PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY
5/25/2012

Taking actions based on perceived words of God

Ben Texter
Contributing Writer

In terms of Judaism and Christianity, Abraham was an upstanding man of faith. The story of the near-sacrifice of his son, Isaac, is universally recognized as being a classic example of a pure and untarnished faith.

For anyone unfamiliar with the story, it is found in Genesis 22. In the passage, God orders Abraham to sacrifice his one and only son, Isaac, on Mount Moriah. Because of Abraham’s uncompromising faith in God, he accepts this inescapable responsibility and ascends Mount Moriah with “the wood and the fire,” and Isaac. Then, as Abraham raised the knife above Isaac’s chest, God called from the heavens and tells Abraham he no longer needed to kill Isaac.

One needn’t look far to find a similar story in modern times. One must only open the 9/11 Commission Report. Having read the report, I came to realize that the hijackers of the 9/11 flights and Abraham seem to have similar stories. Scary thought. Is it blasphemous to think of Abraham as a potential murderer and think of the terrorists as exemplars of faith?

Just like Abraham, the hijackers had an uncompromising faith. They believed entirely that Allah’s will and their actions were inseparable. The attacks they carried out were obligations of faith.

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, the black box of United Airlines flight 175 recorded the hijackers screaming, “Allah is the greatest, Allah is the greatest” while the flight spiraled toward the ground. Replacing Allah with God, these lines are very familiar — Convocation, chapel, Won-by-One? These Muslim terrorists were waging what they believed to be a form of holy war on the United States. They felt and sensed, in some way, that Allah was commanding them to sacrifice not only their “enemy,” but also sacrifice their own lives.

I am by no means suggesting that Islam justifies these actions; however, for these hikackers, Allah appeared to have legitimized their actions. 

Let me now refer you to Joshua 8:8 — the Hebrew holy war fought by Joshua against Ai. In this passage God commands Joshua, “And it shall be, when ye have taken the city, that ye shall set the city on fire: according to the commandment of the Lord shall ye do. See, I have commanded you.”

Here we run into a problem. Two distinct faiths, more particularly religions, are both making absolute, mutually exclusive claims. If there is truth in the terrorists’ claims that Allah is commanding them, then both Joshua’s and Abraham’s claims must be wrong considering the monotheistic structure of the two faiths.

Whether the actions of either the terrorists or Joshua were truly guided by God is irrelevant. It is a futile effort to decide which act of faith is valid. It is important to consider the logical consequences of thinking in terms of any god commanding any individual’s life.

Both the terrorists and Abraham believed that God was directly leading them — both appeared to have listened to God for advice and incorporated his will or calling into their own lives. It is frightening to think that both Abraham and the terrorists doubtlessly believed that God commanded them — especially when one, if not both, must be misled.

Keeping on this line of thought, it can be assumed that a command from the god of the ‘wrong’ religion is simply a figment of the imagination. If Abraham was correct, then the terrorists must be mentally deranged and if the terrorists were right then Abraham must be considered a potential murderer. Basically, if the terrorists are wrong in their beliefs, than is Abraham wrong in his thinking as well?

Granted, Abraham may have thought that his faith was correct — but could he have been absolutely positive?  How can Abraham and the terrorists both be right? Is it pragmatic to think of faith in terms of right and wrong, black and white? Unfortunately, when faith is manipulated in these terms, both the gods of different faiths and the peoples of different faiths cannot coexist. Terrorism is a result of this manipulation. Similarly, so is evangelism.

As a result, there is value in religious pluralism. If two faiths want to live simultaneously, it is imperative that the people learn from one another. Otherwise, they will perpetuate the natural, inherent conflict that exists between opposing faiths.  

Submitted 2-24-2005