this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024
78 points (90.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43897 readers
1090 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think that's baked into all the abrahamic religions. The Old Testament says so, and the Quaran also doesn't like heretics, especially apostasy is considered really bad. As far as I know the death penalty is how to deal with apostates in Islam. But it's not really better in christianity or judaism, the same tribal concept of extinguishing rival tribes is in the Old Testament and Torah. All these religions believe in the same god. So theoretically they're more compatible with each other than for example with atheists or people believing in different or multiple gods. Or people renouncing their ways.
You can have a look at buddhism, hinduism etc to find a different perspective, indigenous beliefs, pantheism or agnosticism. Or the ancient greeks, romans or egypts or maya civilization. They all have a very different view than we have with our abrahamic God.
I personally like science. Just because it's the only sane approach to knowledge. And it has proven to be the way that delivers the goods. And I think this and the observations I made contradict with the existence of any God. And we should not base our decisions on ancient tribal beliefs, so I'm not okay with any of the Gods who tell people what to do and what not to do. I link proper philosophy and progress in what we deem to be our current ethics.
Abrahamic religions do not have death written for apostasy that's just some weird spooky myth Redditors tell
I'm afraid you're wrong, though.
https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2021/11/death-sentence-for-apostasy-in-nearly-a-dozen-countries-report-says
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam
https://web.archive.org/web/20060116103512/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0%2C%2C2-1470584_1%2C00.html
And I've talked to refugees who fled countries in fear of being killed for who they are. Ever heard of ISIS, the jihad? islamic state or sharia law? Wikipedia tells me it doesn't happen that often in countries like Saudi Arabia or Qatar... And it's mostly extra-judicial, not legal executions. But it's in the scripture. And also part of the law of a dozen countries. And I'm pretty sure there has been some genocide out of similar reasons in the wars in Syria and Afghanistan in recent times.
And regarding the christians: What's with the entire medieval times? And what was the whole point of the crusades? Christinity was in an open, bloody war against the heretics for centures. And I think they tortured apostates to death. Currently most of us don't do corporal punishment or death penalty any more. But we sometimes shun apostates and make their lives miserable.
I don't see a myth here...
Your reference is extremist terror groups backed by America. And you're linking secular websites as a source. The irony is truly not lost here.
Which one is a bad source... secularism? wikipedia? the times? feel free to enlighten me. i know i sound a bit negative, but i'm not opposed to learning new things as i think this is somewhat a topic that is important for humanity as a whole. i mean the terror groups like ISIS aren't seperate to the whole religion thing. wars and terror are part of that and can't be viewed seperately. of course if you exclude all the bad parts of religion and just view the moderate ones that do less harm... it looks way better. but both are a part of the whole story.
And the question was if the death penalty for apostasy is part of islam. And I said yes, it is part of law of countries, additionally people do it in the name of God. And it's written in the hadith. So whether you or I like that or how my neighbor practices islam or what the secular people think... doesn't change the facts.
This one you mean?
Fundie terror groups like ISIS and israel only exist because some morons fail to read more than three lines of a book and just ignore the rest.
You're entirely changing the topic here. That was not what we were talking about. But I feel for the people living there. The whole situation is just bad. And it doesn't get better. You're right with the history. The USA and USSR were fighting and funded the most heinous and evil people, gave specifically them money and weapons out of their own political motivations. Oil and other interests added to it over the years. Lots of that did not have the intended consequences, they could have seen that coming and all of that brought the current situation into existence. And they added yet more bad decisions on top in recent times. It's mostly politics and not religion. However I think some of the mujahideen and isis terrorists who actually do the murdering are fueled by religion. At this point it probably doesn't matter much since all they've seen since they were 14 and started fighting is violence and death... I don't have a point to make here. It's bad. I'd change it if I could.
I think the trick here is "written". I can't speak for Islam, but the Bible says nothing about killing all infidels and apostates. Maybe some old papal decrees endorse it if you're catholic.
Killing people for being different or questioning your ways is a time-honoured tradition for everyone.
I don't think it is very important what exactly is written down. These books contain lots of contradictions. And they're made to a degree so people can find what they're looking for. It's all interpretation and the same book can and has been cited to start wars, kill the neighbors, sell them to slavery, torture people. Or be nice to them. Considering societal norms and killing people: It's all in there, you can oftentimes pick.
And I'm not sure what's in the old testament. As I know it, it probably also doesn't talk negatively about killing apostates. It's probably at least allowed to kill them. I haven't opened a bible in 20 years, I'd need to look it up. if it's there, it's probably with all the "their blood shall be upon them." lines in leviticus.
The trick with the old testament is that it was written across a good chunk of the bronze age. Some of the early-written passages don't even assume monotheism or a unified Jewish identity, and as a result you see other slightly later ones selling it pretty hard (how hard is not worshiping a golden cow, really?). Joshua killed many, but I don't know off the top of my head to what degree that was about religion, versus ethnicity or literally just standard pillaging procedure. Almost certainly different writers had different perspectives.
White gentiles weren't even in the picture until Paul's letters, though, so I'm confident they weren't directly given permission for anything.
You're right. My brain kind of skipped a bit on the fact that what we call the Old Testament is also an accumulation of texts from a larger timespan.
I was under the impression that all of that was more a tribal thing. This is the story of the descendants of Jacob, the Israelites, Samaritans etc. Versus Babylonians, Egypts, Assyrians... And group identity was very important. You can't rob your direct neighbor who is part of the same group. That would leave everyone in anarchy and chaos, not a somewhat stable society. So instead you burgle rivaling groups of people, steal their food, donkeys, women, and make them your slaves. It's not really about ethnicity or religion. All of that is more a means of having a strong cohesion within your group and have them fight against the rivaling groups, not amongst themselves. Or a stronger group will take your things. Tribes also are friendly towards some other tribes and might share a common enemy. The content of the stories and traditions isn't that important, but it's what makes you distinct from your rivals, regulates who you're allowed to enslave and gives a feeling of belonging to your group and also reassures you that you're right. But in my view it's more a means of forming stable tribal structures, and not a cause of something. I'm not a historian, though.