| Submit your comments on this article |
| Deep Thoughts on the Trouble with Radical Islam |
| 2007-05-06 |
| No link here. Just something that I just realized. It seems obvious to me really, but I didn't put two and two together until earlier today. There seems to be one concept entirely mangled when I see radical Islam at work: Redemption/forgiveness. What I have decided so far that passes for "redemption" in radical islamic societies is what you might call an initial warning to convert to Islam or die, or maybe even a warning to infidels that a certain behavior is unislamic. Until then you can get away with things that are unislamic. After that, you're toast. For example: Western society has been warned by Bin Laden to convert or face their wrath. There have been huge discussions on this in islamic circles validating the use of nuclear weapons because of this. Radicals will kill each other at random if they even hear a rumor of another Mohamhead cartoon. If you are a muslim growing up in an radical islamic society you better walk the narrow line or risk all kinds of hardship. If you are a woman and flash a bit of ankle by accident you get caned if the wrong guy sees you, and I'll bet nobody steps in to stop it. A bunch of neanderthal Kurds stoned a 17 year old female relative to death recently in Iraq because they suspected she had done the deed with someone from the wrong sect. I know that Judeo-Christian societies have their morons too, but they seem to be left pretty much to themselves as long as they don't cross the line of harming someone. After that, everyone steps in to smack them down to remind them where the line is. In the islamic cultures, radical behavior seems to be more tolerated if it can be argued that it is more "islamic". Perhaps also because of long memories and tribalism. I don't know what the end result of a tribal Judeo-Christian society would be, but I'd bet the outcome would be better than this tribal islamic crap I'm seeing. The Torah doesn't seem to devote a lot to the concept of forgiveness, but it does seem to deal a lot with people being inherintly nice to each other, and Jewish society in general doesn't tolerate terrorists in any form. I would say that Jews have even walked away from the death penalty for what the Torah says deserves the death penalty, and they have also walked away from the advice to wipe out every arab they see because they they would "forever be a thorn in their side" or something like that. Of course the New Testament has plenty of material related to forgiveness and redemption, so I won't even go there. Does anyone know if the Quran addresses forgiveness and redemption? Or did that chapter never get written, as I suspect. I am pretty sure it talks a lot about how muslims should be nice to other muslims and travelers, but that is not forgiveness. What kinds of transgressions are deemed forgivable without some kind of harsh punishment in an islamic society? I know this is a target for snarking, but does anyone out there actually know the answer to this? |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #16 Just for the record - I was not attempting to be snide when I said your comments were "interesting". I meant that. This thread is about Redemption/forgiveness and its impact on Islamic culture. Your view looking at it through a different prism was insightful when attempting to understand different points of view. |
| Posted by: Angaiger Tojo1904 2007-05-06 23:03 |
| #15 Eric, The concept of Christian forgiveness is probably the most misunderstood by those not familiar with the religion. You touch on it when you imply that politicians need only ask for forgiveness and be done with it. In fact, the need for apologies is a liberal obsession and a non-entity for practicing Christians. For Christians, deeds, not words are foremost. It is as much of a mistake to buy into the myth that Christians are dunces and dupes as it is to buy into the myth that Jews are greedy zionist oppressors who rule the world. In both instances, it is ignorance that breeds the bigotry. |
| Posted by: Angaiger Tojo1904 2007-05-06 21:55 |
| #14 They make great fertilizer, thought! |
| Posted by: gorb 2007-05-06 21:08 |
| #13 I really need to work on that counting thing, darn it! ;-) So that makes 40% for God, 60% for interpersonal. And yes, Jihadi Muslims would do better to stop using up our oxygen. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-05-06 21:01 |
| #12 And not taking the Lord's name in vain. Four for God, one for parents, four for acts towards other men and one for thoughts about other men. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-05-06 20:54 |
| #11 TW, I would consider the fourth commandment (3rd in the Catholic division) also to be a commandment about the Man:God relationship. Exodus 20:8–11: Remember the Sabbath day, and keep it holy…. AT1904, Interesting. I guess this why I see so many politicians doing things that hurt their constituents or the nation, simply apologize, and then expect us to forgive them and ignore their faults. Frankly, in most of these cases I would like to see them work hard to repair the damage first, or at least to start repairing the damage. |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2007-05-06 20:46 |
| #10 Deeper thoughts: the problem with radical Muslims is the fact that they breathe. |
| Posted by: Sneaze 2007-05-06 20:00 |
| #9 Critical to understanding the Jewish viewpoint is to realize that Judaism has continued to evolve beyond the Biblical period. With regard to redemption and forgiveness, the key prayer recited on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement), the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, is germane here. Basically, for sins against God, God will forgive; but for sins against another person, God will not forgive until the harm has been made right and the person given forgiveness for it. I think that prayer was written during the Middle Ages. Looking at the Ten Commandments, only two -- You shall have no other gods before Me, Make no graven images -- reference the Man:God relationship; most the rest refer to Man:Man, and forbid behaviours harmful to that relationship. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-05-06 18:51 |
| #8 In any case, forgiveness for a sin against another person required one to compensate him for the mistake. Interesting. For Christians, there is a very distinct difference between redemption and forgiveness. You have described redemption, ie: one redeems oneself or does something to help make it right. Pay the dime or do the time. |
| Posted by: Angaiger Tojo1904 2007-05-06 18:01 |
| #7 Gorb, I get the feeling that non-Jews still misunderstand the jewish point of view on these things. That is, so far as the jews have a point of view on anything, as opposed to 2 points of view or 20. The Torah, the Five Books of Moses, usually speaks of forgiveness in terms of the sacrificial system. A person would violate a prohibition, and later realize it. To gain forgiveness, he would correct the fault, often with a penalty attached. Then he would confess his sin to the priests, and then he would offer a special sacrifice, often tied to his means. Some sins were unforgivable: murder and certain forms of sacrilege. Sometimes people sinned, and they prayed for forgiveness, or others prayed on their behalf, and often forgiveness was granted, but sometimes not fully. Moses was allowed to see the Promised Land, not to enter it. Abraham prayed that the Lord no t destroy Sodom and Gomorrah for the sake of any innocent people there; we know how that conversation turned out. And God did present Himself as forgiving, up to a point. Certainly, punishments only extended to the guilty, which was an advance on the other societies around them. The later prophets expand upon the concept of forgiveness. The orientation turns away from the mechanics of sacrifice to prayer and reconciliation, especially in the writings of Isaiah and in the minor prophets, especially the Book of Jonah. In any case, forgiveness for a sin against another person required one to compensate him for the mistake. |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2007-05-06 17:40 |
| #6 Gorb, you have nailed it. Western society is shaped by Christian values and Judeo law. You can only see what you have lost in its absence. It may not be cool, but it helps tames the vast ugliness and selfishness of human nature. But then, good solid advice that requires self sacrifice is never cool, because it is the kind of stuff that granny tells you to do. Kids today are taught to do what feels good. Take what you can get. Sacrifice? What's that? It's all about meeeeeeee. The new clergy of today are the lawyers - someone must be found to blame for every wrong in the world. Every accident, every hurricane, every time you can't afford an ipod or car of your choice - there is no need to look inward, to roll up your sleeves, to work hard or to help your neighbor - you just need to establish who is to blame and make them pay. Crops failed due to weather? Global warming is GW's fault. Forgiveness and redemption come only in the form of judgements and the settlements which are every bit as ridiculous, uneven and unfair as any punishment every practiced by the church leaders during any era. For the Islamists - the Jews are always to blame for every dead baby. That's why their societies are shitholes. The leaders don't need to take actions since they aren't to blame, it is the joooos. There have no concept of forgiveness. I don't know - but I suspect they do not even have a word in their dictionary for it. |
| Posted by: Angaiger Tojo1904 2007-05-06 17:29 |
| #5 IMO, you confuse cause and effect, gorb. Arab society (and Islam is just a codification of the Arab mindset) is based on kinship and not reciprocity[1] i.e., Muslims are incapable of effective cooperation[2]. You might say that, on the average, typical Muslim's behavior is a close analogy to clinically certifiable sociopath's. This has two consequences: (a) Islamic societies are incapable of long-term economic self-sufficiency & (b) they can't mount effective armies. Because of (a) Muzzies must keep conquering or perish. And they try to make up for (b) by psychotic belligerence. ====== 1. They only recognize reciprocity as intellectual concept to be used as Taquia e.g.. all their whining all the time about being wronged. 2. Except when a bunch of relatives are ganging up on a stranger. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-05-06 17:19 |
| #4 We need to figure out a way to make having this concept so painful that Islam drops it. Take your pick: A.) Carpet Bombing (Disproportionate Retaliation) B.) Incendiary Bombing (Firestorms, i.e., Massive Retaliation) C.) Nuclear bombing (Total Annihilation) Islam's death obsession makes simple retaliation invalid. Reciprocity will not work. The death toll must be so staggeringly high that Islam's clergy either: 1.) Loses its flock (Loss of Political Power) 2.) Loses its life (Corporeal Disintegration) 3.) Loses its turf (Uninhabitable Sphere of Influence) Item 2 is the most vital part of this equation. Part of deprogramming Islam's death meme demands exterminating its sources of indoctrination. Any of items A through C can obtain this result in one of three ways: I.) Motivate aggrieved Muslims to kill jihadist clerics (Incentivization) II.) Kill the jihadist clerics in their mosques (Direct Marketing Approach) III.) Kill leadership and followers (Bulk Processing) Item I is more desirable as it motivates larger numbers of prior participants to engage in the required long term behavioral modification being sought. Islam's total lack of reciprocity in dealing with the West mandates the above measures. Where there is no possibility of negotiation, coercive behavioral correction must be applied. The individual Muslim's fixation upon martyrdom negates the value of proportionate reprisal. Retaliation must be on such an overwhelming scale that all thought of revenge is directed at those who inspired the reprisal and not at the delivering agent. Muslims must be disciplined with sufficient regularity whereby the concept of jihad eventually becomes an accursed concept. Only by instilling a high degree of remorse for the practice of jihad — and the consequences its atrocities precipitate upon its advocates — can any change be obtained. To date, there has been little, if any, significant penalty for jihadist activity and it will continue until some variant of the above equation is enacted. Aside from biological or chemical agents, the West possesses no other means of persuasion that will deliver similar results within a workable time frame. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-05-06 16:10 |
| #3 The biggest problem with radical islam is that they are trying to annihilate just about everyone else. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2007-05-06 15:04 |
| #2 gorb, The Koran has dozens of verses on forgiveness. However, in every case, it is Allah who forgives (or doesn't forgive). Sometimes, people pray for forgiveness, sometimes it just happens (or doesn't happen). A typical case of Allah forgiving is: [4:110] Anyone who commits evil, or wrongs his soul, then implores GOD for forgiveness, will find GOD Forgiving, Most Merciful. A typical case of not being allowed to ask Allah for forgiving is: [9:113] Neither the prophet, nor those who believe shall ask forgiveness for the idol worshipers, even if they were their nearest of kin, once they realize that they are destined for Hell. or, here Allah is just plain 'not forgiving'. [47:34] Those who disbelieve and repel from the path of GOD, then die as disbelievers, GOD will never forgive them. It seems clear to me that the koranic Allah puts great emphasis on correct belief and also great emphasis on correct action (although a bit less than on belief). When you leave the Koran and go to the Sunna, Hadiths and Sharia, things get a bit more complicated. However, there are several things you can say with confidence, 1. the golden rule does not exist is Islam in any of the authoritative texts 2. killing, mutilating or taking property from infidels isn't a sin except under exceptional situations (during a koranically correct hudna for example). 3. Allah may or not forgive believers but most certainly will never forgive infidels. 4. In addition to divine punishment, Allah endorses the punishment of infidels for a large number of sins, provocations, etc. |
| Posted by: mhw 2007-05-06 14:49 |
| #1 You are missing an even deeper reward/punishment problem. Back up a bit and look at what is one of the key secular uses for a religion: Keeping the people in line. Now you can have positive reinforcement and negative. Negative reinforcement requires a threat of punishment. Something like HELL. You will burn in hell forever is a great restrainer of bad actions in believers. (unfortunately it does nothing for unbelievers). So a religion needs a hell. Rewards are, also, useful so a HEAVEN helps keep people doing good deeds that might not be in their best short term interest. Religions, being human creations, also need money so then you get the corruption of things like indulgences. note how quickly global warming has become a religion. So, two major religions have made MURDER of OTHERS a GOOD DEED to RECEIVE positive feed back in terms of GOOD TIMES IN THE AFTERLIFE. The Vikings and Islam. With the Vikings - if you die in battle or fighting its Valhalla For You - YIPPY! With Muslims it's - Suicide yourself (so the rest of us are not directly to blame) and take a lot of NON-BELIEVERS with you and it's Virgin's R Us in Paradise by the dashboard light for the inept! What a deal! A loser has a way to win and the ULAMA wins in a deniable way. We need to figure out a way to make having this concept so painful that Islam drops it. If we can't do that the end is either submission or Death to the Ulama via nukes, or bugs, or nanotech ooze or rod or bigger from god.. The Koran is too black and white so there is no real option. Everybody just kind of shys away from it. We say in jest that they are stuck in Mo's timeframe but it is the nature of the document. That date, is just proof that can't be modified. So there is really only one option just nobody wants to get dirty executing it. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2007-05-06 10:58 |