TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Islam overtakes Catholicism as world's largest religion
Islam overtakes Catholicism as world's largest religion
| quote: |
| Islam has overtaken Roman Catholicism to become the world's largest single religious denomination, according to L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper. In an interview with the paper Monsignor Vittorio Formenti, compilier of the Annuario Pontificio, the Vatican yearbook, said "For the first time in history, we are no longer at the top: Muslims have overtaken us." He said that figures for 2006 showed that Catholics accounted for 17.4 per cent of the world population while Muslims accounted for 19.2 per cent. Asked for an explanation Monsignor Formenti observed that "While Muslim families, as is well known, continue to make a lot of children, Christian ones on the contrary tend to have fewer and fewer". He said the figure for the Muslim global population was derived from data submitted to the United Nations by Muslim countries. However Christians as a whole, including Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants and Anglicans make up 33 per cent of the world population. Mosnignor Formenti said Latin America remained "the stronghold" of Catholicism, and the American continent as a whole had nearly half the world's total. He noted the decline in numbers of Catholic priests, and said the number of nuns was also suffering a "drastic reduction". The figures were released as both the Vatican and Muslim leaders sought to pursue a recently initiated Muslim-Catholic dialogue despite tensions over Pope Benedict XVI's high profile baptism at Easter of Magdi Allam, a converted Italian Muslim journalist of Egyptian origin. Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, said the opinions of Mr Allam, an outspoken critic of Islam as inherently violent and repressive, were not in any way "the official expression of the positions of the Pope or the Holy See". The Vatican puts the number of Catholics in the world at 1.13 billion people, while the figure for Muslims is estimated at around 1.3 billion. Rome has Europe's largest mosque, opened in 1995 and paid for by Muslim countries, mainly by Saudi Arabia, which at present bans Christian worship but is reported to be considering allowing the construction of a church on Saudi soil as part of negotiations for the establishment of diplomatic relations. In a provocative short story entitled "The Last Christmas" (L'Ultimo Natale) the popular Italian writer Valerio Massimo Manfredi imagines a future in which Islam has become the dominant religion in Italy, with the Pope obliged to leave St Peter's and make way for an Imam |
It's easy Lira, most of those Muslims are from 3rd world countries where they breed like rabbits because of a high mortality rate (aka Africa).
It's a numbers game they play to ensure, well, their name cares on basically.
And lets hope that diversification comes sooner than later because God (Mohamed?) knows they need it... 
I'll bet you Christianity still has the highest conversion-to rate.
Islam is already pretty fractured - I think it is misleading to call it a single "denomination" - even within Sunni and Shia you have various sects and traditional belief systems. Wahhabism, Sufism, etc.
And Fir3start3r... that didn't even make sense.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Islam is already pretty fractured - I think it is misleading to call it a single "denomination" - even within Sunni and Shia you have various sects and traditional belief systems. Wahhabism, Sufism, etc. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov And Fir3start3r... that didn't even make sense. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lira But why is it that Islamism is seen as a unified religion then? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Sure it does, think about it. Islam as a religion is going down the same road Christianity did hundreds of years ago. This thought isn't mine - there are lots of articles on this, just Google it. Can Islam honestly house the radicals and the moderates under the same roof without consequence? They would only undo themselves in their current state with birth rate as their only salvation. |
I'll throw out one theory on Islamism.
The region of central Eurasia has been the scene of a lot of oppression and injustice at the hand of despotic regimes and foreign occupation. So, like the rise of the working class in the 19/20th centuries in socialism/marxism/leninism in Europe and Oriental Asia, Islamism has become the socialism of the Muslim world. Examining Islamist movements throughout the world, notice how not just do they center their ideology around Islam, but their economic policies are socialist in nature, and some are extremely nationalist. I consider many Islamist movements in central Eurasia to be synonymous to Maoist/Marxist/Communist movements of the today and the past.
My only fear is that the rapid growth of vastly different religions and cultures being forced to live side by side will bring increased animosity and eventually hostility.
Now if this coming together brings about understanding, and an integration into one another; then I think it's about time for some diversification.
Hopefully we will eventually be able to move toward a more secular and world encompassing culture that sees religion as merely a source of ethics and not a way of life.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov I suppose it's easier to demonize that way. Honestly I don't know, but the media portrayal of Islam in the US has always been extraordinarily poor. I would wager that 95% of Americans couldn't explain the difference between Shia and Sunni forms of Islam, much less the various sub-categories within each. But the way Islam is practiced and the theology that takes root is drastically different from place to place. Wahhabism, the most radical and extreme variant of Sunni Islam, seems to be taken as the de facto norm in the Islamic world by Western media - they're the ones who want radical forms Shari'a criminal law and so vigorously oppose what is viewed as Western decadence. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lira I thought so... but are these variants are as different as, let's say, Catholicism and Lutheranism? There's a human tendency to dismiss differences in groups other than our own, and I wonder if this is the case. And I'm glad Brazilian media has actually tried to make Islam look good this decade |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov So I think the difference is fairly significant. I mean, they're fighting wars over it, right? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov I've only taken one course on Islam, but my understanding that the difference is pretty great, comprising various theologies and philosophies on religion, jurisprudence, and even science. I think the largest religious difference is that the Shia follow the religious guidance of the descendants of Mohammed, whereas the Sunnis adhere more rigorously to the word of the Quran and the Hadiths. The Shia also prioritize the five pillars of Islam somewhat differently than Sunni do in order to incorporate elements of mystical Sufism that are incompatible with the strict interpretation of Shari'a preferred by Sunnis. I can't remember any specifics, but I believe the Shia also believe in a Hidden Imam that will reveal him/herself to be the descendent and heir to the Prophet sometime in the future. edit: yep. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_al-Mahdi So I think the difference is fairly significant. I mean, they're fighting wars over it, right? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z So I orginally posted this here, but yesterday ended up deleting a whole bunch of my post and threads. Don't ask why. All I'm going to say is that I'm seriosuly considering leaving this place for good. Luckily, there's still a copy of this in a thread by Opus. So I'm posting it here once again: What I find interesting is the fact that all this sectarian violence didn't really start or atleast escalate (and was close to non-existant) before the burial site of Imam Hussein, his family, tribe, and companions was supposedly blown up by some crazy Sunnis according to the mainstream media (after the Iraq invasion began). It makes absolutely no sense for any sect, regardless of how fanatical and insane, to do that. Let me explain why by giving you a brief history of the Shia Sunni divide. When Muhammad was near his dead, he expressed his wish and will of Ali, the first young male converts to Islam, a close campanion, cousin, and son-in-law, to be his successor (Caliph i.e spiritual leader of the Muslim world). Now Umar ibn al-Khattāb, who was a prominent and powerful tribe leader before he converted to Islam (and also an important leitenant), didn't want this. He claimed that Muhammad was too old and ill for his decision (and will), of Ali being his succesor, to be taken seriously. [Background knowledge: Muhammad's father died six months after his birth and his mother when he was only six years old. He was taken in and looked after by his uncle Abu Talib, the leader of the Hashim clan of the Quraish tribe, the most powerful in Mecca. He started preaching Islam while he was still alive but was left alone becuase of who his Uncle was, a feared and respeceted tribe leader of the most powerful clan of the Quraish tribe. Muhammad and early convert to Islam had to migrate from Mekkah to Medina in the early days of Islam due to ever increasing and severe presecution. It got to the point where torture, muredering new converts to Islam (who were mostly slaves and the poor), and assanination attempts on Muhammad by the pagan tribes of Mekkah became common place. What you have to know to make sense of this is the fact that paganism, tribal conflict (which usually didn't end for generations once started), slavery, burial of new born daughters, the status of women as mere property, theft, murder, and hedonistic excess was common in pre-Islamic Arabia. Mekkah, before Islam, was a center of pagan worship, as it contained the sacred well of Zamzam and a small ancient temple, the Ka'aba. The Ka'aba was filled with pagan idols at that point. All sorts of pagan ritutals, worship, sex orgies, sacrafice, and other pagan activity took place there. A hand full of few power tribes known as Banu Quraish owned the Kabbah, which at that point was a center of paganism. Pagan pilgirims from all over the Arab world came there to worship who payed large sums of money to them to be able to gain access to the Ka'aba. Their wealth, status, and power largely depended on the status quo, which was total paganism. Muhammad's preaching of the belief in one God and Islamic values was a threat to all of it. Muslims were heavily persecuted in early Islamic history and basically had to constantly be on the run from persecution and annihalation in order to practice their religion freely. ...skip a bunch... Later when Islam spread and Muhammad returned to Mekkah, he destroyed all of the idols in the Ka'aba and it became the most holy mosque in Islam, in the direction of which Muslims face when they pray. And it became the center of Muslim pilgramidge. In order to make things a little easier to follow for late and reference, these are some subclans of Banu Quraish:
After Muhammad's death, the differences that had previously lain dormant amongst the Meccan immigrants (the Muhajirun) and the Medinan converts (the Ansar), threatened to break out and split the Ummah (Muslim Nation). This sparked great controversy over who should be Muhammad's successor. Umar apparently lost it (wheater genuine or disingenuos) and became hysterical when Muhammad passed away, delaying the decision making process that would have in most probability ended up with Ali being selected as first Calioh. This (conveniently) lasted until his buddy Abu Bakar (another big shot) returned from some business trip or something. There was a huge controversy over who should become Caliph. Umar apparently lost it when Muhammad died and refused to allow his barial. He became hysterical (wheater genuine or disingenuos), delaying the decision making process that would have in most probability ended up with Ali being selected as first Caliph. This (conveniently) lasted until his buddy Abu Bakar (another big shot before converting to Islam) returned from some business trip or something. The Ansar met in Medina to discuss whom they would support as their new leader. When Abu Bakr was informed of the meeting, he, Umar and a few others rushed to prevent the Ansar from making a "premature decision." During the meeting Umar declared that Abu Bakr should be the new leader, and declared his allegiance to Abu Bakr. After the meeting at Saqifah, the Muslims who were not present had to be informed of the decision taken by the group. Many of them refused to swear allegiance to Abu Bakr, as did Ali, as they (rightly) believed (in accordance with the Prophet's will) that Ali, was the obvious choice for leader. They became to be known as the Shi'at Ali (the party of Ali) by their enemies. It took six months of threat and pressure to force the refusers to submit to Abu Bakr. Umar roamed the streets of Medina with his warriors to coerce people into submission. Being a hothead, he even threatened to burn down Fatima's house (the Prophet's daughter and Ali's wife) unless Ali came out and submitted to Abu Bakr. Ali refused and requested his privacy to be respected. Umar pushed his way into the house. Fatima, who was heavily pregnant, and trying to prevent Umar from breaking in, was crushed behind the door. She miscarried her unborn son. At one point, there was even a civil war. Eventually Ali reluctantly gave in to prevent Muslims loyal to him and the Prophets will from being persecuted, and to not detroy the unity of the Ummah right after the Prophet passed away, pretty messed up state of affairs. So Abu Bakr became first Caliph, succeeded by Umar as second Caliph, Uthman as third, and finally Ali as forth. But Ali's caliphate only lasted five years, ended with his assasination and then the assaination of his eldest son, Hasan ibn Ali. So basically, this is what lead to the Shiia Sunni divide, although they didn't call themselves Shiia and Sunni at the time. Mu�āwīyah ibn Abī Sufyān, the founder of the Umayyad dynasty of caliphs, engaged in a civil war against Ali and met with considerable military success, including the seizure of Egypt. He assumed the caliphate after Ali's assassination in 661 and reigned until 680. ...skip some more... His son Yazid succeded him in the line of the Umayyads dynasty of caliphs, who was also fairly tyranical and corrupt. The persecution of Shi'iat al Ali continued. At one point, it became so severe that they were basically being denied water (and it's pretty damn hard to survive in a desert without any). The divide between the two groups was intesified when he was opposed and criticized by the Ali's son, the Prophets grandson, Imam Husayn bin Ali. Yazid responded to criticism with force, killing many of his campanion, family members, and Muslims loyal to him. This started the battle of Karbala (which is in Iraq), where he Imam Husayn was martered, including lots of his friends, followers, and family. Him and his followers were burried there. The terms Shiia and Sunni as sectarian labels came in to use much later. The Shiias believe Ali to be the rightful successor of Muhammad and Yazid to an illegitimate tyrant responsible for murdering Imam Husayn. The Sunnis, on the other hand, are the passive masses submitting to power and accepting status quo. Sunnis condemn the killing of Imam Husayn, being the Prophets grandson and all, but still recoznige Yazid as a legitimate Caliph and make excuses like "he wasn't responsible for it, his generals were." |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov So I think the difference is fairly significant. I mean, they're fighting wars over it, right? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r It's easy Lira, most of those Muslims are from 3rd world countries where they breed like rabbits because of a high mortality rate (aka Africa). It's a numbers game they play to ensure, well, their name cares on basically. And lets hope that diversification comes sooner than later because God (Mohamed?) knows they need it... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z Not exactly, the Shiia Sunni divide is mainly a political one, and minor practices revolving around that. There aren't a whole lot of religious differences between the two. Shiiaism doesn't have anything to do with Sufism btw. Sufism is Islamic mysticism, which is a completey differenct story all together. I posted this a while back on PDD, so here it is again in case you're interested: EDIT: You aren't really that off target and your understanding of the sectarian divides is a lot better than most people I've come across. I'm actually rather impressed. But I'm just throwing this out there as an FYI. |
how is the difference between sunni and shia different than the division among christians? comparing apples to apples would have Islam compared to Christianity, not catholicism.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z |
| quote: |
3.4. The Muslim growth rate worldwide The same trend as witnessed in India is conspicuous at the international level: Muslim countries are among the champions of demographic growth. The economic explanation for high and low birthrates breaks down when confronted with the figures for Muslim countries: the rich and orthodox Saudi Arabs procreate much faster than the relatively poor but more secularized Turks. The yearbooks of the Encyclopedia Brittannica give a wealth of countrywise data, including the population's doubling‑rate, which is a more accurate indicator of effective demographic growth than the birth rate. It turns out that no Muslim country has a markedly lower growth rate than India. Indonesia, Turkey and Tunisia are at about the same level as India, which is already seen by many as a demographic disaster area itself (doubling in ca. 33 years). It is no coincidence that these are the three most secularized Muslim countries.[15] The more Islamic a country, the higher the birthrate: Iran, Jordan, Lybia, Kuwait and Eritrea double their populations in 20 years or less, up to twice as fast as India.[16] The Arabs are the champions: "In no Arab country does the population increase at a rate lower than 2.5% per year. In practically every Arab country, more than 4 inhabitants in 10 are youngsters below 15."[17] Pakistan is Asia's fastest-growing non-Arab country, doubling its population every 24 years.[18] No country is known to have a higher birth‑rate among non‑Muslims than among Muslims, but countries where the opposite is true are numerous.[19] The starkest differential is probably found in the European countries. Thus, to use another demographic indicator, the percentage of the under-25 age group in Britain is 33 for natives, 48 for Indians (mostly Hindus) and Caribbeans, 60 for Pakistanis and 63 for Bangladeshis.[20] A similar indicator for the Subcontinent: the under-15 constitute 46.3% in Pakistan, 45.1% in Bangladesh, and 35.2% in India.[21] In Belgium, the average native couple (Christian or secular) has 1.7 children, the immigrant Moroccan couple (Muslim) has 3.25 children, i.e. nearly twice as many.[22] About American Islam, a Pakistani observer makes an estimate for the year 2,000: "The US (...) may by then become the 14th or 15th 'largest Islamic country'. Islam, in fact, is the fastest-growing religion in the US". Though the growth is largely due to immigration, he also sees "a higher birth rate" as "a major factor".[23] |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r We're simply being out-bred. Simple enough for everyone now? I thought this would have been common knowledge for some of you here at PDD. There's tons of facts and articles on this. >>Source<< |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r We're simply being out-bred. Simple enough for everyone now? I thought this would have been common knowledge for some of you here at PDD. There's tons of facts and articles on this. >>Source<< |
.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z I guess I'll go "breed like a rabbit" now . |
) help the cause. But you can still make a difference!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lira Wait, he's got a point, regardless of your religious status. You complained yesterday about programming with engineers, you've got a cute girlfriend that seems to like you quite a lot, and you're here posting on the intarweb instead of relaxing? My girlfriend is in Japan, so I can't (or, rather, shouldn't ) help the cause. But you can still make a difference!Don't make war! Make rabbit-like breeding acts! w00t! |
. And will make your girlfriend appreciate you a lot more too... perhaps a little too much... you might even get tired of sex 
.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z You might want to consider "esoteric" sexual tantric "magic" to open up her / your "chakras" over rabbit-like breeding acts. I assure you it's far more fullfilling . And will make your girlfriend appreciate you a lot more too... perhaps a little too much... you might even get tired of sex . |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.