Hello, hello, hello, Everyone!!
This past semester was quite interesting for a couple of reasons, but there is one in particular that cannot go unmentioned. Before I continue, I should say that this post will contain some sensitive topics as I will discuss things pertaining to religious discrimination. Also, to protect the privacy of the professor, I will refrain from disclosing too much information and will be referring to them as either "they", "them", or simply "the professor".
The course that I was taking at the time was related to the learning of several ancient civilizations. As a part of this, we learned about some religions which influenced particular civilizations and eras throughout time. For example, we learned about the Protestant/Counter Reformation and how Catholicism and Protestantism were the driving forces behind such a momentous point in history. Similarly, we also learned about Islam and how Muslims were the main targets of Catholics during the Crusades. Now is when things take a turn.
As the course went on, I started to notice the professors biases when it came to Christianity and Islam. (I will preface that I am not Catholic but I am a Christian nonetheless.) With certain assignments came "required readings" that I quickly realized were actually pretty unnecessary. For instance, for assignments pertaining to violent moments in history in which religion played certain roles, the professor would assign particular readings that seemingly related to the topic at hand, yet only actually criticized one religion in particular, Christianity.
Yes, throughout history Catholics have done some pretty horrific things, but it is unfair to equate what was done in the past with what all Christians believe. (Remember there are also multiple denominations of Christianity.) Within the extra articles that were assigned, each consisted of people, who were either atheists or anti-Christian, bashing, criticizing, and just plain blaspheming against the Bible and Jesus. I remember one article in which a person claimed that Jesus was not a good role model and was in fact abusive to the people around him, including his disciples. Another article claimed that the Bible should not be used as a moral code because it teaches terrible and violent things. My point is that after reading these disgusting articles that I supposedly had to read, I came to the conclusion... How does learning about how awful Christianity is really relate to the Crusades or the Protestant/Counter Reformation? I, in no way, shape, or form, condone the atrocities that have taken place in the past at the hands of Catholics, but to assume that all Christians, past and present, are the same is unfair and damaging. What really irritated me was not only how offensive those articles were but also the fact that the professor labeled them as "required". Then from a more academic standpoint, I was also irritated that they dared to force the idea that the actions done by Catholics were solely done because of their religion. As someone who enjoys learning about history, I noticed that religion most certainly was not the main driving force of such horrific events because several of the Catholic leaders of those times were corrupted and wanted both money and power. So, to imply that past tragedies were conducted simply because of the Bible and its teachings is just plain wrong.
Aside from the professor putting articles that heavily criticized Christianity, they also put articles that heavily praised Islam. They incorporated those articles the same way they incorporated the others, along with also going as far as having an entire lesson devoted to learning about Islam. When we came across this lesson, I found it odd because the professor never devoted any other lesson to any other particular religion. As I said, the professor also included articles that were clearly in full support of Islam. Within those articles, there were people who stated how Islam and the Koran have wonderful teachings. They also suggested that Muslims who truly abide by their religion are unlikely to commit any crime or atrocity. There were also a couple of articles that tried to defend Muslims against what occurred on 9/11 by stating that those who caused that tragedy were not in fact true followers of Islam because if they were they would not have committed what was done that horrible day. To some degree, I do agree with the professor because I am sure that Islam has its positives and that not every Muslim is terrible or should be feared, but the professor did exactly the same thing as they did with Christianity except it was the exact opposite due to their preexisting beliefs. As anyone can conclude, the professor was/is Muslim.
For Christianity, the professor took their own personal beliefs and biases to sum up all Christians as cruel people with a horrendous moral code. For Islam, the professor took their own personal beliefs and biases to sum up all Muslims as a peaceful and truly God-loving people. However, for both cases, neither is entirely true. Yes, there have been Christians that have done terrible things and have given Christianity a bad name, but not all of us should be viewed in the same light. And, yes, I am sure that there are many Muslims that are kind and peaceful, but we are naive to believe that all are the same. As with anyone, including religious people, not everyone is entirely good or bad. Therefore, it is wrong to claim that each group of people is either one or the other. Not only that, but it is also wrong to blatantly disrespect another religion simply because your beliefs differs from theirs. Just because you disagree with someone's beliefs that does not give you the right to outright claim that their beliefs are horrible and wrong whilst elevating your own as, ultimately, the best.
The truth is I can't blame the professor for them wanting to spread their own beliefs in order to guide others to the truth because, as a Christian, I understand the need for spreading the Word of God so that others can come to Christ. My only problem is how the professor handled the situation. Instead of stating just the facts of their religion, they so obviously and heavily praised their own religion while at the same time heavily criticizing and bashing such a major religion that directly contradicts their own. The bottom line is if you want to lead someone into your own religion, you can share your testimony and say how your beliefs have affected you, but conversion is all about a personal choice therefore you can't force your beliefs unto anyone and/or flat out say that the other persons beliefs are incredibly wrong.
Anyways, that's what I have for you today. I know it's a long one, but I think it's worth it. Let me know your thoughts. I'm curious.
Bye for now,
Eden
