Oh it's very clear to me when I read it. And it's not just the Qu'ran, but also countless Hadiths - which are even clearer. Muslim pacifists have reconciled the militant areas of their faith (to their credit) but one can totally understand the militants view with a literal reading of what is written. The Hadiths give clear examples - all military - of what a "struggle" is, and what happens to a warrior when they die, and the esteem warriors are held in in this life, compared to those who do not go to war.

As said, credit to the muslim who walks the road of peace, but you can't mislabel the militants as distortionists. It's simply not true. </font>[/QUOTE]Yet as I understand it, the Hadith is Islamic theology rather than being the word of Allah written in the Qu'ran. It is not divine, being written purely by men, and is largely used as a foundation for Sharia law. I know plenty of people who would call themselves 'good Muslims' who use only the Qu'ran as a source.

That raises an interesting question; we often see comparisons of Islam and Christianity - the difference being cited is that Christianity had a renaissance. I wonder if the criteria for an Islamic renaissance would be a decrease in the importance of the Hadith and Sharia...

[ 06-13-2004, 06:03 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

Most of the Hadiths are the words of Muhammad: The equivalent of Pauls letters in the Bible for example. The Hadiths show the practical application of the Qu'ran, and give details of Muhammads life.

The only equivalent of the Qu'ran in the bible would be the actual words of Jesus, as Christians believe he is God. The bible is believed to be the inspired word of God - written by men, guided by the Holy Spirit; unlike the Qu'ran which is believed to be a book in heaven dictated to Muhammad by the Archangel Gabriel.

The books of Kings, Chronicles, Job, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, plus all the Pauline letters, are in a sense, a Hadithic equivalent, as they are showing peoples lives and giving practical application of living life with God.

So, in short, I disagree. ;) :D I don't think an Islamic renaissance would be as you suggested.

In any case, Wahabism would be what you are refferring to. When the Wahabists came to power in Saudi Arabia, in a pool of blood they enforced a re-emphasis on Allah, as opposed to exalting the prophets - including Muhammad. I believe the disciples graves were desecrated, as they had been regarded as "Holy".

Thanks for your thoughts. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 06-14-2004, 12:59 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Oh, great, now you went and turned Paul into a girl. :rolleyes:

There are new hadithes that are published by imams. Some of them are not nice. Basicly it seems that in order to be a "good muslim" you must think for yourself and not let the others do their thinking for you.