Yes, there seems to be a bee in my bonnet, a buzzing in my brain, as I try to understand why religion can be such a comfort for some, but so marginalising for others, why deeply religious people can be incredibly warm, loving people and yet fire up with an intense hatred at other times.
At a funeral recently, there was much talk of the comfort felt that the ‘sister’ who had passed away would be reunited with previously passed loved ones and that she would rest in eternity in the loving comfort of the God she worshipped. And yes, believers of all faiths hold fast to the promise of a life beyond this life, and in some respects I am a bit jealous of that heartfelt reassurance they have, and yet, the same religions which offer that hope pour scorn on those who do not hold fast to that faith.
There was a note in my in-box that there will be a Royal Commission into hate speech and, if that is conducted honestly, will look at internet trolls who foster hatred, who radicalise impressionable people, but also at the teachings of the various religions. What was troublesome to me, at the time the legislation about hate speech as a response to the Bondi murders, religious leaders were united in declaring that their teachings could not be curtailed, that they must not be restricted in what they could teach within the broad definitions of the religions they represented, and included in that is what is taught in their holy books.
I thought it worthwhile to consider what the origins of the privilege believers have over others, whether they be unbelievers, or of over religions based on those same texts.
In the New Testament book of 1 John, chapter 4 verse 16 reads:
“And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.
God is love.
Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.”
Wow, that is really cool.
Yet so many who claim to love God do not exude love, in fact quite the opposite. They preach that those who do not follow their god are destined for all sorts of pain in the eternal fires of hell. Or may even be subjected to severe marginalisation, threats of violence, even killings such as conducted by ISIS, by the men who murdered at Bondi, or the man who killed more than fifty Muslims worshipping in Christchurch mosques a few years ago. Or even commit genocide in Gaza and on the West Bank.
To understand this we need to go back to the source of these beliefs to discover how conditional this love is. The beginnings books, the first five in the Bible are foundational in both Christianity and Judaism, and recognised in part for Islam, especially the early parts of Genesis which deal with creation, Noah’s flood, the tower of Babel, and how divisive the consequences of those stories are and how these are re-affirmed throughout both the Old and New Testaments as well as framing the teachings of the Quran.
Adam and Eve has two sons, Cain and Able, according to Genesis 4:1, they grow up, Cain a tiller of the land, growing crops, Cain a shepherd. In making sacrifices, Cain’s offering is deemed ‘not good enough’, because he did not take the best of his crop to offer to God. Able on the other hand takes the best of his flock and sacrifices them to God, which is accepted by God. Cain gets a bit annoyed and kills Able.
“And Cain talked with Able his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against his brother and slew him.” (Genesis 4:8) The punishment is severe, “So now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When thou tillest the ground, it shall henceforth yield unto you her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shall thou be in the earth.” (Genesis 4: 11-12).
And so Cain was to travel away from his parents, away from the scene of his crime, eastward to “dwell in the land of Nod”, where that may be is not clear, but it is suggested that Nod, being so far east of Eden, perhaps as far as China, but clearly laying the seeds for contempt for Cain’s offspring.
So moving on to Noah’s flood and the aftermath which saw Noah growing vines in the newly emerged soil, pressing the grapes to make wine and falling asleep drunk, and importantly, naked, much to the delight of his youngest son, Ham, who laughed and mocked his father’s nakedness. The older sons, Shem, traditionally considered the ancestor of Semitic peoples, and Japheth, whose descendants are associated with northern nations respectfully covered their father.
“And Noah awoke from his wine, and new what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be to his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents os Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.” (Genesis 9: 24-26).
Ham’s descendants are the Canaanites, today, that includes Palestinians, described in ‘We Who Wrestle With God’ (Jordan B. Peterson, 2024) as:
“… characterised in the biblical corpus as the eternally idolatrous and morally corrupt people, and the people over whom and over whose territory God therefore grants the Israelites dominion.” (Page 184).
The next part of the journey takes us to Babel, more specifically, the tower that was being built to challenge the supremacy of God. Jordan B. Peterson opens the chapter on The Tower of Babel with:
“The Bible’s first builders of cities, fabricators of musical instruments and weapons of war – the individuals who pursue technological solutions – are significantly, the children of Cain… They are the engineers, builders, and inhabitants of the eternal Babylon, the city of the prideful and presumptuous.” (Ibid, Page 191).
The perceived arrogance of the Babylonian tower builders, is evident in many biblical texts, references, each condemning the builders challenging the power of God, each declaring the sinfulness of the Babylonians, “And the woman’s arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked in gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
”And upon her foreheads a name written, Mystery, Babylon, The Great, The Mother of Harlots And Abominations Of The Earth” (Revelations 17: 4-5).
Babylonians are today’s broad definition of Arab. References to Babylon with it’s seductive ‘whoredom’ is repeated in the books of the prophets Isiah and Jeremiah, so the hatred for those people, the off-spring of Cain and Ham, there is biblical condemnation, they are the progeny of God-deniers, and are defined in terms of depravity, dishonesty, of murderers, whores. God’s condemnation for not honouring Him is severe. Even when it is intended for good. Take for example a later passage, from 2 Samuel, where King David sets out to retrieve the stolen Ark of the Covent, a man Uzzah saw that the Ark was possibly going to fall off its carriage, so put out his hand to stop that happening, touched the sacred object and died on the spot. God’s judgement is severe.
Continuing the journey through Genesis, we come to Abram/Abraham. Abram and his wife Sarai/Sarah said that He would:
“… make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Genesis 12: 2-3).
A problem arose and as Abraham and Sarah aged, doubts that they would bare a child occupied Sarah’s thinking, and so she offered her servant Hagar to Abraham, and the servant conceived and bore a son Ishmael, and after Sarai bore Abraham’s son Isaac, Hagar and Ishmael were banished. God ‘intervened’ promising that Ishmael would become ‘a great nation’ and is regarded as a prophet and messenger, central to the story and construction of the Kaaba in Meccas, one of the holiest sites in Islam.
Throughout this journey, and the interpretations and commentaries on the readings show a severe level of judgement, an alienation of people who do not do ‘God’s will’, and the commentary reflects on morality today, ‘sins of the world’, the rise of political ideologies such as Communism and Nazi-ism, the rise of feminism, the godlessness of modern life. Very much promoting a world view similar to that which Charlie Kirk was promoting, very much the self-righteousness of the far-right Christians which seek to influence politics today, a winding back of the rights of people who do not define themselves in tradition gender roles, and very much an Islamophobic approach which is reflected in the stance toward immigration.
What really concerns me is that when we approach the issue of hate speech, the divides which are so apparent in the world we live in, whether here in Australia or in the UK with the rise of the reform movement, Trump’s racist and bigoted approach to immigrants in the US, even when considering refugees throughout Europe, religious leaders insist that they should not be curtailed or limited in their teaching of their religions. And yet, a brief excursion into the foundational text of the Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, that text is divisive, it pits one believer against the other over matters which are essentially based on unprovable mythologies.
Even the incongruities of some of the myths, such as if all humanity had been wiped out, except for Noah and his family, that Cain’s progeny was around to continue to corrupt the world, how come if God is love, that there can be so much hatred directed at those who are not “god’s people’, when we carry the same DNA which defines our humanity.
Writers such as Jordan B. Peterson have been influential is the rise of neo-conservative evangelic stands of Christianity and very much so in the Christian Zionist movement, that which looks forward to the final battle, the Armageddon, when for Christians, Christ will return, for Jews, the arrival of their long awaited Messiah, and the final destruction of the godless hoards, the sin-filled world which so despises those that are ‘not like them’. So much of the hatred which manifests itself in the violence of the Bondi attacks, the murderous spree of the Christchurch Mosques of several years ago, the Islamophobia which fills social media and radicalises people to committing such violence.
But in considering how to deal with hate speech, in framing the terms terms of reference for a Royal Commission, the special plea to the Prime Minister to not restrict the teachings of religions when so much of the hatred is expressed in the very texts which are foundational to their teachings.
For some, that sounds like mission accomplished.
From my perspective, Mission Impossible.
Keep Independent Journalism Alive – Support The AIMN
Dear Reader,
Since 2013, The Australian Independent Media Network has been a fearless voice for truth, giving public interest journalists a platform to hold power to account. From expert analysis on national and global events to uncovering issues that matter to you, we’re here because of your support.
Running an independent site isn’t cheap, and rising costs mean we need you now more than ever. Your donation – big or small – keeps our servers humming, our writers digging, and our stories free for all.
Join our community of truth-seekers. Please consider donating now via:
PayPal or credit card – just click on the Donate button below
Direct bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
We’ve also set up a GoFundMe as a dedicated reserve fund to help secure the future of our site.
Your support will go directly toward covering essential costs like web hosting renewals and helping us bring new features to life. Every contribution, no matter the size, helps us keep improving and growing.
Thank you for standing with us – we truly couldn’t do this without you.
With gratitude, The AIMN Team
Catholicism, Judaism, Islamism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Protestantism, Shintoism, Shamanism, Taosism, Atheism – they are all isms, created originally verbally and later in textual form by the whim of human ingenuity. And if you do not believe in an ism then you are of an “other” ism and are therefore of a different belief. Too often the differences are irreconcilable to the extent that there is no tolerance for the “other” and therefore such intolerance breeds social disharmony, hatred, even violence. Intolerance, hatred and violence are anathema to most religious teachings however the anathema does prevent inter-religious hatred or violence. So, metaphorically, I will be the Devil’s advocate, (btw I believe the Devil does not exist), and ask: why do religions exist if people do not practice what they preach? Being devoutly religious is a risky business so why do it?
Typo in my comment:
“..the anathema does NOT prevent inter-religious hatred or violence…”.
Yhe point I am trying to make Mediocratese is that the leaders of the religions who have the Bible as there holy book demand that they teach from it, including when it suits to preach and teach that they are the true believers, and every one else be damned. They demand the right to teach a messagecof hate for those who do not live up to their interpretation of their holy books.
That demand continues to see people punished even killed for being who they are.
Religions are, in fact a form of international police force. They have for centuries curtailed and checked the actions of the masses, The claimed separation of church and state is and always has been a lie, worse, religions being some of the richest organisations in the world, take, sometimes under coercion, money from the poorest in the community.
Without a doubt, religions have killed more than they have ever saved.
Thank you Bert, a thoughtful article for a Sunday morning.
@ Mediocrates: Agreed. The ”Devil” has been shown by American theologists to be a 16th century construct ….. to scare ”unbelievers” or ”thinkers” into capitulation?
Abel
knew
Covenant
bear
Mediocrates:
Atheism is simply a rejection of belief in the existence of god/s. It is not a religion.
There are so many things believers have never been able to explain, mainly because – as Bert points out – the source texts themselves are so contradictory.
I was raised Catholic but could never suppress what seems to be an inherent scepticism; there are too many illogicalities in the story for me to swallow it. Why, for instance, did this god change its mind? All the conquering and smiting and racial exclusivity and then suddenly JC turns up and there’s a complete pivot to loving and accepting everyone with only one teeny little proviso.
I know a few people of faith who actually live according to the basic tenets of that faith, and they’re wonderful people. I’ve also known far too many who twist and cherry-pick and use their religion as both sword and shield.
It’s a form of tribalism, and one of the worst forms.
@ leefe: I have always had problems with the ”Thou shalt have no graven images” text and the practice in Roman churches of having solid timber or plaster images of some human representing an important religious identity.
Oops!! Silly me!! Being made of timber and plaster is OK because they are not graven images, implying a carved rock figure.
Just the same sort of thinking used by some religious to justify priestly pederasty predating poor parishioner’s progeny.
There are two groups asserting connection to the biblical progenitors of the present ZIONAZI generation issuing from the horrors of the de-population policies of the democratically elected German government 1933-1945.
The ”historical” group is the British Israelites, originating in the 16th century as a pseudohistorical, theological belief that people of British and Western European descent are the direct, literal descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of ancient Israel. This movement, peaking in the 1920s, posits that the British royal family descends from King David.”
The currently more dangerous Christian ZIONISTS aka ZIONAZIS are a too large component of the TACO Trumpery regime, Mike Huckabee being a self-confessed supporter who believes the ZIONAZI wrong assertions that Isrevil has a biblical claim to the whole of the Middle East, including Lebanon, Syria, parts of Arabia and surrounding present countries.
Christian Zionists in Australia represent a segment of evangelical and Pentecostal Christians who support the state of Israel based on biblical interpretation, often believing that supporting Israel is necessary for the end-times, or rapture, to occur. They advocate for a strong, unified Israel, including the restoration of the Temple.
Key aspects of Christian Zionism in Australia include:
Theological Foundation: This movement is driven by an eschatological, or “end-of-times,” doctrine, which posits that for Jesus Christ to return, the nation of Israel must be established, Jerusalem must be a Jewish city, and the Temple must be restored.
Check out this link for Christian Zionist influence in the TACO Trumpery regime:
The US Ambassador to Isrevil, Mike Huckabee, a CHRISTIAN ZIONIST, thinks that a biblical text makes it OK to expand Isrevil to include ALL the Middle East, including ”Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and parts of Saudi Arabia”.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/20/us-envoy-suggests-it-would-be-fine-if-israel-expands-across-middle-east?_gl=1*16wxy63*_ga*TGRDRDE5R1VBeF9zX3pqU3hzdGFvb2NUTllxcmxtYTU3bTBIY2Q0WWFjVGNGTms5OGkwYTQ5LVA1ajB1SW00Mg..*_ga_XN9JB9Q0M1*MTc3MTY0NTQ5OS4xLjEuMTc3MTY0NTQ5OS4wLjAuMA..
Sorry Bert – point taken: my ego distracted me from acknowledging your well thought essay. I was raised in an Anglican family and was required to attend Sunday School despite my obvious disinterest. At age 10 I would sit at the back of the class and whilst enduring the Deacon’s diatribe I would silently chant “…shit, bugger bum, let the lightning come…” I am now 82yrs and healthy!