The Religion of Peace
I watched and read several commentaries, memorials and tributes associated with the 11th anniversary of 9/11 last Tuesday. Remembering the victims certainly is appropriate, but nowhere did I find a single reference to who did it. I know we're trying very hard to not offend Muslim sensitivities, which seems not to be working all that well, witness the deadly outrage at the U.S. embassy in Libya and violent demonstrations in Egypt. Seems like the Arab Spring has turned to winter. Some of us felt all along that it was less an expression of democracy and more a power play by radical Islamic elements. Sadly, it appears we may have been right.
We have, or at least had, a tendency to heap scorn on the 19 or 20 perpetrators of the destruction of the WTC twin towers and concurrent murder of thousands of innocents. We usually picture terrorists as wild-eyed ignorant fanatics blowing themselves up. Yet, the 9/11 perpetrators were generally well-educated mostly Saudi men, some of them professionals. However, they chose to immolate themselve in a blatant attack on the U.S. Their motivation was their fervent religious belief, a belief that includes destroying obstacles to the spread or Islam. (The Koran does encourage persuasion but also condones violent and deadly destruction of obstacles to the propagation of the faith.)
These men were simply firm believers in their religion, generally a desirable chracteristic. They felt compelled to martyr themselves in support of that religion, also not really a bad thing when you consider the fate of the Christian apostles. They, however, felt justified in taking many innocent lives with them. Osama bin Laden, the architect of 9/11, was a respected and well-educated professional man as well as a fervent believer. Make no mistake, these people are not kooks, which makes this paradigm even more dangerous.
So, where is the evil in all this. Certainly this was an evil act, considering the loss of innocent life. Was it in the act itself or those who perpetrated it? No, the act in itself was not evil, but the Wahhabist form of radical Islam that justified the act is the true evil. The perpetrators died for their faith. I don't blame them, but then who is to blame? Let us take a look at this faith.
Islam and Christianity have common roots. The Biblical Old Testament is the basis of much of the Koran. The Old Testament contains accounts of bloody violence, a fact frequently pointed out to me, even to the extent of the massacre of women and children. I'm not going to try to justify these historical events. Theologians have twisted themselves into knots trying. The fact is, they happened. But that was then and this is now.
Recall also that Christianity and Islam worship the same Diety. Allah is just another name for God. So, why does radical Islam kill and destroy to defend and spread its faith while Christianity, with the same imperative to spread the faith, does not? The difference is that Christianity is based on the New Testament, the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. Mohammad is not Jesus. Islam does not have the benign persuasion characteristic of present-day Christianity. (Judaism is another case which I will neglect for now.) We send out missionaries, they--the Wahhabists and their sympathizers--send out bombers.
Why us? What did we ever do to Islam to earn their enmity? The simple truth is, it's our very existence. Remember, Islam demonizes obstacles to the spreading of the faith. The United States, a very successful, rich and extremely powerful Christian (mostly) nation, is a powerful symbolic obstacle to the world-wide spread of Islam. Israel, as a successful Jewish nation in the desert of the Middle East, is another hated symbol of non-Islamic success. However, Israel is small and not nearly the equal of the U.S. It's no accident that Israel is known in the Islamic world as the "Little Satan," but the U.S is known as the "Great Satan." WE are the big problem for expansionist, radical Islam. Thus, we are the target. The Atlantic Ocean and vigilent security measures have protected us for some time, but cannot be depended on to shield us indefinitely.
We must recognize that our enemy, radical, Wahhabist Islam, not a small group by any means and growing, considers our very existence an abomination. As the Israelis know, this enmity will never end. Certainly not all Muslims subscribe to this aggressive form of Islam, just as there are many different Christian denominations, but the radical element is strong and relentless and, sadly, frequently enjoys the tacit approval of the non-violent sects of Islam.
I have no happy ending. But we endanger ourselves by letting down our guard. Apologetics and appeasements will not work. The problem is not what we do, it is us. We would do well not to forget that on this anniversary of the most successful terrorist attack ever.
We encourage your comments but will strive to remove discussion that contains personal attacks, racial slurs, profanity or other inappropriate material as outlined in our guidelines. We post-moderate comments on most content, but may choose to pre-moderate some comments so please be patient if you don't see yours appear right way. We also ask for your help by reporting comments you think are inappropriate.






66 Comments
Pierre Del Norte - Sep 20, 2012 7:17 AM
I just want to clarify;
"ahemmer - Aug 28, 2012 11:47 AM» Report abuse 0 0 Click thumb to rate
And right back at you, PDN/Buck/Cosette/John Markham"
For the record, our Dear Ms . Hemmer demonstrates, once again, that she has absolutely no idea what she is talking about.
But then, let's keep in mind that one of the defining characteristics of extreme right wing conservatives is they have a profound ability, and a seemingly innate eagerness, to express opinions on subjects that they know absolutely nothing about.
Thank you Al for that indulgence. Now, can we return to our regularly scheduled programing?
Pierre Del Norte - Sep 20, 2012 10:26 AM
Thank you for your thoughtful response. But then, I would not have expected anything less.
“What you are referring to is selective interpretation, where humans pick and choose within religious text to suit their own value systems.” - Al
Selective interpretation is not what I am referring to here. Clearly, there is a difference between a literal reading of sacred texts versus a contextual reading.
“Lateralization does not obviate contextualization.” - Al.
I think for most evangelicals and fundamentalist it most certainly does. The problem, as I see it, is compounded by the belief that the literal words are the inerrant word of God. This is the ground from which religious extremism sprouts.
For example; in our “advanced” Western culture, we have believers who totally reject the preponderance of scientific evidence and demand “Creationism” be taught in public schools. In my view, and I believe most who are contexualists, would consider this to be extreme.
Finally Al, I note that you artfully limited your comparison of the Koran to the New Testament. Reading through the Old Testament is not for the faint of heart. Clearly, the God of the Old Testament was a pretty wrathful deity – lots of stones, and swords, and fire, and blood on the doorposts, etc.
My point? - If you are going to indict a religion on the basis of how much extremism and violence is contained in its ancient sacred texts, that is going to be a very, very big problem. Rather, your indictment should be directed at those religious extremist who use a literal interpretation of words and a fundamentalist belief they are the inerrant word of God, to justify horrific human atrocities.
Bernie Ziebart - Sep 20, 2012 4:44 PM
There is struggle in Islam for control between the radicals and the moderates. I fear that the radicals have the upper hand.
In the early 1970's, Iran was considered to the model of a moderate Islamic secular country. In the 1980's Turkey became the new model. Even Pakistan at one time in recent history was a moderate secular country. Unfortunately, the era of moderation was short lived. Turkey, with Ergodan, is driving Turkey hard down the path of radicalism. Pakistan has become radicalized over the past few years. And Iran has gone just crazy.
MGarber - Sep 21, 2012 7:56 AM
Im glad to hear you think thats a good thing, BZ. There are forces right here that abhor our own secularism.
But yes, the struggle between the radicals and the moderates has been going on since the early 20th century, which is why its so important we, as a people and country, distinguish between the 2, and dont fall for the islamophobic BS peddeled by MBachmann and her friends.
Bernie Ziebart - Sep 21, 2012 9:49 AM
"dont fall for the islamophobic BS peddeled by MBachmann and her friends"
Don't fall for the disinformation that Michelle Bachmann is peddling islamophobia. She is setting up boundaries against radical Islam. There is an enormous difference. No one, not even the Christian fundamentalists, have a problem with moderate Islam (the Jordanian flavor). They do have a problem with the radical Muslim Brotherhood flavor and the coddling of the radical Islamists within our administration and media.
When you erect a fence on your yard, it doesn't mean that you hate your neighbor.
Pierre Del Norte - Sep 21, 2012 10:40 AM
Just what in heavens name are you talking about here, Bernie?
Please give me a concrete example of the administration or the media "CODDLING" radical Islamists.
As for the Muslim Brotherhood - Wasn't there a free election in Egypt? Didn't Morsi win the election with 51.3% of the vote?
Perhaps you consider respecting a legitimate and real fledgling democracy to be an act of CODDLING? Look at Jordan - these transition just don't happen overnight. Morsi has gone from leading protests in the streets to governing a nation of diverse political interests.
If you have any hope for a moderate outcome in Egypt you don't build walls like Bachmann's crowd wants to do.
You ENGAGE!!!
MGarber - Sep 21, 2012 11:05 AM
Good one!
The problem is, she sees radical Islam wherever she looks. Her attach on Huma Abedin was just a recent example of what can only be described as hysteria. She is doing no one any good, and Im proud of the Rupublicans that took her to task for it.
Amazingly, she has a real chance of loosing her seat in the upcomming election.
WFB resident - Sep 21, 2012 1:02 PM
dumb !
Bernie Ziebart - Sep 21, 2012 1:09 PM
Since the Egyptian election of Morsi, what has happened to the Coptic Christian population? Genocide. Since the media and administration focus has not given this any attention, how is this supposed to be interpreted? A large portion of coddling is through the omission of news
MGarber,
The issues in Bachmann - Huma exchange are still unanswered. Does Huma have relatives who are members of the Muslim Brotherhood (to what degree of involvement)? What influence do these relatives have over Huma? Has Huma affected the administration's policies concerning Israel?
Bachmann was attacked for raising the questions, but the questions were never answered.
Pierre Del Norte - Sep 21, 2012 1:40 PM
Coddling by omission? Please!
From our our National Liberal Radio - http://www.npr.org/2012/08/15/158569357/egypts-christians-form-their-own-brotherhood
Or perhaps - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19089474
Or, http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/18/13942315-us-muslims-walk-tightrope-denouncing-both-violence-and-anti-islam-film?lite
Even - http://articles.cnn.com/2012-09-18/world/world_film-protests_1_copts-and-muslims-coptic-christians-coptic-community
Please Bernie - if you can't do better than that..........
MGarber - Sep 21, 2012 2:45 PM
Sort of like Joe McCarthy??
No; exactly like Joe McCarthy (but probably with less alcohol).
aneuhauser - Sep 21, 2012 3:55 PM
With regard to your assumption of the absolute truth of evolutionary/cosmological theory, I happen to be a creationist by analysis, not dogma. See my post "In the Beginning..." in the archives, 18 Dec 08.
Et al: Once and for all, I would appreciate ceasing and desisting with the non-relevent criticism and insulting of Amy Hemmer. I happen to like the lady but do not read her blog. Her opinions are not mine.
Bernie Ziebart - Sep 21, 2012 3:55 PM
The NPR article makes a half-hearted attempt to address the violence against the Coptic Christians. But I didn't see this information on the PBS news on TV. It's one thing to be in print, but unless the TV viewers actually see, it really doesn't make an impression.
The CNN article actually makes my point. It focuses on the defamation video and the people (reportedly Coptics living in the US) who created it. "Egyptian authorities have charged seven Coptic Christians living in the United States and a Florida pastor with insulting Islam and inciting sectarian strife for their alleged links to an online video that has enraged much of the Muslim world."
Pierre, if we had an enterprising objective media, we would know what is being taught at Muslim schools, we would see the Al Qaeda training camps, we would see on the nightly news of the Islamic attacks on the Coptic christians in Egypt, the riots in Pakistan and the attacks in Nigeria and Kenya.
It's only because I get other world magazines (Voice of the martyrs, not exactly inside the mainstream media) that I have a glimpse of what radical Islamists are doing. It covers much of the Islamic violence from Indonesia, Iraq, Yemen, Pakistan, Egypt, etc. Rarely is anything covered by the US media.
I do not recall seeing the media cover the fresh wave of al qaeda violence in Nigeria in August.
http://www.channelkoos.com/index.php/news/2316-al-qaeda-plots-fresh-attacks-on-nigeria-others
The slaughter of Catholics in the Ivory Coast in 2011 went unreported. http://www.pittsreport.com/2011/04/massacre-muslim-troops-slaughter-1000-christians-in-ivory-coast/
jman99 - Sep 21, 2012 4:25 PM
No, but it does affect his view of the world.
Pierre Del Norte - Sep 21, 2012 5:15 PM
It is not referred to as the Judeo-Christian tradition for nothing. It is true - Christianity is primarily based on the person of Jesus Christ as recorded in the NT. But to truly understand the fullness of Christianity, you must view "The Word Made Flesh" as the fulfillment of the promise and prophecy of the old testament.
I am not sure, but I think the Ten Commandments are still a pretty integral part of Christian theology.
"Incidentally, the Bible is considered by Christians to be the INSPIRED word of God, not His verbatim words" - Al
I did not suggest that the Bible is considered the word of God verbatim. Most Christians believe that God inspired the original authors who wrote what is contained in the Bible. Because of that, evangelicals and fundamentalists believe that the text, as originally written, is inerrant (without error).
My point is that, when you combine the literal reading with the belief in its inerrantcy, you produce the fertile soil from which religious extremism sprouts.
Whether it is a Muslim woman blowing herself up and killing others in the name of her God - Or, a Christian who assassinates a doctor who may provide abortions in the name of his God - They are both radical acts rooted in religious extremism.
They both originate from that same fertile soil.
Thanks for the reference to you piece on evolution - I will read it.
WFB resident - Sep 21, 2012 7:49 PM
Pierre Del Norte - Sep 21, 2012 11:36 PM
This is why we ENGAGE -
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/world/africa/pro-american-libyans-besiege-militant-group-in-benghazi.html?_r=0
Bachmann and her crowd do not have a clue.
Thank GOD she might be gone in November.
WFB resident - Sep 22, 2012 12:43 AM
are doing the good fight to show solidarity with the US !!!! No truer Tea Party people
those pro Amwerican Libians !! lol...I wonder if they will comer to the USA and help
us get rid if that extremist in the WH ?