I have been thinking about Islam recently and I realized that Islam is the only religion in history to have defeated Plato. The Mu'tazila were the advocates of Plato in Islam and they lost. In every other religion, Plato either destroyed the culture or completely corrupted it. Plato destroyed both Athens and Rome.
Plato completely corrupted Judaism as can be seen in the Talmud which reads like a bureaucratic version of Plato's dialogs. And Judaism is structured exactly as proposed in Plato's "Republic" with the rabbis serving as the ruling philosopher class and God being banished from earth as described in the Talmud's story of Rabbi Eliezer.
Christianity is only confronting Plato now, and it is obviously losing and becoming completely corrupt. Christian theology seems much like philosophy and so is easily subject to the corruption of Plato. I see no serious defense against Plato coming from anywhere in Christianity.
Those Muslims who have read the arguments against the Mu'tazila know what I am talking about. For those who haven't, Plato's position is that absolute truth can be found using deductive reasoning. This means that deductive reasoning can be used to constrain God and reality. Of course this is unacceptable both to those with a sound religious background and to those with a sound scientific background.
I am not Muslim, but both the Old Testament (which I follow) and science are clearly against Plato. Given that Islam is the only religion that has ever defeated Plato, I would say that Islam is the best hope for the future of science and the future of humanity.
I have been thinking about Islam recently and I realized that Islam is the only religion in history to have defeated Plato.
First,welcome to the website,and that's good,inshallah (If god's will)you will become a Muslim soon.
May I understand how Islam defeated Plato?... I never heard of Plato,and what is this so called "absolute truth that can be found using deductive reasoning" ?
I also never heard of "Mu'tazila" what is it?
format_quote Originally Posted by fschmidt
I see no serious defense against Plato coming from anywhere in Christianity.
Really? even Christianity? by what means they cant defend against this Plato?
The group which gave the most emphasis to defeating the Creed of the Mu`tazilah was the `Ashaa'irah (Ash`aris). The founder, Imaam Abu-l Hasan al-Ash`ari, used to be a Mu`tazili himself. He grew up as one. Studied it in detail until the age of 40. It was at the age of 40 that Allaah Ta`aalaa guided him away from that, and he now set up working to destroy the Mu`tazili sect and the `Aqeedah of I`tizaal. The very first person he defeated was the person who had taught him the Mu`tazili `Aqeedah in the first place: his uncle, Abu `Ali al-Jubbaa'i. He had studied the principles of debating from them and used those very same principles in later years in his debates against them, and defeated them. Thus, he is credited with wiping out most of the Mu`tazilah. The other `Ulamaa - both in his time and afterwards - of course, all played a large role in wiping out that sect. The Mu`tazilah no longer exist. They haven't for hundreds of years. They're one of the "forgotten sects", like the Qadariyyah, Jahmiyyah, Jabariyyah, etc.
One of the main beliefs of the Mu`tazilah Creed was that reason is above all else. That, if any aspect of religion clashes with reason, then reason is to be given preference. In reality, they were worshipping their own intellects (`Aql) rather than worshipping Allaah Ta`aalaa.
It was also the Mu`tazilah who invented the belief that the Qur'aan is created - a belief which Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمة الله عليه fought against and crushed.
Most of the Khulafaa of the Abbasid Dynasty were from the Mu`tazili sect.
But, as we mentioned, all of that is in the past. A long time ago.
format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam
But, as we mentioned, all of that is in the past. A long time ago.
I think history is very important for understanding the present. For example, why was Islam so strong during its first few centuries and so weak now? I think only by studying history can one try to answer this question.
I am only starting to study Islam but I think Islam was seriously wounded by Greek influence. While al-Ash`ari was right to reject the worship of reason, he was wrong to replace this with atomism, another Greek concept that has no basis in the Quran. My guess is that this atomism is the source of the current Islamic weakness.
Ash'arite Atomism ‑ The substances perceived by us are atoms which come into existence from vacuity and drop out of existence again. The world is made up of such atoms. The Ash'arite atoms are fundamentally different from those of Democritus and Lucretius. The Ash`arite atoms are not material; they are not permanent; they have only a momentary existence; they are not eternal but every moment brought into being, and then allowed to go out of existence by the Supreme Being, God, the only cause of everything in the universe.
Besides having no basis in the Quran, this is extremely harmful to scientific development.
One of the goals here was to argue against causality. The Ash'arites rejected the idea that X causes Y because they insist that God is the cause of all. But I think this is just a misunderstanding of the concept of cause. Cause reflects a process, but there is no process for God's will to be reflected in reality, this just is. Cause can have meaning if one understands that God is generally consistent, something we know not from deductive reason, but simply from humble observation of the real world. So statement "X causes Y" is basically the same as "it is God's habit to will X and then to will Y". There is no practical difference between these 2 statements. And it is this thinking that is the basis of science.
Christianity is only confronting Plato now, and it is obviously losing and becoming completely corrupt.
Jesus grew up in Greek and Roman influenced Judea, Rome, and a lot of the New Testament was written in by, Jew and Roman, Apostle Paul. Plato and Aristotle are woven into The Bible like they belong there, and there is something to it when you know what you are looking for. I will give you some examples.
Socratic Paradox - If everyone is out to do what they believe is in their own good, then how can evil exist? Secular Humanists believe they are doing good. Christians believe they are doing good. Bruce Jenner believed he was doing good. Are they all not good? How can anyone be evil? The answer to that is Satan exists. Satan is in the Old Testament. He is a liar and deceiver. He deceives man about what is in their best interests. Men ends up having false idols in their hearts. These false idols could be false beliefs or ideologies that blind them to God. Things they love more than God. God is Holy and Separate from sin, so falling away from God is a slippery slope that can lead to increasing Evil and Wickedness.
"Son of man, these men have set up idols in their hearts and put wicked stumbling blocks before their faces. Should I let them inquire of me at all?" (Ezekiel 14:3)
An Apocalypse in the Greek is an opening of the eyes. A tearing away of the veil from hidden things. Many people may have accepted lies. These lies give them a false perspective on reality and God.
Has someone ever lied to you? A woman or a friend? Someone lies to you and you just accept it or trust them, then you are in The Dark. You are believing something that is not true. That mean that you are in Darkness like you are in a Cave or The Allegory of The Cave. In Christianity, Jesus is the shining light of the world. He leads people out of the Darkness and into The Light. (Ephesians 5:8)(1 Thessalonians 5:5)
Many Christian Nations are now Secular Humanist Nations. Secular Humanism is Luciferian.
Luciferian - They believe that God is evil or the dark and that Lucifer or man is good and the light. That man can find his own way without God. It could be man worshiping himself.
Are there Migration problems in nations formally Christian? Yes. They prostituted themselves with false idols and foreign nations. Nothing new happens under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 1:9-18)
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks