February 10, 2006
THE REFORMATION WILL BE VERNACULARIZED:
Islam's Uncertain Future: Freedom House's Paul Marshall says Shari'ah is both less and more dangerous than you think. (Interview by Stan Guthrie | posted 02/09/2006, Christianity Today)
You distinguish between two kinds of Shari'ah, or Islamic law, as understood and implemented by Muslims worldwide. What are they?In the last three years, I've been to various parts of the Muslim world talking to people about Shari'ah. I use the term extreme Shari'ah for the sorts of things that happen in Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Pakistan—people getting accused of blasphemy or stoned for adultery, and so on. But most Muslims use the term in a very broad sense. In Indonesia, if you ask people, "Do you think women should be stoned to death for adultery?" more than 80 percent of the population says no. If you ask, "Is it okay for Indonesia to have a woman leader?" more than 90 percent of the population says yes, that's fine. So they have something very different in mind from the Taliban. You get similar results right now in Iraq. [When asked,] "Do you think Iraq should be governed by Islamic law?" about 80 percent say yes. If you ask, "Do you think there should be legal equality between men and women?" about 80 percent say yes. For many Muslims, the term Shari'ah has a very broad sense that the country should be governed in a way that God wants.
So most Muslims would not agree that, say, the punishment for theft should be amputation of one's hand?
Correct. They see that as something that used to be done, but not really fitting for the sorts of societies we live in now, that it's not the core of what Islam is about.
Does this attitude point to modernizing tendencies in Islam?
There are modernizing tendencies, but [a larger factor is that] the vast majority of Muslims in the world live in Africa and Asia, not in the Middle East. Their views on Islam are not very precise. They don't read the Qur'an; they can't read it.
Time for the King George Qur'an. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 10, 2006 4:21 PM
You mean the King Charles Koran? The new holy book of England?
Posted by: pj at February 10, 2006 4:29 PMNo, we're Britain now.
Posted by: oj at February 10, 2006 4:37 PMHe means the President Bush Qur'an. There's no way George Bush would ever accept the title "king" no matter how much Orrin wants to force it on him.
Posted by: Bryan at February 10, 2006 4:44 PMThe Caliph lives in Washington.
Posted by: David Cohen at February 10, 2006 5:02 PMKing abdullah version
Posted by: toe at February 10, 2006 5:23 PMActually. I think they are better off if they can't understand the Quran. If they could, they might begin to take it seriously.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 10, 2006 7:30 PMThe "King George Qur'an" can fit on one page, to wit:
1. Allah wants Muslims to be successful.
2. Only free and democratic societies are successful.
--> Allah wants Muslims to live in free and democratic societies.
Since brevity is the soul of wit, this would be a big improvement on the old one.
Posted by: pj at February 10, 2006 9:18 PMhere's the start of the new Quran:
"In the beginning..."
Posted by: toe at February 11, 2006 1:35 PM