Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
Anyway. Islam instructs us not to ask questions.
"O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account lost their faith." (Surah 5:101-102).
"The Holy Prophet himself forbade people to ask questions ...so do not try to probe into such things." (The Meaning of the Qur'an, Maududi, vol. III, pgs. 76-77)
And there we go again - it seems no one understood Sultan and what the word context means. These verses/sayings were in relation to people asking the Prophet too many questions, he specifically said that he would explain things, so that they wouldn't ask too many questions. In addition to this, it also refers to asking "Who made Allah?", or "Where is Allah?" etc. It does not refer to questioning what is written in the Qur'an. If it did, then scholars of all kinds would highlight this vividly and vigorously.
So some dude, just says he's a prophet, and when people question him, he tells them not too,because it makes God angry? Do you not see the problem here?
To be fair, the 5:101-102 pretty much says believe blindly cause if you start asking question, you will understand that this is like all other religions and became an atheist (lose the faith). 
They don't anger God. But, we're trying to be qualities of the earth (and human-like too) when we ask questions. For instance, many think heaven is like earth, so they ask questions such as: do the fruits taste the same? Or back to the God example: how does God exist? It isn't going to benefit anyone, but it certainly doesn't meat what you think it does.
Revan: I'll respond to this post later today: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/religion-whats-the-point.215250/page-61#post-13646908
Faith, hope, trust, belief.....there are some things beyond science that makes up a human. For many people faith in a supernatural gives strength their normal willpower cannot. You may not want it personally, but ridiculing others for needing it is shortsighted.
As I pointed out to Moses, both world wars, nazism, Stalinism, pol pot...etc were major evils committed that had nothing to do with religion. If you say religion causes evil, history says atheist have done equally so! So if religion is bad, atheism is so too.
But what does that have to do with fecking Pluto?
1+1=100 now, yeah?
Stalin didn't kill in the name of Atheism, nor Pot, nor neither of the WWS.
Just because they happened to be by a religious man/non believer, doesn't demonize the whole cause, unless they're doing it FOR the cause.
Never knew reading and comprehension are hard skills to come by!
He asked for proof of scientific facts disproved, the best my drunk mind could think of was the downgrade of Pluto. From 9 planets welfare down to 8 planets + 5 dwarf planets! There is a equal possibility of people 1000 years down at what 'science' of today believed! Science is equally inefficient in explaining creation or afterdeath as religion is. If scientists believe in Singularity, it is ok. But if religion believes in god, it is bad...though no proof exists for either.
First, religious people killed in the name of religion. Stalin didn't kill in the name of atheism, Hitler wasn't atheist.
Second, what
I've already linked you to the wikipedia page of what a scientific theory is and I suggest that you read it, because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about here.
When something in Science happens to alter an existing thought that's not science "being disproved" that's an upgrading of what we understand. Science isn't dogmatic, it doesn't make any absolute claims, it's a process of collaboration through which our understand is constantly changing and being upgraded. Existing scientific understanding isn't accepted because it has any inherent truth to it, it's accepted at the best answer to specific fields thus far.
Oh, for feck sake, this is something scientifically disproved. Like NASA changing the title of an object from planet to dwarf planet. Really? Really? Are you serious?
And, as I said before, if a theory has been disproved, that doesn't mean that the Science is disproved. If a verse is disproved, that mean that the entire Quran has been disproved.
State atheism was actively done in Stalinist era. Pol Pot is also recorded to have targeted regilgion. My point being evil has existed before religion and will exist even if religion is outlawed. The points on faith etc are some advantages people get out of religion. So ignoring it and just labeling it as evil is a narrow one sided thought process.
I find it strange that religious people are ready to accept wrongs done in name of their religion, but atheists are much more zealous in ignoring the advantages!
Quran is not a science text. You were arguing about meteorite and stars, right? If science can mistake a primary and dwarf planet, it's ok...but a non science religious book is expected to be more accurate than actual sciences?
When science said that Pluto is the 9th planet, it didn't make a claim that was unchangeable, and once challenged with new evidence the classification of Pluto was changed. If this had been written in the Quran you'd probably be telling us that it actually meant Dwarf Planet. Don't try to pretend that the two are in any way, shape or form similar. It's a stupid argument.
Science didn't mistake a planet for a dwarf planet. Science added a new category, dwarfs planet and NASA decided that Pluto is more like a dwarf planet than like the other planets. It's just a classification, not a theory. I repeat, it is just an arbitrary classification.
In Quran it's written that it is perfect and it is the word of God. It also challenges humans to find a single mistake on it (am I correct) and it says that every word on it is true. So yes, Quran must not make a mistake in any part of it, or else it is entirely discredited.
I was talking to a Christian today and as it transpires sin is only transmitted through men (hence the importance of the virgin birth), so good news, soon as science allows two women to have biological children humanity will be saved! lol
I'm much more familiar with Christianity, mostly Baptist, but have seen quite a few arguments about Islam/Qu'ran on some boards/forums/public. Found this link in one forum.
http://1000mistakes.com/1000mistakes/index.php?Page=011_007_001_001
http://1000mistakes.com/1000mistakes/index.php?Page=011_007_001_001
And what do you make of it? Have you done any research on the subject?
I stopped reading after this: "It is well known that he had something like a dozen wives (11 for sure)." I could have stopped reading as soon as I seen the title, as Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) wasn't a rapist, and he certainly wasn't a paedophile...
Perhaps not, but he certainly was a con-man. Just like Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard and every other religious fraud throughout history.
A con-man? In what way? Also, perhaps isn't the right word to use; the word "definitely" is better, as there are various ahadith that debunk this myth of him being a rapist. There was actually a disgusting story started by non-Muslims that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) "thighe" (thighing) Aisha. These non-Muslims said they received the information from Saudi scholars, yet when the Saudi scholars were asked about this, they rejected the absurdity and they had nothing to do with it. There are sources available; creating your own makes you look desperate.
He was either a conscious con-man or a schizophrenic, because he never spoke with any supernatural being, that much is obvious.
At least Silva, Saliph and Co. argue their points with some sense. The new kids on the block make this thread a tough read.
Time to jump back in, we have'nt signed anyone and no one wants to talk about global trade, taxes and the free market which will affect you more than religion.
Unless you're one of the 30 people killed by suicide bombers in Baghdad today.
Or one of the millions of women around the world who isn't allowed to step outside on her own.
How very relevant. Do you make the same point in discussions concerning the Holocaust?
No Saliph, we should only worry about the big issues, the subjugation of millions of people doesn't matter. The housing crisis in the UK is irrelevant because famine exists. Gay rights activists in Europe and America are stupid, their plight isn't as bad as others.
Come on Commandus, do you really think that we should only be concerned with the worst of issues that people are the world face and ignore all the other ones? Should the religious charities who spend money on converting people before they die be ignored because they're not as bad as the famine that causes these people do die?
Come on Commandus, do you really think that we should only be concerned with the worst of issues that people are the world face and ignore all the other ones? Should the religious charities who spend money on converting people before they die be ignored because they're not as bad as the famine that causes these people do die?
Why isn't my comment relevant? Are you somehow the moderator on this thread? Or do you wish to control the narrative of the discussion - if so why?
Tackle the big issues, this issue re religion people are always going to disagree - you think you will convert anyone to your values and beliefs or do you feel that if you win the argument against a person of faith you can bask in your own warm glow of self righteousness the same warm glow of self righteousness you condemn that religious people have.
I'm not knocking anyone be they atheists or religious but it seems too many are hung up on being right. Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
This thread is about religion, there's a plethora of threads in the CE about other things and you're more than welcome to make threads about famine and pollution if you want. But to come in here and say "lol, doesn't matter, famine's worse" is a ridiculous thing to do. Would you consider it a good argument if someone went into all the other threads in the CE and said "lol, doesn't matter, famine's worse"?
Yes, there are a lot of bad things in the world, but religion is one of those bad things. To try and negate this by saying "well, it's not as bad a famine" is an awful argument.
People are always going to disagree with pretty much every issue, I don't seem to recall you changing Andrews mind on anything in the free market thread. Just because people disagree with things, and they'll disagree on famine and pollution too by the way, it doesn't make them bad topics of discussion.
Not sure about that, I have seen people change their minds or at least visibly encouraged to read further after discussions on the internet about topics like economics, politics, science etc.
Not sure I've ever seen that with religion discussion, though again, I do enjoy reading this thread from time to time.
Care to explain?
Also, with today's standard he was pedophile, considering that Aisha was very young when they got married (6 years old married, 9 years old when they made sex, Werewolf posted some pages ago).
Oh.