Re: where do
i wonder what word intead of animals you people would use for "TTP" from now on :D
that means equating humanity with animalism is lame attempt to give raise to the cause of "do whatever you want" and spread anarchy in the world.
Re: where do
i wonder what word intead of animals you people would use for "TTP" from now on :D that means equating humanity with animalism is lame attempt to give raise to the cause of "do whatever you want" and spread anarchy in the world.
I use the term "animal" because its simply a part of our vernacular and so almost habitual.
No one can do whatever they like, regardless of whether there is a religion or not. Anarchy will not spread if there is no religion, i can guarantee you. I mean if anything the opposite is true. look at Pakistan.
Re: where do
In what OP asked; THE religion of Islam is here to stay. What will happen, and it is currently happening is that people will be divided into camps, those who believe in it wholeheartedly and act upon it. Those who selectively choose to follow what they find suits their needs/motives/lifestyles, and those who outrightly abhor and oppose it along with religion altogether.
If anything, the ultimate division maybe two camps. Believers, and non-believers and allies.
Allah Knows Best. He is indeed the best of planners, and has promised to protect this faith and its' scripture. The period of Khilafa lasted as long as Allah willed. The future of Religion, and state of laws governing any nation will be as Allah wills. This is guaranteed; everything else is wishful thinking and daydreaming in my opinion.
Re: where do
I use the term "animal" because its simply a part of our vernacular and so almost habitual.
No one can do whatever they like, regardless of whether there is a religion or not. Anarchy will not spread if there is no religion, i can guarantee you. I mean if anything the opposite is true. look at Pakistan.
I agree. The world today has changed significantly from what it was 100 years ago. Europe ( and I hear Japan) are becoming increasingly less religious. The logical extrapolation, in my opinion, would be the world becoming less religious 100 years from now.
Re: where do
I agree. The world today has changed significantly from what it was 100 years ago. Europe ( and I hear Japan) are becoming increasingly less religious. The logical extrapolation, in my opinion, would be the world becoming less religious 100 years from now.
Anarchy seems to be spreading through out the Muslim world. Countries that are secular (with large atheist citizens) by contrast are relatively stable.
The Islamist types have this convenient get out off jail free card though. ANY Muslim country thats in anarchy is so because they arent Islamic or not Islamic enough. and those that say they are Islamic aren't practicing it the right way. And any Non Muslim country out there that seems stable, well they only appear so on the surface. These guys can never lose.
Re: where do
Being "Islamist" should be an honorary title for any practicing muslim. That is if it is being used literally, and not as mainstream media taunt for those that either look muslim, or seek to adhere to their faith regardless of the pseudo expectation of their enlightened peers.
But I know you didn't mean it in its literal sense, rather as a taunt because the real term for followers of the faith is Muslim. Islamist; not sure what that is perhaps a concoction of the fear that God Forbid people should start living according the expectation of Islam.
Please don't use derogatory terms to define a group of people; some people may find it offensive. You would yield better results and create a welcoming atmosphere for those with opposing views if you avoided labeling them. Thanks.
Re: where do
Listen med11,
Following is the post from where the discussion between you and me started, right!
lolz
you said religion will disappear and humanity will take its place. Dont know how suddenly humanity became irrelevant :) I got that you knew defending believe in humanity is so hard for you espacially when you believe in randomness :)
Let me tell others what you people believe and that it is as bad as hell for the humanity. Atheists believe that the universe is random in most of the senses that it is made, proceeding, and or occurring without definite aim, purpose, reason, or pattern. That clearly contradicts with concept of humanity as there is no definite aim, purpose or reason so human can do whatever they want, some can even justify the killing, stealing and any other evil in the name of randomness.
Considering that you have nothing to say about humanity, imagine how dreadful it would be if your ideas are floated in the world. As soon as modern civilization realizes how damaging your ideas are it will start shunning and condemning such ideas.
Following is your post in reply to my post above. This post has ideas contradicting with beliefs of atheists except the paradox you mentioned. But i have answered paradox question.
When i highlighted things from your posts that go against the belief of atheists, then you corrected those things in very next post #35. for example in this post you implied that notion of good and evil exists, and in post#35 you changed it to 'notion of good and evil does not exist'. This is contradiction. And your very next post #35 confirms what i said about atheists in my post above. You came to counter the post above but ended up with agreeing in post # 35 what is said in my post above.
Why must everything have a purpose? And the Universe may or may not have been created randomly, but if your logic is that nothing can be born out of "nothingness," then the idea that a supreme being created the Universe doesnt in any way resolve the issue, as it just creates another paradox. Because if you believe that nothing can exist without something preceding it, then how to explain God? There is an inconsistency in that logic that most religious people lazily ignore.
**And why must god exist for you to have a sense of right and wrong? Even animals have a sense of right and wrong, its ingrained within is.
Murder, unjustifiable is bad. Stealing is bad, rape is bad etc. I dont need anyone to tell me its that way, I already know it is because I can see that inflicts pain on the recipient. Humans can do anything they want, but society is there to define the limits. That is why we humans always create higher-arches, to impose a sense of order.
Good is simply that which is off greatest beneficence, while bad is that which does the greatest harm.
The belief that morality can only be ascertained through the existence of god doesn't make much sense. We dont need an ultimate arbitrtor, we simply need two eyes to see with, a brain to think with, and a heart to feel with.**
The bolded part is set of emotional argument and also contradicts with what atheists believe. the example you give from animals can be found in human being as well there is nothing special with that example. The problem is, it is emotional to say that you have brain and heart to distinguish right and wrong and act upon right or good. Such reasoning has no significance in philosophical discourse.
let’s agree for the sake of argument that sense of right and wrong is ingrained within us. If i look at this post then i can agree(only emotionally) with you that sense of right and wrong is ingrained within us, but if i look at you very next post, it goes against your own stance, that notion of right and wrong does not exists. Contradiction…
Now, it’s up to you what you choose.
1. If you choose to believe the "sense of right and wrong is ingrained within us" then you have to give rational reasoning against this emotional stance, that sense of right and wrong is same as sense of distinguishing good and acting upon good only accordingly.
2. If you choose to believe the notion from your post #35 that is Perhaps there is no "right or wrong" then you go against you own stance said in '1' and you agree what i said about atheist in my first post.
p.s. I am not in favor of galmorizing athiests, but since an atheist entered the thread attacking religion as it will be dead, so i find it necessary to reply.
Re: where do
Being "Islamist" should be an honorary title for any practicing muslim. That is if it is being used literally, and not as mainstream media taunt for those that either look muslim, or seek to adhere to their faith regardless of the pseudo expectation of their enlightened peers.
But I know you didn't mean it in its literal sense, rather as a taunt because the real term for followers of the faith is Muslim. Islamist; not sure what that is perhaps a concoction of the fear that God Forbid people should start living according the expectation of Islam.
Please don't use derogatory terms to define a group of people; some people may find it offensive. You would yield better results and create a welcoming atmosphere for those with opposing views if you avoided labeling them. Thanks.
Not a taunt, just a way of differentiating progressive Muslims, from the regressive, confused and borderline violent Muslims. You perfer some other term? Let me know what word you would prefer to describe such people?
Re: where do
I prefer that you define people's qualities, and debate those with opposing points of view on the qualities that you find an issue with relative to the discussion at hand, rather than using derogatory terms.
Re: where do
I prefer that you define people's qualities,..., rather than using derogatory terms.
Well that doesnt resolve the question of how to refer to extreme conservatives without insulting them? You could call them ultra conservative, but that is giving them far to much credit, because it implies they have some deep understanding of Islam which they are trying to "conserve," which isnt the case. Defining their qualities would mean calling the "ignorant," "delusional," "irrational," "inane," "Extremist" etc, and that would be construed as being insulting, hence a violation of forum rules. So I dont really see how one could possible describe such people without being deragoatory. "Islamist" seems to be one of those words that has become culturally acceptable when describing groups like the Muslim brotherhood etc. And it doesnt seem like it would be particularly insulting as it embodies what these people claim of themselves, that they are advocates for ISLAM...
Honestly, isnt it a pain being the word police??!?!
If "taunts" are your primary concern, then why no censorship of those people using "Secular" in all those posts? That's not a taunt in your oppinion? One of them has called me a snake tongued peddler of "Kuffar Secularism" and the other has accused of being "Shamelessly Anti Islam." So im sorry if im a bit skeptical of your sudden concern for the others.
Re: where do
I prefer that you define people's qualities, and debate those with opposing points of view on the qualities that you find an issue with relative to the discussion at hand, rather than using derogatory terms.
Healthy debate is good insulting muslims on a majority muslim forum is asking for trouble.
He will not last more than 5 minutes before insulting muslims by calling them backward from a madrassa or a terrorist and now has the audacity to complain when secularism is questioned!
Re: where do
Religion such as Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity will continue to play small part in peoples personal lives.
Ideologies like Islam will establish itself into a state then into a dominant power as previously in history and will unite the muslim world regardless if the secular fundamentalists like it or not!
My humble suggestion to you is to read and ponder on Quranic verses. for instance, ayat-e-istakhlaaf
24:55) **
**Allah has promised to those among you who believe and do good works that He will surely make them Successors in the earth, as He made Successors from among those who were before them; and that He will surely establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them; and that He will surely give them in exchange security *and peace *after their fear: They will worship Me, *and *they will not associate anything with Me. Then whoso is ungrateful after that, they will be the rebellious
first fulfill the pre-conditions then expect the promised reward
Re: where do
Healthy debate is good insulting muslims on a majority muslim forum is asking for trouble.
He will not last more than 5 minutes before insulting muslims by calling them backward from a madrassa or a terrorist and now has the audacity to complain when secularism is questioned!
I insult the backwartds Muslims, they deserve to be insulted. I respect educated and progressive Muslims. If you are going to tout stupidity over sanity, and promote jahluth, then of course anything I say would be insulting to you.
Your just mad that i call you out for you weak argument. There's nothing "Islamic" about your arguments, they are only the musings of someone who is rather confused and has a very shallow understanding of Islam.
Re: where do
I insult the backwartds Muslims, they deserve to be insulted. I respect educated and progressive Muslims. If you are going to tout stupidity over sanity, and promote jahluth, then of course anything I say would be insulting to you.
Your just mad that i call you out for you weak argument. There's nothing "Islamic" about your arguments, they are only the musings of someone who is rather confused and has a very shallow understanding of Islam.
You have no answers for anybody you cannot even give simple straight answers.
You have not exposed any arguments it is your concepts of secularism and capitalusm which are exposed as bankrupt and fit for dumping.
You insult Islam and Muslims even moderator advising you to stop insulting but instead you mocking them also, and tell them you will carry on insulting, what arrogance.
Re: where do
You have no answers for anybody you cannot even give simple straight answers.
You have not exposed any arguments it is your concepts of secularism and capitalusm which are exposed as bankrupt and fit for dumping.
You insult Islam and Muslims even moderator advising you to stop insulting but instead you mocking them also, and tell them you will carry on insulting, what arrogance.
Where did you ask a question?
Moderator said dont use the term "Islamist" to describe backwards Muslims like you. Thats fine with me, i dont mind calling you backwards. I would call you "Muslim" but I dont want to associate myself with you in any way.
Re: where do
Where did you ask a question?
Moderator said dont use the term "Islamist" to describe backwards Muslims like you. Thats fine with me, i dont mind calling you backwards. I would call you "Muslim" but I dont want to associate myself with you in any way.
Wow you sound more desperate I almost pity you.
Anyone that calls for non Islamic concepts like secularism which says no Islamic laws for Muslims is without a doubt the backward one!
Re: where do
Wow you sound more desperate I almost pity you.
Anyone that calls for non Islamic concepts like secularism which says no Islamic laws for Muslims is without a doubt the backward one!
Like I said, backwards...