Café Philos: an internet café

Today, 138 leading Muslim scholars from around the world will present an unprecedented open letter to the Pope and many other Christian leaders.

The letter calls for peace between Christians and Muslims, and notes that:

Together they [Christians and Muslims] make up more than 55 per cent of the population, making the relationship between these two religious communities the most important factor in contributing to meaningful peace around the world. If Muslims and Christians are not at peace, the world cannot be at peace.

The scholars state:

As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them - so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes.

The scholars then continue:

With the terrible weaponry of the modern world; with Muslims and Christians intertwined everywhere as never before, no side can unilaterally win a conflict between more than half of the world's inhabitants. Thus our common future is at stake. The very survival of the world itself is perhaps at stake.

Well, they've got that right -- a religious war between Muslims and Christians would turn the whole world into a Northern Ireland.

Yet, what makes this letter remarkable is, not just the call for peace between Christians and Muslims, but -- and this may be of more lasting importance -- the Muslim scholars assert that Christianity and Islam share a profound common ground: "The Unity of God, the necessity of love for [God], and the necessity of love of the neighbour is thus the common ground between Islam and Christianity." According to the BBC radio this morning, the 29 page letter even asserts that Christians and Muslims worship the same god, and that all the prophets, including Jesus and Mohamed, were revealed the same truths. The 138 scholars are from every school in Islam.

The way I figure it, this is a necessary and long overdue -- but rather small step -- towards peace.

For it to be of any lasting significance, it must lead to much greater things than a few conferences. The notion that Islam and Christianity are not inherently at odds with each other must become commonplace wisdom everywhere in the world. For something like that to happen will certainly take a lot of time and effort -- if it happens at all. Still, a journey of 10,000 miles begins with one step. This could be that step.

References:

Pope Told 'Survival of World' at Stake if Muslims and Christians do not Make Peace

Muslim Statement on Peace Among the Religions 'Historic', Says Academic

Assuming Satan has no ontological existence, of what use is the concept of Satan to us?

Much of the world doesn't strongly associate religion with belief. Islam and Christianity make belief central to religiosity, so in both religions, it makes sense to ask someone about their beliefs. Yet, belief has historically played a small role in many of the rest of the world's religions.

It is fully possible to have a Shinto priest who does not believe in the gods. But it is not possible to have a Muslim Iman or a Christian priest or minister who does not believe in god. When such an iman or priest or minister exists, we say they have lost their faith. We might even accuse them of being frauds. We do not accept them as legitimate representatives of their religion. Yet, no one in Japan wonders much if a Shinto priest doesn't believe the gods exist, and no one in India accuses an agnostic yogi of being a fraud.

So, why is belief so important in Islam and Christianity?

You can look at that question very pragmatically. Bot Islam and Christianity are proselytizing religions. It is far easier to convert someone to your religion when you demand little more than belief of them, than it is when you demand a complete change in lifestyle. Hence, one reason belief might be so important to Islam and Christianity is that making belief the key to the religions helped in converting people to those religions.

Yet, that doesn't answer whether belief has any genuine religious function? Does what you believe actually have anything to do with your spirituality?

A Zen monk might say "no", but it's unlikely that a Muslim or Christian would give the same answer. Muslims and Christians typically believe in belief.

"God says do what you wish, but make the wrong choice and you will be tortured for eternity in hell. That's not free will. It's like a man telling his girlfriend, do what you wish, but if you choose to leave me, I will track you down and blow your brains out. When a man says this we call him a psychopath. When god says the same we call him "loving" and build churches in his honor."


-- William C. Easttom II

Sam Harris is a contemporary philosopher and neuroscientist. Rick Warren is the evangelical leader of a 25,000 member megachurch. Newsweek brought the two of them together the other day to debate the value of religion, especially Christianity.

It turned out a congenial debate, with Harris and Warren finding common ground in some of their moral ideals while respectfully disagreeing about most everything else. You can find the debate here.

Neither Warren nor Harris introduced any unheard of new moves in the classic "Does God Exist" game, but I still found the debate interesting for concisely revealing how evangelicals typically characterize non-believers and their arguments these days.

At one point, Warren says to Harris, "You're more spiritual than you think. You just don't want a boss. You don't want a God who tells you what to do." And at another point, he says, " If death is the end, shoot, I'm not going to waste another minute being altruistic." Seems to me those are pretty common characterizations of non-believers. Many evangelical preachers have long put words in the mouths of non-believers, and Rick Warren continued that tradition in his debate with Sam Harris.

Yet, it was a pretty good thing to see both Harris and Warren agree that individuals should take an active interest in fighting such world problems as hunger, AIDS, Malaria, and so forth. There might be practical grounds on which the sides in the so-called "Culture Wars" can meet and work to accomplish the same goals.

I'm reluctant to recommend reading the debate, for it really doesn't cover much new ground; but if you are not already familiar with that ground, then the debate is a concise introduction to it.

(Thanks to my friend Becky for passing along the article.)

Yes, it has become necessary for Café Philos to break the law.

The law made by The Thinking Blog, that is. Specifically, their law that we are only to tag five other blogs for the Thinking Blog Award. That law must now be broken, smashed, trampled on, because Ali Eteraz is back in town.

Within hours of naming five blogs that provoke even me to thought, I discovered that Ali has started blogging again. As of yesterday, March 25, 2007.

Mark the date: Ali is not only a blogger but a mover and shaker. He is one of the internet's leading proponents of reforming Islam. He accomplishes more in a single year than most such reformers and activists accomplish in three years. And when this man can no longer make even me think, I will have passed on to the Great Weirdness.

Last November, Ali shut down his blog, Unwilling Self-Negation, in order to devote his time to launching Eteraz.Org: States of Islam. (Eteraz.Org is a strange combination of blog, forum and political organization that might, in some ways, represent the future of the internet -- or, at least one of its futures.) Yesterday, Ali restarted his old blog and so it has become absolutely necessary to tag him with the Thinking Blog Award, even though in doing so I become the sort of outlaw who would willingly violate an honor system. Oh well. I shall somehow survive the shame of it.