Washingtonpost.

Newsweek Interactive, LLC

GOD
Author(s): KAREN ARMSTRONG
Source: Foreign Policy, No. 175 (November/December 2009), pp. 54-56, 58, 60
Published by: Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20684940
Accessed: 03-10-2017 06:02 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

preserve and extend access to Foreign Policy

This content downloaded from 186.28.232.27 on Tue, 03 Oct 2017 06:02:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THINK
AGAIN

As casualties from the world's religious wars mount,

God is getting a bad reputation. But the war against
God has had its casualties as well. Here's why we
need a truce?and why secularism is almost as much
of a threat to the world as fundamentalism.
BY KAREN ARMSTRONG

This content downloaded from 186.28.232.27 on Tue, 03 Oct 2017 06:02:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 3
"God Is Dead."
. When Friedrich Nietzsche announced the death of "God and Politics
God in 1882, he thought that in the modern, scientific
world people would soon be unable to countenance the
Shouldn't Mix."
idea of religious faith. By the time The Economist did
its famous "God Is Dead" cover in 1999, the question
Not necessarily Theologically
seemed moot, notwithstanding the rise of politicized illiterate politicians have long given
religiosity?fundamentalism?in almost every major faith religion a bad name. An inadequate un
derstanding of God that reduces "him"
since the 1970s. An obscure ayatollah toppled the shah to an idol in our own image who gives
of Iran, religious Zionism surfaced in Israel, and in the our likes and dislikes sacred sanction
United States, Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority announced is the worst form of spiritual tyranny.
Such arrogance has led to atrocities
its dedicated opposition to "secular humanism." like the Crusades. The rise of secular
But it is only since Sept. 11, 2001, that God has proven ism in government was meant to check
to be alive and well beyond all question?at least as far as this tendency, but secularism itself has
the global public debate is concerned. With jihadists attack created new demons now inflicting
themselves on the world.
ing America, an increasingly radicalized Middle East, and In the West, secularism has been
a born-again Christian in the White House for eight years, a success, essential to the modern
you'll have a hard time finding anyone who disagrees. Even economy and political system, but it
was achieved gradually over the course
The Economists editor in chief recently co-authored a book of nearly 300 years, allowing new ideas
called God Is Back. While many still question the relevance of governance time to filter down to all
of God in our private lives, there's a different debate on the levels of society. But in other parts of
the world, secularization has occurred
global stage today: Is God a force for good in the world?
far too rapidly and has been resented by
So-called new atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Sam large sectors of the population, who are
Harris, and Christopher Hitchens have denounced religious still deeply attached to religion and find
Western institutions alien.
belief as not only retrograde but evil; they regard themselves
In the Middle East, overly aggressive
as the vanguard of a campaign to expunge it from human secularization has sometimes backfired,
consciousness. Religion, they claim, creates divisions, strife, making the religious establishment more
and warfare; it imprisons women and brainwashes children; conservative, or even radical. In Egypt,
for example, the remarkable reformer
its doctrines are primitive, unscientific, and irrational, essen Muhammad Ali (1769-1849) so brutally
tially the preserve of the unsophisticated and gullible. impoverished and marginalized the clergy
that its members turned their backs on
These writers are wrong?not only about religion, but
change. When the shahs of Iran tortured
also about politics?because they are wrong about human
and exiled mullahs who opposed their re
nature. Homo sapiens is also Homo religiosus. As soon as gime, some, such as Ayatollah Ruhollah
we became recognizably human, men and women started to Khomeini, concluded that more extreme
responses on the part of Iran's future
create religions. We are meaning-seeking creatures. While
religious rulers were necessary.
dogs, as far as we know, do not worry about the canine Shiism had for centuries separated re
condition or agonize about their mortality, humans fall ligion from politics as a matter of sacred
very easily into despair if we don't find some significance in principle, and Khomeini's insistence that
a cleric should become head of state was
our lives. Theological ideas come and go, but the quest for an extraordinary innovation. But moder
meaning continues. So God isn't going anywhere. And when ate religion can play a constructive role
we treat religion as something to be derided, dismissed, or in politics. Muhammad Abdu (1849
1905), grand mufti of Egypt, feared that
destroyed, we risk amplifying its worst faults. Whether we
the vast majority of Egyptians would
like it or not, God is here to stay, and it's time we found a not understand the country's nascent
way to live with him in a balanced, compassionate manner. democratic institutions unless they were
explicitly linked with traditional

Karen Armstrong is the author of numerous books on religion, including A History

of God, Islam: A Short History, and, most recently. The Case for God.

November 2009 55

This content downloaded from 186.28.232.27 on Tue, 03 Oct 2017 06:02:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Think Again: God
Islamic principles that emphasized
the importance of "consultation"
(shura) and the duty of seeking
"consensus"(ijma) before passing
legislation.
In the same spirit, Hassan al
Banna (1906-1949), founder of the
Muslim Brotherhood, began his
movement by translating the social
message of the Koran into a modern
idiom, founding clinics, hospitals,
trade unions, schools, and facto
ries that gave workers insurance,
holidays, and good working condi
tions. In other words, he aimed to
bring the masses to modernity in an
Islamic setting. The Brotherhood's
resulting popularity was threaten
ing to Egypt's secular government,
which could not provide these
services. In 1949, Banna was assas
sinated, and some members of the
Brotherhood splintered into radical
offshoots in reaction.
Of course, the manner in which
religion is used in politics is more
important than whether it's used at
all. U.S. presidents such as John F.
Kennedy and Barack Obama have
invoked faith as a shared experi
ence that binds the country togeth
er?an approach that recognizes
the communal power of spirituality
without making any pretense to
divine right. Still, this consensus
is not satisfactory to American
Protestant fundamentalists, who
believe the United States should be
a distinctively Christian nation.
56 Foreign
This content downloaded from 186.28.232.27 on Tue, 03 Oct 2017 06:02:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
"God Breeds Violence and Intolerance/7
No, humans do. For Hitchens in God Is Not Great, religion is inherently
"violent... intolerant, allied to racism, tribalism and bigotry"; even so-called
moderates are guilty by association. Yet it is not God or religion but violence
itself?inherent in human nature?that breeds violence. As a species, we survived
by killing and eating other animals; we also murder our own kind. So pervasive
is this violence that it leaks into most scriptures, though these aggressive pas
sages have always been balanced and held in check by other texts that promote
a compassionate ethic based on the Golden Rule: Treat others as you would like
them to treat you. Despite manifest failings over the centuries, this has remained
the orthodox position.
In claiming that God is the source of all human cruelty, Hitchens and Dawkins
ignore some of the darker facets of modern secular society, which has been
spectacularly violent because our technology has enabled us to kill people on an
unprecedented scale. Not surprisingly, religion has absorbed this belligerence, as
became hideously clear with the September 11 atrocities.
But "religious" wars, no matter how modern the tools, always begin as politi
cal ones. This happened in Europe during the 17th century, and it has happened
today in the Middle East, where the Palestinian national movement has evolved
from a leftist-secular to an increasingly Islamically articulated nationalism. Even
the actions of so-called jihadists have been inspired by politics, not God. In a
study of suicide attacks between 1980 and 2004, American scholar Robert Pape
concluded that 95 percent were motivated by a clear strategic objective: to force
modern democracies to withdraw from territory the assailants regard as their
national homeland.
This aggression does not represent the faith of the majority, however. In recent
Gallup polling conducted in 35 Muslim countries, only 7 percent of those ques
tioned thought that the September 11 attacks were justified. Their reasons were
entirely political.
Fundamentalism is not conservative. Rather, it is highly innovative?even
heretical?because it always develops in response to a perceived crisis. In their
anxiety, some fundamentalists distort the tradition they are trying to defend.
The Pakistani ideologue Abu Ala Maududi (1903-1979) was the first major
Muslim thinker to make jihad, signifying "holy war" instead of the traditional
meaning of "struggle" or "striving" for self-betterment, a central Islamic duty.
Both he and the influential Egyptian thinker Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966) were
fully aware that this was extremely controversial but believed it was justified
by Western imperialism and the secularizing policies of rulers such as Egyptian
President Gamal Abdel Nasser.
All fundamentalism?whether Jewish, Christian, or Muslim?is rooted in a
profound fear of annihilation. Qutb developed his ideology in the concentration
camps where Nasser interred thousands of the Muslim Brothers. History shows
that when these groups are attacked, militarily or verbally, they almost invari
ably become more extreme.
Policy
 Think Again: God ]=

"God Is for the Poor

and Ignorant."
. The new atheists insist vehe
mently that religion is puerile and
irrational, belonging, as Hitchens ar
gues, to "the infancy of our society."
This reflects the broader disappoint
ment among Western intellectuals that
humanity, confronted with appar
ently unlimited choice and prosperity,
should still rely on what Karl Marx
called the "opiate" of the masses.
But God refuses to be outgrown,
even in the United States, the richest
country in the world and the most reli
gious country in the developed world.
None of the major religions is averse
to business; each developed initially in
a nascent market economy. The Bible
and the Koran may have prohibited
usury, but over the centuries Jews,
Christians, and Muslims all found
ways of getting around this restriction
and produced thriving economies. It is
one of the great ironies of religious his
tory that Christianity, whose founder
taught that it was impossible to serve
both God and mammon, should have
produced the cultural environment
that, as Max Weber suggested in his
1905 book, The Protestant Ethic and
the Spirit of Capitalism, was integral to
modern capitalism.
Still, the current financial crisis
"God Is Bad for Women."
shows that the religious critique of
excessive greed is far from irrelevant. It is unfortunately true that none of the major world religions
Although not opposed to business, has been good for women. Even when a tradition began positively for
the major faith traditions have tried to women (as in Christianity and Islam), within a few generations men
counterbalance some of the abuses of dragged it back to the old patriarchy. But this is changing. Women in all
capitalism. Eastern religions, such as faiths are challenging their men on the grounds of the egalitarianism that
Buddhism, by means of yoga and other is one of the best characteristics of all these religious traditions.
disciplines, try to moderate the ag One of the hallmarks of modernity has been the emancipation of wom
gressive acquisitiveness of the human en. But that has meant that in their rebellion against the modern ethos,
psyche. The three monotheistic faiths fundamentalists tend to overemphasize traditional gender roles. Unfortu
have inveighed against the injustice nately, frontal assaults on this patriarchal trend have often proven coun
of unevenly distributed wealth?a terproductive. Whenever "modernizing" governments have tried to ban
critique that speaks directly to the gap the veil, for example, women have rushed in ever greater numbers to put
between rich and poor in our society. it on. In 1935, Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi commanded his soldiers to
To recover from the ill effects of shoot hundreds of unarmed demonstrators who were peacefully protesting
the last year, we may need exactly against obligatory Western dress in Mashhad, one of Iran's holiest shrines.
that conquest of egotism that has Such actions have turned veiling, which was not a universal practice before
always been essential in the quest for the modern period, into a symbol of Islamic integrity. Some Muslims today
the transcendence we call "God." claim that it is not essential to look Western in order to be modern and
Religion is not simply a matter of sub that while Western fashion often displays wealth and privilege, Islamic
scribing to a set of obligatory beliefs; dress emphasizes the egalitarianism of the Koran.
it is hard work, requiring a ceaseless In general, any direct Western intervention in gender matters has back
effort to get beyond the selfishness fired; it would be better to support indigenous Muslim movements that are
that prevents us from achieving a agitating for greater opportunities for improved women's rights in educa
more humane humanity. tion, the workplace, and politics.

This content downloaded from 186.28.232.27 on Tue, 03 Oct 2017 06:02:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Think Again: God

"God Is the Enemy

of Science."

He doesn't have to be.

Science has become an enemy to fun
damentalist Christians who campaign
against the teaching of evolution in
public schools and stem-cell research
because they seem to conflict with bibli
cal teaching.
But their reading of scripture is un
precedentedly literal. Before the modern
period, few understood the first chapter
of Genesis as an exact account of the
origins of life; until the 17th century,
theologians insisted that if a biblical text
contradicted science, it must be inter
preted allegorically.
The conflict with science is symp
tomatic of a reductive idea of God in
the modern West. Ironically, it was the
empirical emphasis of modern science
that encouraged many to regard God
and religious language as fact rather
than symbol, thus forcing religion
into an overly rational, dogmatic, and
alien literalism.
Popular fundamentalism repre
sents a widespread rebellion against
modernity, and for Christian fun
damentalists, evolution epitomizes
everything that is wrong with the
modern world. It is regarded less as a
scientific theory than a symbol of evil.
But this anti-science bias is far less
common in Judaism and Islam, where
fundamentalist movements have been
sparked more by political issues, such
as the state of Israel, than doctrinal or
scientific ones.
"God Is Incompatible with Democracy."
Samuel Huntington foresaw a "clash of civilizations" between the free
world and Islam, which, he maintained, was inherently averse to democracy.
But at the beginning of the 20th century, nearly all leading Muslim intellectuals
were in love with the West and wanted their countries to look just like Britain
and France. What has alienated many Muslims from the democratic ideal is not
their religion but Western governments' support of autocratic rulers, such as the
Iranian shahs, Saddam Hussein, and Hosni Mubarak, who have denied people
basic human and democratic rights.
The 2007 Gallup poll shows that support for democratic freedoms and women's
rights is widespread in the Muslim world, and many governments are respond
ing?albeit haltingly?to pressures for more political participation. There is, how
ever, resistance to a wholesale adoption of the Western secular model. Many want
to see God reflected more clearly in public life, just as a 2006 Gallup poll revealed
that 46 percent of Americans believe that God should be the source of legislation.
Nor is sharia law the rigid system that many Westerners deplore. Muslim reform
ers, such as Sheikh Ali Gomaa and Tariq Ramadan, argue that it must be reviewed
in the light of changing social circumstances. A fatwa is not universally binding like
a papal edict; rather, it simply expresses the opinion of the mufti who issues it. Mus
lims can choose which fatwas they adopt and thus participate in a flexible free mar
ket of religious thought, just as Americans can choose which church they attend.
Religion may not be the cause of the world's political problems, but we still
need to understand it if we are to solve them. "Whoever took religion seriously!"
exclaimed an exasperated U.S. government official after the Iranian Revolution.
Had policymakers bothered to research contemporary Shiism, the United States
could have avoided serious blunders during that crisis. Religion should be studied
with the same academic impartiality and accuracy as the economy, politics, and
social customs of a region, so that we learn how religion interacts with political
tension, what is counterproductive, and how to avoid giving unnecessary offense.
And study it we'd better, for God is back. And if "he" is perceived in an idola
trous, literal-minded way, we can only expect more dogmatism, rigidity, and
religiously articulated violence in the decades ahead. G?

WANT TO KNOW MORE?

Karen Armstrong has spent the past 25
years writing about the centrality of religion to
the human experience. Before her most recent
book, The Case for God (New York: Knopf,
2009), she wrote The Bible: A Biography
(New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2007), an
account of the not entirely orthodox way that
the Bible came into being.
Over the last few years, the so-called New
Atheists have become increasingly vocal about
the dangerous shortcomings of religion in such
books as Sam Harris' The End of Faith: Reli
gion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (New
York: W.W. Norton, 2004), Richard Dawkins'
The God Delusion (New York: Houghton Mif
flin, 2006), and Christopher Hitchens' God Is
Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
(New York: Hachette Book Group, 2007).
Recently, some books have sought out
a middle ground between atheism and
fundamentalism. These include Robert
Wright's The Evolution of God (New York:
Little, Brown and Company, 2009), which
incorporates evolutionary psychology to
explain shifts in belief over time, and Econo
mist editors John Micklethwait and Adrian
Wooldridge's God is Back (New York: Pen
guin, 2009), examining the curiously vital
relationship between modernity and religion.
Religion scholar John Esposito and polling
expert Dalia Mogahed argue in Who Speaks
for Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really
Think (New York: Gallup Press, 2007), a book
based on more than 50,000 interviews in
Muslim countries, that Westerners have been
getting Islam wrong for decades.

60 Foreign Policy

This content downloaded from 186.28.232.27 on Tue, 03 Oct 2017 06:02:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms