Anonymous
7/6/2025, 6:30:02 PM No.17819450
So Sufism corresponds to Orthodoxy, Wahhabism corresponds to Fundamentalist Protestantism, and Shia corresponds to Catholicism? Yes?? Discuss.
Replies:
Thread 17819450 - /his/ [Archived: 632 hours ago]
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 6:33:12 PM No.17819460
Some types of Sufism were products of Crypt Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Church of the East practitioners. Others were derived from Hindu sects. It kinda depended on where you came from. Islam also has structures that are totally different from Chritian and other religious traditions for that matter.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 6:36:03 PM No.17819466
>>17819460
>Islam also has structures that are totally different from Chritian and other religious traditions for that matter.
I know but idk any other way to analogize it. But wasn't Sufism mainstream Sunni Islam for centuries before Wahhabism showed up in the 18th century and did a Protestant-esque reformation of Islam? Idk educate me. This is what I've heard.
>Islam also has structures that are totally different from Chritian and other religious traditions for that matter.
I know but idk any other way to analogize it. But wasn't Sufism mainstream Sunni Islam for centuries before Wahhabism showed up in the 18th century and did a Protestant-esque reformation of Islam? Idk educate me. This is what I've heard.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 6:41:46 PM No.17819475
>>17819466
Not really, no. If you mean practices associated with Sufi's like prayer at tombs and people very openly choosing to draw animals sure. Otherwise, not really. Histoircally, Sufi's were militeary orders but overtime they developed into mystic sects as they began to convert to religions of the peoples they conquered or syncretized with. This generally happened anyway at the level of individuals. Below is an example from Pakistan with combinations of Shavist Hindu religions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEFx1cu-2x4
There were different refomrations. The magiesterial reformation is the one associate with Luther for example. This was focused on eccelesitical bodies. The radical reformation is the one like with Zwingli where there were new hermeneutics, and new metaphysics like Zwingli. Islam has had neither of these because they don't have a model of eccelssiology and because usually hermenutics in Islam is from the top down. It is always connected to madhabs and a state. There were revolts seeking to break from existent models of Islamic state like the Berber revolt, there was a break from the requirment that the Caliph be from the Quraish tribe, but nothing like in Christianity.
Not really, no. If you mean practices associated with Sufi's like prayer at tombs and people very openly choosing to draw animals sure. Otherwise, not really. Histoircally, Sufi's were militeary orders but overtime they developed into mystic sects as they began to convert to religions of the peoples they conquered or syncretized with. This generally happened anyway at the level of individuals. Below is an example from Pakistan with combinations of Shavist Hindu religions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEFx1cu-2x4
There were different refomrations. The magiesterial reformation is the one associate with Luther for example. This was focused on eccelesitical bodies. The radical reformation is the one like with Zwingli where there were new hermeneutics, and new metaphysics like Zwingli. Islam has had neither of these because they don't have a model of eccelssiology and because usually hermenutics in Islam is from the top down. It is always connected to madhabs and a state. There were revolts seeking to break from existent models of Islamic state like the Berber revolt, there was a break from the requirment that the Caliph be from the Quraish tribe, but nothing like in Christianity.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 6:42:54 PM No.17819477
>>17819450 (OP)
>Wahhabism corresponds to Fundamentalist Protestantism
Not at all. The Protestants are Atheists, which the Wahabitists certainly are not.
>Wahhabism corresponds to Fundamentalist Protestantism
Not at all. The Protestants are Atheists, which the Wahabitists certainly are not.
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 6:45:04 PM No.17819481
>>17819475
>The radical reformation is the one like with Zwingli where there were new hermeneutics, and new metaphysics like Zwingli.
What the fuck are you talking about? Zwingli was part of the magisterial reformation and was a strong opponent of the radical reformation of the Anabaptists. lol
>The radical reformation is the one like with Zwingli where there were new hermeneutics, and new metaphysics like Zwingli.
What the fuck are you talking about? Zwingli was part of the magisterial reformation and was a strong opponent of the radical reformation of the Anabaptists. lol
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 6:49:48 PM No.17819496
>>17819481
Zwingli broke from historical views of metaphysics in Christianity by denying the Eucharist. This also invovled new models of hermeneutics that did not exist yet and major breaks from patristic commetnaries and catenary. Anabaptists were even more radical for sure. Pic related.
Zwingli broke from historical views of metaphysics in Christianity by denying the Eucharist. This also invovled new models of hermeneutics that did not exist yet and major breaks from patristic commetnaries and catenary. Anabaptists were even more radical for sure. Pic related.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 6:55:08 PM No.17819511
>>17819496
>real presence
>metaphysics
These are not the same.
>major breaks from patristic commetnaries and catenary
John Calvin was also critical of the patristics. He was by no means part of the radical reformation. The radical reformation includes groups like the Anabapsits and the Socinians. The mainstream Reformed were more hardcore than the Lutherans in pushing for Reformed, but were not as radical as some of the straight up apocalyptic sects that showed up in the radical reformation ( e.g. Zwickau prophets). They were still very much in line with the reformation that Luther started and saw themselves in that light. The radical reformation saw itself completely separately.
>real presence
>metaphysics
These are not the same.
>major breaks from patristic commetnaries and catenary
John Calvin was also critical of the patristics. He was by no means part of the radical reformation. The radical reformation includes groups like the Anabapsits and the Socinians. The mainstream Reformed were more hardcore than the Lutherans in pushing for Reformed, but were not as radical as some of the straight up apocalyptic sects that showed up in the radical reformation ( e.g. Zwickau prophets). They were still very much in line with the reformation that Luther started and saw themselves in that light. The radical reformation saw itself completely separately.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 7:01:19 PM No.17819524
>>17819511
The real presence was absolutely connected to metaphysics. By breaking from that Zwingli actually created a new model of parts, wholes, kinds and more. Calvin did critique certain uses of patristics but still appealed to them. He would have been considered as creating new interpretations of them. Pic is a good book that captures this in detail. Basically, in the later radical reformation different accounnts of rejectin g historical practices was the source of confessional identity. Hence, why the people we call puritans called themselves the nonconformists. Early reformers were found of appealing to science and philosophy at first till those began to change in the late baroque and then you start getting things like literalism develop.
The real presence was absolutely connected to metaphysics. By breaking from that Zwingli actually created a new model of parts, wholes, kinds and more. Calvin did critique certain uses of patristics but still appealed to them. He would have been considered as creating new interpretations of them. Pic is a good book that captures this in detail. Basically, in the later radical reformation different accounnts of rejectin g historical practices was the source of confessional identity. Hence, why the people we call puritans called themselves the nonconformists. Early reformers were found of appealing to science and philosophy at first till those began to change in the late baroque and then you start getting things like literalism develop.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 7:10:18 PM No.17819552
>>17819524
>By breaking from that Zwingli actually created a new model of parts, wholes, kinds and more.
Zwingli was of the more radical in the magisterial reformation, but again he was by no means part of the radical reformation. Nobody thinks this. Zwingli was vehemently opposed to the Anabaptists. He also adhered to some of the basic reformation principles of Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura which many in the radical reformation did not adhere to. He was also quite traditional in many other aspects. For example his Mariology is actually quite high, even compared to other magisterial reformers.
>By breaking from that Zwingli actually created a new model of parts, wholes, kinds and more.
Zwingli was of the more radical in the magisterial reformation, but again he was by no means part of the radical reformation. Nobody thinks this. Zwingli was vehemently opposed to the Anabaptists. He also adhered to some of the basic reformation principles of Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura which many in the radical reformation did not adhere to. He was also quite traditional in many other aspects. For example his Mariology is actually quite high, even compared to other magisterial reformers.
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 7:13:36 PM No.17819562
>>17819524
>The real presence was absolutely connected to metaphysics.
Yeah only if you're doing philosophical theology. You don't have to have a systematized metaphysic to believe in the real presence. Even the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation isn't a deeply metaphysically ingrained. Thomist explanations of the doctrine are, but Thomism isn't dogma. The reformers in general did not systematically do much with philosophy. Luther was opposed to much of philosophy, actually.
>The real presence was absolutely connected to metaphysics.
Yeah only if you're doing philosophical theology. You don't have to have a systematized metaphysic to believe in the real presence. Even the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation isn't a deeply metaphysically ingrained. Thomist explanations of the doctrine are, but Thomism isn't dogma. The reformers in general did not systematically do much with philosophy. Luther was opposed to much of philosophy, actually.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 7:18:51 PM No.17819587
>>17819562
You have to at minimum believe God has a real presence that is theology. When Zwingli deneid the real presence and provided philosophical reasons for why that is he was doing something new. Pic is of a good book explaining this. The book does make the not common claim that Luther was part of the historical tradition and had the same account as Johannes Brenz, which is something heavily debated. Some argue he was more radical than he let on.
You have to at minimum believe God has a real presence that is theology. When Zwingli deneid the real presence and provided philosophical reasons for why that is he was doing something new. Pic is of a good book explaining this. The book does make the not common claim that Luther was part of the historical tradition and had the same account as Johannes Brenz, which is something heavily debated. Some argue he was more radical than he let on.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 7:20:58 PM No.17819594
>>17819587
>You have to at minimum believe God has a real presence that is theology.
Theology is not the same as philosophy. Metaphysics is philosophy.
>You have to at minimum believe God has a real presence that is theology.
Theology is not the same as philosophy. Metaphysics is philosophy.
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 10:14:40 PM No.17820159
>>17819450 (OP)
Well neither Sufism nor Shiism is Islam. Shia worship Ali and Sufi do too plus they adopted lots of Hindu beliefs. They are kafir and under the judgement of God.
Well neither Sufism nor Shiism is Islam. Shia worship Ali and Sufi do too plus they adopted lots of Hindu beliefs. They are kafir and under the judgement of God.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/6/2025, 10:30:02 PM No.17820206
>>17819450 (OP)
Did the world really need a final prophet to tell us to drink camel piss, make it legal to beat our wives, establish slavery as a universal legal institution and practice, and legalize having sex with prepubescent children?
Was all of this garbage really necessary?
REALLY
REALLY
REALLY
ABSOLUTELY
VITAL
AND
NECESSARY?
Would the world be worse if no one ever engaged in any of those actions/activities, let alone codified them into law for all humanity?
Did the world really need a final prophet to tell us to drink camel piss, make it legal to beat our wives, establish slavery as a universal legal institution and practice, and legalize having sex with prepubescent children?
Was all of this garbage really necessary?
REALLY
REALLY
REALLY
ABSOLUTELY
VITAL
AND
NECESSARY?
Would the world be worse if no one ever engaged in any of those actions/activities, let alone codified them into law for all humanity?
Anonymous
7/7/2025, 1:37:10 AM No.17820692
>>17820560
Shut the fuck up Papist you are an idolater.
Shut the fuck up Papist you are an idolater.