Skip to main content

Are Liberalism and Radical Islam really the same Thing?

Christians and all persons who believe in reason and transcendent truths are at war with liberal theorists and radical Islam.

English professor Louis Markos in his book Lewis Agonistes thinks that liberal theorists and radical Islam are at war with analogy in the arts and literature as well as with “transcendent truths in material images.”

Markos says liberals of the Enlightenment mind set believed only in materially observable “facts” and denied the existence of “transcendent truths in material images” be it art, literature or God.

Postmodernist took it a step forward by proclaiming that not only is God dead, but language is dead. They believe that words have no meaning even materially observable “facts.”

Radical liberal theorists of the postmodernist and Enlightenment mind set showed that this thought lead to violence against human life. Lenin and Stalin were Enlightenment men and Hitler was a follower of the postmodernist Nietzsche. Pro-choicer of the kind that kill unborn babies and homosexual identity gender changers are also followers of Nietzsche’s will to power.

As G. K. Chesterton said when people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing - they believe in anything.
Radical Islam showed it association with liberal theorists when they firebombed and shoot bullet holes through Christian churches in West Bank, killed an Italian nun and threatened to bomb the Vatican with a suicide attack when Pope Benedict XVI gave the September 12 called FAITH, REASON AND THE UNIVERSITY. MEMORIES AND REFLECTIONS. In that talk he said:

“The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality.”

“Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to practise idolatry.”

The pope in the lecture countered this anti-analogy theories which ultimately deny transcendent truth by saying:

“As opposed to this, the faith of the Church has always insisted that between God and us, between his eternal Creator Spirit and our created reason there exists a real analogy, in which unlikeness remains infinitely greater than likeness, yet not to the point of abolishing analogy and its language (cf. Lateran IV).

God does not become more divine when we push him away from us in a sheer, impenetrable voluntarism; rather, the truly divine God is the God who has revealed himself as “logos” and, as “logos,” has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf. Certainly, love "transcends" knowledge and is thereby capable of perceiving more than thought alone (cf. Eph 3:19); nonetheless it continues to be love of the God who is “logos.”

Consequently, Christian worship is “spiritual” worship in harmony with the eternal Word and with our reason (cf. Rom 12:1).”

Hopefully, Benedict began a dialogue with Islam. He hoped, according to George Weigel in God’s Choice, that Muslim reformers can find from their “authoritative text . . . that it is God’s will that we be tolerant of those who have different understandings of God’s will.”

We need to pray that Islam accept reason and liberals accept the existence of “transcendent truths in material images” be it art, literature or God.

Radical Islam will continue violent conversion and killing in the name of an unknowable God. And liberal theorists will continue killing in the name of the unknowable gods of Feminism, Marxism as well as Nazism.

Malcolm Muggeridge said it best:

"When mortal men try to live without God, they infallibly succumb to megalomania or eratomania or both. The raised fist or the raised phallus; Nietzsche or D. H. Lawrence"

Although I would add when mortal men try to live without reason or a knowable God, they infallibly succumb to Homosexualism and/or the will to power of Feminism, Marxism,Nazism as well as radical Islam.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...