At first glance, the four appendices in this book might seem to be unrelated to its main thesis—empirical analysis of Islam as a religion and a political supremacist movement. The following brief summaries of the content of the appendices will make these connections clear.
Appendix 1: Buddhist Jesus
Islam regards Jesus as a Muslim and a Prophet of God, but not as a savior, the Son of God, or divine. This is in keeping with Islam’s approach to Christianity as a whole, which is to regard it as a subset or variation of Islam rather than as a legitimately independent religion. This high-handed approach is taken without empirical evidence and with total disregard to the facts of history, most notably the historical precedence of Christian thought and practice. Compared to the theological appropriation of Jesus by Islam, Buddhist influence on Christianity is historically demonstrable.
In the light of the distinction between measurable Buddhist influence and historically and empirically unfounded Islamic claims that Jesus is merely a prophet preceding Muhammad (the final prophet), one might question the motives for the latter. Islamic claims seem to be an attempt to legitimize their doctrine by claiming without authority a connection with an earlier doctrine. Then in turn the earlier doctrine is dismissed as inaccurate or incomplete—in need of the later doctrine for its alleged correction and perfection. The Islamic motive here seems quite self-serving and even parasitic in nature.
Islamic apologists like to claim (when it is convenient for them to do so) that Islam and Christianity are related religions. What they do not add is that the relation, from Islam’s perspective, is entirely to Islam’s advantage. Islam denies the divinity of Christ and sets itself in direct opposition to the fundamentals of Christian belief. Where the Buddhist influence on Christianity, as this appendix argues, gives a non-Semitic and universalist ethos to that religion, Islam retains the dualist outlook which is characteristic of the Semitic mind. This appendix demonstrates just how divorced Islam truly is from Christian thought.
Appendix 2: The Classical Roots of Western Civilization
Since World War II, it has been fashionable in many circles to describe Western civilization as “Judeo-Christian.” This description is only partially true, and in its partiality it ignores aspects of the Western mindset. By emphasizing Jewish and Christian roots, the contributions of Hellenic, Roman, Teutonic, Celtic, Slavic, and other native European peoples are ignored or diminished. Furthermore, the enormous contributions of Classical Greece and Rome to Western science and secularism are completely left out by this phrase, Judeo-Christian. The words and phrases, the science and architecture, the poetry and history—all this is part of the greatness of the West’s cultural heritage. This must be reclaimed, not left to become mere footnotes to Judeo-Christianity or Abrahamic monotheism.
Appendix 3: The Case for Universal Secular Ethics
This writer believes that the alternative to Islam is not a competing religion but a secular and universal ideology. The world needs science and Secular Humanism, not the ancient theology of Muhammad. Universal secular ethics is an attempt to replace the metaphysically-based ethics of religions with an ethical system which is empirical, verifiable, and in keeping with the changing conditions and needs of humanity. One of Islam’s defining features is its inability to change. Alteration of its doctrines is seen by Islam as an admission of falsehood. This renders Islam incapable of critical examination and without its own means of escape from theological debates and seventh century solutions. Such debates and solutions have been applies for 1,400 years without resolution or positive results. Must they continue until the whole world falls into the same useless circular reasoning?
Appendix 4: Hilary Clinton’s Diplomacy of Delusions, A Critical Review of Hard Choices.
As a leading candidate for the Presidency of the United States in 2016, Hillary Clinton’s views on world affairs deserve critical examination. Hard Choices is the most recent and comprehensive statement of these views, and in this appendix it is held up to close scrutiny. As I see it, Clinton’s views on foreign policy in general and the Islamic World and Middle East conflict in particular are naïve and superficial. She shows all the signs of the usual errors and misjudgments which characterize elite Western opinion about Islam. If she continues to hold such views and takes them with her to the presidency it will be yet another disaster for the United States.