Turkey Must Be Christian Again!

And, while we're at it so should Egypt, Syria and Iraq. Similarly Iran (nee Persia) should be reclaimed by Zoroastrians.

These sectarian alterations are only in line with the oft repeated trope by various and sundry exponents of Islam to the effect that Jews are recent interlopers on "historic Muslim territory." This superficial plaint overlooks a basic reality of history which applies not only in the disputed territories but throughout the Mideast.

Christianity, for the benefit of those who are historically challenged, emerged in the land now known as Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and, most importantly, Turkey. The great traveling salesman of Christianity, the Apostle Paul, worked with effective assiduousness to plant the new faith in gentile communities throughout the region. He did so with words, spoken and written, and not the sword.

The history of early Christianity is the history of the area which became the Eastern Roman Empire with its capital in the new city of Constantinople. For centuries before as well as after the moment when Constantine pronounced Christianity to be the state religion, the cities of the East, the bishops of the East, the Emperor of the Eastern Empire (and the Empresses ) created Christianity. The creation of the Church conferences--which occurred without major exception in cities now in Turkey--included the Great Schism which resulted in the split between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic confessions.

The Eastern Roman Empire was Christian. So also was the North African littoral during the period of Visigoth domination. Constantinople outranked Rome as the center of Christianity. For centuries the same can be said of Alexandria, the center of the ancient Coptic church. Other cities of the (now) Arab Mideast were rivals of both Rome and Constantinople. While there was fighting between the Christians of differing perspectives on such key issues as the nature of the Trinity, the nature of the Christ, it is important to note that expansion of Christianity did not rely exclusively or even primarily on the use of armed force.

The most critical result of the internecine warfare which blotted so much of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh centuries was the weakening of the vibrant Christian communities of the Mideast so that no organized resistance could be mounted when the sword waving Muslims exploded out of the deserts of the Arabian Peninsula. So demoralized were the Christians of the region following the generations of internal fighting that the Muslims were initially welcomed as the bearers of peace and tranquility. (That view would change.)

Constantinople, however, held out. The wars between the Byzantines and the Muslims saw Christian fortunes wax and wane. Still, the ancient capital of the Eastern Empire held out--even after it was sacked by Crusaders of Catholic adherence. Not until 1453 and then only because two renegade Christians, one British and the other Hungarian, built and operated the giant artillery pieces capable of demolishing the city's walls were the Muslims--Seljuk Turks--successful in militarily obliterating Christianity there, replacing it with an Islam of forced conversion.

Turkey has been Muslim for only 557 years. Before that it had been Christian for more than ten centuries. By the reasoning employed Muslims as regards Israel and Palestine, the followers of Islam are recent interlopers not entitled to a right of peaceful enjoyment of the conquered Christian land.

The same analogy applies to other one time Christian centers of the Mideast. Sure, the Muslims have been squatting in these historically Christian areas for longer, but they established their presence by force of arms, by conquest, by subjugation of the indigenous population and culture--including religion. From Iraq to the Atlantic coast of Morocco, Christians whether Arian or Orthodox, Coptic or Roman Catholic were suppressed, robustly.

Following the Muslim line of logic--that "recent" arrival and the use of force equals illegitimacy, it is only right that Egypt be returned to the Copts, Morocco to the Arians (if any have survived their repression by Rome for "heresy.") Turkey must be given back to the Eastern Orthodox Church (and the great church of Hagia Sophia be restored to its pre-Muslim grandeur.) The bloody success of the Shia of Iran must be rectified by a bringing back of Zoroastrian beliefs.

Of course these reversions are as realistic as Obama's vision of a world free of the nuclear djinn. However, as a thought experiment the exercise does underscore the absurdity of the Muslim argument that Israel is a foreign implant in the authentic eternal body of Islam. It also shows the intellectual bankruptcy of the Muslim notion holding that the Iberian Peninsula having once been conquered and subjugated by force now belongs forevermore to the Sons of the Prophet.

Listen up, Muslims and apologists, history has no independent existence. It is not some sort of force standing apart from the actions of humanity. Rather it is a record, a record of, in part, winners and losers. The Christians lost in their own historic heartland--and they got over it. Muslims "lost" in Israel. They can't get over it.

The choice for the Muslims is simple: Accept the fact that your wars and terrorism have failed; or, accept more misery and death in the years to come. In either event your choices will not be an invocation of "history" but rather making more entries on the record of human actions, both the wise and the stupid.