The slaughter in Norway by a Christian Fundamentalist seeing himself as a knight defending the faith raises a disturbing issue: what are so many monotheists so violent towards people who disagree with them?  One would think their deity could handle such matters on its own, but it is never allowed to once monotheists have sufficient power to impose their will.

There are two reasons I think: monotheism itself and sacred texts.

Monotheism appears to be at cross-purposes with people’s actual religious experiences.  The evidence is clearest in early Israel and modern America.  In early Israel the Israeli people worshipped a number of deities and were always “falling back” into the habit until some group of murderous fanatics killed them or at least threatened them with death.  Solomon, the king the Bible claims was wisest of all, had altars to other gods that Yahweh in the Temple.  He died of old age. Yahweh seemed not to mind too much, although his more fanatic followers claimed his son was punished for his father’s deeds.  In such a case Yahweh was negligent, unjust, and slow to respond.  No wonder force was needed to ensure his worship.

In America, once religious freedom was established, Christianity fragmented even more than it had before.  People had different experiences they thought were from God, and interpreted them in different ways.  For polytheists that would be no problem, but for monotheists it is a fatal one.  Christianity in my view is a umbrella term for people worshipping different gods under the same name  and claim to exclusivity.  Islam is the same but Muslims have had less opportunity to fragment based on their experiences. But less is not none. And again, violence was the tool used to minimize the fragmenting of the one true faith.

Second, sacred texts are always sources of division because we cannot help but read them differently.  As soon as someone asks me what a text means I HAVE to put it into my own words. That means I have to interpret it.  As soon as I have done so, those hearing my interpretation, if they are to understand it, have to put it into their own words.  Over time interpretations will diverge, especially when the author of the text is no longer around to clarify its meaning.

When the text is said to be infallible this means it is inevitable that there will be a number of different interpretations each claiming to be infallible, and with no way recognized as fair by all to settle the difference.  Given that these texts say they are the only way to salvation, resorting to arms in an “appeal to Heaven” is always in the not very deep background.

There are only two real solutions: keep religion 100% out of politics to try and push political debate in terms that anyone could potentially come to agreement over or abandon monotheism as a nasty theological error rooted in a misunderstanding of mystical experience and philosophical monism.  I favor both and if our country does not come to its senses and repudiate the demonic right in no uncertain terms, we will see what happened in Norway two days ago, and worse, on our shores.  Bit by bit the rhetoric and the actions are building in that direction, and on the right there is no one of substance calling a halt to it.