<p>
</p>
<p>The word “virtually” seems to allow for Putin (who was anyway pretty severely provoked by NATO). </p>
<p>Virtually synonyms: in effect, effectively, all but, more or less, practically, almost, nearly, close to, approaching, not far from, nearing, verging on, bordering on, well nigh, nigh on, just about, as good as, essentially, in essence, in practical terms, for all practical purposes, to all intents and purposes, in all but name, as near as dammit</p>
<p>I can’t imagine Mormons and Evangelicals secretly conspiring to rule the world. Sounds like a conspiracy theory.
Whereas radical muslims are quite open about their goal of a global Caliphate.
Baha’is do work non-violently towards a Lesser and Greater Peace.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In my case, I was not talking about principles morphing, but in the relaxation or elimination of certain imitations. </p>
<p>For example, in Christianity, it was not until recently that women could perform mass. That is an example of what I meant by morphing. </p>
<p>Modern societies do evolve- and religions with them. I imagine there are some branches of Christianity that don’t have women clergy. Reform and Conservative Judaism do, but Orthodox do not. I remember when Catholic Mass was mostly in Latin and Catholics didn’t eat meat on Friday. Now, I think that is only practiced during Lent. </p>
<p>I have no issues with all the differences. People are different, so why not have different ways of expressing a spiritual connection? Different religious groups are ways people organize into communities. </p>
<p>I guess the problems begin when any of them decide to forcefully take over any others. I wouldn’t want any religious group doing that. Evangelical Christians were mentioned. Not all religions have a mandate to convert others, but it is part of Evangelical Christianity to encourage others to convert. However, it is a giant leap from wanting someone to convert to forcing them to convert or be killed. ISIS is a different ideology altogether. </p>
<p>I’ve lived for years among many Evangelical Christians and even if they wanted me to convert, they aren’t forcing me. I feel quite safe living among them and they are nice neighbors. I doubt I could say the same if ISIS was there too. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>However, there have been other unrelated battles and terrorist attacks, so it is not like the US has been free of such before. For example, a place in Oklahoma was the target of a domestic terrorist attack in 1995 that killed 168 people.</p>
<p>As a note about ISIS, the language they use is meant not only to declare a “caliphate” in today’s world but directly refers to the expansion of Islam, mostly by conquest, after Muhammed’s death. My personal take on that is there’s a lot of self-aggrandizement at work in which the leaders are placing themselves as close to Muhammed as they can get, making themselves into latter-day companions of the Prophet. But that self-aggrandizing also functions as a powerful recruiting device. It’s impossible to tell right now how much is self-delusion and how much is cynical marketing. </p>
<p>I could dig up quotes but don’t have the energy right now. They’re very good with language, at least as translated. They clearly have a core of highly competent people and they seem relatively adept at identifying competence in military commanders. There aren’t many reports from inside ISIS but suggestions are they’ve included people - e.g., Chechens - who have real military experience. Of course this looks good when put up against the pathetic quality of Iraqi soldiers and they heavily outgun Syrian Kurds. </p>
<p>A bit more about Islam’s struggles with modernity. Remember, Islamists who think Saudi Arabia isn’t Islamic enough attacked and held the Grand Mosque in Mecca for 2 months. The leaders declared themselves the redeemer, but think about that: the Wahhabist Saudis who have been oppressing any less strict strain of Islam for decades (and continue to do so) were assaulted for not being Islamic enough. More importantly for today, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hasan al-Banna, was motivated by and preached against Western influence that, in his mind, corrupted Islamic ideals. </p>
<p>Also in today’s world, we’re watching the stepping backwards of Turkey under Erdogan. Remember, Kemal Ataturk established modern, secular Turkey and guaranteed its character through the army. His entire project was to modernize Turkey - which included rights for women. Erdogan has Islamized the military and has essentially removed it from its role as guarantor of secular Turkey. If you want to read something weird, get into Turkey’s financial status, which could perhaps be described as floating on nothing. They have the debt levels of Greece and seem to be supported by money from Gulf oil states. The point there is the worse these issues become the more Erdogan yells about enemies of Islam, from his obsession with Jews to the non-observant Turks. Classic stuff. </p>
<p>In other words, Islam has been unsuccessfully struggling with modernity for well over 100 years. It’s fascinating to me the reaction to failure is to become violent and to insist on more devotion to faith rather than to adopt the methods which others show are the ways to success. I noted in an earlier post the pathetically small number of books translated into Arabic. At each step, the Arabic speaking world - and some of the rest of the Muslim world, though of course not all - has turned away from the methods that bring success. One example stands out. If you look up Muslim Nobel Prize winners for any science, the list is very short. [Here[/url</a>] is one at Wikipedia. There are 2. One is a chemist from Egypt who did his graduate work at UPenn and has worked in the US, mostly at CalTech, his adult life. He’s been a US citizen for 30+ years. The other is Abdus Salam. I want to spend a bit more space on him, but first I have to note that Abdus Salam is not a Muslim. I’ll explain why.</p>
<p>Salam was Pakistani. Most of his training was in Britain but he lived and worked in Pakistan and established a solid physics program there. He was also important in the development of Pakistan’s nuclear program. He was devout and saw his work as part of God’s plan for humanity and that what he saw was revelation about creation. He quoted from the Qur’an when he accepted the Nobel. He’s one of my favorites because he won the prize for his work with Steven Weinberg and Sheldon Glashow, both Jews. Can anyone imagine that today? A devout Muslim happily working on the secrets of creation - in this case, the Standard Model - with Jews? </p>
<p>But Salam wasn’t a Muslim. Why? Because his own country, to which he contributed so much, passed a Constitutional Amendment in 1974 which declared the Ahmadis … well, it’s worth quoting the entirety. This is the 2nd Amendment to Pakistan’s Constitution: “A person who does not believe in the absolute and unqualified finality of The Prophethood of Muhammad (Peace be upon him), the last of the Prophets or claims to be a Prophet, in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever, after Muhammad (Peace be upon him), or recognizes such a claimant as a Prophet or religious reformer, is not a Muslim for the purposes of the Constitution or law.” Many Ahmadis have been murdered and they are continuously persecuted in Pakistan. Salam was an Ahmadi. BTW, the slogan of the Ahmadis is “Love for All, Hatred for None”. You can see in that why Salam could see science as part of God’s plan. Salam died in 1996, which means he lived for years as a member of a persecuted minority in Pakistan and deemed a non-Muslim for all legal purposes. That is sad. </p>
<p>For more about Islam and modernity, I suggest Turkish born physicist Taner Edis’ An Illusion of Harmony, in which he describes the need of Islamists to make science conform to belief. We just saw this in action in ISIS; they announced all teaching of science and math, etc. would need to conform “fact” to Islamic teaching. This is a very difficult burden to overthrow. Anyone who thinks this problem will somehow get better soon is wrong.</p>
<p>And for contrast, consider [url=<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_Nobel_laureates]this”>List of Jewish Nobel laureates - Wikipedia]this</a> list](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates]Here[/url”>List of Muslim Nobel laureates - Wikipedia) from Wikipedia of Jewish Nobel winners. Look at the hard sciences: some have more than ⅓ of the winners as Jews. </p>
<p>This thread seems to have run its course, as personal religious feelings and politics were starting to permeate the discussion. - FC</p>