The concept of a one nation European Union would be ideal if it was achievable at this point in history, i.e., one nation, ruled by one Government, one Law, with one currency, one common language, one cultural belief, uniting and protecting every citizen and the nation from any enemy. At makes all the member states as “US” and no longer “them” with no borders or restrictions dividing the peoples. But is this achievable with the diverse cultural differences of the different nation states? Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany has already clearly shown that her comprehension of Muslims and their Islamic culture isquite differently to many Eastern European States. Angela Merkel has welcome all Muslim refugees to Germany whilst the Eastern European States have rejected this welcome. Are their understanding of what Islam stands for so irreconcilably different? The fact is, it is. So on this score can unity on this issue ever be resolved? Never. Take the following article:
Managing Diversity in the European Union: Inclusive European Citizenship and Third- Country Nationals (*TCNs)
Michael A. Becker
European citizenship establishes a precedent whereby the exercise and
protection of rights – the practice of citizenship – is no longer contingent
on residency within the jurisdiction of national citizenship. Free
movement rights have allowed European citizens to cross borders and
participate more nearly as political and legal equals within the host
society. At the same time, however, European citizenship has largely
failed to account for the past or future migration of third-country
nationals (TCNs) – those who are not citizens of any Member State – into
or within the European Union. As a result, the creation of European
citizenship has arguably had the unfortunate side effect of further
distinguishing and excluding TCNs from the emerging European society.
This Note argues that the current legal status of TCNs hinders successful
diversity management by individual Member States, undermines
European integration, and deprives TCNs of fundamental rights. The
Note proposes that European citizenship should be expanded to allow
TCNs to acquire European citizenship without the simultaneous
authority over the citizenship status of TCNs would benefit the project of
migrant integration into local, national, and transnational societies and
help further the democratization of European governance. In addition, a
redefined European citizenship could trigger a fundamental rethinking of
national citizenship, potentially undermine the destructive influence of
the extreme right, and, perhaps, lead to a more complete decoupling of the
political and legal content of citizenshipfrom the idea of nation.
To fully appreciate the significance of Michael Becker’s concern for the political status and citizenship of “Third Country Nations (TCNs),” and the future of the European Union success is crucial. In the Quest to form, “a One Unified Borderless Europe, by adopting “the Schengen Agreement” and Europe’s eagerness to attain this unification, Brussels has lost sight of the diversity of peoples and cultures in Europe and to ascertain whether is is practical to integrate all such peoples into one nation. One strong nation, without exclusive borders, with a free flow of peoples and trade and thus avoid another war amongst themselves as they areal ruled by one central government, and united, Europe will be better able to defend herself from any enemies.
But Europeans in their haste, have not stopped to consider if all the peoples, including TCNs, are racially or culturally suited to produce this unified European Union. The rate of increase of TCNs in Europe is increasing at an alarming rate. I refer in particular to the Muslim TCNs influx into Europe because this is one religion/culture that Will Not Integrate into the European culture. In 2014, the percentage of Muslims in Europe was 7.6% numbering some 56.2 million Muslims. The reasons for my concerns are because most European leaders are not fully aware of the incompatibility of the ideology of Islam with the Western Judeo-Christian Democratic ideology. I quote the following as illustration:
Christianity and Islam Do Not Share Values
“While [Christianity and Islam] may share many historical persons and events in common, there is still an unbridgeable gap between them.”
In the following viewpoint, Dean Robinson, a writer for the Baptist Pillar, a news organ of the Baptist Church in Canada, insists that Islam and Christianity are incompatible. In Robinson’s view, **Islam is a false religion that demands blind adherence from its followers and calls them to take up arms to slay all nonbelievers. He claims that those Christians who try to “dialogue” with Muslims are misguided because Islam has proven itself an intolerant worldview that rejects the core beliefs of Christianity.
As you read, consider the following questions:
- What evidence does Robinson reveal to prove his claim that Islam is an intolerant religion?
- What two quotes from the Koran does Robinson utilize to suggest that “compromise, concession, or agreement between true Christianity and orthodox Islam” cannot exist?
- Instead of dialoguing with Muslims, what does the author suggest is the Christian duty toward Muslims?
Islam is not a religious cult in the strictest sense of the word but it is a major world religion, a false religion vastly different and opposed to Christianity. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world with one out of every five people on the face of the earth being a Muslim. It is considered to be one of the four largest religions in the world, behind Christianity, Judaism, and Hinduism. It is estimated that by the year 2010, Islam will move ahead of Judaism to become the second largest religion in America. Hundreds of millions of people all over the world have embraced the Islamic faith to where entire countries are ruled and dominated by Islamic teachings, practices, and laws. Islam is a religious, social, and political force which every born-again Christian and every American should be aware of….
Islam Offers the World Submission or Death
It is traditionally taught that there is no ceremony, no ritual involved in a person who wants to become a Muslim. All one has to do is to believe and say: “There is no god but Allah and Muhammed is his prophet.” After saying this, the person is obligated to do all the duties of Islam. One must remember that the word “Muslim” means: one who submits. Islam basically offers the world two choices: the Koran (conversion) or the sword (death). According to the teaching of the Koran, conversion to Islam can either be by persuasion or force. We must understand that the spread of Islam through the centuries has been carried out largely on the battlefield. Islam has been advanced by the widespread use of war, torture, and force of arms. Islam has swept over the world slaughtering Jews and Christians alike. Islam is a fighting religion. Conquest is a religious duty in Islam. The Koran urges Muslims to take up arms against the “infidel” (anyone who is not a Muslim). The Koran specifically says: “When ye encounter unbelievers, strike off their heads until ye have made a great slaughter among them, and bind them in bonds.” In another place it says: “those who fight against you, kill them wherever ye shall find them … You Allah are our protector. Give us victory therefore over the infidel nations.” “Kill thine enemy” is the practical teaching of Islam.
The Koran is the final authority in Islam. It is the recordings of all the visions and revelations that Muhammed supposedly received directly from Allah. There were 114 in total. These revelations in the Koran are believed by Muslims to have come to Muhammed over a period of twenty-three years. The Koran is divided into 114 “suras” or chapters and contains many quotations and references to the Bible. Quoting from one source: “The Koran offers a religion that relies upon methods of violence and force—a doctrine of holy wars that brings inducements to political revolution and assassinations which have produced wars and tragedies unimaginable. The Koran offers a theology that is distinctly anti-Christ, claiming a method of salvation based entirely upon works.”
Islam claims to revere the writings of all the supposed great prophets of the world yet the Muslims definitely exalt and honor the “prophecy” of Muhammed (i.e. the Koran) above the Scriptures and any other religious writings. Muslims believe that Muhammed is the prophet who fully revealed the final truth and they will not compromise that belief. A leaflet prepared by the Institute of Islamic Information and Education states: “Muhammed is the very last Prophet of God to mankind. He is the final Messenger of God. His message was and is still to the Christians, the Jews, and the rest of mankind. He was sent to those religious people to inform them about the true mission of Jesus, Moses, David, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham.” The leaflet continues: “Muhammed is considered to be the summation and the culmination of all the prophets and messengers that came before him. He purified the previous messages from adulteration and completed the Message of God for all humanity. He was entrusted with the power of explaining, interpreting, and living the teachings of the Koran.” Muslims believe that all mankind must be brought into subjection to the teachings of the Koran in order to experience peace and blessing.
Rejecting Biblical Views
In the Koran, Islam is more than a religion; it is a complete way of life that includes political, economic, social as well as religious conduct. All Islam claims to follow the Koran but there are a multitude of interpretations and applications of it among Muslims. [sic]
At first glance to the general public, Islamic belief appears to be almost compatible with Christianity. Often people claim that the Muslims believe in the same God as Christians with the exception that they do not accept Jesus Christ. It is often said that Christians, Jews, and Muslims are worshipping the same God but in different ways. Muslims have capitalized on this misconception and now urge Christians and Jews to worship the one God (Allah) with them, and work together for solutions to the world’s many social problems.
Based on the Koran, Muslims believe in one god (Allah but not the Trinity); they believe in God as the Creator and Jesus as a prophet (but not as Saviour); they believe in the resurrection of all (including animals), final judgment, and eternal punishment. They believe in all of these things but not according to the Bible’s definition of these things. When you carefully study the Bible and compare it with the teachings of the Koran, it becomes obvious that the god of Islam is not the God of the Bible. Islam rejects the biblical doctrines of the Trinity and the Deity of Christ, among other things.
What Muslims Believe About God
For the Muslim, Allah is the only true God. The Muslim concept of Allah is not what God reveals Himself to be in the Bible. To say that God and Allah are two names for the same being reveals a lack of understanding of the Bible or the Koran or both. The Muslims teach there is no such thing as the “blasphemous” doctrine of the Trinity, i.e. the Godhead is One but exists in three Persons. Christians are referred to as unbelievers, infidels by the Muslims because they believe in the Trinity. In a booklet entitled Christian Muslim Dialogue on page 16, it states: “The Trinity is not biblical. The word ‘trinity’ is not even in the Bible or Bible dictionaries; it was never taught by Jesus and was never mentioned by him. There is no basis or proof in the Bible whatsoever for the acceptance of the Trinity.” The Koran states that Christians worship three gods: God, Jesus, and Mary. It denies that there is a Trinity in the Godhead. It also says that those who say that God is a Trinity are to be severely punished: “Surely they are disbelievers those who said Allah is one of the three in a trinity. But there is none who has the right to be worshipped but one God (Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily a painful torment will befall the disbelievers among them.”
The Muslim god is unapproachable by sinful man; he is so perfect and holy he can only communicate with mankind through a progression of angels and prophets. The Muslim god is a god of judgment, not grace; a god of wrath rather than love. Muslims have no concept of God as a loving and compassionate Father. Muslims never do refer to God as “Father;” they explain He would have to have a wife and children to be called such a name. This means, of course, that Muslims deny the deity of Christ. The Koran states: “It is not meet for Allah, the he should have any son. Allah forbid.” Another quote plainly says: “God has no Son….”
No Concession Between Islam and Christianity
For a true Muslim, the Koran is the “word of Allah,” and is to be believed and practiced literally. Apart from being a Muslim, there is no hope for a person according to the Koran. The Koran says: “Whoso desires any other religion than Islam, that religion shall never be accepted from him, and in the next world he shall be among the lost.” Another quote: “The true religion with God is Islam.” These two quotes simply signify that there can be no compromise, concession, or agreement between true Christianity and orthodox Islam….
Islam claims to be a religion of peace and tolerance when in fact it is characterized by violence and religious bigotry. It is the Christian’s duty to diligently witness to, not dialogue with the Muslims. We must stand for the true Gospel and against all other false gospels. Islam has rejected the essential teachings of the Word of God. The so-called prophet Muhammed brought an erroneous message from a false spirit that is totally opposed to the Gospel of God’s grace. The message of Islam is a curse, not a blessing. “There is only one true religion. It was prophesied in the Garden of Eden, typified in the days of Noah, confirmed to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and realized in the Person and work of Jesus Christ.”
There is no doubt that Muslims have a definite zeal for their god. They desire to follow Allah and express their worship of Allah through their lives. But the fact remains, Muslims need Christ and His saving Gospel which is still the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth. They need not only to hear and believe this life-changing Gospel of Jesus Christ, but they also need to see it demonstrated in the lives of believers to serve as an example of what the Lord can do with a life that is totally and truly surrendered and submitted unto Him. Islam offers this world two choices: the Koran (conversion) or the sword (death). Bible-believing Christians have only one choice to offer the world: the Cross and empty tomb of Jesus Christ.
In this age of ecumenicalism and tolerance, many people would like to emphasize the resemblances and similarities between Islam and Christianity. While the two religions may share many historical persons and events in common, there is still an unbridgeable gap between them. “There is no possible compromise between biblical Christianity and Islam and none should be sought.”
Until our leaders admit the true nature of Islamic extremism, we will never defeat it
Ever since the spectre of Islamic terrorism in the West first manifested itself, Britain has had its head stuck firmly in the sand.
After both 9/11 and the 7/7 London transport bombings, the Labour government promised to take measures to defend the country against further such attacks.
It defined the problem, however, merely as terrorism, failing to understand that the real issue was the extremist ideas which led to such violence.
Accordingly, it poured money into Muslim community groups, many of which turned out to be dangerously extreme.
When David Cameron came to power, his Government raised hopes of a more realistic approach when it pledged to counter extremist ideas rather than just violence.
This approach, too, has failed. The Government still has no coherent strategy for countering Islamist radicalisation.
Following last week’s barbaric slaughter of Drummer Rigby on the streets of Woolwich by two Islamic fanatics, the Prime Minister has announced that he will head a new Tackling Extremism and Radicalisation Task Force.
And the Home Secretary has said she will look at widening the banning of radical groups preaching hate.
But at the heart of these promises remains a crucial gap. That is the need to define just what kind of extremism we are up against.
The Government has been extraordinarily reluctant to do this — because it refuses to face the blindingly obvious fact that this extremism is religious in nature.
It arises from an interpretation of Islam which takes the words of the Koran literally as a command to kill unbelievers in a jihad, or holy war, in order to impose strict Islamic tenets on the rest of the world.
Of course, millions of Muslims in Britain and elsewhere totally reject this interpretation of their religion.
Most British Muslims want to live peacefully and enjoy the benefits of Western culture. They undoubtedly utterly deplore the notion that the kind of carnage that occurred in Woolwich should take place in Britain.
And let’s not forget that, worldwide, most victims of the jihad are themselves Muslims whom the extremists judge to be polluted by Western ideas.
Nevertheless, this fundamentalist interpretation of the Koran is what is being spouted by hate preachers in Britain and on the internet, and is steadily radicalising thousands of young British Muslims.
Now the Prime Minister says he will crack down on such extremism. Yet after the Woolwich atrocity, he claimed it was ‘a betrayal of Islam’ and that ‘there is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act’.
The London Mayor Boris Johnson went even further, claiming: ‘It is completely wrong to blame this killing on the religion of Islam’ and that the cause was simply the killers’ ‘warped and deluded mindset’.
Yet the video footage of the killers — who had shouted ‘Allahu Akhbar’ when butchering Drummer Rigby — records one of them citing verses in the Koran exhorting the faithful to fight and kill unbelievers, and declaring: ‘We swear by Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you.’
Frankly, these comments by the Prime Minister and London Mayor were as absurd as saying the medieval Inquisition, for example, had nothing to do with the Catholic Church, but was just the product of a few warped and deluded individuals.
Their comments were also deeply troubling. For if politicians refuse to acknowledge the true nature of this extremism, they will never counter it effectively.
But then, government officials have always refused to admit that this is a religious war. They simply don’t understand the power of religious fanaticism.
Of course, there are fanatics in all religions. Within both Judaism and Christianity, there are deep divisions between ultras, liberals and those in between.
In medieval times, moreover, Christianity used its interpretation of the Bible also to kill ‘unbelievers’, because early Christians believed they had a divine duty to make the world conform to their religion at all costs. That stopped when the Reformation ushered the Church into modernity, and today no Christian wants to use violence to convert others to their faith.
The problem with the extremist teachings of Islam is that the religion has never had a similar ‘reformation’.
Certainly, there are enlightened Muslims in Britain who would dearly love their religion to be reformed.
But they have the rug pulled from under their feet by the Government’s flat denial of the religious nature of this terrible problem.
Some people instead ascribe the actions of the Woolwich killers to factors such as thuggish gang membership, drug abuse or family breakdown. But it is precisely such lost souls who are vulnerable to Islamist fanatics and who provide them with father figures, a sense of belonging and a cause which gives apparent meaning to their lives.
Many people find it incomprehensible that such fanatics remain free to peddle their poison. Partly, this is because the Security Service likes to gather intelligence through their actions. But it is also because of a failure to understand what amounts to a continuum of extremism.
There are too many British Muslims who, while abhorring violence at home, nevertheless support the killing abroad of British or American forces or Israelis, regard unbelievers as less than fully human, and homosexuals or apostates as deserving the death penalty.
Such bigotry creates the poisonous sea in which dehumanisation and religious violence swim.
To the failure to understand all this must be added the widespread terror of being thought ‘Islamophobic’ or ‘racist’.
It is quite astonishing that universities mostly refuse to crack down on extremist speakers and radicalisation on campus — despite at least four former presidents of Islamic student societies having faced terrorist charges.
In a devastating account published at the weekend, Professor Michael Burleigh, who advised the Government on revising its counter-radicalisation strategy, described how this process descended into a ‘sad shambles’. He related how the Federation of Islamic Student Societies (FOSIS) had created a sexually segregated environment in which young people were being systematically indoctrinated in anti-Jew, anti-homosexual and anti-Western hatred by Islamist speakers on campus.
But although the Government condemned FOSIS for its failure to ‘fully challenge terrorist and extremist ideology’, with the Home Secretary even ordering that civil servants withdraw from its graduate recruitment fair, the Faith and Communities Minister, Baroness Warsi, actually endorsed it by attending one of its events at the House of Lords.
Nor has the Government done anything to stop extremist preachers targeting and converting criminals in British jails at a deeply alarming rate.
On top of all this official incoherence is the paralysis caused by the excesses of the ‘human rights’ culture.
Thus the Home Secretary is facing a monumental battle to get through Parliament a Communications Bill that would give police and security services access to records of individuals’ internet use.
It is said that some of these extremist preachers exploit loopholes in the law. If so, then the law should be changed.
But we all know what would befall any such attempt. It would be all but drowned out by shrieks that we were ‘doing the terrorists’ job for them’ by ‘undermining our own hard-won liberties’.
Well, it’s time to face down such claims as vacuous and lethal nonsense.
The people threatening our liberties are Islamic radicals determined to destroy our way of life.
It is those who refuse to acknowledge the true nature of this threat who are doing the terrorists’ job for them.
And unless Britain finally wakes up from its self-destructive torpor, all who love civilised values — Muslim and non-Muslim alike — will be the losers.