Christianity ruins families.

[Nikolai]

Why, then, did Paul give recommandations on its use? He was converted much later than pentecost.

EDIT: Baptism by the Holy Ghost is not in the Bible btw.

[Kidlicious]

It is definitely a minority viewpoint though. It's become more acceptable since the rise of the Charismatic movement, but plenty of Christians view it with suspicion and horror.

Methodists view it as a misinterpretation of the scriptures. It's something that only happened to the disciples at Pentecost. To be baptised by the Holy Spirit means to spread the Gospel.

[Nikolai]

The speaking in tongues you've witnessed, were they speaking actual languages they didn't know or just stringing together nonsense?

Neither they nor me understood it. It sounds different from person to person, and I don't know that many languages, but some have sounded asian, and some african. Impossible to say for sure though. People who speak in tongues don't understand it themselves, but for it to be biblical, someone has to get the "translation" from God(ie somehow understand the message God wants us to hear) if it is publicly given. Paul has some on that, but I don't remember right now in which letter.

EDIT: I have heard of a missionary in China that had a person in his flock who spoke in Norwegian, but that is secondhand at best.

[Wezil]

nm- wrong thread

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think you are trying to explain away obvious examples of reinterpretation so as to attempt to validate your point.

It is readily apparent that different Christian denominations adopt different portions of the Scripture to back their views, which is why some are aghast at the seperation of Church and State and others embrace it to the point of living in seperate communities away from the secular world.

[Robert]

That's a good example of the reinterpretation of a minor christian thing, based on scripture.
Now give an example of a major thing, and an example of how that could be implied to the Islamitic junction of state and religion. This is about how the Islam is a political movement in it's core. Not about small details like head covers, woman circumsation (which is more cultural), or the position of christians and jews.

Best would of course be if you explain how christianity could reinterpretate the seperation of church and state. And then show how that could happen in Islam as well.

[OzzyKP]

Speaking in tongues is not unusual in Christianity, I've witnessed it numberous times. And I'm a regular in a low church, conservative prayer house movement attached to the Norwegian church(but not a part of it). We've never been much interested in such occurences. We consider them possible but not necessary, contrary to many a charismatic Christian I've met. Speaking in tongues does happen, and the Bible gives thought on how it should be handled. It's a natural part of church life, much like prayer for the sick. Not everyone gets well, but healing can occur. Not everyone do prayers for the sick, just as not everyone speaks in tongues.

The speaking in tongues you've witnessed, were they speaking actual languages they didn't know or just stringing together nonsense?

[Imran Siddiqui]

To be fair, though, glossolalia has been gaining in acceptance and popularity over the last 100 years, but before the Pentecostal movement was basically dead. So, it's a reinterpretation of a reinterpretation .

[BeBMan]

Some things can easily be re-interpretated.
Some things can hardly be re-interpretated.
The political position of Islam is one of the latter.

Or not.

If you believe that's not true then you should give reasons for it. Why do you believe that it will change? I hope that it will change, but hope is something different. Hope is wishful thinking. We should not base the way we deal with Islam on wishful thinking.

Are you deliberately misreading my posts? I did not express a belief that it will change into X, I gave an example showing that change is not impossible within Islam. As for the question of what change could happen and what not, this is IMO simply a waste of time unless someone here can safely predict the future.

For the modernization of a religion, theology is of major importance. Especially if the combination of religion and state is part of the theology.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Do you want to argue that the process of secularization, or specifically the separation of state and church like it happened in Europe is the result of a major theological drive to limit the influence of religion in society?

[Nikolai]

Like most things, it has to be met with moderation. Some charismatics thinks you are not a good Christian if you don't speak in tongues, and that every Christian should have it if they are "really faithful as they should be". That, of course, is dangerous talk. I doubt the majority of Christians are against it though, most Christians today are conservatives living in the third world, liberal westerners are in the minority.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It is definitely a minority viewpoint though. It's become more acceptable since the rise of the Charismatic movement, but plenty of Christians view it with suspicion and horror.

[Nikolai]

Speaking in tongues is not unusual in Christianity, I've witnessed it numberous times. And I'm a regular in a low church, conservative prayer house movement attached to the Norwegian church(but not a part of it). We've never been much interested in such occurences. We consider them possible but not necessary, contrary to many a charismatic Christian I've met. Speaking in tongues does happen, and the Bible gives thought on how it should be handled. It's a natural part of church life, much like prayer for the sick. Not everyone gets well, but healing can occur. Not everyone do prayers for the sick, just as not everyone speaks in tongues.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Take glossolalia. With the exception of Pentacostalism and Charismatic branches of mainstream Protestant denominations and the Catholic Church, most Christians have taken the view that that was then, this is now. That it was given to the early church, but is not for us anymore. This view is not based on any Scriptural authority, but is just what these denominations have discerned. They reinterpreted the text.

This, btw, can also apply to the concept of divine healing. Jesus says if you ask for healing in his name, he will give it. Not many believe this to be the case today and some say that he merely meant that for his immediate disciples, but its a reinterpretation of the text.

[Robert]

Can you give an example of the process of this reinterpretation, on what was the reinterpretation based, on what could such a reinterpretation be based in Islam?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I just gave a couple examples of Christian reinterpretation. I mean, heck, one could easily see the Protestant Reformation as a Christian re-interpretation as moving away from tradition of salvation through the Church, as Catholics still believe.