These are statements from a popular Christian apologist in which he attempts to justify genocide. What people like this do not realize is that such thinking can be used to justify pretty much any genocide. Just introduce your supreme dictator who must not be refused.

William Lane Craig:
The command to kill all the Canaanite peoples is jarring precisely because it seems so at odds with the portrait of Yahweh, Israel’s God, which is painted in the Hebrew Scriptures.  Contrary to the vituperative rhetoric of someone like Richard Dawkins, the God of the Hebrew Bible is a God of justice, long-suffering, and compassion.

He starts with this assertion of his God being compassionate and just.

William Lane Craig:
I think that a good start at this problem is to enunciate our ethical theory that underlies our moral judgements.  According to the version of divine command ethics which I’ve defended, our moral duties are constituted by the commands of a holy and loving God.  Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself,  He has no moral duties to fulfill.  He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are.  For example, I have no right to take an innocent life.  For me to do so would be murder.  But God has no such prohibition.  He can give and take life as He chooses.  We all recognize this when we accuse some authority who presumes to take life as “playing God.”  Human authorities  arrogate to themselves rights which belong only to God.  God is under no obligation whatsoever to extend my life for another second.  If He wanted to strike me dead right now, that’s His prerogative.

God the ultimate dictator? Think of this for a bit. Grant for a minute that we were able to conclusively demonstrate that humans were engineered by some highly advanced extraterrestrials that have such advanced technology that they have godlike powers. If such beings commanded you to go out and kill some people would you? If they commanded you to kill members of your family, would you?
If God allows you to be killed as a bet with the devil, that's ok.

William Lane Craig:
So the problem isn’t that God ended the Canaanites’ lives.  The problem is that He commanded the Israeli soldiers to end them.  Isn’t that like commanding someone to commit murder?  No, it’s not.  Rather, since our moral duties are determined by God’s commands, it is commanding someone to do something which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been murder.  The act was morally obligatory for the Israeli soldiers in virtue of God’s command, even though, had they undertaken it on their on initiative, it would have been wrong.

Here he starts saying some abhorrent things. Murder is not murder if it is commanded by God.
Question: How do you know it was commanded by God? Could it not have been the devil?
This simply amounts to a redefinition of words to mean their opposites. Once God is introduced, evil becomes good. Genocide becomes justice, brutal murder and other atrocities become compassion.

William Lane Craig:
On divine command theory, then, God has the right to command an act, which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been sin, but which is now morally obligatory in virtue of that command.

According to this, one must kill if so instructed by God. To disobey is a sin also punishable maybe by death too. Do you see where this leads? How then can he turn around and accuse suicide bombers of being immoral?

William Lane Craig:
Think of it!  God stays His judgement of the Canaanite clans 400 years because their wickedness had not reached the point of intolerability!  This is the long-suffering God we know in the Hebrew Scriptures.  He even allows his own chosen people to languish in slavery for four centuries before determining that the Canaanite peoples are ripe for judgement and calling His people forth from Egypt.   

So God the omnipotent ruler and controller could think of no better way than to allow his people to be slaves for 400 years while grooming a tribe to be massacred when they were ready? At the same time, he ensured that he flexed his muscles on the Egyptians? Think of it. Would a 35 year old healthy adult male go out and systematically oppress a disabled 6 year old female? This comparison does not come close to the disparity in power between the Christian God and the Egyptian people.

William Lane Craig:
By the time of their destruction, Canaanite culture was, in fact, debauched and cruel, embracing such practices as ritual prostitution and even child sacrifice.  The Canaanites are to be destroyed “that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the Lord your God” (Deut. 20.18).  God had morally sufficient reasons for His judgement upon Canaan, and Israel was merely the instrument of His justice, just as centuries later God would use the pagan nations of Assyria and Babylon to judge Israel.

So the Canaanites deserved this. Their children, the foetuses, the animals, everything.

William Lane Craig:
By setting such strong, harsh dichotomies God taught Israel that any assimilation to pagan idolatry is intolerable.  It was His way of preserving Israel’s spiritual health and posterity.  God knew that if these Canaanite children were allowed to live, they would spell the undoing of Israel.  The killing of the Canaanite children not only served to prevent assimilation to Canaanite identity but also served as a shattering, tangible illustration of Israel’s being set exclusively apart for God.

Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation.  We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy.  Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.

So God was acting right to kill these children who after will go to heaven, their parents of course deserved to die. Where do their foetuses go?

William Lane Craig:
So whom does God wrong in commanding the destruction of the Canaanites?  Not the Canaanite adults, for they were corrupt and deserving of judgement.  Not the children, for they inherit eternal life.  So who is wronged?  Ironically, I think the most difficult part of this whole debate is the apparent wrong done to the Israeli soldiers themselves.  Can you imagine what it would be like to have to break into some house and kill a terrified woman and her children?  The brutalizing effect on these Israeli soldiers is disturbing.

Interesting. According to this gentleman, the soldiers are to be pitied for being commanded to do such a thing. Now ask yourself. Why would a God so powerful use these people to do this? A God capable of bringing Egypt to her knees, capable of destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, drowning to entire earth in some mysterious flood and using his angels to wipe out entire armies. Why would he do this? Does it even make any sense?

William Lane Craig:
The problem with Islam, then, is not that it has got the wrong moral theory; it’s that it has got the wrong God.  If the Muslim thinks that our moral duties are constituted by God’s commands, then I agree with him.  But Muslims and Christians differ radically over God’s nature.  Christians believe that God is all-loving, while Muslims believe that God loves only Muslims.  Allah has no love for unbelievers and sinners.  Therefore, they can be killed indiscriminately.  Moreover, in Islam God’s omnipotence trumps everything, even His own nature.  He is therefore utterly arbitrary in His dealing with mankind.  By contrast Christians hold that God’s holy and loving nature determines what He commands.

The question, then, is not whose moral theory is correct, but which is the true God? 

So back to this question. In the case of the Muslim suicide bomber, he simply has the wrong God.

Source: here



This sort of thinking puts this aphorism in perspective.
"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion."

Steven Weinberg.

^^^^^ why do we not expect temporary memory lapse, the reason a person with good religion can behave badly, opposing the virtue[s] of the religion he professes, instead of saying he has a bad God just because he behaves badly?

if you can't find his God telling him to commit the bad behavior, why fault his God, instead of him?

we wouldn't fault Yahweh for the wars of Moses and the present day jews.

we wouldn't fault the Trinity for the potential wars that Jesus proposed but couldn't mount enough soldiers to carry out and the many wars of present day christians.

why should the game change when it comes to the muslims, who inspite of the many verses condemning killing and definitely suicide, some commit it? when you look at the history of the suicide bombers, they are fighting for nation, not religion. they often vie far away from the tenets of this religion when they commit this terrible act, otherwise they would have let the warning against such act prevail in their hearts.

opinions of enemies are most of the time subjective, the reason they are enemies.

Sweetnecta:

^^^^^ why do we not expect temporary memory lapse, the reason a person with good religion can behave badly, opposing the virtue[s] of the religion he professes, instead of saying he has a bad God just because he behaves badly?

if you can't find his God telling him to commit the bad behavior, why fault his God, instead of him?

we wouldn't fault Yahweh for the wars of Moses and the present day jews.

Actually, we would. Recall that these wars were written in the Bible and were carried out based on God's instructions. To say that they were not God's instructions would imply that those who did this were either lying or deluded people who simply wanted to kill people for their land.

Sweetnecta:

we wouldn't fault the Trinity for the potential wars that Jesus proposed but couldn't mount enough soldiers to carry out and the many wars of present day christians.

In the case of Jesus and the trinity, the concept of the trinity is also up for debate but, it could easily serve as one more point of separation among the people involved.

Sweetnecta:

why should the game change when it comes to the muslims, who inspite of the many verses condemning killing and definitely suicide, some commit it? when you look at the history of the suicide bombers, they are fighting for nation, not religion. they often vie far away from the tenets of this religion when they commit this terrible act, otherwise they would have let the warning against such act prevail in their hearts.

opinions of enemies are most of the time subjective, the reason they are enemies.

The suicide bombers have also made some religious requests like the one from bin Laden advicing America that their main desire if for her to become an Islamic nation. As is being reported here.
Do you consider Christians as enemies or is it just the apologist?

@Thehomer; i believe, if i am wrong correct me, that you are operating from one of or combination of these premises; There is no God. If there is a God, He is not that important in real time and sense as to hold sway over all affairs. If God is holding sway, then He is unjust in His ways because a single thing that 'thehomer' deems evil is one evil too many. God is not Holy or Good at all by the way He has set up the process of human lives, regardless of the principles that may apply between man as in action has consequences, a good action deserves a good consequence, while a bad action, if the consequence is equally bad, the one who experience the reaction should have expected it.



[Quote]« #2 on: Today at 08:13:43 AM »
Actually, we would. Recall that these wars were written in the Bible and were carried out based on God's instructions. To say that they were not God's instructions would imply that those who did this were either lying or deluded people who simply wanted to kill people for their land.[/Quote]Do you blame your professor for failing you if you do badly in the test? If God wiped out evil people by the hand of God fearing souls, is that a bad thing if you truly understand it as such? Consider if God had allowed the people of Noah to flourish even till today; what we will see will be Lot people's evil on top of all of that. Then the evil of the people of Pharaoh also on top of that. Soon enough, when the WW2 came about the action of the third reich would not have been a sore in the eyes of morality.

To me, the jews were killed under third reich because they were jews, the same way the jews are killing palestinians for just being palestinians and the hausa-fulani cabal killing the other ethnic peoples because they are other ethnic peoples. The children of Israel under Moses killed the disbelievers who were on the wrong path, after due warnings from God [i know the bible didn't tell you that, the reason you must read the Quran where God says He is never unjust to His creation and will not punish a people until they are duly warned]. The set of killing done by Hitler is immoral and unjustifiable. The set of killing done by Moses is to control and cut short the expansionism of evil. You should realize that is the best course, if decency is ever to be allowed to blossom. To me, this is Mercy on all human beings, otherwise many more peoples could have been copy cats rendering human beings to the breed where it is very rare really to find any goodness. Just imagine how bad human race could have turned if you thing we are bad, right now without such intervention?



[Quote]In the case of Jesus and the trinity, the concept of the trinity is also up for debate but, it could easily serve as one more point of separation among the people involved.[/Quote]even at that, you will agree that there is good unpleasant outcome; a person dying young while doing good deeds is better than a person living long with a long term stress on himself and his loved ones, if he were to have suffered everyone by his condition for many decades [it is better that he dies, is a well known expression which i hope that you must have heard], when he finally dies, his death is a relief on the people who have been laden by his suffering, at least.



[Quote]The suicide bombers have also made some religious requests like the one from bin Laden advicing America that their main desire if for her to become an Islamic nation. As is being reported here.[/Quote]Osama bin Laden's statement, if different from the Quran, can we take it over the Quran? The messenger [as] had to in every respect conform to the Quran. if anyone doesn't, Bin Laden or not, can we take his decision as the prevailing authority? We cant, because even the human authority [as] had to be guided by the 'inspiration', the real Authority; The Words of God.



[Quote]Do you consider Christians as enemies or is it just the apologist?[/Quote]neither of them is the true enemies of Islam. that group is in Islam itself; the muslims. it is in islam you will find deviants and outright hypocrites. these two are lukewarm muslims whose presence pollute the muslim community and people use that to smear Islam. Victory will come when muslims return to Islam. even in that state, when they suffer defeat[s], such will stand in the same position as tests of faith. i remember a story where the early muslims defeated their enemies without a single arrow from either side. God make the enemies see the mere brushing of teeth tradition with chewing stick seemed as if the muslims were 'sharpening their teeth in preparation to eat the enemies'. incidentally, both are naturally forbidden to believers who should not change their nature or eat human flesh.

Sweetnecta:

@Thehomer; i believe, if i am wrong correct me, that you are operating from one of or combination of these premises; There is no God. If there is a God, He is not that important in real time and sense as to hold sway over all affairs. If God is holding sway, then He is unjust in His ways because a single thing that 'thehomer' deems evil is one evil too many. God is not Holy or Good at all by the way He has set up the process of human lives, regardless of the principles that may apply between man as in action has consequences, a good action deserves a good consequence, while a bad action, if the consequence is equally bad, the one who experience the reaction should have expected it.

I don't quite get your train of thought here because I'm working from the premise that the God of the Bible exists and presented the Bible as it is. If this is so, then he is actually evil based on our conception of evil.

Sweetnecta:

Do you blame your professor for failing you if you do badly in the test? If God wiped out evil people by the hand of God fearing souls, is that a bad thing if you truly understand it as such?

Yes it is a bad thing. He can do it himself. He does this regularly so why should he co-opt or coerce these Israelites? Making someone who does not want to kill people go out and kill people makes the instigator a pretty terrible person.

Sweetnecta:

Consider if God had allowed the people of Noah to flourish even till today; what we will see will be Lot people's evil on top of all of that. Then the evil of the people of Pharaoh also on top of that. Soon enough, when the WW2 came about the action of the third reich would not have been a sore in the eyes of morality.

I disagree with this. You simply cannot make this extrapolation because as we have seen, cultures evolve.

Sweetnecta:

To me, the jews were killed under third reich because they were jews, the same way the jews are killing palestinians for just being palestinians and the hausa-fulani cabal killing the other ethnic peoples because they are other ethnic peoples. The children of Israel under Moses killed the disbelievers who were on the wrong path, after due warnings from God [i know the bible didn't tell you that, the reason you must read the Quran where God says He is never unjust to His creation and will not punish a people until they are duly warned].

How do you decide who is on the wrong path? Is it one who does not follow the Bible or the Qur'an or the Torah or any one of the numerous and contradictory religious texts out there? You say he is never unjust yet he shows himself to be unjust.

Sweetnecta:

The set of killing done by Hitler is immoral and unjustifiable. The set of killing done by Moses is to control and cut short the expansionism of evil. You should realize that is the best course, if decency is ever to be allowed to blossom. To me, this is Mercy on all human beings, otherwise many more peoples could have been copy cats rendering human beings to the breed where it is very rare really to find any goodness. Just imagine how bad human race could have turned if you thing we are bad, right now without such intervention?

Sorry but I do not think genocide is the best course. Think of what you're saying. If a person looks around and decides that since currently, so many Muslims have become so tightly associated with suicide bombing and random murder of civilians with some of these videos posted online, why don't we go out and exterminate them so that they do not corrupt other non-muslims?
The thing is that performing such an act is unjust so is commanding people to do it. Especially when one considers that among this vast population of people are children, pregnant women, old people, young people and others who simply had nothing to do with this image being presented.

Sweetnecta:

even at that, you will agree that there is good unpleasant outcome; a person dying young while doing good deeds is better than a person living long with a long term stress on himself and his loved ones, if he were to have suffered everyone by his condition for many decades [it is better that he dies, is a well known expression which i hope that you must have heard], when he finally dies, his death is a relief on the people who have been laden by his suffering, at least.

I disagree with this too. Such a person should be able to decide for himself whether or not to continue living. And I don't think the death of a person while doing good deeds is necessarily better especially when one thinks of the incidents of the brutal murders of NYSC members in the line of duty.

Sweetnecta:

Osama bin Laden's statement, if different from the Quran, can we take it over the Quran? The messenger [as] had to in every respect conform to the Quran. if anyone doesn't, Bin Laden or not, can we take his decision as the prevailing authority? We cant, because even the human authority [as] had to be guided by the 'inspiration', the real Authority; The Words of God.

Is it really? How do you know that bin Laden is not guided by "inspiration"? The problem is that he seems to be able to back up his statements from the Qur'an. That is one reason why he is able to have such an influence. This is why I try to encourage people to think for themselves rather than relying on authority to make crucial decisions for them.

Sweetnecta:

neither of them is the true enemies of Islam. that group is in Islam itself; the muslims. it is in islam you will find deviants and outright hypocrites. these two are lukewarm muslims whose presence pollute the muslim community and people use that to smear Islam.

Oh really? Christians and William Lane Craig are muslims? How about someone like A. C. Grayling, and the so called "New Atheists" are they muslims too?

Sweetnecta:

Victory will come when muslims return to Islam. even in that state, when they suffer defeat[s], such will stand in the same position as tests of faith. i remember a story where the early muslims defeated their enemies without a single arrow from either side. God make the enemies see the mere brushing of teeth tradition with chewing stick seemed as if the muslims were 'sharpening their teeth in preparation to eat the enemies'. incidentally, both are naturally forbidden to believers who should not change their nature or eat human flesh.

In that case, victory will never come because most of humanity is not Muslim and many do not like Islam.

The more these religious fanatics try to explain their warped points of view the more they sound ridiculous and crazy. The God of the Jews and the Allah of the Arabs are sociopaths, immoral, genocidal megalomaniacs, reflecting the era of the people of that time, the people who created these ideas of god. Gods around the world reflect the ethos of the people/culture that create them. Yahweh/Jehovah and Allah are as real as Ogun, Amadioha, Thor, Sango, etc, They are the figments of imagination of the people in that region. It is amazing that in the 21st century people are still thinking and relying on medieval moral frameworks. Rationalizing away the evils of some of these religious ideologies.

@Thehomer; « #4 on: Today at 05:13:21 PM »
[Quote]I don't quite get your train of thought here because I'm working from the premise that the God of the Bible exists and presented the Bible as it is. If this is so, then he is actually evil based on our conception of evil.[/Quote]and then you chose one of the many points to operate from. your idea of God is based on your idea of what God should be. If God does not intend to punish, where is justice, if all God does is giving mercy? the evil doer will commit evil with ever receiving justice. the good of the doer of good will be watered down with ever knowing that his reward is truly a mercy from God.



[Quote]Yes it is a bad thing. He can do it himself. He does this regularly so why should he co-opt or coerce these Israelites? Making someone who does not want to kill people go out and kill people makes the instigator a pretty terrible person.[/Quote]have you seen a soul, or the one who removes the soul from the living to render it lifeless? no death occurs unless God ordains it. so in essence, it is God's will, except that those who are unjust employs evil means to accomplish the Will of God.



[Quote]I disagree with this. You simply cannot make this extrapolation because as we have seen, cultures evolve.[/Quote]how sure are you that my thinking is not the better? in the time of Lot, the men wanted men. Today women want women. grown men want young boys. some want infant children as in the south african hiv/aids sufferers thinking these infants are means of cure. people are changing their gender, literally. all of these are in addition to men still wanting men, and other evils from the olden days, while idolatry remain, still. today some people call themselves god and they have followers. imagine if there is no death, will there be a cleansing of the human community of those who love to do evil? your concept of justice is definitely unjust. i am certain that if push comes to shove, it is idealist like you that may not know the limit of anger and revenge. how will you handle a killer that invades your property intending to harm you? will you give him cold drink and be hospitable so much so you offer him one of your women to marry that very moment?



[Quote]How do you decide who is on the wrong path? Is it one who does not follow the Bible or the Qur'an or the Torah or any one of the numerous and contradictory religious texts out there? You say he is never unjust yet he shows himself to be unjust.[/Quote]God's standard is the only standard in this case.



[Quote]Sorry but I do not think genocide is the best course. Think of what you're saying. If a person looks around and decides that since currently, so many Muslims have become so tightly associated with suicide bombing and random murder of civilians with some of these videos posted online, why don't we go out and exterminate them so that they do not corrupt other non-muslims?
The thing is that performing such an act is unjust so is commanding people to do it. Especially when one considers that among this vast population of people are children, pregnant women, old people, young people and others who simply had nothing to do with this image being presented.[/Quote]i never advocated genocide. i do know that the action of prophet Moses [as] could not have included the killing of innocent. And only God Who knows the truly innocent. the unseen as in the future is unknown to you. so a child who will grow up to be hitler is better of dead as a youth. he is even better of dead as a fetus. his mother is better of dead before she bore him. just imagine how many lives would have been spared if his mother or him or both had perished before the turn of the 20th century? well, neither you nor i is a knower of the future, so we rely on the event of the past. you advocated for the preservation of the life of hitler and you read about the outcome in the books. i advocate against his life. if my thinking had prevailed at least he would not played such a horror in the world.



[Quote]I disagree with this too. Such a person should be able to decide for himself whether or not to continue living. And I don't think the death of a person while doing good deeds is necessarily better especially when one thinks of the incidents of the brutal murders of NYSC members in the line of duty.[/Quote]i see that you look at things from a snapshot of the moment. a great grandmother whose great grand children are dying while she has become old as only bone and skin without any flesh making her looking as she a living skeleton, if you ask her she will preferred death. if you ask those who are caring for her, you hear the same from them. even israel will prefer ariel sharon to die already that lay dead alive by life support in bed where the once overweight modern day tyrannical pharaoh is drying up. the NYSC youths, there could have been a worse condition. i remember reading about a young man in a thread on nairaland. he was a student in the university in one of the eastern states. he found himself naked in the city of lagos when he came to his senses. according to him, he said that he must have trekked from his home in the east of nigeria to lagos. imagine that! he was a university student. what if this was his condition till his death? i believe when he was in that state of madness, his father would have preferred that he died before his madness started. i am hoping that you can read appropriate meaning to this. remaining alive at all cost is not the best option. those who terminate lives by force are satanic if only when they are committing the act.




[Quote]Is it really? How do you know that bin Laden is not guided by "inspiration"? The problem is that he seems to be able to back up his statements from the Qur'an. That is one reason why he is able to have such an influence. This is why I try to encourage people to think for themselves rather than relying on authority to make crucial decisions for them.
[/Quote]Inspiration in this case is the Quran and Quran is completed since over 1400 years ago. The truth is that he has not been found guilty in the way america normally processes her accused. While i am not for evil, I am always against evil and injustice. it seems that many more americans have the same quality the reason you see more people asking what happened to Tower No 7 and talking about Termite as possible agent of intentional demolitions. Lets be patient. the truth will come out, if not in our lifetime definitely in our children's children's children's children. If Osama bin Laden or anyone from the muslim community did it or any evil at all, justifying it from the Quran is impossible for many reasons; I will list two.
In Quran itself preaches against evil, and prefers wholesale forgiveness and overlooking instead of retaliation, when it is legally due and justifiable. The Quran warns that when one retaliates it should be in the same kind in which one has been violated, and not not retaliate in a degree more than what you are avenging. without going further, you will see that retaliation is strictly according to a definite road map, often very difficult to accomplish. you can't punish the innocent for the sin committed by a relative, otherwise muslim may as well convert to christianity a system that believes the innocent carries the punishment of the guilty.
in islam, the guilty is the one who should bear the consequence of retaliation. but if a man were to violate a woman, can her people violate him in the same way without become a people of Lot? so this type of sin, one cant truly seek retaliation because you can't retaliate upon his woman folk who for all intense and purposes is innocent.
there is no justification for what happened on 911 or the previous WTC incident of 1993, or similar evil deeds. they are evil and done on innocent people by those who committed them.



[Quote]Oh really? Christians and William Lane Craig are muslims? How about someone like A. C. Grayling, and the so called "New Atheists" are they muslims too?[/Quote]i am not saying they are not enemies of islam. i am simply saying that musims are he real enemies of islam. if there are no muslims who are enemes of islam, even the enemies from the outside, will be rendered powerless in their words and all their efforts to undermine islam. this will be similar to the adage; your enemy is always outside, but the one who will doom you is always inside your home. if the doom comes from within, without him, the outside enemies are just that with their never to come to fruition plans. like it is in islam, you are not a sinner until you commit sin, regardless of your continuous thought. it is better you don't think about it, but the thought alone does not make you a sinner, without the act.



[Quote]In that case, victory will never come because most of humanity is not Muslim and many do not like Islam.[/Quote]When Muslims were "Victorious" in those days, whatever you call victory, they were significantly fewer than the estimated 1.5 Billions people of today. What they had then was exponentially greater Faith and they actually put it to practice just as much, while the muslims of today were many but their faith if any is insignificant, like the foam of the sea to the power of the sea current. Victory from my point of view does not mean when muslims defeat their enemies in battles, or the number of the dead from the enemies. Victory is when the muslims are one voice, marching towards what is right as one body, speaking out against evil, while they themselves avoid it and performing good deeds, so much so the enemies can't do but to imitate the muslims, clearly knowing that they are doing so. This way, the enemies will be forced to melt at your sight,in the same way pharaoh perished while Moses was victorious.

Sweetnecta:

@Thehomer; « #4 on: Today at 05:13:21 PM »and then you chose one of the many points to operate from. your idea of God is based on your idea of what God should be. If God does not intend to punish, where is justice, if all God does is giving mercy? the evil doer will commit evil with ever receiving justice. the good of the doer of good will be watered down with ever knowing that his reward is truly a mercy from God.

Sorry. I couldn't tell so I had to rephrase it in the way I could understand.

Sweetnecta:

have you seen a soul, or the one who removes the soul from the living to render it lifeless? no death occurs unless God ordains it. so in essence, it is God's will, except that those who are unjust employs evil means to accomplish the Will of God.

He used some people to kill other people. What you said above does not address the fact that he could have done it himself.

Sweetnecta:

how sure are you that my thinking is not the better? in the time of Lot, the men wanted men. Today women want women. grown men want young boys. some want infant children as in the south african hiv/aids sufferers thinking these infants are means of cure. people are changing their gender, literally. all of these are in addition to men still wanting men, and other evils from the olden days, while idolatry remain, still. today some people call themselves god and they have followers. imagine if there is no death, will there be a cleansing of the human community of those who love to do evil? your concept of justice is definitely unjust. i am certain that if push comes to shove, it is idealist like you that may not know the limit of anger and revenge. how will you handle a killer that invades your property intending to harm you? will you give him cold drink and be hospitable so much so you offer him one of your women to marry that very moment?

Simple. It's because cultures evolve. Based on the things you've said above, do you think it would be appropriate for the entire populations in which these people were found to be invaded and killed by some people claiming to have been sent by God? You also point out God's failure since these things are still happening.
I don't see the relevance of your reference to how an idealist will address your example.

Sweetnecta:

God's standard is the only standard in this case.

The question that follows this is "Which God"? Is it Jehovah of the Jews? Or Jesus? Or Allah? Or the Elohim? Which one?

Sweetnecta:

i never advocated genocide. i do know that the action of prophet Moses [as] could not have included the killing of innocent. And only God Who knows the truly innocent. the unseen as in the future is unknown to you. so a child who will grow up to be hitler is better of dead as a youth. he is even better of dead as a fetus. his mother is better of dead before she bore him. just imagine how many lives would have been spared if his mother or him or both had perished before the turn of the 20th century? well, neither you nor i is a knower of the future, so we rely on the event of the past. you advocated for the preservation of the life of hitler and you read about the outcome in the books. i advocate against his life. if my thinking had prevailed at least he would not played such a horror in the world.

Sorry. When I said that I was not simply referring to Moses but to the actions carried out by the Israelites at that time.
I hope you realize that here, you advocate for abortion at least in Hitler's case.
I am advocating for the application of reason to issues of morality so I am against morality that is arrived at by authority of which Hitler can be considered as one source.

Sweetnecta:

i see that you look at things from a snapshot of the moment. a great grandmother whose great grand children are dying while she has become old as only bone and skin without any flesh making her looking as she a living skeleton, if you ask her she will preferred death. if you ask those who are caring for her, you hear the same from them. even israel will prefer ariel sharon to die already that lay dead alive by life support in bed where the once overweight modern day tyrannical pharaoh is drying up. the NYSC youths, there could have been a worse condition. i remember reading about a young man in a thread on nairaland. he was a student in the university in one of the eastern states. he found himself unclothed in the city of lagos when he came to his senses. according to him, he said that he must have trekked from his home in the east of nigeria to lagos. imagine that! he was a university student. what if this was his condition till his death? i believe when he was in that state of madness, his father would have preferred that he died before his madness started. i am hoping that you can read appropriate meaning to this. remaining alive at all cost is not the best option. those who terminate lives by force are satanic if only when they are committing the act.

Not just a snapshot but what I'm doing is actually bringing some of these expressed thoughts to life and placing them in perspective.
Sorry but I disagree with this too. It is not true that the parents of mentally ill people generally prefer the death of their children. There are mental health institutions that take care of such people and some of them are quite expensive. This is the effect of the emotion that we call love.

Sweetnecta:

Inspiration in this case is the Quran and Quran is completed since over 1400 years ago. The truth is that he has not been found guilty in the way america normally processes her accused. While i am not for evil, I am always against evil and injustice. it seems that many more americans have the same quality the reason you see more people asking what happened to Tower No 7 and talking about Termite as possible agent of intentional demolitions. Lets be patient. the truth will come out, if not in our lifetime definitely in our children's children's children's children. If Osama bin Laden or anyone from the muslim community did it or any evil at all, justifying it from the Quran is impossible for many reasons; I will list two.

Those that deny the fact that the buildings were brought down by the planes are simply conspiracy theorists and we know this based on the preponderance of evidence in support of the planes bringing down the buildings. If you disagree with this, then all I'd like to ask is whether or not you agree that those buildings were hit by planes.

Sweetnecta:

In Quran itself preaches against evil, and prefers wholesale forgiveness and overlooking instead of retaliation, when it is legally due and justifiable. The Quran warns that when one retaliates it should be in the same kind in which one has been violated, and not not retaliate in a degree more than what you are avenging. without going further, you will see that retaliation is strictly according to a definite road map, often very difficult to accomplish. you can't punish the innocent for the sin committed by a relative, otherwise muslim may as well convert to christianity a system that believes the innocent carries the punishment of the guilty.
in islam, the guilty is the one who should bear the consequence of retaliation. but if a man were to violate a woman, can her people violate him in the same way without become a people of Lot? so this type of sin, one cant truly seek retaliation because you can't retaliate upon his woman folk who for all intense and purposes is innocent.
there is no justification for what happened on 911 or the previous WTC incident of 1993, or similar evil deeds. they are evil and done on innocent people by those who committed them.

In other words, you disagree with the late bin Laden's "revelation"? Yet for some reason, knowledgeable Islamic clerics and other educated people agree with his interpretation. How can one who is on the outside tell the difference?

Sweetnecta:

i am not saying they are not enemies of islam. i am simply saying that musims are he real enemies of islam. if there are no muslims who are enemes of islam, even the enemies from the outside, will be rendered powerless in their words and all their efforts to undermine islam. this will be similar to the adage; your enemy is always outside, but the one who will doom you is always inside your home. if the doom comes from within, without him, the outside enemies are just that with their never to come to fruition plans. like it is in islam, you are not a sinner until you commit sin, regardless of your continuous thought. it is better you don't think about it, but the thought alone does not make you a sinner, without the act.

Oh no. I asked if they were muslims in the first place.

Sweetnecta:

When Muslims were "Victorious" in those days, whatever you call victory, they were significantly fewer than the estimated 1.5 Billions people of today. What they had then was exponentially greater Faith and they actually put it to practice just as much, while the muslims of today were many but their faith if any is insignificant, like the foam of the sea to the power of the sea current. Victory from my point of view does not mean when muslims defeat their enemies in battles, or the number of the dead from the enemies. Victory is when the muslims are one voice, marching towards what is right as one body, speaking out against evil, while they themselves avoid it and performing good deeds, so much so the enemies can't do but to imitate the muslims, clearly knowing that they are doing so. This way, the enemies will be forced to melt at your sight,in the same way pharaoh perished while Moses was victorious.

Well the world population has grown exponentially with the application of science and reason. I'm sorry but I simply have to let you know that they cannot be victorious if they refuse to apply science and reason in their governments. That of course is why emerging countries especially the BRIC nations simply will not adopt what they see in countries with Muslim majorities. In fact, many Islamic majority countries are trying to break away from the old Islamic teachings but are being held back by the fundamentalists and clerics who are probably afraid of losing power.

@Thehomer; « #7 on: Today at 08:35:34 AM »
[Quote]
He used some people to kill other people. What you said above does not address the fact that he could have done it himself.[/Quote]i don't know about you, people say about the dead that God calls him home. yet no one has heard God say to anyone 'come home'. no one has seen God, either. so your doing it Himself suggestion of yours is because you want to see God in the physical instead of experience Him through all things that point to His existence that are abound, even in yourself. no soul is terminated except that God wills it to be so.


[Quote]Simple. It's because cultures evolve. Based on the things you've said above, do you think it would be appropriate for the entire populations in which these people were found to be invaded and killed by some people claiming to have been sent by God? You also point out God's failure since these things are still happening.
I don't see the relevance of your reference to how an idealist will address your example.[/Quote]everything has its proper place. if there are no homosexual alive today, but we only know their existence through the Sodom and Gomorrah story, no one will know what homosexuals are and how to identify and avoid their sexual acts. the fact that they are here is not due to the failure of God but as a lingering sin of evil so that you avoid it.


[Quote]The question that follows this is "Which God"? Is it Jehovah of the Jews? Or Jesus? Or Allah? Or the Elohim? Which one?[/Quote[i am a muslim and i declare that there is Only One God Who is Allah. God is a Title. Allah is the Name of the One so Titled.


[Quote]Sorry. When I said that I was not simply referring to Moses but to the actions carried out by the Israelites at that time.
I hope you realize that here, you advocate for abortion at least in Hitler's case.
I am advocating for the application of reason to issues of morality so I am against morality that is arrived at by authority of which Hitler can be considered as one source.[/Quote[how baby hitler can be an authority is strange. remember i do not say i hate hitler, but his deeds. his deeds were immoral. it was his deed that wrapped him so much so that no one say his person but his deed.


[Quote]Not just a snapshot but what I'm doing is actually bringing some of these expressed thoughts to life and placing them in perspective.
Sorry but I disagree with this too. It is not true that the parents of mentally ill people generally prefer the death of their children. There are mental health institutions that take care of such people and some of them are quite expensive. This is the effect of the emotion that we call love.[/Quote]would you not wish that the man who put a gun against you person, beginning his russian roulette was never born when you are going through the ordeal? when we talk a mad person, it is the extreme case of madness you must consider. the child who is dead the yorubas say is better than the child who is lost.


[Quote]Those that deny the fact that the buildings were brought down by the planes are simply conspiracy theorists and we know this based on the preponderance of evidence in support of the planes bringing down the buildings. If you disagree with this, then all I'd like to ask is whether or not you agree that those buildings were hit by planes.[/Quote]not every building hit by plane implodes. not every building that experience fire implodes. no every build that get hit by plane and catches fire implodes. but tower 7 was a 47 story build some distance away owned by the owner of towers 1 and 2. tower 7 never got the experience of being hit by a plane. the owner said on tv, i told them to pull. hence they decided to pull, just mere hours or less later. now tell me how a 47 story building comes down as soon as the command was given, unless slated for such a command much earlier? i will leave the molten steal experience for you to research.


[Quote]In other words, you disagree with the late bin Laden's "revelation"? Yet for some reason, knowledgeable Islamic clerics and other educated people agree with his interpretation. How can one who is on the outside tell the difference?[/Quote]was anyone of them a prophet with a book or another book after the Quran? Allah says one should take the best meaning of the Quran. some hypocrites may look at the verse of how many is permissible to marry may come to 10 by additions of 2 and 3 and 4 and 1, dubiously ignoring that each is a choice and not addition to another choice.


[Quote]Oh no. I asked if they were muslims in the first place.[/Quote]i stated that the greatest enemies of muslims and islam come from the muslims themselves. have you heard of samson and delila? it was delila the wife of samson who knew the hair was the source of the physical power of samson. she was the one that suggested that they should shave him and he will be weak. this is an illustration of the real enemy is aways from within, while the enemies outside cant really succeed without knowing what the insiders know.


[Quote]Well the world population has grown exponentially with the application of science and reason. I'm sorry but I simply have to let you know that they cannot be victorious if they refuse to apply science and reason in their governments. That of course is why emerging countries especially the BRIC nations simply will not adopt what they see in countries with Muslim majorities. In fact, many Islamic majority countries are trying to break away from the old Islamic teachings but are being held back by the fundamentalists and clerics who are probably afraid of losing power.[/Quote]when ever Allah Wills Success, no force can hod it back. islam of muhammad [as] was unknown until muhammad [as] proclaimed it. from that time on, the world have never forgotten it. when Allah Wills to bring it up from its low place now, the likes of salaudeen will come to the world stage with the virtues of islam. remember america was once a place not worth mentioning. nothing is impossible, just like spain started the renaissance of europe, a new renaissance of islam can come at anytime if many go back to pristine islam; great belief level, doing tremendousgood deeds, cooperating together in all things that are good, defending the weak, studying and researching, etc. there is no better position than obedience to and reliance on God.[/quote][/quote]

"Well the world population has grown exponentially with the application of science and reason. I'm sorry but I simply have to let you know
that they cannot be victorious if they refuse to apply science and reason in their governments. "


Well said homer, can't seem to get this throught these people greasy thought process. The reason why people do not understand history and that the wests advancement over other nations in the past 500 years is because of science and reason. The methodology of reason not religion, race or culture. Reason is core to Western culture. A society based on religion will always fail regardless of the faith. Cultures and societies must evolve as everything else in the universe lest they die.

Sweetnecta:

@Thehomer; « #7 on: Today at 08:35:34 AM »i don't know about you, people say about the dead that God calls him home. yet no one has heard God say to anyone 'come home'. no one has seen God, either. so your doing it Himself suggestion of yours is because you want to see God in the physical instead of experience Him through all things that point to His existence that are abound, even in yourself. no soul is terminated except that God wills it to be so.

everything has its proper place. if there are no homosexual alive today, but we only know their existence through the Sodom and Gomorrah story, no one will know what homosexuals are and how to identify and avoid their sexual acts. the fact that they are here is not due to the failure of God but as a lingering sin of evil so that you avoid it.

If  god purposely makes homosexuals to serve as examples for straight people, why do you consider them sinners? If god creates them like that, their lifestyle isn't a choice . So why do you want them to stop being gay, won't that be undoing allah's work?

Sweetnecta:

@Thehomer; « #7 on: Today at 08:35:34 AM »i don't know about you, people say about the dead that God calls him home. yet no one has heard God say to anyone 'come home'. no one has seen God, either. so your doing it Himself suggestion of yours is because you want to see God in the physical instead of experience Him through all things that point to His existence that are abound, even in yourself. no soul is terminated except that God wills it to be so.

It's not about what I want to see. Remember that in the time of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, he decided to destroy the city himself. If he could destroy these cities himself, why did he coerce the Israelites? These are stories that are reported to have happened many years ago.

Sweetnecta:

everything has its proper place. if there are no homosexual alive today, but we only know their existence through the Sodom and Gomorrah story, no one will know what homosexuals are and how to identify and avoid their sexual acts. the fact that they are here is not due to the failure of God but as a lingering sin of evil so that you avoid it.

How do you know it is not due to God's failure? After all, he's failed in the past e.g in the case of Noah and his flood. Besides, why do you say homosexuality is a sin? Is it a sin like stealing a vehicle? Or murder?

Sweetnecta:

i am a muslim and i declare that there is Only One God Who is Allah. God is a Title. Allah is the Name of the One so Titled.

Therefore the Christians, Jews and Hindus are wrong? I hope you realize that your claim is no better than theirs since the entire basis is revelation.

Sweetnecta:

how baby hitler can be an authority is strange. remember i do not say i hate hitler, but his deeds. his deeds were immoral. it was his deed that wrapped him so much so that no one say his person but his deed.

This is not about baby Hitler but the fact that you seem to accept abortion. My question is do you? And the reference to authority is not about the baby but about any human at any stage in their life. If he was not elevated and obeyed as an authority, he still would not have been able to do what he did.

Sweetnecta:

would you not wish that the man who put a gun against you person, beginning his russian roulette was never born when you are going through the ordeal? when we talk a mad person, it is the extreme case of madness you must consider. the child who is dead the yorubas say is better than the child who is lost.

Desiring that the person was not born would be irrelevant at that point in time because you are making a poor comparison. It's no more relevant than saying what if you were not born? Then there would be no one to be held at gun point.
Sorry but I have to disagree with this aphorism too. It may be applicable in some cases but consider a case in which a child was missing for a month who was later found. Would you still say it was better for the child to be dead than to have been lost?

Sweetnecta:

not every building hit by plane implodes. not every building that experience fire implodes. no every build that get hit by plane and catches fire implodes. but tower 7 was a 47 story build some distance away owned by the owner of towers 1 and 2. tower 7 never got the experience of being hit by a plane. the owner said on tv, i told them to pull. hence they decided to pull, just mere hours or less later. now tell me how a 47 story building comes down as soon as the command was given, unless slated for such a command much earlier? i will leave the molten steal experience for you to research.

How many buildings do you know that have been struck with large sized commercial planes?
You are simply calling on conspiracy theories here while at the same time shifting the discussion. I was referring to the buildings struck by the planes. Do you think that was the cause of their collapse?

Sweetnecta:

was anyone of them a prophet with a book or another book after the Quran? Allah says one should take the best meaning of the Quran. some hypocrites may look at the verse of how many is permissible to marry may come to 10 by additions of 2 and 3 and 4 and 1, dubiously ignoring that each is a choice and not addition to another choice.

No they weren't. Are you saying only prophets should be listened to? I hope you realize that this means the Qur'an then becomes open to be interpreted by anyone in any way they wish. Like the example you've given above. Who are you to say that interpretation is wrong? Are you a prophet?

Sweetnecta:

i stated that the greatest enemies of muslims and islam come from the muslims themselves. have you heard of samson and delila? it was delila the wife of samson who knew the hair was the source of the physical power of samson. she was the one that suggested that they should shave him and he will be weak. this is an illustration of the real enemy is aways from within, while the enemies outside cant really succeed without knowing what the insiders know.

That's not the question I asked. I asked if Christians and other non-believers were Muslims.

Sweetnecta:

when ever Allah Wills Success, no force can hod it back. islam of muhammad [as] was unknown until muhammad [as] proclaimed it. from that time on, the world have never forgotten it. when Allah Wills to bring it up from its low place now, the likes of salaudeen will come to the world stage with the virtues of islam. remember america was once a place not worth mentioning. nothing is impossible, just like spain started the renaissance of europe, a new renaissance of islam can come at anytime if many go back to pristine islam; great belief level, doing tremendousgood deeds, cooperating together in all things that are good, defending the weak, studying and researching, etc. there is no better position than obedience to and reliance on God.

In that case, Allah cannot will it. I thought going back to pristine Islam was what the Taliban were pushing. You need to realize that to actually have good studies and research, there must be a large degree of academic freedom. Even the freedom to not believe in Allah and not be killed.

In other words, you disagree with the late bin Laden's "revelation"? Yet for some reason, knowledgeable Islamic clerics and other educated people agree with his interpretation. How can one who is on the outside tell the difference?

Hommer the question is has this outsided=u ever tried to know the difference? there are a prepondrance of Islamic literature that refutes the use of suicide bombings the question is hae you ever tried knowing the truth?

Let me conclude by saying, Hitler followed what can be called social Dwarnism, that is a belief in te survival of the fittest, a direct interpretatoin of Theory of Evolution in social context, are you willing to claim that he Hitler and his hordes were actually following the theory of Evolution?

@divinereal« #9 on: Today at 03:32:16 PM »
[Quote]"Well the world population has grown exponentially with the application of science and reason. I'm sorry but I simply have to let you know
that they cannot be victorious if they refuse to apply science and reason in their governments. "[/Quote]islam played father to science and reason before. it will return to it when the muslims return to true islam. read the Quran it does talk about science and reason and a whole lot more.


[Quote]Well said homer, can't seem to get this throught these people greasy thought process. The reason why people do not understand history and that the wests advancement over other nations in the past 500 years is because of science and reason. The methodology of reason not religion, race or culture. Reason is core to Western culture. A society based on religion will always fail regardless of the faith. Cultures and societies must evolve as everything else in the universe lest they die.[/Quote]500 yeqrs is just last night in the life of the human race. before 500 years ago even timbuktu in mali was on top of the west in science and reason. what is making you to think that muslims will not return to the basis, later? there is a cycle in everything.



@thehomer « #11 on: Today at 04:35:40 PM »
[Quote]It's not about what I want to see. Remember that in the time of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, he decided to destroy the city himself. If he could destroy these cities himself, why did he coerce the Israelites? These are stories that are reported to have happened many years ago.[/Quote]the Angels were used by God in the cases of sodom and gomorrah. angels are creations, just like men are. Angels are Messengers just true believers are. The angels were ordered. Moses and the israelites were ordered. where is your capability to conduct parallel observation?



[Quote]How do you know it is not due to God's failure? After all, he's failed in the past e.g in the case of Noah and his flood. Besides, why do you say homosexuality is a sin? Is it a sin like stealing a vehicle? Or murder?[/Quote]i dont know how you decide what failure is just because decision is delayed till its appointed time, because of Mercy instead of immediate Justice? How is Noah's flood a failure the evil people perished and believers were saved? A sin is action opposing a commandment/rule. Homosexuality, God says of it, He will not look at them. incidentally, sodom and gomorrah was wiped out, while stealing a vehicle meets a cut off of the hand and murder may actually pay blood money or forgive without any kind of punishment.



[Quote]Therefore the Christians, Jews and Hindus are wrong? I hope you realize that your claim is no better than theirs since the entire basis is revelation.[/Quote]even you who is not one of them see me as wrong and my ways unacceptable the reason you are not on my side.



[Quote]This is not about baby Hitler but the fact that you seem to accept abortion. My question is do you? And the reference to authority is not about the baby but about any human at any stage in their life. If he was not elevated and obeyed as an authority, he still would not have been able to do what he did.[/Quote]i accept abortion if the life of the mother is in the balance. i accept abortion in the case of a rapist which i am sure no sane woman wants to keep the child from unwanted and force upon sex from a complete stranger for a fact. you and are are at different levels in our worldly out look and i doubt if you are as progressive if you do not see a situation in which abortion is acceptable. i see plenty.



[Quote]Desiring that the person was not born would be irrelevant at that point in time because you are making a poor comparison. It's no more relevant than saying what if you were not born? Then there would be no one to be held at gun point.
Sorry but I have to disagree with this aphorism too. It may be applicable in some cases but consider a case in which a child was missing for a month who was later found. Would you still say it was better for the child to be dead than to have been lost?[/Quote]i did not ask about the relevance. i simply ask if it will cross your mind that the man was never born which would be a fact that the incident would not even occur. between a good person and a bad one, the one preferred and beneficial to mankind is the good man. how shall a good man wishes for death so that a bad person does not even come to threaten him? and in the case of the child, just imagine during the period the period the parents were searching without a clue if the nightmare will ever end. if they had found the body, they would not have to suffer thinking whats happening to the child right now. such a worry kills the parents every minute before there is an ending. imagine even a worse condition; the child was never found throughout the lifetime of the parents. Are you a parent, man? no parent wants the suffering of the child to prolong for a moment. parents die 'while alive' when their child is missing. an uncountable thoughts enter the mind.



[Quote]How many buildings do you know that have been struck with large sized commercial planes?
You are simply calling on conspiracy theories here while at the same time shifting the discussion. I was referring to the buildings struck by the planes. Do you think that was the cause of their collapse?[/Quote]imagine a building that was not struck at all, but collapsed just free fall like the ones struck? could you give any reason for its coming down? can you deny larry silverstein saying 'pull'and they pulled? please research it before responding from the blind.



[Quote]No they weren't. Are you saying only prophets should be listened to? I hope you realize that this means the Qur'an then becomes open to be interpreted by anyone in any way they wish. Like the example you've given above. Who are you to say that interpretation is wrong? Are you a prophet?[/Quote]when a person says something that opposes what a prophet [as] said, i will folow the prophet. that is a safe bet than just folowing a person who owes no prophetic authority. All my action will be according to the ruling of the prophet as soon as i know it. i dont follow blindly or have a blind faith. God also gave me mind to think. right is clear. so is wrong, too.



[Quote]That's not the question I asked. I asked if Christians and other non-believers were Muslims.[/Quote]if they were muslims, you will not call them christians and others. right?



[Quote]In that case, Allah cannot will it. I thought going back to pristine Islam was what the Taliban were pushing. You need to realize that to actually have good studies and research, there must be a large degree of academic freedom. Even the freedom to not believe in Allah and not be killed.[/Quote]if taiban did not allow education for women, how can that be pristine islam, when there were women scholars among the companions [RA] who taught men. so were also women in the next generation and the next who did the same before the generation that started the adoption of 'no education' for women. can we say boko haram is on pristine islam wherein they say education is bad even for men, the reason you have the almajiris? consider the wasting brain power and human resources? will nigeria not be a larger educational pool if these men are educated? Almuhajirin is a beautiful name and a description of those who left Makka for the sake of Allah escaping persecution. these people call almajiris have tarnished such a beautiful name.

Sweetnecta:

@divinereal« #9 on: Today at 03:32:16 PM »islam played father to science and reason before. it will return to it when the muslims return to true islam. read the Quran it does talk about science and reason and a whole lot more.

When I brought up science (Evolution) in the other thread you almost instinctively rejected it on the basis of what was said in the Qu'ran. From what you said you were not at all familiar with what the theory of evolution actually was, and yet rejected it whole sale. If islam makes people do that, than it is not at all compatible with science. Furthermore, if science is ultimately needed to confirm the truths in the Qu'ran why use Qu'ran in the first place. Why not just stick to science on matters of the material universe.

^^^^^^^^^^^^Thank God that your evolutionary process is different from mine, the reason we see things from different prisms.


if you are saying fish ultimately became fish, or the smallest particle that could ever existed exploded, giving out the loudest sound which you call 'big bang' thereby producing all these complex things, i do not subscribe to it.

my evolution is for example the fusions of male and female emitted fruits to finally become a living baby person, through the many developmental evolution [changes from one state to a completely different one, and still from one stage based on size and refinement to another], is my own type of evolution.

you are not in my mind, and i pen my thought, my disagreement is simply in your type of evolution.


you are running away from the evolution where human came from the ape family. i do not believe in that. ape is ape regardless of how much it looks like human. human is human regardless of how hard to try to link him to ape.

the only common thing they share is that they and all others are creatures of the same Creator.

Sweetnecta:

^^^^^^^^^^^^Thank God that your evolutionary process is different from mine, the reason we see things from different prisms.
if you are saying fish ultimately became fish, or the smallest particle that could ever existed exploded, giving out the loudest sound which you call 'big bang' thereby producing all these complex things, i do not subscribe to it.

I see you are not familiar with particle physics either. Unstable particles decay into multiple particles of lower energy states. The sum of the total energy before the decay must be equal to that from before. The big bang theory says this as well. The sum total of the energy/matter were compressed into a single energy state, before expanding to ever lower states. No new energy/matter is required.

The Evolutionary Theory I subscribe to is the one espoused by the Biological Sciences. If you do not, than why did you attempt to connect science positively to the Islam when they are not compatible. You yourself are an example of the incompatibility. As a Muslim you are not even willing to take the time understand scientific principles and instead reject them whenever they contradict the Qu'ran.  How can the impact of Islam on reason be anything but negative?

Sweetnecta:

you are running away from the evolution where human came from the ape family. i do not believe in that. ape is ape regardless of how much it looks like human. human is human regardless of how hard to try to link him to ape.

Humans in the realm of taxonomy are defined as a species of Ape by series of common anatomical characteristics such (5 digits, oposable thumbs, four main limbs) . Calling humans a type of ape(Hominidae specifically) is no different than calling an alligator a type of crocodilian. That is category that the creature fits. Evolution merely explains why/how these common features exist among multiple species/families/genera etc,  and more importantly can make predictions based upon them(such as in epidemiology). Saying that the order was randomly/spontaneously formed by already complex being does nothing of the sort.

divinereal:

"Well the world population has grown exponentially with the application of science and reason. I'm sorry but I simply have to let you know
that they cannot be victorious if they refuse to apply science and reason in their governments. "


Well said homer, can't seem to get this throught these people greasy thought process. The reason why people do not understand history and that the wests advancement over other nations in the past 500 years is because of science and reason. The methodology of reason not religion, race or culture. Reason is core to Western culture. A society based on religion will always fail regardless of the faith. Cultures and societies must evolve as everything else in the universe lest they die.

When the West overtook China what religion was holding China back? Or was it lack of Science and Reason in China that caused them to fall behind the West? I don't think so!

vedaxcool:

In other words, you disagree with the late bin Laden's "revelation"? Yet for some reason, knowledgeable Islamic clerics and other educated people agree with his interpretation. How can one who is on the outside tell the difference?

Hommer the question is has this outsided=u ever tried to know the difference? there are a prepondrance of Islamic literature that refutes the use of suicide bombings the question is hae you ever tried knowing the truth?

Let me conclude by saying, Hitler followed what can be called social Dwarnism, that is a belief in te survival of the fittest, a direct interpretatoin of Theory of Evolution in social context, are you willing to claim that he Hitler and his hordes were actually following the theory of Evolution?

Are you suggesting that 2 people reading the koran can come up with 2 radically opposed opinions of what Allah's will is?

@Idehn; « #16 on: Today at 04:10:05 AM »
[Quote]
I see you are not familiar with particle physics either. Unstable particles decay into multiple particles of lower energy states. The sum of the total energy before the decay must be equal to that from before. The big bang theory says this as well. The sum total of the energy/matter were compressed into a single energy state, before expanding to ever lower states. No new energy/matter is required.
[/Quote]first, i do not have to be a master of everything before i know what 'nothing' is. read your own thoughts again; a particle that was so 'compressed' [i wonder what compressed it, or a Causer to bring about it, what compressed it, how it was compressed and how somehow the body can't hold and it had to burst with 'the biggest bang' sound?], that it had no 'size', but position, can't have by itself,without other external factors become all these things that we even have on earth. I dont have to know all the colors on earth to talk about the green color if that is the color that am concerned with, in the same way that i do not have to be expert on particle physics that such a small particle you said gave a big bang can only give a 'whimper' sound. the big bang can never come from a small particle.



[Quote]The Evolutionary Theory I subscribe to is the one espoused by the Biological Sciences. If you do not, than why did you attempt to connect science positively to the Islam when they are not compatible. You yourself are an example of the incompatibility. As a Muslim you are not even willing to take the time understand scientific principles and instead reject them whenever they contradict the Qu'ran. How can the impact of Islam on reason be anything but negative?[/Quote]consider that science changes as new knowledge determines the position that science takes. the other position is Absolute position that Islam holds since it is from The Owner of all knowledge. should i opposite absolute for what shifts based on latest knowledge? latest knowledge of yesterday is incorrect, today.



[Quote] from: Sweetnecta on Today at 02:35:42 AM
you are running away from the evolution where human came from the ape family. i do not believe in that. ape is ape regardless of how much it looks like human. human is human regardless of how hard to try to link him to ape.


Humans in the realm of taxonomy are defined as a species of Ape by series of common anatomical characteristics such (5 digits, oposable thumbs, four main limbs) . Calling humans a type of ape(Hominidae specifically) is no different than calling an alligator a type of crocodilian. That is category that the creature fits. Evolution merely explains why/how these common features exist among multiple species/families/genera etc, and more importantly can make predictions based upon them(such as in epidemiology). Saying that the order was randomly/spontaneously formed by already complex being does nothing of the sort.[/Quote]continue with the charade. are alligator and crocodile really the same? can baby alligator stray into the community of giant male crocs and not be dinner? can we not see a croc standing out by its snort in the mist of many alligators? is a zebra and a wild horse the same, or even similar, if lion and tiger are not similar? you may not be alive when the hypothesis of human and ape being of the same species is disproved, in the future.

vedaxcool:

In other words, you disagree with the late bin Laden's "revelation"? Yet for some reason, knowledgeable Islamic clerics and other educated people agree with his interpretation. How can one who is on the outside tell the difference?

Hommer the question is has this outsided=u ever tried to know the difference? there are a prepondrance of Islamic literature that refutes the use of suicide bombings the question is hae you ever tried knowing the truth?

The truth according to who? Since it is obvious that those who were led by bin Laden and the Taliban are Muslims.

vedaxcool:

Let me conclude by saying, Hitler followed what can be called social Dwarnism, that is a belief in te survival of the fittest, a direct interpretatoin of Theory of Evolution in social context, are you willing to claim that he Hitler and his hordes were actually following the theory of Evolution?

For some reason, you keep calling on Hitler. What you're doing above is simply pulling a red-herring by calling on him.
I'll just use this opportunity to correct this common misconception.
The survival of the fittest is not a belief, it is a fact that is seen in the world.
The interpretation of the theory of evolution in a social context? Please tell me, what is the application of the theory of gravity in a social context? How about the germ theory of disease in a social context? You need to realize that the genocide committed by Hitler has no bearing on scientific theories.

Sweetnecta:

@divinereal« #9 on: Today at 03:32:16 PM »islam played father to science and reason before. it will return to it when the muslims return to true islam. read the Quran it does talk about science and reason and a whole lot more.

True Islam according to who? Sweetnecta?
So what if it talks about it? Keep in mind that human knowledge is hampered by superstitious and plainly wrong information.

Sweetnecta:

500 yeqrs is just last night in the life of the human race. before 500 years ago even timbuktu in mali was on top of the west in science and reason. what is making you to think that muslims will not return to the basis, later? there is a cycle in everything.

How long do you think humans have been on the earth? The point is that to get to the top, there are certain prerequisites.

Sweetnecta:

@thehomer « #11 on: Today at 04:35:40 PM »the Angels were used by God in the cases of sodom and gomorrah. angels are creations, just like men are. Angels are Messengers just true believers are. The angels were ordered. Moses and the israelites were ordered. where is your capability to conduct parallel observation?

Why did he not use the same angels? Were they tired? Why use humans? There's a difference between a person being slapped by a neighbour and being slapped by an angel. The act by the angel cannot be tried in court but the other can.

Sweetnecta:

i dont know how you decide what failure is just because decision is delayed till its appointed time, because of Mercy instead of immediate Justice? How is Noah's flood a failure the evil people perished and believers were saved? A sin is action opposing a commandment/rule. Homosexuality, God says of it, He will not look at them. incidentally, sodom and gomorrah was wiped out, while stealing a vehicle meets a cut off of the hand and murder may actually pay blood money or forgive without any kind of punishment.

The fact that sin still exists shows that the act was a failure especially if he knew the flood act was going to fail. Whose commandments or rules has to be opposed for an act to be a sin?

Sweetnecta:

even you who is not one of them see me as wrong and my ways unacceptable the reason you are not on my side.

Of course this is why revelation is not a good way of claiming to have arrived at knowledge.

Sweetnecta:

i accept abortion if the life of the mother is in the balance. i accept abortion in the case of a despoiler which i am sure no sane woman wants to keep the child from unwanted and force upon sex from a complete stranger for a fact. you and are are at different levels in our worldly out look and i doubt if you are as progressive if you do not see a situation in which abortion is acceptable. i see plenty.

Ok. Would you accept an abortion in the case of a 13 year old child who will likely become disabled if she bore a pregnancy to term?

Sweetnecta:

i did not ask about the relevance. i simply ask if it will cross your mind that the man was never born which would be a fact that the incident would not even occur. between a good person and a bad one, the one preferred and beneficial to mankind is the good man. how shall a good man wishes for death so that a bad person does not even come to threaten him? and in the case of the child, just imagine during the period the period the parents were searching without a clue if the nightmare will ever end. if they had found the body, they would not have to suffer thinking whats happening to the child right now. such a worry kills the parents every minute before there is an ending. imagine even a worse condition; the child was never found throughout the lifetime of the parents. Are you a parent, man? no parent wants the suffering of the child to prolong for a moment. parents die 'while alive' when their child is missing. an uncountable thoughts enter the mind.

No it won't cross my mind since the event is already happening. Neither will it cross my mind that this incident will not occur if I was not born.
I see your point but mine is simply that that aphorism is not often true because more often than not, children who are missing are found alive rather than dead.

Sweetnecta:

imagine a building that was not struck at all, but collapsed just free fall like the ones struck? could you give any reason for its coming down? can you deny larry silverstein saying 'pull'and they pulled? please research it before responding from the blind.

You're still shifting what I said. I was talking about the buildings that were struck by the planes. Do you believe that was the cause of their collapse?
Your reference to the other building is not quite relevant but I'll address it too. That building was struck by debris from the other buildings and suffered a fire outbreak.
Your claim of pulling or whatever is curious because I wonder what ropes were used to pull it down.

Sweetnecta:

when a person says something that opposes what a prophet [as] said, i will folow the prophet. that is a safe bet than just folowing a person who owes no prophetic authority. All my action will be according to the ruling of the prophet as soon as i know it. i dont follow blindly or have a blind faith. God also gave me mind to think. right is clear. so is wrong, too.

How do you know what the prophet said? You don't have blind faith? What other sort of faith is there? How do you explain the diversity of organisms on earth?

Sweetnecta:

if they were muslims, you will not call them christians and others. right?

No I won't but it seems that you will.

Sweetnecta:

if taiban did not allow education for women, how can that be pristine islam, when there were women scholars among the companions [RA] who taught men. so were also women in the next generation and the next who did the same before the generation that started the adoption of 'no education' for women. can we say boko haram is on pristine islam wherein they say education is bad even for men, the reason you have the almajiris? consider the wasting brain power and human resources? will nigeria not be a larger educational pool if these men are educated? Almuhajirin is a beautiful name and a description of those who left Makka for the sake of Allah escaping persecution. these people call almajiris have tarnished such a beautiful name.

Do you not see that all you're saying here is your word against theirs? Iin pristine Islam, when can a female get married? How many wives can a man have? How does a woman choose her husband?

Pastor AIO:

When the West overtook China what religion was holding China back? Or was it lack of Science and Reason in China that caused them to fall behind the West? I don't think so!

In China's case, I think they simply held on to their superstitions and of course generally felt that other cultures were simply inferior to theirs even when their technology had been superseded.

thehomer:

In China's case, I think they simply held on to their superstitions and of course generally felt that other cultures were simply inferior to theirs even when their technology had been superseded.

Thank you. I also want to ask, what role extreme religious devotion of England in the 18th and 19th century had to play in her advancement. It was so extreme that they had a name for them, they were called the Puritans. That is to say these people were trying to be pure christians.

Pastor AIO:

Thank you. I also want to ask, what role extreme religious devotion of England in the 18th and 19th century had to play in her advancement. It was so extreme that they had a name for them, they were called the Puritans. That is to say these people were trying to be pure christians.

I really cannot say because purity is in the eye of the beholder and what one may consider extreme religious devotion may be heresy to another. My point is that countries do not generally progress technologically if her citizens did not allow science and reason to grow.

thehomer:

The truth according to who? Since it is obvious that those who were led by bin Laden and the Taliban are Muslims.

Did Taliban and Al-Qaeda exist right from the time Islam started? the truth is out there for you to see? Only a myopic person who only sees evil in other people beliefs will insist on myopic clinging on a small section of people who simply invents their own theology, as Al-Qaeda and their ilk beliefs are very contemporary in nature hardly having any historical roots in Islamic theology. You asked how can one from the outside tell the difference  the ans has been given and it is simply "that one if he use his common sense can differentiate between lies and truth" but as long as that one has a Jaundiced mind he will not even know how to distinguish between red and blue.

thehomer:

For some reason, you keep calling on Hitler. What you're doing above is simply pulling a red-herring by calling on him.
I'll just use this opportunity to correct this common misconception.
The survival of the fittest is not a belief, it is a fact that is seen in the world.
The interpretation of the theory of evolution in a social context? Please tell me, what is the application of the theory of gravity in a social context? How about the germ theory of disease in a social context? You need to realize that the genocide committed by Hitler has no bearing on scientific theories.

signs! tell that the social Darwinist

Social Darwinism is a term used for various late nineteenth century ideologies predicated on survival of the fittest.[1] It especially refers to notions of struggle for existence being used to justify social policies which make no distinction between those able to support themselves and those unable to support themselves. The most prominent form of such views stressed competition between individuals in laissez-faire capitalism but it is also connected to the ideas of the progressive era, in which many promoted eugenics or scientific racism or imperialism,[2] or a struggle between national or racial groups.[3] In sociology it has been defined as a theory of social evolution which asserts that "There are underlying, and largely irresistible, forces acting in societies which are like the natural forces that operate in animal and plant communities. One can therefore formulate social laws similar to natural ones. These social forces are of such a kind as to produce evolutionary progress through the natural conflicts between social groups. The best-adapted and most successful social groups survive these conflicts, raising the evolutionary level of society generally (the 'survival of the fittest')."[4] The term has very rarely been used as a self description.[5]

thehomer:

I really cannot say because purity is in the eye of the beholder and what one may consider extreme religious devotion may be heresy to another. My point is that countries do not generally progress technologically if her citizens did not allow science and reason to grow.

My guy, I'm not talking about who is purer that who in whose opinion or who is heretic.  I'm talking about the fact that England was an extremely religious place at the time when she was leading the world in scientific discoveries and even building an empire. 

Of course you cannot advance in science if you do not allow 'science to grow'. The same way that you cannot smell clean if you do not clean yourself, or you . . . I'm sure there is a name for it, not 'stating the obvious' but another single word name, but it escapes me now. Like when you say the water is watery, or that's fiery fire etc.

The point of contention is your claim that being religious automatically means that you don't allow 'science to grow'.

vedaxcool:

Did Taliban and Al-Qaeda exist right from the time Islam started? the truth is out there for you to see? Only a myopic person who only sees evil in other people beliefs will insist on myopic clinging on a small section of people who simply invents their own theology, as Al-Qaeda and their ilk beliefs are very contemporary in nature hardly having any historical roots in Islamic theology. You asked how can one from the outside tell the difference  the ans has been given and it is simply "that one if he use his common sense can differentiate between lies and truth" but as long as that one has a Jaundiced mind he will not even know how to distinguish between red and blue.

You're still not making sense. So what if Al-Qaeda did not exist at the beginning of the spread of Islam? Were there Baptists when Christianity started? You still keep wallowing in your No True Scotsman Fallacy. My advice to you is that you educate yourself and stop making the same fallacy again and again. Claiming that a group of people, who regard the Qur'an as the holy book from God, that still go out and kill people are not Muslims is simply absurd and your favourite fallacy,

vedaxcool:

signs! tell that the social Darwinist

Is social darwinism a biological concept? Can you let me know what a social gravitationist believes?
I notice your continued attempt at this red-herring so please go and educate yourself on the proper ways of thinking and presenting arguments so you stop appearing ignorant.

Pastor AIO:

My guy, I'm not talking about who is purer that who in whose opinion or who is heretic.  I'm talking about the fact that England was an extremely religious place at the time when she was leading the world in scientific discoveries and even building an empire. 

Of course you cannot advance in science if you do not allow 'science to grow'. The same way that you cannot smell clean if you do not clean yourself, or you . . . I'm sure there is a name for it, not 'stating the obvious' but another single word name, but it escapes me now. Like when you say the water is watery, or that's fiery fire etc.

The point of contention is your claim that being religious automatically means that you don't allow 'science to grow'.

I didn't say that. Though being highly religious does stifle science (which is distinct from general education) because science at its core is the direct opposite of faith which is required in religion.

@Thehomer; « #21 on: May 03, 2011, 09:25 PM »
[Quote]
True Islam according to who? Sweetnecta?[/Quote]True Islam is only according to one man; Muhammad [as] who was given the Quran.



[Quote]So what if it talks about it? Keep in mind that human knowledge is hampered by superstitious and plainly wrong information.[/Quote]But Islam is from Allah. Where is superstition and wrong Information in what God prescribes? It is your limited knowledge by the unbelief in your heart is making you prosecuting the truth. Islam is evidential belief, not blind belief like the other guy[s].



[Quote]
How long do you think humans have been on the earth? The point is that to get to the top, there are certain prerequisites.[/Quote]humans have been on earth as early as Adam arrived on earth. Adam is the last specie created. And the time of the creation of Adam was between Asr prayer [late afternoon prayer] and magrib prayer [sunset prayer] on that faithful Friday. when exactly is known by the Creator.



[Quote]
Why did he not use the same angels? Were they tired? Why use humans? There's a difference between a person being slapped by a neighbour and being slapped by an angel. The act by the angel cannot be tried in court but the other can.[/Quote]Angels, Humans, etc are creatures. The Creator can use whatever means that pleases Him to do what He Wills. He used slavery to elevate Joseph. So why can't you reflect on that Unlimited resources available to Allah? Don't argue as if you are covering your inner eye.



[Quote]
The fact that sin still exists shows that the act was a failure especially if he knew the flood act was going to fail. Whose commandments or rules has to be opposed for an act to be a sin?[/Quote]Sin is on earth so that people who want to receive His Mercy can avoid it or when they commit it, be conscious of it and seek repentance. On the other hand, those who do not want His Mercy can help themselves to committing sin without stopping, so that they will know, clearly while they end in Hell by His equitable Justice.



[Quote] from: Sweetnecta on May 03, 2011, 12:51 AM
even you who is not one of them see me as wrong and my ways unacceptable the reason you are not on my side.
Of course this is why revelation is not a good way of claiming to have arrived at knowledge.[/Quote]without you being from the people of 'revelation' you see me as wrong. So what benefit is there from you, if you are exactly like the others with their revelation in your hatred of me? You do not have right to condemn 'revelation' as the culprit but human nature, since you are better. And the only thing we have in common is humanity.



[Quote]
Ok. Would you accept an abortion in the case of a 13 year old child who will likely become disabled if she bore a pregnancy to term?[/Quote]my position covers the preservation of the life of the mother who is a known quantity, already. she could be 13 or 31, the same rule applies.



[Quote]
No it won't cross my mind since the event is already happening. Neither will it cross my mind that this incident will not occur if I was not born.
I see your point but mine is simply that that aphorism is not often true because more often than not, children who are missing are found alive rather than dead.[/Quote]And the americans look for their missing children for many decades without a 'we found him alive' ending. imagine how many death they parents os such a child have died in one day. you will get it when you become a parent that closure is a good resolve rather than almost empty hope day in day out.



[Quote]
You're still shifting what I said. I was talking about the buildings that were struck by the planes. Do you believe that was the cause of their collapse?
Your reference to the other building is not quite relevant but I'll address it too. That building was struck by debris from the other buildings and suffered a fire outbreak.
Your claim of[b] pulling[/b] or whatever is curious because I wonder what ropes were used to pull it down.[/Quote]the bold is an amercan building industry's term to mean demolish. when a person cut the light off, or on it means turn the light on or off. cut is just a slang for turn here. You think the debris effect is enough for the building to collapse the same day rather than some other day? when the owner says pull and said they then pull, what do you think e meant? you need to research what silverstein did that day before you continue your argument on this one.



[Quote]
How do you know what the prophet said? You don't have blind faith? What other sort of faith is there? How do you explain the diversity of organisms on earth?[/Quote]The Quran guides what we know that the Messenger said. The faith i have is evidence based faith, hence it is not bad. it is similar to the person who knows the Air is existing because he breath it in, and feel the effect of its current as a blowing wind. i do not have to see God before i know He exists. i feel His by the effect of His presence around me, even me as i stand on the earth that is swimming [rotating, orbiting] on a prescribed course.



[Quote] from: Sweetnecta on May 03, 2011, 12:51 AM
if they were muslims, you will not call them christians and others. right?
No I won't but it seems that you will.[/Quote]you are wrong thinking that you know my heart.



[Quote]
Do you not see that all you're saying here is your word against theirs? Iin pristine Islam, when can a female get married? How many wives can a man have? How does a woman choose her husband?[/Quote]A female can get married when she is at least reached puberty. it is the same for male. A man can have 2 or 3 or 4 or 1. A woman chooses her husband by either proposing or accepting a proposal. just like you can't force a man to marry someone he does not want, you can't force a woman to marry a person she does not want. doing that is not part of islam.

thehomer:

You're still not making sense. So what if Al-Qaeda did not exist at the beginning of the spread of Islam? Were there Baptists when Christianity started? You still keep wallowing in your No True Scotsman Fallacy. My advice to you is that you educate yourself and stop making the same fallacy again and again. Claiming that a group of people, who regard the Qur'an as the holy book from God, that still go out and kill people are not Muslims is simply absurd and your favourite fallacy,

It must be very funny, as ignorant as you are of Islam as a religion you tell me to go educate myself on what precisely? Clinging unto straws is not going to save you from drowning hope u know? You inability to even comprehend what we are talking about only shows how "intelligent" you actually are. you keep hammering and repeating the same line, they are muslims they are muslims, but where did i say they are not muslims? This was my simple point that you fanaticism stop you from understanding:'
Hommer the question is has this outsided=u ever tried to know the difference? there are a preponderance of Islamic literature that refutes the use of suicide bombings the question is have you ever tried knowing the truth?' if this words were so difficult are too difficult for you to understand then do accept my condolences. Again you showed how "intellectually" equipped you actually for comparing the Baptist church which had been been in existence for quiet sometime to Al-Qaeda which I clearly indicated that that their form of theology is contemporary in nature, in fact when Al-Qaeda fought the soviets they clearly were restricted to killing the soviets, if that eludes you ever ignorant brain, then again do accept my condolences. In Islam like every other religion they are acts that if adherents engage in, they automatically become non - Muslim, if a Muslim says lying is good and is allowed, that in itself makes him a non muslim, if killing a fellow Muslim is seen as a grievous offence, yet AlQaeda has engaged in that countless time, now what we see at times is that this people are actually misguided, that is why we i still consider them muslims with a big Question mark. but evidently I am speaking to a self confessed Ignoramus in Islamic matters. Keep repeating scots man fallacy to make urself look a bit intelligent, it only shows you have limited things of importance to say.

thehomer:

Is social darwinism a biological concept? Can you let me know what a social gravitationist believes?
I notice your continued attempt at this red-herring so please go and educate yourself on the proper ways of thinking and presenting arguments so you stop appearing ignorant.

Clap for yourself, how does one so idiotically compare physics with Biology? where do they fit, one deals with non living things and the other focusses on Living things particularly, only a compound Ignoramus will say the theory of Evolution does not talk in any way of behaviours living things exihibit. But i see it is not worth it explaining things that are far too difficult for you to understand.

thehomer:

I didn't say that. Though being highly religious does stifle science (which is distinct from general education) because science at its core is the direct opposite of faith which is required in religion.

Please, how much thought have you given to what you said above? I'm asking so that I know how to respond.