Comparing religions

[Tacitus]

Christian theology, as an ideal too often not realized, goes beyond not killing an enemy but demands that its adherents actually love the enemy. Is there any text like this in Islam in which the enemy (non-Muslims, infidels, people of the book, etc.) are to be so fully embraced?

If we can find these texts, perhaps we could use them to more effectively counter violent salafists' call to combat the "far enemy" in a defensive jihad, a term I know is justified in the Koran. Thanks in advance for your help!

Very respectfully,

Jerry

So the Christian God commands his followers to love their enemy. He’s got a funny way of showing it. You wouldn’t know it from actually reading the Bible. Here is just a short list of the record of atrocities this God endorsed, commanded, or participated in.

People of Judah shout and God helps them kill 500,000 Israelites (2 Chr 13: 15-18)
God kills 70 men for simply looking into the Ark (1 Sam 6:19)
Korah questions Moses’ leadership and God makes the earth open up and swallow his people: men, women, and children (Num 16:20-49)
God drowns almost everyone on earth (Gen 7:21)
God orders and joins in on the genocide of all of Canaan (all through the book of Joshua, the killing just never stops)
God threatens people with having to eat their children’s flesh (Lev 26:29, Jer 19:9)
Sons of Levi are blessed for randomly slaughtering cow worshippers (Exo 32:27-29)
God, after hardening Pharaoh’s heart, kills all the Egyptian babies for Pharaoh’s stubbornness (Exo 11:10, Exo 12:29)
God kills the meat eaters (Num 11)
God allows people to sacrifice their babies to him to teach them a lesson (Ezek 20:26)
God kills a man for not impregnanting his sister-in-law (Gen 38:9-10)
God comes out of the sky to kill David’s enemies (2 Sam 22:9-16)
God allows babies to be dashed and pregnant women to be ripped open (Hosea 13:16)
God threatens to have wild animals carry away the Israelite’s children (Lev 26:22)
God tells people to kill their loved ones if they worship other gods (Deu 13:6-10)
Bible says beat your child with a rod (Prov 23:13)
Bible says beating and wounding people is good for them (Prov 20:30)
God promises to punish children for their parent’s sin (Exo 20:5)
God terrifies and causes tumors (1 Sam 5:6)

If one was to make an argument that a Supreme Being that has ultimate authority has the right to kill innocent children if he so desires, then I concur. But I take issue with the idea of such a Deity being “good”, “benevolent” or “loving.” Such a deity has a death fetish, He is petty, and deserving of not worship, but contempt.

For the record, I was forced to attend a Southern Baptist church every Sunday as a kid. I have recovered from the experience, thank you very much. I tend to find that generally Christians gloss over these atrocities. After all, if they question God they may get the same fate as those mentioned in the Bible. I think that a lot of Christians live in a state of denial about these Scriptures. They just pretend that the atrocities don’t exist in the “inspired, infallible, inerrant word of God.” Fact is these things DO exist in the Bible. Probably because it is the word of man, not God—in particular, the word of an ancient barbaric people who used “God” or “Yaweh” to justify their genocide and blood lust.

There is simply no other explanation, otherwise you have to reconcile a homicidal, genocidal, bloody ogre of a monster God in the Old Testament with the supposedly gentle peacenik hippy Jesus in the New Testament. Good luck reconciling the two.

This is the same problem the Muslims have. The militant, homicidal ones find their passages in the Koran to back up their divinely sanctioned violence. No matter what other good things are there--and they do exist, this backdrop of violence and murder sacnctioned by the Supreme Being just can't be avoided.

[marct]

Hi Tactitus,

I think that a lot of Christians live in a state of denial about these Scriptures. They just pretend that the atrocities don’t exist in the “inspired, infallible, inerrant word of God.” Fact is these things DO exist in the Bible. Probably because it is the word of man, not God—in particular, the word of an ancient barbaric people who used “God” or “Yaweh” to justify their genocide and blood lust.

On the whole, I think you are right about the glossing over of many of these passages. There is even the "convenient" out brought around by the "New Covenant" in the NT . I should also note that it is pretty wel known, in academic circles at least, that the Hebrew tribes plagiarized at least one book (Job) from Ugarit (no citations - what would Dr. P. say !!).

At the same time, you should keep in mind that the bloodthirstyness you mention is pretty much a characteristic of a lot of Gods (and Goddesses) at that time (say ~1850-550 bce). It had a tendency to be exacerbated, to some degree, in later iterations in duotheistic and monotheistic religions.

[Tom Odom]

At the same time, you should keep in mind that the bloodthirstyness you mention is pretty much a characteristic of a lot of Gods (and Goddesses) at that time (say ~1850-550 bce). It had a tendency to be exacerbated, to some degree, in later iterations in duotheistic and monotheistic religions.

I dunno 'bout that Marc. Tacitus hails from just up the Eastex freeway from where I grew up. Like him, I grew up in a strict southern Baptist culture and I can attest that the God my Pastor invoked each sunday when praying for the high school football team was very genocidal in his views of the opposition--especially those who came from Catholic schools.

Tom

[marct]

Hi Tom,

I dunno 'bout that Marc. Tacitus hails from just up the Eastex freeway from where I grew up. Like him, I grew up in a strict southern Baptist culture and I can attest that the God my Pastor invoked each sunday when praying for the high school football team was very genocidal in his views of the opposition--especially those who came from Catholic schools.

Is that like he WW II Army saying that "the Germans are our opponents, but the Navy is our Enemy!"?

Personally, I grew up in a strict Anglo-Catholic (aka "confused") culture - i.e. heavy drinking, lots of incense, the Choir runs the church, and this "God" fellow gets minimal mention. We never had any real problems with the Catholics, except for that, what was it called again?, oh, yeah - "guilt" (never got that one ).

[Tacitus]

WM: I have not read this Job book. But I know the story of Job, and I’ll tell you what I think about Job.

And Job lost all without complaining or cause -- sons, daughters, livestock, all destroyed, and yet Job sinned not. Some say that we should learn a lesson of patience and contentment under wrong and misfortune. That’s what the Preacher delivering the sermon typically concludes is the message. Wrongs will be righted in the hereafter on Judgment Day. But I think that it is not good to submit patiently to wrong, or to rest contented under misfortune. I urge that it is far manlier to resist wrong, better far to carefully investigate the causes of wrong and misfortune, with a view to their removal. Contentment under wrong is voluntary submission under oppression, and (in my opinion) is not the virtue some would have it to be.

In Job there is some poetry, some pathos, and some philosophy, but the story of this drama called Job, is heartless to the last degree. The children of Job are killed to settle a little private wager between God and the Devil. Sort of like a Greek myth, humans are playthings of the Gods, subject to their whims and diversions. Afterward, Job having remained firm, other children are given in the place of the murdered ones. Nothing, however, is done for the children who were murdered. So we are just pawns, bystanders in a cosmic struggle between good and evil then?

Glad you mentioned the melancholy Dane. One of my favorite passages from Kierkegaard is:
One sticks one’s finger into the soil to tell by the smell in what land one is: I stick my finger in existence — it smells of nothing. Where am I? Who am I? How came I here? What is this thing called the world? What does this world mean? Who is it that has lured me into the world? Why was I not consulted, why not made acquainted with its manners and customs instead of throwing me into the ranks, as if I had been bought by a kidnapper, a dealer in souls? How did I obtain an interest in this big enterprise they call reality? Why should I have an interest in it? Is it not a voluntary concern? And if I am to be compelled to take part in it, where is the director? I should like to make a remark to him. Is there no director? Whither shall I turn with my complaint?
 Repetition (1843), Voice: Young Man

Skiguy: I look forward to your answer. I’m Episcopalian now. What can I say, I’m a sucker for the liturgy inside the old stone small Gothic church. It somehow fosters a contemplative mood in me; maybe it is the medieval mood. I have the parish Priest over for dinner once a month. We discuss these weighty theological and philosophical matters long into the evening. So far, these questions have not been resolved.

Like you, it gets my hackles up when I hear Christians lamenting all the violence in Islam. Have they ever read Joshua? Methinks not. If that is an accurate portrayal of the will and actions of God, then He is a God to be feared and dreaded, not loved. Sort of like a kidnapper pointing a gun at your head telling you that if you don't tell him you love him, then he'll kill you. Sure, you'll tell him you love him (anything to get him to put the gun away), but you won't really mean it down deep inside. And you will be awfully uneasy about His presence.

[skiguy]

Tacitus, I think you have the book of Job all wrong. Job was not sinless, he was blameless (because he feared God and shunned evil). It was not a "wager" between God and Satan. Satan challenged and accused God, and God wanted to show Satan that Job can be tested and go through all this suffering yet still love God.
I think Joshua is an interesting book. There's CIA-like stuff in there with the spies, and some instances where the Israelites psyched out the enemy.

Request: let's not trash others' religions or beliefs. I like to compare religions to find the common ground in the call for peace, tolerance, and reconciliation. We all know there's violent verses in most, if not all, religious text (at least in the Abrahamic religions), but what are the good things common to all of them? If Christians, Jews, and Muslims think their commandments are to be warriors and kill or enslave everyone who doesn't follow their religion, that's just plain wrong, IMO.

I'm a Christian. I believe what I believe, and admit I'm very narrow minded about it. You're a Muslim. You believe what you believe and are narrow minded as well. Neither of us is going to change each other's beliefs. Does that mean we have to hate each other? Is there any reason we can't accept each other?

[Stan]

I'm a Christian. I believe what I believe, and admit I'm very narrow minded about it. You're a Muslim. You believe what you believe and are narrow minded as well. Neither of us is going to change each other's beliefs. Does that mean we have to hate each other? Is there any reason we can't accept each other?

That has got to be the best version I've seen (read) to date, bar none.

Very Well Put !

I'm one of those Catholics BTW

[marct]

Hi Skiguy,

Request: let's not trash others' religions or beliefs. I like to compare religions to find the common ground in the call for peace, tolerance, and reconciliation. We all know there's violent verses in most, if not all, religious text (at least in the Abrahamic religions), but what are the good things common to all of them? If Christians, Jews, and Muslims think their commandments are to be warriors and kill or enslave everyone who doesn't follow their religion, that's just plain wrong, IMO.

I really don't think looking at the "dark side" of various religions is necessarily a case of trashing them although, I will admit, it can appear that way . I think it is important to look at both the good and the bad in them - if for no other reason that to establish the commonalities and differences between them.

[invictus0972]

Like you, it gets my hackles up when I hear Christians lamenting all the violence in Islam. Have they ever read Joshua? Methinks not. If that is an accurate portrayal of the will and actions of God, then He is a God to be feared and dreaded, not loved. Sort of like a kidnapper pointing a gun at your head telling you that if you don't tell him you love him, then he'll kill you. Sure, you'll tell him you love him (anything to get him to put the gun away), but you won't really mean it down deep inside. And you will be awfully uneasy about His presence.

Tacitus,

If an alien were to land from another planet and read only the book of Job, would they have a comprehensive understanding of Christian theology? I don't think they would. If the same alien expanded his knowledge by reading the book of Job and excerpts from every example you provided in your previous post, would they then have a comprehensive understanding of Christian theology? Even with the added information from your excerpts, I submit they still would not have a comprehensive understanding of Christianity. The point I am making is that religions should be criticized and judged in total, which is why I was asking Sarajevo for some insight. At no point did I insinuate that the history of Christianity is devoid of any evils. I was comparing one of its many teachings, Christ's command to love one's enemy, with any similar texts in Islam. In the responses I have read so far, I have yet to find, though I believe it exists, one example of this kind of dictate emanating from Islam. I have only seen attacks on inquisitors, crusaders, and Christianity in general, none of which have anything to do with my original inquiry. Sarajevo did offer examples of the kind actions of individual Muslims, but I am looking for doctrinal teachings that can be used in an IO campaign against radical salafists, for they use theology to justify much of their violent actions. It is their appeal to theology that gives them strength and resilience in the ideological arena. They justify their acts in the same way that Eric Rudolph used Christianity to justify his violent actions. However, because I am from a Christian background, I better understand, though I do not agree with, Rudolph's actions. Anyway, I just wanted to clarify those couple of points.

Also, in reference to your comments on Christianity and suffering, there are several people a lot smarter than you and I who have lucid and logical explanations for this apparent contradiction. C.S. Lewis' The Problem of Pain is a good start. I mention this knowing that you probably have already this book.

[wm]

So If one was to make an argument that a Supreme Being that has ultimate authority has the right to kill innocent children if he so desires, then I concur. But I take issue with the idea of such a Deity being “good”, “benevolent” or “loving.” Such a deity has a death fetish, He is petty, and deserving of not worship, but contempt.

For the record, I was forced to attend a Southern Baptist church every Sunday as a kid. I have recovered from the experience, thank you very much. I tend to find that generally Christians gloss over these atrocities. After all, if they question God they may get the same fate as those mentioned in the Bible. I think that a lot of Christians live in a state of denial about these Scriptures. They just pretend that the atrocities don’t exist in the “inspired, infallible, inerrant word of God.” Fact is these things DO exist in the Bible. Probably because it is the word of man, not God—in particular, the word of an ancient barbaric people who used “God” or “Yaweh” to justify their genocide and blood lust.

There is simply no other explanation, otherwise you have to reconcile a homicidal, genocidal, bloody ogre of a monster God in the Old Testament with the supposedly gentle peacenik hippy Jesus in the New Testament. Good luck reconciling the two.

This is the same problem the Muslims have. The militant, homicidal ones find their passages in the Koran to back up their divinely sanctioned violence. No matter what other good things are there--and they do exist, this backdrop of violence and murder sacnctioned by the Supreme Being just can't be avoided.

I heartily recommend Heinelin's book JOB as a corrective for religious angst. It provides a much better answer than reading the melancholy Dane, IMHO

[goesh]

- I've always found browsing the Halachic compositions stemming from their 'book' , Bishul/cooking in particular, took my mind off the sword and inspired a neurosis its own and I intend no offense to Jews, absolutely not

[skiguy]

If one was to make an argument that a Supreme Being that has ultimate authority has the right to kill innocent children if he so desires, then I concur. But I take issue with the idea of such a Deity being “good”, “benevolent” or “loving.” Such a deity has a death fetish, He is petty, and deserving of not worship, but contempt.

I'm going to continue the tradition of glossing over. I don't know the answer to this. The closest I get is because He's God, so there must be some reason for it that we don't understand and may never understand. It probably relates somehow to "the wages of sin is death", but, other than that,I don't pretend to know or pretend to have an explanation. I just do the best I can to obey the commands love God and love your neighbor which is what Jesus said it all boils down to and it's where we're at now...yes, Marc, I played the NT card. Now could someone let Israel know this?
This is part of my whole gripe with Christians calling Islam evil and saying their text condones genocide and suicide bombing. I just point to these verses in the Bible and ask them to explain the difference.

When I get a real answer, I'll let y'all know.

[invictus0972]

So the Christian God commands his followers to love their enemy. He’s got a funny way of showing it. You wouldn’t know it from actually reading the Bible. Here is just a short list of the record of atrocities this God endorsed, commanded, or participated in.

People of Judah shout and God helps them kill 500,000 Israelites (2 Chr 13: 15-18)
God kills 70 men for simply looking into the Ark (1 Sam 6:19)
Korah questions Moses’ leadership and God makes the earth open up and swallow his people: men, women, and children (Num 16:20-49)
God drowns almost everyone on earth (Gen 7:21)
God orders and joins in on the genocide of all of Canaan (all through the book of Joshua, the killing just never stops)
God threatens people with having to eat their children’s flesh (Lev 26:29, Jer 19:9)
Sons of Levi are blessed for randomly slaughtering cow worshippers (Exo 32:27-29)
God, after hardening Pharaoh’s heart, kills all the Egyptian babies for Pharaoh’s stubbornness (Exo 11:10, Exo 12:29)
God kills the meat eaters (Num 11)
God allows people to sacrifice their babies to him to teach them a lesson (Ezek 20:26)
God kills a man for not impregnanting his sister-in-law (Gen 38:9-10)
God comes out of the sky to kill David’s enemies (2 Sam 22:9-16)
God allows babies to be dashed and pregnant women to be ripped open (Hosea 13:16)
God threatens to have wild animals carry away the Israelite’s children (Lev 26:22)
God tells people to kill their loved ones if they worship other gods (Deu 13:6-10)
Bible says beat your child with a rod (Prov 23:13)
Bible says beating and wounding people is good for them (Prov 20:30)
God promises to punish children for their parent’s sin (Exo 20:5)
God terrifies and causes tumors (1 Sam 5:6)

If one was to make an argument that a Supreme Being that has ultimate authority has the right to kill innocent children if he so desires, then I concur. But I take issue with the idea of such a Deity being “good”, “benevolent” or “loving.” Such a deity has a death fetish, He is petty, and deserving of not worship, but contempt.

For the record, I was forced to attend a Southern Baptist church every Sunday as a kid. I have recovered from the experience, thank you very much. I tend to find that generally Christians gloss over these atrocities. After all, if they question God they may get the same fate as those mentioned in the Bible. I think that a lot of Christians live in a state of denial about these Scriptures. They just pretend that the atrocities don’t exist in the “inspired, infallible, inerrant word of God.” Fact is these things DO exist in the Bible. Probably because it is the word of man, not God—in particular, the word of an ancient barbaric people who used “God” or “Yaweh” to justify their genocide and blood lust.

There is simply no other explanation, otherwise you have to reconcile a homicidal, genocidal, bloody ogre of a monster God in the Old Testament with the supposedly gentle peacenik hippy Jesus in the New Testament. Good luck reconciling the two.

This is the same problem the Muslims have. The militant, homicidal ones find their passages in the Koran to back up their divinely sanctioned violence. No matter what other good things are there--and they do exist, this backdrop of violence and murder sacnctioned by the Supreme Being just can't be avoided.

In my post, I was referring to the ideal of Christianity. I would submit that the examples you provide in your response do not represent the ideal of Christianity. In fact, they were mostly examples from the Old Testament or pre-Christianity. I think to pick and choose certain portions of any religion is not the best way to understand its penultimate ideal. I am interested in the highest ideals of Christianity and Islam, not the evidence of how well people did or did not live out these ideals.

I respect your view on the existence or, in your case, nonexistence of a Supreme Being. However, I would submit that your tendency towards anthropomorphism may cloud your judgment. If a Supreme Being does exist, he would not be anything like a human; therefore, standards applied to it would be different than those applied to a mere mortal. Again, I am not trying to convince you of anything.

Have a good afternoon.