I don't believe that religious tendencies are taught properly thus why the world has an improper idea of afterlife. Scientists have been researching people that have had near death experiences, an the patients were given out the same answers except depending on the persons energy they ascended up or down
It's common sense to me that after life exists yo.the wind blows yet we can't see it, we speak words that we hear but can't see, we have an entire world we all can personally see within without others being able to see, we have this character inside this shell that can't be recognized just by simply looking at this flesh
Think, why would life be as simple as do anything and everything here that you want without a consequence, then when you die your done, that's it, <-------- i believe this is more unbelievable then the concept of afterlife
Why do you people conclude based off of what you Are being told? Do you people not see that these religious groups are using ancient texts of long ago to manipulate us humans into being brainwashed?? READ THE BOOKS THESE RELIGIONS FOLLOW AND YOU WILL SEE HOW MOST RELIGIOUS GROUPS DONT EVEN GET THE ANCIENT TEXTS THEY ARE READING.
Thích Nhất Hạnh said that Heaven and Hell exist on this realm of existence. Hell is the just the absence of compassion.[/QUOTE]
Yes, it's all very simple to grasp at one point yet religious simpletons perpetuate their delusions with a sense of communal pride and duty.
Hell is just what an individual can experience through their own ego/thoughts but mostly due to external events. Lets say a gang rape.
Heaven is simply the lack of ego and thinking/living in a bigger bubble of thought. A higher vibrational state of being, let's say.
Yes, it's all very simple to grasp at one point yet religious simpletons perpetuate their delusions with a sense of communal pride and duty.
Hell is just what an individual can experience through their own ego/thoughts but mostly due to external events. Lets say a gang rape.
Heaven is simply the lack of ego and thinking/living in a bigger bubble of thought. A higher vibrational state of being, let's say.
Did I state I know all the answers? Anywho, it's not that hard to see through the underlying corruption in mass-organised systems of opinion structures. Plus, a legitimate argument has always been too much to ask for when dealing with said fanatics.
I "knock" others beliefs as to stir their corrupted minds into a higher realization. Not to show who's 'boss' but as to not feed their demand of respect for their beliefs. Opinion structures should always be broken down for a better, newer model to be created from its ashes, so to speak. Our minds need to keep evolving in order for our species as a whole to reach higher levels of understanding. Organised religion puts a halt to that.
An old example of mine is; (got this from a tedtalk ) What the word 'holy' means is: Here you have a notion you cannot say anyyhing bad about. Why? Because you just cannot.
That is how religious logic works. Claim to be offended so your system of thought won't be challenged. Just a perpetual cycle of stupification, imo.
Did I state I know all the answers? Anywho, it's not that hard to see through the underlying corruption in mass-organised systems of opinion structures. Plus, a legitimate argument has always been too much to ask for when dealing with said fanatics.
I "knock" others beliefs as to stir their corrupted minds into a higher realization. Not to show who's 'boss' but as to not feed their demand of respect for their beliefs. Opinion structures should always be broken down for a better, newer model to be created from its ashes, so to speak. Our minds need to keep evolving in order for our species as a whole to reach higher levels of understanding. Organised religion puts a halt to that.
An old example of mine is; (got this from a tedtalk ) What the word 'holy' means is: Here you have a notion you cannot say anyyhing bad about. Why? Because you just cannot.
That is how religious logic works. Claim to be offended so your system of thought won't be challenged. Just a perpetual cycle of stupification, imo.
You want to bring their opinion structures down only so your opinion takes their place but that defeats the purpose of challenging their beliefs to begin with. You called them simpletons and delusional but you didn't bring anymore logical argument, there is nothing but arrogance driving your opinion.
I'd share my view if you want but if any wants to take it offensively, better not bother since I don't like heated discussions, nor I believe I'll persuade any. But what I believe is what I believe, don't consider myself brainwashed, I find happiness in it, and I don't find it wrong to question any in it.
If a simple discussion of sharing views you ask. Then you'll get it.
You want to bring their opinion structures down only so your opinion takes their place but that defeats the purpose of challenging their beliefs to begin with. You called them simpletons and delusional but you didn't bring anymore logical argument, there is nothing but arrogance driving your opinion.
How can I bring an argument if I'm not arguing with anyone? Lol my previous post, however, is on point.
And the use of "simpletons" and "delusional" is the result of religious absolute confidence combined with the absence of logical arguments.
As for my motivation: I'd love to find a person of faith with a respectable argument but hey..like I said; too much to ask for.
How can I bring an argument if I'm not arguing with anyone? Lol my previous post, however, is on point.
And the use of "simpletons" and "delusional" is the result of religious absolute confidence combined with the absence of logical arguments.
As for my motivation: I'd love to find a person of faith with a respectable argument but hey..like I said; too much to ask for.
I have been thinking about how humans peddle misery. I saw a picture of ISIS beheading an infant that made me sad. There was a forum discussion on Nazis that led to conversations about genocide. Hundreds of millions of people have died in wars, genocide, murder, etc. Many of these people were young, even children.
It got me thinking. How much of humans' hate is caused by or disregarded by some misguided belief in the afterlife? People comment with statements like, "well she's in a better place." Maybe not; probably not. They are just dead and their life got cut tragically short. Some people are just horrible and evil, but other's truly believe in some life hereafter and sometimes justify crimes against humanity because they have some irrational belief that person is being liberated to a peaceful afterlife. I'm not going to argue the psychological nature of rationalizing our fear of loss and death with a fraudulent belief in the afterlife, but at what point does it become a debilitating excuse? Not even murder, but imprisoning people for mild crimes. If this is the only life we get, does someone deserve to be locked into jail for 10 years of their life for possession of marijuana?
Life is precious and we should be thankful we are here for as short of a time as we are, but this misguided belief in an afterlife is part of the problem. If there is any reason to live in the moment it's because there is no afterlife and probably no reincarnation. Do you want to spend your life drunk/high, missing out on life's experiences? People don't get another chance. It breaks my heart to think of people who are massacred for other people's political agendas, religious zealotry, or hate, but if anything it makes me appreciate what I have any more. Even in our day to day life we need to do our best not to peddle misery onto others. Even if you believe in an afterlife, you need to stop and think, just in case there's nothing after death are you living the life you want? Are you allowing other's to enjoy their life?
I'm not really saying the belief in an afterlife creates suffering as much as it instills a very passive outlook towards the suffering of others in this life. These questions are rhetorical and my thoughts are always rambling, but this is what I think about while I'm drinking tea.
I don't get it. Are you talking about people soothing themselves by saying that if someone is killed, he/she is in a better place now? Because then, what does that have to do with hatred? I don't see how it makes anything worse. You can't bring back the dead regardless of what you believe in, so what do you think should be the correct reaction to death? Don't forget that there are many atheists as well, who don't care much if a stranger dies. And there are religious people who still moan and cry and get depressed if a relative/acquaintance dies, regardless of their faith. You get sad over the death of an infant, and sure it is sad, but you still keep sipping your tea, and it's not like you're gonna give up your comfortable life and let's say, whip yourself for every untimely death that happens in the world. So I just don't get the point of this thread. Are you trying to say that those, who believe in an afterlife, are apathetic towards death? Well my friend, that has nothing to do with the belief in afterlife. As I said, atheists can be apathetic too, and religious people can get sad too.
Also, there are people who choose death, by committing suicide. It is because they want to get rid of the suffering and hardships of this life. Whatever awaits them, whether nothing or hell or heaven, they still think it's better than this life. So what then?
If there is any reason to live in the moment it's because there is no afterlife and probably no reincarnation
Yes, if you only want to live in the moment. But what's the point of life altogether? If there is any, I think it is to better ourselves, our insight being fixated beyond perishable matters. There is a misconception though, that people believing in the afterlife don't live this life to the fullest. Why do you think that we don't live the life we want? Living to the fullest is different for each person. I'm perfectly fine without alcohol, drugs, dating and stuff. And it's not even about giving these up for a potential reward in the afterlife, but I think it's the best for me in this life as well. It spares me a lot of trouble that I abstain from certain things. (Btw no I'm not indoctrinated, I was not always religious.) You are asking if we allow others to enjoy their lives...I don't see how my belief in afterlife, or anyone's belief in the afterlife, is supposed to affect others' lives, unless we're talking about a terrorist blowing himself up, or the inquisition purifying a soul by burning a person for witchcraft...It's not like the belief in afterlife necessitates any kind of forcefulness. There are rules in secular countries too, and even those religions that don't believe in an afterlife, set rules for their believers. You sound as if the belief in afterlife could be blamed for crimes, or preventing humans from enjoying their lives, but I could reverse the argument and claim that not believing in the afterlife is responsible for more crimes, as the fear of hell and the hope for heaven has a preventive force. So, every coin has two sides.
I suggest you read Camus. Though, you've read Sartre, so I assume you're familiar with Camus as well. Now, the guy took atheism to a different level. He says that there is no purpose in life, so basically the only question is whether to commit suicide or not? Now of course he couldn't give the answer: 'yeah go everyone and kill yourselves', so he said that we still should keep on living. But why? Just because.
This is taking your thoughts to their limit. Saying that there is nothing but this life and we should only live for the moment, in my humbly deluded opinion, is just as dangerous and leads nowhere. If you add that we should give up our ego, be more self conscious, be more understanding...etc- I don't see how are these notions incompatible with the belief in afterlife? The belief in afterlife is a motivation not to give up, and keep striving. One may say, 'Oh but you don't need religion for that': Ok, you don't, but it's still an extra motivation, and never forget the the belief in afterlife is usually embedded in a set of other believes, which can be backed up by an array of arguments and convictions. I don't just believe in God out of fear, or a selfish desire for reward: though I do believe it's only righteous that everyone will be judged based on how they lived. You may say, it's just wishful thinking: but it's still righteous- and therefore, it is reasonable.
Now one may say, it's just rationalizing fear of the unknown. Not really, I can't be sure if I'll go to hell or not. And not believing in hell/heaven is also just rationalizing the unknown, by labeling them as fairytale-. Thus, nothing better than my beliefs. But again, to each his own. Whatever sails your ship.
But as I said, I do not serve God only to avoid punishment and get reward. Otherwise, one could just accuse me of saying that I'm stuck on a low level of moral development- well, if my memory serves, the highest level is when you act out of imperatives, and this is a rather hypothetical level, as the huge majority never reaches it. But back to the point, religions have their own hierarchy of values, and that's why psychologists are not an authority to me when it comes to that. You can rank your values higher- and I'll rank mine in a different manner, but altogether, you can't prove that the belief in afterlife causes people to be any less moral. Especially if one says that morals are all relative.
Not to mention that in my religion, islam, the highest level is when you do good automatically. That doing good has become your nature. That every moment you are aware that God is present, and so you will abstain from doing bad, and will always do what's right. You won't care about earthly rewards or people's opinion- you do good for God. I think it is a form of imperative. Now you may argue, 'but you expect a reward in the afterlife'- well, as I said, it's only righteous, and no, I can't be sure if I'll go to hell or not, but all I know is that I won't suffer any injustice and I'll be judged righteously. In that sense, I act out of righteousness. Also, out of gratitude towards God. Anyway, even if you do good without believing in a god, you do it to make yourself feel better. 'The reward of a good deed is in itself'- which means that you act out of a conviction that you do good, and that what you do is good, and so you'll feel good too. Even categorical imperatives, like that of Kant, imply practical usefulness, so in the end, regardless of what conviction you act upon, it will have an additional value- it's not like you can abandon your conscience anyway.
Anyway, let me quote the Quran and some islamic thoughts, just 'coz I think it fits here.
“Work for the world as if you are going to live forever. Work for the hereafter as if you are going to die tomorrow.”- so it's not like the belief in afterlife is supposed to make us apathetic towards this world. But there are many things you don't choose and can't help, so in any case it's best to take calamities with dignity. Sure, religious people may say that the deceased one is in a better place- but how is it any degrading? Would it be better to say that 'oh it's sad, but that's how life is, there is no hope' ? Especially that you can't know either, for sure, what's beyond death. And again, it's not even rationalizing fear, at least from my point of view. I'm not afraid of death- never been. I'm just convinced that there is an afterlife: but I'm still afraid to go to hell, but by having hope in paradise, I'm not rationalizing the fear of hell. Let's say you write a test at school. You don't know the questions in advance, but you do your best. You try to answer the questions. But you can't be sure if you fail or pass. But you were sure that there will be a test:so, just by hoping that you'll pass, you didn't rationalize anything.
"Keep the world in your hand, not your heart"- meaning: use the worldly things to do good, but don't take them as idols and don't be obsessed with them.
"Whoever desires the life of this world and its adornments - We fully repay them for their deeds therein, and they therein will not be deprived." /Sura Hud, 15th aya/
Which means, you can live for the moment, but then that's all you'll get. After all, iT's only fair. If that's al you ask for, that's all you'll get. But, you'll get what you asked for, so noone should complain.
Anyway, if these are just rhetoric questions, why did you post them on a forum where people will reply, and you reply them too...
The whole idea of an afterlife (other than death) has always been bullshit. Personally I find it more of a comfort than anything that you can just decide to stop living whenever you want and not have to deal anymore. I guess some people just need a way to cope with their dissatisfying goody-two-shoes lives while they secretly believe the people around them will go to hell. But whatever makes them feel better is okay, I guess.
Nice stereotyping and generalizing. Why woudl I secretely hope that people around me will go to hell? I can't even be sure if I'll go to hell...Noone can know what's in others' hearts, but God. That's the whole point, and you missed it perfectly. No wonder, a nonbeliever will never really understand a believer, but then, how does it make you feel better to attack views made up by yourself, that have not much to do with real faith?
I'll still never understand the concept of heaven though. People are only capable of thinking about heaven in terms of what they wanted in life. People don't want some otherworldly heaven. A lot of them just want a second Earth.
Well, at least there is some truth in this. But even so, I don't see what's wrong with wanting an afterlife similar to this world, but with a few extras? Anyway, noone knows what heaven will be like ~
“The concept of hell and endless torment is popular with those who believe they aren't headed there.” - Ian Brady
"The concept that there is nothing after this life, is popular with those who want to live for the moment, do whatever they want, and believe noone but themselves will make them account for their deeds." /Bakame/
You don't believe either that you are headed to hell- the only difference is that you don't believe in heaven either.
And I can't emphasize enough, that I can't be sure if I'll go to heaven and hell. Even the most pious persons can fail at the end of their lives.
Says the guy who couldn't even refute that his own spiritual beliefs and New Age movement are of religious nature.
Also, if my memory serves, you believe in reincarnation, right? So you also believe there is somethign more than just this life. In which case, I don't see how are you any better? "Coz I bring respectable arguments". Sorry but calling all the religious people simpletons, is not a respectable argument. You expect respectable arguments when you don't respect religious beliefs? "I don't respect religious beliefs coz they can't bring any respectable arguments."- That's circular reasoning. And what is a respectable argument for you in the first place? I could also just comfortably claim that I've never seen you ever bringing a 'respectable argument'- it all boils down to what you deem to be respectable. So far, it seems you don't respect religions in general- apart from your own beliefs, of course- so in the end, no matter what argument a religious person would bring to you, that wouldn't be respectable.
You may say, 'oh I conduct experiments with my gf and they work for most of the time'. Fine, and I feel the guidance of God in my every day life, and my prayers are answered in one way or another. *shrug*
'Oh but I have scientific proof that my beliefs are correct. *posts a video*'- Fine, there are scientists as well who interpret the data accumulated, as conclusive for the existence of god *posts a video*
We can play this game, but just because you haven't found 'respectable arguments', that doesn't mean there aren't any. Maybe you didn't look deep enough, or not from the right sources (f.e, have you read original religious scriptures?)
Inbefore you mock me for trying 'too hard'- like last time-, well, at least I respect you enough to try hard, despite the respect is not mutual Lol
Says the guy who couldn't even refute that his own spiritual beliefs and New Age movement are of religious nature.
Also, if my memory serves, you believe in reincarnation, right? So you also believe there is somethign more than just this life. In which case, I don't see how are you any better? "Coz I bring respectable arguments". Sorry but calling all the religious people simpletons, is not a respectable argument. You expect respectable arguments when you don't respect religious beliefs? "I don't respect religious beliefs coz they can't bring any respectable arguments."- That's circular reasoning. And what is a respectable argument for you in the first place? I could also just comfortably claim that I've never seen you ever bringing a 'respectable argument'- it all boils down to what you deem to be respectable. So far, it seems you don't respect religions in general- apart from your own beliefs, of course- so in the end, no matter what argument a religious person would bring to you, that wouldn't be respectable.
You may say, 'oh I conduct experiments with my gf and they work for most of the time'. Fine, and I feel the guidance of God in my every day life, and my prayers are answered in one way or another. *shrug*
'Oh but I have scientific proof that my beliefs are correct. *posts a video*'- Fine, there are scientists as well who interpret the data accumulated, as conclusive for the existence of god *posts a video*
We can play this game, but just because you haven't found 'respectable arguments', that doesn't mean there aren't any. Maybe you didn't look deep enough, or not from the right sources (f.e, have you read original religious scriptures?)
Inbefore you mock me for trying 'too hard'- like last time-, well, at least I respect you enough to try hard, despite the respect is not mutual Lol
I think it's the other way around. Organised religions seem to have their origins within astrology, paganism, cymatics, etc. Meditation/inner search being the correct interpretation of praying/external search. As the phrase that everybody knows; "god is within you".
So, I very much doubt I "could not refute" that..I probably just didn't elaborate enough to get my message across properly.
As for reincarnation and other non-solidly proven phenomena; I am simply open to it. If I haven't experienced it myself, I'm just open to it if it makes sense and there are some unexplainable events happening like a child remembering their past life and proving they know what they're talking about. There are plenty of docu's on that. I have experience with seeing aura, astral projection, a spirit who dragged me by my arm, being synchronised with one or two individuals in such a way I would stand still and shake paranoidly for a few minutes when a drunk man on a bus tried to rip my girlfriend's leggings off. (me being in another country at that time) Just to name one of the many odd things happening to me. I also conducted intention experiments and they were all succesfull, somehow.
Anywho, this all doesn't mean I'll start a church and claim a higher connection with the divine like those pedophile pope's do, fooling thousands of catholics while they're at it. Not to mention the fact the catholic religion forbids things like freemasonry which is ironic as most, if not all of the positions of power of the catholic church are filled with masons.
No, the difference between me and a religious person is passiveness and not being as easy to manipulate into servitude as they are. they can insult my interests and "beliefs", if you must, and I wouldn't play the 'respectability' and "offended" card. I wouldn't get hostile, butthurt, defensive, you name it. I just got back from a nice evening at one of my muslim friends' place and I'll tell you our 14 year lasting friendship would end just like that if I insulted his religion. He and any other religious person I know wouldn't provide a legitimate argument with the absence of a tense atmosphere, no..their only argument is "do you even read the bible/quran". (implying they decoded and interpreted it correctly).
A respectable argument is one that is logical, makes sense, and can be taken in and accepted by rational consideration, free from peer pressure. > "if 50 million people say a stupid thing, it is still a stupid thing".
Right now it's kinda hard to confront me on a specific subject concerning religion because my "insult" is way too broad. That's because I've gone through too many specific topics with religious ppl and they rarely say something that makes sense. So, new members and ppl I meet in real will just play the offended card and try to bring up the new age stuff, not quite grasping it themselves as of yet. As the "new age movement" is not a religion or originating from one to begin with (although religious scripts do speak of the spiritual growth of our species, creating a new age. But in code.)
The thing with the new age community is that it does not claim absolute understanding of anything, does not claim superiority, does not promote organised systematic opinion structures, but simply love. Repairing the connection of our species and the universe. We're always open to newer, better models of opinion structures and we don't let servitude and absoluteness corrupt our minds as it's just another tool to enslave us. You don't need to be under a religion to be a good person. That's only causing separation. Heck, all religions are the same at their core. But I guess tradition and communal pride weigh in heavily.
I always mention to ppl that I take religious scripts very seriously but not the people who identify themselves by such a religious script and the community around it. The Qu'ran is full of universal knowledge, some parts directly understandable, others coded. (i read bits and parts in the past. And grew up in a christian household so that "do you even read the bible" stuff doesn't work on me)
Shitty nokia lumia browser Crashed 4 times already so as you may I see, I jump from topic to topic.
Oh I was hoping for that you'd bring this up. According to islam, monotheism was the original faith- but it was spoiled throughout history. Now, the least one should admit that logically both are possible. It's possible for monotheism to degrade into politheism and vice versa.
Meditation/inner search being the correct interpretation of praying/external search. As the phrase that everybody knows; "god is within you".
"Indeed we belong to Allah , and indeed to Him we will return." /Quran 2:156/
"To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And to Allah will [all] matters be returned." /3:109/
"...His domain extends over the heavens and the earth." /2:255/
"And to Allah belongs the east and the west. So wherever you [might] turn, there is the Face of Allah . Indeed, Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing." /2:115/
"And We have already created man and know what his soul whispers to him, and We are closer to him than [his] jugular vein." /50:16/
According to the Quran, God has created everything including your soul, which will return to Him, also, He is everywhere, further: we have the fitrah, the 'original inclination to worship God'. Now the Creator can't be one with its creation, but He is omnipresent, so I could say that in a sense, we are part of His Presence. But of course I don't identify God with the universe/nature. But of course, everything is part of His might. It doesn't mean, according to my belief at least, that humans are gods. But no wonder that you feel the presence of God in yourself. After all, He is encompassing everything.
Hope I could explain the difference properly.
So, I don't see why would praying exclude inner development? I think you can be in harmony with the world if you get to know its creator.
As for reincarnation and other non-solidly proven phenomena; I am simply open to it. If I haven't experienced it myself, I'm just open to it if it makes sense and there are some unexplainable events happening like a child remembering their past life and proving they know what they're talking about.
I could just say that maybe satans /or call them demons or whatever you wish/ are whispering to those people and that's why they're saying what they say *shrug*
There are plenty of docu's on that. I have experience with seeing aura, astral projection, a spirit who dragged me by my arm, being synchronised with one or two individuals in such a way I would stand still and shake paranoidly for a few minutes when a drunk man on a bus tried to rip my girlfriend's leggings off. (me being in another country at that time) Just to name one of the many odd things happening to me. I also conducted intention experiments and they were all succesfull, somehow.
Oh well, it also happened to me sometimes that me and a girl I loved, always guessed each others' thoughts, which was a bit creepy after a while. But I wouldn't read too much into it. From a religious- and so, according to you: deluded and sheeple- point of view, I could explain it with satans whispering *shrug* It's not like islam denies the existence of a ...how to put it...other dimensions, that may be interacting with ours.
Anywho, this all doesn't mean I'll start a church and claim a higher connection with the divine like those pedophile pope's do, fooling thousands of catholics while they're at it. Not to mention the fact the catholic religion forbids things like freemasonry which is ironic as most, if not all of the positions of power of the catholic church are filled with masons.
You seem to be overly focused on the catholic church.
No, the difference between me and a religious person is passiveness and not being as easy to manipulate into servitude as they are. they can insult my interests and "beliefs", if you must, and I wouldn't play the 'respectability' and "offended" card. I wouldn't get hostile, butthurt, defensive, you name it.
But you still come off as arrogant and insulting, which you may not care about- nor do I, btw: my convictions are strong enough to allow the luxury of ignoring insults-, but just because you can't be offended, doesn't mean you should insult others who may be more sensitive. If you are so confident, why do you feel the need to purposedly use words like 'sheeple' or 'deluded simpletons' ? Can't you get through your argument in a more civilized manner? Anyway, never mind, it's not like I can insult you back, nor do I have any intention to. I'll just leave this here:
You must be registered for see images
I just got back from a nice evening at one of my muslim friends' place and I'll tell you our 14 year lasting friendship would end just like that if I insulted his religion.
So you never told anyone after years of friendship, 'just like that', that you're done with the person?
He and any other religious person I know wouldn't provide a legitimate argument with the absence of a tense atmosphere, no..their only argument is "do you even read the bible/quran". (implying they decoded and interpreted it correctly).
That's your friends, doesn't mean all are the same. Go to the local mosque and talk to real scholars.
And it was not an argument from my part to ask if you've read the Quran or the Bible, just a question. 'Coz many people who actually read the whole thing- not just certain parts- start believing.
A respectable argument is one that is logical, makes sense, and can be taken in and accepted by rational consideration, free from peer pressure. > "if 50 million people say a stupid thing, it is still a stupid thing".
"Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best." /16:125/
"And it has already come down to you in the Book that when you hear the verses of Allah [recited], they are denied [by them] and ridiculed; so do not sit with them until they enter into another conversation. " /4:140/
"And when you see those who engage in [offensive] discourse concerning Our verses, then turn away from them until they enter into another conversion." /6:68/
"The Muslim who mixes with the people and bears patiently their hurtful words, is better than one who does not mix with people and does not show patience under their abuse."
(Mishkat, Book: Ethics, ch. 'Gentleness, modesty and good behaviour')
So, we have to argue in a logical and respectful manner, but if don't get the same in return, we should turn away. Anyway, you are free to point out which part of my posts don't make sense.
As the "new age movement" is not a religion or originating from one to begin with
Again, wikipedia on New Age, and the definitions of 'religious', disagree.
The thing with the new age community is that it does not claim absolute understanding of anything, does not claim superiority, does not promote organised systematic opinion structures, but simply love. Repairing the connection of our species and the universe. We're always open to newer, better models of opinion structures and we don't let servitude and absoluteness corrupt our minds as it's just another tool to enslave us. You don't need to be under a religion to be a good person. That's only causing separation. Heck, all religions are the same at their core. But I guess tradition and communal pride weigh in heavily.
"And mankind was not but one community [united in religion], but [then] they differed. And if not for a word that preceded from your Lord, it would have been judged between them [immediately] concerning that over which they differ." /10:19/
"Mankind was [of] one religion [before their deviation]; then Allah sent the prophets as bringers of good tidings and warners and sent down with them the Scripture in truth to judge between the people concerning that in which they differed. And none differed over the Scripture except those who were given it - after the clear proofs came to them - out of jealous animosity among themselves. And Allah guided those who believed to the truth concerning that over which they had differed, by His permission. And Allah guides whom He wills to a straight path." /2:213/
"And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ." /5:48/
The Quran gives all the answers as to why are there different religions. And yeah, you don't necessarily need organized religion to be a 'good person': we are all born with the fitrah, a natural instinct common to all humans, which includes basic moral aspects.
I'd share my view if you want but if any wants to take it offensively, better not bother since I don't like heated discussions, nor I believe I'll persuade any. But what I believe is what I believe, don't consider myself brainwashed, I find happiness in it, and I don't find it wrong to question any in it.
If a simple discussion of sharing views you ask. Then you'll get it.
I don't have any problems with people who believe in the afterlife, but it is often used as an excuse to avoid the responsibilities of this life. Some people even use it as an excuse to kill. To some people it is a looming fear of reprisal for what they do in this life. People view the afterlife like some vacation from this existence and ignore the one life they get. It's like relaxing in a hot tub while day dreaming of a hot spring.
What a mess...I decided to join the "fun", as the amount of misconceptions accumulated here has reached a level that needs clarification.
I don't get it. Are you talking about people soothing themselves by saying that if someone is killed, he/she is in a better place now? Because then, what does that have to do with hatred? I don't see how it makes anything worse. You can't bring back the dead regardless of what you believe in, so what do you think should be the correct reaction to death? Don't forget that there are many atheists as well, who don't care much if a stranger dies. And there are religious people who still moan and cry and get depressed if a relative/acquaintance dies, regardless of their faith. You get sad over the death of an infant, and sure it is sad, but you still keep sipping your tea, and it's not like you're gonna give up your comfortable life and let's say, whip yourself for every untimely death that happens in the world. So I just don't get the point of this thread. Are you trying to say that those, who believe in an afterlife, are apathetic towards death? Well my friend, that has nothing to do with the belief in afterlife. As I said, atheists can be apathetic too, and religious people can get sad too.
Also, there are people who choose death, by committing suicide. It is because they want to get rid of the suffering and hardships of this life. Whatever awaits them, whether nothing or hell or heaven, they still think it's better than this life. So what then?
Yes, if you only want to live in the moment. But what's the point of life altogether? If there is any, I think it is to better ourselves, our insight being fixated beyond perishable matters. There is a misconception though, that people believing in the afterlife don't live this life to the fullest. Why do you think that we don't live the life we want? Living to the fullest is different for each person. I'm perfectly fine without alcohol, drugs, dating and stuff. And it's not even about giving these up for a potential reward in the afterlife, but I think it's the best for me in this life as well. It spares me a lot of trouble that I abstain from certain things. (Btw no I'm not indoctrinated, I was not always religious.) You are asking if we allow others to enjoy their lives...I don't see how my belief in afterlife, or anyone's belief in the afterlife, is supposed to affect others' lives, unless we're talking about a terrorist blowing himself up, or the inquisition purifying a soul by burning a person for witchcraft...It's not like the belief in afterlife necessitates any kind of forcefulness. There are rules in secular countries too, and even those religions that don't believe in an afterlife, set rules for their believers. You sound as if the belief in afterlife could be blamed for crimes, or preventing humans from enjoying their lives, but I could reverse the argument and claim that not believing in the afterlife is responsible for more crimes, as the fear of hell and the hope for heaven has a preventive force. So, every coin has two sides.
I suggest you read Camus. Though, you've read Sartre, so I assume you're familiar with Camus as well. Now, the guy took atheism to a different level. He says that there is no purpose in life, so basically the only question is whether to commit suicide or not? Now of course he couldn't give the answer: 'yeah go everyone and kill yourselves', so he said that we still should keep on living. But why? Just because.
This is taking your thoughts to their limit. Saying that there is nothing but this life and we should only live for the moment, in my humbly deluded opinion, is just as dangerous and leads nowhere. If you add that we should give up our ego, be more self conscious, be more understanding...etc- I don't see how are these notions incompatible with the belief in afterlife? The belief in afterlife is a motivation not to give up, and keep striving. One may say, 'Oh but you don't need religion for that': Ok, you don't, but it's still an extra motivation, and never forget the the belief in afterlife is usually embedded in a set of other believes, which can be backed up by an array of arguments and convictions. I don't just believe in God out of fear, or a selfish desire for reward: though I do believe it's only righteous that everyone will be judged based on how they lived. You may say, it's just wishful thinking: but it's still righteous- and therefore, it is reasonable.
Now one may say, it's just rationalizing fear of the unknown. Not really, I can't be sure if I'll go to hell or not. And not believing in hell/heaven is also just rationalizing the unknown, by labeling them as fairytale-. Thus, nothing better than my beliefs. But again, to each his own. Whatever sails your ship.
But as I said, I do not serve God only to avoid punishment and get reward. Otherwise, one could just accuse me of saying that I'm stuck on a low level of moral development- well, if my memory serves, the highest level is when you act out of imperatives, and this is a rather hypothetical level, as the huge majority never reaches it. But back to the point, religions have their own hierarchy of values, and that's why psychologists are not an authority to me when it comes to that. You can rank your values higher- and I'll rank mine in a different manner, but altogether, you can't prove that the belief in afterlife causes people to be any less moral. Especially if one says that morals are all relative.
Not to mention that in my religion, islam, the highest level is when you do good automatically. That doing good has become your nature. That every moment you are aware that God is present, and so you will abstain from doing bad, and will always do what's right. You won't care about earthly rewards or people's opinion- you do good for God. I think it is a form of imperative. Now you may argue, 'but you expect a reward in the afterlife'- well, as I said, it's only righteous, and no, I can't be sure if I'll go to hell or not, but all I know is that I won't suffer any injustice and I'll be judged righteously. In that sense, I act out of righteousness. Also, out of gratitude towards God. Anyway, even if you do good without believing in a god, you do it to make yourself feel better. 'The reward of a good deed is in itself'- which means that you act out of a conviction that you do good, and that what you do is good, and so you'll feel good too. Even categorical imperatives, like that of Kant, imply practical usefulness, so in the end, regardless of what conviction you act upon, it will have an additional value- it's not like you can abandon your conscience anyway.
Anyway, let me quote the Quran and some islamic thoughts, just 'coz I think it fits here.
“Work for the world as if you are going to live forever. Work for the hereafter as if you are going to die tomorrow.”- so it's not like the belief in afterlife is supposed to make us apathetic towards this world. But there are many things you don't choose and can't help, so in any case it's best to take calamities with dignity. Sure, religious people may say that the deceased one is in a better place- but how is it any degrading? Would it be better to say that 'oh it's sad, but that's how life is, there is no hope' ? Especially that you can't know either, for sure, what's beyond death. And again, it's not even rationalizing fear, at least from my point of view. I'm not afraid of death- never been. I'm just convinced that there is an afterlife: but I'm still afraid to go to hell, but by having hope in paradise, I'm not rationalizing the fear of hell. Let's say you write a test at school. You don't know the questions in advance, but you do your best. You try to answer the questions. But you can't be sure if you fail or pass. But you were sure that there will be a test:so, just by hoping that you'll pass, you didn't rationalize anything.
"Keep the world in your hand, not your heart"- meaning: use the worldly things to do good, but don't take them as idols and don't be obsessed with them.
"Whoever desires the life of this world and its adornments - We fully repay them for their deeds therein, and they therein will not be deprived." /Sura Hud, 15th aya/
Which means, you can live for the moment, but then that's all you'll get. After all, iT's only fair. If that's al you ask for, that's all you'll get. But, you'll get what you asked for, so noone should complain.
Anyway, if these are just rhetoric questions, why did you post them on a forum where people will reply, and you reply them too...
Nice stereotyping and generalizing. Why woudl I secretely hope that people around me will go to hell? I can't even be sure if I'll go to hell...Noone can know what's in others' hearts, but God. That's the whole point, and you missed it perfectly. No wonder, a nonbeliever will never really understand a believer, but then, how does it make you feel better to attack views made up by yourself, that have not much to do with real faith?
Well, at least there is some truth in this. But even so, I don't see what's wrong with wanting an afterlife similar to this world, but with a few extras? Anyway, noone knows what heaven will be like ~
"The concept that there is nothing after this life, is popular with those who want to live for the moment, do whatever they want, and believe noone but themselves will make them account for their deeds." /Bakame/
You don't believe either that you are headed to hell- the only difference is that you don't believe in heaven either.
And I can't emphasize enough, that I can't be sure if I'll go to heaven and hell. Even the most pious persons can fail at the end of their lives.
Says the guy who couldn't even refute that his own spiritual beliefs and New Age movement are of religious nature.
Also, if my memory serves, you believe in reincarnation, right? So you also believe there is somethign more than just this life. In which case, I don't see how are you any better? "Coz I bring respectable arguments". Sorry but calling all the religious people simpletons, is not a respectable argument. You expect respectable arguments when you don't respect religious beliefs? "I don't respect religious beliefs coz they can't bring any respectable arguments."- That's circular reasoning. And what is a respectable argument for you in the first place? I could also just comfortably claim that I've never seen you ever bringing a 'respectable argument'- it all boils down to what you deem to be respectable. So far, it seems you don't respect religions in general- apart from your own beliefs, of course- so in the end, no matter what argument a religious person would bring to you, that wouldn't be respectable.
You may say, 'oh I conduct experiments with my gf and they work for most of the time'. Fine, and I feel the guidance of God in my every day life, and my prayers are answered in one way or another. *shrug*
'Oh but I have scientific proof that my beliefs are correct. *posts a video*'- Fine, there are scientists as well who interpret the data accumulated, as conclusive for the existence of god *posts a video*
We can play this game, but just because you haven't found 'respectable arguments', that doesn't mean there aren't any. Maybe you didn't look deep enough, or not from the right sources (f.e, have you read original religious scriptures?)
Inbefore you mock me for trying 'too hard'- like last time-, well, at least I respect you enough to try hard, despite the respect is not mutual Lol
I'm not saying religious people are apathetic towards death. I am saying it is used as an unrealistic escape from reality. At worst it's used as an excuse to kill (religious terrorists) and make this reality even worse. It is used as a fear motivator to force people to "be kind," but is intrinsically self absorbed. Fear is a temporary motivator at best. Many organized religious utilize that fear to manipulate believers for monetary gain. You say that people who don't believe in an afterlife are deluded, but you have no scientific evidence to offer in your beliefs. The unwavering belief in some multidimensional plane of existence that exists beyond the construct of time, where entrance is based on your deeds is delusional, if not bordering on some shared psychosis. How do you judge the deeds of an infant? Sure it's easy to judge the deeds of the Islamic extremist that decapitated a child, but it is impossible to judge what that infant could have been. It could have been a Nobel Peace Prize laureate or just another misguided terrorist.
Hate is reality. It is caused by misery, dissatisfaction, and lack of compassion. It isn't caused by any devil or malingering negative spiritual force save one's own mind. I agree that there are cruel religious and atheist peoples. To me that is proof there is no god or afterlife. People peddle misery no matter what their spiritual and religious background. Sure I sit an drink my tea in the morning and contemplate the world. But you don't know what I do most of the day.
Just take a look at how I do it and you'll get it (go advanced and look at my post).
Oh I was hoping for that you'd bring this up. According to islam, monotheism was the original faith- but it was spoiled throughout history. Now, the least one should admit that logically both are possible. It's possible for monotheism to degrade into politheism and vice versa.
"Indeed we belong to Allah , and indeed to Him we will return." /Quran 2:156/
"To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And to Allah will [all] matters be returned." /3:109/
"...His domain extends over the heavens and the earth." /2:255/
"And to Allah belongs the east and the west. So wherever you [might] turn, there is the Face of Allah . Indeed, Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing." /2:115/
"And We have already created man and know what his soul whispers to him, and We are closer to him than [his] jugular vein." /50:16/
According to the Quran, God has created everything including your soul, which will return to Him, also, He is everywhere, further: we have the fitrah, the 'original inclination to worship God'. Now the Creator can't be one with its creation, but He is omnipresent, so I could say that in a sense, we are part of His Presence. But of course I don't identify God with the universe/nature. But of course, everything is part of His might. It doesn't mean, according to my belief at least, that humans are gods. But no wonder that you feel the presence of God in yourself. After all, He is encompassing everything.
Hope I could explain the difference properly.
So, I don't see why would praying exclude inner development? I think you can be in harmony with the world if you get to know its creator.
I could just say that maybe satans /or call them demons or whatever you wish/ are whispering to those people and that's why they're saying what they say *shrug*
Oh well, it also happened to me sometimes that me and a girl I loved, always guessed each others' thoughts, which was a bit creepy after a while. But I wouldn't read too much into it. From a religious- and so, according to you: deluded and sheeple- point of view, I could explain it with satans whispering *shrug* It's not like islam denies the existence of a ...how to put it...other dimensions, that may be interacting with ours.
You seem to be overly focused on the catholic church.
But you still come off as arrogant and insulting, which you may not care about- nor do I, btw: my convictions are strong enough to allow the luxury of ignoring insults-, but just because you can't be offended, doesn't mean you should insult others who may be more sensitive. If you are so confident, why do you feel the need to purposedly use words like 'sheeple' or 'deluded simpletons' ? Can't you get through your argument in a more civilized manner? Anyway, never mind, it's not like I can insult you back, nor do I have any intention to. I'll just leave this here:
You must be registered for see images
So you never told anyone after years of friendship, 'just like that', that you're done with the person?
That's your friends, doesn't mean all are the same. Go to the local mosque and talk to real scholars.
And it was not an argument from my part to ask if you've read the Quran or the Bible, just a question. 'Coz many people who actually read the whole thing- not just certain parts- start believing.
"Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best." /16:125/
"And it has already come down to you in the Book that when you hear the verses of Allah [recited], they are denied [by them] and ridiculed; so do not sit with them until they enter into another conversation. " /4:140/
"And when you see those who engage in [offensive] discourse concerning Our verses, then turn away from them until they enter into another conversion." /6:68/
"The Muslim who mixes with the people and bears patiently their hurtful words, is better than one who does not mix with people and does not show patience under their abuse."
(Mishkat, Book: Ethics, ch. 'Gentleness, modesty and good behaviour')
So, we have to argue in a logical and respectful manner, but if don't get the same in return, we should turn away. Anyway, you are free to point out which part of my posts don't make sense.
Again, wikipedia on New Age, and the definitions of 'religious', disagree.
"And mankind was not but one community [united in religion], but [then] they differed. And if not for a word that preceded from your Lord, it would have been judged between them [immediately] concerning that over which they differ." /10:19/
"Mankind was [of] one religion [before their deviation]; then Allah sent the prophets as bringers of good tidings and warners and sent down with them the Scripture in truth to judge between the people concerning that in which they differed. And none differed over the Scripture except those who were given it - after the clear proofs came to them - out of jealous animosity among themselves. And Allah guided those who believed to the truth concerning that over which they had differed, by His permission. And Allah guides whom He wills to a straight path." /2:213/
"And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ." /5:48/
The Quran gives all the answers as to why are there different religions. And yeah, you don't necessarily need organized religion to be a 'good person': we are all born with the fitrah, a natural instinct common to all humans, which includes basic moral aspects.
I'm not talking about monotheism though. I'm talking about experiencing the divine directly and not worshipping it out of ignorance.
I'm talking about understanding our solar system through astrology/stronomy, and having a higher sense of oneness with the earth, not an external phenomena that wants you to get on your knees. I'm talking about inner search, not external search.
I say ''god is within you'' because I know people won't get it if you don't use the word ''god''. Our understanding of that word is different. In my view, ''god'' can be used in other words like ''love'', ''growth'' (as the cycle of creation (plants) perpetuates), and ''awareness'' in the general sense. It's something incorporated in the fabric of our universe and our consciousness. Not something external you give praise to but something you're part of. Like you're a drop in the ocean that is ''god'' if you must. The answer and allknowingness is already within you, you just have to search for it yourself and not give praise to something you can't grasp even.
That whispering in people's ears is religious logic. You and that girl's energy were simply synchronized. You don't have to bring up satan because you have no clue what's going on..that sounds like how a person from the centuries ago would respond.
A child supposedly reincarnated realizes such things through vivid memories and sometimes remembers things his/her parents can use as solid information to try and track that said person their child supposedly was in its previous life. You use the word demons/jinns because it is something you have no understanding of so it must be evil/taboo whatever. If I say I was in bed dreaming at night and I suddenly woke up out of my dream but still with my eyes closed and I heard a familiar voice loud and clear in my head, knowing it came internally and not externally, and the emotions that were felt whilest tuning into me was all done by a djinn? No lol as soon as I grabbed my phone I got a message from my hypersensitive gf saying; ''did you get my call''? ..we humans can do much more than you think. The biggest mistery is our consciousness. Our potential is limitness when it comes to internal search. External search like religious prayer only traps and puts a halt to our potential.
sigh.. I did not say or mean that I was done with that friend. I said that if I ever brought up an opinion that insults his religion, he'd make a huge ruckus of it and it would ruin our friendship, perhaps.
Not just my friends. I went to a mosque xd I did hear scholars speak, and they're all the same. All just promote servitude and praise. And then lets not even mention the fact the double standards their women suffer. That upper part of the mosque was absolutely beautiful with tiles depicting cymatic symbols/sacred geometry they don't even understand themselves, and beautiful lights and such. And then the area for the women downstairs had plastic chairs and a sh1tty room.
New Agers promote love, not a system. Organised religions are systems. Lets not get fooled by wikipedia.
I arrived at direct dismissal of religious logic as I kept encountering people with a simple, unlogical argument mixed with this arrogant, confident and highly prideful attitude towards their unwavering faith. They keep quoting parts from their religious script, repeating the name of their allmightiest in their interpretation as if they have a good grasp on its meaning..instead of looking at their own claims from a bigger bubble of thought. Blame your fellow muslims for their cockyness and dismissal of any opinion that clashes with their religion for my attitude towards them. Same things with christians; my dad knows jacksh1t about buddhism but he dismisses it as worshipping pagan gods as they make statues of buddha which is prohibited in both yours and his religion. Its plain dumb stupidity and brainwashery. Same goes for when you talk about demons whispering in your ears.
As for me as a person outside the internet; I can bet you I am a better person than most of my muslim friends. I never stole a thing, I treat women as how I would want my mother to be treated, I try and form a connection between esoteric topics and organised religions as to bring up a nice chat with religious friends in which we compare and connect our differing opinions. They wouldn't do that themselves and when some dumbass christian immediately dismisses cymatics, astrotheology, alchemy and such; I just leave them be because I know it's pointless to argue to a sheep. I put that part of them aside and focus on their personality. A very brainwashed christian friend of mine is one of the kindest, attentive individuals I know. So I never ever argue with him.
Oh, and mentioning the catholic church was to make my point more clear. Just an example. Idk how that makes me 'overly focused' on it.
It may be due to my simplistic religious mind, but I don't get this reasoning. How can something be a motivation and a compel as well at the same time? Unless you define motivation as one's own will compelling the person to act against the fear. In which case, the compel stems from inside the person, not forced upon him by others. Death itself cannot be said to force anyone. Such phrasing would be ridiculous. It may be the fear of death: but that's not forced upon the person. It's just the person's own subjective reflection to an objective phenomenon. Noone's forcing anyone. And now you can't blame the fear of death itself, either. After all, it stems from the instinct to survive. You can only blame the person, who, out of a fear of death, does evil deeds. But in that case, the question is, what if one's life is imminently threatened, and so the person instinctively acts upon a strong feeling of death? F.e, fire breaks out in a building, and people try to escape, they're panicking and some people are trampled to death. I think you can only blame the people for a lack of self-control: you can't blame the instinct to live, which is an objective characteristic of us.
Why did you use quotation marks for kind? Are you trying to say that religious people, who believe in afterlife, can't be really kind to others? Why not? It is very well possible to internalize the morals of religious teachings regardless of a belief in afterlife. Don't ignore other factors like rationality or convention, that also form one's personality to be kind.
So religious people can be kind for real, not just act kindly out of fear or selfishness. And as I said, even if you act upon other moral standards like imperatives, there are additional values present as well. F.e, usefulness, or a positive feeling of a high self-esteem that stems from your own self-justification. Which is also 'intrinsically self absorbed'. There is no 'good' in itself, without additional values. F.e : You give alms to a beggar, coz you are such a good person. But you can't deny that it is useful for the beggar- and that's why you feel good, that you could be useful for someone. You may say 'oh no I don't want to be useful, I only care about being good'- but you are lying to yourself, then. Now you may say: 'but I don't expect any reward, there wasn't any bit of selfish motivation in my act' : but then, why don't you just burn that money? That'd also be an act without any reward or selfish motivation, right? Yet, noone would really believe that it's a good deed. Also, how do you know when do you good? Isn't it by feeling good about it? Then you do it for that good feeling. Which is selfish in a way, too. Then, you may say that you do good to others without feelings, or even when it hurts you- but then, you still do good coz you are convinced that's what you have to do: and so you act to justify that your conviction is right. Which is an additional vlaue.
You also ignore that religions also teach things like 'treat others the way you want to be treated'. You may add that one doesn't need religious beliefs to follow such principles: but that's not the point: the point is that believing in the afterlife doesn't mean that one can't rationally admit to such principles and internalize high moral standards.
Now if you're thinking that it's a higher level of morality to do good without religion, than with religion: as I said, such ranking is not authoritative to me, but you can think what you want too, of course, while I'll keep thinking that doing things for God is the best way. Gratitude is just as big a motivation. Also, religious principles are supposed to be sacred and therefore, not much changeable: so I'll always do good, even if the subjective morals of secular individuals change.
Let me again refer to Kant: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
While I'm following religious teachings -not only out of a belief in the afterlife, but as well as gratitude to God, also out of rationality and also out of having adopted other values as well. F. e righteousness- I also live by that categorical imperative. As I said, I can't be sure if I'll go to hell or heaven: I'm only sure that God will be righteous. Now I can't expect God to reward me: it's His own righteousness that gives us the hope for a reward, not our selfish desire to be rewarded. So as you can see, the logic of believers and non believers are opposite. Now one can ask the good old question: would I still serve God if He expected me to worship Him and there would be no afterlife at all? Now that touches on the already mentioned categorical imperative. Even without a reward or punishment, I should still feel grateful for this life, and religious teachings would still be the best to follow. And let's not forget, that the hypothetical question also presumes that God actually does exist.
So, I don't know what personal experiences and interactions gave you such ideas about people's belief in teh afterlife, but that's not how it works for me.
I believe in God, regardless of afterlife. Also, I never was overly afraid of death, and I never cared much about living forever, so I didn't start to believe in God only out of a selfish desire for a reward. But no rational person would choose hell over heaven (once he/she believes there is any kind of hell or heaven in the afterlife).
And again, it's not like people only believe in an afterlife coz they are afraid of death. IT's just a stereotype popular with atheists. Atheists think they're cool coz they don't need an "imaginary big brother" or "fairy tales to comfort themselves." Well, you still need your tea to make yourself feel better And once more: not believing in the afterlife is also just a form of comfort: saying that 'nothing happens atfer you die, so no need to be afraid of death' is not much better imo than saying 'I hope I'll go to heaven'. And again: I'm not afraid of death. If anything, I'm afraid to go to hell only .If you knew that there is heaven and hell, you would also be afraid to go to hell. Any rational person would choose heaven. So the only thing you may bring up is that I can't know if there is a hell or heaven, so there is no reason to think about it. Well, I do have a reason to think about it, as I believe in God and He is righteous, so it is reasonable to me that He will judge people accordingly. It may not make sense to you, but it makes sense to me. But if you think that my beliefs are irrational: then don't say that I'm trying to rationalize death, coz that'd be a contradiction, no? And again, I'm not afraid to die. Why would I? if there is nothing after death: then why would I be afraid? But if there is an afterlife: I'm only afraid of hell, not death in general, so I think your whole premise is flawed.
Not necessarily. It can be a life-long motivator. Also, noone's forcing me to be kind, and I'm not living in terror or anything like that. Don't make up things. You're addressing points you make up.
Many organized religious utilize that fear to manipulate believers for monetary gain.
There studies that suggest that afterlife is possible. You can find plenty. As for their scientific value, everyone shoudl decide that for themselves.
You must be registered for see links
. How do you judge the deeds of an infant? Sure it's easy to judge the deeds of the Islamic extremist that decapitated a child, but it is impossible to judge what that infant could have been. It could have been a Nobel Peace Prize laureate or just another misguided terrorist.
Simple. Acording to islam, infants won't be judged, but will go to paradise.
As I said, God and His judgement will be righteous. Therefore, it's a reasonable explanation. Hence it is sufficient for me.
Hate is reality. It is caused by misery, dissatisfaction, and lack of compassion. It isn't caused by any devil or malingering negative spiritual force save one's own mind.
"What comes to you of good is from Allah , but what comes to you of evil, O man, is from yourself." /surah 4:79/
" Indeed, the soul is a persistent enjoiner of evil..." /12:53/
I agree that there are cruel religious and atheist peoples. To me that is proof there is no god or afterlife. People peddle misery no matter what their spiritual and religious background. Sure I sit an drink my tea in the morning and contemplate the world. But you don't know what I do most of the day.
And why do you think I'm worshipping 'the divine' out of ignorance? 'Coz all religious people - despite, again: New Age is strongly of religious nature- must be ignorant by your definition?
I'm talking about understanding our solar system through astrology/stronomy, and having a higher sense of oneness with the earth, not an external phenomena that wants you to get on your knees. I'm talking about inner search, not external search.
"Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and earth, and the alternation of the night and the day, and the [great] ships which sail through the sea with that which benefits people, and what Allah has sent down from the heavens of rain, giving life thereby to the earth after its lifelessness and dispersing therein every [kind of] moving creature, and [His] directing of the winds and the clouds controlled between the heaven and the earth are signs for a people who use reason." / 2:164/
Sure it is useful to study the universe. To me the incredible amount and variety of data present in the universe, points towards God. But not inside. However, there are islamic sects, like the sufis, who also focus on mysticism and esoterism.
The thoughts of Rumi or Iqbal, f.e, are appealing, but one shouldn't be overly obsessed with his/her own ego. Or else, one day the person might claim that he/she doesn't even need god anymore. Which you'd probably call 'spiritual development and gaining awarness'. Or whatever terminology you use. But I find it weird that some people place themselves on the same rank with God. Like, what can you do on your own?
"Does man think that he is to be left to wander without an aim? Was he not a spermdrop ejaculated?" /75:36-37/
You couldn't even have been born on your own. And you're gonna die. So how can you claim to be divine? In what sense?
Anyway, I never said that inner research is not important. If you feel complete with yourself, fine, I guess? The Quran also says that God doesn't need humans, so you can stray on your on if you wish. Then, you'll get your full rewad in this life. If you feel that you have achieved all you wanted in your life (((- out of God's grace, despite you're denying it *cough*-))) well, then there's your reward. So really, don't bother with God. Forget Him and He will 'forget' you too in the hereafter, in which you don't believe either, so another reason for you not to care. Though you still seem to care to ridicule religions.
I say ''god is within you'' because I know people won't get it if you don't use the word ''god''. Our understanding of that word is different. In my view, ''god'' can be used in other words like ''love'', ''growth'' (as the cycle of creation (plants) perpetuates), and ''awareness'' in the general sense. It's something incorporated in the fabric of our universe and our consciousness.
I think I'm getting the difference you're talking about, however, I can't help but be reminded of the fitrah that I have already mentioned. It is 'something incorporated in the fabric our consciousness/soul'. So what you are talking about, is not that far from what I'm talking about. But for some reason you seem to think that praying is something humiliatng and degrading, and that it keeps you from being loving...And I don't see how?
Not something external you give praise to but something you're part of. Like you're a drop in the ocean that is ''god'' if you must. The answer and allknowingness is already within you, you just have to search for it yourself and not give praise to something you can't grasp even.
I don't need to grasp everything. I don't even fully grasp how a PC works. Or how quantum mechanics work. Or how women work (this was supposed to be a comic relief )
But I have all I need to know. Of course it doesn't mean I'll stop learning more. The more I learn, the more I believe. So far, whatever I've learned, made sense to me.
And for the 4th time (if my memory serves), what you say, in my vocabulary it's the fitrah. It's within ourselves and I had to recognize it when I was learning about islam. So yes, religion also has an inner reflexion.
That whispering in people's ears is religious logic. You and that girl's energy were simply synchronized. You don't have to bring up satan because you have no clue what's going on..that sounds like how a person from the centuries ago would respond.
Oh, ah, hah. (._. ) Guess what, I'v read Daniel Coleman, on emotinal intelligence and how the social brains of ours are synchronized- but nothing spiritual or esoteristic stuff is going on, either. There is an even less complicated explanation: if you've been talking a lot to someone and have been knowing each other for years, you get to learn the other person's reactions and general behavior and chain of thoughts. Me mentioning satans whispering was just one of the possibilities. Anyway, even you mentioned some kind of ghosts/spirits, so how is that not a medieval response? Double standards again?
A child supposedly reincarnated realizes such things through vivid memories and sometimes remembers things his/her parents can use as solid information to try and track that said person their child supposedly was in its previous life. You use the word demons/jinns because it is something you have no understanding of so it must be evil/taboo whatever.
First of all, a demon / jinn is not necessary evil...At least not in islam.
Anyway, even if you use the word 'reincarnation', you still didn't explain either how is this 'reincarnation' working, how does it make people remember, so you are also using an empty word to label a phenomenon of which you have no detailed knowledge either.
If I say I was in bed dreaming at night and I suddenly woke up out of my dream but still with my eyes closed and I heard a familiar voice loud and clear in my head, knowing it came internally and not externally, and the emotions that were felt whilest tuning into me was all done by a djinn? No lol as soon as I grabbed my phone I got a message from my hypersensitive gf saying; ''did you get my call''?
From my point of view, if you have a connection with God Almighty, then He is enough for you. I'm actually liberated -well, probably not fully, as I'm still learning, but gradually - from the fear of humans, fear of loss, and the idols of greed, hatred and such. What more should I want? To learn how to levitate objects with my mind?
You are still assuming that prayer is all about asking God to help us whilst passively being sunk in by a feeling of powerlessness.
"God changes not what is in a people, until they change what is in themselves. " /13:11/
So, you have to do your own part.
Also, prayer -at least to me-, is more about giving. Giving gratitude, instead of asking. Sure I ask guidance, strength and such, but I don't see how it is limiting my potential? I was more of a mess when I didn't use to pray.
sigh.. I did not say or mean that I was done with that friend.
Oh, it's great you actually visited a mosque. But unless you've spoken all the scholars in the world, don't you think you shouldn't generalize? My scholar gave logical answers to all of my questions, otherwise I wouldn't even have kept on learning, of course.
And then lets not even mention the fact the double standards their women suffer. That upper part of the mosque was absolutely beautiful with tiles depicting cymatic symbols/sacred geometry they don't even understand themselves, and beautiful lights and such. And then the area for the women downstairs had plastic chairs and a sh1tty room.
Well, that shouldn't be like that. In the mosque I visit, the women's room is about the same as the men's area: both are pretty humble. Just the carpet and some columns and a sofa with chairs...The only difference is that women's room is much smaller: but it's coz only a few women frequent the mosque. So maybe the reason why they don't care to buy better stuff in your place, is coz there is no need.
New Agers promote love, not a system. Organised religions are systems. Lets not get fooled by wikipedia.
I) What makes you think that systems can't promote love?
II) I never said that organized religions are not systems. I only said that New Age has a religious nature too, by which I didn't mean to imply that it has a hierarchy, but I was simply talking about its beliefs.
Let's dismiss wikipedia, and take an online dictionary instead, if you wish:
You must be registered for see links
religion
The belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers, regarded as creating and governing the universe
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion
A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usu. involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code for the conduct of human affairs.
________
Religion may refer to institualized religions too, but not necessarily. Based on broader definitions, I consider New Age as a religious movement, but we can agree to disagree, if you wish.
And you still seem to project your prejudice against the catholic church, to all other religions. And don't forget that it's not obligatory for anyone to join the church.
I arrived at direct dismissal of religious logic as I kept encountering people with a simple, unlogical argument mixed with this arrogant, confident and highly prideful attitude
What's the point of faith if it's not unwavering? Now it's another question that first one has to learn and gain knowledge, but some people may accept reasonings and evidences that you may dismiss and vice versa. We are all different. Some people need more evidence, and to some people, nothing is enough.
They keep quoting parts from their religious script,
I only kept quoting stuff so that noone can blame me for making up things on my own. Also, to show that the Quran has answers to your questions, whether you accept its answers or not, but in any case, what you say, is not that incompatible with what the Quran says. It's just we interpret religious scripts differently I guess. It's fine if you keep claiming that religious people's interpretation is deluded, and yours is correct: it's only fair that you can do that.
repeating the name of their allmightiest in their interpretation as if they have a good grasp on its meaning..instead of looking at their own claims from a bigger bubble of thought.
Well I wonder if they've acually read the whole Quran themselves? Are they reading and studying it every day?
Same things with christians; my dad knows jacksh1t about buddhism but he dismisses it as worshipping pagan gods as they make statues of buddha which is prohibited in both yours and his religion.
But islam says that God sent prophets to each nation, and so muslism shouldn't defame the prophets of other religions, as we can't be sure if the one we'd badmouth, may be a real prophet! Actually there are people who say that Buddha was also a prophet of Allah, some people identify him with Luqman from teh Quran. (Look him up if you wish).
I myself, have read complete works of Plato and Aristotle recently, and some of the things they say are pretty compatible with islamic teachings (no wonder muslim medieval philosophers liked especially Aristotle), and I was wondering if Sokrates (the master of Plato) was another prophet, whose teachings were altered by his desciples. Well, we can't be sure.
And yeah, making such sculptures is not allowed, so what? We can't make statues of Muhammad either.
Its plain dumb stupidity and brainwashery. Same goes for when you talk about demons whispering in your ears.
I don't know when demons are whispering in my ears. But it's possible they do sometimes. You also mentioned some spirit dragging your arm and other stuff like that, how is that different? Gee...
As for me as a person outside the internet; I can bet you I am a better person than most of my muslim friends.
Good for you? I was not always religious either, and I also considered myself to be more decent and honest than most of the religious people I know. Now I've learnt to assume the best of others. Each person has something to be respected for, something to learn from them. They may be better in way I don't know of.
And noone said that muslims are perfect, or that believing in God automatically makes you the next Mother Theresa...
I never stole a thing, I treat women as how I would want my mother to be treated,
"And give the relative his right, and [also] the poor and the traveler, and do not spend wastefully." /17:26/
"And give full measure when you measure, and weigh with an even balance. That is the best [way] and best in result." /17:35/
"We have enjoined on man kindness to his parents; in pain did his mother bear him, and in pain did she give him birth" (46:15).
"Thy Lord hath decreed that ye worship none but Him, and that ye be kind to parents. Whether one or both of them attain old age in thy life, say not to them a word of contempt, nor repel them, but address them in terms of honor. And out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility, and say: ‘My Lord! bestow on them Thy Mercy even as they cherished me in childhood' "(17:23-24).
1. The Prophet Muhammad said, may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him: Your Heaven lies under the feet of your mother (Ahmad, Nasai).
2. A man came to the Prophet and said, ‘O Messenger of God! Who among the people is the most worthy of my good companionship? The Prophet said: Your mother. The man said, ‘Then who?' The Prophet said: Then your mother. The man further asked, ‘Then who?' The Prophet said: Then your mother. The man asked again, ‘Then who?' The Prophet said: Then your father. (Bukhari, Muslim).
3. Abu Usaid Saidi said: We were once sitting with Rasulullah when a man from the tribe of Salmah came and said to him: O Messenger of Allah! do my parents have rights over me even after they have died? And Rasulullah said: Yes. You must pray to Allah to bless them with His Forgiveness and Mercy, fulfill the promises they made to anyone, and respect their relations and their friends (Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah).
4. Abdullah ibn Amr related that the Messenger of Allah said: The major sins are to believe that Allah has partners, to disobey one's parents, to commit murder, and to bear false witness (Bukhari, Muslim).
5. It is narrated by Asma bint Abu Bakr that during the treaty of Hudaibiyah, her mother, who was then pagan, came to see her from Makkah. Asma informed the Messenger of Allah of her arrival and also that she needed help. He said: Be good to your mother (Bukhari, Muslim).
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "The best among you are those who treat their wives in the best manner." - Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 217
As you see, the problem is exactly when people don't internalize the morals of religious teachings.
I try and form a connection between esoteric topics and organised religions as to bring up a nice chat with religious friends in which we compare and connect our differing opinions.
Maybe coz the same way some people say that religions have no scientific proof to back up their teachings, they or others may refute astrotheology and alchemy on the same basis, that they are not scientific enough? We are living in a world where science has taken the role of religion. (*waits for people to misinterpret my words*)
I just leave them be because I know it's pointless to argue to a sheep.
You don't have to argue the 'sheep' personally, you can read the Quran for yourself and look up scholarly explanations online. If you've already done so, then it can't be helped.
.
Oh, and mentioning the catholic church was to make my point more clear. Just an example. Idk how that makes me 'overly focused' on it.
Not necessarily. It can be a life-long motivator. Also, noone's forcing me to be kind, and I'm not living in terror or anything like that. Don't make up things. You're addressing points you make up.
It's not made up. Statistically fear only lasts around 30 days as a motivator. It's why alcoholics will quit drinking after their DUI, but within the proceeding months leading up to their court date they go back to old habits. It's why people bargain with God, but revert to their old ways once they get what they want. An example I hear often, "I'll go back to church if you can get me out of this." You may argue that is a low stage of spiritual development, but few people are enlightened.
Many companies/organizations also gain money from people who only live for the moment.
Yeah, but their purpose is to provide material possessions. Walmart isn't hiding behind some guise of greater good, or attempting to illicit some existential meaning through divine word for profit. You go to a store to buy something you want. If you are trying to say that church/synagogue/mosques are just stores where people can buy hope I won't argue with you.
There studies that suggest that afterlife is possible. You can find plenty. As for their scientific value, everyone shoudl decide that for themselves.
Near death experiences, life after death experiences, all of these are shown to be one of two things: neurochemical reactions that occur as oxygen is deprived from the brain during the dying process or the person was lying. There are whole circles of people who make money on their experiences with life after death. Most of these experiences occur within the temporal lobe and can be replicated with electrodes. Another example would be auto-erotic asphyxiation; oxygen deprivation leads to feelings of euphoria. Euphoria could be easily construed as heaven if you knew were dying.
Simple. Acording to islam, infants won't be judged, but will go to paradise.
As I said, God and His judgement will be righteous. Therefore, it's a reasonable explanation. Hence it is sufficient for me.
This is the example of using the afterlife as an escape from reality. Humans fear death because it's the cessation of their attachments. Some people fear it so much they created the afterlife delusion as a way to placate their fears. It is difficult to think this infant's life was cut short, but if I believe he is going to a paradise after death it soothes my anxiety. Reality of the animal world is ugly and humans evolved to meet their personal needs above others. I have hope that humans can one day evolve to an enlightened state, but it starts with seeing reality for what it is. Once you see reality, then you can work to improve it.
Never said it is.
"What comes to you of good is from Allah , but what comes to you of evil, O man, is from yourself." /surah 4:79/
" Indeed, the soul is a persistent enjoiner of evil..." /12:53/
God created good and evil (whatever those subjective definitions are). That quote doesn't make sense. Gandhi said that to be truly faithful one had to look at their faith with the eyes of a child. It's true, because it's not based on rational logic or evidence. It's circumstantial and based on hope and belief.
It may be due to my simplistic religious mind, but I don't get this reasoning. How can something be a motivation and a compel as well at the same time? Unless you define motivation as one's own will compelling the person to act against the fear. In which case, the compel stems from inside the person, not forced upon him by others. Death itself cannot be said to force anyone. Such phrasing would be ridiculous. It may be the fear of death: but that's not forced upon the person. It's just the person's own subjective reflection to an objective phenomenon. Noone's forcing anyone. And now you can't blame the fear of death itself, either. After all, it stems from the instinct to survive. You can only blame the person, who, out of a fear of death, does evil deeds. But in that case, the question is, what if one's life is imminently threatened, and so the person instinctively acts upon a strong feeling of death? F.e, fire breaks out in a building, and people try to escape, they're panicking and some people are trampled to death. I think you can only blame the people for a lack of self-control: you can't blame the instinct to live, which is an objective characteristic of us.
Why did you use quotation marks for kind? Are you trying to say that religious people, who believe in afterlife, can't be really kind to others? Why not? It is very well possible to internalize the morals of religious teachings regardless of a belief in afterlife. Don't ignore other factors like rationality or convention, that also form one's personality to be kind.
So religious people can be kind for real, not just act kindly out of fear or selfishness. And as I said, even if you act upon other moral standards like imperatives, there are additional values present as well. F.e, usefulness, or a positive feeling of a high self-esteem that stems from your own self-justification. Which is also 'intrinsically self absorbed'. There is no 'good' in itself, without additional values. F.e : You give alms to a beggar, coz you are such a good person. But you can't deny that it is useful for the beggar- and that's why you feel good, that you could be useful for someone. You may say 'oh no I don't want to be useful, I only care about being good'- but you are lying to yourself, then. Now you may say: 'but I don't expect any reward, there wasn't any bit of selfish motivation in my act' : but then, why don't you just burn that money? That'd also be an act without any reward or selfish motivation, right? Yet, noone would really believe that it's a good deed. Also, how do you know when do you good? Isn't it by feeling good about it? Then you do it for that good feeling. Which is selfish in a way, too. Then, you may say that you do good to others without feelings, or even when it hurts you- but then, you still do good coz you are convinced that's what you have to do: and so you act to justify that your conviction is right. Which is an additional vlaue.
You also ignore that religions also teach things like 'treat others the way you want to be treated'. You may add that one doesn't need religious beliefs to follow such principles: but that's not the point: the point is that believing in the afterlife doesn't mean that one can't rationally admit to such principles and internalize high moral standards.
Now if you're thinking that it's a higher level of morality to do good without religion, than with religion: as I said, such ranking is not authoritative to me, but you can think what you want too, of course, while I'll keep thinking that doing things for God is the best way. Gratitude is just as big a motivation. Also, religious principles are supposed to be sacred and therefore, not much changeable: so I'll always do good, even if the subjective morals of secular individuals change.
Let me again refer to Kant: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
While I'm following religious teachings -not only out of a belief in the afterlife, but as well as gratitude to God, also out of rationality and also out of having adopted other values as well. F. e righteousness- I also live by that categorical imperative. As I said, I can't be sure if I'll go to hell or heaven: I'm only sure that God will be righteous. Now I can't expect God to reward me: it's His own righteousness that gives us the hope for a reward, not our selfish desire to be rewarded. So as you can see, the logic of believers and non believers are opposite. Now one can ask the good old question: would I still serve God if He expected me to worship Him and there would be no afterlife at all? Now that touches on the already mentioned categorical imperative. Even without a reward or punishment, I should still feel grateful for this life, and religious teachings would still be the best to follow. And let's not forget, that the hypothetical question also presumes that God actually does exist.
So, I don't know what personal experiences and interactions gave you such ideas about people's belief in teh afterlife, but that's not how it works for me.
I believe in God, regardless of afterlife. Also, I never was overly afraid of death, and I never cared much about living forever, so I didn't start to believe in God only out of a selfish desire for a reward. But no rational person would choose hell over heaven (once he/she believes there is any kind of hell or heaven in the afterlife).
And again, it's not like people only believe in an afterlife coz they are afraid of death. IT's just a stereotype popular with atheists. Atheists think they're cool coz they don't need an "imaginary big brother" or "fairy tales to comfort themselves." Well, you still need your tea to make yourself feel better And once more: not believing in the afterlife is also just a form of comfort: saying that 'nothing happens atfer you die, so no need to be afraid of death' is not much better imo than saying 'I hope I'll go to heaven'. And again: I'm not afraid of death. If anything, I'm afraid to go to hell only .If you knew that there is heaven and hell, you would also be afraid to go to hell. Any rational person would choose heaven. So the only thing you may bring up is that I can't know if there is a hell or heaven, so there is no reason to think about it. Well, I do have a reason to think about it, as I believe in God and He is righteous, so it is reasonable to me that He will judge people accordingly. It may not make sense to you, but it makes sense to me. But if you think that my beliefs are irrational: then don't say that I'm trying to rationalize death, coz that'd be a contradiction, no? And again, I'm not afraid to die. Why would I? if there is nothing after death: then why would I be afraid? But if there is an afterlife: I'm only afraid of hell, not death in general, so I think your whole premise is flawed.
) What the word 'holy' means is: Here you have a notion you cannot say anyyhing bad about. Why? Because you just cannot. 
