Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Rosie O'Donnell Crazies
If you have high blood pressure, don't listen to it. However, here is the link to a webpage where you will find a video of Rosie O'Donnell claiming that "radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam."
I think that, while her statements are certainly uncalled for, and an apology to the Christian community is in order, I understand what she is saying. To the those on the left, who are trying to make secular humanism the religion of the state with the ahistorical definition of "separation of church and state, radical Islam and radical Christianity are just as threatening to the secular humanistic worldview. Radical Islam is not a relativistic, secular humanistic system, and will push their viewpoints with blood and violence against that system. In other words, if radical Islam has control of things, there goes secular humanism.
However, the same thing can be said about "radical Christianity." The word of God is so powerful that the irrational, illogical beliefs of secular humanism cannot stand to the word of God. Hence, we try to not even allow it to be debated by redefining things such as "separation of church and state," so we never have to defend our own religious commitment to secular humanism.
So, yes, both radical Christianity and radical Islam are distructive to the secular humanistic worldview. The only difference is that radical Islam destroys the secular humanistic worldview with the sword, while the radical Christianity destroys the secular humanistic worldview with the sword of the spirit.
However, it is easy to see that she was using it to smear Christians, and hence, I would say she owes the Christian community an apology. I know she is not going to give it, but that is liberalism for you.


Gordon Hackman said...

I think we should take the expressed views of people like Rosie O'Donnell in two ways. First, we should take them as an opportunity to prayerfully and carefully reflect on the way we live out and express our Christian faith, and ask ourselves if there is anything in our rhetoric or lifestyle that would give credence to such comments. I've seen way too many Christians who do give credance to these kinds of statements to just simply dismiss them.

Secondly, though, having done the first, having repented of anything we have done to unnessesarily bring shame on the gospel, and being of a clear conscience in our following Christ in public, we should be rejoice in such comments and the fact that the world sees the difference in our communities and recognizes them as a serious challenge to their own view of reality.

RedKnight said...

In regards to "radical" christianity, radical being theocratic fundamentalism, I myself would say that the only difference I know of is that radical Islam is actually more humane in a way. Under the caliphs, dissenters got there heads chopped off. But under the christian counterpart, people were burned alive. Muhammad felt that only Allah has the right to burn people. In Geneva under John Calvin however, heretics like Faustus Socinus, were burned at the stake for running afoul of the religious regime. I think that this was what Rosie O'Donnell was referring to.

RedKnight said...

I meant Michael Servetus, not Socinis. I got them mixed up. Doh!(slaps forhead)