I suspect the response will be nothing as usual, speech saying it doesn’t represent Islam, lone wolf, all the rest of it. Nothing further just another attack.
Actually, if one reads the Quran and the Hadiths of the Prophet one can see that Islam is actually a very detailed and practical how-to guide with very specific dos and don’ts (mostly don’ts) dealing with even the most mundane matters.
It makes sense from a historical standpoint - you needed to develop strict no-nonsense rules for a bunch of unruly desert tribesmen in order to forge them into a disciplined and effective fighting force.
Nothing comparable to the Council of Nicaea and detailed theological discussion about the exact metaphysical nature and the duality of the Son of God, not to mention subsequent doctrinal changes in the different branches of Christianity.
All these changes throughout the centuries mean that in the West on almost one takes the Bible word-for-word seriously, and if they do, they’re able to keep that belief in the private sphere, legacy of the pope Gregory VII/Henry showdown.
So you can believe that every word in the Old Testament is absolute truth from God, that eating shellfish is an abomination etc. but that doesn’t stop you from working at the DMV for example - you’re perfectly capable of separating the public and the private sphere, despite (probably) trying to “save” other people’s souls and handing out pamphlets. Naturally, on some issues such as gay marriage there can be friction, but like I said you can probably function as a productive member of society.
Islam is different - like I said, it’s a detailed do-this don’t do-that list for every aspect of one’s life - private and public. So you cannot simply be super-duper religious inside the mosque and revert back to your official persona in the public sphere when you get back to the proverbial DMV, providing you follow the Quran and the Hadiths literally. From public manifestations of devotion (beards and scarves) to non-submission to infidel laws.
How can you submit to the moral, penal or criminal code of the infidel if the Hadiths explicitly forbid it?
Throughout the centuries the Ottoman Empire developed the non-literal interpretation of sunni Islam in their lands, which is somewhat similar to the Western concept of religion - “hey, we’re not 100% serious about all of that stuff”. That’s why although pork was haram, there was a tacit acceptance of alcohol consumption (although NOT public drunkeness), for example.
Now, with the spread of Saudi-funded salafi Islam this “moderate” sunni Islam is being suplanted by back-to-the-roots literal reading of the Quran and the Hadiths - as in every word is abso-fucking-lutely true.
And since, as I said before, it’s a detailed list, it’s about martyrdom, how to kill infidels, how to keep female slaves etc. - all those rules created for disciplining desert tribesmen embarking upon conquest millennia and half ago.
So when a Western politician says that ISIS “doesn’t represent true Islam”, the uncomfortable truth is that it actually does - they’re simply taking 7th century rules and applying them to the modern world, even Mohammad’s prophesies about the imminent destruction of the Eastern Roman (Rum) Empire.
And that’s the difference - in the West no one is taking the Bible literally in practice, there are no stonings, no one is putting to practice rules about keeping female slaves etc.
Imagine if Pope Francis stepped out on the balcony overlooking St. Peter’s Square in the Vatican and announced, like his predecessor Urban one millennia ago, that those that take the cross and die fighting the infidel are guaranteed a place in heaven. I suppose the general reaction would be incredulity followed by hysterical laughter.
The problem with sunni Islam, and it’s lack of doctrinal evolution, is that when an equivalent situation such as the one I outlined above occurs in Islam (spread of salafi islam) there is a sizeable minority willing to listen, and worse, to act.
4 Likes
I was talking about terrorism. I mean you even said:[quote=“hugh_gilly, post:63, topic:228299”]
Well terrorism will always be around as stupid people disagree with government and overreact.
[/quote]
Is terrorism 100% preventable? Again, I’ll quote myself[quote=“Aragorn, post:87, topic:228299”]
This question does not mean I think terrorism is no issue at all
[/quote]
Even though this quote was a response to usmc, I never said or even implied this in my post. In fact I said pretty much the opposite:[quote=“Aragorn, post:87, topic:228299”]
most certainly does NOT extend even farther to mean I am in favor of just opening the flood gates (to refugees or immigrants)
[/quote]
Moving on–as usmc says, “perspective matters”. So too does location, something else I alluded to in my post by saying this:[quote=“Aragorn, post:88, topic:228299”]
Having survey results that show x% of muslims in the US support making Sharia a 2nd or a primary system of law here—that’s more likely to be radical yes
[/quote]
It would be radical here. I don’t want that here. But you can’t say that muslims living in THEIR OWN COUNTRY shouldn’t have a say in how they are governed, which is essentially how the question was phrased in the survey. And you also can’t say that the way they answer will be independent of their familial and cultural history, because it likely won’t be.
Location matters, perspective matters.
Indeed. Thank you for the addition. Treating Islam as anything different than what it is leads to kind of issues Swedes will have to deal with for many years to come. If they have a lot of time left, of course. Trying to be more Catholic than the Pope has never been a smart thing to do.
1 Like
Yeah, the Swedes are the least religious people in Europe, despite still being steeped in many Lutheran traditions.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing, it just that they cannot understand the concept of the integration of religion and politics - especially that Islam is both a religious and a political system.
Some branches of Christianity still retain this connection characteristic of Islam, although in much reduced terms.
The Russian Orthodox Church for example is the extension of the Russian State, so it’s not interested in day-to-day lives of their flock, the Bible and the supposed salvation of their souls but in harnessing their religious zeal into something more tangible - killing Russia’s enemies.
That’s fine if they want to live in a country with Sharia Law and stone woman to death all along.
What is not fine is if they come to the West with these viewpoints.
So for Westerners these people are radical.
1 Like
Which is precisely why I stated " I don’t want that (those views) here" and “location matters.”
This is an inherent problem with surveys as studies or as data mining.
It’s going to be hard for them to admit it’s a terrorist attack after publicly declaring they have no problems with their huge influx of Muslim immigrants. A terrorist attack, shortly after a night of rioting in the ‘immigrant’ parts of Stockholm is going to make it harder to maintain that narrative.
Or maybe they’ll cave and just say “mmmk, they could be behaving a bit better than they are.”
The WSJ is reporting he was given a deportation order on Feb 24th and had been on the run until the attack.