When Religion Becomes Evil (Paperback)

Kimball believes the well-established religions should be respected, despite evils committed in their name, because they all "converge in teaching both an orientation toward God or the transcendent and compassionate, constructive relationships with others in this world" (p. 39). However, this does not imply that "all roads lead up the same mountain" (p. 25). Religions may defect from their "authentic sources" and thus even become evil in several ways.

For example, religions may make "absolute truth claims," require "blind obedience," "establish an 'ideal time'" (attempt to set up a utopian theocracy), teach that "the end justifies the means" or "declare holy war." Kimball addresses these matters in the context of various religions (ancient and modern), such as providing insights into the dynamics of doomsday groups such the Branch Davidians and the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo, which required total commitment to irrational beliefs that led to destructive behaviors. He also attempts to explore the religious motivations of Osama Bin Laden and his followers, but spends less time on this than expected or required.

Kimball rightly observes that truth claims are foundational for religion. But, he claims that believers err when they hold their religious beliefs in a "rigid" or "absolute" manner. So, when some Christians criticize the Islamic view of God (Allah) as deficient, they reveal their ignorance and bigotry. Kimball asserts that, "there is simply no ambiguity here. Jews, Christians, and Muslims are taking about the same deity" (p. 50). This is because the Qur'an claims that Allah inspired the Hebrew prophets and Jesus. Moreover, the Arabic word "Allah" means "God."

Is this true? While Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all monotheistic, they differ considerably in their conceptions of God. Islam denies the Trinity and the Incarnation, both of which are well-established Christian doctrines. But God cannot be both a Trinity (Christian) and not a Trinity (Islam). This is logic, not religious intolerance. Moreover, these religions' different concepts of God explain why Muslims and Christians try to convert each other. If mutual understanding is key to tolerance, then disagreements between religions should not be dismissed by deleting "absolute" truth claims from their "authentic sources." It is certainly possible to tolerate someone who holds religious views quite contrary to one's own. If Christ himself called us to love our enemies and to pray for those who persecute us, should we not listen to, respect, and show love for fellow citizens who hold differing religious beliefs?

Kimball wants to soften biblical claims about the uniqueness and centrality of Jesus by saying that they should be taken as pious exaggerations (p. 68-70). However, such affirmations are central and plentiful in the New Testament and have historically been seen as objective descriptions, not embellishments (see John 14:1-6; Acts 4:12; 1 Timothy 2:5-6; etc.). Kimball seems to be calling for a revision of Christianity's "authentic sources," not a return to them. Likewise, most Muslims would reject this kind of revision of the Qur'an. Muslims claim that Muhammad was the last and greatest of the prophets, not just one among many. Being "rigid" on this doctrine is necessary to Islam.

In addition, Kimball never really faces the possibility that a religion's "authentic sources" themselves may contain moral errors that encourage evils. He also tends to overemphasize the abuses of Christians-such as the Crusades-while underemphasizing similar abuses by Muslims, such as dhimmitude: an institution that places heavy restrictions on non-Muslims in Islamic nations (p. 201). Nor does he sufficiently treat the subject of jihad or "holy war," a concept that has been traditionally employed by Muslims as a defense of military conquest and martyrdom to that cause. (On this, see Bernard Lewis, "The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror" (New York: Modern Library, 2003], 30-42.)
Kimball's ambitious book highlights the need to make reasoned and well-informed judgments on religions and their ethical implications. However, given Kimball's defective view of Scripture and his errors in reasoning, we still await a post-September 11 book that adequately handles this controversial topic.

Douglas Groothuis