Playing God

ISIS is playing God.  It is deciding who should live or die based on a narrow religious belief.
If Allahu akbar (God is great) means anything, then shouldn't Allah be the One deciding who should live or die?  If God is so dissatisfied with those who don't believe as ISIS does, then shouldn't God be the one sending a Great Flood to punish all the sinners?  If God destroyed the sinful cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, shouldn't God be the one destroying the cities of the Yazidis for their "blasphemy" rather than ISIS?

Speaking of blasphemy, aren't those who charge blasphemy against others being blasphemous themselves.  Is the supposed blasphemy against God or against their interpretation of God and God's laws?

These truly blasphemous acts have been going on for millennia by people with all kinds of religious beliefs.

Jewish law called for stoning those who blasphemed against Yahweh.  But didn't Yahweh give a commandment: "Thou shalt not kill."  Yahweh had no qualifiers on that commandment.  Yet within a few years Joshua destroyed dozens of cities, supposedly on the command of the Lord God.  Was Joshua playing God to assume that he could freely kill the residents of these cities?  He “destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded”.  The Book of Joshua is one big compendium of violence and giving the spoils to the victors.

Irenaeus was a bishop in the early Christian Church.  He railed against those who didn't believe as he did.  He was so successful in banning alternative beliefs that books expounding other beliefs never made it into the Canon, and those who had these books buried them in the desert.  An example is the Book of Judas.

Tomás de Torquemada was appointed as Grand Inquisitor in Spain.  He had many Jews and Muslims tortured and killed because he deemed that they didn’t fully and sincerely convert to Christianity.   His name has become synonymous with overbearing interrogation.  Ironically, he himself was a descendant of Jews.

Of course, Protestants weren't innocent either.  Jean Calvin, originally a Catholic, was an active opponent of Michael Servetus’ anti-trinitarianism.  Calvin was instrumental in having Servetus burned at the stake on order of the Geneva city council.

The Church of England, albeit not strictly Protestant, fined people in the 1500’s for not attending church. The 1559 Act of Uniformity penalized those who conducted unofficial services.  Some who did conduct unofficial services were executed for sedition.

The Pilgrims escaped England because they did not like the trappings of the Anglican Church and the imposition of religious conformity.  One group fled to North America and landed in Massachusetts.  They in turn demanded conformity.  The Quakers upset this conformity, often with disruptive acts.  The Pilgrims tried throwing them out and they would return.  They hung some and bored holes in the tongues of others.  Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses should be glad they live in our times.  They only get doors slammed in their faces.

Is it any wonder that the writers of the Constitution included ““no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”?  It is also a wonder that many “strict constructionists” want to have prayer breakfasts, have candidates meet with religious leaders, and call into question the Christianity of the President.

Jack Whitley was asked to resign as chairman of the Big Stone County Republican Party because of his facebook comments that Muslims are “parasites” and “terrorists”.  What if he had an “Office or public Trust under the United States”?  Would his vile remarks be considered failing a “religious” test?

Unfortunately, these hateful attitudes are not just held by those who call themselves Christian or Muslim.  From “Gandhi” with Ben Kingsley, I remember the hateful remark of a distraught Hindu father, “Muslims killed my baby!  I want to kill Muslims!”  Muslims in Burma have been persecuted by Buddhists many times for over 600 years; it continues even to today.  This doesn’t resonate with one of the Eight Truths of Buddhism: Right Action: Acting in a non-harmful way.

I am always suspicious of anyone who claims to speak for God, whether they go up a mountain or read from some book that is full of contradictory advice.  Especially when they call for the expulsion or murder of people that don’t hold exactly the same views as they do.  These hateful people forget one of the most important words in their holy books: forgiveness.

In addition to the Buddhist Right Action, there are:

“thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”: Leviticus 19:18, Matthew 22:39 (and elsewhere)

“...and you should forgive and overlook: Do you not like God to forgive you?” Qu’ran: Surah 24, v. 22.

My favorite though is:

“What is hateful to yourself, do not to do to your fellow man.  That is the whole Torah; the rest is just commentary.  Go and study it.” - Rabbi Hillel (a contemporary of Jesus), Talmud Shabbat 31a.

This article was also published in the Reader Weekly of Duluth, 2014-12-04 at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2014/12/04/4460_playing_god

Is no "religion" free of violence against "others"

I recently wrote "Criminals hiding behind religion" and "Saints to emulate", about the good and bad done in the name of religion.  Included the Dalai Lama in the second article as a Buddhist to emulate, but even though I knew there were Buddhist terrorists, I didn't take the time to note when and where they were doing their dirty work.

Today, Nicholas Kristof reminded me of where: Myanmar.  See "Obama success or global shame". 

Sometimes these "Buddhists" seem to be in butchery contest with those defilers of the name of Mohammed, Boko Haram.  The Dalai Lama has called for an end to this corruption of Buddhism, but he seems to be having as much effect on reconciling differences as Mahatma Gandhi did on violent Hindus and Muslims.

Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and violence

"But we must ask a question only Muslims can answer: What is going on in your community that a critical number of your youth believes that every American military action in the Middle East is intolerable and justifies a violent response, and everything Muslim extremists do to other Muslims is ignorable and calls for mostly silence?"
- Thomas Friedman, "Judgment not included", New York Times, 2013-04-27

But violence against others is not a Muslim "franchise".  People of all kinds of religious persuasions have turned to violence to promote certain distorted ends.

Christians practiced violence.  The Roman Catholic Church burned people at the stake for supposedly not conforming to the prescribed beliefs.  Torquemada of Spain had many torture devices to get people to admit to being Jewish.  Hitler was never ex-communicated from the Catholic Church.  Catholic Irish who planted bombs were considered heroes by many.  Michael Servetus was "burnt at the stake as a heretic by order of the Protestant Geneva governing council."

Jews have been killing more Arabs than Arabs have been killing Jews: since 2000,  6617 Palestinians vs 1,097 Israelis (including 1,447 vs 129 children).  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_conflict#Cost_of_conflict

Buddhists, supposedly a peaceful group, are attacking Muslims in Burma (Myanmar).  The recent riots of Buddhists against Muslims is only a part of centuries-long list of anti-Muslim events.

And all these perpetrators of violence seem to forget that a tenet of their religions is "to do unto others as you would have them do unto you."