4 ms·

There are some fundamental differences though. Correct me if I am wrong but Quran is considered final the way as it is, any attempt to rewrite is illegitimate.

There are some fundamental differences though. Correct me if I am wrong but Quran is considered final the way as it is, any attempt to rewrite is illegitimate. Whereas New Testament is considered as valid as the Old testament in many streams. The punishment for apostasy are also quite different across abrahamic religions. You can't argue for abolishing death penalty for apostates and yet, be considered adhering to Islam's core tenets. These two things, among others, pose unique challenges for reforms in Islam.

thomasahle 9y ago
I'm not sure I understand this comment. When was list time the bible was rewritten? Probably when then Canon was formalized 1500 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_New_Testament_canon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_New_Testame... Of course, this didn't stop people from interpreting the texts differently. Surely this has always been controversial and caused major strifes and wars between different Christian fractions. Isn't that pretty similar to how Islam has hundreds of different interpretations? http://theconversation.com/why-is-islam-so-different-in-different-countries-51804 http://theconversation.com/why-is-islam-so-different-in-diff...
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  The Bible was retranslated in 1611 (for example), and is regularly. It's not rewritten. New finds of historical texts show this to be true. Some versions (ie translations) are presented with a political end, but they're relatively easily weeded out. Translations tend to sit on a range from translating the idea to translating the specific words - that's why every Christian I know uses different versions, concordances, Bible dictionaries etc.. There are overarching themes that are not in dispute in these religious texts.
  - DanBC 9y ago
    > It's not rewritten. Don't the apocrypha make that a bit more complicated? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha
    - cygx 9y ago
      Depends. The core of the canon is still essentially the same as described by Athanasius[1]. He had the following to say about the apocryphal/deuterocanonical books: there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness Consensus changed, and the books were incorporated into the proper canon. Centuries later, Martin Luther thought the church to be corrupt and its traditions no longer trustworthy; he argued that doctrine should be re-derived from Scripture alone. Given that the canon was itself a product of said tradition, he re-examined it and came to the conclusion that the deuterocanonical books shouldn't be considered capital-S Scripture. Fewer people are aware that he had similar misgivings about parts of the New Testament as well (Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation). [1] http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806039.htm http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806039.htm
Tepix 9y ago
Christianity's solution has been to no longer treat the bible literally. There is a verse in the Bible that tells you to kill your children if they are disrespectful ("For anyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother; his blood is upon him. "). Noone gives a damn any more. Perhaps it will be the same for the interpretation of Islam at some point in the future. Otherwise the culture clash will not disappear.

thomasahle 9y ago

I'm not sure I understand this comment. When was list time the bible was rewritten? Probably when then Canon was formalized 1500 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_New_Testament_canon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_New_Testame... Of course, this didn't stop people from interpreting the texts differently. Surely this has always been controversial and caused major strifes and wars between different Christian fractions. Isn't that pretty similar to how Islam has hundreds of different interpretations? http://theconversation.com/why-is-islam-so-different-in-different-countries-51804 http://theconversation.com/why-is-islam-so-different-in-diff...

pbhjpbhj 9y ago
The Bible was retranslated in 1611 (for example), and is regularly. It's not rewritten. New finds of historical texts show this to be true. Some versions (ie translations) are presented with a political end, but they're relatively easily weeded out. Translations tend to sit on a range from translating the idea to translating the specific words - that's why every Christian I know uses different versions, concordances, Bible dictionaries etc.. There are overarching themes that are not in dispute in these religious texts.
- DanBC 9y ago
  > It's not rewritten. Don't the apocrypha make that a bit more complicated? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha
  - cygx 9y ago
    Depends. The core of the canon is still essentially the same as described by Athanasius[1]. He had the following to say about the apocryphal/deuterocanonical books: there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness Consensus changed, and the books were incorporated into the proper canon. Centuries later, Martin Luther thought the church to be corrupt and its traditions no longer trustworthy; he argued that doctrine should be re-derived from Scripture alone. Given that the canon was itself a product of said tradition, he re-examined it and came to the conclusion that the deuterocanonical books shouldn't be considered capital-S Scripture. Fewer people are aware that he had similar misgivings about parts of the New Testament as well (Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation). [1] http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806039.htm http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806039.htm

Tepix 9y ago

Christianity's solution has been to no longer treat the bible literally. There is a verse in the Bible that tells you to kill your children if they are disrespectful ("For anyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother; his blood is upon him. "). Noone gives a damn any more. Perhaps it will be the same for the interpretation of Islam at some point in the future. Otherwise the culture clash will not disappear.