Posted on 05/08/2015 4:30:28 AM PDT by Biggirl
The idea that Islam needs to reform is again in the spotlight following the recent publication of Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s new book, Heretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
IMHO: No matter how it’s “reformed” it will still be a meaningless cult as regards anyone’s Eternal Salvation (Acts 4:12). Islam was made up out of whole cloth by a moon - worshipping murderous pedophile. There’s no THERE there. Bottom line; It’s a total political/religious system which, if it follows it’s “scriptural” laws, requires a murderous, male oligarchy to run it. How does one “reform” such a lash-up?
Here's some more from the article.
While Ali makes the argument that Islam can reform—and is in desperate need of taking the extreme measures she suggests to do so—many of her critics offer a plethora of opposing claims, including that Islam need not reform at all.
The one argument not being made, however, is the one I make below—namely, that Islam has already “reformed.” And violence, intolerance, and extremism—typified by the Islamic State (“ISIS”)—are the net result of this “reformation.” Such a claim only sounds absurd due to our understanding of the word “reform.” Yet despite its positive connotations, “reform” simply means to “make changes (in something, typically a social, political, or economic institution or practice) in order to improve it.” Synonyms of “reform” include “make better,” “ameliorate,” and “improve”—splendid words all, yet words all subjective and loaded with Western connotations. Muslim notions of “improving” society can include purging it of “infidels” and “apostates,” and segregating Muslim men from women, keeping the latter under wraps or quarantined at home. Banning many forms of freedoms taken for granted in the West—from alcohol consumption to religious and gender equality—is an “improvement” and a “betterment” of society from a strictly Islamic point of view.
This is a quite good article (originally published in 2014) at the source. I regret that it is not more skillfully excerpted for Freepers to actually dig into it.
The main idea being put forward is that jihad IS the Reformation of Islam. Fascinating.
The concept of Reformation as applied here to Islam is backwards. The radical wackos are not seeking to reform Islam. They are seeking reversion. The correct term is Reversion.
Evolutionary reform over recent decades of rapid change and civilization have created an Islam that is different and more refined and much less agressive. The wackos want none of the modern world nor the associated sin and impurity associated with the modernized life.
Reversion is necessary to obtain the Quranic puritanism that is so cherished. The modern reformed Islam of say Jakarta or Cairo or Abu Dhabi is hated.
I tried to post in a posting the WHOLE article of another write-up from Frontpage, yet it got taken out. If you want to read the whole article, go to the site in question.
Now why would anyone need to reform a peaceful religion? This makes no sense.
ping to snip
Islam’s current reformation follows the same logic of the Protestant Reformation—specifically by prioritizing scripture over centuries of tradition and legal debate—but with antithetical results that reflect the contradictory teachings of the core texts of Christianity and Islam.
As with Christianity, throughout most of its history, Islam’s scriptures, specifically its “twin pillars,” the Koran (literal words of Allah) and the Hadith (words and deeds of Allah’s prophet, Muhammad), were inaccessible to the overwhelming majority of Muslims. Only a few scholars, or ulema—literally, “they who know”—were literate in Arabic and/or had possession of Islam’s scriptures. The average Muslim knew only the basics of Islam, or its “Five Pillars.”
In this context, a “medieval synthesis” flourished throughout the Islamic world. Guided by an evolving general consensus (or ijma‘), Muslims sought to accommodate reality by, in medieval historian Daniel Pipes’ words,
The full article is very interesting and makes a lot of sense. You would never suspect that from the scanty excerpt that starts this thread.
Thus, if Martin Luther (d. 1546) rejected the extra-scriptural accretions of the Church and “reformed” Christianity by aligning it exclusively with scripture, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab (d. 1787), one of Islam’s first modern reformers, “called for a return to the pure, authentic Islam of the Prophet, and the rejection of the accretions that had corrupted it and distorted it” (Bernard Lewis, The Middle East, p. 333).
The unadulterated words of God—or Allah—are all that matter for the “reformists,” with ISIS at their head.
The Islamic Reformation Is Here—and It’s ISIS.
Exactly. Sola korana. Sola Allah. Sola Muhammad. Sola Islam.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.