I'm not suggesting that religion as such is necessarily irrational. Many religions are quite rational, if we by that mean that they are internally coherent and serve important purposes for people seeking some kind of meaning in life. I'm just pointing out that the concept of an omnipotent God seems a bit "fishy", to say the least. As I suggested, it may even be self-contradictory, and as such hopelessly irrational regardless of purpose.
BTW, Einstein believed in "God", but not a personal God. His God was the same as Spinoza's - a guiding principle in the fabric of the universe, a guarantee that things have a purpose and structure (I believe this idea of an immanent God is called "deism", but I may be wrong). That seems like a perfectly coherent, rational "religious" view to me. Maybe not as exciting as a personal God who throws thunderbolts or drowns Egyptian armies, though... Spam
Well, I guess I'm glad this inappropriate & ill-conceived thread was not shut down, 'coz it elicited some lively debate - well, not debate, actually. Just a lot of opinions, some philosophical meanderings, some passionate dogma, some historical tidbits, and some unabashed ignorance. Thus making for some fascinatin' and far-out readin'!
For the most part, the real obnoxious flame-throwin' has been avoided (and left to Hydarnes to run w/ on an adjacent thread, god bless 'im!). So, entering into the spiritual realm w/ only a portion of my usual scathing sarcasm... (but before I do, let me weigh in w/ my opinion of the new format of the forum - LOSE IT! This "latest post first after initial post" assumes anyone reading the thread has already read it, and is just checking in to view the updates! Keep it LINEAR, dammit! - You don't read books from the bottom of the page to the top!)
Well, far too many topics have been brought up to address each one w/o falling prey to oversimplification. But I'll address a few:
Barbarossa-
I find your statement "I can't say that I have faith in Jesus as our saviour, but I can definitely say that the concept of God and Jesus are deeply inspiring and soothing to me" to be a wonderful expression of the power of personal (that is, NOT organized) faith. If what you believe in is of comfort to you, if it gives you strength, if it helps you through life, great. The ability to find this peace is probably w/in all of us, no matter what our beliefs or lack thereof.
Capablanca -
You mention how Muslims "spread their religion through war," but forgot to mention that Christians attempted (w/ minimal success) the exact same thing - later dubbed "the Crusades." Not that you were taking sides on this one; I merely wanted to addend your comment.
Pericles -
I can only say it's an incredible leap in logic to attribute the "complex universe which we jut barely scratched the surface on our knowledge of" to God and the Supernatural. You're merely finding the most convenient answer to a question that has always been asked, and perhaps always will be asked. You may be right, and I'm sure your lack of any doubt is quite comforting to you. But it's a far from sufficient answer for many of us who can't quite grasp how the incredible complexity of life & the universe was all masterminded by some guy w/ a white beard & a curious sense of humor.
Thing Yak-
Stop shouting. Your capitals are quite irritating. Just because you launched this highly dubious debate does not give you the right to smash us over the head w/ your faith.
Also, you seem to take it for granted that anyone reading this post believes in God/heaven. "Do you think God can accept sin into heavan (sic), and if not, HOW DO YOU GET RID OF IT" (annoying capitals yours). Is it that you can't conceive of other possible opinions on the matter (in which case, why open it up for debate?), or is it that differing opinions are not worth your notice (ditto)?
Potejon -
The man who "travelled around the med after Jesus' death" and spread the word was Paul, originally named Saul. Saul was one of the original persecutors of the new-found Christian faith, and had many of them tortured and executed. But he saw the light, (or whatever), converted, and became the self-appointed ambassador of this new sect of believers, using many of the Greco-Roman trade/supply routes to spread his message.
FUN FACT: It was during this period that "Jesus Christ" got his name/title (yes, yes... he was already dead). He may have been "Jesus" at birth (there is some argument by scholars, but hey! what do THEY know?), but "Christos" was the Greek word for "Messiah." So he was known throughout the newly-converted pan-Hellenic world as "Jesus the Christ" later shortened to "Jesus Christ."
Xevioso-
Excellent point about not being able to use "the argument for complexity as proof of God." It's been one of my strongest bones of contention of those espousing Judeo-Christian/religious dogma. As I mentioned before, to say that "just because everything is so un-knowable is PROOF of God & the Supernatural" is patently absurd. Do I KNOW what created everything? Of course I don't. Nor do the religious, but they have FAITH. Good for them. (It ain't science, it ain't empirical evidence, but it's something to shield them from the wonder, the mystery, and the nagging DOUBT.)
Indigo -
Well, I haven't read the Qu'ran (or Koran, or Q'ran... face it, I don't read or write Arabic, either!) So I won't weigh in on subjects beyond my ken. So I will limit myself to countering your logic, or simply expressing my own doubts to your points.
"Muhammad fought w/ the Wahabi" because "he had no other choice"? You mention a plot to kill him as the only reason for this campaign against the Wahabi. Is that a reason to start/continue the war? Care to elaborate?
"Muhammad decided it was time to free the people of Mecca from their idol-worshipping rulers." First off - what gives him the right? Second - did they ask him to eradicate the rulers? Again - can you elaborate? I would like to hear more about it.
You follow this w/ "the people there immediately accepted the Islamic faith, destroying the idols they used to worship." Woah. You could show me this in the original text, and I wouldn't believe it. It's too far-fetched, and sounds like effective spin control. Let's face it, no one chucks away their beliefs at the drop of a hat - force, threat of violence/death, a system of re-education, a long period of gradual change... any of these and other explanations may be valid, but yours seems implausible in the extreme.
And then this: Muhammad "HAD to conquer new lands, after all, the arabian peninsula is little more than a lively desert." He was "protecting his people." Oh, Puh-LEEZ. The size and geography of their desert homeland is hardly an excuse for a drawn-out campaign of war. This oversimplification of reasons for huge territorial expansion is ludicrous.
And lastly "the Quran always reminds the men to treat women w/ great respect." Well, Xevioso has already addressed this in depth - suffice it to say, given a choice, do you think the women would choose equal rights & representation, or "respect"?
* * *
More than anything else, the one thing that separates the "major" religions from the so-called "sects" and "cults" is number of members - NOT the message of their respective faiths. And those involved in these "cults" still seem themselves as a religion (yes, even those swindled out of their hard-earned cash by the Scientologists claim to have achieved some sense of spiritual awakening, or whatever the hell it is they believe).
* * *
For my own part, I believe in a moral code, but it's MY moral code. It may have been part of many religions and philosophies, but it's filtered through my own knowledge and experience. I do not follow any particular faith, nor do I believe in the existence of any supreme beings. I do not wish harm on others, and will not raise my hand against those that have not harmed me. (As to "turning the other cheek;" well, it applies in some situations, but is little more than a creed that will get you walked all over.) I believe MOST men and women were created w/ the capacity to reason, though some choose to give up the right, and others were born w/ tragic abnormalities (not caused by the supernatural, but by genetics/biochemistry). I do NOT believe that man is a fundamentally "good" creature, but that he has the capacity to do good things (ditto "evil"). I do not push my beliefs on others - nor would I care to. And I wish others felt the same. I think the concept of "original sin" is one of the most preposterous things I've ever heard. I think the Big Bang is an interesting theory, and there is at least SOME evidence to support it (but it certainly doesn't answer everything). I think earlier mythologies were a lot more fun (and a lot more HUMAN) than the monotheistic ones. I think the "Moral Majority" is neither. I wish we had MORE religious holidays - I could use the time off. I wish I knew where to end this.
Oh, yeah. I was brought up Catholic. Couldn't ya guess?
Reset your "prefs" and you can get the posts in a normal manner. -------------------------- Wow. What a couple of threads (this one and the other). Makes for some interesting reading and I'm glad it didn't degenerate into a flame war. Nice to see. MR oh, btw...I'm agnostic with a heavy leaning towards the atheistic end of that spectrum.
Should I respond? I mean, we have our own beliefs, and the first thing I learned at school back in my country when I was a little kid is that religious faith should not be questioned, since it's a personal matter between the believer and his/her God and everybody has to respect that.
But I guess I'll respond to a few things.
*sigh*
Xevioso,
good posts, man. I enjoyed reading them though it's very obvious I'm not on your side Anyway, I disagree with you that women in Islam are lesser creatures than men in Islam. We have a great deal of respect towards women, and what Indigo said is very true, "Heaven is underneath the feet of mothers." It's not a made-up phrase, it really is like that! I got a little story that is very commonly told among young people. At one time, somebody (I don't know his name) came up to Prophet Muhammad SAW and asked, "To whom should I show my duty first, my father or my mother?" The Prophet SAW said, "Your mother." The man continued, "And then after that?" The Prophet SAW answered, "Your mother." The man asked again, "And then after that?" The Prophet SAW answered, " Your mother." The man went on, "And then after that?" "Then your father," Prophet Muhammad SAW answered. If this doesn't show an enormous amount amount of respect for women in Islam and how important their role is, then I don't know what does. And I guess it depends of the cultures too. Some cultures do look down on their women, and I'm pretty sure they are not all Islamic cultures. Just for example to contrdict this, there is this tribe called Minangkabau in West Sumatra province in my country, Indonesia. They have a very unique culture compared to others. Most others place their men above women (i.e. the oldest son get the most of their parents' inheritance, folowed by the second son and so on, and the daughters come the last even if the daughters are older than the sons). Now, in Minangkabau culture, it's the total reverse; I think it's called 'matriarch.' And you have to note that these Minagkabau people are some of the most Islamically religious people in Indonesia, since their land was the first to be touched by the Muslim traders from Gujarat (India) and Arab peninsula. This is just one example how culture affects religion, and religion should not always be blamed for something that 'seems' wrong in the society. And I'm not sure what you were talking about, but women sure CAN teach men in the society. How do you explain the existence of my female Muslim teachers at schools when I was in Indonesia? Yes it's true they cannot be Imams in prayers, but the reason for it relies directly on the nature of women. They have 'periods' every month, thus making them inconsistent if they were Imams. Also, if they were Imams, they would create distraction during the prayers. Consider this: in every prayer, we do this movement what we call Anyway, move on to another topic, Al-Qur'an should not be questioned because we BELIEVE that it is the very words of God. Unlike Bible, that was written by mortal people many many years after Jesus died. Al-Qur'an was written by Muhammad's followers right after he received the enlightenment from God thourgh Angel Gabriel. He couldn't write it himself because he was illiterate, I'm sure you knew this. Because he was a prophet and the messenger of God, he is a very intelligent man who remembered Al-Qur'an word by word. And you don't have to be amazed by this. I've met several people who are given a special ability by God to remember the Holy Book word-by-word. In Arabic, not in Indonesian, mind you Let's move on to my country. I know that many Madagascar people were descended from Indonesia, mainly Javanese, but as I understand it, it was not the Muslims who practiced the slavery; it was the Dutch, who colonialized Indonesia for a great deal of time, brought most of those Indonesians to Madagascar to enslave them. Some of them were also leaders who were captured by the Dutch army and sent away to other Dutch colonies in Africa. That's what I learned. You might've learned it from a different source/perspective. One thing that makes me sure that the Muslims did not enslave all those people is because it is stronly forbidden in Islam. Ever heard the story of Bilal. Bilal was an African slave who was freed by Prophet Muhammad SAW, became a Muslim, and became the first man to make the Adzan (Islamic call of prayer) loudly, beautifully, and eloquently from a minaret. armagedn, I got a headache writing this reply so I'm just gonna make it short Indigo described why and how the Prophet SAW moved from Mecca to Medina. I just wanted to add something. When he thought that it was time to liberate Mecca, he led his followers to come back to Mecca and to tell the people how wrong it was. When he was about to enter the city of Mecca, one would think that the bloodshed wouldn't be able to be avoided since they were a lot of groups who opposed the Prophet SAW and were ready with their own armies. But it didn't happen. The Meccan people had heard of this new faith brought by the Prophet SAW and they even willingly subdued without any resistance. They destroyed their man-made idols and liberated the city from any pagan faith and accepted Islam. It was indeed true that Prophet Muhammad had a lot of enemies and assasination plots against him. Even his own uncle, Abu Lahab, declared war on Islam. I guess I'll stop here. I got a class tomorrow and I need to sleep Before I go, I just wanna say something to all of us. I honestly believe that such a discussion about religions, like this one, will never end, because everybody has his/her own faith. Religious faiths are probably the hardest things to understand in this world. Now, Indigo and I believe in Islam. It's our way of lives and absolutely nothing can change it. Everything about Islam is good for us. However bad anybody wants to make Islam look like or whatever mistakes one may want to point about Islam won't change a thing. It will still look good to us. And I'm sure that's what other Christians/Jews/ahteists here feel about their own faiths. I guess what I'm trying to say is that this discussion will never end, and however long it will be, I hope everybody will refrain him-/herself from flaming and insulting others. Thanks for reading this. With all regards, de Maupassant
--------------------
De Maupassant, I'm sure you can explain this alot better than me ------ ""Muhammad fought w/ the Wahabi" because "he had no other choice"? You mention a plot to kill him Yes, I would It was the Wahabi's who originally incited the battles. They were afraid Muhammad would gain too muc power and return to Mecca. All around him, tribes were turning against him and his followers. Let me clarify this point as well: Islam limits the just causes of war to self-defence and the protection of Islam, which I tried to point out in my post.. So the first battle was initiated in the case of self-defence. He was vastly outnumbered but he came through and won the battle. Unfortunately, the Wahabi's were not finished yet (Meccans seems like a more relevant name now). At another battle, under the same conditions, Muhammad lost, and retreated to Medina. The Wahabi's were unable to capture Medina, however. After a peace treaty was signed, the Wahabi's were forced to respect the Muslims. Unfortunately, they broke the treaty (I think it was because of an allied attack or something similar) and Muhammad launched a campaign to capture Mecca. He did, and once he was there, he forgave the Wahabi's and his former enemies. He also desroyed the idols they used to worship in the Kaaba. While he was doing so, he recited a phrase from the Quran "Truth has come, and falsehood has vanished away". Many had converted to Islam by then. ""Muhammad decided it was time to free the people of Mecca from their idol-worshipping rulers." First I believe you can hear enough about it in my clarification above. "You follow this w/ "the people there immediately accepted the Islamic faith, destroying the idols they Maybe it was because they finally saw the error of their ways? or because Muhammad forgave his enemies once he captured Mecca? I am not sure. Additional clarification: not all of them converted. Oh, and Muhammad was the one who destroyed the idols. " I agree, the argument is quite weak. Nevertheless , I did include "protecting his people" as a safeguard for misundertstanding os the point I was trying to make. Surrounded by the two most powerful empires at that time, Muhammad had to use arms to protect his people and follow the Islamic religion in *peace*. Holy wars were launched to capture Palestine, Syria, and Egypt from their byzantine rulers. Once again I will remind you the two just causes of war stated by Islam: self-defence and the protection of Islam. Hard to do with two of the most powerful empires of all time as your neighbours. " I just reloaded, and saw de Maupassant's post. It explains it alot better than i would've Finally, I apologize for the confusion my earlier post might have caused. I was in a hurry, if that is a suitable excuse. I will edit it and clarify/correct and unclear or wrong statements. As for Xevioso and the others, I will try to comment on your review of my post soon. I do not have the time now, gotta run. Since HitechRedNeck has a small comment, I will answer it: I've read on another forum that the bible specifically calls for destruction of idol-worshippers. I won't quote it, since, as i said, i've gotta run I believe just as de Maupassant said, that this argument will take very long, and we should keep it civlized
Please regard this is a correction of my earlier post. I will edit the last one shortly due to the confusion it has caused.
as the only reason for this campaign against the Wahabi. Is that a reason to start/continue the war?
Care to elaborate?"
off - what gives him the right? Second - did they ask him to eradicate the rulers? Again - can you
elaborate? I would like to hear more about it."
used to worship." Woah. You could show me this in the original text, and I wouldn't believe it. It's too
far-fetched, and sounds like effective spin control. Let's face it, no one chucks away their beliefs at
the drop of a hat - force, threat of violence/death, a system of re-education, a long period of gradual
change... any of these and other explanations may be valid, but yours seems implausible in the
extreme."
And then this: Muhammad "HAD to conquer new lands, after all, the arabian peninsula is little more
than a lively desert." He was "protecting his people." Oh, Puh-LEEZ. The size and geography of their
desert homeland is hardly an excuse for a drawn-out campaign of war. This oversimplification of
reasons for huge territorial expansion is ludicrous."
And lastly "the Quran always reminds the men to treat women w/ great respect." Well, Xevioso has
already addressed this in depth - suffice it to say, given a choice, do you think the women would
choose equal rights & representation, or "respect"?"
Copyright © 1997–2024 HeavenGames LLC. All rights reserved.
v2.5.0