Notices
Results 1 to 35 of 35

Thread: The Atheist Bible.

  1. #1 The Atheist Bible. 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    101
    Be warned all theists:

    http://www.theatheistbible.com/3.htm

    Godless


    Don't count your money while your sitting on the table.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    28
    People that don't realize the variety of human religious beliefs might say something like (the title of the debate page) -
    "the great debate - science vs. religion."
    This is sad.
    Better to say -
    the great debate - pure empiricism vs. religion.

    As a matter of fact, let's have it now:
    1) most of what there is to know is still unkown
    2) the unknown does have an effect on our existence
    3) mapping what little we know onto every aspect of existence and pretending we have a conclusive "scientific" understanding (prematurely) is lame.
    That is pretty much that.

    I do agree, however, with the things the website says religious people need not say to an athiest.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman craterchains's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Tacoma, WA, usa
    Posts
    58
    I really think FieryIce put it very well when she put this little diddy together.

    "Humans because of our present level of technology can answer questions that have
    plagued scholars for millennium. Questions asked of Ezra about three millennium ago can
    now be answered. Questions asked of him such as, "Go, weigh for me the weight of fire,
    or measure for me a blast of wind, or call back for me the day that is past … or show me
    the picture of a voice … if you solve one of them for me, then I will show you the way you
    desire to see … You cannot understand the things with which you have grown up; how
    then can your mind comprehend the way of the Most High?" Since we can now answer
    these questions and we can now comprehend, there is a responsibility that accompanies
    this comprehension. That also makes us responsible for being able to understand the
    message."

    Of course we can answer these very technical questions today!
    Fire by BTU's.
    Wind by anemometer.
    Voice modulation wave. Like a .wav file.
    Recall a day, would you want that on DVD, or VHS?

    It aint about "religion" it's about comprehension of the message.
    A government coming, the Kingdom of the heavens (universe).
    It's not what you know or don't know, but what you know that isn't so that will hurt you. Will Rodgers 1938
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Blah-blah blink. Ripley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by craterchains
    Of course we can answer these very technical questions today!
    Fire by BTU's.
    Wind by anemometer.
    Voice modulation wave. Like a .wav file.
    Recall a day, would you want that on DVD, or VHS?

    It aint about "religion" it's about comprehension of the message.
    A government coming, the Kingdom of the heavens (universe).
    Quote Originally Posted by quote
    if you solve one of them for me, then I will show you the way you
    desire to see
    Perhaps those sighted solutions might be as crude as the first wheel -- wasn't it made entirely of stone or wood? Or am I thinking of the Flintstones?

    But perhaps those "modern" answers are satisfactory enough to the "gods"? But then who would benefit from the "Most High"? Like, I wouldn't even know how to operate an anemometer... would that mean I'd be excluded from further insight?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    101
    1) most of what there is to know is still unkown
    We know enought to question the authorative church, which it has no answer either!. They still don't have any emperical proof that a god, exist, they don't have empircal evidence that a soul exists, they have no emperical proof, that a heaven/hell exists, Basically the Church has no answers either!. they don't know squat.

    What if the church still had power today politically? IT WOULD STILL BE THE DARK AGES!.

    the unknown does have an effect on our existence
    False speculation, Science is learning daily, the church still thrives on dogma, it still full of cohersive manipulators, who strive and live off the gullible. Dig deep in your pockets, and remember we rather have the kind that folds, instead of the kind that jingles. The church is basically a whore for money. Its a business and the sooner you find out the more money you will save!.

    3) mapping what little we know onto every aspect of existence and pretending we have a conclusive "scientific" understanding (prematurely) is lame.
    Having faith in the assertions of the church is even worst, look at history, where as it gotten us? (The dark ages, religious wars, which burning, homosexual biggotry, the heliocentry theory, flat earht, Waco, Rev. Jim Jones, Dave Coresh, Were has the church led us? if not backwards, if not stagnation of human mental evolution.

    You've got nothing Cole!.

    Godless.
    Don't count your money while your sitting on the table.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by cole
    1) most of what there is to know is still unkown
    Quote Originally Posted by godless
    We know enought to question the authorative church, which it has no answer either!. They still don't have any emperical proof that a god, exist, they don't have empircal evidence that a soul exists, they have no emperical proof, that a heaven/hell exists, Basically the Church has no answers either!. they don't know squat.
    That is your opinion, which is worth something... to you.
    The fact remains that we all are basing our understanding on limited information and anyone who doesn't realize this has a highly distorted view of cognition and reality.


    Quote Originally Posted by cole grey
    the unknown does have an effect on our existence
    Quote Originally Posted by godless
    False speculation, Science is learning daily...
    Quack.
    Does the unkown have an effect or not? Obviously it does, and all the crying you do about people's errors makes no dent in that fact.
    How can the fact that the unknown has an effect upon us be false? One of the many effects the unknown has is that people have an impulse to make sure "science is learning daily".

    Quote Originally Posted by cole
    mapping what little we know onto every aspect of existence and pretending we have a conclusive "scientific" understanding (prematurely) is lame.
    Quote Originally Posted by godless
    Having faith in the assertions of the church is even worst(sic)...
    Having faith in all the assertions of the church (which church again?) might be worse. That doesn't make the foolish idea, I mention above less foolish. Two fools claiming ultimate understanding merely compounds the foolishness of both.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by cole grey
    The fact remains that we all are basing our understanding on limited information and anyone who doesn't realize this has a highly distorted view of cognition and reality.
    Actually it's funny that you say this. Atheists say god doesnt exist, after all, how do we know he would exist? because a book says so? Theists however claim to know/feel/believe he does exist. So theists have a more ambitious knowledge claim then atheists.

    Quote Originally Posted by cole grey
    Better to say -
    the great debate - pure empiricism vs. religion.
    Or just the great atheism vs. religion debate. It's not that I don't believe in god because I 'believe' in science: I just don't believe in god. Whether there's a good substitute or not.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman arditezza's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    40
    I still don't see why most atheists hate the idea of God.

    I personally think that if it brings people comfort and guidance, as long as it's leading in a good way... what's the harm?

    Not all Christians are Bible thumping raving lunatics filled with so much dogma that they can't see straight, in fact I think those numbers are fairly small. I've seen some raving lunatic atheists vehemently strike down anything any religious person has said with all the fury of a massive hurricane. I just don't get it. Why get yourself so worked up about what other people want to believe if it's not infringing on your life?

    Believe or don't. It's as simple as that, and to make it more complicated just reinforces the ideas of intolerance, hatred and in the end violence. Who cares if my next door neighbour is in midday prayer to Allah or to the Virgin Mary? I would still be kind, and respect his right to believe and hope that he respects my right not to. What harm does it do to just not listen and walk away?

    I'm personally tired of all the anti-religion atheists always putting down religion as some sort of evil incarnate. Religions have shaped what society has become with morals and will values that have carried on for centuries. We aren't that bad off at the moment, and if people can come together for the greater good, then is it not a good idea? What do you do with your Sunday mornings as an atheist? I personally take a walk and absorb the beauty of nature and reflect on the weeks events. Why the anger? It's not like their belief somehow subtracts from your disbelief.
    Come join the Babbling Incoherents
    A forum of the humanities/philosophy/arts variety.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Masters Degree invert_nexus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    639
    Not much of a bible. Is it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Junior superluminal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    nowhere
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by arditezza
    I still don't see why most atheists hate the idea of God.

    I personally think that if it brings people comfort and guidance, as long as it's leading in a good way... what's the harm?

    Not all Christians are Bible thumping raving lunatics filled with so much dogma that they can't see straight, in fact I think those numbers are fairly small. I've seen some raving lunatic atheists vehemently strike down anything any religious person has said with all the fury of a massive hurricane. I just don't get it. Why get yourself so worked up about what other people want to believe if it's not infringing on your life?

    Believe or don't. It's as simple as that, and to make it more complicated just reinforces the ideas of intolerance, hatred and in the end violence. Who cares if my next door neighbour is in midday prayer to Allah or to the Virgin Mary? I would still be kind, and respect his right to believe and hope that he respects my right not to. What harm does it do to just not listen and walk away?

    I'm personally tired of all the anti-religion atheists always putting down religion as some sort of evil incarnate. Religions have shaped what society has become with morals and will values that have carried on for centuries. We aren't that bad off at the moment, and if people can come together for the greater good, then is it not a good idea? What do you do with your Sunday mornings as an atheist? I personally take a walk and absorb the beauty of nature and reflect on the weeks events. Why the anger? It's not like their belief somehow subtracts from your disbelief.
    You are very optimistic in your view of religions effect on humanity.

    1) Most of the atheists and theists I know are not foaming-at-the-mouth raving lunatics and we (atheists) don't "hate" the idea of god(s). However, the atheists are genuinely afraid of the effects that religion has and can have on human existence.

    2) I fear living in a theistic state. History shows what happens to people who don't agree with the approved religion.

    3) As for moral guidance, if you follow your instincts, you will be fine. Morals are not "handed down" from on high. If you believe they are, then you are at the mercy of those who interpret the moral telegram for you.

    Religions have shaped what society has become with morals and will values that have carried on for centuries. We aren't that bad off at the moment, and if people can come together for the greater good, then is it not a good idea?
    Imagine where we might be without the ages of religious wars, crusades, intolerance and suppression of scientific inquiry into nature.

    Yes, we atheists have reason to fear religion.
    Huh?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman Also Known As's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88


    A shining example of why I dislike religion in general, and dogma in specific.

    Dogma demands authority, rather than intelligent thought, as the source of opinion; it requires persecution of heretics and hostility to unbelievers; it asks of its disciples that they should inhibit natural kindness in favor of systematic hatred.
    -- Bertrand Russell


    The whole conception of a God is a conception derived from the ancient oriental despotisms. It is a conception quite unworthy of free men.... We ought to stand up and look the world frankly in the face. We ought to make the best we can of the world, and if it is not so good as we wish, after all it will still be better than what these others have made of it in all these ages.
    -- Bertrand Russell, "Why I Am Not A Christian
    To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
    -- Thomas Paine, The Crisis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman ellion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Back In My Box!
    Posts
    95
    religious or political?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    317
    Also Known As,

    A shining example of why I dislike religion in general, and dogma in specific.
    Explain why 911 was a religious action.

    Jan Ardena.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman Also Known As's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88
    The perpetrators of that act were convinced that they were doing god's work, and would be rewarded in an afterlife. They were utterly certain of this, they didn't have a shadow of a doubt.

    This is the heart of the problem. When people are completely certain they are correct, they are willing to do the most horrendous things, confident that the end justifies the means. Russell cites the example of Jesuit missionaries in south america who would baptize native infants, then dash their head against a rock, killing them. Their justification was that if they were returned to their parents and grew up, they would become pagan, and their souls would be condemned to hell eternally.

    One of the most interesting and harmful delusions to which men and nations can be subjected, is that of imagining themselves special instruments of the Divine Will. We know that when the Israelites invaded the Promised Land it was they who were fulfilling the Divine Purpose, and not the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizites, the Hivites, or the Jebbusites. Perhaps if these others had written long history books the matter might have looked a little different. In fact, the Hittites did leave some inscriptions, from which you would never guess what abandoned wretches they were. It was discovered, 'after the fact', that Rome was destined by the gods for the conquest of the world. Then came Islam with its fanatical belief that every soldier dying in battle for the True Faith went straight to a Paradise more attractive than that of the Christians, as houris are more attractive than harps. Cromwell was persuaded that he was the Divinely appointed instrument of justice for suppressing Catholics and malignants. Andrew Jackson was the agent of Manifest Destiny in freeing North America from the incubus of Sabbath-breaking Spaniards. In our day, the sword of the Lord has been put into the hands of the Marxists. Hegel thought that the Dialectic with fatalistic logic had given supremacy to Germany. 'No,'said Marx,'not to Germany,but to the Proletariat'. This doctrine has kinship with the earlier doctrines of the Chosen People and Manifest Destiny. In its character of fatalism it has viewed the struggle of opponent' as one against destiny, and argued that therefore the wise man would put himself on the winning side as quickly as possible. That is why this argument is such a useful one politically. The only objection to it is that it assumes a knowledge of the Divine purposes to which no rational man can lay claim, and that in the execution of them it justifies a ruthless cruelty which would be condemned if our programme had a merely mundane origin. It is good to know that God is on our side, but a little confusing when you find the enemy equally con vinced of the opposite. To quote the immortal lines of the poet during the first World War:

    Gott strafe England, and God save the King.
    God this, and God that, and God the other thing.
    'Good God,' said God, 'I've got my work cut out.'
    http://www.threads.name/russell/ideas_harm.html
    To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
    -- Thomas Paine, The Crisis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    317
    Also Known As,

    The perpetrators of that act were convinced that they were doing god's work, and would be rewarded in an afterlife.
    Could you please demonstrate how you know this?
    And could you clearly demonstrate in what way the attack was caused by the Islamic religion.

    This is the heart of the problem. When people are completely certain they are correct, they are willing to do the most horrendous things, confident that the end justifies the means. Russell cites the example of Jesuit missionaries in south america who would baptize native infants, then dash their head against a rock, killing them. Their justification was that if they were returned to their parents and grew up, they would become pagan, and their souls would be condemned to hell eternally.
    What does this have to do with religion?
    Where in religious texts does it sanction this action?
    Show me where Moses, Jesus, Mohammad, or Krishna says this is okay?

    Jan Ardena.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    61
    8) Hi AKA,

    Good comment, althought as Jan says, we don`t know exactly what went down on 9/11. Was it even about religion?
    Sorrow floats
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Freshman Also Known As's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88
    Osama Bin Laden said it was about religion. From a 1998 statement calling on muslims to kill Americans wherever possible:

    All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al-Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said: "As for the fighting to repulse [an enemy], it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed [by the ulema]. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life."

    On that basis, and in compliance with Allah's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:

    We -- with Allah's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson. Almighty Allah said: "O ye who believe, give your response to Allah and His Apostle, when He calleth you to that which will give you life. And know that Allah cometh between a man and his heart, and that it is He to whom ye shall all be gathered."

    Almighty Allah also says: "O ye who believe, what is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling so heavily to the earth! Do ye prefer the life of this world to the hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For Allah hath power over all things."

    Almighty Allah also says: "So lose no heart, nor fall into despair. For ye must gain mastery if ye are true in faith."
    http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm

    I don't have to show any sort of justification for the Jesuit's actions out of the bible. They found it for themselves well enough. Do you have any doubt about the faith of those who perpetrated the Inquisition, or the Salem witch trials? That silly book does say, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live".

    And if you believed as they did, their logic is irrefutable. Saving the childs immortal soul, versus allowing it to grow up as a pagan, and be condemned to hell forever.

    Where does Marx say it would be necessary to kill millions in order to bring about his revolution? Do you dispute that it was done in his name?
    Mothers in the countryside sometimes tossed their emaciated children onto passing railroad cars traveling toward cities such as Kiev in the hope someone there would take pity. But in the cities, children and adults who had already flocked there from the countryside were dropping dead in the streets, with their bodies carted away in horse-drawn wagons to be dumped in mass graves. Occasionally, people lying on the sidewalk who were thought to be dead, but were actually still alive, were also carted away and buried.

    While police and Communist Party officials remained quite well fed, desperate Ukrainians ate leaves off bushes and trees, killed dogs, cats, frogs, mice and birds then cooked them. Others, gone mad with hunger, resorted to cannibalism, with parents sometimes even eating their own children.

    Meanwhile, nearby Soviet-controlled granaries were said to be bursting at the seams from huge stocks of 'reserve' grain, which had not yet been shipped out of the Ukraine. In some locations, grain and potatoes were piled in the open, protected by barbed wire and armed GPU guards who shot down anyone attempting to take the food. Farm animals, considered necessary for production, were allowed to be fed, while the people living among them had absolutely nothing to eat.
    http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/Gen...ine_famine.htm

    It no more matters that Marx most likely wouldn't have approved of this than it matters that Jesus wouldn't have approved of the Inquisition. Books of sacred scriptures are translated to justify whatever the class in power wants them to. And true believers do not use logic or reason. They obey.
    To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
    -- Thomas Paine, The Crisis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Blah-blah blink. Ripley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    104
    Of course 911 wasn't expressively about the Islamic vs the Christian religions, nor about any obscure rewards for an afterlife. Any such "reward" would merely serve as a boost to will power. I mean, had those jetliners truly been doctrine-driven, why, chartered airliners, under the guise of foreign tourist groups, should have been packed with praying devotees, right? But an obvious asset that organised religions have is a vast network of differing manpower groups united under one roof, all sharing a common cause pertinent to their own way of life, their own interests, their own politics -- gone is the USSR to counteract or counter-balance the special interests of the US.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Freshman ellion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Back In My Box!
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by 'also known as' dude
    It no more matters that Marx most likely wouldn't have approved of this than it matters that Jesus wouldn't have approved of the Inquisition. Books of sacred scriptures are translated to justify whatever the class in power wants them to. And true believers do not use logic or reason. They obey.
    politics or religion?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman Also Known As's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88
    politics or religion?
    That would be choice number 3, dogma.

    I do not believe that a decay of dogmatic belief can do anything but good. I admit at once that new systems of dogma, such as those of the Nazis and the Communists, are even worse than the old systems, but they could never have acquired a hold over men's minds if orthodox dogmatic habits had not been instilled in youth. Stalin's language is full of reminiscences of the theological seminary in which he received his training. What the world needs is not dogma, but an attitude of scientific inquiry, combined with a belief that the torture of millions is not desirable, whether inflicted by Stalin or by a Deity imagined in the likeness of the believer.
    - Bertrand Russell
    To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
    -- Thomas Paine, The Crisis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Freshman ellion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Back In My Box!
    Posts
    95
    and dogma. this dogma that you perceive is it political or religious?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Freshman arditezza's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    40
    If it was about religion, they would have attacked religious targets. They wanted to topple the US financial system, not the US religious system. It was more about killing American Infidels than about killing Christian Infidels. If it was about religion, why didn't they attack the Vatican, or churches. I don't believe that it was a religious attack, no matter what Osama says. He hates the Jews too, and he's not blowing up Israel or anything.

    9/11 was nothing more than a fighting back of an assumed power we have. It's for supporting the Israelis and for going to war against Saddam. It's about trade embargos and it's about oil. It's not about Muslim vs. Christian.
    Come join the Babbling Incoherents
    A forum of the humanities/philosophy/arts variety.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Blah-blah blink. Ripley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    104
    And what about the hearsay that God speaks to Bush? Hasn't Bush hinted as much, or at least uses God as patronage?

    "We are in a conflict between good and evil. And America will call evil by its name," Mr Bush told West Point graduates in a speech last year.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman Also Known As's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88
    In the end, what difference does it make? As Proud Muslim never ceased pointing out to us at Sciforums, as far as he (and Muslims who think as he does) was concerned there was no dividing line between the political and the religious.

    The system of government under Islam is based upon the Quran and the Sunna or Traditions of the Prophet Muhammad. As Islamic government has to suit many different times and situations, the basic rules and principles are set out in the Quran but the details are for the Muslims of a particular time or place to decide. There has always been a lot of discussion amongst Muslim scholars about the best way to implement these rules and principles.

    The sovereignty of God, the message conveyed by all the prophets, is the foundation of the system. Legislation contained in the Quran becomes the basic law of the state. This puts the fundamental law of the society beyond the lobbying power of particular interest groups and ensures that legislation is just and equitable. The government must make decisions on the basis of what God has revealed. If it does not, according to the Quran, it is not Islamic, for those who make decisions on other than what God has revealed are unbelievers (Surah 5 Verse 44). In cases not covered by revelation, decisions based on Islamic principles are left to the Mujtahids, Islamic experts on legal interpretation. The Muslims can make laws or regulations dealing with such matters, but these do not have the same permanence as Quranic injunctions.

    God said in the Quran that He was going to create a 'caliph' or representative upon the earth (2:30). Human beings are these caliphs. This means that all humanity is responsible for the establishment of the laws and principles revealed by God, not some superior class of priests or holy men. Thus Islamic government is not a theocracy. All human beings are equal, the only distinction made by God is in their degree of righteousness. Islam allows no distinction amongst people on the basis of tribe or race, ethnic group or amount of wealth. The Muslims are different from other people only in that they are conscious of the importance of submission to God's decrees.
    http://www.islamfortoday.com/cleland04.htm

    As I said before, September the eleventh was about a fanatical certainty of being right. Since all of us here in the west kafirs or mushrak, there is no need to hit a religious target. So they aimed for maximum impact.

    If you go to school in Saudi Arabia, what do you learn about people who are not followers of Wahhabi, of the prophet?

    The religious curriculum in Saudi Arabia teaches you that people are basically two sides: Salafis [Wahhabis], who are the winners, the chosen ones, who will go to heaven, and the rest. The rest are Muslims and Christians and Jews and others.

    They are either kafirs, who are deniers of God, or mushrak, putting gods next to God, or enervators, that's the lightest one. The enervators of religion who are they call the Sunni Muslims who ... for instance, celebrate Prophet Mohammed's birthday, and do some stuff that is not accepted by Salafis.

    And all of these people are not accepted by Salafi as Muslims. As I said, "claimant to Islam." And all of these people are supposed to be hated, to be persecuted, even killed. And we have several clergy -- not one Salafi clergy -- who have said that against the Shi'a and against the other Muslims. And they have done it in Algeria, in Afghanistan. This is the same ideology. They just have the same opportunity. They did it in Algeria and Afghanistan, and now New York. ...
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...wahhabism.html
    Some kind of philosophy is a necessity to all but the most thoughtless, and in the absence of knowledge it is almost sure to be a silly philosophy. The result of this is that the human race becomes divided into rival groups of fanatics, each group firmly persuaded that its own brand of nonsense is sacred truth, while the other side's is damnable heresy. Arians and Catholics, Crusaders and Muslims, Protestants and adherents of the Pope, Communists and Fascists, have filled large parts of the last 1,600 years with futile strife, when a little philosophy would have shown both sides in all these disputes that neither had any good reason to believe itself in the right. Dogmatism is an enemy to peace, and an insuperable barrier to democracy. In the present age, at least as much as in former times, it is the greatest of the mental obstacles to human happiness.

    The demand for certainty is one which is natural to man, but is nevertheless an intellectual vice. If you take your children for a picnic on a doubtful day, they will demand a dogmatic answer as to whether it will be fine or wet, and be disappointed in you when you cannot be sure. The same sort of assurance is demanded, in later life, of those who undertake to lead populations into the Promised Land. 'Liquidate the capitalists and the survivors will enjoy eternal bliss.' 'Exterminate the Jews and everyone will be virtuous.' 'Kill the Croats and let the Serbs reign.' 'Kill the Serbs and let the Croats reign.' These are samples of the slogans that have won wide popular acceptance in our time. Even a modicum of philosophy would make it impossible to accept such bloodthirsty nonsense. But so long as men are not trained to withhold judgment in the absence of evidence, they will be led astray by cocksure prophets, and it is likely that their leaders will be either ignorant fanatics or dishonest charlatans. To endure uncertainty is difficult, but so are most of the other virtues. For the learning of every virtue there is an appropriate discipline, and for the learning of suspended judgment the best discipline is philosophy.
    http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Orac..._ph4laymen.htm
    To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
    -- Thomas Paine, The Crisis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Freshman ellion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Back In My Box!
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by 'also known as' sir
    As I said before, September the eleventh was about a fanatical certainty of being right. Since all of us here in the west kafirs or mushrak, there is no need to hit a religious target. So they aimed for maximum impact.
    your pretty certain this is what happened arent you?

    the difference is you are claiming that religion is akin to a military organisation, a danger to public interest and responsible for numerous attrocities, arent you?

    my point is political systems including the present ruling class have been responsible for much of the same, perhaps more, perhaps the real problems, the problems that are killing people day in day out, in their own homes and unarmed, in "civilised" and "secure" social structures are caused by these corrupt political aggendas. conveniently the finger of blame is turned upon those who are easy targets, the religious, immigrants, racial issues are exaggerated, poor education is blamed, drugs, terrorism blah blah blah any scapegoat that distracts public attention from government activity.
    perhaps the reilgious systems have become the victim of clever politics the bishop on the chess board of a strategic game of power.

    but then i dont know really, it could be that some muslims have interpreted their sacred books different to others and decided that unbelievers are evil. this doesnt make all muslims terrorists and it doesnt mean all relgious ar militant.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    61
    8) Yo AKA, (what`s your sciforums nic?)

    I absolutely share your sentiment regarding the atrocities committed in the name of religion. In my opinion: religion = division. So history has shown us repeatedly that human nature combined with religious license will surely result in zealous and senseless violent behaviour. As much as religions preach peace and brotherhood, the results are quite contrary.

    The reason I question the motivation for 9/11 is based largely on the outcome of that incident. I.e. American foreign policy. Without 9/11, American forays into Afghanistan and Iraq would not have been possible. The American agenda in the Middle East is clearly visible, when looked at unemotionally. What Bin Laden is purported to have said is all given to us via the media. Same as the WMD was hyped up by the media. Once more to stir up a aggressive frenzy to implement American agendas in the Middle East. You will see that Iran will probably be the next American target, and evidence for this is mounting.

    I’m not nit-picking your basic sentiment, rather the example you offer. There is plenty contrary angles to the official line that you can research for yourself.

    (There is a good article on Islamic suicide bombers in the current European Time magazine, but there is once again, subtle political subtext
    Sorrow floats
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Freshman Also Known As's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88
    I'm not big on conspiracy theories, so lets just say I believe that the obvious explanation for Sept. 11 is the correct one. If it hasn't had the intended consequence (or if it had unintended consequences as well as the intended one), well, neither did the U.S. policy of funding and arming the Mujahideen in Afghanistan.

    How about a more open and shut case? Eric Rudolph:

    In the summer of 1996, the world converged upon Atlanta for the Olympic Games. Under the protection and auspices of the regime in Washington millions of people came to celebrate the ideals of global socialism. Multinational corporations spent billions of dollars, and Washington organized an army of security to protect these best of all games. Even thought the conception and purpose of the so-called Olympic movement is to promote the values of global socialism, as perfectly expressed in the song "Imagine" by John Lennon, which was the theme of the 1996 Games even though the purpose of the Olympics is to promote these despicable ideals, the purpose of the attack on July 27 was to confound, anger and embarrass the Washington government in the eyes of the world for its abominable sanctioning of abortion on demand.

    The plan was to force the cancellation of the Games, or at least create a state of insecurity to empty the streets around the venues and thereby eat into the vast amounts of money invested.

    Rudolph has also confessed to the bombings of an abortion clinic in the Atlanta suburb of Sandy Springs on January 16, 1997, a gay and lesbian nightclub, the Otherside Lounge, in Atlanta on February 21, 1997, injuring five, and an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama on January 29, 1998, killing Robert Sanderson and critically injuring Emily Lyons. Rudolph's bombs were made of dynamite surrounded by nails which acted as shrapnel, increasing the destructive power of the bombs. The use of two bombs is a common terrorist tactic: the second bomb is timed to target those responding to the first explosion.

    He is said to have targeted the health clinic and office building because abortions were performed there, and targeted the Otherside Lounge because it was a predominantly lesbian nightclub. Rudolph is an adherent of the extremist group Christian Identity, a sect that holds that white Christians are God's chosen people, and that others will be condemned to Hell. However, in a statement released after he entered a guilty plea, Rudolph denied being a supporter of that movement, claiming that his involvement amounted to a brief association with the daughter of a Christian Identity adherent.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph

    Intelligent free thinking people do not do these sorts of things. Indoctrinated fanatics do. It doesn't really matter if the dogma is political or religious. And as I mentioned before, for many in the Muslim world, the distinction between the two is artificial.

    Don't forget this part:
    On March 7, 1998, Daniel Rudolph, Eric's older brother, videotaped himself cutting off one of his own hands with an electric saw in order to "send a message to the FBI and the media." The hand was successfully reattached.
    To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
    -- Thomas Paine, The Crisis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Freshman ellion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Back In My Box!
    Posts
    95
    whats with the quotes, do you work for the media?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    61
    8) Fair enough AKA,

    "How about a more open and shut case? Eric Rudolph:"

    * Frightening. I say stamp out superstition! Anyway gods been at work in London it seems.

    "Don't forget this part:
    Quote:
    On March 7, 1998, Daniel Rudolph, Eric's older brother, videotaped himself cutting off one of his own hands with an electric saw in order to "send a message to the FBI and the media." The hand was successfully reattached."

    * So religious zeal is genetic! Good mental healthcare can work wonders, once denial is overcome.

    Allcare.
    Sorrow floats
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Freshman ellion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Back In My Box!
    Posts
    95
    "gods been at work in london"

    all the politicians went to scotland!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    61
    8) Yo ellion,

    In Blairs first telecast, he seemed a bit over rehearsed. Heh. My friend was just across the street in Tavistock when it happened. She is fine. I feel for the familes involved. Lets see what th official line is. I reckon, this will be the excuse to invade Iran.
    Sorrow floats
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Freshman ellion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Back In My Box!
    Posts
    95
    it is sad that people will go to lengths such as this to impose their own ideals on others. is there another thread on the terrorist atttacks in london on this forum?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    405
    If we are talking about blind religious fanaticism here, it's worth noting that the identities of the London bombers has been discovered, and they are, after all, suicide bombers.

    I felt it was rather strange that the initial reaction of the Metropolitan Police was to downplay the idea that it was a suicide mission, but rather consider it to be the timed bomb devices left in packages as used to be the way of the IRA when performing their outrages.

    Since the bomb was of the co-ordinated type on public transport favoured by Muslim extremists and the confirmation seemed to come quite quickly that it was indeed Muslim in origin, surely it was obvious that they would be suicide bombers? I mean, it's not like the British terrorist contingent have said to themselves, "Hey, I've got a great idea - if we use timers, we don't have to be in the same place as the bomb!"

    No, no, martyrdom for the direct path to Paradise is central to the fanatical beliefs that the calmer, wiser, manipulators behind the scenes, the real bastards, play up to. Obviously from their point of view it's doubly useful to have the bombers die in the actual outrage. The great tragedy is that the reason you would expect such a technique to be a bad idea instead of a good one - the lack of supply of volunteers, or so you would have thought - is not in fact a problem at all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    49
    My bible is my books on evolution and zoology, and the accasional Stephen King book.
    "Nature is an infinite sphere whos center is everywhere and whose circumferense is nowhere."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,355
    Quote Originally Posted by Thamnophis
    My bible is my books on evolution and zoology, and the accasional Stephen King book.

    someone asked the question earlier in this thread that why most athiests hate the idea of god, i dont hate the idea of god, as in a story kinda way. but to base you lives and kill for a story book and then believe its factual is odd. If i believed in grimm fairy tales and believed the storys in there were telling me how to live my life/where we came from etc i'd have been sectioned.

    thats not just the bible, its the koran and every other book out there. There is no proof of it being real anywhere and then you get told its a faith thing, another word for that kinda faith is gullable.

    this is not directed at anyone on here as you all seem polite people(on the whole :wink: ) but i believe athiests dont like the idea of god cause of what it does to people, it takes all the common sense from there heads and fills it full of whimsicle fairy tales and any comment agains it, is seen as a personal attack. luckily one here it may be a rude remark in reply. But in other parts of the world means be-heading

    I would have thought by now in our many years of evolution we would have grown out of the religion thing and got on with the important things in life :-D
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •