|
Normal Adult Human posted:literal interpretation of biblical rewards: they call it the land of milk and honey but i'm lactose intolerant. should i worship the devil?
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:43 |
|
|
Tendai posted:Yes, it is. But like I said, the view of it as being literal rather than an attempt to describe "a thing that is gonna be really awesome" in a frame of reference that people of the time (and any time, if we're just looking at the sex aspect) would understand, doesn't make much sense to me. But even if we don't take it literally, it's still pretty distasteful. That having 72 sex slaves can apparently be used here as an appropriate metaphor for the rewards of heaven, tells me that I probably don't want to be part of any of the literal heavenly rewards, whatever they may turn out to be. It's a bit like saying, "if you do what we say, we'll let you kick a puppy in the dick"! I mean, do I really want to be part of an organisation which uses puppy dick-kicking as a metric of happiness?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
Blurred posted:But even if we don't take it literally, it's still pretty distasteful. That having 72 sex slaves can apparently be used here as an appropriate metaphor for the rewards of heaven, tells me that I probably don't want to be part of any of the literal heavenly rewards, whatever they may turn out to be. It's a bit like saying, "if you do what we say, we'll let you kick a puppy in the dick"! I mean, do I really want to be part of an organisation which uses puppy dick-kicking as a metric of happiness? Well you don't have to do any of that though, my understanding is that its one of the things you can have, other parts of the qur'an mentions comfort, rivers of wine, etc i imagine its supposed to be a place where you can have anything without being distracted by anyone or anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Fizzil posted:i imagine its supposed to be a place where you can have anything Even sex slaves? Also, how is this any different from the Quran& The Gays situation earlier? You take the gay passage absolutely literal with zero wiggle room for interpretation. But the virgins passage is totally metaphorical and should not be taken literal? Why are they different?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Even sex slaves? Are houris really slaves though? their description is that they aren't human, and are created for sex so i dunno really how is that any different from say a sexbot. Is the other question directed towards me? i'm pretty sure my stance towards homosexuals is different from other posters, and i personally have no problems or see any problems from being muslim and homosexual, there are groups that exist that are exactly that, because you know people have different interpretations to things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Fizzil posted:Are houris really slaves though? their description is that they aren't human, and are created for sex so i dunno really how is that any different from say a sexbot. Fizzil posted:Is the other question directed towards me? i'm pretty sure my stance towards homosexuals is different from other posters, and i personally have no problems or see any problems from being muslim and homosexual, there are groups that exist that are exactly that, because you know people have different interpretations to things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:"Heaven is 72 sexbots". I know its a really horrible comparison  but people have various fantasies that aren't ok to have in this life, i mean sure its ok to have fantasies as long as you separate it from reality, but why not in heaven, you basically won and get to do whatever you want, thats the idea anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Tendai posted:Yes, it is. But like I said, the view of it as being literal rather than an attempt to describe "a thing that is gonna be really awesome" in a frame of reference that people of the time (and any time, if we're just looking at the sex aspect) would understand, doesn't make much sense to me. But having lots of women to gently caress literally is awesome. Anything less would be fundamentally less-awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Fizzil posted:I know its a really horrible comparison
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:IMO, bad incentive structures are the main problem in basically everything ever. The kind of people who only does nice things because they're waiting for their turn to drunkenly have sexbot orgies is not the kind of people you can build a truly good society with. You want the kind of people for whom kindness is inherently rewarding - where heaven is a place where you're still being nice to others, or at least treating people with basic respect, because that's the kind of person you are. Wouldn't this be a virtue ethics conception of morality rather than a deontological one? As far as I know most branches of most Abrahamic religions don't use virtue (in the Classical sense, i.e. personal character) as their metric of goodness, but rather good acts. Therefore it's not hypocritical to reward people for being good because of what they get out of it; if the act is what's important, then the motivation of the individual is irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:IMO, bad incentive structures are the main problem in basically everything ever. The kind of people who only does nice things because they're waiting for their turn to drunkenly have sexbot orgies is not the kind of people you can build a truly good society with. You want the kind of people for whom kindness is inherently rewarding - where heaven is a place where you're still being nice to others, or at least treating people with basic respect, because that's the kind of person you are. I'm pretty sure they also mention you won't be stepping on anyones toes in heaven, and its a place of excess where every need is satisfied. I don't know why you care if someone indulges in their sexual fetishes that is literally materialized with magic or whatever, they aren't harming anyone. How is this any different from programming a video game that has really terrible themes? does that make the player not a good person because he likes these games?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:Wouldn't this be a virtue ethics conception of morality rather than a deontological one? As far as I know most branches of most Abrahamic religions don't use virtue (in the Classical sense, i.e. personal character) as their metric of goodness, but rather good acts. Therefore it's not hypocritical to reward people for being good because of what they get out of it; if the act is what's important, then the motivation of the individual is irrelevant. Next, Lutheran protestantism, as a prominent example, thinks your acts don't matter, your motivation doesn't matter, what matters is your faith. Now this may seem stupid - why should a murderer get out of paradise just cause he, maybe at the last minute, declares he believes in God? But the typical argument is, true faith is a state of being that inherently predisposes you towards prosocial behavior so you don't even wish for rewards anymore anyways, you strive to be good because that is what true faith inherently brings with it. I'd argue this concept should be close to many muslim theologian's hearts. A nice treatise on this is the very good story Hell is the Absence of God by Ted Chiang.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Fizzil posted:I'm pretty sure they also mention you won't be stepping on anyones toes in heaven, and its a place of excess where every need is satisfied. I don't know why you care if someone indulges in their sexual fetishes that is literally materialized with magic or whatever, they aren't harming anyone. How is this any different from programming a video game that has really terrible themes? does that make the player not a good person because he likes these games?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
I don't have anything to add or ask, but thank you for making this thread. It's a lot easier to learn about a subject from someone personally involved than a wikipedia page or a text.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
I might have missed this, but on the "who does and doesn't go to heaven" discussion, what about people of non-Abrahamic faiths, or no faith at all, who nonetheless lived good lives? Will the Dalai Lama go to heaven, for example?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
What do mainstream Muslims think of the Nation of Islam and the Five Percenters
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Flagrant Abuse posted:I might have missed this, but on the "who does and doesn't go to heaven" discussion, what about people of non-Abrahamic faiths, or no faith at all, who nonetheless lived good lives? Will the Dalai Lama go to heaven, for example? Don't believe in God, no love for you. That's the ONLY requirement to go to Heaven in Islam. Literally the ONLY one. Smoking Crow posted:What do mainstream Muslims think of the Nation of Islam and the Five Percenters Nation is total bullshit and perverts Muslim belief. Five Percenters are even more bullshit and literally worship a dude as if he was the embodiment of God, which literally goes against everything Islam stands for. People can worship and believe in either is they want, I don't really give a poo poo. But they shouldn't call themselves Muslim and none of what they believe is Islam.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:Don't believe in God, no love for you. That's the ONLY requirement to go to Heaven in Islam. Literally the ONLY one. Abu Talib is used as an example of that, he was pagan until his death but a good person who protected the prophet from persecution and tried to calm things down in the community, its very debatable because there is hadith on people who aren't that but were granted heaven because of small things ( hadith of the prostitute that gave the thirsty dog water comes to mind) being granted heaven. We really cant pass judgment is what im saying.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
Fizzil posted:I'm pretty sure they also mention you won't be stepping on anyones toes in heaven, and its a place of excess where every need is satisfied. I don't know why you care if someone indulges in their sexual fetishes that is literally materialized with magic or whatever, they aren't harming anyone. How is this any different from programming a video game that has really terrible themes? does that make the player not a good person because he likes these games? What if I am a psycho-killer and my idea of Heaven is torturing people to death in between bouts of rape? Is that what heaven is going to be like for me? Maybe I get 72 children I can terrorize to death over and over- but don't worry, they aren't real! Well, I mean, they are as real as heaven is, but they aren't "born of man" so they don't really mind being dismembered repeatedly for some reason. Anyway, this just drives home for me how specious all this pamphlet-style religious explication is. I mean, the books all say the same drat things: "Don't do thievery and murder. Don't suck dicks or be naked. Do what a supernatural manifestation of Super Grandpa would want you to do. Everything is better after you are dead. This is justice." And a friendly person shows you some quotes from the book and isn't that great. But some unremarkable passages from a book are not what you really get with these religions. The actual, functioning religions are inextricable from history and culture and what people actually DO. You can't tell me about Catholicism by pointing to some passages from the book that say nice things- you won't have told me a real thing about it! Catholicism is cathedrals, saints, secrets, Jesuits, illuminated manuscripts, guilt, Gallileo, rosaries, barely suppressed pervery, the entire West coast of America being covered in mission-style houses. Is the Pope in the book? How can you even tell which books go in the book if you only look at the words in the book? Looking at only the friendly-sounding bits is a sales pitch, always re-configured to sound like the pop-culture ideals of the day. Islam is a social justice movement, everybody! Now look at this funny meme of a anime drinking INFIDEL TEARS, lol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:14
|
|
|
I can buy that Islam was a social justice movement at the time of its creation. That Islam is currently a social justice movement... that's a much harder sell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:43
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:What if I am a psycho-killer and my idea of Heaven is torturing people to death in between bouts of rape? Is that what heaven is going to be like for me? Maybe I get 72 children I can terrorize to death over and over- but don't worry, they aren't real! Well, I mean, they are as real as heaven is, but they aren't "born of man" so they don't really mind being dismembered repeatedly for some reason. What the gently caress, dude.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:If God doesn't like butt sex, oh well. If it's a sin, maybe he'll forgive it. If premarital sex is a sin, maybe he'll forgive me for it, too. I'm a pretty good person otherwise, and believe in God, so either way, even if I end up going to Hell for sinning more than good deeding, eventually I'll get out because I believe in God and that's the only unforgivable sin. I find it interesting that you use the word "prophet" to describe Muhammad, where the other Muslims in the thread said "Messenger" is more correct. Is this a sectarian difference?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:What if I am a psycho-killer and my idea of Heaven is torturing people to death in between bouts of rape? Is that what heaven is going to be like for me? OMG the silliness is getting thick in here.  Is there any wonder some of us Muslims are taking a periodic break from this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
ashgromnies posted:I find it interesting that you use the word "prophet" to describe Muhammad, where the other Muslims in the thread said "Messenger" is more correct. There are 2 classifications. Prophet (Nabi) and Messenger (Rasoul). A Prophet receives revelation from God. A Messenger receives revelation "and" a code of Law from God. For example, Musa (Moses) was a Prophet and a Messenger. 'Isa (Jesus) is a Prophet and a Messenger. Muhammad is also a Prophet and a Messenger. On the other hand, Yaqub (Jacob) was only a Prophet. Ayub (Job) was only a Prophet. Amun Khonsu fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
Khizan posted:I can buy that Islam was a social justice movement at the time of its creation. That Islam is currently a social justice movement... that's a much harder sell. It is. The idea that Islam does not evolve with the times is completely wrong. Yes, Muslims have had difficulty adjusting with a fast advancing west, but it was like this for Christian Europe during the Dark Ages when Muslims were in their Golden Age. It is natural among humans to go through these challenges in their societies and cultures. The only thing that cannot evolve in Islam are things relating to the core tenets of the faith, the 5 pillars, 6 basic beliefs and the principle of "Ihsan" (our duty to work towards perfection). These are the three basic dimensions that make a Muslim a good Muslim. Amun Khonsu fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Flagrant Abuse posted:I might have missed this, but on the "who does and doesn't go to heaven" discussion, what about people of non-Abrahamic faiths, or no faith at all, who nonetheless lived good lives? Will the Dalai Lama go to heaven, for example? 1. There is a general understanding in the Qur'an that people with no or minimum knowledge of Islam are as capable of going to Paradise as the rest of us. Some people take that to a very literal point, meaning that they believe that if Person A has heard the basic tenets of Islam and doesn't believe them, they are going right to Hell. The more liberal side of things takes it as referring more to the sense that one has actually started to believe, because that is well, the minimum knowledge or experience needed, really. Like, not just lip-service, but wholeheartedly believe, where they are certain it is true to the point that saying/doing otherwise would be a total act of just spite for whatever reason. 2. There is an even bigger emphasis on the belief that only Allah knows who and who will go to Paradise. Anyone who says "Oh, that dude over there is goin' straight to Hell" is talking out of their rear end because none of us know. We can hope. We can pray. We can assume. And yes, that does have negative connotations -- do the 9/11 attackers go to Paradise? The answer is, I don't know. Based on what I believe, my assumption would be no, unless one ascribes to the idea of Hell as a temporary place of punishment until the end of the world. And that I'm not sure on. Smoking Crow posted:What do mainstream Muslims think of the Nation of Islam and the Five Percenters I don't know much about the Five Percenters but they seem to be the above, but moreso? So same thing, really. Khizan posted:I can buy that Islam was a social justice movement at the time of its creation. That Islam is currently a social justice movement... that's a much harder sell. Others tend to see this as bidah, innovation, and clamp down on it hard. It all depends on who you ask.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Amun Khonsu posted:It is. The idea that Islam does not evolve with the times is completely wrong. Yes, Muslims have had difficulty adjusting with a fast advancing west, but it was like this for Christian Europe during the Dark Ages when Muslims were in their Golden Age. It is natural among humans to go through these challenges in their societies and cultures. In what way has Islam been a social justice movement in the last several centuries? The Golden Age of Islam is ancient history, unfortunately. I'm not aware of any social justice movement spawning progressive changes which have originated among Muslim groups. Certainly the Nation of Islam was a part of the Civil Rights Movement in the US, but I'm not sure that counts. Otherwise, I don't believe Islam being progressive relative to the 8th century, allowing women to own/inherit property and so on, suffices for cred as a social justice movement until the end of time. As they say, what have you done for me lately?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Lassitude posted:In what way has Islam been a social justice movement in the last several centuries? The Golden Age of Islam is ancient history, unfortunately. I'm not aware of any social justice movement spawning progressive changes which have originated among Muslim groups. Certainly the Nation of Islam was a part of the Civil Rights Movement in the US, but I'm not sure that counts. Otherwise, I don't believe Islam being progressive relative to the 8th century, allowing women to own/inherit property and so on, suffices for cred as a social justice movement until the end of time. As they say, what have you done for me lately? In British India they made a lot of progress toward overturning the completely archaic caste system... all of which ended up being undone by Gandhi and is a large part of why Hindus have so much animosity toward Islam. Unfortunately, the caste system has no place in Muslim society, because shunning and treating entire groups of people simply because of their lineage or because they have a deformity totally flies in the face of the Islamic ideal of everyone being equal and deserving fair treatment. That said, a lot of modern Hindus don't actually follow it, especially in the West, but the higher castes still want to enforce it for obvious reasons. Fuzz fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
That is interesting and I wasn't aware of it, but it seems as though the caste system has also been embraced by a certain percentage of Muslims in India as well. For example, this fellow writes here: http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/410.html ... that among Muslims in India, the caste system is actually significantly worse than among Hindus. While the caste system is terrible and I'm pleased to hear that some Muslims opposed it, in the end it would seem that they became what they initially fought, which I don't think we can blame on Gandhi.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Lassitude posted:That is interesting and I wasn't aware of it, but it seems as though the caste system has also been embraced by a certain percentage of Muslims in India as well. For example, this fellow writes here: http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/410.html Ironically, Gandhi is generally agreed to have also been a pedophile, forcing his followers to send their daughters to him in the night to sate his, "shivering fits." He also thought black people were subhuman and apartheid wasn't a terrible idea. Way more recent than Muhammad, and yet people still deify and turn a blind eye to all that stuff, even in the West. (especially in the West...) Not trying to bash the guy, he did a lot of good getting my parents and grandparents out from under British oppression... but yeah, that's always intrigued me that a lot of the people that point fingers at ancient religious figures will still have admiration for Gandhi despite the fact that, by all accounts, he was a slimy racist rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:Ironically, Gandhi is generally agreed to have also been a pedophile, forcing his followers to send their daughters to him in the night to sate his, "shivering fits." Fuzz posted:he was a slimy racist rear end in a top hat. What you're doing is stupid. Gandhi wasn't a saint; okay, point taken. But what you're doing is stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
Social justice would be Islam pulling out of Persia and North Africa and returning them to their historical cultures.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Social justice would be Islam pulling out of Persia and North Africa and returning them to their historical cultures. Seriously, this is a dumb suggestion because it's impossible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
You have to have goals.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Social justice would be Islam pulling out of Persia and North Africa and returning them to their historical cultures. Homo sapiens sapiens must immediately retreat from all occupied Neanderthal territory, by 5 pm tomorrow. If my social justice demands are not met by then, I WILL proceed to poo poo myself in public!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
I am not familiar with any cool Neanderthal cultural things to experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:I am not familiar with any cool Neanderthal cultural things to experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Neat. Now, if you can convince me of any cool Neanderthal cultural regions that should be restored, I will be happy to advocate for it! Maybe in heaven I can ask Allah for 72 Neanderthal babes to brutally plow. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Now, if you can convince me of any cool Neanderthal cultural regions that should be restored, I will be happy to advocate for it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 10:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:43 |
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:What if I am a psycho-killer and my idea of Heaven is torturing people to death in between bouts of rape? Is that what heaven is going to be like for me? Maybe I get 72 children I can terrorize to death over and over- but don't worry, they aren't real! Well, I mean, they are as real as heaven is, but they aren't "born of man" so they don't really mind being dismembered repeatedly for some reason. God finds 72 people who's idea of Heaven is to be brutally tortured, raped and murdered. He hooks you up. Everyone wins.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 19:30
|
|