By
Rudy Barnes, Jr.
Do
all of the world’s great religions share a belief in one God, or even one
central idea? In the Introduction to God Is Not One,
Stephen Prothero tells us that Hinduism has many gods and Buddhism has no
god. But Judaism, Christianity and Islam—the religions of the book—are the most
contentious and they all share a belief in one God. Prothero, who is skeptical of what passes for
interfaith dialogue, tells us that belief in one God is about all that those religions of the book have in common,
and he notes there are even some Jews who do not believe in God (p. 21).
Prothero
challenges perennialists like Huston Smith who assert that all the great
religions have the same ultimate goal but different paths to achieve it, as
well as Mohandas Ghandi’s statement that “Belief in one God is the cornerstone
of all religions.” (p. 1) Prothero acknowledges
the need for religious tolerance gained through the freedoms of religion and
expression, but he questions whether religious tolerance will lead to religious
unity:
“The Age of
Enlightenment of the 18th century popularized the ideal of religious
tolerance, and we are doubtless better for it.
But the idea of religious unity is wishful thinking nonetheless, and it
has not made the world a safer place. In
fact, this naïve theological groupthink—call it Godthink—has made the world
more dangerous by blinding us to the clashes of religion that threaten us
worldwide. “ (p.
3)
Prothero
points out similarities and differences between religions: “The world’s
religious rivals do converge when it comes to ethics [morality], but they
diverge sharply on doctrine, ritual, mythology, experience and the law.” (p.
3) Prothero makes a distinction between
the two components of legitimacy—the voluntary standards of ethics/morality and
coercive laws (p. 3)—but he doesn’t explain why the distinction is essential
for religious tolerance. Religious rules
or laws must be voluntary; if they are coercive, as with apostasy and blasphemy
laws, there can be no freedom of religion or speech. Those freedoms are possible only in libertarian
democracies where laws are made by elected representatives and are subject to
fundamental human rights.
According
to Prothero, the “all religions are one” mantra is neither accurate nor
ethically responsible. (p. 3) He explains,
“The ideal of religious tolerance has morphed into the straight jacket of
religious agreement….What we need on this furiously religious planet is a
realistic view of where religious rivals clash and where they can cooperate.”
(p. 4)
Prothero
takes notice of the New Atheists who condemn all religions as inherently evil. He acknowledges that religion is one of the
greatest forces of evil in the world, but argues that it is also one of the
greatest forces for good (p. 9); and because most people in the world are religious,
whether it is good or evil “…religion is a force too powerful to ignore.” (p.
10)
As
for Christian and Muslim interfaith relations, Prothero says, “While I do not
believe we are witnessing a clash of
civilizations between Christianity and Islam, it is a fantasy to imagine
that the world’s two largest religions are in any meaningful sense the same, or
that interfaith dialogue between Christians and Muslims will magically bridge
the gap.” (p. 12)
Christianity
is the world’s largest religion at 33%, but Islam is the fastest growing, from
12% in 1900 to 22% in 2010. (p. 18) While
Christians make a distinction between religion and secular politics, Muslims do
not. They consider Islam both a religion
and a holistic way of life with comprehensive and immutable laws that limit
individual freedom. (p. 19)
Prothero
points out fundamental differences in faith and belief between the religions of the book, and the many
variations of each religion create a vast diversity of beliefs. There are common themes: Christianity is
about sin and salvation, while Judaism and Islam are less about sin and salvation
and more about a holistic way of life. Both
Judaism and Islam are deontological or rule-based religions, while Christianity
is more teleological, emphasizing belief in an ultimate principle of faith
rather than obedience to religious rules and rituals.
Prothero’s
stated goal is to make people more religiously
literate in order to disprove the perennialist view that all religions
share one central theme. (pp 22-24) That
is a laudable goal, but it would be a serious mistake to emphasize religious
differences to the exclusion of their similarities. That reverses the error of the perennialists,
but is equally mistaken. The truth lies
in between: There are many religious differences, but there is enough common
ground to avoid hate and violence so long as we respect our differences.
Prothero’s
emphasis on religious differences can give the false impression that religious
diversity is a problem. Libertarian
democratic cultures with a diversity of religions have produced cultures of
religious tolerance and minimized religious fundamentalism in the West since
the Enlightenment. Where there is
intrafaith diversity progressive believers can often find more in common with those
of other religions than with fundamentalists in their own; but that has not
happened in the Islamic East where fundamentalists in emerging democracies have
used apostasy and blasphemy laws to prevent the freedoms of religion and expression.
Jews,
Christians and Muslims have many differences, but they share a belief in one God
and also share a common word of faith
in the greatest commandment to love
God and our neighbors as ourselves. It is
a common principle of legitimacy based on love
over law. Were it not for
fundamentalist believers who insist on imposing their holy laws on others,
Jews, Christians and Muslims could all embrace the principle that we love God
by loving our neighbors as ourselves—even our unbelieving neighbors—and promote religious tolerance through the
freedoms of religion and expression.
Notes
and References to Resources and Blogs:
Stephen Prothero, God Is Not
One, Harper One, 2010.
On religion as a primary source
of morality and law, see the Introduction
to The Teachings of Jesus and Muhammad on Morality and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy at pages 10-15. On the
importance of the Enlightenment to conforming religions to libertarian democracy,
see above and the following blogs: Religion
and Reason (posted 12/8/2014), Faith
and Freedom (posted 12/15/2014), Religion
and Human Rights (posted 2/22/2015), God
and Country: Resolving Conflicting Concepts of Sovereignty (posted
3/29/2015) and Faith as a Source of
Morality and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy (posted 4/12/2015).
On a common word of faith for Jews, Christians and Muslims, see The Greatest Commandment (posted
1/11/2015) and Jesus Meets Muhammad: Is
There a Common Word of Faith for Jews, Christians and Muslims Today?
(posted 1/25/2015).
See Love over Law (posted 1/18/2015).
On whether religion is good or
bad and the atheist view, see Is Religion
Good or Evil (posted 2/15/2015) and Religion
as a Source of Good and Evil (posted 3/1/2015).
On religious exclusivism and
competition, see Promoting Religion
through Evangelism: Bringing Light or Darkness? (posted 2/8/2015).
On religious differences on
issues of sex, see Love Marriage and
Homosexuality (posted 2/1/2015).
On religious violence, see Religion, Violence, and Military Legitimacy
(posted 12/29/2014).
No comments:
Post a Comment