If radical Islam is violent due to culture and not religion

[Stoneburg]

@Slow_Moving_Vehicle

Except that there’s no more reason to trust that the Gospel of Thomas is any more accurate than the synoptic Gospels. According to Wikipedia, scholars are divided into two camps as to the date of Thomas, but even the earliest put it at 50 - 100 CE. Which is to say, contemporaneous with Mark. The other camp puts it in the second century. So no closer to the historic Jesus than the Synoptics.

The reason for my trust in it is not mainly based on archeology but rather that it quite accurately describes the process of ego-dissolution.

@Slow_Moving_Vehicle

Whereas the message of Gnosticism is that the world was created by an evil or incompetent Demiurge, that it is an “error”, that some - but by no means all - people have a divine spark (the rest being no better than beasts), and that truth is a hidden pearl that is only accessible to the enlightened elite.

The ’world’ created by the Demiurge is the same thing as the Eastern religions call the ’maya’, meaning the illusion or play that is created by your ego-mind and the collective ego-mind. It basically states that the world you inhabit is an illusion of your mind, and that while you are in it you are that illusion. And that the apparent evil in the world is created externally by the collective ego and experienced as suffering by the individual ego.

It also says that everyone has access to ”the kingdom of heaven” which refers to a different perspective or state of consciousness, what the Buddhists call enlightenment and the Hindus call moksha. The ”kingdom of heaven” is not the same as the afterlife, but available right here and right now, as soon as you see through the illusion of a separate self, which is what the awakening actually is. You wake up from the dream of a separate and suffering little you.

That the truth is ”accessible to an enlightened elite” is not a fair statement. The Truth is all there is, always present and always available, in fact inescapable. The Truth is already here and now, it’s just a flaw of perception that keeps one from seeing it. Of course it depends on everyone unique life story and pre-disposition if they will experience it in this life time, but pointing out that fact does not make you responsible for it. Understanding the theory of relativity is theoretically a possibility for almost everyone, but in reality it is currently mainly understood by a small elite. Pointing that out does not make me or physics teachers inherently evil. The criticism of Jesus was just that, that the faiths at the time were actively hiding the truth from people and in many if not all cases did not even know the truth themselves.

@Slow_Moving_Vehicle

Oh, and women can’t enter into Heaven unless they become male:

"114. Simon Peter said to them, “Make Mary leave us, for females don’t deserve life.”

Jesus said, “Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven.”

Once again ”enter into heaven” means liberating oneself from the ego, and in the language used here ”makes herself male” basically means make herself a spiritual being. At the time spirituality was not allowed for women, who were of course considered the source of all sin and basically on the level of domesticated animals regarding social rights. The very fact that Jesus taught women and said that they could become equal to men should be taken as an insanely radical statement of egalitarianism, unheard of at its time, not as a slight upon women.

@Slow_Moving_Vehicle

I mean, honestly, whoever that itinerant preacher from Galilee actually was, and whatever he actually said, he’s become a blank slate for Christians to project any theology they can derive. And given that it’s not even historically certain that the man existed, that’s entirely understandable. But Gnosticism is no more or less a valid version of Christianity than orthodox Christianity. And to bring this hijack back to the point of the thread, I’m sure that if the Gnostic interpretation of Christianity had become orthodoxy, there would have been just as much blood on its hands as there is on those of Islam or Hinduism or communism or just about any -ism in human history. And just as much grace.

Gnosticism is valid from the only two viewpoints I am interested in:

-Providing methods for enlightenment
-Describing how the universe works

Your idea that Gnostics would have caused as much bloodshed as Islam or Christianity is just an angry opinion expressed without any facts to back it up. If they would, it would at least not have been possible to support the actions with their teachings. Unfortunately we will never know.

[Gyrate]

@Robert163

I suppose you have a point with the Lord’s Resistance Army, but in all of those other situations violence is being committed for some secular reason. My point never was, ONLY muslim dominated countries have violence. My point is when the county is run :by the book" you get bad results. And people here are going a looooooooooong way out of their way to try and deny that fact. Well, not deny it. Just a whole lot of:

Look, over there, bad things happen over there too!!!

I agree that theocracies are bad. That’s not the same thing as saying Islam is bad, since history shows that where things have been run by other books you get the same problems. Christianity, Hinduism and Buddhism all also have historical and ongoing issues with religion-inspired atrocities, to pick three examples.

Religious extremism is a problem, of which Islamic extremism is a subset. Singling out a 1400-year-old religion based on events of the past 20 years is cherrypicking.

[tomndebb]

@Robert163

LOL

They took over north africa and spain by by force, didnt they? that sounds pretty bad to me.

So did Rome, which also took over Western Europe, Greece, the Balkans, Asia Minor, the Levant, . . . And then Christianity took over the Americas, India, most of Southeazt Asia, . . .

Treatinvg the expa sion of the Abbasid and aAlmoravid empire as some sort of special case of “bad Islam” is nothing more than Islamophobic special pleading as if it was different than every empire. Building that preceded and succeeded it.

[Robert163]

@Gyrate

I agree that theocracies are bad. That’s not the same thing as saying Islam is bad

well, actually, it is saying exactly that

since history shows that where things have been run by other books you get the same problems. Christianity, Hinduism and Buddhism all also have historical and ongoing issues with religion-inspired atrocities, to pick three examples.

Look, over there!!! Bad things happen over there too!!!

Religious extremism is a problem, of which Islamic extremism is a subset. Singling out a 1400-year-old religion based on events of the past 20 years is cherrypicking.

leaving out the bad parts and just looking at the “good” ones is cherry picking too!!! (seriously)

[Robert163]

@tomndebb

So did Rome, which also took over Western Europe, Greece, the Balkans, Asia Minor, the Levant, . . . And then Christianity took over the Americas, India, most of Southeazt Asia, . . .

Treatinvg the expa sion of the Abbasid and aAlmoravid empire as some sort of special case of “bad Islam” is nothing more than Islamophobic special pleading as if it was different than every empire. Building that preceded and succeeded it.

Look, over there!!! Look!.. Look!

[Gyrate]

@Robert163

Look, over there!!! Bad things happen over there too!!!

If your argument is that Islam is uniquely bad, then dismissing evidence to the contrary is just you saying “Don’t look over there!!! Ignore the bad things happening over there too!!!..Don’t look!!!”.

It’s interesting that we’ve essentially agreed that culture is a major factor in the manifestation of Islamic extremism and the debate has now moved to whether Islam is intrinsically bad but is kept in check by “good” cultures or whether it isn’t intrinsically bad but is corrupted by those in “bad” cultures. I’ve already given examples to support the latter view, which you’ve just handwaved away. What have you got?

[Robert163]

@Gyrate

If your argument is that Islam is uniquely bad, then dismissing evidence to the contrary is just you saying “Don’t look over there!!! Ignore the bad things happening over there too!!!..Don’t look!!!”.

It’s interesting that we’ve essentially agreed that culture is a major factor in the manifestation of Islamic extremism and the debate has now moved to whether Islam is intrinsically bad but is kept in check by “good” cultures or whether it isn’t intrinsically bad but is corrupted by those in “bad” cultures. I’ve already given examples to support the latter view, which you’ve just handwaved away. What have you got?

1- I never said Islam is uniquely bad

2- Yes, I am redefining my position as Islam is intrinsically bad but is kept in check by “good” cultures

3- I’m not handwaving anything away

[andros]

@Robert163

1- I never said Islam is uniquely bad

right back atcha. Didn’t you start this discussion asking why Muslims do horrible things when non-Muslims do not?
.

[Robert163]

@andros

right bat atcha. Didn’t you start this discussion asking why Muslims do horrible things when non-Muslims do not?

yes

[andros]

@Robert163

yes

That would seem to be arguing for a uniqueness, then. No?

[Robert163]

@andros

That would seem to be arguing for a uniqueness, then. No?

As far as I am aware there has never been any Christian Sect that has stoned people to death for adultery, homosexuality or for working on the Sabbath. As far as a I am aware there has not been any Jewish group that has done that for THOUSANDS of years. If you like, we could get into a discussion, which is worse, living in Jewish society under Moses or living under the Taliban today, I think the Taliban is obviously worse but if you wanted to have that discussion we could.

As far as I know, however, back in the time of Moses the worst was stoning someone to death. As far as I know, and I could be wrong, Islamic law calls not only for stoning but also for beheading and cutting of the hands of thieves. So, I’m going to say both are bad but Islam is worse.

[andros]

So then you are arguing that Islam is uniquely bad.

[Memnon]

@Gyrate

Religious extremism is a problem, of which Islamic extremism is a subset. Singling out a 1400-year-old religion based on events of the past 20 years is cherrypicking.

Not so. Islamic fundamentalism is only a problem because the fundamentals of Islam are a problem. Jain fundamentalism hurts no-one. The more extreme you become as a Jain, the less likely you are to hurt anyone.

[Robert163]

@andros

So then you are arguing that Islam is uniquely bad.

No, I’m arguing that it is worse than Christianity and Hasidim. Can you name any far right christian group or Hasidic group that is even — half — as bad as the Taliban?

[Robert163]

@Tithonus

Not so. Islamic fundamentalism is only a problem because the fundamentals of Islam are a problem. Jain fundamentalism hurts no-one. The more extreme you become as a Jain, the less likely you are to hurt anyone.

Wow, thank you!!! That’s my whole point entirely.

[Stoneburg]

@Robert163

As far as I am aware there has never been any Christian Sect that has stoned people to death for adultery, homosexuality or for working on the Sabbath. As far as a I am aware there has not been any Jewish group that has done that for THOUSANDS of years. If you like, we could get into a discussion, which is worse, living in Jewish society under Moses or living under the Taliban today, I think the Taliban is obviously worse but if you wanted to have that discussion we could.

As far as I know, however, back in the time of Moses the worst was stoning someone to death. As far as I know, and I could be wrong, Islamic law calls not only for stoning but also for beheading and cutting of the hands of thieves. So, I’m going to say both are bad but Islam is worse.

Uganda is a Christian country and in 2013 they introduced a law that included the death penalty for homosexuality. Due to massive international pressure it was reduced to life imprisonment. Considering the attitude towards homosexuals in Uganda, I would personally prefer execution to spending the rest of my (now most likely very short, violent and painful) life in an Uganda prison. Considering that Uganda is on the other side of the world for you, I am not surprised that you have missed it.

On the other hand I am surprised you have missed another Christian sect native to the US, that even I have heard of. They are called the Ku Klux Klan and as recent as a month ago they were handing out fliers that said Stop Aids: Support Gay Bashing, basically encouraging people to beat homosexuals to death. Not decades ago, a month ago. I’m sure that several of the gay bashings that have resulted in death have included the use of stones, so that should fit your criteria of a Christian sect stoning someone to death for homosexuality, and they are not shy about it since they are handing out flyers encouraging it.

[Fear_Itself]

@Robert163

No, I’m arguing that it is worse than Christianity and Hasidim. Can you name any far right christian group or Hasidic group that is even — half — as bad as the Taliban?

The Spanish Inquisition.

[andros]

See also Lehava, Sikrikim, the JDL, Westboro Baptist, the aforementioned LRA, and–why not–colonial Virginia.

[Hiker]

@Robert163

As far as I am aware there has never been any Christian Sect that has stoned people to death for adultery, homosexuality or for working on the Sabbath. As far as a I am aware there has not been any Jewish group that has done that for THOUSANDS of years. If you like, we could get into a discussion, which is worse, living in Jewish society under Moses or living under the Taliban today, I think the Taliban is obviously worse but if you wanted to have that discussion we could.

As far as I know, however, back in the time of Moses the worst was stoning someone to death. As far as I know, and I could be wrong, Islamic law calls not only for stoning but also for beheading and cutting of the hands of thieves. So, I’m going to say both are bad but Islam is worse.

Religious fanaticism is always a bad thing. When religion is taken to its extremes, things get ugly. You single out Islam, because that religion gets taken to its extremes today, whereas the same happened in Christianity in a distant past. But it happened. You could ask the Cathars, if any of them were alive today. Unfortunately their creed was considered a heresy by the Catholic church. And the church happened to have an Army at hand. The rest is a fairly gruesome piece of history. Especially in the town of Béziers:

The doors of the church of St Mary Magdalene were broken down and the refugees dragged out and slaughtered. Reportedly, 7,000 people died there. Elsewhere in the town many more thousands were mutilated and killed. Prisoners were blinded, dragged behind horses, and used for target practice. What remained of the city was razed by fire. Arnaud-Amaury wrote to Pope Innocent III, “Today your Holiness, twenty thousand heretics were put to the sword, regardless of rank, age, or sex.” The permanent population of Béziers at that time was then probably no more than 5,000, but local refugees seeking shelter within the city walls could conceivably have increased the number to 20,000.

So would I rather be a Christian under Taliban rule or a Cathar in Béziers? I don’t know. What do you think?

[Gyrate]

@Tithonus

Not so. Islamic fundamentalism is only a problem because the fundamentals of Islam are a problem. Jain fundamentalism hurts no-one. The more extreme you become as a Jain, the less likely you are to hurt anyone.

Sure, and extremist Amish people are unlikely to drive a horse and buggy into a building. What you’ve got there is an exception, represented by six million people mostly living in a country of over a billion people of a different faith. Come back when the Jainists are in a position to impose their authority over non-believers and we’ll see how they’re doing.

Of course, that argument still doesn’t negate the point that we see and have seen extremist behaviors from other religions as already cited, religions which represent the vast majority of the world population collectively, so unless you’re arguing that the fundamentals of those religions are also “a problem” your argument fails.

@Robert163

Wow, thank you!!! That’s my whole point entirely.

And it still fails.

@Stoneburg

Uganda is a Christian country and in 2013 they introduced a law that included the death penalty for homosexuality. Due to massive international pressure it was reduced to life imprisonment. Considering the attitude towards homosexuals in Uganda, I would personally prefer execution to spending the rest of my (now most likely very short, violent and painful) life in an Uganda prison. Considering that Uganda is on the other side of the world for you, I am not surprised that you have missed it.

Kenya’s legislature likewise discussed a death-by-stoning anti-gay bill just last year, although it too was reduced to up to 14 years in prison. Note that Kenya recently legalized polygamy, just to raise a point of interest.