Book review: 'Terror in the Mind of God' by Mark Juergensmeyer

November 25, 9:35 AMHouston Legal Issues ExaminerSami Hartsfield

Previous Next

3 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Houston Legal Issues Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Terror in the Mind of God by Mark
                   Juergensmeyer

[Author's note: My apologies in advance to anyone who is offended by my point of view on the existence--or not--of God. This book review reflects only my own opinions and commentary.]

Long has man attempted to justify his actions or control others by claiming divine providence: the ancient Greeks and Romans would burn ritual pyres and offer hecatombs to curry favor with a particular god/dess; the medieval European kings claimed to rule by divine right; and now we have straight up bullies—for what else can we call those who employ violence and fear to accomplish their goals—claiming divine patronage. It seems like an awfully circular argument to this author to use the will of god—of which we still have no definitive proof even early in the 21st century—as verification that one’s will is on a “cosmic” mission. Ironically, though, this argument appears to be the most effective; after all, who can argue with god? (It is, of course, the same argument the Catholic priests used in the Middle Ages and beyond.) The problem this author has, however, with Juergensmeyer’s proposition in his twelfth chapter, boldly entitled “The Mind of God,” is that he is using this fallacious argument (i.e. which came first—humans or god à la the chicken or the egg?), albeit at the behest of the perpetrators, and is thus providing us with no empirical answers at all.

The assumption that god exists never fails to bemuse me. The aforementioned ancient Greeks and Romans, amongst many other ancient peoples, both had whole pantheons of god/desses from which to beseech (unlike today, where most of us have just one). Their gods seemed to be very human-like, what with their egos, vanities, and vengeances (much like the angry, vindictive Judeo god of the Old Testament). Do we not now look back at the ancients in amazement, and maybe even snicker, that they actually seemed to believe in what we modern humans call “mythology”?

Additionally, an afterlife is not falsifiable; therefore, we humans have absolutely no way of ever discerning whether or not there even is such a thing. If we look at the matter from this vantage point, it seems a bit disingenuous to concern ourselves so greatly, such that our whole life is predicated upon--and we might even be willing to commit extreme acts of violence because of--something that may or may not even be fact.

Moreover, when it was convenient for the monarchs of early Europe to claim divine right, after a split, say, with the powerful Catholic Pope, they audaciously did so. Historically, we can look back upon this as an “a-ha” moment: Was it cosmic serendipity, or mere cleverness, that they suddenly received their much-needed celestial blessings?

Can we not now look back at, for example, the Spanish Inquisition, and wonder what that was really all about? Was it a form of crowd control? Anti-Semitism? Or did the “inquisitors” really believe in their dogma, and were they on a world-soul-saving mission? Were those gleefully doling out the dreaded auto de fé merely sadistic devotees, or did they actually believe that they were doing god’s work (as they claimed)?

History is replete with this types of examples, and this author submits that the same can reasonably be asked of bin Laden, or of the “reverend” (the word is lightly used here) Paul Hill, and all the others the book mentions, which Juergensmeyer rightly points out are “marginal—in varying degrees—to their own religious societies” (221).

At the beginning of Chapter 12, Juergensmeyer writes that (and I’d emphasize this entire passage as my main point):

[The suicide missionaries] would do virtually anything if they thought it had been sanctioned by divine mandate or conceived in the mind of God. The power of this idea has been enormous. It has surpassed all ordinary claims of political authority and elevated religious ideologies to supernatural heights. (219)

Indeed, a Hammas “martyr,”--or a suicide bomber, depending on your point of view--proclaimed earlier on the same page that he was “doing this for Allah” (219).

It seems blatantly contrived to this author that in order to get underlings to do your dirty work, one need only claim that he has god on his side. Juergensmeyer does rightly point out a commonality of marginality, but instead of having all these terrorists jump on a god-bandwagon due to lack of choices, let us see Juergensmeyer explore how anyone even half sane can buy into this age-old “god made me do it” argument. And would it not even be a bit sacrilegious to claim to be able to see into the mind of god — if there is one— to’ boot?

Furthermore, if all these differing dogmas claim god’s providence, how do we mere mortals know whom to believe?

In all fairness, it is relatively easy for this author to comprehend why some people choose to follow a religious ideology. After all, we humans are here with some idea of how we got here (evolution or creationism perhaps), but we basically have no idea why, or what happens, if anything, after we’re through here. It follows, then, that we frail, ultimately ignorant humans need some sort of explanation. Indeed, human societies have been coming up with explanation stories since time immemorial. Virtually every society has come up with some type of creationist tale to answer that age-old question. Except that in the case of attempting to explain why we are here, it’s relatively harmless (we’ll skip what this author sees as the brainwashing element for now); whereas in the case of terrorism it’s decidedly NOT harmless, and could conceivably be seen as an egregious perversion of propagandist mind control.

So why do terrorists do it, and do they really believe it? Let’s say we buy that these people are, as Juergensmeyer states, typically marginalized members of society, and as pathetically illustrated in the case of Shoko Asahara, and this god-talk offers them the otherwise unattainable possibility of infallible, superhuman-like power. The problem then becomes that Juergensmeyer writes a book like this at all, and in effect elevates bullies to the point of someone worth studying. Admittedly, in order to best our enemies, we need to understand them, and toward this end we must try to discern their motivations, but in this his book misses the mark. I submit that it is not god at all at work in these men’s minds, but rather some sort of egotistical megalomania, and to use the notion of a god backing such dastardly deeds is, in my estimation, quite simply brainwashing propaganda, if not outright blasphemy. This author believes we cannot expose these phonies for what they are until we call a spade a spade, so to speak.

While reading Juergensmeyer’s book, this author is constantly reminded of an old children’s fable when we are told of religious extremists using “god” to justify their actions with what would otherwise be considered unacceptable means. The fable is called “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” and we all know the story -- how a whole kingdom was conned to believe that their emperor had an exquisite new set of clothes fit for a king, this as a result of a scam from a couple of shysters apparently nonetheless educated in the way humans behave socially. It was left to a small child, free from adult cumbersome societal expectations and mores, to publicly announce that the emperor was, in fact, traipsing about the town completely naked! How is it that so few miss that these terrorists’ arguments are based on just such a shaky house of cards? Why are so many so obviously—at least to this author—willing to blindly accept and follow the fallacious influences of a (thankfully) few, but highly clever, con-men?

Since we all view life through our own unique filters, my gut tells me — viewed through a litigation standpoint — that these folks are most certainly not good candidates for mediation. Neither side is wrong, can even be wrong (of course god is never wrong), will admit to any wrongdoing, and indeed each side claims infallibility. But if nobody is wrong, how can everybody be right?

Despite what this author views as the book’s shortcoming, Juergensmeyer’s book is nevertheless well-researched, well-written, and worth a read, especially given our temporal climate of fundamentalist religions and terrorism. Juergensmeyer writes that the terroristic thought process begins with the notion that “the public world has gone awry, and the suspicion that behind this social confusion lies a great spiritual and moral conflict, a cosmic battle between the forces of order and chaos, good and evil” (228). I emphasize the word cosmic. In truth, would we not all benefit on a chapter detailing how this historical cosmic brainwashing, using the supposed word of an unverifiable god as “proof,” has ultimately hurt humanity rather than helped (at least as far as terrorism is concerned)? Surely even marginalized members of a society would be enraged to learn they’ve been manipulated (conned) this way, much as that naked king in the fable.

In summary, it’s been said that there is enough religion in the world to make man hate one another, but not enough to make him love. From religion’s humble beginnings as an effort to explain to explain the world in which we find ourselves, it has undergone a radical shift from its original -- perhaps innocent and even benevolent -- purpose to a perverse justification for violence. When people begin to discern, and maybe Juergensmeyer can add another chapter on, the utter folly of justifying one’s actions via some mythical god, perhaps then the terrorists will be exposed for what they really are—shysters who have sold whole societies on a dangerously fictitious new set of clothes.


By TwitterButtons.com

Coming soon: Book review of What to NOT Write (on the bar exam) by Tania N. Shah and Melissa A. Gill.

Work Cited
Juergensmeyer, Mark. Terror in the Mind of God: the Global Rise of Religious Violence. 3d ed. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 2003.

For more info: To buy on Amazon.
 

Copyright  2009 Sami K. Hartsfield - All Rights Reserved