Question For The Non-muslims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Panther said:
I am not a Muslim because I am an Atheist. Simple, really. XD

I am a non-religious Atheist because I do not feel the need to adopt a set of rules or laws in order to live my life morally.

I have my own set of morals comprised of firstly the influence of my parents and society, and secondly of my own judgement and conscious decision.
Click to expand...

Panther, I'm supposing that someone could have a set of morals comprised of firstly the influence of their parents and their perceptions of society, and secondly of their own judgments and conscious desicions that were completely antithetical to yours. Would you see that person as living his/herr life morally?

If yes, can you help me to understand what you mean by moral?

If no, on what basis would you continue to claim that your life was being lived morally and that his/her life was not?
 
For the people that are saying there is no afterlife you're wrong. Spirtualism exists. We are an energy and once we die our spirit hatches out of this egg, which we call our physical body. Energy does not die. Energy is converted to different forms but it doesn't die. The same goes with OUR energy... We will not die, our spirit moves on into "another world."
 
England said:
For the people that are saying there is no afterlife you're wrong. Spirtualism exists. We are an energy and once we die our spirit hatches out of this egg, which we call our physical body. Energy does not die. Energy is converted to different forms but it doesn't die. The same goes with OUR energy... We will not die, our spirit moves on into "another world."
Click to expand...

....Proof? That's a swooping statement to make.
 
Skavau said:
....Proof? That's a swooping statement to make.
Click to expand...

I was once like you, a sceptic. Then I went to a spiritualist church and was given a reading from a medium that passed messages from some family members that died. They were accurate in everything they said. One that springs to mind was that my grandad found a cribbage board the previous week which he hadn't seen for 20 odd years. We rang him and asked him, it was true. He didn't like it as it scared him a bit. It must have been about 1 in a billion chance.

There is scientific proof that energy doesn't die, it converts to a different form. We are an energy. If you want proof of an afterlife then go to a spiritualist church and get a personal reading. It's completely free. They make no profit from this at all... Do not go for the readings that you "pay" for as they are scam.
Visit some spiritualist churches and I'm sure you will turn from a sceptic, just like I was, into a believer.
 
England said:
Energy does not die. Energy is converted to different forms but it doesn't die.
Click to expand...

So maybe when you die your energy will be converted into heat and be used to warm sombody elses toes. Conversion of energy doesn't imply preserving of sentience.
 
Pygoscelis said:
So maybe when you die your energy will be converted into heat and be used to warm sombody elses toes. Conversion of energy doesn't imply preserving of sentience.
Click to expand...

Are you another sceptic lol? Do as I said in the previous post. Start going to the spiritualist church, get a personal reading which is completely free and then come back :) I promise you 100% and I will guarantee you that you will lose the scepticism of spirtuality. I used to laugh aswell as my family at mediums. I used to think "weirdos" and "spiritualism? What an utter load of...." but no way. Only the mediums you "PAY" for are crap.

Good luck :D
 
Pygoscelis said:
So maybe when you die your energy will be converted into heat and be used to warm sombody elses toes. Conversion of energy doesn't imply preserving of sentience.
Click to expand...
Then how do you explain this?

350px-Spirits.jpg


'Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter'

:p
 
Pygoscelis said:
So maybe when you die your energy will be converted into heat and be used to warm sombody elses toes. Conversion of energy doesn't imply preserving of sentience.
Click to expand...

You just used the word "maybe"? And I thought athiests were out for "facts", not things like "maybe their is a G-d".
 
Skavau said:
Since when was that the definition of an Atheist?
Click to expand...

Since atheism I believe rejects the existance of G-d because it cannot be proved (or is that agnostics?), yet he is trying to make points on "maybes" and things that cannot be 100% proven.
 
lavikor201 said:
Since atheism I believe rejects the existance of G-d because it cannot be proved (or is that agnostics?), yet he is trying to make points on "maybes" and things that cannot be 100% proven.
Click to expand...
Being an Atheist does not require someone to automatically take a direct standpoint on EVERY issue.

All Atheism is the assertion that there is no God/s. That is it.
 
lavikor201 said:
Since atheism I believe rejects the existance of G-d because it cannot be proved (or is that agnostics?), yet he is trying to make points on "maybes" and things that cannot be 100% proven.
Click to expand...

It's Agnostic dude!
 
Grace Seeker said:
Panther, I'm supposing that someone could have a set of morals comprised of firstly the influence of their parents and their perceptions of society, and secondly of their own judgments and conscious desicions that were completely antithetical to yours. Would you see that person as living his/herr life morally?

If yes, can you help me to understand what you mean by moral?

If no, on what basis would you continue to claim that your life was being lived morally and that his/her life was not?
Click to expand...

Happy to answer your questions, my friend. :)

From dictionary.com:
"mor·al
1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes."

As I have stated, my 'morality' has been mostly determined by my environment, as is the case for the majority of human beings. The standards of one's society are most prevalent in dictating moral values, that is - what is 'right' and what is 'wrong'.

For example, let us take a sensitive subject, such as... Hmm. Homosexual marriage.
In Canada and the Netherlands, homosexual marriage is completely legal and even encouraged. In countries such as Egypt, Russia and America, however, it's a differant matter. The reasons these countries frown upon homosexual marriage are mostly due to religious 'morality'. Here in the UK where I live, it's an uneasy in-between - gay couples can have civil partnerships, but not marriage.(segregation is not equality, but that's just my opinion.)

In Egypt, homosexuality is believed to be "wrong". Men are even imprisoned for participating in consensual acts of homosexuality. In Canada, however, it's a-okay. What is considered "right" and what is considered "wrong" differs greatly from community to community. It also differs on an individual level, as one person may look at homosexual marriage as a good thing, another person from the very same community may consider it a heinous crime.

Therefore, we come to the conclusion that what is "moral" is subjective. Acknowledging that morality is subjective, if I were to come across someone who had the exact opposite moral values as compared to me, I would consider thier way of life as "immoral", as it would conflict with my idea of what is right and what is wrong. That's not to say that I am right and they are wrong or vice versa - much like the topic of the existance of deities and gods, morality is a subject that canot be laid down in facts.

I, nor any one else, cannot say that I am living my life by absolute, inarguable , superior morality. But I can say that I am living my life in a suitable manner, according to the moral standards of my community.

I can, however, say that I am also living my life by a code that is a recurring theme throughout the majority of mankind's communities within the world.
The Wiccans say it best, I believe:

"An it harm none, do as thou wilt."
 
lavikor201 said:
You just used the word "maybe"? And I thought athiests were out for "facts", not things like "maybe their is a G-d".
Click to expand...

Atheism is nothing more than the lack of belief in Gods. There is nothing more to it. Atheists need not be "out for facts" at all. The little boy raised in secular society who has never heard of religion is an atheist. Yet he may very well believe in Santa and unicorns because he thinks they are cool.
 
Pygoscelis said:
Atheism is nothing more than the lack of belief in Gods. There is nothing more to it. Atheists need not be "out for facts" at all. The little boy raised in secular society who has never heard of religion is an atheist. Yet he may very well believe in Santa and unicorns because he thinks they are cool.
Click to expand...

I disagree. A "lack of belief in god(s)" is either agnoticism or agnostic-atheism. Athiesm is the belief that there is/are no god(s).
 
It is a rather confused term.

There are a few who do believe it means what you think it means, including some atheists such as yourself. Most atheists I've met though use it to mean a lack of belief. The root of the word works better this way, for it to mean not (a) believer in gods (theist).

But this is just semantics. The thread seems to have completely unwound now :)
 
Panther said:
Happy to answer your questions, my friend. :)

From dictionary.com:
"mor·al
1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes."

As I have stated, my 'morality' has been mostly determined by my environment, as is the case for the majority of human beings. The standards of one's society are most prevalent in dictating moral values, that is - what is 'right' and what is 'wrong'.

For example, let us take a sensitive subject, such as... Hmm. Homosexual marriage.
In Canada and the Netherlands, homosexual marriage is completely legal and even encouraged. In countries such as Egypt, Russia and America, however, it's a differant matter. The reasons these countries frown upon homosexual marriage are mostly due to religious 'morality'. Here in the UK where I live, it's an uneasy in-between - gay couples can have civil partnerships, but not marriage.(segregation is not equality, but that's just my opinion.)

In Egypt, homosexuality is believed to be "wrong". Men are even imprisoned for participating in consensual acts of homosexuality. In Canada, however, it's a-okay. What is considered "right" and what is considered "wrong" differs greatly from community to community. It also differs on an individual level, as one person may look at homosexual marriage as a good thing, another person from the very same community may consider it a heinous crime.

Therefore, we come to the conclusion that what is "moral" is subjective. Acknowledging that morality is subjective, if I were to come across someone who had the exact opposite moral values as compared to me, I would consider thier way of life as "immoral", as it would conflict with my idea of what is right and what is wrong. That's not to say that I am right and they are wrong or vice versa - much like the topic of the existance of deities and gods, morality is a subject that canot be laid down in facts.

I, nor any one else, cannot say that I am living my life by absolute, inarguable , superior morality. But I can say that I am living my life in a suitable manner, according to the moral standards of my community.

I can, however, say that I am also living my life by a code that is a recurring theme throughout the majority of mankind's communities within the world.
The Wiccans say it best, I believe:

"An it harm none, do as thou wilt."
Click to expand...

So. My great-great-great-grandfather who owned my great-great-grandmother on a cotton plantation in southern Tennesse was living his life morally because he was living his life in a suitable manner, according to the moral standards of his community. Further, he too was also living his life by a code that was a recurring theme throughout the majority of mankind's communities in the world -- at least at that time, and is more common today than people like to admit.
 
And morals will continue to change as the centuries pass by.

If we carry on in the west as we are we will soon be sueing ourselves over defamation of character, the plaintiff being our own guilt and the procecutor our secularism.

At least Islam hasnt got to handle that kind of nonsense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top