TrevAnon
Big List researcher
(snipped loud screaming)
We know.
Please take your meds before posting.
(snipped loud screaming)
Islam is interpreted by individuals as they read the Kuran, usually under a teacher/Imam...what is moderate Islam ,and which translation is used?
Thanks for the note.
There is a stunning parallel between the West's rather astonishing lack of recognition & aggressive action against against the global rise of Islamic terrorism and the complacency and appeasement theories that allowed Hitler's rise to power. His reign of worldwide terror resulted in the deaths of over 60 million innocent people and with the terror-sponsor state of Iran about to acquire nuclear weapons, this has equally grim implications if the world doesn't have some Winston Churchills to counteract the politically correct apathy of the world's Chamberlains.
It's hard to imagine that the US has devolved from its spectacular heights of bravery, focus and commitment to defeat Hitler to its present effete state of handwringing fear of even stating that the problem is ISLAMIC terrorism. I hope it is not true, but I fear that the only thing that will wake the world up to the civilization-ending threat of 21st century fanatical jihadists is one or more nuclear weapons being blown under major cities such as London, Paris or New York.
Islam is interpreted by individuals as they read the Kuran, usually under a teacher/Imam...
Unlike christian faiths (catholicism, anglicanism, orthodoxies etc....) there is no central voice, no real authority to assert what is the righteous path for Muslims....Anyone who has been studying in madrassa and has working knowledge of Kuran, Hadiths, & other important Islamic scholars' writings can assert his own interpretation....hence the difficulty....
Shewolf says a moderate is a person who has understood that Kuran is a medieval spiritual doctrine that contains incitements to behaviors acceptable in that long ago time (cutting body parts, stoning, beheadings, for unacceptable social behaviors), that throughout the centuries since and with better education, humans ought to have evolved beyond savagery as recently seen...
Just saying !
In the Sunni tradition this is true, but the Shia have the Ayatolla.
I agree with your definition of a moderate but I am always puzzled by how anyone can have a book written by a perfect being and not believe all of it is worthy of their attention.
Shewolf says a moderate is a person who has understood that Kuran is a medieval spiritual doctrine that contains incitements to behaviors acceptable in that long ago time (cutting body parts, stoning, beheadings, for unacceptable social behaviors), that throughout the centuries since and with better education, humans ought to have evolved beyond savagery as recently seen...
Just saying !
Shewolf knows both Shiites and Sunnis and can tell you that Ayatollah or not, the lines of Shiism are not dictated by Khameni alone....you have to look to the scholars of Qum for that...always consultations before any decision is made.In the Sunni tradition this is true, but the Shia have the Ayatolla.
I agree with your definition of a moderate but I am always puzzled by how anyone can have a book written by a perfect being and not believe all of it is worthy of their attention.
Missed something:....."books worthy of attention"..... Would that apply to the bible perhaps? That fount of knowledge that has you cut your hand if it offended thee....
I think with intelligent growth folks advance in humanity, and take a depth survey of the assises of their beliefs, this inevitably leads to an 'accomodation' with the text.
We need to pay attention to our own ignorance.
Just saying .
IT'S MONIQUE RATHBUN'S LAWSUIT !!!
Thanks!!!
Thanks!!!
I read this a long time ago - when I was a kid - I remember that at one time I had the opinion that the 'age of reason' and even the renaissance was somehow against faith - now I'm older with a different outlook I will read it again and see what I think now - it's definitely a classic and very influential book - thanks for posting the link - I tried listening to the audio book but every one I find that's posted online free has a robot like voice and I can't stand listening to it - there's no emotion or anything and it puts me to sleep LOL - reading it is a lot better though I'd listen to an audio book if it had a real person reading it -
Anyway.....reason is a good thing - I'm not atheist but I am changing my outlook and I think critical thinking is important and faith doesn't have to mean you check your brain in at the door - but seeing how ridiculous the so-called scripture of CO$ or the Mormons has caused me to look closer at the things I've believed that sound almost as ridiculous. My current thinking is this - I don't see why it's even necessary to believe the stuff that's not really possible - I don't think that's the important part - I used to think that dogma and articles of faith were important - I'm not so sure anymore. It never was what I focused on - that said though I did believe and I think it made me kind of gullible - I once thought I witnessed a miracle and I believed it was real and I later learned that it was a trick to make money. This was in what was once part of a canonical church - they were soon defrocked and expelled but none the less - they tricked a lot of people I was just shocked and it made me really feel like a fool. I've changed a lot over the last few years - especially since being away from my own faith community. I know people are different but I am kind of curious - do many of the ex-Scientologists end up atheist or do they find another faith - I know there are a few that remain independent Scientologists and I really do understand that now ....I didn't at first but in my own way I think I may have done something similar in my own way - I guess that's why I ask - .... after an experience like what so many ex's have gone through I wonder what is most common? Do they tend to drift toward other more traditional faiths, become atheists or what?
I fully respect Marty's "rising above" Indie Scientology and am glad to see that after fanatically defending Hubbard and his tech, he finally figured out it was a destructive hoax.
But, his spin that it was a "failed experiment" is not a good analogy. That would be like someone who was arrested and imprisoned for armed bank robbery trying to simply explain it "was a failed bank transaction where i mistakenly overdrafted my account and tried to withdrawal funds that weren't reflected on my account balance".
What is missing is their final 'cognition': it all was a huge fraud, a killing grift, a destructful kult!
Shewolf, the never-in wog, guesses that admitting this must be the last step out of the mind-set....
Probably because it is the very final realization that you've been royally had .....Not good for a fragile ego this, so that's why exes must take their time to recover and take stock of themselves.
non?
I agree with your definition of a moderate but I am always puzzled by how anyone can have a book written by a perfect being and not believe all of it is worthy of their attention.
Thanks!!!
I read this a long time ago - when I was a kid - I remember that at one time I had the opinion that the 'age of reason' and even the renaissance was somehow against faith - now I'm older with a different outlook I will read it again and see what I think now - it's definitely a classic and very influential book - thanks for posting the link - I tried listening to the audio book but every one I find that's posted online free has a robot like voice and I can't stand listening to it - there's no emotion or anything and it puts me to sleep LOL - reading it is a lot better though I'd listen to an audio book if it had a real person reading it -
Anyway.....reason is a good thing - I'm not atheist but I am changing my outlook and I think critical thinking is important and faith doesn't have to mean you check your brain in at the door - but seeing how ridiculous the so-called scripture of CO$ or the Mormons has caused me to look closer at the things I've believed that sound almost as ridiculous. My current thinking is this - I don't see why it's even necessary to believe the stuff that's not really possible - I don't think that's the important part - I used to think that dogma and articles of faith were important - I'm not so sure anymore. It never was what I focused on - that said though I did believe and I think it made me kind of gullible - I once thought I witnessed a miracle and I believed it was real and I later learned that it was a trick to make money. This was in what was once part of a canonical church - they were soon defrocked and expelled but none the less - they tricked a lot of people I was just shocked and it made me really feel like a fool. I've changed a lot over the last few years - especially since being away from my own faith community. I know people are different but I am kind of curious - do many of the ex-Scientologists end up atheist or do they find another faith - I know there are a few that remain independent Scientologists and I really do understand that now ....I didn't at first but in my own way I think I may have done something similar in my own way - I guess that's why I ask - .... after an experience like what so many ex's have gone through I wonder what is most common? Do they tend to drift toward other more traditional faiths, become atheists or what?
Hahaha, I am so totally in love with you Helluva