“Islam needs its own Martin Luther,”
Mohammad specifically forbade the altering or moderating of Islam - to do so would be to gainsay both mohammad and allah; any one doing so must be killed.
An Islamic Martin Luther’s career would be short and bloody.
A "Reformation"? There's another way to parse that history.
A good case can be made that today's jihadis ARE the "Reformation" period of Islam. There are differences, of course, but today's Islamic Reformation shares these characteristics with earlier historic Reformations:
- anti-modern "back to the roots" ideology in the sense of acting as if a several thousand year period of "development of doctrine" never happened or was totally contemptible
- "Sola Korana" Scripture-only focus
- "Sola Fide" with zero recognition of the integrity of human reason per se
- belief in an all-efficient fate, which the Muslims call "kismet" and other historic reformers called "predestination"
- intolerance for art and images: tearing down of statues, shrines, paintings, smashing out stained glass, whitewashing of mosaics and murals: done by all reformation movements in history
- intolerance for veneration of holy people, places or things, saints, angels, etc.
- merger of church and state: the founding of national churches ("Church of England," etc.) headed by monarchs
- intolerance /contempt for human culture per se, if it is not specifically sanctioned, chapter and verse, in their holy books.
- setting off generations-long "clash of civilizations" warfare (e.g the European Wars of Religion 1524 to 1648).
Radical Islam doesn't need a "Reformation". Unfortunately, Radical Islam IS the Reformation.