Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
Did Christianity reform on its own or was it forced to by reasonable people objecting to religious squabling in the civilized world? Probably some of both, because there are reasonable people everywhere, and if they're not shouted down or intimidated by unreasonable people they do have an influence.
|
Here lies one major concern I have regarding Islam. In contrast with the general historical awareness, even recognition of the manner in which the scriptures were gathered in Christianity, which made criticism of the texts possible, there seems to be little corresponding recognition in Islam. After all, it was a Roman emperor who ordered that an authoritative biblical text be put together. There was never a pristine original copy of the Bible to adhere to, and the essence of the faith was defined by synods and in creeds.
In the case of Islam, we have a sacred immovable text, so perfect and unamendable that only the original classical Arabic is considered valid for the practice of true Islam. (Which in turn has produced arguments regarding the perfection of classical Arabic.) This absolutism at the level of the Koran itself, is the key obstacle to the modernization of the faith as practiced and is what always threatens a return to its worst forms at any time.
I perceive it as sort of a 'Dale Carnegie' one-upsmanship, making its absolutism more influential and so taking it to the next and now impossible level. Perhaps it was a ploy at the time to make it more competitive with the well established Jewish and Christian faiths in the area. But its consequences are nasty.