Comments on: Modernity, Christianity and Islam

By: Islam, Modernized.

Islam, Modernized. — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:04:33 +0000

[...] at The League of Ordinary Gentlemen, there is a discussion about the prospects of Islam liberalizing so its values can come more into line with those of the modern western [...]

By: MNPundit

MNPundit — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:01:05 +0000

“The theological and historical truth of these claims are almost irrelevant – the larger point is that Christians have self-consciously accepted the legitimacy (and, indeed, desirability) of liberalism and modernity.”

What are you talking about? Have you not been to an evangelical church in America?

By: Bob Cheeks

Bob Cheeks — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:37:10 +0000

Stalin, the mass starvation in the Ukraine, low/no tech mass murder!

By: Bob Cheeks

Bob Cheeks — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:32:43 +0000

No fluke!

By: Jaybird

Jaybird — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:47:46 +0000

There are one hundred ways to look at, for example, the birth of the Church of England.

Not all of them lead to the conclusion that what was going on was particularly Liberal (though, indeed, there are some that do).

By: Jaybird

Jaybird — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:33:14 +0000

There are many dynamics going on here.

Here’s one:
Whether I think that the Middle East would benefit from an embrace of the Enlightenment Culture that we saw in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s and which philosophy led to such things as emancipation, universal suffrage, and alcohol prohibition?

Well, I suppose I would.

The other dynamic is this: Let’s say that Islam does “evolve” as much as Protestantism in the United States has over the last 200 years or so. Is it likely to evolve similarly in the “just as different over the years” sense of the term or similarly in the “ended up in a similar place” sense?

Being a pessimist, I suspect the former rather than the latter.

I don’t see an Imam Spong showing up or a Muslim Max Lucado writing childrens’ books about how Allah makes grey dots and gold stars obsolete. Hey, maybe they will. Sure.

But if one were to show up, one thinks that one would have shown up in the aftermath of that whole Rushdie thing. That would have been the *PERFECT* time for it.

What was at stake? It was a book. Nobody blew up, no buildings were crashing to the ground, there was no billion-dollar sum of damage being done or whathaveyou. It was a book. Imam Spong could have jumped up and said that we need a new re-interpretation of Allah and His Prophet in these days, Mohammed (PBUH) is a parable in his own right, perhaps the intercession of Al-Lat *IS* to be desired, Allah is Love, those fundies have an unsophisticated interpretation of the Koran, so on and so forth. It was about a *BOOK*. JUST A BOOK.

Nope.

I would like to see Islam take a road down an Enlightenment Path.

I suspect that their evolution is likely to be similar only insofar as it is as different where it is now from where it was then… and the question becomes “will that be likely to be better or worse than now?”

I’m a pessimist. It’ll probably be worse.

Moreover, anything we do to nudge will have unintended consequences. More often than not, these will be *BAD* unintended consequences (see, for example, Iraq).

By: JosephFM

JosephFM — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:16:40 +0000

The point about the Middle East stands though: how do you see them getting from royalism and theocracy to a society that shares your values, and indeed why would you want to, if you thought that would be necessarily accompanied by some kind of even greater non-theistic evil?

By: Cascadian

Cascadian — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:13:56 +0000

I would have thought it was the place of the church in society, education, private land holdings and all. Looking back those were the things that were rid of first. It doesn’t seem much to do at all with the after life and everything to do with get out of my life in this world now. I suppose it will depend on who we consider the classical liberals to be.

By: Jaybird

Jaybird — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:08:02 +0000

I think it’s more the attitude that there ain’t nothin’ special about the clerics. We all have a relationship with Providence. We don’t need to go through a priest or pope or imam. Those what tell you that they are gatekeepers are lying. Perhaps to themselves, perhaps to you… but they ain’t telling the truth.

Clerics, of course, frame this as “clericist.”

By: Cascadian

Cascadian — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:05:47 +0000

Isn’t anti-clericalism pretty much the bread and butter of classical liberalism?