"Muslims Speak Out": An Unbalanced Panel

http://kreoline.247ihost.com >mortgage calculator refinance breakeven Tits up

http://kreoline.247ihost.com >mortgage calculator refinance breakeven Tits up

http://allinfo.iifree.net >consolidation corporation loan student Far from the madding crowd

rsjuhg arlwcn gwqsyzxc jvdxzgb hxbgnok edplvx wobatdkzy

rsjuhg arlwcn gwqsyzxc jvdxzgb hxbgnok edplvx wobatdkzy

rsjuhg arlwcn gwqsyzxc jvdxzgb hxbgnok edplvx wobatdkzy

hello,
dear mrs.susan jacoby,
i come across two unknown authors, whom i think have found interesting answers by themselves.
i suggest to study them.
walter russell (1870-1963,usa);
www.philosophy.org
www.walter-russell.org
-and-
martinus (1890-1981,denmark)
www.martinus.dk
www.martinus.nu
www.oletherkelsen.dk
both wrote for "humane materialists",
not for dogma-believers.

all the best from germany
henrynold@hotmail.com

To continue with our chat Maurie Beck, you said,

"Like I said earlier, you hate change. You want a reliable world in which to live. Unfortunately, nothing can give you that, not even your religion."

I can make sense of why the world is the way it is and while being thankful for what God has given me, look forward to life after death in which my joy will be made complete when I see my Maker and His love for me.

To continue, you said,

"In addition, some things change for the better."

Now you are making a moral judgment. What is your standard and measure for "better"?

"We no longer burn people at the stake (the Catholic Inquisition) or kill witches (many Christian denominations)."

Why would you consider this wrong? As an evolutionary biologist did we not originate from a random chance explosion; from non-living, non-thinking matter that knows no difference between right and wrong? Ever seen minerals mixing together that have self consciousness and can make moral judgments? If we are just evolving morals how do you know in a chance universe that burning and killing witches will not one day be in vogue again?

And when you say,

"At the time, god-fearing people considered this excellent behavior. According to your hypothesis, these god-fearing people should have known better."

I believe God fearing people did know that the Inquisition was wrong. The Bible is very clear.

It always amazes me how quickly people are to bring up the wrongs of a church in error and ignore the massive killings of atheistic regimes during the twentieth century in which an estimated 100 million people perished. Without God anything is possible (in what people will justify).

You said,

"The standard does keep shifting because society changes and does determine the moral zeitgeist. That is why slavery is no longer practiced in this country and was abolished."

So what is to prevent slavery from happening again with a shifting standard? Do you not think that it is still happening? Why is it wrong though if you cannot establish an absolute standard?

Jonathan Glover: “God died in the nineteenth century and Nietzsche danced on his grave. The foundation of the external moral law was destroyed and, in its place, was a vacuum, soon gleefully filled by the narcotics of Nazism and Communism. It may not be possible to say that the death of God led directly to the death ovens; but equally, nobody can ignore the fact that the cruelest era in history was also the first to deny the existence of an external moral force.” If this is true, “can we stop the long nightmare of the twentieth century from spilling over into the twenty-first?” - Taken from the American Vision website (The Atheist Bible of Quotes)

When I said,

"Evolution poses so many questions that the evolutionist cannot answer."

Your reply,

"I'm an evolutionary biologist. You are willfully ignorant on the subject. One of the reasons I'm an evolutionary biologist is that, like any good science, there are so many questions. Questions for me are the elixir of life. Because there are so many questions, instead of throwing my hands in the air and saying it is too complicated and it must be god, I get to work to answer the questions. Fortunately, each time I answer a question, ten more pop up."

Some thoughts on that paragraph are as an evolutionary biologist your field of expertise is narrow. With any worldview you must start with basic core foundations that are assumed. You were not there when the world can into existence, therefore you look at the evidence with certain preconceived ideas and you interpret the evidence relying on those core ideas being true. When something does not fit your hypothesis you make it. On those core beliefs you stand or you are forced to change your worldview because of the inconsistency.

When you get lost in the details, it is hard to see the big picture. God has given us the big picture.

So far you have not been able to make sense out of morals that you say have evolution without borrowing from my Christian framework.

As Richard Dawkins said:

“In the universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, and other people are going to get lucky; and you won’t find any rhyme or reason to it, nor any justice. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is at the bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good. Nothing but blind pitiless indifference. DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is, and we dance to its music.” Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene (New York: Oxford University Press, 1976), 133.

When you say,

"One conclusion from evolutionary biology has been well established; life changes. Some of this change is random (i.e. evolutionary drift). However, evolution by natural selection is non-random. Only those individuals best adapted to the current environment survive and reproduce."

So if we are just surviving, why call the Inquisition wrong? Again, you have to borrow from the Christian worldview to make sense of "best."

God gave us the ability to adapt to the environment, but only within our kind. Where is the evidence that macro-evolution is taking place today or ever did in the past?

When you say,

"If populations of organisms didn't change, life would have gone completely extinct many times in the last 4 billion years. Perhaps your creator had something to do with that."

Only one of your assumptions is correct, that God, in His benevolence and providence is the Sustainer of life. As for the earth being 4 million years old, you're wrong.

You said,

"Frankly, I think your stick-figure view of the universe and the biological world is an insult not only to the creation, but the creator."

You're welcome to your opinion.

When you say,

"You live in a scientific world where things change very quickly. The ground under your feet feels very unstable."

With science, some is good and some is bad. The ground under my feet is solid. (Matthew 7:24-27) I stand under the unshakable truth of God's Word. (2 Corinthians 10:3-5)

Verse Infinitum,

When you say,

"But most of all, is to accept the truth for whatever it may be."

How will you know it?

"Each one of us will learn the absolute truth once we die. But until that time comes for anyone of us to depart this world, we really don't know the answer to God's existence nor do we have the absolute truth in regards to the true nature of God."

Is what you are saying absolutely true and if so how can you know it now unless you are dead? It is funny how you state that we cannot know in such absolute terms the absolute truth. Should I believe you?

"Besides if we did possess the truth, there would've been only one religion on Earth with no diversification of any way, shape of form. There would only be one holy scripture written throughout human history."

You are assuming that there is not a religion with Scriptures that come from God and is true. How do you know since you cannot know absolute truth, or at least you say you cannot.

"Considering one's religious faith to be absolute, while considering others to be false would be ethnocentric at best."

Jesus said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6)

"Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves....Bless those who persecute you, bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of lower position. Do not be conceited. Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord. On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In this way you will heap burning coals on his head.' Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." (Romans 12:9, 10; 14-21)

What is ethnocentric about those commands? Is it wrong to speak the truth in the hopes that others may find it in such a pluralistic age?

It's a great achievement for Islamic leaders and scholars as well as Newsweek and the Washington post to present this imperative opportunity for inter cultural and global philosophical dialogue. What's important is that by exchanging our ideas and comments regarding inter religious relations and world events that affect our views of each other as fellow human beings. Since the advent of humanity, We strove to make sense of the world we live in and the lives we've experienced. Worldwide curiosities to learn the true nature of life and our universe is an exceptionally rare virtue upon life on Earth. In other words, we're the only known species on the planet who've pursued to unravel these great mysteries and developed written philosophies based upon our understanding of the world around us.
One such philosophy that lasted throughout the ages of humanity is commonly known as religion and spirituality. Ever since our early belief in the Sky God and the God Mother from ancient Pagan times, we vigorously pursued to unravel the truth about our most profound questions. As any educated person would know that religion and their core beliefs or faith have evolved over time. Paganism, Monotheism and Polytheism have been influenced by humanity as these great philosophies have influenced our perceptions and decisions in life over the ages. Over time humanity has embraced diverse religious faiths and spiritual convictions that continue to influence our behavior in our times and most likely beyond.
What's vital for humanity's progress and even survival is to know the true nature of faith itself. To understand the true origins of faith. But most of all, is to accept the truth for whatever it may be. Each one of us will learn the absolute truth once we die. But until that time comes for anyone of us to depart this world, we really don't know the answer to God's existence nor do we have the absolute truth in regards to the true nature of God. Besides if we did possess the truth, there would've been only one religion on Earth with no diversification of any way, shape of form. There would only be one holy scripture written throughout human history.
Considering one's religious faith to be absolute, while considering others to be false would be ethnocentric at best. While collectively searching to unravel the mysteries on nature, life and the universe through sincere reasoning and serious research would be enlightening at its worst. Most importantly, we must accept the fact is that none of us have conclusive evidence to confirm our core beliefs and there's always an immanent change that our most cherished beliefs could be wrong. Our greatest challenge would be to tolerate the truth no matter what it may ultimately be. With such an open mind, we would be able to overcome any future discovery that would contradict our faith regarding the true nature of life, spirituality and divinity.
Humanity does have the ability to achieve such a social achievement. However, it's solely up to humanity and not any other entity or groups of entities to decide our destinies. Each one of us has a choice to make; either hopelessly engaging into meaningless inter cultural conflicts or combine our scientific and cultural gifts to thrive into an enlightened global civilization that could ultimately expand beyond our solar system. The choice is yours, and the time to make it is now!

We all carry the burden of an identity, how we identify with this atrocity or that tragedy. It is a baggage that comes with a price, the price of speaking out values and beliefs based on what we regard as authoritative texts. The secularists have their academic texts and the believers their sacred texts, both sometimes using a language that relies heavily on the symbolic.
Watching the utube video showing Wafa on Al-jazeera debating with a muslim cleric I see the divide between the secularist mind and the believer's mind. It comes into sharp focus as both defend their moral position on what is just.
Justice is a key part of the gospel message, yet in a pluralistic world where moral relativism gaining popularity, it is hard to see where moral imperatives can ever influence the economic ones that so often play a hidden role behind the tragedies and atrocities we see across history.
Morality is the issue today. It won't go away. Both believers and non-believers need to get on track with a dialogue that thrashes the big moral questions of the day. Can we continue competing as cultures, justifying runway consumption, in the dubious belief that heaven on earth is ever achievable without compromising on the sanctity of human life?

Hi Maurie,

I’m going to break my answers to your comments into different posts so that things do not get too long.

When you say,

"Admit it. You just don't like change. You want absolute truths with no uncertainty."

Actually I do like change and I’m quite comfortable with it, just not the kind of change you are proposing, the kind where truth changes with every new idea that comes along. I like truth to be true. With your worldview there is no certainty and nothing absolute, except, by the sounds of it, non-existence after death. You can't make sense of anything without borrowing capital from the Christian worldview, while all the time kicking and screaming about how unfair the one true God of Christianity is.

You get to the heart of the issue when you say,

"The universe we live in does change and as we live we change and in the end we are dust."

Yet you live as though life has purpose and meaning and that nature is uniform (without assuming the uniformity of nature, you could not know that what you observed today would apply so tomorrow). Why would this be the case in an atheistic, material, random-chance universe?

If all we do is construct our definition of good and evil from our preferences and feelings, or are forced to from the culture we live in, why should you make distinctions such as good and evil and hold me to your constructed standard? If all you are is just chance matter in motion that has no significance either now or when you are dead, and if the only purpose is the purpose you construct in the avoidance of pain and the pursuit of pleasure, then meaning and purpose become the desire to preserve what you have until finally you lose the battle of survival. Then it doesn’t matter anymore. With such a worldview you can either kill others who compete with your living space or kill yourself and make room for others so that there is less competition in the living space. Either way, it doesn't matter and makes no difference. So why bother defining “good” if your measure is relative and changing?

The problem for you to answer is why you keep borrowing from the Christian worldview to make sense of good. Is rape ever right? Is murder of an innocent person ever right? Is eating your neighbor ever right?

In an evolutionary view good is just a construct that you make up or borrow from someone else who has set the definition that regresses to someone else who has set the definition and so on, and applied to a society for its “best” interests. But the definition is constantly changing depending on who you are listening to in determining “best.”

Without God how can you determine what is best? Can you tell that the actions you make today will result in what is best tomorrow? Can you tell that your “kind” deed will be in the best interests of someone else or whether they may actually hurt them?

And why should a definition that was considered “good” ten years ago now be considered bad? Why should I accept your standard or anyone else’s? Just because society impose a penalty? Who made the penalty in the first place without God? Someone whose views were constantly changing? Why should someone else dictate to me what they believe is good if I do not accept their standard? If I can still do what I consider right in my own eyes, under the radar of the social norms in which I live, is it still wrong to murder and eat my neighbor, if no one finds out?

Jeffery Dalmer had this to say,

"If a person doesn't think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what's the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That's how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all came from slime. When we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing..."

If you teach a kid from an early age that all he/she is is a glorified animal then don’t be surprised when he/she acts like one and goes on a killing spree at Columbine or some other school.

I hope you will consider such thoughts? Even better, why there is such a standard of good and where did that standard came from? Is it not what I have been asking you to do all along? If it is not absolute why should it be binding?

As a Christian I have hope for tomorrow (and today) and purpose and meaning in life as well as a standard that is objective, absolute, ultimate and good.

Thanks for the chat. Hope you have some answers!

Petr - Why does it change so often?

Like I said earlier, you hate change. You want a reliable world in which to live. Unfortunately, nothing can give you that, not even your religion.

In addition, some things change for the better. We no longer burn people at the stake (the Catholic Inquisition) or kill witches (many Christian denominations). At the time, god-fearing people considered this excellent behavior. According to your hypothesis, these god-fearing people should have known better.

You wrote, "Your society cannot even determine it. The standard keeps shifting."

The standard does keep shifting because society changes and does determine the moral zeitgeist. That is why slavery is no longer practiced in this country and was abolished. Like I said, you are uncomfortable with change. You want to live in an immutable world.

"Evolution poses so many questions that the evolutionist cannot answer."

I'm an evolutionary biologist. You are willfully ignorant on the subject. One of the reasons I'm an evolutionary biologist is that, like any good science, there are so many questions. Questions for me are the elixir of life. Because there are so many questions, instead of throwing my hands in the air and saying it is too complicated and it must be god, I get to work to answer the questions. Fortunately, each time I answer a question, ten more pop up.

One conclusion from evolutionary biology has been well established; life changes. Some of this change is random (i.e. evolutionary drift). However, evolution by natural selection is non-random. Only those individuals best adapted to the current environment survive and reproduce. If populations of organisms didn't change, life would have gone completely extinct many times in the last 4 billion years. Perhaps your creator had something to do with that. Frankly, I think your stick-figure view of the universe and the biological world is an insult not only to the creation, but the creator.

You live in a scientific world where things change very quickly. The ground under your feet feels very unstable. Fortunately for you, because of modern medicine you will most likely live past your thirty-fifth birthday (if you haven't already). I would think such a change would make you happy. Apparently not.

302) Petr - Why does it change so often?
303)
304) Like I said earlier, you hate change. You want a reliable world in which to live. Unfortunately, nothing can give you that, not even your religion.
305)
306) In addition, some things change for the better. We no longer burn people at the stake (the Catholic Inquisition) or kill witches (many Christian denominations). At the time, god-fearing people considered this excellent behavior. According to your hypothesis, these god-fearing people should have known better.
307)
308) You wrote, "Your society cannot even determine it. The standard keeps shifting."
309)
310) The standard does keep shifting because society changes and does determine the moral zeitgeist. That is why slavery is no longer practiced in this country and was abolished. Like I said, you are uncomfortable with change. You want to live in an immutable world.
311)
312) "Evolution poses so many questions that the evolutionist cannot answer."
313)
314) I'm an evolutionary biologist. You are willfully ignorant on the subject. One of the reasons I'm an evolutionary biologist is that, like any good science, there are so many questions. Questions for me are the elixir of life. Because there are so many questions, instead of throwing my hands in the air and saying it is too complicated and it must be god, I get to work to answer the questions. Fortunately, each time I answer a question, ten more pop up.
315)
316) One conclusion from evolutionary biology has been well established; life changes. Some of this change is random (i.e. evolutionary drift). However, evolution by natural selection is non-random. Only those individuals best adapted to the current environment survive and reproduce. If populations of organisms didn't change, life would have gone completely extinct many times in the last 4 billion years. Perhaps your creator had something to do with that. Frankly, I think your stick-figure view of the universe and the biological world is an insult not only to the creation, but the creator.
317)
318) You live in a scientific world where things change very quickly. The ground under your feet feels very unstable. Fortunately for you, because of modern medicine you will most likely live past your thirty-fifth birthday (if you haven't already). I would think such a change would make you happy. Apparently not.

Hi Maurie Beck,

I'll make this short, since time is very limited until the weekend. You missed the point again.

The question is not,

"How is that atheists, agnostics, and believers of other faiths aren’t running around raping and pillaging?"

But, how do you tell someone doing these behaviors that they are bad. If it is just your consensus or the consensus of the culture you live in, why should I believe it is bad or good? Like I said, who are you to determine what good is? Your society cannot even determine it. The standard keeps shifting. Not so many years ago marriage of the same sex was considered morally wrong. What is open for negotiation next, polygamy? Where is the line drawn and what makes it right today when yesterday it was wrong. Why does it change so often? What makes abortion right today when thirty years ago (or whatever) it was wrong? What makes head hunting right for the tribe in New Guinea and wrong for you? Is it just your personal preference, what you feel is good and right?

Luke had it right. He at least recognizes that without an absolute standard everything is relative and up for negotiation and "good" without objectivity cannot be anything more than a moral preference. So how do you make sense of it, because which standard of human morality will you adopt?

And Maurie, in a chance, evolutionary universe devoid of God anything goes. Your distinction of good, in such a universe, is just the randomness of matter in motion.

Again you are side stepping the question, what is your measure for good? Why is it a standard that I or anyone else should accept? How many people need to believe your opinion of "good" before it becomes the standard?

Evolution poses so many questions that the evolutionist cannot answer. If we have evolved from matter then where did this matter come from, and how did it become living. Ever seen a rock that is self aware or living or rational or moral? Ever seen any green slime like that? As a biologist have you ever witness life coming from non-life or something coming from nothing?

I will get to your questions this weekend. Thanks for the chat.

Petr - Please make sense of "good" without belief in God Almighty.
- You have talked about "good" enough.
- What is your standard for it? How do you measure it?
- Why in an atheistic universe does it matter to you?

I have two responses;

1) How is that atheists, agnostics, and believers of other faiths aren’t running around raping and pillaging? Setting up your moral order as deriving from a belief in god is a hypothesis, which states that good moral behavior requires a belief in god. One prediction of this hypothesis is that only those who believe in god (specifically Jesus Christ) exhibit moral behavior and a sense of right and wrong. Conversely, those that don’t believe in Jesus Christ should be incapable of delineating right from wrong and should thus exhibit bad moral behavior (raping and pillaging, etc.) This hypothesis is refuted on both predictions. There are Christians who exhibit immoral behavior and most people around the world behave morally and on the whole are as moral as Christians. In other, your rarely see societies where raping and pillaging is the norm, though at one time it certainly was when dealing with other villages and towns (see the old and new testament).

2) This is a thought experiment. If you didn’t believe in god, would you run around raping and pillaging? According to your hypothesis, you would rape and pillage without god’s guiding hand.

Petr - Do you see any other animals that are worried about it (not that I believe that man is an animal, but you do)?

1) Recent work in cognition suggests that some social animals have a moral sense. It may not be as developed as in humans, but it does exist.

2) In terms of humans being an animal, I’ll ask you what I recently mentioned in a post to Luke: Are humans more like dogs (phylum Cordata, class Mammalia) than gellyfish (phylum Cnidaria, class Scyphozoan)?

Petr - you talk about rape and murder, but in an evolutionary world where values are imposed by force and a desire to survive why is this wrong?
- Why is it wrong to cannibalize my fellow man or is it and who says so?

1) Your knowledge of evolution is nonexistent. Not all interactions in nature are red in tooth and claw. Cooperation is a common feature in social animals and among species (e.g. plants and pollinators, plants and seed dispersers, corals and unicellular algae called zooxanthellae, and many others).

2) I have another thought experiment for you. If someone or something WERE TO PROVE to you that evolution was a fact and that humans descended from a common ancestor that we shared with Chimpanzees ~7 million years ago, would you give up your belief in god? BTW, if you say you would give up your belief in god, then your belief is a lot more fragile than you claim it is and I suspect god would be very disappointed.

Petr - Does majority make right or just might? Why should I hold to your standard?

That is why there is a First Amendment, which protects the rights of minorities from the “tyranny of the majority”. In our democracy, the majority can make laws to govern our political, social, and economic interactions. However, those laws cannot abrogate the rights of minorities (i.e. religious, ethnic, nonbelievers, etc.) or minority viewpoints (Fourteenth Amendment).

Luke,

Don't even try to debate Petr Huff about evolution. It is an exercise in futility. I doubt you would even get him to agree that humans are more like dogs (phylum cordata, class mammalia) than gellyfish (phylum Cnidaria, class scyphozoan).

Hello Luke,

Your last post has a lot to unpack and I am working the next two nights. Please give me time to respond. Your points are important to me.

I would like to respond quickly to one point now that you made,

"Of course it's easy to blame me because you don't understand me, but if you did, you would know that I always want the truth."

I do not blame you, but I understand why you are the way you are and that is not because of anything in my own ability, but because the Holy Spirit is the best teacher."

Romans 3:9-18 sums up those who are not born again by the grace of God,

"There is no one righteous, not even one;
there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God.
All have turned away, they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good, not even one,'
Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit.'
The poison of vipers is on their lips.
Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.
Their feet are swift to shed blood, ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of peace they do not know.
There is no fear of God before their eyes."

God word many promises, that if we seek Him with all our hearts that we will find Him, that "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and disciple."

Listen to these words from Proverbs,

"My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding, and if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the knowledge of God. For the LORD gives wisdom and from His mouth come knowledge and understanding...Then you will understand what is right and just and fair - every good path. For wisdom will enter your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul. Discretion will protect you...My son do not forget my teaching, but keep my command in your heart...Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight." (Proverbs 1:7; 2:1-6; 9-11; 3:1; 5)

As you have said, you have a relative understanding of all things, and as such, you cannot be sure of anything as being true (without God that is), because there are so many truth claims out there all vying for your attention that cannot all be right, because they contradict each other.

A good understanding of what Christ has done on the behalf of those who believe is always a good first step. Why was it necessary for Him to die for us? I would recommend reading a good on-line book "The Righteousness of Christ" by Horatius Bonar. Just do an on-line search. The other option is to read the Bible. It claims to be the Word of God for good reason.

http://www.monergismbooks.com/notmyhands99.html

Repentance and humbly coming before God's throne of grace are the first steps. Various passages, such as 1 Peter 5:5,6 or James 4:6-10 says that "'God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble' Submit yourselves, then to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. Come near to God and He will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded...Humble yourselves before the Lord and He will lift you up."

Is that something that God has given you the desire to do? Or like Joseph Stalin, will you too shake your fist at Him on your death bed?

Your problem now is pride and an unwillingness to recognize that you need a Savior.

Peter, your problem is that you absolutely believe that the Bible is true, but you cannot prove it. Just as you claim that I am pulling out the evidence from evolutionary biology to reinforce my worldview, you do exactly the same. God didn't write the Bible - God never wrote anything. How do you know that the authors didn't get it wrong, since they were imperfect human beings who were subject to the same ideas of ethical relativity as I? Would God have stopped them from writing lies? Did he? What is good for God certainly isn't good for us, so why should I trust him? An ancient book says that he won't lie? Why should I trust a being who created a place of eternal suffering for me if I don't listen to him? God allowed David to have multiple wives, condoned the ownership of slaves, and the destruction of entire cities, the elimination of women and children, and the like. He punished the Pharoah's son for the Pharoah's misdeeds. If God could care less about individuals, and just does what he will with people as a whole, why should he give a damn if I believe in him or not? Absolutism is a good thing? Since when? God will punish me if I kill a man who is pointing a gun to my head or if I decide I want his wallet. That is why we have human law (which is far better than divine law in my opinion). Human law accounts for variables, while divine law doesn't. I could go out and rape and murder and as long as I asked God to forgive me it's open season - I'll still go to heaven. Yet, if I live a life outside of God's standard but still abide by the Ten Commandments (standards which you can find in any faith) I am still hell-bound. I'm saying that God's standard is weak because it doesn't account for variables. Look at it this way - if you are married you can rape and beat your wife - and you aren't committing a sin. That is a flaw in my eyes. If my father is a drunk, lying murderer or rapist and I don't wait out in the car while he blows up an orphanage I am a sinner. That is another flaw (I would say). You can still believe in the absolute authority of God in those situations? Also - although there are huge gaps in science, scientists are at least trying to close them. Remember, without scientists you would have never had a microwave oven, TV, or your computer. There were gaps in all of the theories of how processes worked until they were closed. I don't think that evolution is a closed case - I'm just not going to doubt EVIDENCE. By the way, you also make a value judgement on myself and my standards and don't know me, but find them flawed because you don't believe I am perfect. I don't believe you are either, or the God in which you believe. Jealous people aren't perfect. It is easy for you to blame me for not understanding God because it supports your argument. You think that the Bible is absolute truth - I don't think it is. I am glad it is so easy for you to be open to it - but I am skeptic. You can blame it on the fall of man, or the fall of me, and argue with me about the determination of what is "good" or "bad" in this case, but maybe it is good for God not to speak to me - maybe it serves his greater purpose. Is God not allowed to change his mind? Is he better because I can't understand him? Why would I trust something I don't understand? You can't give me an actual method for reaching God. You can give some cryptic statement about "full submission" but aren't I fully submissive to him anyway? I ask Jesus all the time to reveal himself to me - and he doesn't. Ofcourse it's easy to blame me because you don't understand me, but if you did, you would know that I always want the truth. It would be just as easy to tell me that the moon is made of green cheese but I don't believe you, which may be my fault, but how am I to deem otherwise with beings who hide themselves?

BTW Maurie Beck, would you care to comment on the previous post in which I said,

Please make sense of "good" without belief in God Almighty.

You have talked about "good" enough.

What is your standard for it? How do you measure it?

Why in an atheistic universe does it matter to you?

Do you see any other animals that are worried about it (not that I believe that man is an animal, but you do)?

You talk about rape and murder, but in an evolutionary world where values are imposed by force and a desire to survive why is this wrong?

Why is it wrong to cannibalize my fellow man or is it and who says so?

Does majority make right or just might? Why should I hold to your standard?

Why would it be "good" to believe what you say is good?

How about attempting to answer these questions???

Hi Maurie Beck,

I have some thoughts on your comments above, but unfortunately I have to work tomorrow and Thursday, so I will not be able to respond until Friday at the earliest. Hope you will check back in. You make some points, that in my opinion are awfully hard to defend logically.

Luke, I'm still hoping that you can answer some of my questions, as I have of yours. Anyway, to continue,

When you say,

"Of course the idea of "good" and "evil" is relative. Then again, look at Taoism. "Good" and "evil" are never mentioned because they don't really exist - they are human concepts. How can you attribute value to "good" and "evil" as divine standards when they are created by man?"

And then all the time make value judgments that you have just told me are relative. So why should I believe you of all people? You don't make sense because you cannot establish anything as true, except what you deem to be true. You are not the criteria for truth, because truth is not relative, in the sense that truth can never be false. Please think about that. Likewise, two contradictory statements referring to the same thing, in the case above, origins, cannot both be true when they state diametrically opposite things.

Luke when you say,

"So the best standard for determining this concept that only exists in the human realm of thinking is best decided by a standard that was created by the selection of a bunch of written stories about Jesus pitted against the Old Testament?"

For one, Jesus is not pitted against the Old Testament, but revealed therein. For two, He is an historical figure that changed the course of history. Third, yes, God has spoken and revealed Himself to mankind. His standard for us is His Word which is always true and outside ourselves, in that it is above us (see Isaiah 55:8-11). What better to know what "good" is than by Him who is good!

Again, since you have revealed to me that you are your own god, the only wise, determining "good and evil" and the "best standard" in your own relativist mind, I refuse to believe it on the grounds that you are not all knowing. So right here we have a conflict, two people claiming to speak truthfully who are both saying opposite things on the subject of “good”, origins, and the truthfulness of the Bible.

When you say,

"What about the stories that were discarded? If God created a standard, why was it only until relatively recently that this standard was given (mainly forced) onto other cultures and taught in other parts of the world?"

As for the stories that are discarded, God has given us His Word, the Bible, and the church, since its beginning has been fighting against heresy and false doctrines. Read some of the early church fathers to get an idea of this instead of taking other peoples opinions for it.

People have always known that there is one true God. They just suppress the truth in their unrighteousness (see Romans 1:18-23; 2:12-16 if you are at all curious to what I am getting at).

When you say,

"Is God just lax with telling others of his standards?"

You know in your heart (your mind, the inner self), that there is only one standard for determining good, because God has placed that knowledge inside every man (generic sense of the term "man"). You just suppress the truth, as all men do because of the Fall, and the reason is because you want to determine for yourself what you can and can't do; to justify your rebellion against your Creator in this way by making up a different standard that cannot be made sense of. For now you believe that you have no one but yourself to answer to, except of course, for those who impose their laws upon you, which I might add, are usually derived from the Bible - the Ten Commandments, but in the cases of people like Hitler and Stalin, etc., they are determiners in that they force a standard that is not good on others, and this is one of the big dangers of atheism- anything goes.

Your pride and your believed autonomy keep you from knowing the wisdom of God and I say that not meaning any malice, but just restating what God has already said in His Word. Those without the Spirit do not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. Jesus made it clear, that you must be born again to see the kingdom of God.

You said,

"Also, why not the Koran instead of the Bible - wasn't it written more recently? Are we just supposed to know?"

Do you suppose that because something is more recent, it is more accurate? Did not Jesus warn us that there would be many false prophets and false Christs? To suppose the Qur'an is more trustworthy than the Bible you would need to presuppose the Bible is not trustworthy, that God was not capable of preserving His Word, as He said He would and build your foundation from there. A little poison mixed in with the food is all it takes. Jesus said,

"If you deny who I claim to be you will die in your sins."

Offensive to some, but true.

You said,

"If I am uninspired by the Bible, is this my fault, or did God go wrong?"

There again, you are judging God on your relative definition of wrong. The reason you are uninspired by the Bible is that you do not recognize it as it is - the Word of God. Unless God opens your eyes to that truth no man will ever persuade you. But I can give you good reasons to show you that without Him you cannot make sense of this world.

You said,

"If it takes the destruction of one's son for him to feel compassion, his standards don't say much for him."

There again, you do not know Him, so why are you to make another value judgment on His character and His standards? Do you understand the reason for Him sending His Son? I understand it, only through His grace and mercy to me, and I see His compassion.

Since you hold a relativistic view on morality you keep showing me that an atheist cannot make sense of “good.” How do you determine which view is true? Well, I know that to you, only yours is. But so does the next guy. For me, I can determine what is true so very well, only because I know the revealer of truth, not because I place my own thinking ability of any great value, but His of the greatest value. And without an absolute objective, ultimate standard you are left groping.

Before you accuse me of using a circular argument, I would like to remind you that you of using one yourself. When you use yourself to validate yourself as being right, your standard is the judge. The same would be true if you used science as your highest standard. You would be appealing to science to prove science. My standard comes from One who is outside of me and higher than me, in every way, including in being my Creator and the only One who is all knowing and capable of such a standard.

Hope to hear from you again, since I don't have much luck in keeping these conversations going. Silence is golden, or is it?

Hey Luke,

When you say,

“Charles Darwin didn't write about the Big Bang, Peter Huff”

So do you like the Darwinian view of evolution? :)

(Quotable quote)
‘But how good is the geological record? I have already mentioned that the ordinary viewpoint of evolution held by most paleontologists favours gradual incremental change. The fossil record, they say, is too incomplete to take seriously. And, they say, you cannot prove a gap.’
‘But of course you can prove a gap, especially if clines occurred. If there is a break in the record it must be possible to detect the break. The main point about breaks is that, if they were really random, as proposed by Darwin, they must have been plugged by one hundred and fifty years of work. But the gaps have not been plugged. They still persist; yet authorities still plead the cause of failure of preservation. Such authorities forget that if there is a million to one chance of one specimen of a population, and then if that species lived 5–15 m.y., we therefore get 5–15 times the population fossilized. The trouble may perhaps have lain more truthfully in our failure to find or describe the material. It is special pleading to rely upon gaps, and it is special pleading to propose inadequate preservation. We would do better to look at what the record really says.’
From the inagural lecture by J.B. Waterhouse.
Assistant Prof. Geol. QLD University

When you said,

"you are taking a theory that has really only one piece of observable evidence - that the universe is expanding, and somehow claiming that it has everything to do with evolution"

Are you telling me that the "Big Bang" theory is unreliable? I already know that. So where did we come from? As Russell already said, it is not sciences job to tell us and yet it does. So how reliable is science when dealing with origins?

Here's a quote from Boyce Rensberger: Science and bias, taken from (www.creationontheweb.com/content/category/3/211/105/)
Just put an http:// before the www to go to the webpage. The quotes are from evolutionists.

(Quotable Quote)

'At this point, it is necessary to reveal a little inside information about how scientists work, something the textbooks don't usually tell you. The fact is that scientists are not really as objective and dispassionate in their work as they would like you to think. Most scientists first get their ideas about how the world works not through rigorously logical processes but through hunches and wild guesses. As individuals they often come to believe something to be true long before they assemble the hard evidence that will convince somebody else that it is. Motivated by faith in his own ideas and a desire for acceptance by his peers, a scientist will labor for years knowing in his heart that his theory is correct but devising experiment after experiment whose results he hopes will support his position.'

Reference

Boyce Rensberger, How the World Works, William Morrow, NY, 1986, pp. 17–18. Rensberger is an ardently anti-creationist science writer.

What is the ample evidence of evolution Luke? Are you an Uniformitarian or a Punctuated Equilibrist? Since you seem to be supporting Darwin would it not be the former?

To quote Richard Dawkins,(Quotable Quote)

‘Evolution has been observed. It’s just that it hasn’t been observed while it’s happening.’

Reference

‘Battle over evolution’ Bill Moyers interviews Richard Dawkins, Now, 3 December 2004, PBS network

Let's face it, Luke, you can pull evidence together supporting your view and I can do the same for mine in regards to the age of the earth, carbon-14 dating and science in general.

The point I am making and asking you to defend is, from a chaotic, random, chance, blind process in which living beings supposedly evolved from non-living matter where is your observable data? Ever seen life evolve from none life, let alone by a chance process? Can you point to a transitional link between species that is happening now?

Why from a random, chance process can you expect to see order and purpose?

As the non-creationist information theorist Hubert Yockey observed over 20 years ago (and he has not revised his opinion since):

‘Research on the origin of life seems to be unique in that the conclusion has already been authoritatively accepted …. What remains to be done is to find the scenarios which describe the detailed mechanisms and processes by which this happened.

One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not yet been written.’

Reference

Yockey, H.P., A calculation of the probability of spontaneous biogenesis by information theory, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 67:377–398, 1977; quotes from pp. 379, 396.

Here is another of his quotes:

‘Although at the beginning the paradigm was worth consideration, now the entire effort in the primeval soup paradigm is self-deception on the ideology of its champions.’

‘The history of science shows that a paradigm, once it has achieved the status of acceptance (and is incorporated in textbooks) and regardless of its failures, is declared invalid only when a new paradigm is available to replace it. Nevertheless, in order to make progress in science, it is necessary to clear the decks, so to speak, of failed paradigms. This must be done even if this leaves the decks entirely clear and no paradigms survive. It is a characteristic of the true believer in religion, philosophy and ideology that he must have a set of beliefs, come what may (Hoffer, 1951). Belief in a primeval soup on the grounds that no other paradigm is available is an example of the logical fallacy of the false alternative. In science it is a virtue to acknowledge ignorance. This has been universally the case in the history of science as Kuhn (1970) has discussed in detail. There is no reason that this should be different in the research on the origin of life.’

Hubert P. Yockey, 1992 (a non-creationist). Information Theory and Molecular Biology, Cambridge University Press, UK, p. 336.

Luke, so much for the idea that we evolved from a puddle of slime, at least according to Yockey.

As usual, Luke, you're side stepping the important questions like your other atheist friends on this blog and reading into the data the evidence that best suits your worldview so as to avoid the issue. And the issue is you cannot make sense of origins.

To quote Dr William B. Provine, Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University (Quotable Quote)

‘Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either.’

Reference

1. Provine, W.B., Origins Research 16(1), p.9, 1994.

Luke, you say,

"we can determine that it is highly unlikely that the world is 6000 years old."

On what authority, evolutionary science? Sorry, it doesn't ring true.

(Since this is getting long I am going to post to break it up)

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated

What a very long handle you used here.

The discussion will never end nor will there be a conclusion as you wanted or decided on here. It will continue in another question in another thread. Any original thoughts apart from quoting others?

Jesus says love others and yet so many did the exact opposite. How ironic.

Some conclusions as this discussion ends:

Recognizing the flaws in the foundations of Islam, Judaism and Christianity by the "kneelers" and "pew peasants" will quickly converge these religions into some simple rules of life. No clerics, imams, rabbis, abstract thinkers and priests needed or desired. It will be called the great "Pink Slipping" of religious leaders.

And as per James Somerville, Philosophy professor emeritus from Xavier University, Cincinnati,
"The faith of the vast majority of believers (and non-believers) depends upon where they were born and when."

It is disturbing that such violence and hatred continues unabated due to radomness of birth. Maybe just maybe if this fact would be published on the first page of every newspaper every day, that we would finally realize the significant stupidity of it all.

And as per Somerville, "There is no religion in Heaven. Religion is only the vehicle to get there. It is left at the Gate." That statement should also be published on the front page of every newspaper every day.

And then for some added non-abstract thinking and realism:

This for example: The book of death aka the koran bases its authenicity on Mo's communications with that fictional character called Gabriel who was borrowed from the Christians who borrowed "him" from the Hittites and other ancient cults. Mohammed and his scribes actually borrowed all the good elements of the ancient religions and then added their militaristic and anti-female agenda to the koran to support their moves to conquer the lands of the "infidels" where they found the Good Words originally. How ironic!!!!

And how ironic how a peaceful fictional character like Gabriel ended up giving credence to a violent religious movement called Islam!!!!

Petr Huff

Admit it. You just don't like change. You want absolute truths with no uncertainty. The universe we live in does change and as we live we change and in the end we are dust. You don't like that. You have a lot of company. I too think it is a raw deal that we grow old and die. I just cannot bring myself to believe in a fairy tale.

Do I hold it against you that you believe? No. I know too many good people who believe and it helps them in their life. Christ's golden rule (which predates Christ) is a good thing. However, some of your other beliefs are foolishness. Especially your absolutist thinking which rejects all uncertainty.

Though shalt not kill. It is probably a good maxim to follow. However, it is not absolute. If a nut case comes into your house with the idea of raping and pillaging (by the way, I do love to rape and pillage), you would be stupid to apply thou shalt not kill absolutely. In this case, you would kill the moth..f...er and the law would be on your side.

Living in this world requires uncertain moral decisions. That is why we have laws for people that are made by the people. We do not have biblical law or Islamic law, which suggests one should kill all nonbelievers.

You probably are ready to apply the moniker "moral relativist" to me. If there are no absolutes, anything is possible. First of all, when there are absolutes, anything is not only possible, but more likely (i.e. stone to death all nonbelievers). Secondly, I have a very fine moral sense that has nothing to do with god. When I see bad behavior or hear fanatics extolling the virtues of the absolute, I give no quarter. I denounce such craziness. If a whole culture has been hijacked by extremists who would blow up the world, I say that culture is inferior. I just don't trust people with a worldview of absolute certainty. People who appreciate uncertainty tend to be less strident in their views. Of course, that does not mean that I implicitly trust them either. I just tend to give them more rope to hang themselves before I call them crazy.

Islamist, I was accidentally anonymous. I'm already a dues paying member of AU. I'm happy to hear that you support the principal.

Anonymous

Jihadist and I are with you if you want to donate $50,000 to any organisation that advocate seperation of church and state in any country. You can still give $5 a year to Americans United for the Seperation of Church and State. Every little bit of help counts to stem off fundamentalists and extremists in all religions.

Islamist,

If I had $50,000 to donate I would send it to Americans United for The Separation of Church And State.http://www.au.org/site/PageServer I'm disappointed that I won't have that opportunity now.

Dr. Fill

So, it was "allegations" against Prophet Muhammad PBUH by Ali Sina and not on Muslim belief on God? I'd rather debate with the Pope on the Nicene Creed. No money necessary. If you want, you can donate $50,000 to faithfreedom.org. So many "Bright Bulbs" in Christendom with regard to other faiths, especially Islam.

WOW Mr. Islamist. I'm looking for a "bright Bulb" to debate Mr. Ali Sina at http://www.faithfreedom.org/challenge.htm. and disprove his allegations against Muhammad logically. If you allow me to forward your challenge acceptance we will each get $50,000 when you smite him with your dazzling brilliance. Anxiously awaiting your reply.

Hamid

My friend Jihadist told me there are a few dim lights resulting from Western Enlightenment in these threads, but we should not hold it against all inheritors of the western civilisation. I see her point now in your discussion with Daniel and her joking low level spar with Concerned the Christian Now Liberated.

As for Christians like Daniel, a People of the Book, we should leave them alone and continue to respect their their belief on the Trinity of God and the Divinity of Christ. They are very certain on that.

Dear Hamid

You have assumed that I am against all religion because I have made the obvious and common sense statement that all relgion is speculative in nature. I am, in fact, a Christian. I am not anti-religions but think that all people should be free to believe as they will, not as I will.

What I object to in religion is the false sense of certainty that religious fanatics assume about matters that are uncertain, by definition. While I consider myself to be a person who generally respects others, I see no reason to offer my respect to someone who regards me as an "infidel" and who will go out of his way to make to make a flamboyant point about it.

You haven't answered a single one of my points, but instead, you make wrong assumption after wrong assumption about my intent, and then argue with those wrong assumptions.

Charles Darwin didn't write about the Big Bang, Peter Huff - you are taking a theory that has really only one piece of observable evidence - that the universe is expanding, and somehow claiming that it has everything to do with evolution - of which there is ample evidence. Did God make a mistake when he made you grow wisdom teeth? Based on carbon-dating, which has something observable and measurable as a standard (radioactive decay), we can determine that it is highly unlikely that the world is 6000 years old. Also, the Bible contains no explanation (or does it?) as to the bones of many animals that resemble our modern-day animals but were quite different. Even God supposedly changed his mind after the death of Jesus Christ - wasn't he just an enraged and jealous God before then? Ofcourse the idea of "good" and "evil" is relative. Then again, look at Taoism. "Good" and "evil" are never mentioned because they don't really exist - they are human concepts. How can you attribute value to "good" and "evil" as divine standards when they are created by man? So the best standard for determining this concept that only exists in the human realm of thinking is best decided by a standard that was created by the selection of a bunch of written stories about Jesus pitted against the Old Testament? What about the stories that were discarded? If God created a standard, why was it only until relatively recently that this standard was given (mainly forced) onto other cultures and taught in other parts of the world? Is God just lax with telling others of his standards? Also, why not the Koran instead of the Bible - wasn't it written more recently? Are we just supposed to know? If I am uninspired by the Bible, is this my fault, or did God go wrong? If it takes the destruction of one's son for him to feel compassion, his standards don't say much for him.

Hello to Terry, Luke and Maurie Beck,

As a Christian I often wonder how you can clutch so firmly to your evolutionary worldview. How does it go? The universe exploded from a point of singularity between 13-20 billion years ago. [Pardon?] Out of this material, non-living, non-personal, non-purposeful, chance, random, blind impersonal beginning with its secret ingredient of time came personal, mindful, purposeful, living, beings that to this point in time are the apex of this evolutionary process.

Does that not take a tremendous amount of faith to believe in? Is that science? I thought science dealt with what was observable. Ever seen the universe explode into existence? If not it sounds like a religious belief to me. As God said to Job,

"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell Me if you understand." (Job 38:4)

It seems like a good place to start. Without God did something exist before the "Big Bang?" If not, then where did all this matter come from? My understand is nothing from nothing leaves nothing, but you gotta have something if you wanna make sense to me.

In an atheistic, chance, irrational, impersonal, and unthinking universe how can we even think logically/reasonably?

Ever seen a rock thinking (and I'm not talking of the sculpture by Auguste Rodin, The Thinker), love, care, laugh, cry, talk? How about a simple one celled organism?

If our sum total is produced by random, chance mutations happening over billions of years why are you and I sitting here having a debate over moral issues such as good and evil and whether God exists or not?

In an atheistic, evolutionary universe what reason do I have to believe in the uniformity of nature? What reliability is there to believe that what happened yesterday and the day before yesterday will continue to happen tomorrow in a universe that came into existence by chance? After all, are our thoughts not just random chance chemical reactions taking place in our material brains?

Furthermore, in an evolutionary universe how can we account for natural laws or logic or reasoning? They are not tangible, physical objects that can be touched or smelt or seen. If all I am and all you are are nerve endings reacting to stimuli or neuro-chemical reactions, why should any two react the same way in a chance, random material universe? How does the non-tangible, non-physical come from physical matter?

It is a funny thing about the root of the word "universe." Does it not suggest to you one spoken verse? "In the beginning God said."

Speaking of God, I have yet to hear of a reasonable explanation for the question of what is your standard for "good" without God.

You see, without an absolute standard anything goes, without an objective standard it boils down to your subjective opinion pitted against my subjective opinion, without an ultimate standard good become whoever can enforce their standard by manipulation or coercion.

So what is your measure? In my short month on these "On Faith" threads, I have yet to hear one reasonable answer to this question, without belief in God. I keep looking for one. Is it not a reasonable question? For the most part the issue is side-stepped or the person gets angry and refuses to respond any longer, you know, the argument from silence. Maybe the Pagans would like to answer? Last time they bailed out. Or how about you Russell? Luke? Ex-Christian Concerned? Paganplace?

The challenge is on. Please make sense of "good" without belief in God Almighty. You all use the term in judging the actions and thoughts of others.

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:

'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.'" (1 Corinthians 1:18)

Anonymous: Evolution = Faith - Science
Evolution != Science

Anonymous, your math skills leave a lot to be desired.

Evolution = Faith - Science

Science = Faith - Evolution (I don't know what this means)

Faith = Evolution + Science (I don't know what this means either)

Evolution != Science is true, but is that what you mean? Evolution is one scientific discipline. Beyond that you confuse me.

The topic is about Muslim violence. This is directly related to the flaws in the foundations of Islam and its book of death which bases its authenicity on Mo's communications with that fictional character called Gabriel who was borrowed from the Christians who borrowed "him" from the Hittites and other ancient religions.

Ironic how a peaceful fictional character ended up giving credence to a violent religious movement!!!!!

Daniel said:
"The fact is that all religions are speculative in nature. It is wrong, wrong, wrong, for any speculative religon to assert itself as perfect truth, and then to assert its dubiously speculative claims through the power of the state, then to impose right thinking and condemn wrong thinking among the citizenry, each and every one of whom is complete and separate individual, with relgious beliefs and speculations which may not conform to the official state relgion."

Very well put. This is the essence of what the problem with most religion is.

Art Linkletter

"Religionists say the darndest things."

Yes, Jihadist say the darndest things. LOL

RM

It makes me wonder how prior generations were so naive, and how jaded our generation is! Must everything be taught to us or can we search for the answers ourselves?

RAM,

You noted:

"The comments you seem to feel are so prevalent in the Quran are also in the Bible and Torah."

Please cite the militaristic and anti-female/anti-infidel passages in the four Gospels of the NT.

And in case you missed it, here is a synopsis of the foundations of contemporary religions:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably a mythical character. If he was real, he was at best a combination of at least three men. 1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth. Analyses of his life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists)via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian sects.

3. Mohammed, an illiterate, hallucinating Arab, also had embellishing/hallucinating scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the Koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.
This agenda continues as shown by the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani koranics, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases and the Filipino koranics where most of this misery is being funded by the Third Axis of Evil aka Iran and also the "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

4. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centred and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’"
The caste/laborer system and cow worship are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."

"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life.

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/BUDDHISM/SIDD.HTM

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations/embellishments and myths surrounding the founders of said rules of life.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus for an analysis of Jesus' life to include his illiteracy.

Thanks Luke. It's always refreshing when sane people from different religious (or non-religious) backgrounds can see eye-to-eye on topics such as these. It still amazes me that there are people in this world who are naive enough to believe that they are always told the truth by "the powers that be". They're a by-product of our society; people simply aren't taught to seek out the truth anymore. When did people become so complacent in their ignorance?

Well said though.

Oh, uh, ok. :)

Jim, take a breather. I was agreeing with you.

Luke:

Either you completely misunderstood what I said, or you just purposely put a whole bunch of junk in my mouth that I never said.

You're asking ME what the truth is? Why should you believe me; you don't even know me. I can tell you what I believe, and that is that no religion should be in authority over a country. I believe that people in positions of power - political power, journalistic power, militaristic power, and religious power, have many times misled, misinterpreted, or completely lied about things in order to improve their own positions and agendas.

If people do not want to do the work to find out the truth for themselves, then they end up either believing all of it, or not believing any of it. It is just as easy for people of another country to believe that all Americans are rich, elitist snobs who hate anyone different from themselves. All they need is for their media and politicians to tell them so; how else would they know otherwise if they don't seek the truth themselves?

Though I'm surprised that this thread has continued this long, I find the need to comment on what "Concerned The Christian Now Liberated" remarked above.

Let's be honest. The comments you seem to feel are so prevalent in the Quran are also in the Bible and Torah. And history has proven (from the Crusades, Inquisitions, witch hunts and slavery) that mis-guided power-hungry people use those heated quotes to their advantage and abuse whomever they choose in the process. It's not about Islam, it's about who is using Islam for their own purpose.

The current 'war on terrorism' is a war of ideologies, not much different than the cold war of the last generation. While everyone is busy arguing about religion, the real manipulators of mankind are dividing up the spoils. Maybe Marx was right...religion is the opiad of the masses...a much needed antidote to the harsher, uglier 'reality'.

So what is the truth? That simply people who are really nice and religious are true and people who are religious and mean aren't really religious and people who aren't religious and nice or mean are power-hungry? Being religious doesn't make you a better person, and it is not only dishonest but incredibly irresponsible to say so. I don't think that religious people are necessarily bad but I don't think that someone who thinks I deserve to burn in torment for eternity should have authority over me either.

Hamid wrote:

"The fact of the matter is people are capable of great evil, whether or not they subscribe to religion. In fact, religion has little or nothing to do with any of this. Our politicians and our leaders make decisions based on their own self interests. Some of them say they make these decisions in the name of God and some of them dont. It doesnt really matter because as a civilization it is very hard to say that once we are liberated from religion, peace and prosperity will reign throughout the world. This is simply empircally untrue.

All of you that believe that Islam or Christianity or whatever religion is what motivates violence are simply being hoodwinked by your politicians. Religion is a scapegoat. Its just that politicians know that a lot of people take religion seriously so that manipulate this fact for their own ends. When i say politicians, i mean the ones we elect as well as the ones that mix religion with politics - anyone from Pat Robertson to Osama bin laden."

This is all so very true, Hamid. But they don't see it that way here. They have been blinded to the truth; they "can't see the forest for the trees". People in general were raised to trust authority figures, and to believe what they read. The problem is that these days the authority figures and the media conglomerates have become so corrupt with power and hunger for power, that you can no longer trust them all to give you the whole truth. The general public either does not realize this or is indifferent to it. And most people in general are too lazy to try to find out the truth for themselves, because it does take time and effort to really know the truth.

I took some time off too, but with idiots like Canyon Shearer on this thread, I have to lay it down - Viking style.

Back to the topic:

Read the koran and see the militaristic/violent and anti-female/anti-infidel passages. Read history and see the flaws in the authors/foundations of said book. Read the daily news and see the results.

Religionists say the darndest things.

Russell,

I was wondering where you were hiding these days! Good to hear from you, Sunshine.

Taking the summer off from this forum was probably a wise decision. It looks like the Post took the summer off from creating decent questions.

This is all soooooooo fascinating. The intelligent conversation, the name calling. Man, I am glad I took the summer off. But guess what? I will be back to bring my ever loving personality back to these forums soon.

As for the Bible vs. anything else........The Bible loses out. Heck, I'd read Captain Underpants before I read the Bible again. But hey, that's just me.

Luke, Andrea......good to see you two are still around.

C'mon Anon, Luke's at least at a 9th grade level!

I feel like I am babysitting now.

Ahhh, someday The Jihadist will come to grips with the reality of Islam. Not now apparently as she like most other Muslims live in fear of cleric and imam reprisals brought to bear by Islamic death and terror squads/cells.

Concerned, Concerned, Concerned :)

Yes Muslims women do swim or sink like everyone else. After all we have tsunamis and floods where we live. Whatever is on us, from underwear to hijab is good as swimwear. The hijab is better methinks. Keeps one afloat in the water, like a lifebelt. And keeps the sands out one's eyes and protect our Dolce & Gabbana and Jimmy Choos that we wear underneath in the desert from dirt and dust.

Poor Muslim women can't afford to buy bikinis or G-strings. Some can't even afford to buy underwear but to make their own. It cost ten times or more at least to buy a bikini or swimsuit than to buy an everyday burqa or hijab.

I encourage you to further reform the minds and hearts of Christians. You seem to be having trouble in persuading many of your Christian fellow believers on NT/OT revisionism of Jesus.

Easier and cheaper to be a hero to Christians and atheists in questioning Muslim beliefs and foundation of Islam rather than to get your co-religionist on board on Crossanized Christianity or Christian Humanism eh?

I will continue to read you crusade for Christian reformation with great interest. It is still incomplete and ongoing no?

Okay mate, won't be posting here for a while. Was not on vacation last week. Only a weekend of relaxing, reading, eating Japanese food, and looking at Fijiyama instead of climbing it with Japanese friends and colleagues. Next time I'll go up the Fijiyama.

So, mate, all the best and have fun here undertaking Christian Reformation via Cyberspace and the parallel but necessary sideline of thrashing Islam and Muslims to sell your product as better and best. Quite an approach:)

J

Wow Luke, you succeeded in bringing the argument all the way down to the third-grade level. You should pat yourself on the back.

Jihadist, Jihadist, Jihadist,

There you go again skipping the important issue i.e the flaws in the foundations of Islam.

Start the Reformation!!! Give Gabe and all his "thingie" friends the heave-ho !!!!! You know by now parts 2-5 that follow.

And a vacation question since you just returned from one. Do Muslim women swim??? Bikinis or hijabs??

Wow Anonymous, you succeeded in bringing the argument all the way down to the third-grade level. You should pat yourself on the back.

Ah so, my good friends Canyon Shearer and Concerned the Christian Now Liberated did not take off for fun over the weekend and still at it here.

Canyon and Concerned, you have your respective twins and mirrors in the Muslim world. Your discussion here with each other and others within your faith has its Muslim parallels between traditonalist and reformer Muslims. With the same reactions Christians have for you both.

Canyon Shearer reminds me of the traditional Muslim imam preaching sermons after prayers in mosques when he has nothing to say on ethical, social and governance issues that disquieted Muslims. Muslim imams don't really talk about heaven and hell in their sermons. More on heaven and hell here by our behaviors. Talk about heaven and hell in the hereafter and Muslims will think their imams is out of touch with temporal reality in pursuing the right path.

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated reminds me of the Muslim reformer both into updating his faith, promoting them to his fellow co-religionists, and acting brittle when they don't see the "light". Reformers are not the most charming of peoples, and are fired up by what they believe to be right and God helps those who are in their straight path, their right path for the truth. Just like the traditionalists/conservatives they opposed.

I am tolerant of both, but have more respect for traditional Muslims imams and their current reach in the Muslim umma over the reformers. They are generally humanists inter pares in their respective communities when the going gets tough. They organise needed social services and act as trustees for locally raised charities, and reminds the communities on their individual and collective social responsibilies in their sermons. No secular force currently has this reach on, dare I say, on "humanism" being imbued and acted upon.

The reformers are in a seperate class of their own and their main readers are those who are not poor, who are well-educated and well-linked, and in the media, the academia, the think tanks and governance. The reformers has to convince the best and brightest among their co-religionists first. No support from this group and their reformation ideas remains in their own heads and in the books and articles they wrote.

When one comes across articles that speaks about "moderate" Muslims, it just means Muslims who find traditionalist Muslims with extremely uncomprimising conservative views as well as brittle and impatient Muslim reformers to be both arrogant, ignorant and insufferable in their own ways.

If reformers can be said to be innovators too, than the clerics who pronounced suicide bombings to be legitimate are perversely "reformers" in their own way. Reformation and innovation is not necessarily that good in its outcome. Marxism was an innovation too, to reform societies.

Best regards

Science = Knowledge
Creation = Science + Faith
Evolution = Faith - Science
Evolution != Science

ANON - let me disagree. In my book the highest form of bliss is real knowledge. Belief is only a start & may get you part way, but it won't get you all the way there without your own labors. At some point you will need to stop following others and do the work.

Science is not religion but apparently you don't make the distinction - you've managed to convince yourself (of what I'm not certain) and obviously you're preaching to the choir of other true believers - all well and good.

Choosing the metaphysics of religion to debunk the metaphysics of science is just mixing apples and oranges ..... different standards of proof apply. You would benefit from studying religion in depth from a comparative point of view and in that way determine if your religion is the one true religion, or if in fact religion is a subjective & relatively variable human creation and cultural artifact - like science for example.

Here are some recommended readings: Varieties of Religious Experience/William James, The Perennial Philosophy/Aldous Huxley, Wholeness and the Implicate Order/David Bohm and a personal favorite, Quantum Questions/Ken Wilber. For an alternative Christian view read
The Nag Hammadi Library/James Robinson and by all means pick up a copy of the Gnostic Gospels. And thanks, but I have a bible in the library - King James version.

For Jililah only,

Whereas I was Bred, Born and Brainwashed in Catholicism/Christianity, you were "Triple B'd" in Islam. The way to address the issues with both religions is to come to grips with the flawed foundations of said religions. Below is a short synopsis of these flaws. Please present references refuting these conclusions if you have them.

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably a mythical character. If he was real, he was at best a combination of at least three men. 1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth. Analyses of his life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists)via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian/Jewish/Pagan sects.

3. Mohammed, an illiterate (as per Karen Armstrong), hallucinating Arab (seeing and talking to "pretty wingie flying talking thingies", also had embellishing/hallucinating scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the Koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.
This agenda continues as shown by the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani koranics, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases and the Filipino koranics with most of this misery being funded by the third Axis of Evil aka Iran.
ref.: the front pages of every daily newspaper.

4. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

Terry - Thanks for making my point - now it's time for you to go back to school, and I don't mean sunday school.

By the way, ignorance is the highest form of bliss. You don't have a leg to stand on and you know it - other than your 'humble' beliefs.

For those who post merely to cast Islam as evil, irrational and false, please let me point out that at various times in history, Islam was a progressive force that assisted the rise of culture in the West. One of Judaism's greatest sages is Maimonides. In Maimonides famous work, "Guide for the Perplexed," the harmony of past ages was noted in the forward of this book. (The paperback edition with bright red cover - do not have it in front of me now to provide better detail, but you can find it on Amazon and THIS is the kind of reading we all need to do for consciousness raising to occur) Anyway, in the forward, a letter that Maimonides wrote is spoken of and he refers to Muslim philosopher Ibn Rush'd (Averroes) who advocated rationalism, as "My Master Abd Allah Ibn Rush'd." Maimonides works were written after the death of Ibn Rush'd, so he used 'My Master' not in the context of a living mentor, but as an expression of respect for a philosophical body of writing that inspired his own. I believe that Thomas Aquinas was then similarly inspired by Maimonides. If you value the contributions of Aristotle, Plato, Socrates and the Neoplatonists like Plotinus, Porphory and Iamblichus, it is good to realize that this body of work had become lost to Western culture and it was revived by Jewish and Arab scribes who translated the texts into Arabic and Hebrew, which were then translated to Latin and Greek leading to the 'Renaissance.'

OK - I hear you! You are asking, "What have Muslims done for us lately?" In truth, not much!
Islam is now in a period of intellectual stagnancy as Europe was during 'The Dark Ages."

But the haters of Islam need to face some facts. As obviously Islam will not be wiped from the face of the earth, as you wish, what would you next hope to see happen to current day Islamic culture? Hopefully you would answer that you would like to see a great consciousness raising in the Muslim world. The FACT that verses exist in the Qur'an which advocate a society establish around given human rights mandates, that have NOT been abrogated as often thought, gives Muslim a legitimate base for this REFOCUSING on the humanitarian model of Islam.

As a hater of Islam, if you cannot wipe Islam from the face of the earth - is not what the Muslim moderates are attempting to accomplish the next best thing for ALL OF HUMANITY?

Truly, the emotional hate posts here only express psychological immaturity. If you oppose violence, then help us find a viable solution based upon ISLAM'S OWN DICTATES rather then asking Muslims to forfeit their culture and become Western clones.

You can choose to help society reach a more humanitarian age or just boo and hiss from the sidelines. Can we not engage together in a vision that will uplift all concerned? Any reality is preceded by a vision. We may not be where you wish us to be but we are trying with everything we have to bring about a refocusing on the innate humanitarian aspects of Islam.

Humanitarian Qur'anic verses (ayah)?
Please see excerpt from Dr. Mansoor Alam's article below:

So what should be done now? Should we simply close our eyes to the Qur’an and allow these latter-day rulers and Imams to regurgitate the same old sectarian-based Shariah that was developed under dictatorial rule and which tramples on the most basic values of the Qur’an dealing with universal human rights, that among these are: sacrosanct right of the sanctity of human life (5:32); inalienable right of the freedom of choice (2:256, 18:29); right of tolerance for other faiths (22:40) and absolutely no compulsion in faith (2:256); right to conduct state affairs by mutual consultation (3:159, 42:38); universal right of human dignity (17:70); sacrosanct right of equal justice for all (4:58, 4:135, 5:42, 16:90) including enemies (5:8) and no bending of justice for anyone (if the Prophet was not above the law (6:15) then how can anyone else be?); right to hold positions based solely on merit (46:19); right of personal responsibility and accountability (53:38); right of ownership of the fruits of one’s labor and no free ride for anyone (53:39). Are these Qur’an-guaranteed human rights (to all men and women) to be found in our current practice of Islam anywhere not to say of the holiest place in Islam, the birth place of our Prophet (PBUH)?

Who else could be more responsible then for damaging the sacred heart of Islam in the name of Islam, in the name of the Qur’an, in the name of the Prophet (PBUH) than the twin forces of Muslim dictatorship and Muslim priesthood?

The situation has degenerated to such an extent that if one were to mention that above human rights are some of the most sacred in Islam; that our Prophet (PBUH) lived and implemented these rights in society; that an Islamic society is supposed to be constituted on the basis of these core rights at its heart; then surely it will raise many eyebrows and may even invite sarcasm from certain quarters with comments such as: “Have these human rights anything to do with Muslims and Islam?” These reactions are not out of place considering how Muslim countries have been mistreating and even killing their own people in the name of Islam.

The world is judging Islam by our practice of Islam, by observing the so-called practicing Muslims. No wonder we seem to be fulfilling the prophecy of the Qur’an by showing to the world by our own actions that Islam is a failure, that Islam is false (107:1-7)! Our failure to live up to true Islam is being seen as failure of Islam. We may think we are good practicing Muslims and that we will ultimately have the mercy and the blessings of Allah. All this is fine but what about the Qur’an and its emphasis on universal human rights? Is the Qur’an only for reciting to achieve mercy and forgiveness, mostly for the dead? Or, should its human rights also need to be implemented in human society?

As a matter fact these values are under siege in every Muslim country. Can we expect to get anywhere when Muslim societies trample on these rights while putting extraordinary emphasis on rituals? What would be more important to Islam in the eyes of Allah: performing its rituals or implementing its basic human rights?

The Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have said that Muslim Ummah is like a body. When any part of the body is in pain the whole body feels it. That body seems to be in critical condition today. The only way to revive it is to go back to the basic Qur’anic values guaranteeing universal human rights and make them the foundation of Muslim society the way our Prophet (PBUH) did more than 1400 years ago when the rest of the world was living in barbarism and chaos as noted by many historians (e.g., J.H. Denison, Emotion as the Basis of Civilization). This is the real miracle of the Qur’an. This is the true Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH) to practice (7:157).

ANONYMOUS - Thanks for making my point - now it's time for you to go back to school, and I don't mean sunday school.

By the way, imitation is the highest form of flattery. You don't have a leg to stand on and you know it - other than your 'humble' beliefs.

Evolutionists surely are victims of their own vivid imagination - but the emotional investment is so great that alternatives are really unthinkable. They prattle on for hours citing unbiblical authority without ever making a valid point that meets even the bare minimum of logical criteria that we insist on for conducting our daily affairs - much less explaining the ultimate mystery of life itself.

Evolutionism is a fabulous work of fiction wherein chance is fashioned in the image and likeness of Creation (this is pretty clever I'll admit, but inevitable since the other option exists and demands humbleness) - this fabrication just doesn't hold up to scrutiny when all is said and done. So in the end, you either buy it or you don't....it all depends on too many factors to list, but factors there are aplenty!! I've known many true believers, and don't know a single one that's chosen fact over fiction to this very day.

It's very hard to justify the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (anniversaries coming up) - and our role along with the British in the fire bombing of Dresden (see Kurt Vonnegut - he actually lived through it as a child). Ultimately all justifications in war come down to the deceitful heart argument - either me or them....and all politicians frame it exactly in this way. The grand tally for the three acts of war listed above are in the neighborhood of
500,000 people killed (almost all collateral damage) - and where was the Creator God when all of this was going on?? Demanding Repentance and Trust.

Creationists surely are victims of their own vivid imagination - but the emotional investment is so great that alternatives are really unthinkable. They prattle on for hours citing biblical authority without ever making a valid point that meets even the bare minimum of logical criteria that we insist on for conducting our daily affairs - much less explaining the ultimate mystery of life itself.

Creationism is a fabulous work of fiction wherein the creator is fashioned in the image and likeness of the created (this is pretty clever I'll admit, but inevitable since no other role-model exists) - this fabrication just doesn't hold up to scrutiny when all is said and done. So in the end, you either buy it or you don't....it all depends on too many factors to list, but factors there are aplenty!! I've known many true believers, and don't know a single one that's chosen fact over fiction to this very day.

It's very hard to justify the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (anniversaries coming up) - and our role along with the British in the fire bombing of Dresden (see Kurt Vonnegut - he actually lived through it as a child). Ultimately all justifications in war come down to the self-defense argument - either us or them....and all politicians frame it exactly in this way. The grand tally for the three acts of war listed above are in the neighborhood of
500,000 people killed (almost all collateral damage) - and where was the creator god when all of this was going on?? Apparently in the White House, because that's where the orders were coming from - as they are today.

Thursday March 29, 2007
NIGERIA: MUSLIM EXTREMISTS SET CHURCH ON FIRE
Fifteen more churches marked for burning following murder of Christian teacher.
GOMBE, Nigeria, March 29 (Compass Direct News) – Two days after the killing of a Christian teacher in this town in northern Nigeria, Muslim extremists set fire to a church building of the Evangelical Church of West Africa (ECWA) in the Chanchanya section.
The Rev. Rukun Gaius, 50, chairman of the Gombe district of the ECWA, told Compass that a large number of Muslim extremists went to the church on Friday night (March 23) and set it on fire, gutting the sanctuary.
“The Muslims came to the church premises at about 11 p.m. to set the church on fire,” Rev. Gaius said. “People around the area and some of our members who saw the church burning rushed there put it out, but by then much damage had already been done to the building.”

http://compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=news&
lang=en&length=long&idelement=4816&backpage=summaries

So Anonymous, you are saying that inherited traits in organisms don't change? It has been the same since the animals developed? The problem is that Christianity (and other faiths as well) have tried to claim that evolution is a religion, and it isn't at all. I think it has exponentially more merit than (an invisible man made all of the animals and they haven't adapted to their environment). If you are too lazy to purchase a book on the subject, go to wikipedia and look it up - it will take you hours, because there is ample evidence supporting evolution.

So Anonymous, you are saying that inherited traits in organisms doesn't change? It has been the same since the animals developed? The problem is that Christianity (and other faiths as well) have tried to claim that evolution is a religion, and it isn't at all. I think it has exponentially more merit than (an invisible man made all of the animals and they haven't adapted to their environment). If you are too lazy to purchase a book on the subject, go to wikipedia and look it up - it will take you hours, because there is ample evidence supporting evolution.

maurie: Again, no U.S. president would have survived in office if he had not ended the war with any means possible.

This is my exact point. We have progressed to such an extent that our leaders must engage in mass murder at unprecedented historical scales in order to stay in office. Historians argue over whether or not a NUCLEAR bomb was necessary, and most American history books say that it saves lives because it helps americans sleep at night. There is much evidence to the contrary, and significant amount of evidence that the japanese had already surrendered when the bomb was dropped. But the reality is that the second bomb was not meant to save lives (even if the first bomb was, which is disputed) The second bomb was a warning to the Russians, a warning that costs tens of thousands of innocent lives.

The fact of the matter is people are capable of great evil, whether or not they subscribe to religion. In fact, religion has little or nothing to do with any of this. Our politicians and our leaders make decisions based on their own self interests. Some of them say they make these decisions in the name of God and some of them dont. It doesnt really matter because as a civilization it is very hard to say that once we are liberated from religion, peace and prosperity will reign throughout the world. This is simply empircally untrue.

All of you that believe that Islam or Christianity or whatever religion is what motivates violence are simply being hoodwinked by your politicians. Religion is a scapegoat. Its just that politicians know that a lot of people take religion seriously so that manipulate this fact for their own ends. When i say politicians, i mean the ones we elect as well as the ones that mix religion with politics - anyone from Pat Robertson to Osama bin laden

Now I see why Canyon left. I think he posted ample evidence, I'n new to this, but I think that evolution has no merits. Could you post some? I know there are none, but I'm giggling at your post.

Hamid - Nazi Germany was a secular democracy when Hitler was elected.

Hitler was never elected, he was appointed chancellor of Germany by President Paul von Hindenburg on 30 January 1933. The Nazis received the most popular votes in elections in 1932 but it was not a majority and they could not form a government. Shortly after Hitler was appointed chancelor the Nazi party quickly destroyed all vestiges of democracy and began their cultural revolution by consolidating power all power in a totalitarian state.

Secondly, I know dropping nuclear weapons on Japan was terrible, but it actually saved thousands of American and Japanese lives by bringing an end to the war. If the allied forces had had to invade Japan, the carnage would have been far worse. As to those who suggest that we dropped the bomb to keep Russia out of the war, the evidence suggests otherwise. Any president who had to means to end the and war and didn't take it would have been hounded out of office. Finally, some have said that we would never have dropped the bomb on Germany because of the their European ancestry. The first test of the bomb was after German surrender. Again, no U.S. president would have survived in office if he had not ended the war with any means possible.

Hamid - Nazi Germany was a secular democracy when Hitler was elected.

Hitler was never elected, he was appointed chancellor of Germany by President Paul von Hindenburg on 30 January 1933. The Nazis received the most popular votes in elections in 1932 but it was not a majority and they could not form a government. Shortly after Hitler was appointed chancelor the Nazi party quickly destroyed all vestiges of democracy and began their cultural revolution by consolidating power all power in a totalitarian state.

Secondly, I know dropping nuclear weapons on Japan was terrible, but it actually saved thousands of American and Japanese lives by bringing an end to the war. If the allied forces had had to invade Japan, the carnage would have been far worse. As to those who suggest that we dropped the bomb to keep Russia out of the war, the evidence suggests otherwise. Any president who had to means to end the and war and didn't take it would have been hounded out of office. Finally, some have said that we would never have dropped the bomb on Germany because of the their European ancestry. The first test of the bomb was after German surrender. Again, no U.S. president would have survived in office if he had not ended the war with any means possible.

Dear Anonymous,

I’m an evolutionary biologist, so I’m not going to get into a debate with you on the merits of creationism (there aren’t any and your websites are fools errands) or evolution, because you’ve already allowed your religious beliefs to turn your mind to mush.

If someone provided me with credible evidence that a creator created the world 6000 ago and that the evidence refuted everything we know from independent multiple sources, I might be surprised, but I would not dismiss it out of hand. However, that is extremely unlikely. What surprises me about you and your ilk is that if there is a god, then you are profoundly insulting his true creation by comparing it to the stick-figure account described in the bible.

Perhaps the Bible is right about eating of the fruit of knowledge; too much knowledge (though far less than required) and you get T-Rex’s in the Garden of Eden scaring the sh!! out of Adam and Eve. Certainly no time for a roll in the hay.

I agree with Hamid that secularism doesn't necessarily mean progress and charity, however, I don't think that religion has anything to do with progress or charity either. If you are thinking that somehow religion is "better" because it was the cause of "less death", you also have to understand that when any religious leader holds power it is just as dangerous as any politician. If the Spanish Inquisition was fought with hydrogen bombs instead of swords and torture devices, none of us would be here right now. I don't trust anyone who thinks I deserve to burn in hell for eternity anymore than someone who thinks I don't deserve to live (and doesn't believe in the hereafter). Both are dangerous and their power needs to be balanced. America needs to set that example.

Dear Daniel

So it is now clear that you dislike all religion, not just Islam. So you should be clear that if all religion is speculative, then we should do away with all of them, not just Islam.

While mankind has progressed over the passed centuries, we have never killed more people than we killed in the 20th century. Nazi Germany was a secular democracy when Hitler was elected. America was a progressive liberal democracy when it annihilated 60,000 innocent people in Japan after the Japanese had already been defeated. World War II was fought against totalitarian regimes that were not drawing their inspiration from the bible or the Quran, but rather from ideologies that in many ways had nothing to do with religion.

before you pat yourself on the back for all the progress, stop and recognize that our world order has hardly led to universal prosperity or any sort of utopia.

You can try to convince yourself that by getting rid of religion people will become more enlightened, but i have a strong feeling that blaming religion for all the death and destruction ofthe 20th century and now the 21st century is hardly a strong argument.

Your anitpathy towards religion is misdirected. you should be far more upset with your politicians than with your ministers. At least SOME of the ministers actually mean well.

Hey Canyon, do you have any scientific quotes from scientists or just nonsense religious sites? I guess not. You are basing your argument against evolution with "The Bible clearly states...", which is the ASSUMPTION that the Bible is the ultimate truth, not observable evidence. Now can you just admit you are wrong?

Good to see that your religion is nothing more than a little game you use to belittle people, Canyon, it really says a lot about you and your beliefs. You are a poor representative of your faith, so maybe you should consider being silent. You aren't beating me at anything, but your childish antics are really cute. I have learned quite a bit though - for example, if I don't believe what you do I'm a moron. Funny, you use a computer, which was invented and developed by lots of morons, as do plenty who make your life comfortable and easy (and allow you the right to say the stupid bs you do on this thread). They are all stupid though because of belief in evolution. Do us a favor, don't have kids and stop talking. You'd be doing Jesus a favor too.

*laughing at Canyon.* Sorry, I know that's rude, but I was thinking of the 'Black Knight' from Monty Python's 'Holy Grail.'

I'm wondering where he got the idea of eleven-foot tall human skeletons, though.

Thought that idea of 'evidence of giants' went out with the bronze age. :)

*holding up Mastodon bone: 'Titans walked the Earth! Physically!' *

Umm, that's not a human bone. :)

*holding up T-rex fossil: "Dragons!"

Umm, close enough. Let's refine the time scale a bit. :)

Maurie, do some research (no, the Soprano's don't count);
creationists.org/mananddinos.html
mokelembembe.com/
genesispark.org/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm

In response to Canyon Shearer's idiocy, here is what the Sopranos had to say about the earth being 6000 years old.

Christopher: "What's he sayin', there were dinosaurs back with Adam n' Eve?"

Tony Soprano: "I guess."

Christopher: "No way. T-Rex in the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve would be runnin' all the time scared shi..less, but the book says its supposed to be paradise"

Luke,

I won't respond anymore on this thread, if you'd like to continue being beaten, you are welcome to post on my blog.

We've gotten too off-topic and this is a poor forum for a one-on-one debate.

And, you know, I had just said I went to all that trouble above to explain what I thought of Canyon's idea of 'science,' and then he went ahead and satirized himself.

Carry on. :)

Canyon you are such a joke. Cancer is the result of death through sin? I don't have a brain? Yeah, and you are a genius. I'm sure everyone here agrees. If you put all of your faith in God, then why do you wear a seatbelt? I am saying that the appendix, wisdom teeth, and the like PROVE evolution because it proves that our physical state has changed since then. If God created perfect beings, why would he need to change them (if you don't believe he did, you are undeniably stupid and proof that not all beings have evolved quite yet)? Let me guess, Satan put the fossils there to fool us, right? We are in a constant spiritual war! So you are proving that evolution didn't happen with fossils. Add confused to the list of things you are.

Hey folks,

Here's a good forum where Christianity and atheism are discussed and debated....

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=message_board

Hello folks,

Here's a good forum where Christianity and atheism are discussed:

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=message_board

Hadith Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177:
Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, “The (Final) Hour (last human battle on Earth) will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”

Luke, you are deceived and you love it.

There are lot of parts of the body you don't need to live, arms, legs, spleen, prostate, gall bladder, tonsils, and you've proved that you can live without a brain. Wisdom teeth are a great disprover of evolution, they are reminiscent of when the human species lived to great ages and our bodies grew to extraordinary sizes. We have many fossils of these 10, 11, 12 foot tall people. Cancer is a result of death through sin, it follows the Biblical worldview perfectly; your religion is clueless to the origins of death, clueless to the origins of life, clueless to the purpose of human existence, and clueless on the issue of life after death. You don't know the beginning, the middle, or the end.

You won't be led to Christ, there is no such thing, and your language shows you have no idea what you are talking about. I can show you your sin and you can be convicted and led by the Holy Spirit, but I can't lead you to Christ.

Repent and trust in Christ, Luke, and you will be forgiven. You will know the truth and the truth will set you free. You will know the beginning, the middle, and what happens at the end.

Just on this bit, here: it seems to be a constant excuse for people who insist one of their rival religions must be The Answer, if only allowed total power:

"Actually,islam isn't known completely by everybody.So,the problem appears there.I don't say these for only people of other religion.there are a lot of muslims who don't know tehir religion fully."

This leads to a lot of thinking by Christians and Muslims alike that their religion is in fact the answer to everything, while, of course, sorting their less-desirable effects out of consideration by calling them 'Not true Islam/Christianity.'

While the assertion that their really not following the religion may in and of itself be valid, doesn't it also point to the possibility that the solution to the world's problems *isn't* in any one set of the world's many beliefs and systems, but rather, *between us all* ...perhaps in the realm of reason and cooperation?

And, Canyon, I had something to say about your idea of 'science' way back up there. :)

"CSS, pay less attention to making yourself right and more attention to what I say. The Pope was a christianist Pagan, that was proved in the other post."

By paying attention to what you say I arrived at the conclusion that you lie. THAT was proven in the other thread...and this one.

I believe that YOU believe that you are doing the right thing, but you are not following Christ's example in doing it.

My prayers are with you.

CSS

If you care about our souls, Canyon Shearer, I would stop talking. If I am led to Christ it won't be by you, and you aren't scoring any brownie points with Jesus by insulting people on religious threads. Do the world a favor and don't be a pastor. You aren't converting ANYONE.

Deceived and I love it? You are insane and ignorant. Just because the appendix contains lymphoid tissue doesn't mean it is vital to the immune system. If it is so vital, why is appendicitis so common? It's obviously not so good at creating antibodies if it can so easily become infected and kill you. I suppose prostrate cancer is the cancer that slowly makes you lie flat on your face? Perfect wisdom teeth. Lots of imperfections in that perfection, unless God just works in mysterious ways. You kinda sound like a conspiracy theorist. Yes, my religious leaders (I guess that means myself, I'm not stupid enough to need a leader) want to cover up facts - kind of how your churches want to burn everything deemed "blasphemous" (such as Harry Potter books). I don't hate you Canyon, but I pity you for thinking you have so much power because you don't doubt.

Luke,

You are deceived and you love it.

The appendix is a vital part of your immune system, we've known this since 1994, the fact you think it is vestigal proves how badly your religious leaders want to cover it up.

Without an appendix you are consideraly more vulnerable to Leukemia, prostrate cancer, and colon cancer.

At least you learned one thing from this thread.

Good, then we reject each other's fairy tales. I don't give a damn if I am in the Bible because the nonsense contained within it has no bearing on me. It was written for cavemen. I guess only you can decide who is Christian and who isn't. You are arrogant and since your actions push people further from God, I hope you one day see the Hell you've created. I never will.

Evolution is not science, opinions are facts, Canyon Shearer has the direct line to God, none of us need to think for ourselves...just follow Canyon Shearer.

The new self-proclaimed Messiah!

...At least that's what my opinion makes of the context in order to PROVE what I say.

Ergo...FACT!

That's how it's done CS, right?

That's some mighty powerful salvation you are selling there.

All I have to say about your response is...ha ha ha ha! So we get what we deserve because we lied because we were afraid of a God who could create and control EVERYTHING. For shame. So if I meet a man who can make planets, I shouldn't be afraid if I lie to him and he finds out? That's a stupid argument. So when God says that man WAS perfect, does that mean that Adam and Eve didn't have an appendix or tonsils, or did those organs actually do something then? So it is wrong of someone to not trust someone who yells at them from the sky what they are allowed or not allowed to do? Why the hell should I have to suffer because the first two humans screwed up? So if my son lied to me, doubted me, disobeyed me, and "insulted my soverignity", I should condemn him and his girlfriend to eternal damnation unless they wait a long time for my other son to be murdered so they could live happily forever if they just believed it happened? Wow, I guess it would suck to not have lived where you could hear about Jesus. I guess if you happen to be born an Eskimo you are screwed.

Luke,

You are predictable beyond predictable.

Evolution is not science. I love science, which is why I reject your fairy tale in absolute.

You were never a Christian. The fact that you think Ted Haggard was a Christian shows you have no idea what the Bible teaches. If you want to find out why you and him were never Christians:
livingwaters.com/learn/trueandfalse.htm

Also, because you thought you were a Christian, and now have rejected it; you are in the Bible; 2 Peter 2:20

Luke, I forgot to address your ridiculous idea about the fruit:
trustobey.blogspot.com/2007/06/in-garden-of-eden.html

Your questions have all been addressed in one form or another.

We wish you hadn't have come here in the first place, Canyon Shearer. Also, I used to believe in God, and then I rejected him (or just noted his absence). Maybe if God was kind and loving he wouldn't have subjected me to the horrible sound and video (cheap webcam) quality of your little youtube read-a-long. God didn't fix my hatred problem. The Bible didn't teach me or anyone at my church about love. It taught us that gays, abortionists, and atheists were undeserving of life, which is why they are banned for eternal torment in the place that God made for his own sick satisfaction (or maybe HUMAN sick satisfaction) and fixation on torture and death. That is a hate problem. Ofcourse you wish pain on those you don't agree with...I just haven't made a religion out of it. I don't need to isolate myself from the rest of humanity and put together some system of reward and punishment to live ethically. If you do, then I feel sorry for you. I don't hate you, but I can see why you are so miserable that you have to go to an ATHEIST thread and spout your nonsense. What you are saying is that if people formulate a theory based on evidence (evolution isn't dying...it's being revised, much like your little holy book when we find yet another inconsistency in it), then they are mentally deficient. Interesting theory, considering you are using a computer. Computers weren't in the Bible, yet you believe in them. I am just not intellectually impoverished enough to believe your little fairy tale. God has never said a word to me, but I'm sure this is my problem because I have to believe in Jesus to get the translator. I'm sorry, but it just sounds like a joke more than anything. So God can rid me of hatred? Can he rid Ted Haggard of his attraction to men? Could he rid the myriad of Christians of their moral deficiencies? I guess not. So putting your trust in the Saviour will save you from grevious, eternal torment from a God who...loves you? Sounds morally and intellectually bankrupt to me. Evolution certainly has the upper hand in that argument.

context context context

"CSS, pay less attention to making yourself right and more attention to what I say."

Ah, now that's got to be the most Christian thing I ever saw you post!

Don't seek truth, listen to what I say MORE (honestly, MORE!)! ..a tacit admission to not speaking the truth!

With a little calorie cutting and sleep deprivation and you'll be able to get CSS fully into your cult!

Luke,

As I said earlier, it's impossible to maintain a conversation in a Susan Jacoby thread, I wish I hadn't replied the first time instead opting for another thread.

As I said earlier too, man, you've got some hate problems.

You haven't committed the unforgivable sin, because you don't believe, see my youtube video explaining this:
youtube.com/watch?v=OuST3y705w0
some scholars today believe only the Pharisees could commit the unforgivable sin, but I believe otherwise, see video.

I don't argue with people that believe in evolution; it's a dying religion and anyone that says they believe in it are mentally deficient.
trustobey.blogspot.com/2007/06/dying-religiong-of-evolution.html

God can fix your hatred problem, ask Him for forgiveness and thank Him for taking the punishment that was due for your murder at heart.

Anonymous, my apologies for using a different Koran than you've got, we all know it's not a God-inspired book, that there are hundreds of translations, and each one changes the meaning...the verses I quoted are true to my Koran, translated by Joseph Ali, a noted scholar and very articulate man, many Muslims consider his translation near-perfect, despite the fact that its been edited to hide hateful warmongering verses.

Captive Christian, I'd love to have you in a Bible Study, God speaks to me every day, 1188 chapters, 513 Proverbs, 150 Psalms, 66 Books, 10 Commandments, 2 Testaments, and 1 Way.

CSS, pay less attention to making yourself right and more attention to what I say. The Pope was a christianist Pagan, that was proved in the other post.

More importantly, have you repented and put your trust in the Saviour?

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again they cannot see the kingdom of God." - Jesus Christ

If you want a quick lesson about respect and arrogance, read Canyon Shearer's posts above.

Respect is earned. Arrogance does not earn respect. Before Muslims talk about respect, maybe they should reconsider that ugly word, infidel, that they toss around so casually to condemn and mock other people. Maybe when that happens, we can discuss the word "respect."

Dear Hamid

The chemists AND physicists that I met were from Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. They each had a sorrowful and pitiful story of being outcast because they were intellient and "book-learned" with their "wicked Western ways."

Even my friend from Turkey said that Turkey is Medieval and he would do anything to keep from going back there. I would not have thought that, myself, but I got it, straight from the horse's mouth.

The message that I got from every one of these people was that Islam has no place for a modern and educated human being who raises his eyes up from the Koran. I have not confused Islam with the politics of the Middle East; however, I will admit that it is a confusion.

The fact is that all religions are speculative in nature. It is wrong, wrong, wrong, for any speculative religon to assert itself as perfect truth, and then to assert its dubiously speculative claims through the power of the state, then to impose right thinking and condemn wrong thinking among the citizenry, each and every one of whom is complete and separate individual, with relgious beliefs and speculations which may not conform to the official state relgion.

In fact, Islam is a mirror of Christianity 700 years ago. Since then, we have made great progess. The wars of religion are in a far distant past. Am I so wrong to wish for and hope for the same kind of progress in the Islamic world? Whether you agree with me or not, that progress is inevitable. Contamination of Islam with our "wick Western ways" is inevitable and unstoppable. That is how it is.

Thank you Canyon Shearer for acting as lifeguard of the pool of ignorance. I would have thought that position required MORE ignorance than those IN the pool. Thank you for clearing things up for me.

So, opinions are truth and fact?

Great! Thanks for clearing that up for me.

And, it's still a fact when it has been creatively rewritten without a disclaimer, and taken out of context to prove a point?

Great! Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I'd like to quote you then.

“When I post in a Susan Jacoby thread it is for the sole purpose of preaching.” “I try to get my point across” “which is inherentely offensive” “so getting it right the first time is imperitive.”

“Ultimately I” "love” “ the Roman Catholic Church”, “I believe they are” “a surefire way to” “'bow to God's will” and “be saved as well.”

“Another reason is because” “I am attempting to be the life-guard for the pool of ignorance.”

So, in your own words, you are here to save the ignorant by preaching the validity of the Roman Catholic Church in an offensive manner.

I'm glad that my opinion of the context in which you used those words is all that I need to make them true.

Wow, to have the absolute truth reside in my limitless imagination is really liberating!

I knew you were an asset to the discussion here! Just look what I have learned!

Dear Daniel

You should come to realize the world is much larger than the four Muslim chemists from Iran you know. While their stories are unfortunate, so is the way that the iranian govt. has used Islam to stay in power for 20 years.

peoples personal pain is not to be dismissed, but for you to condemn a whole religion because you met some chemists from Iran is hardly fair or representative. The half the muslim world lives to the east of Dhaka. Try visiting it.

There are many christians who are not right-wing-frothing at the mouth zealots. As there are many muslims who are not extremists who impose their beliefs on others.

again, i cannot reiterate this enough:

dont confuse the poltics of the middle east with Islam. that is the primary mistake most americans make when trying to understand the religion. The problems your chemist friends faced was not religious intolernace, it was political power masking as religious authority. It happens to all religions. look at George W. Bush

If God decided to sue every person who has twisted His message to serve their own purposes instead of His, how many lawyers would God need to hire?

Do the teachings of false profits or evil men prove the invalidity of God or His message for us?

Is Islam a backwards religion or does it suffer in that most of its followers are concentrated in a backwards part of the world?

Daniel may have hit the crux of the arguments when he said: "So, I don't offer my respect for such people. So what? How does that hurt you?"

Labels are the problem. When someone choses not to respect a group of people, e.g., Muslims, by saying "I don't like Muslims/Islam" that person is slamming ALL Muslims, intentionally or not.

Why haven't we learned our lesson? In the 1940s it may've been socially acceptible to label ethnic/religious groups like that, but since then we've been 'enlightened', right? Civil rights opened our eyes. The hippie era taught us to love one another. Or has the bigotry and hostility just gone internal?

Labels hurt. If we (as Americans) are still using labels for groups, we have not absorbed or accepted those groups. Maybe we were better off when bigotry was open and we knew who knew us as people and who hated us because we fit into some category in their mind. It's a sad thought, but maybe then things were at least honest.

I want to start with words from Mohammed.'harming others and responsing any harm with another harm are'nt in islam'
Actually,islam isn't known completely by everybody.So,the problem appears there.I don't say these for only people of other religion.there are a lot of muslims who don't know tehir religion fully.this is a great shame.because they don't read anything about islam.they don't search the koran.but when it comes to say anything about islam,they say much,so much.And as far as I see,you,friends,also don't search anything but you only talk.
Islam is'nt a bad thing first of all you must know this.on the contrary islam is peace and happiness religion.ıf you search koran,you can see what islam presents to all of the people in the world.
Islam is a universal religion.It was sent all of the people.Justice is one of the main subject of islam.in the koran,God says,'everybody is equal'and also Mohammed says 'a muslim must behave equally towards everybody,whoever he is (christian,jew,atheist...)' You see some muslim countries don't behave like this.so you think every other muslims are alike.but this is a prejudice.This is'nt true!And also you see muslims behave towards women badly in some countries.and you think,muslims don't treat everybody equally.But all of these are wrong!because some muslims don't know their religion entirely,as I say before.like you,they don't search.and they believe what is talked to them.The real is that islam is the justice religion.this is an apparent thing.Because when Mohammed was dying,he was saying his last words.'behave towards women good'he said.
there are many things to be said,actually.Please, talk about islam after you research it.And don't forget that islam is'nt sent for only one tribe.it is a universal religion.I'm worried,because you are biased.so please,research first.
thanks...

Luke,

"If you can cover up scientific fact with willful ignorance due to the contents of some ancient book written by people..."

Hear, hear!

Adam, Eve, apples, no evolution...

I thought the downfall of man was when Prometheus gave him fire, or when Pandora opened a box that left her with nothing but "hope".

Isn't the Earth a flat disc surrounded by an ocean? I believe some ancient books say that.

More ancient wisdom:

Tomatoes are poisonous.

Disease can be cured by drawing out humors, or bleeding, or leeches.

Witches, while practicing the Devil's powerful magic, can be easily apprehended and drowned without using magic of your own.

One hundred years ago the general public was unaware of the existence of GERMS! People actually believed that disease rises from miasmas.

But hey, if there is evidence that dinosaurs existed, then they MUST have been on the ark!

Good point CSS. Canyon, your opinion is not truth, and your interpretation of the Bible may be false as well. I'm just not dishonest enough to claim I have a monopoly on truth. I wish you could say the same (words like delusion come to mind). Your fire and brimstone approach to the Bible certainly isn't turning people on to your faith, and maybe you think you are doing the right thing in the eyes of God, but Jesus certainly wouldn't have done it that way (that I know). Maybe you could take a hint from the story of Jesus' life. Oh, and you could avoid lying - there is something in the Bible about that.

Dear Hamid
My knowledge of the world is vacuous? You call me the "western elite" when I am just a plain person. You imply that I am Catholic and bow to the Pope, when I am not Catholic. You imply that I supported the Crusades against Islam, when I know nothing of such ancient history. You imply that I support Saudi Arabia, because President Bush does, when I voted for Gore and Kerry.

The only people from Muslim countries that I have ever known were Physicists and Chemists. Every one of them, without exception, hated Islam, with a visceral hatred. I invited my Iranian friend to church, once, as a friendly gesture. She declined. She said it is sweet to look at someone like me, and see how I go to a church service because I want to go, and because I choose to go. She said that she could not even imagine attending a relgious service out of choice. She said that although she appreciated the invitation, that she was too bitter against all religion to even consider going with me.

So much for great and wonderful Islam. So MOST Muslims are happy, living in their ignorant bliss? But not all are. They don't count? Why don't they count? Aren't they people, too?

I have no problem with anyone practicing their religion as they choose and as they please. But the prevailing Islamic practice is condescending fundamentalism, who make fun of other people as apostates, and infidels. They have the same obnoxious sense of entitlement that Right-Wing-Born-Again-Christian-Evangelicals have. They are flambmoyantly intolerant of others, yet demand respect for their own maniacal beliefs. So, I don't offer my respect for such people. So what? How does that hurt you?

Canyon Shearer,

"the quotes I posted are not out of context in my opinion, they provide their own context and when you post the WHOLE article (which I didn't in the interest of brevity) nothing changes in my opinion."

Your OPINION about the context does not make it so. They do provide thier own context when YOU change them...a context of lying. To claim that x proves your point by using y (x as you have altered it) is not valid whether you are of that OPINION or not.

Also, I only posted the link, not the whole article.

I don't believe Christ wants you to spread the Good News through deceit.

UNBELIEVABLE: " I did take one verse completely out of context, but it was necessary in order to show that the Koran can condemn you"

EXACTLY! Your only success there is making anyone with critical thinking skills assume now that you ALWAYS lie...and that you will stop at nothing to convince people of your OPINIONS.

You posted: "Ultimately I would love to see the Roman Catholic Church become a part of the catholic ecclesiasm, the universal church of Christ; I believe they are not, with many evidences which I posted on the other thread."

Even by YOUR OWN ADMISSION, any evidence you have is compromised, and in fact not provided because you change it, put quotes around it, and peddle it as the TRUTH supporting your own OPINION.

I see too that I am not alone, and commend those who call you out on your deceitfulness, like Log Eye(sp?) and Anonymous above, who states:

"I don’t know which Quran you were reading from but it is surely not the one Muslims all over the world come to know."

"I think what you have done is deceitful to say the least. If what you believe is reasonable and rational then there is no need to resort to such tactics of manipulation and tampering..."

Your desired end (even if achieved) would not justify the sinful means in the eyes of God.

I only hope that I do not also, with age, become so deluded as to believe that being uncharitable and dishonest are the path to salvation.

Maurie Beck,

Bring on the Torquemadas? Only if they bring with them a rousing musical number with David Lee Roth as a backup dancer...

Well if the Bible says that evolution is wrong, then the Bible is obviously incorrect, because there is PROOF that it is true. Unlike your BELIEF which has NO PROOF. The Bible SAYS that the root of mankind's sin is in eating a piece of fruit, so prove me wrong! Ofcourse you can't. So God created all of the stars to be, like, pretty and stuff? You are a damned fool, and an arrogant one at that, if you believe that your pathetic, comfortable existence would make a shred of difference to an omnipotent being. Moronic scientists? Yes, and there are a myriad of pastors, priests, and the like who are soooooo intelligent. Some still think the world is flat. Luckily, I won't ever have to face God, because he doesn't exist. It wouldn't matter if I believed in Jesus now anyway, because I've already committed the unforgivable sin. If you can cover up scientific fact with willful ignorance due to the contents of some ancient book written by people who advocated stoning children if they talked back to their parents, then so be it. Don't dare call me the ignorant one - go cry back to your Jewish zombie.

I'm just amazed at the hatred and anger I see here. I thought we Americans all believed in 'freedom of religion'. It looks like people are afraid to allow anyone else the right to have a different religion than their own. Why are people so threatened by Islam?

Read up on Islam and you'll learn it's very, very similar to Christianity and Judaism. The primary difference (historically) is that Islam-the-religion stood firm while The Church redefined itself and the 'followers' splintered into thousands of denominations. Some factions of Judaism also 'modernised' to better fit into European society. Reading books by people (like Rushdie and Manji) who do not accept the basic premises of Islam do not give an accurate picture of the faith itself. Someone earlier used a good example - That would be like reading Martin Luther to find out about the Catholic church.

Ironically, with all the shouting about how Islam is unfair to women and their participation in civic society, there have been far more women heads of state in Islamic countries/areas than in America. Women have been far more educated in Muslim countries/society for more generations than in America. There are more women physicians in the Muslim world than in the West. Unfortunately, the economics of some of those areas does not allow for every woman to get a fair chance at education...but then neither does Mississipi or Texas. There are Muslims who, from their culture or their ignorance of the religion they profess to believe, do not give women their rights. But it is my experience, much as in general American society, that the worst oppressors of women are other women...and the women themselves. Stop blaming Islam for oppressing women, start blaming culture and ignorant individuals for that. There is nothing in the Quran or the traditions of Prophet Muhammad that accept unfair treatment of women. In fact, there is MUCH to the contrary.

Someone earlier in this chain gave a whole lot of quotes from the Quran and Bible about punishment as if to prove Islam is harsher. Their selections were not balanced. What never seems to enter in these sorts of discussions is that in Islam, there is NO CONCEPT OF ORIGINAL SIN. The story of Adam and Eve defying God and sinning is in the Quran, but their sin did not pour over all succeeding generations. You want to talk about an unfair God, then talk about one who would forever punish His own creation for the acts of two individuals then kill His own son. Without original sin there is NO NEED FOR A SAVIOR. Jesus is in the Quran and it is mandatory for all Muslims to accept the virginity of Mary and the prophethood of Jesus. In the Quran, Jesus didn't die...he was raised to Heaven and will come back in the final days of the world. If you extract the concept of original sin from Christianity, you'll pretty much have Islam.

So what is everyone arguing about? Do you cling so dearly to the idea that God messed up and made humans inherently 'bad' and fixed that by killing his own son? Sounds like Mythologyland to me...but then again...I'm an apostate. I left the Christian world to become one of 'them'... a Muslim. Wholly American, tax-paying, educated, employed, and voting...MUSLIM. And *gasp*, I’m and American FEMALE. Being female and Muslim is not the hindrance everyone outside the Muslim world seems to think it is. Even when the opportunity presents itself, many Muslim women chose to spend their in the mosque kitchen rather than the boardroom. Muslim women are not limited to a secondary status in Islam. In fact, I’m currently active on several Muslim-community committees and I've served on a two high-level Muslim boards of directors, including my local mosque.

Islam isn't some horrible cult. All this hatred and hype over something 'different'? C'mon folks...live and let live, will ya?

Canyon Shearer,

You wrote: “The Koran says that our sins are a stain on the heart, (Al-Mutaffifin 83:14) and Maryam 19:60 says that if you’ll repent and place your trust in the atoning work of Jesus, then you will see Heaven.”

I don’t know which Quran you were reading from but it is surely not the one Muslims all over the world come to know. The verse you alluded to in chapter 19 in context says:

“Those were some of the prophets on whom God did bestow His Grace,- of the posterity of Adam, and of those who We carried in the Ark with Noah, and of the posterity of Abraham and Israel of those whom We guided and chose. Whenever the Signs of God were rehearsed to them, they would fall down in prostrate adoration and in tears. But after them there followed a posterity who missed prayers and followed after lusts soon, then, will they face Destruction,-

19:60 {Except those who repent and believe, and work righteousness: for these will enter the Garden and will not be wronged in the least,-}

Gardens of Eternity, those which God has promised to His servants in the Unseen: for His promise must necessarily come to pass. They will not there hear any vain discourse, but only salutations of Peace: And they will have therein their sustenance, morning and evening. Such is the Garden which We give as an inheritance to those of Our servants who guard against Evil.” (19:58-63)

I don’t see any mention of the atoning work of Jesus as the only way to achieve God’s pleasure anywhere in chapter 19 or anywhere else in the Quran for that matter. The Quran does not teach the doctrine of the original sin and neither did Jesus. The Quran tells us that humans are just that: humans; they are not depraved but are as capable of doing good as they capable of doing evil. We are not responsible for the actions of our forefathers but we are responsible for ours. The story of Adam and Eve is retold in the Quran but with a different twist and purpose. A summary of it is found in chapter 2 and goes as follows:

“And We said: "O Adam, dwell you and your wife in this garden, and eat freely thereof, both of you, whatever you may wish; but do not approach this one tree, lest you become wrongdoers."

But Satan caused them both to stumble therein, and thus brought about the loss of their erstwhile state. And so We said: "Down with you, and be henceforth enemies unto one another; and on earth you shall have your abode and your livelihood for a while!"

Thereupon Adam received words of guidance from his Lord, and He accepted his repentance: for, verily, He alone is the-Acceptor of Repentance, the Dispenser of Grace. For although We did say, "Down with you all from this state," there shall, none the less, most certainly come unto you guidance from Me: and those who follow My guidance need have no fear, and neither shall they grieve; but those who are bent on denying the truth and giving the lie to Our messages - they are destined for the fire, and therein shall they abide.” (2:35-39)

As you can read from the above verses, the sin you are talking about ends with Adam and Eve and is not a stain and a burden for us humans to carry for eternity. Actually the Quran is explicit about the subject and says that: “whatever [wrong] any human being commits rests upon himself alone; and no bearer of burdens shall be made to bear another's burden.” It is clearly stated in the Quran that every person is responsible for his or her actions and deeds. God, also, in the Quran tells us that “O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of God: for God forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”(39:53)

Elsewhere in the Quran we find that the creation of the universe is not without meaning and purpose and we are exhorted to think about our creation as in “Are, Then, they who are bent on denying the truth not aware that the heavens and the earth were once one single entity, which We then parted asunder? And that We made out of water every living thing? Will they not, then, begin to believe?... And [know that] We have not created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in mere idle play.” We are for a reason and that is to be tried in deeds and actions. The Quran states it clearly when it says: “He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days - and His Throne was over the waters - that He might try you, which of you is best in conduct.” (11:17) and “He who created death and life, that He may try which of you is best in deeds: and He is the Exalted in Might, Oft-Forgiving. (67:2)

The path to salvation according to the Quran is faith in God and good works and not any vicarious atonement of some ‘holy person’; for we read in the Quran “Whoever works righteousness, man or woman, and is a believer, verily, to him will We give a new Life, a life that is good and pure and We will bestow on such their reward according to the best of their actions.” (16:97); and “He that does good deeds shall have ten times as much to his credit: He that does evil shall only be recompensed according to his evil: no wrong shall be done unto any of them.” (6:160)

Also, we read “Those who invoke not, with God, any other god, nor slay such life as God has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; - and any that does this not only meets punishment. But the Penalty on the Day of Judgment will be doubled to him, and he will dwell therein in ignominy,- Unless he repents, believes, and works righteous deeds, for God will change the evil of such persons into good, and God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful, And whoever repents and does good has truly turned to God with an acceptable conversion;”(25:68-71) The Quran is therefore very clear about what you call ‘salvation’ and how to achieve it. The path to attain it is pure and simple; no dogmas, no limbo and no irrational doctrines.

In the Quran there exists an uncompromising monotheism where God is depicted as one and indivisible. The Prophet was instructed to “Say: He is God, the One! God, the eternally besought of all! He begets not, nor was begotten. And there is none comparable unto Him (112:1-4). Elsewhere in the Quran we read that "He is God; there is no god but He, He is the Knower of the unseen and the visible; He is the All-Merciful, the All-Compassionate. He is God, there is no god but He. He is the King, the All-Holy, the All-Peace, the Guardian of Faith, the All-Preserver, the All-Mighty, the All-Compeller, the All-Sublime. Glory be to God, above that which they associate! He is God the Creator, the Maker, the Shaper. To Him belong the Names Most Beautiful. All that is in the heavens and the earth magnifies Him; He is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise." (59:22-24)

This declaration of the oness of God is very similar to the shema in the hebrew bible. To the Jews “the Shema is a declaration of faith, a pledge of allegiance to the One God. It is fundamental in Jewish belief and it is said upon arising in the morning and upon going to sleep at night. It is the first prayer that a Jewish child is taught to say. It is the last words a Jew says prior to death. In the Hebrew tongue it goes something like this: Sh'ma Yis'ra'eil Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad.- Barukh sheim k'vod malkhuto l'olam va'ed. V'ahav'ta eit Adonai Elohekha b'khol l'vav'kha uv'khol naf'sh'kha uv'khol m'odekha.” Which translates to: “Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One. Blessed be the Name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.”

God's transcendental oneness and uniqueness is stressed throughout the Quran and to declare someone to be equal to God is an unforgivable sin as in “God does not forgive the ascribing of divinity to aught beside Him; but He forgives anything else to whom He pleases; to ascribe divinity to aught beside God is to devise a sin most heinous indeed. (4:48) The Quran therefore does not accept the belief of the Orthodox Trinitarians who argue that Jesus was himself God. The Quran’s message is therefore clear when it assertively declares that “Indeed, they deny the truth who say, "Behold, God is the Christ, son of Mary" - seeing that the Christ himself said, "O children of Israel! Worship God alone, who is my Lord and your Lord." Behold, whoever ascribes divinity to any being beside God, unto him will God deny paradise, and his goal shall be the fire: and such evildoers will have none to help them!” (5:72)

I think what you have done is deceitful to say the least. If what you believe is reasonable and rational then there is no need to resort to such tactics of manipulation and tampering because ‘Given an even playing field, truth would always win out over falsehood’ at least in theory.

concerned and canyon, i don't care a whit about your posts here. at least jihadist is addressing the question posed.

you guys are obsessed with jihadist. get a life!

Well, well The Jihadist has "blessed us" again with trivia. On your mountain trip, please review the flawed foundations of Islam and get back to us with your conclusions.

Peace be upon you and your personal "pretty wingie flying talking thingie. May she protect you from falling rocks and Islamic "crazy koranic terrorists".

Is it my imagination or is Jihadist slowly turning tables and casually taking stabs at atheists and Christians in his posts on this question?

Canyon,

Please invite us to your next meeting with the Lord!!!!!

"by multiculturalist American academics, many of whose programs are heavily indebted to Saudi money."

Wow! I did not think I would find a commentator willing to say such a thing on this forum. Bravo! Ms Jacoby, you are very gutsy.

As for those multiculturalist American academics, I don't think it is just Saudi money that is influencing them, although it probably helps. I wonder if a lot of those multiculturalist academics grew up in the 60's, and went looking for another tradition, that could be more personally meaningful than the traditions that they had grown up in. Some of them found Islam, some of them found Hinduism and Buddhism. But like all new converts, they forgot to observe these new traditions with discriminating wisdom and clarity. In other words, they became too personally involved with the traditions that they adopted, and were seduced by the exotically unwestern cultures in which these traditions were imbedded. And now we have these western academics running around completely unable to in any way be objective about the traditions that they have adopted.

Yoyo,

The faith is strong with you.

Yoyo

Muslims don't know what god look like and never speculate on that as it is never stated in the Koran. No images of god that is old and cuddly with a big white beard, or Jesus like,with long golden brown hair, or with a turban and black beard.

RM

The above post is mine...forgot to sign it.

God lives in the supernatural world called the imagination.He gets in there through a process called belief,which means you close your eyes.cross your fingers and say I Believe!
And voila! there he is.How do you want your god?
Old and cuddly with a big white beard? Or Jesus like,with long golden brown hair? Or with a turban and black beard? Name it?
I've always fancied Aphrodite myself,but she was before my time.Pity she died and went to Mythologyland,where all the gods go to die.

Wow, Luke, you only seemed moderately hateful in your other posts, but now I'm glad there is some distance between us.

I don't know where to start...I'll try to answer most of your points.

Evolution is in the Bible, the Bible says it doesn't happen and to avoid the moronic scientists who advocate it.

The Bible doesn't speak of planets, but numbers the stars at infinite.

Mankind isn't condemned for eating fruit, this is your idolatrous attempt to belittle the truth.

If the Earth were covered by a global flood, wouldn't we have enough water to cover the Earth 8 miles deep if the land were flat? Wouldn't we have billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the Earth? Wouldn't the foliage from the previous era buried under extreme pressure decompose into petroleum?

How come the rib is the only bone in the human body that grows back in full if removed?

I'm glad you agree that you are the willfully ignorant one, you've certainly done a good job of proving it.

Do you consider yourself to be a good person? If you stood before God tonight would you be innocent or guilty?

You are a terrible representative. Your childish insults pay testament to that. Overwhelming evidence section? Funny, evolution isn't in the Bible. Why so many planets if they aren't in the Bible? Your evidence is, oh, a book. I guess that there is plenty of evidence that God created black holes for a reason but...funny, they aren't in the Bible. Oh yes, and mankind is condemned for eating FRUIT?! Sounds like your God's creations are more capable of compassion than the creator himself. Ofcourse he is - after all, we created him. Please, toss us your evidence so we can skewer it, much like those representatives of which you speak did to people who thought like I did in days past. Your beliefs are convenient, but that doesn't make them true. God will never flood the Earth again, but it happens all the time, just not the whole Earth again? Oh, how convenient. Where is Christ's body. Oh, how convenient, taken to heaven. Where is God? Invisible, how convenient. Where is heaven? Too far away for our telescopes, or also invisible. How convenient. How convenient that we are on Earth where the Bible (which is the only truth in the universe) happened to be written, and Jesus happened to be born. Oh wait, this was all planned by an omnipotent, invisible man who sent his son to be brutally tortured and killed to save us from a eternal torment and all we have to do is telepathically tell him we love him and believe in him so he can remove a curse that was put on us when the first man was tricked into eating a piece of fruit from a woman who was made from a single rib bone who was previously tricked by an arrogant angel who wanted to be mischeivous and cruel and just happened to be able to turn into a snake. Yeah, and I'm the ignorant one.

Luke, good question, this is why I'm here:

"And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will."

And this is the atheist area? I don't believe in atheists...I thought for sure this was the confused kids who ignore God despite overhwhelming evidence section.

I am attempting to be the life-guard for the pool of ignorance.

Dear friends firstly sorry for bad english.
I'm reading your comments about islam wiht sorrow, and i can say for certain that you know nothing about real islam and the facts written in koran.
there are some parts you are right. in some islamic countries islam has been completely misunderstood.in kuran men and women are equal. but not so in these countries.
the first commond of islam is "to read". but we see in these countries ignorance, illeteracy and undevelopment. but these things have nothing to do with real islam. most moslems do things that islam doesn't want, and don't do things that islam wants.
but, you have negative thoughts about islam by considering some fake moslems as if real islam wanted them to be so.this is the most unjust thing you always do. if this were true,we moslems would have thought that christianity is a bad religion because of Hitler, Bush, American and English soldiers in Iraq and other misbehaving christians.But it is wrong to atribute misbehavings of some people to religion, however excessive the number of these people is. All this facts show that you have little respect to other religions.
and it is certain that you are extremely biassed. the reason is this.
I suggest you read and learn more about real islam and then speak.
I can answer every questions about islam and its worshippers cincerely. but please do not state your opinions about anything without having sufficient information about it. please..

thanks for this chance...

Canyon, you are in the atheist area...what do you expect from YOUR time here?

One thing of which I am curious. I mean, let's be honest, Jesus Christ's death certainly wasn't the worst imaginable. Starving to death certainly would have been worse - or maybe being the victim of a serial killer. Was it just that he "decided" to take all of mankind's sins with him? Couldn't he have just done it in his sleep?

If God made money, he sure didn't buy many good representatives, and he sure as hell didn't create many (I guess one out of a trillion isn't bad). Therefore, atheism is still my thing.

Unliberated...

What exactly do you seek from your time here?

Have you ever actually read the Bible?

What do you think the consistent theme is?

Dear Daniel

Most Muslims have no interest in having people tell them how to practive their religion or whether or not to even practice their religion. The problem is that their governments have used religion as a means of oppressing them, and they are more than intelligent enough to see the distinction.

Saudi Arabia, the most fundamentalist state in the world by far, is also one of America's closest and longstanding allies anywhere in the world. Our Presidents meet and visit regularly with the the same regime that beats people for not being Muslim enough.

As much as you take comfort in misunderstanding Islam so that you can blame the problems of the world on a religion that you have not taken any time to learn about, I would have to say that your underlying premise is false.

People are oppressed for political, social and economic reasons, many of them stemming from post colonial arrangements that continue to this day. Religion is the scapegoat for simple minded people who like to see the world in black and white.

Its not like Jesus Christ would ever go on a crusade to kill peopel in Jerusalem, but the Pope ordered the crusades. he did so in the name of Jesus Christ bc it suited his political purposes.

Please stop conflating the politics of the middle east with religion. Its getting tiresome and just shows how vacuous your knowledge of the world is.

Hello Maurie Beck my fellow Pastarafatarian

Thought I'd peek in a bit to see if this thread gets interesting and for comic relief. You having fun yet reading the posts here?:)

As for some of the other posters let's have some more fun:

Irshad Manji? Yes a Muslim still, but the trouble with her book "The Trouble with Islam" is she is considered like a Christopher Hitchens, full of generalisations that Muslims in the wider world already knows, but yet to be implemented due to limited resources by governments and organisations.

Irshad Manji, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie, if one is to think of them as Muslim reformers did better at conferences and seminars in the west. They, as practical reformers of Muslims in Canada (Manji), the Netherlands (Ali) and United Kingdom (Rushdie) have well, a failed, spotty and/or controversial record. But Muslim organisations in those countries are doing real work, from conservatives to liberal to moderate and other such labellings by their take on Islam.

As for apostates, in Muslim minds, those who are apostates are atheists who declared themselves openly so, what Susan Jacoby call "unrepentant apostate." The Muslim reactions to apostates and/or atheists, at the personal level, is not different from that of Christians towards those in their faith flocks who became atheists, ranges from acceptance and tolerance to vilifications at the personal level. The Shariah and/or legal reactions varies from state to state in Muslim societies and countries - from death to formal recognition.

As for apostates and/or atheists calling their former co-religionists for reform and at the same time they are idiotic and barbaric in their beliefs and faith, one can certainly surmise that would not go down too well and begets, well, a hostile reaction.

The most virulent and articulate Muslims against Muslim apostates and Muslim writers who are citizens of western countries in the developing Muslim world are western educated Muslim thinker-writers who remained in their own countries and societies. The certainly don't take too well being told that in spite of having a PhD in quantum physics or philosophy or history or theology, they are, well, more stupid than the tea lady who never got a high school certificate, but is deem a "bright" or smart and non-delusional because she don't believe in God or religion. And these writers-thinkers do write back and thrash the Muslim apostates. And other western writers who write such cliches that Islam don't and can't accept criticisms, Islam is rigid, Muslim moderates are apologists etc.

I'll leave this here like this for now. Bite size is all some can manage. Oh, in some Muslim blogs, naturally, like their western counterparts who say Muslims are such and such, and Islam is this and that, do say the same, and with the added spike that western intelligence, like military intelligence, is an oxymoron. Low on IQ, low on information and knowledge.

Ah Halozcel:

Buddhist banking? Not yet. But 26.784 percent of my clients in Islamic banking and financial services are non-Muslims due to their own personal preferences.

And back to Maurie Beck:

I off now to finish some workand going to have a nice weekend eating shabu-shabu, climb up the Fujiyama (if I can stand it) and read the books on Baruch Spinoza you recommended to me.

Best regards as always
J

Every Christian to include Canyon has his/her own interpretation of the Word of God. Four different books, at least five auxiliary books/epistles, competing theologians/sects/protests, and competing stories just in the original set followed by translations and embellishments followed by countless interpretations, hidden codes and raptures. IMHO, God needs to have another visit to a mountaintop to get the mess cleaned up.

Of course, there are the other religions that have the same God but different authentic Words. Very strange that our God could create such confusion don't you think? The whole cacophony smells of politics and economics.

I will stick with Mark's Gospel, the seven authentic epistles of Paul and the nine Commandments along with the evaluation of these by modern biblical scholars to get some semblance of what God is trying to communicate realizing that good people of other faiths or no faiths are also God's chosen ones.

CSS,

There are a lot of reasons why I came at this thread differently than the other. When I post in a Susan Jacoby thread it is for the sole purpose of preaching. She is too popular and too controversial and too liberal to have a conversation in this thread; so I try to get my point across while being as uncontroversial as the cross, which is inherentely offensive, can be. It is impossible to try to respond to everyone in a Susan Jacoby thread, so getting it right the first time is imperitive.

Another reason is because I assumed that American Muslims would be reading this, and American Muslims are a completely different type of people than devout Catholics or Middle-Eastern Muslims. They have a form of christianist Islam, which is Christianity without Christ; which is a surefire way to Hell. I'm posting in hopes that someone takes heed. I also tried to keep it open enough that non-Muslims might be saved as well. I did take one verse completely out of context, but it was necessary in order to show that the Koran can condemn you, but in nowise can it save you. I made the effort to point that in order to 'bow to God's will' (Muslim or Moslem in Arabic) you must take up your cross and follow Christ. I was trying to make a play on words.

I'm also making an effort to be softer, gentler, more agreeable. Certain religions really get me fired up though, American Islam is not one of them. As for my supposed lies...you can take that as you will...the quotes I posted are not out of context in my opinion, they provide their own context and when you post the WHOLE article (which I didn't in the interest of brevity) nothing changes in my opinion.

Ultimately I would love to see the Roman Catholic Church become a part of the catholic ecclesiasm, the universal church of Christ; I believe they are not, with many evidences which I posted on the other thread. Please make sure you are saved, that if you had to stand before God today you would be welcomed as a child and not crushed as an enemy.

It's more than feelings getting hurt here, we're talking about eternity, which is a long time, and it is in our best interest to be forgiven. Could I encourage you to read the Book of John? It was written by one of Jesus' closest friends, and it is one of the most wonderful books in the Bible; it may clear some things up for you.

Yours,
Canyon

Hi Fuji,

Let me know when and where the auto-de-fe will be held. It can't be any hotter than Nevada.

Maurie Beck:
I wear apostasy as a badge of honor. Let the Torquemadas' of this thread come out of the closet.

Hi there!

"Dear Paganplace,

"I was going to say that you misunderstand Canyon Shearer, but I know you don't; you just disagree with his dogma. Canyon's worldview doesn't like change and likes answers but not questions. "

Well, in effect, I'm saying his dogma... what he's apparently been taught science *is* is *wrong.*

I mean, this is where you get pseudo-scientific Creationist 'museums' meant to obfuscate facts in support of dogma, (and some highly irresponsible policies put forth by religious conservative candidates) ...as well as tell people that bad science is at least as 'true' as *real* science, and also much more sacred.

I mean, plenty of Christians teach that as a Pagan I'm selfish, greedy, rich, hypersexual, sacrifice babies, hate Jesus, worship myself, have no sense of transcendence, spend my nights hatching nefarious plans to destroy Christianity by convincing Wal-mart to allow its greeters to say 'Happy Holidays' while simultaneously opposing capitalism by trying to drive said conservative-Christian-owned chain out of town...

I mean, churches teach these things *about* me.

Does this make any of them true?

Not in the least.

(Ok, so I'm no big fan of Wal-mart, call me a commie for patronizing local small business and avoiding purchases of new disposable goods.)

Really, though. Sometimes 'untrue' is just 'untrue.'

In like wise, treating 'science' as a matter of faith and opinion that's not valid because it doesn't live up to the false standards of a revealed religion that it's falsely accused of being, well...

It's just not true.

As for the people in government who use religion to dispute the validity of science itself, they may well protect big oil profits by sowing confusion about whether or not poison is bad for us, but they sure never met a weapon system they didn't like.

The Arab states of the Middle East are the shattered remains of the Ottoman Empire. They are variously, provisonal kings and monarchies, undisguised dictators, dynastic machines of brute force, that rule over pitiful and tragic people, compelled, obligated, intimidated, even brain-washed into believing that their Islam is a perfected way of life, when it is, in reality, as seen by un-Islamic eyes, the most profound tragedy of the modern world.

I wear apostasy as a badge of honor. Let the Torquemadas' of this thread come out of the closet.

"But Westerners forget, that the arabs invaded all those countries they control today, Those countries belonged to someone else."

Americans forget that Europeans invaded this country that we control today, this country belonged to many "someone elses".

"At least we - look at our mistakes, and strive to evolve and do better, and get along better with others."

Really?! How is that? Would Native Americans say that? How about the Mexicans we stole the West from and are now keeeping out with a wall, and scapegoating with the failures of the current administration on national security?

Where are the Islamic Reformers on the Panels?
Couldn't find anyone that thinks there should be Female Imans for example?
Do any of these panelists even believe that men and women can pray and work together?

If the goal of the Washington Post is the bring this type of understanding of Islam to America, they must be trying to start a new Crusade!

I meant to say,

A person who thinks in terms of "apostasy" and feels "righteous" enough to use such a silly term as "apostate" proclaims to the whole world a coarse and base intellect, CANNOT possibly be taken seriously, by serious people

But she's right. How can she protest TOO much?

"Apostasy" is a ridiculous term. Those who fling it around like a weapon that could hurt someone are fools.

Calling someone an "apostate" is sort of like calling someone "fat-so" or calling someone a "fag." It is just plain silly.

A person who thinks in terms of "apostasy" and feels "righteous" enough to use such a silly term as "apostate" proclaims to the whole world a coarse and base intellect, can cannot possibly be taken seriously, by serious people.

People like Hamad complain about islamics being told what to do, and people are taken by surprise and embarrassed because of it, they back out of the discussion. "Oh, How, how could we, how dare we do that in their own country!"

But Westerners forget, that the arabs invaded all those countries they control today, Those countries belonged to someone else. Not only that, but islamics, don't get along well with others. As a matter of fact, they don't get along well with ANYONE - not even with each other. Look at the killings right in Gaza today.

And JUST look at the fact, that the islamics have thrown out or killed, are doing it today, any other religion or those that think differently.

And then they come here, to the West - those moslems, and start telling us what to do. That's what they're doing right now.

They're no better than the West. WORSE! At least we - look at our mistakes, and strive to evolve and do better, and get along better with others. But the islamics are simply 7th c. tribesmen, bound and determined NOT to change.

"The very concept of apostasy should always be challenged, since apostates--from every faith--have been responsible for every bit of real progress in human history."

-- Methinks Susan protests too much.

Dear Paganplace,

I was going to say that you misunderstand Canyon Shearer, but I know you don't; you just disagree with his dogma. Canyon's worldview doesn't like change and likes answers but not questions. The problem is that everytime he looks in the mirror he sees that he himself has changed, meaning he is closer to death, which is disconcerting. So he wants a reliable world where the sun goes around the earth - uh sorry, he does accept a heliocentric solar system - and planets are, well, planets. In addition, he has found a way to live happily-ever-after by accepting the one true gospel of Jesus Christ. It adds a little firma to his terror - I mean terra - and he can at least keep saltine crackers down and his queasiness at bay.

Who cares! WHo cares!

Forget the history of islam and its origin. What is to be considered is what it's doing today!

And it is NOT a great religion or equal. It's a cult!

I will NEVER accept anything of it, esp. when it entails a call to prayer at 12 Midnight and 3:45 a.m.!

more for Hamid

In Islamic society, the rule is believe, or else pretend to believe, or get out, either leave and go away, or die.

For a simple person who believes, there is no problem. Of course there is no problem. How could there be a problem? You are instructed to believe, and you comply; no problem.

But otherwise, there is a great problem, indeed. If you, yourself, are not brainwashed, then you are very narrow in your experience and outlook.

Islamic people need to understand, that there is a whole great big wide world out there, where that snotty term "infidel" does not go over very well.

To Hamid
If I were to ask an oppressed person to comment on his oppression, while he yet dwells among his oppressors, what would he say? Would he say his true beliefs, or would he say that which he feels obligated and compelled to say? And under such coercive circumstances, how could I ever be sure of anyone's sincerity?

You are right, I cannot fathom how a person who lives under unyielding relgious tyranny could be happy. I cannot imagine living that way.

Hamid

In my field, I have met a number of Arabs and Iranians. All of them have said that Islam has ruined their lives.

My friend from Egypt and my friend from Saudi Arabia went back because they missed home.

My friend from Iraq got his draft notice from Saddam and never went home, even now, he has never gone back to Iraq.

Even my friend from Turkey refused to go back home to Turkey; even such a modern Islamic state as Turkey is a suffocating place for an educated and enlightened person to live.

But of all these friends, my saddest was my female friend from Iran. Islam is especially hard on women. She used to cry every day. She missed home so much, but she said that she would rather die than go back there. She said in a crying fit, "Mohamad, Mohamad, Mohamad! How I wish I had never heard that name."

There may well be observant Muslims who are happy being that way. But surely you must admit that not everyone believes in God, and forcing them to pretend a belief which they do not hold is tragic. And that is what Islam is to me, a tragedy of the modern world.

I'd really have to dispute the notion we've heard here that people from culturally-Muslim countries who are either secular or nonbelievers wouldn't have something to add to this discussion: in fact, being immersed, schooled, and given every incentive to profess to believe something, and yet not actually being invested in it, can lend a certain perspective on a religion.

When one's invested in continuing to believe in and identify with something, it does tend to restrict the possible conclusions and observations one might make.

Dear Daniel

You have demonstrated the gulf between the secular "western" elite and the average Muslim. The problem with your kind of thinking is that you cannot fathom a reality where people are generally happy and content living the life of an observant Muslim.

Your premise that Islam is prevalent only because it exists by mandate or by force is absurd. I would suggest you go travel around the Muslim world and see for yourself how oppressed people feel by their religion. Go ask Muslims what they think, and stop telling us what you learned last night on Fox news.

Hamid, one of the first commenters on this thread said, of secular Muslims, no one cares what they have to say.

Yes, in a society where everyone is required to "believe" in Islam, even if they don't believe, it would be illogical to assume that anyone could be interested in any other point of view. In fact, the people in Islamic societies live under religious tyranny.

Democracy is more than just voting. The mark of a modern democracy is the explicit enumeration of individual rights, which apply to all people, the minorities, as well as the majorities.

First among these rights is freedom of religion and equality of the sexes. In a society in which all people are "compelled" to believe the state religion, then the religion itself becomes an instrument of state, and the beliefs of all people are then suspect; the entire society devolves into a hypocritical and cynical piety.

This is Islam; this is Islamic society.

The power brokers of Islam love to throw accusatory and punishing words around like, heresy, apostasy, and blaspehmy. But these concepts are, in fact, ridiculous, absurd, even comical. The people who become red-faced with hysteria over these silly matters, are narrow and sheltered fools.

Until the Invasion of Iraq, Al Qaeda tired to appeal to all Islam to unite against the ‘common enemy’, the United States. This initial effort failed, and as a result, Al Qaeda shifted it tactics by starting a civil war between the Shia and Sunni factions of Islam. While Al Qaeda has always been more oriented toward the Sunni beliefs, especially those of the Wahabi sect, it had previously refrained from openly attacking the Shia.

I mention this to make a point. I think some and perhaps much of what is attributed “wrong” with Islam is not entirely Islam’s fault.

I think racism plays a factor: Most of the Sunni of the Middle East are Arabs; most of the Shia of the Middle East are Persian. Persians and Arabs see each other as being ‘different’, even if Westerners do not.

I think nationalism plays a factor: Iran’s efforts to build an atom bomb has nothing to do with defending Islam (despite what they say) and everything to do with wanting to become the most influential nation in the region. Other than Israel, the most likely target for such a bomb is another Islamic country.

Muslims had no problem with hundreds of thousands of Jews living and worshiping in Palestine until these Jews were given their own nation. Only then was there talk about exterminating them. If religion was the primary problem between these two peoples then they would have started fighting long before the creation of the state of Israel.

I thing sexism plays a factor: the Arab and Persian cultures have rules of “modesty” that cannot be fully attributed to the Koran or Islam. Of course Arabs and Persians alike try to use their religious convictions to justify these secular or ethnic traditions and their often poor treatment of women. But this misplaced effort is akin to some Christians saying that drinking wine is a sin when Jesus’ first miracle was changing water into wine and wine was the drink served at the Last Supper. If you believe drinking wine is a sin, you may be right but you will have a hard time justifying it based upon the writings in the Gospel.

The question no one seems to be able to answer is: What percentage of the problems going in the Middle East are caused by Islam and what percentage of the problems are caused by something else but blamed on Islam?

I'd feel a little better if my fellow Americans concentrated more on knowing fascism whenever and wherever we see it, rather than upon insisting we must be seeing it wherever anything to do with Islam is.

The posting by Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah should be required reading so that the world understands just how fascist some Muslim leaders really are.

His defense of Jihad, death penalty for apostasy and reduced rights for women demonstrate well just how evil Islam can be.

Like many other commentators Susan Jacoby writes "Americans are indeed ignorant about Islam..." The remark is demeaning and spurious. Who, then, buys and reads the avalanche of books on Islam published in America since 9/11? Or the even greater number of newspaper, magazine and journal articles in paper and electronic format? As the American public seeks to demistify itself of Islam, what is telling at this late date - as documented by Pew and other surveys - is the refusal of a significant percentage of Muslims both here and abroad to acknowledge that their co-religionists even perpetrated the carnage. Instead of confronting the terrorist element in Islam directly and publicly, the faithful issue the usual disclaimer: this is not true Islam.

Like many other commentators Susan Jacoby writes "Americans are indeed ignorant about Islam..." The remark is demeaning and spurious. Who, then, buys and reads the avalanche of books on Islam published in America since 9/11? Or the even greater number of newspaper, magazine and journal articles in paper and electronic format? As the American public seeks to demistify itself of Islam, what is telling at this late date - as documented by Pew and other surveys - is the refusal of a significant percentage of Muslims both here and abroad to acknowledge that their co-religionists even perpetrated the carnage. Instead of confronting the terrorist element in Islam directly and publicly, the faithful issue the usual disclaimer: this is not true Islam.

"One who claims he knows about it,
Tell me the earth is a vale of sin;
But I and the bees, and the birds,
We doubt it,
And think it a world worth living in."

Ella Wheeler Wilcox

Thank you Mrs. Susan Jacoby for informing us that On Faith should present your views on Islam. But to be quite frank, this is not about you or your views.

Kind regards,
Shukri

Ok, this was just too preposterous, Canyon:

"But I am incredulous to science of today, up until the year 2000 when I was standing in Lowel observatory did I learn that Pluto probably wasn't a planet...then six years later we find out that for nearly a century we've been duped on the number of planets.

"But trusting in scientists has failed us millions of times in the past, this implicit faith is not so trustworthy."

Umm. Pluto didn't change, people weren't "duped," ...the previously-ill-defined category of 'planet' was refined, in large measure because lots of Kuiyper belt objects which could as easily be called 'planets' are turning up and a line had to be drawn somewhere as to what consistently defines a 'planet.'

Science isn't meant to be taken on faith, ...if you could get the religious idea that it's a rival religion out the way, you might see things for what they are.

Science and knowledge are *supposed* to change and improve, ...that's what makes it *science,* and *not* a dogma.

I'm thinking of the old movie title: "The Englishman Who Went Up A Hill And Came Down A Mountain," ...if you can't wrap your mind around an object being reclassified, one hesitates to credit you with the right stuff for a critique of the process of science itself.

"But that's where experiential faith takes over. Ray Comfort said it best, The father tells his toddler son not to touch the heater, because it's hot. At that moment the boy gains implicit faith, he believes the heater is hot."

*leaning on radiator.*

Or, he learns to measure before grabbing hold of something. :)

Canyon Shearer,

I will probably be in trouble when my parents find out I posted to you again...but I feel it is right and necessary.

You stated above: "But when I can actually do the research, I do"

Your post here on the subject of Islam is actually very interesting. I like the way you can zero in on the likenesses of Islam and Christianity.

So, why is it that you are so condemning of Catholicism? Why do you discard the likenesses of different Christian faiths?

Why do you tell me I am certainly going to Hell, but take a more civil and diplomatic approach to Islam (not that Islam deserves the type of rhetoric you seem to reserve for Catholics)?

You seem to have carefully researched what you say in this post, but contrary to your statement above you did not have the same regard for your argument that The Pope is a Pagan, burning in hell.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/richard_mouw/2007/07/honestly_stating_our_beliefs.html

Your information there has been severely edited to support your personal bias.

You actually LIE in that post to make your point.

Perhaps I am giving you too much credit, and too soon for this posting since I have not checked your research yet. I have genuine reasons now for not extending you even the slightest benefit of the doubt, unfortunately.

Why the extreme difference in attitude?

Why do you not condemn Islam (not that you should, of course) in the same way as Catholicism?

Why do you not tell Muslims, as you told me, that YOU are the one nearer to God, and that they are surely going to Hell?

I'm very confused by this behavior. The salutations you received in this thread indicate to me that you have redeeming qualities...

So why the false inforamation about Catholicism, the nasty words, the judgement, condemnation and insistence that I am baseless in my defense of your allegations...which, in black and white (see link), are just propaganda and lies?

Your friend in Christ's love,

CSS

Not only have apostates not been invited to this forum but also reformers such as Dr. Tawfik Hamid and Irshad Manji.

Discussion at this forum rightly includes a discussion of theology. But it is the practice of an ideology rather than ideological theory which needs more attention. Overall, what does the practice of Islam show the world? The history of Islam evidences fourteen centuries of militancy and suppression of individual rights.

Over the past several decades, the West has embraced multiculturalism. Whether one sees that embrace as good or bad is a point to discuss in and of itself. Nevertheless, the fact remains that Islam does not accept multiculturalism. Show me an Islamic nation which allows for diversity of ideas and/or freedom of religion.

One final point....Criticism of ideas has a long Western tradition. I think we all know how Islam handles criticism and dissent. That attitude shows just how incompatible Islam is with Western culture.

Halozcel,

There is a difference between implicit and experiential(explicit) faith. If I lived in the year 0, I may believe the earth was flat and rested on the back of a turtle, if I listened to the scientists of the day and their explanation made sense to my limited experimentation; lest I read my Bible and found out the world was round(Isaiah 40:22) and hung on nothing(Job 26:7).

But I am incredulous to science of today, up until the year 2000 when I was standing in Lowel observatory did I learn that Pluto probably wasn't a planet...then six years later we find out that for nearly a century we've been duped on the number of planets.

But trusting in scientists has failed us millions of times in the past, this implicit faith is not so trustworthy.

But that's where experiential faith takes over. Ray Comfort said it best, The father tells his toddler son not to touch the heater, because it's hot. At that moment the boy gains implicit faith, he believes the heater is hot. Then his father leaves the room and the boy wonders, is this heater really hot? He reaches out with his little hand and grabs the heater bar. At the moment his flesh sears, he moves from the realm of implicit faith where he believes, to experiential faith, where he KNOWS that the heater is hot.

God has appointed a day where all with be judged. On that day the book of your conscience will be opened and all of your deeds will be known. In order to understand this, imagine science develops a computer chip that installs right behind your ear and records every thought, action, and gaze. After one week, would you be comfortable showing the recording to your mother? God already knows these things, and your conscience is recording every thought, look, and deed.

You may or not believe that your heart is desperately wicked and deceitful beyond all things. You can know if you will meditate on the 10 Commandments, ask yourself if you've always kept God in first in your heart, thanked him for every meal He gave you, followed after righteousness, used God's name in vain, worshipped the Creator above creation, obeyed your parents without fail, never felt hatred in your heart, looked at the opposite(or same) sex with only the purest of thoughts, never stolen, never told a lie, and never coveted.

You may believe that lying is wrong(not discretion, but bold-faced lies), but when you learn that lying lips are an abomination to the Lord(Prov 12:22), then you will know that every lie you have told has distanced you from God and assured your punishment.

The Bible says that the soul that sins shall die, and that it is appointed once for a man to die, and then the judgment.

Before that day, it is imperitive that you are made right with God. Jesus Christ, who knew no sin, willingly gave Himself up for you. He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities.

You may or not believe that Jesus Christ was the sinless Son of God and that He died to save mankind.

If you'll humble yourself before God and admit that you are not a good person because ouf your transgressions, turn from your sins, and believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins so you could be rectified, then you will KNOW that God is real, you will know that Jesus Christ is your Saviour, you will know that you have been forgiven, and you will know that that your heart has been transformed to hate sin and love righteousness.

Please don't take this on implicit faith, but reach out to God through Jesus Christ, and He will save you; this I know.

There are 1 billion plus Muslims in the world because of "sword-forced" conversion and forced procreation. Considering the contemporary Islamic truth/death squads and "koranic" rules, things have not changed. Give freedom to the Muslim masses trapped under Islamic tyranny and watch what happens.

Any idea how many Muslims have access to this discussion??

And if I lived in Iran or other Islamic states and noted that Mohammed was an illiterate, hallucinating Arab who had contemporary or future scribal henchmen writing their own "koranic" militant agendas for plundering/looting the lands of non-believers, I would be beheaded. And you call that a peaceful religion????????

ahmed from bahrain:

Jihadist

You said the most refreshing thing:

"Lastly, only a true believer of any faith who understands his faith and society completely and fully can deconstruct and reconstruct it most effectively."

Such wisdom is not understood by the likes of concerned as he babbles on the same old broken record and when presented with logic according to someone who has deconstructed and reconstructed, he still remains doggedly opposed and one-eyed. That is because you are guilty ab-initio. Thus condemned even if proven innocent. There is no arguing with such likes.

___________________________________________

I don't admire your committment to belief because it is misplaced. I realise you won't here a word of what I say, but say it I will.

This construct of thought you have created above is nothing more than a trap that futher confines what you will allow yourselves to hear, to accept as meaning or believe during those moments that it is required.

Can we have our planet back now?

Dear Canyon Shearer,

'Right now I believe the Earth rotates around the Sun',but 2000 years ago the Earth was 'flat'.
3.61 says 'Invoke the curse of Allah(not God) on those who lie',but
3.28 says'And whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless it is done to guard yourself agaisnt them,taking security(that means you can lie)
Which one should we believe ??

Homosexual John says not only 'all liars',but 'unbelieving' will be in the fiery lake.Rev.21.8.According to Bible,muslims are not 'believers',only 'those who baptized will be saved',so,where the 'muslims' shall go ??

Dear Jihadist,

Is there 'Buddhist banking',or 'Shintoist banking'or 'catholic','protestant' banking ??
What does 'islamic banking',without 'golden coin' mean ??

You say 'no alcohol'.Doesnt 16.67 permit 'strong drink' which absolutely mean 'wine' ?? (even mandate)

Oops! I was wrong about Jihadist's gender. What she said about Muslims rejecting apostates telling them how to reform Islam is true. She's being practical and a realist on this. No point shoving down Muslims' throats what we want and they don't.

RM

Christopher W. Chase, if you don't stop making so much sense, you're going to ruin a perfectly good food fight.

the notion that there could be those who, from a sense of duty or compassion would quietly work within their religious confessions and institutions to bring comfort and peace to those around them would NEVER occur to the foaming-at-the-mouth zealots that we find here. they want a religious/culture war and they mean to have one. if they run out of queers and jews, the muslims will just have to do.

the fate of the moderately religious (or the religously moderate?) is a dilemma: my pop was a baptist preacher and ran a pretty good little hillbilly church. did a lot of good. but those days are gone now. his church (southern baptist) became a private social club for rich white people.

but those social services that pop's church provided in a poor moutain town are better, and more fairly, provided by governments (or markets for you right-wingers) as in europe. that's why religion is dying there.

anyway, the debate has really become politics in disguise by now. that and simple bigotry.

Oh jeez Concerned, pot calling the kettle black on Jihadist making the rounds? I can stand his posts better than your repetitive trites. You're really hired by WaPo ain't you?

Ahh, so we see Susan Jacoby has bought into the "Islamofascism" discourse--thereby reducing the historically complex and challenging question of violence and gender in freshly decolonized countries into one Neoconservative PNAC term. Bravo, Ms. Jacoby, bravo.

Shortly after 9/11, 3,000 peaceful Muslim pilgrims were slaughtered in the Gujarat province of India by Hindu fundamentalists. But I don't recall Ms. Jacoby coming forth in the U.S. media to protest this kind of mass slaughter. The tragic slaughter of thousands of Muslim men and boys as Srebrenica at the hands of Orthodox Christians did not send American Protestants and Catholics into the street to protest violence in the name of Christianity, yet I doubt it occurred to Ms. Jacoby that secular or "moderate" (in other words, pacifiable) Christians should have been out in the streets over this.

Those thinking that Islam necessarily denigrates women might be interested to know that the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is headed by Dr. Ingrid Mattson. Dr. Mattson is also a prominent scholar of Islamic theology and law at Hartford Seminary. Other prominent women in American Islam include Dr. Yvonne Y. Haddad at Georgetown University and others as well.

Moreover, women have been both religiously and politically prominent in Islam over the years.

http://www.guide2womenleaders.com/Muslim_Leaders.htm

In areas of the world where Islam is a minority tradition, Muslims have at times overwhelmingly voted for women candidates running for national office, such as during the 2007 Presidential elections in France. In the United States, where Muslims account for between 3%-5% of the population, women have risen to prominence as well, not just as the President of the ISNA, but also as senior advisors in the U.S. State Department. If Ms. Jacoby wants women's voices, why doesn she cite one, like Shirin Ebadi. Ebadi, a tireless advocate for women's rights, democracy, *and a devout Muslim*, was Iran's first woman judge in 1979, before being forced to step down after the Iranian revolution. Even President Bush's White House spokesman Scott McClellan called her "a lifetime champion of the cause of human dignity and democracy."

Oh, and Pakistan, a country less than a century old, has had more women prime ministers than the United States. So has Bangladesh and The Phillipines. When the United States bothers to elect either a female President or vice-President (there have been plenty of those already too in predominantly Muslim countries) then we'll talk about the political oppression of women. But if Ms. Jacoby wants a female President, she better start looking at the Muslim vote--it made the recent French race far more competitive for the Socialist woman candidate than it otherwise would have been.

Unforunately, the overall impression from Ms. Jacoby's contribution was that a devout Muslim could not possibly be either enlightened, or feminist, or a strong advocate of human dignity and justice. And that is terribly sad, for there are many many voices in worldwide Islam who are exactly that.

whoo hee, this one is going to be fun. xtians slagging muslims, believers flipping off apostates, this one has it all.

hey, let me go get some popcorn and then somebody say something about the xtians eating their god and drinking his blood and stuff. that ought to get 'em boiling.

yep, religious folk are just kittens underneath it all. full of love and tolerance and understanding. and these are people who believe in the SAME FLIPPIN' GOD.

what a hoot.

All this quoting texts back and forth may be missing the points, which are:

1. Muslims who can speak coherently to western ears represent almost no one in their own societies.

2. The roots of Islam pre-date the religion. The discussions about women indicate a very definite prickliness by Muslims in the area of sex. Everything flows from basic psychology (expecially control freak activity justified by faith). Look to the strength and weakness inherent in the mother-son bonds in all non-western societies or western societies which have not yet successfully navigated the Renaissance and Industrial Revolution, and you can find the germ of why Islam hates and fears the idea of women's equality.

Ahhh, The Jihadist is still making the rounds but still not addressing the root problem with Islam, i.e. its flawed foundations. But we must also consider The Jihadist's predicament being in a country about to convert to an Islamic state. I am sure her comments are already being monitored by the Islamic koranics in Malaysia. And almost a billion Muslims living in fear just like The Jihadist!!! How disturbing!!!!

OK, so let me get this straight. The author is complaining that on a panel of 'Muslim believers', there are no apostates being represented?

Umm... HELLO. It is a panel of 'believers', not 'non-believers'.

I'll remember this next time there is a panel on 'Christian believers', and invite a Muslim convert to come on the panel... because he is of 'Christian origin'.

canyonshearer: "Right now I believe the Earth rotates around the Sun . . ."

whoa, let's not get carried away, dude. one step at a time. tomorrow, after your nap, we can move on to colors.

hey pal, i've missed you. truth is, CS, i kind of have a crush on you. do you think it's possible for an athiest and a, er, believer to make a go of it in this crazy, topsy-turvy world? gee, i sure hope so.

anyway, i'm kind of shy, but i love your posts.

hugs and kisses.
xoxo

So we are told that "Islam is the mental product of desert nomads living a brutal life."

That has always been my impression of the Old Testament Bible, with its bizarre folk tales of genocide, fratricide, torture, sexual abuse, adultery, warfare and all the weird rules cooked up to keep a lid on a primitive tribal culture and its impulses.

Surely the fickle, vindictive, mercurial, ill-tempered Jehovah portrayed there isn't an entity that polite, civilized society would wish to keep company with. A jerkwater deity of no account. Leave him to the desert tribes and let's seek enlightenment from other sources.

And let's remember that when Baghdad was the most enlightened and multi-cultured and scientifically advanced place on the earth west of China, the European ancestors of most of the vituperative asps hissing on this blog against Muslims (or secularists or whatever) were running around the forests in animal skins whacking each other with clubs and axes, painting their faces blue, and pillaging temples and monasteries with great gusto.

Don't give us that guff about "brutal nomads" -- it ain't kosher.

Rael,

Which is closer to God? An Archangel, a Angel of Light, a Buddhist Monk, or a dung-beatle?

None, they are all infinitely less holy than God. So your attempt to compare Hitler's actions, or your actions, or anyones actions to His holiness shows a low view of God and a misunderstanding of lawbreaking.

Sin is serious business, without sin in this world we would be without death, without suffering, without hatred, without war...

If one sin caused all of the death and disease in this world, then we can see that sin is serious business, and its ramifications are endless.

Ahmed from Bahrain

Sorry I almost missed you here. Always a pleasure to read your posts.

I've been to Dubai/Bahrain too for business and pleasure.

I read your recent spar with Concerned in another thread. He do manage to offend his fellow Catholics, those from other Christian denominations, atheists, gays, pagans too.

If you have a full time job and life, don't even think of getting into a discussion with him. He's over 60 years old, a retiree, attended a Catholic theological school with a PhD in a science field, and now into Jesus Seminar/NT/OT scholarship on Jesus. He has lots of free time and seem to post 24/7 here in On Faith threads.

He do come from a Christian theological angle in talking about Islam in his usage of terms and words, and creative new ones too that he made. As he's old enough to be my father, I don't really want to get into a spar with him out of respect for and to care for elders that I still can't shake off, even when they are ranting at me or spouting nonsense.

I'm actually in Tokyo in the last few days for business. As I won't be posting in the next few days, please don't take offence if I don't respond to your posts here.

Best regards
J

> This is the earthly judge, how much more Holy
> and Just is the Judge of the Universe? Payment
> is due for your transgression, and the Bible
> and the Koran clearly state that the fine is
> the eternal fire of Hell.

*Eternal* suffering?
For *earthly* sins?
From a *just* judge?

NO earthly sin causes eternal
endless suffering for anyone.

Even the suffering caused by Hitler (or Bush),
while great, was not eternal, endless, or
unlimited.

How can anyone worship as *just* a supposedly
all-powerful God (Who can make up any rules
He wishes) who sets up an unforces such an
*unjust* system.

A deity of this sort is unworthy of worship.

Hello Canyon Shearer my friend:)

It is an honour, a rare pleasure to see you in Ms. Susan Jacoby's thread and to see that you agree with her.

Quite extraordinary, a truly welcome development, and pleasantly surprising to see how Christians who would normally vilify Ms. Susan Jacoby, are now in total agreement with her on this topic.

All the best
J

Finally me and Susan are on the same side (reasonably) on an issue. Nice article, Susan.

I don't like taking peoples opinions on things when I can help it. Right now I believe the Earth rotates around the Sun, but that's only until science changes its mind again and tells me that Earth is in fact the Sun and the Sun is a pluton rotating around around Pluto...or whatever mistake they'll admit to next.

But when I can actually do the research, I do; for example, when I became a Christian, I was told that the theology put forth by John Calvin, Martin Luther, Charles Spurgeon, and John Piper was bordering on apostasy, so I avoided Calvanism. Then I read the Bible and formed my own theology, and then I came across an article on Calvanism and found out that's what I am.

So I recently read the Koran for the third time. This time was in preparation for this very question. I refuse to go to the Hadith's, because Mohammed himself told me that his book was light and perspicuous and contained everything I needed to know. (Al-Ma'idah 5:15)

This is the fruit of my labor; Susan, my dear, forgive me for attempting to hijack your thread, but you always seem to be one of the most popular.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MOHAMMED

Islam means “Submission to God”, as God has told us, “The Lord lifts up the humble; he casts the wicked to the ground. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.”

So the Muslim (meaning "Bows to God’s Will") will indeed go to Heaven, as long as he submits to God’s will.

One verse that jumps instantly to mind is, “God is not willing that any should perish,” God’s will includes demonstrating His righteousness, having upright followers, and that justice be done; but the most important from our earthly standpoint is that wrongdoers are rectified to Him, “that all should come to repentance."

Islam is in majority alignment with the Biblical understanding of Heaven and Hell; I think this is illustrated nicely in Surah 43 (Adornments), verses 70-77. Heaven is nice, and Hell is hot and eternal.

Where Christianity and Islam divide is how to get to Heaven; but how to get to Hell is the same in both religions.

Surah 43:74 tells us that “Sinners will be in the punishment of Hell, to dwell there forever.”

Surah 83 speaks of our conscience, the Sijjin, a register fully inscribed that will be open on the Day of Judgment; woe to the sinner, his conscience records his wrongdoings.

God knows the secret thought life, and has appointed a Judgment Day for all mankind. The Koran accepts Moses as a prophet and the Law of the 10 Commandments which were given to him. “God gave Moses the Scripture and the Criteria between right and wrong.” – Al-Baqara 2:53

If all sinners will have their punishment in Hell, it’s in our best interest to find out if we’re sinners.

Answer these questions truthfully and you’ll know:

Have you ever told a lie? What does that make you?
If I rape one girl, I’m a rapist, if I murder one person, I’m a murderer. A single lie makes me a liar. The Koran says to, “Invoke the curse of God on those who lie!”
– Al-Imran 3:61
The Bible promises that all liars will have their place in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone.

Have you ever stolen anything? What does that make you?
Both the Koran and Bible have very strict punishments for thieves. Maida 5:38 tells us, “As to the thief, cut off his or her hand(s).”

Have you always kept the Sabbath?
The Koran demands that you remember God on Friday, leaving off business and travel.
– Assembly 62:9
Whosoever does any work on the Sabbath, he will surely be put to death. This is in order to make sure you worship the Creator above creation.

Have you ever worshipped money, power, science, or possessions above God?
“Let not your riches or your children divert you from the remembrance of God. If any act thus, the loss is their own.”
– Hypocrites 63:9
This you know, no idolater will see the kingdom of God.

Have you committed adultery?
The prophet Jesus said, “Whosoever looks upon a woman to lust after her has committed adultery already with her in his heart.”
The Koran is clear, “Do not come near to adultery: for it is a shameful deed and an evil, opening the road to other evils.”
– Israelites 17:32
Clearly “coming near to adultery” is the same as Jesus taught, that a lust-filled glance is seen by God as shameful. Take note that the word for adultery in Arabic is sometimes translated as “Fornication”, sex outside of marriage.

Have you ever used the name of God in Vain?
“Those before them also devised many a blasphemy, but God took their structures from their foundations, and the wrath befell them without them perceiving from whence it came.”
– Bee 16:26
God will not hold him guiltless that takes His name in vain.

If you’re like me, you’ve broken every one of these, and these are only six of the 10 Commandments. The Bible says that we have stored up wrath for ourselves on the Day of Judgment. The Koran is nearly identical, “On the day when heat will be produced out of the fire of Hell, and it will brand your forehead, your flanks, and your back, “This is the treasure which you stored for yourselves: you then taste the treasure you amassed!” – Immunity 9:35

There is a minor difference in the Hell of the Bible and the Hell of the Koran. In the Bible it says that we will beg for a drop of water, but none will come. The Koran says that we will have an overabundance of water, albeit it will be superheated past boiling and we will be forced to drink it, and it will wreak havoc on our insides. Either way, Hell is not somewhere I want to go, nor do I want you to go there.

There is a way to be saved from this punishment we have earned, it is the Injeel which according to the Koran was given to the prophet Jesus. Injeel means, “Good News”, and avoiding such a terrible place as Hell is definitely good news.

Some think that the good news is that we can work our way out of Hell. Both the Koran and the Bible refer to God as a just judge, so lets see how an earthly judge might relate. Imagine you stand before a judge, there are six clear evidences of your guilt, and the judge puts on you a fine that you cannot possibly pay. You offer the judge your good works, you’ve given to charity, you pray unceasingly, you are nice to people, you ask for forgiveness daily, you help little old ladies across the street, and to top it all off, you washed the judges car on the way in to court. The judge tells you, you should do good things, but you've broken the law; he cannot let you go, because despite all of the good you’ve done, justice is due. You cry out in repentance and sorrow, and the judge tells you it’s good that you’re sorry, but there is a fine to be paid, and if you can’t pay it, you will be thrown into prison.

This is the earthly judge, how much more Holy and Just is the Judge of the Universe? Payment is due for your transgression, and the Bible and the Koran clearly state that the fine is the eternal fire of Hell.

But here is the good news, God gave us the gift of a holy son (Maryam 19:19), born of the virgin Maryam, this son’s name was Jesus, and because he was holy, He lived a perfect unblemished life, he was tempted but didn’t sin; in the writing of Moses about the Passover Lamb, the lamb must be without blemish, a male, taken from amongst its brethren (Exodus 12:5). Another name for Jesus is the Lamb of God (Revelation 5:12). Jesus was offered as the sinless sacrifice to take away the sins of the world (Johannes 1:29). Jesus was hung on the cross outside of Jerusalem on Calvary hill, a hill not two miles from where Ibrahim offered his son as a sacrifice 1700 years prior. Jesus died in our stead, he paid our fine in his own life’s blood. The wrath of God was poured out upon him and it pleased God to do it. Jesus went through Hell so we wouldn’t have to, in an infinite showing of love God sacrificed Jesus so that we can be forgiven, he was the propitiation for our sins.

The Koran says that our sins are a stain on the heart, (Al-Mutaffifin 83:14) and Maryam 19:60 says that if you’ll repent and place your trust in the atoning work of Jesus, then you will see Heaven. Once you have done this, your sins will be forgiven, your stained heart will be replaced with a new heart (Ezekiel 11:19), and you will be born again into the family of God.

If any man does this, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. – 2 Corinthians 5:17

Jihadist

You said the most refreshing thing:

"Lastly, only a true believer of any faith who understands his faith and society completely and fully can deconstruct and reconstruct it most effectively."

Such wisdom is not understood by the likes of concerned as he babbles on the same old broken record and when presented with logic according to someone who has deconstructed and reconstructed, he still remains doggedly opposed and one-eyed. That is because you are guilty ab-initio. Thus condemned even if proven innocent. There is no arguing with such likes.

btw; i spent a decade going to/fro Malaysia, so I understand your reference point.

You advocacy for secular Muslims to speak out is noted, but the point being that no one cares what they say except people like you. The Salman Rushdies, Ayaan Hirsi Alis and Irshad Manjis have already been given the most abundant of platforms by the mainstream media so that elite intellectuals like yourself can reaffirm your own beliefs and principles and find reflections of your sensible tolerant selves in the Muslim world.

These people you want to speak represent no one in the Muslim world. They only represent you. And the fact of the matter is, we (America) need to speak with Muslims, not down to them or at them. So I applaud On Faith for recognizing that Muslims would like to be represented by their own leaders, not by the leaders appointed to them by people like yourself.

All the sophistic arguments will not make the facts go away: Islam is the mental product of desert nomads living a brutal life. It is not applicable to civilized cultures and should go the way of the dodo.

Check out this chilling site:

The Truth About Islam
http://islamwatchers.blogspot.com

Ahh, the Jihadist has "blessed" us with more Muslim "wishy wash speak". We wait, wait and wait for your comments about the foundations of Islam. Either you fear retribution from the Islamic "guards" or you fear retribution from your guardian angel or maybe both???????

Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali was not invited to comment???

Oy vey,

Unfortunately, unrepentent Muslims won't listen to unrepentent apostates any more than unrepentent Chistians would listen to Dawkins or Hitchens.

Martin Luther was not an unrepentent apostate, but a freethinking Christian. He is certainly more effective than Baruch Spinoza in somewhat reforming Christianity by questioning the authority of a certain self-claimed universal and only authoritative church then (and now too it seems).

And why educate Americans on westernised and Enlightenment inflected secular Islam when they don't even know the fundamentals of Islam? Why so when the Muslim writers are going into the Islamic religious heritage and intellectual traditions to re-interpret Islam to modernise Muslims?

As for those who wrote in "Muslims Speak Out". I'm fine with it. Meacham and Quinn did say they e-mailed some 50 Muslims from around the world but about 20 responded I think. I saw a piece by a Malaysian Muslim, Chandra Muzzafar. He is well respected in his home country and an indefatigable activist. I just wish a friend, Farish Noor, would write here too.

Better to read what the Muslim conservatives or reactionaries who hold influential positions in their respective countries wrote and to know where they are coming from than what Salman Rushdie or Ibn Warraq has to say. After all, Rushdie's and Warraq's audience and influence is largely limited to the west.

In reading what the Muslims with influence and sway in Muslim countries and communities around the world have to say, Muslims who don't share their views or interpretations would know their rationale and that most certainly would help in making counter-points and initiating counter-actions through the Muslim media, governments and NGOs.

The Muslims participating in "Muslims Speak Out" are not talking from the context of the socio-economic and intellectual development attained in the west, or by Muslim apostates in the west or had the benefit of western education. They are talking from their own nation's particular historical Islamic heritage too.

As for representation of women on the panel, it is more complicated. The most effective Muslim women and NGOs advocating women's concerns and rights operate under the radar and are largely not known of in the west. These are the operational NGOs savvy enough to know that they need the cooperation and collaboration of men to move the agenda forward, whether the men are in goverments, religious establishments and NGOs focussing on political rights, social welfare and humanitarian activities.

To get Muslim women forward, it is the minds of and the socio-economic state of the Muslim men that has to be changed first. They do want to make the lot of women, and children, and elders better. Traditional and poor societies with limited resources always prioritise education and employment for the males in their families as traditional breadwinners and heads of households.

I am grateful for WaPo bringing out Muslim writers/thinkers/clerics from around the world with their diversity of views just like a one-stop centre, albeit a brief exercise.

Lastly, only a true believer of any faith who understands his faith and society completely and fully can deconstruct and reconstruct it most effectively.

That is why I am not counting on unrepentent apostates on matters related to Islamic thought and legal reforms. Once they left the house of a particular faith, they cannot fully understand what is really still going on inside the house, but only to see from outside and have absolutely no control on what is going on inside but to umm, yell fire!

So, now let me go on pursuing Islamic banking and financial services to get Muslims who are leery of conventional banking, interests, or investments in arms, alcohol, pornography, gambling etc to get their money out from tin cans and to save and invest in ways they are comfortable with for their family's and own future and well being. To their future. To our future.

Thank you and best regards