John Steinrich
http://actforamerica.org
April 28, 2010
The comparison of Islam to Judaism and Christianity is a hot topic of discussion, and there is a common understanding in the West that any concern about violence espoused by the Qur'an should be countered by direct analogs to violence found in the Bible. If we examine these phenomena closely, however, we will see significant difference in the nature of the ideologies proposed by the Bible and the Qur'an vis-a-vis violence. Let us then examine this issue. The Bible indeed contains exhortations to violence similar to what we find in Islam. Oneof the most famous is the story in 1 Samuel 15, in which the Israelite king Saul was
commanded to annihilate the entire tribe of the Amalekites and destroy all of their property as recompense for their ancestors’ ill treatment of the Israelites. Saul carried out this mission almost completely, but he was reprimanded by Samuel and lost his favor with God for having spared Agag the Amalekite king and for keeping livestock as spoils of war. Samuel the prophet even took up the sword and executed Agag himself (1 Samuel15:33). Given the reality of such violence in Judeo-Christian history, it is unfair to Islam to use episodes of violence in the Qur'an and Hadith in isolation to paint a negative picture of Muhammad and Islam.
That said, it is my strong belief that there are many reasons why the violence committed by people of Judeo-Christian origin against unbelievers as recorded in the Bible such as in 1 Samuel 15 is qualitatively different from Islam. The most immediate difference is the fact that the Bible does not endorse such violence as a pathway to Heaven, whereas in Islam via the Qur'an and Hadith it does. Additionally,Yahweh God was not in the business of providing material gain to the Israelites when they went to battle against their enemies. In fact, the Israelites were instructed to destroy the material goods of their enemies and not to keep them as a means to enrich themselves. Conversely, in the exile of the Nadir and Qaynuqa and in the genocide of the Qurayza (all three of which were Jewish tribes vanquished by Muhammad in the city of Medina), there is clear evidence that the Muslims were promised Heaven if they died as a result of the battle and if they survived they profited economically from their conquest, with Muhammad himself reserving the biggest share of the goods.
Furthermore, when we look at the history of the Israelites, they had a period of aggressive warfare to capture the Promised Land during the time of Joshua, immediately subsequent to the Exodus from Egypt. Once the conquest was completed, the Israelites were commanded to live peaceably with their neighbors, respect the aliens who lived among them, and set a good example for all people around them. In the New Testament, there is scant evidence of Christians committing violence in the name of Christ (which was reprimanded when it occurred) and there is not a single directive for Christians to commit violence against unbelievers anywhere in the New Testament. The fact that Jews and Christians throughout history have behaved violently towards unbelievers indicates a disobedience to God, who wants them to live in peace. The fact that Muslims commit acts of violence in the name of Allah demonstrates their adherence to the direct commands of their god and an excellent emulation of the behavior of their Prophet.
Often times, people in the West will argue that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all have followers who are intolerant, biased, and negative toward people who do not share their faith. Such an assertion is absolutely correct on this matter. Unfortunately, of the three religions mentioned, only the last has institutionalized, scriptural, and religious doctrine that actively promotes intolerance, prejudice, and condescension of non-believers.
Additionally, I have heard it said that we must not only look at the religious teachings contained in the scriptures of a religion as our basis to formulate an interpretation of the religion, but we must also look to the way the adherents of the faith apply those teachings practically in their lives. I believe that this is a valid consideration By its fruit, a tree is known.
If we are then to judge Judaism not only by its religious teachings but by the application of those teachings in the lives of Jewish people, then we can clearly say that there is overwhelming evidence that Judaism promotes love, family, academic achievement, peace, hard work, cooperation, and the like.
Although Christianity has some significant historical blemishes in the form of the Inquisition and the Crusades, we can say that the New Testament's teachings and the lives of Christians have in general contributed greatly to the advance of the human race through kindness and charity to the poor, the development of educational systems, studies in science, the support of the arts, the promotion of liberty and prosperity, and so on.
To do the same type of review with Islam--looking intently at the Qur'an, the Hadith, and the behavior of Muslim people--you will find significant degrees of bias, terrorism, violence, misogyny, anti-Semitism, enmity, separation, balkanization, and such. This does not mean that all Muslims are bad or violent. It just means that their religion contains volumes of teachings that sanctify violence, therefore they are going to be more apt than most other people to commit violence in the name of their god.
There is no bias against Muslims in asserting such truths. In fact, it is healthy and appropriate to bring them to light. It is best for people of any faith to actually know what their religion teaches so that they can make informed choices about the way they will behave towards others.
And let's not pretend that all religion leads to the same place...
No comments:
Post a Comment