AHC: Deistic offshoot of Islam?

Except the texts are different from each other, it's pretty clear that the reason all three was included was because the Biblical text was collected by committee, and in fact the Churches have never hidden this fact, and they kept all of them to show that fact. In fact the reason I he Muslims decided to destroy all heterodox Qurans, was likely because they saw the disagreement these different texts brought to Christians.

They are different, but that's not the point. That was never the point of what I've been saying. My point is the difference between the individual texts that make up the Biblical canon, and the difference between the source and role of the Bible in Christianity and the Quran in Islam, are not relevant to this discussion. The differences are not so great that Deism can arise in Christendom but the Ummah is somehow immune.
 
Islam insists it is the last Revelation. Any radical new teaching that comes out of their tradition is treated as rank heresy and apostasy, which is why Bahai'i is so massively persecuted. Your hypothetical Deist faith would be persecuted even harder.

IMO, the only way to get something like this would be on the far fringes of Islam. Maybe Indonesia or central Africa or ... Or 20th century academics in 'white' countries.
 
To be fair, Deism from a traditional Christian perspective should also be rank heresy and apostasy, as you say.

What you really need is a prominent, deeply secular but traditionally Islamic country, ideally with some sort of popular/elite backlash against religion. I doubt there's anything inherent to Islam or Christianity or any other religion that prevents heretical and divergent beliefs from springing up. It's all a matter of societal situation and context.
 
Hmm, would deism-lite be more doable? Say "God created this world, set its laws, and revealed himself to prophets but except through revelation as such he does not directly intervene in the world; furthermore his agency in this is accessible to reason, at least in principle"? This would seem to be less out of line with at least many strains of classic Abrahamic doctrines.
 
Islam insists it is the last Revelation. Any radical new teaching that comes out of their tradition is treated as rank heresy and apostasy, which is why Bahai'i is so massively persecuted. Your hypothetical Deist faith would be persecuted even harder.

IMO, the only way to get something like this would be on the far fringes of Islam. Maybe Indonesia or central Africa or ... Or 20th century academics in 'white' countries.

The only way I see it as doable is if it's a small group of intellectuals that never achieves a widespread following among the populace...kind of like Christian Deism.

EDIT:I think that's what's so confusing about the OP. Does he mean he wants a sect the size of say, Mormonism or (even the Druze) or a small movement among intellectuals who really like empirical science?
 

samcster94

Banned
Hmm, would deism-lite be more doable? Say "God created this world, set its laws, and revealed himself to prophets but except through revelation as such he does not directly intervene in the world; furthermore his agency in this is accessible to reason, at least in principle"? This would seem to be less out of line with at least many strains of classic Abrahamic doctrines.
That actually makes some sense, and seems quite close to OTL Baha'i faith. It would probably do better on a Shia line(which Baha'i) is from than a Sunni Line given the idea of Mohammed being the final prophet is more loosely followed(the Imam line, holy leaders revered more etc ...).
 
Top