Holy Wars

[Ewen]

Hawking's new book apparently implies that gravity is the real creator. No need for a god when gravity is around. Don't walk around with your head in the clouds, keep your feet firmly on the ground....All hail Gravity.

[Septic]

Bingo. Now, I won't google his age and quote wikipedia... what I will do is say that when I was in school, that man was credited as being the first person to measure the circumference of the earth. If things have changed then so be it, as far as my tutelage goes...... he's the man when it comes to that particular argument.

 

On a side note, was he the father of algebra? I'm trying to picture it and it isn't working out. Who was the mother?

 

By the way, noone on here can credit or discredit anyones intelligence. Google is a minefield of information at the best of times and everyone is a wikimaniac as far as I am concerned. If you want to get your knob out about intelligence and match wits against the best I suggest you do it with a printed off British Mensa IQ certificate..... how many of you own one? Not that I would for 1 minute underrate any of the people who show intelligence on this forum, I just hate seeing an articulate nature passed off as intelligence, regadless of how impressive it is percieved. The English language and memory are the last things that the IQ test is based on.

 

 

Chicken nuggets!

 

Firstly, are we now critiquing Biruni and his workings and denying what is deemed as historical fact? If so, then what I watched on the documentary and the various sources are all wrong. Also, if you observe my first post, where do I state that Khwarzimi was solely responsible for the inception of Algebra? It just goes to show the lengths people will go to to argue their particular case. I did not award anyone the title 'father of algebra' nor am I responsible for the fact that Algebra is so-called based on a lot of his work.

 

In regards to the issue of intelligence, if you read my previous post carefully, I clearly state how some people on this forum have the inability to conduct a mature and well reasoned argument; their cerebral capacity isnt an issue. In regards to being a member of MENSA, I have never taken the test but interestingly I was having a conversation with my girlfriend last week about taking it as she has one. Good on you if you have one. I personally do not know how I would fare on the test but

I shall hopefully take it soon.

 

In regards to obtaining information via Google or Wikipedia, is any of the information I have supplied erroneous? You guys make it out as if I was made aware of the information purely from the above sources. Can you not see that in my reply to Ian C I mention those various examples in general terms. And then, Scott, you admit yourself about not recalling Erastosthenes' name and another forumite gave you the answer. The difference between us is I used the aforementioned sources to ascertain Biruni's name. Also, from what I recall when watching the documentary, Biruni employed a similar method using a metre stick and the sun and then used triangulation and other methods to measure the radius of our planet.

 

Tannhauser, do you mind me asking what you do for a living? You are, by far, one of the most impressive forumites I have come across in regards to the knowledge you possess, all Google-free of course

[Abz]

Why is it that religion is granted such respect, nothing based on fact and force fed to children. Try to reason the other side of the story to the religious mind and you receive bitter angst. If everyone ever thought "This is not explainable, god must have created it", nobody would even bother to answer any questions because an ancient book,rewritten many times to suit the current needs of the ruling man has answered it for them.

 

Religion equals death, oppression of women, oppression of thought and a never ending list of control.

 

Is this one perticular religion?

 

IMO The world is a less safer place without religion, Kids grew up more faith & respect for everything. Didn't mean everyone was blind zombies, we still built technology, discovered millions of things, created legends, the world was pretty much booming.

 

An now we have Paris Hilton & TV.

[Septic]

Btw Scott M, Al-Khwarzimi (sp?) was given the title in regards to Algebra. Biruni's work is concerned with geodesy. Are you mixing up the two or is it just the way you posted? It confused me for a bit.

[Septic]

Is this one perticular religion?

 

IMO The world is a less safer place without religion, Kids grew up more faith & respect for everything. Didn't mean everyone was blind zombies, we still built technology, discovered millions of things, created legends, the world was pretty much booming.

 

An now we have Paris Hilton & TV.

 

Whilst I agree with you Abz that religion plays a big part in how people conduct themselves, factors such as culture etc also play a vital role. Observe the Japanese for example; the vast majority of them I have found to be extremely respectful.

 

I'm not going to raise the issue of the 'value' of morality and emotions such as love etc in an Atheist world because the argument always ends up the same way. But I have encountered a lot of hypocrisy from atheists regarding the latter. I was watching The God Delusion the other day and Dawkings answers on it, I feel, were far from satisfactory and contained many contradictions.

[Hemanhead]

Is this one perticular religion?

 

IMO The world is a less safer place without religion, Kids grew up more faith & respect for everything. Didn't mean everyone was blind zombies, we still built technology, discovered millions of things, created legends, the world was pretty much booming.

 

An now we have Paris Hilton & TV.

 

I understand what you are saying but morals and respect do not come from religion, it is taught. Yes we have shallow TV, but is that the result of a religion free world? Most of this celebrity TV is a product of America which is supposed to be quite religious.

[Scooter]

ok I got curious..........

 

Google.....typed in "Islam"

 

Top of the page clicked "how to convert to Islam"

 

A little way down the first page of text is the following.....

 

" Upon entering the fold of Islam purely for the Pleasure of God, all of one’s previous sins are forgiven, and one starts a new life of piety and righteousness. The Prophet said to a person who had placed the condition upon the Prophet in accepting Islam that God would forgive his sins:

 

“Do you not know that accepting Islam destroys all sins which come before it?” (Saheeh Muslim)

 

When one accepts Islam, they in essence repent from the ways and beliefs of their previous life. One need not be overburdened by sins committed before their acceptance. The person’s record is clean, and it is as if he was just born from his mother’s womb. One should try as much as possible to keep his records clean and strive to do as many good deeds as possible.

 

 

The Holy Quran and Hadeeth (prophetic sayings) both stress the importance of following Islam. God states:

 

“...The only religion in the sight of God is Islam...” (Quran 3:19)

 

In another verse of the Holy Quran, God states:

 

“If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter, he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (their selves in the Hellfire).” (Quran 3:85)

 

 

So we have the convenient (and usual part of a religious sales pitch?) don't worry about the past all that will be forgiven.....

 

.........followed by the bolded sections that seem to suggest the numpties following all other religions will be stoking the fires of hell with no doubt a long and antisocial shift pattern.

 

I am going to do some more reading of other links as I won't use this first instance to completely sway my thinking but this first forray into "keeping on thinking and learning" hasn't been that positive.....

[Septic]

Scooter, you've just jumped straight in the middle of the scripture without background info but fair enough, I'll explain. There was a Channel 4 documentary on Islam that would have been really good for people reading up on Islam for the first time. I'll try and find the link later tonight as I'm typing on my HTC phone.

 

All your above quotes are correct. Before properly accepting Islam, one of the major things that put me off it was what I believed to be this unfair clause where only Muslims seemed to be able to be guaranteed paradise. But that really isn't the case. Read carefully what it the link you provided says:

 

All RELIGIONS except Islam are not acceptable, not individuals. Hence why the Quran states for example;

 

"Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians -- whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve" (2:62, 5:69)."

 

Verses 109:1-6 "Say : O ye that reject Faith!^ I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship.^ And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship.^ To you be your Way, and to me mine."

 

In regards to all your sins being forgiven when accepting Islam, its not as black and white as that. Conviction and true belief in your faith have to be present. I'll post up verses tonight as I'm going to work.

 

As for thinking and the duty to seek knowledge, ill poet up more on that tonight but you can search terms like Hidayat and see what you find. Unfortunately I cannot access Quran Explorer on my HTC as it runs on flash and I don't have the new update. Bear with me; ill be of more help tonight when I get home after 6.

 

In the meantime, can other Muslims on here knowledgeable on Scooters issue post up their opinions and beliefs? Cheers

[Tannhauser]

Why is it that religion is granted such respect, nothing based on fact and force fed to children. Try to reason the other side of the story to the religious mind and you receive bitter angst.

 

That's not my experience. I meet a lot of atheists and christians. Many the atheists are far less open to a critical scrutiny of their beliefs than the christians.

 

I would argue that people are 'force fed' atheism every bit as much as you think religion has been, and in far greater numbers.

 

In the UK, a majority of people are born into an atheist family. The culture they are born into is secular. The comedy and drama they are exposed to routinely uses religious figures as targets (how many police dramas are there where the serial killer is a psychotic christian -e.g. Messiah). Religion is even airbrushed out of classic fiction because it doesn't sit well with the modern idiom (e.g. a recent adaptation of Mansfield Park). Dan Brown tops the bestseller lists. Richard Dawkins gets a polemical show in which he promulgates his views unchallenged.

 

When was the last time you saw a prime time TV programme that did not portray devout christians (for example) as anything other than freaky, geeky, bigoted and generally risible?

 

Then you have the immense forces of marketing, which encourage all of us to live in the moment and enjoy ourselves as much as possible. Seeing any sort of spiritual value to life is the enemy of profit, because a planet full of spiritually fulfilled people wouldn't buy any 'stuff'. The me, me, me, now, now, now message is in direct opposition to contemplation of any 'higher purpose' to life.

[Tannhauser]

Tannhauser, do you mind me asking what you do for a living?

 

Thanks for the thoughts.

 

Nothing high-powered or interesting. I never discuss my job on the BBS because I f***ing hate it so much.

 

No, I don't mind you asking .

[Tannhauser]

Most of this celebrity TV is a product of America which is supposed to be quite religious.

 

And I wasn't going to post on this thread...

 

That's a really interesting one.

 

Alain de Botton did a program on this a while back...I forget the title. Jesus' message is dangerously socialist and anti-capitalist, so it's been a tough challenge to square it with The American Dream. But they've managed it somehow.

 

Ultimately, I think the simple reason is that the 'Bible belt' isn't in charge of programming. Advertisers are, and celebrities are walking billboards for their brands.

[tbourner]

Talking about intelligence, isn't it more to do with your ability to understand concepts? Whether they be learning a language and being able to wrap your lips around the pronunciation, learning simple to complex math, somebody explaining how something works and you understanding it - that kind of thing?

It's funny how kids always say "When will I ever need to know that" when at school/college/etc., whereas I see it as a test to learn those things - if I've been taught degree level pure maths and then get a good grade in an exam, it shows that I've understood that level of that subject, so in subjects related to it I'm likely to be quite good at understanding them easily at a high level - therefore a degree in pure maths would make me a good mathematician - or Engineer, or any other thing that involves that kind of thinking.

 

Obviously you can be very good at one thing and not at another, or quite good at lots of things, I'm not sure what weighting should be applied to each type of material for an IQ measurement.

[Rob]

When was the last time you saw a prime time TV programme that did not portray devout christians (for example) as anything other than freaky, geeky, bigoted and generally risible?

 

Rev, one the BBC last month. A brilliant little sitcom that was very pro-CofE.

[Hemanhead]

That's not my experience. I meet a lot of atheists and christians. Many the atheists are far less open to a critical scrutiny of their beliefs than the christians.....

 

Would you not agree that with the advent of increased scientific knowledge the two simply do not meet? Science will give us answers based on fact where as religion gives us answers because a book told us that is the way it is.

Correct about the market forces telling us to be debt laden but look again at the church. It used to sell 'indulgences' which were signed certificates paid for which reduced the amount of days spent in purgatory. So the church can tell god just how many days hes allowed to keep us there? It has to be one of the,if not the best scam of all time.

Richard Dawkins does shows and gets ridiculed for them too,for example. Root of all Evil? he was criticized for picking the most extreme Christians. This shocked British audiences with its views of Pastor Ted Haggard (Colorado). But he was worryingly right in portraying him as the norm because he is the president of the 30 million strong National association of Evangelicals and proclaims to have been an adviser to the fantastic president George W.Bush.

 

Ultimately, I think the simple reason is that the 'Bible belt' isn't in charge of programming. Advertisers are, and celebrities are walking billboards for their brands.

 

So the people who make the decisions on what we watch aren't religious? I just think America has as many hypocrisies as the bible itself, the men at the top control popular culture which controls the people.

 

"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."

-Napoleon Bonaparte

[Tannhauser]

Rev, one the BBC last month. A brilliant little sitcom that was very pro-CofE.

 

Missed that one.

 

Would you not agree that with the advent of increased scientific knowledge the two simply do not meet? Science will give us answers based on fact where as religion gives us answers because a book told us that is the way it is.

 

It's a massive misinterpretation, and oversimplification, to say that science deals in fact. Equating religion with holy texts likewise. I mean, where do we start with this one? That science can never establish truly universal conclusions because it's based on inductive reasoning? That many scientists have bought into variants of the cosmological argument (fact: the universe exists, inference: a prime mover outside of time is necessary to start the process)? That I believe in electrons because some book told me its true (the original maths of the observations is well beyond me, I need a high priest to interpret the observations for me)?

 

Of course there are differences between the two, but the dichotomy you suggest is completely misleading.

 

Correct about the market forces telling us to be debt laden but look again at the church. It used to sell 'indulgences' which were signed certificates paid for which reduced the amount of days spent in purgatory. So the church can tell god just how many days hes allowed to keep us there? It has to be one of the,if not the best scam of all time.

 

I'm familiar with many more corrupt practices of organised religion, too. I'm not sure what bearing they have.

 

Richard Dawkins does shows and gets ridiculed for them too,for example. Root of all Evil? he was criticized for picking the most extreme Christians. This shocked British audiences with its views of Pastor Ted Haggard (Colorado). But he was worryingly right in portraying him as the norm because he is the president of the 30 million strong National association of Evangelicals and proclaims to have been an adviser to the fantastic president George W.Bush.

 

Richard Dawkins picks up about 1% of the flak he ought to. He gets massive TV coverage because he fits into the current zeitgeist. To serious scholars of the philosophy of religion, on both sides of the debate, he is a joke. Everything I've seen him do shows the same weaknesses. He continually conflates religious extremism with mainstream religion. Even within evangelicism, there are shades of opinion that escape him, and 30 million evangelicals is a drop in the bucket globally.

 

 

So the people who make the decisions on what we watch aren't religious? I just think America has as many hypocrisies as the bible itself, the men at the top control popular culture which controls the people.

 

They may or may not declare themselves Christians. Whether they are following the teachings of Jesus is another matter.

 

"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."

-Napoleon Bonaparte

 

"Atheist ideologies will do just as nicely." -Tannhauser

[Paul]

Nothing high-powered or interesting. I never discuss my job on the BBS because I f***ing hate it so much.

 

He works in a gay sex shop, sells nothing but butt plugs and anal lubrication cream all day, this forum is a release from those demanding customers

[RedM]

He was talking about the forum!

[Hemanhead]

I was just trying to keep it brief but will be more specific in saying that science actively seeks answers to these questions where as religion just stops, personally i think that is ignorant. As a quick example use the bibles account of the age of the Earth and science using its carbon dating we can see a clear conflict of interests.

 

When i spoke of religious corruption it was aimed at..."Seeing any sort of spiritual value to life is the enemy of profit, because a planet full of spiritually fulfilled people wouldn't buy any 'stuff'" But my point was people would not be spiritually fulfilled,and the church found that gap in the market and offered solace for cash.(Sorry i don't post much so i don't know how to multi-quote).

 

30 million is a drop in the bucket globally, but nationally that is a good percentage, and from i country that is pretty unstable at the best of times. Regardless of his perception from either side some of his ideas and arguments are worth a read and i would subscribe to a few. I can see you don't like him at all though.

 

"Atheist ideologies will do just as nicely." -Tannhauser

 

The world has tried religion, why not try without it? Whats the worst that can happen; can't remember a war in the name of atheism.

[Tannhauser]

He works in a gay sex shop, sells nothing but butt plugs and anal lubrication cream all day, this forum is a release from those demanding customers

 

You're not that demanding, you just buy a lot. By the way, your discount code came through.

[Charlotte]

I went to a Polish Catholic wedding church service yesterday. Not understanding most of it was quite refreshing.

[Paul]

You're not that demanding, you just buy a lot. By the way, your discount code came through.

 

Cheers mate, when I can walk properly again I'll pop in for them

[Tannhauser]

I was just trying to keep it brief but will be more specific in saying that science actively seeks answers to these questions where as religion just stops, personally i think that is ignorant. As a quick example use the bibles account of the age of the Earth and science using its carbon dating we can see a clear conflict of interests.

 

OK, let's take the age of the earth. For the overwhelming majority of Christians (apart from the fundamentalists that Dawkins relentlessly focuses on), there is no conflict between their religion and science. They are perfectly willing to accept that a literal interpretation of the Bible is incorrect. And you're right that they don't actively seek answers to questions that science is far better equipped to answer.

 

I'd go further and say a lot of Christians see the Bible as the work of a pastoral people who were trying to interpret the world around them. That doesn't necessarily contradict either (a) the proposition that Jesus had a divine origin or (b) his teachings, or © the existence of God.

 

I can see you don't like him at all though.

 

I think he is an excellent science populariser. I love the stance he takes on stuff like homeopathy. But he is a shrieking, dogmatic, arrogant fundamentalist when you get him on to religion. He remains wilfully one dimensional on the subject.

 

The world has tried religion, why not try without it? Whats the worst that can happen; can't remember a war in the name of atheism.

 

A world without religion - that's a can of worms.

 

As for wars -plenty of wars of secular ideologies. How about the Korean and Vietnam wars? Two wars in which beliefs in abstract entities (democracy and communism) struggled, without God making any appearance - effectively atheist wars. Hw is that different fro one group of religious believers attacking another group?

[Septic]

Scooter, im sorry but ill post info tomorrow. Knackered from fasting.

 

Hemanhead, war declared in the name of atheism? What about war for land, oil, power? Observe the conflict in the Middle East (Israel/ Palestine) for example. It's always been described as a conflict between two faiths but isn't it really just about terra forma? Religion isn't the cause of all wars. In fact, its mankind's inability to follow his/her own faith that leads to conflict.

 

What guarantee is there that there won't be any conflict if religion didn't exist? In Islam, only God is the final arbiter in deciding a persons worth, only he can judge a person. No human being on the face of the planet can assess your consciousness. Now imagine an atheist realm where man dictates what is acceptable and what isn't. What about the dangers of mob rule? How many u-turns has mankind made just recently? Imagine Nazi Germany being a microcosm of the world. Imagine the VERY recent changes in opinion in the West regarding homosexuality or on issues such as sex. What we consider morally abhorrant today can be acceptable tomorrow. This is why some religions (especially Islam) are perceived to be backwards, unable to 'keep with the times'. In fact, rather surprisingly one of Matt H's quotes come to mind. However, proponents of the above religions will draw attention to the view that the truth is unwavering, it should not be in a constant state of flux to mirror mankind's indecisiveness.

 

What is good and what is evil? Dawking kept making reference to our sense of morality deriving from our genetic code. That's it. Just genetics. Emotions such as love, hatred, compassion are a result of mere physical reactions in the brain. Their quantitative value is subjective to every individual. In Islam and all religions these emotions have 'real value' simply because they are described as so by a deity, a higher power responsible for our creation and a power aware of all things. I argue that because of our perception and strong inclination towards morality, this alone should spark ones contemplation of an omnipotent being but this is my personal belief.

 

One of the inherit dangers of atheism is that it allows, governments and society can to assess everyone in bulk; cogs in a greater machinery. Dawking talks about the 'beauty' of the world but then in a world without God, beauty is just a word, a mere perception of an individual or of a mass of people.

 

Ultimately, and I challenge any atheist to deny this; if there is no god, whether you are serial killer/rapist or a charity worker/ the most caring of individuals, you end up the same way. Dead. No memories, no accountability, nothing. I've heard atheist scientists claim that the purpose of life is essentially to reproduce. If that is what you believe then so be it but attributing a mere logistical value to our existence greatly diminishes any real value to the emotions we feel so strongly about. At the end of the day, its all just a bunch of matter. Or am I wrong? No doubt you will raise the point about morality because we are commanded by God vs morality emanating from the 'goodness in our hearts' being superior.

 

I'm off to sleep but I shall be on tomorrow InshAllah. I don't mean to insult anyone btw and I apologise in advance if my post does cause any ill-feeling. Scooter, I apologise for not posting up more info like i said I would. Hopefully tomorrow I will post it up. It takes ages on the HTC and I pretty much work 7 days a week.

[RedM]

Imagine a world in which religion had never existed. Everything else is the same. We're at the same technological level etc etc. It's just that no human had ever thought of what 'we' consider as religion.

 

Now, if someone came up with the idea of a God, of Heaven and Hell etc etc do you think anyone would take it seriously?

[Hemanhead]

OK, let's take the age of the earth. For the overwhelming majority of Christians (apart from the fundamentalists that Dawkins relentlessly focuses on), there is no conflict between their religion and science. They are perfectly willing to accept that a literal interpretation of the Bible is incorrect. And you're right that they don't actively seek answers to questions that science is far better equipped to answer.

 

I'd go further and say a lot of Christians see the Bible as the work of a pastoral people who were trying to interpret the world around them. That doesn't necessarily contradict either (a) the proposition that Jesus had a divine origin or (b) his teachings, or © the existence of God.

 

He doesn't actually just focus on the extreme and admits himself that you cannot 100% disprove the existence of a god, but by weighing up the for and against you would most likely conclude there is no god. (I am not a Dawkins groupie by the way )

 

The world is better with science interpreting it but to me just believing in Jesus origin,teachings,existence of god is fairly liberal attitude towards the bible. It looks to me like this hypothetical person would readily absorb scientific fact, but i suspect it would always be in the shadow ofPascal's wager.

 

A world without religion - that's a can of worms.

 

As for wars -plenty of wars of secular ideologies. How about the Korean and Vietnam wars? Two wars in which beliefs in abstract entities (democracy and communism) struggled, without God making any appearance - effectively atheist wars. Hw is that different fro one group of religious believers attacking another group?

 

Well the Korean war has more to do with the interests of the USSR and the USA, one occupying the north the other the south.

WWII didn't start as a religious war but Mr. Hitler did use it to rally his cause even though privately he seems to have been atheist. But i do agree there is definitely room for secular beliefs to start conflict.

 

Have you read 'The God Delusion'? I don't think its particularly biased but it is very good at rationalizing religion.

 

And just as a matter of curiosity, what side of the fence are you on, or are you just standing up for quieter voice?