The Divine Office and Islamic Daily Prayer

Here is a fascinating dissertation comparing and contrasting a version of the Divine Office - in this case, the Roman Catholic Liturgy of the Hours - with Islamic salat, the daily cycle of ritual prayer. It is well worth reading, and contains a number of interesting insights, especially for those of us who keep some version of the Divine Office.
https://d-nb.info/975188119/34

 

What is most interesting is that one is a false religion and one is a true religion. Of course what I mean is that tChristianity is true and Islam is false. It is important to keep this in mind when looking at other religions.

 

In an exercise like this I prefer to look at it more sociologically. One might look at the relative simplicity of Islamic prayers and assume there’s nothing in it corresponding to the Eucharist (from a comparative point of view), but there is, and it’s hiding in plain sight. It’s enlightening to see where those connections are and how they are made, and it makes it easier to communicate, while reducing the potential for misunderstanding.

 

I tend to view at as anything true in their false religions, just as the early church approached Greek religions and philosophy they came from the Triune God and ultimately points back to him

 

I seem to recall catching some grief recently about using non-primary sources. Yet here we have a dissertation by a student who's attempting to complete his doctoral degree. A citation from authority? Perhaps not.

But after all, it's just to examine sociological similarities. Thankfully it's not meant to bolster the image of Islam amongst Christians or to help justify the relative goodness of their religion, or else one might be inclined to refer to the ultimate 'primary source' and find such statements as: And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? (2 Cor. 6:15). Or maybe even: Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son (1 John 2:22).

Reaching Muslims with the Gospel entails communicating of Christ crucified and risen for their redemption out of sin & separation from God. That does not require insights into the content of a Muslim's daily prayers. Putting the shoe on the other foot for a moment, if a Muslim said to a Christian, "Our daily prayers have much in common with your daily prayers," would that inspire a conversion to Islam? But it's a way to seem friendly as well as accepting of the other's religion.

 

Actually you caught grief because you were making claims that weren’t true on another thread, and the root of your error was unfamiliarity with the primary sources. (You never would say if you’d actually read the Qur’an, for starters.) Neither of the verses you cited has any application to Islam; Muslims worship the God of Abraham, not “Belial”, and they acknowledge the messiahship of Jesus.

A dissertation such as this assumes such familiarity, and is comparing and contrasting the canonical prayers of two distinct religious traditions, for their own intrinsic interest. I posted it for people who might share that interest. It’s not intended to promote either Catholicism or Islam. My hope is that people will read it and find something insightful or interesting in it, and that they will share those impressions here. That is the object of this thread. Studies like this can help us to think more deeply about our own life of prayer, and what we’re trying to accomplish by it. And that’s a valuable thing.

 

I can't claim to have read the entire Quran because I only read about the first one-half before I'd had enough of filling my head with mush. But I get the distinct impression that you have read the entire thing, correct? Just once, or more than?

 

More than once.

 

Holy cow, oy vey, and yikes!

 

As literature, on the whole I find it noble, inspiring, and profound. Working through it patiently is a rewarding exercise.

 

I can understand where you're coming from with such a response, but think it's worth appreciating that many Christians could learn a lot and understand their own faith better through diving deeply into other religions. Perhaps the best example of that is Thomas Merton, a Roman Catholic monk who would meditate with the Dalai Lama, studied Sufism, and visited Buddhist temples in Thailand and Vietnam. From his wikipedia:

While Merton was not interested in what these traditions had to offer as doctrines and institutions, he was deeply interested in what each said of the depth of human experience. He believed that for the most part, Christianity had forsaken its mystical tradition in favor of Cartesian emphasis on "the reification of concepts, idolization of the reflexive consciousness, flight from being into verbalism, mathematics, and rationalization."
​

Now I don't know if I'm the kind of person that would glean anything particularly useful from reading the Quran, beyond specific excerpts, but I acknowledge there are some people that can learn a lot about their own Christian faith, and come closer to God by doing so.

 

I personally can’t bring myself to read a book written by a man with a legion of wives and Aisha who was a little 9 year old .

 

Do you equally struggle to read Proverbs and Ecclesiastes?

 

Of course Solomon knew polygamy was wrong, and the God of Israel forbids it. In no way comparable to Muhammad and what he fashioned the true God to be. And Solomon never wrote in the scriptures that it’s ok to discipline your wife with force, as far as I know, nor did he marry a 9 year old

 

Solomon had a far larger legion of wives, and "virgins without number" (note: ancient kings often only trusted young girls to be maidens). It doesn't seem beyond the pale to me that of his 1000 wives and concubines in the 900s BC at least one (or far more than one) were children.

My point isn't that this is acceptable, or will avoid judgement by God, it's that a lot of our own books are written by people that are not beyond reproach. Judge the book by the content of what it teaches, not by the behaviours of who wrote it. If the Quran teaches that it is acceptable to marry children (it doesn't), condemn the book for that. Aisha's age is not mentioned in the Quran, that there is an external tradition that says Aisha was somewhere between 9 and 13 shouldn't impact your willingness to read a book that has nothing to do with that tradition.

There are many reasons to find Islam unfulfilling and spiritually unpersuasive, there's no need to attack the unrelated actions of the religion's founder to disparage their holy book.

 

The difference is the Quran was written by what Muslims consider to be the prime example of human behavior, Muhammad. Christians don’t believe that. And I believe the tradition is Aisha was 6 and consummated at 9, so yeah. I’ve never heard such a thing of a Jewish girl being married off at 6 years old in the Bible. I think the Jewish tradition was around 12.
Muslims do believe he is a prime example to follow, with the legion of wives and the whole “disciple your wife.”
That’s where they get that they’re allowed to hit their wives. Now they will tell you it’s only a “light” slap, but I know of no man that can slap lightly when he’s angry, neither of anytime it is appropriate to ever raise a hand against your wife, whether it be lightly or not.
The Quran absolutely does teach everything Muhammad did was right, they don’t even believe he sinned after receiving his prophetic mission. I don’t know how you can compare that to Solomon or David. We know Solomon's wives lead him to idolatry, and we also know God never approved of polygamy but allowed it, just like he allowed divorce. The Quran absolutely teaches by Muhammad’s example what is proper and what isn’t, and it also teaches women’s testimonies are worth less in a court of law than men’s, that husbands may “discipline” their wives, and that it’s ok to marry more than one woman, that killing infidels is rewarded by God, and a bunch of other things.
So once again, the actions of Muhammad are absolutely presented as the prime example for Muslims to follow.Idk how you can come to any other conclusion. Every Muslim wants to be like Muhammad, he is the epitome of human behavior to them.

 

This seems like a very different gripe from what you first said. You said you couldn't bring yourself to read a book written by a man with a legion of wives and a child bride. There are books in the bible written by men with legions of wives and (almost certainly) several child brides. You don't need to become a Muslim or believe Muhammad to be the gold standard of humanity to read the Quran and find it an inspiring or rewarding Christian exercise.

 

Reading a book which advocates or supports a false religion is not wise. Such a book is inherently deceptive and tends to lead people away from the true faith and away from the Gospel about Jesus.

Since we know that our God would not inspire a book like that, it must be either the product of man's faulty reasoning or inspired by demons.

The Quran purports to provide good news to mankind about Allah and his prophet, Muhammad.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

It would be one thing to read Plato or Socrates, for we know that their writings are the product of mortal man and they do not purport to reveal the mind of the Creator. But the Quran is claimed to be the product of Allah's own thoughts and intentions, and we know that this cannot be so.

 

Perhaps I'm stretching the limits of being a faithful devil's advocate here, because I don't disagree with anything you're saying, but if you go into it with the mindset that the Quran is not the product of God's thoughts, then you can extract from it as much about the human experience as you can from reading Greek myth or Indigenous origin stories.

 

Might not appear like it but it was always my reasoning, that I can’t read it because Muhammad supports it and so do Muslims. I couldn’t read the Bible either if God thought polygamy or hitting women or 6 year old brides were ok. But he doesn’t
I just find it hard to be inspired by a man who thinks those types of things are permissible and even godly to do, as Muhammad is the standard of godliness.
Anyway, I did try reading the Quran when I was probably like 13 years old. I didn’t care too much for it and I think I was way too young to let myself read it in a “removed” way in order to harness some sort of truth or spiritual reality among all the things I found objectionable.