THE PROBLEM WITH THE REGIONS OF THE BOOK -
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—collectively known as the Abrahamic or “religions of the book”—each contain
exclusive and excluding doctrines that set clear boundaries for group membership and define claims to ultimate truth and salvation. These doctrines serve as
prerogatives: privileges or rights claimed by each faith that distinguish its path from all others. While these doctrines foster strong internal cohesion among believers, they can also divide societies by creating exclusionary boundaries—sometimes described as a kind of “religious apartheid”
4.
Additional Details
- All three faiths have long histories of mutual theological rivalry, each holding a privileged or “superior” relationship to the Divine within its worldview43.
- Christianity and Islam often consider each other’s key beliefs—and Judaism’s—invalid or insufficient, based on their own doctrines (e.g., Trinitarianism is rejected by Islam, the messiahship of Jesus rejected by both Judaism and Islam)3.
- Doctrinal exclusivism means salvation, truth, and/or divine favor are not available on equal terms to those outside the faith—or, in some cases, even to different sects within the same religion (see Islam's hadith about “73 sects” and narrow definitions of orthodoxy)1.
Impact on Social Cohesion
- These exclusive claims can lead to “othering” and perpetuate in-group vs. out-group dynamics, alienating those who do not belong46.
- While internal solidarity is enhanced, intergroup mistrust, suspicion, and rivalry can be amplified, often resulting in diminished social cohesion across different religious communities64.
- Historical and ongoing conflicts—over theology, identity, and even basic civil rights—can be traced, in part, to these exclusionary doctrines and the resultant boundaries they enforce within and between societies46.
It is important to note that, in practice, the intensity and impact of exclusivist doctrines vary with time, place, and cultural context, with some communities emphasizing pluralism or dialogue, while others stress doctrinal boundaries
16. Despite shared beliefs and common origins, the
prerogative, exclusive, and excluding doctrines of these faiths have often worked against broad interreligious social cohesion
462.
Beliefs about “the Great Satan”
(or Satan) vary significantly between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, with each tradition attributing different roles, characteristics, and levels of power to this figure. Here is a detailed summary based strictly on the provided search results:
Judaism
- Nature of Satan: In Judaism, Satan is not an independent, malevolent being. He is viewed as an “adversary,” “accuser,” or “tempter” meant to test a person's faithfulness to God, but always subordinate to God and never acting in rebellion or rivalry25810.
- Role and Function:
- Satan functions as a prosecuting angel who executes tasks given by God, such as testing Job’s piety235810.
- The concept is closer to an internal inclination or obstacle rather than an external devil. The Hebrew word “Satan” is often associated with the yetzer hara (evil inclination) that tempts individuals from within256.
- Theological Significance: There is no doctrine of a “great Satan” as a cosmic enemy of God. Evil and temptation ultimately originate under God’s sovereignty, not from a being in cosmic opposition to Him35810.
Christianity
- Nature of Satan: In Christianity, Satan is a powerful, malevolent spiritual being, originally an angel who rebelliously opposes God and leads other fallen angels. He is personified as the Devil, the tempter and primary adversary of both God and humanity35.
- Role and Function:
- Seen as the originator of evil in the world, the ruler of demons, and the deceiver of humanity.
- Responsible for tempting Jesus and instigating opposition to God’s purposes5.
- Central to apocalyptic imagery, where he wages war on the saints and is ultimately defeated by God at the end of time.
- Theological Significance: Satan is portrayed as the “great enemy”—a cosmic rival to God’s kingdom and the ultimate embodiment of evil. He is blamed for sin, suffering, and opposition to Christian faith35.
Islam (Relevant context not found in search results—supplemented by well-established knowledge)
- Nature of Satan (Iblis/Shaytan): In Islam, Iblis/Shaytan is often called the “Great Satan.” He is a jinn who refused to bow to Adam and was cast out because of pride. He is not an angel but a distinct, powerful, malevolent being.
- Role and Function:
- Iblis leads humans astray, whispers temptations (waswasa), and opposes God’s guidance.
- Like in Christianity, there is a strong sense of an external cosmic adversary, but always ultimately subject to God’s will.
- Geopolitical Use: The phrase “Great Satan” is also a modern political epithet, especially in Iran, to describe perceived enemies (often the United States), drawing on Qur’anic and folkloric imagery of Satan as the tempter and corrupter.
Impact on Social Cohesion
The
different conceptions of Satan contribute to
distinct in-group/out-group boundaries:
- Judaism’s non-dualistic view avoids a cosmic personification of evil and tends to focus on personal ethical struggle.
- Christianity and Islam attribute greater cosmic significance and danger to Satan, often describing non-believers as subject to his influence, reinforcing exclusive community boundaries.
This doctrinal divergence shapes interfaith perceptions:
- Christianity and Islam’s personified, powerful Satan can foster spiritual suspicion or othering of those outside their faith.
- Judaism’s internalized adversary keeps the focus on self-improvement, but does not provide a shared enemy figure with out-groups.
Summary: Judaism’s Satan is an internal tester and subordinate being, Christianity’s Satan is a cosmic rebel, and Islam’s Iblis is a powerful but ultimately subordinate tempter—only in the latter two does the “Great Satan” figure underpin a strong sense of cosmic struggle and group separation
235810.
Perhaps 'the Great Satan' of medieval superstition is that which divides social cohesion through
- prerogative
- exclusivity
- exclusion
www.ibtimes.com
