Morality & Obedience

[Pygoscelis]

like for example, halal slaughter. After reading about how an animal is killed according to halal means, I realized "wow...that causes the animal to suffer a lot." But it's not my job to care if it causes the animal to suffer since that it what God says to do.

Aside from whether or not this kind of slaughter is the most humane, this sort of logic I quoted of you is the kind of religious logic that scares me the most. What if it was human suffering you thought to be ordained by God? Would you still be indifferent? And what if God told you to sacrifice your son on an altar or fly a plane into a building? I hope at some point along the line you would start to follow your own internal sense of morality instead of mere obedience to what you think is power.

[Scimitar]

Aside from whether or not this kind of slaughter is the most humane, this sort of logic I quoted of you is the kind of religious logic that scares me the most. What if it was human suffering you thought to be ordained by God? Would you still be indifferent?

Loaded questions...

...I'll bite.

And what if God told you to sacrifice your son on an altar or fly a plane into a building? I hope at some point along the line you would start to follow your own internal sense of morality instead of mere obedience to what you think is power.

Considering that Abraham (pbuh) was told to do exactly this - take his first born and sacrifice him on an altar - we have to ask, did he falter? Or did he do as commanded? More importantly, did God intervene before that proverbial knife ended up slitting the throat of his first born? Have you studied the Abrahamic faith traditions?

And if you have - how can you make such an erroneous and illogical comparison to 911? Stupid mate.

As for this loaded question :D I had no ideas airplanes were mentioned in the Qur'an, 14 centuries ago :D stupid.

Then you speak of morality.

Mind telling me what is defined as morality in your Atheist handbook? Please? :D

Scimi

[Serinity]

no, we can not just follow our internal sense of morality, as it is corruptable, and may be, and will be corrupted by our desires if we are not God conscious, and God-fearing. I am not saying to ignore our moral-sense, but to realise that Allah :swt: knows best.

Allah :swt: is all-wise, so we put our trust in Him :swt: so if He :swt: ordered me to kill my brother, I'd do it. But He :swt: doesn't.

This flawed logic of "follow your logic only, your own morality" is in direct contradiction with reality. Yes we should to a certain extent. but ignoring the Creator is utmost arrogance.

All that has happened to people turning away from Allah :swt: is moral degradation.

But humans only know so far, and ignoring the Creator can and will have devastating consequences for us humans.

The more I see around me, the more I see the need for reliance on Allah :swt: and to turn to Him :swt: for if we do not, corruption will continue to happen. As humans we need Allah :swt: ignoring this need will bring corruption.

Allah :swt: calls us to think.

[Scimitar]

I think pygo's question would be better targetted to this camp:



:D horrific

Scimi

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Hmm, it is a little more complicated, Pygoscelis.

Say I was in the military (I'm not and it's just a hypothetical example) and let's say I was a military commander and I'd sent in my men on a convert mission to destroy enemy target. Now, one of these men sees an old woman being hit by a man and this man has strong convictions that this is wrong and wants to stop the other man from doing so. This man NOW has to make a choice: His orders from me are obedience to my order and my order specifically includes ensuring that no one knows their vantage or location so that they can complete their mission. If this man steps in to stop the man whom he sees beating the old woman, he's just jeopardized his mission because he's just given away his location and possibly those of the other men I'd sent in with him. He's disobeyed my order. And if he or the other men die, then he's to blame. When I give an order, I wouldn't want to afford the morality of men because obedience is the key to a successful mission and not my men's individual logic and morals or ethics. Similarly, Islam cannot afford the logic of individual men and women or because their logic is incomplete and their morals or ethics devoid of completeness if not within a divine framework.

See, you don't believe in a God or any gods. But let's say there is a God and for the purposes of God we'll talk about God within the backdrop of Islam and this God is as He's said of Himself that He's Perfect and Sublime and Always wants the Best for His creation. If you accept this divine framework, you'd already know that obedience that point in time is the only perfect moral to have and anything other than that will lead you astray.

Aside from whether or not this kind of slaughter is the most humane, this sort of logic I quoted of you is the kind of religious logic that scares me the most. What if it was human suffering you thought to be ordained by God? Would you still be indifferent? And what if God told you to sacrifice your son on an altar or fly a plane into a building? I hope at some point along the line you would start to follow your own internal sense of morality instead of mere obedience to what you think is power.

[Pygoscelis]

See, you don't believe in a God or any gods. But let's say there is a God and for the purposes of God we'll talk about God within the backdrop of Islam and this God is as He's said of Himself that He's Perfect and Sublime and Always wants the Best for His creation.

Why would I believe him? Or more to the point, why would I believe somebody who claims this for him, since he doesn't actually speak for himself, but through so-called "prophet" messengers.

Though I believe the answer was already given that it is fine to just say "God knows and I do not"

If you accept this divine framework, you'd already know that obedience that point in time is the only perfect moral to have and anything other than that will lead you astray.

I suppose, but look at it from the other side. I said this kind of thinking scares me, because from my vantage point your God is imaginary and by pushing your empathy and own moral copass aside, you are abandoning morality altogether.

We just had somebody above post that they would kill their brother without question if Allah told them to. All he now needs to become a mindless murderer with no empathy for what he is doing, is to become convinced that Allah wants that. This is a perfect justification for daesh or flying planes into buildings or "sacrificing" your children (ie, the stories of Abe and Isaac or worse yet Jephthah and his daughter) or killing them because they are "possessed", or hunting "witches" or mudering homosexuals, etc. We see such things in news headlines every once in a while. It is also the thinking of an obedient nazi soldier.

Obedience to power is not morality. Morality is doing what is right NO MATTER what you are told. And obedience is doing what you are told NO MATTER what is right. It genuinely scares me when people can't tell the two apart.

[Scimitar]

Pygo, which book do you get your moral fortitude from? if anywhere?

Your argument sounds very much like this to me:



The irony is so on point, tragically... please don't weasel out - this is the second time I'm asking you the same question.

Scimi

EDIT: as for this:

We just had somebody above post that they would kill their brother without question if Allah told them to. All he now needs to become a mindless murderer with no empathy for what he is doing....[/snip]

Who? news to me dude... please show me who????

[Scimitar]

Come on pygo, leave the little children alone and deal with me instead, ok?

Scimi

[Pygoscelis]

Come on pygo, leave the little children alone and deal with me instead, ok?

They are not the ones who behave like children. That would be you. It is why I usually don't respond to you. You posted an interesting video though, so I will humour you this once.

Pygo, which book do you get your moral fortitude from? if anywhere?

My moral fortitude does not come from a book, nor from any dictator, tyrant, king, God or other authority figure. Yours doesn't either, if you have any.

Your argument sounds very much like this to me:


The irony is so on point, tragically... please don't weasel out - this is the second time I'm asking you the same question.

Interesting, and not at all what I was expecting when I hit play on that. Why does it remind you of what I have said above? Are you imagining Allah to be like that math teacher? Yes, I would indeed have been the boy who was shot dead, or at least the one who corrected the answer at the end in his notebook. I do value thinking for oneself and standing up to tyranical authority. If there were enough others with the courage of their convictions to stand up to that math teacher, some actual progress may have been made there.

Who? news to me dude... please show me who????

Allah is all-wise, so we put our trust in Him so if He ordered me to kill my brother, I'd do it. But He doesn't.

[Scimitar]

They are not the ones who behave like children. That would be you. It is why I usually don't respond to you. You posted an interesting video though, so I will humour you this once.

admit, i shake you down baby :D you na like we. You been cornered more times than Amy's Baking Company, online - each time it was me doing the cornering and you doing the cowering...

My moral fortitude does not come from a book, nor from any dictator, tyrant, king, God or other authority figure. Yours doesn't either, if you have any.

|Where does it come from then? lollypop stick jokes? come on... tell me. Don't just jog on fella. Let me get to know you a little you dodgy rascal.

Interesting, and not at all what I was expecting when I hit play on that. Why does it remind you of what I have said above? Are you imagining Allah to be like that math teacher? Yes, I would indeed have been the boy who was shot dead, or at least the one who corrected the answer at the end in his notebook. If there were enough others with the courage of their convictions to stand up to that math teacher, some actual progress may have been made there.

The foolish teacher would be you, trying to corner those little children with bad math - sheesh - i thought you'd know a mirror when presented.

Anyway, I still have questions left unanswered - You have ten minutes before I sign out... else I'll come back tomorrow with the School governing board to asses your teaching methods,

Savvy?

Scimi

EDIT: Serenity you idiot - you fell into his lame bait n switch lol grow a brain fella. And understand that God does not speak to mere mortals unless they be Prophets and Messengers - the fact you entertained his question from yout "ahlul ray" idiotic POV, shows you to be green around the ears when it comes to Islam. You do not represent me. Or Muslims in general with opinions like that.

Do us all a favour - get educated.

[Pygoscelis]

Where does it come from then?

That is a fair question, so I'll answer it. And then I'll go back to ignoring your trolling.

What I call "morality" stems from our senses of fairness and empathy, which evolved in us due our being a social and cooperative species. We can see the same in other such social species such as dogs, dolphins, and monkeys. From there it is shaped by society and mixed up with social norms and other human tendencies, some of them good and some not so much, such as authoritarianism and tribalism to form what you call "morality". That then sometimes gets codified into "holy books" of religions. And that is what you are actually working from.... thinking it comes from a magic book created by an imaginary celestial dictator.

[Scimitar]

That is a fair question, so I'll answer it. And then I'll go back to ignoring your trolling.

Well well well, miracles do happen :D

What I call "morality" stems from our senses of fairness and empathy, which evolved...[/snip]

I don't entertain logical fallacies. Evolution you say? :D come on, appeal to my logic, not a fantasy based on bad science.

Scimi

EDIT: signing out, catch you later bud. ;)

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

Obedience to power is not morality. Morality is doing what is right NO MATTER what you are told. And obedience is doing what you are told NO MATTER what is right. It genuinely scares me when people can't tell the two apart.

Thousands of troops blindly obeyed George Bush, when they invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, men women and children died. Bomber pilots must know innocent people will die, yet they blindly follow orders.

Why do you keep singling out 9/11, there have been around 350,000 gun deaths in America since 9/11. We have allowed around a hundred million children to die needlessly of grinding poverty, preventable disease and starvation since 9/11. This has nothing to do with mindlessly following orders, this has more to do with self interest and not caring for others. Self interest is far more dangerous than blindly following orders.

In the spirit of praying for justice for the poor and oppressed.

Eric

[Pygoscelis]

Why do you keep singling out 9/11, there have been around 350,000 gun deaths in America since 9/11. We have allowed around a hundred million children to die needlessly of grinding poverty, preventable disease and starvation since 9/11.

And all you need to do to excuse it all and drop all empathy and effort to do anything about any of that, is to decide that God decreed it this way, and that it is his mysterious plan, that must have a higher purpose. Just because it looks horrible and immoral, doesn't mean that it is, if you have decided that God knows better and must have some moral purpose for it all. How is that line of thinking any different than Serenity above who said he would kill his brother if God wanted him to? How is it in any way moral?

It isn't moral. It is a wholesale farming out of moral decision making and judgment to a perceived authority figure. If you allow your blind obedience to authority override your sense of empathy, you have shoved aside your ability to actually care about any of what you write about above. I am glad that you yourself don't do that. Many religious folks don't do that. You interpret your scripture through the lens of your own moral compass. But there are people who do shove it aside in favour of blind obedience, and that is what I have referred to above.

I may be wrong, Eric, but I do not view you as somebody who would go on a killing spree if you somehow became convinced that God asked you to, and I don't see you as Jephthah or Abraham, who would kill your kid for God as an obedience test. Am i wrong? Would you kill your brother for God? Do you equate morality with obedience to power?

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Why would I believe him? Or more to the point, why would I believe somebody who claims this for him, since he doesn't actually speak for himself, but through so-called "prophet" messengers.

For me, any question that begins with why must go back to self because the question began with you and so the answer must lie with you. It goes back to the hadith (prophetic tradition) that holds, “Whosoever knows himself knows his Lord.” Every prophet or messenger of God came with a miracle to prove the claim that God is sending a human being as a means to deliver a message to another human being, and in this way God speaks for Himself. His Creation. His Message. So, choice of delivery is His as well.

I suppose, but look at it from the other side. I said this kind of thinking scares me, because from my vantage point your God is imaginary and by pushing your empathy and own moral copass aside, you are abandoning morality altogether.

We just had somebody above post that they would kill their brother without question if Allah told them to. All he now needs to become a mindless murderer with no empathy for what he is doing, is to become convinced that Allah wants that. This is a perfect justification for daesh or flying planes into buildings or "sacrificing" your children (ie, the stories of Abe and Isaac or worse yet Jephthah and his daughter) or killing them because they are "possessed", or hunting "witches" or mudering homosexuals, etc. We see such things in news headlines every once in a while. It is also the thinking of an obedient nazi soldier.

I have been an atheist; so, I have already looked at it from the other side so-to-speak. So, while I understand your concern, I think it is misplaced here. Pygoscelis, you seem to believe obedience to God and morality as mutually exclusive whereas I see them as mutually inclusive of one another in terms of Islam. So, that's where our POVs diverge. It is not that I can't tell them apart; it is because I am able to tell them apart from your POV that I see them as being in complete harmony with one another in my POV.

Secondly, God has already said that Revelation has stopped and so therefore there is no reason to believe any modern person's claim that God is talking to him/her.

That said, you also seem to believe that Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) had done a moral wrong in trying to obey God when he decided to sacrifice his son for obedience to God. But that's such a literalist interpretation. What I understand from the task with which God tasked Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) is to see whether Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) is owner or owned of the world. See, when you own the latest model car or have the best significant other you can imagine, do you begin to be possessed by them? Or are they that in which you feel blessed to possess but would still be okay if you didn't have them? Case in point are Wall Street executives who jump out of buildings when they can't face the stress of heavy financial loss.

Pygoscelis, look beyond the obvious: Do you really believe Daseh commit atrocities because they imagine God tells them? Have you ever talked to people of these ilk? On the Internet, I participated in a site in which I spoke to a self-confessed Daesh member and also the few persons who openly supported Daesh in the vain hope of talking sense into them. And when you talk to these people, you'll find that beyond the veneer of religious words lays honest-to-God raging anger. Anger in Islamic scripture is regarded as the root of evil and satanic, and these people are angry, too angry to care about right or wrong. I provided an entire list of Islamic scholars which clearly and unequivocally condemned Daesh with specific religious justifications and in the end these specific persons were still too angry to care. I provided quotes from Quran and ahadith (prophetic traditions) and even scholars' words again to no avail. Despite what people may say, the root of Daesh's existence is not religion but political anger at the atrocities that have been happening in the Middle East for which they blame many countries in the Western Hemisphere.

Pygoscelis, I had sometime back watched a video online about a man that was on Al-Jazeera talking about how he used to be an extremist but changed and how he disagreed with Osama Bin Laden's ideological stance then about flying into the building. Again, why do you think 9/11 happened? Because of religion? No. It happened because Osama Bin Laden believed that the only way to drive out the Western nations' bases off their land was to commit this atrocity. These people feel like they are struggling against imperialism and therefore they don't care who dies in that struggle because they feel their struggle is legitimate. Religion is just a cloak through which to channel anger at what has felt to them invasion of their land.

Islam is against extremism, but extremists don't care about that at all because they can use minority opinions of Islamic scholars of centuries past in regards to the subject of warfare and say that even if this is a minority opinion that it is okay to use because they believe themselves to be in warfare and then say that war cannot be held hostage to Islamic ethics or rules because the "other side" doesn't feel bound to rules or declared warfare.

What I'm trying to tell you is that I don't see obedience to God in Islam as the reason that atrocities happen; I see people, Daesh and 9/11 perpetrators, following their own logic and morals and then calling it the religion of Islam at the root of how these things happen. What these people will tell you is that they are defending their land and their people and therefore they are being moral. What Islam will tell you is that these people are following their wayward and evil desires for dominance. You think that morality can come from human beings, but I don't think it ever will and I see morality that stems from human beings as differing from one person to another and therefore being disastrous.

Obedience to power is not morality. Morality is doing what is right NO MATTER what you are told. And obedience is doing what you are told NO MATTER what is right.

I agree with you here. But that doesn't mean that I equate obedience to God as possibly being immoral in certain situations. I believe that obedience to God in the context of Islam is inherently moral always and therefore there is no disharmony between the two as seen by me.

[noraina]

I agree with you here. But that doesn't mean that I equate obedience to God as possibly being immoral in certain situations. I believe that obedience to God in the context of Islam is inherently moral always and therefore there is no disharmony between the two as seen by me.

This! Allah is inherently just and merciful, as I said that means His every commandment has justice and mercy in it for us. Obedience to Him is to behave morally, the two go hand in hand.

Morals which comes from humans and their logic are not set in stone, they are fluid and change according to time, culture, place. What might be accepted in a specific time or place would be unacceptable in another - they are not permanent and are largely influenced by society or culture. Morals from God are permanent and don't change according to people's culture or society.

As far as terrorists go, there are people who will behave immorally in every religion, culture or society. It doesn't mean they represent the group they come from or their laws of conduct. If someone breaks the rules in a certain country, it doesn't mean that country's specific laws are wrong or immoral - it just means that person twisted them or completely disregarded them and they act like this. The same can be said for such terrorists.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

It isn't moral. It is a wholesale farming out of moral decision making and judgment to a perceived authority figure. If you allow your blind obedience to authority override your sense of empathy, you have shoved aside your ability to actually care about any of what you write about above. I am glad that you yourself don't do that.

I strive to base my moral judgement on the two greatest commandments, to love God, and to love my neighbours as I love myself. All the law of God hangs and depends on these two commandments, I can do nothing greater. I believe Jesus is the biggest critic of religious people, he gave us the parable of the Good Samaritan to explain the greatest commandments. The religious priest and Levite are made out to be the bad guys, and the Samaritan who was probably on a par with atheists, turns out to be the good guy.

We are asked to love and pray for our enemies, I include this in my moral compass.

I may be wrong, Eric, but I do not view you as somebody who would go on a killing spree if you somehow became convinced that God asked you to,

I would rather help people than harm them, and as I have said before, I have done about fifteen hundred hours of voluntary work for the people who gave me the sack.

and I don't see you as Abraham, who would kill your kid for God as an obedience test.

Abraham was asked to sacrifice his son, (his only true son) but Abraham had had a number of encounters with angels and with God, so Abraham had seen the power of God. Abraham had also been told that his descendants will be as numerous as the stars in the sky, so he just trusted in God to be true to his word, and he had faith that his son would not die, or would come back to life.

God had great plans for Abraham, I cannot see God asking the same again.

Am i wrong? Would you kill your brother for God? Do you equate morality with obedience to power?

Jesus said, love one another as I have loved you, by this will all men know that you are my disciples.

Pygoscelis, I know we differ, but people can and do live a moral life through faith in God.

May God bless you and those you lave and care for.

Eric

[Serinity]

Morality is what Allah :swt: granted us. Allah :swt: forbids evil and commands good. You can not separate obedience and morality when it comes to Allah.

Allah never commands evil. Obeying Allah :swt: is moral, disobeying Allah is immoral.

Allah SWT only commands good, disobeying Him :swt: would then be immoral

[Scimitar]

I may be wrong, Eric, but I do not view you as somebody who would go on a killing spree if you somehow became convinced that God asked you to...[/snip]

If anyone is hearing voices, they are in dire need of a psychiatrist in this modern age. And from what I make of you entertaining such a notion, I would say that someone would be you. Which nuthouse did you escape from?

Scimi

[*charisma*]

What I call "morality" stems from our senses of fairness and empathy, which evolved in us due our being a social and cooperative species. We can see the same in other such social species such as dogs, dolphins, and monkeys. From there it is shaped by society and mixed up with social norms and other human tendencies, some of them good and some not so much, such as authoritarianism and tribalism to form what you call "morality". That then sometimes gets codified into "holy books" of religions. And that is what you are actually working from.... thinking it comes from a magic book created by an imaginary celestial dictator.

You're wrong. Humans don't have innate empathy. We don't grow up empathetic. Empathy is a learned trait. Our morality stems from religion.
In animals, it could very well be that their empathy is innate because it might be one of the foundations for their herds/groups. It's a means of their survival especially if they are social creatures. However the empathy seen in animals is still very much a mystery because it's not observed in all animals. Reptiles for example don't show as much emotion as apes do. Reptiles guard their young, but that's not because of morality, it's cuz it's their nature. They'll also eat their own young.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

Morality is doing what is right NO MATTER what you are told. And obedience is doing what you are told NO MATTER what is right. It genuinely scares me when people can't tell the two apart.

But how do you morally fight oppression? People in power virtually turn the peasants into slaves, this was possibly the catalyst for the French and Russian revolutions. The aristocrats enjoyed great wealth and power, they had no reason to give any of this up for the great unwashed.

I agree that killing off the aristocracy is morally unjust, but how else could the poor gain some kind of justice? If there were justice in the Middle East today, then I believe ISIS would not exist, I believe the emergence of ISIS; is very much the same as the causes for the French and Russian revolutions.

The rich don't really need justice in the same way the poor need justice; they just pay for what they want, they can even pay for million dollar toys they don't need. The poor just watch their children go to bed hungry, they watch forty percent of their children die before they reach their fifth birthday.

In a way, it is the rich and powerful who exploit others, when they are immoral, they eventually force the poor to become immoral and retaliate.

I look at Bill Gates as being totally immoral, he underpays his employees, he overcharges his customers, and the odd seventy billion dollars left over goes in his back pocket. I call this legalised theft. He gives away a few pennies to help some people, so he can look to be the good guy. But the small change he gives away, is still the money he has gained by legalised theft, morally this should not be his money to give away in the first place. He gives away a pittance, so he can still remain the richest man on Earth much of the time.

The biggest tragedy is, we look up to Bill Gates as a role model, selfish greed looks good. This goes against God's justice, he hears the cry of the poor.

In the spirit of praying for the poor and oppressed.

Eric

[czgibson]

Greetings,

I look at Bill Gates as being totally immoral, he underpays his employees, he overcharges his customers, and the odd seventy billion dollars left over goes in his back pocket. I call this legalised theft. He gives away a few pennies to help some people, so he can look to be the good guy. But the small change he gives away, is still the money he has gained by legalised theft, morally this should not be his money to give away in the first place. He gives away a pittance, so he can still remain the richest man on Earth much of the time.

I'm not sure why you are attacking Bill Gates. You may be aware that he has stepped down from Microsoft and now his main focus is the charitable foundation he set up with his wife. Bill Gates has given away more wealth than almost anyone in human history.

Peace

[Serinity]

The question that "Would you obey God if He commanded you to do immoral actions?" is illogical, and a fallacy.

Firstly:

you are assuming that God could possibly command evil, don't you see the fallacy in that? Satan is who orders evil and immorality.

Any sane man who would think of God, would think of a Kind and Just one, if you say otherwise, you've invented a lie, as you speak of Allah, what you know not, you speak from a position of ignorance.

It is inherent in our nature to think good of Allah / God.

How do you know that killing a person is wrong? you feel it is wrong? But what about a psychopath, he thinks it is ok, so is it ok for him, and not for you?

where do you get your morality from? we say morality is from God, and that God knows best what is right and wrong. And you base it on your morality, which is susceptible to corruption?

so morality to you is subjective? who then determines what is right and what is wrong? we say it is God.

we are not set in stone of what is right or wrong. Killing innocents is wrong because God said so. yes, majority of mankind know this, but as humans we are corruptable, and may think subjectively and kill.

[AabiruSabeel]

Obedience to Allah :swt: and Morality go hand in hand.

Allah :swt: says:

Indeed, Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids immorality and bad conduct and oppression. He admonishes you that perhaps you will be reminded. [16:90]
And fulfill the covenant of Allah when you have taken it, [O believers], and do not break oaths after their confirmation while you have made Allah , over you, a witness. Indeed, Allah knows what you do. [16:91]


In another Surah, Allah :swt: says,

And when they commit an immorality, they say, "We found our fathers doing it, and Allah has ordered us to do it." Say, "Indeed, Allah does not order immorality. Do you say about Allah that which you do not know?" [7:28]

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you czgibson;

I'm not sure why you are attacking Bill Gates.

I am not sure why you would want to defend him, his wealth comes at a cost to the poor.

Ok Microsoft has made three billionaires and around twelve thousand millionaires. But they still outsource production to China where workers are paid slave wages and work under harsh conditions. In fact paying Chinese workers $466 per month is too expensive, they are looking to move to Vietnam and only pay $145 per month.
If Bill Gates truly had a heart for the poor, he would look after his poorest workers first, he should have a moral obligation. Instead he exploits his poor workers so he can look like the wonderful philanthropist the media makes him out to be.

Amid a large restructuring of its Nokia unit, Microsoft is also joining many technology companies moving manufacturing from China to Vietnam. Microsoft is also moving operations to Brazil and Mexico.
Microsoft said it will lay off 18,000 employees, with many of them being factory workers in China. According to Stephen Elop, chief of Microsoft's devices unit, the software giant will move its device manufacturing and marketing operations to markets where Windows Phone has some traction
What's happened to China is simple. There's a middle class emerging and wages are going up. A factory worker in Hanoi makes $145 a month compared to $466 in Beijing, according to the Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO).
http://www.zdnet.com/article/microso...na-to-vietnam/

Originally posted by czgibson;
You may be aware that he has stepped down from Microsoft and now his main focus is the charitable foundation he set up with his wife. Bill Gates has given away more wealth than almost anyone in human history.

Your link paints a very cosy picture of Bill, he intends to give his wealth away, but will keep a few billion for his family. It’s not cheap to live in a $150 million home. He intends to give away $1.8 billion over the next six years, he will earn more than that over the next six years. He is still listed as the richest man on Earth, so when is he going to seriously give away his wealth?

In the spirit of praying for the poor and oppressed.

Eric

[Pygoscelis]

like for example, halal slaughter. After reading about how an animal is killed according to halal means, I realized "wow...that causes the animal to suffer a lot." But it's not my job to care if it causes the animal to suffer since that it what God says to do.

Here we have an example of somebody who believes God has told him to cause animals to suffer. His evolved sense of empathy and fairness tells him this is wrong, but his religion convinces him that it isn't his job to care if the animal suffers, since God says to do it. All of you who are saying that God would not demand suffering or that God is by definition good... I really don't know what to say to you. I'm sure that you imagine that there must be some higher purpose everytime you hear and imagine that God wants something nasty. I suppose that is a form of "faith", which I see as mere excuse making since I don't believe such a God exists. I also see this frequently in Christians as they try to do acrobatics to explain the horrors commanded by God in their bible.

God has already said that Revelation has stopped and so therefore there is no reason to believe any modern person's claim that God is talking to him/her.

If more believers adopted this position it looks like an interesting way to sidestep the problem that I see, but only a little. You would still have some ambiguous and hotly contested "holy" scripture and traditions etc. There are hundreds of different religions and dozens of denominations within each that disagree on what God wants. And what some of them believe God wants is not in any way moral.

That said, you also seem to believe that Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) had done a moral wrong in trying to obey God when he decided to sacrifice his son for obedience to God. But that's such a literalist interpretation. What I understand from the task with which God tasked Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) is to see whether Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) is owner or owned of the world. See, when you own the latest model car or have the best significant other you can imagine, do you begin to be possessed by them? Or are they that in which you feel blessed to possess but would still be okay if you didn't have them? Case in point are Wall Street executives who jump out of buildings when they can't face the stress of heavy financial loss.

Of course we start with a literalist interpretation. Then we can look at more poetic interpretations. But by doing the latter we are infusing our own already existing moral values. We have seen interpretation of many holy scriptures change over the decades and centuries to fit with the cultural norms of the era. I know that a lot of religious people like to pretend that their religions never changed, but they have and they do, and we can see it very clearly if we look. Christians don't burn witches at the sake anymore even though "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". The new pope is a drastic change from how the previous pope looked at things. Existing sects change and new sects emerge over time. Karen Armstrong's "History of God" is a pretty good read on this.

But however you spin the Abraham and Isaac story or the Jephthah and his daughter story or the story of Job, I really don't see how it could be a positive moral story. In Abe & Isaac you've got obedience directly coming up against morality with obedience trumping (even though God is playing a trick on Abe and Isaac and lets them back out at the last moment). The most generous interpretation I can give Abe & Isaac, is that somehow Abe knew all along that God wouldn't kill Isaac and would step in at the last moment, and God was testing Abe's trust in him not to be a monster and accept a child sacrifice. But then in Jephthah you've got God actually accepting a child sacrifice (Jepthah does kill his daughter for God and God doesn't tell him not to). In Job you've got God and the Devil settling a bet on how blindly loyal to God Job is, killing his family, ruining his life, and generally torturing him like a mad tyrant concerned only with his own ego. In each case the human lives of the people who are slaughtered (or would be in the case of Isaac) are disregarded completely. In Job's case, after he proves his loyalty, God gives him a new family, as if that somehow makes up for the innocent people he killed.

And of course you've got the immoral stories of Noah, Passover (to include the Jews here), Lot pimping out his daughters and his wife turning to salt for merely "looking back", etc. And you have amoral stories also showing obedience praised over morality, such as the story of Adam and Eve, the Ten Commandments, and even the story of Jesus sacrifice, and vicarious redemption, which I am very happy to see Islam doesn't subscribe to as Christianity does. The theme of obedience over all else, and over morality, is I would say THE central theme in these Abrahamic religions. That Islam speaks in terms of submission and slavery to Allah is telling.

Morals which comes from humans and their logic are not set in stone, they are fluid and change according to time, culture, place. What might be accepted in a specific time or place would be unacceptable in another - they are not permanent and are largely influenced by society or culture. Morals from God are permanent and don't change according to people's culture or society.

Oh but they do. Your morality is no more objective than mine is. They both start in the same place (empathy and fairness), and they are both influenced by social and cultural forces, one of which is religion. It is just a question of whether we try to think for ourselves and make our own moral judgments based on our empathy and fairness senses, or whether we farm our moral decision making out so we can feel less responsible, and claim some authority figure, be it King or God has made the decision for us, and can't be wrong.

Pygoscelis, I know we differ, but people can and do live a moral life through faith in God.

Eric, I don't believe that any of your moral inclinations come from your religious belief. You have them already. You are already an empathic, kind, and fairminded person. Your religion in a lens through which you see it and that helps you focus it and encourages you to push it forward, which is good, but it isn't the root source of it. And if it was; if you were only doing kind things because you were told to by an authority figure, that would not be moral behaviour at all, as it would be arbitrary and mere obedience. Doing what is good for the sake of doing good - that is morality. Doing it for the sake of reward or to obey may look moral, but isn't so much.

And in your case, I don't believe for a second that if you genuinely thought God directly commanded you to commit atrocity that you'd do it. You wouldn't. You are too decent a person to be a nazi or daesh soldier.

I agree that there are plenty of people who do good things and are encouraged to do more, or watch over themselves from doing bad things because of their religion. This is great, and is a reason why I am not totally pushing for the eradication of religion altogether. But other people are motivated to do very immoral things through their faith in God. These folks fill the headlines from time to time, and vary from people killing their "demonically possessed" children, to people denying blood transfusions to their children (killing them), to people murdering cartoonists, to people turning against their children and kicking them out of the home for being gay, etc etc. This brings us back to the quote that started this thread.

You're wrong. Humans don't have innate empathy. We don't grow up empathetic. Empathy is a learned trait. Our morality stems from religion.

That isn't what science has found:

http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/arti...onate_instinct

http://www.psy.miami.edu/faculty/dme...evelopment.pdf

you are assuming that God could possibly command evil, don't you see the fallacy in that? Satan is who orders evil and immorality.

No. I don't believe God exists, so I can't be saying that. What i am saying is that people can be convinced that God commands what appear to be immoral acts, but they trust they must be moral because God says so. This is a farming out of moral decision making and leads to statements like that in the OP.

Any sane man who would think of God, would think of a Kind and Just one, if you say otherwise, you've invented a lie

This is demonstrably untrue, as can be seen in modern religion as well as ancient. The Greek gods were known to be cruel.

It is inherent in our nature to think good of Allah / God.

It is if you pre-define God as good, regardless of what horribly bad things God commands. Those horribly bad tings then become "good" if you are putting obedience over actual morality.

How do you know that killing a person is wrong? you feel it is wrong?

I know that killing a person is wrong because I have an evolved sense of empathy and fairness. I have an ability to see myself in others and identify with them and feel their pain even with mirror neurons. And I know that if we allow people to kill people without us caring or doing anything about it, then I could be next killed.

where do you get your morality from?

I answered this already. You can go back and read and respond to that answer if you like, but I won't keep repeating myself over and over.

we say morality is from God, and that God knows best what is right and wrong. And you base it on your morality, which is susceptible to corruption?

Even if God exists as you believe he does, God belief is susceptible to corruption, is it not? How else do we have so many different religions and denominations within religions?

Killing innocents is wrong because God said so.

And what if God says the opposite? Or what if people believe God says the opposite? What if people interpret "innocent" in very narrow terms? What if there are passages in holy books that say to kill the kafir, kill the gays, kill the apostates, kill adulterers, kill disobedient children, kill the neighbouring tribe and take their virgin women for yourselves, kill the unbeliever wherever you find them, not suffer a witch to live, stone people to death for 100 different reasons? Let us not pretend that the Quran or Bible or Torah is written by pacifist Jains. I can open these books randomly and odds are I will find a passage in there telling me to kill somebody for some completely unjustifiable reason.

[Serinity]

you are confused, Pygo. no person who says "I do this immorality cuz God says so" is doing it because God says so, they are lying. May Allah :swt: guide you. Ameen.

keep in mind Allah :swt: gave us morality. it is us that corrupt ourselves.

Morality and obedience go hand in hand, as Allah :swt: only commands that which is good, and forbids that which is evil.

And people invent lies about Allah. And false deities are but false deities, no value at all.

God doesn't command evil, so what ifs are a waste of time. Those who misinterpret the Qur'an are themselves to blame.

"What if God commands you evil?" isn't even a question worth answering, as God would never command evil.

those who associate partners with Allah, may Allah protect us from that, are lying and they aren't even deities, they are erroneous lies.

What do you mean belief in God is susceptible to corruption? If you mean that people can deviate from the truth, then yes. But God Himself is free from all corruption.

There are many different religions because people follow their desires rather than what God told them. They follow their own interpretation. Misleading themselves by their desires.

[Pygoscelis]

There are many different religions because people follow their desires rather than what God told them. They follow their own interpretation. Misleading themselves by their desires.

And they think they have the one true understanding of God(s), just like you think. And they probably also think that you are misleading yourself by your desires, just like you think of them. You are each evidence to one another that people can very much have a wrong and/or corrupt understanding of what God is and what God commands. You both think the other is wrong. I simply agree with both of you on that.

[crimsontide06]

Here we have an example of somebody who believes God has told him to cause animals to suffer. His evolved sense of empathy and fairness tells him this is wrong, but his religion convinces him that it isn't his job to care if the animal suffers, since God says to do it. All of you who are saying that God would not demand suffering or that God is by definition good... I really don't know what to say to you. I'm sure that you imagine that there must be some higher purpose everytime you hear and imagine that God wants something nasty. I suppose that is a form of "faith", which I see as mere excuse making since I don't believe such a God exists. I also see this frequently in Christians as they try to do acrobatics to explain the horrors commanded by God in their bible.

All animals suffer when killed.... whether it be from head bolts, bullet...etc. There is just no way around it.

[Serinity]

If done correctly they won't suffer, In shaa' Allah,

besides, Allah :swt: is All-Just, Most Merciful, He :swt: sent The Prophet Muhammad :saw: upon whom Allah :swt: has bestowed great moral character.

Allah :swt: is Perfect, so there is no need to hesitate when obeying Allah :swt:

[M.I.A.]

Aside from whether or not this kind of slaughter is the most humane, this sort of logic I quoted of you is the kind of religious logic that scares me the most. What if it was human suffering you thought to be ordained by God? Would you still be indifferent? And what if God told you to sacrifice your son on an altar or fly a plane into a building? I hope at some point along the line you would start to follow your own internal sense of morality instead of mere obedience to what you think is power.

Sick and tired of this misinformation.

The asking of sacrifice and the accepting of sacrifice are two different things..

Don't worry, maybe in a few more years.


Don't confuse power with servitude, even a judge presides over the cases that are presented.

The crimes have long before been committed.

[Pygoscelis]

All animals suffer when killed.... whether it be from head bolts, bullet...etc. There is just no way around it.

And there are carnivorous animals that are unable to process plants and have to kill and eat other animals or die a horrible death from starvation themselves. And some insects are especially terrifying in what they do to other animals as a necessary part of their life cycle. Curious that a loving god would set things up like that eh?

But that isn't my point here. My point isn't about what method of killing is kindest, or even if we should be killing animals and eating meat at all. My point is the attitude of "God says its ok, so its not my job to care or worry about it" is the removing moral agency from yourself and farming it out to somebody else, in this case an imagined God that you have convinced yourself must be good and can't be wrong. I find that frightening.

[Serinity]

And they think they have the one true understanding of God(s), just like you think. And they probably also think that you are misleading yourself by your desires, just like you think of them. You are each evidence to one another that people can very much have a wrong and/or corrupt understanding of what God is and what God commands. You both think the other is wrong. I simply agree with both of you on that.

In Islam, it is clear who and what God is, there is no dispute except for those who are deviant and defiant. In Islam we don't care what people think, we only care about what Allah :swt: says about Himself.

In Islam, when a matter has been concluded, the believers say "we hear and obey" when Allah :swt: decrees a matter.

Islam is clear, and the path is clear. There are no mysteries in Islam, we know who Allah :swt: is, and what He :swt: wants.

There can never be 2 rights, and in Islam we go by what Allah :swt: says in the Qur'an. The Qur'an is always right.

you think very subjectively about this.

Lets take science, do we go by "I think the universe is like this!" the other "no my understanding is like this" and leave them like that? with constant disputes? no.

we make observations by what is around us, and the one with most compelling proof, 'wins'.

Will you agree with both of those:

Person A: The Earth is a square.
Person B: No it is spherical.

No, why? :D

[M.I.A.]

Some say your brain chemistry is affect by bacteria in your gut..

The big nasty may not always seem that way.

Other parasites drive the victim to climb trees to the highest point.. so they can burst out of it to spread spores.

Veeeery clever evolution.

On the other hand I've seen go pro's of charging bears that suddenly change direction and lions that wait for children's banks to be turned before pouncing.

Nice windows are nice.

Unfortunately I still have no idea about the double slit experiment.

[Serinity]

we know God by our morals, and fitrah. your problem is, that you try to separate God from morality, as if to say, God orders immorality, which is a lie you invented,

so yes, any sane man who thinks of God, would think of a Kind and Just one, to say otherwise, you'd have lied. If you say God is evil, bring your proof, which there is no proof to.

Yes God created evil, that doesn't make God evil. God created us such, we'd be able to recognize Him.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

My point isn't about what method of killing is kindest, or even if we should be killing animals and eating meat at all. My point is the attitude of "God says its ok, so its not my job to care or worry about it" is the removing moral agency from yourself and farming it out to somebody else, in this case an imagined God that you have convinced yourself must be good and can't be wrong. I find that frightening.

If God is good, then why would God want us to be bad?

In the spirit of searching for a God,

Eric

[Serinity]

you are the one imposing the Idea of an angry and cruel God. we aren't.

you object to the idea of being cruel and stuff, yet what you don't realise is that God Himself, created us to recognize Him. He :swt: created us good,

Think of it like this:

God = Commands Good and Justice.
Satan = commands evil, immorality, and oppression.

Now, if anyone now comes and says "God is cruel, etc." we know that this is untrue, and a lie from him, either by his own desires, or Satan who deluded him.

you want to be good, and in your mindset you think "for one to be good, one has to disobey God" or something, which is a fallacy. For God is good. This isn't something we made up. you are the one making up the idea of a cruel God.

we say what the Qur'an say, and Allah :swt: in the Qur'an says He :swt: orders Good and moral conduct, etc.

If you truly seek God, then seek Him.

basically those who say God is cruel stand on nothing and has no proof to that. They speak from themselves, and God doesn't speak to anyone except to Prophets and Messengers.

So if anyone comes and says "God commanded me to kill innocent and wage havoc on civilians" we know he is a liar, and it was Satan, not God. Those who confuse what Satan says with what God says, are themselves confused.

[Pygoscelis]

Serenity,

I am not talking about actual Gods, whether they exist, if they are good or bad, or what they may demand. I am talking about misconceptions of God, misconceptions of who he is and what he wants, etc. The fact is that these misconceptions exist. Islam is not the only religion, and people who claim to be Muslims do not all agree with your interpretation of it. Forum rules apparently require me to say that your Allah exists and is all good, and that these other misunderstandings are the work of Satan, and that is fine. My point remains. People are rationalizing away what they would otherwise know is immoral (see the quote in the OP) due to obedience to what they think are the commands of their Gods, or faith that their Gods must have some higher purpose making what appears to be bad actually good. You and I both know that they are wrong, because the Gods they believe in are not real Gods (ie, not your Allah) and the commands they think are from their Gods are not real divine commands (ie, not commands from your Allah). Can you not see a problem with this?

[greenhill]

Pretty long and wide topic.. but initial bits, what I understand as being the basis of the subsequent elaborations, is about nabi Ibrahim pbuh.

For it must also be told that Allah granted nabi Ibrahim's dua for zuriat with condition. That when the time comes for his sacrifice to remember the pledge. It was a test and he passed the test.

It was not that nabi Ibrahim never knew Allah was going to test him and that this news came as a surprise. He was expecting it.

But what I read about these "voices in the head" just tell you actions, but there were no prior covenant for the requirement of these actions. So be weary . .

:peace:

[Serinity]

Serenity,

I am not talking about actual Gods, whether they exist, if they are good or bad, or what they may demand. I am talking about misconceptions of God, misconceptions of who he is and what he wants, etc. The fact is that these misconceptions exist. Islam is not the only religion, and people who claim to be Muslims do not all agree with your interpretation of it. Forum rules apparently require me to say that your Allah exists and is all good, and that these other misunderstandings are the work of Satan, and that is fine. My point remains. People are then doing bad things or rationalizing away what they would otherwise know is immoral (see the quote in the OP) due to obedience to what they think are the commands of their Gods, or faith that their Gods must have some higher purpose making what appears to be bad actually good. You and I both know that they are wrong, because the Gods they believe in are not real Gods (ie, not your Allah). Can you not see a problem with this?

There are people who use the name of God, in order to do bad, they mask their bad deeds, and wrongdoings by saying "god said so"

they kill people saying it is for the sake of God, etc. Do you really believe those people? That they do immoralities for God's sake?

They take their desires as God, and excuse themselves that way from moral accountability.

we know The Qur'an is the Word of Allah :swt: 100%, so when He :swt: commands a thing, and it is explicit, we have no say in the matter, and say "we hear and obey"

Allah :swt: is Just, and says in the Qur'an that He :swt: only orders righteousness, etc.

Allah :swt: is truthful, and never lies. So what may appear to us as bad for us, may be good for us, and so on.

we are not all-knowing, etc. so to think of one self as more knowing and wise than God would be arrogant.

There are those who talk for themselves, and then say "god said so" they lie.

The quote above, you can't take as an example. Because Allah :swt: in The Qur'an commanded us to slaughter in a certain way. we know Allah :swt: is All-Just and Most Merciful.

Allah :swt: created sheeps and other animals for us to eat.

but say a murderer who is not a Prophet, goes and kills innocent people for no reason, and says "God told me" is a liar.

[Pygoscelis]

but say a murderer who is not a Prophet, goes and kills innocent people for no reason, and says "God told me" is a liar.

Can't they just be wrong? Just because somebody thinks God told them something doesn't mean that God actually did, even if there is a God that could. And just because somebody holds a religious belief, doesn't mean that it is true (especially if it conflicts with your true Islamic belief, right?). Or do you believe that every non-muslim, every Christian, every Jew, every Hindu, every ancient believer in the Roman, Egyptian, Norse, Aztek, etc Gods, are all just liars?

[Serinity]

Can't they just be wrong? Just because somebody thinks God told them something doesn't mean that God actually did, even if there is a God that could. And just because somebody holds a religious belief, doesn't mean that it is true (especially if it conflicts with your true Islamic belief, right?). Or do you believe that every non-muslim, every Christian, every Jew, every Hindu, every ancient believer in the Roman, Egyptian, Norse, Aztek, etc Gods, are all just liars?

they are wrong and liars.

See, God only forbids what is wrong, it is forbidden because in God's wisdom it is wrong. people can't go and legalize and illegalize as they want.

Now you may think: "but there are people who go "I kill innocents cuz God told me" "
Those who disbelieve in Islam, follow falsehood, and those who believe follow the truth from their Lord.

They take their desires as God, and misguide others.

You have to understand that God does NOT speak to mere mortals.

There is no God besides Allah, some lie about Allah, etc. speaking without knowledge.-

I advice you one thing: Do not speak from your desires or imagination. Please stop confusing yourself with imaginations. Try to look at what is, rather than what ifs.

Just don't believe everyone who says "I do it cuz God said so"

[Pygoscelis]

they are wrong and liars.

See, God only forbids what is wrong, it is forbidden because in God's wisdom it is wrong. people can't go and legalize and illegalize as they want.

Now you may think: "but there are people who go "I kill innocents cuz God told me" "
Those who disbelieve in Islam, follow falsehood, and those who believe follow the truth from their Lord.

Following falsehood and knowingly following falsehood are not the same thing. Only the second is dishonesty and being a liar. The first is just being wrong.

Are you really saying that every non-muslim is the second? A liar? You think that we all believe as you do, and just lie about it and knowingly follow faslehood? You say this of the majority of humans that ever lived? Or am i misunderstanding you?

[Serinity]

Following falsehood and knowingly following falsehood are not the same thing. Only the second is dishonesty and being a liar. The first is just being wrong.

Are you really saying that every non-muslim is the second? A liar? You think that we all believe as you do, and just lie about it and knowingly follow faslehood? You say this of the majority of humans that ever lived? Or am i misunderstanding you?

I am not saying every non muslim is a liar, no. What I am saying that anyone who doesn't follow Islam, follows falsehood. Or in other words, those who disbelieve in Islam (Truth) follow falsehood.

For if you disbelieve in truth one must follow falsehood. Pretty logical. for if one disbelieves in truth, one must believe in other than that, which is false. Cause there can only be 1 truth.

There are those who say about God, that which they don't have any knowledge about, I ask them "Bring me your proof, or a criterion from God, that says what you say, otherwise you are liars" and they of what they say of falsehood about God, are liars.

They may not mean to lie, but whether one realises they are lying or not, does that really matter? One is basically lying. However knowingly lying, is worse.

It is not wise to say about God, what one has no knowledge of.

The more I read your posts, the more I see you just confused. may Allah guide you.Ameen.

I don't know you, but I see you confused. why not take as step towards God, and try searching for Him, without assuming from ignorance?

you don't know about God. I only know of Him, from what He revealed Himself. If I was to ever speak of God, of that which I've no proof, I'd be damned.

you don't need to search every religion. you just search for God first, and He Himself will guide you to His religion, Islam.

[Pygoscelis]

They may not mean to lie, but whether one realises they are lying or not, does that really matter?

Yes, of course it matters. If somebody is following falsehood unintentionally, without knowing it, they are not lying. They are mistaken. And being mistaken, they believe just as strongly as you do that they know and understand who God is and what God wants. You will say they are wrong, because they are not proper Muslims like you are, and that's fine. But as we saw above in this thread, there are plenty of people who will obey God and do seemingly horrible things (one fellow said he would kill his brother) because they trust God has some higher purpose that makes it all ok. Since your God exists (I am forced by the forum moderator to say) then in your case it isn't a big deal. But the false follower's god doesn't exist, as we both agree, so they will do the seemingly, and indeed horrible thing and there will be no "higher purpose" to excuse it. They have become an agent of evil because of their belief and obedience in what they think is God.

[Serinity]

Yes, of course it matters. If somebody is following falsehood unintentionally, without knowing it, they are not lying. They are mistaken. And being mistaken, they believe just as strongly as you do that they know and understand who God is and what God wants. You will say they are wrong, because they are not proper Muslims like you are, and that's fine. But as we saw above in this thread, there are plenty of people who will obey God and do seemingly horrible things (one fellow said he would kill his brother) because they trust God has some higher purpose that makes it all ok. Since your God exists (I am forced by the forum moderator to say) then in your case it isn't a big deal. But the false follower's god doesn't exist, as we both agree, so they will do the seemingly, and indeed horrible thing and there will be no "higher purpose" to excuse it. They have become an agent of evil because of their belief and obedience in what they think is God.

you are being subjective about this, you are trying to say that obedience to God could possibly be immoral, it can not. Besides, God does NOT speak to mere mortals.

So what is your point? That obeying God could be immoral, evil? I disagree, rather they say with their mouths, but they lie, they say "I do evil for God" but they lie.

Whatever Allah :swt: commands in The Qur'an we say "we hear and obey" to.

God only order righteousness, so for one to do immorality in the name of God, is a fallacy, they are lying. They have taken THEIR desires as GOD.

I don't think you will understand this before you find God yourself. People invent falsehood, and call upon false deities, and speak of God what they have no knowledge of.

As A Muslim, my belief in God, does NOT stem from imagination, and I did NOT just start believing. It is because I am convinced that someone made this World.

However, can I go and tell people what God wants and doesn't want, without proof from His book? No. I am not a Prophet, and there are no Prophets coming anymore.

So your point is mute, God doesn't speak to people. If anyone hears voices they need to see the psychiatrist, fast.

They've taken their oaths as cover. We know one of the attributes of God is All-Wise, so it would be UNWISE to go against any decision from God, and IGNORANT, as God is All-Knowing.

BUT That doesn't mean people can use the name of God and command people to do things and say "God says so" without proof from The Qur'an as they are NOT prophets.

I honestly feel you are confused. Find God first and then come back.

[Muezzin]

Aside from whether or not this kind of slaughter is the most humane, this sort of logic I quoted of you is the kind of religious logic that scares me the most. What if it was human suffering you thought to be ordained by God? Would you still be indifferent? And what if God told you to sacrifice your son on an altar or fly a plane into a building? I hope at some point along the line you would start to follow your own internal sense of morality instead of mere obedience to what you think is power.

Fortunately, God hasn't asked me to do anything like that.

[Pygoscelis]

you are being subjective about this, you are trying to say that obedience to God could possibly be immoral

No, I'm not. The forum moderators don't allow me to say such a thing, so I am not, and I don't need to for the point I am making to stand. Your Allah is perfect and all good and would never demand anything immoral and anybody who thinks that God is telling them to do something immoral must be wrong, or the thing must not be immoral because God has some understanding they don't have. You have said that a number of times now, and that is fine.

But you still have believers in FALSE Gods (ie, not yours) who will do bad things because they wrongly believe their false God tells them to, either directly or through some misreading of the Quran (pure truth but misread by them) or some other "holy" text (a false one; one other than the Quran). And by obeying what they (wrongly) think is God's commands they set aside their own moral judgment making just as you do, and trust in their (false) God to make it for them, only unlike you, in their case there is no higher reason or explanation that makes it good, and the action truly is bad. You really don't have any problem with that?

How about Nazi soldiers who obeyed their leaders without question despite committing atrocities?

[Serinity]

No, I'm not. The forum moderators don't allow me to say such a thing, so I am not, and I don't need to for the point I am making to stand. Your Allah is perfect and all good and would never demand anything immoral and anybody who thinks that God is telling them to do something immoral must be wrong, or the thing must not be immoral because God has some understanding they don't have. You have said that a number of times now, and that is fine.

But you still have believers in FALSE Gods (ie, not yours) who will do bad things because they wrongly believe their false God tells them to, either directly or through some misreading of the Quran (pure truth but misread by them) or some other "holy" text (a false one; one other than the Quran). And by obeying what they (wrongly) think is God's commands they set aside their own moral judgment making just as you do, and trust in their (false) God to make it for them, only unlike you, in their case there is no higher reason or explanation that makes it good, and the action truly is bad. You really don't have any problem with that?

How about Nazi soldiers who obeyed their leaders without question despite committing atrocities?

The Nazi soldiers were wrong. The ONLY one to be obeyed WITHOUT question is God. HOWEVER, it is OK to question, and The Qur'an does say to THINK for yourself, and to REASON for yourself.

Allah / God :swt: created MORALITY, so what makes you think that God doesn't know?! God already KNOWS what is right and what is wrong. So it is mute to say or to quote atrocities happening in the name of God, as possibly God's fault.

God is All-Wise, and The Judge.

The Nazi soldiers obedience to Hitler was WRONG. because what Hitler commanded was WRONG. So what about it? God is perfect and free from all imperfection, and nothing is like Him. Hitler on the other hand is imperfect.

your attempt at quoting nazi soldiers, is mute, and doesn't stand.

Allah :swt: is All wise, thus the All-Wise Judge. we've already established that Allah / God judges with Wisdom, and only orders righteousness, and He is FREE from error, and does NOT lie, EVER.

So what are you trying to say ? I know, you are trying to say that Obedience to God could be immoral. I disagree. It can NEVER be immoral. Why? Cause Allah :swt: is pure, etc.

your point is only valid in regards to mortal beings. In that case, yes I agree. But when it comes to God, no. Cause by logic and reasoning, God only orders Justice. However there are people who lie, and they are themselves responsible for that, and they do not but lie.

They say they do it because God said so, but they don't. So what is your point? That Obedience to God could be immoral, if so I disagree.

It is like quoting a guy saying "I disobey God, cuz God said so" as proof for your case. Cause immorality will ALWAYS be DISOBEDIENCE to Allah. Whosoever says otherwise are liars.

Obedience to God and Morality go hand in hand, you can NEVER separate the two. So whoever says they OBEY Allah, while they do IMMORALITY, that is NOT TRUE.

Immorality = disobedience.
morality = obedience.


Get it? Forget people who do atrocities in the name of God, you know and I know they are just trying to cover for their bad deeds. They are liars.

PLain and simple what you are saying is this: MORALITY is doing what is right NO MATTER what you are told. Obedience is doing what you are told NO MATTER what is right.

IN Islam, Obedience and morality are inseparable. So YES, you do what is right NO MATTER what you are told, cuz ALLAH says to DO what is moral and right (i.e. what you are told) NO MATTER Who says otherwise.

may Allah :swt: forgive me if I erred. Ameen.

you have to remember Allah created us how HE Wanted us to be created and He created us to RECOGNIZE Him. you like to be good, right? not bad? God says to do what is right no matter what you are told! He COMMANDS you to do good.
And Allah knows best.

[Pygoscelis]

So what are you trying to say ? I know, you are trying to say that Obedience to God could be immoral. I disagree. It can NEVER be immoral. Why? Cause Allah :swt: is pure, etc.

I just told you twice that NO, that is NOT what I am saying, at all. And I am amazed at my inability to communicate that to you, or your adamant refusal to understand.

Allah / God :swt: created MORALITY, so what makes you think that God doesn't know?! God already KNOWS what is right and what is wrong. So it is mute to say or to quote atrocities happening in the name of God, as possibly God's fault.

Nobody is saying here that anything is God's fault. I don't need that to make my point.

They say they do it because God said so, but they don't. So what is your point? That Obedience to God could be immoral, if so I disagree.

Please re-read my last post. I don't know how to be any more clear or direct. I have conceded that obedience to God can't be immoral. Yes, I conceed this because I am forced to by the moderators here, but also because my point applies either way. As I wrote above I am not talking about actual existing Gods. I am talking about false Gods that people believe in but don't actually exist (ie, not your Allah), and false understandings of various holy books. Both you and I know such false God beliefs and false God understandings exist, you just insist that yours isn't one of them, and that's fine. The others still exist to make my point.

[Serinity]

may Allah :swt: guide you. Ameen.

I understand what you are saying, that people misread or whatever, and turn off their brains and go and do atrocities thinking they do it for God. Misinterpreting it.

however, God does say to think for yourself and reason. But when Allah / God commands something, we say "we hear and obey" without question, KNOWING that Allah is all-wise and all-knowing. However we CAN ask questions in order to gain more knowledge and understanding.

[MidnightRose]

Please re-read my last post. I don't know how to be any more clear or direct. I have conceded that obedience to God can't be immoral. Yes, I conceed this because I am forced to by the moderators here, but also because my point applies either way. As I wrote above I am not talking about actual existing Gods. I am talking about false Gods that people believe in but don't actually exist (ie, not your Allah), and false understandings of various holy books. Both you and I know such false God beliefs and false God understandings exist, you just insist that yours isn't one of them, and that's fine. The others still exist to make my point.

Greetings Pygo,

My assessment here is that you yourself believe in the unseen. This belief in the unseen influences who you are.

Your belief system stems from your thought processes. These thought processes are based in your brain. They are encoded in chemical neurotransmitters and electrical impulses that allow us to think, feel, and act. The keyword here is encoded.

Despite our technological advances, the best that we have is an abstract understanding of how our brains process complex information such as our thinking.

In other words, we have no idea how our brains process the complex information related to thinking. There is speculation, and that’s where the abstract, encoded explanations come in.

Our thinking, therefore, is without a shadow of a doubt, unseen. This unseen is based in our brains. No one can credibly say that it is not.

Furthermore, there is no concrete analogy to this that can be made – including computer models, which are based on concrete machine code. A competent computer programmer can tell you exactly/concretely what machine code does and how it relates to computer functioning. We can’t do that in explaining the processing of complex information in the brain.

Although it could be contended that we may figure it out someday, that doesn’t negate any of the above. Muslims also believe that we will be exposed to the unseen someday.

All of your judgements are based on the unseen phenomenon described above. You, nor anyone else can see it. Yet we still believe it’s there because we’re able to function in complex ways. The difference is that you place your belief in the unseen within your brain – and people you agree with – and Muslims place their belief in the unseen that Allah has described to Al-Amin – the Prophet Muhammad (:saws:) – and those that interpret the world based on his (:saws:) guidance.

Furthermore, it would be extremely dishonest to say that the majority of bad things that occur in the world (all kinds of theft and injustice, bribery, rape, domestic violence, gang violence, prejudice, etc.) is due to Islam. And I don’t think that’s what you’re saying. Nevertheless, your contention is that there are people who use Islamic religious texts to commit objectionable acts.

The fact of the matter here is that the people who commit non-terrorist related crimes use their brains to commit them. They are using their brains in an incorrect manner – like the people who use Islamic texts incorrectly and people such as the Nazis.

It would be absurd to blame the existence of brains for these crimes. Yet you believe the world would be a better place without Islam because some people either don’t have a proper understanding of and/or are misusing Islamic texts. And, when given satisfactory answers by Muslims, you respond by stating they have an evolved sense of morality independent of their religious texts.

That is your interpretation based on your belief in your unseen.

[Serinity]

for you obedience and morality is separable, for us they are inseparable.

You think our morality is independent of our religion (which is not true) we say that Allah :swt: is Moral Himself, and He :swt: GAVE us morality. Morality and Islam go hand in hand! our Morality is inseparable from Islam, why? Cause it is from ALLAH.

I just feel like you are trying to say that obeying God can not be moral. I obviously disagree. Cause that is a fallacy. Obeying God is always moral. Why? Cause God always order good, and always forbids evil. God created us, and His revelation can not be in contradiction with the SOUND human mind, and SOUND human nature!

God created us, and sent down revelation to GUIDE us. Logic says that what He sends down can NOT be in contradiction with the SOUND human mind (intellect) and SOUND human nature (morality)

Why? cause He CREATED us and He KNOWS us!

may Allah / God :swt: forgive me if I erred. Ameen.

And Allah :swt: knows best.

[Pygoscelis]

It would be absurd to blame the existence of brains for these crimes. Yet you believe the world would be a better place without Islam because some people either don’t have a proper understanding of and/or are misusing Islamic texts.

No. I didn't say that. It is clear that you would not allow me to say that. And I didn't even say that before you censored me (and it is unfortunate that only you and I know that). Perhaps you could speak to the actual point I was making above instead of creating positions and arguments for me so that you can address those instead?

[MidnightRose]

No. I didn't say that. It is clear that you would not allow me to say that. And I didn't even say that before you censored me (and it is unfortunate that only you and I know that). Perhaps you could speak to the actual point I was making above instead of creating positions and arguments for me so that you can address those instead?

You just quoted me out of context.

[Pygoscelis]

I just feel like you are trying to say that obeying God can not be moral.

And I'm not saying that, as I have stated numerous times to you now. So now the more interesting question becomes why do you so badly need to believe that I am trying to say that?

[Pygoscelis]

You just quoted me out of context.

You are trying to tell me what I am saying, despite what I am actually saying. There is no context to protect you from that fallacy. Try again maybe?

[Serinity]

And I'm not saying that, as I have stated numerous times to you now. So now the more interesting question becomes why do you so badly need to believe that I am trying to say that?

Then what is your case, people who take things out of context, thinking they do it for God?

[AabiruSabeel]

Thread closed for the Last Ten days of Ramadhan. Let us all focus on 'ibaadah during these days and we will review the thread after 'Eid :ia:.

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Well, as you know, I was an atheist before but I am a Muslim now. So, having been on both sides of the spectrum, I'll have to say that it's not that I don't see the difference but that I don't quite agree with you or czgibson on this exact point.

For me, morality as you describe, would fall under the realm of self-knowledge because even in your signature it says, "Morality is doing what is right regardless of what you are told." But where is this morality coming from? You.

Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Whosoever knows himself knows his Lord." And in the Quran (51:20-21), it says, "And there are signs on the earth for those who are certain. And [signs] in your own souls (too)." Basically, this self-knowledge allows you to distinguish between right or wrong, but it's not from you, but somewhere within you that guides you to make that distinction. So, yes, you, but not the you-you-think but the you-that-is-deeper-within-you.

In the Quran, God says (41:53), "We will soon show them our signs in the universe and in their own souls, until it becomes quite clear to them that it is the Truth." So, God is talking about also giving us self-knowledge as Truth that we can witness also.

In logical terms, it would be this:
Self-knowledge ------> God
God ------> Self-knowledge

Thus, it's really:
Self-knowledge <------> God.

Therefore, spiritually, for me, separating the two are like trying to say that y cannot (at least some times) equal x when x always equals y and y always equals x. That is why for me as a theist obedience will equal morality and morality will equal obedience.

Also, I remember reading the other thread, and the one mistake that I think you make in regards to this issue is that you pit Islam as being in the same positions as other religions when I and other Muslims will tell you that it is not.

I have to agree very strongly, and I point you to the Obedience vs Morality thread. I made an offhanded comment in another thread about how Obedience is not morality and a mod here turned that into its own thread. It became very interesting reading the posts from the Muslims there, in how they didn't seem to be able to see Obedience and Morality as separate concepts. They insist that Obedience to authority (Allah) is the very definition of morality and it seems blind, as if no independent thought is applied. This truly perplexes me. Eventually a supersensitive mod there became frustrated and disabled my account for weeks. Only now am I able to post again. This is a very sensitive topic and I think it may be the very weakest point in Islam. I stand by my signature below. And I remain prepared to be banned from the forum if people can't handle it.

[ardianto]

I have to agree very strongly, and I point you to the Obedience vs Morality thread: Morality & Obedience. I made an offhanded comment in another thread about how Obedience is not morality and a mod here turned that into its own thread. It became very interesting reading the posts from the Muslims there, in how they didn't seem to be able to see Obedience and Morality as separate concepts.

Obedience without morality will make us 'blind', which we just do whatever told to us regardless it is right or wrong. Morality without obedience can make us break the rule, which we think we do something right although actually wrong.

So, basically obedience require morality, and morality require obedience. These two things should not be separated.

Do you agree?. It's okay if you disagree. Since I was kid I have been taught to respect different opinion.

:)

[Pygoscelis]

^ And here we see a demonstration of why I don't lump all muslims into one group. Search and ardianto are both what I would consider exceptions to the norm.

ardianto, I would disagree with you on that yes. I see no virtue in obedience in and of itself. I see some situations where obedience is necessary due to time restraints (military orders where there isn't time to explain - but even there I would disobey an order such as the Nazi soldiers were receiving). I see other situations where obedience makes sense because of (not independent of) cooperation/morality. I obey traffic signals and pay taxes only because I understand the reasoning behind them and agree with them. If I had reason to question such orders, I would. And I would certainly never try to justify something immoral like genocide (example above), killing my son (ie, Abe; Jepthah) or discriminating against homosexuals by saying an authority demanded it.

[ardianto]

ardianto, I would disagree with you on that yes. I see no virtue in obedience in and of itself. I see some situations where obedience is necessary due to time restraints (military orders where there isn't time to explain - but even there I would disobey an order such as the Nazi soldiers were receiving). I see other situations where obedience makes sense because of (not independent of) cooperation/morality. I obey traffic signals and pay taxes only because I understand the reasoning behind them and agree with them. If I had reason to question such orders, I would. And I would certainly never try to justify something immoral like genocide (example above), killing my son (ie, Abe; Jepthah) or discriminating against homosexuals by saying an authority demanded it.

Few of my friends are gays. I never hostile them or excommunicate them because morality forbids me to do it. I understand, if that being homosexual for them is not a choice, but something that they could not avoid.

But in another side my religious obedience make me cannot support them like I support my heterosexual friends when they were looking for wife. If I just follow morality without obedience, then very possible I would support their homosexual activity.

To be honest, obedience and morality make me feel like stand over a ravine which my right foot was on one cliff, and my left foot was on another cliff. If I was not wise then I would fall. But this is the challenge that the religious people must face. How to live religious wisely.

[AabiruSabeel]

Thread re-opened now. Let's all stick to the topic.

...It became very interesting reading the posts from the Muslims there, in how they didn't seem to be able to see Obedience and Morality as separate concepts. They insist that Obedience to authority (Allah) is the very definition of morality and it seems blind, as if no independent thought is applied. This truly perplexes me.

The morality of Atheists is blind, because it is not guided by the One who created them. Your morality depends on what society teaches you. If your society tells you having polygamous relations without committing to marriage is ok, you take it as right. When it tells you charging interest on loans and making poor go poorer is ok, you accept it as ok.

But our morality is guided by the One who knows everything. His wisdom encompasses everything.

So the fact is, your morality is blind without a guide and our morality is guided by Allah, the Most Wise. Whether you accept it or not, that is your choice.

[M.I.A.]

Everybody turns up for somebody.

...is what you do when you get there important?


I ain't writing no book about it.

[Pygoscelis]

The morality of Atheists is blind, because it is not guided by the One who created them. Your morality depends on what society teaches you.

It goes a little deeper than that. It stems primarily from senses of empathy and fairness, which are evolved into us, hard coded, and not totally unique to our species. Empathy means seeing yourself in others, identifying with them, and feeling their pain and suffering (even literally - see mirror neuron research). The dark side of that is tribalism. We have an easier time feeling empathy for those who we most identify with. This is explains why people care more about their children than their neighbours and more about their neighbours than strangers, and more about strangers from their country than strangers from other countries. The very dark side of that is things like racism, homophobia, islamophobia, and other groupings of us vs them, and in a religious context it can be taken all the way to "don't take kafir as friends" or "infidels should burn in hell for not believing as we do". Both sides of this Empathy/Tribalism dynamic can be found in all of us, and it varies from person to person which side is stronger. it also explains why people who hold identical texts holy can read them so very differently, setting aside parts as analogy or simply ignoring them, while emphasizing other parts as key. You don't meet many Jews who worry about wearing mixed fibres or eating shellfish today, and not many of them go around stoning people to death for various infractions, as their holy text tells them to.

If your society tells you having polygamous relations without committing to marriage is ok, you take it as right. When it tells you charging interest on loans and making poor go poorer is ok, you accept it as ok.

Social norms, peer pressure, and other social forces do definitely play a role. Religion is key amongst them. At the end of the day though, the empathy and fairness instincts can prevail, and logic and reason can be applied, if we don't blind ourselves with adherence to some externally applied code and think things through for ourselves. Personally, I will revise my position on various social issues, and have done so on more than one occasion as I gain better data and think or hear better arguments. Should polygamy be ok? Should usury? I can see arguments on both sides of both of those issues and I don't blindly follow any dictator of thought or belief.

But our morality is guided by the One who knows everything. His wisdom encompasses everything.

As I wrote earlier in this thread, if you truly do have a God who knows all, and who is perfectly benevolent towards you, which is awfully hard to explain given the world we live in, with natural disasters and disease and animals that can only survive and reproduce by eating others from the inside out, then you have a point. And, as I was forced to earlier in this thread by an admin, I grant you that Allah is perfect and wise and just and benevolent, etc etc. Horray, your forum rules make you win a no-prize.

But that doesn't undo my point earlier in this thread in any way, because there are OTHER "gods": FALSE Gods. There are followers of those false Gods who believe just as strongly as you do that anything they think their false God is telling them to do must be good and just, even if they can't see why or how. They follow the exact same reasoning you do, in shutting off or overriding their own internal moral senses of empathy and fairness, because surely their (false) god knows better than they do, and so they believe some truly horrible things and engage in some truly horrible behaviour thinking it just and good. Everything from forcing poisoned Koolaid on children, to murdering people who they think are possesed by demons, to "witch" burnings, to hanging homosexuals, to flying planes into buildings, and on and on it goes. And you can't reason with these people once they have farmed their moral decision making out. They have made themselves into well meaning monsters.

Note that religion isn't the only reason farm out their moral decision making. This can happen in a secular context as well. We should be weary to defer moral decision making to any leader, real or imagined. Obedience is not in and of itself morality, and in fact it is often its opposite.

[Serinity]

Complete obedience is for Allah, ALONE. Worship is for Allah ALONE.

Get it? We do not obey anyone or worship anyone or anything besides Allah. This obedience is unique.

what will you do when because of your failed - and erring in judgment, you decide to do something immoral? There are many instances where people, who may be very moral, snap in anger and attack, and then feel regret.

Would you kill someone or disobey your leader on a mission if that means saving a comrade, yet at the expense of the whole team while you percieve not the consequences at that time? Now you may give a informed answer, but at that you have no time to think, will you not then give in to this empathy of your and save a comrade losing sight of the greater purpose? Can you say, for certain, that you are willing to sacrifice your life, time, happiness, for the happiness of others? To die ?

Would you be able to face certain death? or is what you say just words and you value yourself more than every human? Do you think about how many ants you kill? don't you have any regard to their worth of living? Reality is, you don't have any empathy, and most likely, at time of certain death, you'd save yourself before others. With your mindset, I figure yes. It is natural, afaik, and may Allah forgive me if wrong, to value and love yourself more than others. I think. May Allah :swt: forgive me if I said wrong.

A true Muslim would sacrifice his life and property, as Allah is invaluable, incomparable. For a Muslim, Allah is all he needs, a Muslim would sacrifice arms and limbs for the sake of Allah.

We need a guide, cuz reality is, either greed, ego, or failed judgment may put everyone at risk. This empathy is corrupted by either greed or ego. In a certain situation, you'd probably overlook, unconsciously, your empathy for your own good.

Empathy can be easily corrupted.

What and who do you fight for, mere feelings? Humans who can do you no benefit or harm? Islam adds sacred value to life. It adds meaning.

Obedience and morality is inclusive in Islam.

[piXie]

^ I obey traffic signals and pay taxes only because I understand the reasoning behind them and agree with them.

What about those people who don't understand the reasoning or agree with paying taxes in the amounts imposed upon them. After all, it is their hard earned money and they should have a choice if they wish to give and how much. Do you believe these people should be forced to obey, or should they be allowed to decide based upon what they feel is moral and correct?

[Pygoscelis]

What about those people who don't understand the reasoning or agree with paying taxes in the amounts imposed upon them. After all, it is their hard earned money and they should have a choice if they wish to give and how much. Do you believe these people should be forced to obey, or should they be allowed to decide based upon what they feel is moral and correct?

They should be free to leave the country. They should also be free to vote, to run for office or to otherwise attempt to change the laws. And ultimately they can refuse on principle if that is their moral conviction. Doens't mean they won't face consequences for it. For example, if I see a red light at 4am and the land is flat and I can see there are no other cars for miles, I may go straight through that light. It isn't morally wrong for me to do so. But there may be a red light camera that catches me and I may be faced with at ticket. In some other scenarios, it may even be morally imperative that I refuse the authority figure, such as a nazi conscript told to to gas the Jews at Auschwitz.

[piXie]

They should be free to leave the country

How is that freedom and how is that fair ? Isn't this their country too and their money ? Shouldn't they be allowed to live in their country freely and not have taxes imposed upon them or any other "law" they don't agree with ?

Shouldn't man be free to choose and live by what he believes is right, why should there be any law and do's and donts in the first place?

Isn't our evolved sense of morality and fairness enough?


Also, morality is doing what is right, but what is "right" ? How can mankind implement the quote in your signature when so many disagree with what this word means and so many are confused.

Please could you englighten us.

Thank you.

[ardianto]

How is that freedom and how is that fair ? Isn't this their country too and their money ? Shouldn't they be allowed to live in their country freely and not have taxes imposed upon them or any other "law" they don't agree with ?

In living together we must be willing to contribute for the public benefit, and tax is our contribution to build facilities for public benefit such as street, road, public building, park, including to help poor people. If we want to use public facilities but not willing to contribute, this is a selfish behaviour that not only morally wrong, but also Islamically wrong.

:)

[Pygoscelis]

How is that freedom and how is that fair ? Isn't this their country too and their money ? Shouldn't they be allowed to live in their country freely and not have taxes imposed upon them or any other "law" they don't agree with ?

Shouldn't man be free to choose and live by what he believes is right, why should there be any law and do's and donts in the first place?

Because Anarchy isn't much good for anybody. We come together collectively as societies and set rules for ourselves, based on culture, empathy, social contract (I don't want you killing me so I won't kill you), etc. Or the greed of the powerful overrides our collective will and creates harsh laws that are less than fair or just, creating kings or dictators ruling with an iron fist; much like how many Gods are depicted to do, and we strive to overturn them and create more just societies. It is an eternal struggle between the positive and negative aspects of human nature.

You can imagine it as a struggle between Good and Evil if you want, and many do. And you can even personify these forces and call some angels and some devils, etc. I simply note the danger is taking that further to the point of forgetting the good and the bad and simply endorsing or opposing such characters created by this personification; and obeying some of them simply because you are told to and know they are the "Good" ones, even though they order some pretty horrific bad things.

Isn't our evolved sense of morality and fairness enough?

No. It isn't. I just explained that in the posts above. Our senses can fail us. Consider the trolley moral thought experiment and many others. That doesn't mean these senses are useless. It just means we have to apply reason and logic to ethical thought. It certainly does not mean we should abandon ethical thought altogether and simply go by might makes right, and follow whatever dear leader says is good. North Korea isn't an ideal scenario; neither would a celestial North Korea be.

Also, morality is doing what is right, but what is "right" ? How can mankind implement the quote in your signature when so many disagree with what this word means and so many are confused.

We are working it out. Our societies have made a lot of progress since the times these "holy" texts were written, for example. We no longer go on witch hunts (for the most part), stone people to death for trivial offences to imaginary people, or keep an entire gender subdued. We will develop further. I predict that there will be more vegetarianism in the future as we discover how much suffering animals can go through when harvested as food. The day will likely come when people people look back in horror at how we killed and ate beings as intelligent as pigs, dolphins, etc.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

[Zafran]

There are anarchists who will disagree with you like Chomsky. According to him its the people in power that keep us in line eg "manufacturing consent" etc etc.

We are working it out. Our societies have made a lot of progress since the times these "holy" texts were written, for example. We no longer go on witch hunts (for the most part), stone people to death for trivial offences to imaginary people, or keep an entire gender subdued. We will develop further. I predict that there will be more vegetarianism in the future as we discover how much suffering animals can go through when harvested as food. The day will likely come when people people look back in horror at how we killed and ate beings as intelligent as pigs, dolphins, etc.

Dont forget the Nuke and modern warfare and spying tech etc - Theres plenty of things that are wrong and seem to be getting worse. Modernity has its own demons. You also seem to think that women/men are not oppressed or that people dont kill people for trivial offences anymore - It still happens in every society. With Modern tech to boost the whole horror.

[Pygoscelis]

Dont forget the Nuke and modern warfare and spying tech etc - Theres plenty of things that are wrong and seem to be getting worse. Modernity has its own demons. You also seem to think that women/men are not oppressed or that people dont kill people for trivial offences anymore - It still happens in every society. With Modern tech to boost the whole horror.

All the more need for the development of true ethics instead of mere obedience to authority and tribalism. Imagine if the Nuke was in the hands of ancient tribes that thought their Gods were literally telling them to commit genocide and destroy all the surrounding tribes. We would not be here today.

[Zafran]

All the more need for the development of true ethics instead of mere obedience to authority and tribalism. Imagine if the Nuke was in the hands of ancient tribes that thought their Gods were literally telling them to commit genocide and destroy all the surrounding tribes. We would not be here today.

No need to as there are people who used it in the modern progressive world (The US), people that wouldn't hesitate to use it (Theresa May) and people who believe they have the authority to have them and nobody else (nuclear powers). For them there is No need of God - Just themselves.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

I predict that there will be more vegetarianism in the future as we discover how much suffering animals can go through when harvested as food. The day will likely come when people people look back in horror at how we killed and ate beings as intelligent as pigs, dolphins, etc.

Man seems to have little concern for their own kind, let alone dolphins, I think you may be living in a dream world. We allow around twenty thousand children to die every day as a result of grinding poverty, preventable disease and starvation. That is around a hundred million unnecessary deaths since 9/11, this is the result of a disobedience to god's teaching when it comes to the care and concern for the poor.

In the spirit of praying for the poor and oppressed.

Eric

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

And what if God told you to fly a plane into a building?

No we should all follow the law of God and the law of the land, do not kill.



In a speech on the 1st October 2015, president Obama said, 24 Americans have been killed by terrorism in the last decade, while 280,024 Americans were killed by guns.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...nd-terrorism-/

In the Land of the Free, we are told to “fear the terrorists” but US police kill 58 times more people than all terrorist activity against US civilians since 9-11!
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/sho...rs-killed-war/



If Americans obeyed the law, there should be no killings, but many clearly do disobey the most obvious law of do not kill.

I hope at some point along the line you would start to follow your own internal sense of morality instead of mere obedience to what you think is power

Many people think like you do, they make up their own justifications to do what they want to do, they follow their own sense of morality, the law is a free for all, hence we have to live with all the murder and crime.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people

Eric

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Zafran;

No need to as there are people who used it in the modern progressive world (The US), people that wouldn't hesitate to use it (Theresa May) and people who believe they have the authority to have them and nobody else (nuclear powers). For them there is No need of God - Just themselves.

Sadly, a vote has just taken place to renew the trident nuclear programme in the UK. Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, voted against it, he is pretty much on his own in parliament, very few MPs have the courage to back him. He said if he became prime minister, he would not authorise pushing the nuclear button. His MPs are rebelling against him on this issue.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth.

Eric

[piXie]

In living together we must be willing to contribute for the public benefit, and tax is our contribution to build facilities for public benefit such as street, road, public building, park, including to help poor people. If we want to use public facilities but not willing to contribute, this is a selfish behaviour that not only morally wrong, but also Islamically wrong.

:)

JazakAllaah Khair brother, though I wasn't voicing my opinion about tax. I was just giving an example of how everyone has a different concept about what is right and moral and if we all followed what we personally thought was right without a set criteria, there would be chaos. Men can never collectively come together and create this criteria themselves or agree, and to think that they can is (again) a denial of the awful realities of this world and complete ignorance about the nature of man.

Man might be able to work some things out through trial and error, but this is foolishness when we have an instruction manual (The Quran) from the Creator who Created us and understands our very nature. Following this manual is the most safest, most rational and effective solution and involves the least risks or damage to man or to society as a whole.

We are working it out.

Well you can speak about what is moral and right after its been worked out then. Until then, keep working it out.

Peace.

[kritikvernunft]

Aside from whether or not this kind of slaughter is the most humane ...

You are allowed to run after a sheep, catch it, bite it in the throat with your teeth, and wait until it bleeds to death, because that is how wolves do it. If wolves are allowed to do that, to survive, why not you? Therefore, any way of killing a sheep that is not more cruel than the standard case in nature, is obviously permissible:

Quran 2:173: He only prohibits for you the eating of animals that die of themselves (without human interference), blood, the meat of pigs, and animals dedicated to other than God. If one is forced (to eat these), without being malicious or deliberate, he incurs no sin. God is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

In fact, it is even the other way around. You are NOT allowed to eat a prey animal, if you or another person did NOT purposely kill it.

Quran:6:119: Why should you not eat from that upon which God's name has been mentioned ? He has detailed for you what is prohibited for you, unless you are forced. Indeed, many people mislead others with their personal opinions, without knowledge. Your Lord is fully aware of the transgressors.

In my impression, you should say something like this to the prey animal "In the name of Allah, the most merciful, I will bite you in the throat now, and bleed you to death, in order to eat you." while you are running after it, if you intend to hunt, kill, and eat it in the way of the wolves. As you know, prey animals, such as sheep, are supposed to be eaten by their predators. That is simply what they are here for. I do not see where the problem is that people make about all of that !? If I am hungry, and this happens to be the most convenient way to get hold of food, why would I NOT run after a prey animal in order to kill and eat it?

[Pygoscelis]

We keep weaving around my central point here instead of addressing it.

Can we agree that forgoing your own moral judgment making in favour of an authority figure, trusting that the authority figure is benevolent to us and knows better than we do, can be a very dangerous thing if that authority figure turns out not being so benevolent or not existing?

Can you recognize this in the context of false Gods that are not your own real God?

Because that is my concern here, people actively shutting off morality in favour of fantasy, and i don't think you have to be an atheist to see it. Just think in terms of other and false religions.

[syed_z]

Can we agree that forgoing your own moral judgment making in favour of an authority figure, trusting that the authority figure is benevolent to us and knows better than we do, can be a very dangerous thing if that authority figure turns out not being so benevolent or not existing?

Hey Pygo.

Ali Ibn Abi Talib (RadiAllah Anhu) - Son in Law, a cousin and a very close companion of the Prophet - was asked by an atheist. 'What if your Allah (swt) doesn't exist?' To which he replied 'I'd nothing to loose, but if He does exist then you'd have a lot to loose.'

[Serinity]

Arguement from imagination or ignorance.. we won't get anywhere by doing that. "what ifs" without evident and convincing proof is, empty, meaningless.

Why is it that you aren't concerned about fairies existing and concerned (or discussing with us) about the existence of God?

Cause you know fairies are false, and from folklore. Afaik, that is. then you extrapolate it on belief in God, which is error. Cause how do we know God exists? By what do we know? In Islam, we know Him by His Book, and we know His existence by His signs in creation.

you are trying to put God in the same basket with fairies, etc. Audhu billah.

It is vital to differentiate between truth and falsehood, imagination, and reality. Atheists however take this to the extreme being like "see it, then believe it" kinda. Confusing reason with imagination. So I see it.

may Allah forgive me if I erred. Ameen.

Allahu alam.

[Pygoscelis]

Why is it that you aren't concerned about fairies existing and concerned (or discussing with us) about the existence of God?

I am not concerned with the existence of either. I am equally confident that both don't exist. False Gods I mean of course, not yours. As explained by our dear admin I am forbidden from saying yours doesn't exit. Yours is oh so very real and true :) The difference between the false Gods and faeries is that one currently has people trying to structure society around belief in it and shutting off their own moral decision making in favour of it, and the other at present does not.

In Islam, we know Him by His Book, and we know His existence by His signs in creation.

The same ways believers in false gods think they know their existence, except in your case its true and in their case it is false...

you are trying to put God in the same basket with fairies, etc. Audhu billah.

Do Zeus, Thor, Ra, etc not all belong in that basket?

And anyway, you didn't answer my question above. Surely you can see what I am talking about in my point above in regard to false religions (unlike your own true religion), no? Why won't people here admit this? Are you defending false Gods or just yours? If just yours, then you should be able to see my point.

[Pygoscelis]

Hey Pygo.

Ali Ibn Abi Talib (RadiAllah Anhu) - Son in Law, a cousin and a very close companion of the Prophet - was asked by an atheist. 'What if your Allah (swt) doesn't exist?' To which he replied 'I'd nothing to loose, but if He does exist then you'd have a lot to loose.'

Pascal's wager... again? I refer you to the dozens of other times we've already addressed the problems with it. If you can't find them, let me know and I'll address it again.

['abd al-hakeem]

people actively shutting off morality in favour of fantasy

From where did you develop your sense of morality?

And how do you determine what constitutes fantasy?

[Pygoscelis]

From where did you develop your sense of morality?

I can only ask you to read the thread. I am repeating myself at this point regarding this question.

And how do you determine what constitutes fantasy?

I'm not. You are. I outright stated that Allah is real and true, since the mods demand I do so. I can do so while still making my point. You know that there are false Gods, being Gods that are not Allah and that conflict with Allah. Look at my point in relation to those false Gods. Or just dodge as everybody else is :)

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

We keep weaving around my central point here instead of addressing it.

Can we agree that forgoing your own moral judgment making in favour of an authority figure, trusting that the authority figure is benevolent to us and knows better than we do, can be a very dangerous thing if that authority figure turns out not being so benevolent or not existing?

Can you recognize this in the context of false Gods that are not your own real God?

Because that is my concern here, people actively shutting off morality in favour of fantasy, and i don't think you have to be an atheist to see it. Just think in terms of other and false religions.

Whoops, I pressed like instead of the quote button, my mistake.

We keep weaving around my central point here instead of addressing it.

Can we agree that forgoing your own moral judgment making in favour of an authority figure, trusting that the authority figure is benevolent to us and knows better than we do,

I am sorry to say, we cannot agree. There is only 'One God' the creator of the universe and life. All religions worship this same creator who knows better than we do, and who is a benevolent God. If God says we should not murder, then we should not murder, God also says it is better to be merciful and forgive, rather than demand the justice of an eye for an eye, or a death for a death. If god is benevolent, it would make more sense that he would want his creation to be the same. In Islam, I like the 99 names of Allah, they tell us much about our God.

State laws follow the law of God, which say do not kill, we must all be obedient to this law. If you disobey this law, you go against God against the state and against your victim. In America, 24 people have been murdered by terrorists in the decade leading up to 1st October 2015, as opposed to 284,000 during the same period, for good old murders for non terrorist motives, I know who I should be afraid of, and it is not the terrorist.

Can you recognize this in the context of false Gods that are not your own real God?

Because that is my concern here, people actively shutting off morality in favour of fantasy, and i don't think you have to be an atheist to see it. Just think in terms of other and false religions.

The definition of a false god, is a god who cannot create the universe and life. Now if you think the furies created the universe, then clearly you can make up your own rules. You have said on occasions there are some laws you don't agree with, so if you want to make up your laws, that gives everyone else the freedom to make up their laws, I would not want to live in a world like this, where we all know what is best.

In the spirit of searching for God

Eric.

[Pygoscelis]

There is only 'One God' the creator of the universe and life. All religions worship this same creator who knows better than we do, and who is a benevolent God.

This is demonstrably false. There are plenty of "Gods" both today and throughout history who totally opposed one another, demanded conflicting things, and even went to war with one another through the wars of their believers. Some of them must be false. They can't all be true. And they can't all be the same God. Some people are clearly mistaken, and believing in Gods or conceptions of Gods that are not real. Your bible even explicitly refers to false Gods, and thr first of the ten commandments forbids "other Gods" before yours, so they can't all be one.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

This is demonstrably false. There are plenty of "Gods" both today and throughout history who totally opposed one another,

With all due respect, I don't know who believes there was an army of gods competing to create the universe and life. I worship the same God who created the universe and life, as do my Muslim friends here. There is only one God responsible for creation, the same God hears all our prayers despite the differences between all the religions.

We have a duty to care for God's creation, and that has to mean caring for each other despite our differences.

In the spirit of searching for a greatest meaning of 'One God'

Eric

['abd al-hakeem]

[Abz2000]

Estimated Time of Death from Various Execution Methods
Lethal Injection	5 min to 2 hours
Gas Chamber	10 to 18 minutes
Hanging	4 to 11 minutes
Electric Chair	2 to 15 plus minutes
Firing Squad	Less than a minute
Guillotine	Less than a minute

Estimated Time of Death from Various Execution Methods
Lethal Injection 5 min to 2 hours
Gas Chamber 10 to 18 minutes
Hanging 4 to 11 minutes
Electric Chair 2 to 15 plus minutes
Firing Squad Less than a minute
Guillotine Less than a minute

http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view....ourceID=001623

[Pygoscelis]

With all due respect, I don't know who believes there was an army of gods competing to create the universe and life. I worship the same God who created the universe and life, as do my Muslim friends here. There is only one God responsible for creation, the same God hears all our prayers despite the differences between all the religions.

I am not talking about real Gods; actual being competing to create the universe. I am talking about false Gods; ideas and conceptions competing to fill our minds. You know that many of these Gods are not real, And you can see that people nevertheless believe that they are, and that they can go on to use the same logic that we have seen above, that their God knows better than they do what is good and bad, and that something that seems bad, must be good if their God (which they think exists) says so, because he/she/it is all knowing and all good (according to them). You can see how that can be dangerous, yes? They have shut off their own moral decision making, or subdued it, in favor of this false God, who doesn't actually exist, so doesn't actually make what they think they are being told to do actually good.

Remember the quote that started all of this:

like for example, halal slaughter. After reading about how an animal is killed according to halal means, I realized "wow...that causes the animal to suffer a lot." But it's not my job to care if it causes the animal to suffer since that it what God says to do.

crimsontide06 believes that God knows better so what may look bad must actually be good. That only works so long as crimsontide06's god exists and is all good. I am not saying crimsontide06's god doesn't exist (I am forbidden by the mods to say that). I am saying that others can and do use the same sort of reasoning with other and false gods.

[Pygoscelis]

Estimated Time of Death from Various Execution Methods
Lethal Injection	5 min to 2 hours
Gas Chamber	10 to 18 minutes
Hanging	4 to 11 minutes
Electric Chair	2 to 15 plus minutes
Firing Squad	Less than a minute
Guillotine	Less than a minute

Estimated Time of Death from Various Execution Methods
Lethal Injection 5 min to 2 hours
Gas Chamber 10 to 18 minutes
Hanging 4 to 11 minutes
Electric Chair 2 to 15 plus minutes
Firing Squad Less than a minute
Guillotine Less than a minute

http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view....ourceID=001623

Not relevant to this discussion. But I have to point out that time of dying probably isn't the only concern people would have when looking at ways you can die.

[Scimitar]

The difference between morality and obedience:

Morality is acting on something with the best intentions and sensitivities to another as well as yourself.

Obedience is acting on something without question because you trust the source based on core teachings which you agree with.

Are they the one and the same? No. Are they related? Yes.

Are they distinguishable? Only to the distinguished.

What right do we have to distinguish ??? ...moral grounding and obedience to our own innate need to know better - why did i post? to point that out.

Why are you still reading? :D is it due to some mystified moral obligation? or are you simply obeying your innate need to know better?

Is there a difference? What is it? and Why?

Scimi

[kritikvernunft]

Some people are clearly mistaken, and believing in Gods or conceptions of Gods that are not real.

If a false god becomes powerful enough, because he has enough believers for that, he will start demanding human sacrifice. He will start eating the flesh and drinking the blood of his own believers. In fact, all gods, including the One True God, will end up terminating the lives of their followers and recovering their souls, in one way or another. You cannot request for your life not to be terminated at some point. It will always get terminated. You can only choose which entity will recover your soul.

Used in this sense, "true" and "false" are just conventions, actually. We conventionally define the universe and its reality as "true", and its creator as the One True God, but in fact, this is an almost arbitrary choice. This arbitrary choice just happens to suit me fine, and that is pretty much all there is to it. Nothing would stop you from picking another kind of reality and such other creator as your conventionally false god. Lots of people do this, actually. This practice is very common, and there is really nothing special about doing that.

[Serinity]

Falsehood is falsehood, truth is truth. They are not arbitrary. Whether everyone followed Islam, wouldn't make it more Truer than it is, cause it is the Truth.

Whether everyone left Islam / truth. Wouldn't make a difference to the authencity.

Let me give you an example:

IF everyone followed truth, it would still be truth. IF everyone followed falsehood, it'd still be falsehood.

Truth is not dependent on humans. Rather Truth has always beenb independent of humans.

Truth never needs us to exist. Truth never benefits from us, rather we benefit from it. Falsehood is what is born of the imagination of mankind. In the end Truth will prevail, and it is no need of anyone.

The sun exists, someone say it doesn't. Whether the sun does truly exist or not, is it arbitrary? No. Either something is true, or it is falsehood. Regardless of what anyone says. It can never be both.

No matter how many follow falsehood, or how "powerful" it looks. Truth will prevail in the end. Cause Falsehood, by nature, is destined to perish, while Truth, is destined to prevail.

[kritikvernunft]

Falsehood is falsehood, truth is truth. They are not arbitrary.

There is the belief that truth is the only thing that will remain consistent, while falsehood will ultimately always collapse under its own contradictions. But then again, this is just a belief. You cannot know if it is true or not, no matter how often you may have experienced this. Therefore, this belief is still to an important extent an arbitrary choice that you make or do not make.

No. Either something is true, or it is falsehood. Regardless of what anyone says. It can never be both.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-valued_logic
In logic, a many-valued logic (also multi- or multiple-valued logic) is a propositional calculus in which there are more than two truth values. Traditionally, in Aristotle's logical calculus, there were only two possible values (i.e., "true" and "false") for any proposition. Classical two-valued logic may be extended to n-valued logic for n greater than 2. Those most popular in the literature are three-valued (e.g., Łukasiewicz's and Kleene's, which accept the values "true", "false", and "unknown"), the finite-valued (finitely-many valued) with more than three values, and the infinite-valued (infinitely-many valued), such as fuzzy logic and probability logic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-valued_logic
Four-valued logic taught on technical schools is used to model signal values in digital circuits: the four values are 1, 0, Z and X. 1 and 0 stand for boolean true and false, Z stands for high impedance or open circuit and X stands for don't care (e. g. the value has no effect). This logic is itself a subset of 9-valued logic standard by the IEEE called IEEE 1164 and implemented e. g. in VHDL's std_logic.

An algebraic lattice can have any arbitrary number of truth values, besides (tautologically) true and false, and still remain consistent as long as it correctly implements the absorption law. There is almost no technology that would function correctly, if we only used a simplistic Aristotelian (true,false) algebraic lattice.

Catuskoti. 4-valued logic system.
Many-valued logic systems are very old. They appeared thousands of years ago. In particular, the catuṣkoṭi is a "four-cornered" system of argumentation that involves the systematic examination and rejection of each of the 4 possibilities of a proposition. The Catuṣkoṭi in Western Discourse has often been glossed, Tetralemma, which is the nomenclature for the Greek form.

1. true
2. false
3. true and false
4. not true and not false

The 'Four Extremes' (Tibetan: མཐའ་བཞི, Wylie: mtha' bzhi; Sanskrit: caturanta; Devanagari: चतुरन्त) [25] is a particular application of the Catuṣkoṭi:
1. Being (Wylie: yod)
2. Non-being (Wylie: med)
3. Both being and non-being (Wylie: yod-med)
4. Neither being and non-being (Wylie: yod-med min)

[Serinity]

There is the belief that truth is the only thing that will remain consistent, while falsehood will ultimately always collapse under its own contradictions. But then again, this is just a belief. You cannot know if it is true or not, no matter how often you may have experienced this. Therefore, this belief is still to an important extent an arbitrary choice that you make or do not make.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-valued_logic
In logic, a many-valued logic (also multi- or multiple-valued logic) is a propositional calculus in which there are more than two truth values. Traditionally, in Aristotle's logical calculus, there were only two possible values (i.e., "true" and "false") for any proposition. Classical two-valued logic may be extended to n-valued logic for n greater than 2. Those most popular in the literature are three-valued (e.g., Łukasiewicz's and Kleene's, which accept the values "true", "false", and "unknown"), the finite-valued (finitely-many valued) with more than three values, and the infinite-valued (infinitely-many valued), such as fuzzy logic and probability logic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-valued_logic
Four-valued logic taught on technical schools is used to model signal values in digital circuits: the four values are 1, 0, Z and X. 1 and 0 stand for boolean true and false, Z stands for high impedance or open circuit and X stands for don't care (e. g. the value has no effect). This logic is itself a subset of 9-valued logic standard by the IEEE called IEEE 1164 and implemented e. g. in VHDL's std_logic.

An algebraic lattice can have any arbitrary number of truth values, besides (tautologically) true and false, and still remain consistent as long as it correctly implements the absorption law. There is almost no technology that would function correctly, if we only used a simplistic Aristotelian (true,false) algebraic lattice.

Catuskoti. 4-valued logic system.
Many-valued logic systems are very old. They appeared thousands of years ago. In particular, the catuṣkoṭi is a "four-cornered" system of argumentation that involves the systematic examination and rejection of each of the 4 possibilities of a proposition. The Catuṣkoṭi in Western Discourse has often been glossed, Tetralemma, which is the nomenclature for the Greek form.

1. true
2. false
3. true and false
4. not true and not false

The 'Four Extremes' (Tibetan: མཐའ་བཞི, Wylie: mtha' bzhi; Sanskrit: caturanta; Devanagari: चतुरन्त) [25] is a particular application of the Catuṣkoṭi:
1. Being (Wylie: yod)
2. Non-being (Wylie: med)
3. Both being and non-being (Wylie: yod-med)
4. Neither being and non-being (Wylie: yod-med min)

I sense some misapplication..

I won't entertain fancy arguements. The reality we live in, there can only be one Truth. This is true, and can not be false.

In regards to religion, it is a given that there can only be one truth. This is true, and can not be false. If you say otherwise, bring me your proof, because there is no proof to 2 truths. Cuz it is contradictory. There can only be one truth. This is fact, not belief.

you have misapplied something, and you are mistaken.

Truth will always stay consistent, falsehood will collapse. This is NOT just a belief. It is FACT.

I won't entertain misapplied stuff.

In regards to beliefs, it is either true or false, not both. If you come with something, with NO proof. It is false!

In regards to finding the True religion, it is either:

False, or true. Some false religions may have truth in it, but following it would be disbelief cuz it is falsehood, cuz its beliefs are falsehood.

[kritikvernunft]

Truth will always stay consistent, falsehood will collapse. This is NOT just a belief. It is FACT.

In fact, there are not even facts. If you believe that an event truly happened, why is that? Because people witnessed it? In that case, the "fact" just represents the belief in their witness depositions. If you witnessed it by yourself, it represents the trust (=belief) in your own eyes and memory. Everything is literally belief.

In regards to beliefs, it is either true or false, not both.

Aristotelian naivism collapsed a long time ago. In the 19th century, when set theory (Zermelo-Fränckel) was busy replacing number theory (Dedekind-Peano) as the dominant axiomatization for mathematics, with everybody thinking and hoping that things would finally get better, Russell's paradox triggered a meltdown in the belief that all questions would now be decidable (i.e. be true or false): Does the set of all sets that do not contain themselves, contain itself? That was the end of "naive" set theory and naive Aristotelian 2-valued logic. The answer to the paradox is obviously that it cannot be true, but that it can also not be false. It is fundamentally not-true-not-false.

[Serinity]

In fact, there are not even facts. If you believe that an event truly happened, why is that? Because people witnessed it? In that case, the "fact" just represents the belief in their witness depositions. If you witnessed it by yourself, it represents the trust (=belief) in your own eyes and memory. Everything is literally belief.

Aristotelian naivism collapsed a long time ago. In the 19th century, when set theory (Zermelo-Fränckel) was busy replacing number theory (Dedekind-Peano) as the dominant axiomatization for mathematics, with everybody thinking and hoping that things would finally get better, Russell's paradox triggered a meltdown in the belief that all questions would now be decidable (i.e. be true or false): Does the set of all sets that do not contain themselves, contain itself? That was the end of "naive" set theory and naive Aristotelian 2-valued logic. The answer to the paradox is obviously that it cannot be true, but that it can also not be false. It is fundamentally not-true-not-false.

what you are talking about is types..

If I asked you "Is killing a person Evil?" you'd say depends. It can be evil (true) it can be just (good and true)

If I asked you "does the moon exist?" you'd say yes. Saying it does not exist, is false. If you say "THIS WHOLE WORLD COULD BE JUST A DREAM. WHAT YOU SEE MAY JUST BE SOME INPUT, WORTHLESS" if you have no proof, it is false.

[kritikvernunft]

If I asked you "Is killing a person Evil?"

Morality is a bit of a special field. According to Immanuel Kant's Kritik der practischen Vernunft, moral rules must always be categorical imperatives. There can never be any hypothetical explanation or goal-to-attain as to why a particular type of behaviour is forbidden. Any such explanation would require access to the Theory of Everything. This is something that will never possible. In other words, morality can only be revealed. We don't know why the moral rules are there. We do not even need to know that. It is just like that.

If I asked you "does the moon exist?" you'd say yes. Saying it does not exist, is false.

It represents the trust (=belief) in my eyes and/or memory, when I see it, and in the witness depositions of people who also saw it. Seriously, I have never actually traveled to the moon. We have models that explain what that thing is doing over there, but this in turn represents trust in the provability or falsifiability of these models. But then again, it is not a particularly important question either. I did not intend to make money from the moon in one way or another. If it were important to me, I would certainly take a closer look at what exactly everybody seems to be conjecturing about that thing. At the moment and in the foreseeable future, I cannot see any possible application for that. Therefore, the moon is pretty much irrelevant to me. Hence, ignorance is bliss! ;-)

[Pygoscelis]

Did we not inform you that Allah :swt: never commands a bad or horrible thing? I would suggest you to go back and re-read both the threads from the beginning once again.

Oh indeed. So it must be true. Because you have defined it to be true. And you force us all to agree because those are the rules here. And that is fine. I didn't say Allah is ever wrong or bad. He is true and perfect. You are not delusional at all. My only point was that OTHER religious people, delusional with other mistaken conceptions of gods, that are not Allah, and not perfect and true, give the exact same moral reasoning as I stated above. Nobody here wants to address them, afraid that I may be talking about you good folks. I'm not. Apparently you can't see it in other people? In the Christians? In the Jews? In the Hindus? In people who believed just as strongly in Zeus, Odin, etc?

[AabiruSabeel]

I get your point Pygo and I was planning to address it here.

As I said earlier, the basis for all this discussion on morality and obedience is the belief in Allah, the One and Only God. As long as you do not believe in Him, you will not be able to fully understand this concept. Once we believe in Him, we can easily dismiss all other false gods and their commands.


Just to explain this point in simple words, when you look for a good doctor for your treatment and finally you find one whom you can trust, you accept his treatment and follow his advice, even if you had to take bitter medicine, and even if he does horrible things to your body, pulls out your organs, drains your blood and replaces them with better ones. Do you not trust him and agree that he knows better what he is doing, and that he does it for your own good sake? Or do you go around saying he wants to do this and do that, and refuse to take any treatment just because it sounds horrible?



So the first step is finding the One True God, the One who is the real God. Once you find Him, you place absolute trust in Him.

[Pygoscelis]

So the first step is finding the One True God, the One who is the real God. Once you find Him, you place absolute trust in Him.

... Regardless of being right or wrong about that first step. That is the problem. You may be right, but that means others are wrong, and they follow that same second step, thinking, just like you do, that their God must have some higher reason to demand they do whatever they are convinced that he demands of them, whether or not it makes sense or seems moral to them.

Can you see how this makes them dangerous? Or will you continue to avoid that question and just keep insisting that since your God is true, this doesn't apply to you? So what if it doesn't apply to you? It still applies to the others...and leaves them immune to moral reason or empathy.

[Serinity]

Those who think God commands them to do wrong, are devoid of morals themselves, or they do not even understand themselves.

Those who do not know themselves, do not know God. GOD created us, GOD gave us the morality, GOD created us upon His Fitrah, so we can recognize Him. The way to find God is to know yourself.

you are either, ignoring, or blind to the fact that God created us, and with that in mind, He gave us morality. He :swt: created us to worship Him, alone, and none else. HIS religion would NEVER contradict SOUND human NATURE. What did He gave us? Morality. So your point is mute. You are ignoring a huge chunk, and that is the fact that God created us, and with that in mind, His religion can not contradict.

Those who think God commands them to do wrong or horrible things, as you suggest, do not even understand themselves, or know themselves.

The way to find God is to follow one's Fitrah, one's morality.

[Pygoscelis]

Well... now this is getting interesting...

There are hundreds of different conceptions of Gods, mostly conflicting with each other. So by simple logic we know that most can't be true. One may be true. Yours may be true. But most of them are false conceptions; false Gods.

Nevertheless, all believers in Gods (real or false) believe that theirs is true, and that what they think God wants of them is also true. The false God believers are just as certain about this as the real God believers.

With the rare exception of psychopaths and sociopaths, all believers in Gods (real or false) also have inborn senses of empathy and fairness, just as atheists do.

So the question then, is what is a theist to do when their own moral senses conflict with or can not explain what they know (think they know) are commands from God.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think I am seeing two different approaches in this thread to this question, one in the OP and in ibn-Adam's most recent post, and one in Serenity's post immediately above.

The first approach is a top-down approach. This believer trusts in their God(s) that he/she/it/they are all-good and know better than the believer, and that the believer simply doesn't see what makes an action morally right that would appear morally wrong otherwise. For the true God believers, who actually have an all-good and all-knowing God, this works. They are trusting in somebody who knows better than they do and everybody benefits as a result. For the believers in False Gods though, this is just an abandonment of moral senses, enabling them or encouraging them to do bad things they wouldn't have otherwise done. And that is the point I was making earlier in this thread.

The second approach is more of a bottom-up approach. This believer recognizes/decides that, as Serenity says, to know God the believer must know himself, and that God would not order bad or evil. This believer starts with the notion that the true God's religion would never contradict sound human nature. So this believer in a God (real or false) uses their own moral senses to determine if their concept of God is true or not, and adjusts it accordingly, bringing them to the one true God. This requires one to admit that the conception of God that they believe in presently may be false, and that they may need to adjust it with further introspection and as they find better moral information.

These two approaches are opposite of one another and I am surprised to find both presented within the same religion (Islam).

[Serinity]

you are misunderstanding Pygo.

I do not know about the concept of God, except by revelation. Whatever God affirms for Himself, we believe in whatever He affirmed. I do not make up stuff about Allah from my own self. I believe in the concept of God presented by Islam, what Allah affirmed for Him, I affirm for myself.

So if Allah says He is Most Merciful, I affirm that in my beliefs. I do not make things up myself. I believe in Allah, The One and Only True God. I believe whatever the Quran tells me to believe. The Quran is always right, so the concept of God, will always be true, never false.

we don't care what people think who God is, what they say God is, we affirm our belief in God, and the concept of God, by affirming in belief, what God Himself affirmed For Himself, in attributes and qualities.

One requires first to believe God exists, then search.

Whatever Allah commands, I do not know myself, except by reading His book, The Quran.

I do not adjust by concept of God by my morals. I believe in Allah, and His attributes and whatever He revealed about Himself.

The concept of God, in Islam, is 100% true. So it can not be false.

The concept of God is in Surah Al-Ikhlas. 112. Aqeedah.

[Pygoscelis]

^ I suspected as much. Seems I called your bluff and now you are correcting it eh?

Care to address the actual topic here then?

The first approach is a top-down approach. This believer trusts in their God(s) that he/she/it/they are all-good and know better than the believer, and that the believer simply doesn't see what makes an action morally right that would appear morally wrong otherwise. For the true God believers, who actually have an all-good and all-knowing God, this works. They are trusting in somebody who knows better than they do and everybody benefits as a result. For the believers in False Gods though, this is just an abandonment of moral senses, enabling them or encouraging them to do bad things they wouldn't have otherwise done. And that is the point I was making earlier in this thread.

And I can't really distinguish the believers in true God from the believers in False gods, as everybody insists that they are the beleivers in the true God. I can't tell you apart. So from my point of view, any of you, or possibly all of you are abandoning your moral senses with the above logic, without the justification of an omni-benevolent God who knows better than you. And from your own perspective, even if your God is real, you must be able to see that this is happening to those whose conceptions of Gods are not real.

I am amazed how in thread people have been twisting and turning, ducking and dodging to prevent themselves form seeing and acknowledging this simple fact.

[Serinity]

The conception of God, can never come from humans, ever.

we can never make up claims and say what God is and what He isn't.

Whatever Allah :swt: affirms about Himself, that is what He is. Not what any Joe says.

Whosoever says "God is this and that" without proof from revelation, is a liar. Again, first find God, then we can speak, and weed out all the false Gods, and dismiss their commandments.

you can not distinguish cuz you don't know God Himself.

[aamirsaab]

(snip)...
So the question then, is what is a theist to do when their own moral senses conflict with or can not explain what they know (think they know) are commands from God.

Think, ponder and come to a decision - either through consultation with a more knowledgeable person or through self reflection. Theists are not immune to moral dilemas, certainly there are times when even the staunchest theist will have doubts in and towards their faith. This is commonly known as "life",

[Pygoscelis]

The conception of God, can never come from humans, ever.

Of course, I believe the exact opposite; that the conception of God only comes from humans, but for the sake of this point, I am quite fine going along with your claim here. It does not change my point, which you still have not addressed.

we can never make up claims and say what God is and what He isn't.

Sure we can. We may be completely wrong and be making up false ideas, and no that isn't he same as lying if we honestly think it is true, which I think most theists do. You may have the right and actual existing God concept, but there are plenty of people who are just as confident as you are, who have concepts of God that are wrong.

Whatever Allah :swt: affirms about Himself, that is what He is. Not what any Joe says.

Sure, but irrelevant to my point.

Whosoever says "God is this and that" without proof from revelation, is a liar. Again, first find God, then we can speak, and weed out all the false Gods, and dismiss their commandments.

My point isn't about that at all. And no, they are not liars if they honestly believe what they say. They are just wrong. You and I think each other are wrong too, but neither of us are liars about it.

you can not distinguish cuz you don't know God Himself.

It doesn't really matter to my point if I could distinguish or not. You and I are both confident that those believers in other god concepts that are not yours, are wrong. We both know that they are wrong. We agree on that much. So you should be able to see my point in regards to them even though to adamantly deny it in regards to yourself (since you know your God to be real).

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

There are hundreds of different conceptions of Gods, mostly conflicting with each other. So by simple logic we know that most can't be true. One may be true. Yours may be true. But most of them are false conceptions; false Gods.

As far as I know, all the main religions have a command saying do not kill, all countries have a law saying do not kill. So whatever false religion or false nation you belong to, you should still not commit murder.

On the other hand, you say you choose the laws that you want to obey, you weigh them up with your own brand of morality. This implies you have a higher regard for your own brand of morality, than you do for Canadian morality. If you want your freedom to obey the laws that suit you, then you have to accept that every Tom, Dick and Jane can make up their own laws to suit them. Just imagine seven billion people making up their own laws, the law would become a free for all, and there would be no law or authority worth following.

The law needs authority, there can be no higher authority than God who sees all and knows all.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people.

Eric

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;


Remember the quote that started all of this:

Originally Posted by crimsontide06

like for example, halal slaughter. After reading about how an animal is killed according to halal means, I realized "wow...that causes the animal to suffer a lot." But it's not my job to care if it causes the animal to suffer since that it what God says to do.

Originally posted by Pygoscelis;
crimsontide06 believes that God knows better so what may look bad must actually be good.

Most city dwellers are squeamish when it comes to the slaughter of animals, we like to see our meat nicely displayed in butchers shops without all the gore. The halal way to slaughter animals was written fourteen hundred years ago, before electricity was invented, I believe it to have been the most humane way to slaughter animals when there were no stun guns.

According to the RSPCA, most commercially-caught wild fish that are alive when landed die either from being left to suffocate in air, or by a combination of suffocation and evisceration (gutting) during processing. These methods take from minutes to hours to induce insensibility, can cause significant suffering and are not regarded as humane.

Originally posted by Pygoscelis;
That only works so long as crimsontide06's god exists and is all good. I am not saying crimsontide06's god doesn't exist (I am forbidden by the mods to say that). I am saying that others can and do use the same sort of reasoning with other and false gods

There is only 'One God' the creator of all that is seen and unseen, the same God hears all our prayers despite our differences.

In the spirit of praying to 'One God'

Eric

[Serinity]

Sure we can. We may be completely wrong and be making up false ideas, and no that isn't he same as lying if we honestly think it is true, which I think most theists do. You may have the right and actual existing God concept, but there are plenty of people who are just as confident as you are, who have concepts of God that are wrong.

No we can not, cuz whatever comes from us, can not be true, in regards to claims about God. IF Prophets said something about God we'd take it, cuz we know he has contact with God.

I disagree with you, 100%.

And I hold those who say about God, without proof, to be liars. Cuz if I say something, and I have NO proof, I have lied! Even if I believe I didn't, one still has lied! Cuz claims without proof are lies.

I'd call it delusional for one to make up claims about God and think it to be true without proof. A rather delusional liar, rather pathetic.

Even if he did not know, it is still a lie, if he has no proof. Regardless of ignorance. To make claims from ignorance does not excuse one from being a liar.

my concept of God, does not come from me, neither did it originate from human thought. Rather, who and what God is, we only know by revelation. And those who make claims without proof, are liars. No matter whether they are ignorants or not, a lie is a lie, and liars are liars, ignorant or not.

[Serinity]

It doesn't really matter to my point if I could distinguish or not. You and I are both confident that those believers in other god concepts that are not yours, are wrong. We both know that they are wrong. We agree on that much. So you should be able to see my point in regards to them even though to adamantly deny it in regards to yourself (since you know your God to be real).

The dividing line between our thought processes is that you think that everything is in our brains, and that it all is from imaginations. I believe in God not because of imagination or whatever, but because I am convinced by the His signs in creation.

So, why are they wrong? How are you confident they are wrong? They are claims, but are they true? what factors do you consider for you to confidently say someone is a believer in a false God? Try to think more objectively about it, rather than subjectively.

Who cares what they say, what we care for, is whether it is true or not? The Basic principle I go by is this "No proof - a lie", in regards to claims about God.

Interesting you say that you are confident about someone believing in a false God, why are you confident about that?

In the quest to Truth, we can not take statements lightly, can we? Nor can we take what people say, for granted.

In regards to claims about God, if you say "God is this and that" in a definite voice, and you have no proof, you have lied. Cuz we can not know about God Himself, by our own brains. you can not make claims about God, and bring no proof, and then say you have not lied. Cuz you have, if you did. Claims about God can either be true or false, and the one claims so can only be liar, if he brings no proof.

Any claims about God from ignorance (imagination, etc.), can never be true, ever.

I will always consider those who make claims about God from ignorance, and with no proof, as liars.

[Pygoscelis]

As far as I know, all the main religions have a command saying do not kill, all countries have a law saying do not kill. So whatever false religion or false nation you belong to, you should still not commit murder.

There are plenty of people who think their God wants them to kill or harm or hate people, be it Isis types telling thinking God tells them to kill the infidels, be they distraught parents who kill their own children thinking them possessed by demons, or be they other parents denying life saving medical treatment (such as Jehova's Witnesses in regard to blood transfusions) or standing in the way of research that could save millions (ie, stem cell research). There are more who preach hatred, but not killing, because they think God tells them to (Fred Phelps' types), and more who think other destructive behaviour is instructed by God.

They may all be completely wrong and misguided, but they believe, and they use the same logic as above... And indeed we have had people in this thread outright state that if God wanted them to kill people, they would kill people.... So no, you don't get to pretend that God belief is all peace and roses. And it is crystal clear that people's obedience to what they think are Gods cause horrible tragedy, no matter how much you and others here want to avoid acknowledging it.

Of course people do horrible things for other reasons than religion too, and they rationalize it and tell themselves it is right, etc. But they can't do that in quite the same way as when they think a God has told them to do it, absolving them of any personal responsibility to think it through for themselves, making them think it is right (because they think God knows better) even though it appears clearly wrong to them, and removing themselves from any ability to reason with them (since they have abandoned moral judgment making in favour of their God).

On the other hand, you say you choose the laws that you want to obey, you weigh them up with your own brand of morality. This implies you have a higher regard for your own brand of morality, than you do for Canadian morality. If you want your freedom to obey the laws that suit you, then you have to accept that every Tom, Dick and Jane can make up their own laws to suit them. Just imagine seven billion people making up their own laws, the law would become a free for all, and there would be no law or authority worth following.

Only if morality was totally arbitrary. In reality, most of us agree on what moral values are, as you noted above, because we have as a species evolved senses of empathy and fairness. Most of us know that killing isn't good, for example, except in very particular and extreme circumstances. And we shape our societies with ethical reasoning based on those senses and on social contract and utilitarianism.

It is our guard against those who would be tyrants and seek to rule over us, including those who seek to do it with the greatest tool ever devised for it: religion. If they can shut your ethical reasoning down, telling you to do what they say God demands of you, then you become their tool, and that is a shame. That is why statements like we have seen in this thread are scary.

Thankfully, I don't think that has happened to you, or to many religious people, which is why we see so much disagreement among you and selective readings of your holy books, ignoring the bad and embracing the good. The book says that God demands both nasty things and good things, but you ignore the nasty and explain it away with convoluted mental gymnastics... because you already know what is good and what is bad, and didn't actually need a God to tell you, just like me.

Most city dwellers are squeamish when it comes to the slaughter of animals, we like to see our meat nicely displayed in butchers shops without all the gore. The halal way to slaughter animals was written fourteen hundred years ago, before electricity was invented, I believe it to have been the most humane way to slaughter animals when there were no stun guns.

So you don't think it is the most humane way today? We do have stun guns now, and people continue to do it because of obedience to ancient religious directives. And actually, I think that we will someday look back as a species in shock and horror that we used to be so barbaric as to eat other thinking animals. Especially as it becomes easier and easier to avoid and still be healthy.

[Pygoscelis]

And I hold those who say about God, without proof, to be liars. Cuz if I say something, and I have NO proof, I have lied! Even if I believe I didn't, one still has lied! Cuz claims without proof are lies.

We appear to be disagreeing on semantics here. To me, the word "lie" means intentionally misleading somebody. You are not intentionally misleading anybody if you yourself believe what you are saying. For example, I don't actually believe your God exists... but I don't think you are being dishonest either when you say that he does. You are just wrong. From your point of view, I hope you don't think that I am being dishonest either. Perhaps I am just wrong?

I'd call it delusional for one to make up claims about God and think it to be true without proof. A rather delusional liar, rather pathetic.

You are far more harsh than I then. Is this what you think of all Christians, Jews, Hindus, ancient Greek and Egyptian and Norse and Aztec pagans, and others who believe in Gods that are not Allah?

[Pygoscelis]

So, why are they wrong? How are you confident they are wrong? They are claims, but are they true? what factors do you consider for you to confidently say someone is a believer in a false God? Try to think more objectively about it, rather than subjectively.

Far more simple for me. I don't believe in theism itself. So I think all Gods are false Gods. You only think all Gods but yours are false Gods. But we agree on all Gods but yours, so you should be able to see my point about the danger of people confusing obedience for morality and farming out their moral decision making to a God that does not actually exist. Your arguments that God knows better than we, so that even if it looks wrong to us, it must still be right, doesn't apply to them, if their Gods are not real.

Why duck and dodge so strenuously to avoid seeing this?

Interesting you say that you are confident about someone believing in a false God, why are you confident about that?

Well now.. you are baiting me here... to say things the mods get uppity about me saying.. but here goes anyway...

First, I am confident that Gods don't exist (in as much as I am confident that other supernatural beings don't exist; since I see no evidence for them - but that is a whole other debate I am not currently interested in - so just accept that this is my vantage point). Second, I take believers (including yourself) at their word. They (and you) say that they believe in the particular God(s) that they describe, and I have no reason to doubt that they do, and their other statements and their actions confirm that they do.

I will always consider those who make claims about God from ignorance, and with no proof, as liars.

The irony of this is that to me, you are somebody who makes claims about God without proof. But I don't see you as a liar.

[kritikvernunft]

As far as I know, all the main religions have a command saying do not kill, all countries have a law saying do not kill. So whatever false religion or false nation you belong to, you should still not commit murder.

Given the Qasis, i.e. the Lex Talionis, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, there can impossibly be an absolute ban on any behaviour whatsoever, no matter how evil it could be.

The morality of killing another person is entirely predicated on the history of hostile behaviour causing damage in the other direction. Outside this closure of historical hostility, it is simply not possible to attribute any moral status to killing another person. In other words, there are many circumstances in which killing another person is completely legitimate.

It is entirely false to claim that religion would have a command "do not kill" or that there is an absolutely requirement "not to commit murder", since nobody can take away the victim's right to retaliate against the perpetrator of evil. You are indeed allowed waive your rights under the Qasis to inflict reprisals for hostile acts onto the perpetrator, but there is absolutely never a requirement to do so.

Therefore, I completely and utterly reject you claim as being in gross violation of the Qasis.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

So no, you don't get to pretend that God belief is all peace and roses.

The greatest commandments are to love God and to love your neighbour as you love yourself, you can do nothing greater. In life we should all search for a greatest good and strive towards it, despite all the evil that happens in this world.

In the spirit of praying for justice for the poor and oppressed, of all nations and religions.

Eric

[Eric H]

greetings and peace be with you kritikvernunft;

Given the Qasis, i.e. the Lex Talionis, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, there can impossibly be an absolute ban on any behaviour whatsoever, no matter how evil it could be.

Of course an eye for an eye and a death for a death are allowed, but that leaves two blind people and two dead people, instead of one of each. After the death of an 84 year old Catholic priest yesterday, we should not be looking to punish Syria further, rather we should be praying for Syria, they have endured too much suffering.

The greater path that leads us closer to God, is striving to be merciful and forgive.

If we cannot forgive others, we will never come to understand how God can forgive us.

In the spirit of praying for mercy and forgiveness.

Eric

['abd al-hakeem]

[Muhammad]

Greetings Pygoscelis,

So the first step is finding the One True God, the One who is the real God. Once you find Him, you place absolute trust in Him.

... Regardless of being right or wrong about that first step. That is the problem. You may be right, but that means others are wrong, and they follow that same second step, thinking, just like you do, that their God must have some higher reason to demand they do whatever they are convinced that he demands of them, whether or not it makes sense or seems moral to them.

I am glad you finally acknowledge this discussion is really about the existence of God. To understand the context of morality and obedience, we first need to establish belief in the One True God, as everyone has been telling you.

However, once again you put up a front of complete ignorance with regards to the belief in God. About four months ago we were having a very similar discussion. I mentioned Muslims hold that there are very strong, rational reasons for them to believe in their religion. It is not simply a matter of blind faith. Yes, many people do have erroneous beliefs about God, but the falsehood of such beliefs very quickly becomes apparent when one examines them as there is no evidence to support such erroneous beliefs (the example of Poseidon was discussed earlier). The reasoning given by such people and their conviction can in no way be assumed to be the same, as all religions are not on an equal footing. The false gods worshipped by the idolaters, which they hoped would help and provide for them, have been likened by Allah :swt: in the Qur'an to the house of a spider - something so weak and frail, because by clinging to these gods they were like a person who holds on to a spider's web, who does not gain any benefit from that. When Prophet Ibrahim :as: debated with his people against their mistaken worship of false gods, he advanced logical arguments to negate their views and establish the correct creed. Thus, in elucidating the correct monotheistic belief in God, Islam offers many logical arguments and examples, facilitating the use of our intellect and reason.

Therefore, what 'others' are doing due to their erroneous beliefs is not relevant to this discussion. You are on Islamicboard and you are conversing with Muslims about their obedience to Allaah :swt:. We are all telling you to be fair to our religion and consider our arguments separately to what believers of other religions may believe.

The other mistake you and others make is bringing up extreme cases of terrorist groups to justify that religion is dangerous and removes moral responsibility. You will find that the actions of such groups have more to do with political grievances and social factors than with following religious teaching. There are countless examples of wars and killing which are not in the name of any religion. Therefore, these examples have nothing to do with the perfect moral code taught by Islam.

And I can't really distinguish the believers in true God from the believers in False gods, as everybody insists that they are the beleivers in the true God.

That's a shame if you haven't come across any arguments presented for the truth of Islam in your (almost) 10 year stay here. Here are some points to remind you [a post from another thread]:

We can begin by considering two broad categories: the Prophethood of Muhammad :saws:, and the miracle of the Qur’an.

Regarding the first, whichever aspect of the life of the Prophet :saws: we study, we see evidence for the truth and credibility of his message. He was from a noble family and one who, from the beginning, demonstrated a virtuous character and was well-respected amongst his people. They called him ‘Al-Amin’ (the trustworthy) and considered his advice. This is a very important sign of the truth of his Prophethood as someone who has never lied to people would not lie regarding the Lord of the Worlds.

You make an accusation that he was deluded or insane. If examined, this claim does not stand whatsoever. The Prophet :saws: displayed no symptom of insanity at any time in his life. No friend, wife, or family member suspected or abandoned him due to insanity. To the contrary, they viewed him as an example to be followed and found from him a solution to their problems. The Prophet :saws: preached for a long time and brought a Law unknown in its completeness and sophistication to an ignorant society. If he was insane, it would have become obvious to those around him in the decades of his teaching. When in history did an insane man preach his message to worship One God for ten years, three of which he and his followers spent in exile, and eventually became the ruler of his lands? Which insane man has ever won the hearts and minds of people who met him and earned the respect of his adversaries? Delusion cannot explain the detailed legal codes and rulings that would be followed by millions over centuries, providing guidance in all areas of life including divorce, inheritance, finance, moral character and social justice. Delusion cannot explain 600 pages of revelation to an illiterate man that would be inimitable by the most talented around him, that would be memorised, recited and taught every day. Delusion does not explain the distinct difference that would come over him when he was receiving revelation, as witnessed by his Companions.

Those are some points to get you thinking. There are many other areas to explore, such as how he could know of stories regarding previous Prophets and nations, the testimony of those Jews and Christians who came to know him, his miracles and prophecies, the fact that he did not desire material gain or power, and the list goes on.

The second category of discussion is the Qur’an. There are numerous facets related to the Qur’an to prove its miraculous nature. I have linked you to threads and posts above, so I’ll only quote the following for now:

Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl

I'll try to give you a comprehensive answer as to why the Qur'an is regarded the way it is by so many people.

1. The Power of the Qur'anic Message:

-it is universal, unrestricted by time and applicable to any nation/culture. The Qur'an is by far the most widely followed and acted-upon book in the world. As for the Bible, most Christians follow the Church over the Bible, and each denomination has its own bible anyway. The fact that there is no other book in the world that forms the constitution of the lives of billions of followers is itself a sign.
-it is practical and logical, it can be established practically in society and is logically able to address the fundamental questions relating to all aspects of our universe.
-it is comprehensive, addressing all fundamental sectors of human life, be it spritual, physical, mental, social/societal, politcal, environmental, economic, etc.
-it is natural, in concordance with a person's nature and what they feel deep inside to be the truth.
-it is clear and consistent, free of the changes in worldview and understanding that dominate the works of human beings.
-it is deep, having provoked thousands upon thousands of volumes of exegesis, expounding upon its meaning and revealing fascinating details that many people otherwise miss in their reading of the Qur'an.

2. The Power of the Qur'anic Style:

-it is Interactive, the text seems alive as it responds to the very questions that arise in one's mind at that moment. It speaks to the reader and delivers specific yet universal advice.
-it is Inerrant, free from contradictons and discrepancies, or other errors that would normally be found in the works of human beings.
-it is Memorizable; the Qur'an is the only book in the world which is continuously being memorized by millions of people and recited daily. No other book has been committed to memory by so many followers, as though it fits in one's mind as a key in a lock.
-its Language, the Qur'anic arabic is a stunning miracle in itself, its style is powerful and its recitation is melodious. More info: Here, Here, Here.

3. The Power of the Qur'anic Text:

-it is Preserved, even after fourteen and a half centuries, the Qur'an is recited today exactly as it was first revealed. Thus it was free of the tampering that befell other religious scriptures.
-its other Remarkable features; many Muslims find a striking concordance between many Qur'anic statements and established scientific truths, which could not have been known by any normal human being 14 centuries ago. (see here). Many Muslims have also found the Qur'anic perfection extends even to various mathematical miracles within the text (see here for discussion of word repetitions). As well, there are the Qur'anic Prophecies.
-its Authorship; the context in which the Qur'an was revealed leaves the reader with no other conclusion than the fact that it could only be the word of God.

Further reading:
http://www.islamicboard.com/discover...ml#post1588513
http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...d-prophet.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/seerah/3...e-prophet.html

[Serinity]

You treat religion like it's a fantasy. Treat it as a science of its own.

why don't you believe when I say the sun is a square and is very cold for us all the time all around the globe all year round? with your logic, you'd say I may be right!

you limit religion to fantasy and imagination, you limit it to whatever is in the brain. Why don't you treat Religion as you treat science?

your assumption that people believe in God just because of their imagination, is erroneous and false. I, personally, believe because whatever I see around convinces me of the existence of God.

How do you know the sun exists, is it because you thought it up yourself? NO. Because you can see with your eyes, as for oxygen, how do you know? Because science proves it. Not because you thought it up.

[Pygoscelis]

The greatest commandments are to love God and to love your neighbour as you love yourself, you can do nothing greater.

I am glad that that is your conception of God, Eric. It isnt everyone's. Not all theists agree with you. Not even self described Christian does.

[kritikvernunft]

Of course an eye for an eye and a death for a death are allowed, but that leaves two blind people and two dead people, instead of one of each.

Yes, that is the price to pay for discouraging misbehaviour.
You cannot make an omelet without breaking eggs.
Furthermore, the Qasis is Divine Law. Therefore, the believers are not supposed to question its validity.
Either you accept it, or else you are not voluntarily submitting to Divine Law, which in turn removes you from the religion.

After the death of an 84 year old Catholic priest yesterday, we should not be looking to punish Syria further ...

Well, Syria had nothing to do with it in the first place, even though some people of a rather virtual organization called "ISIS" may have "claimed responsibility", but they are also known to claim responsibility for the bad weather! ;-)

If we cannot forgive others, we will never come to understand how God can forgive us.

Possibly, but no such consideration may ever be used to argue against other people's rights under the Qasis. As I said, the victim may forgive and waive reparations, but that is his exclusive prerogative. He perfectly has every right not to do that.
Your statement sounds too much like an encouragement for the victim of misbehaviour to give up his rights under divine law. The problem with that view is that it actively encourages misbehaviour. Therefore, the victim has the right to waive, but should never be pressured to do so. It remains an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

[Pygoscelis]

Therefore, what 'others' are doing due to their erroneous beliefs is not relevant to this discussion.

*double face palm*

No, what people are doing due to their erroneous beliefs is what this discussion is all about. It is about suspending or ignoring your own moral senses and your own moral judgment making, to instead trust in what you think is God, and saying that he knows better so it must be good, even if it looks bad to you. You should be able to see this in regard to those who don't share your religion; those with false beliefs. That is what this thread is about.

Your demanding that this be instead a thread about Islam being the one true religion is a dodge; and less than honest one. I don't need to say otherwise for my point to be seen, and you know very well that I can not call you out on your claims without breaking forum rules and upsetting your fellow admins. So please, stop baiting me or demanding that I do so. Not everyone shares your religion or finds what you see as evidence to be at all convincing. You do, so you are Muslim. Eric H believes he has better evidence for Christianity and that Christianity is more true; so he is a Christian. And other believers in other Gods, including false Gods, think the same of their religions.

You are on Islamicboard and you are conversing with Muslims about their obedience to Allaah

Look again. That isn't what I have been doing in this thread. I take a much broader view here. I don't zero in exclusively on Allah. I am making a point about the danger of suspending your own moral judgment making and trusting that God knows better than you, if your God turns out to be false, or if what you thought he wanted wasn't what he actually wanted. Of course, I do include your Allah as one such false God, along with all other Gods. Otherwise I would be Muslim. But that isn't he point of this thread, and you and others are twisting and turning to avoid the actual topic here.

[ardianto]

Greetings, Pygoscelis

In every Eid-ul Adha I always buy goat and then give it to mosque. I never attend when that goat sacrificed. Maybe because my heart too weak. I know that goat feel pain. So I always pray, wish God makes that goat die as fast as possible.

I buy goat to be sacrificed as my obedience to the command that clear. But how if God command me to sacrifice my son?. Would I obey it?.

The answer is not yes or no. But, I believe God will not command me like that. I am not a prophet like Abraham who had direct connection with God. God tested prophet Abraham with command to sacrifice his son because Abraham was prophet. While I am just ordinary human, and God test me with other tests like my ability to prevent myself from commit sin, my ability to be grateful on Him. So, if I got a dream which God command me to sacrifice my son, I would know that this dream was not from God, but from devil.

I am still normal Muslim, Pygo. I just use my sense in living as religious person. :)

[Muhammad]

No, what people are doing due to their erroneous beliefs is what this discussion is all about. It is about suspending or ignoring your own moral senses and your own moral judgment making, to instead trust in what you think is God, and saying that he knows better so it must be good, even if it looks bad to you. You should be able to see this in regard to those who don't share your religion; those with false beliefs. That is what this thread is about.

This is where the 'less than honest' dodging is going on. You know you cannot challenge the firm foundation of Islam, which is why you've now decided to make it a broader discussion by lumping all religions into one and treating them as the same. As Muslims, we are not responsible for what other people of other faiths are doing. We are here to tell you about Islam, not the false gods.

and you know very well that I can not call you out on your claims without breaking forum rules and upsetting your fellow admins.

This is a cop-out. You have been freely breaking forum rules in your insulting remarks about Islam being compared to fairytales. Tell me, which fairytale is supported by the logical arguments I have listed in my above post? Which supposed book written by a 'faery' has the qualities of the Qur'an? Please, don't pretend you have been abiding by the forum rules just to appease us till now.

I am making a point about the danger of suspending your own moral judgment making and trusting that God knows better than you, if your God turns out to be false, or if what you thought he wanted wasn't what he actually wanted.

That's why I am telling you to look at the evidences for Islam. Sometimes you argue about obedience to God, other times you argue about how to know the existence/correct belief in God. Instead of yo-yoing between different arguments you should deal with the issue in a stepwise approach.

[Pygoscelis]

You treat religion like it's a fantasy. Treat it as a science of its own.

why don't you believe when I say the sun is a square and is very cold for us all the time all around the globe all year round? with your logic, you'd say I may be right!

you limit religion to fantasy and imagination, you limit it to whatever is in the brain. Why don't you treat Religion as you treat science?

your assumption that people believe in God just because of their imagination, is erroneous and false. I, personally, believe because whatever I see around convinces me of the existence of God.

How do you know the sun exists, is it because you thought it up yourself? NO. Because you can see with your eyes, as for oxygen, how do you know? Because science proves it. Not because you thought it up.

The heat from the sun and the existence of oxygen have been tested and studied through the scientific method, with falsifiable hypotheses, testing, and revision of understanding. That is science. That isn't how "revelation" or "faith" work. Where you do make falsifiable claims, then we can do some science on them, but otherwise science really doesn't apply here.

I understand if it troubles you, but you are just going to have to accept that not all of us find your "evidence" for your religion at all convincing. We need not bicker over that or call each other liars over it. We simply disagree. We're not all Muslims. And this thread isn't about that. Care to address the actual topic here?

[Pygoscelis]

This is where the 'less than honest' dodging is going on. You know you cannot challenge the firm foundation of Islam, which is why you've now decided to make it a broader discussion by lumping all religions into one and treating them as the same. As Muslims, we are not responsible for what other people of other faiths are doing. We are here to tell you about Islam, not the false gods.

Mohammad. Are you asking me to "challenge the firm foundation of Islam"? Your forum rules and your fellow admins tell me not to. But here you are implying that if I don't, I must not be able to. That is dishonest. It is a delicate balance for me on this forum; to openly state that I am an atheist and answer questions that inevitably arise such as yours, and yet not break the forum rules. It is not easy to walk on eggshells like that, and I admit that I have not always done it perfectly. I don't care to engage in it here, as it isn't necessary in this thread, and is only distracting from the actual topic of this thread... which you continue to dodge.

If you would rather discuss with atheists and other non-muslims about the arguments for and against Islam, you can certainly find that outside of this thread.

You say that the behaviour of other theists, who you see as believing in and obeying false ideas of God, are not your concern? Really? You don't care about children who are denied blood transfusions due to beliefs of Jehova's Witness parents? You don't care about the slowing of science in curing fatal illness due to Christian blocking of stem cell research? You don't care about Hasidic Jewish Rabbis doing oral suction circumcision on infants? You would have been ok with the ancient Aztecs ripping out the still beating hearts of innocent virgins to sacrifice to their God? You are ok with the likes of Daesh murdering homosexuals and kafir (including Muslims, like I presume yourself, that they deem unfit) due to a misreading and misunderstanding of Islam? None of this bothers you at all?

[Muhammad]

I don't care to engage in it here, as it isn't necessary in this thread, and is only distracting from the actual topic of this thread... which you continue to dodge.

There seems to be a misunderstanding regarding what the topic is about. Essentially the topic involves two components, as mentioned by brother ibn-Adam earlier: the first step is to acknowledge the One True God, the second step involving obedience and morality follows from that. In a number of your posts you have questioned how one can know the One True God or how we can know what He wants from us. Therefore, the arguments for the validity of Islam are addressing the very core of the issue here; it is not dodging the topic at all.

Mohammad. Are you asking me to "challenge the firm foundation of Islam"? Your forum rules and your fellow admins tell me not to. But here you are implying that if I don't, I must not be able to. That is dishonest.

You are already questioning the foundation of Islam when you are implying there is no logic in obeying our God and receiving moral guidance from Him. Our forum rules state that we don't accept attacks and insults towards Islam. What breaks those rules is repeatedly making baseless assertions about Islam despite receiving responses to prove otherwise, and leads one to think you are unable to address those arguments. It is somewhat ironic you speak of treading on eggshells after 7 pages containing numerous insulting comments about our religion.

You say that the behaviour of other theists, who you see as believing in and obeying false ideas of God, are not your concern? Really?

What I said was that we are not responsible for others' choices. If they wish to believe in false gods that go against logic, you should take it up with them, not us. Don't treat all religions as one. We hope and pray for their guidance and we make efforts to convey the message, but we can't force them to desist from their error. What this has to do with accepting murders or human sacrifices, I really don't know, so let's not twist words here.

[MidnightRose]

Hello @Pygoscelis

You have been here for approximately 10 years. You should know that Islam teaches that there is only one true Lord and that all other deities are false. Yet you want the Muslims of this forum to accept this premise as a point of yours.


You should also know that Islam states non-Islamic belief - and actions based on them - to be misguided. Your attempts at making Muslims accept this as a point of yours is also interesting.


Actually, it's not.


And no, I don't see your point about other religions and the obedience of their followers. That's because Islam already teaches that these are misguided religions.


Your narrative went from: Since there are some people who do misinterpret Islamic teachings, Then we'd be better off without the teachings in the first place to Since the obedience of followers of other religions can be dangerous, Then Muslims should be able to understand that obedience to a deity can be dangerous.


This is no different than the tactics Christian missionaries use by quoting Qur’anic verses out of proper context to fit their perceptions and agendas.


Your analogies were never lost on me and your insults and nonsensical playing the victim doesn't intimidate me.


These analogies are indicative of ignorance towards the person, teachings, and truthfulness of Muhammad :saws:.


After your spending years here on IB, I think it's just disregard and malice towards it.

[Pygoscelis]

Our forum rules state that we don't accept attacks and insults towards Islam. What breaks those rules is repeatedly making baseless assertions about Islam despite receiving responses to prove otherwise, and leads one to think you are unable to address those arguments. It is somewhat ironic you speak of treading on eggshells after 7 pages containing numerous insulting comments about our religion.

Actually, I have been making extensive efforts not to do that. My point here doesn't require me to speak against Islam. We can keep this exclusively to Gods that are not yours, as I have been trying to do, to walk on those eggshells for you. It isn't me that keeps insisting we turn this thread into one about whether or not Islam is true.

Can you see the danger in believers in false Gods when they stop making moral decisions for themselves because of it, or not? That was the only point I was making. Your fellow admin turned it into this thread and people have been arguing that Islam is right and true instead of addressing the actual point ever since, despite my efforts to rein it in, even by saying that Islam is right and true (which obviously I don't actually believe).

What I said was that we are not responsible for others' choices. If they wish to believe in false gods that go against logic, you should take it up with them, not us.

We are both effected by their actions. Innocent third parties are effected by their actions. We have every reason to care about their actions. That you say you don't perplexes me.

Don't treat all religions as one.

I'm not. There can be one true religion, and it can even be yours, and my point remains valid in regard to all those other religions.

[Serinity]

Unlinke you, Pygo, we have no doubt, at all, that Allah is the One and only true God, cuz our belief is based on reason and logic.

should we now ban our morality too? well, someone can misuse it and say something is right, when it is wrong.

who cares what other people of other religions do, thinking God commanded them. Islam however is superior and unlike any other religion.

we already have given you enough proof that God exists, which is not based on superstition, or imagination. Rather you are the one imposing the idea of people thinking God told them.

Should we ban all knives, since, hey. They are dangerous, are they not? people can kill innocents, therefore knives are evil and dangerous.. Not.

[Muhammad]

Actually, I have been making extensive efforts not to do that. My point here doesn't require me to speak against Islam. We can keep this exclusively to Gods that are not yours, as I have been trying to do, to walk on those eggshells for you. It isn't me that keeps insisting we turn this thread into one about whether or not Islam is true.

Firstly, we are not stupid in that we don't recognise the implications directed at Islam under the guise of speaking of 'Gods that are not yours'. Secondly, regardless of what you have been trying to do, the insulting remarks are there for all to see. There is a repeated narrative of comparing Islam to some kind of fantasy on the same level as the 'Loch Ness monster' and nonsensical beliefs. There have also been disrespectful remarks about Allah :swt: and the Qur'an. All of this despite numerous attempts at pointing out the stark differences between Islam and mythical beliefs. If you were simply asking questions about Islam, fine. If you don't believe in Islam, your choice. But going round in circles casting aspersions is not our idea of discussion.

Can you see the danger in believers in false Gods when they stop making moral decisions for themselves because of it, or not? That was the only point I was making.

I see a danger in all systems besides the belief in the One True God, be that atheism, agnosticism, polytheism etc. The moment moral decisions are directed away from the One True God, we see all sorts of societal problems as a result. Does that answer your question?

Your fellow admin turned it into this thread and people have been arguing that Islam is right and true instead of addressing the actual point ever since, despite my efforts to rein it in, even by saying that Islam is right and true (which obviously I don't actually believe).

When you have an issue with any mod action or moderator, you should make a thread in Helpdesk and discuss it there. Repeatedly complaining about them in your posts is very disrespectful and against the forum rules. You should consider yourself fortunate that the mods haven't decided to ban you on that basis alone, as they probably would on other forums. I haven't seen anyone force you to say Islam is true. The mods have never done that to any non-Muslim who has visited here. As I said before, they only ask for respect.

We are both effected by their actions. Innocent third parties are effected by their actions. We have every reason to care about their actions. That you say you don't perplexes me.

Where did I say I don't care about their actions?

I'm not. There can be one true religion, and it can even be yours, and my point remains valid in regard to all those other religions.

So why are you asking Muslims about the moral decisions of other theists?

['abd al-hakeem]

@Pygoscelis
Your tactics don't confuse nor intimidate me.
Edit: I suggest our respected readers sift thought the thousands of posts this member has made over the past 10 years in respect to what I have mentioned.

Bismillah walhadmulillah;
Salaam aleykum ikhwan;

I think our readers have better things to do than waste their valuable time with the antics of a disbeliever, let alone re-reading 10 years worth of post devoid of benefit.

Why I even posted to this thread, again, given the number of ways that I fall exceedingly short, in the eyes of Allah subhanahu wa Ta'ala [surely there are more pious, more righteous people in the world; I'd be lucky to consider myself of those who successfully repent, astaghfirullah] what is the point of entertaining one who is clearly devoid of guidance, when only Allah swt guides?

Have we lost perspective?

24:49 But if the right is on their side, they come to him with all submission.

2:284 To Allah belongeth all that is in the heavens and on earth. Whether ye show what is in your minds or conceal it, Allah Calleth you to account for it. He forgiveth whom He pleaseth, and punisheth whom He pleaseth, for Allah hath power over all things.

7:178 Whom Allah doth guide,- he is on the right path: whom He rejects from His guidance,- such are the persons who perish.

10:35 Say: "Of your 'partners' is there any that can give any guidance towards truth?" Say: "It is Allah Who gives guidance towards truth, is then He Who gives guidance to truth more worthy to be followed, or he who finds not guidance (himself) unless he is guided? what then is the matter with you? How judge ye?"

24:46 We have indeed sent down signs that make things manifest: and Allah guides whom He wills to a way that is straight.

39:37 And such as Allah doth guide there can be none to lead astray. Is not Allah Exalted in Power, (Able to enforce His Will), Lord of Retribution?

Wallahu alem.

May Allah guide you Pygo, and me, and my ikhwan, and all our respected members. Amin ya Rabbil alamin.

[AabiruSabeel]

I think this thread has run its course and we seem to be running in circles now. We can safely close this thread with the following quote from the above post:

Can you see the danger in believers in false Gods when they stop making moral decisions for themselves because of it, or not? That was the only point I was making.

I see a danger in all systems besides the belief in the One True God, be that atheism, agnosticism, polytheism etc. The moment moral decisions are directed away from the One True God, we see all sorts of societal problems as a result. Does that answer your question?

I'm not. There can be one true religion, and it can even be yours, and my point remains valid in regard to all those other religions.

So why are you asking Muslims about the moral decisions of other theists?

If there's anything anyone would like to contribute, please contact us in the Helpdesk and we will review it :ia:.


:threadclo