1
   

God vs. Allah, Us vs. Them

 
 
solar
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2004 08:03 pm
nothing
In physics they can't even see the atom. Only the effects of one.
When an item or even space is broken down into it's material molecules or knowns, the weight of the parts do not equal the weight of the whole.
There is something else there in the whole which is nothing.
Even if you were to be broken down into your little chemicals and what nots, your bits wouldn't equal you as whole. So as a whole, you are made of somethings and nothings.
LOL...it's heady physics. Not to mention very Tao.
Both nothing and something have to exist for everything to be here.
I highly recommend that book. Smile
0 Replies
 
SCoates
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2004 08:13 pm
No offence, but it sounds like classy garbage. Smile I'm not one for philosophy in most cases.
0 Replies
 
Portal Star
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Mar, 2004 09:01 pm
Re: nothing
solar wrote:
In physics they can't even see the atom. Only the effects of one.
When an item or even space is broken down into it's material molecules or knowns, the weight of the parts do not equal the weight of the whole.
There is something else there in the whole which is nothing.
Even if you were to be broken down into your little chemicals and what nots, your bits wouldn't equal you as whole. So as a whole, you are made of somethings and nothings.
LOL...it's heady physics. Not to mention very Tao.
Both nothing and something have to exist for everything to be here.
I highly recommend that book. Smile


The weight of the parts do equal the weight of the whole.
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Mar, 2004 08:43 pm
Rick d'Israeli wrote:
What can I say? I agree with QKid. Islam can not be caught under one, huge interpretation that is shared by all Muslims in this world. Beside different interpretations, other religions can also influence the way of thinking by a Muslim. In Indonesia for example, it is well known Hinduism and Buddhism have influenced Islam. That this can lead to misinterpretation is something very wrong, but can you blame that on Islam in general? What is Islam "in general"? Is there any religion where you can talk about one unity? In Christianity, there is a huge difference between Roman-Catholics and Jehova's Witnesses, between Calvinists and Russian-Orthodoxs. That Islam is also very diverse, seems to be forgotten here. While Wahhabism really neglects women's right, under the shia Alevites women were treated equal to men already in the 13th century, meaning the possibility for education and not having to wear a headscarf. I do know that Islamic fundamentalism is rising, but I don't think a Muslim in Istanbul likes to be compared to a suicidebomber in the Palestinian Territories.

Rick, Did you even read the post that Qkid was responding to??Most of what you say I can agree with, but we were discussing what is in the Koran and his view that it is perfect and unchanged.
0 Replies
 
Rick d Israeli
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Mar, 2004 01:48 pm
Mesquite you sound angry... Anyway, what I understood from QKids post was that it was about the Quran and that a lot of Muslim fundamentalism comes out of misinterpretation of the Quran, but that wasn't the point QKid wanted to make apparently. I did read his post of course, but I apologize for misinterpreting your discussion.
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Mar, 2004 04:55 pm
Rick, No apology necessary. The dialog with qkid has been going on for sometime across several threads. His main assertion is that the koran does not have the same problems as the bible because all korans are the same and not one letter has changed since muhammod's time. As you can see most have given up on having any meaningful discussion with him.

My view on religion is that they all cause more trouble than good, especially those that are based on ancient texts. I have tried to keep the discourse directly related to the texts, in the case of islam that is the koran and hadiths. The fact that some groups overlook some of the text or use a different interpretation has no bearing. The text is still there and will be taken literally by some.
0 Replies
 
SCoates
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Mar, 2004 06:34 pm
It's odd how people rely on ancient texts almost proportionately to how old they are, or how little change has come to them over time. Odd because most of our ancestors were idiots compared to us. (My definition of "idiot" is relative to education)
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Mar, 2004 11:13 pm
Scoates, could you expand on that a bit? I have not seen any relationship between age and reliance on ancient texts, especially here on A2K where there may even be an inverse relationship. Older and wiser as they say. :wink:
0 Replies
 
SCoates
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Mar, 2004 11:24 pm
Yes, on A2K it is different, but there are plenty of religions which rely on ancient text. Still, I wouldn't like to expound on my statement, since it was hogwash. I must admit I was only thinking of the bible, and your comments on qkid's post. Still, somewhere in the back of my mind, it just seems like people rely on ancient texts more than they do. Perhaps I've watched to many movies?
0 Replies
 
Rick d Israeli
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Mar, 2004 02:37 pm
In that case: I disagree with QKid concerning the Quran and that it has not changed through time :wink: But I rather stick out of that discussion.
I do not agree with you though with "all religions cause more trouble than good". Yes, you can say that there are a lot of people using religion for wrong purposes. But you look at the "religion-in-the-news": the negative aspects of religion which show up frequently in the media. You forget that on small scale, religion has given so much to so many people. Religion has cost a lot of lives, but has mentally saved maybe even more. I rather stick to "all religions cause more good than trouble".
I'm not religious by the way.
0 Replies
 
Portal Star
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Mar, 2004 04:37 pm
SCoates wrote:
It's odd how people rely on ancient texts almost proportionately to how old they are, or how little change has come to them over time. Odd because most of our ancestors were idiots compared to us. (My definition of "idiot" is relative to education)


Oh. You mean like the Greeks, Phoenecians, Ancient Romans and Egyptians. The ones that our government and knowledge is based off of. Ever heard of Archimedes?

Once texts get too ancient they are abandoned. I think a main reason Christianity is still around is because of the painstaking record keeping and translations of the Bible. What I think is odd is how most members of currently popular religions fail to see the relationship between their religions and religions of the past.
0 Replies
 
SCoates
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Mar, 2004 05:19 pm
And I'm sure there are more you can add to the list, but that doesn't make my exact statement true.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 11:16:45