--- "Robert J. Chassell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Perhaps people on the list can help: is the > following a fair > description of the nature of the Jewish/Christian > God, and how it is > different from the nature of the Moslem God? > > And if so, are the fundamental political > implications as described? > Are more Moslems likely to believe in false > conspiracies because of > these beliefs than US Christians or Jews? > > An article in Asia Times Online > http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/EJ28Aa02.html
This had an interesting perspective on the foundations of America, BTW, but I think that will be another post. > says > "... the Jewish God enjoys only a qualified sort > of omnipotence. His > sympathy with mankind, his creation, compels him > to suffer along > with his creatures. He cannot help but hear the > cry of innocent > blood, the complaint of the widow and orphan, the > mistreated > stranger and the oppressed slave...<snip>... > Friedrich Nietzsche labelled the Jewish deity a God > of slaves." I think a better argument could be made for the Jesus of the Gospels being perceived as 'deity of slaves,' as the OT God has power to reach out and blast offenders, whereas Jesus said 'love your enemies' and 'turn the other cheek.' Certainly that aspect of Christianity was employed in hopes of keeping slaves and serfs complient and submissive to masters/overlords in various AD cultures. I seem to recall that Muslims are also supposed to 'have concern for the widow and orphan,' BTW. >"He permits the likes of Abraham and Moses to give > him a hard time over such things as the destruction > of Sodom, or > exterminating the sinners among the Israelites." Which is hardly 'master-to-slave' interaction, more like 'master-to-free-servant' or even 'parent-to-child.' > Is this a fair characterization. Is Nietzsche > correct? I don't think so, but there *is* a distinct flavor of democracy, in that a mere man is allowed - and perhaps is even expected - to question the divine. My understanding of Jewish theological teaching (which is sketchy at best!) is that while God is the ultimate authority, Man must participate in decision-making processes, and so must seek knowledge and ask questions. My understanding of Islamic teaching (even sketchier!) is that Allah is not to be questioned, ever. That also seems to be the position of extremist Christians - "it's there in black and white, and don't you dare question it!" My moderate Christian background allows for cultural context and ongoing re-interpretation of the Bible: 'what does this mean to us today?' > The article goes on to say: > > ".... The Christian God even came to earth and > allowed himself to be > crucified. He loves the poor and weak. Indeed, > weakness ineluctably > draws forth his love. Jewish and Christian > theologians speak of "divine humility"." > > To what extent is this statement false? If 'weakness' includes will or moral strength; the Christian God expects (? or at least praises) followers to (who) persevere in profession of belief even in the face of torture, as in martyrdom. If 'weakness' instead means 'powerless in worldly authority' or 'downtrodden,' that seems to be fairly accurate. IMO, of course! > Who among Christians and Jews > says `my God is bigger than your God'? The extremist fundamentalists! And how! > Is the notion of "divine > humility" widespread, or is it understood to be > purely a matter of > hypocrisy? How does the US differ from Germany and > France? I'm not really sure if I know what is meant by "divine humility," although I think that God's promise not to destroy the world again by flood is an example of it. I guess I'd call it "compassion." Are there any stories in which Greek gods are ever persuaded to 'do the right thing' by a human, or give a de facto apology? Does Prometheus' gift of fire, and his suffering for that act, not count as 'divine humility?' Although he was not the supreme god, he was still divine; and what about Odin who 'hung on the tree for nine days and nine nights' IIRC? > Not so Allah, the beneficent, the merciful. "For > Islam, the notion > that man's failings more powerfully awake God's > love than man's merits > is an absurd, indeed an impossible thought. Allah > has pity upon human > weaknesses, but the idea that he loves weakness > more than strength is > a form of divine humility that is foreign to the > God of Mohammed," > wrote the Jewish theologian Franz Rosenzweig. > > Is this true? Or is this a misleading > characterization of Sunni or Shia theology? I'd like to see what an Islamic scholar says. > Here comes the political implications: > > " _Imitatio dei_ may explain why Americans and > Muslims seek quite > different attributes in their political leaders. > More important > than strength and intelligence in the character > of an American > presidential candidate is humility"...<snip> Humph! Not "more," but it is a needed quality. <wry> And somehow I see a heck of a lot of arrogance in GWB's stance on the world stage! Of course, we have a kind of schizophrenic stance on how one ought to present oneself, anyway: Be strong, but kind. Be proud, but polite. Win, but don't rub it in. Don't be a sore loser. Don't toot your own horn. [I think Reggie commented on this aspect too.] > "More than anything else, Americans want their > leaders to listen to > them. A president had better be a better listener > than a talker. That > is what Americans expect from their God, after > all, and all the more > so from a president who is a mere human. > > The sort of leader who evoked adulation in the > Arab world, eg, a Gamal > Abdel Nasser, produces only revulsion among > Americans." .... > > Is the theological-political connection right? Is > it fair to say that > many people do wish to behave with the same > qualities as their God? Yes, at least from a Christian viewpoint. In Sunday School one is told to "be as little Christs in the world..." > If so, and if the qualities are as stated, does this > predefine the > attributes that Americans seek in their presidents, > on the one hand, > and that Eqyptians and others seek in their leaders, > on the other? Not all attributes, but some, yes. > To what extent are people living in France and > Germany different, > although nominally or actually Christian? <scratches head> Do they share our bizarre "humble arrogance?" Maybe "arrogant humility" is more accurate. > To what extent are the divisions among Jews, > Christians, and Moslems > important; or is this something that conjoins > Protestants of all types > with Catholics, so long as they are American, and > separates them from > their co-religionists in France and Germany, and > separates them from > Moslems who are as far apart themselves as > Protestants and Catholics > were during the European religious wars? To those sure they Hold The Truth, such divisions seem all-important, speaking as one Who Can Be Certain Of Little, But Is OK With That. :) To harp on a favorite theme, I have little to no quarrel with the tolerant of any faith; but I have little to no patience with those who demand that I see the world *only in their way.* I have much more in common philosophically with a Reform Jew than a follower of Pat Buchanan. Of course, I think that Reform Judaism is an American movement, so that would make it 'American first,' wouldn't it? Debbi GSV Whew! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
