Is Religion Good or Evil?

 By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

            At the National Prayer Breakfast on February 5, 2015, President Obama generated a flurry of commentary when he suggested that religions could be the source of evil as well as good and related ISIS to Islam, something Islamic nations have taken care to avoid.  It brought to mind Karen Armstrong’s recent book, Fields of Blood, in which she made an impressive argument to exonerate religion as the cause of the evils of war (see the blog on Religion, Violence and Military Legitimacy posted on December 29, 2104).

            E.J. Dionne commented on the prayer breakfast and noted that the President affirmed the obvious when he said, “We’ve seen professions of faith used both as an instrument of great good, but also twisted and misused in the name of evil.”  And when he condemned the Islamic State as “a brutal vicious death cult that in the name of religion carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism ...claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.”  Obama cautioned Christians not to “get on our high horse” and to “remember that during the Crusades and Inquisitions people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.”  He could have also cautioned Jews, since the story of Joshua at Jericho set a Biblical precedent for ethnic cleansing.

            Richard Cohen ignored historical precedents that associate evil with religion and argued that ISIS atrocities are not religious but caused by a universal force of evil that is totally detached from Islam.  Cohen cited the fact that ISIS terrorists are Sunni Muslims like many if not most of their victims.  He failed to recognize that intrafaith sectarian differences can generate as much religious hatred and violence—the essence of evil—as interfaith differences.

            Michael Gerson used political considerations to detach evil from religion, citing the “Bush/Obama approach [in which] terrorism is an aberration that must be isolated [from religion]” and Gerson recalled George W. Bush saying, “I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace.…And I believe that people who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives aren’t religious people.”  The problem with that reasoning is that Islam makes no distinction between religious and political objectives; but even in Western cultures that distinction can be blurred, as with Christian right-to-life zealots who kill abortion doctors.

            Eugene Robinson took the President to task for suggesting that Islam needs a Reformation or Enlightenment to conform its ancient laws to modern standards of legitimacy, and said that “…comparing the depredations of the Islamic State with those of the Crusaders is patronizing in the extreme,” implying that Muslims are “slow learners” when it comes to distinguishing between God’s will to do good and Satan’s will to do evil.

            Whether patronizing or not, Islam needs to follow the example of Judaism and Christianity and embrace the libertarian political ideals and reason of the Enlightenment to be compatible with modernity.  That would amount to a Reformation of Islam, and it would have to begin with the law.  Muslims consider Islamic law, or Shari’a, as God’s immutable law, and use apostasy and blasphemy laws to protect the sanctity of Islam.  The prohibitions of Shari’a conflict with the fundamental freedoms of religion and expression and also deny women and religious minorities the equal protection of the law.                                

            Michael Gerson acknowledged that Islamic law is problematic: “It is harder to separate divine law from  positive law in a faith where the founder was also a political and military leader.”  Gerson urged that Presidential rhetoric on this contentious issue of legitimacy “should not be theological but phenomenological” and should characterize the conflict with ISIS as the peaceful people versus the terrorists rather than the peaceful people versus the radical Islamist terrorists to avoid causing “…a global firestorm.” 

            It is a mistake to deny that Islam has a role in motivating the terrorism of al Qaeda and ISIS; but it is also a mistake to believe that mainstream Islam supports such terrorism, even as an increasing number of young disaffected Muslims are attracted to ISIS.  Islam, like Judaism and Christianity, includes great diversity of believers.  A primary objective of the ISIS Jihad is to polarize Jews and Christians against Muslims, creating the fear that Islam is threatened.  Such religious polarization must be resisted.  Only Muslims can determine the future of Islam, but Jews and Christians can support progressive Muslims in their battle with radical Islamists for the heart of Islam by engaging in interfaith dialogue that seeks to reconcile these Religions of the Book on common values, while acknowledging their differences.

             Is religion good or evil?  The President got it right when he said it can be both.  God’s will is to reconcile and redeem while Satan’s will to divide and conquer, and Satan does a superb imitation of God and does some of his best acting in the synagogue, church and mosque.  But God’s good can prevail over Satan’s evil if people of faith put love for their neighbor—including their unbelieving neighbors—over condemning and trying to convert them.  If Jews, Christians and Muslims promote religious reconciliation rather than division, it will help the forces of good overcome those of evil, and in the process vindicate religion as a source of good, not evil.      

Notes and References:

             

Related blogs are Religion, Violence and Military Legitimacy posted December 29, 2104, and  Promoting Religion through Evangelism: Bringing Light or Darkness? posted February 8, 2015.

E. J. Dionne, Obama’s Christian Humility, Washington Post, February 8, 2015: 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-breakfast-prayer/2015/02/08/c82e0f7a-ae3b-11e4-abe8-e1ef60ca26de_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines&wpmm=1

Richard Cohen, The Universality of Evil, Washington Post, February 9, 2015:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-universality-of-evil/2015/02/09/bac33078-b08d-11e4-854b-a38d13486ba1_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1

Michael Gerson, Step Up the War Against ISIS, not the Rhetoric Against Islam, Washington Post, February 9, 2015:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/condemning-islam-is-the-wrong-course/2015/02/09/b4eb521e-b085-11e4-854b-a38d13486ba1_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1

Eugene Robinson, At the Prayer Breakfast, President Obama Struck a Patronizing Tone, Washington Post, February 9, 2015: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/patronizing-at-the-prayer-breakfast/2015/02/09/90215174-b09c-11e4-854b-a38d13486ba1_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1

On Joshua enforcing the Hebrew ban at Jericho, see Deuteronomy 20:16-18 and Joshua 6.

On interfaith dialogue, see The Interfaith Fellowship: A model of purpose and process for interfaith dialogue.

Promoting Religion through Evangelism: Bringing Light or Darkness?

 By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

            Throughout the Bible, light is a symbol of God’s presence and darkness a symbol of the absence of God or the presence of Satan.  In Gnosticism, light and darkness represent the opposing forces of good and evil in a great and unending cosmic battle.  For Christians and Muslims, evangelism is about promoting their religion as a light shining in a world of darkness; but it is a light visible only to believers, with unbelievers condemned to eternal darkness. 

            Jesus taught his disciples to follow him and spread the good news of the Gospel, like a lamp spreading light into the darkness: “Do you bring in a lamp and put it under a bowl or a bed?  Instead, don’t you put it on a stand?  For whatever is hidden is meant to be disclosed, and whatever is concealed is meant to be brought out in the open.  If anyone has ears, let him hear.”  The good news was that the light of God’s transforming love and mercy could dispel the darkness of sin and give people new spiritual life, reconciling and redeeming them into the universal family of God (Mark 4:21-23; see Matthew 5:14-16; 10:26-28; Luke 8:16-17; 11:33-36; 12:2-5; John 3:19-21; 8:12). 

            Jesus was a Jew who never promoted any religion, not even his own; and he never taught any belief that provided only one way of salvation and condemned all others to hell.  That came later with Church doctrine and dogma that limited salvation to those who believed in Jesus Christ as God’s one and only Son, and that believers were saved from the ravages of hell through the crucifixion of Jesus as a blood sacrifice for the atonement of their sins. (Romans 3:21-26; Hebrews 2:14-18)  It was only natural for Paul and other Jews in the early Church to understand the crucifixion that way since Mosaic Law provided for the atonement of sin through blood sacrifice.  But Jesus was critical of blood sacrifice, and like prophets before him Jesus taught that God wanted mercy, not sacrifice.    

            Jesus taught his disciples to follow him as the word of God, not to worship him as God’s only Son, and the word of God—the good news of the Gospel—was that sinners could repent of their sin and be reconciled and redeemed as children of God based on the transforming power of God’s forgiveness, love and mercy.  God’s blessings were not limited to Jews and were not dependent on obedience to Mosaic Law as taught by the Pharisees.  The good news that had been hidden and that was meant to be disclosed was that God’s love fulfilled Mosaic Law.  It was now love over law.

            The Qur’an, like the Hebrew Bible, emphasizes holy law as a standard of righteousness, and like Christian church doctrine it limits salvation to believers.  In Islam it is belief in the Qur’an as the immutable word of God, while in Christian doctrine it is belief in Jesus as God’s one and only Son.  Both the Qur’an and church doctrine assure believers that they will have eternal life in heaven and condemn all unbelievers to eternal damnation in hell. The Qur’an states that Jews and Christians are People of the Book, but it also condemns as blasphemers and unbelievers all those who believe that God had a son. 

            The Qur’an gives Muslims the evangelical mission to promote Islam by word and sword, and the violent evangelism of radical Islam today seems to be to expedite divine judgment and dispatch all unbelievers, including Jews, Christians and non-conforming Muslims, to hell.

           

            Christianity and Islam are competing religions that measure their success by the number of their believers, who now represent over half of the world’s population.  While Christians now outnumber Muslims, Muslims are growing faster than Christians.  But even as globalization has brought Christians and Muslims closer together than ever before, their evangelical competition for converts with exclusivist claims for salvation has prevented better interfaith relations. 

            The exclusivist claims of Christianity and Islam are based on fundamentalist religious beliefs that defy knowledge and reason and generate more darkness than light.  If it is God’s will to reconcile and redeem all people into a universal family of God, and Satan’s will to divide and conquer God’s people, history has shown that Satan has done a superb imitation of God using fundamentalist religious beliefs to divide and conquer people of faith by encouraging believers to condemn unbelievers, and Satan has done some of his best work in the church and mosque.    

            Both Islam and Christianity claim to embrace the greatest commandment to love God and our neighbors, including our unbelieving neighbors.  With Jews, Christians and Muslims now living closer together than ever before, evangelism needs to shift its priorities from condemning and converting those of other religions to reconciling with them.  If Christian and Islamic evangelism can promote religious reconciliation rather than exclusivism, then it can bring the light of God’s reconciling love into a world of darkness and be a force for good rather than evil.

Notes and References to Resources:

This topic is related to Lesson #7, Lamp on a Stand, at pages 43 and 44 of the J&M Book.

Related blogs are those on Religion and reason, posted on December 8, 2014; Salvation and reconciliation into the family of God, posted on January 4, 2015; The greatest commandment posted on January 11, 2015; and Love over law posted on January 18, 2015.          

Jesus echoed the prophets Hosea and Amos when he said: But go and learn what this means: I desire mercy, not sacrifice. (see Matthew 9:10-13; 12:7; Hosea 6:6; Amos 5:21, cited in Jesus came to save sinners, not the righteous at page 17 of the J&M Book)  On blood sacrifice as a Jewish ritual for atonement of sin, see Leviticus 17:11, and those Jewish sacrificial rituals at pages 603-651 in the Appendices of the J&M Book.

On Christian beliefs that distort the teachings of Jesus, see Robin R. Meyers, Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus, Harper One, 2009.

On the lack of Biblical evidence that God condemns unbelievers to eternal damnation in hell, see Robert H. Bell, Jr., Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every  Person Who Has Ever Lived, Harper One, 2011.

For provisions of the Qur’an on belief, unbelief and rewards and punishments for Jews and Christians, see pages 469-485 in the Appendices to the J&MBook; on the morality of violence in defending and promoting Islam, see pages 498-502 in the Appendices to the J&M Book.

Love, Marriage and Homosexuality

 By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

            Perhaps the most volatile topic in religion and law today is the legitimacy of same-sex marriage.  The Hebrew Bible and the Qur’an support the marriage of a man and a woman and condemn homosexual relations, while Jesus never addressed the morality or legality of homosexuality. Today homosexuality, like blasphemy, is a capital crime in some Islamic nations like Saudi Arabia.  If homosexuals are our neighbors, then making them criminals is a clear conflict with the mandate to love God and neighbor in the greatest commandment. 

            Love is a term with several meanings that are differentiated by the Greek of the Bible: eros, the love associated with sexual desires, philios, or brotherly love, and agape, the altruistic, unconditional and sacrificial love taught and exemplified by Jesus.  Agape love is the opposite of those human appetites or selfish desires commonly referred to as love in our hedonistic culture. 

            There is no evidence that Jesus ever experienced erotic love or was ever married, but he affirmed the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman and condemned divorce (Mark 10:5-12).  Jesus also spoke of the dangers of sexual desires when he condemned sexual immorality, lewdness, lust and adultery (Mark 7:17-23; Matthew 5:27-30).  But Jesus never addressed homosexuality, and he once spoke favorably of eunuchs in advocating celibacy (renouncing marriage for the kingdom of heaven) for those who could accept it (Matthew 19:11-12). 

            Unlike Jesus, Muhammad was married more than once, giving him personal experience with sexual relations.  The Qur’an allows Muslim men to have up to four wives (Sura 4:3) and to have sexual relations with slaves “held by their right hand.”  It also gives husbands the power to discipline their wives by striking them, and requires women to “cover their adornments” to avoid exciting the sexual desires of men.  Both the Hebrew Bible and the Qur’an provide extensive laws on marriage, divorce and sexual relations, while the teachings of Jesus say little about sexual issues and instead emphasize forgiveness and agape love for others without making any distinction for sex. 

            Mosaic Law describes homosexual behavior as detestable with offenders to be cut off from other Jews and even put to death (see Leviticus 18:22, 29 and 20:13).  Both the Hebrew Bible and Qur’an include stories about the “wickedness” of homosexuality in Sodom and Gomorrah before Lot (Lut in the Qur’an) and his family left and those cities were destroyed by God (see Genesis 19:4-29 and Suras 7:81; 11:78,79; 15:67; 26:165, 166; 27:54, 55; 29:28, 29).  The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah did not mark the end of Lot’s sexual immorality; after his wife died Lot slept with his daughters and sired two sons by them. (Genesis 19:30-38).  

            While Jesus did not elaborate on how love related to intimate personal relationships, the Apostle Paul did so, even though he, like Jesus, was never married.  Paul wrote to the Corinthians: Love is patient, love is kind.  It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.  Love never fails.  (I Corinthians 13:4-8)  And Paul later wrote to the Romans that love fulfilled Mosaic Law. (Romans 13:8-10)

            Paul also described marriage in his time and place, with wives having subordinate roles to their husbands similar to those provided in the Qur’an (Ephesians 22-33); and Peter described the duties of husbands and wives in much the same way. (I Peter 3:1-7)  These men were describing the cultural standards of their day, which have changed dramatically since then.

            The above are a sample of the religious standards of legitimacy for marriage, divorce and sexual relations found in the Hebrew Bible, the Qur’an and the teachings of Jesus.  Obviously, they should not be considered immutable moral or legal standards today.  The principle of agape love, however, has passed the test of time and is the standard by which we should determine the legitimacy of all human relations, including marriage and sexual relations.  Our current laws on marriage, divorce and sexual conduct may have been influenced by ancient religious laws, but they were made by elected representatives and are continually being modified to reflect changing cultural standards.

            The debate over same-sex marriage should not be governed by ancient religious standards of legitimacy that condemn homosexuality as a sin or crime, but instead by the timeless principle of selfless love that tolerates differences and puts the interests of others ahead of our own preferences and religious traditions.  It should be expected that cultural standards of marriage and sexual relations will change over time, and that the standards of legitimacy that govern them will have social, political and economic consequences that are as relevant to those changes as traditional religious standards.

            Homosexuality has come out of the closet.  While some believers consider homosexual acts a crime and others consider them immoral or abnormal, in the U.S. a person’s sexual preferences are now considered in the same category as a person’s religious preferences, so that homosexuals are entitled to equal treatment under the law.  The current debate is not over the right of homosexuals to have a legal union, but whether that union is considered a marriage.  That is a complex legal issue with Constitutional implications that will ultimately be decided by the courts, not the church.                 

     

Notes and References to Resources:

For the teachings of Jesus on marriage and divorce, see Mark 10:5-12 and Matthew 19:3-9 and commentary for Lesson #6, Marriage, divorce and human sexuality at pages 39-42 of the J&M Book.

On the teachings of Jesus on celibacy, see Matthew 19:10-12 in Celibacy and sexual preference at page 165 of the J&M Book.

On provisions in the Qur’an and the Hebrew Bible on marriage, divorce and sexual morality, see Selected provisions of the Qur’an on family law at pages 491-497 and Selected provisions of Mosaic Law on family law in the Appendices to the J&M Book at pages 578-584.

Jesus once addressed an ancient Jewish variation of marriage known as levirate marriage in which men were required to marry the widows of their deceased brothers.  Once Jesus was asked who would be the husband of a woman in heaven who had been married to seven different brothers during her life.  Jesus told them: “When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” (Mark 12:25; see Life after death and resurrection at pages 74-77 in the J&MBook)  Apparently angels in the kingdom of heaven are like eunuchs and have no sex.  The Gospel of Thomas suggests as much when it has Jesus say: "...when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male and the female be female, ...then you will enter [the <Father's> domain]." (Thomas 22:4, 5, 7; see also Thomas 106:1 and 114, at page 40 of the J&M Book.).  

       

Jesus Meets Muhammad: Is There a Common Word of Faith and Politics for Jews, Christians and Muslims Today?

  By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

            Recent terrorist attacks have exacerbated the polarization of Jews, Christians and Muslims around the world.  Causes for that polarization have shifted from theological to political differences, especially those over the freedoms of religion and speech.  If interfaith dialogue is to reconcile Jews, Christians and Muslims in today’s world, that dialogue must proceed from a common word of faith and politics, especially since there is no separation of the two in Islam.

            Neither Moses, Jesus nor Muhammad addressed the freedoms of religion and speech since they were not relevant to their ancient times.  Libertarian human rights were introduced in the 18^th century by Enlightenment thinkers like Thomas Jefferson who drafted the American Declaration of Independence and championed the freedoms of religion and speech in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  Jefferson considered the teachings of Jesus to be “the sublimest morality ever taught,” but he had little use for the “corruptions” of those teachings by the church and monarchs of his day. 

            In 2007 Islamic scholars offered the greatest commandment as a common word of faith for Muslims and Christians, but political events have since raised doubts as to how that common word of love for God and neighbor relates to faith and politics: First, Who are our neighbors?, and second, How do we love our neighbors as ourselves?  Most of the signatories to a common word are from Islamic nations that have recently experienced democratic upheavals and have chosen to retain Islamic law (Shari’a) as an immutable standard of law and politics, together with apostasy and blasphemy laws to protect the sanctity of Islam.

            An immutable Shari’a that condones apostasy and blasphemy laws conflicts with the fundamental freedoms of libertarian democracy as well as international law.  Until Muslims consider Shari’a a moral code compatible with the freedoms of religion and speech rather than a code of coercive laws, it will continue to conflict with libertarian human rights and further polarize Jews, Christians and Muslims, negating any common word of faith between them.

            With religious polarization exacerbated by Islamist radicals, the need for interfaith dialogue is greater than ever, and to sustain that dialogue a common word of faith and politics is needed.  To be effective interfaith dialogue must go beyond discussing arcane theological issues and exchanging pleasantries and address the contentious issues that divide Jews, Christians and Muslims today, and those issues are more about politics, morality and law than about theology. 

            The greatest commandment may provide a common word of faith, but unfortunately there is no common word of politics in the ancient scriptures.  The greatest commandment does, however, provide a common principle applicable to modern politics.  It is the principle of love for one’s neighbor—even one’s unbelieving neighbor.  It would put love over law and abolish apostasy and blasphemy laws and other ancient religious laws as immutable standards of justice, and embrace the fundamental freedoms and secular laws of libertarian democracy.  That is a daunting challenge for Muslims, but it is one that God/Allah has given to all who love Him.

Notes and References to Resources:

Thomas Jefferson selected those sayings of Jesus that he considered to be teachings on morality in The Jefferson Bible, and they are used in The Teachings of Jesus and Muhammad on Morality and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy (The J&M Book) as explained in the Introduction (pages 10-15).  See End Note 2 at page 425 for Jefferson’s contrasting opinions of the "sublime" moral teachings of Jesus and “…the corruptions of it which have been invested by priestcraft and kingcraft, constituting a conspiracy of church and state against the civil and religious liberties of man.”  

On the fundamental freedoms of international law in the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights and the contrasting standards of the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, see the blog on Faith and Freedom, posted December 14, 2014.

On The greatest commandment as a common word of faith, see the blog posted January 11, 2015. 

On Love over law, see the blog posted on January 18, 2015.

A sampling of the lively debate between Islamic scholars over how their religion and Shari’a relate to modern politics and law can be found at pages 10-17 at Religion, Legitimacy and the Law.  Seyyed Hossein Nasr is a signatory of a common word and author of a widely used text on Islam that illustrates the differences between the legal and political principles of Islam and those of libertarian democracy (see page 15 and end note 55 at page 31).

A Common Word (see http://www.acommonword.com/the-acw-document/) takes the greatest commandment from Mark 12:28-33.  It is also found in the Gospels of Matthew (Matthew 22:34-40) and Luke (Luke 10:25-29), and Luke’s version answers the first question, Who is our neighbor? The story of the good Samaritan casts a Samaritan as the good neighbor to a wounded Jew, and that is significant since Samaritans were considered apostates by Jews of that day. 

How do we love our neighbors? Muslim scholars have answered that in A Common Word:

LOVE OF THE NEIGHBOUR IN ISLAM

There are numerous injunctions in Islam about the necessity and paramount importance of love for—and mercy towards—the neighbour. Love of the neighbour is an essential and integral part of faith in God and love of God because in Islam without love of the neighbour there is no true faith in God and no righteousness. The Prophet Muhammad ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) said: “None of you has faith until you love for your brother what you love for yourself.”xviiiAnd: “None of you has faith until you love for your neighbour what you love for yourself.”xix

However, empathy and sympathy for the neighbour—and even formal prayers— are not enough. They must be accompanied by generosity and self-sacrifice. God says in the Holy Qur’an:

It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in God and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and to set slaves free; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere. Such are the pious. (Al-Baqarah 2:177)

And also:

Ye will not attain unto righteousness until ye expend of that which ye love. And whatsoever ye expend, God is Aware thereof. (Aal ‘Imran, 3:92)

Without giving the neighbour what we ourselves love, we do not truly love God or the neighbour.

So it is that if we love God we should give our neighbors—even our unbelieving neighbors—what we ourselves love, and that includes the benefits of our political freedom, beginning with the freedoms of religion and speech.  Those freedoms don’t exist in many Islamic nations today.             

Love Over Law: A Principle at the Heart of Legitimacy

 By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

            The recent massacre in Paris and continuing violence in Islamic nations is a reminder that Islamic law (Shari’a) conflicts with the freedoms of religion and expression and inspires terrorist acts.  It illustrates why all religious standards of legitimacy must be voluntary moral standards of behavior rather than coercive laws to be compatible with political and religious freedom.       

            Jesus was a Jew, and for the Jews of his day Mosaic Law was the ultimate standard of righteousness and legitimacy.  Jesus emphasized the supremacy of reason and love over religious law, as summarized in the greatest commandment, and to make that point he often violated religious laws and was criticized by Jewish teachers of the law for his ”civil” disobedience.

            On one occasion Jesus was criticized for picking grain on the Sabbath and he told his critics, The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27).  The word religion or law can be substituted for the Sabbath to illustrate the point: Religious laws can rob us of our inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness if we allow them to do so.

            On another occasion Jesus was criticized for violating purity and dietary laws and he told his critics, Nothing outside a man can make him unclean by going into him.  Rather, it is what comes out of him that makes him unclean. (Mark 7:15)  Jesus later told his disciples: What comes out of a man makes him unclean.  For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly.  All these evils come from inside and make a man unclean. (Mark 7:20-23)  This saying illustrates how religious laws can distort reason and common sense.   

           

            Blue laws that once prohibited business activities on Sunday in South Carolina have since been repealed.  Blasphemy laws that violated the freedoms of religion and speech were eliminated in the U.S. in the 19^th century, but they continue to be enforced in Islamic cultures where, sanctioned by Shari’a, they are considered to be part of God’s immutable law.

            Shari’a incorporates ancient Mosaic Law that made blasphemy a crime punishable by death (Leviticus 24:16).  Shari’a makes any criticism of Islam, the Qur’an or Muhammad blasphemous, and also makes any assertion that God has a family or that Jesus was the son of God blasphemous.  Today Islamic nations such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt use apostasy and blasphemy laws with severe penalties to protect the sanctity of Islam against any criticism.

            Like ancient Judaism, Islam is a deontological religion and makes Shari’a its standard of legitimacy. The teachings of Jesus are more teleological and assert the timeless principle of love or compassion over religious laws.  Perhaps that is why Christianity has proven to be more compatible with democracy, human rights and the secular rule of law than Islam, but that has not always been true.  Before the Enlightenment made democracy and human rights prerequisites for Western governance, the Church used heresy and blasphemy laws to promote its worldly power at the expense of political and religious freedom, just as Islamic rulers now use the Shari’a to promote their political agendas.  It is axiomatic that there can be no freedom of religion or expression where apostasy and blasphemy laws protect the sanctity of any religion.

            The Founding Fathers who drafted the U.S. Constitution, most notably Thomas Jefferson, understood the conflict between religious law and libertarian democracy.  Jefferson might be considered a hypocrite on matters of individual freedom since he was a slaveholder, but his advocacy for the inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in the Declaration of Independence and for the freedoms of religion and speech in the First Amendment to the Constitution continue to resonate in U.S. politics and law, and for the vast majority of American believers, political freedom trumps coercive religious laws.

            Globalization has forced competitive religions into closer proximity, escalating religious polarization and violence around the world.  World peace requires religious reconciliation, but it must be based on the primacy of human rights and the secular law of libertarian democracy over Islamist theocracy based on Shari’a.  The two concepts of legitimacy are mutually exclusive, as indicated by a popular Islamic scholar from Egypt who asserted that “God is the only legislator.”                   

            Interfaith dialogue that seeks to address such contentious issues should acknowledge that dichotomy on issues of legitimacy.  Meaningful dialogue requires a commitment to justice based on the primacy of human rights and secular law over religious law.  Then there should also be an affirmation of the moral primacy of God’s love over law as expressed in the greatest commandment to love God and our neighbors as ourselves, including our unbelieving neighbors.

Even though Paul could not have foreseen how democracy and human rights would set new standards of legitimacy and law, he rejected religious law as God’s immutable standard of justice when he wrote to the Romans that “…love is the fulfillment of the law.” (Romans 13:9-10)    

            The truth is that God did not give us an ancient and immutable code of sacred law, but instead a timeless and universal principle of altruistic love by which to measure the legitimacy of our governments and their laws.  It is largely up to those Christians and Muslims who make up over half of the world’s population to ensure that their governments and laws provide justice through laws that are consistent with love for others.  That principle is at the heart of legitimacy.

             

Notes and References to Resources:

This topic is related to Lessons #4 and #5 at pages 31-38 in the J&M Book and previous blog topics.

On Islamic Law and Mosaic Law, see the Appendices to the J&M Book at pages 469-651.  

On the moral teachings of Jesus selected by Thomas Jefferson and their application to politics, religion, legitimacy and law compared with the teachings of Muhammad, see the Introduction to the J&M Book at pages 10-15; see further discussion in Religion, Legitimacy andthe Law.

On human rights from a Muslim perspective, see Muhtari Aminu-Kano et al., Islamic and UN Bills of Rights: Same Difference, April 15, 2014, at https://www.opendemocracy.net/openglobalrights/muhtari-aminukano-ayaz-ali-atallah-fitzgibbon/islamic-and-un-bills-of-rights-same-d.   

For a criticism of blasphemy laws, see Fareed Zakaria, Blasphemy and the law of fanatics, Washington Post, January 8, 2015, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-blasphemy-and-the-law-of-fanatics/2015/01/08/b0c14e38-9770-11e4-aabd-d0b93ff613d5_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1.

For a Muslim perspective that opposes blasphemy laws, see Ali Mamouri, Islam preaches tolerance of critics, no matter what the Charlie Hebdo attackers believed, Washington Post, January 8, 2015, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/01/08/islam-preaches-tolerance-of-critics-no-matter-what-the-charlie-hebdo-attackers-believe/.

For more articles on religion and human rights, go to Links and click on Open Global Rights: Religion and Human Rights (at Open Democracy).

On the comments of Pope Francis on how love over law relates to the freedom of speech and violent responses to blasphemy (Killing is not justified, but punching someone for insulting my mother would be OK), see http://rt.com/news/222935-pope-religion-freedom-insulted/. 

A recommended purpose and process for interfaith dialogue is provided at Interfaith Fellowship: Seeking Reconciliation through a Common Wordof Faith.

The Greatest Commandment: A Common Word of Faith

By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

            Christianity and Islam share the common roots of Judaism and also a common word of faith from the Hebrew Bible.  That common word is made up of two commandments.  The first is the Shema, or Jewish confession of faith: Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.  Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. (see Mark 12:29-30, taken from Deuteronomy 6:4-5)  And the second is this: Love your neighbor as yourself. (see Mark 12:31, taken from Leviticus 19:18)

           

            Islamic scholars have offered the greatest commandment to Jews and Christians as a common word of faith.  It is where the mystical and moral priorities of our faith—to love God and to love others—come together.  Islam means submission to God, and requires a submissive kind of love for God similar to that of the Jewish Shema.  Both Judaism and Islam define love for God as obedience to God’s laws as set forth in their ancient scriptures, with God rewarding the obedient and punishing the disobedient. 

            Ancient holy laws have produced holy wars, whether those enforcing the ban in the Holy Land, the Christian Crusades, or those of modern Jihadists who believe it is God’s will to kill all infidels.  According to the Hebrew Bible and the Qur’an, the love of God can have hateful consequences for unbelievers.  Beyond making war, fundamentalist Christians and Muslims believe that God condemns unbelievers to eternal damnation.  How do you love a God like that? 

            Jesus answered that question by combining the two commandments of the greatest commandment into one: We love God by loving our neighbors as ourselves.  Like prophets before him, Jesus taught that God expects our mercy, not sacrifice (see Matthew 9:10-13, citing Hosea 6:6 and Amos 5:21; also Matthew 12:7).  We show our love for God through loving acts of mercy and compassion like forgiveness, reconciliation and humble service for our neighbors, not through religious rituals like blood sacrifices for a jealous and vengeful god.

            That begs the question: Who is our neighbor?  Jesus answered that question with the story of the good Samaritan, in which an apostate Samaritan stopped to help a wounded Jew after several Jews passed him by.  To hear that a Samaritan was the good neighbor was shocking to Jews who hated their neighboring Samaritans, whom they considered apostates. (Luke 10:29-37) 

            Jesus told other stories that shocked his Jewish audience, like turning the other cheek and loving your enemy, but they were rabbinic hyperbole and not intended to be practical standards of legitimacy.  Jesus was never responsible for governing his people, as were Moses and Muhammad, so he never addressed how to defend people from those who would do them harm.  But the principles of sacrificial love taught by Jesus do not allow us to turn the other cheek to those who would harm our neighbors.  Jesus taught and exemplified that loving others came at great risk, and that there was no greater love than to give one’s life for another. (John 15:13) 

           

            Today we have issues relating to how we love our neighbors that were not addressed by Moses, Jesus or Muhammad.  They involve democracy, human rights and the secular rule of law and are vital to the well-being of all people, but there are major disagreements grounded in religious and cultural differences.  In Western democracies, an emphasis on individual freedom can jeopardize providing for the common good, including welfare for the poor, while in Eastern Islamic regimes, fundamental freedoms such as the freedoms of religion and expression do not exist because of apostasy and blasphemy laws that protect the sanctity of Islam from criticism.  

            The future of democracy and human rights depends upon striking a balance between libertarian individual rights and providing for the common good.  Both are essential to political legitimacy, but libertarian democracy is likely to fail in the West if it cannot balance individual rights with providing for the common good, and democracy will never gain traction in the Islamic East without the freedoms of religion and speech.

            Even though Moses, Jesus and Muhammad never addressed libertarian democracy and human rights, the greatest commandment is a common word of faith that requires us to share what we love most with our neighbors—and our neighbors include those of other faiths.  Every 4^th of July we give thanks for a rule of law that protects our freedoms of religion and speech and that protects women and minorities from unlawful discrimination.  Because we love these libertarian rights it is a moral imperative of our faith that we share them with our neighbors around the world. 

Notes and References to Resources:           

           

This topic is related to the same topic with commentary on the teachings of Jesus and Muhammad found in Lesson # 3 at pages 25-30 in the J&M Book.

On beliefs, rewards and punishments under Islamic and Jewish (Mosaic) Law, see the Appendices to the J&MBook at pages 470-485 and pages 548-557. 

See the story of the good Samaritan at page 223 of the J&M Book; see the golden rule at page 124 of the J&M Book.

On forgiveness, see page 113 of the J&M Book; on reconciliation, see anger and reconciliation at page 93 of the J&M Book; on humble service, see humility: leaders as servants at page 54 of the J&M Book.

On turning the other cheek, see page 102 of the J&M Book; on loving your enemies, see page 104 of the J&M Book.

On conflicting views of democracy and human rights in the West and East, see Religion, Legitimacy and the Law  at pages 7-8 and 10-17.

Religion and New Beginnings: Salvation and Reconciliation in the Family of God

By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

            A new year is about new beginnings, and for people of faith new beginnings are about repentance, reconciliation and redemption, or salvation, as children of God.  These are mystical concepts with moral implications for our relationship with God and with other people.  After giving his disciples a new command to love one another Jesus prayed for a unity of all believers.  Jesus taught that through the transforming power of God’s love and mercy we can be reconciled and redeemed as children of God, and then reconciled with others, even those of other faiths.

           

            Sin is our separation from God’s love, and salvation liberates us from the bondage of sin and death and reconciles us with God and each other.  God’s will is to reconcile and redeem us in the family of God; but attempts to proselytize others into exclusivist religions can further Satan’s will, which is to divide and conquer the family of God.  Unfortunately Satan does a wonderful imitation of God, and has done some of his best work in synagogues, churches and mosques.

 

            Salvation has traditionally been based on belief in mystical doctrines and obedience to religious rules and rituals, and Judaism, Christianity and Islam offer different perspectives of salvation.  Jews to their credit do not proselytize, but fundamentalist Christians and Muslims do so with exclusivist beliefs that limit salvation to believers and exclude unbelievers from the unity of all believers and the family of God, condemning them to eternal damnation.

  

            For Jews, the Mosaic Law of the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) provides a divine standard of legitimacy and righteousness that rewards obedient Jews and punishes the disobedient in this world, not the next.  For Christians and Muslims, God’s rewards and punishments overcome the finality of death with eternal life in heaven/paradise or hell.  

            Jesus was a Jew who emphasized love over law as God’s will and the means to salvation, with the promise of new spiritual life and peace in God’s kingdom and the universal family of God.  The Church has distorted that message with exclusivist doctrines that limit salvation to Christian believers, with unbelievers condemned to hell.

            For Muslims the Qur’an is the immutable word of God, and it conditions salvation on belief in the Qur’an and obedience to its laws, doing good works and submission to God in all things (Islam); and, as with Christians, unbelievers are condemned to eternal damnation.

            Even with their differences, Judaism, Christianity and Islam all share the greatest commandment to love God and neighbor as a common word of faith.  Unfortunately each religion has different ideas about what it means to love God and neighbor, and fundamentalist Christians and Muslims do not accept unbelievers as members of the family of God.

 

            When asked by a Jew who was his neighbor, Jesus told the story of the good Samaritan in which an apostate Samaritan was a good neighbor to a wounded Jew (Luke 10:29-37).  Jesus upset Jewish religious teachers by associating with tax collectors and prostitutes who were considered sinners, and told sanctimonious Jewish teachers of the Law who questioned him, I came to save sinners, not the righteous (Mark 2:15-17).  Later, when told that his mother and brother were seeking him, Jesus told a crowd, Anyone who does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.  Jesus never promoted any religion, not even his own; for him inclusion in the universal family of God depended on a person’s love for others, not their religion or family ties. 

            Over the years the Church has not only advocated exclusivist beliefs but also attempted to extend its worldly power through the Crusades and Inquisitions, and Islam has a similar history of exclusivity and violence.  The Qur’an sends mixed messages on the family of God, appearing inclusive by referring to Jews and Christians as People of the Book, but also asserting that it is blasphemy to believe that Jesus was the Son of God, and that most Jews and Christians are unbelievers.  And like ancient holy warriors, modern Jihadists believe they are instruments of God’s judgment with a divine mandate to exterminate all unbelievers.

            The teachings of Jesus point the way to religious reconciliation and peace.  They are grounded in inclusive concepts of salvation and a universal family of God; and even though Jesus never mentioned democracy, human rights or the secular rule of law, he related salvation to freedom when he read from Isaiah that God’s will was to liberate the oppressed (Isaiah 61:1-2 and Luke 4:14-21).  De oppresso liber links faith and freedom.  It is on the crest of the US Army Special Forces and affirms the relevance of religion to political freedom and military legitimacy.

          

            The concepts of salvation and the family of God shape the relationships between Jews, Christians and Muslims.  Until those competing religions understand salvation and the family of God in a more inclusive and universal way there will be continuing hate and violence between them.  Believers must learn to respect those of other religions, or like the Hatfields and McCoys, they will continue their holy family feuds with little hope of religious reconciliation and peace.   

    

Notes and References to Resources:

See the following references in TheTeachings of Jesus and Muhammad on Morality and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy (the J&M Book) in the Resources:  On Lessons 1 and 2 on Sin, righteousness and the family of God  see Mark 2:15-17 and Mark 3:31-35 at page 17; on The new command to love one another, see John 13:34-35 at page 325; on The farewell prayer of Jesus: the unity of all believers, see John 17:1-26 at page 420; on The story of the good Samaritan, see Luke 10:29-37 at page 223; on Jesus announcing his mission to liberate the oppressed (de oppresso liber) see Liberation at page 385.

See related blogs at Blog/Archives: Faith and Freedom, posted on December 15, 2014; see also Religion, Violence and Military Legitimacy, posted on December 29, 2014.

The greatest commandment is the topic of the next blog, to be followed by love over law.

For those provisions in the Qur’an on Belief, rewards and punishment for Jews and Christians, see Appendix to the J&M Book at pages 476-485.

On a common word of faith, see http://www.acommonword.com/.