PDA

View Full Version : Religious discussion



Parihaka
16 Jun 07,, 08:47
From time to time we feel the need to remind members of the forum guidlines (http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/member-introductions/2232-forum-guidelines-revised-2-15-07-a.html), especially regarding discussion about religion.

As such please take note of this.
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/382285-post31.html

Tronic
18 Jun 07,, 01:10
Sad we can't have even a single religious thread where we can discuss religion without some members crossing the line and ending up getting the thread locked! I was really looking forward to his reply there. :frown:

Ray
18 Jun 07,, 17:44
I wanted to post on the issues from the Hadith and Parihaka, as usual, acted as the Fastest Gun in the Wild West even though he lives in the Farthest of East!! :)

I bet he does not know that his High Commissioner has been expelled from Fiji! Those Fijians have proved to be the fastest Fatsos in the East!

joey
18 Jun 07,, 21:33
Religious discussions should be done if any, as a debate,not like Roshan who exceeded the norms of respect and decency.

Parihaka
18 Jun 07,, 23:53
I wanted to post on the issues from the Hadith and Parihaka, as usual, acted as the Fastest Gun in the Wild West even though he lives in the Farthest of East!! :)

I bet he does not know that his High Commissioner has been expelled from Fiji! Those Fijians have proved to be the fastest Fatsos in the East!

You're more than welcome to start a new thread Ray, but our policy is to shut down ones where flaming is developing.;)

Bainarama is discovering that we're better friends with the Chinese than he is.
The story is going around that he kicked the commissioner out because he had a better seat at the rugby:biggrin:

Ray
21 Jun 07,, 20:50
.

Feanor
22 Jun 07,, 07:55
Sad we can't have even a single religious thread where we can discuss religion without some members crossing the line and ending up getting the thread locked! I was really looking forward to his reply there. :frown:


Not true.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/world-affairs-board-pub/39192-religion-no-its-not-another-p-ssing-contest.html

ygalg
25 Jun 07,, 22:46
unfortunate it gone to be locked.

on the book matter, it's no longer available at LULU, due disagreement arose.
how ever it will be soon on new provider. if you wanna to be updated follow faithfreedom.org announcement on the book release.

ygalg

Parihaka
25 Jun 07,, 23:59
I will say this again. Anyone is free to start a discussion about any aspect of any religion or religions they like. What we won't tolerate is deliberate flamebaiting and insulting of those religions and their adherents.

ArmchairGeneral
26 Jun 07,, 04:51
I will say this again. Anyone is free to start a discussion about any aspect of any religion or religions they like. What we won't tolerate is deliberate flamebaiting and insulting of those religions and their adherents.

Durn pagan. ;)

Parihaka
26 Jun 07,, 05:48
Durn pagan. ;)

Quiet in the cheap seats knee knocker, or I'll call down Eris on you.;)

Feanor
26 Jun 07,, 08:19
MANDANGO THERE IS NO BOREDOM OR JEALOUSY AND EVERYONE LIVES A LIFE OF WINE DRINKING AND STEAMING HOT SEX FOR ALL OF ETERNITY. Sorry for all caps, it was religious fervor.

Ray
26 Jun 07,, 11:04
Religion bores!

Ray
01 Jul 07,, 21:10
Parihaka,

Check up what is Nashi.

It is not what one reads about it up front.

Arnold123
22 Jul 08,, 15:19
Is this thread an honest atempt to discus religion? Checkout a thread 'Should members of the Church of God go to War', last reply.

King Six
22 Jul 08,, 15:42
Muhammad. I don't want to say what I really think. I don't think he was a paedophile, but he wasn't a nice man at all. Certainly not nice enough to be the founder of a religion that claims to be peaceful. He's no Buddha that's for sure. He's no Jesus, he's not even Moses (assuming the last two even existed)

A religion of peace doesn't send letters to the Byzantine/Persian empires demanding they convert to Islam or be invaded.


"In the name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful. From Muhammad, the Messenger of God, to the great Kisra of Iran. Peace be upon him, who seeks truth and expresses belief in God and in His Prophet and testifies that there is no god but God and that He has no partner, and who believes that Muhammad is His servant and Prophet. Under the Command of God, I invite you to Him. He has sent me for the guidance of all people so that I may warn them all of His wrath and may present the unbelievers with an ultimatum. Embrace Islam so that you may remain safe. And if you refuse to accept Islam, you will be responsible for the sins of the Magi.

Tabaqat-i Kubra, vol. I, page 360; Tarikh-i Tabari, vol. II, pp. 295, 296; Tarikh-i Kamil, vol. II, page 81 and Biharul Anwar, vol. XX, page 389

Islamic conquest of Persia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_conquest_of_Persia#Persia_Before_the_Conqu est)

That's just one example.

Oh man, you guys really have to read some of the other tripe about Muhammad on wikipedia. Some of it is hilarious. They talk about how Muhammad is connected to religions like Hinduism and is mentioned in texts like the Rig Veda - Hilarious really. People will interpret things to whatever they want. That's the problem with religious texts of all kinds really. I could probably interpret passages in the Bible/Koran/Torah/Rig Veda so that it looks like they're talking about me :D

zraver
18 Aug 08,, 10:10
Muhammad. I don't want to say what I really think. I don't think he was a paedophile, but he wasn't a nice man at all.

you've made one major flaw in reasoning. You are applying your morlity to his time and culture. That doesn't work if you want a real feel for history. Jesus was the product of a Jewish culture that was almost modern-left wing liberal with some of its ideas of social justice.

Lets take the paedophile issue. Was he or wasn't he? Well to be one he needs to have enjoyed the sexual company of children. There is no evidence to support this. What we do have evidence for is the tribal culture that pre-dominated in the region. He married Ayesha to cement an alliance. That marriage is only valid if it is consumated. So we can surmise that he did his "duty" although given his writings on the treatment of women and social laws it was not common occurance and may have been nothing more than beaking her hymn with a finger to show the blood to the brides family. We do know from her (Ayesha) writings and those who knew the both of them that he was loved by her and was a good husband. So sexual trauma of any sort let alone child rape is probalby ruled out. He also married an older widow something he did not have to do.

People who apply modern morality to ancient times will find many and sundry ways to castigate old regimes which they do not understand.

Ray
18 Aug 08,, 10:17
That's just the point as raised by Zraver.

We cannot judge ancient events with modern day standards!

Herodotus
18 Aug 08,, 14:36
He's no Jesus, he's not even Moses (assuming the last two even existed)

There's little doubt the historical Jesus existed, whether he was the son of God is another question.


Oh man, you guys really have to read some of the other tripe about Muhammad on wikipedia. Some of it is hilarious. They talk about how Muhammad is connected to religions like Hinduism and is mentioned in texts like the Rig Veda - Hilarious really. People will interpret things to whatever they want. That's the problem with religious texts of all kinds really. I could probably interpret passages in the Bible/Koran/Torah/Rig Veda so that it looks like they're talking about me :D

I don't think it is quite kosher to go around insulting other peoples' religion. Why was this thread created? You seem to like bringing up religion as a topic on these boards, but it never quite seems to me that you are looking for honest debate on the topic.

King Six
18 Aug 08,, 14:41
I'm aware that we can't judge him by todays standards. So why do approximately 1.5 Billion people do just that? How is it that this man can be considered to be a leader of a religion?

I'm not looking for a debate although it would be interesting to see how someone would try to talk about how I'm wrong. I look at religion in a Historical factual context, I don't look at religion as how it perceives itself in history. I look at it separating the myth/legend from reality.

I'm only looking at them from a critical standpoint. If someone wants to counter me they can feel free to do so. It's not my fault nobody is countering my claim that Muhammad is what I say he is. Maybe that says something.

I was also comparing Muhammad to other people around and even way before his time, yet he still stands out as one of the worst. And then for him to revered as a saint/prophet is just funny.

zraver
18 Aug 08,, 15:14
I'm aware that we can't judge him by todays standards. So why do approximately 1.5 Billion people do just that? How is it that this man can be considered to be a leader of a religion?

becuase for 99.9% of them its a faith issue not an intelelctual issue.


I'm not looking for a debate although it would be interesting to see how someone would try to talk about how I'm wrong. I look at religion in a Historical factual context, I don't look at religion as how it perceives itself in history. I look at it separating the myth/legend from reality.

I think your ideal of bulls eye and relaity are some what different,


I'm only looking at them from a critical standpoint. If someone wants to counter me they can feel free to do so. It's not my fault nobody is countering my claim that Muhammad is what I say he is. Maybe that says something.

Refusing to stoop to your level does not make you right.


I was also comparing Muhammad to other people around and even way before his time, yet he still stands out as one of the worst. And then for him to revered as a saint/prophet is just funny.

I see a ban coming. If you were really interested in an honest comparison you'd not have said that. As I pionted out Jesus was a prodct of a particular culture unigue in its world view for its time and place. If you broaden your mind and your refrecne sample to look at other great figures you will se ejust how moderate and good Mohammed was. Compare him to Octavian, who was called the fahter of his country and was Pontifax Maximus for a better fit in terms of social-politcal roles as one example. He was not an enlightenment thinker, but in many ways he was enlightend.

Officer of Engineers
18 Aug 08,, 15:21
I was also comparing Muhammad to other people around and even way before his time, yet he still stands out as one of the worst. And then for him to revered as a saint/prophet is just funny.You can't read the rules, can you?

JamesCash
19 Aug 08,, 08:49
I think religions should give an explanation for the why we are here and stop with that. All the rules that govern every-day matters and real world affairs are clearly put in there by persons that want to abuse the religious person. You can't do this, you should do that, give us money and fight for your god.
As for me I don't know why I'm here and try to accept that I will probably never come across a good explanation in my lifetime.

Kansas Bear
20 Aug 08,, 07:53
I think Karl Marx got it right about religion. Though, I think that the ONLY thing he got right!!