Islam As a Pagan Religion

[MugenOne]

According to Franz Rosenzweig, a German theologian, pagan society is totalitarian in nature. In fact, Rosenzweig wrote, pagan society dissolves the individual into a mere instrument of race or state. That is precisely what Rosenzweig meant when he described Islam as pagan, and Allah as an apotheosized despot. He began, that is, with a general characterization of pagan society, that is, society in the absence of God’s self-revelation through love, and then considered Islam as a specific case of a paganism that parodies the outward form of revealed religion. God’s self-revelation as an act of love first makes possible human individuality: the individual human is an individual precisely because he is loved.

It seems shocked to discover that radical Islam promotes a culture of death. Paganism everywhere and always is a culture of death, for the simple reason that pagans know that their time on Earth is limited. Pagans fight to the death for their land and culture, knowing that each fight might be the last, and one fight inevitably must be; for that reason all pagan culture exalts death.

When Western political scientists speak of “totalitarianism”, they refer to “modern regimes in which the state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private behavior” (Wikipedia). Rosenzweig explains something deeper: the individual has no identity separate from the group and therefore cannot act in opposition to it. Because the individual is merely an instrument of the totality, not an individual, there is no capacity for doubt.

And that is precisely that there is no possibility of doubt in Islam. That is because in Islam, the zone of the sacred contains only a single concept, which is tawhid, or the oneness of God. Tawhid leaves no room for tensions, rebellions, or doubts. A deep and tragic sense of doubt is not even a conceptual possibility.

MugenOne

 

[Mirdath]

According to the Vatican, they worship the same God the Catholics do. Islam isn’t a pagan religion – not that paganism is, as you assume, a necessarily bad thing.

 

[ahmadhassan]

an advice for you ,dont take islam from nonmuslims or you will be like that who go to dentist bec he has stomache

i warn you this site full of idiocy bec now i will show you that the christ called allah
The Gospel of John Syriac - Aramaic
1 ܒܪܫܝܬ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܡܠܬܐ ܘܗܘ ܡܠܬܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ ܘܐܠܗܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܗܘ ܡܠܬܐ
2 ܗܢܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܒܪܫܝܬ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ
the word allah in aramic is here ܐܠܗܐ
kerala.com/wiki-Alaha
learnassyrian.com/aramaic/church/church.html
may allah guide us to straight way

 

[ahmadhassan]

do you think christ was a pagan worshipper when he prayed to allah at the mountain?

 

[Verisimilitude]

According to the Vatican, they worship the same God the Catholics do. Islam isn’t a pagan religion – not that paganism is, as you assume, a necessarily bad thing.

Allah is not God.

The Church regards with esteem also the Muslims. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even his inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, his virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. (Nostra Aetate 3; cf. Lumen Gentium 16)

I think there is a very specific reason why allah nor Muhammad are mentioned specifically.

 

[ahmadhassan]

Allah is not God.

I think there is a very specific reason why allah nor Muhammad are mentioned specifically.

thats what we call ******ce

 

[Booklover]

According to the Vatican, they worship the same God the Catholics do. Islam isn’t a pagan religion – not that paganism is, as you assume, a necessarily bad thing.

The Catechism states that they profess to worship the same God. the “god” who speaks in the Quran is the creation of Muhammad.

Vickie

 

[Booklover]

For pagan sources of Islam see here.

Vickie

 

[ahmadhassan]

For pagan sources of Islam see here.

Vickie

why do christians tell about islam that is really in their religion

 

[KarenNC]

Rosenzweig explains something deeper: the individual has no identity separate from the group and therefore cannot act in opposition to it. Because the individual is merely an instrument of the totality, not an individual, there is no capacity for doubt.

So a Catholic is free to be an individual in matters of religion, to act in opposition to the group if s/he deems their way to be a better way?

I will agree that in earlier times religions were, by and large, primarily state or tribal religions and part of the identity of the individual as a member of that tribe or state (you are x so you worship y). There was not a lot of concept of choosing one’s individual form of religious expression as totally separate from that of your tribe or state. Judaism is no different. Medieval Christianity was no different. America was unique among nations that there was not a state religion that everyone was expected to practice. That idea of a state separate from a specific religion is slowly spreading but far from worldwide.

For the ancients such as the Romans and Greeks at least, however, it was not as cut and dried as all that. Yes, you were expected to participate in the state rites to perpetuate the harmony and existence of your nation, but you were also free to belong to any of the mystery cults or worship other Gods in addition to the state ones. It was more a concern with orthopraxis (right action) in terms of piety rather than orthodoxy (right belief) in terms of what you believed about the Gods.

 

[guardian1]

why do christians tell about islam that is really in their religion

and muslims talk about christianity, even though they never practiced it

 

[kellicouch77]

What happens to a Catholic who decides he or she no longer wishes to be Catholic? Are they put to death?

What happens to a Muslim who decides to leave that line of faith? Are they stoned? Imprisoned? Tortured?

Just something to think about.

 

[Mirdath]

Allah is not God.

First you say no, then you quote the Catechism saying yes.

[Muslims]
adore the one God, living and subsisting in himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men

To which other ‘one God’ would the Catechism be referring?

Booklover:

The Catechism states that they profess to worship the same God. the “god” who speaks in the Quran is the creation of Muhammad.

God is as much a creation of Mohammed as he is of Abraham or Moses or Paul. The Muslims see God differently from the Christians – no trinity, no Logos as God and Man, and so on and so forth, but it’s still your God. The two groups simply ascribe different attributes to him.

To reuse an example I’ve seen here several times before, it’s like I’m walking with a friend and we see a man bicycle past us. I note he’s wearing a green shirt; my friend thinks it’s blue. We still saw the same guy.

 

[MHalsey]

To reuse an example I’ve seen here several times before, it’s like I’m walking with a friend and we see a man bicycle past us. I note he’s wearing a green shirt; my friend thinks it’s blue. We still saw the same guy.

But only one of you was correct. You **note **the green shirt, while your friend **thinks **it’s blue. The shirt isn’t blue AND green.

So although you see the same guy, one of you has a distorted vision of him. This is how I see Islam. It is a distorted vision of the True God.

 

[Mickey]

No God of mine would approve of dhimmitude.

 

[Mirdath]

But only one of you was correct. You **note **the green shirt, while your friend **thinks **it’s blue. The shirt isn’t blue AND green.

So although you see the same guy, one of you has a distorted vision of him. This is how I see Islam. It is a distorted vision of the True God.

Exactly! This is the stance the Catholic Church takes regarding other religions’ perception of God – and, generally, the stance those other religions take regarding Catholicism An attitude of ‘we’re right, you’re pretty close, but we’re definitely talking about the same thing here’.

 

[KarenNC]

What happens to a Catholic who decides he or she no longer wishes to be Catholic? Are they put to death?

What happens to a Muslim who decides to leave that line of faith? Are they stoned? Imprisoned? Tortured?

Just something to think about.

Depends, what time period and in what culture are we talking about? It is the separation of the state from religion, not the religion itself, that allows that Catholic to decide s/he no longer wishes to be Catholic and to go his/her merry way. It has not always been thus for Catholics or Protestants, not even for those who wanted to go from one to the other.

newadvent.org/cathen/01624b.htm
"When the Roman Empire became Christian, apostates were punished by deprivation of all civil rights. They could not give evidence in a court of law, and could neither bequeath nor inherit property. To induce anyone to apostatize was an offence punishable with death …In the Middle Ages, both civil and canon law classed apostates with heretics; so much so that title 9 of the fifth book of the Decretals of Gregory IX, which treats of apostasy, contains only a secondary provision concerning apostasy a Fide [iv, Friedberg, Corpus juris canonici (Leipzig, 1879-81), II, 790-792]. Boniface VIII however, by a provision which was amended in the sixth book of the Decretals [V, title 2, De h£reticis, 13 (Friedberg, II, 1075)], merely classes apostates with heretics in respect of the penalties which they incur. This decretal, which only mentions apostate Jews by name, was applied indifferently to all. The Inquisition could therefore proceed against them. The Spanish Inquisition was directed, at the end of the fifteenth century, chiefly against apostates, the Maranos, or new Christians, Jews converted by force rather than by conviction; while in 1609 it dealt severely with the Moriscos, or professedly-converted Moors of Spain.

Today the temporal penalties formerly inflicted on apostates and heretics cannot be enforced, and have fallen into abeyance."

In America (and in all non-theocratic countries of which I am aware, even those that have a state religion but who are not run by that religious authority), the Catholic and the Muslim are equally free to leave their faiths. Their doing so is not seen as a threat to the stability or existence of the state. In a theocratic state (of any religion), the state has a vested interest in whether that person remains part of the state religion.

It is a function of politics when run by the religion, not inherent in the religion itself. If you want a really scary look at whether there would be support today for similar punishments to heretics (and thus apostates) go to the recent thread on “was the burning of heretics justified.” Some of the attitudes displayed and justifications given by *self-professed Christians *were chilling.

 

[KarenNC]

No God of mine would approve of dhimmitude.

Well, it is an open question as to whether the God of the Muslims approves of dhimmitude any more than the God of the Christians approved of similar treatment of the Jews by those Christians in power throughout most of history. It goes back to politics and religious control of politics rather than necessarily the religion itself.

Compare the attitude of the Christian government and the Muslim government, both claiming to be acting with the blessing of God, in the article below.(it is unfortunately too long to quote)

jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=378&letter=D

 

[MHalsey]

Exactly! This is the stance the Catholic Church takes regarding other religions’ perception of God – and, generally, the stance those other religions take regarding Catholicism An attitude of ‘we’re right, you’re pretty close, but we’re definitely talking about the same thing here’.

The difference here is that the Catholic Church is far older than Islam. To continue your analogy, let’s say you saw the cyclist, but your friend is going by what you said, then says, no that’s a corruption of what the actual color was. And a guy claiming to be the representative of the cyclist said so and his statement is proven by the fact that he said it was so.

That sounds illogical, but this is the same claim made by Muslims. The Bible is corrupt, and the Qur’an is actual word of God because the Qur’an says it is.

 

[Verisimilitude]

First you say no, then you quote the Catechism saying yes.

Selective reading is a common problem. The Catechism does not recognize allah or Muhammad.

To which other ‘one God’ would the Catechism be referring?

There is only one God.

God is as much a creation of Mohammed as he is of Abraham or Moses or Paul. The Muslims see God differently from the Christians – no trinity, no Logos as God and Man, and so on and so forth, but it’s still your God. The two groups simply ascribe different attributes to him.

No, that’s not true.

To reuse an example I’ve seen here several times before, it’s like I’m walking with a friend and we see a man bicycle past us. I note he’s wearing a green shirt; my friend thinks it’s blue. We still saw the same guy.

A better more astute example:
My grandfather started a business that has remained in my family since he died. It is a success because grandfather established rules on how to conduct that business, and I follow them. A stranger arrives and says he is a long lost relative and wants to be included in the family, and the business. The stranger says grandfather really had different rules than the established ones I know and use, and wants me to change my rules to suit him (or he will kill me because if I refuse him he will claim I am persecuting him.) I refuse.

The stranger has no proof of legitimacy to my grandfather.
The stranger has no authority to speak for my grandfather.

Just becauae you, another stranger, thinks the first stranger is also a relative of mine- only becasue the first stranger says so, is your problem, not mine*.

*But it has become my problem because I am now defending my grandfather’s good name and my business to two people who have no business in it. My grandfather has not changed, just your, and the first strangers misconception about him has.