The Islamic Discussion Thread ٤: It's Always Sunni In Arabia

[Dreamersistan]

Same as every religion
Eventually the moderates will be the majority

It's already happening, and will continue to with time and technology. Radicals are faltering and people are already seeing holes in religious prophecies. Plus everyone wants to partay!

[Racist Commonwelath of East Virginia]

Islam looks like it is going to collapse like Catholicism.

Since when Catholicism ''collapsed''? Or you mean it lost its traditional values?

People will just stop practicing them, or caring. As muslim societies become more modern (like Turkey), Islam and Islamic practices become less and less relevant to the daily lives of people.

[Gospel Power]

It will become bigger than Christianity, it is harsher, and muslims have more children then any other religions

[Azadistan-land of the free]

Actually i was writing a book written by a GCSE sociology lecturer and it said the Islamic world is becoming more religious. Look at Iran also I think the Islamic world will become a superpower due to oil, Imran Khan's anti-corruption platform, failures of leadership elsewhere, the rise of the real left in Britain and increased investment in science and technology (an area previously neglected).

[Inetsograd Soviet]

Same as every religion
Eventually the moderates will be the majority

Only if the forces the moderates are moderates to remain dominant, who are slowly but surely fading.

[Racist Commonwelath of East Virginia]

Islam is an important faith for millions of people across the world but it’s clear to everyone that there are some serious problems. What will Islam look like in 20 or 30 years time? Islamic religious prescriptions, such as the prohibition of extramarital sex or consumption of alcohol and 5 times daily prayer, are becoming increasingly less relevant. There is no way that Muslims pray 5 times a day with rapid 8 hour weekly work shifts. I don’t think any of the Muslims I know even prey at all. Of course there is the political issue of whether secularism and democracy is comparisons with Islamic theology, which is mostly law not really theology at all; Indonesia and Turkey are good examples of co-existence. Even in those countries Islam has become less and less relevant to the lives of young people. Funnily enough, some of the most irreligious societies on earth (Albania and Azerbaijan I’m looking at you) are majority Muslim and have a strong secular tradition. I personally think that Islam will end up like catholics, with most Muslims becoming irreligious, anti-religious or ‘lapsed’ with some sticking true to the core tennants of the faith. Islam looks like it is going to collapse like Catholicism.

I think you're really underestimating the religiosity of the Islamic world. Such a massive shift certainly isn't coming in the next 20-30 years.

Maybe not, but the shift is inevitable eventually. It will happen. I think your overestimating it. If you look at Iran, people in the cities are less religious and people who move to the city from the country become progressively less religious. Many young people are already beginning to rebel against Islamic authority anyway.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Same as every religion
Eventually the moderates will be the majority

It's already happening, and will continue to with time and technology. Radicals are faltering and people are already seeing holes in religious prophecies. Plus everyone wants to partay!

My point exactly
Right now we see radicals all over the news and think that’s the majority, but really they’re just the dying vestiges of hardliners
Eventually “radical Islam” will look the same as modern day “radical Christianity”

[Ifreann]

Fully Automated Luxury Reformed Space Islam.

[Strength and Order]

Hopefully nonexistence. While I have nothing against Muslims themselves, their faith sounds much more like a cult than a religion.

And yes, there is a difference.

[Dreamersistan]

Actually i was writing a book written by a GCSE sociology lecturer and it said the Islamic world is becoming more religious. Look at Iran also I think the Islamic world will become a superpower due to oil, Imran Khan's anti-corruption platform, failures of leadership elsewhere, the rise of the real left in Britain and increased investment in science and technology (an area previously neglected).

Quite the opposite. It's growing in the west because of the need for identity, and sinking into cultural tribalism. This has been expanding since 2009. In the SE, ME and NE, islam is slowly getting moderated. KSA, UAE, Oman, BD, Qatar, Malay and so on are less hardcore islamic. It's decreasing slowly in Pak. There are some areas where it's growing. All of them have the oppression of muslims or the perception of it. Palestine, Iran and India, where the nationalist hindu movement is pushing ppl into it. I'm not sure abt Syria, since reports are difficult to come by.

Iran and Bahrain have always been outliers, they're mostly Shi'a. Islam won't disappear, none of the major religions do. They assimilate little by little and people pick and choose what works. Few ppl would like to live in tents or plan for war rn, the world may be messed up but it's still the best it's been in history. It's the inculcated groups that keep religiosity alive. Govt support for it has diminished, except where they use them as pawns to fight their battles

edit: diff between cult and religion? size and viewpoint. Judaism and Christianity also arose as cults.

[Pasong Tirad]

Since when Catholicism ''collapsed''? Or you mean it lost its traditional values?

People will just stop practicing them, or caring. As muslim societies become more modern (like Turkey), Islam and Islamic practices become less and less relevant to the daily lives of people.

You don't watch a whole lot of news, do you, Mr. Wayne?

[United Muscovite Nations]

It's already happening, and will continue to with time and technology. Radicals are faltering and people are already seeing holes in religious prophecies. Plus everyone wants to partay!

My point exactly
Right now we see radicals all over the news and think that’s the majority, but really they’re just the dying vestiges of hardliners
Eventually “radical Islam” will look the same as modern day “radical Christianity”

Depends how you define radicalism. What we might say is radical religion today looks pretty moderate to people in the Middle East.

[Hirota]

Actually i was writing a book written by a GCSE sociology lecturer and it said the Islamic world is becoming more religious.

Writing a book written by someone else? Thats called plagarism

I imagine you made a typo there right?

Look at Iran also I think the Islamic world will become a superpower due to oil, Imran Khan's anti-corruption platform, failures of leadership elsewhere, the rise of the real left in Britain and increased investment in science and technology (an area previously neglected).

Iran is a good example with the pre and post revolution of '78 & '79, although I'd like to think it's softening lately.

It's probably worth raising the question of if people think Islam needs it's own Martin Luther, which is an often repeated argument. I'd argue no, primarily because there are a half dozen different sects of Islam already which all have varying levels of dislike for one another, much like post-Reformation Christianity and it's multitude of different branches.

[Azadistan-land of the free]

It's already happening, and will continue to with time and technology. Radicals are faltering and people are already seeing holes in religious prophecies. Plus everyone wants to partay!

My point exactly
Right now we see radicals all over the news and think that’s the majority, but really they’re just the dying vestiges of hardliners
Eventually “radical Islam” will look the same as modern day “radical Christianity”

I agree but there is a difference between devout and radical for example the leaders of the Nasqhbandi Sufi Order or Rumi were pious(Rumi even giving up wealth and power for Islam) but were not radicalised see http://naqshbandi.org/) Also there is an increasing number of converts to Islam meaning more than just people being "culturally" Muslim is at work in the fast growth of Islam. And Imran khan mentions Islam in his speeches all the time these days. Just because he is not a fascist doesnt make him "secular". Oh and the fact that only a few countries are mentioned. Egypt introduced religious police and so more against alcohol, Egypt also saw islamic party the Muslim Brotherhood win elections(they were deposed by the fascists in the army).

[Dreamersistan]

My point exactly
Right now we see radicals all over the news and think that’s the majority, but really they’re just the dying vestiges of hardliners
Eventually “radical Islam” will look the same as modern day “radical Christianity”

I agree but there is a difference between devout and radical for example the leaders of the Nasqhbandi Sufi Order or Rumi were pious(Rumi even giving up wealth and power for Islam) but were not radicalised see http://naqshbandi.org/) Also there is an increasing number of converts to Islam meaning more than just people being "culturally" Muslim is at work in the fast growth of Islam. And Imran khan mentions Islam in his speeches all the time these days. Just because he is not a fascist doesnt make him "secular". Oh and the fact that only a few countries are mentioned. Egypt introduced religious police and so more against alcohol, Egypt also saw islamic party the Muslim Brotherhood win elections(they were deposed by the fascists in the army).

That's political islam. It's a way to get people to identify under an umbrella. Imran khan is considered a hypocrite muslim by the original tenets

The ppl who call to oldschool warring islam are in Pakistan's NWFP and afghanistan regions, in the levant. Pretty much anywhere that muslims are having a horrid time and need a way to group together. This includes certain areas in the west. Reports of the UK's intense religiosity are baffling to me. It's rarely seen here in the ME other than the holy cities in KSA

[Inetsograd Soviet]

It's probably worth raising the question of if people think Islam needs it's own Martin Luther, which is an often repeated argument. I'd argue no, primarily because there are a half dozen different sects of Islam already which all have varying levels of dislike for one another, much like post-Reformation Christianity and it's multitude of different branches.

Also the main attempts at reformation in response to new challenges have yielded beauties like Salafism.

[Azadistan-land of the free]

I agree but there is a difference between devout and radical for example the leaders of the Nasqhbandi Sufi Order or Rumi were pious(Rumi even giving up wealth and power for Islam) but were not radicalised see http://naqshbandi.org/) Also there is an increasing number of converts to Islam meaning more than just people being "culturally" Muslim is at work in the fast growth of Islam. And Imran khan mentions Islam in his speeches all the time these days. Just because he is not a fascist doesnt make him "secular". Oh and the fact that only a few countries are mentioned. Egypt introduced religious police and so more against alcohol, Egypt also saw islamic party the Muslim Brotherhood win elections(they were deposed by the fascists in the army).

That's political islam. It's a way to get people to identify under an umbrella. Imran khan is considered a hypocrite muslim by the original tenets

The ppl who call to oldschool warring islam are in Pakistan's NWFP and afghanistan regions, in the levant. Pretty much anywhere that muslims are having a horrid time and need a way to group together. This includes certain areas in the west. Reports of the UK's intense religiosity are baffling to me. It's rarely seen here in the ME other than the holy cities in KSA

Well aggressive wars between Muslims(such as in Afghanistan unlike those between Muslims and non-Muslims) were never considered lesser jihad by the majority of scholars. Also Imran Khan is married to a Sufi Pir. And why is political Islam only considered real when its violent or totalitarian.

[Hirota]

It's probably worth raising the question of if people think Islam needs it's own Martin Luther, which is an often repeated argument. I'd argue no, primarily because there are a half dozen different sects of Islam already which all have varying levels of dislike for one another, much like post-Reformation Christianity and it's multitude of different branches.

Also the main attempts at reformation in response to new challenges have yielded beauties like Salafism.

Yeah, and Salafi jihadism being particularly nasty.

[Alvecia]

Also the main attempts at reformation in response to new challenges have yielded beauties like Salafism.

Yeah, and Salafi jihadism being particularly nasty.

I mean, the counter reformation wasn't exactly sunshine and daisies

[Beylik of Tunis]

People often throw around terms like ‘hardliners’, ‘moderates’ and ‘radicals’ without any serious concern for who actually constitute these groups, which is why we best avoid speaking about it in this way. For example, Islamism is often depicted as a radical far right, or at least conservative, political ideology, but this overlooks the fact that a number of Islamists were liberals, like Said Halim Pasha, some, like Al-Kawakibi were secularists and some, most notably Ghulam Ahmed Parviz, were even anti-religious. To talk about Islam in a ‘traditional hardliner’ vs ‘liberal modern’ is too simplistic. The Secondly, just because many Muslims appear non-practicing does not mean that Islam and a sense of Muslimness are not important features of their identity or day to day experience.

Now in terms of Islam’s future, there have been notable changes. Firstly, the conservative Islamist movement has sparked a secularist impulse among religious intellectuals, not to protect society from religion but to protect religion from the state; arguing that political Islam would inevitably soil Islam itself. A notable instance would be Iranian intellectual Abdolkarim Suroush. Secondly, women within religious circles and various Islamist movements have been engaging in religious tradition in order to establish definite rights for women, which has challenged the male dominated religious orthodoxy and broader societal values. Regardless, I don’t think Islam has a predictable future, but I personally believe that Islamic law will effectively fizzle out as a legal system and instead operate more like a set of moral codes, Islamic-ness will be a central feature of most Muslim societies but their political and judicial systems will not be theocratic or enforce religious law. We might expect to see changes similar to those that rocked American society in the middle of the 20th century, but whereas for many Americans a sense of Christianness is irrelevant, Islam will come to play a more predominant role in Muslim countries, operating in place of nationalism as a glue that holds people together.

[Bienenhalde]

Islamic religious prescriptions, such as the prohibition of extramarital sex or consumption of alcohol and 5 times daily prayer, are becoming increasingly less relevant. There is no way that Muslims pray 5 times a day with rapid 8 hour weekly work shifts.

Islam has its problems, and certainly there are some beliefs or practices among some Muslims which I would find absurd or morally wrong, but I do not see the problem with any of the things you listed. Why would you object to Islam for prohibiting extramarital sex, for example, when Christianity and many other world religions do as well? And prohibiting alcohol seems like a good idea to me too, after all alcohol has been a great scourge on many societies, leading to disorderly and immoral behavior. In the past many Christians have also supported temperance movements and even the prohibition of alcohol by law. While it may be difficult to pray five times daily, I do not see why it should be a problem. Even if it does interfere with busy work-shifts, I do not see why we should surrender our spiritual discipline to the goals of materialistic profit-seeking. This seems more like a problem with modern society than a problem with religion.

[Dreamersistan]

The `muslim problem' as those in the west see it, is quite clouded by a lack of historic perspective. It was gone for years, even before the death throes Uthmani (ottoman) sultanate. Think of it as the King Arthur stories. The celts held onto the myth that if trouble arises in Britain, Arthur will rise. That's what fuels the radicals. The need to free their countries. Palestine's opposition of Jewish settlers was for the sake of power, promises of self determination and greed. Islam was their excuse (I don't think they'd be any more conducive to goodwill relations with Christians or Buddhists). The war against the soviets was about identity and self determination. The label used to band them together was islam.

KSA's rulers came to power because of deals made with western powers. There are (were) hundreds of kingdoms and tribes who fought them tooth and nail but couldn't win. It's the royal image of islam that's being pushed. Iran was extremely unhappy with its puppet ruler, it could only be overthrown by people banding together under the political label of Islam. Same with post-war iraq and post-india Pakistan. The actual religion in its most warlike prescriptions calls for continuous, unending spread of the religion by diplomacy or sword. That's been dead for a century. What you have now is political use of an identity for rebellion, wars against invasion and attempts to fulfil prophecies as ISIS attempted. It's also being used to carve out cultural niche in foreign countries by 2nd and 3rd gen migrants, who feel entitled to acceptance in in a way their parents never did. Finding their birthright denied, they turn inward. They're not alone in this very human attempt to find belonging, and time and trends wean out such divisive attidues.

[Vistulange]

Yeah, and Salafi jihadism being particularly nasty.

I mean, the counter reformation wasn't exactly sunshine and daisies

I mean, the Reformation itself wasn't exactly sunshine and daisies.

Looking back to about 400-500 years ago, we tell it like a story, but the truth of the matter is that the Reformation was a process, as opposed to people waking up one day and simply saying "okay, let's not be Catholics any longer". Moreover, the Protestants and the others (too many to count, really) weren't exactly "tolerant": They simply disagreed with Roman Catholic doctrines on (admittedly) a lot of things.

I could be wrong, but I think the de-radicalization of Christianity is something more than simply the Reformation or the Counter-Reformation, and is a longer, more thorough process than "oh, Reformation happened and that's it".

Not that I think you claimed any of that, I just wanted to piggyback on your comment.

[Dreamersistan]

I mean, the counter reformation wasn't exactly sunshine and daisies

I mean, the Reformation itself wasn't exactly sunshine and daisies.

Looking back to about 400-500 years ago, we tell it like a story, but the truth of the matter is that the Reformation was a process, as opposed to people waking up one day and simply saying "okay, let's not be Catholics any longer". Moreover, the Protestants and the others (too many to count, really) weren't exactly "tolerant": They simply disagreed with Roman Catholic doctrines on (admittedly) a lot of things.

I could be wrong, but I think the de-radicalization of Christianity is something more than simply the Reformation or the Counter-Reformation, and is a longer, more thorough process than "oh, Reformation happened and that's it".

Not that I think you claimed any of that, I just wanted to piggyback on your comment.

Indeed. Reformation began with the annoyance over many of the Catholic church's vices, the extreme destruction caused by some of their decisions and of course the hypocrisy of indulgences. It took a long time, and many were killed, splinter groups were formed (some with crazy apocalyptic cult leaders themselves that put Mormonism to shame). Social change takes time and lingers on. Much like an android OS update

It isn't coincidence that in my travels, I've found the most autocratic leaders, the poorest and least educated populace and the most staunchly religious humans in the same spots. Religiosity is partly a matter of social culture, partly political pressure and partly economic freedoms to pursue and explore life. I agree that the attitude of warring and extreme legal actions and views of Islam will continue to fall away, and it'll remain as a social glue to bind people together under shared identity. People will not outright disagree to the troublesome aspects of the faith, but covertly accept others' breaking of them and avoid sermonising or seething about them. It's happened everywehre.. BD, India, Pak, Indonesia and Malaysia (quite strongly muslim countries, not far behind KSA), Sudan. The UAE, Kuwait and Oman have always been pretty lax. It's easy to believe in the promises in the realm beyond when you're an bedouin in the scorching deserts of the Levant or the arabian peninsula. Not so easy when they are fast cars, high rises, good booze and pretty chicks waiting outside.

OTOH.. if the muslim countries keep getting attacked, stay poor or get impoverished further, they become targets for the demagogues who shout apocalyptic stories, bring up a nostalgia of a world where Muslims were #1 that hasn't been seen in 600 years and bring them together under the guise of a prophecied future. In that case we could see a large increase in religiosity.

[Kollin]

Same thing happened to Christianity. Not in 20-30 years, i don't think, but eventually people referencing Islamic terror attacks in the future will be the same as people referencing Christian witch-hunts right now.