Creating a Religion

[TINNY]

Originally posted by: Freethinker

Young girls are forced back into a burning school to their deaths because they did not have their religious garb on. Thus "abid(ing) by the divine principles".

Again. the qur'an has to be taken as a whole. there are priorities and what is called darurat. if you only take one verse about covering the body, there are also verses about the importance of lives; which is a higher priority. if the person intentionally kills herself, then that is NOT ABIDING BY THE DIVINE PRINCIPLES.

Research is stopped in areas that can save millions of lives. Thus "abid(ing) by the divine principles".

so again, the right practise of Islam in the Abassid, Muawiyah, and ottoman saw tremendous progress in the field of medicine, and that was abiding by the divine principles.

DOGMA - "a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church" WWWebster

"1 a : something held as an established opinion; especially : a definite authoritative tenet b : a code of such tenets <pedagogical dogma> c : a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds" WWWebster

"A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.

An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.

A principle or belief or a group of them: “The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present” (Abraham Lincoln). " Dictionary.com

 

HAH!

You intentionally omit segments that are not in your favour.

[TINNY]

It is perhaps more accurate to say that Free Will asserts that the INDIVIDUAL is the CAUSE for our actions. Not that there is no cause

OK, so what is the cause of that individual's choice? If there is the cause to that, then there is no free-will.

"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention" WWWebster

Plus, there has never been an action/ decision made by a human that was completely ORIGINAL, without ANY prior exposure to related ideas.

Of course, there can be influence, which is the Stimulus. But humans have free-will to choose the Response to the Stimulus. If they choose a positive response, then that stimulus is likely to be repeated and vice versa. Just basic SR psychology.

Naturally this is mutually exclusive from any Supreme Begin god beliefs. It is not possible for there to be an entity, a Supreme Being, that has Perfect Knowledge (Omniscience) and for there to be Free Will.

I've been puzzling over that too. It may be like this: "God is not involved in time. Therefore can know the what our free-will is."

[TINNY]

Originally posted by: Freethinker

Repentance 9 :29

"Fight against such of those to whom Scriptures were given as believe neither Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued."

 

Repentance 9:4-6

"Proclaim a woeful punishment to the unbelievers...When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and pay the alms-tax, let them go their way. Allah is forgiving and merciful[!]"

 

Repentance 9:5

"When the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush."

 

The Spoils 8:60:

"Let the unbelievers not think they will escape Us... Muster against them all the men and cavalry at your disposal, so that you may strike terror into the enemies of Allah..."

 

The Table 5 : 33

"Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorders in the land shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the country. They shall be held to shame in this world and sternly punished in the next."

 

Again. the qur'an has to be taken as a whole.

ex:

"God commands justice and doing good and giving to relatives. And He forbids indecency and doing wrong and tyranny. He warns you so that hopefully you will pay heed." (Qur'an, 16:90)

 

"Eat and drink of God's provision and do not go about the earth corrupting it." (Qur'an, 2:60)

 

"...if someone kills another person - unless it is in retaliation for someone else or for causing corruption in the earth - it is as if he had murdered all mankind. And if anyone gives life to another person, it is as if he had given life to all mankind... "(Qur'an, 5:32)

 

"There are only grounds against those who wrong people and act as tyrants in the earth without any right to do so. Such people will have a painful punishment." (Qur'an, 42:42)

 

"... Be good to your parents and relatives and to orphans and the very poor, and to neighbours who are related to you and neighbours who are not related to you, and to companions and travellers and your slaves. God does not love anyone vain or boastful". (Qur'an, 4:36)

 

"... Help one another in benevolence and piety. Do not help each other to wrongdoing and enmity. And fear God. God is severe in retribution." (Qur'an, 5:2)

 

O You who believe! Show integrity for the sake of God, bearing witness with justice. Do not let hatred for a people incite you into not being just. Be just. That is closer to faith. Heed God (alone). God is aware of what you do. (Qur'an, 5:8)

 

Fight in the Way of God against those who fight you, but do not go beyond the limits. God does not love those who go beyond the limits. (Qur'an, 2:190)

 

God does not forbid you from being good to those who have not fought you over religion or driven you from your homes, or from being just towards them. God loves those who are just. God merely forbids you from taking as friends those who have fought you over religion and driven you from your homes and who supported your expulsion... (Qur'an, 60:8-9)

 

And, also it is important to clarify jihad.

The exact meaning of "Jihad" is "effort". Thus, in Islam, "to carry out jihad" is "to show effort, to struggle". The Prophet Muhammad explained that "the greatest jihad is the one a person carries out against his lower soul". What is meant by "lower soul" here is selfish desires and ambitions.

Assessed from the Qur'anic point of view, the word "jihad" can also mean a struggle carried out on intellectual grounds against those who oppress people, treat them unjustly, subject them to torture and cruelty and violate legitimate hu

[TINNY]

Originally posted by: Freethinker

Originally posted by: TINNY

The basic tenets of Islam is clear. But the interpretation is open to subjective reasoning and critical thinking.

So your all powerful god's divine revelation, the Koran, is no better than any other assortment of fairy tales either eh? Individuals are free to draw what ever arbitrary conclusions they wish and still claim to be following it. Sounds as reliable of a source as Mother Goose or Brothers Grimm.

 

If it's arbitrary, then it is not valid reasoning. The process of interpreting the qur'an is passed via the consensus of the 'jumhur ulama'. The fact that the Qur'an can be interpreted is because common language is sometimes inadequate to convey certain messages. Over time, as human intellect progresses, the meanings can be interpreted better. Not that the meaning is different, the concept is the same, but the understanding of the verses can be deeper parallel with intellectual progress.

[Stargazer]

Originally posted by: TINNY

Originally posted by: Stargazer

Secularism in itself is not a dogma. What you mentioned was communism. As you probably noticed, I also said that some do put ideology (not necessarily religion) before facts.

Where's your proof that secularism is not dogma? I though secularism is an ideology that rejects god. communism surely is secular and, also, the proponents are atheists.

 

Are you suggesting that you can't be communist and still believe in unsupported myths? Also, secularism is not an ideology, as you can be conservative, liberal or socialist and still be aware of the lack of evidence of mythological creatures.

[IrishEyes]

I have to say this now, before I go to sleep and wake up in a different frame of mind...

 

Tinny and Freethinker, thank you both for this ongoing DISCUSSION! For as long as I have been a part of these forums, I have not seen such an interesting exchange of ideas from two such differing camps. I was truly beginning to despair. I want to applaud both of you for keeping this on a very even keel. While your personal feelings are shining through in your posts, you have managed to keep from disparaging each other's beliefs.

 

Well done to you both, and I hope that others will take your lead and continue this DISCUSSION in the same manner!

[IrishEyes]

Are you suggesting that you can't be communist and still believe in unsupported myths? Also, secularism is not an ideology, as you can be conservative, liberal or socialist and still be aware of the lack of evidence of mythological creatures.

 

Well said, Stargazer. And a belated WELCOME to Hypography Forums. I am thoroughly enjoying your posts, and look forward to getting to know you better in the future!

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: TINNY

Where's your proof that secularism is not dogma?

Secularism - "indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations" (WWWebster). Secularism is a REJECTION of the religious dogmatic approach. Secularism is a dogma the way that BALD is a hair color.

I though secularism is an ideology that rejects god.

More correctly, one that does not have a god belief. It does not require a proactive rejection.

communism surely is secular and, also, the proponents are atheists.

Communism is based on the root "Commune", basically group ownership of everything. Early communes were RELIGIOUS in structure. In fact...

 

"Before it became associated with atheism, communism was mainly a religious idea. Religious communists throughout history have been advocators of communal living and the whole or partial rejection of individual property. In this category can be included many orders of monks and nuns of such religions as Christianity, Taoism, Jainism, Hinduism and Buddhism."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_communism

 

Communism is not aligned with any specific ideology regarding a god belief (or lack there of). That some philosphers/ ideologs have bundled various indepedant philisophical leanings into cerrtain packages does not assert that requirement. i.e. Communism does not require Atheism.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: TINNY

'no objective value'?

This might be of use to check out:

Thanks, I love examples of postdiction. You can take almost anything that has ever been written and find passages that can be twisted into pretending it PREdicted something. Yet all it is is taking things that happened AFTER (post) and finding text that might fit it somehow. The "bible code" fraud is another example. Or Nostradamus.

 

We see how absurd the attempts are at aligning antiquated texts with more recent scientific findings with the very first example given at that site.

 

"The origin of the universe is described in the Qur'an in the following verse:

 

He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. (Qur'an, 6:101)

 

This information is in full agreement with the findings of contemporary scientists.

 

I'd love to see this list of peer reviewed "contemporary scientists" in directly related fields that are "in full agreement with the findings of" a "He (being) the Originator of the heavens and the earth."

 

The assertion is absurd. Your site can;t even get the very first example correct!

 

So let's look a little further. The problem with POSTdiction is it only works if the connect stays valid. If the later event actually happens as claimed. So let's look at what is claimed to be a PREdictive scientific fact in the Quran. From that same site:

 

"This is how this scientific hypothesis of the Big Crunch is indicated in the Qur'an:

 

That Day We will fold up heaven like folding up the pages of a book. As We originated the first creation so We will regenerate it. It is a promise binding on Us. That is what We will do. (Qur'an, 21:104)"

 

BIG PROBLEM! As we are now aware, the RATE of expansion of the universe is INCREASING. Yet when this was written is was thought that a "big crunch" MIGHT happen. So the author set out to find something in the Quran that he could use to support it. He did find something to use as a POSTdiction. Problem is it is WRONG scientifically based on recently revised cosmology.

 

Obviously the Quran FAILS to be correctly PREdictive here.

 

Or what of even basic statements? Things that can be directly compared to what we know scientifically.

 

"Do those who disbelieve not see that the heavens and the earth were sewn together and then We unstitched them and that We made <u>from</u> water every living thing? So will they not believe? (Qur'an, 21:30)"

 

Perhaps you have heard somewhere along the way that life on earth is CARBON, not water based? And there is a growing base of evidence to support the concept of abiogenesis being extraterrestrial, NOT earth based. NOT "coming from the seas", primordial ooze. Thus, just like the "big Crunch" PREdiction error, we see bogus attempts to align the Quran with "facts" that aren't.

 

Jules Verne PREdicted space travel and submarines in his fictional novels. At least those were intentional efforts to ACTUALLY PREdict something. Not later attempts to force antiquated texts into areas they fail to actually address acurately.

 

The site you suggest is just plain absurd and fails misreably.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: TINNY

Originally posted by: Freethinker

Young girls are forced back into a burning school to their deaths because they did not have their religious garb on. Thus "abid(ing) by the divine principles".

Again. the qur'an has to be taken as a whole.

Don't ya love it? It's OK to slaughter little girls, in fact FORCE them to burn to death, as long as you can invent excuses for what the Koran says.

there are priorities

Such as stopping the painful torture and death of children? Obviously NOT a priority of Islam!

and what is called darurat. if you only take one verse about covering the body, there are also verses about the importance of lives; which is a higher priority. if the person intentionally kills herself, then that is NOT ABIDING BY THE DIVINE PRINCIPLES.

What part of FORCED BACK INTO THE BURNING BUILDING do you not understand?

 

You only arbitrarily claim "DIVINE PRINCIPLES". You fail to provide ANY support for the claim and want us to accept that these "DIVINE PRINCIPLES" state it's OK to slaughter little girls, in fact FORCE them to burn to death.

 

Add to this that we have seen the Quran to be in error and in support of murdering people just because they don't agree with it.

 

Anyone that supports such attrocious ideology is SICK.

[IrishEyes]

Anyone that supports such attrocious ideology is SICK.

 

You were doing great right up to here.

This is a warning, ok?

Watch your CAPS.

Don't imply that ANY of our members are 'sick'.

Don't make me sorry that I complimented you on your style earlier.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: TINNY

It is perhaps more accurate to say that Free Will asserts that the INDIVIDUAL is the CAUSE for our actions. Not that there is no cause

OK, so what is the cause of that individual's choice?

Hey, YOUR the one that wants to claim Free Will exists. Don't expect me to resolve the inconguity if you can't.

Plus, there has never been an action/ decision made by a human that was completely ORIGINAL, without ANY prior exposure to related ideas.

Of course, there can be influence, which is the Stimulus. But humans have free-will...

See? It is YOU that is making the claim.

... to choose the Response to the Stimulus. If they choose a positive response, then that stimulus is likely to be repeated and vice versa. Just basic SR psychology.

Coming from someone that admitted to know knowing much about it, quite a claim.

Originally posted by: TINNY

The answer might lie in cognitive psychology or neurology (I know almost nothing about them, but I think these two are the branches that will constitute whether there is free-will).

which is more apparent when we see how you try to pretend that an "informed decision" based on weighing the odds against KNOWN results is the same as "completely ORIGINAL ... actions".

 

Again, Free Will would assert the ability to develop a completely original solution. Yet there has never been one in all of recorded history. Yes there have been new efforts in differring applications. But there has neveer been a case of a thought that has no prior context to the individual. Something they have never had ANY exposure to. ALL decisions/ actions are based on the individual's previous exposure or hard wired reactions.

 

Naturally this is mutually exclusive from any Supreme Begin god beliefs. It is not possible for there to be an entity, a Supreme Being, that has Perfect Knowledge (Omniscience) and for there to be Free Will.

I've been puzzling over that too. It may be like this: "God is not involved in time. Therefore can know the what our free-will is."

How does this resolve the FACT that if the information is KNOWN, the action to be taken is already known to someone/ thing, then it can not be changed, a FREE WILL choice can not be made.

 

All you are doing is putting RESTRICTIONS on your god myth. Claiming something it CAN'T do.

 

So what other failings does your all powerful god have?

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: TINNY

Originally posted by: Freethinker

Repentance 9:4-6

"Proclaim a woeful punishment to the unbelievers...When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and pay the alms-tax, let them go their way. Allah is forgiving and merciful[!]"

Again. the qur'an has to be taken as a whole.

IOW since there are contradictions in the Quran, whichever side you take on an issue you can claim THAT was the overriding one!

 

This does not remove the contradictions. Nor does it lessen the literal assertions to kill as we find in the Quran.

"...if someone kills another person - <u>unless it is in retaliation for</u> someone else or for <u>causing corruption in the earth</u> - it is as if he had murdered all mankind. And if anyone gives life to another person, it is as if he had given life to all mankind... "(Qur'an, 5:32)

OK, so this gives the excuse of "unless it is in retaliation for ... causing corruption in the earth" to allow justification for killing. So what?

"There are only grounds against those who wrong people and act as tyrants in the earth without any right to do so. Such people will have a painful punishment." (Qur'an, 42:42)

Same thing. Justification for " painful punishment" becasue the Quran suggests that not following it or causing someone else to not follow it is to "wrong people" and "causing corruption in the earth".

 

So just as with the bible, the Quran promotes hatred, prejudice and murder.

 

Oh ya, it throws in some warm fuzzys as contradictions along the way.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: TINNY

If it's arbitrary, then it is not valid reasoning. The process of interpreting the qur'an is passed via the consensus of the 'jumhur ulama'. The fact that the Qur'an can be interpreted is because common language is sometimes inadequate to convey certain messages. Over time, as human intellect progresses, the meanings can be interpreted better. Not that the meaning is different, the concept is the same, but the understanding of the verses can be deeper parallel with intellectual progress.

Hahahahaha,,, This is so funny! ANOTHER perfect word of an all powerful god who is completely unable to give a direct literal accounting of it's desires.

 

And to further claim that the farther we get historically from it's origin, the better we can understand it! Hilarious!

 

Let's all ignore that this group of PEOPLE changes as does their "consensus" and thus the objective absolutes CHANGE with them.

 

Nothing like ever changing absolutes! LOL!

 

You believers are so funny! The lengths you go to to obfuscate the contradictions and arbitrary nature of your supposed perfect word of some god!

 

I really have to question whether you can actually convince even yourself of such convolutions with a straight face!

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyes

Anyone that supports such attrocious ideology is SICK.

Don't imply that ANY of our members are 'sick'.

Don't make me sorry that I complimented you on your style earlier.

So you don't feel that someone that thinks it's OK to force children to be burned alive is SICK?

 

Sorry, but I do.

 

I guess only Atheists would find this SICK. I'm even more proud to be an Atheist then!

[IrishEyes]

You're getting *very close* to a line here, Freethinker. I am reasonably sure that you are aware of this, and I am asking you, in my nicest and most respectful Moderator tone of voice, to stop any personal attacks.

 

You know what Tinny believes and accepts. You are free to disagree with him, his beliefs, and his chosen religion. What you are not allowed to do is make rude or insulting remarks about him, or his religion. By stating that anyone that supports that ideology is sick, and knowing that he supports this idealogy, you are in fact calling him sick.

 

While I may not agree with his religion, I can not, as a Moderator, allow him or his chosen faith to be attacked in this manner. If you want to strongly state that you feel his religion is flawed, please feel free to do so. However, there is a difference between saying that you don't agree with a particular religion and saying that its followers are 'sick'.

 

I know that you are proud to be an atheist. We all know that. And if someone called you 'sick' for your atheistic views, I would ask them to modify their tone as well. As for 'only atheists' finding the practice of burning children alive 'sick', you are probably wrong. I would guess that there are many others that think this is wrong as well, including me, and Tinny. You don't have a corner on right and wrong, regardless of how morally superior you may feel you are as a person without a God-belief.

[Freethinker]

What I very specifically structured as SICK was the intentionally slaughter of innocent children by forcing them back into a burning building in order to maintain a religious ideology. It is just plain SICK and that is all there is too it.

 

I did not state nor even imply that Tinny, as an individual, was SICK. I would hope that Tinny could show how they can resolve this issue. If someone tried to assert that actions taken based on Atheism is inherently SICK, I would be happy to evaluate any PROOF they have to offer and do my best to refute/ resolve it. That is what open discourse is all about. This is just your desire to promote a religious POV no matter what. And that is exactly the mindset that allows such SICK actions to be accepted.

 

If I was to create a religion (the topic), it would not require forced adherance, esp to dogma that results in SICK actions.

 

But then I am an Atheist. (funny how somone using "Because I am a Christian" never hears about that!)