Talk:Aqidah

Websites such as http://www.islam101.com/theology/ have restricted the articles of faith to three points. Can wikipedia produce an expert who can clarify this issue — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.182.18.129 (talk) 00:31, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

This page lists Athari as an Islamic school of theology. There is no basis for this claim. I have been having a discussion on this topic with another on the Talk:Athari page and suggest that unless someone here or there can back up, with legitimate sources, that it is widely accepted that there are in modern times three schools of Islamic thought then any reference to it as a school should be deleted.--Ddragovic (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

I am not an Arabic speaker but in other literature Islamic theology and Islamic creed are not considered as the same (nor are they in English). What I have seen is that the former is translated as 'ilm al-kalam and the latter as aqeedah, two very different concepts. Yet in Wikipedia both are directed to this page (Islamic Theology).

Even though Ilm al-Kalam has a separate page in Wikipedia searching for "Islamic theology" brings you to this current page, Islamic theology, which seems to describe Islamic creeds instead of talking about theology and taking you to Ilm al-Kalam to discuss Islamic theology. So even though creed and theology are different searching in Wikipedia for "Islamic creed" by way of a redirect brings you to Islamic Theology as does searching for "Islamic theology". I do not believe that this is correct.

The Brill Encyclopaedia of Islam Second Edition uses this terminology:

• ʿIlm al-Kalām, one of the “religious sciences” of Islam. The term is usually translated, as an approximate rendering, “theology”.

• ʿAḳīda (a.), creed; but sometimes also doctrine, dogma or article of faith; and hence ʿaḳāʾid (pl.), articles of faith, is also used for "creed".

Clearly they are different things in the English language and presumably in the Arabic also. As such I suggest that this page be changed to "Islamic Creed" and searches for Islamic theology be redirected to the current Wikipedia page Ilm al-Kalam.--Ddragovic (talk) 14:58, 16 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'm not an expert in the subject, so keep that in mind when weighing my input. Should the aqida page (this page, basically) be moved to creed or dogma? From what I've read - and keep in mind that I haven't read much - theology is a combination of jurisprudence, dogma and some other topics. Theologian is a general term, while jurist or "dogmatist" (I guess) is more specific. Perhaps this page could be changed from Islamic theology to Islamic dogmatics? As for ilm al kalam then from what I understand it was the attempt of some Muslim scholars to engage in both dialectic among themselves and debates with Christians; would it, then, be more appropriate to term it theology or something along the lines of Muslim dialectic? MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

This article is completely unfit under this title. There's no article on social rights in other religions, and this one is not at all about social rights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.194.4.2 (talk) 00:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am not sure title and article scope are in accord here. Shouldn't this be "Islamic creed" or similar? And how is Islamic theology different from Muslim theology? THe -logy in "theology" indicates that it is about discourse. Theology is learned discourse on matters of faith and religion, as opposed to practice or ritual, or statement of creed. I suggest that "Islamic thelogy" along with "Muslim theology" should stand alone or redirect to the existing Ilm al-Kalam (which seems a fair equivalent of the western concept "theology"), while Aqidah can still stand on its own, or redirect to a title like "Islamic creed". --dab (𒁳) 15:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

On further review, it seems obvious to me that terminology has been messed up (the article itself is aware that mutakallim equates "theologian", and thus kalam "theology"), and I am putting up a split tag. --dab (𒁳) 15:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

The section on Atharism does not describe Atharism at all but instead describes Salafism. Additionally, all the references for this section are from primary sources and are devoid of any reliable academic sources. I have therefore replaced it with the opening section of the Wikipedia article on Atharism.RookTaker (talk) 16:39, 12 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

This article has good points but its in quite a mess! This needs to be the new Islamic Theology page and then the current Islamic theology page needs to be Islamic schools of divinity. Sakimonk ^talk 15:38, 17 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sakimonk this gives the impression that Islamic theology is a subset of Aqidah. On the other hand the article is about Aqidah. Bad move?--Peaceworld 19:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

You're right, thanks for pointing this out. Sakimonk ^talk 20:55, 17 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aqidah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904013100/http://abdurrahman.org:80/aqeeda/index.html to http://abdurrahman.org/aqeeda/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:03, 16 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Much of the "muslim philosophers" are as unserious as Artstotle, and actually a lot of the time builds on it. Referances to them should go, sectarianship go, and muslim faith really should be about monotheism. That there is just one Allah, and no other Ilah, or No God But The Divine, similar to a religious view free of the deification of Jesus, and any triniy. That would be a clear point in an article on Islam, and aqidah could be moved into it. A suggestion, I put forth here, out of good intent, rather than make all the change myself, which would probably upset the typical "Islam is sunni", "the philosophers this that", "tradition this that" type view, that is only hampering clear and valid information on Islam. It simply is monotheism, not strangeness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.186.71.1 (talk) 12:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)Reply