Most religions with a written account of that faith, profess certain principles and commandments for living within that faith. These written accounts have many features in common, which, by the way suggest that over time influences from outside a specific faith may have been adopted and shared as religious movements grew in complexity and richness.
Over time it has also become apparent that only a very small minority of nominal adherents to a religion actually live their lives according to the rules and regulations of their religion. Superficial obeisance is common, but deep commitment or even understanding of a religion's substance are rare so that misinterpretation, deliberate mis-quotation , the bending and twisting of strictures and doctrines become acceptable to the rank and file and are weaponized by all and sundry.
The basic survival impulses of humanity are always present in the brain and more likely to prevail in times of high emotion or stress. The undisciplined mind is a fearful mess to behold.
Ignorance coupled with rote, unquestionable memorization is the proximate cause of mis-application of religious tenets . To which the ill informed cling, buckle and thong. It is a universal trait and applies to religion, politics, "common sense" and all belief based systems.
Trump plans to "deport" (to where? camps) anyone who doesn't agree with him. I see this latest as, yes, fearmongering, but also as a statement of his intention to jail anyone who pushes back, citizens or not.
I'm embarrassed to admit that, as it turns out, I had no idea what the word jihad meant. As a self-proclaimed Recovering Catholic who has been repeatedly disappointed and hurt by self-proclaimed Christians and Christian establishments, religions are something I typically shy away from, and I often paint them all with essentially the same brush. Thank you for continuing to teach us, I greatly appreciate (and need) it! ❤️
Thank you, Qasim! I am hungry for this education & deeper understanding of Islam. I am in touch with several Palestinians in Gaza… their resilience, kindness & mercy are an example of the greater Jihad… even in the face of Israel’s goal of annihilation.
I wonder what percentage of "believers" fall into the extremist category? Likely very similar to any group, where it's a minority, but who apparently, whether by real actions or by media exposure or both, have an outsized impact with their minority views. Certainly not confined to Muslims, as the same is true for other groups, wherein people get the message wrong, either mistakenly or deliberately.
We humans generally have a long way to go to any form of enlightenment or thoughtfulness.
I enjoy all of your posts, but this one is particularly good - you have an excellent knack for breaking down concepts quickly and making them easy to understand. Thank you for your efforts, they are appreciated!
Qasim, I am not remotely a spiritual person, and I am very anti-religion. Spirituality and religion offer something of value to believers, but spirituality depends on believing and having faith in something of which there is no evidence, and religions have a very long history of causing far more harm than good.
I have also never read the Qur'an. So knowing of you as I do, I take your word for everything you say.
What is interesting in this post is the openness and permissiveness of Islam regarding other believers, people who believe something else, and people who are not believers at all. Abraham Isaac Kook was an ultra Orthodox Jewish rabbi (1865-1935), and he had a similar view of people and what, if anything, they believed. Clearly, he believed there was such a thing as "god," and he said that all people of all beliefs, or no beliefs, were manifestations of "god," and all were equally treasured. They were different facets or angles or components of the same thing.
As I said, I do not join in any of this, but I am impressed with the level of tolerance, some of which you quoted from scripture, of some people and groups of people. Obviously, not all Muslims follow what you have quoted from the Qur'an, and not all Jews follow Kook's theory. It is their loss, and it contributes to everyone else's loss, too.
Republicans take a lot of good words and demonize their meanings. Woke and Anti-fascist are perfect examples. I cannot credit the author of this post b/c sadly I forgot to write that down, but here it is. "Right wing terminology: DEI = the 'N' word. CRT= Black history. Woke = diversity and inclusion. School choice = defunded public schools. Right to work = the end of union wages. Liberty = guns and ammo "
One would think that "diversity & inclusion" would be positively received, but apparently that, too, is vilified by Republicans. I strongly support diversity & inclusion. Also learning Black history along with a well-rounded account of American history that includes all of us.
a Gallop Poll found that Muslims are the most likely demographic to reject violent military attacks on civilians.
And yet, majority of research says hamas builds its tunnels and puts its resources where civilians are more likely to be killed or maimed. Shouldn't that make Muslims be angry with hamas? Make it make sense.
This statistic is regarding Americans. Muslims have assimilated better in the US than in many other countries, & traditionally have gotten along very well with fellow Americans. This changed somewhat when many were persecuted as a reaction to 9/ll, & even more so since the hate & bigotry directed against American Muslims by Trump. Trump & the GOP have poisoned race relations, which had been gradually getting better over time before Trump's demagoguery. We seem unable to recognize a good thing when we have it.
By these statistics, you can see that in the US, it's the Christian sects that are most willing to use violence, & Muslims the least, followed by atheists, etc.
Muslims also assimilated dramatically well in Spain some centuries ago. They uplifted the country in ways that are still evident, and still treasured by the Spanish.
As Qasim said about Hamas, the 9/11 attacks were political, not religious.
If you want to make a list of what Trump and his stooges have destroyed in this country and elsewhere, it won't be a short list.
I can't imagine why atheists would be violent against anyone or anything (being one myself). Atheists have no beef with anyone. We mind our business, and we hope everyone else will mind theirs.
Fellow atheist here. What I like about religion though is having a place to meet regularly, fellowship, activities on behalf of charity or a good cause. A certain coordinated effort to make this world & our community a better place as atheists, I think, would be not only good for society, but to our own lives as well, & promote a positive image for atheists (skeptics, agnostics, free thinkers). I once proposed something like that where I live & got virtually no response. Why nothing like that (that I know of) for atheists?
Mr Rankin, that's an interesting comment. I usually think of religion as having three purposes. You have added a fourth. I think religion, or thinking there's such a thing as "god," as allowing people to have some fantasy about what happens when we die, what is the meaning of life, and providing a reason (because of the threat of not doing it) to be good, moral, and decent. I think of religion as serving people with no imagination, and who can't tolerate anxiety. I myself have no trouble being good, moral, and decent without thinking there's such a thing as "god" that will punish me if I'm not. Nothing happens when you die. You just die. No one will ever know why the universe and life are. They just are. You have added the concept of what you call fellowship. Unitarians would agree with you. Or you can take up golf or tennis, or join a book club.
Of course, you can always join some sort of group or club or organization with shared interests. But having a focus not on a narrow interest or issue, but with a wider scope to join together to do good things for each other & for society as a whole & build a better future, help those in need, that doesn't depend on somebody's money or votes.
Mr Rankin, my apologies. You said the equivalent of service clubs are LESS narrow than religions, and you're right. I misread you. There's still room for individuality and differences of agenda, and the emergence of people who want to be leaders, but you're right to say the general aim is broader. Or it can be.
By the way, Mr Rankin, if you choose one of the religions -- let's say Islam -- there are sects that fight with each other and mistreat each other. Qasim did a post recently about the mistreatment of Amadhi Muslims by Muslims who did not adhere to whatever is different about the Amadhi. There are Jewish sects like that and Christian sects like that. They'll go to war with each other, and deny each other their religious identity over stuff like this. But what do they find to fight about? They all believe the same basic things. It's as if religions were gratuitously narrow so they could invent differences worth fighting with each other about.
There's a movie called "The God Who Wasn't There." It's about Jesus. There were lots of "Messiahs" offered, and they had many things in common. The one accepted (as the "true" Messiah, not the "false" Messiahs) had a more tortured and violent, and therefore more intriguing and appealing, story. And the Christians fight with each other, too. The big fight was the breaking away of what came to be the Protestant sects from the Catholic sect. All based on nothing, and among people who would generally all claim to believe the same things and rely on the same scripture.
The religions are not narrow interests? There are many of them, but once you choose one, it's extremely narrow. You must adhere to the right interpretation, which never makes sense, and often depends on the super-interpretation of some cleric. Or is simply invented. And if you disagree, or say that a given religion has merit because it inspires you to do good things for society and build a better future in your own way, you'll get extruded. And apart from Islam, as Qasim has enlightened us with quotes from the relevant scripture, or Abraham Isaac Kook, they're all at odds with each other.
When I do marriage counseling or couple's therapy, I tell people that in this country, the divorce rate is about 50%. Of the other 50%, who don't get divorced, many of them should, because they're unhappily married. So I say marriage is a dumb bet, which most people are going to lose one way or another. (That, of course, doesn't stop people from getting married, and losing their bet because they're part of one 50% or the other.) The religions are the same way, including if all you allow yourself to expect is comradery.
Thank you so much for this! I had no idea. I guess it's easier to call someone our enemy if we whittle down their culture and belief system to simply "violent hate." As always when I read your articles, I wish they were in every newspaper in the world.
This is not surprising to most of us, I would bet. Violence seems to be imbedded in the predominately Christian US culture. Traveling has taught me how profoundly violent US culture is relative to most other countries I have been to. Certainly Mexico has a reputation for violence, but it seems to be more related to the illegal drug trade rather than a part of their culture.
The US that has often been placed on “travel advisories” warning of dangers in visiting the US.
My sweet, protective mother worried when we travelled to places like Costa Rica, but I reminded her where we lived at that time, the mission district of San Francisco, where we were at much higher risk of potential danger than we were anywhere in Costa Rica. Alas, that provided no comfort for her.
Costa Rica is well-known for being a peace-loving nation. They have no standing army. They have government-funded universal healthcare, unlike we do. They are also proud of being environmental stewards. All of this while being in one of the most violent neighborhoods in the world (Honduras, Nicaragua & Guatemala are all among the world's most violent countries).
Not to disparage San Francisco or the mission district as being especially violent. I was comparing US with Costa Rica. There is a pocket of street drug dealing in the mission district, as well as in the Tenderloin. In my opinion this proliferates not because of the wonderful mix of people living there, but by corrupt police who are facilitating drug smuggling and sales. Drugs could not be such a problem without the corrupt police, border guards, and politicians who profit off of illegal activities of all sorts.
Most religions with a written account of that faith, profess certain principles and commandments for living within that faith. These written accounts have many features in common, which, by the way suggest that over time influences from outside a specific faith may have been adopted and shared as religious movements grew in complexity and richness.
Over time it has also become apparent that only a very small minority of nominal adherents to a religion actually live their lives according to the rules and regulations of their religion. Superficial obeisance is common, but deep commitment or even understanding of a religion's substance are rare so that misinterpretation, deliberate mis-quotation , the bending and twisting of strictures and doctrines become acceptable to the rank and file and are weaponized by all and sundry.
The basic survival impulses of humanity are always present in the brain and more likely to prevail in times of high emotion or stress. The undisciplined mind is a fearful mess to behold.
Ignorance coupled with rote, unquestionable memorization is the proximate cause of mis-application of religious tenets . To which the ill informed cling, buckle and thong. It is a universal trait and applies to religion, politics, "common sense" and all belief based systems.
Excellent. Thank you Mr. Rashid.
Trump plans to "deport" (to where? camps) anyone who doesn't agree with him. I see this latest as, yes, fearmongering, but also as a statement of his intention to jail anyone who pushes back, citizens or not.
I'm embarrassed to admit that, as it turns out, I had no idea what the word jihad meant. As a self-proclaimed Recovering Catholic who has been repeatedly disappointed and hurt by self-proclaimed Christians and Christian establishments, religions are something I typically shy away from, and I often paint them all with essentially the same brush. Thank you for continuing to teach us, I greatly appreciate (and need) it! ❤️
Thank you, Qasim! I am hungry for this education & deeper understanding of Islam. I am in touch with several Palestinians in Gaza… their resilience, kindness & mercy are an example of the greater Jihad… even in the face of Israel’s goal of annihilation.
He says "jihadist" for the same reason they say "woke". So that they can define who they are.
Very enlightening, as always.
I wonder what percentage of "believers" fall into the extremist category? Likely very similar to any group, where it's a minority, but who apparently, whether by real actions or by media exposure or both, have an outsized impact with their minority views. Certainly not confined to Muslims, as the same is true for other groups, wherein people get the message wrong, either mistakenly or deliberately.
We humans generally have a long way to go to any form of enlightenment or thoughtfulness.
Present company excepted, of course!
I enjoy all of your posts, but this one is particularly good - you have an excellent knack for breaking down concepts quickly and making them easy to understand. Thank you for your efforts, they are appreciated!
Thank you Duncan.
Qasim, I am not remotely a spiritual person, and I am very anti-religion. Spirituality and religion offer something of value to believers, but spirituality depends on believing and having faith in something of which there is no evidence, and religions have a very long history of causing far more harm than good.
I have also never read the Qur'an. So knowing of you as I do, I take your word for everything you say.
What is interesting in this post is the openness and permissiveness of Islam regarding other believers, people who believe something else, and people who are not believers at all. Abraham Isaac Kook was an ultra Orthodox Jewish rabbi (1865-1935), and he had a similar view of people and what, if anything, they believed. Clearly, he believed there was such a thing as "god," and he said that all people of all beliefs, or no beliefs, were manifestations of "god," and all were equally treasured. They were different facets or angles or components of the same thing.
As I said, I do not join in any of this, but I am impressed with the level of tolerance, some of which you quoted from scripture, of some people and groups of people. Obviously, not all Muslims follow what you have quoted from the Qur'an, and not all Jews follow Kook's theory. It is their loss, and it contributes to everyone else's loss, too.
Republicans take a lot of good words and demonize their meanings. Woke and Anti-fascist are perfect examples. I cannot credit the author of this post b/c sadly I forgot to write that down, but here it is. "Right wing terminology: DEI = the 'N' word. CRT= Black history. Woke = diversity and inclusion. School choice = defunded public schools. Right to work = the end of union wages. Liberty = guns and ammo "
Yep well said
One would think that "diversity & inclusion" would be positively received, but apparently that, too, is vilified by Republicans. I strongly support diversity & inclusion. Also learning Black history along with a well-rounded account of American history that includes all of us.
a Gallop Poll found that Muslims are the most likely demographic to reject violent military attacks on civilians.
And yet, majority of research says hamas builds its tunnels and puts its resources where civilians are more likely to be killed or maimed. Shouldn't that make Muslims be angry with hamas? Make it make sense.
It does make Muslims angry. But also Hamas isn’t a religious organization. It’s a political one.
This statistic is regarding Americans. Muslims have assimilated better in the US than in many other countries, & traditionally have gotten along very well with fellow Americans. This changed somewhat when many were persecuted as a reaction to 9/ll, & even more so since the hate & bigotry directed against American Muslims by Trump. Trump & the GOP have poisoned race relations, which had been gradually getting better over time before Trump's demagoguery. We seem unable to recognize a good thing when we have it.
By these statistics, you can see that in the US, it's the Christian sects that are most willing to use violence, & Muslims the least, followed by atheists, etc.
Muslims also assimilated dramatically well in Spain some centuries ago. They uplifted the country in ways that are still evident, and still treasured by the Spanish.
As Qasim said about Hamas, the 9/11 attacks were political, not religious.
If you want to make a list of what Trump and his stooges have destroyed in this country and elsewhere, it won't be a short list.
I can't imagine why atheists would be violent against anyone or anything (being one myself). Atheists have no beef with anyone. We mind our business, and we hope everyone else will mind theirs.
Fellow atheist here. What I like about religion though is having a place to meet regularly, fellowship, activities on behalf of charity or a good cause. A certain coordinated effort to make this world & our community a better place as atheists, I think, would be not only good for society, but to our own lives as well, & promote a positive image for atheists (skeptics, agnostics, free thinkers). I once proposed something like that where I live & got virtually no response. Why nothing like that (that I know of) for atheists?
Mr Rankin, that's an interesting comment. I usually think of religion as having three purposes. You have added a fourth. I think religion, or thinking there's such a thing as "god," as allowing people to have some fantasy about what happens when we die, what is the meaning of life, and providing a reason (because of the threat of not doing it) to be good, moral, and decent. I think of religion as serving people with no imagination, and who can't tolerate anxiety. I myself have no trouble being good, moral, and decent without thinking there's such a thing as "god" that will punish me if I'm not. Nothing happens when you die. You just die. No one will ever know why the universe and life are. They just are. You have added the concept of what you call fellowship. Unitarians would agree with you. Or you can take up golf or tennis, or join a book club.
Of course, you can always join some sort of group or club or organization with shared interests. But having a focus not on a narrow interest or issue, but with a wider scope to join together to do good things for each other & for society as a whole & build a better future, help those in need, that doesn't depend on somebody's money or votes.
Mr Rankin, my apologies. You said the equivalent of service clubs are LESS narrow than religions, and you're right. I misread you. There's still room for individuality and differences of agenda, and the emergence of people who want to be leaders, but you're right to say the general aim is broader. Or it can be.
By the way, Mr Rankin, if you choose one of the religions -- let's say Islam -- there are sects that fight with each other and mistreat each other. Qasim did a post recently about the mistreatment of Amadhi Muslims by Muslims who did not adhere to whatever is different about the Amadhi. There are Jewish sects like that and Christian sects like that. They'll go to war with each other, and deny each other their religious identity over stuff like this. But what do they find to fight about? They all believe the same basic things. It's as if religions were gratuitously narrow so they could invent differences worth fighting with each other about.
There's a movie called "The God Who Wasn't There." It's about Jesus. There were lots of "Messiahs" offered, and they had many things in common. The one accepted (as the "true" Messiah, not the "false" Messiahs) had a more tortured and violent, and therefore more intriguing and appealing, story. And the Christians fight with each other, too. The big fight was the breaking away of what came to be the Protestant sects from the Catholic sect. All based on nothing, and among people who would generally all claim to believe the same things and rely on the same scripture.
The religions are not narrow interests? There are many of them, but once you choose one, it's extremely narrow. You must adhere to the right interpretation, which never makes sense, and often depends on the super-interpretation of some cleric. Or is simply invented. And if you disagree, or say that a given religion has merit because it inspires you to do good things for society and build a better future in your own way, you'll get extruded. And apart from Islam, as Qasim has enlightened us with quotes from the relevant scripture, or Abraham Isaac Kook, they're all at odds with each other.
When I do marriage counseling or couple's therapy, I tell people that in this country, the divorce rate is about 50%. Of the other 50%, who don't get divorced, many of them should, because they're unhappily married. So I say marriage is a dumb bet, which most people are going to lose one way or another. (That, of course, doesn't stop people from getting married, and losing their bet because they're part of one 50% or the other.) The religions are the same way, including if all you allow yourself to expect is comradery.
Thank you so much for this detailed explanation...I wish this would be published on the front page of all the major newspapers in this country...
Thank you so much for this! I had no idea. I guess it's easier to call someone our enemy if we whittle down their culture and belief system to simply "violent hate." As always when I read your articles, I wish they were in every newspaper in the world.
You and Anne Thacker and I.
This was excellent! Thank you.
This is not surprising to most of us, I would bet. Violence seems to be imbedded in the predominately Christian US culture. Traveling has taught me how profoundly violent US culture is relative to most other countries I have been to. Certainly Mexico has a reputation for violence, but it seems to be more related to the illegal drug trade rather than a part of their culture.
The US that has often been placed on “travel advisories” warning of dangers in visiting the US.
My sweet, protective mother worried when we travelled to places like Costa Rica, but I reminded her where we lived at that time, the mission district of San Francisco, where we were at much higher risk of potential danger than we were anywhere in Costa Rica. Alas, that provided no comfort for her.
Costa Rica is well-known for being a peace-loving nation. They have no standing army. They have government-funded universal healthcare, unlike we do. They are also proud of being environmental stewards. All of this while being in one of the most violent neighborhoods in the world (Honduras, Nicaragua & Guatemala are all among the world's most violent countries).
Not to disparage San Francisco or the mission district as being especially violent. I was comparing US with Costa Rica. There is a pocket of street drug dealing in the mission district, as well as in the Tenderloin. In my opinion this proliferates not because of the wonderful mix of people living there, but by corrupt police who are facilitating drug smuggling and sales. Drugs could not be such a problem without the corrupt police, border guards, and politicians who profit off of illegal activities of all sorts.
As an FYI: christian jihad is just as evil! Perhaps even more so! Thank you for sharing this with us! How dare this fool say stuff like this!