How morally different are ISIS fighters from us? If we had a similar upbringing would we think it morally correct to kill Yazidi children for having the “wrong” religion?
A relevant factor which is (intentionally or not) ignored by American media is that, from the point of view of pious Muslims, Yazidis are satanists.
To quote Wikipedia (Taus Melek is basically the chief deity for Yazidis, God the Creator being passive and uninvolved with the world):
As a demiurge figure, Tawûsê Melek is often identified by orthodox Muslims as a Shaitan (Satan), a Muslim term denoting a devil or demon who deceives true believers. The Islamic tradition regarding the fall of “Shaitan” from Grace is in fact very similar to the Yazidi story of Malek Taus – that is, the Jinn who refused to submit to God by bowing to Adam is celebrated as Tawûsê Melek by Yazidis, but the Islamic version of the same story curses the same Jinn who refused to submit as becoming Satan.[38] Thus, the Yazidi have been accused of devil worship.
So, what’s the Christianity’s historical record for attitude towards devil worshippers?
or at least I don’t want to belong to the same species as them
Any particular reason you feel this way about the Sunni armed groups, but not about, say, Russian communists, or Mao’s Chinese, or Pol Pot’s Cambodians, or Rwandans, or… it’s a very long list, y’know?
from the point of view of pious Muslims, Yazidis are satanists [...] what’s the Christianity’s historical record for attitude towards devil worshippers?
The closest parallel might be to Catharism, a Gnostic-influenced sect treating the God of the Old Testament as an entity separate from, and opposed to, the God of the New, and which was denounced as a “religion of Satan” by contemporary Christian authorities. That was bloodily suppressed in the Albigensian Crusade. Manicheanism among other early Gnostic groups was similarly accused as well, but it’s much older and less well documented, and reached its greatest popularity (and experienced its greatest persecutions) in areas without Christian majorities.
A few explicitly Satanist groups have popped up since the 18th century, but they’ve universally been small and insignificant, and don’t seem to have experienced much persecution outside of social disapproval. Outside of fundamentalist circles they seem to be treated as immature and insincere more than anything else.
On the other hand, unfounded accusations of Satanism seem to be fertile ground for moral panics—from the witch trials of the early modern period (which, Wiccan lore notwithstanding, almost certainly didn’t target any particular belief system) to the more recent Satanic ritual abuse panics.
The persecution of witches targeted individuals or small groups, not (as far as modern history knows) members of any particular religion; and the charges leveled at alleged witches usually involved sorcerous misbehavior of various kinds (blighting crops, causing storms, bringing pestilence...) rather than purely religious accusations. Indeed, for most of the medieval era the Church denied the existence of witches (though, as we’ve seen above, it was happy to persecute real heretics): witch trials only gained substantial clerical backing well into the early modern period.
Charges of being in league with the Devil were a necessary part of accusations against the witches because, I think, sorcery was considered to be possible for humans only through the Devil’s help. The witches’ covens were perceived as actively worshipping the Devil.
I agree that it’s not the exact parallel, but do you think a whole community (with towns and everything) of devil worshippers could have survived in Europe or North America for any significant period of time? Compared to Islam, Christianity was just more quick and efficient about eliminating them.
I agree that it’s not the exact parallel, but do you think a whole community (with towns and everything) of devil worshippers could have survived in Europe or North America for any significant period of time?
That veers more into speculation than I’m really comfortable with. That said, though, I think you’re giving this devil-worship thing a bit more weight than it should have; sure, some aspects of Melek Taus are probably cognate to the Islamic Shaitan myth, but Yazidi religion as a whole seems to draw in traditions from several largely independent evolutionary paths. We’re not dealing here with the almost certainly innocent targets of witch trials or with overenthusiastic black metal fans, nor even with an organized Islamic heresy, but with a full-blown syncretic religion.
No similar religions of comparable age survive in Christianity’s present sphere of influence, though the example of Gnosticism suggests that the early evolution of the Western branch of Abrahamic faith was pretty damn complicated, and that many were wiped out in Christianity’s early expansion or in medieval persecutions. There are a lot of younger ones, however, especially in the New World: Santeria comes to mind.
That’s only tangentially relevant to the historical parallels I’m trying to outline, though.
Oh, it certainly is, but the issue is not what we are dealing with—the issue is how the ISIS fighters perceive it.
The whole Middle-East-to-India region is full of smallish religions which look to be, basically, outcomes of “Throw pieces of several distinct religious traditions together, blend on high for a while, then let sit for a few centuries”.
Oh, it certainly is, but the issue is not what we are dealing with—the issue is how the ISIS fighters perceive it.
I’m pretty sure their perceptions are closer to an Albigensian Crusader’s attitude toward Catharism—or even your average Chick tract fan’s attitude toward Catholicism—than some shit-kicking medieval peasant’s grudge toward the old man down the lane who once scammed him for a folk healing ritual that invoked a couple of barbarous names for shock value. Treating religious opponents as devil-worshippers is pretty much built into the basic structure of (premodern, and some modern) Christianity and Islam, whether or not there’s anything to the accusation (though as I note above, the charge is at least as sticky for Catharism as for the Yazidi). The competing presence of a structured religion that’s related closely enough to be uncomfortable but not closely enough to be a heresy per se… that’s a little more distinctive.
Although I’m a libertarian now, in my youth I was very left-wing and can understand the appeal of communism. For many of the others on the long list, yes they do feel very other to me.
I too was very left-wing when I was young, and now I feel communism does belong with the others on that list. It fills the same mental space as a religion, and is believed in much the same way (IME).
A relevant factor which is (intentionally or not) ignored by American media is that, from the point of view of pious Muslims, Yazidis are satanists.
To quote Wikipedia (Taus Melek is basically the chief deity for Yazidis, God the Creator being passive and uninvolved with the world):
So, what’s the Christianity’s historical record for attitude towards devil worshippers?
Any particular reason you feel this way about the Sunni armed groups, but not about, say, Russian communists, or Mao’s Chinese, or Pol Pot’s Cambodians, or Rwandans, or… it’s a very long list, y’know?
The closest parallel might be to Catharism, a Gnostic-influenced sect treating the God of the Old Testament as an entity separate from, and opposed to, the God of the New, and which was denounced as a “religion of Satan” by contemporary Christian authorities. That was bloodily suppressed in the Albigensian Crusade. Manicheanism among other early Gnostic groups was similarly accused as well, but it’s much older and less well documented, and reached its greatest popularity (and experienced its greatest persecutions) in areas without Christian majorities.
A few explicitly Satanist groups have popped up since the 18th century, but they’ve universally been small and insignificant, and don’t seem to have experienced much persecution outside of social disapproval. Outside of fundamentalist circles they seem to be treated as immature and insincere more than anything else.
On the other hand, unfounded accusations of Satanism seem to be fertile ground for moral panics—from the witch trials of the early modern period (which, Wiccan lore notwithstanding, almost certainly didn’t target any particular belief system) to the more recent Satanic ritual abuse panics.
I would probably say that the closest parallel is the persecution of witches in medieval Europe (including but not limited to the witch trials).
The persecution of witches targeted individuals or small groups, not (as far as modern history knows) members of any particular religion; and the charges leveled at alleged witches usually involved sorcerous misbehavior of various kinds (blighting crops, causing storms, bringing pestilence...) rather than purely religious accusations. Indeed, for most of the medieval era the Church denied the existence of witches (though, as we’ve seen above, it was happy to persecute real heretics): witch trials only gained substantial clerical backing well into the early modern period.
Seems pretty different to me.
Charges of being in league with the Devil were a necessary part of accusations against the witches because, I think, sorcery was considered to be possible for humans only through the Devil’s help. The witches’ covens were perceived as actively worshipping the Devil.
I agree that it’s not the exact parallel, but do you think a whole community (with towns and everything) of devil worshippers could have survived in Europe or North America for any significant period of time? Compared to Islam, Christianity was just more quick and efficient about eliminating them.
That veers more into speculation than I’m really comfortable with. That said, though, I think you’re giving this devil-worship thing a bit more weight than it should have; sure, some aspects of Melek Taus are probably cognate to the Islamic Shaitan myth, but Yazidi religion as a whole seems to draw in traditions from several largely independent evolutionary paths. We’re not dealing here with the almost certainly innocent targets of witch trials or with overenthusiastic black metal fans, nor even with an organized Islamic heresy, but with a full-blown syncretic religion.
No similar religions of comparable age survive in Christianity’s present sphere of influence, though the example of Gnosticism suggests that the early evolution of the Western branch of Abrahamic faith was pretty damn complicated, and that many were wiped out in Christianity’s early expansion or in medieval persecutions. There are a lot of younger ones, however, especially in the New World: Santeria comes to mind.
That’s only tangentially relevant to the historical parallels I’m trying to outline, though.
Oh, it certainly is, but the issue is not what we are dealing with—the issue is how the ISIS fighters perceive it.
The whole Middle-East-to-India region is full of smallish religions which look to be, basically, outcomes of “Throw pieces of several distinct religious traditions together, blend on high for a while, then let sit for a few centuries”.
I’m pretty sure their perceptions are closer to an Albigensian Crusader’s attitude toward Catharism—or even your average Chick tract fan’s attitude toward Catholicism—than some shit-kicking medieval peasant’s grudge toward the old man down the lane who once scammed him for a folk healing ritual that invoked a couple of barbarous names for shock value. Treating religious opponents as devil-worshippers is pretty much built into the basic structure of (premodern, and some modern) Christianity and Islam, whether or not there’s anything to the accusation (though as I note above, the charge is at least as sticky for Catharism as for the Yazidi). The competing presence of a structured religion that’s related closely enough to be uncomfortable but not closely enough to be a heresy per se… that’s a little more distinctive.
It hasn’t been ignored by the American media. I’ve heard it multiple times. I don’t think the term used was Satanist, but “devil worshippers”.
Although I’m a libertarian now, in my youth I was very left-wing and can understand the appeal of communism. For many of the others on the long list, yes they do feel very other to me.
I too was very left-wing when I was young, and now I feel communism does belong with the others on that list. It fills the same mental space as a religion, and is believed in much the same way (IME).
Take some ISIS propaganda and do s/infidels/capitalist exploiters, s/Allah/the revolution, etc.