Do you have a higher opinion of Evangelical Christianity or Islam?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Evangelical Christianity. 

Evangelical Christianity presents Jesus as who He says He is in Sceripture.  Belief in THAT Jesus as Savior and Lord is the one way to Eternal Life.

For me, it's that simple. 

[Ferguson97]

My answer is Islam because there are many liberal sects of Islam, whereas Evangelical Christianity specifically is very reactionary.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Islam has smothered the Middle East for over a thousand years. Persia used to be one of the great cultures of the world and look at it now.

Absorbed all of the most cutting-edge thought of the 1820s, I see.

The 1820s? Iran is CURRENTLY under the second most oppressive theocracy in the world.

The only relevant conflict from way back then is the Russo-Persian war of 1826-8. I have nothing to say about that conflict, only that it's not hard to imagine a stronger Persia winning out.

This thread is not about the past, it is about the present. At present countries like Iran and Afghanistan are among the most oppressive in the world, with North Korea the only secular state able to compete as the worst place to live on Earth.

You claimed Islam turned the middle east from some of the greatest countries in the world, which is historically illiterate considering the Middle East thrived and was a center of knowledge and scholarship under many of the Arabian Caliphates. The middle east is a lot less tolerant now than it was 500 years ago (and even 100 years ago AFAIK).

[bagelman]

Islam has smothered the Middle East for over a thousand years. Persia used to be one of the great cultures of the world and look at it now.

Absorbed all of the most cutting-edge thought of the 1820s, I see.

The 1820s? Iran is CURRENTLY under the second most oppressive theocracy in the world.

The only relevant conflict from way back then is the Russo-Persian war of 1826-8. I have nothing to say about that conflict, only that it's not hard to imagine a stronger Persia winning out.

This thread is not about the past, it is about the present. At present countries like Iran and Afghanistan are among the most oppressive in the world, with North Korea the only secular state able to compete as the worst place to live on Earth.

You claimed Islam turned the middle east from some of the greatest countries in the world, which is historically illiterate considering the Middle East thrived and was a center of knowledge and scholarship under many of the Arabian Caliphates. The middle east is a lot less tolerant now than it was 500 years ago (and even 100 years ago AFAIK).

The flourishing of knowledge and scholarship under the Arabian caliphates was more due to the existence of a central authority in the region. Islam itself cannot claim responsibility.

Also, my point was less about the technological progress of the medieval era and more of the cultures that existed before the conquests of the war leader Muhammad and his successors. Can you imagine what Egypt would be like? Did you know under Muslim rule they seriously considered tearing down the Pyramids? Iran at least has its own language and some aspects of its culture and aesthetics survive but it's not hard to imagine Iran becoming a major cultural player on the world stage if it wasn't held back by regressive theocracy. 

Or maybe you're right and without the central authority of the Caliphates the dark ages would continue with the unstable theocratic dictatorship in Constantinople blundering away science and progress. We can't know the answer without a device that can see into alternate timelines, and it's all completely secondary to my central point: whatever Islam was in the past, today it is a strong force of global social reaction. You essentially admit this when you say that the Middle east is less tolerant than it was centurie(s) ago, it has socially regressed during a span of time where the west went from pseudoscientific racism to acceptance of LGBTQ people. Islam has been corrupted by severe intolerance and Arabic nationalism and is a more powerful force than Evangelical Christianity.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Islam has smothered the Middle East for over a thousand years. Persia used to be one of the great cultures of the world and look at it now.

Absorbed all of the most cutting-edge thought of the 1820s, I see.

The 1820s? Iran is CURRENTLY under the second most oppressive theocracy in the world.

The only relevant conflict from way back then is the Russo-Persian war of 1826-8. I have nothing to say about that conflict, only that it's not hard to imagine a stronger Persia winning out.

This thread is not about the past, it is about the present. At present countries like Iran and Afghanistan are among the most oppressive in the world, with North Korea the only secular state able to compete as the worst place to live on Earth.

You claimed Islam turned the middle east from some of the greatest countries in the world, which is historically illiterate considering the Middle East thrived and was a center of knowledge and scholarship under many of the Arabian Caliphates. The middle east is a lot less tolerant now than it was 500 years ago (and even 100 years ago AFAIK).

The flourishing of knowledge and scholarship under the Arabian caliphates was more due to the existence of a central authority in the region. Islam itself cannot claim responsibility.

Also, my point was less about the technological progress of the medieval era and more of the cultures that existed before the conquests of the war leader Muhammad and his successors. Can you imagine what Egypt would be like? Did you know under Muslim rule they seriously considered tearing down the Pyramids? Iran at least has its own language and some aspects of its culture and aesthetics survive but it's not hard to imagine Iran becoming a major cultural player on the world stage if it wasn't held back by regressive theocracy. 

Or maybe you're right and without the central authority of the Caliphates the dark ages would continue with the unstable theocratic dictatorship in Constantinople blundering away science and progress. We can't know the answer without a device that can see into alternate timelines, and it's all completely secondary to my central point: whatever Islam was in the past, today it is a strong force of global social reaction. You essentially admit this when you say that the Middle east is less tolerant than it was centurie(s) ago, it has socially regressed during a span of time where the west went from pseudoscientific racism to acceptance of LGBTQ people. Islam has been corrupted by severe intolerance and Arabic nationalism and is a more powerful force than Evangelical Christianity.

My point was that it's tendency to be a reactionary force is recent.

[Хahar 🤔]

The flourishing of knowledge and scholarship under the Arabian caliphates was more due to the existence of a central authority in the region. Islam itself cannot claim responsibility.

This is not just casually incorrect but totally wrong. One of the most remarkable characteristics of the middle period of Islamic history, a period that broadly overlaps with the so-called "Golden Age", is the absence of any strong political authority. Medieval Islamic political theory held the state was not even capable of making law; the role of the state in this framework could be reasonably analogized to Nozick's nightwatchman state. The Islamic world of the time was peppered with small states ruled by petty princes, the exact opposite of central authority.

It's okay to just admit that you don't know about a subject instead of feeling like you have to make things up. If you are interested in learning more about this fascinating subject, a great resource is The Venture of Islam by Marshall Hodgson: specifically, the second volume, which covers the specific time period in question.

[bagelman]

The flourishing of knowledge and scholarship under the Arabian caliphates was more due to the existence of a central authority in the region. Islam itself cannot claim responsibility.

This is not just casually incorrect but totally wrong. One of the most remarkable characteristics of the middle period of Islamic history, a period that broadly overlaps with the so-called "Golden Age", is the absence of any strong political authority. Medieval Islamic political theory held the state was not even capable of making law; the role of the state in this framework could be reasonably analogized to Nozick's nightwatchman state. The Islamic world of the time was peppered with small states ruled by petty princes, the exact opposite of central authority.

It's okay to just admit that you don't know about a subject instead of feeling like you have to make things up. If you are interested in learning more about this fascinating subject, a great resource is The Venture of Islam by Marshall Hodgson: specifically, the second volume, which covers the specific time period in question.

Fascinating, but as I've stated before it's all secondary to what Islam has become today. I don't think it specifically proves that Islam deserves credit for the golden age, but again you could prove that and still won't change how reactionary it is now.

Bernie Sanders once said there is a war for the soul of Islam. I think there's some truth to that, and I'm sure there are some that are fighting the good fight, but the other side is positioning the second largest organized religion in the world as a direct threat to the safety and freedom of LGBTQ people worldwide. Meanwhile the power of Evangelical Christianity is in freefall and is increasingly regional, anti-LGBTQ activism will get nasty headlines even if perpetuated in the mostly deeply conservative parts of the US. Both are also used as tools by nationalist factions to persecute minority groups.

Evangelical Christianity also doesn't consider apostasy to be worthy of death. The mere notion that free thought, even if misguided, deserves death is not something that can be allowed to survive. There are 10 countries where the death penalty is on the books for apostasy. 10 of these are Muslim and 0 are evangelical Christian.   

[afleitch]

If the US overnight became a right wing evangelical theocracy, gays absolutely would be executed (eventually, as that's where unchecked dehumanisation always leads) but in true American fashion by something needlessly complex like a Rube Goldberg death machine rather than a simple hanging.

I know I'm quoting my own post here, but American Evangelicalism (and it's export) is restrained because of the political structures of the US and most Western nations.

If it was unrestrained... you'd see a very different beast. Islam had been shaped more by politics and trade these past few decades more than any cultural or scriptural basis. The idea that at it's core it's more 'prone' to a fundamentalist default than Christianity is flawed.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If the US overnight became a right wing evangelical theocracy, gays absolutely would be executed (eventually, as that's where unchecked dehumanisation always leads) but in true American fashion by something needlessly complex like a Rube Goldberg death machine rather than a simple hanging.

I know I'm quoting my own post here, but American Evangelicalism (and it's export) is restrained because of the political structures of the US and most Western nations.

If it was unrestrained... you'd see a very different beast. Islam had been shaped more by politics and trade these past few decades more than any cultural or scriptural basis. The idea that at it's core it's more 'prone' to a fundamentalist default than Christianity is flawed.

Yep. And the people who vaunt the inherent superiority of Enlightened Christianity over Barbaric Islam are the same people who actively seek to remove those guardrails and establish theocracies in the West as well. Of course, none of these people actually care about things like women's or LGBT rights - they're just a useful political cudgel to hide their most basic tribalism.

[TheReckoning]

When have evangelical Christians tried to murder someone for writing a book they didn’t like? Because I can name many times Muslims have done that. 

[bagelman]

If the US overnight became a right wing evangelical theocracy, gays absolutely would be executed (eventually, as that's where unchecked dehumanisation always leads) but in true American fashion by something needlessly complex like a Rube Goldberg death machine rather than a simple hanging.

I know I'm quoting my own post here, but American Evangelicalism (and it's export) is restrained because of the political structures of the US and most Western nations.

If it was unrestrained... you'd see a very different beast. Islam had been shaped more by politics and trade these past few decades more than any cultural or scriptural basis. The idea that at it's core it's more 'prone' to a fundamentalist default than Christianity is flawed.

I don't think it's logically inconsistent to agree with this and also judge Islam more harshly because of how much oppression is caused in its name. Should Evangelicalism be unshackled by the strong tradition of American constitutional Republicanism and it becomes as bad or worse than many Islamic states, my opinion of it would simply decline in response.

Sometimes it's possible to have too much context and details. Right now it's very illegal to convert to another religion or to be gay in many Muslim countries, and depressingly common for them to punish such "crimes" by death. Evangelical Christianity is also a strong homophobic force but not quite as successful at getting the death penalty on the books.

[ingemann]

If the US overnight became a right wing evangelical theocracy, gays absolutely would be executed (eventually, as that's where unchecked dehumanisation always leads) but in true American fashion by something needlessly complex like a Rube Goldberg death machine rather than a simple hanging.

I know I'm quoting my own post here, but American Evangelicalism (and it's export) is restrained because of the political structures of the US and most Western nations.

If it was unrestrained... you'd see a very different beast. Islam had been shaped more by politics and trade these past few decades more than any cultural or scriptural basis. The idea that at it's core it's more 'prone' to a fundamentalist default than Christianity is flawed.

But they point is that Evangelical Christianity do exist in the context of being a minority religion in mostly secular states with strong rule of law. If we compared Objectivism with Nazism people could come with the claim, that Objectivism is worse because if it gained power it would kill more people than Nazism, but in the end that’s just a claim and Nazism have a massive body count in the real world and not just in some theoretical world. .

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I think the actual arguments that have been mounted in this thread are mostly acceptable so far, but any more low-effort tit for tat and I'm locking it.

[jojoju1998]

Evangelical Christianity. 

Evangelical Christianity presents Jesus as who He says He is in Sceripture.  Belief in THAT Jesus as Savior and Lord is the one way to Eternal Life.

For me, it's that simple. 

Hint : You can believe all that and not be of the Evangelical strand.

Lutherans, Catholics, Orthodoxs, Anglicans.

[jojoju1998]

If the US overnight became a right wing evangelical theocracy, gays absolutely would be executed (eventually, as that's where unchecked dehumanisation always leads) but in true American fashion by something needlessly complex like a Rube Goldberg death machine rather than a simple hanging.

I know I'm quoting my own post here, but American Evangelicalism (and it's export) is restrained because of the political structures of the US and most Western nations.

If it was unrestrained... you'd see a very different beast. Islam had been shaped more by politics and trade these past few decades more than any cultural or scriptural basis. The idea that at it's core it's more 'prone' to a fundamentalist default than Christianity is flawed.

American Evangelicalism is not the same as the wider Evangelical movement.