Islam and Christianity are friendly competitors?

John7755 يوحنا

'Ezana

John7755 يوحنا said:
Morocco never claimed the Khilafah, and an alliance is fine except in the case where the alliance is against another Muslim nation. Hence the Peshawar 7 (Mujahadeen of Afghanistan) in the Soviet-Afghan war where they took aid from the secular nation of Pakistan and the U.S.
Click to expand...

The Ottomans claimed the Caliphate though. Anyway, I don't see Muslims having a serious issue allying against other Muslim nations because while the scriptures implore them not to, the way Islam is practiced isn't completely reflective of what the Qur'an says; especially when it comes to issues of pragmatism.
 

saoralba

leopard9 said:
Two monotheistic religions that both teach that their God is the only one, all other gods are demons and deceptions of the devil, it's either their way or Hell, and both have a mission by God to convert the world. Conflict is inevitable. Look how Islam and Christianity have treated divergent sects.
Click to expand...

Except the Christian and Muslim God are one and the same, just the interpretations of their prophet's teachings are different. Muhammad viewed Jesus, Moses and the prophets who came before them as Muslims whose teachings were corrupted by their followers. Muhammad seeked to bring these teachings back in line with what he viewed as God's true will.
 

Napoleon IV

I don't think it would happen, not unless one religion essentially joined the other. Islam believes in a prophet that Christians don't acknowledge, and Christianity believes that the only path to salvation is following Jesus's teachings, including that he's the Son of God (something Islam rejects). Add the fact that they were competing for the Levant, Anatolia, and Andalusia and you have the perfect rivalry.
 

John7755 يوحنا

'Ezana said:
The Ottomans claimed the Caliphate though. Anyway, I don't see Muslims having a serious issue allying against other Muslim nations because while the scriptures implore them not to, the way Islam is practiced isn't completely reflective of what the Qur'an says; especially when it comes to issues of pragmatism.
Click to expand...


Perhaps not always, and like I said it is not always Kufr. However, it is rare in past times for Islamic nations to ally with the Ahl al-Harb against other Muslim, which is why the few that did had takfir made upon them, such as most Shia regimes like the Fatimids, or states like the Golden Horde, Ilkhanate, Etc.. Ibn Taymiyyah was clear on many of these cases.

I also contest, why wouldn't Muslim nations take this into account? If you are a Wilayet or Caliph and your population is Muslim, why would you neglect these clear cut issues? Even modern states do so with apprehension, and make sure that whom ever they assist the U.S with is a Khawarij or labels them such or another deviant sect so that it is lawful, hence the Ulema in Saudi who came to a consensus on support against Al Qaeda or against Daesh, but are not so keen to assist against Taliban.
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
Personally, I think the best chance would be for the Caliphate to fail to conquer Persia and Rome - and the Caliphate decides that an alliance with Rome is preferable to defeat. This would require the teachings themselves to change (not impossible, it is still early days) - and for the Romans to support the Arabians against the Persians and vice versa.

Long term alliance and stability between the Christian Roman Empire, and the Muslim Arabia (and its trade network converts) can emerge. Islam may eventually conquer Persia, but the long term alliance makes it almost taboo to invade the other.

With no conquest of Egypt and an independent Ethiopia, there are both Christian and Muslim traders in the Red Sea - and both compete in the Indian Ocean trade network.
 

John7755 يوحنا

GdwnsnHo said:
Personally, I think the best chance would be for the Caliphate to fail to conquer Persia and Rome - and the Caliphate decides that an alliance with Rome is preferable to defeat. This would require the teachings themselves to change (not impossible, it is still early days) - and for the Romans to support the Arabians against the Persians and vice versa.

Long term alliance and stability between the Christian Roman Empire, and the Muslim Arabia (and its trade network converts) can emerge. Islam may eventually conquer Persia, but the long term alliance makes it almost taboo to invade the other.

With no conquest of Egypt and an independent Ethiopia, there are both Christian and Muslim traders in the Red Sea - and both compete in the Indian Ocean trade network.
Click to expand...


This could work, I mean, I would figure that the Poster would want Islam to not change much.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
If Islam does not explode out of the peninsula in a flurry of conquests of Christian lands, I can see it vaguely possible that trade contacts will see Islam be seen by Western Christianity a lot like Ethiopia, as in heretical but still good enough to do business with and support.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top