(September 29, 2016 at 3:03 pm)mcolafson Wrote: The Bhagavad Gita trial in Russia was a trial that commenced in 2011 about banning the Russian edition of the book, Bhagavad Gita As It Is (1968), a translated version of the Hindu holy text, Bhagavad Gita, on charges of religious extremism. commonly known as the Hare Krishna movement.
Why not put other Holy books on trial?
Most people, or even governments, aren't brave enough to put any of the major religions' holy books or teachings on trial. It would be extremely expensive and there would be such an outcry, threats, etc. In the U.S. we constantly hear about the "war on Christianity" because over the past few decades the courts have taken away the privileges Christian churches claimed in the past. Can you imagine the chaos if we put the Bible on trial? Of course, it could happen to a cult or a minor religion without much ado, but because of our Constitutional freedom of religion, we pretty much let people believe as they wish, unless it is extremely harmful to the community at large or to individuals. For example, courts have ruled against parents who refused medical treatment for their children because they believed prayer was the only way the child would be cured.
If Salmon Rushdie and Ayaan Hirshi Ali had death threats against them for their writings, you can imagine what kinds of terrorism a government would expect if they held a trial on the Quran.
Besides the fact that such a trial of any major religion would cause a zillion problems, it wouldn't change minds. It has been proven that it is almost impossible to change a long-held belief. In fact, when someones' long-held belief is threatened, s/he becomes determined to believe it even more. This applies to politics, racial bigotry, but especially religion.
Most holy books have been questioned often enough that if anyone wanted to read about their flaws and inconsistencies, anyone can find the information. Here are a few sources:
Thomas Paine's "The Age of Reason" questions much about Christianity, including parts of the Bible.
Thomas Jefferson cut apart the pages of the Bibile (I think the New Testement, only) eliminating anything that was supposedly a miracle or went against the laws of nature, leaving only the compassionate teaching of Jesus. The result is known as the Jefferson Bible.
Bart Ehrman, a Biblical historian, studies the Bible and, along with other Biblical scholars, tries to determine where and when various parts of the Bible were written, and by whom if they can figure that out. All of his books are interesting and explain a lot of the inconsistencies that came about by oral tradition, faulty copying, various early sects trying to include their own points of view, a committee deciding what to include and what to leave out, etc. In some cases, stories that had never been in older editions suddenly appeared in newer ones, obviously made up to skew the reader toward a group's or individual's own beliefs.
A blog called "Dwindling in Unbelief" by Steve Wells closely examines how many people God killed versus how many were kiiled by Satan in the Old Testament. (Satan wasn't even close.) Wells has also published an annotated Bible for skeptics and I think he may be working on one for the Quran and/or the Book of Mormon.
“The problem with those who choose received Authority over fact and logic is how they choose which part of Authority to obey. The Bible famously contradicts itself at many points (I have never understood why any Christian would choose the Old Testament over the New), and the Koran can be read as a wonderfully compassionate and humanistic document. Which suggests that the problem of fundamentalism lies not with authority, but with ourselves.” ~Molly Ivins
