Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by shamrock_uk:
but you won't find government ministers doing it precisely because you need such a distorted Qu'ranic reading to support it.
|
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. [/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 ]