Making Sense of Beliefs

Your god?

What do you believe?  There is a God?  No god?  How about a God who sacrificed His Son for the benefit of mankind or, childless, send a final prophet with blueprints for how people are supposed to live?

Something else?

There are so many choices: religions with no gods or with thousands of them.

Why would anyone believe any of these claims?  People obviously do.  In fact, they’ll willingly kill someone who attacks their faith and, in some cases, will eagerly try to impose their belief on everyone else.  They’ll even faithfully deny clear, contrary scientific and historical evidence in order to hold onto their faith.

Sunrise

There are several reasons for such obstinate behavior:

To begin with, humans like answers.  Why does the sun rise in the East?  Why is the sky blue?  You name it, we want to know.  Science has found many of the answers, including the orbit of our planet around the Sun, and the way that colors are perceived.  We know the origin of lightning and thunder, how life began and a lot more.

Some things we will never know, such as what happens after death, is there a soul, does sin really exist?  For those puzzlers, we invent answers.  Those answers take on a special quality because they are our answers, as opposed to answers provided by someone else.

Early family

That’s because humans evolved in small family groups.  In order to survive, we developed the ability to go along with the family.  Lone humans, not blessed with fangs or sharp claws, had little chance to survive away from the clan.

Of course, our answers to the unanswerable questions then became dogma in contrast with answers provided by other human families. 

That dichotomy continues today, just on a larger scale.  Religions are bigger and radiate worldwide; so are families that espouse one belief ahead of another.

Bathing in the Ganges

In addition, those answers provide a helpful framework in a very confusing world.   Many people need that.  If they follow these guidelines – fast 30 days in a row, eat the body and blood of a god, bathe in the polluted Ganges River and so on – all will be well. How easy.  How simple.  The rest of reality becomes a blur of meaningless noise.

Another reason has to do with how we treat people who provide our answers.  Our religious representatives supposedly have some special knowledge or contact with a higher authority.  As a result, people longing for such ego-stroking happily join the accepted religion and strongly support its views.  Their social standing and self-esteem depend on that.  

Pryce

In contrast, an imam carries no status in a community that does not recognize the Muslim faith.  That’s equally true for a pope, who could be mistaken for actor Jonathan Pryce while touring a non-Catholic locale.  

Francis

In addition, there’s something called plausibility.  People believe because the accepted paradigm is not completely plausible.  That’s why the Da Vinci Code, a novel with no basis in fact, attracted so many people who find the Christian  historical claims difficult to swallow.

In another example, I was recently reading where some conspiratorial theorists are insisting 9/11 was an “inside” job.  That’s despite all the evidence that the attacks were plotted by a small group of Islamic terrorists then in Pakistan.  Why?  Because the theorists don’t trust the government and prefer to accept an outlandish, alternative theory that seems more “plausible.” 

Kennedy with his wife

The same process is involved with hard-core believers who tout alternative assassins of President John Kennedy.

Both conspiracies collapse when you realize that, for the theories to be accurate, they must have included thousands of people, an impossibility for any conspiracy.

Unfortunately, such facts won’t puncture beliefs.  That’s understandable since beliefs come with such emotional links to both our past and our present.  To deny them would be to reject ourselves, something only the few with strong identities can endure.

People who finally recognize that what they believe simply can’t be true often find themselves foundering emotionally and psychologically.  As one ex-Mormon leader noted that, when he finally understood that Church teachings were inaccurate, he felt as though he had been “kicked in the stomach.”  Months late, he still could not decide what he believed.

For most others, even as reality closes in, they continue to believe.  They often adopt an attitude that one friend who became an Orthodox Jew told me: “I made up my mind.  Don’t bother me with the facts.” 

That’s belief’s greatest asset: no facts required.

Long-time religious historian Bill Lazarus regularly writes about religion and religious history.  He also speaks at various religious organizations throughout Florida.  You can reach him at www.williamplazarus.com.  He is the author of the famed Unauthorized Biography of Nostradamus; The Last Testament of Simon Peter; The Gospel Truth: Where Did the Gospel Writers Get Their Information; Noel: The Lore and Tradition of Christmas Carols; and Dummies Guide to Comparative Religion.  His books are available on Amazon.com, Kindle, bookstores and via various publishers.  He can also be followed on Twitter.

Bill is now teaching religious history classes in DeLand.  To sign up, contact him at williamplazarus@aol.com/

You can enroll in his on-line class, Comparative Religion for Dummies, at http://www.udemy.com/comparative-religion-for-dummies/?promote=1

No Comparison in Gaza

The real bullet?

The on and off battles between the Palestinians and the Israelis in Gaza has unleashed far more than a deadly rockets.  There has been a torrent of propaganda from both sides.  In one example, a distraught Palestinian shows off a bullet he says killed his son.  The Israelis release a video tape that shows the gun involved only contained rubber bullets and noted that even if a bullet hit the boy, it would have been mashed by the impact and could not look perfect.  

Who’s right?  Probably no one.

To complicate matters even more, commentators representing both sides have opted for absurd comparisons, demeaning both history and themselves in the process.

A Palestinian group insisted that the death of their countrymen somehow equated with the “blood libel” that has been a favorite canard against Jews for centuries.  Someone else compared the battles in Gaza to the events in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising; another claimed that the Israelis are creating another holocaust.

All of that is plain nonsense.

No blood in matzoh

For starters, Jewish law forbids eating blood.  Jews invented humane killing of animals – essentially draining of blood – to avoid transgressing against that biblical injunction.  Miftah, a Palestinian organization founded by a Palestinian politician and funded by European and Western governments, published an article in its newsletter that used the noxious and ridiculous claim that Jews need blood for their ritualistic spring meal.

The reference to a “blood libel” comes from the Middle Ages when Christians accused Jews of needing the blood of children to make matzoh for Passover.  Such a claim was horrific and created simply as an excuse to kill Jews.

Eating Jesus

Ironically, during Communion, Catholics claim to be eating the blood and body of Jesus.  Somehow, Jews were accused of doing something Catholics freely choose to do at every Mass.

The Warsaw Ghetto comparison refers to the four-month uprising that ended in April 1943.  Thousands of Jews had been forced into a ghetto in Warsaw and faced liquidation.  As a result, they used whatever weapons they could find or make and stymied the Nazis for a while.

There’s no comparison to Gaza in any way.  The Palestinians are free to leave. The Egyptian border is open to residents with valid passports.  Palestinians study abroad.  I met one at Embry-Riddle when I taught there.  Some were definitely forced out of the new state of Israel in 1948, but they could have gone anywhere.  They were not required to live in Gaza because of their religion.  There are Muslims in Israel.  There are Christians in Gaza.

Tunnels in Warsaw and in Gaza were cited as a key element of that comparison.

Fighters in Warsaw used sewers

Polish Jews more than70 years ago didn’t build tunnels.  They crawled through existing sewers in a desperate effort to attack the Nazi army.  The Palestinians created dozens of tunnels for only one reason – to infiltrate and to murder.  Hamas could have devoted the manpower and money used to construct tunnels to help residents there to enjoy better lives.  Instead, they have followed a Nazi-like approach – try to kill everyone they hate.

Using the Holocaust in a comparison is even more insidious.  Nazis butchered around 6 million Jews for only one reason – their religion.  They killed everyone who might have one relative who was Jewish, relying on a discredited science called eugenics.  Nothing remotely close has happened in Gaza.  Israel has used blockades to try to stop militants, not poison gas pellets.  

Even the latest bloodshed, Israel distributed flyers in hopes of warning civilians away from targets.

Moreover, despite off-claimed comments to the contrary, Israel doesn’t control Gaza.  Its army pulled out in 2005.  Israeli citizens who had built homes in Gaza were evicted then.  Hamas joined with another political group, Fatah, to set up political control.  Their solution was to build more tunnels and fire more rockets.  As a result, Israel closed the border, an understandable solution practiced by nations worldwide and a proposed answer to the influx of Latin American refugees into this country.

Neither the blockade nor constant rocket attacks are going to end the bloodshed.  Israel and the Palestinians have to reach a political solution, one that involves the rights of all residents to live freely without fear of surprise attacks. 

At a recent Unitarian presentation, I was asked if I thought such a solution was possible.  I said no until both sides have to come to the conclusion that further bloodshed is futile.  Both sides have to look beyond the atrocities of the past to focus on making better lives for everyone in the future.

The end of the war in Northern Ireland

That has happened before in recent memory.  Northern Ireland was convulsed by religion-fueled wars for decades before finally resolving to stop in 2005.  The same accords were reached in the past when warring European countries gave up their battles over Catholic or Protestant faiths.  

Those are comparisons that the warring Israelis and Palestinians should consider and not the outdated arguments that continue to keep them at each others' throats.

Long-time religious historian Bill Lazarus regularly writes about religion and religious history.  He also speaks at various religious organizations throughout Florida.  You can reach him at www.williamplazarus.net.  He is the author of the famed Unauthorized Biography of Nostradamus; The Last Testament of Simon Peter; The Gospel Truth: Where Did the Gospel Writers Get Their Information; Noel: The Lore and Tradition of Christmas Carols; and Dummies Guide to Comparative Religion.  His books are available on Amazon.com, Kindle, bookstores and via various publishers.  He can also be followed on Twitter.

You can enroll in his on-line class, Comparative Religion for Dummies, at http://www.udemy.com/comparative-religion-for-dummies/?promote=1

Israel's Right to Exist

UN vote in 1947

One of my friends both on and off Facebook has been posting his usual anti-Israel canards.  His latest, however, really goes too far.  He claims that Israel doesn’t really exist and that it’s a myth that the country was created by the United Nations.

That’s rubbish.

Israel was created by a vote of the United Nations in November 1947.  The reports fill the archives of both media and the United Nations.  The New York Times may make an occasional mistake, but it doesn’t report mythology as truth.

Here is a sample report:

The General Assembly voted, 33-13, in favor of partition, with 10 members, including Britain, abstaining. The six Arab nations in the General Assembly staged a walkout in protest.  The New York Times reported: “The walkout of the Arab delegates was taken as a clear indication that the Palestinian Arabs would have nothing to do with the Assembly’s decision. The British have emphasized repeatedly that British troops could not be used to impose a settlement not acceptable to both Jews and Arabs, and the partition plan does not provide outside military force to keep order. Instead, it provides for the establishment of armed militia by the two nascent states to keep internal order.”

This is how the Arab world saw the partitioning of Palestine.

The United Nations recommended dividing Palestine between Arabs and Jews. The plan was published in November 1947. The Arabs immediately rejected partition, because they believed that Palestine was theirs by right. The Plan also appeared to favor the Jews. Although the population of Palestine was about 60 percent Arab, the Jews received more than half of the land and the more fertile areas as well. The Arabs were allotted areas that were mostly desert.

Irgun

As the British withdrew, the Palestinians fought to gain control of every town. On the other side, Israeli terrorist gangs, the Stern and the Irgun, forced Arabs to leave their homes and flee for their lives. Those who stayed, or tried to fight, were killed, men, women and children. This was a major factor in the bitter hatred that developed between Jews and Arabs.

Nevertheless, the United Nations plan was approved, and preparations began for the new state of Israel.

For their part, the Israelis announced that Israel would be a secular state; that meant that religion would have no influence, and that all people living within its borders would have the full rights of citizenship. In other words, although Israel was being created as a homeland for Jews, Arabs would qualify as citizens and be able to vote and stand for the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. This did not satisfy many Arabs. They did not want to live in Israel. They wanted a state of their own.

On 14 May 1948 the Israeli Prime Minister, David Ben Gurion, announced the creation of the state of Israel. There was great rejoicing in Tel Aviv, but the Arab governments in the surrounding countries objected to the new state and tried to destroy it. On 15 May 1948 the armies of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Transjordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt attacked Israel.

There’s no question that Israel was created as a direct result of the United Nations vote.  Certainly, the Arab countries understood what the vote meant as did every other nation.  Supporters and opponents fought bitterly to woo ambassadors to their side, offering bribes and presents.  The Israeli side won.

My friend is correct that General Assembly resolutions are not enforceable.  In this case, the partition resolution (181) was never acted on by the Security Council.  That doesn’t make the Resolution invalid.  Its decision still stands.  A resolution is binding whether or not the Security Council votes.  Resolutions are often ignored.  This one was acted on.

 

The Resolution divided the ancient land into three units: 

1)      A Jewish state covering 56.47 percent of Mandatory Palestine (excluding Jerusalem) with a population of 498,000 Jews and 325,000 Arabs;

2)      An Arab state covering 43.53% of Mandatory Palestine (excluding Jerusalem), with 807,000 Arab inhabitants and 10,000 Jewish inhabitants;

3)      An international trusteeship regime in Jerusalem, where the population was 100,000 Jews and 105,000 Arabs.

The partition plan also included these points:

4)      A guarantee of the rights of minorities and religious rights, including free access to and the preservation of Holy Places;

5)      A constitution of an economic union between the two states: custom union, joint monetary system, joint administration of main services, equal access to water and energy resources.

The British Mandate allowing England to control Palestine ended May 14, 1948.  As a result, that day, Israel declared its existence.  

 The published statement reads:

Accordingly, we, members of the People’s Council, representatives of the Jewish community of Eretz-Israel and of the Zionist movement, are here assembled on the day of the termination of the British Mandate over Eretz-Israel and, by virtue of our natural and historic right and on the strength of the Resolution of the United Nations General Assembly, do hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel, to be known as the State of Israel.

Zionist leaders had already established a shadow government, which promptly took control.  

The residents of southern Syria, as Palestine was usually called, were actually supposed to choose which portion of the divided land they wished to join, but, of course, that was only wistful thinking.  After all, Zionists made no secret that they didn’t want a large Arab population, and neighboring Arab countries promised swift destruction of the new country.

Without any doubt, some of the tactics on both sides involved terrorism and brutality.

Holocaust victims

That’s deplorable, but the Jewish efforts are at least understandable.  The United Nation’s vote was a direct result of the Holocaust, the murderous efforts by the Nazis to rid Europe of Jews.  Around 6 million of them died.  It’s wholly understandable that Jews would take desperate measures to create a homeland where they would be safe from such vile anti-Semitism, which had been the European norm for close to 1500 years.

No other ethnic group has ever suffered such prolonged mistreatment.

On a personal basis, I would prefer that all ethnic groups gain independence.  That would include the Berbers, the Kurds, the Armenians, the Tamil and many others who have been persecuted.  They have certainly have tried, just as the Jews did.

Maybe, someday, a United Nations resolution will allow these ignored ethnic communities to declare their own legal and unimpeachable creation of a new homeland.

Long-time religious historian Bill Lazarus regularly writes about religion and religious history.  He also speaks at various religious organizations throughout Florida.  You can reach him at www.williamplazarus.net.  He is the author of the famed Unauthorized Biography of Nostradamus; The Last Testament of Simon Peter; The Gospel Truth: Where Did the Gospel Writers Get Their Information; Noel: The Lore and Tradition of Christmas Carols; and Dummies Guide to Comparative Religion.  His books are available on Amazon.com, Kindle, bookstores and via various publishers.  He can also be followed on Twitter.

You can enroll in his on-line class, Comparative Religion for Dummies, at http://www.udemy.com/comparative-religion-for-dummies/?promote=1