| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Progress Islam
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Progress Islam

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Apr 2014 at 19:23
Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

çWhat's obvious to me is the wholesale projection of human values into religious scripture. Being grateful is a human attribute. Why would a supreme being, far beyond our understanding, ask for gratefulness? Why would they insist on humans worshiping them in exclusion of all others? Why would they get mad (another human behavior) if they do not receive the appropriate attention? This is all about people, PoH, not ultimate beings.

How a parent explains a complicated matter to his/her child? Religious scriptures use allegory for this reason. Our comprehension is finite but even more curiously, it's varies greatly to one invidual to another. Because of this, message of religion must be both simple and universal.

Doesn't wash PoH. Today we very much understand the psychological principle behind the need for recognition, self-esteem, etc, and the problems with acting out anger rather than trying to understand underlying causes. Gods that behaved in these ways may have invoked awe 3000 years ago, but today they are an embarrassment, which is exactly the reason religious scripts undergo continuous revision, to bring them more into line with present day science. It's all about people, not magic.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Apr 2014 at 20:06
Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

 What is unknown can make us uncomfortable, and so humans have always tended to rationalize or explain away the unexplained. Religion, astrology, numerology, mythology, etc are all ways of making a more comfortable situation than simply saying it is unknown at the present time. Saying that god is simply outside of everything is the thinnest of arguments, as we can make the same claim about anything. Sea monsters? Yes, they exist, but they are just outside of everything we know. Leprechauns? Yep, there're around, just outside of all laws of physics.

Everything inside laws of physics must be coherent with laws of physics. Anything outside of physics must be self coherent, which only the God can be Smile

I'm getting dizzy going around this circle. Sure and begorrah me lad, you should have yourself a pint and relax, because its leprechauns that are all outside physics, and handle all that magic and mysticism. Or they'll turn you into a pillar of salt. Hey, that'll stimulate your thirst.

When you deny rationality, and insist you have the answers, but cannot give a coherent explanation, and perhaps are not comfortable looking for one, then you are adrift, clinging to a favoured myth, but one that must continually be modified,updated, and twisted about in all manner of fashion, in order to not sound like it was presented to, and by, pre-modern agriculturalists.
Back to Top
caldrail View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Rushey Platt
Status: Offline
Points: 968
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote caldrail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2014 at 14:17
Quote That's a very late 19th century sentence Tongue We know people worship power above all else. There are endless numerious historical examples of kings declaring themselves gods...

Today, that power lies on knowledge thus it's the knowledge/science which worshipped. That was the subconsciousness of your sentence.

But internet will change current paradigm of power. Now, knowledge is spreading everywhere at increasingly higher pace. As much as having tons of skyscrappers are not a sign of being developed today, knowledge itself will lose it's hegemony. That's my prediction for rest of 21th century Smile


"The love of money is the root of all evil" says one old piece of wisdom. "A rich man has no more chance of passing through the eye of a needle than a camel" says Jesus, who got himself a reputation for financial reform.

The word 'power' is subjective. Not everyone seeks power in any absolute sense, and often, power over others is sought in a restricted sense in that these individuals seek to enslave targeted others in some way as opposed to everyone at large as dictators like to do. But then, such power is often applied for personal profit. Drug dealers will sometimes try to 'own' their clients, but the objective is continued wealth, not command. 

Simply being able to boss people around is rewarding psychologically only in the short term. Wealth, and the status deriving from it, is more persistent in the human perception. After all, there was one Roman whose lavish dinners aimed at impressing his peers bankrupted him. He committed suicide.

Now - the question of 'knowledge is power'? It can be, but only as long as that knowledge has relevance, exclusivity, and is given out in small doses for a price, thus establishing a market and demand. The internet is however mostly rubbish. Despite teaching kids to learn the ways of the world wide web in British schools, our kids are still dumber than they used to be (but much better at art - I caught one guy decorating the neighbourhood recently). Of course, if you choose not to require that knowledge, then the holder is powerless immediately.

As for skyscrapers, these are nothing new, as mankind has long had a prediliction for creating tall monuments to pronounce their status. Not power - status. A tall building does not give you power over vertically challenged homes. It merely proclaims that the owner, or more usually the community, settlement, or society owning it, is thinking of itself as more important.
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2014 at 15:45
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

I didn't ask for a load of verbiage or a "yes or no" - I asked for your personal opinion... 
If you prefer not to answer - just say so.

I assure you, there was no verbiage in my comments. I always sum up and write very little of what was on my mind on particular issue.

But I'm suspecting you people lack many of fundamental notions that makes avaible our advanced understanding of life, no offense. In some cases you are not even aware of such notions, in other cases it's completely emptied of its original meaning. Yes, I'm implying ontological and epistemological death of the Western civilisation. Because you have forgotten and you have forgotten the fact that you have forgotten. 

In short;
1. nominally there is no way I or anyone else could know what my creed would be
2. in reality, there is no way things could happen any other way (unless you believe in inflationary universe teory of course...)

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

What question are you answering here? - is it "How do you know Islam is the only true religion"?
That's a very broad question. I already gave a short answer but nevertheless it can be expended. Smart questions can sum up many answers into one sentence. So, do you think you will be a Muslim if I came on top in every argument you throw at me? I think you won't, I never expect such an outcome. Neither should you expect from me. But why? Don't we all have reason and logic? Even if some of people doesn't know formal logic, the language itself is a construction of logic (nonetheless it's far better to have a grasp on formal logic). So why we cannot agree on it?

It's so, because our perceptions of reality differs so radically. Many of notions we use to describe external/objective reality is different. Most Muslims and Westerners agree on existence of an objective reality but we radically differ on how it can be obtained. What makes Westerners mad is they successfully managed to wipe out or fossilised every other civilisation concept (thus concepts of alternate perceptions of reality) but one of them, tought to be fossilised is about to emerge again.

Remember, I lived all my life in Turkey. A country ruled by state atheism for a century, beginning from late Ottoman period. Our education system is hardcore positivist and rationalist. Many teachers was like priests and nuns of enlightenment until recent times. That makes me familiar with everything about West. Here, at the point of collision of the West and the classical East everything is much more hardcore. People here viciously reading works of Western philosphers like Heidegger, Kierkegaard, Hegel, (Auguste) Comte, Freud, Foucault,  Durkheim, Nietzsche, Sartre and Baudrillard along many others. So, we are very well aquinted with Western values and Western thougth patterns. On contrary, average Western intellectual has little grasp on ours and that big empty gap is filled with myths of enlightenment and arguments used to subdue Christianity. As it is the case with most of you.
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2014 at 16:23
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Of course there is randomness...wouldn't he make sure we all became Muslims?

I think you mean causality rather than randomness. According to Maturidî school (which most Turks follow) the God's will and the God's consent are different things. Good or evil, everything needs the God's will to came into existance. When someone wishes to commit an act of evil, the God also wills it. But there is no consent of the God on evil acts. That's our strong position on many questions like "problem of evil (why there is evil if there is a God?)". 

Back to the your question. Do you actually ask the God for He should make you forcefully comply to His consent? Which means you don't like having a will? 

Some parts from Qur'an regarding your question (underlinings and bold parts are not my markings, it's just copy paste):

"Had Allah willed, they had not been idolatrous. We have not set thee as a keeper over them, nor art thou responsible for them. S. 6:107 Pickthall

And if thy Lord willed, all who are in the earth would have believed together. Wouldst thou (Muhammad) compel men until they are believers? It is not for any soul to believe save by the permission of Allah. He hath set uncleanness upon those who have no sense. S. 10:99-100 Pickthall

And We never sent a messenger save with the language of his folk, that he might make (the message) clear for them. Then Allah sendeth whom He will astray, and guideth whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Wise. S. 14:4

Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? God hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom God hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom God hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way. S. 4:88 Y. Ali

Whomsoever Allah guides, he is the guided one, and whomsoever He sends astray, those! They are the losers. And surely, We have created many of the jinns and mankind for Hell. They have hearts wherewith they understand not, they have eyes wherewith they see not, and they have ears wherewith they hear not (the truth). They are like cattle, nay even more astray; those! They are the heedless ones. S. 7:178-179 Hilali-Khan

And had Allah willed, He could have made you (all) one nation, but He sends astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills. But you shall certainly be called to account for what you used to do. S. 16:93 Hilali-Khan

'If We had so willed, We could have given every soul its guidance; but now My Word is realized -- "Assuredly I shall fill Gehenna with jinn and men all together." So now taste, for that you forgot the encounter of this your day! We indeed have forgotten you. Taste the chastisement of eternity for that you were doing!' S. 32:13-14 Arberry"



Edited by Paradigm of Humanity - 15 Apr 2014 at 16:31
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2014 at 18:35
Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:

 
No, a pen cannot exist outside time and space. Any object we can assume to do so must be completely selfsufficient, omnipotent, omniscient etc. Which are the God's attributes. Only thing it could be imagined so will be the God, among many names we use for the God there is also "Vacib-ül Vücud" (the Necessary Entity). The God have to exist, there is no other possibility. Not that the God created everything and they exist on their own. Everything need the God in every moment to be in state of existance.

Being needy and dependent is an essential attribute of everything created. Because they are finite in every aspect we can imagine. Qualities and quantities in this finity described as their self. Everything needs and depends on the God, because of that we use the name "Ar-Razzak" (the Provisioner) for the God.

You are nothing if not precise PoH. What you have described here is a perfect circle. But you have omitted at least three things in your presentation of geometry here: any philosophical, rational, or logical argument. What is unknown is god, and god incorporates all that is unknown. If there is no current explanation, we know where to dump the question. It's all god, except for what is rationally known, which ominously for religion, seems to be growing all the time, slowly edging out the need for god. Round and round we go.
 
Well thanks, that means it is cohorent. Circles and globes are nice, signs of perfection. Everything is made of circles.

It's such an outrageous act of arrogance to demand reduction of the God to one's own comprehension. Also the God is not what is unknown, its called "ğayb". The knowledge which is not possessed by mankind. Even so, there are numerious examples of unknown entities are described by religion, such as angels, hell, heaven etc... That doesn't mean they exist on their own. Who said that only form of existance is the one known to us? We call the God "Rabbil A'lemîn" (Lord of the worlds). In Arabic, earth = arz or ard, world = dunya, but alem means a world of different form of existance like the afterworld. 

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:

Oh thank God, finally Smile I want to answer that soon.

Good luck.

Well I'm quite lucky then LOL Because we have 1400 years of tradition of it and it's called "tasawwuf" or "sufism" in English. First, where needs originate? Of course physical explanation is obvious but without compulsion (feelings of hunger, thirst, sexual arousal etc) they wouldn't be so interfering with our reasoning. So, aquiring knowledge and experience about our inner side is fundamental to being in control of it. That's the only way to came closer to objective reality.

This is what have been tought to be true self/soul/psyche by the Westerners for a last one and half century:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nafs
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 00:15
Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

Doesn't wash PoH. Today we very much understand the psychological principle behind the need for recognition, self-esteem, etc, and the problems with acting out anger rather than trying to understand underlying causes. Gods that behaved in these ways may have invoked awe 3000 years ago, but today they are an embarrassment, which is exactly the reason religious scripts undergo continuous revision, to bring them more into line with present day science. It's all about people, not magic.

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

When you deny rationality, and insist you have the answers, but cannot give a coherent explanation, and perhaps are not comfortable looking for one, then you are adrift, clinging to a favoured myth, but one that must continually be modified,updated, and twisted about in all manner of fashion, in order to not sound like it was presented to, and by, pre-modern agriculturalists.
You think I'm revising religion with modern knowledge at my disposal. That's mostly because many of notions Muslim world was familiar with reached the West or independently discovered in the West very late. So you think of my 10th-11th century based knowledge as modern.

Originally posted by Wikipedia Wikipedia wrote:

Regarding the increased emphasis placed on the role of human reason, the Maturidis say that the unaided human mind is able to find out that the more major sins such as alcohol or murder are immoral and evil without the aid of revelation. The Ash'aris disagree, and conclude that the unaided human mind is unable to determine if something is good or evil, lawful or unlawful, moral or immoral, without the direct aid of divine revelation. Another point where Ash'aris and Maturidis differ regarding the role of human reason is divine amnesty for certain non-Muslims in the afterlife. The Ash'ari view as explained by al-Ghazali says that a non-Muslim who was unreached by the message of Islam, or was reached by it in a distorted fashion, is not responsible for this in the afterlife. The Maturidi view states that the existence of God is so evident and rationally discernible, that every human being who has intellect and the ability to think (thus excluding children and the mentally ill and disabled) and was unreached by the message of Islam and does not believe in God will end up in hell, and divine amnesty is only available to those non-Muslims who believed in God and were unreached by the message.

Both the Ash'aris and Maturidis follow occasionalism, a philosophy which refutes the basis for causality, but also proves the existence and nature of the Islamic belief of the tawhid (oneness of God) through formal logic.

This theology is popular where the Hanafi school of law is followed, particularly the lands of the former Ottoman and Mughal empires, viz. in Turkey, the Balkans, the Caucasus, the LevantAfghanistanCentral AsiaPakistanBangladesh, and India.

Originally posted by Wikipedia Wikipedia wrote:

Al-Ghazali expresses his support for a scientific methodology based on demonstration and mathematics, while discussing astronomy. After describing the scientific facts of thesolar eclipse resulting from the Moon coming between the Sun and Earth and the lunar eclipse from the Earth coming between the Sun and Moon, he writes:[4]

Whosoever thinks that to engage in a disputation for refuting such a theory is a religious duty harms religion and weakens it. For these matters rest on demonstrations, geometrical and arithmetical, that leave no room for doubt.

In his defense of the Asharite doctrine of a created universe that is temporally finite, against the Aristotelian doctrine of an eternal universe, Al-Ghazali proposed the modal theory of possible worlds, arguing that their actual world is the best of all possible worlds from among all the alternate timelines and world histories that God could have possibly created. His theory parallels that of Duns Scotus in the 14th century. While it is uncertain whether Al-Ghazali had any influence on Scotus, they both may have derived their theory from their readings of Avicenna's Metaphysics.


Originally posted by Wikipedia Wikipedia wrote:

The Incoherence of the Philosophers is famous for proposing and defending the Asharite theory of occasionalism. Al-Ghazali wrote that when fire and cotton are placed in contact, the cotton is burned directly by God rather than by the fire, a claim which he defended using logic.

He explained that because God is usually seen as rational, rather than arbitrary, his behavior in normally causing events in the same sequence (i.e., what appears to us to be efficient causation) can be understood as a natural outworking of that principle of reason, which we then describe as the laws of nature. Properly speaking, however, these are not laws of nature but laws by which God chooses to govern his own behaviour (his autonomy, in the strict sense) - in other words, his rational will.

This is not, however, an essential element of an occasionalist account, and occasionalism can include positions where God's behavior (and thus that of the world) is viewed as ultimately inscrutable, thus maintaining God's essential transcendence. On this understanding, apparent anomalies such as miracles are not really such: they are simply God behaving in a way that appears unusual to us. Given his transcendent freedom, he is not bound even by his own nature. Miracles, as breaks in the rational structure of the universe, cannot occur, since God's relationship with the world is not mediated by rational principles.



My worldview (which is my perception reality) is ancient and still coherent. How long you think yours will stand the test of time?



Edited by Paradigm of Humanity - 16 Apr 2014 at 01:07
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 01:20
Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:


It's such an outrageous act of arrogance to demand reduction of the God to one's own comprehension. Also the God is not what is unknown, its called "ğayb". The knowledge which is not possessed by mankind. Even so, there are numerious examples of unknown entities are described by religion, such as angels, hell, heaven etc... That doesn't mean they exist on their own. Who said that only form of existance is the one known to us? We call the God "Rabbil A'lemîn" (Lord of the worlds). In Arabic, earth = arz or ard, world = dunya, but alem means a world of different form of existance like the afterworld.

It's like this PoH- sure there are unknowns out there, but what sort of measure are you going to use to try and find out what they may be? If it is just believing what you consider to be authority figures, then you are placing yourself in a vulnerable position. Do you really know the motivations of those that (supposedly) wrote these documents? Do you really know the aspirations of those that have interpreted them through time? Because by rejecting the scientific method, that is what you are doing. You are picking items that seem nice, and settling on them, no questions asked.

It may seem bizarre, but human nature is such that we can indulge in no end of fantasy, to the extent of producing violent behavior, and other abnormalities, and it can override some of the most fundamental aspects of physical existence. Presidents in the US are sometimes elected by way of Hollywood fantasies, sometimes even actual Hollywood actors. People spend their hard earned money based on the fantasies of the advertising industry. In the Muslim world, women are abused and assaulted, and people are killed due to belief in various medieval scribblings, and sometimes not even that, just the ravings of some dysfunctional mullah.

Claiming that, no no, it is in the writings just doesn't cut it. Who wrote it? If you have a name, or a context, or some other evidence, how was that arrived at? You can either take things on faith, because you feel comfortable with that, or you can courageously inquire. Many take the easier route.

Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:

Well I'm quite lucky then LOL Because we have 1400 years of tradition of it and it's called "tasawwuf" or "sufism" in English. First, where needs originate? Of course physical explanation is obvious but without compulsion (feelings of hunger, thirst, sexual arousal etc) they wouldn't be so interfering with our reasoning. So, aquiring knowledge and experience about our inner side is fundamental to being in control of it. That's the only way to came closer to objective reality.

This is what have been tought to be true self/soul/psyche by the Westerners for a last one and half century:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nafs

Inner side indeed. Sure, there are valuable lessons to be learned by introspection. But they are all about us, PoH. There is no magic cosmic fiberoptic cable that connects with our heads during such sessions. The thoughts that come up may be, as Freud said, the royal road to the subconscious, but they are about the more proletarian debris left by human existence. Some do claim god is talking to them though. Those folks  tend to have many other problems to deal with in addition to god's advice.
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 01:52
Originally posted by caldrail caldrail wrote:


"The love of money is the root of all evil" says one old piece of wisdom. "A rich man has no more chance of passing through the eye of a needle than a camel" says Jesus, who got himself a reputation for financial reform.

The word 'power' is subjective. Not everyone seeks power in any absolute sense, and often, power over others is sought in a restricted sense in that these individuals seek to enslave targeted others in some way as opposed to everyone at large as dictators like to do. But then, such power is often applied for personal profit. Drug dealers will sometimes try to 'own' their clients, but the objective is continued wealth, not command. 

Simply being able to boss people around is rewarding psychologically only in the short term. Wealth, and the status deriving from it, is more persistent in the human perception. After all, there was one Roman whose lavish dinners aimed at impressing his peers bankrupted him. He committed suicide. 
Humans are aware of their finity on every level of their consciousness unlike many other creatures. They are meant to be created that way. This way, they will seek the God - the Infinite to become complete. When they don't do so they will be full of fear, anger, greed and other forms of anxiety. Then they began try to control everything around them as a consequence of their unadressed incompleteness. Of course this doesn't free them of their anxiety. Perhaps even contrary, their anxiety increases as they aquire more control/power because it became unstable (yeeees, yess enthropy you know Tongue) and invidual live in fear of losing it. 

Originally posted by caldrail caldrail wrote:


Now - the question of 'knowledge is power'? It can be, but only as long as that knowledge has relevance, exclusivity, and is given out in small doses for a price, thus establishing a market and demand. The internet is however mostly rubbish. Despite teaching kids to learn the ways of the world wide web in British schools, our kids are still dumber than they used to be (but much better at art - I caught one guy decorating the neighbourhood recently). Of course, if you choose not to require that knowledge, then the holder is powerless immediately.
 
Remember Chinese stealing terabytes of information from US defense companies (from other side of the world)? Remember Wikileaks? Remember Edward Snowden? Once a piece of information reachs internet, it multiplies millions and billions times and it becomes impossible to eradicate. This speed is surely something new.
Originally posted by caldrail caldrail wrote:


As for skyscrapers, these are nothing new, as mankind has long had a prediliction for creating tall monuments to pronounce their status. Not power - status. A tall building does not give you power over vertically challenged homes. It merely proclaims that the owner, or more usually the community, settlement, or society owning it, is thinking of itself as more important.

Skyscrappers was (and still is) a technical marvel. But this technic is now available for everyone who has enough cash. Which is making it no longer a symbol of power. And cash is needed can be obtained by selling natural resources like oil on contrary to getting the money from advanced economic activities. Cutting edge in technics are still seen as signs of power, which skyscrappers no longer are.
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4308
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 02:47
Well, a lot of interesting comments, but I think we've strayed slightly from the topic.
 
While there's been some pretty deep conversation about religion here, what I originally intended was a discussion on the reasons for some Islamic countries remaining in comparative poverty and isolation, while more moderate Muslims have advanced.
 
As I've posted before, surely the countries on the lower end of the socio/economic ladder can see benefit to the people by slightly adjusting their interpretations of religious doctrines, and moving into the 21st Century.
 
Religion, regardless of which one, was never intended to oppress it's followers, but it seems that in some countries of Islam, that's precisely what's happening.
 
 
Tiocfaidh ár lá
Back to Top
caldrail View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Rushey Platt
Status: Offline
Points: 968
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote caldrail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 11:56
But that's the folly of human beings, not the religion. Christianity has done the same thing here and there and still does. It harbours greed and domination among their ranks (along with certain other motives) and only the current political status and cultural relevance prevents further attempts to revitalise christian machinations. remember that at the height of christian power and popularity, the Pope was making moves to create a pan-european christian empire ruled by the church. The bubble burst because the Pope concerned foolishly set off the crusades, which to this day resonates in the middle east.
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4308
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 12:27
Caldrail wrote..."The bubble burst because the Pope concerned foolishly set off the crusades, which to this day resonates in the middle east."
I agree with you. Do you think Muslim sensibilities might be quenched a bit if there was friendly dialogue between the Pope and senior Muslim Clerics?
 
One of the holiest places in Islam, and the most holy in Christianity is one and the same. It should be shared.
 
It would be fantastic if a simple apology made a difference to some Islamic attitudes towards the west.
 
 
 
Tiocfaidh ár lá
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 19:57
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Well, a lot of interesting comments, but I think we've strayed slightly from the topic.
 
While there's been some pretty deep conversation about religion here, what I originally intended was a discussion on the reasons for some Islamic countries remaining in comparative poverty and isolation, while more moderate Muslims have advanced.
 
As I've posted before, surely the countries on the lower end of the socio/economic ladder can see benefit to the people by slightly adjusting their interpretations of religious doctrines, and moving into the 21st Century.
 
Religion, regardless of which one, was never intended to oppress it's followers, but it seems that in some countries of Islam, that's precisely what's happening.
 
 

I think these things have more to do with mindset than they do with economics. Saudi Arabia, for example, is awash in oil money, but is also arguably one of the most repressive countries in the world, due to religion. Other places aren't so well off, but are comparatively more liberal.

The human mind can be surprisingly malleable, and will adapt to perceived needs, of which material comfort is just one.
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 21:27
Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:


It's like this PoH- sure there are unknowns out there, but what sort of measure are you going to use to try and find out what they may be?
Amount of knowledge we do not possess is infinite. We should only bother with what's beneficial for us. There are many vivid examples of the heaven in Qur'an and hadiths, these examples clarify what the heaven is and what it is not in general sense. Much like what a tv is for (which a few sentences will suffice), not how tv works (many volumes of extensive knowledge of electronics and electromagnetics). Which one makes more sense if you was about to describe what a tv is to someone who never saw a tv?

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

 If it is just believing what you consider to be authority figures, then you are placing yourself in a vulnerable position. Do you really know the motivations of those that (supposedly) wrote these documents? Do you really know the aspirations of those that have interpreted them through time?
None of Islamic knowledge rests on a single invidual, save Muhammed (peace be upon him), the messenger of the God. He might even be most documented person ever. We know what meals he like, how he cut his fingernails, how he looked etc. Knowledge of countless thousands of schoolars shows an extreme degree of coherence and harmony. 

My practice of Islam is of Hanafi school of jurisprudence. Imam-ı Azam Ebu Hanife is the founder of it. A very well known and documented figure of 8th century. Throughout of his life, he wrote more than a million page about issues regarding Islamic jurisprudence. When it is divided to his life time (including childhood) it makes 17 pages each day. Many of his writings summarised in a number of books by his students and became among fundamental texts in Islamic jurisprudence. His works also benefited many great schoolars after him.

My creed (abstract and theorical part, not basic creed) of Islam is of Maturidî school of theology and philosophy. Which is founded by Imam Maturidî, also a very well known schoolar from 10th century.

My denomination in tasawwuf is the most well known one, the Nakşibendiyye (my denomination also incorporates Kadirî teachings as well). We can trace our teachings back to the Prophet Muhammed. Spread through all of continents. A few great figures from both orders are:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baha-ud-Din_Naqshband_Bukhari
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imam_Rabbani
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junayd_of_Baghdad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul-Qadir_Gilani

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

Because by rejecting the scientific method, that is what you are doing.
No, I certainly not. But I don't treat it like a magic stick to solve every problem. 

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

 You are picking items that seem nice, and settling on them, no questions asked.
Definitely not. My creed is fairly orthodox and old school. Nothing really sophisticated. I'm not picking out some stuff that sound nice, I embrace them as coherent and harmonical block of docktrines. I may favour Asharie's opinion on a particular issue instead of my own school of Maturidî. Nevertheless, it's a rare occasion. Both schools are compatible and differantiate on minor issues. But I won't go as far as picking up an opinion of Mutezile school, because it's a particular school which is refuted by Ashari's and Maturidi's.
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 22:14
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Well, a lot of interesting comments, but I think we've strayed slightly from the topic.
Sure. We should gradually move into topics like women's issue.

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

 
While there's been some pretty deep conversation about religion here, what I originally intended was a discussion on the reasons for some Islamic countries remaining in comparative poverty and isolation, while more moderate Muslims have advanced.
I do not agree it was a deep conversation. It was very superficial. I didn't red many of fundamental texts of Islam. Diciplines of religious sciences are very deep and broad. I lost my hope that I'll aquire any proefficiency on any of its branches. Once I had a chance of such education alongside with academic education. But I scrapped both for personal reasons.

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

 
what I originally intended was a discussion on the reasons for some Islamic countries remaining in comparative poverty and isolation, while more moderate Muslims have advanced.
It's a great accusation here to call someone moderate Muslim. To us, moderate Islam is corrupt values in Islamic package. Although one group seems to be sneakily embraced this, although they do not declare so in Turkish public. Not so suprisingly, this group is known for being corrupt for lying to people get more charity, using charity for their own purposes, being hyprocyrite by playing that they embraced Western values outside and playing more conservative inside Turkey.

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

 
As I've posted before, surely the countries on the lower end of the socio/economic and ladder can see benefit to the people by slightly adjusting their interpretations of religious doctrines, and moving into the 21st Century.
Like allowing usury? I prefer better be dead than red or capitalist.
 
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Religion, regardless of which one, was never intended to oppress it's followers, but it seems that in some countries of Islam, that's precisely what's happening.
Oppression means denial of rights of someone. First we have to agree what's one's rights and what is not Wink
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 22:25
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Caldrail wrote..."The bubble burst because the Pope concerned foolishly set off the crusades, which to this day resonates in the middle east."
I agree with you. Do you think Muslim sensibilities might be quenched a bit if there was friendly dialogue between the Pope and senior Muslim Clerics?
 
One of the holiest places in Islam, and the most holy in Christianity is one and the same. It should be shared.
 
It would be fantastic if a simple apology made a difference to some Islamic attitudes towards the west.

What apology? Nobody is guilty of his father's crimes. Also I don't see any antogonisation towards foreign Christians in Muslim majority countries because of this. Surely there are some friction and sometimes violent cases between local Christian and Muslim communities at some places. But these are of course not results of the Crusades. They are rather communal conflicts. I'm doubtful if the Crusades has a significant place in social memory of most Muslim communities.
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Apr 2014 at 02:42
Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:


It's like this PoH- sure there are unknowns out there, but what sort of measure are you going to use to try and find out what they may be?
Amount of knowledge we do not possess is infinite. We should only bother with what's beneficial for us. 

And what is beneficial to us? A true notion of the cosmos, a better understanding of quantum mechanics, an inkling of the actual meaning of time..........you are raining subjectivity all over the place PoH, in the way rainstorms buffet your captain's adjacent rainforest. Without an
honest commitment to science, there are only wants and needs, most of which become obscure, as only slightly understood human motivations take over the external agenda, as they often do. Before science, there was merely surrender to our evolutionary inspired needs: survive, reproduce, stay on top, stay comfortable. Is that it? Your beneficial might not be my beneficial. Your (and everybodys) religion fits into one or more of these categories. This was the vast majority of history, up until very recent times, and is not over yet (look at M. Putin).

No, you say, it's in the scriptures? There is a sharp dividing line between anecdotal and scientific reasoning. Anecdotal goes like this: When I hear lightening, it sounds angry. I think it is the gods being angry. In fact, I have heard others say this. I think lightening comes from the gods. My old uncle Jake told me that there was a great flood, and all living things on earth were killed, except for a few that were saved by god, in a great ship. I know my uncle Jake is honest, and indeed I have heard other people tell the same story. I think there was a great flood. That's anecdotal reasoning. Sound familiar?

Scientific reasoning attempts to see the actual universe, by compensating for our various  bias and complicating factors. You are stating unequivocal support for Islam. This acceptance means answers to all of life's most vexing questions, and a glorious procession on to enternal life, acceptance in your community, and a general rosy glow. Furthermore, rejection of this belief system would no doubt cause all sorts of dislocations, disapproval, social problems, and perhaps worse in your location. Would you be able, even in a brief unguarded moment, to admit that there just might be a certain bit of bias creeping in to your reasoning? Because you have presented nothing here but a reiteration of medieval scribblings, and bits and bobs of philosophical thought that are unanchored in anything other than fancy.

They said, they wrote. In the 1950's they said, and wrote about superman and batman. In 2000 years or so, do you think archaeologists will see these figures as gods, or perhaps do a bit more digging to try and find some context and wider explanations? I hope they do.
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Apr 2014 at 19:34
Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

Because you have presented nothing here but a reiteration of medieval scribblings, and bits and bobs of philosophical thought that are unanchored in anything other than fancy.
I'm standing in awe. I never thought you would wander that far. Your way of thought is shaped by those "scribblings". 
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4308
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2014 at 02:55
What PoH has written reminds me of similar mind sets in radical Christianity.
 
If people honestly hold these types of thought, I suppose, that's their business and it's OK, until it starts to impact on an unwelcoming community.
 
I have to say that I'm agnostic. Science doesn't corroborate the religious claims, in fact it disproves most of them and mitigates against the remainder.
 
PoH's thoughts remind me also of a Christian sect and "Golden Plates", and the attempt to blend Christianity with Science.
 
But, he doesn't convince me, sorry.
 
But to get back to the question, I'm left believing that perhaps Islamic Fundamentalism is a much about power as it is about religion, perhaps more so.


Edited by toyomotor - 19 Apr 2014 at 02:58
Tiocfaidh ár lá
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2014 at 03:28
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

What PoH has written reminds me of similar mind sets in radical Christianity.
 
What hit's "the radical" in your compass, exactly?

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

I have to say that I'm agnostic. Science doesn't corroborate the religious claims, in fact it disproves most of them and mitigates against the remainder.
 
I see... Could you tell me what is the difference between science and magic exactly? I'm asking this for sharing basic epistemological concepts. Asking questions is best way to generate answers. 

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

PoH's thoughts remind me also of a Christian sect and "Golden Plates", and the attempt to blend Christianity with Science.

I only used one positive science (by science I assume you mean positive science) and that is formal logic. Muslims are very well aquinted with it from as early as 8th century and it's teaching became standart after 10th century.

I suppose you are influenced by Captain's these words:

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

 
And what is beneficial to us? A true notion of the cosmos, a better understanding of quantum mechanics, an inkling of the actual meaning of time..........you are raining subjectivity all over the place PoH, in the way rainstorms buffet your captain's adjacent rainforest
Well, Captain... Firstly, my interest on science was inexhaustible during my childhood and teenagehood. I red adult's Bilim & Teknik (Science & Technic) magazine instead of children's Bilim Çocuk (Science for Children) magazine when I was between 11-13. Then I was ended up in a science college - I even had a two hour long conversation with general director of Bilim & Teknik magazine in that college when he came for a seminar LOL. After that my interest shifted to social sciences. Of course what I know will influence what I think and surely I made some remarks with my knowledge of positive sciences. But they were in previous old topics, I don't see any such remarks in this topic.

By the way, FYI time and space is not just science fiction material. Properties of time and space discussed from ancient Greeks to this day. How extensively these are dealt by Muslim schoolars are well known. But I will show you something interesting. We call a third people as People of the Book alongside with Jews and Christians. They are Sabians and these are their thoughts about the God in perhaps as early as 7th century:

Originally posted by Wikipedia Wikipedia wrote:

 
They believed that the universe had a Creator and Sustainer, Who is Wise and above any resemblance to created beings, but many of them, or most of them, (i.e. the Sabians of Harran) said: we are unable to reach Him without intermediaries, so we have to approach Him through the mediation of spiritual and holy Bud Asaf who are pure and free of any physical elements and who are above place and time, rather they are created pure and holy.
 
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4308
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2014 at 07:17
Paradigm:
1. What hit's "the radical" in your compass, exactly?
When a sub-culture, and I use the term carefully, uses it's beliefs to the detriment of common sense, proven science, as well as the to the detriment of its members, I would call it radical.
 
2.I see... Could you tell me what is the difference between science and magic exactly? I'm asking this for sharing basic epistemological concepts. Asking questions is best way to generate answers. 
This question is facetious. Science is that which has been proven by documentation, research and experimentation, subjected to peer review and accepted as fact. Magic is illusionism.
 
3.I only used one positive science (by science I assume you mean positive science) and that is formal logic. Muslims are very well acquainted with it from as early as 8th century and it's teaching became standard after 10th century.
But it's logic instilled by religious brainwashing, virtually from birth.
 
4.I suppose you are influenced by Captain's these words....
Well, in this case, no. Although I will admit to being influenced by rational arguments posted by other members. I do not have a closed mind on most things, and I'm certainly not anti-Islam.
 
To the extent that I'd like to see the barriers between Islam, the Hebrew Religion, Christianity and others taken down, and that I'd like to see some of the Muslim countries benefit from modernity, I suppose I'm slightly pro Islam.
 
 
 
Tiocfaidh ár lá
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 916
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2014 at 00:44
I'm retiring from the topic out of lazyness. I couldn't figure out a short way to express my opinions. Only poetry could do that but that's never the truth itself, only it's image - like all of our sensory information. I heard there's a way to the Truth but only those who do not seek truths are allowed there.
the single postmodern virtue of obsessive egalitarianism
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2014 at 02:06
Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:

 
 
I see... Could you tell me what is the difference between science and magic exactly? I'm asking this for sharing basic epistemological concepts. Asking questions is best way to generate answers. 


It is a difference of degree. Some need no evidence, just a pleasant ride without too many bumps. You will see these folks reading the horoscope in the paper, and buying lurid magazines about UFO abductions and presidents that are really foreign born communists.

There is a certain logic in the various quotes you have presented, but they are philosophical musings, which stand on much slimmer foundations than those that have been subjected to a rigorous course, ie: the scientific method. Not that the latter is any guarantee, but it comes down to, do you want to know, or is knowing not important, just have a good story, and leave it at that. For many, that is all that is needed.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4308
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2014 at 04:19
Captain wrote:"
"There is a certain logic in the various quotes you have presented, but they are philosophical musings, which stand on much slimmer foundations than those that have been subjected to a rigorous course, ie: the scientific method. Not that the latter is any guarantee, but it comes down to, do you want to know, or is knowing not important, just have a good story, and leave it at that. For many, that is all that is needed."
 
I wish I had his eloquence.
 
I agree that science is not a guarantee, as it changes virtually from day to day as new discoveries are made. But there is a constant in science, it provides a logical evidence based foundation from which to argue or debate, and it's progressive.
 
I also agree that to some people belief and knowledge have become blurred. They have been told all of their lives that so and so is a fact, and, in their minds it becomes knowledge that cannot be budged.
 
This what I think could be the case in what I shall call, for the purposes of this discussion, regressive Islam. Those countries in which there is no separation of the powers-religion is the government, the law and the church, all rolled up into one. And at the head of some of these, are people who are so steadfast in their religious belief that it has become fact, undeniable, and regardless of science.
 
While some of these countries are so hobbled by history, they cannot advance in any of the major cultural aspects. Civil Liberties being one of those aspects.
 
I repeat, is it not possible that Islam can be dragged into the 21st Century in these countries?
 
 
Tiocfaidh ár lá
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2014 at 08:09
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:


 
I also agree that to some people belief and knowledge have become blurred. They have been told all of their lives that so and so is a fact, and, in their minds it becomes knowledge that cannot be budged.
 
This what I think could be the case in what I shall call, for the purposes of this discussion, regressive Islam. Those countries in which there is no separation of the powers-religion is the government, the law and the church, all rolled up into one. And at the head of some of these, are people who are so steadfast in their religious belief that it has become fact, undeniable, and regardless of science.
 
While some of these countries are so hobbled by history, they cannot advance in any of the major cultural aspects. Civil Liberties being one of those aspects.
 
I repeat, is it not possible that Islam can be dragged into the 21st Century in these countries?
 
 

I think it is a human attribute to decide what sort of life seems the most comfortable and entertaining, and then bend factual material about in vigorous ways until they fit with what is needed and desired. Metaphysical beings are of course of tremendous value in this exercise, as their powers go far beyond drab technicians and researchers. For the poor and marginalized, this is even more important, because they don't have comfort or entertainment at all, so are highly motivated to get some. It should be no surprise that Christianity is  now growing in the most benighted parts of the world, and shrinking in those areas in which the lifestyle doesn't need such anxious bending and twisting of fact, as it is not so bad as it is.

You might be interested in a book I recently read that outlines the rather incredible state of society in Saudi Arabia, the major redoubt of magic in the world today.

http://www.amazon.com/On-Saudi-Arabia-Religion-Lines/dp/0307473287
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4308
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2014 at 08:36
Captain:  Thank you.
 
I think I'm drained now on this topic, but I doubt if I will see change in my lifetime.
 
As you say, quite correctly, those who have nothing, have their faith.
 
Those have it all don't need it-generally speaking. Well, sometimes.
 
Yes-No


Edited by toyomotor - 21 Apr 2014 at 08:37
Tiocfaidh ár lá
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.