What do you think?
Rate this book
Holy Terrors: Thinking About Religion After September 11
It is tempting to regard the perpetrators of the September 11th terrorist attacks as evil incarnate. But their motives, as Bruce Lincoln’s acclaimed Holy Terrors makes clear, were profoundly and intensely religious. Thus what we need after the events of 9/11, Lincoln argues, is greater clarity about what we take religion to be.
Holy Terrors begins with a gripping dissection of the instruction manual given to each of the 9/11 hijackers. In their evocation of passages from the Quran, we learn how the terrorists justified acts of destruction and mass murder “in the name of God, the most merciful, the most compassionate.” Lincoln then offers a provocative comparison of President Bush’s October 7, 2001 speech announcing U.S. military action in Afghanistan alongside the videotaped speech released by Osama bin Laden just a few hours later. As Lincoln authoritatively demonstrates, a close analysis of the rhetoric used by leaders as different as George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden—as well as Mohamed Atta and even Jerry Falwell—betrays startling similarities. These commonalities have considerable implications for our understanding of religion and its interrelationships with politics and culture in a postcolonial world, implications that Lincoln draws out with skill and sensitivity.
With a chapter new to this edition, “Theses on Religion and Violence,” Holy Terrors remains one of the essential books on September 11 and a classic study on the character of religion.
“Modernity has ended in its Marxist form in 1989 Berlin, and in its liberal form on September 11, 2001. In order to understand such major historical changes we need both large-scale and focused analyses—a combination seldom to be found in one volume. But here Bruce Lincoln . . . has given us just such a mix of discrete and large-picture analysis.”—Stephen Healey, Christian Century
“From time to time there appears a work . . . that serves to focus the wide-ranging, often contentious discussion of religion’s significance within broader cultural dynamics. Bruce Lincoln’s Holy Terrors is one such text. . . . Anyone still struggling toward a more nuanced comprehension of 9/11 would do well to spend time with this book.”—Theodore Pulcini, Middle East Journal
Holy Terrors begins with a gripping dissection of the instruction manual given to each of the 9/11 hijackers. In their evocation of passages from the Quran, we learn how the terrorists justified acts of destruction and mass murder “in the name of God, the most merciful, the most compassionate.” Lincoln then offers a provocative comparison of President Bush’s October 7, 2001 speech announcing U.S. military action in Afghanistan alongside the videotaped speech released by Osama bin Laden just a few hours later. As Lincoln authoritatively demonstrates, a close analysis of the rhetoric used by leaders as different as George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden—as well as Mohamed Atta and even Jerry Falwell—betrays startling similarities. These commonalities have considerable implications for our understanding of religion and its interrelationships with politics and culture in a postcolonial world, implications that Lincoln draws out with skill and sensitivity.
With a chapter new to this edition, “Theses on Religion and Violence,” Holy Terrors remains one of the essential books on September 11 and a classic study on the character of religion.
“Modernity has ended in its Marxist form in 1989 Berlin, and in its liberal form on September 11, 2001. In order to understand such major historical changes we need both large-scale and focused analyses—a combination seldom to be found in one volume. But here Bruce Lincoln . . . has given us just such a mix of discrete and large-picture analysis.”—Stephen Healey, Christian Century
“From time to time there appears a work . . . that serves to focus the wide-ranging, often contentious discussion of religion’s significance within broader cultural dynamics. Bruce Lincoln’s Holy Terrors is one such text. . . . Anyone still struggling toward a more nuanced comprehension of 9/11 would do well to spend time with this book.”—Theodore Pulcini, Middle East Journal
190 pages, Paperback
First published January 15, 2002
8 people are currently reading
161 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
October 16, 2024
Bruce Lincoln show how religious rhetoric and mythological narratives are used to legitimise acts of violence and terror, not only within a single religion but across various religious traditions. He examines speeches made by George W. Bush and how they allude to religious themes and narratives, drawing a comparison to Bin Laden’s speech following the 9/11 attacks. Perhaps surprisingly to many, Lincoln finds that these two speeches share striking similarities in their use of religious discourse.
The book is particularly compelling as it highlights how marginalised groups, both historically and in contemporary times, have used religious discourse to fight for freedom. Toward the end of the work, Lincoln introduces several key points, summarised under three categories that describe the role of religion in revolutionary contexts: religions of resistance, religions of revolution, and religions of counter-revolution.
These points include:
Certain types of religious discourse can be used to reframe problematic acts as righteous deeds or sacred duties, such as when killing is seen as sacrifice, destruction as purification, or war as a crusade.
No single religious tradition is more inclined than another to make such arguments. All people are capable of this, and the canonical texts of all religions contain passages that can be used for these purposes. Those intent on committing violence can always find arguments and precedents to justify their actions, though selective readings and biased interpretations are key to this process.
Most conflicts stem from competition over scarce resources. Violence is often a means of resolving these conflicts to one’s own advantage, typically in the pursuit of wealth, power, or territory, despite the determined resistance of an adversary.
The book is particularly compelling as it highlights how marginalised groups, both historically and in contemporary times, have used religious discourse to fight for freedom. Toward the end of the work, Lincoln introduces several key points, summarised under three categories that describe the role of religion in revolutionary contexts: religions of resistance, religions of revolution, and religions of counter-revolution.
These points include:
Certain types of religious discourse can be used to reframe problematic acts as righteous deeds or sacred duties, such as when killing is seen as sacrifice, destruction as purification, or war as a crusade.
No single religious tradition is more inclined than another to make such arguments. All people are capable of this, and the canonical texts of all religions contain passages that can be used for these purposes. Those intent on committing violence can always find arguments and precedents to justify their actions, though selective readings and biased interpretations are key to this process.
Most conflicts stem from competition over scarce resources. Violence is often a means of resolving these conflicts to one’s own advantage, typically in the pursuit of wealth, power, or territory, despite the determined resistance of an adversary.
September 9, 2019
Lincoln's writing covers several salient topics within religious studies in a clear and comprehensive way: the categorisation of religion, its compartmentalisation in the West and the dissimilarity this causes with other parts of the world, and the extent to which we can understand any/all violence as 'religious'. I'm surprised by how ideal this book would be as an entry point into Religious Studies, by centring key topics and fundamental framework in a response to the responses to an event that most people have a visceral reaction to.
November 22, 2010
Throughout the latter part of the 20th century it was thought that we were well on our way to a secular world. Nowhere was this thought more comfortably accepted that in the United States. But this thought would be heavily challenged after our blanket of security was lifter on September 11th. In his Holy Terrors: Thinking about Religion after September 11, Bruce Lincoln forces us to re-think religion, not only around the world, but in the familiar and seemingly unthreatening Christianity in our very own country. He further aims to evaluate how the role of religion has changed, particularly as it relates to violence (ix).
Lincoln admits that Holy Terrors was already underway when his 9/11 occurred. As a result, the book was nearly entirely rewritten and framed in relation to the attack that would provide the perfect context for discussion. The result is hardly noticeable, as all of his theories fit perfectly into 9/11. He starts by redefining religion as it seems to be fairly elastic a concept. The four elements he determines make a religion are discourse, practice, community, and institution. Keeping this in mind, Lincoln points out that is a disparity between religion as most people think of it and the religion of what, he would later identify as “Maximist.” He later identifies the Muslim religious leader Sayyid Qutb. Qutb had visited the United States and found that although people attended church, many failed to apply the tenets of Chrstianity to their life. Qutb identified this as hypocrisy (3). This thought of a religion active in the lives of its members pervades the directions to the 9/11 attackers. These letters, along with others provided in their entirety, George W. Bush’s Public Address following the attacks and Osama bin Laden’s televised retort, and a transcript of Jerry Falwell’s appearance on the 700 Club, are the showcases of Lincoln’s argument that religious discourse is very much active today and, as detailed throughout his chapter Symmetric Dualisms, the rhetoric, whether it belong to a Muslim terrorist or a President of the United States, who tip-toes the line between his pleasing his religious conservative constituents and maintaining his official and wholly non-offensive secular duties, is can be strikingly similar in its richest form.
Chapter 3 further examines the popularized concept of jihad. He particularly focuses on Islam in this chapter, examining why “maximalists” feel the need to reclaim space. He further states that there are two types of jihad, internal and external. If one fails to reclaim lost space, appeasers such as Saudi Arabia, who let America use their lands to stage an attack on a fellow Muslim nation, then they are in no shape to wage the more important internal jihad. It is here that Lincoln provides Jerry Falwell’s scapegoating of gays and abortionists. Both Muslims and Christians are locked in a cosmic struggle, which the common man neglects to see.
Chapter 4 concentrates on religious leaders as Lincoln differentiates between “culture” and “Culture,” detrmining that some are in a position to speak for others. Chapter 5 views the effects colonialism had on religion and global sentiments. Chapter 6 examines the relationship between rebellion and revolution. It is in this chapter that Lincoln brings up a mélange of examples throughout history. The scope of examples given makes for an interesting juxtaposition with the chapters that focus on specific examples. The chapters in the book are not overly relying one another. Each could be read alone and make perfect sense. There does not seem to be much of a conclusion. Rather it seems like a book of essays with a common author. Lincoln regularly uses bubble charts to expound on his ideas. Some of his ideas are relatively straight forward and I do not know that uses of these charts are always necessary. One illustration, Figure 1.1, shows how Al Qaeda mirrors Muhammad and the first Muslims in mission. I feel that this chart was pretty clear and that this did not need to be diagrammed (14).
Lincoln admits that Holy Terrors was already underway when his 9/11 occurred. As a result, the book was nearly entirely rewritten and framed in relation to the attack that would provide the perfect context for discussion. The result is hardly noticeable, as all of his theories fit perfectly into 9/11. He starts by redefining religion as it seems to be fairly elastic a concept. The four elements he determines make a religion are discourse, practice, community, and institution. Keeping this in mind, Lincoln points out that is a disparity between religion as most people think of it and the religion of what, he would later identify as “Maximist.” He later identifies the Muslim religious leader Sayyid Qutb. Qutb had visited the United States and found that although people attended church, many failed to apply the tenets of Chrstianity to their life. Qutb identified this as hypocrisy (3). This thought of a religion active in the lives of its members pervades the directions to the 9/11 attackers. These letters, along with others provided in their entirety, George W. Bush’s Public Address following the attacks and Osama bin Laden’s televised retort, and a transcript of Jerry Falwell’s appearance on the 700 Club, are the showcases of Lincoln’s argument that religious discourse is very much active today and, as detailed throughout his chapter Symmetric Dualisms, the rhetoric, whether it belong to a Muslim terrorist or a President of the United States, who tip-toes the line between his pleasing his religious conservative constituents and maintaining his official and wholly non-offensive secular duties, is can be strikingly similar in its richest form.
Chapter 3 further examines the popularized concept of jihad. He particularly focuses on Islam in this chapter, examining why “maximalists” feel the need to reclaim space. He further states that there are two types of jihad, internal and external. If one fails to reclaim lost space, appeasers such as Saudi Arabia, who let America use their lands to stage an attack on a fellow Muslim nation, then they are in no shape to wage the more important internal jihad. It is here that Lincoln provides Jerry Falwell’s scapegoating of gays and abortionists. Both Muslims and Christians are locked in a cosmic struggle, which the common man neglects to see.
Chapter 4 concentrates on religious leaders as Lincoln differentiates between “culture” and “Culture,” detrmining that some are in a position to speak for others. Chapter 5 views the effects colonialism had on religion and global sentiments. Chapter 6 examines the relationship between rebellion and revolution. It is in this chapter that Lincoln brings up a mélange of examples throughout history. The scope of examples given makes for an interesting juxtaposition with the chapters that focus on specific examples. The chapters in the book are not overly relying one another. Each could be read alone and make perfect sense. There does not seem to be much of a conclusion. Rather it seems like a book of essays with a common author. Lincoln regularly uses bubble charts to expound on his ideas. Some of his ideas are relatively straight forward and I do not know that uses of these charts are always necessary. One illustration, Figure 1.1, shows how Al Qaeda mirrors Muhammad and the first Muslims in mission. I feel that this chart was pretty clear and that this did not need to be diagrammed (14).
November 17, 2025
Holy shit… went into this thinking it was gonna be about the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11… came out of it with a new understanding of religion’s relation to violence, identity, revolution, and state leadership… intelligent and insightful… draws parallels between al Qaeda and the American evangelist religious right… great read
June 28, 2020
Another book I read for my religious studies course in college--fascinating juxtaposition between speeches and religious underpinnings in what we assume to be secular systems.
January 19, 2015
I liked it, it made some very interesting arguments. I have a few problems:
- the book was a little bit too politically opinionated at some points - which I don't necessarily disagree with, I just don't think this book was the right place for them.
- presented some interesting and clear arguments, but I don't they were brought together as coherently as they could have been
- not sure about the amount of religious sub-text found in President Bush's post-9/11 address, I can understand it is likely there was some, but, I don't necessarily agree with the parallels he drew to biblical verses in most of his examples. Not as such that I don't agree, but that I just wasn't convinced enough of that degree of religious subtext
+ I did very much like his analysis and application of the types of religion that had been demoted to a reduced role after the enlightenment.
+ thought he presented the 'religion of resistance' and 'religion of revolution' argument well, forgive me if haven't cited that verbatim as I don't have the book with me anymore.
Read it for a religious studies module I am taking at University. Although it is a fairly academic book, it still has very interesting and accessible arguments.
- the book was a little bit too politically opinionated at some points - which I don't necessarily disagree with, I just don't think this book was the right place for them.
- presented some interesting and clear arguments, but I don't they were brought together as coherently as they could have been
- not sure about the amount of religious sub-text found in President Bush's post-9/11 address, I can understand it is likely there was some, but, I don't necessarily agree with the parallels he drew to biblical verses in most of his examples. Not as such that I don't agree, but that I just wasn't convinced enough of that degree of religious subtext
+ I did very much like his analysis and application of the types of religion that had been demoted to a reduced role after the enlightenment.
+ thought he presented the 'religion of resistance' and 'religion of revolution' argument well, forgive me if haven't cited that verbatim as I don't have the book with me anymore.
Read it for a religious studies module I am taking at University. Although it is a fairly academic book, it still has very interesting and accessible arguments.
February 17, 2008
I think that this is a good compilation of the three major 'Western' religions and some of their more radical followers view and use of religion to back up their actions. Most importantly, I think it provided a pretty even representation of the followers of the different religions and didn't focus too much on any one (it didn't turn into a book on Islamic fundamentalists and their radical views).
It was pretty short and easy to read and I think it provided some good insight into how 'terrorists' and their supporters view their actions. For me (someone how had never studies terrorism or aggression before) it really did help me to understand some of the deeper issues that are currently taking place in the US and overseas and it helped me understand a little better why the old 'why can't we all just get along' is a little too simplistic.
It was pretty short and easy to read and I think it provided some good insight into how 'terrorists' and their supporters view their actions. For me (someone how had never studies terrorism or aggression before) it really did help me to understand some of the deeper issues that are currently taking place in the US and overseas and it helped me understand a little better why the old 'why can't we all just get along' is a little too simplistic.
October 20, 2008
This book opened my eyes to the deep political and religious issues surrounding the events of 9/11 and its aftermath. Without it I might have gotten sucked in with all the rest of the countries fanaticism in retaliation for those events. Also it showed me how deeply interwoven the religious right is with conservative political parties and how that relationship is no longer healthy for either.
October 22, 2008
Lincoln, a linguist by trade certainly has some interesting things to say about the speeches and rhetoric of both Osama bin Laden and American politicians. It's not been some time since I finished the book, but it amounted to a fairly expected critique of both parties - especially the ideological absurdities of Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell and George Bush.
November 17, 2008
I found the latter half, in which Lincoln clearly explains many of his central views on the study of the religion, more engaging than the analysis tied to the 9/11 attacks in the first chapters. (I think it would have been different reading this when it was first published, not long after that date.)
March 11, 2010
If you're looking to rhetoric for an explanation of terrorism, this might be your book. While some of Lincoln's arguments seemed stretched at best, his analysis of both Bin Laden's and Bush's speeches post 9/11 contribute to our notion not just a "cosmic war," (with Bush saying "May God continue to bless the United States of America), but some attempt to define the essence of religion itself.
Want to read
June 5, 2012He does seem to go on a liberal rant at times (I'm neither relentlessly "for" or "against" Bush), and the easy route would just be to write him off as such, but there is some value to the content of this book. It's an interesting read, even if it is about politics. It's not something I'd normally read outside of school, but since I've read through some I think I might finish it after finals.
July 25, 2012
This book has so much to offer to a mainstream audience, but its academic language will prevent many people from examining it. Lincoln's comparisons between the religious maximalist statements from state, Christian and Muslim zealots (bin Ladin, Bush, Robertson, Falwell) following 9/11 is fascinating and thought-provoking for anyone who believes in any sort of nation-religion.
December 22, 2014
Very useful book for understanding how Sept 11 has changed Religious Studies, and for understanding current discourse on (and motivations behind) religious violence.
ETA: Re-read in December 2014, with a fine tooth comb. Still useful. Might be worth a 4 out of five, in re-read.
ETA: Re-read in December 2014, with a fine tooth comb. Still useful. Might be worth a 4 out of five, in re-read.
January 25, 2008
There are some holes in it, but it's a pretty amazing study into religion as it APPLIES to us today. Very insightful.
March 12, 2008
This was an excellent analysis of the fundamentalist movements as expressed in both al Qaida and in the Christian Right in the United States.
May 19, 2009
This is what I like about religious studies.
Read
April 24, 2010Not terribly impressed.
January 25, 2016
Enjoyed some of the appendices
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews