Differences in Christian & Islamic Culture

[Rival]

I've heard a lot of people, in real life and quite a few on here, suggest that the Abrahamic (for lack of a better word) faiths are basically all the same. This brought to mind this question.

What accounts for the differences in how Christianity and Islam ended up in their respective 'spheres'? I'm mostly thinking about the differences between European Christianity and Middle Eastern/Asian Islam. Islamic nations have stayed mostly very religious compared to the European ones, and even the US seems to have more atheists than the most liberal Islamic nations.

It's clear that Christianity shaped Europe for thousands of years, and the same with Islam in the Middle East; what, then, can help us account for the differences that the world's two largest religions experience culture-wise? How come Islamic nations have stayed so religious, while Christianity seems idle in Europe?

 

[epronovost]

IIt's clear that Christianity shaped Europe for thousands of years, and the same with Islam in the Middle East; what, then, can help us account for the differences that the world's two largest religions experience culture-wise? How come Islamic nations have stayed so religious, while Christianity seems idle in Europe?

Islam is very important in the middle East since the collapse the Ottoman Empire as the loss of prestige and the fragmentation of its government has led to a greater instability and a sense of cultural collapse. Religion, in those circumstances, acts as a safeguard to unify people, but intestine divisions within that religion leads to bitter conflict. Following the collapse of the Ottoman, nationalism copied from Europe during the 30's and islam (as in a theocratic islam) became the ''go-to'' political doctrines since they were the only one with some popular support, cultural relevence and capacity to present a societal project.

Europe started it's secularisation with the rise of humanism from the syncretisation of christian theology and greco-roman philosophy and rationalism. In a time of division, there were other options besides, kings and priests. There was this idea of renaissance and syncretism between antiquity and modernity.

 

[Samael_Khan]

I've heard a lot of people, in real life and quite a few on here, suggest that the Abrahamic (for lack of a better word) faiths are basically all the same. This brought to mind this question.

What accounts for the differences in how Christianity and Islam ended up in their respective 'spheres'? I'm mostly thinking about the differences between European Christianity and Middle Eastern/Asian Islam. Islamic nations have stayed mostly very religious compared to the European ones, and even the US seems to have more atheists than the most liberal Islamic nations.

It's clear that Christianity shaped Europe for thousands of years, and the same with Islam in the Middle East; what, then, can help us account for the differences that the world's two largest religions experience culture-wise? How come Islamic nations have stayed so religious, while Christianity seems idle in Europe?

It is tricky to identify exact cultural differences due to factors apart from religion playing a role in culture. Most European countries are first world countries whereas many Middle Eastern/Asian countries that have a large muslim population are third world or developing countries. So there is a quality of life, technological and educational differences.

But a big clear difference between Islam and Christianity is that Islam is more like Judaism in a sense that there are rituals to follow. They also follow the example of Muhammed to such an extent that the way he dressed and acted influences their behaviour, so that the average muslim is noticeably "Arabised". On the other hand, Christians do not care about how Jesus dressed, trimmed his beard or other things he might have done which are aesthetic. They focus on how he thought and treated others, which means that their beliefs do not necessarily impact the way they dress depending on which culture they go to. So it is actually easy to distinguish between a muslim and a Christian unless the Christian is from a muslim country, in which the Christians beliefs overlay the arabised aesthetic of Islamic influence.

Christianity also went through a Reformation which had the side effect of causing many different people to decide for themselves what is the truth about what the Bible says and they interpreted it in many different ways. Islam never had that so no major internal group has challenged the status quo besides some minor groups in the early days.

 

[Vee]

I've heard a lot of people, in real life and quite a few on here, suggest that the Abrahamic (for lack of a better word) faiths are basically all the same. This brought to mind this question.

What accounts for the differences in how Christianity and Islam ended up in their respective 'spheres'? I'm mostly thinking about the differences between European Christianity and Middle Eastern/Asian Islam. Islamic nations have stayed mostly very religious compared to the European ones, and even the US seems to have more atheists than the most liberal Islamic nations.

It's clear that Christianity shaped Europe for thousands of years, and the same with Islam in the Middle East; what, then, can help us account for the differences that the world's two largest religions experience culture-wise? How come Islamic nations have stayed so religious, while Christianity seems idle in Europe?

Although I don't know that much about the Islamic culture, from what I've seen and heard here in France I would say we have very different cultures and views. Let me not say anything else because I don't want to get into politics.

 

[Tambourine]

What is a "Christian culture" and what is a "Islamic culture"? Are we including every single cultural space where either of these two religions are practiced, or are these terms supposed to be somewhat narrower than that?

 

[Rival]

What is a "Christian culture" and what is a "Islamic culture"? Are we including every single cultural space where either of these two religions are practiced, or are these terms supposed to be somewhat narrower than that?

Countries/continents where either Christianity or Islam has dominated so much so as to have had an indelible impact upon people's lives, concepts, worldviews and traditions. Here I specify Europe and the ME.

 

[Tambourine]

Countries/continents where either Christianity or Islam has dominated so much so as to have had an indelible impact upon people's lives, concepts, worldviews and traditions. Here I specify Europe and the ME.

So this is just about the differences between Western Europe and the Middle East, then?

 

[Rival]

So it's just about the differences between Western Europe and the Middle East, then.

No. It's more nuanced than that. Religion influenced those cultures to a high degree. They are both Abrahamic religions with more similarities than if, say, one were a Celtic Pagan continent. Why is it that religion (Christianity) in Europe is on the sharp decline, despite Christianity basically making Europe, giving it its values, culture, schools, traditions etc., but Islamic nations retain their numbers of religious people? How did the two religious traditions influence the directions these cultures went in and how come they seem so diametrically opposed?

 

[Tambourine]

The Middle East was dominated by secular authoritarian regimes until the late 1970s, where a combination of two major regional events - namely, the Yom Kippur War and the Islamic Revolution in Iran - both destabilized these secular dictatorships and secularism as a political program for the Middle East (both Arabic and Persian). The growth of religiously-motivated political movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood should be seen in that light, as a counter-movement to the secular dictatorships of that time.

Another notable factor is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's growing importance since its growth as an economic powerhouse of the region due to its oil. The KSA has wielded a lot of its influence over other Muslim nations by way of religious, and specifically extremist Sunni Muslim, political movements, and by funding closely-aligned religious organizations around the globe.

(It is notable that the secular holdouts of the region - the PKK and the PLO - were underground movements that did not experience the kind of failure the secular dictatorships of Egypt or Iran did. They were also the ones least amenable to Saudi support, being of a secularist-socialist/nationalist bent, in the old Baath party tradition.)


Europe, meanwhile, has experienced a major resurgence of religous power and influence after the fall of the USSR, as major Christian organizations all over the former Eastern bloc were rehabilitated and re-legitimized in their public opposition to communism (whether performed or factual). Since then, religion has served as a ready support pillar for extreme nationalism all over the continent, providing justification for Serbian ethnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia, fascist movements all over Western and Central Europe, and of course Europe's surging anti-Muslim populism.

 

[Rival]

Since then, religion has served as a ready support pillar for extreme nationalism all over the continent, providing justification for Serbian ethnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia, fascist movements all over Western and Central Europe, and of course Europe's surging anti-Muslim populism.

This doesn't seem to be the case in W.E. though, where in my day-to-day most folks I meet are atheists. Many Christians here are cultural Christians, not folks who actually attend Church, pray, or study Scripture. Whilst E.E. does seem to be more religious, after having had numerous conversations with many, particularly from Romania, it seems belief in G-d isn't even necessary. One person told me that belief in G-d isn't part of the point, but that Orthodoxy is part of his identity as a Romanian, not a theological understanding. I've heard the same of a Russian who was extremely Orthodox, yet belief in G-d didn't actually seem to matter to him much either. It seems to me a bizarre form of religion, which is more about one's identity than one's actual theological position and understanding. As you pointed out, it can be used to justify all sorts of nonsense, and religious conviction seems little to do with it; it just seems to be a handy tool to have in one's box.

So to all intents and purposes, a lot of these folks may as well be atheists.

 

[Tambourine]

@Rival
Are you American?

I ask because this quasi-secular approach to religion which seems to weird you out matches pretty well how I've experienced religion in Austria for most of my life. A German comedian once called it "seelischer Trachtenverein", which is hard to translate but means something along the lines of "a spiritual club for rural folk traditions".

 

[Rival]

@Rival
Are you American?

I ask because this quasi-secular approach to religion which seems to weird you out matches pretty well how I've experienced religion in Austria for most of my life. A German comedian once called it "seelischer Trachtenverein", which is hard to translate but means something along the lines of "a spiritual club for rural folk traditions".

British.

But this is kind of my question: what is it that leads to this approach, particularly in Europe, with Christianity? And why has Islam resisted this?

 

[Augustus]

Europe started it's secularisation with the rise of humanism from the syncretisation of christian theology and greco-roman philosophy and rationalism. In a time of division, there were other options besides, kings and priests. There was this idea of renaissance and syncretism between antiquity and modernity.

The process of secularisation began centuries before that and it had nothing to do with humanism or renaissance but tensions between the church and the crown and the evolution and eventual formalisation of differing spheres of authority.

"The Renaissance" is largely a self-congratulatory myth created by those who wanted to differentiate themselves from an imaginary "Dark Age".

The investiture controversy had shattered the early-medieval equilibrium and ended the interpenetration of ecclesia and mundus. Medieval kingship, which had been largely the creation of ecclesiastical ideals and personnel, was forced to develop new institutions and sanctions. The result, during the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries, was the first instance of a secular bureaucratic state whose essential components appeared in the Anglo-Norman monarchy.

The intellectual expansion of Europe in the twelfth century, which was largely the work of churchmen, was in some ways more beneficial to the growth of secular power than to ecclesiastical leadership. The improvements in education, law, and even the increase in piety all came to serve the aims of monarchy. The rise of the universities produced a new kind of administrative personnel for royal government. The great increase in legal knowledge gave kings a way of implementing their control over society. It also gave them a juristic ideology to replace the early-medieval tradition of theocratic kingship, which had been divested of its effectiveness by the attacks of the Gregorian reformers.

The explosive effects of the new piety also contributed to the entrenchment of secular power. The widespread criticism of the clergy made it easier for royal government to assert its own leadership in society. The many problems arising from the new piety also distracted the hierarchy from paying close attention to what was happening in political life and gave kings greater freedom to pursue their own interests without ecclesiastical interference.N Cantor. - Civilization of the Middle Ages

 

[amorphous_constellation]

That's a pretty hard question for your average layman.. Probably requires a book to answer it.. But I think maybe when Catholicism gave way to other things, the secular ideas started coming to the surface more over there, and then the Protestants carried the torch and came over here. We have atheists, but as you can probably see, our american culture has some pretty hardcore believers in the control room. So I guess the answer, is that this place was the escape valve for that

 

[Tambourine]

British.

But this is kind of my question: what is it that leads to this approach, particularly in Europe, with Christianity? And why has Islam resisted this?

I don't think it has, really. Islamism (the political ideology) is essentially Arab nationalism, but built on a quasi-religious rather than a quasi-secular foundation (like 1950s Arab nationalism used to be). This is even more obvious with political Wahhabism/Salafism, which tends to be mostly fielded in support of the KSA (which let's not forget is profiting enormously from its status as the nominal "center" of Islam, both economically and politically).

And a lot of the modern "Sunni" vs. "Shia" factional rivalries essentially boil down to pro-KSA factions vs. pro-Iran factions.

 

[Tambourine]

That's a pretty hard question for your average layman.. Probably requires a book to answer it.. But I think maybe when Catholicism gave way to other things, the secular ideas started coming to the surface more over there, and then the Protestants carried the torch and came over here. We have atheists, but as you can probably see, our american culture has some pretty hardcore believers in the control room. So I guess the answer, is that this place was the escape valve for that

European Secularism is a child of the French Revolution, but the strongly secular nature of modern European governments is arguably the result of governments led by or strongly influenced by Socialists or Social Democrats either during the Interwar years or after WW2.

However, many European countries still maintain official state churches, or heavily subsidize locally dominant religions (such as the local Protestant churches in Germany that are directly and officially supported by tax payer money).

 

[Deeje]

No. It's more nuanced than that. Religion influenced those cultures to a high degree. They are both Abrahamic religions with more similarities than if, say, one were a Celtic Pagan continent. Why is it that religion (Christianity) in Europe is on the sharp decline, despite Christianity basically making Europe, giving it its values, culture, schools, traditions etc., but Islamic nations retain their numbers of religious people? How did the two religious traditions influence the directions these cultures went in and how come they seem so diametrically opposed?

Perhaps it has something to do with the Law?.....and adherence to it.

Islam is not an offshoot of Judaism, but is “Abrahamic” through his firstborn, Ishmael, not Isaac. (This despite the fact that all of God’s promises were to come through Isaac and Jacob)

All of the “Abrahamic” faiths accept that the Law was binding on Abraham’s descendants, but when Christ came, he ended the Law by fulfilling it. Neither Judaism nor Islam ever dispensed with the Law....or at least their interpretation of it. Neither accepted Jesus for who he said he was. The Samaritans too had their version of Moses’ writings....but always separated from the Jews because of ongoing rivalry and deep animosity.

Ritual was part of Jewish culture and that has never changed. Ritual is still an integral part of Islam, but Christianity initially dispensed with ritual because the Law was no longer binding on them. They concentrated more on preaching and teaching Christ’s message of peace and the coming of God’s kingdom. But as time went on, Christianity became corrupted (as it was foretold) and reverted back to the comfort of ritual and made Christianity back into a distorted version of Judaism but with pagan adoptions.

Culturally IMO, we see both Islam and Judaism seemingly stuck in their ancient mindset and adhering to ritual as if performance of these rituals is all that God demands, but Christianity became a mish-mash of pagan sun worship, and Northern Hemisphere beliefs revolving around Nimrod and Norse gods and customs. This is reflected even in the names of days and months which were retained in the Catholic Gregorian calendar.

Christianity lost its grip in Europe I believe, because as time went on, the hold that Catholicism had on the people, began to wear thin. The church was drunk with power and was governed by some very corrupt and ungodly men. The threat of hellfire no longer kept the ignorant masses in check, so the Reformation released many of them from a lot of Catholic ritual, (and fear) and opened up for some the idea that “grace” now made them impervious to sin. All they had to do was “believe”.....Christendom was now a free-for-all.

It appears that the greatest enemy of any religion is disunity. Once you break them up into sects, all of them lose their power over the people, except those who follow their brand of that “religion”. This causes animosity even between members of their own faith who have chosen a different path to God. Do all roads lead to Rome, then?

I do not see God being present with any of them TBH.....all are guilty of bloodshed (Isaiah 1:15).....so where does that leave all those who are confused with seemingly nowhere to go? Has God left us in the dark?

Or is there one truth, hiding like a diamond in a pile of broken glass?

 

[Augustus]

How come Islamic nations have stayed so religious, while Christianity seems idle in Europe?

Many things no doubt, but some contribution likely due to the following.

Protestantism replaced ritual with belief, and catholicism replaced the Latin Mass with vernacular turning the 'sacred' into a rational proposition.

This happed alongside the development of a concept of 'religion' that could be abstracted from the rest of society and The Idea of Progress.

Europe basically created the conditions to divorce Christian religion form Christian culture (modern humanistic liberalism).

 

[Rival]

I don't think it has, really. Islamism (the political ideology) is essentially Arab nationalism, but built on a quasi-religious rather than a quasi-secular foundation (like 1950s Arab nationalism used to be). This is even more obvious with political Wahhabism/Salafism, which tends to be mostly fielded in support of the KSA (which let's not forget is profiting enormously from its status as the nominal "center" of Islam, both economically and politically).

And a lot of the modern "Sunni" vs. "Shia" factional rivalries essentially boil down to pro-KSA factions vs. pro-Iran factions.

This is all very political. I'm talking about on the ground, everyday, real people.

 

[Rival]

Many things no doubt, but some contribution likely due to the following.

Protestantism replaced ritual with belief, and catholicism replaced the Latin Mass with vernacular turning the 'sacred' into a rational proposition.

This happed alongside the development of a concept of 'religion' that could be abstracted from the rest of society and The Idea of Progress.

Europe basically created the conditions to divorce Christian religion form Christian culture (modern humanistic liberalism).

@Vouthon and I basically came up with this hypothesis, too. But what confuses me is, Islam never had a central structure like Christianity (The Pope, for instance), yet remained largely somewhat more stable regards factions etc. I'd have expected to see, more likely, a secular state emerge from a place where already there is no ultimate religious authority (though there are kings), but this doesn't seem to have been the case.