1.2 It is no use pretending that these attacks arise from anger over poverty or Western presence in Islamic nations. Muslims of one sect viciously attack Muslims of other sects as well; it seems that Islam is inherently militant. I am not really concerned with what the Qur'an says here; I believe in "judging them by their fruits". In other words, rather than wrangle over texts, I look at the behavior of past and present Islamic movements.
1.3 I find that Islam (when not busy persecuting its own heretics) has always sought to expand, often by military force or sheer genocide, to conquer the Kafir, the infidels. I see in the daily news blogs, the same behavior all over the world to this very day: Islamic jihad groups named MILF and BIFF are fighting with each other over control of the Philippine Islands. In light of the endless stream of bloody attacks on each other and the world, I conclude that Islam is inherently violent.
1.4 In fact, Islam behaves similarly to the medieval Christian church. There are persecution, torture, burning, sexual molestation, holy wars, and abuses of all kinds, all in the name of religion. Again concerning Christianity, during the 16th century, Protestantism gained power and Protestants persecuted Catholics. It really does not matter what the Bible says; people bent the Scriptures to their needs.
1.5 Yet strangely, modern Christians do not persecute anyone, at least en masse. Christianity has changed since the Middle Ages. For instance, whereas once homosexuals were burned at the stake, now many churches are accepting homosexuals, even in leadership positions. While the church defended slavery as late as the 1850's, now Christians everywhere are against slavery and racism in general. While women were once considered silly and inferior to men, now many churches are led by women. These changes are evidence of a phenomenon I have come to call the evolution of religion.
1.6 According to this theory, a religion's historical and cultural development (I speak especially of Judaism, Christianity and Islam), shows a slow but continual adaptation to the factual evidence of science, and to the needs of human beings, over the commands of a god. Religions thus adapt to cultural changes. The religious sects which fail to adapt, become marginalized and gradually go extinct.
1.7 The general pattern of religious evolution is as follows:
- Authoritarianism: there is one God, the Bible is the only truth, rule by Shari'a law, etc.
- Sectarianism: the members of the religion begin to quarrel over doctrinal and other issues, and to divide into mutually-exclusive denominations.
- Ecumenism: the sects begin to engage in friendly discourse with one another and even "inter-faith dialogue" with essentially different religions.
- Humanism: the members of religion "reinterpret" their standards, such as the Bible or the Qur'an, to agree with science and social progress. They increasingly choose human needs over supposedly divine laws.
1.8 As an example, consider Judaism. In the Old Testament, the Israelites were commanded by their God to wage genocidal wars against the endemic peoples of Canaan. They often killed, not only men and women, but also children. In one text, they are allowed to "keep for yourselves the young maidens, who have not known a man".
1.9 Mosaic law also stated that if a woman, in order to defend her husband, grasped the genitals of his assailant, her hand must be cut off, "without mercy". In the Old Testament there are commands to execute people for any number of crimes and offenses against the law of God. Thankfully, the Jews of today do not obey these laws, and would repudiate anyone who did. Judaism has become almost entirely humanistic.
2.0 In the time of Jesus, it had its sects of Pharisees and Sadducees, and still has conservative Chasids and others. But by and large, Judaism has completed its evolution.
2.1 Jewish humanism has produced wonderful results. Jews build hospitals, engage in numerous humanitarian efforts, and have earned an impressive collection of Nobel prizes, especially in the fields of science and medicine. If similar results can be expected with other world religions, we should work for their humanization as well.
2.2 Christianity is beginning to show a similar adaptation toward a more humanistic ideology. As I mentioned in 1.5, even homosexuality is becoming more widely accepted. How Christians bend the Bible to accommodate such things is another story*; the amazing fact is that between 1970 and 2010, the main body of Christianity has gone from demonizing homosexuals to accepting and even ordaining them.
2.3 The Episcopal Church, after much struggle, has ordained at least one openly homosexual bishop. In fact, there is an evangelical pastor, Mark Tidd of the Highlands Church in Colorado, who welcomes homosexuals, saying "gay or straight here, there's no hate here". Of course many denominations do not yet accept homosexuals. I suppose some even have women wearing veils (as Paul says in 1 Cor 11.1-6). However, overall, the trend is clear: Christianity is becoming humanized.
2.4 There is still strong resistance to reason and science, especially here in the United States. Conservative Christian churches have been demanding that the biblical story of God's creation of life be taught as biological history in public schools. A fierce struggle has arisen between faith in an ancient myth, and the discoveries of science. To this day there are endless debates, books, sermons, and even motion pictures on the subject.
2.5 The most famous debate on the subject, to date, occurred during the Scopes "Monkey" Trial. In 1925, high school biology teacher John Thomas Scopes was accused of teaching evolution, contrary to Tennessee's Butler Act. Officially, the resulting case was called Tennessee versus Scopes. However, due to the evolutionary assertion that humans have arisen from apes (not monkeys), people soon started calling it the Scopes Monkey Trial.
2.6 Scopes was a more-than willing defendant. In fact, he was responding to a request from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for someone to challenge the anti-evolution law. He was defended by attorneys including Clarence Darrow, an agnostic. The State of Tennessee was represented by several attorneys, most notably Williams Jennings Bryan, a devout Presbyterian. Both sides called in expert witnesses, from scientific and biblical fields. The case soon became a cause celebre, and people all over America listened and debated the merits of evolution versus creation.
2.7 The court in Dayton, Tennessee eventually found Scopes guilty, but later reversed its verdict on a technicality. The winning of the court case proved a Pyrrhic victory, however. During the trial, Darrow and the defense team demolished the prosecution's arguments. Bryan in particular was embarrassed by questions from Darrow concerning the Bible's reliability.
2.8 In the end, the case dealt a strong blow against the belief that biblical creationism could compare with rational science. The Scopes trial brought the scientific and religious communities of the US into direct conflict as never before. This conflict still rages, 86 years later. I was surprised to discover that still 40% of Americans believe in some form of literal creationism; this is far more than in any other developed nation. Despite Scopes, and innumerable debates and books on the subject, four out of ten of my fellow citizens prefer a Bronze Age myth to modern science.
2.9 However, there are now many denominations who have adapted their beliefs to include the science of evolution. They use strategies such as the "Day-Age" theory, which posits that the biblical six days of creation were really six ages of indeterminate length. Other Christians simply say, "my God caused evolution". Thus they manage to meld belief in the Bible with acceptance of scientific truth.
3.0 There are obvious problems with this thinking. If the days were ages, then God created the plants an age before he created the sun; and if he causes evolution, then God makes mostly mistakes. Despite that biblical characters such as Jesus and the apostle Paul speak of Adam and Eve as historical, not mythical people, many Christians are holding to the Bible while accepting evolution, by adapting their belief system. This is a very hopeful sign of progress.
3.1 Thus the evolution of Christianity follows this historical pattern:
- Authoritarianism: circa AD 100- 1500
- Sectarianism: 1500- circa 1900
- Ecumenism: 1900-circa 2000
- Humanism: circa 1950-date (2011)
3.2 The one religion most resistant to change, is Islam. The Prophet Mohammed began teaching his ideology circa AD 630, but Islam's essential values and practices have not changed since the Middle Ages. Islam seems to be stuck in the middle of an Authoritarian-Sectarian stage. There are thus Shi'ites and Sunnis and others, but they are all authoritarian. The Qur'an is not yet questioned or "reinterpreted" as in Christianity; it is still considered the inerrant and binding word of Allah.
3.3 Islamic resistance to change can perhaps be explained by the inherently belligerent, indeed militant, character of its central text, the Qur'an, and the literal hermeneutic with which large numbers of Muslims read the text. Also, the the Bible has its Old and New Testaments. Whereas the Old Testament is centered on holiness and law, the New Testament's message is focused on grace and forgiveness.
3.4 The Qur'an has no such teachings, at least not as it has been read by most Muslims. If it did, where are the hospitals built with Muslim money and open to all people? Where are any Muslim humanitarian efforts at all? Why is it that all we get from Islamic people is hatred and terrorism?
3.5 We cannot pretend that Islamic atrocities are common to other groups; I have yet to see a Hindu or a Jew blow up a building, or a Christian group engage in any form of terrorism. Honor killing is most definitely not "domestic violence"; it is systematic religious violence against women.
3.6 There are isolated instances of someone like Anders Breivik or Timothy McVeigh, but they are separated by years or decades, and tend to be the work of individuals or small groups. In fact, as some say, "all religions can be violent": granted, they can. Violence and oppression can be done in the name of practically any ideology, but they are a specialty of Islam.
3.7 Let us compare religions in terms of terrorism. On the one hand, count the religiously-motivated terrorist acts by all non-Islamic groups, over the past twelve months; and on the other hand, the Islamic terrorist attacks during that time period. It will quickly become apparent that comparing the terrorism of other ideologies to Islam is like comparing a poodle to a pack of hyenas.
3.8 However, even in Islam, there are some hopeful signs. There is an increasing number of reformers, who contend that Islam must adapt to the modern world. Granted that these brave men and women may be in the minority, compared to the Islamists; however, they are a beginning.
3.9 The Critical Thinkers for Islamic Reform, Muslims for Progressive Values (whose chairperson is an unveiled woman), and the Ahmadiyya are only a few of the voices of nonviolent, progressive Islam. Of course, the Islamists often reject these forward-thinking people as apostates. But that depends on how one reads the Qur'an. The progressive Muslims read it very differently from the Islamists.
4.0 As I have said of the Bible, religious texts can become very flexible. Indeed flexibility, or adaptability, is necessary if any religion is to survive the selective pressure of the social and scientific environment. Therefore, like other religions, Islam will ultimately "reinterpret" its texts and adapt to humanism: or else it will become extinct. Ultimately, all religions will reinterpret their beliefs to reflect the needs of humanity, and this should give us hope.
*See "Westboro Baptists-True Christians"
No comments:
Post a Comment