please dont be offended by what people post.
they have the right to believe what they want.
you have a respected voice here dont waist it on something thats not worth arguing.
im iterested to know where you stand with humans ideas.
do you realy think that western people just pray with no action and so that makes religion usseles?
just wondering your stance on this.
I was sleep deprived for the last few days (best torture ever) now I've got sleep ill make a long reply later
If I had been born in any age but the present I would have died, twice. First, I would have died from swallowing my own sh it in the womb. The second time I would have been murdered for having seizures. When men of god ruled the world science was held back like a tide. Maybe in those days souls were saved, but I would not have been incubated until I was able to breate on my own. Instead by some flaw in gods design an infant would have swallowed its own fec es and died. As I suffered from seizures these men who served the highest universal good would have damned me to burn at the stake. In our modern, secular age, I did not die but am able to talk to people from around the world instantly. Humanity is worth it, we don't need god, we are gods. After a fashion.
Man kind has crawled its way out of the muck of ages, usually against and never with religion, into an age of reason. Right now we understand the universe to such a point that we can convince it to let us travel to the moon, this is why the moon landing disproves god. We have built the ultimate tower of babyl, and what has happened? Did we begin eating babies, or selling our souls to satan? No, we have entered an age when well being for all is possible, if we abolish the profit motive, to ensure well being for all. I have gods, 4 actually:
science: to explain reality and make it work for the species
will: to force myself to work when I feel I cannot
reason: to no simply understand the universe, but what is right and wrong, and how to use my knowledge
resistance: to stand against the muck of ages, solidified into the masters of the current order, and say "NO"
I had this brilliant ode to humanity written out and then I lost it. 3 paragraphs I had worked out then I lost it. I'll retype it later. It was buetiful, some of my best writng.
I certainly don't think they exclusively do that, but statistically atheists tend to donate more to charity, so it's possible that's an operating factor. If a person is moved to do something about a tragedy, and feels the need to do something to help, if they feel that prayer really does help then that may satisfy their need, thereby blocking them from further action. It's no hard and fast rule, though. I think most theists understand on some level that prayer isn't really effective, so they help out tangibly anyways.
Aw dude! I hate when that happens :( Gotta Ctrl+C it before you post!
If I had been born in the age of gods and not the age of reason I would have died, twice. First because when I was in the womb I breathed in my own fe ces, and choked on it. In the age of god when priests held back the tide of science they would have leeched me. In our age when reason and science rule, doctors put me in a machine and saved my life. I would have died again when my seizures were mistaken for witchcraft and I was burned at the stake. In the age of reason it was understood as just a form of fever and I lived.
Humanity has crawled out of the muck of ages, often against religion and never with it, we have built marvels. The space shuttle is the ultimate tower of babel, a testament to the power of the human mind, spirit and will. We have pried from the universe its secrets and mysteries, we understand how to put men in space, without god or magic. I have gods, after a fashion:
Science: to study and learn from the universe. to understand its secrets
Will: to drive us to new heights, to climb mountains and build a better world.
Reason: to understand how to use our knowledge and will, and to discern right from wrong
Resistance: to fight against the muck of the old world solidified into institutions of power and majesty, and build a new world worth living in.
Not as good as the original
What lovely writing. I'm glad you survived :)
The age of God in Europe has probably totally mucked up your views on religion. Is it not enough of an argument that the age of God in slightly more to the East (Arabian Peninsula) heralded the age of science? Humanity's experiences of religion are vastly different. Is it fair that you only ever view God with a Judaeo-Christian lens, and even that, more Christian than Judaic? Is it being honest if you refuse to acknowledge that while in Europe "doctors" were trying to exorcize out spirits from people as a form of medicine, in Egypt and Syria and Tunisia and God knows where else people were performing surgeries to get rid of medical disease? Is it not arrogant, Eurocentric, and historically biased to think that science has only really begun from the 1600s? What of all the discoveries and thought and personalities who developed the scientific method before the 1600s, and not in Christian Europe? Would it not be more fair to judge humanity based on its cumulative experiences, not on the experiences of one continent on the world - and even there Andalusia (or Muslim-ruled Spain) was home to great discoveries and tolerance? When did Muslims ever burn witches at the stake? Progress is good, but will you give up for it stability? Should we not try to strike a balance between progress and stability?
What secrets of humankind would you know without humanism? And what is humanism but another set of ideals, ones to bring about social justice, that have nothing to do with an essentially indifferent universe? Has going to the Moon prevented suicides? Has it created social justice? Was it not borne out of a conflict - the Cold War, in fact?
And what has all this got to do with the truth?
Thx for the compliment that was what happens when I edit and use a keyboard.
Only Arab Muslims developed this and that was because they happened to be at the right place at the right time: give me wealth a unified empire and the library of Alexandria and I'd have a golden age to. Islam plaid a role, as a unifying ideology.
Okay Ian.. you don't even want to start with me on Islamic History. In short: you're mistaken :) but here are specifics:
a) "Only Arab Muslims developed this": Nope. Andalusians, South Asians (Indians), Tunisians (the first university was made in current-day Tunisia), etc. Also, "Arabs" are an ENORMOUS group of people. It's like saying, "Only North Americans did so and so". Yeah, and it's a huge amount of people given that Islam started in one city (Makkah).
b) "This was because they happened to be at the right place at the right time": You can say this about literally anything historical. If Descartes had been born in 800 CE instead of in the Renaissance, yadda yadda yadda. I could use this against what you say too. It's not an argument.
c) "Give me wealth, a unified empire, and the library of Alexandria and I'd have a Golden Age too": Where'd this wealth come from? Where'd the unified empire come from? I can say this about the United States/Europe right now: Give me Harvard and wealth and any Muslim nation would be at where the US is right now. Come on Ian. Give me a break here.
d) "islam played a role as a unifying ideology": Islam isn't an ideology, the word "ideology" doesn't even exist in Arabic (until the 1900s that is). It's a religion, or more correctly, a way of life. And Islam is the reason all of this started. Abu Bakr and Umar, the latter of whom basically expanded the Islamic Empire to God knows how far, are both companions of the Prophet (pbuh). As in, they'er not randomers who happened to be Muslim. They were Muslims, and they specifically started conquering lands because of the initiative of the Prophet (pbuh) (for instnace, to stop tyranny, to invite others to Islam, etc). And their armies were such that to be a solider you had to have memorized the Qur'an. And the Muslim scholars/scientists/theologians were such that they justified their seeking of knowledge as an Islamic endeavour. And the preservation of history in unparalleled preciseness was justified as an Islamic endeavour for the sake of the ahadith sciences. I could go on and on.
"You can say this about literally anything historical. [...] I could use this against what you say too. It's not an argument."
Excuse me, yes it is. I don't care if it's me or someone else, I'd prefer you not construct blatant strawmen, and instaed address the point that's actually being made here: Islam is not not reason for those successes.
*Rolls eyes* I doubt you've ever read an Islamic scholar's work, seeing as most of them are Arabic, so you probably have 0 clue why they did things. On the other hand, I actually read about Islam because I happen to have a deep interest in it. If your previous replies are anything to judge by, you replace "Christianity" with "Islam" and "Islamic scholars" with "medieval Catholic Church" in every single one of your replies and think that it applies. It does not. Also, I replied to Ian in point (d).
Incidentally Ian, the latter Islamic empires had rulers who often imprisoned and tortured Islamic scholars due to political reasons (they wanted to for instance kill somebody unjustly, Islamic scholar condemned it, he was tortured). Scientific progress was never condemned in the Islamic world.
Cheers you guys
And I just realised that Ian didn't actually state an argument (I am sure he didn't have time so I'm not blaming him - he is camping after all), so there wasn't much of anything for me to create a straw man over. Making unbacked claims is not an argument.
I'm sorry SDD I'm so rude :( I didn't mean to be. I should've like inserted smileys but my mum was calling me and I was in a hurry. Plus uninformed and speculative insulting of religions just bugs me. :/ SORRY!!!!
I think you're right, I ought not to try wasting my time with theological history. For one, I'm not a history buff, so it doesn't interest me in that way, and second, I'm just not interested in mythology or what it drove people to do in the past. I'm more interested in the present.
"I think you're right"
That's all I heard... *eyes glaze over*
I guess I can't really judge you though, you're only getting as frustrated about my not knowing history as I do about scientific illiteracy.
We just had a moment <3 Let's add this to The Book Thief and Eragon. We're basically like, besties now.
I'm honestly okay with people not knowing history, especially when it's history that your public school isn't going to teach you about, and I barely know ANYTHING about Islamic history, but you know... passing speculative judgments is totally different.
Incidentally, scientific illiteracy is like, the least important thing in my mind. LOL. I get more worked up over UPS than scientific illiteracy.
what do you mean
" if i had been born in the age of gods and not the age of reason i would have died twice"
um no not exactly, because:
1 technecly we " thoeists" concider it still to be the age of Go.d.
2 this is obviously no the age of reason mainly because...
a; we have killed so many unborn I would have to check the clock twice to find an accurate number, it changes that rapidly.
b; we have faught more wars in the last 800 years than in the 1000 years before it.
c; the men in power are using everything we say and do against us ( hence i dont think we live in a good age )
d; priests never held back the age of science-elaborate please?
please it depends on where you were from as well as WHO was the leader at the time.
also what does the " the age of God" mean to you and what does he have to do with that?
the age of reason is a joke, there is no such thing as truely smart humans because we wouldnt be killing each other in that case.
" humanity has crawled out of the age of wizdom, often against religion and never with it"
okay thats just wierd to say.
because there are many different beliefs in our world today and christianity is stronger today than 500 years ago and many of the greatest scientist pronounced faith in Go.d
we have not " unlocked the mysteries of space "
infact we know little about it, and sending men to a moon a little ways off is great and all but it does not mean that we have learned even in part what we could in the long run.
" to study and learn from the univers and understand its secrets"
okay i can agree that this is awsome, but to replace Go.d with His creation is stupid.
okay men in the bible climbed mountains and built cities, bigger than austin.
that was just with thier families, not an entire city of people helping.
and if there is no Go.d
nobody to answer to later, who cares about right and wrong, at that point, no-one is wrong or right because they make their own rules.'
institutions are usualy good by the way.
majesty is good as well, science in itself is majestic.
and last of all but maybe the worst:
you cant change peoples hearts, wich you would have to do in order to " make a new world "
cause no matter what scientific level we come to, no matter how smart we are.
people will still rebell under the best of cercomstances and will hate good in their hearts.
that is just the truth about human nature.