Look at the Abrahamic God all three have. The Koran out of the three books, has the same bloodthirsty gang leader Mafia boss of a god. The thing that makes the Koran harder for followers to break their grip on is that it has the added vile naked assertion that it would be the final book in the trilogy of the books. And while all three depict violence towards dissent and outside tribes, the Koran has the most depictions of violence.
But hero motifs are the core characters of all three. You have a head god in all three that bribe's followers with a afterlife utopia, and promises to protect the tribe from threats and rewords the respective tribe members for loyalty to the tribe.
The truth is they are all the same God character, and Christianity and Islam are merely spin offs of the Hebrew god Yahweh, but even his character was taken from Canaanite polytheism and was a lesser god in that polytheism as part of a "divine family".
Gods of antiquity reflect the tribal times and kingships of the time. Humans lived under feudal kingships and those kings falsely attributed their power and success to the divine. "Prophets" and savior ideas were never unique to monotheism. The human desire to be protected and the gap filling of those desires is what caused humans to create comic book answers as a place card because of their own scientific ignorance.
Islam currently has the biggest problem because it has not had it's age of Enlightenment, but Christianity was once as barbaric as we see far too much of the middle east still is. It' isn't that individuals in the east are nt capable of compassion, that is in our species genes. It is that they are still stuck in the past.
Even in the west, to know Christianity is still a volcano too, you still see the attempts at religious law and sexist laws to control the bodies of women and religious based homophobia. If secular law in the west was suddenly removed, it would not take long for Christianity to regress back into the barbarity of the dark ages.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali makes the same case about the difference between Mecca and Medina when it comes to the competing sects of Islam. But that really is no different than Protestants and Catholics, liberals vs conservatives.
I always hear people from all religions argue the complexities of their respective religions and sects, and yes, it is complex and historians are needed to untangle that mess. But the idea of grouping around a god claim or holy books or holy writings, will always end up creating divisions.
But hero motifs are the core characters of all three. You have a head god in all three that bribe's followers with a afterlife utopia, and promises to protect the tribe from threats and rewords the respective tribe members for loyalty to the tribe.
The truth is they are all the same God character, and Christianity and Islam are merely spin offs of the Hebrew god Yahweh, but even his character was taken from Canaanite polytheism and was a lesser god in that polytheism as part of a "divine family".
Gods of antiquity reflect the tribal times and kingships of the time. Humans lived under feudal kingships and those kings falsely attributed their power and success to the divine. "Prophets" and savior ideas were never unique to monotheism. The human desire to be protected and the gap filling of those desires is what caused humans to create comic book answers as a place card because of their own scientific ignorance.
Islam currently has the biggest problem because it has not had it's age of Enlightenment, but Christianity was once as barbaric as we see far too much of the middle east still is. It' isn't that individuals in the east are nt capable of compassion, that is in our species genes. It is that they are still stuck in the past.
Even in the west, to know Christianity is still a volcano too, you still see the attempts at religious law and sexist laws to control the bodies of women and religious based homophobia. If secular law in the west was suddenly removed, it would not take long for Christianity to regress back into the barbarity of the dark ages.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali makes the same case about the difference between Mecca and Medina when it comes to the competing sects of Islam. But that really is no different than Protestants and Catholics, liberals vs conservatives.
I always hear people from all religions argue the complexities of their respective religions and sects, and yes, it is complex and historians are needed to untangle that mess. But the idea of grouping around a god claim or holy books or holy writings, will always end up creating divisions.
