socratesone
24-03-2002, 18:11
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 26-03-02 AT 09:01 AM (GMT)]All the tenents of any religion require a leap of faith. You can read the 7 things that all Muslims believe and each and everyone requires faith. So also do the basic tenents of any religions, whether it be faith in the Bible, Torah, Sankrit etc.
I become troubled when I see Muslims using words that refer to authority that does not exist like: the prophet says, truth, facts, or the usual dualistic thinking like good vs evil, right vs wrong and so on.
I notice that most Islamic sites, and this one, as well as this one, seem to really be resistent or closed to even a well mannered discusion. The usual forum is you ask questions and they give answers, not where you can express your own philosophy and get feedback. Some kind of press, speech or thought control. I notice that even with manners, a person is not free to question Islamic ideas, but there is a free for all on Christian, Judaism etc. Others I have talked to feel the same way about many Islamic sites.
It is kind of like the allegory of the cave with Socrates, wherein the people were stuck in their chairs and only became experts in analysing shadows on the wall. When a person became free he went above to find that the people below did not understand that the real light was above and their limited view was found only in the cave. He was of course killed, like a person who questions the Taliban about the IMAM's interpretation of some Sura.
I find that the logic of finding errors in christianity or judaism presents as truth to Islam as an error in philosophy. I find that 5th century thinking is found in the denotation within the Qu'ran. For example the Sura 8 refers to keeping your "steed" ready for war" and not to give anyone who has not prepared for war your steed. In the 21st Century, to prepare a horse for battle is impractical and irrelevant so if you are going to stick to the dennotation, then you must keep your horse ready. However, if you take the symbolical, or the metaphorical connotation, then it means to stay prepared for a struggle. Along the same lines, if I use a 20th century metaphor, like, "it's raining cats and dogs" and you run to the window to see them falling, then I would say that you have taken a literalist denotative view rather than a contectural connotative view. So, one can say, that without a leap of faith, the metaphorical writings of all prior historical religious person are "true" to their metaphorical point, but to get stuck in your dennotative words in a fallable language such as arabic (an evolved language from Aramaic) spoken by Jesus wherein he would have said, "Alaha" when referring to God. So rather than getting stuck in language traps, literalist thinking and behavior, lets start with accepting all writings in their connotative meaning. All imply that behinds the dennotations is God, Allah, Alaha or Eloheim.
Unfortunately, all nations have not acted fairly at all times, so we must look at them from a most usual behavior. Like should the US give back Texas to Mexico. Even though the origin of the Jews is not fair to others, now is too late to take it back. So why don't the Palestinians want their own state more than wiping Israel off the mediterian area. It's too late. Saudi has proposed some good ideas lately and so did Sadat, the merciful and wise. But when will we see, the extremist get off the total anilhilation of Jews and move on to getting their own state? There is enough internation momentum only to be crushed by extremism.
Extremism: well, when David Korish displayed militant Christianity and extremism, Christians could not get away from them fast enough in their philosophies. But what concerns me is, that Extremists in Islam are not separated off by even US Muslims who would rather believe some remote unfounded conspiracy theory that the Jew and the US did the twin towers twice and the press is lieing? If Arabic people would spend as much time translating Arafat as they did in creating the Jews did it to the Americans and blamed it on the Arabs then you would see that Arafat is two people, one who insights violence and one who pretends he wants peace. Clearly, a Muslim who claims to be hamas, or hezbollah et al is an extremist. If you doh't separate from them then I don't blame the rest of the world to fear you and your 5th century beliefs.
So if Sadat was right, and that the final Jihad is a personal struggle of the heart, and US Muslims feel that way, time to reduce your numbers. You may not like homsexuality and it may have been a "bad thing in the 5th century, but Iran killed 400,000 they thought were homosexual following their conversion to an Islamic republic. I think this is another example of getting stuck in the denotation again.
Christians will never be able to turn the US into a Christian Republic and neither will Muslims. Americans have given their lives to preserve a republic, indivisable, with liberty and justice for all, yes even Muslims. The freedom of speech and religion is protected for all. If you want to talk about morons who live in American and say hateful things to our American Muslim brothers, well, this can be helped by doing what the Christians did with Koresh, separate them. Hell, even Louis Farrakan, a baptize style proselyting person, seems to be accepted as American Islam. Where is the outrage on terrorism. If you have none and subscribe to the conspiracy theory, perhaps you don't have enough money to pay cable, and get the Fox News. Al quzeer (sp) running 24/7 days a weeks puts out such crap, no wonder Muslims distrust the news from any country. Last reported was the 18 US hostages to trade for the detainees in Cuba. So, I know how the "Idiots Guide to Understanding Islam": and other books designed to inform non Muslims, contain messages and passages or interpretations from the Qu'ran that clearly were meant for the 5th century. To accept it for more than metaphorically "true" is to mean that all good Muslim will keep their horse ready for war: Sura 8.
I believe that the Qu'ran was a more recent view of God/Allah, Alaha, Eloheim and has the advantage of being able to draw from all the previous writing from the people of the book. So it is the word of God, but only metaphorically, otherwise you are stuck in a closed philosophy, blinded daily by tripping over the interpretations of things such as Jonah, Adam/Eve, Moses and burning bushes or Noah?
Let's get real also, science requires a leap of faith as well, the piceing together of ancestors and theorizing links, takes a leap as well.
Imagine the Leap of faith, to one day go to a titty bar and the next kill yourself and thousands of innocents? It is really a stretch to get all the virgins. If they are still virgins then, who would want them anyway?
I become troubled when I see Muslims using words that refer to authority that does not exist like: the prophet says, truth, facts, or the usual dualistic thinking like good vs evil, right vs wrong and so on.
I notice that most Islamic sites, and this one, as well as this one, seem to really be resistent or closed to even a well mannered discusion. The usual forum is you ask questions and they give answers, not where you can express your own philosophy and get feedback. Some kind of press, speech or thought control. I notice that even with manners, a person is not free to question Islamic ideas, but there is a free for all on Christian, Judaism etc. Others I have talked to feel the same way about many Islamic sites.
It is kind of like the allegory of the cave with Socrates, wherein the people were stuck in their chairs and only became experts in analysing shadows on the wall. When a person became free he went above to find that the people below did not understand that the real light was above and their limited view was found only in the cave. He was of course killed, like a person who questions the Taliban about the IMAM's interpretation of some Sura.
I find that the logic of finding errors in christianity or judaism presents as truth to Islam as an error in philosophy. I find that 5th century thinking is found in the denotation within the Qu'ran. For example the Sura 8 refers to keeping your "steed" ready for war" and not to give anyone who has not prepared for war your steed. In the 21st Century, to prepare a horse for battle is impractical and irrelevant so if you are going to stick to the dennotation, then you must keep your horse ready. However, if you take the symbolical, or the metaphorical connotation, then it means to stay prepared for a struggle. Along the same lines, if I use a 20th century metaphor, like, "it's raining cats and dogs" and you run to the window to see them falling, then I would say that you have taken a literalist denotative view rather than a contectural connotative view. So, one can say, that without a leap of faith, the metaphorical writings of all prior historical religious person are "true" to their metaphorical point, but to get stuck in your dennotative words in a fallable language such as arabic (an evolved language from Aramaic) spoken by Jesus wherein he would have said, "Alaha" when referring to God. So rather than getting stuck in language traps, literalist thinking and behavior, lets start with accepting all writings in their connotative meaning. All imply that behinds the dennotations is God, Allah, Alaha or Eloheim.
Unfortunately, all nations have not acted fairly at all times, so we must look at them from a most usual behavior. Like should the US give back Texas to Mexico. Even though the origin of the Jews is not fair to others, now is too late to take it back. So why don't the Palestinians want their own state more than wiping Israel off the mediterian area. It's too late. Saudi has proposed some good ideas lately and so did Sadat, the merciful and wise. But when will we see, the extremist get off the total anilhilation of Jews and move on to getting their own state? There is enough internation momentum only to be crushed by extremism.
Extremism: well, when David Korish displayed militant Christianity and extremism, Christians could not get away from them fast enough in their philosophies. But what concerns me is, that Extremists in Islam are not separated off by even US Muslims who would rather believe some remote unfounded conspiracy theory that the Jew and the US did the twin towers twice and the press is lieing? If Arabic people would spend as much time translating Arafat as they did in creating the Jews did it to the Americans and blamed it on the Arabs then you would see that Arafat is two people, one who insights violence and one who pretends he wants peace. Clearly, a Muslim who claims to be hamas, or hezbollah et al is an extremist. If you doh't separate from them then I don't blame the rest of the world to fear you and your 5th century beliefs.
So if Sadat was right, and that the final Jihad is a personal struggle of the heart, and US Muslims feel that way, time to reduce your numbers. You may not like homsexuality and it may have been a "bad thing in the 5th century, but Iran killed 400,000 they thought were homosexual following their conversion to an Islamic republic. I think this is another example of getting stuck in the denotation again.
Christians will never be able to turn the US into a Christian Republic and neither will Muslims. Americans have given their lives to preserve a republic, indivisable, with liberty and justice for all, yes even Muslims. The freedom of speech and religion is protected for all. If you want to talk about morons who live in American and say hateful things to our American Muslim brothers, well, this can be helped by doing what the Christians did with Koresh, separate them. Hell, even Louis Farrakan, a baptize style proselyting person, seems to be accepted as American Islam. Where is the outrage on terrorism. If you have none and subscribe to the conspiracy theory, perhaps you don't have enough money to pay cable, and get the Fox News. Al quzeer (sp) running 24/7 days a weeks puts out such crap, no wonder Muslims distrust the news from any country. Last reported was the 18 US hostages to trade for the detainees in Cuba. So, I know how the "Idiots Guide to Understanding Islam": and other books designed to inform non Muslims, contain messages and passages or interpretations from the Qu'ran that clearly were meant for the 5th century. To accept it for more than metaphorically "true" is to mean that all good Muslim will keep their horse ready for war: Sura 8.
I believe that the Qu'ran was a more recent view of God/Allah, Alaha, Eloheim and has the advantage of being able to draw from all the previous writing from the people of the book. So it is the word of God, but only metaphorically, otherwise you are stuck in a closed philosophy, blinded daily by tripping over the interpretations of things such as Jonah, Adam/Eve, Moses and burning bushes or Noah?
Let's get real also, science requires a leap of faith as well, the piceing together of ancestors and theorizing links, takes a leap as well.
Imagine the Leap of faith, to one day go to a titty bar and the next kill yourself and thousands of innocents? It is really a stretch to get all the virgins. If they are still virgins then, who would want them anyway?