Religious Questions & Answers [Archive] - Literature Network Forums

Bruce

01-01-2006, 06:17 PM

Axiology is just the study of value.)

If there is no God, then it's plausible that the moral values and duties which have gradually evolved among homo sapiens are not really objective. By “objective” I mean “valid and binding whether anybody believes in them or not.” For example, to say that the Holocaust was objectively wrong is to say that it was wrong even though the Nazis who carried it out thought that it was right, and it would still have been wrong even if the Nazis had won World War II and succeeded in brainwashing or exterminating everyone who disagreed with them. Many atheists and theists alike agree that if God does not exist as a transcendent anchor point, then the moral values and duties that have evolved in human society are not objective in that way.

In other words,

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.

Now this first premise seems eminently plausible. For on the atheistic view, human beings are just animals, relatively evolved primates; and animals don't have moral obligations. When a lion kills a zebra, it kills it, but it doesn't murder it. When a great white shark brutally forces a female into submission, it copulates with her, but it does not rape her. For animals are not moral agents with moral duties to observe.

But on the atheistic view, human beings are just animals. Their morality is just the result of socio-biological evolution. Just as members of a troupe of baboons will exhibit altruistic behavior because it is advantageous to the species in the struggle for survival, so human beings have evolved certain behavior patterns which enable us to cohabit in society and so are beneficial for the species. But there’s nothing objective about this herd morality.

Now if you find such a view morally abhorrent, then I agree with you. It’s evident, I think, that objective values do exist, and deep down we all know it. Actions like rape, cruelty, and child abuse aren’t just socially unacceptable behavior; they're moral abominations. Some things are objectively wrong. Similarly love, equality, and self-sacrifice are really good. Accordingly, we can affirm:

2. Objective values and duties do exist.

But then it follows logically and inescapably that:

3. Therefore, God exists.

God thus provides a foundation for the moral values which the atheist just has to accept by faith.

-- William Lane Craig, from HERE (http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/craig-curley02.html) .

Pretty nice :thumbs_up

Just so you know i took all of this from a friend.

emily655321

01-01-2006, 07:30 PM

Just so you know i took all of this from a friend.
'Kay, but, um... what was your question?

Doctor Boogaloo

01-02-2006, 01:40 AM

Are you guys serious? An 'atheist' (and I am one) does not accept ANYTHING on 'faith'. You can believe anything you like. That does not make it true -- or, in logical terms, valid. Every society, no matter how brutish, godless, 'religious', monotheistic or secular has understood one thing: our children will inherit the power we are able to secure. Religion, like money, is a social commodity. And it has been spent in monstrous ways.
That, children, is an OBJECTIVE truth. (And we atheists do possess a strong moral code. It comes from a long history of weighing the evidence... and realizing that actions have consequences, regardless of which particular 'God' is in temporary ascendancy.)

dark_182_88

01-02-2006, 03:04 AM

Not necesarily doctor boogaloo...for there are many aetheists that just turn aetheists, not because they have studied thoroughly their religion as well as others as well as the concept of God and spirituality and the world and all that, but just because they're not interested.

Most societies and communities in the west nowadays, have an increasing population of aetheists, not because they truly weigh the evidence and all what you said, but just because they do not care really.

RobinHood3000

01-02-2006, 06:56 AM

2. Objective values and duties do exist.

But then it follows logically and inescapably that:

3. Therefore, God exists.

God thus provides a foundation for the moral values which the atheist just has to accept by faith.

-- William Lane Craig, from HERE (http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/craig-curley02.html) .
Inescapably, my eye. Just because God is a "transcendent anchor point" doesn't mean he's the only such point. Ever since the beginning of life (exactly when that is shall be left for another debate), or at least for a very long time now, animals have known that pain is bad, pleasure is good. This is one of the earliest aspects of life, because pain alerts the creature if something threatens it. The Holocaust caused unimaginable pain, both physical and emotional--it is therefore bad. Mother Teresa eased pain--she's good. For some atheists, this is how God exits the equation. Hardwired instinct is the benchmark for good and bad; it is only when religion comes into play that some people start trying to argue with nature.

As for me, my morals are centered thusly: that which promotes the optimal combination of my health/happiness/well-being and the health/happiness/well-being of others. Hence, I don't drink, smoke, do drugs, watch Richard Simmons tapes, etc., because such actions are a threat to the health and/or happiness and/or well-being of myself and of those around me.

Joakim

01-02-2006, 01:31 PM

What started universal existance, if something.
How did life evolve from non living matter?

If god is the designer of all this how does the spread out religions in this world present their wiev on this topic and what is the main difference?

Tis

01-02-2006, 07:03 PM

Given the global reach of the Internet these days, one must presume that not all members here are citizens of the United States, consequently, perspectives will vary accordingly, whether narrowly or broadly, from the opinions of others. Therefore, allow me to establish my perspective. Though I have spent considerable time in several other countries, primarily southern Germany, my global experience is grossly over shadowed by my American experiences, and thereby, tend to be singularly American in nature. If not American, then certainly Western based.

While I would agree that axiology is the study of value, I believe the definition given earlier lacks specifics that require clarification, particularly when discussing issues of faith, religion and the existence or non-existence of a divine motivator. Axiology deals most broadly with ethics, a much more nebulous element of human behavior than human morality.

As to my personal beliefs, I am an agnostic. Yet, I am fully aware of the more cynical view of agnostics as those who exhibit all the requisite attributes of atheism but wishes to remain socially acceptable. However amusing this definition is interpreted, I do not deny the existence of the divine, but rather, I simply refuse to commit my ultimate destiny to any currently accepted established faith. This is not intended to, in any way, demean atheism, religion or those that express faith in the divine. Nor will I will deny the positive role established religions have played in the development of moral human behavior. Conversely, I would not hesitate to point out the apocryphal atrocities committed by these same religions in the name of their own particular divinity.

The Ten Commandments, allegedly handed to Moses and written by the finger of God, is a fundamental Christian precept of most western faiths. They supposedly provide for the elementary moral behavior of mankind. Curiously, however, of these commandments, roughly half have less to do with moral human behavior than that they establish the ‘ultimate authority’ of God over mankind. Clearly, we do not all freely acquiesce to this authority, yet, we do tend to accept as reasonable these elementary ideals of behavior. The laws of government, or those established by man himself, (in a democracy) are typically based on the acceptable morals of the community at large and tend to reflect the influence of conservatism and liberalism over time. This also tends to explain the exasperating cyclic nature of political extremism. Regardless, we follow, perhaps in the most general fashion, these basic laws.

I will not begin to argue the application of moral boundaries for animals as mentioned before. It is silly and irrelevant relative to any conscious effort to continue a coherent discourse on religious questions and answers. The human species is merely that, a species of animal that has, through his supremacy of intellect, gained the ability to discern, reason, deduce and rationalize and has, to this point in his ascendancy, almost, escaped the trappings of an instinctive existence. This is not to say that mankind is free of his ability to live or die on instinct alone because it is abundantly clear that man is the single most lethal creature that has ever tread upon this insignificant little planet. Whatever gruesome, horrible or tragic death one can possibly imagine from the lower animals, only man has the capacity to surpass it ten fold.

As for ethics, they are not as applicable to religious discussion as man’s laws and the Ten Commandments. Typically, they apply to the individual’s conscience relative to fair play, honor and the concept of gentile behavior. They do have value, certainly, but that value has diminished over the last few centuries. Generally, violations of ethical behavior no longer carry with them, the accountability standards of the law or of the commandments. People that violate ethics may go to jail, but generally, not because they violated some rule of collective behavior, but because in their actions, they have broken a law of man.

Robinhood3000

Your “self centered” morals are fully consistent the vast bulk of mankind. I have known of only an extraordinarily few individuals that demonstrated any concern beyond the own self interest. Atmittedly, I count myself among the bulk of humanity.

Joakim

As regards the evolution of living matter, that is a subject for Creationism vs Evolution thread. However, you will likely find that most recognized religions hold similar fundamental beliefs and, however surprising, vary only slightly.

Pendragon

01-03-2006, 07:12 AM

Whoa up! I started this thread as a question/answer forum on religious beliefs and stated flatly that I would not put up with arguments. If you disagree with someone, you can still be civil about it. Take the man who said "I disagree with everything you said but I will defend until the death your right to say it!" as your motto. So far, I see a lot of arguments and statements, but as Emily pointed out, "Um. what was your question? This is not about who's right and who's wrong, or who feels qualified to do the judgeing. This is about learning from each other. I will make a statement here that goes across all social, religious, scientific, and other boundries. Often just when we think we've got it all figured out, and begin to rest easy in our beliefs, something happens to shake those beliefs up. And it should. The quest for the truth will always be a journey, we learn something new everyday, often from the oddest sources, and the most dangerous thing we can have is a closed mind. When asked a question, try to answer it as if you were teaching someone, no tirades as if the person were a dolt for not knowing. You reached the point where you are at the moment by learning, and you learned by questioning. Have respect and you gain respect. Show compasion and people respond with compasion. Be friendly and people can be friends despite disagreements. OK? ;) I personally am interested in exactly what the Koran says about Jesus. Muslim scholars, I ask your help. :angel:

Joakim

01-03-2006, 11:39 AM

Tis
Yes that would be a question for another thread, I agree.
We can leave that behind for now but the point of asking these questions was to start again from the beginning.
If we are to debate divinity the most interesting to me is to compare different definitions of creation and procreation.

The actual question would be, how did it all start and where are we headed if we keep believe what we believe and do what we do.

Religion has become guidelines for moral values and we spend too much energy debating and sometimes even killing eachother over things we obviously do not understand fully. (Even though we claim to know)

I do not believe that mankind as a whole is smart enough to survive forever if we do not change.
But with the spread of instant communication we have given ourselves an "out".

An out that can only come from understanding and trying to understand other people before discussion turn into argument and argument turn into frustration that will in time create violence.

For example why would any religion that place their faith in a supreme being and a form of reward or punishment after life be interested in going to war?

Do people actually Want to go to war?

Do people actually believe in their own religion?

Or do they believe in their leaders?

"you will likely find that most recognized religions hold similar fundamental beliefs"-Tis

Yes, its rather amazing to me that people can believe the same thing and still kill eachother because of the difference between holy text when attempting to explain intangible things. Believe it or not, but some things in this world can not be explained in words but have to be experienced to fully understand the complexity of what appears to be a problem. In these cases there is only one definition that can be agreed on.

I better stop before I start rambling again ;)

Nightshade

01-03-2006, 02:59 PM

I personally am interested in exactly what the Koran says about Jesus. Muslim scholars, I ask your help. :angel:
Hey Pen :wave:
Ok Im not exactly a scholar, I only know so much. And Id probably like to go over everything I know before I get in any debates about it which looking at the posts weve had recently is nearly bound to happen.
OK as far as I know definetly the Koran says ( Ill put the proper quotes in later)
Jesus was born to the unwed virgin Mary, who was told by an angel that she was to have a baby boy while she was had gone off somewhere in holy seclusion. But he is not the Son of God or God in any manifestation but human prophet of normal flesh and blood.
That he spoke and prophesised in the cradle.And that Jesus could heal the sick and raise the dead, by the grace of God. That Jesus was hounded and prosecuted and eventually was raised to heaven alive and that he was never crucified, but that someone else ( and here Im not sure who it was)was.

That one of the last "Big signs" of the day of judgment will be the return of Jesus to earth to fight and kill The anti-christ (Messih el Dagal).

Thats more or less the basis for what everyone belives and knows , obviously the people who really are scholars and know the entire koran inside and outside off by heart will be able to tell you exactly what we belive with quotes and more of our version of the life of jesus.
Sort of like everyone knows about Moses and red sea, but less people know about the golden calf, the whale, the wise man etc.
:D

Pendragon

01-03-2006, 07:13 PM

Thank you, Night. I must say, that is food for thought. Where other might find only controversy, I see things where we agree, much more that I thought. I was aware that Muslims were certain that Jesus was a prophet. There is more there than I knew. This is exciting!

Tis

01-03-2006, 08:20 PM

Actually Joakim, I thought you did rather well.

“Yes that would be a question for another thread, I agree. We can leave that behind for now but the point of asking these questions was to start again from the beginning. If we are to debate divinity the most interesting to me is to compare different definitions of creation and procreation. The actual question would be, how did it all start and where are we headed if we keep believing what we believe and do what we do.” - Joakim

In most western cultures, Creation is a concept of divine intervention, a predetermined formation of the material and spiritual universe from nothingness; of light from darkness; of life from nonexistence and of order from chaos, at the hand of an omnipotent deity within a six day period and he rested on the seventh day. The fundamentals differ very little from the Old Testament to the King James Version, as I understand it, so that this has been generally accepted by most Christians as the gospel.

As regards procreation, I’m not sure that is in question, at least universally, with the possible exception of the ‘virgin birth’ of Jesus. I believe there is sufficient evidence to support the historical existence of Jesus and, even as an agnostic, I would not argue the point. Clearly, Christianity holds that he was the son of God and the chosen woman, Mary. Outside the Christian church, the general accepted view is that Jesus was a Jewish cleric and the son of Mary, an unwed virgin.

“Religion has become guidelines for moral values and we spend too much energy debating and sometimes even killing each other over things we obviously do not understand fully. (Even though we claim to know).” - Joakim

I do not believe anyone in their right mind could reasonably argue that religion, via the Ten Commandments, was not the fundamental basis for general moral behavior, particularly during the initial settlement of America. In fact, one of the primary objectives of coming to the new world was to worship in your particular faith and do so within a community that believed as you did. These were very tight knit communities and may often have been led and sponsored by a cleric of some opposing faith to the Church of England. There were many other reasons such as forced tithing to the Church of England, taxes, arbitrary class distinctions, police and local government corruption and several other causes. But make no mistake, successful early settlements in America could be especially closed societies with severe restrictions on religious beliefs and if you were not a ‘true’ believer, you could quickly find yourself summarily cast out.

As the decades passed, two things began to happen. First, a need for mutual aid and mutual protection from Native American tribes who began to realize that there was likely no end to white settlers coming to America to consume their food and take their land. Consequently, settlements began to learn the value of religious tolerance and began to band together for mutual protection and establish militias. Secondly, very specific skill-trades became critically important to each settlement and migration began to open up to all Europeans and not just English, Irish and Scots. Where you might have a Calvinist settlement with a low tolerance for non-Calvinist believers, things began to change a bit when the only blacksmith, carpenter, barrister or printer was a Catholic or a Quaker or a Methodist….. Again, it was the self interest of the colony/settlement that was the primary motivator while the church made some reasonable allowances. And they did.

Slowly, overtime as colonies expanded they became territories with British based governors or colonists with ties to the English government. Some colonies began to merge but local communities would still be very discriminating in just who they would allow in as ‘citizens’ of their community. This ‘forced’ cross settlement association continued until the mid 1700s when talk of breaking with England began. Religious faith was falling out of favor among many settlers because of the unchanging church dogma and its rigid stale traditions that began to impose on the communities while a growing need for a more directly involved local government increased. The country was growing fast and because of the great distance to England, it took too much time for approval from the King. Then the King himself, in an attempt to manage the recalcitrant colonies, began making demands that were becoming intolerable. They revolted with the Declaration of Independence.

After the Revolution, and not very long after the US Constitution was ratified by all the 13 colonies, church clerics began to realize that the new secular government provided a clear and unambiguous freedom of worship and that that freedom also extended to those that did not wish to worship at all. This, in effect, protected secularists and agnostics as equal citizens under the law and, to some degree, diminished the influence of the church.

Within a very short period, a religious movement and accompanying fervor swept the country. This was an attempt by the various churches to quickly establish their own religious beliefs as the one holy “Word of God” for truth among men and to influence, as much as possible the direction of government. Fortunately, most and even many clerics saw the risks involved with a government heavily influenced by the church and tended to elect to local offices, those individuals more in synch with their own views. This does not mean that people left the church in droves, they didn’t. But the church was clearly relegated to its proper place in society and by the mid 1800s, morality was influenced as much by the laws of man as by the church. It is fortunate that these beliefs and their supporting counterpoints in the law of the land were quite compatible.

“I do not believe that mankind as a whole is smart enough to survive forever if we do not change. But with the spread of instant communication we have given ourselves an "out".” - Joakim

Respectfully, I disagree... I firmly believe that mankind has clearly demonstrated sufficient cleverness to ensure his place in the world until this planet becomes the dust of space. In effect, I think man has the intellectual capacity to survive. However, even cleverness demands reason, accountability and, above all, maturity to temper our genius. A favorite topic of discussion during the 19th century and the adherents to the Transcendentalist movement was the theoretical ‘perfectibility of man’. In a letter to a friend in 1844, Edgar Allan Poe wrote, “"I disagree with you in what you say of man's advance towards perfection. Man is now only more active, not wiser, nor more happy, than he was 6000 years ago." I know of nothing since 1844 that would conflict with Poe’s position.

“An out that can only come from understanding and trying to understand other people before discussion turns into argument and argument turn into frustration that will in time create violence. For example why would any religion that place their faith in a supreme being and a form of reward or punishment after life be interested in going to war?” - Joakim

To establish their religion as the one true faith, their God as the one true God. This has been going on for centuries and likely started before the Crusades. The only difference was that they had more than one God to fight over.

”Do people actually Want to go to war?” - Joakim

Honestly, I don’t think so and to go to war over religious beliefs appears to be a rapidly declining motivation as the world becomes more smaller through instant communications. The successes and failures of our multi-cultural society has been watched closely for over 200 years now and it is becoming apparent that our position on the world stage has much to do with our diversity and our strength of will to ensure our personal liberties.

”Do people actually believe in their own religion?” - Joakim

I’m confident they do... wars are started for any number of reasons. Religion is not the only basis of conflicts. Power, economics and regional influence are also prime motivators. I’m sure you have heard the quote, “Power corrupts... Absolute power corrupts absolutely!”

”Or do they believe in their leaders?” - Joakim

Perhaps many do, but many people have little choice but to believe in their leaders. America is not a great country because we have great leaders, it’s a great country because the greatness is in the hands of a free people who give or take away the authority of our leaders. It might not be perfect... but I have yet to see anything better.

Bruce

01-04-2006, 12:49 AM

The Holocaust caused unimaginable pain, both physical and emotional--it is therefore bad..

Bad in our eyes? yes. but what of the nazi's? They thought what they were doing was right and good. So if it was wrong even though they thought it was right then morals are valid and binding whether we believe in them or not. Objective morals exist. God exists. (This may sound vague but even atheists believe this is true. They just don't accept it. They believe Objective morals do not exist)

And now what you said about obtaining morals through evolution. This topic is widely discussed in the field of sociobiology. I'm reading more about sociobiology and your view sounds plausible because it's the same thing I think about everyday.

We know for a fact objective morals do exist but what if they are only objective in our mind and they hold no real purpose in the world? :confused:

i'll think about this question more...what do you think?

oh yah and to that emily girl look at the title of my first post.

and to the person that said most atheists are atheists because they don't care. This is very true. Most, not all, do not weigh the differences before they choose. Most kids just wanna be rebels.
To me this is really sad. If you read the madman by nietzche you'll find out why i think this.

Bruce

01-04-2006, 12:58 AM

"Um. what was your question
Once again, look at my TITLE

this message isn't long enough blah blah more characters.

chmpman

01-04-2006, 02:17 AM

I dont mean to start an argument but I'm curious about what information Bruce is using in making his broad generalizations about atheism. His comments strike me as coming from someone who has a negative view of atheists. I would like to know from what information his comments are based, as I'm sure they are formulated through research of some sort. Again, i mean this with all respect intended.

Nightshade

01-04-2006, 05:33 AM

(Nora)

01-04-2006, 10:41 AM

Thank you Pendragon , it is nice post :)

what the Koran says about Jesus. Muslim scholars, I ask your help. :angel:

it is easy my sister ;) :

In the name of Allah the Most Gracious , the Most Merciful .

16. And mention in the book ( the Qur'an , O Muhammad the story of )
Maryam (Mary) , when she withdrew in seclusion from her family to a place facing east .

17. She placed a screen ( to screen herself ) from them ; then We sent to her Our Ruh [ angel Jibril ( Gabriel ) ], and he appeeared before her in the form of a man in all respects.

18. She said:" Verily , I seek refuge with the Most Gracious ( Allah ) fom you , if you do fear Allah."

19. (The angel) said :" I am only a messenger from your Lord , ( to announce ) to you the gift of a righteous son."

20. She said :" How can I have a son , when no man has touched me , nor am I unchaste ?"

21. He said :" So (it will be) , your Lord said 'That is easy for Me ( Allah ): And ( We wish) to appoint him as a sign to mankind and a mercy from Us (Allah) , and it is a matter ( already) decreed (by Allah).' "

22. So she conceived him , and she withdrew with him to a far place (i.e. Bethlehem valley about 4-6 miles from Jerusalem).

23.and the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a date-palm.She said:" would that I had died before this , and had been forgotten and out of sight!"

24. Then [ the babe 'Isa ( Jesus ) or Jibril ( Gabriel )] cried to her from below her , saying " Grieve not: your Lord has provided a water stream under you .

25. " And shake the trunk of the date-palm towards you, it will let fall fresh ripe-dates upon you."

26." So eat and drink and be glad . And if you see any human being, say:' Verily , I have vowed a fast (1) to the Most Gracious ( Allah ) so I shall not speak to any human being this day.'"

(1) Fast here means : abstinence from food and speech .

27.Then she brought him ( the baby) to her people , carrying him. The said :" O Mary! Indeed you have brought a thing Fariyy ( a mighty thing ). [ Tafsir At-Tabari]

28. " O sister ( i.e. the like) of Harun (Aaron ) (2) ! Your father was not a man who used to commit adultery , nor your mother was an unchasts woman."

(2) This Harun (Aaron) is not the brother of Musa ( Moses ) , but he was another pious man at the time of Maryam ( Mary)

29. Then she pointed to him . They said: " How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?"

30." He ['Isa (Jesus) ] said :" Verily , I am a slave of Allah , He has given me the Scripture and made me a Prophet ;"

31." And He has made me blessed wheresoever I be, and has enjoined on me salat (prayer) , and Zakat , as long as I live."

32." And dutiful to my mother , and made me not arrogent ,unblest.

33. " And Salam(peace ) be upon me the day I was born , and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!"

34. Such is 'Isa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) .(It is) a statement of truth , about which they doubt (or dispute).

35. It befits not (the Majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son . Glorified ( and Exalted ) is He ( above all that they associate with him) .When He decrees a thing , He only says to it :"Be!"__ and it is.

36.['Isa (Jesus ) said]: " And verily,Allah is my Lord and your Lord .So worship Him (Alone) . That is a straight Path. ( Allah's religion of Islamic Monotheism which did ordain for all of His Prophet )." [ Tafsir At-tabary]

Surat Maryam (Mary)

___________

In the name of Allah the Most Gracious , the Most Merciful .

59. Verily , the likeness of 'Isa ( Jesus) before Allah is the likenessof Adam .He created him from dust , then (He) said to him: "Be!" __ and he was.

60. (This is) the truth from your Lord , so be not of those who doubt.

61. Then whoever disputes with you concerning him [ 'Isa (Jesus) ] after ( all this) knowledge that has come to you [i.e. 'Isa (Jesus) being a slave of Allah , and having no share in Divinity ], say: (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم ) "Come let us call our sons and your sons , our women and your women , ourselves and yourselves__ then we pray and invoke ( sincerely) the curse of allah upon those who lie."

62. Verily, this is the true narrative [ about the story of 'Isa (Jesus) ] , and ,La ilaha illallah ( none has the right to be worshipped but Allah , the One and the Only True God , Who has neither a wife nor a son ) . And indeed, Allah is the All-Mighty , the All-Wise .

surat Al'Imran

Nightshade

01-04-2006, 04:51 PM

Just a point or two Nora it doesnt say Gibreal it can be said to be angel yes but it doesnt say Gibreal.
and Pen is a he
:D
Salam

emily655321

01-04-2006, 06:56 PM

oh yah and to that emily girl look at the title of my first post.I don't mean to speak for Pen, but I don't think that's the sort of question he meant. Perhaps you could start another thread with that title. :nod: This thread is for specific questions about religions, not just discussion on the nature of religion in general. I think, perhaps, there is a distinction within the word "religion" that hasn't been made, and which is causing confusion. In the context of this thread, "religion" means a real, established world religion. The discussion of the existance/non-existance of God doesn't fall under that particular category.

(P.S. I'm trying to politely suggest that you're hijacking the thread, and, while it's a valid and interesting discussion in which I might be interested in participating, maybe you could please do it somewhere else. :cool:)

Pendragon

01-04-2006, 07:40 PM

I don't mean to speak for Pen, but I don't think that's the sort of question he meant. Perhaps you could start another thread with that title. :nod: This thread is for specific questions about religions, not just discussion on the nature of religion in general. I think, perhaps, there is a distinction within the word "religion" that hasn't been made, and which is causing confusion. In the context of this thread, "religion" means a real, established world religion. The discussion of the existance/non-existance of God doesn't fall under that particular category.

(P.S. I'm trying to politely suggest that you're hijacking the thread, and, while it's a valid and interesting discussion in which I might be interested in participating, maybe you could please do it somewhere else. :cool:)
Emily, as two people who have come to respect each other, you may be sure that I take no offence in your speaking for me on this subject. I've probably spoken for you before on another thread and failed to give credit. Thanks, my friend. Bruce, if you have a valid point to make, no one is saying go away. Maybe we missed it somehow, because I quoted Emily in asking what your question was. Please be clear and concise.

Pendragon

01-04-2006, 07:50 PM

Thank you Pendragon , it is nice post :)

it is easy my sister ;) :

In the name of Allah the Most Gracious , the Most Merciful .

16. And mention in the book ( the Qur'an , O Muhammad the story of )
Maryam (Mary) , when she withdrew in seclusion from her family to a place facing east .

17. She placed a screen ( to screen herself ) from them ; then We sent to her Our Ruh [ angel Jibril ( Gabriel ) ], and he appeeared before her in the form of a man in all respects.

18. She said:" Verily , I seek refuge with the Most Gracious ( Allah ) fom you , if you do fear Allah."

19. (The angel) said :" I am only a messenger from your Lord , ( to announce ) to you the gift of a righteous son."

20. She said :" How can I have a son , when no man has touched me , nor am I unchaste ?"

21. He said :" So (it will be) , your Lord said 'That is easy for Me ( Allah ): And ( We wish) to appoint him as a sign to mankind and a mercy from Us (Allah) , and it is a matter ( already) decreed (by Allah).' "

22. So she conceived him , and she withdrew with him to a far place (i.e. Bethlehem valley about 4-6 miles from Jerusalem).

23.and the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a date-palm.She said:" would that I had died before this , and had been forgotten and out of sight!"

24. Then [ the babe 'Isa ( Jesus ) or Jibril ( Gabriel )] cried to her from below her , saying " Grieve not: your Lord has provided a water stream under you .

25. " And shake the trunk of the date-palm towards you, it will let fall fresh ripe-dates upon you."

26." So eat and drink and be glad . And if you see any human being, say:' Verily , I have vowed a fast (1) to the Most Gracious ( Allah ) so I shall not speak to any human being this day.'"

(1) Fast here means : abstinence from food and speech .

27.Then she brought him ( the baby) to her people , carrying him. The said :" O Mary! Indeed you have brought a thing Fariyy ( a mighty thing ). [ Tafsir At-Tabari]

28. " O sister ( i.e. the like) of Harun (Aaron ) (2) ! Your father was not a man who used to commit adultery , nor your mother was an unchasts woman."

(2) This Harun (Aaron) is not the brother of Musa ( Moses ) , but he was another pious man at the time of Maryam ( Mary)

29. Then she pointed to him . They said: " How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?"

30." He ['Isa (Jesus) ] said :" Verily , I am a slave of Allah , He has given me the Scripture and made me a Prophet ;"

31." And He has made me blessed wheresoever I be, and has enjoined on me salat (prayer) , and Zakat , as long as I live."

32." And dutiful to my mother , and made me not arrogent ,unblest.

33. " And Salam(peace ) be upon me the day I was born , and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!"

34. Such is 'Isa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) .(It is) a statement of truth , about which they doubt (or dispute).

35. It befits not (the Majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son . Glorified ( and Exalted ) is He ( above all that they associate with him) .When He decrees a thing , He only says to it :"Be!"__ and it is.

36.['Isa (Jesus ) said]: " And verily,Allah is my Lord and your Lord .So worship Him (Alone) . That is a straight Path. ( Allah's religion of Islamic Monotheism which did ordain for all of His Prophet )." [ Tafsir At-tabary]

Surat Maryam (Mary)

___________

In the name of Allah the Most Gracious , the Most Merciful .

59. Verily , the likeness of 'Isa ( Jesus) before Allah is the likenessof Adam .He created him from dust , then (He) said to him: "Be!" __ and he was.

60. (This is) the truth from your Lord , so be not of those who doubt.

61. Then whoever disputes with you concerning him [ 'Isa (Jesus) ] after ( all this) knowledge that has come to you [i.e. 'Isa (Jesus) being a slave of Allah , and having no share in Divinity ], say: (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم ) "Come let us call our sons and your sons , our women and your women , ourselves and yourselves__ then we pray and invoke ( sincerely) the curse of allah upon those who lie."

62. Verily, this is the true narrative [ about the story of 'Isa (Jesus) ] , and ,La ilaha illallah ( none has the right to be worshipped but Allah , the One and the Only True God , Who has neither a wife nor a son ) . And indeed, Allah is the All-Mighty , the All-Wise .

surat Al'Imran It is very interesting, Nora, since I, myself, as a Christian, believe in but one God. 1 John 5:7 KJV. This verse is often left out or corrupted in other versions. How I believe that one and only one God exists causes arguments among those who do not wish to be told differently, so I withold at the moment. That Jesus was Virgin born, a prophet from birth, we agree on whole heartedly. And also that there is but one true God. Surprised? Many would be. That's why I started the thread. I would be a brother, not a sister, born male in 1960.

Pendragon

01-04-2006, 08:07 PM

I have a question and its very vaugue Im afraid. Pen, according to some people the bible contains a referance to some human who was to follow Jesus as a messenger/ prophet. Somthing like that, but since these were muslims who told me Ive always wondered.
Is it true?
:DYes, it is there. Malicah 4:5&6 "behold I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord. And he shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."

That this was not John the Baptist is evident in the questioning of the Pharisees in St. John 1:19-23

Yet Jesus told the disciples that Elijah had already come and they had done to him as they wanted and they knew he spoke of John. St. Matt 17:12

The difference was that John fullfilled the voice of one crying in the wilderness, and the great and dreadful day of the Lord, the End of All Things was not yet come. So another must come, yes.

Bruce

01-04-2006, 09:04 PM

sorry, i won't talk any more about it here

chmpman

01-04-2006, 10:58 PM

Nightshade

01-05-2006, 05:43 AM

It is very interesting, Nora, since I, myself, as a Christian, believe in but one God. 1 John 5:7 KJV. This verse is often left out or corrupted in other versions. How I believe that one and only one God exists causes arguments among those who do not wish to be told differently, so I withold at the moment. That Jesus was Virgin born, a prophet from birth, we agree on whole heartedly. And also that there is but one true God. Surprised? Many would be. That's why I started the thread. I would be a brother, not a sister, born male in 1960.
Im not suprised :D.
Oh and nice smiliey Pen and thanks for answering my question. :nod:

Vedrana

01-05-2006, 07:22 AM

I have read that in the Hindu religion, they believe that there is the spirit of Brahman, which is sort of like the Christian/Muslim/Jewish God. Brahman is so vast that there are various deities that represent different aspects of Brahman, and so people choose to worship particular Gods, like the way Catholics have patron saints. Anyway, I THINK, but am not entirely sure, that that's how it works. If someone can give a better explanation, please, feel free to correct me.

chmpman

01-06-2006, 02:37 AM

This isnt exactly a question about religion, but what is the story behind Kwanzaa? I really know nothing about this holi (holy) day, besides it's celebrated by Africans.

Nightshade

01-06-2006, 05:12 AM

Iknow a little but only a little as my mum looked into it last year .
Its a celebration of community and social spirt.. I think it goes on for 7 days and each day yopou light a candle and children rcive little presnts. The candles are a differant color each day to represnt a different thing, honesty, courage, friendship, etc etc.
Actually thats not answering your question at all is it??
sorry, Ill ask my mum next time I see her :D

Pendragon

01-06-2006, 09:12 AM

Thank you Pendragon , it is nice post :)

35. It befits not (the Majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son . Glorified ( and Exalted ) is He ( above all that they associate with him) .When He decrees a thing , He only says to it :"Be!"__ and it is.

Surat Maryam (Mary)

Nora, be not angry with me, but I wish to share with you something I find to be glorious. In this verse of the Qur'an (I apologize for not spelling it correctly at first, I certainly intended no disrespect) I have found something that trancends to the way I believe Christianity and is so beautiful. Quoting the last part of the verse: "When He decrees a thing, He only says to it: "Be!:__ and it is."

How great a statement of the greatness of God! And how little faith we put in Him at times! We worry so much and yet if He be for us, He need but speak a word, and it is so! Why then the long questions over how we came to be? He spoke and it was! I would love to have this translated into Hebrew or Aramaic: "He That Speaks And It Must Be!" as a praise name for God.

May God smile upon you, and the blessings of God be upon you and yours forever.

Pen

smilingtearz

01-10-2006, 02:38 AM

I had a question concerning the Hindu religion. I was curious how their polytheistic system worked. My understanding is that Krishna is a Zeuslike figure at the head of the other gods. This understanding comes from a little bit of reading from the Bhagavad Gita, but I was more curious as to how the entire system worked, and if it has a whole mythology surrounding it that may be similar, or dissimilar to that of the Greeks. Thanks to anyone who can help.

umm...Im a christian, but i've got a lot of hindu friends, so i had one of my friends explain this to me

The Hindus worship various gods which may be manifestations of natural forces (rain, wind, etc.), or manifestations of certain activities (creation, preservation, etc.), or manifestations of human psychological states and emotions (love etc.).

The major Hindu gods are:
Brahma – The Creator
Shiva – The Destroyer
Vishnu – The Preserver
Saraswati – Goddess of Learning
Lakshmi – Goddess of Wealth
Ganesha – God of Success/Progress
Indra – The Rain-God
Surya – The Sun-God
Vayu/Pavan – The Wind-God
Kama (pronounced ‘Kaam’) – God of Love
Dharma – God of Law (although ‘law’ is a very inadequate translation of ‘dharma’)
Yama (pronounced ‘Yum’) – God of Death

All gods symbolise different things and are worshipped for different reasons.
It is believed that Brahma created the world and its creatures (including man) through his powers. He is considered the supreme creator. All creatures are essential parts of the web of life. Although man is intellectually superior to all the other creatures, no creature should be considered inferior because every creature is a reflection of the stupendous power of nature and creation. Hinduism proposes a web of living beings, in which every creature is as important as the other. Nature itself is a very powerful force capable of both creation and destruction (this concept is very similar to Darwin’s theory of survival).

In Hinduism, creation and destruction are the two sides of the same coin. Destruction leads to creation. Creation is impossible without destruction. This is where Shiva, the Destroyer, becomes very important. Anything and everything which leads to the downfall of uprightness and morality, which is against ‘dharma’, must be destroyed, in order to uphold moral values. This only can lead to a proper continuance of life. Destruction evades all chaos and becomes the medium by which creation can be continued. Shiva’s Tandava nritya is a symbolic representation of his wrath, which brings about great destruction and ultimately leads to great creation (this concept is very similar to the concept of ‘phoenix’ – rising from its own ashes).
Shiva is also the God of Fertility and hence is worshipped by married women.

Preservation, too, is a great philosophy in Hinduism. Whenever the world is on the verge of complete downfall, when moral values give way to selfish individualism, when crime is at its peak, when there is no guiding principle for people’s conduct, Vishnu, the Preserver, manifests Himself into human form and comes on the earth to save the world and its creatures. It is believed that Vishnu has ten ‘avatars’ (incarnations), of which nine have already come into the world in times of need. One. Ravana represents evil things – bad thoughts, bad conduct, bad actions, etc. This is why burning the effigy of Ravana on Dussehra is very symbolic.. Ram-rajya was one of the finest rules in the history of the world. It was a near-utopian world. Notice how destruction, creation, and preservation come together here.

Another of Vishnu’s avatars was Krishna. He was sent into the world to teach humanity its forgotten dharma. This was done through the Bhagvad Gita, which is Krishna’s sermon on dharma and karma to Arjuna during the Mahabharata war. (Duryodhana and company represent the forces of evil which become very powerful in the absence of dharma. Arjuna was taught to uphold dharma and save the humanity from destruction. The central concern is that destruction of your kinsmen, if necessary for the larger cause of the preservation of the human race, should be brought about. Arjuna learnt the important lesson of selflessness and sacrifice for the upholding of dharma.)

The last of the ten avatars of Vishnu, Kalki, is yet to arrive in the world. It is prophesied that He will come during the Kaliyuga, when crime will be at its peak and humanity will be on the verge of destroying itself.

Sarawati, the Goddess of Learning, is worshipped so that she bestows immense capability for knowledge and learning. Artists, especially, musicians and singers, worship Saraswati with all sincerity. It is believed that through Her inspiration artists can become masters in their art.

Lakshmi, the Goddess of Wealth, is worshipped so that one acquires money and wealth by Her grace. Acquiring wealth is not considered bad till one does it by fair means and does not harm anyone in the process. Her kripa is very important for businessmen.

Ganesha is the God of Success and Progress. Ganesha-puja is conducted before a business venture or before buying property etc., so that one achieves success in it. Ganesha is very important for students and young people who wish to succeed in their studies, job etc.

Indra is the Thunder/Rain-God. He is worshipped so that the monsoon keeps up to its normal cycle (since rains are essential for harvesting). Indra is also the King of Heaven. This may set him at a parallel stage to Zeus in Greek mythology, but in many ways Shiva is more Zeus-like than Indra. (I do not agree that Krishna is a Zeus-like figure).

Surya, the Sun-God is symbolic of energy (all forms). He is worshipped by offering water (jal chadhana) to Him in the morning and doing Surya-namaskar. As a force of nature, Surya is a part of continuance of life and activity.

Vayu, the Wind-God is worshipped as an important force of nature and a manifestation of energy.

Kama is the God of Love, especially sexual love. Hinduism promotes marital consummation. It is believed that in the world, one must fulfil his essential duty of providing progeny and multiplying the human race. Hinduism does not promote celibacy. Even Brahmins and temple priests get married and raise children.

Next is Dharma. Dharma is not a word in Hinduism but a philosophy, and that is why ‘law’ is an inadequate term for it. Dharma embodies right conduct, right actions, right priorities, upholding of moral and spiritual values, fulfilling one’s duties and responsibilities, and many more things. The Bhagvad Gita provides a good lesson on dharma and karma.

Lastly, Yama, the God of Death. In Hinduism, death is the fulfilment of life and the beginning of the journey of the soul. The concept of multiple births of a single soul until it attains salvation is also prevalent. Yama is considered as having the supreme knowledge of all beings, ordinary or divine. Yama evades all doubts and is the solver of the mysteries of life and death.

Above all it is worth remembering that Hinduism is not just a religion, but A WAY OF LIFE.

It took a long time for me to write this...so i hope you red this chmpman... and i hope this answerd your question

dark_182_88

01-10-2006, 02:59 AM

Very interesting smilingtearz, thanks alot for writing that, it was very informative and interesting

smilingtearz

01-10-2006, 03:05 AM

yea... thanx for reading, dark..

chmpman

01-11-2006, 03:03 AM

Thank you for the information and the time spent on it, it was very informational. I find the Hindu religion very interesting, and although i cant say this answered all my questions, it was a start, and i will be back to post more. But again, thanks for the post.

Avalive

01-16-2006, 08:50 PM

Pendragon

01-17-2006, 08:40 PM

The other day, one of my friend told me :" I am going to church tommrrow."
I was like $^$&^**$#@:" Why?"

He replied :" Cause I wanna be a christian."

"Why? Do you believe in God?"

"..."

"..." me

"I just want to find something to believe in. When I am lonely, when I have nobody to talk to, at least I can pray. You know, I am desperated sometimes."

"..." I truly don't know what to say," So I guess you are suggesting that going to church and believing in God is another weekend pastime, a perfect entertainment for free?"

"..."

"..."So, what is you question? Your statement seems more geared to the questioning of the existence of God or something. To that everyone always has different reasons for their disbelief in a devine being, and I would rather hear your own reasons that try to give any blanket answer and expect it to cover everything. That I do not do. I respect the other person's views. Your friend sounds confused and looking for something, but is not certain what. I would suggest such a person carefully choose the church he/she decides to attempt, and watch their step. Confused people are vulnernable.

Jannah

01-19-2006, 05:51 PM

Whifflingpin

01-19-2006, 08:03 PM

Jannah wrote "Why did the New Testament get written? When originally there was an old Testament? Also I do not understand the different beliefs of Christianity such as Protestant, Catholic, Arthrodox and all. if someone would classify them in a simple way, I'd be grateful."

I've just put a bit about Old and New Testament in answer to your question about the Torah.

There are many different groupings and kinds of belief within Christianity. Christianity was not originally dependent on a one-off revelation, but on the teachings and actions of Jesus, and the memories, feelings and reactions that his followers had to him. While some things seemed clear immediately, and are accepted by most Christians, it took centuries for the implications of supposedly simple beliefs to sort themselves out.

The central Christian belief is that Jesus is God who at a particular time was equally a man living on Earth. Through this one perfect man (perfect because he was also God)
the rest of mankind can be (or have been) re-united with God. (I expect that this simple explanation will be flamed, but please remember that tens of thousands of books have been written to explain what Christians really believe, or should believe.)

Orthodox/Catholic
A major division occurred between Christians living in the Eastern Roman Empire and those in the Western Roman Empire. Specifically, the item of disagreement was (when describing the threefold nature of God) whether the God the Holy Spirit proceeded from God the Father and God the Son, or just from God the Father. (If that makes no sense to you, don't worry - the doctrine of the Trinity is a mystery that can only be explained in terms of what it does not mean.) Orthodox Christians are those whose tradition descends from the East Empire, and they do not believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds from God the Son.

The Catholic Church embodies the Christian tradition of the Western Roman Empire, and believes that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son as well as the Father.

Catholic/Protestant
The term Protestant means, mostly, those of the western tradition who do not accept the Bishop of Rome (Pope) as their leader. Within this group are some whose belief is very close to that of the Roman Catholics (other than accepting the authority of the Pope) These people would call themselves Catholic and Protestant at the same time - Catholic in belief, but Protestant against the authority of the Pope.

And there are many Protestant groups whose beliefs differ in all sorts of ways from the Roman Catholics. Some differ in what they believe about God, or Jesus, or how the Bible should be interpreted. Others differ in how they think that Christian communities should be run. There is no simple explanation, more a complicated tapestry, with threads that could be followed by someone with time enough.

.

emily655321

01-19-2006, 08:18 PM

I have a question about The Bible.

Why did the New Testament get written? When originally there was an old Testament? Also I do not understand the different beliefs of Christianity such as Protestant, Catholic, Arthrodox and all. if someone would classify them in a simple way, I'd be grateful.Whifflingpin explained the difference between Catholic/Orthodox/Protestant very well, so I'll leave that one alone.

As to the New and Old Testaments...

The Old Testament is a collection of writings on which the Jewish religion is based. Christianity evolved out of Judaism, so Jesus and most of his disciples grew up studying the Old Testament writings.

The New Testament is all about Jesus' life and teachings. It was written by early Christians sometime after Jesus died. Some of its teachings differ radically from those of the more ancient Old Testament, but it is used in combination with the Old Testament in Christian worship.

Jannah

01-20-2006, 08:56 AM

Whifflingpin, Emily
Thanks, the picture seems clearer now.

Pendragon

01-20-2006, 09:12 AM

Good job, Whifflingpin, Emily. As I said when I started the thread, I will not be the one to answer all questions. Others may be more qualified to do so, and should never be afraid to speak up. Your opinion is important on this thread!

Ancestor

01-29-2006, 04:53 PM

This question may seem a bit odd and anyone can answer it. Do you feel a person can have faith without believing in the Bible or Qur'an and any religious book? I asked because there are parts of the Bible I believe in but not the book as a whole. Yet I consider myself a person of faith yet I have heard that unless I believe in the Bible I am not a person of faith. One last question for you and it is mainly curiousity. Do you consider Spiritualism a faith? Thank you. Take Care,

Amra

01-29-2006, 07:56 PM

:Do you feel a person can have faith without believing in the Bible or Qur'an and any religious book?"

As far as Islam is concerned, a person has to believe everything that is written in the Qur'an to be considered a muslim. If you negate one word from it, you cannot be considered a believer, because the whole Qur'an is believed to be the word from God, and it is not up to us to pick and chose parts from it.

Whifflingpin

01-29-2006, 08:28 PM

"Do you feel a person can have faith without believing in the Bible or Qur'an and any religious book?"

Sounds like the subject for a poll.

I think that faith came before books and depends on experience, not scripture. There are religions that do not have any definitive holy books, but that does not make the followers any less faithful. I think (and I know that there are people posting to this forum who disagree with me,) that religious books are human attempts to record or explain the religious experience of the writers. I do not think that any of them is actually dictated by God, or delivered by angels in a literal way. (In another sense, of course, religious experience may all be sent by angels, but I don't think that is relevant to your question.)

Only a small proportion of Christians would argue that you should believe, literally, every word that is in the Bible.

The Bible is a peculiar thing, in that, although it is normally presented as one book, it is actually a collection of writings, accumulated over a thousand years, more or less. Not all of it is directly to do with faith. It includes poetry - so why not treat that as you would any other poetry. There is history, which is as true and as doubtful as history tends to be, and is only interesting if you like history. Moreover, the history is written largely from one side, and if you are thoughtful you might think that maybe the Amalekites and Midianites might have had a version of their own that did not get written down.

Even the religious/ethical parts may vary in importance or even truthfulness. I was rereading Paul's letter to the Christians at Corinth, for another thread. Some of it (actually the least important) I found totally believable - the purely pastoral stuff, where Paul tells the church in Corinth to stop squabbling about who they heard about Jesus from, and concentrate on Jesus himself - that rings true. There is a lot more stuff on behaviour and relationships within the church, which, I think, should mostly be taken as good advice - but I don't think your faith will collapse if you happen to disagree with Paul on the subject of headgear for women. The vitally important bit (which I don't believe at all, but I think you do) is chapter XV. I'd say that if you accepted that chapter, then you could call yourself a Christian whatever else you believed or did not believe. If you accept what Paul says in that chapter, then you could see the rest of the Bible as helping you to understand the implications of the chapter, and, how, as a believer, you should act. Accept any parts that help: any that don't, ignore - you may come to them later, they'll still be there.

You may have noticed Muslims posting to this forum who claim that every word of the Quran is true, and trying to say that if your holy book is not true in every word then your religion is baseless. Frankly, I think that attitude is mistaken and probably blasphemous. It is not a requirement of a faith that it be fully contained in a book, although its essence may be contained in a sentence. "Christ is risen," or "There is but one God, God," are, perhaps, all that need be said to explain Christianity and Islam respectively. Finding out what those tiny sentences mean takes a lifetime of action, prayer, thought and experience, with reading, maybe, a very small part.

Any meaningful religion is a human response to life as we find it, and holy writings are all a groping towards expressing the unexpressible.

Whifflingpin

01-29-2006, 08:58 PM

"Do you consider Spiritualism a faith?"
What is a faith?

When examining life, the universe and everything, as we do, we may come up with views on what is there, and how it works. I do not think such ideas count as a faith, merely thoughtful observation. You do not need faith to see the sun rise, or to know that there is a relationship called friendship. People have worked out by observation, testing and practice why the sun appears to rise, and how to win friends and influence people.

However, it is also possible to ask (but not to answer conclusively) the questions "Why are things as they are" and "Why should I make any particular response to things as they are?" Ideas which go towards answering these questions are a faith, in that they go beyond observing what can be experienced, and attempt to interpret the experience.

You know more about Spiritualism than I do. Does it offer answers to "Why?"

Is it a good faith? Only if it offers helpful answers to "Why?" that match your experience that caused the question "Why? in the first place.

Ancestor

01-29-2006, 09:55 PM

Thank you Whifflingpin yours word rang so true to me.

Is it a good faith? Only if it offers helpful answers to "Why?" that match your experience that caused the question "Why? in the first place. That is how I have always felt that faith was but not many people seem to look at it that way. I do truly appreciate the time you took to reply to me, thank you.

Ancestor

01-29-2006, 10:00 PM

Nightshade

01-29-2006, 11:19 PM

may have noticed Muslims posting to this forum who claim that every word of the Quran is true, and trying to say that if your holy book is not true in every word then your religion is baseless. Frankly, I think that attitude is mistaken and probably blasphemous. It is not a requirement of a faith that it be fully contained in a book, although its essence may be contained in a sentence. "Christ is risen," or "There is but one God, God," are, perhaps, all that need be said to explain Christianity and Islam respectively. Finding out what those tiny sentences mean takes a lifetime of action, prayer, thought and experience, with reading, maybe, a very small part.
.
Whiffiling as I dont know if you know this but for muslims "The Quaran is the whole and unabridged truth" is one of tose sentances. Muslims belive that God is protecting the Quaran from being changed becasuehe gave us His word that this was the last such revelation, basicaly the last revised edition and would remain as it is until the end of the world.

Ansstor I think you can have faith as long as by Faith you mean Belief in some Greater power. But I think tha you really need to belive the things relating to your faith to have faith. But I think to have faith in what you belive in you haveto belive in all of it. But that could be the muslim in me talking and not what I thought of myself :D

Ancestor

01-30-2006, 04:13 AM

Whiffiling as I dont know if you know this but for muslims "The Quaran is the whole and unabridged truth" is one of tose sentances. Muslims belive that God is protecting the Quaran from being changed becasuehe gave us His word that this was the last such revelation, basicaly the last revised edition and would remain as it is until the end of the world.

Ansstor I think you can have faith as long as by Faith you mean Belief in some Greater power. But I think tha you really need to belive the things relating to your faith to have faith. But I think to have faith in what you belive in you haveto belive in all of it. But that could be the muslim in me talking and not what I thought of myself :D

Thank you Nightshade and I appreciate your answer and I do believe in my faith. It is just that I often have gotten of you are a satanist when I said Spiritualist. People do not always try to understand others faith and I try to understand their faith. I find other faith fascinating and I can see how wonderful their faith makes them feel as mine does for me. Thank you.

Pendragon

01-30-2006, 10:50 AM

I am pleased to see that this thread has moved along so well during my recent battle with illness. Like I said, ask your questions without hesitation. Someone will be there to answer, if I cannot, there will be someone else to pick up the slack. If it's not my strong point or my religious viewpoint, someone else will clear that up. And we have managed to do that without a lot of fuss! Just be open minded, and that will help you along! God bless.:angel:

Nightshade

01-30-2006, 02:56 PM

I've learned a lot about Islam on this forum, and I'm very grateful for it. One question I have consistently, though, is about the Muslim understanding of Jesus. I'm sorry if this isn't the most relevant place to ask this question, but it's the most recent thread available.

In the Gospels, Jesus never denies that He is the Son of God (excuse the wording of that phrase--I understand that Muslims believe God cannot beget, but this is the easiest way for me to understand Jesus' relationship to God). Peter calls him the Christ to His face, and Jesus accepts his worship. A true prophet of God who is nothing more than a prophet of God would have rebuked Peter for that worship. Jesus also makes many claims that He is divine, claims that a mere prophet would not make, the most famous of which is, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).
So my question: What does Islam do with this behavior of Jesus? How do Muslims believe He is no more than a prophet when He does things like this?

I firmly believe that he who seeks God with all his or her heart will find Him; therefore, I want to make it clear that I am seeking God's truth and am not trying to pick a fight.

Ok your not going to like this but... basically they/ we explain it in the easiest way possible the Bible/Gospel was corrupted by numerous translations and politics also the fact that Jesus himself ddnt write it or actually say right these things I want you all to rember and learn means that its really what people belived they saw him say or do.
As for
"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).
If you inturprit the words a diifeerant way he could be seen to be saying" I am way (so path, route, guided/sign posted safe passage), the truth( I bring the truth) the life ( eternal life after death or possibly meaning lead a good life on earth). No one comes to ( you wont find the way to or enlightment of) The Father (synonym include Lord, God, Master and Protector) except through me ( unless you listen to what I say)
So in this light what he said was basically " I am the true gfuide on the path through life and to eternal life, No one can reach the true love or knowledgeof GOd unless he belives in m and th message I bring."
And that is basically what muslim belive Jesus said.
_____________________________________________
Which brings me to my question what does the word Christ actually mean??

RobinHood3000

01-30-2006, 05:05 PM

Pendragon

01-30-2006, 05:53 PM

Robin, it is going to depend on whom you ask here. I started the thread, so I'll answer. An atheist has a perfect right to be one, and people should not attempt to cram their views down his/her throat. If you cannot by gentle persuasion or logical argument somehow get the person to accept the existence of a higher power, the constant irritation of your bugging them will just drive them further away. I have made friends with several atheists on this forum. I do not try to forcibly convert them. We've had arguments on various things, and I don't mind hearing their imput. If I truly believe what I say I do, they cannot change me anyway, and I may learn something of value along the way. Many have told me they respect me for my stand. I hope this is helpful. I am no man's judge.

XXdarkclarityXX

01-30-2006, 07:13 PM

I think in order to find the answer to Robin's question we need to ask this question of ourselves: Is the religious community one coherent body or a plethora of individuals loosely bound by a set of core beliefs? I have found the latter choice to be true after what I choose to describe as conducting religious warfare upon this forum. A select few within the forum have identified my outwardly militaristic behavior, and after doing a good bit of intellectual backtracking I have found the reason for the behavior: I attempted to attack the religious community instead of persuading the religious individual.

What is my point, exactly? It is simply that religion is relative, so what we need to ask each other is how each of us feels about atheists on our own individual level. I suppose many of you, after I have identified myself as an atheist and displayed the behavior that was enunciated by my posts, now have a less than glorified opinion of an atheist. So, I now ask each of you Robin's question- What is your opinion of atheists and atheism?

A last sentiment- Warfare cannot be conducted against a non-tangible object such as religion. The closest one can come to attacking religion is attacking the person who associated him/herself with it, and that is not the intended object of the belligerence. One cannot conquest the mind, for in their attempt it is they who are invaded with dillusion and eventually corrupted by the very tool which they employed for their benefit.

Xamonas Chegwe

01-30-2006, 07:29 PM

I'm curious--I asked this question in the Atheists thread, but didn't get any answers: What is the general opinion among the religious community of atheists? I hope that the nature of the asker does not corrupt the response, but dear old Heisenburg says otherwise.

Actually, I believe that Heisenberg states that you cannot know simultaneously the position and motion of a sub-atomic particle. Or have I got the wrong Heisenberg?

RobinHood3000

01-30-2006, 07:41 PM

No, you're right, that's the gist of it, but the general implication of that statement is that the nature or presence of the observer changes the observed.

Xamonas Chegwe

01-30-2006, 07:42 PM

Whiffiling as I dont know if you know this but for muslims "The Quaran is the whole and unabridged truth" is one of tose sentances. Muslims belive that God is protecting the Quaran from being changed becasuehe gave us His word that this was the last such revelation, basicaly the last revised edition and would remain as it is until the end of the world.

Ansstor I think you can have faith as long as by Faith you mean Belief in some Greater power. But I think tha you really need to belive the things relating to your faith to have faith. But I think to have faith in what you belive in you haveto belive in all of it. But that could be the muslim in me talking and not what I thought of myself :D

I don't wish to be disrespectful Nightshade. But surely it is people (specifically muslims) that are 'keeping the Qu'ran from being changed'. Can you be 100% sure that not one word has changed since it was first written. Furthermore, are there no words in the arabic language that mean something different now than they did at the time of Mohammed? And if you say not, how do you know they don't?

And finally, where is the proof that the Qu'ran is the last and final word of god, except in the Qu'ran itself? Surely this is a circular argument? It is perhaps unfair to aim that last at muslims alone. The same question applies equally to those that believe in the bible.

I would appreciate peoples opinions on this question.

XC

Xamonas Chegwe

01-30-2006, 08:17 PM

No, that's the gist of it, but the general implication of that statement is that the nature or presence of the observer changes the observed.

The way I hear it, that is the general misinterpretation of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. He never claimed that, except in the specific case of sub-atomic particles. That it applies in other circumstances is a happy coincidence but not in any way a part of his theory. Sorry to get picky, but it's just one of those things that always bugs me - like when people say 'ironical' when they mean 'ironic'. :nod:

RobinHood3000

01-30-2006, 08:25 PM

Yes, he never explicitly claimed it (and I'm well-aware of what he applied it to), but as it happens to apply to real life just as easily as it does to sub-atomic particles, is there really any problem with using it to describe such a phenomenon? (Wow, that was a massively awkward-sounding sentence.) Statisticians aside (they classify it as "response bias" when the person asking the question influences the answer), I personally think it's a valid extension. The answer may not be changed because of the wavelength of the light being used to make measurements, but it IS changed because of the fact that something is being actively measured.

And I know what you mean about getting peeved about semantics--it's the same way with me and "conversate."

rachel

01-30-2006, 08:59 PM

Well I believe there is God and He is not just sitting there doing nothing. I look at the vastness of the night sky, the intricacy of a babe in the womb, the beauty of trees , whatever and I am convinced. I cannot begin to explain Him that would be like baby Hasia sitting down at the table and telling me about quantum theory or how to build a skyscraper including blueprints. I believe the scripture that says "for the whole obligation of man is to get to know God". for me that implies freedom and hard work, a quest if you will. I also believe the scripture that says "For My ways are higher than yours, my thoughts than yours" which implies to me that argue as one might, puff one's head in pride and dictate this or that, in the end it will be an embarrassment because we can't possibly understand the depths of such Intelligence nor explain Him in a million years. He allows us to understand a particle and that is it.
In the end I believe all we have said and thought will be rather pale to what really is and who He really is. There is another scripture that says for now we look thru a dark glass but the time is coming we will see clearly.
So I must seek and search and come to my own free conclusion of what I believe and get on with it. For me arguing is wasting precious time that I could be making a difference in this sad world, however small in another's eyes.
So I just tell people" ask God for yourself. You will either in your life time hear or you won't." But if you do isn't it worth just the asking? Why bicker one to the other when we are ALL so flawed and just a mist that is here and then gone when the sun shines down upon us.

Ancestor

01-30-2006, 09:20 PM

Ancestor

01-30-2006, 09:29 PM

My apologies to the admin and Pendragon if I got off topic here and I do try not to get off the topic. I am sorry.

Whifflingpin

01-30-2006, 10:00 PM

"And finally, where is the proof that the Qu'ran is the last and final word of god, except in the Qu'ran itself? Surely this is a circular argument? It is perhaps unfair to aim that last at muslims alone. The same question applies equally to those that believe in the bible."

I suspect that all belief systems, including atheism, end up in circular arguments, at least in arguments that may be logical in form, but rest on unprovable premises - some get there a bit quicker than others. We are not truly outside observers of our universe, so our judgements may be partially objective, but they are ultimately subjective.

Given this, dubious, premise, it is worth asking what might approximate to a "reasonable" acceptance of a belief system. May I use Subjective for any belief that attempts to explain the universal, and Objective for a belief about something that is within our area of competence? (OK, I'm no philosopher, but I accept that even that is rash.) On the one hand, one should not expect to be able to prove the Subjective belief, but the Subjective belief should not be inconsistent with one's Objective belieflets. And, to be "reasonable" you should recognise where your own Objectivity turns into Subjectivity. Not that Subjectivity is a bad thing - it is inevitable if you think of anything beyond tying your own shoelaces - but it has no merit over anyone else's Subjective belief, assuming that the other person holds a "reasonable" Subjective belief, in the terms I've just burbled.

I guess I'm talking to myself now, so I'll go on to say that for many years my Subjective belief was a form of Christianity, and I still think that it has a great deal of merit. However - there came a point where a little Objective niggle became too significant for me to ignore. The question (which someone in this forum recently ascribed to Hume, though I'd certainly never heard of Hume) of the existence of evil, was not, is not, for me satisfactorily explained in Christianity. As a Christian I had, over the course of years, tried out various answers, but I came to the conclusion that monotheism and evil don't fit in the same universe.
At this point, I had to find a new Subjective belief. Some would have turned to Atheism, but for me Atheism offers no explanation for Mozart, trees or grandchildren, or indeed for anything else that I consider important. Any other purely monotheistic religion was out of the question, the polytheistic ones too complicated to be real, Buddhism was a serious contender. The belief that offered, however, the least shift for greatest effect, was Zoroastrianism in a very minimal form. All the "Religions of the Book" draw heavily on the teachings of Zoroaster, so many of the themes were familiar. The question of evil in our universe is explained by a dualism, and our response to it is defined - the function of humanity is to help God to fight evil.
The religion avoids extremes, its symbolism works for me, and in its primitive form it was not ritualistic, but, in fact, opposed priestcraft. There are various other aspects that that I find very satisfactory. I did not have a Pauline conversion all bang and blinding light, but I slipped into Zoroastrianism as into a second skin, and found it didn't pinch and had no baggy bits.

** **
Edit.
I'd posted the above, and having posted it I saw that Rachel had already written a much better version. Uncanny that we'd both selected children and trees as pointers to God.

Ushta te

Pendragon

01-30-2006, 10:39 PM

So I just tell people" ask God for yourself. You will either in your life time hear or you won't." But if you do isn't it worth just the asking? Why bicker one to the other when we are ALL so flawed and just a mist that is here and then gone when the sun shines down upon us.Well said, Rachel. People, I begin to detect a certain hostility building here in some of the statements being asked of Muslims. We are not here to down the other person's beliefs. And if you are an ammitted atheist to begin with, arguing the valitity of a person's religious documents seems to be wasted effort since you do not believe in any higher power. Perhaps we need to back oof and look at things from a different angle?

Did I misunderstand, Robin, were you asking if Atheistism is a religion? I would say no, it is a philosophy of life. I have stated elsewhere, and will state here that I have more respect for a dedicated Atheist than a wishy-washy religious person, who is in today, and out tomorrow. The Bible says "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

When you are, then nothing changes your mind. That's why a good education didn't make me stop believing in God, it made me stronger. Reading philosophy did the same. You cannot argue what you do not know. I learn from other religions to srenghten my own belief. It is amazing where common ground can be found if you look for it with an open mind.

Pendragon

01-30-2006, 10:43 PM

My apologies to the admin and Pendragon if I got off topic here and I do try not to get off the topic. I am sorry.No apology need, Ancestor, dear friend. You can say what you wish as long as you are your own sweet self and stay within the boundries of courtesy. :wave:

XXdarkclarityXX

01-30-2006, 10:51 PM

You cannot argue what you do not know.

Under this pretense, there's no basis for religion whatsoever. How do argue that there's a basis for religion when you don't know if there is a supreme being? All we really know is that we don't know. So, according to Pendragon's statement, all we can argue is that we don't know. That leaves us with a significant void of any type of divine being, leaving us with atheism. All gods are merely in our minds anyway. We created the God(s), not the other way around. The minute we BELIEVE in the existence of a divine being, and perpetuate that thought with whole-hearted belief in such a being, a religion is born. It happened with the Greeks, then the Romans, then the Jews, and now the Catholics (among others I omitted). The point is that religion is in our heads, and it is different to each of us. Like I said, it's relative. That's why there's no such thing as "universal truth". Truth of any kind is just a strong collective belief in a fact. In the case of Catholicism, this collectivity is called the Catholic Church. They perpetuate their beliefs with strong voracity, but at the end of the day that's all it boils down to- a strong belief in one's mind. Atheism escapes such fantasy as it is the absence of religion, and thus the absence of belief. Just my thoughts...

Ancestor

01-31-2006, 01:27 AM

No apology need, Ancestor, dear friend. You can say what you wish as long as you are your own sweet self and stay within the boundries of courtesy. :wave:

Thank you Pendragon, I felt that I might have been out of the bounderies. I hope this finds you doing much better now, health wise. I still keep you in my prayers.

rachel

01-31-2006, 01:39 AM

RobinHood3000

01-31-2006, 06:43 AM

XXdarkclarityXX, the very premise of faith (as I have learned from my religious friends) is that is it not based on proof. And telling the religious that they are imagining their entire religious system is not a very effective method of conversion, if that's what you're aiming for.

In response to Pendragon, I was actually looking to ask how religious people tended to regard atheists. I've met some that treated me as if I'd entered the room through a smoking hole in the ground, and others that treated me with the same respect they would treat anyone else (as far as I could tell). I was wondering which would be the majority opinion.

Pendragon

01-31-2006, 07:45 AM

Under this pretense, there's no basis for religion whatsoever. How do argue that there's a basis for religion when you don't know if there is a supreme being? All we really know is that we don't know. So, according to Pendragon's statement, all we can argue is that we don't know. That leaves us with a significant void of any type of divine being, leaving us with atheism. All gods are merely in our minds anyway. We created the God(s), not the other way around. The minute we BELIEVE in the existence of a divine being, and perpetuate that thought with whole-hearted belief in such a being, a religion is born. It happened with the Greeks, then the Romans, then the Jews, and now the Catholics (among others I omitted). The point is that religion is in our heads, and it is different to each of us. Like I said, it's relative. That's why there's no such thing as "universal truth". Truth of any kind is just a strong collective belief in a fact. In the case of Catholicism, this collectivity is called the Catholic Church. They perpetuate their beliefs with strong voracity, but at the end of the day that's all it boils down to- a strong belief in one's mind. Atheism escapes such fantasy as it is the absence of religion, and thus the absence of belief. Just my thoughts...I will say this in answer to your statement. You say you know there is no devine power. I say I know there is, for I can clearly see each day the wonders of the works of His hands. You explain this with a scientific theory that in my eyes is full of plenty of "I don't knows", "We are not certain why", and "For some unknown reason." The whole premise of the "Big Bang" is based on what "might have happened." I was merely pointing out that I could not argue these things if I did not know about them. Many atheists read the Bible, so that they can better answer someone who always quotes it. But under the definition you chose to give my simple statement, you tell me, how much of science can really stand up to absolute proof and how much is what science refers to as "best guess based on what we have now." What was accepted scientific fact yesterday has often been proven incorrect later on, due to that very fact, science works with variables that constanly change, so everything is "best guess." A case in point: The Smithsonian Institute finally had to admit that their beloved triceretops skeleton had been a fake for 90 years. The skeleton had been incomplete when discovered, lacking a set of feet and other parts, so they added duckbill feet and parts from other dinos. With the new age of computer animation, they were finally able to create the missing parts. 90 years is a long time....

Xamonas Chegwe

01-31-2006, 01:27 PM

Whifflingpin (and others),

I think you misunderstand me. I do not say that my atheism is objective and your religion (or anyone's) is subjective. I say that they are all subjective and based on unprovable beliefs - atheism as much as anything else. I apologise if I gave the wrong impression.

All I was objecting to was the way that the religious often quote their book of faith as if that 'proves' that faith is true. This is no more valid than proving Darwin's theory of evolution by quoting his book. Or stating that any philosophy is true because it is published. Claiming that the book of your faith is different because it is god's word is only valid if one believes in that faith to begin with - hence circular argument.

Atheism is a philosophy, (actually, an umbrella term for several philosophies, with the contention that there is no god the only common factor) but so are all belief systems and religious faiths.

I have my philosophy, you have yours. It's nice to chat about them once in a while. That way lies understanding and mutual respect.

XC

Whifflingpin

01-31-2006, 03:04 PM

Xamonas Chegwe
I did not misunderstand you, and I agree with you that to claim that a book is true, just because within the book it says it is true, is indeed a circular argument, of the simplest kind.

I tried to expand the principle, by saying that even if this particular circular argument were not used, ultimately any belief system (religion or philosophy) has a basis that does not stand logical scrutiny. (as you have just said, in fact.) After all the discussions and reasoned arguments, we will always end up with a statement like "Well that is what I believe." There is no point whatever in asking for a final proof, because we are inside the proof, not outside it.

I added the one criterion that I think is necessary for a belief system to have in order to claim to be valid. To be satisfactory, the belief must, in my opinion, account for and be consistent with the experience of the person holding the belief. Ok that was two criteria.

Good hunting

.

Green Lady

01-31-2006, 04:17 PM

I've always been curious about a few things having to do with atheism... So, since atheists don't believe there is a god or higher being, whatever, what's after this? Life, I mean. Do we just end? I have a friend who's atheist but I've never had the chance to ask her my questions and I haven't seen much of her these past few weeks.

Xamonas Chegwe

01-31-2006, 05:18 PM

RobinHood3000

01-31-2006, 05:39 PM

Xamonas Chegwe

01-31-2006, 06:54 PM

Exactamundo, Xamonas. Couldn't have said it better myself.

If it helps, though, Green Lady, for this particular atheist, the afterlife consists of (I say this slowly because it's a big thought to let sink in--scares the living daylights out of me) absolute...nothingness.

I could have said it better but I was in a hurry! :lol:

And why should nothingness scare you? I doubt you'll even notice it! :nod:

emily655321

01-31-2006, 07:53 PM

Green Lady, this atheist offers the same answer as Robin and Xamonas. As I don't believe there is such a thing as a soul, separate from the body, I don't believe that there is a "place" or dimension to which it goes after the body has died. I believe that human consciousness is a result of brain activity, so when the body dies and the brain cells cease to fire, the "personality" formerly present simply ceases to exist. In other words, that death is the end for that person.

Ooh, ooh! This is a completely different subject. Perhaps I should start a new post... but I won't. I've had a question kicking around in my head, and it eluded me whenever I came to this thread, but now I remember:

What is the Hadeeth? I've heard people mention it a lot here, and at first I surmised that it must be a collection of key writings from the Q'uran, something like the Jewish Torah. But Nightshade mentioned that it was separate, so now I'm back to square one. I've also read in another thread an argument between two Muslims, from which I gathered that not all Muslims accept all of the teachings in the Hadeeth. I'd be very grateful if my Muslim friends here on the Forum would explain to me what it is, and how it came to exist, and how widely is it accepted in the Muslim community?

:)

Green Lady

02-01-2006, 04:37 PM

Exactamundo, Xamonas. Couldn't have said it better myself.

If it helps, though, Green Lady, for this particular atheist, the afterlife consists of (I say this slowly because it's a big thought to let sink in--scares the living daylights out of me) absolute...nothingness.

Try grasping the concept of eternity... backwards AND forwards in life. :brow:

Thanks for the answers, though something about it just doesn't sit with me *shrugs*. Don't you ever think there's more to life than just living until you're dead?

emily655321

02-01-2006, 06:49 PM

Don't you ever think there's more to life than just living until you're dead?Why does there need to be more? :) As long as you're really living, and not just waiting for heaven to come...
Is life less precious, just because it ends?

Xamonas Chegwe

02-01-2006, 07:11 PM

Don't you ever think there's more to life than just living until you're dead?

Don't you ever think there's more to life than just preparing for the end of it, as if that's all that's important?

Amra

02-01-2006, 10:28 PM

"I'd be very grateful if my Muslim friends here on the Forum would explain to me what it is, and how it came to exist, and how widely is it accepted in the Muslim community?"

Peace to you. The holy Qur'an is the basis of Islam, and it is the first source of the religion. It is believed to be God's word in its unchanged form, given to Mohammed a.s through the angel Gabriel. Every word in the Qur'an is believed to be from God, and muslims accept everything in the Qur'an as the ultimate truth. Hadiths, on the other hand, are the second source of Islam. They are the teachings, sayings, and practice of the Prophet Mohammed a.s. For example, they contain what the Prophet a.s did, or said, or what others observed from him. All hadith date to the years where Prophet Mohammed a.s was alive, and they have been collected by his companions, wives and others who came into contact with him. To be a muslim, you have to accept both of those sources of Islam, the Qur'an and the hadith. Hadiths basically explain how to practice the religion, and are an extension of the Qur'an. Not all hadiths are believed to be factual, because some of them are believed to have been invented. There is a whole science behind gathering those hadiths that are factual, and those that are not, which is too complicated to get into. HOwever, when you see someone citing a hadith, they usually give all the narrators, from the first person who heard it from the Prophet a.s, to the last who noted it. Scholars have examined all those hadiths, and if they found that one of those people in the chain of narrators in not trustworthy, than the hadith would be classified as weak. Those hadiths that are believed to be true and valid are called saheeh, and when you read any book of hadiths, they note next to it whether or not it is saheeh, or daif (weak). There is a very small group of people within the muslim religion that do not accept the hadiths at all. They are called Qur'aniya, which means they only accept the Qur'an. However, they only account for 1-2% of all muslims, and the scholars of Islam classify them as a sect within Islam, that is not on the right path, because the main testimony that one is a muslim is the shehadat (testimony) that says. La Il'Allahe il'Allah, Mohammedu resulullah..meaning that there is no deity but Allah, and that Mohammed is his Messenger. The hadiths are a testimony of MOhammed a.s's life, his teachings, and his sunnah (practice), and we accept it as truth, not above the holy Qur'an, but as a valid source of Islam.
Hope this will help you. ;)

Here are some examples of a hadith:

Volume 8, Book 73, Number 2: (this is the book the hadith can be found in)

Narrated Abu Huraira: (this is the person who heard it from the Prophet, and he was one of the closest people to the Prophet a.s)

A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Who is more entitled to be treated with the best companionship by me?" The Prophet said, "Your mother." The man said. "Who is next?" The Prophet said, "Your mother." The man further said, "Who is next?" The Prophet said, "Your mother." The man asked for the fourth time, "Who is next?" The Prophet said, "Your father. "

Volume 4, Book 54, Number 416:
Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle said, "When Allah completed the creation, He wrote in His Book which is with Him on His Throne, "My Mercy overpowers My Anger."

RobinHood3000

02-01-2006, 10:53 PM

Thanks for the answers, though something about it just doesn't sit with me *shrugs*. Don't you ever think there's more to life than just living until you're dead?
Sure, I do--trying to positively influence those around me so that the quality of their lives will have been improved during my life, and hoping that their memories thereof will persist after my death.

Pendragon

02-02-2006, 12:43 PM

Thanks for the answers, though something about it just doesn't sit with me *shrugs*. Don't you ever think there's more to life than just living until you're dead?You know, that's quite a thought you have there. I happen to believe in an afterlife, but do you think that's what I'm doing, just living until I die? An afterlife, dear Green Lady, is the Sweet By and By. With no disrespect of any kind, this is the nasty now and now. On a tombstone there are two dates, seperated by a dash. You cannot control the first-- that was your date of birth. Short of suicide, which we aren't even going there, you can't control the second either, your date with the Grim Reaper. But the dash--there's a different story. Make the most of it. Live life to the fullest. Write. Sing. Play music. Make friends and influence people. Try to take the time to understand someone different from you. Learn a new language. Read. Discuss things with others and keep an open mind. Decide what you believe and stick to it, unmovable. Carpe diem! :thumbs_up

Green Lady

02-02-2006, 04:12 PM

Don't you ever think there's more to life than just preparing for the end of it, as if that's all that's important?

If the end isn't actually the end, wouldn't you want to prepare for it? Eternity, doesn't mean an eternity of sitting on your butt listening to angelic music and watching the white clouds float by. There's far more involved, at least according to what I believe. Think of it as not death, but growth.

Xamonas Chegwe

02-02-2006, 04:21 PM

Green Lady

02-02-2006, 04:36 PM

According to what I believe, it is the end.

But hypothetically, if you believed there were an afterlife wouldn't you want to be ready for it if it was more than just that, an afterlife?

****Terrible cliché alert!****

Life is not a rehearsal!

True, true... but then again, life is where we make mistakes and then fix them... so it is a lot like a rehearsal in my eyes but also like the play itself too. Great, I'm confusing myself with my own words. Heh, I tend to do that soemtimes.

emily655321

02-02-2006, 07:45 PM

Amra~

Thank you very much. :) Your explanation was very clear, I think I understand now. And I like the second verse you cited, quite a lot. That's a piece of wisdom I will try to remember. Thanks again!

Xamonas Chegwe

02-02-2006, 07:58 PM

Can I thank you too Anya. That was an interesting explanation.

I have one question, if I may. What does the "a.s." after each mention of Mohammed signify? I know it must be something along the lines of "peace be upon him" but I can't work it out.

I liked the first quote, it read almost like a zen koan.

Amra

02-02-2006, 11:16 PM

"Can I thank you too Anya. That was an interesting explanation."

Glad I could shed some light on the issue...it's Amra by the way. ;)

"I have one question, if I may. What does the "a.s." after each mention of Mohammed signify? I know it must be something along the lines of "peace be upon him" but I can't work it out."

It is an abbreviation for alleyhi sellam, which in arabic means something like peace be upon him. The full version would be sallalahu alejhi ve sellam, and would be abbreviated s.a.v.s. Muslims greet each other with the greeting assalamu aleykum (we rahmetullah we berakatuhu), which means peace be upon you (and Allah's mercy and blessings), so when we mention the Prophet's name (any Prophet by the way), we ask God to bestow peace and blessings on them as well. You can say the short version or the long including that what is in the parenthesis. ;) There is a hadith (and I am translating it myself from my own language into english, because I couldn't find it in english), that says that Prophet Mohammed said: "You will not enter paradise unless you believe, and you will not believe unless you love each other. Do you want me to guide you to what will make you love each other? Spread selam (greeting) among yourselves. " (Muslim)

There are many more hadiths that tell of the importance of greeting each other in that way.

"And I like the second verse you cited, quite a lot. That's a piece of wisdom I will try to remember"

The hadith that you liked belongs to the group of hadith that is called qudsi hadith. Hadith Qudsi are the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him) as revealed to him by the Almighty Allah. Hadith Qudsi (or Sacred Hadith) are so named because, unlike the majority of Hadith which are Prophetic Hadith, their authority (Sanad) is traced back not to the Prophet but to the Almighty.There is 40 of them, and they are of the highest importance and validity. ONe of my favorite qudsi hadith is:

On the authority of Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) say: Allah the Almighty said:

O son of Adam, so long as you call upon Me and ask of Me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds of the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I would forgive you. O son of Adam, were you to come to Me with sins nearly as great as the earth and were you then to face Me, ascribing no partner to Me, I would bring you forgiveness nearly as great at it.

meddle_some

02-03-2006, 12:55 AM

When most refer to an afterlife, they seem to be referring to their self existing outside of the physical body. Indeed, we don't identify ourselves with any particular part of our body, nor do we limit our self identification to physical terms. The personality is made up of much more than "flesh and bones", as any fool knows. So when it comes to existing after the death of the body, we do. For though the body does perish, the deeds of the self never do. What we do before our body is called to the grave does not pass away simply because we die. The doings of the self constantly accumulate, in essence, giving me eternal life.

Pendragon

02-03-2006, 08:47 AM

If the end isn't actually the end, wouldn't you want to prepare for it? Eternity, doesn't mean an eternity of sitting on your butt listening to angelic music and watching the white clouds float by. There's far more involved, at least according to what I believe. Think of it as not death, but growth.Mind you, Green Lady, I do believe in the afterlife, and like yourself, I don't have visions of "sitting on my butt listening to angelic music and watching white clouds float by." But recall what I said about having no control over when you exit--stage right. My advice: live your life the way you would anyway. If you feel you are prepared to meet your Maker, then why live in fear? If I knew I was dying tomorrow, I have a new Sherlock Holmes book to read today. I'd read that book. Tomorrow, I go to what awaits me, unafraid, for I stay prepared. Your next question may be "What if you are wrong?" I've already asked myself that question, I think it a solid one for any religious person to ask themselves. On that answer your faith will stand or fall. If you can be made to doubt your faith, do you really believe? And if you truly believe, why worry? Live your life according to the dictates of your heart and seize every minute of every day and fill it with 60 seconds worth of life lived to the fullest! Then when the time comes to depart, you can say "I have fought a good fight, I have kept the faith, I have finished my course." You lived your life and enjoyed what you could, accepted your pains, bore your burdens, and above all conquored! :nod:

Xamonas Chegwe

02-03-2006, 01:59 PM

Thank you for your reply Amra and my apologies for getting your name wrong.

Could I ask another question about Islam?

I was told today, by someone that is not a muslim, that there is an instruction in the Qu'ran that a muslim should back any fellow muslim in an argument with a non-muslim. I must admit that I read the book so long ago myself, that I can't recall if this is true or not (old git that I am ;)). My question is this: Firstly, is this truly a part of islamic doctrine? and secondly, if a muslim knows in his heart that his fellow muslim is wrong in his argument, should he still take his side according to the Qu'ran (my friend seemed to think that this was exactly what the Qu'ran states but I am not sure he's right)?

I would appreciate if you could shed some light on me in this case.

XC

Amra

02-03-2006, 02:53 PM

I would appreciate if you could shed some light on me in this case.

Sorry, but I have never heard of such concept. Maybe if you could cite a verse from the Qur'an I would be able to help you more. :wave:

Xamonas Chegwe

02-03-2006, 03:17 PM

Sorry, but I have never heard of such concept. Maybe if you could cite a verse from the Qur'an I would be able to help you more. :wave:

Sorry, I don't own a copy and I only read it once when I was 19 - I'm slightly older now. :nod: He might well have been wrong. He'd heard it from someone, that had heard it from someone, etc....

Thanks all the same. Perhaps someone else knows where he got the idea from.

rachel

02-03-2006, 08:50 PM

Inescapably, my eye. Just because God is a "transcendent anchor point" doesn't mean he's the only such point. Ever since the beginning of life (exactly when that is shall be left for another debate), or at least for a very long time now, animals have known that pain is bad, pleasure is good. This is one of the earliest aspects of life, because pain alerts the creature if something threatens it. The Holocaust caused unimaginable pain, both physical and emotional--it is therefore bad. Mother Teresa eased pain--she's good. For some atheists, this is how God exits the equation. Hardwired instinct is the benchmark for good and bad; it is only when religion comes into play that some people start trying to argue with nature.

As for me, my morals are centered thusly: that which promotes the optimal combination of my health/happiness/well-being and the health/happiness/well-being of others. Hence, I don't drink, smoke, do drugs, watch Richard Simmons tapes, etc., because such actions are a threat to the health and/or happiness and/or well-being of myself and of those around me.

Richard Simmons M'Lord? :lol: no 'sweatin to the oldies?' or whatever that dvd is. But M'Lord does he not help thousands upon thousands of people with regaining self esteem, losing weight so they can function properly in society and does he not give of his personal time and money to help his fellow man?
Not to mention the millions of dollars he generates for the economy-food stores-clothing stores, transportation etc. just wondering. :D

RobinHood3000

02-03-2006, 09:15 PM

Don't get me wrong, I love oldies, I just can't stand his hair...he's almost as frightening as Pauly Shore.

Xamonas Chegwe

02-03-2006, 10:08 PM

Richard Simmons M'Lord? :lol: no 'sweatin to the oldies?' or whatever that dvd is. But M'Lord does he not help thousands upon thousands of people with regaining self esteem, losing weight so they can function properly in society and does he not give of his personal time and money to help his fellow man?
Not to mention the millions of dollars he generates for the economy-food stores-clothing stores, transportation etc. just wondering. :D

Listening to his voice causes me indescribable pain. All things are relative.

rachel

02-04-2006, 02:40 AM

Listening to his voice causes me indescribable pain. All things are relative.

but if you don't exist how can you have indescribable pain. I am going to have to listen to him, I don't remember what he sounds like.
:D

rachel

02-04-2006, 02:41 AM

Don't get me wrong, I love oldies, I just can't stand his hair...he's almost as frightening as Pauly Shore.

M'Lord,
dead guys who have been decomposing in the ground five years are not as scarey as Pauley Shore.(shivers uncontrollably) :lol: :lol:

Xamonas Chegwe

02-04-2006, 07:23 AM

but if you don't exist how can you have indescribable pain. I am going to have to listen to him, I don't remember what he sounds like.
:D

Dude,
You're mistaking this with the non-existence thread. I exist in this thread, but only as a religious question (and an irreligious answer) - glad that's cleared up.

He sounds like an effeminate munchkin on amphetamines.

RobinHood3000

02-04-2006, 08:25 AM

...on helium.

rachel

02-04-2006, 09:41 PM

on both.
and are we back to dude once more sweet little mohair man? Don't make me pull out my arsonal of weapons. you'll be so sorry......

RobinHood3000

02-04-2006, 10:34 PM

Hmm...methinks I've found a second sidekick. Rachel shall be heretofore known as...ARSENAL.

Green Lady

02-05-2006, 07:32 PM

Mind you, Green Lady, I do believe in the afterlife, and like yourself, I don't have visions of "sitting on my butt listening to angelic music and watching white clouds float by." But recall what I said about having no control over when you exit--stage right. My advice: live your life the way you would anyway. If you feel you are prepared to meet your Maker, then why live in fear? If I knew I was dying tomorrow, I have a new Sherlock Holmes book to read today. I'd read that book. Tomorrow, I go to what awaits me, unafraid, for I stay prepared. Your next question may be "What if you are wrong?" I've already asked myself that question, I think it a solid one for any religious person to ask themselves. On that answer your faith will stand or fall. If you can be made to doubt your faith, do you really believe? And if you truly believe, why worry? Live your life according to the dictates of your heart and seize every minute of every day and fill it with 60 seconds worth of life lived to the fullest! Then when the time comes to depart, you can say "I have fought a good fight, I have kept the faith, I have finished my course." You lived your life and enjoyed what you could, accepted your pains, bore your burdens, and above all conquored! :nod:

Oh, I said nothing about fearing the end. Just preparing. There is a difference. I do believe what you just basically said, never said anything against it. If I did sound like I did mean that, please see signature below... :nod:

I've been taught since I was young and truely believe that if I've done everything that I needed to do, lived life the way I needed to, that I have no reason the fear anything. Not death, not consequences because what I've done will only bring positive consequences. Sure there are bumps along the road, but those are unavoidable in anyones life.

Pendragon

02-05-2006, 08:04 PM

Oh, I said nothing about fearing the end. Just preparing. There is a difference. I do believe what you just basically said, never said anything against it. If I did sound like I did mean that, please see signature below... :nod:

I've been taught since I was young and truely believe that if I've done everything that I needed to do, lived life the way I needed to, that I have no reason the fear anything. Not death, not consequences because what I've done will only bring positive consequences. Sure there are bumps along the road, but those are unavoidable in anyones life.Quite so. I pray you have a pleasant life, so much as is possible. God bless! :angel:

Theshizznigg

02-07-2006, 02:24 AM

I like the name Pendragon, good choice for a name.
Do you study Arthur Pendragon? If so send me a message, I've always found the subject of the great king fascinating.

Theshizznigg

02-07-2006, 02:50 AM

Something I don't understand and maybe someone can help me.
In previous posting there are those of the humanist religion that have claimed that human religion while useful, also is responsible for great attrocities in the world.
I wholeheartedly agree, no element with a human reaction in it can stay in its purest form for long, and the same goes for the leaders of the churches.
What I don't seem to understand, is their claim that the Humanist is infallible morally because they don't pertain to those semi-corruptive religions of humanity.

I then ask you, how can you claim that those who follow humanism are just as responsible for human attrocity as religious figure?
Are you telling me that Hitler because he took a humanist view was right in his persecution of the Jews?
Or better yet, the rise of the USSR, and its subsequent massacre of millions of its national people in the pursuit of Marxist and Athiestic idealism?
Was Lenin, Stalin, or Mao Tse Tung, infallible or not responsible when they together under the reign of Communist systems took over and forced their wills amongst the people, because they were Athiest and thus morally superior to those attached to churches.
Where was their moral superiority when they collectively were responsible for the deaths of over 36 million Russian/Ukrainians, and 60 million Chinese?
I would then ask that you consider the attrocities that Atheism has caused and then tell me the superiority of the human intellect in developing its own moral code, against the so called corrupt religious codes.

Also I ask you explain that with the emergence of former Communist states, there has been such gaining surge of Christianity, and Islamic beliefs, in a people who were forced by state to have no religion, and follow humanist moral code?

This is supposed to be a forum for religious teaching, and sharing of ideals, not the constant conviction that humanist feel they must prove to justify their existence.

Thank you Shizz.
:D