Islam and censorship

Me too…hehe :wink:

I don’t know what their rational is. But as far as I can tell there’s not a lot wiggle room on if they should follow what Muhammad said to do. The only thing I can think of is people question the accuracy and authenticity of different hadiths. So maybe they can just say they don’t believe what that Hadith said Muhammad said about something.

There doesn’t seem to much wiggle room on the separation of Islamic laws and the laws of the state either.

1 Like

All of these things can be interpreted in various ways. Various Christians at various points in the past would have various interpretations of scripture with different implications. Same scripture, same religion.

But we see very different results. Either Muslims are somehow inherently different or there’s something very different about the religion that produces different results.

For example, Muhammad governed. Jesus did not. So it would seem logical Muslims would have a hard time separating Islamic laws of governance and a secular state. Where as Jesus did not govern and said people should follow the laws of the land with certain exceptions.

Not really. There’s been a lot of stuff throughout the history of Christianity that we would say are horrible results now.

Is the horrible Christian stuff happening now?

What does that have to do with anything.

And yet predominantly Christian nations are able to democratize and even separate church and state. Yes, have there been awful things done in the name of god. Too many to list. But In 2019, predominantly Christian nations (or at least during the founding) are at the complete different end of the spectrum in terms of human rights, democratization, scientific development and more. I’m sure there are a complex web of factors. But is the religion that influenced the culture not one to point at?

1 Like

Absolutely right, and I’m not contesting that. But you seem to be saying it would be impossible for Muslims to make any progress as Christians have done.

It might not have much to do with the religion itself, but it clearly has a lot to do with the interpretation of the religion. I would argue that it is partly down to the religion itself.

Sure. But what’s in question here is if it’s possible for a Muslim to maintain a moderate interpretation of their scriptures and disregard immoral commands. Christians do it.

I wouldn’t say impossible. But I’m skeptical as I don’t see much wiggle room for it other than rejection. Reforming Islam seems to mean turning more radical or in reality more like how it was with Muhammad and his followers. Isis and Saudi are examples for reforming to more true versions of Islam as they both claim.

Also the Protestant reformation was really violent. People were burned alive, tourtured and slaughtered. It didn’t happen easily. I don’t see it being any easier for Muslims and that’s scary to think about.

1 Like

I’m going to watch Mick’s video and see what this guy has to say!

It took Christians, in general, a long time to do it. I wasn’t under the impression that anyone was arguing that Muslims, in general, were incapable of doing it.

Might take a few hundred years. People were shoving state-sanctioned hot pokers up other people’s backsides in the name of Jesus what, 400 odd years ago?

1 Like

Mod’s note: quoted material is from this post

Did Jesus govern? I know he is called the king of Kings but he did not have a earthly kingdom during his time. Muhammad commanded a army and ruled an empire (or at least laid out the foundation of an empire)

I would suspect if Jesus was a war general…we might have more militant Christians today. Christians are called to Christ like so that would probably change how the religion is followed.

I believe I told you, 5 solas are the foundation of Christianity as Protestants.

The Five Solas are:

  1. Sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”): The Bible alone is our highest authority.
  2. Sola Fide (“faith alone”): We are saved through faith alone in Jesus Christ.
  3. Sola Gratia (“grace alone”): We are saved by the grace of God alone.
  4. Solus Christus (“Christ alone”): Jesus Christ alone is our Lord, Savior, and King.
  5. Soli Deo Gloria (“to the glory of God alone”): We live for the glory of God alone.

17 posts were split to a new topic: Split topic

What about 'O Sole Mio?

Okay okay–the Five Solae are Lutheran, not pan-Protestant. And Luther only articulated the first three.

I AM TOM CRUISE! I should have added the industrial revolution was also a problem.

I see a lot of criticism but few answers in your discourse. How would you solve the, apparent, divisiveness in the west?

‘Intellectuals’ like to spew rhetoric to the point of blowhardyness that makes them sound both holier than thou and out of touch with reality. I think some of you are so stuck in your echo chamber that you don’t realize you’re only, at most, 30% of any western population. Peterson is speaking to the vast majority who lack the will and patience to get into drawn out dialogue about their own why’s.

Did it matter to any of the Christian theocratic monarchs who claimed the mandate of heaven (phrasing it whichever way they liked)? Even modern day constitutional monarchs still reign “by the grace of God”.

Get in your time machine and go and watch a medieval battle between Christians and “Saracens” or what have you. Then tell me how obvious it is that one side has a pacifist religion. :cactus:

Great. As Dawud pointed out, that’s not a view that has broad consensus, but it’s your opinion, so okay. Now can you explain how Methodists, Presbyterians, etc. fail to meet those five criteria? And members of the (Lutheran) state church of Denmark, while we’re at it?

We’ve already been over that many have used God for violence and other atrocities. But the result today is Muslim countries and Countries where Christianity was/is the primary influencing religion are on a complete opposite end of the spectrum.

But to be fair to the crusades, it was a logical reaction and strangely took a long time to happen. As with war, atrocities and violence are part of it. But Muslims were expanding rapidly and also into Christian territory, Rome was raided a few times by Muslims or at least tried to. Pilgrimaged into the holy land became almost impossible after some time when it was actually open to Christians under Muslim control. Which brings up my point, to Christians there is no Holy War theologically. To Muslims, they do have this concept. Which is why they view those events so differently, they see it as a holy war. Christians at the time mostly wanted to be allowed to make their pilgrimage amongst other obvious interests of the people in power. Probably a reason why Christians are not blowing themselves up screaming Jesus is the lord while Muslims are screaming allah akbar.

Maybe another time. There enough for multiple books to write about and still not come to any satisfaction of people.