[ExI] Religions and violence [Was Re: Sarah Palin]

Mirco Romanato painlord2k at libero.it
Wed Aug 18 12:53:01 UTC 2010

Il 22/07/2010 0.16, Tomasz Rola ha scritto:
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, max at maxmore.com wrote:
>> Gosh, I?m glad we?re discussing the fine details of Catholic
>> theology here. :-)
> [...]
>> The main point is: Do you agree with the Muslims who claim that
>> their highest religious authorities and texts do *not* tell them to
>> fight the infidel?
>> Max
> I think it's a bit hard to agree or disagree, unless one reads "the
> text" in original, i.e. in Arabic language.

Old Arabic language.
This is an old point made by Islamists and Islam apologists.
But this also imply that 99.99% of the Muslims have nothing to say about
their religion. Not much apart their life experience.
I remember a blog of a young girl in Iraq (few months after the toppling
of Saddam) where she complained about how difficult were the lessons of
Arabic. I suppose she was talking about the "international" version used
to communicate between different people from Morocco to Pakistan and

> From what I've heard so far, reading a translation "does not count",
> whatever this really means (not sure yet).

It mean that Allah spoke in the Quran in Arabic (classic). So all other
are "interpretation of the meaning". The few that know the Arabic
Classic are the only that can interpret the Quran; so, if you are a
native arabic speaker you are more able to understand the Quran that,
for example, a Malay or a Pakistani.

> As of authorities, I guess
> it is same as the case with Catholic religious authorities, they tend
> to disagree (more or less) even with their previous manifestations.

The problem Islam have not a central authority able to settle and bind
all to a "official" position.
Then, Catholic Authorities consider the understanding mutable as
knowledge know.
Islam is not interested in "Theology" (to study and understand God) like
Christianity. This because Allah is not understandable by definition and
is not interested in be understood; what concern Islam is Theopraxy, to
do as God order and wish, no need to understand what one do.
God (Christian's), in the reverse, want be know and understood, so
studying it is a good deed. In this, what one do is important as much as
the reason one do it.

> Maybe I am not clear enough, so we can reverse the situation and
> question. I know there are "doves" and "hawks" in US, both have their
> "sacred texts" (some shared) and authorities - now, question is, do
> American "texts" and "authorities" tell their citizens to go to war
> or the other way? And the answer is a bit complicated, isn't it?

The "sacred texts" don't order their followers to "go in war" against
someone; they, at best, give some reasons to go in war and some reasons
to don't. In Christianity people is expected to choose between good and
evil. Is this course of action good? Will it cause good in the long
time? And in the short?

In Islam people is expected to do as the "sacred text" command; no one
can prohibit what is allowed and allow what is prohibit; and you can
broke any (sacred or profane) law if enhance Islam power.
The concepts of "good" and "evil" in Islam are very different from the
same concept in Christianity.

Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog <http://extropolitca.blogspot.com/>

Leggimi su Estropico Blog <http://estropico.blogspot.com/>

*Mirco Romanato*

-------------- next part --------------

Nessun virus nel messaggio in uscita.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com 
Versione: 9.0.851 / Database dei virus: 271.1.1/3079 -  Data di rilascio: 08/18/10 08:35:00

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list