What makes you atheists so sure there isn't a God? Any Christian input?

[Offeror]

All of them?


You've a noticeable absence of the individual's connection between the world of ideas and the world of phenomena. Perhaps an individual's salvation is of secondary concern to religion's political function.

An individual's salvation is the issue, however Islam does not alienate an individual from a society. A collective improvement, and a collective salvation is important. The political function which you have referred to concerns itself with achieving the collective improvement and salvation of a society, not by force of course. An imposed system always inevitably fails. It has to start from the individual level, spreading to the extent that an eventual collective change results.

Sharia law is just? Moral crimes punishable by stoning to death is an example of justice? Are you attempting to rectify a situation where a girl is stoned to death on her father's doorstep for not being a virgin on her wedding night? How is that just?

Sharia Law especially penal law is first of all applicable only for an Islamic state, and no individuals are allowed to carry out legal punishments themselves. For example, if you live in any country the state reserves the right of determining legal punishments as it deems necessary for each offence. Secondly if someone is accused of adultery (which is a crime in an Islamic society), no punishment can be accorded to the accused until and unless four witnesses can be produced (quite a tough condition to fulfill).

The purpose of punishments in Islamic Law is much different to maybe other Laws. The punishments have been set hard in order to discourage and even strike fear in those who are potential criminals. The same applies to adultery, the punishment is to discourage the practice in the society, but it is only applicable if four witnesses can be produced by the one who is accusing someone.

Do you hold the killing of apostates an injustice? I've heard it is prescribed by Islamic law.

What is the punishment for treason in your country? Islam gives any man complete freedom of whether he wants to convert to a Muslim or not. I repeat complete freedom. Its your choice. But if you do convert, it demands total commitment from the man. Even if a man becomes as apostate, he is not killed straight away but he is given time to reconsider and study Islam. His punishment is supposed to be delayed as much as possible so that he might return. However, it is not plain apostasy but treason which is punished by killing in usually all countries.

Even keeping all the above in mind, it is totally upto a man to convert to Islam or not. If he converts then he accepts it knowing the punishment for apostates. Its his or her choice.

Islamic society you mean? Even then your side must be out of practice because the reports I'm hearing indicate Islam is failing to provide justice of the humanitarian sort.

I dwelled on it, that we should not mix up things. The culture and norms of each region differs and we cannot blame Islam for everything that goes within. If you are really interested in learning how the Islamic law looks like when it is in practice, then you should study the Islamic history. The time of Prophet Mohammad and the first four Caliphs who followed him is considered the best practical implementation of Islamic system in its true letter and spirit.

[minorwork]

Sharia Law especially penal law is first of all applicable only for an Islamic state, and no individuals are allowed to carry out legal punishments themselves. For example, if you live in any country the state reserves the right of determining legal punishments as it deems necessary for each offence. Secondly if someone is accused of adultery (which is a crime in an Islamic society), no punishment can be accorded to the accused until and unless four witnesses can be produced (quite a tough condition to fulfill).

And I suppose that (like here in the U.S.) the system must deal with perjurers and crooked judges.

The purpose of punishments is Islamic Law is much different to maybe other Laws. The punishments have been set hard in order to discourage and even strike fear in those who are potential criminals. The same applies to adultery, the punishment is to discourage the practice in the society, but it is only applicable if four witnesses can be produced by the one who is accusing someone.

The punishments are HARD? A bit of an understatement isn't it? By whose authority are the punishments set? By a dead prophet's writings? How compassionate is God that his followers show so little of it? They are distracted from God by a book whose Teachers are dead. It is known that without the Teacher you cannot correctly interpret or understand a book.

"However, let me make it perfectly clear that the Holy Scriptures were not sent down to ordinary people. They were given to Prophets, and while evaluating the whole religion we should also take a look at the Prophet's life who was given the book. (We must bear in mind as well, that even Holy Scriptures include accounts from the lives of Prophets and nations, so they must be studied as well) Because Prophets were the teachers of Holy Scriptures, and without the teacher you cannot correctly interpret or understand a book." ~ Offeror

Doesn't it follow, then, that since there are no Prophets living, that an adequate interpretation or understanding of Holy Scripture is impossible? How does one become a Prophet so as to learn the mysteries of Scripture? Are YOU a Prophet?

What is the punishment for treason in your country? Islam gives any man complete freedom of whether he wants to convert to a Muslim or not. I repeat complete freedom. Its your choice. But if you do convert, it demands total commitment from the man. Even if a man becomes as apostate, he is not killed straight away but he is given time to reconsider and study Islam. His punishment is supposed to be delayed as much as possible so that he might return. However, it is not plain apostasy but treason which is punished by killing in usually all countries.

It is by man's authority, in Islam today, that man punishes, not God's. You've hinted that you understand this, but will not say so, perhaps fearing the charge of apostasy yourself. It is not God that you fear it is man's perversion of God's love of justice. I don't blame you. The United States is the bastion of freedom in the world and we could use some help. The wolves in sheep's clothing have stormed the gates and not all appear as sheep. Do you need help? I could certainly use yours.

Even keeping all the above in mind, it is totally up to a man to convert to Islam or not. If he converts then he accepts it knowing the punishment for apostates. Its his or her choice.

I dwelled on it, that we should not mix up things. The culture and norms of each region differs and we cannot blame Islam for everything that goes within. If you are really interested in learning how the Islamic law looks like when it is in practice, then you should study the Islamic history. The time of Prophet Mohammad and the first four Caliphs who followed him is considered the best practical implementation of Islamic system in its true letter and spirit.

Sir, with all due respect, the past is dead.

[Offeror]

And I suppose that (like here in the U.S.) the system must deal with perjurers and crooked judges.

The punishments are HARD? A bit of an understatement isn't it? By whose authority are the punishments set? By a dead prophet's writings? How compassionate is God that his followers show so little of it? They are distracted from God by a book whose Teachers are dead. It is known that without the Teacher you cannot correctly interpret or understand a book.

Doesn't it follow, then, that since there are no Prophets living, that an adequate interpretation or understanding of Holy Scripture is impossible? How does one become a Prophet so as to learn the mysteries of Scripture? Are YOU a Prophet?

The authority for the punishments is God not a dead prophet's writings. And secondly God is compassionate to me only for any follies I do that concern myself. As soon as my actions harm my fellow humans then God does not provide me with compassion as it violates that God is Just. What sort of justice would it be, if someone kills my friend and God forgives the murderer on repentence?

How do we interpret? We interpret through the Prophet. How is it possible when the Prophet is dead? Maybe you haven't heard of a term called Hadith. A very detailed and comprehensive account of the Prophet that was recorded and remains available to this day. How will we consider the validity of these accounts? For these you will have to know the specific science of Hadith, which involved the complete biographies of each person who transmitted every single hadith. That is a preserved historical record which helps in the interpretation of Quran. All Islamic scholars use it without exceptions, so there is unanimity in this area.

It is by man's authority, in Islam today, that man punishes, not God's. You've hinted that you understand this, but will not say so, perhaps fearing the charge of apostasy yourself. It is not God that you fear it is man's perversion of God's love of justice. I don't blame you. The United States is the bastion of freedom in the world and we could use some help. The wolves in sheep's clothing have stormed the gates and not all appear as sheep. Do you need help? I could certainly use yours.
Sir, with all due respect, the past is dead.

It is very true that it is by man's authority, in Islamic societies today, that man punishes, not God's. And don't worry I do not have any plans of leaving Islam. I fear what you cannot comment. Its like shooting in the dark.

Regarding the past of Islam I agree that what has happened has happened. But if you do not consider using that as a model then why are you using current societies as a model?

[minorwork]

The authority for the punishments is God not a dead prophet's writings. And secondly God is compassionate to me only for any follies I do that concern myself. As soon as my actions harm my fellow humans then God does not provide me with compassion as it violates that God is Just. What sort of justice would it be, if someone kills my friend and God forgives the murderer on repentance?

Circumstances known to God and not man are at play. Man is impertinent in claiming he is wielding God's justice. As to killing. What sort of justice is it when God forgives the murderer of your enemy? Islam's enemy? This is not justice of God, this is man's vanity.

How do we interpret? We interpret through the Prophet. How is it possible when the Prophet is dead? Maybe you haven't heard of a term called Hadith. A very detailed and comprehensive account of the Prophet that was recorded and remains available to this day. How will we consider the validity of these accounts? For these you will have to know the specific science of Hadith, which involved the complete biographies of each person who transmitted every single hadith. That is a preserved historical record which helps in the interpretation of Quran. All Islamic scholars use it without exceptions, so there is unanimity in this area.

All written hearsay by the hand of man. Of course codified law is suitable for the control of a population, as are other systems requiring the use of a priestcraft type to interpret the law. Anything to keep attention off the Living God within that frees man's soul from the bondage of death. The scribes of the Hadith are dead too as I understand it.

It is very true that it is by man's authority, in Islamic societies today, that man punishes, not God's. And don't worry I do not have any plans of leaving Islam. I fear what you cannot comment. Its like shooting in the dark.

I can comment on pretty much what I want as long as I do not directly insult you. Your religion is fair game though. You are deemed more worthy of honor than your religion. But I may have missed your meaning about fearing what I cannot comment.????

Regarding the past of Islam I agree that what has happened has happened. But if you do not consider using that as a model then why are you using current societies as a model?

But I do consider Islam's tremendous contributions to civilization a model in my imagination and seek to eliminate the reasons that have contributed to its decline resulting in today's situation. I as well press at factors not pertinent to Islam that distract efforts improving the lot of those less fortunate.

The reasons for the stagnation in Islam, as in the Christian tradition, is due to the worship of a dead Master. The religion stagnates at the hands of political corruption as it wields instruments of ever increasing power thru the ages. The urge for man to rule over his brother has not gone away. Neither has the Opponent, distracting man from God, left this plane of existence, its kingdom. Seems to me the Sixth Pillar is pursued without in these days rather than looking within. Again political turning of attention away from the living God.

[Lamna nasus]

...The primary purpose of religion is to improve the moral and social problems within the society. Any other progress is secondary.

I disagree, the primary purpose of religion appears in virtually every case to be the establishment of a power base for political influence and the accumulation of wealth within a hierarchical business model for an elite, primarily by manipulating ill-educated individuals' fear of death and the unknown through facile fables; any other progress is secondary...

For example a very technologically advanced society, where there is injustice to a section of the society would not be welcome in Islam.
On the other hand, a society that is technologically outdated but provides justice to all sections of the society is preferred.
This does not mean that Islam discourages technological advancements, but only that the priority is moral character building of the individual as well as the society.

This is precisely why most religions fear science, it puts ridiculous sky fairy mythologies under the microscope and demonstrates their flaws.

Islamic states were a haven for classical knowledge during the Dark Ages, precisely because their enlightened rulers realized it gave those states a technological advantage, however when science started to advance beyond that of classical civilisation, it became a serious threat to the dogma of the Abrahamic religions and their social dominance.
At this point Western and Eastern technologies started to diverge, since Western religious dogma began to lose influence in the face of technological advances, which offered an alternative route to political power and wealth far beyond that available through religious dogma.. by contrast, the primary Islamic state of the period, the Ottoman Empire became terminally moribund, precisely because of its inability to accommodate scientific advances alongside theocratic dogma.. that state of affairs remains almost unchanged to this day.. notwithstanding the temporary anomoly of Western technology's current reliance on Petroleum and the geographical location of much of the primary reserves of that resource.

[Offeror]

Circumstances known to God and not man are at play. Man is impertinent in claiming he is wielding God's justice. As to killing. What sort of justice is it when God forgives the murderer of your enemy? Islam's enemy? This is not justice of God, this is man's vanity.

Man is ultimately involved everywhere in everything. God did not send down Angels to implement Islamic laws, it was meant for people to implement. If you don't like man implementing Islam, then the rest of the stuff being implemented is also done by the same man. What gives you confidence in that? Also totally detaching the spiritual from the physical will not provide complete understanding of Islam, the aspect that is under consideration is only the physical.

All written hearsay by the hand of man. Of course codified law is suitable for the control of a population, as are other systems requiring the use of a priestcraft type to interpret the law. Anything to keep attention off the Living God within that frees man's soul from the bondage of death. The scribes of the Hadith are dead too as I understand it.

If we stop believing everybody on the mere fact that they are dead right now, we might as well be believing nothing. The subject that we call history is pretty much the account of past times written by many dead men. I said it before, if being dead is the issue, then how will you believe in any event that happened before your birth. You have to believe man in the end.

I can comment on pretty much what I want as long as I do not directly insult you. Your religion is fair game though. You are deemed more worthy of honor than your religion. But I may have missed your meaning about fearing what I cannot comment.????

Sorry. Actually I wasn't stopping you from commenting just saying that if you don't know a man personally, you cannot tell what he might be fearing. Don't bother. Its probably mixed up. Sorry.

But I do consider Islam's tremendous contributions to civilization a model in my imagination and seek to eliminate the reasons that have contributed to its decline resulting in today's situation. I as well press at factors not pertinent to Islam that distract efforts improving the lot of those less fortunate.

The reasons for the stagnation in Islam, as in the Christian tradition, is due to the worship of a dead Master. The religion stagnates at the hands of political corruption as it wields instruments of ever increasing power thru the ages. The urge for man to rule over his brother has not gone away. Neither has the Opponent, distracting man from God, left this plane of existence, its kingdom. Seems to me the Sixth Pillar is pursued without in these days rather than looking within. Again political turning of attention away from the living God.

Dead master? Living God? I don't get it. The urge for man to rule over his brother is there for everyone to see.

[Offeror]

sorry duplicated post. deleted.

[Ken Carman]

This is not true. Satanism as defined by Aleister Crowley is the worship of pleasure, and I suppose is somewhat of a hedonistic religion. Satanism is actually atheistic, in that it does not believe in a higher power or a deity figure of any kind. Perhaps you're confusing Satanism with the general worship of Satan, which is something like Glen Benton's philosophical musings.

Wow. So I should have one person define Satanism for me, for everyone? OK, if it were The Pope, or the head of some Satanic Church/organization... whatever... I could see your point: I would still disagree. While we can somewhat rely on dictionaries, more so on theological texts/books and non-theological (I type that since I suspect some Atheists would quibble with that moniker being attached to their writings. To me, if it is discussing anything theological related it's still... ) ...in the end we must rely on our own definitions, or acceptance/interpretations of any definition.

Sidebar time! I always found it ironic his friendship, and falling out with, Greg Mathers. since historically Cotton Mather has some theological relevance. As in Salem witch trials and, wasn't he the "we are but a dangled spider over the pit of Hell," guy?

Anyone else notice that those who skirt closest to absolutism of any kind are usually nasty, rotten, corrupt, vicious. liars, cheats...

Shall I go on?

I am confusing Satanism with NOTHING. There is a Satanic Bible
If you clicked on the link, did I miss Crowley's name somewhere? You may notice several biblical principles, like sins and such, are essentially opposite in The Satanic Bible. Wiki doesn't phrase like I did, but the observation is relevant, I believe.

I am assuming you're claiming that worshiping Satan isn't Satanism. Seems a little like claiming worshiping God isn't theism and worshiping Jesus isn't Christianity. I understand there are certain "practices," however then we get into this purist "he really isn't/wasn't a..." fill in the blank that theists play whenever someone claiming to be of their faith gets caught eating babies, serving Kool Aid or going to male prostitutes. Essentially involved in incorrect, or not enough correct, practices. That always seemed silly and all to self serving to me.

One may not be very involved in Satanism, or correctly involved, but that doesn't mean the term can't still be applied.

Glen Benton? Hell, I'm an old man who got into music years before the Beatles and NEVER was a fan of Metal. (I'm sorry. At that level it's noise, and nasty noise at that, annoying at best, IMO.) Never really listened to his "musings." But Zappa's rants seemed crystal clear and interesting, though his music was a bit... odd... let's say.

[Ken Carman]

Quote by: Offeror
The primary purpose of religion is to improve the moral and social problems within the society. Any other progress is secondary.
.

I suppose this depending upon the individual believer and, more specifically, those who lead the believers. While I would agree as horribly misguided or delusion as some may be, I would think that would define an intent. However, knowing humans all too damn well I have no doubt that gaining power over others in the worst ways may be more of the original intent, or present intent, in some cases. The rest? Just BS applied in heavy quantities to serve that kind of intent.

[Ken Carman]

There's an assumption going on here in some posts that bothers me: that Science is, by definition, atheistic.. Think I'll start a new thread.

[Lamna nasus]

There's an assumption going on here in some posts that bothers me: that Science is, by definition, atheistic.. Think I'll start a new thread.

That may be because most scientists are atheists..whereas most theists spend a considerable amount of time trying to debunk science, unless it can be presented as supporting their sky fairy fables in which case they are all over it like a rash as 'irrefutable proof'.. which is why theists are always trying to co-opt Einstein...

[Offeror]

That may be because most scientists are atheists..whereas most theists spend a considerable amount of time trying to debunk science, unless it can be presented as supporting their sky fairy fables in which case they are all over it like a rash as 'irrefutable proof'.. which is why theists are always trying to co-opt Einstein...

Anything that has been proven by science a 100% is or should be accepted by theists.
While atheists should also consider theists argument reasonably rather than clinging on to bizarre comparisons with tooth fairies, or comparing Holy Scriptures with Harry Potter.