|
|
Post by Josh on Dec 22, 2008 18:22:39 GMT -8
Mo, I know you don't even want to start on this, but, hey, after all, it's part of your thesis so I'm such at some point you can touch in on this.
I'm very curious to hear some specific examples of personal Muslim revelations.
Also, I'm sure you've learned quite a few nuggets of interest about Islam in general (especially modern Islam). So, maybe at some point you could just throw out some of the most interesting things for us on this thread?
|
|
|
|
Post by robin on Dec 22, 2008 20:53:47 GMT -8
I know of some, but they have to do with Muslims being converted to Christianity through personal revelations, including dreams. I can try and find the information about these revelations, they are quite striking, but I'm certain that this is not the direction that you intended for this thread.
Robin
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Dec 22, 2008 21:06:40 GMT -8
I've read of many of those as well. Two sources come to mind: Ravi Zacharias- Indian Christian Apologist who has been able to speak in Mulsim countries, and also many are chronicles in the book Jesus Freaks.
They are, of course, quite fascinating. Still, I'm curious about the kinds of personal revelations Mo has come across in his studies on Islam.
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Dec 23, 2008 15:31:16 GMT -8
Will do. Yet another bookmark.
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Feb 1, 2009 13:53:45 GMT -8
Mo, I know you don't even want to start on this, but, hey, after all, it's part of your thesis so I'm such at some point you can touch in on this. I'm very curious to hear some specific examples of personal Muslim revelations. Also, I'm sure you've learned quite a few nuggets of interest about Islam in general (especially modern Islam). So, maybe at some point you could just throw out some of the most interesting things for us on this thread? Now that I paid my academic dues, I have time to write about this. First off: my thesis was about the image of Islam in a social network called studiVZ (similar to facebook though much bigger in Germany). So though I did come across a lot of Muslim writing, I can by no means claim to be an expert on Islam. Just to get this straight.  The thing with revelations in Islam is tricky. Muslims believe that Muhamad was the seal of the prophets - the last one to get direct divine orders. Hence as far as I understood it, Muslims don't claim to have heve been called upon by angels or even Allah himself. Cause if you claim that an angel has spoken to you, one could claim that you are a prophet which according to Islam's own logic would be rather heretic. Yet, Muslims - like Christians - are 100% sure of the truth of their faith. Unshakably. If you ask them how they can be sure, they speak of revelations along the lines of what Chris claims to have experienced: That they were made to know. This happens during prayer, during a walk, when they look at trees and ather stuff in nature and of course through a variety of miracles, etc. etc. etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 9, 2009 20:32:18 GMT -8
Similarly, Christians tend to distinguish between revelation of new, absolute truth and inner revelations of relative truth granted to the individual.
For instance, Paul says in Galatians 1:8-9:
But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
Here he is prohibiting new absolute revelation that might replace the gospel. You can see why Christians therefore have a really difficult time with the Muslim story of Gabriel's revelation to Muhammad.
But, on the other hand, Paul himself experienced and would not deny that private, relative revelation between God and man can and should occur in the life of the believer. For instance, Paul received his personal ministry from a direct encounter with Jesus. But this wasn't an event in which some fundamental doctrine was altered. It was what God had to say to Paul in his unique situation.
I'm not sure what you mean by 100% sure and therefor I don't know if I can agree with your statement that Christians are this way--- or Muslims for that matter.
This is one of the pitfalls of a faith that rests only on subjective experience.
However, many Muslims in their own right seek to support their faith with apologetic argument. Have you seen any attempts at Muslim apologetics among the groups you've studied?
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Feb 10, 2009 8:52:51 GMT -8
I'm not sure what you mean by 100% sure and therefor I don't know if I can agree with your statement that Christians are this way--- or Muslims for that matter.. Well, I didn't want to say that each Christian or Muslim is literally 100% certain of his faith. But here is something Margot posted a while ago in the Dawkins-scale-thread: "Wow, this is absolutely amazing. I've called myself a Christian for---well, lets just say a LONG time--and in any other time of my life, I would have marked myself as a 2, but this time I read each description and felt fully convinced I was a 1 !" (the number one was defined as: Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C. G. Jung, 'I do not believe, I know.') I haven't come across a Muslim who was doubtful or skeptical. This may be due to the fact that many of them found themselves in a position of defense, being cornered by a weird, unholy coalition of Christians and unbelievers. (don't look at me, I didn't participate, I only observed!) Anyway, lets not fuss about the 100%. The vast majority of both Christians and Muslims that I've met in my life was pretty convinced of the truth of their believes. This is one of the pitfalls of a faith that rests only on subjective experience. You can say THAT again! However, many Muslims in their own right seek to support their faith with apologetic argument. Have you seen any attempts at Muslim apologetics among the groups you've studied? I have indeed. One major field of muslim apologetic coincides with Christian apologetic: Language. When beeing confronted with diverse accusations, Muslims often argue that the arab language is very versatile and that things are being translated falsely. For instance I've heard someone argue, that the Quran doesn't really allow men to slap their wifes but that the term originally means "upbraid". There are many more examples. The interesting thing is that Muslims actually only accept the original Arab version of the Quran. There are translations for every language of the earth, but they usually come with a preamble saying that every translation is actually an interpretation. Every Muslim learns to read the Quaran in arab. Apparently that doesn't help avoiding a variety of different interpretations. I'd like to discuss this further in a separate thread some day. Another example concernes Muhamad's favorite wife Aicha. Apparently she was nine years old when the prophet married her and executed the marriage. So Muhamad is frequently being accused of child abuse. The muslim response to this charge is somewhat weird. Many argue that he did marry her at age nine but didn't execute the marriage until she was an adult, others translate that she was actually over 20 when she married him, again others argue that a digit got lost and she was really 19, yadda yadda yadda. Oh and again others argue that the information about the age of Aicha doesn't come from the Quran but from the Sunna, (a collection of stories, attitudes and opinions attributed to the prophet from which Muslims derive guidelines for their own lifes) and that it's hence worthless. Those who argue that way only accept the Quran as the source of their faith ("The Quran is Gods word, the Sunna is the work of men"). Another similarity between Christian and Muslim apologetic is the picking and choosing of relevant scripture passages. The wide array of secondary belief which you and I have diagnosed for Christianity also goes for Islam. Just like Osama Bin Laden and his disciples find the passages on which they justify their terrorism, there are those who find the exact opposite. Muslims often counter the accusation of Islam being a violent religion (see Al Qaida) with the argument, that islamic extremists pull Quran passages out of context (both literally and historically). I think I could go on forever. The things I've read in the last couple of months reminded me a lot of Christian arguments. You guys have way more in common than you might think. I'm positive one could work out general religious argumentation patterns. Any questions so far? |
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Feb 10, 2009 9:54:48 GMT -8
It certainly is not a pitfall for the one experiencing it. Rom 8:13-17 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, "Abba, Father." 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs--heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.
NKJV
But I would agree, that if it's all you have, it would be very hard to keep the faith at all since feelings ebb and flow. Christianity has (in addition to that subjective experience) a firm objective foundation in history though (IMO), where Islam relies solely on the testimony of one man, much like Mormonism does.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 11, 2009 21:31:38 GMT -8
Just a clarification that I wasn't describing you Chris. Emphasis on the only nor unduly denigrating personal faith experiences.
It's just that the fact that so many people claim to experience inner confirmations of contradictary faiths is important to keep in mind when analyzing our own faith experiences.
Chris, do you think that the inner confirmation of the Holy Spirit has any unique characteristics?
Mo wrote:
Well, I know a fair amount about Islam and I definitely agree that we hold much in common.
Mo wrote:
Probably, though I'm not convinced that they would be fundamentally different than simply basic logical argumentation patterns.
Mo wrote:
Go for it. I'd love to discus this too.
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Feb 13, 2009 4:00:47 GMT -8
Christianity has (in addition to that subjective experience) a firm objective foundation in history though (IMO), where Islam relies solely on the testimony of one man, much like Mormonism does. I hope to keep on exploring this supposed "firm objective foundation in history" with Josh in the other thread. For the time being I don't see anything near a firm foundation and especially not an objective one. What's the difference whether you believe this Paul or Peter guy or this Muhamad or Ali guy? It's not like Islam doesn't claim to have witnesses. |
|
