Well, it is the word Arab Christians use ;).
Muslims generally believe in a line of prophets stretching back to Abraham and including Jesus, with Muhammed as the terminal one.
With the kind of ignorance being shown in this thread, it would be surprising if there WEREN’T some backlash.
Well, there was the effort during the election to cut Obama down by portraying him as a secret Muslim, as if being Muslim would automatically make him an America-hating heretic who was in cahoots with terrorists.
Yeah, I had to get the post off quickly…I even had to go back and make sure that I didn’t say “If Allah is his prophet…” long night.
Actually, to get to the matter, if Mohammed was his prophet, Jesus wasn’t, Christianity-wise, so it is not unreasonable to say that they are different gods. Either argument can be made, and I have no dog in this fight, but to imply that it is idiotic or unfair to say that they are different is not right.
hh
How did you come up with the idea that there is only one prophet per god? There are something like 20 “official” prophets in the Bible alone. Islam believes that all of those, plus Jesus, plus Muhammad, were prophets of Allah (which is the same god…Arab Christians call their god (which I assume is the same as non-Arab Christians’ god) Allah, as well).
Also Arabic speaking Jews I understand used the word Allah to refer their Jewish interpretation of God, so…
I always understood that classically Jews in the Mediterranean world considered the Islamic approach to God / Allah to be rather more theologically compatible to the Judaic understanding of God in fact than Christian Trinitarianism.
There certainly is a backlash in the Netherlands. Populist politician Geert Wilders founded his Party for Freedom (PVV) in 2006. The agenda of the PVV isn’t very clear, and they aren’t big on suggesting practical solutions and reasonable compromise. What they ARE big on, however, is a lot of strong retoric that those towelheads need to tone it down, or else.
And it works, with a large part of the malcontent electorate.
Yes, there are many many leaders just as there are in all religions. While there is a flatter structure to the hierarchy they all still meet for lunch once a year which is a tighter bond than any other religion holds over it’s various sects. When calls of jihad or fatwas are made they are made to all Muslims. It is truly an “us versus them” mentality that transcends the myth of local mosques operating in a vacuum. Countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia have a supreme religious leader or a common religious manifold that extends itself physically with a religious police force.
If you’re trying to suggest there isn’t a hierarchy that funnels money and terrorists from around the world then I disagree. The last 2 terrorist attacks had connections overseas that extended outward from a local mosque and then to another country. The same applies to 9/11. These terrorists came from many countries.
They all still meet for lunch once a year? Was this meant to be a joke?
Jihads aren’t “made,” and fatwas are made to whoever feels compelled to listen to them. Nobody is under any obligation to honor any fatwa pronounced by anybody.
You state that there’s a hierarchy that funnels money and terrorists from around the world. Please describe that hierarchy. Thank you.
Not unless the requirement to travel to Mecca is a joke.
and yet they’re made and followed. I guess the religious police don’t exist in Iran and Saudi Arabia to enforce the word of the religious leaders.
What’s to describe. Money is funneled to organizations that train people for terrorist actions. Do you think the money magically pools itself? It’s not hard to google.
You are equating millions of Muslims making a yearly, days-long pilgrimage that most of them only make once in their lives to a yearly meeting of a cabal of Islamic religious leaders are who secretly planning to rule the world? I’d love to hear your views on how people going to Disneyworld constitutes an Illuminati plot.
Describe the “making” of a jihad. Thank you.
Police exist in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and they enforce laws. Many of those laws are based on Sharia law.
Individual Islamic charities do not equal a hierarchy. Speaking of Googling, try “hierarchy.”
How did *you *come up with the idea that *I *came up with that idea?
hh
Because of this…
Why are they mutually exclusive? Why is it that if Mohammed was Allah’s prophet, Jesus couldn’t be? Because Muslims certainly believe he was.
Describe islamic terrorism. Thank you
An amorphous ideology with a loose, non-hierarchal network of radicals.
You’re quite welcome chap.
Once in a lifetime trip as well, generally. Damned hard to get a place I am led to understand by my mates.
Errr a once in a lifetime do it if you can religious obligation for a pilgrimage isn’t a hierarchy.
Mate, the Saudi religious police (who are more like a militia) enforce Saudi code, not individual religious scholars’ dictates, and the Saudi King is not a religious figure at all.
Of course that King plays to the Religious Conservative Base, rather like your Republican Party in the US, so they have all kinds of retarded laws.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the Saudi king head of the Wahabis, sort of like Queen Elizabeth is the head of the Anglican Church?
hh
Moving from GQ to GD.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
They’re voiced as such, but in actuality have no authoritative force in that regard. Sunni fatwas are pretty much completely non-binding for everyone but the scholar who made it. Shi’a fatwas are slightly more complicated. So for example Khomeini’s infamous fatwa against Rushdie wasn’t even binding on all Iranians or Shi’a. It is supposed to be taken seriously at least by those who view him as a religious “source of emulation”, which is an entirely voluntary association and had nothing to do with his government position ( technically - de facto I’m sure the prestige associated with the title brought many more followers ). But Khomeini was one of probably a dozen such at the time. Small ( or no, probably ) consolation to Rushdie, but it wasn’t like all Muslims were suddenly enjoined to seek his death - only those who were personal followers of Khomeini and not too squeamish. Quite a bit fewer than the whole Muslim world.
This is quite exaggerrated. To the “myth of local mosques operating a vacuum” one should add the myth of a unified hivemind or structure. There is none.
Iran is a theocracy, but in a bit of a semantic twist it does not have a supreme religious leader. That is to say that the supreme leader is a religious figure by constitutional fiat, but said leader is not head of the religion. Khamene’i is one of a number of Grand Ayatollahs in the Shi’a world and none have any hierarchical supremacy over any others. Influence and power varies, but it does so relative to individual abilities as theologians plus simple charisma. Khamene’i is actually not thought of that highly as a working theologian.
Saudi Arabia has a government-appointed head cleric, part of SA’s careful management and control of the religious establishment. However his position, such as it is, is owed to government authority, not religious mandate or hierarchy.
And that’s about it. With the Taliban no longer functioning as a state government, you’d be hard-pressed to find many other strong examples. Some voices, even in the Sunni world, carry more weight than others such as the clerical pronouncements from the Al-Azhar Mosque in Egypt. But their influence in informal, without the sort of ex cathedra infallibility that can be exercised by the Pope.
I’m trying to suggest exactly what I did - that there is NO single leader of either the Shi’a or the Sunni religious sects as Silverstreak Wonder insists much exist. I was speaking to the actual clerical hierarchy or lack of it in the religion, which has fuck-all to do with the cell and leadership structure of terrorist organizations, an entirely separate topic.
Again, this has nothing to do with anything I was saying :). Some terrorists are likely lone nuts, some may be part of wholly independent cells inspired by outside forces, some are no doubt part of loosely organized networks and some, undoubtedly, are members of tightly structured, highly hierarchical core organizations. I imagine the third is most typical, but I expect all are in play at one time or another.
Which has exactly zip to do with whether there is currently a single Sunni or Shi’a Caliph anywhere in the world. Except perhaps for the very tangential fact that ObL wishes there were one and that he agreed with him :D.
I didn’t say *mutually *exclusive.
Many of the pagan deities are more than happy to incorporate all other gods that come along into their pantheons, including Jesus. If we recall Paul’s address to the Athenians on Mars Hill, we can see that they even had a statue, or something or other, can’t remember, to the Unknown God.
Point being, orthodox Christianity disallows the doctrine that Muhammed is a pretty good guy, since he removes Jesus from His rightful place, irrespective of Mo’s giving Jesus a patronizing, and begrudging nod.
hh
No. It sounds like you are thinking of Wahabbism as a church, which it is not. It’s a school of thought in Islam. The Saudi government enforces some of these beliefs but the King is not in charge of it.