LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.Best Political Blog Winner, 2007 Webby Awards, People's Voice and Jury.   Dateline: Iraq - Anna Badkhen and Sarah Stillman on Assignment
 
May 17, 2008
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Reports

Arts & Culture

Digs
Inside the Data Mine

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Reports

The Evangelical Rebellion

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Dec 23, 2007
Huckabee
AP photo / Steve Mitchell

By Chris Hedges

The rise of Mike Huckabee as a presidential candidate represents a seismic shift in the tactics, ideology and direction of the radical Christian right. Huckabee may stumble and falter in later primaries, but his right-wing Christian populism is here to stay. Huckabee represents a new and potent force in American politics, and the neocons and corporate elite, who once viewed the yahoos of the Christian right as the useful idiots, are now confronted with the fact that they themselves are the ones who have been taken for a ride. Members of the Christian right, recruited into the Republican Party and manipulated to vote against their own interests around the issues of abortion and family values, are in rebellion. They are taking the party into new, uncharted territory. And they presage, especially with looming economic turmoil, the rise of a mass movement that could demolish what is left of American democracy and set the stage for a Christian fascism.

The corporate establishment, whose plundering of the country created fertile ground for a radical, right-wing backlash, is sounding the alarm bells. It is scrambling to bolster Mitt Romney, who, like Rudy Giuliani or Hillary Clinton, will continue to slash and burn on behalf of corporate profits. Columnist George Will called Huckabee’s populism “a comprehensive apostasy against core Republican beliefs.” He wrote that Huckabee’s candidacy “broadly repudiates core Republican policies such as free trade, low taxes, the essential legitimacy of America’s corporate entities and the market system allocating wealth and opportunity.” National Review’s Rich Lowry wrote that “like [Howard] Dean, his nomination would represent an act of suicide by his party.”

Huckabee spoke of this revolt on the “Today” show. “There’s a sense in which all these years the evangelicals have been treated very kindly by the Republican Party,” he said. “They wanted us to be a part of it. And then one day one of us actually runs and they say, ‘Oh, my gosh, now they’re serious.’ They [evangelicals] don’t want to just show up and vote, they actually would want to be a part of the discussion.”

George Bush is a happy stooge of his corporate handlers. He blithely enriches the oligarchy, defends a war that is the worst foreign policy blunder in American history and callously denies medical benefits to children. Huckabee is different. He has tapped into the rage and fury of the working class, dispossessed and abandoned by the mainstream Democrats and Republicans. And he refuses to make the ideology of the Christian right, with its dark contempt for democratic traditions and intolerance of nonbelievers, a handmaiden of the corporate establishment. This makes him a much more lethal and radical political force. 

The Christian right is the most potent and dangerous mass movement in American history. It has been controlled and led, until now, by those who submit to the demands of the corporate state. But the grass roots are tired of being taken for rubes. They are tired of candidates, like Bush or Bill Clinton, who roll out the same clichés about working men and women every four years and then spend their terms enriching their corporate backers. The majority of American citizens have spent the last two decades watching their government services and benefits vanish. They have seen their jobs go overseas and are watching as their communities crumble and their houses are foreclosed. It is their kids who are in Iraq and Afghanistan. The old guard in the Christian right, the Pat Robertsons, who used their pulpits to deliver the votes of naive followers to the corporatists, is a spent force. Huckabee’s Christian populism represents the maturation of the movement. It signals the rise of a truly radical, even revolutionary force in American politics, of which Huckabee may be one of the tamer and less frightening examples.

Hints of Huckabee’s bizarre worldview seep out now and then. Bob Vander Plaats, Huckabee’s Iowa campaign manager, for example, when asked about his candidate’s lack of foreign policy experience, told MSNBC: “Well, I think Gov. Huckabee has a lot of resources that he goes to on national security matters. Here’s a guy, a former pastor, who understands a theological nature of this war as we’re fighting a radical religion in Islam.”

Robert Novak noted that Huckabee held a fundraiser last week at the Houston home of Dr. Steven Hotze. As Novak wrote, Hotze is “a leader in the highly conservative Christian Reconstruction movement.”

Huckabee has close ties with the Christian Reconstructionist or Dominionist branch of the Christian right. The Dominionist movement, which seeks to cloak itself in the mantle of the Christian faith and American patriotism, is small in numbers but influential. It departs from traditional evangelicalism. It seeks to redefine traditional democratic and Christian terms and concepts to fit an ideology that calls on the radical church to take political power. It shares many prominent features with classical fascist movements, at least as such movements are defined by the scholar Robert O. Paxton, who sees fascism as “a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cultures of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”

Dominionism, born out of Christian Reconstructionism, seeks to politicize faith. It has, like all fascist movements, a belief in magic along with leadership adoration and a strident call for moral and physical supremacy of a master race, in this case American Christians. It also has, like fascist movements, an ill-defined and shifting set of beliefs, some of which contradict each other. Paxton argues that the best way to understand authentic fascist movements, which he says exist in all societies, including democracies, is to focus not on what they say but on how they act, for, as he writes, some of the ideas that underlie fascist movements “remain unstated and implicit in fascist public language” and “many of them belong more to the realm of visceral feelings than to the realm of reasoned propositions.”

Dominionism teaches that American Christians have been mandated by God to make America a Christian state. A decades-long refusal by most American fundamentalists to engage in politics at all following the Scopes trial has been replaced by a call for Christian “dominion” over the nation and, eventually, over the Earth itself. Dominionism preaches that Jesus has called on Christians to actively build the kingdom of God on Earth. America becomes, in this militant Biblicism, an agent of God, and all political and intellectual opponents of America’s Christian leaders are viewed, quite simply, as agents of Satan. Under Christian dominion, America will no longer be a sinful and fallen nation but one in which the Ten Commandments form the basis of our legal system, in which creationism and “Christian values” form the basis of our educational system, and the media and the government proclaim the Good News to one and all. Labor unions, civil rights laws and public schools will be abolished. Women will be removed from the work force to stay at home, and all those deemed insufficiently Christian will be denied citizenship. 

Baptist minister Rick Scarborough, founder of Vision America and a self-described “Christocrat,” who attended the Texas fundraiser, has endorsed Huckabee. Scarborough, along with holding other bizarre stances, opposes the HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccine on grounds that it interferes with God’s punishment of sexual license. And Huckabee, who once advocated isolating AIDS patients from the general public and opposed increased federal funding in the search for a cure, comes out of this frightening mold. He justified his call to quarantine those with AIDS because they could “pose a dangerous public health risk.”

“If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague,” Huckabee wrote. “It is difficult to understand the public policy towards AIDS. It is the first time in the history of civilization in which the carriers of a genuine plague have not been isolated from the general population, and in which this deadly disease for which there is no cure is being treated as a civil rights issue instead of the true health crisis it represents.”

Huckabee has publicly backed off from this extreme position, but he remains deeply hostile to gays. He has used wit and humor to deflect reporters from his radical views about marriage, abortion, damnation, biblical law, creationism and the holy war he believes we are fighting with Islam. But his stances represent a huge step, should they ever become policy, toward a theocratic state and the death of our open society. In the end, however, I do not blame Huckabee or the tens of millions of hapless Christians—40 percent of the Republican electorate—who hear his words and rejoice. I blame the corporate state, those who thought they could disempower and abuse the working class, rape the country, build a rapacious oligarchy and never pay a political price. 

Chris Hedges, who graduated from seminary at Harvard Divinity School, is the author of “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America.”

Email Newsletter

Get truth delivered to your inbox every week.

Previous item: Banking on Grass Roots in Iowa

Next item: The FCC's Christmas Gift to Big Media

Jump to Comments

Advertisement


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

Comment Pages: «1 2 3 4 5 »

By dreadnaught, April 23 at 8:58 pm #
(30 comments total)

Minverva's Owl - 5

“Who are we?” Simon asked me.

“The Coloney,” said I. “The last vestiges of civilization.” I was rattling off what I’d heard in church and in the main hall since I was little. Simon was not satisfied with that.

“The vestiges of what?”

“We’re all elements of the same whole. A community can’t function if its members schizm or vanish into the dark woods.”

“Why dark? Why do we always say dark woods?” Simon asked. He gestured to the trees around him. “These woods aren’t dark.”

“They will be when night comes.”

A child tugged Simon’s sleeve, whining about others who would not let her play with them. He let her be in charge of the blackberry bucket. In order to keep his thoughts from returning to Jolene I mused aloud.

“To be honest I think dark woods means unexplored, unknown. A place easy to get lost in and hard to return from.”

Simon considered. “Isn’t there some better word than dark, though? I mean, my house is dark too at night because we just have lanterns. It’s dark but it’s a small, knowable dark. Isn’t there something that means exactly what we want it to mean?”

I considered as we watched VanCorland hang by his knees from a branch, arms down over his head so that his knuckles grazed the grass. The girl with Simon’s bucket fed him blackberries one by one. Standing, her head was on level with his.

“Vasty,” I said, dredging up a word that Cas had used once or twice.

“The vasty woods.” Simon said slowly. “That’s right.”

On the way back through the gate I saw the Coloney sign and sang out the words that came to mind, for Simon: “Coloney, bologna, colonel--”

Fredric’s lanky form appeared from beyond the wooden gateway. He grabbed my arm as I passed. Simon bristled. Fredric ignored him.

“I was just reading the sign,” I said. Somehow I always sounded whiny when I talked to Fredric.

“Those other words aren’t on the sign. Only one of them rhymes.”

“The other one is only different by one letter,” I protested.

“You can read.” It sounded like an accusation. “You could read all this time?”

It was useless to lie.

“No loitering about for you today.” Fredric was gleeful as he dragged me inside the big house and up the stairs so fast I almost fell over my own feet. My mind was whirling. Was I about to be lectured? Perhaps punished with a heavier workload so my thoughts would not wander from dirty dishes and floors? Or would I be cast out of the house and have to live as a beggar or worse? They couldn’t possibly think reading was an offense worthy of the stocks or whipping? Fredric hauled me into his father’s study. I’d never been up there before but was in no mood to appreciate my surroundings. Fredric’s father was already frustrated. He’d apparently spent several angry hours trying to put the records in order. Their thoughts whipped back and forth, a series of idiosyncrasies between father and son, subliminal glyphs that I could not keep up with.

Reply to this | Report this

By dreadnaught, April 23 at 8:50 pm #
(30 comments total)

in media res

Forgive my absence, everyone, please. Yesterday was not a good day for me. And if I have an off day, I make it a policy not to open my mouth. Whatever comes out will not be useful to me or to you. In this instant I am neither facetious or self-depreciating. I am being honest.

But on to pleasant matters. I adore Dumas (his Count of Monte Cristo is one of my favorites, much highlighted and underscored) and am honored indeed to be compared to one of his characters. Porthos enjoyed wine & music, did he not? I believe he named his shword… I named my dreadnaught guitar. Her name is Genevieve, not Balizarde, but close enough for government work, eh?

Am vain enough to be flattered that you’d want to print out my story, Shenonymous. Again, apologies that last night’s “issue” of the story was missing.

Have come back in “in media res,” as it were. OM just made a point about a questionable quote. I know the first three letters of the Arabic alphabet but nothing else about that language. However I do know that “res” (or rem, singular) in Latin means “things/thing” and depending on context can mean almost anything. Rem publicam is where we get our word “republic,” of course, and means “government” or “things of the people” and was held with great honor. Illia res mean “those famous things.” Ista res meant “infamous things.” Mala res are those evil things, sometimes “the evil eye” or “curses” or those things too horrible to be mentioned by name. Words are so important… am I being honored or shall I faint at the suggestion of scandal?

Same word, completely different context & thus different meaning. “Things” are like water, shaped by the surfaces around them.

Latin is not Arabic or remotely close. What I’m trying to say is that we really need this “thing” put into the context of the words around it in the original language before we can decide whether or not Armstrong has a legitimate quote.

Context anyone? Wine? Biscuit? Does anyone have a request for a song?

Reply to this | Report this

By Nabih Ammari, April 23 at 8:44 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

To Shenonymous

Subject:Registration with Truth-Dig.

I have sent the following E-mail four weeks ago to
Truth-Dig at:newsletter@truthdig.com.I think that it will explain the whole situation with Truth-Dig:

Quote
=====

Dear Sir/Madam,

I filled the registration form 9 months ago and it
was initially accepted and then all of the sudden
it was changed to ‘Unregistered Commenter’.All I am
interested in now is to be registered commenter.

Will help me? Thank you.

Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari

Unquote
=======

Shenon,thank you much for your concern.Appreciated.
Best Regards,
Nabih Ammari

Reply to this | Report this

By OzarkMichael, April 23 at 9:46 am #
(174 comments total)

A Quran Study Performed With the Honesty and Respect That a Holy Book Deserves

Shenonymous, I will use Muhammad Asad’s translation, its the one with ‘Awesome’ in it. Thats the one Karen Armstrong must have used. I dont know how you found this, but thank you.

Our text is Quran 2:217

They will ask thee about fighting in the sacred month. Say: “Fighting in it is an awesome thing (grave transgression); but turning men away from the path of God and denying Him, and [turning them away from] the Inviolable House of Worship and expelling its people there from - [all this] is yet more awesome (greater transgression) in the sight of God, since oppression is more awesome (greater transgression) than killing.”

“Fighting in it is an awesome thing (grave transgression)” The verse does not have to say ‘awesome evil’. Grave transgression is close enough.  For now it looks like i might have to buy some books! But lets take a closer look

“Fighting in it is an awesome thing (grave transgression); but...” there is an important word: but, which undercuts and possibly negates the idea of “all warfare”. I dont know. I wont be that picky. For me that doesnt ruin Karen Armstrong’s interpretation.

They will ask thee about fighting in the sacred month. Say: “Fighting in it is an awesome thing (grave transgression)” There is an important qualification, Mohammed is explaining about fighting in the sacred month. Mohammed says that “warfare in the second month is an awesome evil, but we must not allow ourselves to be persecuted. If we dont fight, they might drive us from the sacred mosque”

This ruins Karen Armstrong’s interpretation. It means almost the opposite from “All warfare is an awesome evil” Instead of All the Quran means 1/12(ie, one month of the year). Which means “a tiny fraction of warfare is an awesome evil” and not only that, further undercutting the awesome evil is ”but”, so we are left with,

“Only a fraction(1/12) of warfare is an awesome evil. But we need to win, so fight all year to preserve your faith.”

And I must add that this is not a terrible thing for Muhammed to say. It is practical. What is terrible is karen Armstrong’s wobbly ‘scholarship’. Scholarship which is a fraud because it indulges in forgery of Quran verses. 

A person reading my little Quran study could certainly object to it. I am not an Arabic speaker nor an Islamic Scholar. Maybe I am influenced by racism and Islamophobia which clouds my mind from seeing the sweet truth of Quran 2:217 which Karen Armstrong percieves so clearly. Therefore, Nabih, I hope that you will stand up for Karen Armstrong and her insightful ‘interpretation’ of Holy Quran 2:217.

Maybe the Arabic reads differently. Will you prove that Karen Armstrong is right? Then I will know that she is a scholar, and I really will press my nose until it bleeds to teach myself a lesson, and I will purchase her books.

Otherwise you leave her standing on her nose, which means you admit that Karen Armstrong has no respect or honesty when dealing with the Holy Quran.

If that is not enough to discredit her from being a guide to us on Islam I dont know what would be. In that case i wont keep attacking her, since no amount of proof will make a difference anyway.

Reply to this | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 23 at 6:00 am #
(896 comments total)

Rigor

Good morning, OM, indeed I do!  I cut my graduate baby teeth on searching for truth!
Nabih, thank your for the low down on Thompson.  Even Ozark seemed troubled by the article.  I can see how easily the uninitiated might be convinced by some untruths.  Writings that have an air about them as factual have a deceptive authority.  I think that is Michaels concern about Armstrong.  As I research various topics, I am assembling not only a great deal of information, but a better sense of the Islamic culture.  While still prey to misinformation because of my still ignorance of the motives of the current main players, and the set of circumstances that encompassed the situation in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad, my bank of knowledge is certainly growing.  How important it might be to the world whether or not I learn about this civilization I cannot even imagine, as I am quite the existentialist.  But whatever it is, perhaps it does have some even minor potential since I work in education and offer my students a moment to think about things as I present “facts.” Being more sensitive to the details of the ‘facts,” also allows me when I interact with grownups to express more truthful description of the way things were and are. 
As a historian and graduate student myself, I am also attuned to the importance and rigor of citation when making statements of weight about what one is studying.  Keeping this in mind, I did do some research, actually a lot, to find a way to allow Armstrong to turn right side up and stop twirling on her head in that position Ozark so forcefully put her. I was getting dizzy myself!  And I was successful at least for the specific quotation he was sniping about.  He has that cute way of sniping for which I know you are very familiar.  And since he is “family,” a brash young man, we let him do it and just take care of him, as we know he is growing by leaps and bounds.  He is being nourished by his own research.  He may never let loose of his beliefs and that is perfectly all right with me.  Well maybe not perfectly all right.  But perhaps he will have a better and more tolerant notion of us (non-believers) and the rest of the different believing world. 
I discovered several translations into English of the Qur’an and that the passage that supports Karen Anderson’s comment about the “awesome evil” of warfare, is in the 2nd chapter, “The Cow,” or Al-Baqara, verse 217.  The translations are from Yusufali, Pickthal, Shakir, Surah Al-Baqara, Mufti Shafi Usman, and Muhammad Asad.  It is well-known that translations will differ.  And the hermeneutics will also depending on various reasons, translators own language and culture will color both translations and interpretations.  It is by nature contextual.  That Anderson translates the passage as a “condemnation of all warfare as an “awesome evil,” is negligible since the other translations are extremely close synonymously.

Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 23 at 6:01 am #
(896 comments total)

Re: Rigor

Yusufali translates it as “Fighting therein is a grave (offence); but graver is it in the sight of Allah to prevent access to the path of Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and drive out its members.”

Pickthal, They question thee (O Muhammad) with regard to warfare in the sacred month. Say: Warfare therein is a great (transgression), but to turn (men) from the way of Allah, and to disbelieve in Him and in the Inviolable Place of Worship, and to expel His people thence, is a greater with Allah; for persecution is worse than killing. And they will not cease from fighting against you till they have made you renegades from your religion, if they can. And whoso becometh a renegade and dieth in his disbelief: such are they whose works have fallen both in the world and the Hereafter. Such are rightful owners of the Fire: they will abide therein.”

Shakir: “Fighting in it[the sacred month] is a grave matter, and hindering (men) from Allah’s way and denying Him, and (hindering men from) the Sacred Mosque and turning its people out of it, are still graver with Allah, and persecution is graver than slaughter;”

Surah Al-Baqara:  “’Fighting therein is a great sin; but to prohibit from the way of Allah, and not to have faith in Him and to prevent from the sacred Mosque (Haram) and to oust its dwellers, are greater sins than it with Allah; and their mischief is more grievous than killing. And they will remain fighting against you always, until they turn you back from your faith, if they can. And whoso among you turns back from his faith, then dies as an infidel, then their works shall go in vain in the world and in the Hereafter, and they are the people of Hell and will abide in it.”

Usmani: ‘Fighting in it is something grave but, in the sight of Allah it is far more grave to prevent from the path of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, and al-Masjid al-Hariim, and to expel its people from there and Fitnah (to create disorder) is more grave than to kill!’ And they will go on fighting you until they turn you away from your faith if they could. And whoever of you turns away from his faith and dies infidel, then they are those whose deeds have gone waste in this world and in the Hereafter. And they are people of the Fire. They shall be there for ever.

And here is the one that chafes the most because it uses the word “awesome”:
Muhammad Asad: They will ask thee about fighting in the sacred month. Say: “Fighting in it is an awesome thing (grave transgression); but turning men away from the path of God and denying Him, and [turning them away from] the Inviolable House of Worship and expelling its people there from - [all this] is yet more awesome (greater transgression) in the sight of God, since oppression is more awesome (greater transgression) than killing.”

I shall need assistance here as to what this all means except that it seems to me that Anderson is well within her literary right to have translated it and interpreted as we see it in the quote.

Nabih, I do wish you could get registered on TD.  Tell me again what happens when you try to do that.  I now have some correspondence with a TD computer geek (a webmaster) and perhaps we can figure a way to get you registered.  Reason is that I do not get your comments for many many hours and they always contain corpulent sentiments and pertinent information.

Reply to this | Report this

By OzarkMichael, April 23 at 5:49 am #
(174 comments total)

Quran 2:217

I havent looked yet, but maybe I will find myself ordering Karen Armstrong books tonight.

I dont know yet. One thing i know, Shenonymous, is that you search for truth without fear.

Reply to this | Report this

By OzarkMichael, April 23 at 5:34 am #
(174 comments total)

Options

Briefly i will agree with Nabih. It was never ‘convert or die’. Islam is more reasonable than that and I am not being ironic.

The actual choices for Christians are these:

1. Convert to islam

OR

2. Submit to the Islam

OR

3. Be executed

If the Christians agreed to submit, all Muslims were forbidden to harm them. The terms of submission are spelled out in Sharia.

And for its day this was very very fair. Christian conquerors had no such control over themselves themselves

Reply to this | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 23 at 12:32 am #
(896 comments total)

Might be what looking for?

By eclectic composite, OM, I meant parts of the truth collected together into a whole from not necessarily one place.  What we call The Truth as a universal representation of reality, that is, a coherence to what is experienced.  It might take several experiences for The Truth to emerge as logically consonant. I was not suggesting that Anderson created an eclectic composite.  But I may not have made that clear enough. 

In any case, try Qur’an 2:217 for the citation of her comment from your post: “per Karen Armstrong: Spencer never cites the Koran’s condemnation of all warfare as an ”awesome evil” Maybe the quotation is in the Quran?. Keep looking. Find it and I will buy her books and chat about them.  Have I misunderstood you?

Reply to this | Report this

By Nabih Ammari, April 22 at 10:04 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Re:A small caution April 22

Shenonymous,

I selectively read your above Re and checked the link
you cited for the article"Karen Armstrong:Islam’s
Hagiographer” by David Thomson.

I felt I should point out a fallacy in his article based on what I knew about present days Arab Christians in Jordan,Syria,and Iraq;and I would leave the rest to reach your own conclusion about the credibility of Mr.David Thomson:

“Islamic holy war against followers of other religions,such as,Jews,is required unless they convert to Islam”

Please go back and check(3)Appearance of Islam,of the
13 topics I posted on Islam.In(3),I have mentioned
the following Christians and Jewish tribes that
existed in Arabia When Islam appeared:

-The Christian Arab Tribes of Ghassan.
-The Jewish Arab Tribes were five:Nadir,Hudi,Qurazah,
Thalaban,and Qaynuqa’.

What has happened to all these Arab but non-Islamic
tribes? A valid question:

The Christian Arab Tribes of Ghassan joined the forces of their brethren Arabs of Arabia and fought
the Eastern Roman Empire whose citizens were Christians like the Arab tribes of Ghassan.Together they defeated the Roman Empire in the historical battle of “Yarmuk” in Greater Syria.

I Know for certain that most Christian Arabs in Jordan,Syria,and Iraq proudly trace their ancestors
to the Christian Arab Tribes of Ghassan.Some of them even have family trees showing what branches of Ghassan they descended from.I had countless encounters with some of those Christian Arabs in the
seventies and eighties,in Jordan,Syria,and Iraq.

Therefore,David Thomson’s claim that Islam dictates
on non-Muslim people either they convert to Islam or
face death is totally false.That is based on what I know about many many Christian Arabs in the country I carefully specified.

With the exception of the Jewish Arab tribe of Qaynuqa,the other four Jewish Arab tribes were left
alone to practice their religion as before the appearance of Islam.Some of them left Judaism on their own to Iraq and Jerusalem and remained practicing their religion as they saw fit under Arab protection.Some left Judaism and join Islam on their
own.I realize the haters will say that they were
forced to do so.

As one goes much deeper in studying the Arab Empire’s
history one may discover that many of those Arab Jews
held important positions close to the Arab Caliphs,
worked as good translators in translating the great
works of Socrates,Plato,Aristotle,etc...and even the
administrative skills and laws of the Roman Empire.
The current hatred between Arabs and Jews,as the whole world sees it these days,is sadly abnormal.

As to the Jewish Arabs tribe of Qaynuqa’,they were forced to leave Medina safely because they breached
an accord they had signed with Muhammad,because of their secret dealings with the powerful tribes of
Quraysh in Mecca.Of course,the Zionists and their
supporters claim that Muhammad breached it.All Arabic
references I reviewed stated that the Prophet Muhammad had absolutely no interest whatsoever in breaching the only accord he had ever signed in his whole life for protecting the interest of his people,including the interest of all the Jewish tribes,from the threat that the tribes in Mecca had
threatened to finish him up,along with his followers
and supporters(Al-Ansars)in Medina.Unless you read what I read,the propaganda and distortions about
the Prophet Muhammad will continue with unabated hatred,and may sound credible to the innocent readers.

As far as I am concerned David Thomson’s article is just as bad as the writings of Robert Spencer,Daniel
Pipes,Norman Podhorets and their ilks of haters across the land.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio.

Reply to this | Report this

By OzarkMichael, April 22 at 4:26 pm #
(174 comments total)

The Eclectic Composite which presents itself as Scripture

This website in your last post
http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?n um=202

was pretty tough on her. She is certainly famous, certainly creative, and certainly emulated. But for me to approve a summary all her work, even a negative summary, would mean reading all her books, which I dont plan on doing unless she is proven truthful about the Quran.

Am I denying Karen Armstrong the right to create the “eclectic composite”? No, heaven forbid! 

An eclectic composite is another word perhaps for reflection. How could I be against that?

I am creating a composite whenever I think about anything. 

Your excellent description of how I was role-playing Mohammed, ‘acting’ as you put it so well, involved a very eclectic composite. How well it stands up to reality can be debated with logic and examples. It doesnt pretend to be Scripture.

per Karen Armstrong: Spencer never cites the Koran’s condemnation of all warfare as an ”awesome evil”,

Please note the word ‘cites’ and also the quotation marks “awesome evil”. This implies not just once but twice that there is a particular verse or section. She is accusing others of not including a quotation which is available in the Quran. As if its been willfully withheld. I would like to know what verse she is refering to. I suspect she made it up.

It is not a hard earned eclectic composite that she is refering to. No, its a simple quotation.  Maybe the quotation is in the Quran?. Keep looking. Find it and I will buy her books and chat about them.

Otherwise Karen Armstrong is still standing on her head. I will not veto or disrupt your discussion of her with Nabih and dreadnaught. I just wont buy her books myself.

Why? Because one may take liberties with history, but one must not take liberties with the Divine and the Holy. One must not write checks against the account of the Quran and sign Muhammed’s name to it.

Religiously speaking it is forgery.

Reply to this | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 22 at 2:45 pm #
(896 comments total)

Agathon or Aristophanes

dreadnaught please do not be too humble.  Ozark has been pinched in the derriere in the past for that.  Since we are now divining our Jungian natures, (I don’t know that we are really of the Jungian psychological stripe, but it sounds good), I am taking the artistic license to fancy this motly crew as the four musketeers, one for all and all for one: Athos, Porthos, Aramis and d’Artagnan.  All starting out as drunken bums, I don’t quite envision us as that, but on an inebriated quest which we are too; they slay enemies of France, we try to slay the dragons of mis-belief.  I see Michael as a kind of d’Artagnan, a prideful and somewhat ambitious dreamer with slightly a quick temperament (Ozark, not the storybook character who is much more hotheaded) but always contrite and polite, and our musketeer is an ardent seeker of truth and goes to great and dramatic lengths to find it, but we do not know if he succeeds.  Nabih would certainly have to be Athos, except for the drinking and gambling which I highly doubt Nabih ever did either (and Nabih doesn’t really like our fictionalizing our character but he puts up with our somewhat histrionic adolescence games because he sees we have such fun and pleasure.  We can’t always be so serious and sober).  Our theatrical fun is slightly intoxicating as far as that can be done in electronic existence.  Then you, dreadnaught, must be Porthos, whose character was based upon the historical musketeer, Issac de Portau, an adventurer from Pau.  You have bravely stepped into our peculiar family, quite an adventurer I would say.  And we have liked you right away and are now one of us, like it or not.  Too bad if you don’t like it.  You could just disappear into the ether, but I hope you never do.  I, of course, have to take on the personna of Aramis, though with some radical changes, he was a Catholic who becomes a bishop!  I became an atheist who became a philosopher.  He studied theology, I study philosophy, he loves intrigues and women, as a She, I love intrigues and men, it fits all right. 

I understood what you meant about good reviews and truth.  No one is going to discount anything you say.  I think you are helping us find our way through the maze towards truth.  At least I enjoy your company on the Diaphanous Road.  What I meant was that we need always to see through the veil of passion.  Not that passion has no place.  Please never forget that I am a passionate artist, poet, and musician.  We must see where passion is appropriate and when it is not.  For instance, your story, is a marvelously passionate expression.  Perfect!  I wait with bated breath for every installment.  I also wonder if you would mind that I print out the serial, especially since you are a published member here?  I would just like to be able to read it in coherent form. 

I have sometimes functioned as a braking force in our collective consciousnesses.  (Jung would love that I said that).  Stogy, I hope not. 

Our analyses of Islam, morals, Dominionism, fascism, and a plethora of other ‘important’ issues is the most fascinating engagement I have been in for many a year.

Reply to this | Report this

By dreadnaught, April 22 at 7:09 am #
(30 comments total)

feel free

Shenonymous is right & perhaps I ought to have qualified: of course we should not discount something just because it is widely accepted. That would be insanity. Let’s not forget the Challenger tragedy. Wasn’t that regrettable episode caused by forgetting all the accepted theories and “renovating” with pure, extremely flammable oxygen?

All I was trying to say is that good reviews do not make truth.

I was not trying to drive anybody crazy with purism, to nit-pick, or to cloud the issue. Feel free to discount what I’ve said if I have been obstructing truth.

Reply to this | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 22 at 4:00 am #
(896 comments total)

Quick question

Have to run off to teach music to very young people.  But I had a question that I will look forward to an answer later today, this evening as I respect your thinking on such things.

How really important is it whether anderson gathered her conceptions precisely from the exact words of the Qur’an?  I know there are purists in the world that want to be very tight with written words.  For me the important thing is if she says anything significant.  I will know better when I have her books and read them.  Isn’t it more important to have truth from wherever it springs?  Even it it is an eclectic composite?  If we were compiling a history book, then if might be important that a translation or interpretation be as veritable as possible.  Is that what we are doing here?  Or are we trying to discover what really is?  The reality of words or the reality of existence?

Reply to this | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 22 at 2:44 am #
(896 comments total)

A small caution

Karen Armstrong: Islam’s Hagiographer an article by freelance critic David Thompson, who it appears has no more credentials to criticize anything than anyone else.  So I do not know whether the discussion of Anderson has any substance.  Visit the article at the site here noted and you be the judge.  Seems like he might have a point as much as you all???
http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?n um=202
While I am making the effort to stay neutral on the Anderson scholarship of the Qur’an, when I run across articles directly related to the subject I will inform of my finding.  The noted article at the site listed above makes a comment about Karen Anderson’s scholarship.  I am not sure how to evaluate David Thompson’s criticism since he would have to be evaluated as well.  And since I am not familiar with the Qur’an or Anderson, especially her scholarship and faithful translation of the Qur’an, I am actively seeking all information about this subject.  I am reading all of your comments (‘your’ meaning all of you:  Nabih, OM, and dn) since I seek the truth about the matter (and all matters for that matter).  I would appreciate any light shed on this and how one can go about checking the credentials of those such as Karen Anderson.  Because she is popular does not in my mind disqualify her as a critic.  But neither does it qualify her.  The Qua’ran is a long text and without some guidance, or lexicon, I am afraid relying on “experts” will have to do, but I hardly think Thompson is an expert.  But I do think, emotion ought to be kept at a minimum or eliminated altogether with respect to this topic.  This should be a completely objective exploration otherwise I’m afraid we could lose each other in the heat of disagreement.  I for one would feel a tremendous loss.

Reply to this | Report this

By dreadnaught, April 21 at 8:18 pm #
(30 comments total)

Minverva's Owl - 4

Thick mist settled in the valleys in the morning. Where the hills rose above it they looked like islands in a white sea. Blackberries were in season and a big group of young people trouped out, all carrying plastic buckets, past the walls of the stockade and down to the blackberry patch in the pine woods below. At first Simon, VanCorland, Arte and I kept close to the others for fear of getting lost. By the time we got to the blackberry brambles the sun had burned the mist away and we felt free to roam about. My jeans were soaked to the knee and my shirt to the elbow. Fragments of leaf and grass and berries clung to my wet hands. The berries smelled wonderful. I ate them by the handful.

A shadow fell across the leaves. Responsible Arte’s bucket was almost full. He picked at a leisurely pace, concentrating more on the thoughts he wanted to express: VanCorland had applied to move out of the main hall. No, a family had not agreed to take him in. He wanted to live alone.

“Why shouldn’t he?” I sent.

“You’re just as worried as I am,” Arte returned. “He’s strange and getting stranger.” Images of half-eaten sandwiches left to petrify on the windowsill, drawings in charcoal on the walls surrounding VanCorland’s dormitory bed, so large that it was hard to tell what they were; landscapes with arms and hands, houses with eyes, human faces missing features. He’d been beaten for drawing on the walls. “I don’t think he ought to shut himself off.”

“Well, and what are they going to do to him? Put him in the stocks for being strange?” I was more vehement than I meant to be. At that point I’d thought a lot-- probably more than most people-- but never done anything extraordinary. I had never drawn on the walls when I lived in the main hall. I worked for the ruling family but had never crossed them in anything.

Arte’s eyes were wide. “Don’t say that.” His thoughts were a tangle of disapproval. I tried to sort them out. It was hard to tell whether he was he was more upset at the dig and afraid for VanCorland, or dismayed at the idea of upsetting the Coloney. He believed in order and did not want anyone to rock the boat or cause a headache for those who kept us from scattering away into the woods and degenerating into animals.

My own thoughts were pretty tangled at that point. I probably could not have continued the argument, but Arte did not call my bluff. He gave me a hurt look and moved off to greener pastures.

Simon picked berries methodically but the children around him ate most of what he picked when they thought he was not looking. Tears slid down his cheeks when he thought they were not looking. 

“Jolene wants to be just friends?”

Simon nodded. He’d seen it coming. He always did, and I’d never liked Jolene. That did not make it hurt any less. “I think I could fall in love with almost anyone,” he said with a look that I tried to ignore. “My problem is that I can love anyone romantically.” Instead of looking at the thoughts surrounding Simon’s words, I greeted VanCorland as he materialized from a tangle of mist-slick bushes. He was even wetter than I was. There were blackberry leaves in his hair and loam on his knees. He was lost in his own world, dreaming again. Through his eyes, we saw the dew gather itself from the tips of the blackberry leaves and pine needles, sliding back up to the arc of the leaves before lifting off into the air, back up toward the sky. Sunlight rolled around inside the droplets, sending out sparks of color. VanCorland wandered off, taking his bizarre view of gravity with him.

“Who are we?” Simon asked me.

Reply to this | Report this

By dreadnaught, April 21 at 7:59 pm #
(30 comments total)

OzarkMichael,

You write Mohammed to Jesus mano e mano. And it is true, Mohammed acknowledged prophethood but never claimed godhead. 

Mohammed claims in the Qur’an itself, 2.097 - 2.101, that the Angel Gabriel is telling him what to write and that this Qur’an is the Holy Book of Allah.

So you see either Mohammed lied to begin with or could not have been trapped by his younger self and the laws he had made before, because according to him, he was not the one who said it was alright to dwell in abandoned house (Qur’an 24.029) or that women ought to breast-feed for 2 years (Qur’an 2.233) if the father so wishes, and to enter the Kabah with a shorn head (Qur’an 48.27). The Angel Gabriel told him to say it. If he wanted to say “I am a man, and I made it up,” he could regret, but either he is a liar or the Law came from Allah via Gabriel and so Mohammed must not regret any of it because it is perfect. After all, “who is more wicked than he who inventeth a lie against Allah, or who says ‘I have received inspiration’ when he hath received none?” (Qur’an 6.093)

And now having said that I disagree with OzarkMichael about Mohammed and hopefully backed up my words to his satisfaction, I will turn about and say that I agree with him about Armstrong.

Armstrong has some impressive references, Nabih. An Archbishop, a Rabbi, numerous magazines. They might be experts in Catholicism or Judaism, but are they historians any more than OzarkMichael is? Perhaps A.N Wilson is a historian, for writing about Jesus, but is he also an expert on Islam? How are these people qualified to judge the goodness or badness of what Armstrong writes? 

She has received a lot of good reviews as both you and Shenonymous have pointed out. Yet surely we know after well over 2,000 years of history that not everything that is popular is good. What is popular is, alas, merely appealing. Hence pop-culture. I am not an Islamic scholar and do not claim to have the answers to Life, the Universe and Everything. But one thing I do know is writing. I have been published and edited those who have.  Like “The DaVinci Code,” “Harry Potter,” or those Victorian horrors that contain phrases such as “she Bid me Contemplate by her Pointing Finger,” Armstrong is incredibly appealing to most people of the time. She may possibly be right but Nabih, with deep respect for you, I’d never know she was right from the flimsy way she strings semi-related scraps of history together. 

I am not OzarkMichael’s son, and would never presume to push his nose against a pane of glass. However I was a boxer for a while. A bloody nose does not bother me.

Reply to this | Report this

By OzarkMichael, April 21 at 7:47 pm #
(174 comments total)

Balancing Karen Armstrong

Nabih, I value a word from you, even if it is a stern one. Your advice that I press my nose against glass is pretty funny. Reminiscent of dreadnaught’s comment of your Jihad post. I get the hint. No, I am not posting pseudonyms. 

Here is a quote from Karen Armstrong’s Balancing the Prophet. The bold is my highlight:

Islam has a far better record than either Christianity or Judaism of appreciating other faiths. In Muslim Spain, relations between the three religions of Abraham were uniquely harmonious in medieval Europe. The Christian Byzantines had forbidden Jews from residing in Jerusalem, but when Caliph Umar conquered the city in AD638, he invited them to return and was hailed as the precursor of the Messiah. Spencer doesn’t refer to this. Jewish-Muslim relations certainly have declined as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict, but this departs from centuries of peaceful and often positive co-existence. When discussing Muhammad’s war with Mecca, Spencer never cites the Koran’s condemnation of all warfare as an ”awesome evil”, its prohibition of aggression or its insistence that only self-defence justifies armed conflict. He ignores the Koranic emphasis on the primacy of forgiveness and peaceful negotiation: the second the enemy asks for peace, Muslims must lay down their arms and accept any terms offered, however disadvantageous. There is no mention of Muhammad’s non-violent campaign that ended the conflict.

Nabih, if you can find a quote in the Quran where All war is described as awesome evil then I will trust Karen Armstrong. I will buy her books and we will read them together. You will need to search the Quran because I have tried and cant find it.

If you cannot find this quote which says that all war is an awesome evil, then you should drop Karen Armstrong as a guide.

She has ‘cited the Quran’ here, Nabih. But I think she made it up. That is patronizing the Holy Quran. You would never do that. I would never do that.

Or is she above the Quran? Is she allowed to put her words in Prophet Muhammed’s mouth? No, she is commiting what is religiously understood as forgery. 

If forgery is what she has done, will you drop her? If not that is ok, its your choice to value as you wish. It will mean that I value the integrity of the Quran more than you do. Sort of a surprise. I hope we are still friends.

But note that I have stood Karen Armstrong on her nose.

I will not come back to her unless she is righted. So there she will stay unless you rescue her. Call all your friends who write so glowingly of her, such nice reviews by such respectable people. Read her books where perhaps she performs more forgery to explain her forgery. Take your time. Bring it back here if you find anything so we can all examine it closely.

But I suspect you will leave her balancing on her nose forever.

Forgive me, but I dont think its funny to create forgeries of Quran just to make a point.

Nabih, your heartfelt and knowledgeable opinions deserve better ‘scholarship’ than Karen Armstrong.

Armstrong’s whole article, Perhaps you will love it but I couldnt get past all war is an awesome evil in the 6th paragraph:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4a05a4a4-f134-11db-838b-000b 5df10621.html

Reply to this | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 21 at 6:52 pm #
(896 comments total)

“Who caught his blood?
With my little dish,
I, said the Fish,
I caught his blood.”

From Nabih’s post to OzarkMichael, my little step-brother, I cannot help myself:
Are you too young to remember from whence that came?

dreadnaught;s story is wonderful.  I can’t wait to see what is going to happen next?.

Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 21 at 6:56 pm #
(896 comments total)

Re:

Weird this happened. It posted twice! Sorry.  It is a problem with TD website.  I finally got a TD geek to email me about these odd problems.  I’m going to tell him about the page three problem that ends up with OM’s email address!  So strange.

Reply to this | Report this

By Shenonymous, April 21 at 6:49 pm #
(896 comments total)

“Who caught his blood?
With my little dish,
I, said the Fish,
I caught his blood.”

From Nabih’s post to OzarkMichael, little step-brother, I cannot help myself:
Are you too young to remember from whence that came?

dreadnaught’s story is wonderful.  I can’t wait to see what is going to happen next?  Storytelling is as ancient as we humans.

Reply to this | Report this

By OzarkMichael, April 21 at 1:00 pm #
(174 comments total)

"Not Much"

per dreadnaught: Where am I? Where is relative… Unless (as I once did) you work in a funeral home and somebody asks you “what is that dead body doing in the hall?” Even then, I’m guessing “not much.”

You made me laugh here at work. It would be a catastrophe if we had a dead body in the hall here, but at least now i have something to say.

per dreadnaught: I’ve looked for Five Moral Pieces since there was great discussion about it on the forum but it was virtually the only one of Eco’s works that my favorite used-book store did not have. So am still looking. Incidentally, “still looking” describes where I am spiritually as well.

Excellent and poetic.

per dreadnaught: A more serious & analytical reply to follow.

You scare me with how fast you can write and how fine your reply is when you are NOT serious and analytical. So now i wonder if i have another Shenonymous on my hands. You two will run me off my feet. Also, i officially declare whatever advantage i had in Quran and hadith to be zero now. You two are more than up to speed so no more short selling ourselves.
Shenonymous is right about something. Let us have no more “Not Much” as a self evaluation. Everyone in our company has earned respect, not just as a human being, but as a thinking person. Agreed?

Reply to this | Report this

By dreadnaught, April 21 at 10:59 am #
(30 comments total)

the gold ring of truth

Am in the netherworld known as “work” at the moment & thus am not at liberty to search the Qur’an but will investigate when I reach home. I may be agnostic but even I wish my employers understood that the nature of Mohammed is more important than the nature of the Database. Ah well.

One of the reasons why I believe that Mohammed must have conditioned his followers, on purpose, to believe that his example was acceptable in all things is that other spiritual leaders who live on old age such as the Dalai Lama or Buddha or Confucius don’t have the problem Mohammed did. And as for government, well, the Lamas were not only spiritual leaders in Tibet, but they also had great political power before China moved in.

Where am I? Where is relative… Unless (as I once did) you work in a funeral home and somebody asks you “what is that dead body doing in the hall?” Even then, I’m guessing “not much.” Unless you mean where I am spiritually? Your other questions indicate that’s the case. Where is the soul of the departed left lying in the hall by some erstwhile funeral director?

Everybody has got to have guessed by now that I know quite a bit about Christianity & the scriptures, modes of thought & doctrine therein. I used to go to church & can fling principles or phraseology around with the best of them. Old Testament Law vs. New Testament Freedom was the central theme in C.S. Lewis’s Pilgrim’s Regress which I used to love as a kid. Am not being facetious. I really was about 10 and I really did love it. I’ve looked for Five Moral Pieces since there was great discussion about it on the forum but it was virtually the only one of Eco’s works that my favorite used-book store did not have. So am still looking. Incidentally, “still looking” describes where I am spiritually as well. 

I meant the gold ring was a good story to include, not that you’d made it up. It perfectly illustrated what you wanted it to, that Mohammed had to sacrifice even little things he liked.

A more serious & analytical reply to follow.

Reply to this | Report this

By Nabih Ammari, April 21 at 10:49 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Re:Karen Armstrong Parts(1)&(2) April 18

OzarkMichael,

I suggest that you make sure that your son,the good
chess player,will be near you by the time you
finish reading this post.You may need his help
to finish a job I will ask you to do.

Since I am totally captivated by Karen Armstrong’s
depth of knowledge about the Arabic language and Islam and by her eloquence and ability to tackle
complex issues,I refrain from defending her in this
particular post of mine but I reserve the right to do the opposite as I see fit.In this post I will let others who read her books do what I think it must be
loudly and clearly be heard by everybody interested:

“Karen Armstrong has read widely,has missed nothing
and gives us a solid purview of the God of the past
as it would be possible to find in a book...Highly
readable and ought to be read”. By Anthony Burgess,
The Observer.

“This is the most fascinating and learned study of the biggest wild goose chase in history-the quest for
God.Karen Armstrong is a genius”. ByA.N.Wilson(author
of Jesus:A Life).

“She refreshes the understanding of what one knows,
and provides a clear introduction to the unfamiliar..
...’yearning’ said Augustine ‘makes the heart deep’.
That is the theme which runs through this lucid book
and the note of hope on which it ends”.By Robert Runcie,Former Archbishop of Canterbury.

“A brilliantly lucid,splendid readable book.Armstrong has a dazzling ability:she can take a long and complex subject and reduce it to its fundamentals,
without oversimplifying”.By Sister Windy Becket,The
Sunday Time.

“An enormously intellectual challenging book.A fascinating way of approaching the subject”.By Rabbi
Julia Neuberger.

“Splendid...Eminently Sane and Patient...Essentials
reading for Jews,Christians,and Muslims”.By The
Washington Post.

“The Best Serious,Accessible History Of The most
Spiritually Important City In The World”.By The
Baltimore Sun.

“A work of Impressive Sweep and Grandeur”.By The Los
Angeles Times book Review.

“Karen Armstrong is a genius”.By A.N.Wilson,Author of
Jesus:A Life.

“Holy War brings compassion,objectivity,breadth,and
imagination to the most urgent crisis of our time”.
By The Boston Globe.

“Erudite,balanced,and lucidly written...{provides) a
mine of useful information on Muslims-Western
perceptions of each other...An important book”.By
Library Journal.

All of the foregoing explicit compliments provide
food for thought,if one truly wishes to free himself
or herself from delusional ideological biases.

Now,son,do the following:

Go to the nearest window to you in the house and press your nose,as hard as you can,until your nose bleeds.Ask your son to help you push harder for
achieving a quicker bleeding.As your nose starts
bleeding stop pressing against the window.You can
take care of the First Aid required:You are a PHYSICIAN,OzarkMichael,not a HISTORIAN.Do not fool
yourself on Armstrong,son.She is a real Pro in her
field and you are a real Pro in yours.The difference
is so huge.You will never catchup with her in your life time.To be delusional is destructive.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio

Reply to this | Report this

By OzarkMichael, April 21 at 10:18 am #
(174 comments total)

Caught

per dreadnaught:At first, the “lowering” of Jesus seems like a humble and perhaps a foolish move. Ah, but I know better. Jesus even as a lowly human being struck down before he reaches middle age manages to set his followers free rather than tangle them in Law.

You are right. You catch me out. I would like to point out that Jesus’ teaching is consonant with his early death, because his teaching sets free as well. In fact your last phrase puts it better than i could. set his followers free rather than tangle them in Law.

What is your relation to that phrase? It is too accurate to be an accident. Do you believe it? If so, do you believe it ‘merely’ as humanly significant for human freedom as Eco does?(Please get a copy of Five Moral Pieces if you havent already) Or one step closer like Oriana Fallaci, who calls herself a ‘Christian Atheist’? Or do you believe it as part of your salvation? Or none of the above?

You are catching me out. I have a right(well maybe not a right) I have a curiousity! to know from whence you catch me out. Where are you, dreadnaught?

per dreadnaught: Granted, he must have grown tired of having his every movement scrutinized. Hence the example with the gold rings. Very clever, but I do not know that Mohammed was enslaved to his younger self at all.  Well into old age he not only acted in new and different ways (marrying new wives/wife, for example) but made new decrees depending on what was going on his life.

On minor matters, little things, I think he was stuck. To overturn minor things or to nullify them would confuse people. What type of prophet keeps changing his mind?  He himself claimed that all his actions were acceptable to Allah. This statement of yours expresses the problem perfectly, i have read that. Please give a Quran verse.

Even if you are right and I am wrong about the ‘stuck’ aspect, once Mohammed dies and the ahadith are being written, any detail, even incidental ones become fair game. I am certain Mohammed saw this coming, he was very intelligent. So he has to straighten it all out beforehand. But that is humanly impossible. The dilemma persists no matter how free Mohammed was to decree law. He was therefore not free. He had to decree more, more than he wanted to or felt was needed today in order to ensure the incidentals are not misunderstood as law tomorrow. The Gold ring must be thrown away in front of everyone.

The Gold ring story is hadith. Here it is:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/ bukhari/092.sbt.html#009.092.401

The hadith below it is also interesting. In a way that reminds me of the new testament. Muhammed at first advises eating, but then goes along with the religious people who think they should not eat. Their fragile faith is worth fasting alongside for. But in the end Mohammed has to set them straight, he has to say something again. He cant just warn them and then indulge them. If he did so, his indulgence would be his last word and might later become a law that the fasting was a good idea! Knowing this, he has to pronounce something against them again after the fast. He cannot rest and even a good deed by Muhammed is turned into a struggle.

He himself claimed that all his actions were acceptable to Allah. that is a heavy burden to carry. And for a whole lifetime at that. But no! Carry it even after you are dead! For it goes on after you are dead, when people start remembering little details of your life, even the type of dye you use on your beard.

Reply to this | Report this

By dreadnaught, April 21 at 7:17 am #
(30 comments total)

apres moi, le deluge

Shenonymous,

Why does it not surprise me that you were/are an aviator? Now my mental image is more accurate… although strangely enough the description of how you are helps just as much as describing what you look like. The hair-clips help, though. Symmetry super omnia.

OzarkMichael,

I am a compulsive picker-aparter of all things written, so now it is my turn for a take on your Letters. Let it be said that I understand what you’re trying to do. You are trying to show your respect & understanding for the Muslim faith, even going so far as to “even the playing field” by lowering Jesus to human status.

That said; you set up a world-weary Mohammed, trapped by his own vast dogma. At first, the “lowering” of Jesus seems like a humble and perhaps a foolish move. Ah, but I know better. Jesus even as a lowly human being struck down before he reaches middle age manages to set his followers free rather than tangle them in Law.  By this equalization of the players, you show your feelings of the innate superiority of Jesus’s message. By the end of the letter, if Mohammed doesn’t exactly see the error of his ways, he is inches away from admitting that it might have been better to die at age 30 rather than live to ripe old age as a prophet.

Mohammed was certainly intelligent and charismatic. He was trying to do what he thought was right, but let’s face facts. It takes chutzpah to start a religion. If a person claims not just leadership but divine prophet-hood, that person realizes that they’re taking on the responsibility of providing an example to their followers. Granted, he must have grown tired of having his every movement scrutinized. Hence the example with the gold rings. Very clever, but I do not know that Mohammed was enslaved to his younger self at all. He himself claimed that all his actions were acceptable to Allah. Well into old age he not only acted in new and different ways (marrying new wives/wife, for example) but made new decrees depending on what was going on his life. If he were trapped by Medeo-Persian hedge maze you describe he might hesitate before decreeing in his older age that four men must testify against adulterers. His followers did not simply follow his example that way. He stood up and made it so in order to spare his wife, Aisha, from punishment. Also, wasn’t he the one who wrote the Qur’an? Yes, he was trying to organize things but again, anybody can write laws. It takes a lot more belief in what you’re doing to say “This is from God and don’t ever change it.” Someone with that much confidence might get frustrated with his followers, but might not think of his prophet-hood as such a burden.

Again, I understand what you were trying to do. You weren’t trying to provide a historic account, I know. I wasn’t there, so I don’t know either. All I’m trying to say is that even though you professed to even the playing field, it wasn’t really even at all when a depressed Mohammed looked enviously at the well-rested Jesus.

Reply to this | Report this

By Nabih Ammari, April 21 at 12:58 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Re:We abide April 19

Shenonymous,

I had checked the site,brothersjud.com.

You are right,it is an interesting site.It seems pretty decent.I plan to pay visits to it on regular basis.Thanks for calling my attention to it.

As to the “damnation of Allah” by the Muslim Shiekh
I can safely make the following statements:

-It is true that simple Muslims unintentionally and
religiously allow fatalism to control how they feel
and think after a catastrophe hits.
-A degree of mysticism exists in the Arab Islamic
culture.That is so not because it is in the Qura’n.
Not at a all.It is because Islam has assimilated
so many different and diverse cultures;consequently
Islam as an integrated whole has been affected.Many
of these mysticisms have nothing to do with the Qura’n,nor have they anything to do with the desert
Arabs whose a residue of the positive aspect of
muruwah remained with them as they traveled as merchants or conquering warriors.Intermarriages and social interactions,in time,had done their functions.

Therefore,it does not surprise me if simple Muslims
interpret the tragedy in Iraq as some kind of a wrath
from Allah.
Sincerely,
Nabih Ammari
An Independent in Ohio.

Reply to this | Report this

By dreadnaught, April 20 at 10:56 pm #
(30 comments total)

Simon’s girl Jolene hung on her gate. She swung herself back and forth with one booted foot. “Hello boys,” she called. “Simon.” Her lips were plump and red against her pale skin. I had grown used to being mistaken for a boy. Jeans and a home-made shirt that used to fit Arte hung off my scrawny frame. He was good to donate, so I rolled the cuffs and sleeves up. Other young women wore dresses with narrow waists and full skirts like the ones on sitcoms. If they had bloomed, I was still a bud and saw no reason to encumber myself while working in the kitchen. I wore my hair long as women were supposed to but it was always in braids wrapped around my head. The men of the Coloney wore their hair parted in the middle, shellacked back and out in a shiny V. Of my friends, only Arte was old enough to do this.

We parted ways with Simon, leaving him to take a few precious moments alone with Jolene before his parents called him in. Arte walked me and VanCorland as far as the main hall. This was another large building, but although it had the fixtures for lights, they did not work anymore. The top floor was for girls, the bottom floor for boys. I’m sure the heads of the Coloney would have liked completely separate dwellings for us, but that would mean either figuring out how to build bigger cabins or one of the influential families giving up one of their large halls with light and heat. I wouldn’t want to if I were them. VanCorland looked up at the dark windows of the hall. He thought they were like big, sad eyes watching him and he balked at dwelling behind them. Before he had a chance to freak himself out I gave him a push toward the door.

Arte lived nearby. I said goodnight to him and ran alone past darkened log cabins and my uncle’s place. Cas never came to church and had not watched a sitcom as far back as I could remember. He was not my uncle and his name was not Cas and he said he had not suffered any guilt since he was fourteen. I called him Cas though, and he hardly ever called me by my name either. He called me You. At first I’d been unsure about this but it was a private joke with him, he always smiled when he greeted me. If I knocked and he did not answer I left a note-- I miss rhetoric, rhubarb pie, and the laments of a sentimental gentleman-- and signed it You. Even then I could write rather cleverly if I wanted to make someone laugh. My parents taught me to write before they died, first mother then father. That was not something I liked to think about, but I did like words. Few in the Coloney did, and even fewer could write.

So past Cas’s shop and on to the big house at the top of the hill. The kitchen windows were alight and fogged over. I slowed to a walk, forgetting ghosts and relishing my last few minutes of non-work. I was sleepy and cold and hungry almost to the point of fainting, but those things were so constant that they had become part of the scenery. When I got to the door I found Fredric waiting, leaned up just outside the beams of the electric porch light. He was the son of the masters of the house. I tried to avoid him when I could. My impression was of a large, rawboned boy-man dissatisfied with everything, including me. His skin burned even in our distant, pale sun. He had no eyelashes.

“You’re late,” he informed me.

If I’d seen him, I would have hurried.

“That shouldn’t make a difference,” he said.

He was right. I bit my tongue, squelched any mental whining, and looked at my shoes. He sent me inside but during the next week it seemed like he was always hanging around downstairs watching what we d