3 ms·

I think I will take the word of the billion Muslims who don't believe Islam is about war, slavery, and rape over the word of you and ISIS. Judaism is not about

I think I will take the word of the billion Muslims who don't believe Islam is about war, slavery, and rape over the word of you and ISIS. Judaism is not about emulating Abraham, David, Moses, Jacob, Joseph, or Isaac all of whom did at least some of the terrible things you mention. So why do you presume to speak for Islam, rather than listen to the vast, overwhelming majority of its followers?

renegadesensei 11y ago
I don't think he is speaking for Islam. He said that ISIS is attempting to follow the life of Mohammad. He did not say that what ISIS is doing represents the views of most Muslims.
- jberryman 11y ago
  I understood his point to be implying that Islam inherently and uniquely among religions gives rise to the sort of radicalism we see with Isis. If I'm not misunderstanding, I hope he expands on what he thinks the implications of this worldview are.
  - musha68k 11y ago
    The problem with the whole issue is that all of us need to talk much more about religion in general. Many people feel the need to believe in something which extends beyond physical reality and that's the reason we have freedom of religion. Time again history has shown though that religions often tend to go overboard in terms of violence so most modern societies have taken a pragmatic approach to offer freedom of religion under certain checks (i.e. not infringing on the freedoms of others from a secular perspective). That said Einstein believed in god so don't belittle someone because of their religion and most importantly don't let fear take over your humanity (most people never got asked if they wanted to be "a muslim", "a christian" or "a jew"). What we need is more dialogue, not wars - those usually just create even more suffering and pain. Talk to people - especially to the ones you don't feel comfortable talking to - we are all together on this pale blue dot.
    - ethbro 11y ago
      So, this is probably going to get touchy, but I think the more fundamental issue is that religion, both from epistemological and functional perspectives as a movement, is incompatible with democracy. In the sense that one cannot simultaneously hold the following two sets of beliefs: Religion: knowledge by authority, submission to authority, authority by appeal to ex-human grantor, otherwise ignorance until submission before authority Democracy: knowledge by inalienable and intrinsic human nature, authority as composed of the will of individuals, pluralism as a path to better decisions for the whole society I personally believe religion is a powerful force for good in the world. But, if we're being really honest, a lot of times that's because of the stuff we're leaving out or bending rather than the strict interpretation.
  - justinhj 11y ago
    But he explicitly states that he is talking about fundamentalists and Isis, not mainstream Muslims
ritchiea 11y ago
What we're missing is that most practicing religious people don't literally follow word of their holy text. The torah and the bible and the koran aren't typically interpreted by Supreme Court justices carefully weighing over the meaning of every word. In the present day we think of those types of interpretations as fundamentalist and extremist. The problem is the literal texts contain dated values and typical modern practices are far from the texts. We have reached a point in religious practice where there is a chasm between religious texts and religious practices. Religious pragmatists want to live in the modern world while maintaining the values that they find comforting within their religion but the world is perpetually at risk of damage done in the name of the literal interpretation of religious texts.

renegadesensei 11y ago

I don't think he is speaking for Islam. He said that ISIS is attempting to follow the life of Mohammad. He did not say that what ISIS is doing represents the views of most Muslims.

jberryman 11y ago
I understood his point to be implying that Islam inherently and uniquely among religions gives rise to the sort of radicalism we see with Isis. If I'm not misunderstanding, I hope he expands on what he thinks the implications of this worldview are.
- musha68k 11y ago
  The problem with the whole issue is that all of us need to talk much more about religion in general. Many people feel the need to believe in something which extends beyond physical reality and that's the reason we have freedom of religion. Time again history has shown though that religions often tend to go overboard in terms of violence so most modern societies have taken a pragmatic approach to offer freedom of religion under certain checks (i.e. not infringing on the freedoms of others from a secular perspective). That said Einstein believed in god so don't belittle someone because of their religion and most importantly don't let fear take over your humanity (most people never got asked if they wanted to be "a muslim", "a christian" or "a jew"). What we need is more dialogue, not wars - those usually just create even more suffering and pain. Talk to people - especially to the ones you don't feel comfortable talking to - we are all together on this pale blue dot.
  - ethbro 11y ago
    So, this is probably going to get touchy, but I think the more fundamental issue is that religion, both from epistemological and functional perspectives as a movement, is incompatible with democracy. In the sense that one cannot simultaneously hold the following two sets of beliefs: Religion: knowledge by authority, submission to authority, authority by appeal to ex-human grantor, otherwise ignorance until submission before authority Democracy: knowledge by inalienable and intrinsic human nature, authority as composed of the will of individuals, pluralism as a path to better decisions for the whole society I personally believe religion is a powerful force for good in the world. But, if we're being really honest, a lot of times that's because of the stuff we're leaving out or bending rather than the strict interpretation.
- justinhj 11y ago
  But he explicitly states that he is talking about fundamentalists and Isis, not mainstream Muslims

ritchiea 11y ago

What we're missing is that most practicing religious people don't literally follow word of their holy text. The torah and the bible and the koran aren't typically interpreted by Supreme Court justices carefully weighing over the meaning of every word. In the present day we think of those types of interpretations as fundamentalist and extremist. The problem is the literal texts contain dated values and typical modern practices are far from the texts. We have reached a point in religious practice where there is a chasm between religious texts and religious practices. Religious pragmatists want to live in the modern world while maintaining the values that they find comforting within their religion but the world is perpetually at risk of damage done in the name of the literal interpretation of religious texts.