RELIGION of TRUTH versus RELIGIONS of IDENTITY

Unlike Eastern religions, Western ones –Judaism, Christianity and Islam- have normative nature. Reciting the scripture does not give its member just spiritual sense but creates norms for them to be applied in their daily life. Many dos and don’ts of the scriptures are clear enough to see this normative character. But these holy texts can’t speak but their interpreters do on behalf of them. And they interpret them within an interpretive context that geohistorically, geo-culturally and geo-politically rather different from one another. This is the reason why there are conflicts not just among those who believe and don’t but among the members of the same holy text, as well. Through out of context quotations some so-called devout members can easily distort the very meaning of the text, and thus transform it into a source of uproar and chaos rather than peace and serenity. Considering this historical experience, my paper puts a difference between the scripture and historical phenomena it has created and criticizes the essentialist approach that identifies the scripture with its members. In this context the following titles will be dealt with: Islam of identity and Islam of truth and neo-Orientalism, essentialism and contingencies about scripture and its relation to believer’ behavior.