Radio show host and author Michael Savage wants violent statements removed from holy books.
He stated as much within his June 3, 2015 AD radio show The Savage Nation. He came to this conclusion, and demand, by circuitous means.
He regularly refers to Muslim terrorists as vermin who should be eliminated from the planet. He is also right in noting that, both, Islam’s written scripture the Qur’an / Koran as well as their traditions the Hadith actually prescribe violence against non-Muslims and even certain Muslims such as Muslim husbands beating their Muslim wives (see what Muhammad and Jesus: Regarding Wives).
Now, he is also quite right that the very moment that anyone brings up such documented and historical facts, the instant reply is to run screaming from the issue and desperately turn towards attacking Christianity. Thus, the Pavlovian response to the fact that Islam’s scripture and traditions prescribe violence in general is to claim, in a logically fallacious tu quoque manner, that the Bible does likewise.
This is one reason that we cannot have one of these supposedly great national conversations on this subject; because US culture and politics would have to admit some inconvenient truths.
Besides countless “individual” terrorist acts, the fact is that the Encyclopedia of Wars was compiled by nine history professors who spent decade chronicling what they reckon to be 10,000 years of war (8000 BC to 2003 AD). Out of 1,763 wars a mere 123 wars (6.98%) are categorized as being “religious wars.”
Now, the contextually relevant fact is that Islam has been involved in half of history’s religious wars even though they are one of the youngest world religion; this did not happen by accident.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Video: PBS misrepresents Islam’s Qur’an / Koran on ISIS beheadings:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now, Michael Savage’s ultimate answer to dealing both with Islam’s prescriptions to violence as well as his reply to those to take the tu quoque approach to avoiding reality is to demand that, at least in the USA, all references to violence should be removed from all “holy books.”
Well, such a demand can be attention getting emotive rhetoric, it could be a gedankenexperiment yet, ultimately, it can be a small step on a slippery slope towards a new secular world order—how knows?
The fact is that references to violence were not all created equally. For example, Savage claimed the reason that Jews, today, do not stone homosexuals to death is that they do not texts such “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” (Leviticus 18:22) as literally.
Speaking as a Jew I can tell you that the reason that I, a modern day Jew, do not do not believe in stoning homosexuals to death is because of the fact that I do take the Bible literally.
You see the cultural context, the historical context, the grammatical context, is that someone could have been a homosexual all they wanted just not in a particular place, at a particular time, under particular governance.
The Tanakh / Old Testament specifies that when YHVH built up a nation from the ground up, as the Jews / Hebrews / Israelites were liberated from their institutionalization after slavery in Egypt, he gave them certain laws and, here is the key, they agreed to uphold them.
Thus, in essence, just as is the case with any law of any land; if you want to do that which is against the law then you have to go elsewhere or reap the consequences of your actions.
Now, once that the Jews no longer lived under YHVH’s theocratic (monarchically administered) kingdom; those laws no longer applied. In fact, Rabbinic Judaism came about as an attempt to figure out how to still be Jews whilst having no priesthood, sacrifices, Temple, etc.
Now, some claim that Islam needs to have a reformation much like the Christian reformation.
However, the Christian reformation was away from manmade tradition and towards the written text of the scripture. On the other hand, if Islam has such a reformation it will have to be away from the written text of the scripture and towards manmade traditions.
Muslims can rightly, logically and theologically justify their violent actions.
However, Jew could not rightly, logically and theologically justify their violent actions because they are not living at the aforementioned particular place, particular time and particular monarchically administered governance.
Christians could not rightly, logically and theologically justify their violent actions because of the same reasons as pertain to Jews and additional New Testament statements regarding loving and praying for our neighbors as well as those who persecute us.
Thus, Michael Savage’s statements and demands may be emotive, bombastic, thought provoking, etc. but they are premised upon a great number of fallacies.