Role model in your community

[Pygoscelis]

until we see christians verbally and physically condemning these acts and not supporting them or at least not so complacent to their occurring there is only one side that we Muslims have seen and will likely continue to see. It doesn't help matters any that these sanctimonious Tartuffes come here spreading their stupidity, hatred and propaganda.

This is eerily similar, no, in fact it is verbatim identical to what I see islamophobes saying about muslims. So much so that it makes me wonder if you copied this from that dawkins board you read and switched the names.

 

[Pygoscelis]

To Yales lily what happened to that man that women is posing beside?:heated: That picture is too much it'll be in my head for a long time subhanallah.

What I find the saddest is that everybody knows who the woman posing is (she got rather notorious and famous from that picture) but pretty much nobody knows the name of that man or his particular story. Did he have a family? What were his hopes and dreams? Etc. He is reduced to a photo prop.

 

[جوري]

This is eerily similar, no, in fact it is verbatim identical to what I see islamophobes saying about muslims. So much so that it makes me wonder if you copied this from that dawkins board you read and switched the names.

It has to hold true for at least one party. We don't see Muslims waging wars on the west and celebrating with all kinds of hateful diatribe and killing of civilians. we see westerners alleging that Muslims hate them so they wage wars while pushing out all kinds of tactics and warfare to cement and then pumping out bin laden tapes when opportunity presents itself!

all the best

 

[Pygoscelis]

Although you try to make fun of me, I choose not to do the same to you. I started this thread to hear about touching stories in your community that showed their love for God demonstrated through their love for fellow human beings, not to debate theology of Islam or Christianity. People including me are touched and moved by this kind of story than by religious performances. In fact the Christian man in our home country refused to leave lepers when the area was retaken by communist rebels, and was executed later by communist soldiers. Certainly he did good deeds not for a show. Christians do not do good deeds for show, as much as Muslims do not do good deeds for show. I believe there are those Muslims like Mother Teresa or this Christian believer of our home country. Would you please share their stories with me? Thank you.

I totally disagree that Christains do not do good deeds for show. The entire basis of the religion is a reward/punishment dymanic towards an all seeing God. You are being watched by God and you *DO* do these things for show, for him to see and reward, or at least not punish you. If you were doing good for the sake of good, religion wouldn't be involved. This is why I never give to religious "Charities". Charity should be done for charity's sake, not to covert people or please some God. Tht latter takes away from the noble nature of the former.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Of course I am not Abraham or Moses. But “unfortunately” from your perspective, we Christians enjoy the same quality of spiritual relation with God through Jesus as Abraham and Moses did in the past. Because the barrier between God and human beings was broken by the sacrificial death of Jesus on the cross, the broken relation with God was finally restored to the level of intimacy to Christians. The almighty God has become our Friend and Lover, not just our Master.

But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it. (Matthew 13:16-17) Here many prophets and righteous people include Abraham and Moses.

A friend would not demand that you kill your kid. That is a master. And a sick one. It is like joining the mob. You are told to point a gun at your brother and pull the trigger, as a test of loyalty. Unbeknownst to you the gun isn't loaded, but it is still a sick display of obedience trumping morality.

 

[Zafran]

A friend would not demand that you kill your kid. That is a master. And a sick one. It is like joining the mob. You are told to point a gun at your brother and pull the trigger, as a test of loyalty. Unbeknownst to you the gun isn't loaded, but it is still a sick display of obedience trumping morality.

what morality from an athiest??

 

[Pygoscelis]

what morality from an athiest??

Indeed.

Or did you think we atheists are all running around eating babies? ;D

 

[Insaanah]

Christians always talk about how loving and forgiving God is, but current day Christian belief does not actually show that:

Unless the problem of sin is dealt with completely, we could never go before God, thus eternally separated from God. It does not matter how many good works you perform to compensate your past mistakes and sins.

It is like saying to a student, it doesn't matter how hard you study, even if you get excellent marks you will never pass. Glorified be the Majesty of God above such injustice!

We try to do good works, and hope for His Mercy, and we know our good works will not be in vain if done sincerely for God.

Here is what Allah says:

"Establish worship at the two ends of the day and in some watches of the night. Lo! good deeds annul bad deeds. This is reminder for the mindful. And be patient, for indeed, Allah does not allow to be lost the reward of those who do good." (11:114-115)

This infinite gap between the perfect God and the sinful human beings must be filled by Jesus Christ. If you still believe you do not need the intermediator between God and you, it comes from your ignorance about the infinitely perfect and holy nature of God, and about the sinful and immoral nature of human beings. If you dare to approach God directly, actually you are inviting disaster on yourself. You would be immediately consumed to nothing by the glory of God because there are some sins in you.

"When My servants ask thee concerning Me, I am indeed close (to them): I listen to the prayer of every suppliant when he calleth on Me: Let them also, with a will, Listen to My call, and believe in Me: That they may walk in the right way." (2:186)

"We verily created man and We know what his soul whispereth to him, and We are nearer to him than his jugular vein." (50:160)

"Say: Who delivereth you from the darkness of the land and the sea? Ye call upon Him humbly and in secret, (saying): If we are delivered from this (fear) we truly will be of the thankful. Say, "It is Allah who saves you from it and from every distress; then you [still] associate others with Him." (6:63)

He alone saves us, but some people are daring enough as to associate others in His Divinity!

"It is He who enables you to travel on land and sea until, when you are in ships and they sail with them by a good wind and they rejoice therein, there comes a storm wind and the waves come upon them from everywhere and they assume that they are surrounded, supplicating Allah , sincere to Him in religion, "If You should save us from this, we will surely be among the thankful. But when He saves them, at once they commit injustice upon the earth without right. O mankind, your injustice is only against yourselves, [being merely] the enjoyment of worldly life. Then to Us is your return, and We will inform you of what you used to do." (10:22-23)

God tells us that He is near, that we can all call on Him, anyone can turn to Him sincerely and ask of Him, even those experiencing desperate times who would not normally acknowledge His existence, yet find themselves asking of Him in their hour of need. He is the Lord of all, not of a few, the Creator of all, not of a few, the sustainer of all and everything, not just a few or a bit.

All praise be to Allah for He is the most approachable and the most Just!

And may peace be upon all the messengers of Allah, including Jesus (peace be upon him).

Peace.

 

[Zafran]

Indeed.

Or did you think we atheists are all running around eating babies? ;D

God knows what atheists think - who cares anyway - whatever your subjective "Morality" maybe.

 

[Zafran]

delete double post

 

[Pygoscelis]

God knows what atheists think - who cares anyway - whatever your subjective "Morality" maybe.

It is the same sense of morality religious people have, once you cut passed the blind obedience to dogma and religious "authority". We all have it. Some hide it or dress it up under ideology/religion, but its still there and not so different.

 

[Ramadhan]

It is the same sense of morality religious people have, once you cut passed the blind obedience to dogma and religious "authority". We all have it. Some hide it or dress it up under ideology/religion, but its still there and not so different.

which religion do you identify your morality with, pygoscelis?

morality standards differ from religion to another.

what is considered "moral" by a buddhist may not be so "moral" by a tribe in Papua, and vice versa. What is considered moral by a jew may not be so moral by a christian and vice versa.

So where do you atheists get your morality standards from?

 

[Lynx]

I totally disagree that Christains do not do good deeds for show. The entire basis of the religion is a reward/punishment dymanic towards an all seeing God. You are being watched by God and you *DO* do these things for show, for him to see and reward, or at least not punish you. If you were doing good for the sake of good, religion wouldn't be involved. This is why I never give to religious "Charities". Charity should be done for charity's sake, not to covert people or please some God. Tht latter takes away from the noble nature of the former.

I don't think you can say all religious people only do good deeds to avoid punishment or gain a reward; it is entirely possible that a religious person does not rape because they feel it is wrong and it so happens to be against their religion as well. In other words, the fact that rape is wrong in Islam or Christianity does not necessarily imply that the followers of those respective religions only think rape is wrong b/c of the religion.

So where do you atheists get your morality standards from?

You should read up on some ethics. It's a pretty interesting topic. Did you know that there have been secular ethical systems for the past 200 years? Yep, it's a whole new world outside your dogma.

 

[Ramadhan]

You should read up on some ethics. It's a pretty interesting topic. Did you know that there have been secular ethical systems for the past 200 years? Yep, it's a whole new world outside your dogma.

But what were the secular ethical systems based on?

surely they must have been based on some already existing ethical systems, no?
You are not suggesting that the secular ethical systems were drawn up from scratch, inventing totally, completely new moral standards, are you?

 

[جوري]

You should read up on some ethics. It's a pretty interesting topic. Did you know that there have been secular ethical systems for the past 200 years? Yep, it's a whole new world outside your dogma.

Believe it or not that 'alleged' secular moral system borrows an awful lot from religion-- sort of like the book of the Mormon's looks alot like the king J version of the bible!
It would be silly to suggest you get your morality is from a 200 year old book.. saying that it is innate in you (which is a given) the sense of right or wrong would concede that there is a higher power that has instilled it in you.. and that will of course open a can of worms from which you can't extricate yourself and if someone really had the time could annihilate to pieces having sprang into higher reticular function by a mere chance!

all the best of course!

 

[Zafran]

You should read up on some ethics. It's a pretty interesting topic. Did you know that there have been secular ethical systems for the past 200 years? Yep, it's a whole new world outside your dogma.

what like Kantian, Utilitarianism may have been around for 200 years or so but Aristotles Virtue theory has been around far longer then that. I agree with the other posters these secular systems do borrow a lot from religion. More then they like to think so.

 

[Lynx]

But what were the secular ethical systems based on?

surely they must have been based on some already existing ethical systems, no?

Kant said the basis of his ethical system is reason. You will be able to find tons of stuff on Kant's ethics all over the internet; google is your friend. The Utilitarians thought they could create a morality based on a cost/benefit analysis of acts.

You are not suggesting that the secular ethical systems were drawn up from scratch, inventing totally, completely new moral standards, are you?

I hope you are not under the impression that if some moral system believed x was wrong and if some prior existing religion also believed x was wrong that the moral system has a basis in that religion...

@Lily

Believe it or not that 'alleged' secular moral system borrows an awful lot from religion-- sort of like the book of the Mormon's looks alot like the king J version of the bible!

I don't think non religious systems of morality borrow much from religion...if they borrow at all. As I pointed out to naidamar, the mere existence of shared moral beliefs does not imply that one took it from the other.

It would be silly to suggest you get your morality is from a 200 year old book.. saying that it is innate in you (which is a given) the sense of right or wrong would concede that there is a higher power that has instilled it in you.. and that will of course open a can of worms from which you can't extricate yourself and if someone really had the time could annihilate to pieces having sprang into higher reticular function by a mere chance!

Well I don't get my morality from any 200 year old books. I am just saying it is possible for systems of morality to exist with a basis other than religion. Also, I don't think there is a sense of right and wrong instilled in anyone. There are some shared characteristics amongst humans such as empathy, the desire to be happy, certain emotional responses, etc. that I think can explain quite formidably the existence of morality.

@Zafran

what like Kantian, Utilitarianism may have been around for 200 years or so but Aristotles Virtue theory has been around far longer then that. I agree with the other posters these secular systems do borrow a lot from religion. More then they like to think so.

Well there are more than just Kantian and Utilitarian philosophies; I was just stating the big ones that have dominated the scene for the most part since recent times.
Anyway, I don't see how Utilitarianism, for example, could borrow from religion at all. In fact, there are many things that can be derived from certain branches of utilitarianism that are completely contrary to principles in Christianity and Islam...

 

[جوري]

I don't think non religious systems of morality borrow much from religion...if they borrow at all. As I pointed out to naidamar, the mere existence of shared moral beliefs does not imply that one took it from the other.

I have studied ethics quite extensively and can pin on many occasions almost identical ethical foundation to that of Abrahamic religion. Namely Islam!
the implication was never that one borrowed from another except as pertains to atheism/secularism since the religion that has always been was monotheism before all sorts of people got colorful. There are always amendments to the secular ethical system and that is usually develops when a case involves the judicial system but again that always relies on a foundation that is older than sin!

Well I don't get my morality from any 200 year old books. I am just saying it is possible for systems of morality to exist with a basis other than religion. Also, I don't think there is a sense of right and wrong instilled in anyone. There are some shared characteristics amongst humans such as empathy, the desire to be happy, certain emotional responses, etc. that I think can explain quite formidably the existence of morality.

That is a very hollow explanation that didn't require you much thought.. and it is just as well since I have a migraine and not in the mood for a protracted discourse that leads to nowhere!

all the best

 

[Lynx]

I have studied ethics quite extensively and can pin on many occasions almost identical ethical foundation to that of Abrahamic religion. Namely Islam!

You're repeating the same logical confusion that I thought I had remedied in my previous post; if two systems have the same view on some moral problem or dilemma or etc., it does not follow that one system is basing its view on the other system.

the implication was never that one borrowed from another except as pertains to atheism/secularism since the religion that has always been was monotheism before all sorts of people got colorful.

citation please.

There are always amendments to the secular ethical system and that is usually develops when a case involves the judicial system but again that always relies on a foundation that is older than sin!

You're confusing the law and morality. The purpose of the law is not to uphold the morals of the people; the purpose of the law is to enforce a set of rules that the state thinks is consistent with the political philosophy it has adopted.

That is a very hollow explanation that didn't require you much thought.. and it is just as well since I have a migraine and not in the mood for a protracted discourse that leads to nowhere!

all the best

No problem. I didn't want to spend the time in detailing my beliefs on ethics. That's what essays are for !

 

[جوري]

You're repeating the same logical confusion that I thought I had remedied in my previous post; if two systems have the same view on some moral problem or dilemma or etc., it does not follow that one system is basing its view on the other system.

you are incapable of remedying anything unfortunately including your ability to comprehend what is written: since I have stated and in so many words :the implication was never that one borrowed from another....

which to the naked eye can be construed as just that not borrowing but the standard norm upon which all else evolved!

citation please.

You should request one from your person give your ''the mere existence of shared moral beliefs does not imply that one took it from the other.''

You're confusing the law and morality. The purpose of the law is not to uphold the morals of the people; the purpose of the law is to enforce a set of rules that the state thinks is consistent with the political philosophy it has adopted.

Law is based largely on what is moral and good-- further my comment on the law, stems as applicable to ethical legal issues that need upholding. For instance should a plug be pulled from someone who is in a vegetative state, can you perform an abortion after 4 months etc. should a person who murdered receive the death penalty etc. The law though a guideline for what to do when such issues arise has its basis largely in what is good and moral. Its basic principles can be found in the original commandments.

No problem. I didn't want to spend the time in detailing my beliefs on ethics. That's what essays are for !

excellent indeed!