Christianity and Islam: ANY similarities?

[Ziggy Stardust]

Cool, but it doesn't make any sense... What do you mean?

Not all terrorists are muslims

 

[HannibalBarka]

A wise man once said: Not all muslems are terrorists, but all terrorists are muslems.

He may be wise, but he sure is ignorant

 

[Swedishguy]

He may be wise, but he sure is ignorant

Actually, it was a muslem that said it. But I can't remember his name; it disturbs to boot!

 

[HannibalBarka]

Actually, it was a muslem that said it. But I can't remember his name; it disturbs to boot!

He may be muslim, he sure is still ignorant

 

[SecretKnowledge]

The kind of reform you mention is relatively easy to do in Christianity, it is a simiple and flexible belief system: believe Jesus died for your sins, and love your brother. That is about it. It is basic and fundamental and as such, can evolve around any culture.

As people try to complicate it, or mold it into a social system as the dominant philosophy, it tends to fall into corruption and break down. It is not intended to be a political, but a counterculture, an oasis of rebellion against a religious totalitarian regime. That is why it is so different from Islam, which is more like communism, in that they always have the need to expand, "we need more people to be perfect". They work in opposite tandem, Christianity works better when it is is persecution, and Islam works better as a demand to dominate. Interesting, but different.

In Islam, the Koran and Mohammed's example are the main ideal, until they can change these, there is going to be problems dividing politics and religion. Luckily, Christianity works better without politics. Religion and politics should always be separate.

If Islam only used the Koran it wouldn't be impossibly hard to consider religion separate from politics; the main problem stems from the enthusiasm for viewing the hadiths (which were used to create Sharia) as divine and apparently equal to the Koran. Although it could take a while some type of change will probably occur as it indeed is occuring in many countries. The alignment of extreme religious views and geopolitical objectives is prolonging this process and has been partly responsible for its reverse in some countries.

Many religious texts have elements that could be construed as political and some even have extensive legal ideas, often more than the Koran. In these religions the legal stuff is now viewed as irreleveant generally. Most of the cultures of the world did not view government as an purely political institution however that has changed and is changing all over the world.

One thing that has contributed to the diminishment of legalistic versions of many religions is the fact that modernization makes such an approach unworkable as well as the fact that doubt over their origin starts to appear.

 

[Katheryn]

If Islam only used the Koran it wouldn't be impossibly hard to consider religion separate from politics; the main problem stems from the enthusiasm for viewing the hadiths (which were used to create Sharia) as divine and apparently equal to the Koran. Although it could take a while some type of change will probably occur as it indeed is occuring in many countries. The alignment of extreme religious views and geopolitical objectives is prolonging this process and has been partly responsible for its reverse in some countries.

Many religious texts have elements that could be construed as political and some even have extensive legal ideas, often more than the Koran. In these religions the legal stuff is now viewed as irreleveant generally. Most of the cultures of the world did not view government as an purely political institution however that has changed and is changing all over the world.

One thing that has contributed to the diminishment of legalistic versions of many religions is the fact that modernization makes such an approach unworkable as well as the fact that doubt over their origin starts to appear.

I have heard that for scholars, the 'later texts' supercede the earlier texts. If this is true, then the Hadiths are much more acceptable for teaching than the Koran. Is that true? If there is a contradiction, then the later Hadiths take precedence over the earlier writings. Isn't this a problem for reforming the teachings of Islam?

But you are absolutely right, for one the Jewish people have pretty well abandoned all their civil law.

 

[SecretKnowledge]

I have heard that for scholars, the 'later texts' supercede the earlier texts. If this is true, then the Hadiths are much more acceptable for teaching than the Koran. Is that true? If there is a contradiction, then the later Hadiths take precedence over the earlier writings. Isn't this a problem for reforming the teachings of Islam?

But you are absolutely right, for one the Jewish people have pretty well abandoned all their civil law.

From what I have heard it seems that the traditional position is that certain parts of the Quran abrogate other parts. Although I am not entirely sure of this it seems like they actually believe that the hadiths do not contradict the Quran and so try to rationalize using them. From some strange reason they are treated as a source of divine law even though Islam claims that Mohammed was only a transmitter of a message (not to mention the fact that the hadiths did not really come from Mohammed - even much of the Quran probably did not).

The idea of parts of the Quran cancelling out other parts is somewhat peculiar since it is upheld as a sacred, full message. The use of the hadiths seems to contradict rationality since they are admitted to be of human origin. When a person gives the hadiths supremacy over the Quran that makes it seem like that person doesn't regard the Quran as complete or perfect. If someone is going to accept progressive revelation why not accept that it continues even to the present regardless of what previous religious authorities said?


Muslims in the West often take a much less legalistic approach and are far more willing to discard the legal elements. This attitude appears to be gaining some ground in Muslim countries among the most important sections of the demographics. Even in theological change is slow in coming the pressures of modernization and globalization may change attitudes anyways.

If historical research on the so-called Islamic law were to be carried out in enough Muslim countries they might acknowledge its fallibility. Entrenched elites and many clerics would be very hard to convice though so schism might result. It would be interesting to see what type of interpretation would become predominant if more Muslim countries allowed a more open look at religious ideas as has happened in many other parts of the world.