• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Caliphate explained

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
12,222
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Here's an excellent three part series (produced by Al-Jazeera) on the phenomena of the caliph. Even though it's made with the most careful language possible, it's pretty clear that it's a bullshit title of political convenience. The most powerful caliphs throughout history was the Ottoman caliphs and their claim to decendency from Mohammed is frankly absurd. As is ISIS' Al-Bhagdadi. So it's pretty clear that it's a meaningless term nowadays.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3O9d7PsI48
 
caliphate is unislamic concept
Apparently, so is providing support for your bald assertions.

Mohammed had not mentioned a successor. So I'm going to back up Syed on this one. Mohammed left an empire and an effective fighting machine with zero instructions. His closest followers sort of just winged it. True story.

One interesting thing about the Shia/Sunni split is that it's all about power. Who should rule the Muslims after Mohammed. They all just assumed it should be a decendent of Mohammed. As if they would inherit Mohammed's sacredness. But Mohammed made no mention of this.

Perhaps he didn't have to? Perhaps the culture would infer it? Who knows? Still interesting. I doubt Mohammed fullt appreciated the depth of the power vacuum right when the Muslims appeared on the scene.
 
Apparently, so is providing support for your bald assertions.

Mohammed had not mentioned a successor. So I'm going to back up Syed on this one. Mohammed left an empire and an effective fighting machine with zero instructions. His closest followers sort of just winged it. True story.
But if it's something Islam invented to serve Islam, why isn't it Islamic?

I mean, it's not in the Koran, then it's not Koranic, but that's a separate deal. Like unbiblical being discrete from unChristain. Not all Christain practices are supported by the documentation, but they are clearly Christain practices.

Where does one draw the line between Islamic and fake-Islamic? Does everything Islamic have to come from the Koran?
 
Mohammed had not mentioned a successor. So I'm going to back up Syed on this one. Mohammed left an empire and an effective fighting machine with zero instructions. His closest followers sort of just winged it. True story.
But if it's something Islam invented to serve Islam, why isn't it Islamic?

I mean, it's not in the Koran, then it's not Koranic, but that's a separate deal. Like unbiblical being discrete from unChristain. Not all Christain practices are supported by the documentation, but they are clearly Christain practices.

Where does one draw the line between Islamic and fake-Islamic? Does everything Islamic have to come from the Koran?

There is two ways to see it. Yes or no.

It's the same deal as with any religion. If your religion doesn't agree with you = metaphorical interpretation.

I've always wondered what kind of guy Mohammed was. Since he was a historical figure it's fun to compare him to other leaders. I see a lot of Mao in him. An all out narcissist who believes he is superior to everybody. Is an actual genius. But uses that genius, mostly just to score with as many chicks as possible. How do you get sex from ladies = get power and be their spiritual leader.

There's no shortage of spiritual leaders preaching abstinence, mostly just to cover up an out-of-control sex addiction.

Why narcissist? Because he left no plan. Narcissists do that. Create an intricate web of allegiances around them all leading to themselves. Designed to collapse if they would go. From history we know that Mohammed did exactly that. As did Mao BTW.

So that's why I think the caliphate is un-Islamic. I don't think Mohammed gave a fuck about his followers or gave a damn what would happen to them after he was gone. If he did we would have seen some evidence of it in the Quran.

Yes, all pure speculation. All of it conjecture. Still fun to speculate.
 
Back
Top Bottom