February 16, 2017
The following is an excerpt from the NYT just after finishing Karen Armstrong’s new book, I happened to hear a discussion on television about the latest outbreak of violence in the Middle East. “We have to hope that this disagreement stays on the political level, rather than becoming a religious dispute,” one of the experts said. “Political differences can be resolved. Religious ones cannot.”
“Fields of Blood” can be thought of as a long, wide-ranging and overall quite effective rebuttal to the outlook expressed in that comment. “In the West, the idea that religion is inherently violent is now taken for granted and seems self-evident,” Armstrong says on the book’s first page. It follows that the main hope for peace is to keep faith and statecraft separate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/books/review/fields-of-blood-by-karen-armstrong.html?_r=0
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/sep/29/fields-of-blood-review-absorbing-study-religion-violence-karen-armstro
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/11/is-religion-inherently-violent/382035/