim immigration, and not so many talking about the opportunity. So when I see another post about the threat I feel the need to seek to re-emphasize the opportunity. From your reply we’re largely on the same page (as I think you are saying). I agree wholeheartedly with your comments that western forms of governments with their accountabilities and checks and balances are far superior to those that have developed in less Christian-influenced cultures including those that the Islamic nations are now saddled with – and are worth defending.
The question all comes down to what the correct response should be (or perhaps where the emphasis should be in terms of response, as a response on both fronts is necessary – maintain activism in the political sphere in order to protect existing rights and freedoms, as well as reach out in creative ways to win Muslims to Jesus). Your final point (in the original post) about vigilance is well made. I only sought to add that reaching out is at least as important as political/social vigilance and is worthy of at least as many column-inches and books published, but it’s strange how it never seems to get that much attention. We seem to have a fetish for bhaad news.
Turning now to points raised by Dunstan and Barry. We need to remain keenly aware of one thing Bill pointed out, and that is that there is only a tiny minority of Muslim immigrants that are seeking anything other than a better life in a freer society than the one they have emigrated or fled from. The vast majority, if engaged by us (and particularly by churches) in the right way will make a positive contribution to society, and will embrace and enjoy the freedoms that western society offers. (And a note here, seeing all Muslim immigrants as dangerous tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy – by isolating them you radicalise them.) Indeed, Philip Jenkins points out that more than 50% of Arab immigrants to the USA are Christian Arabs who are fleeing oppression in their home country! (Philip Jenkins, “The Next Christendom” p. 123) And you want to sound the alarm on immigrants from these countries being a threat? Would that 50% of the immigrants from New Zealand to this country were Christian! (No offense to my kiwi bro’s and sisters, I just picked the country that most migrants come here from).
So lets be careful about making that distinction, as our response will be shaped by this. If even as few as 95% of Muslim immigrants are non-militant and open to the Gospel, I welcome all of them for the sake of receiving the 95-98% that we can reach. As for the other 1 or 2 percent that are militant activists, please see my earlier post – God has often brought non-Christians into nominally Christian countries as it is the best opportunity for them to come to the truth. He is not willing that any should perish, and neither am I. We should also remember that Paul the Apostle was a radical militant anti-Christian before his conversion. When was the last time you prayed for a radical muslim leader, by name, to come to Christ?
As for getting eaten up like a piece of cake, I happen to believe the Scriptures when they say that He that is in us is greater than he that is in the world, and that includes any spirit of Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, Communism, or anything else.
You might be aware that the largest Muslim nation on earth, Indonesia, is officially 15% Christian and unofficially over 25% Christian, or that more Muslims have come to Christ in Iran in the last 10 years than in the previous 1000 years combined. Or we could talk about Ralph Winter’s statistics on the growth of Christianity from AD100 to now, or David Barrett’s figures from the World Christian Encyclopedia. You may find it enlightening to read Jensen’s book which I quote above as he points out some very interesting historical realities on the expansion of Islam which were quite different from what I learned in Church History classes.
So what am I saying? That as Christians we need to:
Reach out in culturally relevant ways to Muslims that live amongst us, and support programs that promote this kind of outreach;
Support missions to the Muslim world overseas (contact me if you’re interested, I know personally a number of Chinese Christians who are in Middle Eastern countries right now and could really use some support and encouragement);
Engage effectively in the political arena to ensure that our freedoms are protected not just from militant Islamists but also militant leftists, liberals, etc. This includes all the actions that Bill has outlined above and in many other posts;
But there is no need in my view to oppose immigration from majority Muslim nations – just get busy with the above three, there’s enough to do there!
Mark Burnard
Thanks Mark
Yes I think we are mainly singing from the same song sheet. The only point I would challenge is the idea that Islamic militants make up only 1-2 per cent of all Muslims. While exact figures are hard to come by, most experts put the Islamists (militants, jihadists, etc) at 15 per cent. Now with a billion Muslims in the world, that is a lot of militants. So this is a very real threat indeed, one which we should never minimise or ignore. But thanks again for sharing your thoughts.
“There is always a moral asymmetry between the free West and its enemies. The West is meant to play by the rules, and it usually does.” Where exactly have you garnered this pearl of wisdom from? Have you perhaps heard of the Bush Doctrine which was widely considered a fragrant breach of international law? You have missed the point of what is occuring where these radicals are emerging from, the majority are not religiously motivated but rather there is a deep seated cultural malaise towards the west, whose actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have clearly been intrusive and some would say imperalistically underscored. It is bizarre to say we should remain vigilant of this “healthy minority” I agree we should remain vigilant of all people who are willing to perpetrate violence and hate, but our laws already do this. The Australian Anti-Terrorism Act 2005 introduced by John Howard was critised on the basis that it covered areas of law already covered by criminal law whilst impinging on civil rights long held at the cornerstone of society. Whilst I understand this is a society which you are not particularly pleased with it is bizarre to nitpick at one particular group of people, the issue is with the violence perpetrated not the religion.
Michael Wentburg
Thanks Michael
It is always interesting when a commentator comes along and nicely exemplifies the very thing I have been talking about. Here we go again with more moral equivalence. ‘Yes those nasty terrorists are bad news, but so too is (insert your enemy of the week: the US, Bush, the West, etc).’ Sorry I am just not buying this moral equivalence. Nor am I buying this foolishness that Islamic terrorists are basically nice chaps who have been driven to murder and terror because of those nasty Americans. They already have an ideology and belief system of hate which sees the West – and all unbelievers – as the enemy.
Thus you miss the point altogether – Muslim terrorists are killing in the name of their religion. They are killing because of their religion, not in spite of it. That is exactly the problem. They would certainly not regard themselves as being aberrational, but in fulfilling their faith to a T. Indeed, they can find full justification for doing what they do by the life and teachings of Muhammad, Islamic history, and the hadith. Making excuses for terrorism helps no one here.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Perhaps the question which needs to be asked is: “Why have the massive immigration policies, we in the western world have embarked upon, been necessary?” Reference to another new post here will provide the answer: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2009/08/29/forget-the-kids-we’re-gonna-save-the-planet/
Dunstan Hartley
What are the credentials of the members of the Refugee Review Tribunal?
Dawn McGregor
Ralph Winter (missionary statesman and founder of the US Centre for World Mission in Pasadena) talks in one of the articles in “Perspectives on the World Christian Movement” about how Scandinavia was evangelised. In a nutshell, the French, Germans and English had had the Gospel for many centuries, but minimal effort was made to bring that Gospel to the bizarre and backward cultures to the north. As a result, when the scandanavian countries decided to expand (as the vikings) they did so ruthlessly, having had no influence in their culture which would have blunted some of the violent excesses to which they were prone (this is in contrast to the barbarians that sacked the Roman empire upon its fall, as they had had some exposure to the Gospel/Christian values through the heretics that had been expelled from the empire over preceding centuries. But I digress.)
By various means (including the kidnapping of slaves who were Christians) this invasion exposed the scandanavian lands to the Gospel, to the extent that within a few generations those parts had been largely exposed to the Gospel. Winter calls this evangelism by invasion.
Fast forward to the time and issue we are considering here, and consider that less that 0.1% of finances given to Christian causes go towards reaching the unreached (even less to reaching the Muslim world) and that, while there is 1 missionary per 1000 people in Israel (as an example) there are fewer than 1 missionary per 100,000 people in the Middle East and North Africa.
I don’t see Muslim immigration as a threat, I see it as an opportunity to reach large numbers of people with the Gospel in ways that would be extremely costly and often not possible in their home lands. Muslim immigration? Bring it on! The church just needs to awaken to the reality of the opportunity before us, and put some effort into consistent, culturally sensitive and relevant ways of reaching Muslim neighbours with the Gospel.
Bill I hear what you’re saying and I don’t disagree entirely, but the emphasis is in the wrong place. Are we that scared that Muslims are going to transform our society as a vocal an militant group making up less that 3% of the population? They could, but only if the church stands idly by in the face of an extraordinary opportunity to reach Muslims for Christ.
What happened to the God who gave us a Spirit of love, power and a sound mind?
Mark Burnard
Thanks Mark
Islam is indeed a threat – but it is an opportunity as well, as I have written elsewhere on this site. So in many respects I agree with you. The truth is, we are citizens of two kingdoms and have responsibilities to both – this world and the next.
In this world we need to be vigilant and seek to protect God-given freedoms where possible. Governments do have a divine mandate to promote what is good, defend justice, and deal with evil (Romans 7, eg.). Not all forms of government are equal, and some are clearly better than others, at least in a fallen world. Western democracies on the whole are superior to Islamic theocracies.
Having said that, yes by all means, we have obligations to reach everyone with the Gospel – Muslims included. And yes, it is hard to get into many Muslim nations to share the Good News, so I believe God has sovereignly been bringing Muslims to the West. But if we do not evangelise them, remember, they too are an evangelistic religion, and they will evangelise us.
So it is fine to say that God has brought Muslims here to be evangelised. I believe that. But the real worry is – is the church in fact doing its job, or is Islam on the ascendency in the West, including all the downsides – the imposition of sharia law, the destruction of freedom and democracy, and so on? How we respond to the huge influx of Muslims is the real question, as you also mention. Either we capitalise on this God-given opportunity, or we become victims of this very real threat. In many ways the choice is up to us.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Mark, it would be a good idea to read: “the Crusades in Context” by Dr Paul Stenhouse, Chevalier Press, 2007. Did you realise that the countries around the Mediterranean were once Christian? Now most of them are Muslim. Furthermore, Muslims occupied parts of Europe for about 800 years. They were eventually beaten back, but are now launching their second assault Sadly, Christianity is either unwilling or unable to defend itself this time around.
Dunstan Hartley
From its very early days Australia has accepted people of many cultures, including Muslims. Some were the Afghan camel drivers in the Northern Territory. What is significant about these early Muslims is that they have been fully integrated socially into the Australian culture. But this has not been the case with more recent arrivals, mainly because the Australian government has agreed to give permanent residence (and citizenship) to imams who claim to ‘lead their flocks’. The first imams were only given temporay (work) visas (eg Imam Hilaly) However, the result is enclaves of Muslims who tend not to integrate; As an ex-migration officer responsible for the development of settlement services, I was very much aware to one condition of being granted permanent residence in this country was that newcomers had agreed to integrate socially after their arrival. Also that they would not bring with them old hates and/or animosities from their former overseas lives. This worked well until recent times and I continue to wonder why the present situation has been allowed to develop? Surely if cultural groups are not integrating (in a reasonable time), we should be asking the government why we are continuing to accept these people for permanent residence?
Peter Rice
Mark,
Please get real. We are not talking about the old stalwart Christian Europe. In its current lifeless spiritual state, Europe itself needs the gospel first, before it can even think of evangelising people of other faith.The danger is that the European people might even freely embrace other beliefs or just remain indifferent to the spread of Islam in Europe. No Mark, you can’t bring it on, you’ll be swallowed up like a piece of cake.
Barry Koh
Hi Bill, I intended to respond to your reply more quickly than this but was interrupted… seems like a good thing now as others have added to the discussion. My response was going to be that I appreciate your balanced reply. My first post was really just to comment that I see a lot of Christians talking about the threat of Muslim immigration, and not so many talking about the opportunity. So when I see another post about the threat I feel the need to seek to re-emphasize the opportunity. From your reply we’re largely on the same page (as I think you are saying). I agree wholeheartedly with your comments that western forms of governments with their accountabilities and checks and balances are far superior to those that have developed in less Christian-influenced cultures including those that the Islamic nations are now saddled with – and are worth defending.
The question all comes down to what the correct response should be (or perhaps where the emphasis should be in terms of response, as a response on both fronts is necessary – maintain activism in the political sphere in order to protect existing rights and freedoms, as well as reach out in creative ways to win Muslims to Jesus). Your final point (in the original post) about vigilance is well made. I only sought to add that reaching out is at least as important as political/social vigilance and is worthy of at least as many column-inches and books published, but it’s strange how it never seems to get that much attention. We seem to have a fetish for bhaad news.
Turning now to points raised by Dunstan and Barry. We need to remain keenly aware of one thing Bill pointed out, and that is that there is only a tiny minority of Muslim immigrants that are seeking anything other than a better life in a freer society than the one they have emigrated or fled from. The vast majority, if engaged by us (and particularly by churches) in the right way will make a positive contribution to society, and will embrace and enjoy the freedoms that western society offers. (And a note here, seeing all Muslim immigrants as dangerous tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy – by isolating them you radicalise them.) Indeed, Philip Jenkins points out that more than 50% of Arab immigrants to the USA are Christian Arabs who are fleeing oppression in their home country! (Philip Jenkins, “The Next Christendom” p. 123) And you want to sound the alarm on immigrants from these countries being a threat? Would that 50% of the immigrants from New Zealand to this country were Christian! (No offense to my kiwi bro’s and sisters, I just picked the country that most migrants come here from).
So lets be careful about making that distinction, as our response will be shaped by this. If even as few as 95% of Muslim immigrants are non-militant and open to the Gospel, I welcome all of them for the sake of receiving the 95-98% that we can reach. As for the other 1 or 2 percent that are militant activists, please see my earlier post – God has often brought non-Christians into nominally Christian countries as it is the best opportunity for them to come to the truth. He is not willing that any should perish, and neither am I. We should also remember that Paul the Apostle was a radical militant anti-Christian before his conversion. When was the last time you prayed for a radical muslim leader, by name, to come to Christ?
As for getting eaten up like a piece of cake, I happen to believe the Scriptures when they say that He that is in us is greater than he that is in the world, and that includes any spirit of Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, Communism, or anything else.
You might be aware that the largest Muslim nation on earth, Indonesia, is officially 15% Christian and unofficially over 25% Christian, or that more Muslims have come to Christ in Iran in the last 10 years than in the previous 1000 years combined. Or we could talk about Ralph Winter’s statistics on the growth of Christianity from AD100 to now, or David Barrett’s figures from the World Christian Encyclopedia. You may find it enlightening to read Jensen’s book which I quote above as he points out some very interesting historical realities on the expansion of Islam which were quite different from what I learned in Church History classes.
So what am I saying? That as Christians we need to:
Reach out in culturally relevant ways to Muslims that live amongst us, and support programs that promote this kind of outreach;
Support missions to the Muslim world overseas (contact me if you’re interested, I know personally a number of Chinese Christians who are in Middle Eastern countries right now and could really use some support and encouragement);
Engage effectively in the political arena to ensure that our freedoms are protected not just from militant Islamists but also militant leftists, liberals, etc. This includes all the actions that Bill has outlined above and in many other posts;
But there is no need in my view to oppose immigration from majority Muslim nations – just get busy with the above three, there’s enough to do there!
Mark Burnard
Thanks Mark
Yes I think we are mainly singing from the same song sheet. The only point I would challenge is the idea that Islamic militants make up only 1-2 per cent of all Muslims. While exact figures are hard to come by, most experts put the Islamists (militants, jihadists, etc) at 15 per cent. Now with a billion Muslims in the world, that is a lot of militants. So this is a very real threat indeed, one which we should never minimise or ignore. But thanks again for sharing your thoughts.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch