Is Islam compatible with atheism/lack of belief ?
- Thread starter Paul_cz
- Start date
What are you smoking...
Here is the Bali Bombing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Timor_genocide
Or how about East Timor:
Maybe if you hadn't spent the majority of your answers pointing at the indiscrepancies in what was obviously a hypothetical situation where the important part was the end result where Islam was the dominant Religion in the world rather than rubbish about using time machines etc I would have bothered to read the complete posts, I often choose to not waste my time, for example I tend to take my time when writing a response to someone but if someone's acting like a smartypants I don't bother as I don't see the effort being worth it.
I am sorry if whot i right is rong. if it bovvers u that much its best two ignore me rather than come up with one pedantic response after an other.
My apologies. I didn't know that you find reading so difficult that reading a few sentences is too onerous for you. That must be a challenging handicap in the modern world. Would automated text to speech software be useful to you?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
....
What a coincidence I was thinking practically the same thing about you and your antagonistic attitude but hey it's a live and let live world unless your an extremist, whoops! theres a another example of my pour righting skills.
What a coincidence I was thinking practically the same thing about you and your antagonistic attitude but hey it's a live and let live world unless your an extremist, whoops! theres a another example of my pour righting skills.
Last edited:
That makes no sense:
1) You complained about the existence of a few sentences briefly saying why I thought a hypothetical situation either couldn't exist or would result in unpredictable change. I haven't complained about the existence of a few sentences because I don't find it an onerous task to read small amounts of text.
It's true that I could have assumed that you meant one thing (an alternate timeline in which Muslims recently conducted a completely successful war of conquest and eradicated all other religions) when you wrote other things (an alternate timeline in which European countries never existed and then another alternate timeline in which no religion other than Islam ever existed), but I prefer not to do that to other people. Besides, how could I have guessed the timescale you meant? You switched from prehistoric to prehuman to 19th century!
2) You had a go at me because I asked you to stop repeatedly doing something obviously wrong. One very simple thing. Which I asked for politely.
Sure, I'm antagonistic towards you now, but that's a result of your own behaviour towards me.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,704
- Location
- Surrey
I c wut u did dere
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
I agree in principle, but I don't think it could be done in practice.
It is bizarre that you need to be 18 to do something as simple as sign a contract for a mobile phone but not for the far more serious and wide-ranging thing of following a religion designed to control your life far more than a mobile phone contract.
I believe you have misconstrued the quotation.
You're forgetting the main point of the Quran. The singularity of god is the main concept of the ENTIRE book. NOT some sort of organised religion/tradition/idolisers of Mohammed.
When it says "and [until] worship is for God." It doesn't mean until "Islam" is the only religion. It literally means until God is the only thing which is worshipped. You don't even need to "reasonably interpret" as you said, just read it literally lol.
It's referring to polytheism and the worshipping of things like the sun and moon and the wind and the seas, etc. As well as the idolatrous worship of figures like Jesus and Mohammed.
Unfortunately you have misconstrued this in the SAME fashion terrorists do!
Last edited:
I disagree. I think that when a monotheistic religion refers to a god, it almost certainly means the god of that religion and when it refers to worshipping that god it almost certainly means that religion because believers in a religion must believe it's the right way to worship the right god(s) or else they wouldn't be doing it that way.
"I think that when a monotheistic religion refers to a god"
This isn't a religion referring to a god though. This is a book referring to "The" god.
The Quran isn't a religion. Mohammed Idolatry is a religion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_the_Book
The Quran even recognises the singular god from other "religions", so when the quran talks about God, it really is talking about just "The God", not a special "islamic god" reserved for people who idolise Mohammed.
Last edited:
This is about "worship" not belief. Do Christians only worship one third of god? Do they seperate Jesus from the Father and Spirit and worship only Jesus? Or do they worship the trinity as a singularity.
This is what wiki says: "In Trinitarian doctrine, God exists as three persons or hypostases, but is one being, having a single divine nature."
So I don't believe it would be wise to simply single out Jesus and start worshipping only him. When you're worshipping you need to worship the trinity as one being. The father, son, and spirit aren't separate gods. They can be described as "states" of God.
I'll repeat what Dowie said about what are you smoking? while there are certainly external factors as much as anything else the crisis in the ME can be pointed back to one of the oldest divisions in Islam, the Philippines has millions of Muslims and is currently going through an escalating crisis with Islamic extremists, etc. etc.
I've already posted several times but it's worth looking up why the separatists are fighting in the Philippines. Yes they are Islamists, but they have been fighting for several hundred years for independence after their area of the world was colonized by the Spanish.
AFAIK the current flare up somewhat adjacent to that along with ISIS making a presence.
Not exactly people trying to stake out a claim for independence.
Honestly I've no idea why they have decided to push to take the city now, it may be in part because pledging aliegence to ISIS has given them access to funds and training they otherwise wouldn't have had. There have been flare ups regularly over the last few decades, not just this single event.
