Have you heard of this prophetic hadith?

[Bilal Abdur-Raheem]

Really? Amazing...so if one doesn't believe in G!d then they must believe rape, murder and incest are OK? That is an unsubstantiated leap of biblical proportions.

Seems there is a plethora of believers in prisons and not many atheists.

But I thought Mohammed (pbuh) was the last prophet? Hadith's are word of Allah?

Straw man! I never said anyone who doesn't believe in God must believe rape, murder, and incest are okay. Never said that. I said that they can NOT say conclusively with any authority that those things are wrong. They just can't. Without a higher power, an absolutely objective authority, these things become just matters of opinion. Without said authority you can never prove those things are wrong no matter how hard you try. We have seen in the varying civilizations of history varying values and ideas of morality. Those things can change with society. It is not set in stone without a higher power.

And...not sure what was meant by your last sentence, but I will try to expound on it.
Yes Muhammad salla allahu alihi wa salaam, was the final messenger of God. The ahadith are not equal in authority with the Qur'an which is the eternal word of Allah. It is however a part of the sunna and example of the Prophet (pbuh).

 

[wil]

So rape, murder, and incest, all these things are not truly wrong.

Well I guess we have nothing to speak of... I really don't wanna know your justification for rape.

I say it is truly wrong...as well as incest and murder...

 

[Bilal Abdur-Raheem]

Well I guess we have nothing to speak of... I really don't wanna know your justification for rape.

I say it is truly wrong...as well as incest and murder...

Thats where you're going with this? An insult? Insinuating I defend atrocious acts? I was simply stating a truth. Without an objective authority for right or wrong it becomes simply a matter of opinion. I have never heard anyone offer a valid answer to that and you have yet to either. Still no need to insult brother.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

Without formal religion's edicts we will act selfishly and form mafioso groups headed by megalomaniacs. This is the default behavior of people confined for generation in geographical areas that facilitate autonomous growth. When the faculty for autonomous growth dwindles [ie drought etc] the population seeks to expand its territories. Of course, during thew dark-ages, the world had been reduced to myriads of tribal units that experienced generations of inbreeding and limited know-how and limited self-interests ---and the colonisation era had then emerged, when first come-first served rules applied.

OTOH, I have read threads that were titled:
**Can't people be 'Moral without a religion'?**

 

[Bhaktajan II]

According to the Vedas of India [BTW I think India was founded in 1947 ---correct?], according to the Vedas of India, we are in an epoch named Kali-yuga. This epoch is named as the forth [out of a total of four epochs]. After this 4th epoch ends, the cycle of 4 epoch repeat, starting with the 1st epoch. According to the Vedas of India this last [the forth] epoch will see mankind evolve into pygmie baby eaters. And any fragment of knowledge of "Dharma" will be lost.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

When Dharma is lost there is a need for an Avatar to advent and instruct some degree of Dharma.

So when Dharma is destroyed it is certainly an end of an era.

Some scriptures discuss mundane human demands for comfort and pleasure and its means of continuance.

Some scriptures discuss release from repetitive suffering.

Some scriptures discuss service to Godhead's personage.

Some scriptures simply discuss when to plant seeds.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

I confess that I don't have faith in any religion that is composed of words of a soothsayer.

I accept original texts that define religions ONLY as historical writings. As history books that document what was written.

I don't feel compelled to believe in the words of a "Farmer's Almanac" printed in 1870 ---but I accept that it is an authentic relic of history.

 

[wil]

That simply is not true...atheists follow laws...you'll find a higher percentage of believers in prison than on the street. And a higher percentage of atheists on the street than in prisons.

Obeying laws is not a justification for religion

I only challenged the words you use and statements you have made.

 

[Craz]

That simply is not true...atheists follow laws...you'll find a higher percentage of believers in prison than on the street. And a higher percentage of atheists on the street than in prisons.

Obeying laws is not a justification for religion

I only challenged the words you use and statements you have made.

What I find really scary is when a religious person says "I would happily murder if it was not forbidden in scripture"(eg 10 commandments). I have had people say this to me several times.

 

[Bilal Abdur-Raheem]

That simply is not true...atheists follow laws...you'll find a higher percentage of believers in prison than on the street. And a higher percentage of atheists on the street than in prisons.

Obeying laws is not a justification for religion

I only challenged the words you use and statements you have made.

That doesn't dispute what I said at all. Nazi's followed laws in Hitler's Germany, and the laws were wrong. They were downright evil. Law's are simply a man made reflection of current social mores that actually validates my statement. Laws can not be a substitute for morality, they are based on a moral code. So again, there is no morality without an objective standard. So thanks for proving my point.

And seeing as you continue to repeat the line about more believers than atheists being incarcerated I'm going to ask for some proof. Some proof that these so called "believers" actually believe that is, seeing as how following the tenets of the major religions couldn't possibly land one in jail or prison. Not that it proves anything, as religion obviously has nothing to do with crime, but if you're gonna keep repeating it, please back it up.

 

[Bilal Abdur-Raheem]

What I find really scary is when a religious person says "I would happily murder if it was forbidden in scripture"(eg 10 commandments). I have had people say this to me several times.

That's maybe scary someone would say that, but seeing as none of the major world religions condone or command murder it's not a major problem. Of course it is illogical to assume that if the actual Creator of the universe commanded a thing that us selfish, falliable, and corrupt humans could ever attempt to label it immoral or wrong as if we would be better judges. Lol I don't think humans have done a very great job so far of being moral authorities. The very idea is comical that some insignificant human being could shake his finger at the Creator of all things and dare presume to tell Him who knows all things, that something He does or commands is "wrong." Wow glad the fate of the world is not in human hands. We are so weak and emotional.

 

[Craz]

That's maybe scary someone would say that, but seeing as none of the major world religions condone or command murder it's not a major problem. Of course it is illogical to assume that if the actual Creator of the universe commanded a thing that us selfish, falliable, and corrupt humans could ever attempt to label it immoral or wrong as if we would be better judges. Lol I don't think humans have done a very great job so far of being moral authorities. The very idea is comical that some insignificant human being could shake his finger at the Creator of all things and dare presume to tell Him who knows all things, that something He does or commands is "wrong." Wow glad the fate of the world is not in human hands. We are so weak and emotional.

Just to be clear what scares me is that without their religion, some would happily murder. It scares me that people like that exist, so the religion keeps them in check. The same as the non-religious are kept in check regards murder.
As regards your views on humans, I like us humans and have faith that we will continue to grow and create a wonderful society through continual striving for more knowledge and resolution of our differences thru the raising of consciousness enough to see our inner unity.

 

[wil]

d I'm going to ask for some proof....Not that it proves anything

Now that is the cornerstone of discussion, give me evidence, and then I'll deny it is evidence!

We are a much better society today, less murder, rape and violence than the days of the Bible and Koran...

Love the Hitler quote though... Two things that almost always indicate discussion is lost...name calling and/or a Hitler reference.

Hint, it doesn't take laws or religion to keep me from murder, rape and incest.

Craz's point is clear....

 

[Ahanu]

Craz's point is clear....

Is it? I just want to clarify something.

Just to be clear what scares me is that without their religion, some would happily murder.

Well, in a tribal world it is more clear, I think. As Wil pointed out . . .

We are a much better society today, less murder, rape and violence than the days of the Bible and Koran...

The ancient tribal worlds of Moses and Muhammad were far more violent. The likelihood you'd be killed by another human being back then increases. Let's suppose a rival tribe, which lost its animals, comes to steal our tribe's animals. It's not hard to imagine that many people in my tribe would be ready for a fight. Why? Starvation is not far away. With few resources, people are constantly fighting over water, pastureland, food, and so on. Religion is the glue for our tribesmen. Should I attack? Should I not? Do you believe tribesmen needed religion to "keep them in check"? I do.

Now in the modern world society has changed . . .

Hint, it doesn't take laws or religion to keep me from murder, rape and incest.

Because we in the modern world stand on the shoulders of our ancestors, we can see that clearly. Wil, you and Craz have never encountered a society that lacks religion, nor have either of you ever lived in a society where religion hasn't had a significant influence. Statements like "it doesn't take laws or religion to keep me from murder" are declared after living in the long shadow of religious morality, after many of the non-religious have unknowingly or not internalized some religious values, and after we've been lifted up from our violent tribal past. Nietzsche knew the complete disappearance of Christianity's moral values would lead to new moral values not yet decided. No society has fully realized Nietzsche's "death of God", because "we still have yet to vanquish his shadow."

 

[wil]

Religious influence on the world has wained the past thousand years as humans got more humane.

It is the secular influence that provides the US with civil rights movement, women's rights, american disability act, sexual preference rights, national health care... In the US.the Conservative Party, the one that thinks it holds the corner on god and virtue that has fought all these advances in society.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

it doesn't take laws or religion to keep me from murder, rape and incest.

The law breaker and the law's up-holder both share a common-denominator [in regards to good vs bad] is: Self-Interest.

It's the repercussions that good do-er seeks to avoid;
It's the disruptive actions that bad do-er "opines" are an edict.

The good do-er knows his place & duties.
The bad do-er thinks his place & duties are "whatever he says it is".

The good do-er "supports the team",
the other paints an chaotic abstract.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

Religious influence on the world has waned the past thousand years as humans got more humane.

It is the secular influence that provides the US with civil rights movement, women's rights, american disability act, sexual preference rights, national health care... In the US.the Conservative Party, the one that thinks it holds the corner on god and virtue that has fought all these advances in society.

There is the old meme: Historically, religions caused all the wars. [Btw I don't agree. I say it wars were always prompted by "Profiteering ventures"].

By 1899 modern man [simultaneously the far end of the spectrum existed in, say, the jungles of the amazon forests] had every comfort and knowledge of "enlightened mankind" . . . thus, the sceptre of the 'capos' announced campaigns as a means to an end ---by the prowess of their own design.

Repeating the same old thing to get a different result . . . is made much worse when those past attempts were lost to memory, and thus the repetition cycle re-starts.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

Could it be that "Bees" is a metaphor.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

That simply is not true...atheists follow laws...you'll find a higher percentage of believers in prison than on the street. And a higher percentage of atheists on the street than in prisons.

Obeying laws is not a justification for religion

I only challenged the words you use and statements you have made.

Not sure Wil if this post was addressing me. [If so, I don't see yet what prompted it...what did I say inre yr reply?]

Aside from that I have a fresh reply to Wil's post above:

Karma is NOT a religious concept.
Karma is a religious mechanical construct.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

CORRECTION [since I can't edit my own post]:

Karma is NOT a religious concept.
Karma is a mechanical construct.


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
By extension, my last post [imo] contends that:

Samsara* is NOT a religious concept.
Samsara* is a mechanical construct.


*Samsara = cycle of birth and death; the soul travels to a new body to inhabit at the time of death.


PS: When a Christian says "I dont believe in reincarnation"...I think, "of course not, it is not defined in your scripture, that's not my fault"
and then When I hear a Christian say Jesus rose from the dead; and that there is an afterlife ...I think, "Wha? That's reincarnation. An afterlife is all about reincarnation. A paradise beyond is achieved by the process of reincarnation.

So I think I can say:


Reincarnation* is NOT a religious concept.
Reincarnation is a mechanical construct.

*Reincarnation = Samsara; but without any retained traits, ie Jack dies and is Reincarnated, his soul is Reincarnated ... but his past personality is lost. The soul is Reincarnated, the personality does not Reincarnate. Only the soul survives.