Tamerlan Tsarnaev |
Dzhokhar Tsarneav |
It is too soon to know for sure exactly what their motives were. Friends and acquaintances find it hard to believe that they would have been capable of such a crime. But there is some evidence to suggest that the older of the two brothers, Tamerlan, had become more serious about his Islamic faith in recent years, and that he was troubled by what his fellow Chechens had suffered at the hands of the Russians, as well as the ongoing civil war in Syria. He also reportedly had difficulty relating to American culture.
The bombing was just one more in a string of events involving the Islamic world that has left Americans baffled. Why the hostility? What have we done to them? How can one justify terrorism in the name of religion?
Part of the problem is that we tend to assume that Islam is much like the religions with which we are familiar: Christianity and Judaism. But it is not, and understanding the differences is crucial to making sense out of the world situation today. Consider two key events: one in Christianity and the other in Islam.
According to the Gospel of John, shortly before His crucifixion, when Jesus appeared before the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, Pilate asked Him straight out: "Are You the King of the Jews?" (John 18:33; NKJV). Jesus answered that "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here" (v. 36).
The Jews had been looking for a political Messiah to deliver them from Roman rule. But in its present form at least, Jesus' kingdom is not an earthly kingdom – it is not a geo-political entity that can be defended through force of arms. Rather, it is a spiritual kingdom – it exists in the hearts of believers who embrace the gospel.
Now fast forward nearly 600 years. The scene is a valley near the city of Badr, about eighty miles southwest of Medina in the Arabian Peninsula. On the one side is a relatively small band of Muslims led by Mohammed. On the other side was a larger force from Mecca determined to stamp out the Mohammedan nuisance (the Muslims had been raiding caravans). Mohammed pleas for divine guidance. He believes he received it; the Muslims attack, and the Meccans are routed. It was the beginning of a long march of conquest through the Near East and North Africa.
In a Surah written shortly before the Battle of Badr, Mohammed lays out the rules for his community. He says, among other things, "Fight in the cause of Allah / Those who fight you, / But do not transgress limits; / For Allah loveth not transgressors. / And slay them / Wherever ye catch them, / And turn them out / From where they have / Turned you out; / For tumult and oppression / Are worse than slaughter; / But fight them not / At the Sacred Mosque, / Unless they (first) / Fight you there; / But if they fight you, / Slay them. / Such is the reward / Of those who suppress faith . . ." (2: 190, 191).
It is important to recognize two things here. One is that the use of force in the defense of the faith is explicitly sanctioned in the Koran. The second is that there are rules that govern the use of force: indiscriminate killing is not permitted.
Sir John Glubb |
Sir John Glubb, a former British army officer who was once Commander of the Arab Legion, summarized the difference between the two cultures this way: "Their respective attitudes to the legitimacy of physical force has, ever since then, been one of the most marked contrasts between Muslims and Christians . . . The fact that Muslims believe that war can sometimes be a religious duty has resulted in the fact that Muslim soldiers are often extremely religious and enjoy a far higher status than they do in Christian countries." But then he went on to add, " . . . once violence is admitted, it is all too easily abused" (A Short History of the Arab Peoples, chapter II).
The majority of Muslims today do not support the terrorist campaigns of the radical jihadis, but the jihadis themselves believe that they have just cause. They can point to the actions of Israel and to tyrannical governments in their own countries, and to the tacit support that the U.S. government gives to both as ample reason to attack us. We need to understand and address their concerns. Simply calling them "terrorists" resolves nothing. At the same time it will do little good to pretend that Islam is no different from Christianity. Muslims cannot be expected to think and act like Christians. And "by their fruits you shall know them."
But it is not, and understanding the differences is crucial to making sense out of the world situation today. Consider two key events: one in Christianity and the other in Islam.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Gospel of John, shortly...
Subjective methodology.
You choose one passage but the other guy chooses another. It might personally feel good but you end up going around in circles.
In a Surah written shortly before the Battle of Badr, Mohammed lays...
Same methodology. Same problem.
If someone goes shopping for passages in the koran for "proof" that Islam is all sweetness and light then it's easy to find. There's plenty of nice stuff.
On the other hand, the opposite is true.
Going shopping in the Koran for "proof" that Islam is all bloodthirsty and barbaric is child's play.
Same thing goes for the bible.
Christians always focus on certain parts of the bible for Sunday School and gloss over other parts.
If a Muslim goes shopping in the bible to demonstrate just how horrible "those Christians" are, then there's plenty of material to choose from. The word "context" is going to be used a lot. It's inevitable.
And "by their fruits you shall know them.".
Ah, but you can always use the "No true Muslim" dodge. It's exactly like the "No true Christian" dodge only....for Muslims.
So say a Muslims does something horrible and senseless and just plain awful?
Ah well. He/She was not a "real Muslim".
Easy fix. It's a jim dandy escape hatch.
Perfect for any religion.
Have you ever read the Koran? There isn't much sweetness and light in it.
ReplyDeleteI understand from a friend of mine who lived for a number of years in North Africa that among Muslims today there are something like 5 different interpretations of "jihad." Many will point out that the word doesn't mean "holy war," but "struggle," and that it can be interpreted broadly to mean our own personal struggle to overcome evil and injustice. So it would be a grave injustice to accuse all Muslims of being potential terrorists.
However, in the Koran itself the original context does suggest military action, and the subsequent history of Islam bears that out. Modern Jihadis are working with a classical doctrine of jihad that was developed in the Middle Ages. The underlying problem is that Islam is essentially a theocratic system that unites the state with the mosque. This inevitably involves the use of the sword at least to defend Islam, if not to promote it.
In the history of Christianity the problem is the state churches that emerged at the time of Constantine, which resulted in the Medieval Inquisition and other forms of persecution. But there is no sanction for any of this in the New Testament, and it could be argued that the whole state church thing was a deviation from what Christ originally intended.
Have you ever read the Koran? There isn't much sweetness and light in it.
ReplyDeleteBob, um, that's something an atheist could say too.
However, sweetness, light and "muchness" are like beauty and it is in the eyes of the beholder.
That's how subjectiveness works.
Walk a mile in the shoes of a believer and you will see lots of sweetness and light in the Koran and the associated text.
As an unbeliever? Well, not so much.
Try a word search on the Koran and look for beautiful verses and see how the Muslim community advertise their own book. It's quite cheery....according to them. I'm sure that does not come as much of a shock to you.
...that among Muslims today there are something like 5 different interpretations of "jihad." Many will point out that the word doesn't mean "holy war," but "struggle," and that it can be interpreted broadly...
Yes, it's almost like the book was written by people and interpreted by people and there's no divine stuff really happening.
Remind you of anything?
... the original context does suggest(..)the subsequent history(..)a classical doctrine(..)The underlying problem (..)essentially a theocratic system(..) This inevitably involves (..)there is no sanction for any of this(..)it could be argued that(...) deviation(..) originally intended...
Ah context. It never fails to show up on cue.
Hmm.
Bob, your subjectiveness is showing. You need to walk a mile in the other guy's shoes.
I'm not just saying that.
Please try.
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
...Stephen F Roberts
Have you ever read the Koran itself? You should. Every westerner should. It sheds a lot of light on what is going on in the world today. It might surprise you to see what is in it. Go ahead. Take a look for yourself!
ReplyDeleteHave you ever read the Koran itself?
ReplyDeleteHave you ever read my comments?
You should.
It would make having a discussion with you so much easier.
It might surprise you to see what is in it. Go ahead. Take a look for yourself!