- AbdelRahman Siddig
- Doha
- Qatar
This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Can we live without a religion?
Many people associate the word religion to Islam , Christianity or Judaism
but religion word is much more than that
religion in short form is a "life style " believe or not
your life style is your religion
religion is a template with Basic fields
Who Made life ?
Why he made ?
What he want from you? in other word how should we spend our time in this word ?
any answers to the above question will form a religion regardless of the answers
Who Made life ? no one
Why he made ? I don't know
What he want from you? No thing
how should we spend our time in this word ? as I wish
this a complete religion
but the question will be is it True or false answers
What I want to say
"No one can live a single moment without a religion "
but he can live with true or false religion deepening on his answers
AbdelRahman Siddig
I do not know why TED change the time from open-end ?
any way I want to focus in 2 points
this topic was not about which religion is correct and which one is wrong
this topic about defining what is religion ???
many people disagree with my definition which was
religion is the answers to life fundamentals questions
Why life exists in first place ?
who made it ?
what he want from us?
the second point is
dis-believing is believing
so I believe in GOD I have my religion and if you believe there is no GOD you also have your own religion
say O non believers you have your own religion and I have mine
in other word each one have his own reference point which he refer to when things come across
A J
AbdelRahman Siddig
but you still have a religion which is based on this believe No God
Fabiano Barboza
But if we understand religion as the own consensus approves (a set of practices enticing spirituality), we can then work on true possibilities.
Personally, i think we can live without spiritual practices. But I direct my answer to the risk of defining such thing. Religion is the most personal thing a person may have. Even if the religion is practiced in group, faith comes from within. So I always fear statistics of democratic (majority) understandings about faith.
Katrina Musick
Humanity will probably not live without religion for a very long time, if ever.
My wish is that one day humans will be able to define morally right ways of life based on treating people how those people want to be treated, and helping out everyone selflessly, instead of a religion and a higher power's supposed desires. If we all did that, we'd never have to look out for ourselves because other people would. We're still animals though, unfortunately, so we'll probably never be able to do that either, as survival is our number one goal, and we wouldn't give up our last bit of food for most people.
Personally I think it is childish of humanity to have to be threatened in order for them to be nice to each other, and told that if you do good to the people who are like you and ignore/convert/kill/hurt/scare/annoy people who aren't they'll get a giant cookie/a crowd of virgins/whatever else they want when they die.
Just be good for the sake of being good, and you're going to die anyways, just cope with it.
AbdelRahman Siddig
There are some people planing to escape from death
Or at least wish if they could live for ever
Matt Zhang
Why he made ? I don't know
What he want from you? No thing
how should we spend our time in this word ? as I wish
this a complete religion
"No one can live a single moment without a religion "
Abdel, I would be cautious calling atheism a religion. Religiosity requires belief in the existence of a supernatural force or entity. Most atheists are naturalists, and reject supernaturalism as non-existent and from a logical approach non-sensical. As many atheists have consciously rejected the religions they were raised with, the definition of atheism as a religion could be seen by some as not only incorrect, but even offensive. Certainly, most philosophies within atheism require a certain minimal degree of belief within the bounds of epistemology (eg. the continuity of the laws of nature) but as no supernatural elements are involved, these belief systems are not technically religions.
Benjamin Torrence
I think people are a little foolish in thinking that religion is caused by a need for a deity or such. Many people simply believe. It's not that they can't live without it.
Kodiak Krapf
In my eyes your comparing apples and oranges, if James didnt know who the owner of the home was then he could go and shake Tony's hand and see that he is a physical being. If some one asked if God is real and i replied no, then they said well here he is, come shake his hand, they would remove all doubt.
AbdelRahman Siddig said "GOD does not explain every thing to us but he explained in clear details which path we should walk into to escape from hell and enter haven" GOD does not explain anything directly to us but more on the lines of vicariously through many disciples who wrote in a book in their own words years after the death of his son
Shokrullah Amiri 10+
Let’s do not forget why a religion came into being for.Let’s not forget what was happening before religions.
What you lose in having religion?
Jim Moonan 30+
I'll say it again
God is a concept by which we measure our pain."
-Lyric from the song "God" by John Lennon
inthegarden beyondthecave
Since we are all born into a world in which we make decisions, we are all in need of some set of beliefs to base our decisions upon. These will include beliefs about what should be done and what should be believed. If for purposes of this discussion, we want to call such a belief system a "religion", then yes, everyone needs a religion. On the other hand, if we want to define religion as a set of beliefs that includes beliefs about supernbatural beings, then the answer is no, we do not need that.
Another way of defining religion is by looking at the sort of justification that the beliefs have. Scientific beliefs supposedly require empirical justification. It is sometimes supposed that religious beliefs are different since empirical jusification is not required. So the question "can we live without religion" could be restated as "Do we need to have at least some beliefs that are not subject to empirical verification?"
I think the answer to that question is yes. Certain evaluative beliefs about the difference between good and bad are needed in order to make decisions, but those beliefs are not subject to fully empirical verification.
So, each of us needs a core of moral beliefs. Those may or may not include beliefs about supernatural beings. If you want to call this moral core a "religion" even if it does not include beliefs about supernatural beings, then we each need a "religion". If you want to define religion as a set of beliefs about supernatural beings, then religion is not necessary.
Of course the difficult question has to do with what our moral core "ought" to be. That question seems to require a circular, self justifying answer. Usually we do not like circular reasoning. What should we do in this situation?
Tony Kuphaldt 10+
Who Made Life: I don't know
Why He Made: I don't know
What He Want From You: I don't know
How Should We Spend Our Time In This World: I don't know
If the person giving these answers is honest (i.e. the person honestly does not know who made life, etc.), then those answers are indeed true. Does that person therefore live with a true religion?
AbdelRahman Siddig
AbdelRahman Siddig
and when James been asked this question who is the owner of the home
He replied I do not know
Is his answer is correct
He is honest is his answer but his honesty does not remove the fact which
Is Tony is the owner of the home
Tony Kuphaldt 10+
The reason why I asked this question is because you include "I don't know" as a religion. My question to you is whether or not an honest declaration of ignorance is itself a religion, as you seem to say in your introduction. If "I don't know" is not a religion, then we must conclude it is definitely possible to live without a religion because many people live without answers to these very questions. On the other hand, if "I don't know" is a religion, then I would ask whether or not it is a *true* religion. Does "true religion" leave room for uncertainty, even if that is the most honest answer a person can give?
You and I have corresponded on other threads, and I see the same pattern here: you seem to hold that there are definite answers to these questions which we can be absolutely sure of. I agree with you that there indeed are definite answers to these questions, but I do not see how any human being can know those answers with certainty. The possibilities are so vast, the evidence so scanty, and our perception of reality so veiled by physical and mental limitations, that the only honest response I see for any fallible human being is to admit they don't really know.
This is where "religion" steps in: religions of all kinds encourage people to be sure about things they lack the ability to confirm or deny. This is what separates mere hope from religious faith: a certainty beyond reason. This is also what people like myself try to avoid: we see the dangers inherent to faith, and choose to temper our hopes with the knowledge of our own limitations.
AbdelRahman Siddig
because simply some people when they are not sure which path to take
and they say it is not important all path are the same its does not matter
but in reality they must be walking in certain path our jumping between them
"Does "true religion" leave room for uncertainty, "
yes it does but not in major topics
like why we are here
GOD does not explain every thing to us
but he explained in clear details which path we should walk into to escape from hell and enter haven
so the are a room for uncertainty in most of the thing around us but not in which way we should take
Tony Kuphaldt 10+
However, saying "I don't know" is not a religion. Rather, it is the absence of belief. It is possible to live without religion. Many people do it every day, myself included.
Tim blackburn 30+
Niko Stolwijk
My answer is yes ! I decided to do so when I was 12 years of age based on my interest of science!
Religion has a function in primitive societies but the more knowledge humans aquiered it became more obsolete.
Dawkins mentioned in his book (The God delusion)(sometimes he is too aggresive but I seperate the message from the messenger) that a jesuit priest once said "give me a young child and I'll turn him or her into a firm believer". This was based on the survival instinct of a child which has to learn quick and without critisism in a dangerous world to survive.
In smart persons raised in a religious environment acquiring knowledge leads sometimes to an internal conflict and most of the times artificial solutions are found to handle this.! (The explanation of Dawkins is not completely satisfactory because sometimes atheist become believers!)
Arguments that a person becomes a worse person when leaving a religion is incorrect! The basic biology still works and your personality is based on your biology. A quite person will stay a quite person leaving a religion or going the other way has no effect
My argument is that the impact of leaving a religion has more a social impact. Will you be extradited or even killed when you leave a religion? Leaving science has never had such an extreme impact. '
My question is : when you live for a mere 85 years in an universe 13,5 billion years old are you going to be hinderd by religion or are you going to look for the real truth?
You will be death longer then alive so use it to the max to do good and develop your self in a universal (wo)man.
A nicer scientific question would be:
How does religion work?
Is there a difference between the brain of believers and non believers?
How do people handle internal conflicts metioned above?
Cameron Garcia
The questions posed by 'why' are not those that can be answered by science, but by philosophy.
AbdelRahman Siddig
man output is actions (talk , walk, thought,..etc)
this actions is driven from his believe
his believe is driven from what he his think is right
every one has his one thought about life (Religion) which he think is right
Tim blackburn 30+
Obviously by all the answeres around here this is not true.
Cameron Garcia
Religion is beyond just simple 'way I live my life.' This is so because the moral system ('way to live life') of a religion is derived from a myth (ie, story), whereas 'lifestyle' doesn't need that myth inorder to exist. It is a simple, yet very forcible, difference.
And, in accordance with the question posed by the title of this conversation ("Can we live without a religion?"), I would say it's possible to live without religion, since 'lifestyles' don't have to derive from myth. However, this brings up the argument of living 'correctly,' thus leading to arguments of moral objectivity and whether or not morality comes from God/G_D/Allah/etc.
(It's beyond the scope of the current discussion that this post is in, but I think goes with where this discussion should go, in relation with the title of the conversation.)
AbdelRahman Siddig
Tim blackburn 30+
Cameron Garcia
Tim blackburn 30+
AbdelRahman Siddig
belief of what life is all about is core of the religion
do not tell you do not have a belief of what life is all about
you have one for sure
that is your religion . whether you get it from story or you made it your self it does not matter
what matter is you have this belief of what life is all about
Tim blackburn 30+
AbdelRahman Siddig
Cameron Garcia
This is just an argument of semantics.
I agree with a 'personal belief system' (ie, a system of beliefs that I create myself, for myself, from my understanding instead of from someone/thing else), but don't agree that it's a religion.
Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
In this wonderfl address wise posits that religion, in its broadest sense is humanity's moral compass. It is that part of humanity which cares for others, that has compassion, that has reverence for creatures and growing things, that aspires, hopes, wrestles with questions of "justice". It is all of that inner faculty we all possess that is about the qulaitative,not the quantitiative, that is beyond resaon. As individuals, to fully actualize as fellow members of mankind, to fully realize our own unique gifts we need the fullest possible expression of both our minds and our ability to think and the fullest posisble development of our moral compass.
Malcolm Goodson
Although much that is good about the world has stemmed from religion, art, philosophy, science, was the pain of all the intolerance, suffering and downright cruelty worth it? If we knew then what we know now, would we have ever started down the path to 'organised' religion? Perhaps it IS time to let it go.
AbdelRahman Siddig
for sure you can it let go but it will not let you ago
GOD will bring alive again after you die
Malcolm Goodson
"Gott ist tot; aber so wie die Art der Meschen ist,wird es vielleicht noch jahrtausendlang Hoehlen geben, in denen man seinen Schatten zeigt." (F.Nietzsche)
Salim Solaiman 50+
Jordin Agnew
Matthieu Miossec 100+
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
the original reason of war is greed. and religion is a tool in hand of emperors to collect more soldiers using beliefs of believers.
you mean kings will stop war when there is no religion?
so secular countries should not have any war.
Matthieu Miossec 100+
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
Brandon Cavalho
ancient religions like the Greeks believe in the concept of many gods and how the world was created but really did not catch on
what makes religion so special like Christianity, Islam and Judaism is they explain in the holy books is how life is created in the world and also how to live your life
so you are right that it is associated to having a life style like in modern religion today and we all have different life styles
but sometimes people just define religion as believing in something that is make believe or supernatural
a good example is a person who is a atheist who does not believe in a type of god but is able to live a good lifestyle
its true that we still don't have full understanding of life was created and the existence of life, that we rally on religion so much that there is a number of religious studies, anthropologists, and archaeologists take this in a serious manner of looking for truth
Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
Matthieu Miossec 100+
Abhiram Lohit 10+
All the moral and ethical teachings have value for the preservation of the human race. Divine punishment was only an excuse to make simple-minded people behave. The intelligent ones don't need threats of "eternal damnation" to behave in a civilized and decent manner to one another.
If, on the other hand, you want to say that there is a sum total of existence that is eternal, and undergoes modifications to form and un-form the universe, then there is no objection. Let humans be the final authority on human affairs.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
who is that man?
"Let humans be the final authority on human affairs."
what if afterlife existed? who will be authority?
do you promise to help me if I was in Hell?
Abhiram Lohit 10+
2) is a ruthless dictator who is immature and childish and wants his "people" to kill others only because they worship another ruthless dictator who is also immature and childish.
3) is so undivine and utterly and lowly human that he needs a "business agreement" like cutting off foreskins or sacrificing sons to prove that we will not "cheat" on the "business deal". And if somebody cheats, KILL THEM! Even if they were the kindest people you ever met.
4) talks in terms of "kingdoms and rule" like any other worldly human.
And so on and so forth.
Do you get my point? All of this is a construction by human beings, for human beings. Even the afterlife.
Once you're dead, that's it. There's nothing that's going to travel to some other place. It's all recycled around on the Earth. I need proof that there is heaven or hell. For me heaven is here if I'm happy and hell is here if I'm in pain. So I try to be happy and make others happy RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
the God I know is Allah.
and about Allah:
"tell him everyday how powerful he is." does not mean he is insecure.
pray is like home work and has no benefit for God and all has benefit for human.
does a teacher need to homework?
God is not man nor human nor material.
God has no son
God does not need needs cutting off foreskins. its for human health and is a proof for obeying God. but God does not need it and human has free will to obey or not obey.
God selected the 'high" attribute for himself and banned it for human to unselfish humans be known.
"Do you get my point?"
yes
" All of this is a construction by human beings, '
disagree. so who made Koran?
"There's nothing that's going to travel to some other place"
proof?
death is like sleep. how do you travel in sleep dream?
"I need proof that there is heaven or hell."
Koran.
"For me heaven is here if I'm happy "
heaven has no end. but happy in this world has end and is always beside a pain.
"and hell is here if I'm in pain. "
pain is only a tiny sample of Hell.
"So I try to be happy and make others happy RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW."
so what about after death?
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
yes.
but it is risky.
because no one could prove afterlife not exist.
so it is risky like driving at high speed with no insurance.
or building a home not resistant to earthquake.
Matthieu Miossec 100+
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
I am Muslims and I have no risk. I do is doing pray some minutes in day and fasting one month per year. this makes life risky?
"Maybe we're part of a cyclic universe and this conversation will happen time and time again. "
I can not live with maybe and perhaps. I prefer to life with evidence. until know the most certain evidence I have found is Koran and TRUE Islam.
also Imam Sadiq (PBUH) said:
"God has 12000 universe."
"Maybe we're part of a cyclic universe and this conversation will happen time and time again"
not maybe. according to Islamic sayings this happened and happens again and again.
but please note each human has only one life. and we will not have any new opportunity after our death.
*** today is doing and not result. tomorrow is result and not doing ***
prophet Muhammad (PBUH)
I pick by wisdom. not random.
also about eating the important ones is wine and pork, blood. eating of other does usually not happen so much in life.
Matthieu Miossec 100+
Tony Kuphaldt 10+
"I can not live with maybe and perhaps." Now you're getting to the real reason for religion. People crave security, and religion offers security above and beyond all else.
Jim Moonan 30+
In that regard, by virtue of your decision to follow the teachings of Islam to the exclusion of all else, you have taken an extreme risk. It may very well suit your own definition of living life to the fullest, but others - those who adhere to different religious teachings and those who don't look to religion at all to find meaning in life - all are in a very real sense taking their own paths towards earthly death. Life is risky, but there is no "insurance" you can buy to minimize that risk.
Jim Moonan 30+
This is the elephant in the church/temple/mosque!
For me, religion would be the easy way out of the difficult yet beautiful labyrinth of life.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
I only relay on some of them.
some who are said by Koran itself.
Koran itself like pieces of a puzzle guided us which interpret is accepted by God and Koran.
Koran always has at least one alive true interpreter even today.
I explained who are them here:
http://www.ted.com/conversations/3351/understanding_quran.html
"An interpretation rife with manipulation."
agree.
please reading different interpretations for science and general information about Koran does not mean relay.
for relay only few interpretations are valid.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
please read this thread:
http://www.ted.com/conversations/3351/understanding_quran.html?c=266738
carefully to know which interpret of Koran is reliable and which is not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_of_the_two_weighty_things
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fourteen_Infallibles
each of them have lots of reliable interpret of Koran. and other is valid only if have enough certain proof.
please not studying interpret in having more knowledge about Koran is different of reliable interpret.
you know anythings in newspaper but not all things you read is reliable.
only interpret having enough support by proof and rational and sayings of prophet and Ahl al Bayt are reliable. not any interpret.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
1- Pascal's Wager is a rational and logical argument independent of any religion. it is first step and next step is selecting true religion.
2- religion as Insurance is the min. benefit of religion and benefits of believing is not limited to it. but as Insurance it is min. req. to be safe from Hell.
3-"Maybe we're both wrong" this is logically true. then what? this causes leaving all religions completely?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religions_and_spiritual_traditions
the reply is simple: researching among religions to find out which is the true religion God satisfy (by assumption that God exist in this Insurance plan)
Tony Kuphaldt 10+
If, for example, Buddhists are correct by teaching that eternal suffering is caused by craving, and that this cycle may be broken only by relinquishing those cravings, then Pascal's Wager may be used to argue for *not* clinging to a God who grants love and eternal bliss. This simple change in initial assumptions reveals Pascal's Wager to be a circular argument: it assumes the very thing it argues for.
Another problem I see with Pascal's Wager is that it offers God as a means to an end, rather than an end itself. Many religious people I know would take offence at this notion, that God would honor the faith of someone who is merely looking to get a piece of heaven for themselves. To them, faith springs from a deep love of God with no expectation of reward.
Thirdly, Pascal's Wager ignores the immediate harm done to the individual by believing in something as a means to an end. I would argue that choosing to believe in something primarily to appease a superior is to sell out your own integrity.
There may very well be good reasons to believe in God, but a wager based on the probability of personal gain is not one of them.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
what if God did not accept your self made religion at Judgement day?
Matthieu Miossec 100+
what if Odin did not accept your self made religion on Judgment day?
Matt Zhang
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
Jim said that this is his beliefs so it is made by himself.
I do not let myself make any reigion. because if only one human follow me I should be responsible for his sins at Judgement day and I am partner in every deed of him.
I try to not say anything out of Koran and Hadith (sayings of Fourteen Infallibles)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fourteen_Infallibles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_of_the_two_weighty_things
if I be successful do not not add anything from myself then it is not self made and it is Muhammad (PBUH) made which is actually God made.
at Judgement day God is Judge and judge is based on rules of God. not rules of any one other.
at Judgement day God says to who believe in anything other than God:
http://tanzil.net/#search/quran/%D8%B4%D8%B1%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%8A
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
it is talking about after death.
Indeed not believing had rewards before death.
"If the possibility of reward for non-belief "
at least one evidence for this should be. but bible and Koran and Torah says other thing.
about Buddhism it needs research. I consider Buddhist beliefs specially returning to world after death false.
anyway this is start and is not all. after start much research about religions and God is needed.
Tony Kuphaldt 10+
Ironically, that's what Pascal's Wager was based on: an argument for faith based solely on the probability of reward for having faith, in the absence of evidence either for or against the existence of God. What I'm saying is that Pascal's Wager is a circular argument: it argues for the very thing it assumes. Assume that there is the possibility of reward for belief (with no reward for non-belief), and it leads you to the "safest bet" of belief. But if you admit the possibility of reward for non-belief, Pascal's Wager might just lead you to skepticism. Like all circular arguments, Pascal's Wager is arbitrary and therefore invalid.
I am very curious what you would propose a person do as "research" to verify a religious claim about the afterlife, and specifically what one must do to enter Heaven.
Abhiram Lohit 10+
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
I did not understand.
please explain.
Abhiram Lohit 10+
So then people are being motivated to be good only because they will go to heaven, and not because they genuinely care for and have consideration for other people.
That is like a bribe.
What will happen as a result is that people will stop being creative. They will only look to their holy books for what to do and what not to do. When a new situation arises that was not mentioned in the holy book, they will still react in old ways, which may not be suitable to the newer problems. The essence of being in the world is to adapt and change as the world changes. Strict adherence to centuries-old books without adaptation is like not accepting change and living in the past.
I'm not saying there's no good in holy books, but we should be allowed to take the spirit of the holy books and reframe it for the changing times.
For example, in this age of scientific research and rational explanation, the concept of an afterlife is, with all due respect, a little silly. It can still remain as a belief, but we should not base our behavior on that belief. That is very simple-minded.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
not only for Hell.
the pray and obeying God is in 3 category:
1- for fear of Hell
2- for greed of Heaven
3- some pray and obey God because they found God worthy to appreciate.
not the pray of all people are the same.
"What will happen as a result is that people will stop being creative. "
disagree. God wants to people be creative.
"When a new situation arises that was not mentioned in the holy book, they will still react in old ways, "
disagree. religion laws are like formula and has some principals and new secondary rules can be made according to new happenings. in Islam this is called fatwa.
religion is compatible with change.
"I'm not saying there's no good in holy books, but we should be allowed to take the spirit of the holy books and reframe it for the changing times."
already religion is so.
"For example, in this age of scientific research and rational explanation, the concept of an afterlife is, with all due respect, a little silly."
many things were silly before discovery by sciense.
until there is no evidece or proof for disproving afterlife a rational human does not deny it.
"It can still remain as a belief, but we should not base our behavior on that belief. "
why?
the behaviors that religion wants are not silly. I do not know what special behavior you say? if there is any God we should obey it. perhaps you say some behaviors in deviated and changed religion during history. when a religion is expired and out of date God send his new and updated religion.
"That is very simple-minded."
every thing has its price. people maybe befool a believer. but real believer does not care about it.
Abhiram Lohit 10+
"3- some pray and obey God because they found God worthy to appreciate".
I'm glad for you if you believe this.
Have your beliefs, have your religion, have your God, but please don't force others to do as you do.
Because each and every argument that you put forth on behalf of Allah, a Christian can do the same on behalf of his God, a Jew can do the same on behalf of his Yahweh, a Zoroastrian can do the same on behalf of Ahura Mazda, a Buddhist can do the same on behalf of the Buddha, a Hindu can do the same on behalf of his numerous Gods.
Your religion may be good from what you describe, but that is not what we see in the world. How you treat other people shows more of your religion than what is in the books.
The Arabs from the 7th century onwards have been going around and destroying other cultures and Islamizing every civilization. Even in Iran they forced conversion of the Zoroastrians to Islam or massacred thousands who refused to convert. They are now a minority in their own country, or moved to other countries. I don't have to repeat facts from history here.
To think that only you or your religion is true and only your God is true speaks of supreme arrogance and egoism. When different languages, skin colors and bone structures are equal, how can you say that one conception of the same Divine Spirit is lower than the other.
Can you go into the minds of other people to see what they feel about their conception of God? If not, out of respect, leave every person to his/her own God an his/her own beliefs. We can only dare to demand civil behavior from one another and nothing more.
From your arguments, I see that you are not willing to step outside of your beliefs and put forth reasonable statements. You use circular logic - "why is Koran good? Because we believe so. Why do we believe so? because the Koran says so. Why does the Koran say so? Because it is good"
I will stop here. Peace be with you and to others around you.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
religions are two type
1- God made like Abraham religions
2- man made
the 2 are only superstition
the one are now all expired unless Islam. why Gods sends new prophet? Jesus after Moses and Muhammad after Jesus (peace on them all)?
is not the latest religion more original?
it depends of if God exist or not.
please first research it then about religion
if God exist then God decides which religion is true and accepted not you.
you say all are true. this is pluralism.
please read:
http://www.al-islam.org/religiouspluralism/
http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/default.asp?url=pluralism.htm
not all beliefs are truth.
please do not prejudice about me.
yes some Muslims use circular logic. but not all.
when I used circular logic?
this is your belief.
AbdelRahman Siddig
why do you gain skills to work for a company which will take care of your needs
this the default nature of human
run after gain and run away from pain
David Meiden 10+
Oh, and everybody please stop bending the definition of religion. Everyone needs beliefs because it's simply impossible to fact-check everything you hear. Organized faith-groups with rules on how to live and what to believe on the other hand, are completely unnecessary and actually damaging in the long run (and they've been here for a looooong run already).
P.S.: Using terms like 'TRUE religion' and 'real believers' really makes you sound arrogant and as brainwashed as all the other suckers who think their religion is true and real.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
can this be a prove?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager
"in fact that fear is a product of your religion."
no fear is from wisdom and logic and possibility of danger.
"and at least be neutral,"
at least is Hell.
"because I don't have the outrageous belief that a being that created everything would punish me eternally for simply being human."
your belief does not change situation if Hell exist.
not for being human. but because you had wisdom at your life and did not seek and find and obey God.
"Please stop using TED for evangelical purposes."
1-I am not christian
2- I do not see such think in ted terms
"P.S.: Using terms like 'TRUE religion' and 'real believers' really makes you sound arrogant and as brainwashed as all the other suckers who think their religion is true and real."
OK. but this not prove 'TRUE religion' and 'real believers' not exist even if all religious people be brainwashed.
also washed brain is more clean then unwashed brain!
David Meiden 10+
You say that the fear of hell is due to 'wisdom and logic and possibility of danger' while only the possibility of danger is a real (and in my opinion) the only good reason for fear. Seeing that hell is as likely to exist as fairies and unicorns and equally unprovable, for me the probability is so low that it's not something to worry about.
My mother, who loves me, always used reasonable punishment when I did something wrong and only to teach me something. Believing that a being, which is infinitely more intelligent and loving than my mother, could punish me for eternity without the possibilty of me learning from the experience is something I have no reason to believe.
I'm sorry to say this but you try to come of as a rational person while at the same time you're completely oblivious to the irrationality of your beliefs. Like all the other fruitless 'discussions' I've had with religious people this won't go anywhere because your faith is sealed in a part of your brain which has shut itself off from reality and that's one of the things which makes religion so scary to me.
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
so better to wait to see the result of your low probability after death.
see you there!
Katrina Musick
S.R. Ahmadi 20+
also kind of statements of who can not prove afterlife not exist but believe it.
they are called materialists.
they believe only material exist with no prove for not existence of soul and God and Hell and NDE and sleep dreams (seen by soul not for reflection of day activities) and many other non-material facts.
I wonder how they reject what they do not know and can not prove it not exist although there are many facts about their existence (even science have no clear explain for them)
which kind of statements are more irrational? my statement or materialists statements?
also I say this statement as final reply to who do not consider any value to some arguments like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager and are not ready to accept anything non-material exist.
this is my final reply after lots of arguments. not my first reply.
but terrorists have no talk their first reply is killing before any talk.
Muslims first talk then kill only who block Muslims from spreading their ideas.
terrorists first kill then not talk.
what are called who kill Muslims in Palestine, Iraq, Bahrain, Pakistan,...? are they terrorists? or only Muslims are terrorist? and when Muslims are killed "terrorist" change name to "human right" and "peace in middle east"?
what is the name of killing children in Palestine?
http://rememberthesechildren.org/about.html
http://www.ifamericansknew.com/stats/children.html
http://rememberthesechildren.org/remember2000.html
why word terrorist is used only for Muslims? who decide about this? do you disagree TV learns this to people? who controls the larges TV channels?
Katrina Musick
We all decide to have different toothpaste, hair colors, clothes, and shoes, without killing each other. Why can't we have different beliefs and rituals?
Comment deleted
Matthieu Miossec 100+
Comment deleted
Comment deleted
Comment deleted