When will Islam have a humanist period like Christianity did during the Renaissance?

When will Islam have a humanist period like Christianity did during the Renaissance?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-808K3KB_Gc
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Never.

If they were capable of being receptive to it then they would have already had it back when we had it or shortly afterwards.


Islam either dissolve and be eroded entirely by globalised culture or it will stay as it is. It's not going to go through a period where Islam is both strong and humanist like Christianity did.

It was called turkey before arab spring fucked it up.

Islamic golden age...

When they ignore everything their holy book says

So never

Renaissance wasn't a humanist period of Christanity, it was a european without Christanity

It took Christianity 1400-1700 years to start toning down the "HEATHEN! BURN HER/HIM AT THE STAKE"

Islam just needs more time to tire itself out of the "INFIDEL! BEHEAD HER/HIM AT THE SQUARE"

>Islam just needs more time to tire itself out of the "INFIDEL! BEHEAD HER/HIM AT THE SQUARE"
That's literally what Islam is though

It's not tied to religion.
Middle East is shit. Always has been. Always will be.

I think it has something to do with climate. They have it too easy. Easy level agriculture leads to population explosion, that leads to trouble.

Why are you timing Islam from a different starting point from Christianity?

It didn't come to exist in a seperate universe.

It's start at A.D. 660 or whatever took place after the same 600 years of Christianity in the region as everywhere else.

It's not like it is impossible for the Islamic workd to have been exposed to the same ideological and cultural development taking place among Christians.

Your logic of saying "well Iskam is only 1400 years old so we'd expect it to be as savage as Christianity was in the year 1400" is as dumb as me saying "well Rastafarianism has only been around for ~60 years so we would expect it to be as savage as Christianity was in a.d. 60"

It's just wrong and shit logic. Iskam did not appear in some isolated bubble where it had never heard of Christianity before. Most of the Islamic empire had been Christian or Jewish before they were Islamic. They should have the same preceding cultural and ideological evolution.

Any respect in which contemporary middle eastern Islamic culture is backwards or savage compared with Christian cultures of Europe and the near east is a feature of Islam, not the age of Islam.

Canadians really are fucking retards

>european without Christianity
Lol wut? The pope funded a fuck ton of artists and people. The 12th century renaissance was almost solely the responsibility of the church and the uni of paris was a theological school

>The church funded artists and theologians in the 12th century
>Therefore the bible and Christianity are automatically true and good
Nice red herring

I bet you're the type of reactionary that believes being patrons of the arts shows the inherent goodness of the Catholic Church; but massacres against pagans and heathens in Europe and the Americas are merely the deeds of rogue Catholics who don't reflect the church, yet tries to also argue their actions were justified.

>red herring
You don't know what that means.
>actual head of the church funds art and literally makes the renaissance possible
>not real Catholics
>others kill and murder
>these are the real Christians
He said the renaissance was European, not Christian, yet everything leading up to it disagrees. And no, im not dinduing for Christians or Catholics, they're as violent as any other human.

>comparing Abrahamic religions to meme shit like Rastas

kek

They will stay butthurt and unable to reform as long as they feel existiantially threatened, since this fuels their inferiority complex and make them so angry

So prolly not as long as the western world is not collapsing

Never

With the concept of Jahiliyyah, Islam will never know such a thing.

It all depends on the political climate, it goes hand in hand with religious change.

The Catholic church came about as a continuation of a Roman style of governance. Bishops in the modern Roman Catholic Church are not elected by the people, they're appointed by the Vatican. Who elects the Pope? Well the cardinals. So if the Pope is elected, but by only a limited number of men, old men who themselves were appointed by previous Popes. This is not a democratic system, it's structured on monarchical and imperial ideas of politics.

The Reformation comes along and things change. The Reformers, of course, sort of claim that what they were doing was simply getting back to the biblical model. That's not really right. What they were doing was reflecting what was a rising bourgeoisie form that was at least a bit more like Republican or Democratic political structures.

The growth of a mercantile middle class, and the decline of the aristocracy in Europe, led to more Democratic tendencies, first in towns, and then in countries overall. It led to Republicanism. It's reflecting the changes that are going on also in politics in society, which we of course shouldn't be surprised about.

What's wrong with Islam? The people are too poor and uneducated. There is no real bourgeoisie middle class to initiate change and remove their "monarchical" tendencies. Thus the populous cling to old ways and fight against change

Actually burning people at the stake was a common pagan practice, which the early Church tried to abolish with vehemence.

The call for witch burnings came from the peasants, the common people, who still believed in the existance of witches, like they did in pagan days (Tacitus eg. references a case of "hallerunan", hell-runes, being burned by the Goths).

During the Reformation 16-17th century there were a lot of witch burnings promoted by both catholics and protestants (but not eastern orthodox), as a reaction to the Renaissance and protestantism, in the case of the protestants themselves their fundamentalism and eagerness to spread amongst the population.

Bullshit, before islam the middle east was way more civilized than Europe, and civilisation basically started between the Tigris and Euphrates you mongol.

What did it take for Aztecs to stop sacrificing people to the sun gods?

>not understanding the logic of the argument at all

Muh Castillian dick

And yet saying that they will never adapt to global culture isn't dumb?
I'm sure you just need to get out and talk to people. Maybe get some fresh air.

youtube.com/watch?v=-808K3KB_Gc
>ITS A POLITICAL IDEOLOGY