Islam: the Untold Story

This documentary recently appeared on British television:

Click HERE to view the documentary 

It argues that the origins of Islam are very different from those which are usually recounted and makes highly controversial claims about Islamic history. Yet unlike the Innocence of Muslims, it seems to me to represent a genuine attempt by a non-Muslim to discover the truth using historical methods. I think it would be a great pity if the backlash against films like the Innocence of Muslims were also to mean that films like this one could not be produced or discussed or were always and only seen as a provocation instead of a spur to dialogue between religious and non-religious people. What do you think? Comments are welcome :)

I should also point out that this film has been dismissed as wildly speculative, biased and badly researched. See for instance this blog here and also this scholarly refutation on youtube:

I am not qualified to decide whether the speculation contained in the documentary is well founded or not. However, I am intrigued by some of the implications that would follow from taking such a historical perspective to the orgins of Islam as is taken in this documentary and also in this other video-clip below:

For example, it is often assumed by non-Muslims that Mohammed intended to found a new and competing religion to Judaism and Christianity. But it seems many sixth century Christians saw Islam as a kind of Judaism. This perspective throws some light on the syncretism of Islam, which acknowledges both Jesus and Mary as important figures and sources of inspiration. Even the Quranic statement that "the natural religion of humanity is Islam" becomes a source of ecumenical unity rather than division once the term Islam is translated. If what Muslims were saying is that "submission to God is the natural religion of humanity", then how different is this from the attitude to God recommended by the central Christian prayer which starts out: "Our Father who art in heaven, Thy will be done"? If, then, Islam is seen as gradually developing its inner core by building and uniting previous religious traditions and developing its theology over time, then surely its validity as a religion would rest not on its originality but on the extent to which it manages to persuasively restate and make relevant central religious themes taken from Judaism and Christianity? And if this is indeed the case, then surely the the Byzantine Emperor quoted by Pope Benedict was making a theological mistake when he asked: "what did Islam bring which is new?" The point about Islam would lie precisely in the fact that its message is not new, which is why, I believe, the Quran emphasises remembering God.