In the context of Nice, they point out that according to the truck terrorist’s cousin, the mass murderer “didn’t pray, drank alcohol, ate pork and took drugs. He was an ‘unlikely jihadist’ who beat his wife and never went to a mosque”. Therefore, they infer, the perpetrator was motivated by the circumstances of his private life rather than Islam.
This explanation for Mahomed Lahouaiej Bouhlel’s actions is fairly typical of the left’s overwhelming urge to remove blame for Islamic atrocities from the religion which they have invited into the West. They almost invariably try to pin it on something else – chiefly the society whose Christian nature they are attempting to engineer into destruction using mass Muslim immigration as a battering ram for the purpose.
According to these mealy-mouthed dimwits, if Bouhel was a loser who tried to make a name for himself by murdering dozens, this was the fault of the ’oppressive’ society he lived in which discriminated against him. The answer to the oppression of the majority, according to the left, is to make sure that there is no ethnic / religious majority by importing yet more Muslims and other religions /ethnicities. So the madness goes on. This is in fact an outcome one can draw from recent remarks made by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
But back to Bouhel’s alleged lack of Islam, saying that the man never went to a mosque, etc. proves his actions ‘had nothing to do with Islam’ is to display a deep ignorance of what makes a culture and how a person is influenced by that culture if he is part of it, as Bouhel would have been in multicultural France. Bouhel shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’ as he went about his grisly task for good reason.
Look at it this way. Most people in the West don’t go to church these days. Yet their ideas of right and wrong, though debased, are essentially Christian in origin, even if they aren’t aware of it and take them for granted. It could hardly be otherwise since Christianity has been forming the conscience of the West for millennia.
The equality cultists of left- liberalism have been diligently undermining Christianity for many decades now. They have tried to replace Christian morality with Cultural Marxism / Political Correctness and so, partly as a result, some of the more noticeable societal aspects of Christianity have declined.
Nevertheless the traditional religion of the West will exert a profound, unseen and, for most, little-understood influence on us so long as there is something one can call the West. Indeed, how is the West defined? Essentially, it is still and always has been its ethnic nature of which Christianity has been by far and away the most important cultural /religious element.
To illustrate what is meant by a religion and its culture having a powerful influence on a civilisation/ culture, even when those who do not practice it are in the grip of it are unaware of the fact, one can point to our assumed freedom of our will. Our own responsibility to make choices is fundamentally Christian in origin. It comes from our freedom to accept or reject Christ’s injunction to ‘go and sin no more’. This freedom is at odds with Marxist materialist determinism.
It is also directly contradicts Islam. Islam teaches the transcendent lordship of Allah. This means the impossibility of free will. What we do, whatever it is, is foreordained by Allah because human beings cannot contradict or rebel against this transcendence. Human beings can only submit. Thus in many verses in the Qur’an, Allah is held responsible for the choices people make. In fact, some of the Ahadith (Stories and sayings of Mohammed) suggest that Allah has actively devised sins for mankind to lead them to perdition. Hence the oft quoted saying in Islam, ‘Inshallah’: ‘if Allah wills it’.
This ‘predestination’ doctrine has had a profound effect on Islamic societies. It has greatly contributed to the lethargy and lack of progress found in them. After all, if Allah is in charge, of whatever I do, whether or not I get up in the morning or complete a task or go on Jihad is down to him, not me.
Then there is the assumption and actuality of progress in Western societies. The idea of progress did not appear in any other religion or philosophy prior to Christ. It is specifically Christian in origin, deriving from the doctrine of the coming Kingdom of God. Without the idea of it, any progress which does occur in a society (such as the advent of agriculture) is largely accidental. One cannot work towards something about which one has no conception.
History for other cultures had no pattern and was merely a procession of events as in Judaism, or was cyclical or was a decline from some previous ‘Golden Age’. Islam was / is one of these latter. For Mohammed, his own generation (the one which murdered individual enemies and slaughtered whole groups and tribes across Arabia) was the best in Islam. After that came the next and then the next and so on. This attitude has helped to bring about the stultification of Islamic societies which have made no self-generated progress in any direction in seven centuries.
Of course, Christian progress brought about by spiritual change in an individual is not the same as the perverted environmentalist versions of it represented by Marxism, modern ‘progressivism’ etc. Christian doctrines have been a necessary although not a sufficient cause of the material progress of the West but Christianity is not dominated by it as are these bastardised, secular’ forms of ‘progress’.
Another example of the way a religion / culture influences the ideas which guide those who live in it is the assumption of the equal importance inherent in individuals in Western Societies. Part of the Christian revolution in ethics derives from the doctrine that each one of us has dignity and is equally valuable as an equally loved Child of God, whether they are wicked or selfish or not, or whether they believe in Jesus or not. This idea has led to innumerable political and social consequences such as modern democracy, one person; one vote, the assertion of the rights of women and the abolition of slavery.
The Christian idea of equality does not mean that all are held to be equal in any other way, or equal outcomes are expected of them, as is the fatuously wrong ideology of many if not most on the left. A parent knows that his / her children have different temperaments and capabilities and whilst loving them equally, treats them accordingly. This is Christianity.
Islam on the other hand makes it clear that sinful people are rejected by Allah as are non-believers and can expect no mercy from their creator who, bafflingly, has predestined them to this fate. These are excluded from Islamic ‘Equality’. Also excluded are women. For all of these reasons, respect for the individual is not open-ended as in Christianity but excludes most of humanity. Thus we see Burka or Niquab – clad women holding aloft placards reading ‘to hell with democracy’.
While the Christian West has had blood and oppression in its history, these aspects have run counter to Christ’s injunctions in the Sermon on the Mount. They merely point up the human capacity for evil, as is taught by Christianity. The teachings of the Sermon on the Mount though have provided a yardstick for the best of behaviour in Western societies. It is something that these societies have always aimed at, even if they have mostly fallen far short of them.
The bloody conquests of Islam, on the other hand do not run counter to Islam but are fully in line with the teaching and the spirit of that religion as promulgated by Mohammed. The reasons, to be found in the Qur’an and in the deeds of Islam’s ’perfect man’ and example to others, Mohammed, are too well known to reiterate here. These attitudes of aggression and absence of forgiveness for wrong permeate Islamic societies, producing the scenes we see so often on our TV screens and on YouTube.
Enough has been said to show that even when an individual does not practice a religion / culture in which he or she has been enculturated, this same religion / culture is highly likely to be the foundation of his / her fundamental ideas and attitudes. This is true even when that religion and its culture are consciously rejected. For example, the ‘Enlightenment’, so -called, which some people like to point to as a self-starting, anti-Christian movement was in fact a product of faith in reason which was in turn itself a product of the Christianity it rejected.
Islamic enculturation was very probably what lay behind the actions of the murdering truck driver in Nice. Non-practicing Muslim or not, this man’s attitudes were directed by the malignant bacillus called Islam. If he was also motivated by race hate and resentment and hatred for France, this dire religion has provided a cover and an excuse for the baseness of his actions.
So yes, these murders had a very great deal to do with the ‘Religion of Peace’.