Mosque at the Twin Towers

Recently, there has been quite a bit of discussion in the news media about the possibility of building an Islamic activities center in New York near the site of the 9-11 world trade center disaster. Unsurprisingly, there is quite a bit of controversy surrounding this issue for several different reasons, not the least of which was that their faith in Islam is what inspired the people who flew two planes into the Twin Towers to destroy their own lives and the lives of so many innocent citizens.

Most Americans have a hard time with this concept; the idea that someone’s faith in God could inspire them to such senseless violence. Unfortunately, this is a concept that is neither new nor restricted to the followers of Islam. Christianity itself has a long and sordid history of violence against the non-believers, one that eclipses that of Islam in scope for the simple reason that it is more widespread and has been around a lot longer. Christianity springs from Judaism which has an even older and more violent history if one puts any faith in the accuracy of the Old Testament. Monotheistic religion is by definition intolerant to one degree or another. After all, the concept is based upon the idea that an all-knowing omniscient being passed on to man the proper path that his life should take. This does not leave room for the possibility that there may be other ways that are equally correct. Interestingly, all three of the major monotheistic religions have a common source, the Old Testament.

Judaism springs from this collection of books written by members of a nomadic tribe. In point of fact, the Old Testament is quite distinctly the history of this tribe of people and their belief in their God. Some of the earliest writings explaining how Jews interpreted this history and what it meant point out the fact that the early Jews did not believe that Yahweh was the only God, only that he was the God of their people. This point is also supported in some of the books of the Old Testament itself. For example, the first commandment which is widely believed to be this God’s written rule for his people says, “thou shalt have no other Gods before me”. Remember, this is God’s word given to Moses as his most important guidelines that these people were to live by and this is the first rule. It does not say that there are no other Gods; it says that the Jews shall have no other Gods before Yahweh. If one reads some of the writings of Jewish scholars and priests from the time of Jesus it becomes obvious that this was the understanding most Jews held at the time. They did not believe Yahweh was the only God, only the one that protected them and necessarily, the greatest God. This eventually evolved into the idea that he was the one true God but it was not the original understanding. At any rate, this God was a jealous and angry God and often visited great pain and suffering on the Jews for transgressions against him. This was nothing compared to the slaughter that he ordered the Jews to visit upon their enemies however. The Old Testament contains several instances where this God was actually angry at the Jews for not following his directions to wipe out whole tribes of people and sparing some through the weakness of human mercy. All one has to do is read the Old Testament to understand that violence, genocide, murder, and all manner of what we would today consider to be heinous slaughter were regularly carried out on this God’s orders. I would suggest that this God was not the kind of fellow any of us would particularly want for a neighbor.

Christians believe they have a monopoly on what the truth is as God passed it to them through what they believed to be the incarnate son of God. Interestingly, this son of God was actually a rather fundamentalist Jew. This God amongst men supposedly told them that he was the way to everlasting life and salvation. The New Testament collection of books is supposed to compromise a new covenant with God who has by this time evolved into the one true God. This is not a message open to a lot of dissent and Christianity is necessarily a very narrow and intolerant faith accordingly. It is impossible to believe that you know the only true way to salvation and still actually be tolerant of other people that believe you are wrong. After all, if God has spoken; who is man to disagree? There is a lot of talk about tolerance of other religions in most Christian faiths today but the fact remains that for much of the last two centuries Christians have regularly slaughtered dissenters and non-believers in the name of their faith. Even today as Christianity has undoubtedly evolved into a less violent faith there is no room for anything but a sort of mild forbearance of other religions. Christians may believe that other people have a right to worship as they please but they also believe these other people are undeniably wrong or misinformed in that choice. The Bible they so fervently believe in tells them that there is a great Apocalypse coming. This climactic battle will only have two sides; the forces of good and the forces of evil and every man must at that time choose. This type of faith is not a vehicle for compromise or world peace, it is by its very nature a recipe for continuing conflict.

Islam, which is the latest of the three major monotheistic faiths, sprang from this same source. Islam in Arabic means simply “I submit” and the faith is all about submission to God’s will. Mohammed, who was the prophet of God, is believed by Muslims to be the last of the great prophets. Interestingly, Muslims believe that Mohammed is not the only prophet of the one true God, just the latest and therefore most correct. Muslims believe Jesus was one of the prophets and the secondary prophet to Mohammed. A common thread through all three religions is the belief that men often misunderstand God’s true meaning, which is why prophets are necessary to begin with; to get men back on the right track. I find this a little bit of a logical fallacy in that it seems to me that an all knowing and omniscient being should have no problem communicating with men who he created in his own image but then again I never could understand the logic behind the Easter bunny either. The Koran or Q’ran is God’s word as passed on to Mohammed through the angel Gabriel who supposedly spoke directly to Mohammed throughout his later life. I won’t pretend that the possibility of an angel speaking God’s word directly to a chosen prophet is any more unlikely than a burning bush talking or God somehow procreating with a virgin. I will say that none of these things seem to be what we would today consider likely possibilities, yet much of the world is daily filled with violence, anger, and turmoil based largely upon which of these three ancient stories is most correct.

For my money all organized religions are a detriment to our ability to live together as human beings. I have no greater disdain for Islam than I do for Christianity or Judaism and rate all three as little better than ancient superstitions propagated by professional classes of charlatans and snake oil salesmen in order to maintain political and economic control of the population. The real problem is that these charlatans and the superstitions they espouse continue to serve to cause dissension, violence, and widespread suffering across the face of the globe.

This gets back to the point of this post to begin with; the Islamic center that is being proposed to be built in New York near the site of the collapsed twin towers. For the basic reason that I believe anything that furthers the cause of organized religion is basically a net negative as far as human understanding is concerned I am against it. Beyond that, I believe that Islam is presently the most dangerous of the three major monotheistic religions and I will explain why. Islam has two basic tenets which make it so dangerous. They can be summed up in the statement that Mohammed was perfect in word and deed. What this means is that his messages that came directly from God were perfect, unassailable by human logic because they came from the one true omniscient being. This also means that Mohammed’s actions, supposedly carried out with the direct urging of this same omniscient being are also beyond the ability of human beings to question.

One can argue that many Christian fundamentalist believe in the same things as far as Jesus is concerned and I will concede that this is true. I would also point out that these people are what we term fundamentalist Christians. They are defined by their belief that the Bible is inerrant in every statement that it contains. While most people with even a hint of scientific understanding understand that the Bible is literally chock full of factually inaccurate statements there are those that believe it is completely and inalterably accurate. Anyone who takes this position must also find a way to support the violence and devastation that the Bible contains within it which is why most people understand that the relative danger to society that any Christian group offers is proportional to how fundamentalist their group is on the scale of such things.

Muslims have for several years now been trying to separate themselves from Islamic fundamentalist movements such as the one espoused by the people that crashed into the Twin Towers. These efforts have met with varying amounts of success as far as most Americans are concerned. It is a natural reaction to the senseless slaughter of innocents. This reaction manifests itself in the abhorrence of Americans to Islam as well as the efforts of mainstream Muslims to distance themselves from such actions. This is where the basic tenet that Mohammed was perfect in word and deed comes into play. By ascribing to this belief all Muslims put themselves on a par with any reasonable definition of fundamentalist Christians in that they believe the Koran is inerrant. Much like the Bible the Koran is open to a large degree of interpretation so different sects of Islam much like different sects of Christianity interpret it differently. However, the accepted standard by how the Koran is interpreted is contained within the tenet that Mohammed was perfect in deed.

Mohammed lived in Saudi Arabia during his lifetime in what was a very backwards and violent society. He was, like all men, largely a product of the environment he sprang from. During his lifetime Mohammed married multiple wives including young children, ordered the slaughter of prisoners and the enslavement of their wives and female children, assassinated political enemies, and ordered violent Jihad to be carried out against his enemies whom he classified as infidels or non believers. The accepted methodology for interpreting the Koran is to tie its verses to Hadiths or direct sayings and actions of Mohammed himself. These saying and actions are carefully cataloged by Islamic scholars and are the basis for deciding what the Koran means. There are different Hadiths valued by different sects of Islam but all sects of Islam believe that Mohammed’s actions along with his sayings comprise the best understanding of God’s will. This makes it impossible for Muslims to condemn such violence because the founder of the faith not only did not condemn violence; he ordered and carried it out by his own hand throughout his lifetime. His actions, taken together with his words in the Koran overwhelmingly support such activities against the enemies of Islam.

It is true that Mohammed preached against the slaughter of innocents but it is also true that he was the sole arbiter of defining who was innocent and who was an enemy of Islam. After Mohammed died there was a protracted struggle for control of the religion which eventually wound up causing the division of the faith between two basic groups, Shia and Sunni. Although both groups have their own set of Hadiths which they believe is the more accurate record of what Mohammed actually said and did, there is not disagreement with the basic fact that he condoned violence against the enemies of Islam.

This leaves those who argue that Islam is a peaceful religion without a leg to stand upon which is why you will not see such adherents condemn Islamic violence in general. They might condemn violence against innocents but they cannot condemn violence against the enemies of Islam because Mohammed most definitely condoned such violence. The internal struggle we see within Islam today is a struggle to decide who its enemies are; it is not a struggle to condemn violence. It is a struggle not to end violence but to decide who it is to be levied against. In point of fact since Mohammed’s death it has been the duty of Islamic leaders in the faith to make such distinctions. What we are seeing today is inevitable result of such thinking and it is a dilemma for which Islam has no answer.

Islam is a faith that does not believe in separation of church and state. The followers of Islam believe that their God is the only true source of rightful government or indeed correct decision making of any kind. God is at the source of every correct decision in a believer’s life and the written record of Gods will to the faithful was left by a violent, egomaniacal misogynist. This is a formula for continuing escalating violence and the truth of the matter is that Islam has no way out of this cycle because it is based upon the belief that Mohammed himself was perfect in word and deed. The best that we can hope for from Islam is a respite from violence because violence itself is inherent in the faith. Islamic leaders do not debate whether the violence is correct only who it is correct to carry it out against. This is a distinction that is little understood in this country and actually has very little use as far as the possibility of peaceful coexistence of Islam with the rest of the world. The only methodology that allows peaceful co-existence with Islam is contained within its name; submission. Until the whole world is ready to submit to their interpretation of God’s will there can be no peace with Islam.