Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Christianlady said:

Just like there are sincere young Muslims, so there are sincere young Christians who don't "take religion as a joke" but who rather truly love God!!! :)

Peace and God bless you

 

Yeah definitely. One of my close friends is a Catholic Christian and he is quite religious too. My friend is strong in his beliefs and abtains from certain activities which goes against Christianity and also Islam. 

It is a gift from God, those youth who have love for their religion. Many young Muslims love going to the mosque purely not out of their love and not because of their parents. I suppose some Christian youth also love going to the church.

:)

Edited by ali_fatheroforphans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

@Quisant please answer my question 

Descriptions like 'good' and 'bad' are entirely subjective; in reality they only have contextual existence.

Somethings will be considered good by some people, some others bad, but overall people exist in the world and need to survive and reproduce.

Human beings are genetically primed to be 'self interested', not good or bad. 'Self interested' is an objective description of human behaviour.

Morality comes from Human empathy. It is the ability to relate/connect with your fellow human beings. 
We act morally because to do so makes us feel good about ourselves and reward us with better friends and allies. 

Moral codes have been in practice since ancient times. Here are some samples:

The Sumerian Code of Ur-Nammu 2100 BC
The Babylonian Code of Hammurabi 1760 BC
The Justinian Code 429 CE 
The Tang Code 624 CE


Historically, both believers and non-believers committed atrocities.
Being good out of fear of God or hell is not moral but immature. One would hope that people don't need a "commandment" from a God to refrain from killing and stealing. 

Saying that you are moral because you believe in God is like saying you are a financier because you play monopoly.

:)

 

11 hours ago, Ron_Burgundy said:

So what about before big bang? what caused big bang?

Nobody knows the reply to those questions. 

The Big Bang theory describes how the observable universe expanded from an early hyper-dense energetic state. 
The theory does not include a description of how or why that state came to be. There are many speculative hypotheses, including quantum fluctuations and Brane Theory, that attempt to answer that question, but as yet we don't know. 
It is important to remember that the Big Bang theory does not prove that the universe had a beginning from nothing.

All the best.

*
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Quisant said:

 

31 minutes ago, Quisant said:

Nobody knows the reply to those questions. 

The Big Bang theory describes how the observable universe expanded from an early hyper-dense energetic state. 
The theory does not include a description of how or why that state came to be. There are many speculative hypotheses, including quantum fluctuations and Brane Theory, that attempt to answer that question, but as yet we don't know. 
It is important to remember that the Big Bang theory does not prove that the universe had a beginning from nothing.

All the best.

 The universe was opaque to visible light (non-transparent) and photons couldn't travel at all. After the Big Bang the universe was primarily Hydrogen, Helium and a tiny bit of Lithium. However when a gas is too hot it becomes ionized (loses the electrons) and becomes opaque (like today's smoke). In the beginning the universe was opaque to visible light (non-transparent). After 380,000 years the universe cooled enough and it became transparent to visible light. For other wavelengths it was opaque for a billion years. So "Let there be light" turned out to be false. However the Quran correctly said that at the beginning it was SMOKE, that is, a hot non-transparent gas:

[Quran 41.11] Then He directed himself to the Heaven when it was SMOKE, and then said to it and to Earth: "Come willingly or by force" they said "We do come willingly"

 

The universe was created in a Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago, is still expanding today, and billions of years from now it might recollapse by its own gravity with a Big Crunch (or continue expanding forever, Big Chill). The Quran says that on the first day of creation, God made the heavens and the Earth meshed together, tight and compact (Big Bang), continues to expand it into the universe we know today and at the last day God will recompress it into its original state (Big Crunch). About the first day (Big Bang), Allah says:

[Quran 21.30] Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the Earth were meshed together then We ripped them apart? And then We made of water everything living? Would they still not believe?

In the Quran the Heavens expanded from a single point.

Cosmologists just confirmed the existence of "Dark Energy", a mysterious repulsive force that acts in opposite to gravity. As the distance increases, the attractive gravitational force decreases but this mysterious repulsive force increases. This repulsive force is pushing galaxies apart; the greater the distance the greater the repulsion. Scientists today do not know what this "Dark Energy" is, but they know that it is causing the entire universe to expand at an increasing rate.

[Quran 51.47] And the heaven, We built it with craftsmanship and We are still expanding.

There are three possibilities to how the universe could end: Big Crunch (Quran), Big Chill and the Big Rip. NASA recently ruled out the third scenario (No Big Rip; see also: Universe Today). This leaves the universe with only two possible endings: Big Chill or Big Crunch, depending on what this Dark Energy turns out to be. Learn more: Expansion of Universe in Quran. In the Quran God promises to make the Big Crunch:

[Quran 21.104] On the day when We will fold the heaven, like the folder compacts the books, and as We originated the first creation We shall return it; a promise (binding on Us); surely We will deliver.

 

Edited by Unforgiven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:bismillah:

اللَّهُ الَّذِي خَلَقَ سَبْعَ سَمَاوَاتٍ وَمِنَ الْأَرْضِ مِثْلَهُنَّ يَتَنَزَّلُ الْأَمْرُ بَيْنَهُنَّ لِتَعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ أَحَاطَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عِلْمًا
"Allah is He Who created seven heavens and of the earth the like of them; the decree continues to descend among them, that you may know that Allah has power over all things and that Allah indeed encompasses all things in (His) knowledge" (65:12)

Knowledge & Power are prerequisite for the origin of systems like Universe & Life. A Supreme Being therefore exists.

@eThErEaL,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Quisant said:

Being good out of fear of God or hell is not moral but immature.

In my opinion it is immature for some one to deny the cause of an effect.

Denying a creator of the Universe is like denying an engineer who built a building.

Religion was not given to us by God so we can be promised for eternal life.You seem to focus on that,As if Islam is only for eternal life.We have given laws by God so we can establish peace and govern the affairs of Muslims and Non-Muslims alike. 

God gave us these laws in a name called Islam,and gave us a great book called "Quran".

Do you consider that God is a probability or non-exist for sure ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Quisant said:

Moral codes have been in practice since ancient times. Here are some samples:

I never denied what you just said. Quran confirms that there have been 124,000 prophets sent to guide mankind who are there to perfect our morals and be as a guide. That is why all prophets were sinless, so we humans have the best leaders to follow. 

How are you sure that many ancient moral guidelines were not set by prophets? We are sitting here in the 21st century and it is very easy to speculate. Do you know the struggles the prophets went through? So many of them have been killed in their mission. 

The fact is that religion had come down because this innate nature of 'being all moral and ethical' can be affected due to certain factors. Arabia before Islam was in a total mess and bloodshed was considered a norm. Research it and you will find that different tribes had wars for so many years. Why couldn't the Arabs stop all this butchery and killing by their very own instinct?  The fact is that sometimes greed, jealousy, power etc can cause humans to become worse than animals. Prophets were perfect in morals and were sent to bring people back to life. Prophets came to remind people about their moral responsibility. That is why religion always talks about our moral responsibility. 

Your statement that people only be good out of their fear of hell  is completely wrong. Many Muslims love to be moral out of their love for god. We realize that God has given us the capability to become the best in morals. We make sure we are ethical because that is what God has created us for, regardless of whether we go to hell or heaven.

You still haven't answered my question, how will science ever explain this moral system? And why don't animals have what we humans have?

Edited by ali_fatheroforphans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

:bismillah:

اللَّهُ الَّذِي خَلَقَ سَبْعَ سَمَاوَاتٍ وَمِنَ الْأَرْضِ مِثْلَهُنَّ يَتَنَزَّلُ الْأَمْرُ بَيْنَهُنَّ لِتَعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ أَحَاطَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عِلْمًا
"Allah is He Who created seven heavens and of the earth the like of them; the decree continues to descend among them, that you may know that Allah has power over all things and that Allah indeed encompasses all things in (His) knowledge" (65:12)

Knowledge & Power are prerequisite for the origin of systems like Universe & Life. A Supreme Being therefore exists.

@eThErEaL,

 

Salamun Alaykum,

That is an interesting verse:

There are three pre-requisites.

1) Knowledge (indicated by "He encompasses all things with respect to His knowledge")

2) Power  (indicated by "He has power over all things")

3) Love (indicated by the "in order that you may know His Power & His Knowledge").  

But what is even more interesting is the fact that we can only know this through His "amr" (Command), which is continuous (you can say at every moment) and heavenly or celestial (not of this terrestrial or material world but certainly through which this material or terrestrial world depends).  

In another Quranic verse, God says about the "ruh" (spirit) that it is nothing but a command from God.

In Hindu cosmology, the timeless beginning of creation is a Principal that is at once Sat (Being / Power) , Chit (Knowledge / Awareness), and Ananda (Love/ Bliss).

In Islamic Metaphysics this Principal is Wujud (Being).  And Wujud is etymologically related to other words derived from the same roots of w-j-d: wajd (love/ ecstasy) and wajada (he found...or find / to have consciousness of). So Wujud is also not just being, but it is also awareness and love.

This verse is essentially saying that we can only know God through Him (through His command, His ruh or His spirit that He breathed into us, a spirit that is mysteriously connected to Him like the rays of the Sun are connected to the Sun itself).

The point I was trying to make above is the following:

We cannot know God rationally.  We need the light of His celestial command or spirit.   And I am not talking about something that only a few people have access to (I am not talking about something mystical or highly esoteric).  Everyone here has access to this mode of knowing.  This is because we all bore witness to God when He asked us "Am I not your Lord?".  This is because God breathed into everyone His spirit.        

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

Where are you getting that feeling of satisfaction from? Aren't you being drived by something?

he already told you his motivation.  he gets rewarded, he says, from people around (for they respect him more or they like to be around him and they are more likely to treat him in the same way he treats them).  He feels good about being good to others.  (to be good for god's sake is a bit immature and not such a good reason, according to him).  

He kind of has a point (you know).  That is a good great incentive to be moral.  There is a reason why most religious people are hypocrites after all.  They don't really ever do anything for God;s sake alone, they do it for other reasons (other selfish reasons, maybe because it makes them feel good or because they get friends out of it).  Quisant is just being honest about his motivation for being moral unlike most religious people who are hypocrites (and not honest with themselves).  

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

he already told you his motivation.  he gets rewarded, he says, from people around (for they respect him more or they like to be around him and they are more likely to treat him in the same way he treats them).  He feels good about being good to others.  

You don't get my point man.

He said morality comes from human emptathy and it is the ability to connect with fellow human beings. This feeling makes us feel better about ourselves. I agree with him.

My point is that, where did he get this innate nature from? Of course everyone wants to be moral because they feel that satisfaction, which Allah gave us.

However where did this feeling of satisfaction originate from by connecting with fellow humans. What scientific fact or research does an athiest have to describe human morals?

He hasn't answered any of my questions. 

Edited by ali_fatheroforphans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

You don't get my point man.

He said morality comes from human emptathy and it is the ability to connect with fellow human beings. This feeling makes us feel better about ourselves. I agree with him.

My point is that, where did he get this innate nature from? Of course everyone wants to be moral because they feel that satisfaction, which Allah gave us.

However where did this feeling of satisfaction originate from by connecting with fellow humans. What scientific fact or research does an athiest have to describe human morals?

He hasn't answered any of my questions. 

Well if I were Quisant and you were to ask me "why does it feel good to be good to others", I would say: Because my serotonin (or whatever other feel good hormones are responsible for my happiness) levels in my brain increase every time I do good to others. 

Why does it increase?  Why do serotonin levels in the brain increase?  because of a rewarding stimulus from the environment.  I do good and the reward is that people smile and like me, and are good to me.  

 

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

You don't get my point man.

He said morality comes from human emptathy and it is the ability to connect with fellow human beings. This feeling makes us feel better about ourselves. I agree with him.

My point is that, where did he get this innate nature from? Of course everyone wants to be moral because they feel that satisfaction, which Allah gave us.

However where did this feeling of satisfaction originate from by connecting with fellow humans. What scientific fact or research does an athiest have to describe human morals?

He hasn't answered any of my questions. 

 

It is you who does not understand.

Humans have learnt trough millennia of experience that it is cleverer to be cooperative rather than antagonistic, it is better to be honest than a thief.

We are political animals, we need to live within societies and feel respected by them. Otherwise it would be anarchy. We need to trade, interact and live with one another.

We have discovered with the passing of time that it is a superior 'life strategy' to have decent principles to regulate our interactions, that fairness and cooperation have higher value when dealing with people repeatedly.

It is self evident that being good and moral is the more advantageous choice for our own selfish self-interest.

wslm.

*
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Quisant said:

Humans have learnt trough millennia of experience that it is cleverer to be cooperative rather than antagonistic, it is better to be honest than a thief.

That is why I said 124,000 prophets were sent down. They all had perfect morals and were the best leaders to look up to. You can't just magically become moral and ethical over time without a leader or guider. You need to have constant guidance and leadership. There needs to be one guide who overlooks everything and guides nations to what is right.

You are sitting here in the 21st century and it is very arrogant of you to belittle all the struggles the Prophets went through, to make us aware of morality. 

Our environment certainly affects us. If you see a person who is raised up in a bad environment where he is taught no morals, then there is a very high probability that he will be unethical and adopt a lot of bad traits. A person who curses and bullies people, is only like that because of his environment and the way his parents raised him up. Why is it that these people with no morals, can't come to their own senses? According to your logic shouldn't they have learned from their experiences? They only change when they come across someone who guides them whether it be a person who inspires them or a psychologist who supports them etc

You need leaders who have perfect morals and can demonstrate morality. Prophets were sent to make people conscious and encourage only that which is good. 

Awz and Khazraj had been fighting for years and all of a sudden both of these tribes united when Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) came. This is a historical fact and you can research it. Why couldn't these two tribes come to peace and unity by their own senses as they had been shedding blood for years? The answer is that they needed a guide who had perfect morals. These two tribes knew the consequences of destruction and bloodshed but they never chose to be ethical.

It is very arrogant for me to say "wow, I'm so moral etc." sitting at the comfort of my home. I must give credit to god and the prophets.

If it weren't for the Prophets we would of all killed each others like animals. Without guidance everything would be a mess. Your model is very flawed if you think Prophets had no role to play.

 

Edited by ali_fatheroforphans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

You are sitting here in the 21st century and it is very arrogant of you to belittle all the struggles the Prophets went through, to make us aware of morality. 

I am not being arrogant or belittling anybody, I simply do not believe there are such things as prophets. It shouln'd be too hard to understand.

Al-Ma'-arri (973-1057) 
"The Prophets, too, among us come to teach, 
Are one with those who from the pulpit preach; 
They pray, and slay, and pass away, 
and yet our ills are as the pebbles on the beach."

Religion is not the cause of morality any more than the cockerel crowing is the cause of the dawn or the virgin sacrifices are keeping the volcano quiet. 
This mind trick has been perpetrated on people for centuries and people continue to fall for it. 

I think our conversation has reached a conclusion: you will keep your beliefs and I will keep mine...thanks for talking to me.
All the best.

*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, 

I am not defending Quisant because I am an atheist or a secular humanist.  I am defending him because I don't find anyone giving a satisfactory response to his arguments.  

So what is morality?  What does it mean to be good?  What does it mean to be bad?  It is interesting that Christians will immediately think about virtues when it comes to morality and Muslims will immediately think about Law when the issue of morality is raised (and if they do think about virtue it will with respect to it being part of a sacred Law).  

What is the subtle difference (if any) between BEING good and DOING good?  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

I am defending him because I don't find anyone giving a satisfactory response to his arguments.  

Maybe you should respond to his questions instead of complaining? If you have a specific answer in mind

He has his own opinions and just like he is not convinced, I too am not convinced with his arguments.

Edited by ali_fatheroforphans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

Maybe you should respond to his questions instead of complaining? If you have a specific answer in mind

He has his own opinions and just like he is not convinced, I too am not convinced with his arguments.

It is not a complain dear brother.

You asked a question about what why a secular humanist would want to be moral and why he thinks one should be moral and where he thinks the source of morality comes from.  I answered all of them from a secular humanist point of view.  

Why does this not answer your question (or does it?):

Well if I were Quisant and you were to ask me "why does it feel good to be good to others", I would say: Because my serotonin (or whatever other feel good hormones are responsible for my happiness) levels in my brain increase every time I do good to others. 

Why does it increase?  Why do serotonin levels in the brain increase?  because of a rewarding stimulus from the environment.  I do good and the reward is that people smile and like me, and are good to me.  

 

 

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

It is not a complain dear brother.

You asked a question about what why a secular humanist would want to be moral and why he thinks one should be moral and where he thinks the source of morality comes from.  I answered all of them from a secular humanist point of view.  

Why does this not answer your question (or does it?):

Well if I were Quisant and you were to ask me "why does it feel good to be good to others", I would say: Because my serotonin (or whatever other feel good hormones are responsible for my happiness) levels in my brain increase every time I do good to others. 

Why does it increase?  Why do serotonin levels in the brain increase?  because of a rewarding stimulus from the environment.  I do good and the reward is that people smile and like me, and are good to me.  

 

If you were him/her. I would ask to stick to basics. Define and clarify basic/fundamental concepts/tenets of your Belief System. Before going into to secondary topics. 

Because without this clarity, we would be at odds. and nothing will get accomplished.

Atheist and humanist and love, and empathy are contradictory terms based on fundamental principles of such ideologies. Good slogans/tag line for marketing purposes but have no real teeth to it(no substance to it).

When the base case is flawed or based on flawed assumptions, later topics will be very confusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Quisant said:

 

I think our conversation has reached a conclusion: you will keep your beliefs and I will keep mine...thanks for talking to me.
All the best.

*

I was under the assumption that you did that on page one, and will go on some retreat to find yourself. And only concern yourself with 'YOU" and your "obligations" instead of the Universe(Unknown). But here you are again trying to playdown something you can't comprehend or want to hide the Reality.

If your above statement  is really true, why are your here?. you like to talk to people, I am sure you can find much, Exciting sites for FUN and FUN people to chat with, instead-  you are on a Religious site in the Religion section. having contentious arguments. Does not sound like Fun to me.

If above is really true you will not be feasting on souls in Topics  that an Atheist/Agnostic/ “self proclaimed deity”(you are your own god, you Submit to your desires/wishes)”  ,  would not be interested in, like Religion. Stardust which got its existence through a chance would have other important things to do with its limited time and only chance here on this rock?

What do you care if people believe in Religion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

You asked a question about what why a secular humanist would want to be moral

You still haven't understood my point. I clearly said that all humans have this innate nature of wanting to do good, I never denied this. Atheist no doubt can even be better than Muslims in morals.  

What my main argument is that, science/evolution/natural selection or whatever you call it, can never have any sort of foundation to describe morals and how we as humans can differentiate wrong from right. Some atheists will say that naturally humans evolve over time and natural selection explains it, but that too doesn't help at all. @Quisant then said that civilizations have learnt through many experiences that it is better to be good than bad, denying the possibility of Prophets being sent down and guiding people to that which is right.

I don't care about the fact that atheist can be moral or not, I want to see how can they describe this whole system without religion or God. If you can answer this question(apart from the hormone argument) for him then that will be good. I mean where did humans get this sense of right or wrong from? These arguments such as social pressure, natural selection, survival are all weak and can never explain the foundation of morality.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

You asked a question about what why a secular humanist would want to be moral

You still haven't understood my point. I clearly said that all humans have this innate nature of wanting to do good, I never denied this. Atheist no doubt can even be better than Muslims in morals.  

What my main argument is that, science/evolution/natural selection or whatever you call it, can never have any sort of foundation to describe morals and how we as humans can differentiate wrong from right. Some atheists will say that naturally humans evolve over time and natural selection explains it, but that too doesn't help at all. @Quisant then said that civilizations have learnt through many experiences that it is better to be good than bad, denying the possibility of Prophets being sent down and guiding people to that which is right.

I don't care about the fact that atheist can be moral or not, I want to see how can they describe this whole system without religion or God. If you can answer this question(apart from the hormone argument) for him then that will be good. I mean where did humans get this sense of right or wrong from? These arguments such as social pressure, natural selection, survival are all weak and can never explain the foundation of morality.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

 I am defending him because I don't find anyone giving a satisfactory response to his arguments.  

I would appreciate if you, instead of defending, try to give him satisfactory response :).

Why you're avoiding to do that brother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×