The Crusader Mentality

The Crusader Mentality

The Crusader mentality is a negative term used by adherents of Islam who resent and resist continued involvement of the U.S. or others who are not Muslims in Islamic countries.

In short the “Crusader” mentality is the flip side of the coin of Jihadist mentality. Both refer to holy war. The Jihadist conducts holy war against infidels (non-Muslims) whereas the Crusader fought to free the holy lands from Islamic control. The Jihadist fights to spread the faith of Islam and believes that death in that enterprise assures him of a spot in Paradise. Likewise, the Crusader believed that death in carrying out their “holy” mission would automatically open a space for the one who died in heaven.

Note the following quote from Osama bin Laden in a tape, as reported by Reuters News Service today:

The lion of jihad ... Abu Musab al-Zarqawi ... was killed in a U.S. raid. We hope to God he accepts him as a martyr," said the speaker who sounded similar to previous recordings attributed to al Qaeda leader bin Laden.

Islam fears the Crusader mentality because it is as absolute as itself. It is similar to the situation where an irresistible force moves an unmovable wall. Both beliefs are absolute in nature, both are extreme and uncompromising, and the result is continued conflict until one side prevails or the two sides are so exhausted that they default to the status quo.

Although there are evangelical groups in the U.S. who may support Israel, this fight (either fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your point of view) is not about spreading Christianity into Islamic countries or setting up a Christian state. Instead the fight appears to be about self-protection (against Islamic attacks on the U.S.—elsewhere in the world or in the U.S. itself). It is about a declaration of war by Islamic militants against the U.S.

To some degree, the fact that the U.S. has been allied with Israel automatically caused the U.S. to be seen in the same light as Israel, which to an Islamic mentality is very reasonable. You are known by your friends.

However, our fight must be about our democratic values. There should be freedom of religion, freedom of press, and treatment of women as equals. In Islamic countries, this is not allowed. These freedoms are worth dying for. Therefore, the issue is not the expansion of Christianity into Islamic countries. The issue is one of individual freedoms.

Ah, but you may respond that those people do not want individual freedom (This sounds like a discourse with the Grand Inquisitor in the Brothers Karamazov). My response is this. First, do not be so sure. People in Islamic countries are not able to speak or write dissent without punishment. Second, people desire order even more than freedom. When the National Socialist brought order in economic chaos, the majority of people were content to live under it even if the minorities, including the Jews, were persecuted.
In Afghanistan, people may prefer to live under the Taliban than under a place where every local leader is a tyrant and there are no laws. And so they may be forced to live under draconian Taliban religious law rather than no law altogether. They may prefer bad laws harshly enforced by those with limited corruption to no law and corrupt enforcement. It is not a matter of religion, but of life and of getting along in hard times. It is a human condition and predicament, and not uniquely Islamic.

Is there a middle ground in the conflict between the Crusader mentality and the Jihadist? Unfortunately, for the true believers on either side there is not. However, sometimes there can be grounds for compromise by enlightened men of good will.

During the Crusades, the great Islamic leader Saladin, did not kill all the infidels in Jerusalem when he took it. He let them live. He was more generous and enlightened than today’s Islamist militants.

For years Jerusalem has been a free city where many beliefs coexist. And sometimes people of good will have cooperated, even in areas of belief. For example, two Christian groups have competed for centuries over the Church of the Nativity. The keeper of keys of the door for that venerable church is a neutral Muslim. Although, ironic, this is a symbol that people of different faiths can live in peace if they work together.

Unfortunately, people of peace, when Christian, may be viewed as less than stellar. Muslims who work for peace may be viewed by those of their religion as being less than stellar Muslims. That is the nature of extremism: it tries to wipe out the reasonable people who would compromise. No compromise is allowed by extremists of whatever religious persuasion.

Jesus spoke of a broad road that leads to damnation. There are many desiring to journey on the broad road of hatred.

As for those who are dying by suicide to kill others, I have this thought (which I admit is not Scriptural). What if God were to give the key to Paradise or to heaven to the victims of this war? Under Islamic law, opportunity is often given to the victims to have their say. What if the Supreme Being did the same thing?

What if the perpetrator of a suicide bombing were to show up in heaven and find that the key to Paradise or Heaven had been granted to those victimized by the action? What if the innocent people harmed by the action have the key to Heaven or Paradise?

Perhaps a young soldier blown up by the suicide has the key. The person who committed the suicide has to ask for the key from the young soldier. The young soldier might say: “I was drafted into the war; I believed I was fighting for my country; I never again saw my young wife, or my parents, or my sweet child. Why should I give the key to you?” What if the person committing suicide killed a young innocent child who had nothing to do with the war at all, or a young mother and her baby. In this scenario we ultimately must find that the word “martyr” is an inappropriate word to use and that “killer” is a more appropriate word.