Will the internet slay Islam?

Thought provoking article on the Global Politician website.

http://www.globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2817&cid=2&sid=2

Commentary:

While I hopefully don't have the apparent bias against Islam as the author, I do find it interesting to contemplate if the advent of information on the internet regarding contradictions and "uncomfortable truths" lurking within Islam might not cause more muslims to become militant in the defense of their faith. The human psyche has an enormous capacity for cognitive dissonance and justification of contradictions within their faith.

I can look at almost ANY religion and find contradictions and misinterpretations, to include christianity (whether catholic or protestant). Islam is no different. For what is a religion except mankind attempting to manifest its various perceptions of the spiritual "will of god"into their daily lives? And interpretations are almost always subjective, with more emphasis placed upon certain beliefs than upon others. In protestantism, for example, some faiths emphasize the "gifts of the holy spirit" (such as the speaking of tongues), over others (like the gift of healing). Some interpretations accept that alcohol, drunken in moderation, is acceptable (take a little wine for thy stomach's sake), which others strictly forbid it's consumption to the point that they use grape juice for their sacrament ceremonies.

Through the ages the teachings of Christ have been warped and defiled by the corrupt desires of the men and women who claim to believe in them. Anyone know the phrase "kill them all, let God sort them out". It was first uttered by Arnaud-Amaury at Berziers, where crusaders exterminated the "heretical" sect of Cathars. He was asked by a subordinate how to differetiate a Cathar from other residents in the area, to which he responded, "kill them all, God will know his own". Does that sound any different from the militant rhetoric we're hearing from Al Qai'da and other Jihadist factions? Were some Christian leader to utter such an edict today, he would be immediately denounced and humiliated. Thus, it's evident that Christianity has definitely evolved over the centuries via the process of intellectual "domestication".

And as a whole, today's religious faiths are representative of this evolution. In fact, the whole nature of religion is a history of man's attempts to define his place within the universe. Some have theorized that Judaism has its roots within the teachings of Akhenaten's cult of the sun god in Ancient Egypt, widely recognized as the first monotheistic religion. Christianity, obviously, has its roots within Judaism. And Islam has it's roots within both Judaism and Christianity, with both the old and new testaments accepted (supposedly) as holy writings worthy of being read and studied. However, find a modern muslim Imam, mufti, or ayatollah, who would be willing to publicly proclaim that it's alright to read the bible. And, of course, later religious faiths, such as Mormonism, has its basis in Christianity. And it is worthy to note that both of the latter religions make use of contemporary prophets in order to unveil new "revelations" of god in order to supercede, if not replace, the Bible, proclaiming their new religious texts as the "fulness of the gospel". But I digress.

What we represent as religion today would be almost unrecognizable to the beliefs originally taught because they have had to evolve to incorporate modern intellectual and technological change. Where once Christians wouldn't have thought twice about waging wars, and forcible conversion, in the name of god against heretics and non-christians, today the majority of Christians find the thought of waging "crusade" an antiquated belief, unworthy of the teachings of Christ. They prefer to wage spiritual "battles" for souls, using evangelism and foreign ministries to convert people to their religions.

But Islam is different. Muslim society as yet to fully cast off the belief in their right to wage violent Jihad to forcibly convert the infidel. That's not bias, it's just plain fact that is portrayed to the world in the Muslim proclamations and their media. Islam has stagnated since it Muhammad proclaimed that he held a new revelation from god. It's adherents have failed to submit it's original teachings to serious re-examination as to exactly what God demands from them. And the interpreters of the Q'uran have failed to reconcile why their society has been unable to recognize the fruits of its religious fervor. Islam's defeat at the hands of Charles the Hammer at Poitiers, followed by the crushing defeat at the hands of the Mongol horde, followed by the humiliating eviction of the Moors from the European continent by Ferdinand and Isabella, and ultimately it's defeat under the Ottoman Turks at the Battle of Vienna has left its adherents with a serious inferiority complex. And the fall of the Ottoman empire at the hands of the West, and break up of its territorial holdings into a polyglot of arbitrarily defined geographical boundaries is only the latest in that string of humiliations.

And now Islam is facing it's ultimate challenge, an information war where every one of its tenets is being analysed and debated on an international level, via the internet. Thus, maybe, just maybe, the advent of Qutbism (See Sayyid Qutb) which is the basis for moderan Islamic extremism may be argued as a reactionary response to having their beliefs exposed and challenged on a global scale. It only seems logical that as Muslim beliefs, and especially those that justify violence, are revealed, that it's adherents would assume a defensive, if not militant reactionary stance. But the question in my mind is whether there lies the ability for progressive and peaceful change within the soul of Islam that will bring it "up to date"? Can moderate muslims who hold to the perception that Islam is a religion of peace prevail over those who defend their "right" forcibly convert humanity to their religion? Can moderates manage to evolve their religious beliefs to dovetail with modern philosophical thought, namely that violence perpetrated in the name of religion is repugnant and antithetical to the nature of god's will for humanity? That, in my opinion, is a question that we'll have to wait decades before we receive an answer.

What right has any man/woman to believe that they are empowered by God to physically force another human being to adher to their particular religious interpretation? Can anyone logically accept the contention that any Supreme Being would need (or desire) to force people to believe in "him"? I can't. It's the ultimate contradiction that any almighty, all knowing creator of all we know would need to force we puny humans to believe in him. Maybe I'm a fool, but I prefer to believe that God is attempting to throw me a lifeline to save me from the ocean of sins I'm wallowing in, not threatening to make me walk the plank. And what militant religious fanatics are attempting to perpetrate upon humanity is exactly the latter; convert to their faith or walk the plank in order to expedite our trip to hell,... do not pass go, do not collect eternity.

So the challenge for modern muslims is whether they can muster the necessary intestinal fortitude to confront the militants in their midst, and instead, wage a spiritual, but peaceful, war aimed at changing the hearts of humanity to more closely adher to that definition of "paradise" they all seem to claim is awaiting us. And for that matter, the very same thing can be said to apply to those militant Christians who believe they have the god-given right to blow up abortion clinics.

The Scrutinizer