Islam versus christianity

I think it also has a lot more to do with Arab identity. Osama bin Laden hates the secular governments of Arab nations easily as much as he hates the US. They were afraid of him long before we were. He sees the Arab world united as an Islamic empire. Others prefer secular states ruled by totalitarian regimes. What is most foreign to them is the Western way of life that is slowly seeping in, and that people like bin Laden want to protect against.

I think instead of Christianity vs. Islam, you have to look at this as an Arab war for self-identity. Democracy is as much a part of this as Christianity, with many Arabs hating the former as much or more than the latter. If they give people individual freedom, it allows them to be sacreligious, and allows them to discard those parts of their culture they deem inconsequential. That is too much for people like bin Laden to stomach.

We have seen the same kind of thing with Waco and Oklahoma City, here. Our culture changes, and sometimes those left behind can't tolerate it and respond violently.

But dont you think the political and economic divide in the world has some role in this.

On the whole ,nice post, BS.


Keep me posted.

I think those are secondary. These folks have an idea of what life is like, much like ultra-conservatives in the US, and how French culture-protectionists have in France. France is a golden example, really, though no one feels strongly enough about it, and they don't have religious precedent to kill people over it as Islam does.

To me economics and politics are the conduits through which this cultural blending is occuring. People like bin Laden see the erosion of this heritage as a erosion of Arabic power, which is held in place by these cultural norms. Look at Islamic law, for instance. You could say he supports it because he thinks it is holy, sure, but it also ensures a concrete preservation of the culture, and harshly, barbarically punishes those who seek to change it or jeopardize the power of those in charge.

I don't think Islamic law is as cut and dried as many make it out to be. Recent publications by imams in Indonesia and other more secular Islamic societies have proposed some extremely "radical" ideas, like universal education for both men and women, an end to enforcement of the hijab, and some quite interesting arguments for democracy with copious reference to the Qur'an, good, sound and unfortunately in some cases unsound haddith.

Islam is undergoing an ideological revolution at the moment. Whilst the troubles in the Middle East are providing a significant stumbling block to a more widespread knowledge of the new ideas, they do exist and they are having increasing influence. Muslim leaders like Gus Dur/Abdurrahman Wahid (who was also incidentally President of Indonesia for a short while) publicly advocated the divergence of church and state, particularly during the New Order period but these ideas have continued to some extent even today. Cultural (ie nonpolitical) Islam, as most famously proposed by Nurcholish Masjid (sp?) became a powerful force for liberalisation throughout Southeast Asia.

Islam is not of itself the problem here, just as Christianity is not the cause of closemindedness or intolerance amongst some in the west. Unfortunately just like every other religion it can be used to justify violence and evil, but in reality the issues in the Muslim world are more concerned with social, economic and cultural problems than with Islam. Islam merely provides a forum for their debate. EDIT: BakerStreet's point about Arabs is interesting, but I confess I don't know enough about the region to make an intelligent argument about it, so I'll stick to what I know.

Yes Islam or Christianity is not the issue here. The issue is who controls economic and political hegenomy in the world at present. Any religion can be used for good or bad purposes but does it augur well for the world, if power is concentrated in just a supermighty superpower, who does not want little people having dear own 'little dreams' ?

I have lived in Muslim controlled Countries. their religon is one of hate. They arrive in other Countries only cause chaos at a later time.

" if power is concentrated in just a supermighty superpower, who does not want little people having dear own 'little dreams' "

It certainly is disconcerting to the handful of petty thugs that control the handful of nations that churn out terrorists like an assembly line. Radical Islam is great for them, it keeps them in power. I think it is laughable to think that the leaders of Arab countries live in their palaces, make billions in the face of their people's poverty, and you say we are the ones "who does not want little people having dear own 'little dreams' "...

If the Arabs want to make a war with the Christians (which includes me)... BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You need not be so emotionally suracharged, Repub. Take it easy. Shanti.

TAKE IT EASY!!!!!!!! The Arabs have been killing innocent Christians all for Allah and Muhammed!!!! The Arabs would not stand a chance if they declared a "Holy War"!! BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If economics had a damn thing to do with this then Central America would be producing more terrorists that any area except Africa. This war has been raging for as long as there has been organized religion.

This war has been raging for as long as there has been organized religion.

I agree.

The Arabs have been killing innocent Christians all for Allah and Muhammed!!!!

While this may be true, don't you remember your history? What about the Crusades, the Inquisition, and WWII Germany?
Christians have been just as willing to fight someone over disagreeing with their beliefs as Muslims, or Jews.

"While this may be true, don't you remember your history? What about the Crusades, the Inquisition, and WWII Germany? Christians have been just as willing to fight someone over disagreeing with their beliefs as Muslims, or Jews."

You should also remember that Muslims had invaded Spain, etc. People tend to think the Crusades were one-sided. Hardly. Expansion was on the mind of both sides. The Crusades was an abuse of the Christian religion. "Imperialization" of the Islamic religion was undertaken by Mohammed himself, and is considered a plan-of-action by people like bin Laden and other radicals today.

As well, the statement about WWII is not entirely valid; that was not a CHRISTIAN campaign; in fact, many (admittedly the minority) Christians in Germany opposed the Nazi regime and some even died in the concentration camps.

And what of the Christian young men and women that were among those who came from countries all around the globe to fight the nazi regime? The fact that they are forgotten in your sweeping indictment of "Christians" says much.

If you look at Hilter's occultism, and the inner spirituality they were trying to build arround the SS cult, I think you'll find that there wasn't anything Christian about Naziism, either. There were some anti-semitic elements in the Catholic church that sympathised with Nazis, but Nazism was not a Christian movement, not in the least.

Anyway, I think it would be pretty futile to start comparing modern Islam and modern Christianity in terms of anti-Semitism.

"You should also remember that Muslims had invaded Spain, etc. People tend to think the Crusades were one-sided. Hardly. Expansion was on the mind of both sides. The Crusades was an abuse of the Christian religion. "Imperialization" of the Islamic religion was undertaken by Mohammed himself, and is considered a plan-of-action by people like bin Laden and other radicals today."

Except that while in areas under christian control you would be tortured or killed for being a Muslim or Jew, while in Islamic Spain christians and jews were given complete freedom to worship and even access to positions within the Islamic government. Unfortunately, theres really no denying that what people did during the middle ages "for" christianity was terrible.

"Unfortunately, theres really no denying that what people did during the middle ages "for" christianity was terrible."

Revisionist history, cwarsh. You take the actions of SOME areas of Christian Europe, and use them to damn the whole, and take the good action of SOME areas of the Islamic Middle East and use them to laudthe whole. On the whole Jews were no more safe in the Middle East than they were in Europe, and Jewish communities thrived in Europe during the Inquisition. Don't damn and bless entire regions blindly.

I find it humorous that people want to balance the bahavior with some Muslims today with the behavior of Christians 600 years ago. Regardless, more people died in Rwanda in one year during the 1990's than died during the entire Inquisition.

Why must people look at atrocity and feel the need say "See we did that too, we have no right to condemn"?. Why not just call it atrocity? You can't balance what a bunch of dead people did half a millinium ago with what is being done NOW. We are not culpable for what the medieval Catholic church did, but those who support and donate to terrorism NOW are very, very culpable.

When you point to the crusades continually, all you do is validate modern atrocity in the minds of sick people.

The Crusades was an abuse of the Christian religion.

Certainly not!!!!
It was an attempt to regain what was ours in the first place, and what we had lost. No need to be apologetic about it. Please...

Do not forget that most of the Middle East was Christian before the Arab(Muslim Bedouins from todays region of saudi arabia) Conquest. Mecca had a thriving Jewish population.

I know that Jews call the period of Islamic spain "The Golden Age of Spain" because of the freedoms that Jews (as well as christians) were allowed under Muslim rule, and the progress that was achieved during that period.

cwarsh: Yes, you undoubtedly know the worst of whatever you intend to dislike. Would you consider Spain to be one of the more moderate areas during the inquisition? There were horrible excesses on both sides, and in the end it is HISTORY, whereas the behavior of radical Islamic terrorists and terrorist states is CURRENT EVENTS.

I think hatred is not the monopoly of one religion. If human emotions go unchecked,it creates hatred and religious divide whether you are christian, budhist or muslim. But I believe,at least in spirit, Budhism seems to be the most pacific,right?

No religion teaches hatred, but the capacity for human cruelty seems to be universal,right?

" No religion teaches hatred, but the capacity for human cruelty seems to be universal,right?"

Lots of religions have taught hatred, even Christianity. The question is, do they have the ability to evolve beyond it. Islam, at least its radical varieties, believe that such evolution is wrong, so they stay in the Middle Ages, in roughly the same place the Catholic Church was when it was burning people.

You have to face the fact that the "kinder, gentler" Islam that we respect is as hated as as we are by those radical Muslims we are fighting. That modern brand of Islam rips the power from religious officials and gives it to secular authority, and that they can't stomach. When the Catholic Church, for instance, relinquished its "secular" governmental powers, and focused on the spiritual, it began to evolve. People who were power hungry and greedy had less tools to work with. Islam will be the same, hopefully.