Why have islamic countries historically had trouble with

The concept of political authority coming from somewhere other than God was still radical in late 17th century Europe.

That's because there is no current "REAL" Christianity - it's true doctrines got corrupted in the very first centuries of it's birth. When the true doctrines get corrupted and "reformed" so many times, it becomes far too feeble against the changing of times. Yesterday they were theocratic now they're separated from state, yesterday they were against homosexuality, today the pope says it's cool, etc.

When the basis of a religion is that weak - then the structure is malleable to whatever the people want.

lets be real

the reason Europe became secular was capitalism.....increased wealth, there was simply no need for a god

Compare this to the early history of Islam, where the Arab conquests created new states which were intended to follow Islamic guidelines.

so in essense Islam's stronger structure makes it harder to change than Christianity?

Turkey failed this man

It's complete hyperbole to suggest that Turkey is creeping towards theocracy.

Erdogan is good at using religion to whip up support amongst his conservative base. And there are definitely those amongst his supporters who want to see an Islamic state. However, he knows that it would be insanity to attempt to abandon secularism - it would cause him far too much trouble with voters who aren't hard Islamists. His share of the vote would drop to below 40% and he'd be in even more trouble than he was after the June 2015 elections.

Erdogan isn't an ideologue. He's a very smart, very pragmatic political player. He's too savvy to champion a hard Islamist line in a country like Turkey. He has all the power he needs in a secular model. His endgame is absolute power, not Islamic theocracy.

For the first three hundred years of its existence Christianity was at best ignored, at worst actively proscribed. They developed a shadow state out of necessity, not out of ideological commitment to the separation of powers. When Constantine adopted Christianity there already was a robust ecclesiastical structure, independent of the state. He saw no point in unbuilding it, it was enough to put himself on top of both hierarchies.

Then the political hierarchy collapsed with the G*rman invasions, while the Church remained. Ergo the Christian tradition of keeping Church and State separate.

>"Europe's spine has cracked. This referendum will be the most effective thing in the rebirth of the Ottoman Empire."
Where is the current head of the family now? I know the last one died in January and he was living in NYC. What's the family's opinion on this shit?

All Abrahamic religions suck, but some are better than others.

Buddhism seems like the best religion desu.

Christianity spread without a state (missionaries)
Islam spread by conquest by states (caliphates)

you stick to what works and what you know.

There's literally no history of states in the Arab world that don't draw on religion as a justification. They also never had a big secularizing revolution like the French Revolution

they also never had an enlightenment

Wasn't Gaddafi something of a secular revolutionary leader?

That picture is not Muhammad (pbuh). The picture is of Ali, his successor.

Not to the extent of the European political development during the 19th century. Europe is the anomaly, not the other way around

Because Islam started as a theocratic empire? If you have looked into the matter you should know this. The leader had a religious title, caliphate, for the first couple of the centuries. It would be like if the Pope had been the ruler of the Roman empire.

Thank God

how is it good

Not really.

A huge rift was caused in the muslim world right after Muhammads death because he never specified who or how the ummah should be governed after him.