Suggest a Remedy

In my English class we have been reading short stories by Jhumpa Lahiri. As I was writing my essay on one of her stories I noticed that in Interpreter of Maladies Mrs. Das is the basic portrayal of humanity. We make our mistakes, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and yet too often we don’t take responsibility for our actions. Now, I think every person who reads the story has, at some point in the story, unwittingly identified with Mrs. Das, whether sympathizing with her “dull” life, apathetic words, or life choices. The interesting thing though when she reveals her actions to Mr. Kapasi, he pinpoints her feelings of guilt and not pain. Humanity feels the pangs of guilt and tries to disown them or describe it as pain.

When it comes to the guilt Mrs. Das feels I realized it is not because of her actions. I don’t think she regrets what she did, rather she regrets what came out of it. If she really regretted the affair I think she would have confessed it to her husband. Yet it took her eight years to finally confess it to someone and when she did it was because she thought he could “suggest some kind of remedy.” Bobbie’s presence was a continual reminder to her of her affair and she probably thinks that if she could do it over again she would have stopped herself from getting pregnant rather than not having the affair at all. It reminds me of humanity. We sin and are very protective of our sin. We would rather cover up our sin and mistakes than expose them for what they are. We do not want anybody to point out our sin and we become quite defensive of it. I think this portrays humanity at its finest (without God).

What do you think?

Am I content?

The Lord has been really pressing on my heart lately to be content. I really viewed myself as content in about everything, but was I really? Honestly, looking at myself right now I see my heart and it yearns for something indescribable yet something so temporary. I am continually being drawn to my own emotions and not the will of God. The Lord has been laying on my heart Proverbs 4:23 "Keep your heart with all diligence for out of it spring the issues of life." The issues of life? It's not just little things, but outcomes. If I do not keep my heart in line with God's word then I could affect not just myself, but the lives of those around me, whether family, friends, future spouse, future children and grandchildren. How devastating could the decision I make today be tomorrow or in the years to come? This is such a great burden. Am I content to satisfy the temporary without regards to the long-term affect? The Lord knows my heart and sees my desires even when I feel like they are not seen. There are days when I feel extremely torn between what my soul desires and what my flesh desires. They don't line up and I want my fleshly desires fulfilled. Yet the Lord reminds me of what my soul longs for and that when I delight myself in Him, He will give me the desires of my heart. I am learning what Colossians 3:2 means. "Set your minds on the things that are above, not on things that are on earth."

The Myth of Moderation in Religion. Is it Just a Myth?

      “The idea that any one of our religions represents the infallible word of the One True God requires an encyclopedic ignorance of history, mythology, and art even to be entertained—as the beliefs, rituals, and iconography of each of our religions attest to centuries of cross-pollination among them.” Sam Harris refers to this in his book The End of Faith. In his book, he tries to convince his reader that all religious beliefs are absurd and hazardous to society. He opposes Islamic terrorism and the religious elitism of the American government. He senses the urgency of the situation and seeks to demolish the credentials of religion. He then goes on to illustrate the damaging effects of religious belief and argues that religious belief should not have any influence in today’s culture because it is not acceptable. He explains why science is better used to establish morality than religion and finishes by introducing his reader to a new kind of spirituality, one that is devoid of religious faith. He believes that spirituality built on rational ground renders faith superfluous. One of the biggest criticisms he states is found on page 66 of his book, The End of Faith, “Nothing could change about this world, or about the world of their experience, that would demonstrate the falsity of many of their core beliefs.” He believes that no amount of evidence would justify religious beliefs and that religious individuals are close-minded. Yet through all of this, he is adamantly holding fast to his atheistic beliefs and thus, he disqualifies his own thesis statement of his essay on the Myth of Moderation in Religion.

      Before one delves any deeper into such a major social issue, one must understand what faith is. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines faith as a “firm belief in something for which there is no proof; belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion; something that is believed especially with strong conviction.” Faith is belief in something or someone when one has no reason to believe. As the conductor from the Polar Express states, “Seeing is believing, but sometimes the most real things in the world are the things we can’t see.” There are many things one cannot see yet one still believes they exist. Faith does not always require evidence, but when there is evidence one ought to believe.

     The first step to believing in something that exists is looking at the proof of its existence. One way to do this is test the reliability of the document in question. Each major world religion has a document upon which it bases its beliefs. For the Muslim it is the Qur’an, for the Jew it is the Torah, and for the Christian it is the Bible. These are just three of the many religions in the world. Each person ought to repeatedly check his document for its reliability so that he is not swayed by every wind of doctrine or speech. There are guidelines for evaluating and analyzing a document to determine the accuracy and reliability and to show the document’s flaws. Whether subconsciously or intentionally, it is important to note that each document is biased to the author’s beliefs. One must determine the author’s relationship to the events he/she is writing about and try to see how these events affect the author’s own life. Another aspect of determining reliability of documents is looking at different accounts of the same events. If these accounts differ, one should consider the possible explanations for the differences. Yet if the accounts correspond while having different authors then these accounts are more accurate. There are also three major questions to ask when evaluating a document: How does the author know the details and was he/she present at the event? Where does the information come from- the author, eyewitnesses, or reports from others? Upon what are the author’s conclusions based- a single piece of evidence, multiple sources, or third-party accounts? The University of New York Libraries delves even deeper than that and generates a list of questions to be asked based upon authority, accuracy, accessibility, and purpose. After asking these questions, one can determine the reliability, accuracy, and purpose of the author and document.

     The documents of the aforementioned religions of the Muslim, Jew, and Christian must be tested to determine their reliability and accuracy first and foremost. The first step is “

To understand the value and limitations of a source, try to answer the following questions: Is this source a firsthand account, written by a witness or participant? Was it written at the time of the event or later? Is the account based on interviews or evidence from those directly involved?” (New York University Libraries)

When analyzing the history behind the Qur’an, the average person may not know this, but it is not a firsthand account because Muhammed was illiterate. Yet when analyzing the history behind the Torah one knows that it is a firsthand account because Moses was directed by God to write the Torah. The Bible is known to have both first and secondhand accounts since the author would sometimes have his scribe write for him or the book would be anonymous. One must go on from there answering each question to determine the reliability and accuracy. The New York University Libraries warns the reader when doing this to “

Be alert to the biases imbedded in primary sources. Every document is biased, whether deliberately or unconsciously, by the point of view of the person who wrote it.  Determine as much as possible about the author of the document and his or her relationship to the events and issues described.”

When reading the document the New York University Libraries recommends comparing “the accounts of one event provided by different primary sources to evaluate the reliability of each document.” One can determine the reliability through the sources conflicting or concurring.

“When sources conflict, consider possible explanations for the differences. When they concur, the account provided may be more accurate - especially if the authors have different points of view. Do not assume that one type of document is necessarily more reliable than another” (New York University Libraries).

When looking at the Torah, Qur’an, and Bible for contradictions there are no actual contradictions for the Torah or the Bible, yet there are at least five known contradictions in the Qur’an. Abd El Schafi points out these five contradictions in chapter 11 of his book Behind the Veil. ‘

(1) In several verses the Qur’an indicates that it was revealed in the Arabic tongue; that is, in the Arabic language (refer to 14:4; 26:192-195; 13:37; 42:7; 39:28, and 43:3). Yet, in at least two plain verses, the Qur’an commands the deletion of any dialect other than the Arabic language in the Qur’anic text (16:103; 41:44)… And we say to Suyuti: "We know that the Qur’an is an Arabic book, but the Qur’an denies that it contains non-Arabic words (refer to verses 16:103; 41:44). It is obvious that this is a contradiction, especially since there are about 118 non-Arabic words—not just five or ten words. The simple explanation for this contradiction is that Muhammad himself did not know that the origin of the words he employed in the Qur’an were non-Arabic. He was not aware that some of them were Persian, Ethiopian, Berber, Turkish and Nabatean; thus, he claimed that the entire Qur’an was revealed in pure Arabic language! (2) He remarks that there is something in the Qur’an to which ibn ’Abbas stopped short of giving any answer. A man told him that one verse in the Qur’an mentions that the length of the day of resurrection is one thousand years and another verse says it is 50 thousand years (al-Sayda: 5 and al-Ma’arij: 4). Ibn ’Abbas said, "This is an honest acknowledgment by ibn ’Abbas without any attempt of justification. When ibn Musayyib, one of the great companions, was asked about these two days and why they contradict each other, he said, "Ibn ’Abbas avoided talking about them and he is more knowledgeable than me.” Yet we find some contemporary scholars who endeavor to justify this contradiction and claim that they are more knowledgeable than ibn ’Abbas! (3) In the same part (p. 79), the Suyuti says that the Qur’an states in chapter 6:22-23 that in the day of judgment, infidels attempt to conceal something from God while in chapter 4:42 the Qur’an contradicts that and indicates that they do not conceal anything from God. The Suyuti tries to justify this contradiction by saying that ibn ’Abbas was asked about it and he answered that they conceal it by their tongues but their hands and their limbs admit it. Yet the question is still without answer because if their hands admit it in spite of themselves, it should not be said that they did not conceal any fact from God because they did try to hide, but their hands gave it away, as ibn ’Abbas says. (4) In chapter, "al Waqiha," the Qur’an talks about those who are destined to enter paradise. It states in verses 13 and 14 that the majority will be from the nations who came before Muhammad and the minority will be from peoples who believed in Muhammad. But in the same chapter (verses 39 and 40), it is said that the majority will be from those people who came before and after Muhammad also. This is a contradiction in the same chapter. (5) Pertaining to marriages, it is clear that the Qur’an calls for the possibility of marrying four women at the same time. In Chapter 4:3, "But if ye fear that you shall not treat them fairly, then only one." But in Chapter 4:129, we read, “You will not be able to deal equally between your wives however much you wish to do so."  In his book, "The Itqan,” the Suyuti says, "In the first verse we understand that fairness is possible while in the second, we perceive that fairness is not possible" (Itqan, part 3, page 85). Actually, from the Qur’anic point of view as well as according to Muhammad and the rest of the Muslims, "fairness is possible" to be practiced by the evidence that they got (and still get) married to four women. Even Muhammad’s companions and his successors did so. Therefore, "fairness" seemed to be possible for them because it is not reasonable that all of them, including ’Umar, ’Ali, ’Uthman and Muhammad violated the Qur’anic teaching. Then why does the Qur’an says in chapter 4:129 that "fairness" is not possible? This is an obvious contradiction which Muslim scholars, among them the Suyuti, realized and comprehended. In order to solve the problem, the Suyuti argued, "The first verse (meant) fairness in regard to fulfilling the pledges while the second verse is related to the heart’s inclination and it is not within the ability of a man to be fair in this matter”… We have not used this but have attempted and continue to attempt to quote only the Muslim scholars such as Suyuti, Baydawi, Jalalan, and Zamakh-Shari, who endeavor to explain these verses to negate any contradiction against the proper usage of the language, such as by saying the word ‘after’ means ‘before’. Or, as we read in Sura 90:1, they said that God does not swear in the sacred land (that is, Mecca), then in Sura 95:3, we see Him swearing in Mecca the sacred land. The contradiction between these two verses is evident, yet the Suyuti (along with other scholars) denied that there is any contradiction because the word ‘no’ in Chapter 90 is redundant. It is not intended to negate but to affirm! The Suyuti mentioned this issue among many others, under the title, "What Was Mistaken to be Contradiction.” He summarizes the opinions of the scholars in response to this criticism by saying: "The people did not reject what you rejected because the Arabs may use ‘not’ in the context of their conversation and abolish its meaning."’

Just looking at these five contradictions within the Qur’an should make a person consider the reliability of this document, Mohammed, and his scribe.

     When analyzing the reliability of scripture one would use a similar procedure as one used analyzing the Qur’an. James F. Williams, the founder and president of Probe Ministries. “provides evidence for the trustworthiness of the biblical documents.” He explains how to look at the copies and compare them so that one can see that the copiers/scribes did not insert, delete, and embellish the documents. If the biblical texts had been tampered with, then there would be evidence of the texts contradicting themselves and contradicting other biblical texts as well. James F. Williams (the founder and past president of Probe Ministries) offers three errors to avoid and a procedure for testing the validity of the biblical texts. The three errors James F. Williams states are ‘

[First] do not assume inspiration or infallibility of the documents, with the intent of attempting to prove the inspiration or infallibility of the documents. Do not say the Bible is inspired or infallible simply because it claims to be. This is circular reasoning. [Second] when considering the original documents, forget about the present form of your Bible and regard them as the collection of ancient source documents that they are. [Lastly] do not start with modern “authorities” and then move to the documents to see if the authorities were right. Begin with the documents themselves.’

He brings into light information about scribes and who they were and why they were chosen to copy down the texts. “

The scribe was considered a professional person in antiquity. No printing presses existed, so people were trained to copy documents. The task was usually undertaken by a devout Jew. The Scribes believed they were dealing with the very Word of God and were therefore extremely careful in copying. They did not just hastily write things down. The earliest complete copy of the Hebrew Old Testament dates from c. 900 A.D” (Williams).

He also shows which documents were compared. The Masoretic text, Septuagint, and Dead Sea Scrolls comprised the Old Testament, while numerous Greek texts comprised the New Testament. The Masoretic text was named after the group of Jews called Masoretes who meticulously copied the documents without punctuations or paragraphs. When they completed a copy the would total up the number of letters, find the middle letter and if it was not the same as the original text they would make a new copy. “Comparisons of the Masoretic text with earlier Latin and Greek versions have also revealed careful copying and little deviation during the thousand years from 100 B.C. to 900 A.D” (Williams). A young Bedouin shepherd discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran in clay jars in a cave. The importance of these scrolls is found in what is written on them. “

The Dead Sea Scrolls include a complete copy of the Book of Isaiah, a fragmented copy of Isaiah, containing much of Isaiah 38-6, and fragments of almost every book in the Old Testament. The majority of the fragments are from Isaiah and the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). The books of Samuel, in a tattered copy, were also found and two complete chapters of the book of Habakkuk. In addition, there were a number of nonbiblical scrolls related to the commune found… The supreme value of these Qumran documents lies in the ability of biblical scholars to compare them with the Masoretic Hebrew texts of the tenth century A.D. If, upon examination, there were little or no textual changes in those Masoretic texts where comparisons were possible, an assumption could then be made that the Masoretic Scribes had probably been just as faithful in their copying of the other biblical texts, which could not be compared with the Qumran material… A comparison of the Qumran manuscript of Isaiah with the Masoretic text revealed them to be extremely close in accuracy to each other” (Williams).

The Greek translation of the Old Testament, known as the Septuagint, proves the accuracy of the Masoretic scribes. The Septuagint is commonly referred to as LXX, because 70 Jewish scholars allegedly wrote it around 200 B.C. in Alexandria. “The LXX appears to be a rather literal translation from the Hebrew, and the manuscripts we have are pretty good copies of the original translations” (Williams). The Septuagint is one of over 4,000 Greek ancient manuscripts. While most of the other texts contain portions or entire books of just the New Testament, the Septuagint contains the entire Biblical text.

     Another part of comparing the reliability of the Bible to other books is relating the number of manuscripts and the time between the writing of the original document and the copies. Williams created a table to compare fifteen separate documents in regards to the author and his work, his lifespan, date of the event(s) and writing, earliest extant manuscript, time lapse to writing and time lapse to manuscript. When comparing two documents, the time lapse from the event to the manuscript for Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul’s letters is very short compared to those of the other ten. The book of John has a time lapse of 100 years between the events and the first surviving manuscripts, while the other four have a time lapse of 200 years. The document with the next closest time lapse is Pliny’s Letters which is anywhere from 725 years to 750 years. Historians know that the larger the gap between the event, the first manuscript and the copies the greater the chance for inaccuracy. Clay Jones formatted a table to compare the number of manuscripts of the New Testament to other documents factoring in other information. The New Testament has over 5,000 of both old and new manuscripts while the next closest, Homer’s Iliad has only 643 old manuscripts and almost 2,000 new copies. The document with the least amount of copies is Livy’s History of Rome with 1 original document and 150 new copies. There is such a vast differences between the Iliad and the New Testament concerning the time-lapse difference of 360 years and number of manuscripts, which is over 8,000.

     What if one were to look at a different aspect of these documents by looking at the major world religions. The three major world religions are Christianity, Islam, and Unaffiliated, as of 2010. What are these religions? Alex Crain on Christianity.com explains Christianity as simple. “

It's all about one life, the life of Jesus the Son of God. The Bible teaches that Jesus was God Himself, come to live in His world as a human… The Bible teaches that because we are sinners by nature and by choice, we have a broken relationship with our Creator. We live out our days seeking fulfillment and meaning in the things that surround us, but the deepest need of the human soul is to be restored to the One who made us. Jesus came to accomplish that restoration… The central message of Christianity is that Jesus Christ is God the Son who came to earth to rescue sinners not only from a life of sin but also from eternal damnation in hell.  Christians believe that the 66 books of the Bible comprise the inerrant Word of God.  As such, they read it, come to know God more deeply by it, stand for and live by its truth.”

There is another difference between Christianity and other religions. Christianity is not actually a religion at all, in fact, it is a relationship with the Creator God. No other religion is like this, not even Islam. There are those out there, who believe Islam to be a cult and not actually a religion. Some think that Muslims and Christians have the same beliefs if not very similar beliefs, but they do not. All one needs to do to perceive this is to ask a Christian or a Muslim how their faith differs from that of the other person’s faith. If one desires to understand the differences to a greater extent one may study and compare the Qur’an and the Bible. “Islam is not a cult, but a major world religion distinctly different from Christianity…At first glance, Islamic belief appears to be almost compatible with Christianity and/or Judaism…[Yet] Islam rejects the biblical doctrines of the Trinity and the Deity of Christ” (Martin 364, 366). Unlike Islam, Christianity is the only religion where mankind doesn’t save himself—almost every other religion emphasizes good works and earning salvation. Walter Martin explains each cult and religion in detail with regards to beliefs, sects and even defining what certain terms mean in each religion in his book The Kingdom of the Cults. He gives history and teachings of the religion/cult and explains it in non-technical language. He does a thorough study and even explains how to approach each cult or religion when questions are raised. The first one that will be covered here is Islam. What is Islam? ‘

The word “Islam” actually means “submission to God.” Therefore, “a Muslim is one who strives to submit to God… Islam has seven fundamental beliefs that every Muslim must accept as a part of his/her religion (the Emanul Mufassil, or Faith Listed in Detail). Every Muslim learns this formula as a part of his/her religious training.” ^*

• “Belief in God” (the standard word for “God” in Arabic is الله—“Allah”)
• “Belief in the angels” (both good and bad)
• “Belief in the revealed Books of God”
• “Belief in God’s many prophets” (including Adam, Abraham, Moses, David and others Christians and Jew are familiar with)
• “Accepting that there will be a Last Day”
• Belief in the divine measurement of human affairs
• Belief in life after death”

* Yahiya Emerick, Understanding Islam (Indianapolis: Alpha Books, 2002, p. 18.)

Muslims, also, believe in Satan and in a Day of Judgment on which God will send people to either heaven or hell. They also believe that Ishmael (the father of the Arab world), not Isaac, received the promise from God through Abraham; this helps to explain why Arab Muslims feel that their claim to the Holy Land is a God-given right (Christian Answers Network).

If Muslims and Christians have very similar core beliefs, does that mean they believe in the same God? No. Christian Answers Network explains that the core beliefs of a religion do not affect the fundamental beliefs about Jesus and God, and that is where Islam and Christianity differ. ‘

Although the two religions share some terminology and even some theology (monotheism, for instance), Islam is fundamentally different from Christianity. Islam is a works-oriented religion, while Christian faith is based on salvation by grace through faith as a result of the shed blood of Christ. In Islam, if God wants to forgive sin, He simply says, “It is forgiven.” Christianity recognizes the necessity of the shedding of blood for the forgiveness of sin (Hebrews 9:22).’

Islam on the other hand is a works based religion and even so, the Muslim has no real assurance of salvation unless he dies in Jihad.”

As a works-oriented religion, Islam requires that its adherents earn their way to heaven by performing the five pillars of the faith.

1. Say the confession of faith.  A Muslim must confess, “There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is the prophet of God.”

2. Pray.  Muslims are supposed to pray five times a day: shortly before sunrise, mid-morning, noon, mid-afternoon, and after sunset.

3. Give alms.  Muslims are to give about 2.5 percent of their wealth.

4. Fast during Ramadan.  For one lunar month, from sunrise to sunset, Muslims are not to allow anything to pass down their throat. (Theoretically, a good Muslim would even spit out his or her saliva.) Then from sunset to sunrise, they are permitted to eat as little or as much as they want. This is their way of developing discipline and relating to the poor. (Travelers, young children and pregnant or nursing mothers do not need to keep the fast.)

5. Make a pilgrimage to Mecca. Every Muslim who is financially able is supposed to travel to the birthplace of Islam once in his or her lifetime.

Muslims have no guarantee of being saved. They believe that all their works will be accounted for and that on Judgment Day, if your bad works outweigh your good works, you are going to go to hell. But if your good works outweigh your bad works, you'll probably go to heaven. (Since God is all-powerful, they concede that He may do with you as He pleases, even if you have been very righteous. They hope He won't be having a “bad day” at Judgment.) A third possibility is that you could go to hell and burn your sins off for a while and then be allowed into heaven. The only way Muslims can be guaranteed to go to heaven is through “jihad.” Although it is often translated “holy war,” “jihad” literally means “exerting force for God.” One could be in “jihad” by writing a book about Islam, or by sharing his faith to bring others to Islam, or by physically fighting for the cause of Islam. If a Muslim dies in “jihad,” he is guaranteed to go to heaven” (Christian Answers Network).

The average Muslim has some knowledge of Christianity, but usually that knowledge is misunderstood. “

This is largely due to fact that their only understanding of Christianity comes from movies, music and television shows such as “Baywatch,” “Madonna,” Rated-R films, etc. Because they believe America is a Christian nation, they assume everything that comes out of America is Christian. Muslims think Christians believe in three gods: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Mother (Mary). They believe that Christians and Jews have changed the Bible; therefore, although the Quran acknowledges the Gospel of Christ, the Torah of Moses and the Psalms of David, the existing copies can't be trusted. In any case, they are all superseded by the Quran. Because of pornography from the West and the Western media, they equate Christianity with free sex, drugs, alcohol, rape, divorce… all the evils of the West. This misconception confirms their belief that Islam is the true and final religion for all mankind” (Christian Answers Network).

What does unaffiliated mean and who comprises it? “

The religiously unaffiliated are comprised of three distinct subgroups. About three-in-ten of the unaffiliated describe their religion as either atheist (12%) or agnostic (17%), while about seven-in-ten describe their religion as “nothing in particular” (71%).Religiously unaffiliated Americans tend to be, almost by definition, less religious than Americans who belong to a religious tradition. In Pew Research Center surveys, the unaffiliated are less likely than the general public as a whole to say that religion is very important in their lives, to attend worship services regularly and to pray on a daily basis. At the same time, the unaffiliated are not wholly secular. Substantial portions of the unaffiliated – particularly among those who describe their religion as “nothing in particular” – say they believe in God or a universal spirit. And while 42% of the unaffiliated describe themselves as neither a religious nor a spiritual person, 18% say they are a religious person, and 37% say they are spiritual but not religious. There is little evidence that the unaffiliated are, by and large, “seekers” who are searching for a religion that fits them or that they have embraced New Age spirituality, Eastern religious ideas or other beliefs from non-Abrahamic faiths. Only about one-in-ten U.S. adults who identify their current religion as “nothing in particular” say they are looking for a religious affiliation. The unaffiliated are about as likely as others in the general public to believe in reincarnation, astrology and the evil eye… Compared with other adults in the general public, the unaffiliated are less likely to say that belonging to a community of people who share their beliefs and values is very important to them. And their views of churches and other religious organizations are decidedly mixed. A majority agree that religious organizations strengthen community bonds and play an important role in helping the poor and needy. But most also say that religious organizations are too concerned with money and power, too focused on rules and too involved in politics. The unaffiliated also are more skeptical than others in the general public of the idea that churches and other houses of worship contribute to solving important social problems, and the notion that religious organizations protect and strengthen morality in society. Unlike the general public… the unaffiliated are divided over whether a decline in religion’s influence on society is a good or bad thing” (Pew Research Center).

In light of these three major world religions, what is radicalism? Religious radicalism can either be positive or negative in its effect on the world around us. ‘

“You can define radicalism with respect to violence or rejection of society, you can define radicalism in ways that are positive.” Gartenstein-Ross defines radicalism in the positive sense as life transformation. “When your relation with the world is transformed by your relationship with God, it transforms the way you relate to others, it transforms the way you do your work, it transforms the way you live your life”’ (Orme).

     Christianity and Islam are the two most radical religions in the world, yet they differ in their radicalism. Both religions strive to “bring in” new believers and to “keep” existing believers, but for different reasons. John 3:16 describes true Christianity; “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life” (KJV). Another verse is John 15:13; “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (NKJ). Al Baqarah 2:216 of the Qur’an states, “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not” (Qur’an). Another verse from the Qur’an is Al Anfal 8:12, “Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): I am with you: Give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them” (Qur’an).

     A relatively recent example of radical Christianity is the story of five missionaries speared to death. These men and their families went to Ecuador to share the gospel with Auca Indians and when they finally met them they sacrificed their lives for the Indians rather than killing them. “

For the next two days, the missionaries waited for other Aucas to return. Finally, on day six, two Auca women walked out of the jungle. Jim and Pete excitedly jumped in the river and waded over to them. As they got closer, these women did not appear friendly. Jim and Pete almost immediately heard a terrifying cry behind them. As they turned they saw a group of Auca warriors with their spears raised, ready to throw. Jim Elliot reached for the gun in his pocket. He had to decide instantly if he should use it. But he knew he couldn't. Each of the missionaries had promised they would not kill an Auca who did not know Jesus to save himself from being killed. Within seconds, the Auca warriors threw their spears, killing all the missionaries: Ed McCully, Roger Youderian, Nate Saint, Pete Fleming and Jim Elliot.

An even more recent example of radical Islam is the attack on the United States of America on September 11, 2001. That day is engraved in almost every American’s mind. If a child was too young to remember the events of that day or not born yet he has probably already had the story recounted to him. “

Islamic extremism is driven by an interpretation of Islam that believes that Islamic law, or sharia, is an all-encompassing religious-political system. Since it is believed to be proscribed by Allah (Arabic for “God”) sharia must be enforced in the public sphere by a global Islamic state. As such, Islamic extremists consider it to be the only truly legitimate form of governance and reject democracy and human rights values. Thus, the ultimate objective of Islamic extremists is the merger of “mosque and state” under sharia law. Those who favor such an approach are called Islamists. Their ideology is called Islamism, or political Islam. Related terms for Islamic extremism include radical Islam and Islamic supremacy. Islamic extremists believe they are obligated to install this form of governance in Muslim-majority territories, countries and, eventually, the entire world. In the minds of Islamic extremists, they are promoting justice and freedom by instituting sharia. In some cases, Islamic extremists even describe sharia as a superior form of “democracy.” Islamic extremists have intermediate political goals which they believe will pave the way for the global implementation of sharia. One of these goals is the removal of non-Muslim military forces from Muslim lands and the overthrow of “enemy” regimes. Acts of Islamic extremism includes terrorism, human rights abuses, the advancement of sharia-based governance, bigotry towards non-Muslims and rival Muslims and overall hostility to the West and, in particular, Western democracy… Islamic extremism is the primary national security and human rights concern of the world today. It is firstly the primary motivator of acts of terrorism worldwide. Secondly, as Islamic extremists gain power and rule, human rights abuses – including oppression of women, homosexuals and religious minorities as well as governmental tyranny, sectarian warfare and bigotry inherent in sharia law – come to the fore… Islamic terrorists… use violence and terrorism to instill fear and to gain political power in order to establish their goals” (Mauro).

Many might still say that Islamic extremists are not really following the Qur’an, but the only way to tell for certain is by studying the Qur’an. It is a violent religion as read in at least 109 verses. One example of this is in Surah 5:33, “

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and his messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the hereafter” (Qur’an).

     Islam is viewed as an unsafe religion by more than just Christians. Robert Tracinski, as an atheist, sees that Islam is more dangerous than Christianity. ‘

As I see it, the main danger posed by any religion to its dissenters and unbelievers lies in the rejection of reason, which cuts off the possibility of discussion and debate, leaving coercion as an acceptable substitute. I am with Voltaire on that one: “If we believe absurdities, we will commit atrocities.” But all religions are different and have different doctrines which are shaped over their history—and as we shall see, that includes different views on precisely such core issues as the role of reason and persuasion. I should preface this by saying that I am no expert on theology, particularly Muslim theology. Yet there are a number of big, widely documented differences between Christianity and Islam that can be seen in the traditions established by their history and in the actual content of their religious doctrines’ (Tracinski).

Religion is also viewed through the philosophical aspect. Austin Cline, an expert on agnosticism and atheism, explains differences and similarities of religion and philosophy. “

The questions discussed in both religion and philosophy tend to be very much alike. Both religion and philosophy wrestle with problems like: What is good? A separation between the sacred and the profane is something else lacking in philosophy. Certainly philosophers discuss the phenomena of religious awe, feelings of mystery, and the importance of sacred objects, but that is very different from having feelings of awe and mystery around such objects within philosophy. Many religions teach adherents to revere sacred scriptures, but no one teaches students to revere the collected notes of William James [an American psychologist and philosopher during the 1900’s].”

     It has been revealed that there is visible proof that some religions are violent and other religions are not. Before one can say a religion has a minority of radicals, one must study and understand that particular religion. Just as one does not like to have assumptions made of that person before an explanation is given, one must do the same for religions. Also, one must take into account how faith in God is increased when a person, group of people or country is threatened. “

The final explanation is that intelligence provides whatever functions religion does for believers. There are four such functions as proposed by Zuckerman, Silberman, and Hall. First, religion provides people a sense of control. This was demonstrated in a series of studies conducted between 2008 and 2010, which showed that threatening volunteers’ sense of personal control increased their belief in God… Second, religion provides self-regulation. In a 2009 study, it was shown that religion was associated with better well-being… Third, religion provides self-enhancement.  A 1997 meta-analysis compared the intrinsically religious, who privately believe in the supernatural, to the extrinsically religious, where people are merely part of a religious group without believing in God… Last, and possibly the most intriguing, is that religion provides attachment. Religious people often claim to have a personal relationship with God” (Rathi).

     So are religions really cross-pollinated through beliefs, rituals, and iconography? Could one religion “represent the infallible word of the One True God” as Sam Harris tried to disprove? Does it really require “an encyclopedic ignorance of history, mythology, and art even to be entertained” to believe in such a religion? That will be left up for the reader to decide, for opinions do not matter when it comes down to spiritual issues. Only real evidence and truth matter. Will you believe? Will you toss it aside like Sam Harris, when he wrote “Nothing could change about this world, or about the world of their experience, that would demonstrate the falsity of many of their core beliefs.” He believes that no amount of evidence would justify religious beliefs and that religious individuals are close-minded. What is the verdict? What will you believe?

 

 

Bibliography:

New York University Libraries. September 2007. Web. November 17, 2015.

Schafi, Abd El. Behind the Veil: Unmasking Islam. Pioneer Book Company. Maharashtra, India. 2002. Paperback.

Probe Ministries. May 27, 1995. Web. November 18, 2015.

Probe Ministries. April 17, 2006. Web. November 18, 2015.

Jones, Clay. October 1, 2013. Web. December 2, 2015.

Pew Research Center. “Global Religious Landscape.” December 18, 2012. Web. December 2, 2015.

Pew Research. “Religion and the Unaffiliated.” October 9, 2012. Web. December 2, 2015.

Christianity.com. “What is Christianity.” Alex Crain. Web. December 2, 2015.

Martin, Walter. “The Kingdom of the Cults.” Bethany House Publishers. Minneapolis, Minnesota. 1992. Paperback.

Christian Answers Network. What is Islam. AIIA Institute et al. Web. December 3, 2015.

Word of His Grace. How Many Religions are There? 2012. Peter Ditzel. Web. December 3, 2015.

Mohammed. Koran. Asir Media. Turkey. 2012.

Brian Orme. “The Hard Questions of Religious Radicalism.”

Christianity.com. “Jim Elliot: No Fool.” Web. December 3, 2015.

The Clarion Project. Understanding Islamic Extremism. January 26, 2014. Ryan Mauro. Web. December 3, 2015.

Relevant Magazine. November 16, 2009. Web magazine. November 19, 2015.

Laurence R. Iannaccone. Eli Berman. “Religious extremism: the good, the bad, and the deadly.” Prepared for a special issue of Public Choice on the Political Economy of Terrorism, edited by Charles Rowley. Web. November 19, 2015.

Austin Cline. "Religion vs. Philosophy.” Atheism.about.com. Web. November 20, 2015.

The Federalist. January 27, 2015. Web. November 20, 2015.

Akshat Rathi. “New meta-analysis checks the correlation between intelligence and faith.” Ars Technica. August 11, 2013. Web. November 19, 2015.

New Beginnings

I had a blog before and I can't quite remember the last time I posted on it. I decided to start afresh and to use this as what could possibly be my ramblings of a book I am thinking about writing and about my walk with the Lord.  I have the first part of my "book" completed and at this very moment a very dear friend is reading over it before I submit it for my English class at college. A little nerve wracking, but I am confident in my research and hours I spent writing this paper. As finals are next week I should be able to really start working on this book and of course, study for my entrance exam for the college of Nursing at CSU over Christmas break. Yay!