There are several ways in which Islam differs from all other major religions. For starters:
It sanctions militant proselytization, mandating forcible imposition on other peoples by coercion, threat and overt violence (Koran 8:39, 9:29, etc.), a practice unique among religions today.
It punishes apostasy with death (Koran 4:89; Hadith, Bukhari 9.84.57), also a practice unique among religions today.
It countenances no separation between church and state, that is, it cannot render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. The scope of its ambition is khilafil, that is, the establishment of a Caliphate requiring that a state—ultimately a universal state—be ruled by Islamic law. As Muslim scholar Jaafar Sheikh Idris explains, “Secularism cannot be a solution for countries with a Muslim majority or even a sizeable minority, for it requires people to replace their God-given beliefs with an entirely different set of man-made beliefs. Separation of religion and state is not an option for Muslims because it requires us to abandon Allah’s decree for that of man.”
The “religion” itself takes precedence over the transcendent values it should strive to attain: the flourishing of the individual soul, the love of God’s Creation, the grace and miracle of life, the conversation with the Divine, freedom of conscience and the inviolability of personal choice in determining one’s redemption. Instead, it elevates conformity to a set of stringent rules, down to the smallest detail, as a prerequisite to salvation, whose effect is primarily to perpetuate the faith itself at the expense of the individual votary. Admittedly, this is a literalist practice common to most restrictive and comparatively minor orthodoxies, but regarding the massive following enjoyed by Islam and its susceptibility to violence and the subjugation of other faiths and peoples to its hegemony, we are remarking a radically greater economy of scale and the havoc it can wreak.
The propensity to violence is not an aberration but an intrinsic element of the Islamic corpus. As Lee Cary has written, Islamic terrorists are “legacy, Koranic literalists” who use terror “to enforce a dogma that defines behavioral practices that comply with the Koran and [defines] the regulations of daily life.” The much-bruited notion that there is such a thing as “Islamism,” a form of extremism that has nothing to do with Islam proper, or is a perversion thereof, is a pure canard, another in a series of timorous progressivist memes bleaching the blood out of the Islamic ideological jalabiyya. Islam, not “Islamism,” promises paradise for martyrs and jihadis killed in battle (Koran 3: 157), thus palliating and even inciting feral attitudes and fanatical actions—a patently non-spiritual way of earning beatitude.
As Howard Kainz points out in an illuminating essay, “Islam and the Decalogue,” Islam reverses the Golden Rule, which is central to Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism (Koran 48:29, 2:191, 3:28, etc.). For this reason, Kainz concludes, “Islam may best be understood,” not as a religion, but “as a world-wide cult.”
Grendel wrote:Kind of stating the obvious. Every organized religion is a cult in my eyes and many of them declare non-believers outlaws.
...Just curious... does that make secular humanism a cult?
As far as I can tell it's a philosophy, not a religion.
It's organized and people have regular meetings to talk about it's tenants - so how is it different from other religions - more specifically what exempts it from your "cult" criteria?
Arch Linux x86-64, Openbox
"We'll just set a new course for that empty region over there, near that blackish, holeish thing. " Zapp Brannigan
Technically, I'd say secular humanists aren't a cult, as there's no centralized idol figure to be emulated, worshiped, or followed. In practice, however, any group of people with similar beliefs will display tribal behaviors.
It's probably close enough to religion for most discussions on belief systems.
I'm guessing it doesn't really matter, but why is this discussion relevant? I mean, TB has consistently mis-represented Islam as a monolithic belief system, when it is a sectualized as Christianity, with easily as much variation in belief. Where is the discussion of religion v. cult v. belief system supposed to get us?
"The Party told you to reject all evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."
George Orwell---"1984"
Just look around you. Some see religion as a way of managing a large number of people for their own purposes, someone finds solace in religion, someone uses religion as a way to earn money, some as a good method to collect information in the style of the special services etc. For me personally, God exists in the starry sky and every insect, to consider, to study and to admire how he did it.
snoopy wrote:It's organized and people have regular meetings to talk about it's tenants - so how is it different from other religions - more specifically what exempts it from your "cult" criteria?
This is why I think it matters whether you capitalize the S and the H or not. There are a lot of people who would read the wikipedia page for secular humanism and think that those beliefs were pretty similar to their own without having ever even heard of secular humanism, whereas there are some as you point out who have a much larger agenda.
callmeslick wrote:where are these regular meetings held?
My local library on Sunday afternoons.
My main point: I think we naturally tend to poopoo beliefs different than ours while giving ones similar to ours the benefit of the doubt. (Isn't that part of where you started, Grendel, when you said they want to declare those who believe differently outlaws?) Also, isn't it natural and understandable? If we think someone's opinion is wrong, won't we think that opinion inferior? But... don't let yourself think that somehow popular philosophical thinking in the US (aligned fairly closely with Secular Humanism) is any less of a belief system just because most people don't attend organized meetings to discuss it. The OP opened with Islam is bad because it produces killing (useful discussion of the merits of beliefs); Grendel's response amounted to every belief system other than mine is bad and some are worse than others (blanket stereotyping). If we're going to cast such a wide net, we should be mindful of getting caught in it ourselves...
Arch Linux x86-64, Openbox
"We'll just set a new course for that empty region over there, near that blackish, holeish thing. " Zapp Brannigan
snoopy wrote:It's organized and people have regular meetings to talk about it's tenants - so how is it different from other religions - more specifically what exempts it from your "cult" criteria?
My crochet circle is organized and has regular meetings where we talk about stuff.
re·li·gion
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
cult
a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.
sec·u·lar hu·man·ism
humanism, with regard in particular to the belief that humanity is capable of morality and self-fulfillment without belief in God.
Apatheism FTW.
Edit:
Organized religion, [..] is religion as a social institution, in which belief systems and rituals are systematically arranged and formally established. Organized religion is typically characterized by an official doctrine (or dogma), a hierarchical or bureaucratic leadership structure, and a codification of rules and practices.
Grendel wrote:My crochet circle is organized and has regular meetings where we talk about stuff.
Yes, but my local secular humanist group doesn't talk about "stuff" - they talk about the merits and the furtherance for their philosophical beliefs. (link) I didn't bother asking whether your crochet circle is a religion because I'm fairly certain we'll all agree that it's not.
Arch Linux x86-64, Openbox
"We'll just set a new course for that empty region over there, near that blackish, holeish thing. " Zapp Brannigan
I think the confusion comes from language. For instance, there are Nazi beliefs (Hitler, eugenics, holocaust), and if you espouse those beliefs, then you are a Nazi. But the belief that Nazism is wrong, that in a weaker sense can be called a Nazi belief insofar as it is a belief concerning Nazis. But if you have that kind of Nazi belief, you are not a Nazi. In the same sense, there are religious beliefs (God, miracles, afterlife), and if you espouse those beliefs, then you are religious. But the belief that religion is wrong, that too in a weaker sense can be called a religious belief insofar as it is a belief concerning religion. But if you have that kind of religious belief, you aren't religious.
Belief in a God is called "spirituality" and it's hardwired into the brain for some reason. Our Creator must have put it there, perhaps so that we would worship Him? And why is it a "him" anyway?
Religion is a creation by man to address that spirituality and it's a "cultural system" with a set of beliefs that explains, or tries to explain, the nature of God, man and the universe and sets rules for the followers of that system to adhere to. I'm with sigma. I don't follow the world's current sets of cultural systems that attempt to define God, or the rules they create to follow those beliefs. Personally I tend to believe in a God or something more powerful than us, but don't ascribe to any cultural system that tries to define that God or the rules laid down for worshiping that God.
Cat (n.) A bipolar creature which would as soon gouge your eyes out as it would cuddle.
I do not know for sure. I think God did it for the good of the person when all the people betrayed you, or the person does not agree with the reality that he sees, or when more hope there is nothing but himself and God.
I hope I do not hurt the feelings of believers unwittingly.
Jeff250 wrote:I think the confusion comes from language. For instance, there are Nazi beliefs (Hitler, eugenics, holocaust), and if you espouse those beliefs, then you are a Nazi. But the belief that Nazism is wrong, that in a weaker sense can be called a Nazi belief insofar as it is a belief concerning Nazis. But if you have that kind of Nazi belief, you are not a Nazi. In the same sense, there are religious beliefs (God, miracles, afterlife), and if you espouse those beliefs, then you are religious. But the belief that religion is wrong, that too in a weaker sense can be called a religious belief insofar as it is a belief concerning religion. But if you have that kind of religious belief, you aren't religious.
Hence my use of secular humanism, not atheism.
Arch Linux x86-64, Openbox
"We'll just set a new course for that empty region over there, near that blackish, holeish thing. " Zapp Brannigan
