Hello all,
The real problem of islam is not that "muslims are parasites". It is that islam sends unbelievers to hell, and that such a view is fiendish.
Why is it so important for God that we acknowledge and worship him? What really matters is to live a virtuous life, isn’t it? We respect God by respecting his children, with which we have to live.
This idea makes all muslims self-centered and self-important as they believe that they are the only moral people on Earth. Thus, when they move into your country they are, in their mind, moving into a country filled with the immoral. That give them the right to do as they will in the country. No respect is needed, as everyone is hell bound and should know better. That is why they are parasites. They have the right to be so according to their belief system.
Grrr
As a (cyber)philosopher, I am speaking of the creed, not of how people apply it to real life.
What I said is part of the creed. The idea was that all people across the Earth were offered Isalm by god (mystically I suppose) and they rejected it. SO, that means that even someone living in the Amazon should be muslim but denied it. Everyone is guilt, thus that sets everyone up as evil in the world, and makes them undeserving of respect.
How much do you know about the religion?
TheAdlerian, that is really sad if true. Christianity has the same thing, though, that if you don’t believe in God and ask for forgiveness you go to hell.
Of course, in Christianity it is always possible to convert (even after death), and one is not necessarily evil for not believing in God. I’m unsure on how this differes from Islam.
It is out of grave concern for a world being torn into bits by religious divisiveness that I am spreading the word about a new book that is a powerful guide to discovering God on one’s own. Written as a bridge between traditional organized religion and mystical spirituality, God Without Religion invites readers to examine their beliefs and explore the nature of the divine. Author Sankara Saranam (a former monk of the swami order and the son of self-exiled Iraqi Jews) welcomes the reader’s willingness to question, and offers seventeen universal techniques for developing a personal relationship with God. The book is an honestly written accounting stemming from Sankara’s deep faith in a higher power, if not necessarily in any one institution that claims to serve a higher power.
Called ‘a spiritual masterpiece’ that is ‘a direct path to God’ and a way out of ‘religious shackles and abuse,’ God Without Religion: Questioning Centuries of Accepted Truths was written especially for people who believe organized religion continues as the cause of humanity’s worst wars and most acute suffering, and who seek a more expansive relationship with God. I invite you to learn more at godwithoutreligion.com
Hello F(r)iends,
The real problem with Islam is a combination of these things:
(01) Islam is based on faith in a perfect god and his perfect message
(02) The god of Islam is absent from physical manifestation
(03) Islam has a book that has strict but ambigous rules of conduct
(04) Strict but ambigous rules are subject to interpretation
(05) Islam is thus subject to interpretation
(06) Interpretation is subject to the interpreter
(07) All interpreters are humans
(08) Humans are flawed
(09) Interpretations thus cannot be perfect
(10) Inperfect humans will want inperfect things
(11) Islam cannot be perfectly practiced
Of course this can apply to all faith based religions that claim to have received the ‘perfect’ word of god. Importantly, this can also apply to any philosophy that can be bent to one’s favor. An effect that occurs for these religions and philosophies is similar to what the Adlerian stated:
“This idea makes all muslims self-centered and self-important as they believe that they are the only moral people on Earth.”
The Jews, the Christians, the Nazis… they all claimed to have the answers to the worlds problems and used their holy books and/or their leaders to champion a particular direction. Ultimately, the real problem is not god, not religion, not philosophy. The real problem is: mankind.
What do you base this doctrine on?
-Thirst
[size=75]P.S. Adlerian, would you agree that all humans are parasites?[/size]
I guess it is more my own personal belief. As I’ve understood all you have to do is accept God and ask for forgiveness for your sins, and you are off to heaven.
Hello F(r)iends,
OK. However, if you have not questioned your faith with that which is one of the primary reasons it exists (the bible) then how certain can you be of your understanding? I should also clarify that I wanted to know more about the belief that one could convert “even after death”… I was trying to figure out if it was a Catholic based belief/doctrine/assumption…
-Thirst
It is merely the impression I’ve got after growing up in a moderately Evangelical Lutheran society.
My primary exposure to actual doctrine would be when I was 12 (I think). At that time I was together with my class taught in Christian belief by a priest a couple of hours a week in preparation for confirmation.
i don’t believe that one needs a book to believe in God. I do question my belief and therefor it changes reguarly.
So, what are the studies or the testimonies backing up your hateful claim that this is how muslims think…?
The real problem with Islam is a combination of these things:
(01) Islam is based on faith in a perfect god and his perfect message
O- This is not a problem or part of any religion’s problem but one of their claimed virtues. In order to have faith, it goes without saying that it must be because one sees it as the perfect message from a perfect god.
(02) The god of Islam is absent from physical manifestation
O- When they were winning wars, their victories were enought of a physical manifestation, just as it was for the hebrews before them.
(03) Islam has a book that has strict but ambigous rules of conduct
O- Another strenght. That ambiguity allows it to remain vital in the tension between interpretations. The death of a faith comes when no ambiguity can be found. The more mystical a faith, the more fuzzy it is, the more converts it will attract.
(04) Strict but ambigous rules are subject to interpretation
O- yes but only carefully. Some interpretations are kept other discarded.
(05) Islam is thus subject to interpretation
O- No. The interpretation is subject to Islam. I can give a specific interpretation but if it cannot be welded to the tradition, it will become a cult or a heresy.
(06) Interpretation is subject to the interpreter
O- Not all. If an interpretation is useful to the tradition then it is said not to come from the interpreter but from god himself. Take a terrorist. They might give an interpretation to blow up a civilian, but for a moderate muslim, it does not fall within tradition, so it is not from God.
(07) All interpreters are humans
Duh
(08) Humans are flawed
O- Is the Prophet flawed to a muslim?
(09) Interpretations thus cannot be perfect
O- They are believed as so when they are believed as coming from god through a man.
(10) Inperfect humans will want inperfect things
O- Religion is the wish of the imperfect for the perfect.
(11) Islam cannot be perfectly practiced
O- That is not a problem of Islam but of Muslims. Just because the lung doctor smokes does not invalidate the soundness in not smoking. Just because an christian is hard to find but on the cross, does not mean that the precepts there are wrong.
The real problem with Islam is a combination of these things:
(01) Islam is based on faith in a perfect god and his perfect message
O- This is not a problem or part of any religion’s problem but one of their claimed virtues. In order to have faith, it goes without saying that it must be because one sees it as the perfect message from a perfect god.
(02) The god of Islam is absent from physical manifestation
O- When they were winning wars, their victories were enought of a physical manifestation, just as it was for the hebrews before them.
(03) Islam has a book that has strict but ambigous rules of conduct
O- Another strenght. That ambiguity allows it to remain vital in the tension between interpretations. The death of a faith comes when no ambiguity can be found. The more mystical a faith, the more fuzzy it is, the more converts it will attract.
(04) Strict but ambigous rules are subject to interpretation
O- yes but only carefully. Some interpretations are kept other discarded.
(05) Islam is thus subject to interpretation
O- No. The interpretation is subject to Islam. I can give a specific interpretation but if it cannot be welded to the tradition, it will become a cult or a heresy.
(06) Interpretation is subject to the interpreter
O- Not all. If an interpretation is useful to the tradition then it is said not to come from the interpreter but from god himself. Take a terrorist. They might give an interpretation to blow up a civilian, but for a moderate muslim, it does not fall within tradition, so it is not from God.
(07) All interpreters are humans
Duh
(08) Humans are flawed
O- Is the Prophet flawed to a muslim?
(09) Interpretations thus cannot be perfect
O- They are believed as so when they are believed as coming from god through a man.
(10) Inperfect humans will want inperfect things
O- Religion is the wish of the imperfect for the perfect.
(11) Islam cannot be perfectly practiced
O- That is not a problem of Islam but of Muslims. Just because the lung doctor smokes does not invalidate the soundness in not smoking. Just because an christian is hard to find but on the cross, does not mean that the precepts there are wrong.
Sâmkhya,
It says it right in their religious text. I put the time in to reading the stuff and so should you.
I find it annoying when people post about subjects that they have not read up on. It would be like starting a discussion about a movie that one has not seen.
I don’t speak of religious texts, but of what muslims actually think and how they actually behave when abroad.
Hello F(r)iends,
You appear to claim that one only (and exclusively) has faith if one believes in a perfect message; however, various religious denominations do not require a perfect message. To a degree, a perfect message may not be necessary precisely because faith does not require proof and a perfect message could be considered proof. Ironically, many religious people offer that the bible is god’s perfect word and that they use that perfect word as proof for their faith…
In any case, my intent with positing the problem with a faith based religion is that it often leads to the demand for physical (and empirical evidence). The evidence that non-believers or doubters can and will demand will need to be more significant than battle victories.
I don’t see how this is a strength. Science is taking the masses further and further away because it offers evidence and is less ambiguous, i.e., it is observable and predictable. Not to be condescending, but we do not receive the same observable results each time a person prays.
Yes, but think of who decides if the interpretations are accurate, kept, or discarded? Humans. Islam is thus subject to interpreation becase humans decide which interpretations are best… Cults, heretics, fanatics, extremists: these are results of interpretations. Note: I am not arguing that there isn’t a correct interpretation or that there should be interpretations. I am arguing that there are interpretations… Also, the point is that all ideas/notions are subject to interpretation.
Basically you summed up my point: A human decides if it comes from god… and remember traditions arise from ideas/notions and are subject to interpretation.
Yes. Mohammed was not, typically, thought of as a perfect human like most Christians think of Jesus. Though there is a claim that the Qur’an is directly dictated to Mohammed.
Bingo!
If a perfect religion exists it cannot be practiced perfectly because humans are not perfect. My point was not to discredit Islam but to prove that the problem starts and ends with humans.
-Thirst
Sâmkhya,
Perhaps they think of dancing across rose petals with microfeet magically glued onto thier toes.
How can we know what is being thought of while they are about. However, I have met more than my share of ethnic groups that believe they should not mingle with other ethnic groups and this is not based on much other than ethnicity. So, I can only imagine how the ethnic factor mixes with the religious stuff telling you that you are better than others. Have you ever met and Italian Catholic or a religious Jew?
People who like to understand Islam, I would suggest them to read Leopold Weiss’s books. Weiss was born Jewish and was a German who later travelled to middle east during 1930s and kept on travelling in its deserts and small cities for quite a number of years. As a born Jewish he was well versed in Hebrew due to which it became extremely easy for him to master the Arabic language during his years of wandering in Middleeast. Weiss, during one of his lively conversations heard somebody saying to him:
“But thou are a Muslim, thou just havent realized it yet!” …after that Weiss truely surrendered himself to God and hence became a true Muslim to be called by the name Mohammad Asad.
Asad had a deep grasp on Philosophy which is evident from his books. His autobiography “Road to Mecca” is worth reading.
Another remarkable effort by Asad was his translation of Quran into English named as “Message of the Quran”, in which Asad has time and again emphesized on the “Elipticism” (ijaz ‘Arabic’) of the Quranic expression by which Quran express multiple meanings through single phrase which is one of the reason that Quran is timeless and applicable in any era.
Quran says(they are not the exact words but it goes something like):
“Its only the good people who look for the best of the meaning from certain book.”…Indeed.
To that I would like to add an—Oh Brother—a–see that’s what I mean—and an—I told you so.