Changes

[[File:Karen Armstrong.jpg|right|170px]]

[[File:Karen Armstrong.jpg|right|170px]]

'''Karen Armstrong''' (born 1944) is a [[liberal]] British comparative [[religion]] writer. Her first book, ''Through the Narrow Gate'', describes her seven years as a nun in a [[Roman Catholic]] order. After leaving she pursed studying the world's monotheistic religions, beginning with Islam. Armstrong is a popular voice for [[liberal Christianity]] and who promotes [[Islam]] and anti-Christian (in the Biblical theological sense)  sentiment.  She is a member of the [[anti-Christ]] [[Jesus Seminar]]  and has written more than 20 book including ''A History of God'', ''Islam: A Short History'', ''Buddha'', ''The Spiral Staircase'', ''The Great Transformation'', ''Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time''  and most recently ''The Case for God ''; also numerous articles for ''The Guardian'' and other publications.

'''Karen Armstrong''' (born 1944) is a [[liberal]] British comparative [[religion]] writer. Her first book, ''Through the Narrow Gate'', describes her seven years as a [[nun]] in a [[Roman Catholic]] [[convent]]. After leaving she pursed studying the world's monotheistic religions, beginning with Islam. Armstrong is a popular voice for [[liberal Christianity]] and who promotes [[Islam]] and anti-Christian (in the Biblical theological sense)  sentiment.  She is a member of the [[anti-Christ]] [[Jesus Seminar]]  and has written more than 20 book including ''A History of God'', ''Islam: A Short History'', ''Buddha'', ''The Spiral Staircase'', ''The Great Transformation'', ''Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time''  and most recently ''The Case for God ''; also numerous articles for ''The Guardian'' and other publications.

Armstrong spent 7 years as a [[nun]] in [[convent]], and her life as part of the austere Ignatian regimen is described in  her acclaimed book, ''Through the Narrow Gate.'' While designed to bring its subjects to be filled with [[God]], yet like many others in institutionalized programs, Armstrong found only silence from God and evidences no indication that she ever experienced becoming truly ''[[born again]]'' through personal [[repentance]] and [[faith]] in the [[Lord Jesus Christ]] to save her from her [[sin]]s, with its resultant Scriptural relationship with God.  

The austere Ignatian regimen which Armstrong was part of for years a nun was designed to bring its subjects to be filled with [[God]], yet like many others in institutionalized programs, Armstrong found only silence from God and evidences no indication that she ever experienced becoming truly ''[[born again]]'' through personal [[repentance]] and [[faith]] in the [[Lord Jesus Christ]] to save her from her [[sin]]s, with its resultant Scriptural relationship with God.  

Her conclusions regarding God conform to her experience, or lack thereof, and the faith that Armstrong promotes is revealed as being closer to atheism than the [[Bible]], due to her rejection of the Biblical revelation of God as a literal benign creator, and affirmation of atheists and [[evolutionists]] in imagining that there is "no Intelligence controlling the cosmos, and that life itself is the result of a blind process of natural selection." In an interview with the [[Wall Street Journal]],<ref>Sept. 12, 2009</ref> the militant atheist  [[Richard Dawkins]], who himself wars against a god of his own imagination, responded to Armstrong's own attempt by stating, "Tell the congregation of a church or mosque that existence is too vulgar an attribute to fasten onto their God, and they will brand you an atheist. They'll be right."

Her conclusions regarding God conform to her experience, or lack thereof, and the faith that Armstrong promotes is seen by some as being closer to atheism than that of the [[Bible]]. She rejects the Biblical revelation of God as a literal benign creator, and is akin to [[atheists]] and [[evolutionists]] in imagining that there is "no Intelligence controlling the cosmos, and that life itself is the result of a blind process of natural selection." In an interview with the [[Wall Street Journal]],<ref>Sept. 12, 2009</ref> the militant atheist  [[Richard Dawkins]], who himself wars against a god of his own imagination, responded to Armstrong's arguments in her book "A case for God" by stating, "Tell the congregation of a church or mosque that existence is too vulgar an attribute to fasten onto their God, and they will brand you an atheist. They'll be right."

In contrast to the consistent references in the Bible to God as the literal Creator of the [[Universe]], and who does reveal Himself through what He has made and has worked in literal events, Armstrong subscribes to the discredited<ref> http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm</ref><ref>http://www.tektonics.org/TK-J.html#jedp</ref> Documentary Hypothesis Theory, and also asserts that the literalistic reading of Scripture, when contrary to what [[Science]] may say, was a development that began in the 17th century. She contrasts this to the "a good myth" of paganism, which she sees as as "an early form of psychology," and which she advocates as showing"how to cope with mortality, discover an inner source of strength, and endure pain and sorrow with serenity."  Rather than being a literal reality one can experience, the "God" Armstrong advocates "is '''merely''' a symbol that points beyond itself to an indescribable transcendence, whose existence is only intuited by means of spiritual exercises and a compassionate lifestyle that enables cultivating new capacities of mind and heart."<ref>''Man vs. God'', The Wall Street Journal,  Sept. 12, 2009</ref>

In contrast to the consistent references in the Bible to God as the literal Creator of the [[Universe]], and who does reveal Himself through what He has made and has worked in literal events, Armstrong subscribes to the discredited<ref> http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm</ref><ref>http://www.tektonics.org/TK-J.html#jedp</ref> Documentary Hypothesis Theory, and also asserts that the literalistic reading of Scripture, when contrary to what [[Science]] may say, was a development that began in the 17th century. She contrasts this to the "a good myth" of paganism, which she sees as as "an early form of psychology," and which she advocates as showing"how to cope with mortality, discover an inner source of strength, and endure pain and sorrow with serenity."  Rather than being a literal reality one can experience, the "God" Armstrong advocates "is '''merely''' a symbol that points beyond itself to an indescribable transcendence, whose existence is only intuited by means of spiritual exercises and a compassionate lifestyle that enables cultivating new capacities of mind and heart."<ref>''Man vs. God'', The Wall Street Journal,  Sept. 12, 2009</ref>

"I say that religion isn't about believing things. It's ethical alchemy. It's about behaving in a way that changes you, that gives you intimations of holiness and sacredness."<ref>powells.com/authors/armstrong.html</ref>

"I say that religion isn't about believing things. It's ethical alchemy. It's about behaving in a way that changes you, that gives you intimations of holiness and sacredness."<ref>powells.com/authors/armstrong.html</ref>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

Rather than affirming the God of the Bible as the literal creator, or merely acknowledge that the fullness of God goes beyond the comprehension of man, (Romans 11:33-36)  Armstrong denies Him as the literal Creator who literally spoke to such men as [[Moses]],  and was revealed in flesh by the Lord Jesus, as held in [[New Testament]] [[Christianity]], and who is known by man in a real relationship through saving faith in Him, out of a broken and contrite heart. (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-19) Gal. 4:6; Ps. 34:18)  She therefore renders all who testify of a transformative evangelical-type Christian conversion and its relationship, which testimony includes thousands of Christian hymns expressing such, to basically having expanded powers of imagination.

Rather than affirming the God of the Bible, or merely acknowledging that the fullness of God goes beyond the comprehension of man, (Romans 11:33-36)  Armstrong denies Him as the literal Creator who literally spoke to such men as [[Moses]],  and was revealed in flesh by the Lord Jesus, as held in [[New Testament]] [[Christianity]], and who is known by man in a real relationship through saving faith in Him. (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-19) Gal. 4:6; Ps. 34:18)  She therefore seems to render all who testify of a transformative evangelical-type Christian conversion out of a broken and contrite heart, and its resultant relationship with God, with the thousands of Christian hymns expressing such, to basically having expanded powers of imagination

==Views==

==Views==

==Critical analysis==  

==Critical analysis==  

Armstrong presents the Qur'an as saying "that every rightly guided religion comes from God. And there must be no compulsion in religion,"  while stating that the Bible has no clear answers or theology. However, the reality is that the Qur'an is hardly a cohesive, progressively comprehensive revelation, while its disjointed suras do support an exclusive and elite view of Islam, and that unbelievers are worthy of repression, such as is expressed in the Pact of Umar.<ref>http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/pactofumar.html</ref> Moreover, anything close to a "New Testament," with its rejection physical religious violence, was part of Muhammad's earlier preMedenic  "revelations" (when he was a minority, and militarily weak), in which there is one verse (2:256) clearly stating there should be "no compulsion in religion," while it is well evident in many other places that the Qur'an clearly exhorts retaliation and religious violence.  

Armstrong presents the Qur'an as saying "that every rightly guided religion comes from God. And there must be no compulsion in religion,"  while failing to see clear answers or theology in the Bible. However, the reality is that the Qur'an is hardly a cohesive, progressively comprehensive revelation, while what is expressed in its disjointed suras is an exclusive and elite view of Islam, and that unbelievers are worthy of repression, such as is seen in the [[Pact of Umar.]]<ref>http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/pactofumar.html</ref> Moreover, anything close to a "New Testament," with its rejection of physical religious violence and retaliation , was part of Muhammad's earlier preMedenic  "revelations" (when he was a minority, and militarily weak), in which there is one verse (2:256) clearly stating there should be "no compulsion in religion," while it is well evident in many other places that the Qur'an clearly exhorts retaliation and religious violence.  

   

   

The Qur'an is far more restrictive in its scope of communication than the Bible,<ref>http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/Gilchrist/Vol1/4a.html</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/bravo_r4bc.htm</ref>  lacking the manner of context and clarity of theology which the Bible provides in this area, with its extensive historical narratives and theological treatises, which for Islam might enable restricting its religious violence to simply a defensive context or a limited geographical areas, versus commands such as to fight until the only worship be of Allah (2:193; 8:39) being used to justify world - wide physical Jihad. In addition, oppressing or making war against Islam can easily be understood to include ideological opposition. <ref>http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html</ref> It is also evidenced that the teaching of the Hadith promotes physical violence.<ref>http://www.muslimhope.com/WarInIslam.htm</ref>   

The Qur'an is far more restrictive in its scope of communication than the Bible,<ref>http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/Gilchrist/Vol1/4a.html</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/bravo_r4bc.htm</ref>  lacking the manner of context and clarity of theology which the Bible provides in this area, with its extensive historical narratives and theological treatises. If this was the case in the Qur'an then it might enable restricting its religious violence to simply being sanctioned in a truly defensive context or offensively in a limited geographical area, versus commands such as to fight until the only worship be of Allah (2:193; 8:39) being used to justify world - wide physical Jihad. In addition, oppressing or making war against Islam can easily be understood to include ideological opposition. <ref>http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html</ref> It is also evidenced that the teaching of the [[Hadith]] promotes physical violence.<ref>http://www.muslimhope.com/WarInIslam.htm</ref>   

In contrast to the Qur'an, the New Testament is clearly and consistently contrary to the use of violence by the church, either in retaliation, church discipline or ruling over those without (1Cor. 5:12,13; 2Cor. 6:1-10; 12:3; Eph. 6:12) in contrast to the State, (Romans 13:1-7; 1Pet. 13,14) with the violence of the Crusades and Inquisitions being accompanied by widespread ignorance of the Bible.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html Jesus versus Muhammad]</ref>

In contrast to the Qur'an, the New Testament is clearly and consistently contrary to the use of violence by the church, either in retaliation, church discipline or ruling over those without (1Cor. 5:12,13; 2Cor. 6:1-10; 12:3; Eph. 6:12) in contrast to the State, (Romans 13:1-7; 1Pet. 13,14) with the violence of the Crusades and Inquisitions being accompanied by widespread ignorance of the Bible.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html Jesus versus Muhammad]</ref>

''For more information see [[The Bible versus the Qur'an]]''

''For more information see [[The Bible versus the Qur'an]]''

While it is evident that perhaps the majority of Muslims, especially in the West, seek to live in peace with their neighbors and uphold traditional moral values and understand the Qur'anic suras exhorting violence in a much more limited and spiritual sense, in contrast to Armstrong, it is understand by many that the fundamentalists such as [[Osama Bin Laden]] have a strong case, partly based upon the manner of their leader in regard to the use of the sword.  

While it is evident that perhaps the majority of Muslims, especially in the West, seek to live in peace with their neighbors and uphold traditional moral values and understand the Qur'anic suras exhorting violence in a much more limited or spiritual sense, yet in contrast to Armstrong, it is understand by many that the fundamentalists such as [[Osama Bin Laden]] have a strong case, partly based upon the manner of their leader in regard to the use of the sword.  

Robert Spencer, director of [[Jihad Watch]], and a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law, criticizes Armstrong for spending a great deal of time propagating "a highly tendentious version of Islam, as benign as Quakerism and as expansive as the most liberal form of Anglicanism." In regards to the tendency to emphasize pacifist texts, and to see exhortations to violence as defensive, Spencer responds,   

Robert Spencer, director of [[Jihad Watch]], and a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law, criticizes Armstrong for spending a great deal of time propagating "a highly tendentious version of Islam, as benign as Quakerism and as expansive as the most liberal form of Anglicanism." In regards to her tendency to emphasize pacifist texts, and to see exhortations to violence as defensive, Spencer responds,   

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

The Muslim terrorists are committing acts of terrorism, by their own account, because of core Islamic teachings. Saying that we are supposed to ignore that is tantamount to saying that we must ignore what the enemy tells us about himself, who he is, what he wants, and why he is fighting. Which is tantamount to saying that we should surrender. We cannot defeat an enemy we are afraid to name.

The Muslim terrorists are committing acts of terrorism, by their own account, because of core Islamic teachings. Saying that we are supposed to ignore that is tantamount to saying that we must ignore what the enemy tells us about himself, who he is, what he wants, and why he is fighting. Which is tantamount to saying that we should surrender. We cannot defeat an enemy we are afraid to name.

Recent recipients of the Freedom Medal include Nelson Mandela, Kofi Annan, Bill Clinton, and wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Recent recipients of the Freedom Medal include Nelson Mandela, Kofi Annan, Bill Clinton, and wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As is true of liberalism in general, Armstrong opposes "religious certainty," favors Buddhism, and essentially sees those who hold that truth is exclusive by nature as being the problem, including Christianity which she also accuses of idolatry by making what she sees as a human idea of God to be absolute. Yet she seems certain that the only truth and "god" that should be sanctioned is one that conforms to a rather nebulous idea of what compassion is. She allows traditional faith "as long as it leads you to practical compassion," <ref>Dave Weich, Powells.com interview, ''Karen Armstrong, Turn, Turn, Turn''</ref> but which can be subjectively defined. Such objectively baseless human reasoning is advocated by [[atheism]], but such can easily call evil good,<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Atheism1.html ATHEISM versus CHRIST]</ref> as a false religion can, while opposing abortion and the typical homosexual lifestyle would be rejected by Armstrong's religion.     

As is true of liberalism in general, Armstrong opposes "religious certainty," and favors Buddhism, and essentially sees those who hold that truth is exclusive by nature as being the problem - including Christianity which she also accuses of idolatry by making what she sees as a human idea of God to be absolute. Yet she seems certain that the only truth and "god" that should be sanctioned is one that conforms to a rather nebulous idea of what compassion is. She allows traditional faith "as long as it leads you to practical compassion," <ref>Dave Weich, Powells.com interview, ''Karen Armstrong, Turn, Turn, Turn''</ref> but which can be subjectively defined. Such objectively baseless human reasoning is advocated by [[atheism]], but such can easily call evil good,<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Atheism1.html ATHEISM versus CHRIST]</ref> as a false religion can, while opposing abortion and the typical homosexual lifestyle would be rejected by Armstrong's religion.     

Armstrong is a strong advocate of the [[Golden Rule]], but which requires a foundational guiding morality if everyone doing to others as they would have to them will be always be beneficial,  yet Armstrong asserts that "there are no clear answers, no clear theology in the Bible." While she often contrasts bigotry and religious wars, primarily the Crusades - by which she too often seems to define Christianity by - with compassion, she largely rejects the Scriptures in their totality from providing a clear basic moral theology, with its resultant divisive stands, obedience to which prevents the pitiful conditions that need compassionate care.  

Armstrong often contrasts bigotry and religious wars, primarily the Crusades - by which she too often seems to define Christianity by - with compassion, and is a strong advocate of the [[Golden Rule]], but which requires a foundational guiding morality if everyone doing to others as they would have done to them (Luke 6:21) will be always be beneficial,  yet she largely rejects the Scriptures in their totality from providing a clear basic moral theology, with its resultant needful divisive stands, obedience to which prevents the pitiful conditions that need compassionate care.  

In 2008 Armstrong's was rewarded with the [[liberal elite]] TED (Technology Entertainment and Design) Prize, receiving  $100,000,  in which she asked for assistance in assembling the Charter for Compassion, a document around which religious leaders can work together for peace, with atheists also being invited. The carefully nuanced document exhorts general values of compassion while disallowing "any interpretation of scripture that breeds...disdain."<ref>[http://charterforcompassion.org/site/#l]</ref>  This would promote an imagination of peace though commitment to an amorphous morality, based upon what one understandings to be truly compassionate, and has the effect of marginalizing or fostering disdain towards who take sides on divisive moral such as abortion, and spiritual claims to truth, most principally Biblical ones.

In 2008 Armstrong's was rewarded with the [[liberal elite]] TED (Technology Entertainment and Design) Prize, receiving  $100,000,  in which she asked for assistance in assembling the Charter for Compassion, a document around which religious leaders can work together for peace, with atheists also being invited. The carefully nuanced document exhorts general values of compassion while disallowing "any interpretation of scripture that breeds...disdain."<ref>[http://charterforcompassion.org/site/#l]</ref>  This document imagines peace though commitment to an amorphous morality, based upon what one understandings to be truly compassionate, and has the effect of marginalizing or fostering disdain towards who take sides on divisive moral such as abortion, and spiritual claims to truth - most principally Biblical ones.

   

   

The project manifests the superficial view of humanity and morality which is foundational to liberalism, which sees mankind as basically good, not sinful, and that there is no absolute moral truths or ultimate moral authority and judge, which is a claim to elitist truth itself, and is antagonistic even in its benign forms towards those who think otherwise.   

The project overall manifests the superficial view of humanity and morality which is foundational to liberalism, which sees mankind as basically good, not sinful, and that there is no absolute moral truths or ultimate moral authority and judge, which negative claim is elitist itself, and is antagonistic even in its benign forms towards those who think otherwise.   

For years Armstrong wanted "wanted nothing whatsoever to do with religion," and now sees "quarreling about religion" as being "counterproductive and not conducive to enlightenment," <ref>''Out, Out, Damned Atheists'', Newsweek, September 11, 2009</ref> but what she is seen quarreling with is religion that enables one to know God in a real and relational, Scripture-based way, and her radical interpretive basis regarding the Bible is understood as an example of what the apostle Paul referred to in warning,

For years Armstrong wanted "wanted nothing whatsoever to do with religion," and now sees "quarreling about religion" as being "counterproductive and not conducive to enlightenment," <ref>''Out, Out, Damned Atheists'', Newsweek, September 11, 2009</ref> but what she is seen quarreling with is religion that enables one to know God in a real and relational, Scripture-based way, and her radical interpretive basis regarding the Bible is understood as an example of what the apostle Paul referred to in warning,