GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
Just that I don't misunderstand you: are you implying with this quote that we are lying, insulting and persecuting you with this discussion?
If there is something different you wanted to say with quoting this text please elaborate.
...
We don't "know." We don't have any "absolute truth." But, if we are no longer content to be afraid of that possibility, many exciting thoughts open up ... without fear or guilt or "any of that other garbage."
Here I see a problem and often quote "we" because: I do know there are no gods, ghosts or souls so! As you quoted absolute truth I too think it not a Sonic screwdriver (plus some doors have nothing on the other side...) that last bit about dropping fear for education is brilliant!
If I say humans are bad! Do we all get mad? No. Because we're not all bad! If "we" say it's because you 'pray' for a false deity and you get mad, go to war like you will [/ranTonSid]but don't have more babies.
Last edited by jamison20000e; 03-26-2016 at 10:00 AM.
“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
That one sounds like taken from the holy book of the christians.
-----------x
This one from ours:
Quote:
They rejoice in a Grace and a Bounty from Allah, and that Allah will not waste the reward of the believers. (A'al Imran 3:171)
I hear you must watch out for those way more toxic drugs induced by our brains when they perceive our death (tricked or not,) [disclaimer] imagine a life in a blink if you can...
Last edited by jamison20000e; 03-26-2016 at 09:58 AM.
Here I see a problem and often quote "we" because: I do know there are no gods, ghosts or souls so! As you quoted absolute truth ...
You may interpret my post as meaning: "It is my opinion (alone ...) that: 'we, as humans ...'" (etc.).
I simply feel that many people "get all bolluxed up" with the idea – expressed on billboards around these parts – that this Book is: "Inspired. Absolute. Final.™" (Some people even go so far as to insist on a particular translation of it.) But, in my opinion, this point-of-view is unsustainable ... unrealistic ... and unnecessary. Hence, my opinion that you just shouldn't ask "a Book, any book" to be what "a book, any book" cannot possibly be. Read what it contains in context. It was written by humans, it may have started with oral traditions thousands of years old, and it's been through a lot of editing, redacting, and outright-political manipulations along the way.
(And, if you are so inclined, research some of the many other(!) books that are known to exist: books that the Council of Nicene [et al] for whatever reason didn't choose to include in the volume that is in your hands. BTW, many of them also got the same treatment ... there are no "digital error-correction codes" on papyrus or mud manuscripts, nor in their path-forward from their original discovery. Plenty of people, possibly including the original author(s), have strong motives to "stick their dirty hands into the pie.")
You wind up with a state-of-affairs that is a good bit "murkier" and "uncertain" than what you were probably force-fed told in Church as a kid ... but it's (in my opinion) now much more realistic. And, I think, quite fascinating. (Archaeology is like that.) A foundation built upon that might be a good bit less, and quite a bit different, than what Church originally taught you, but you can stand up on the thing ...
If you "say that you 'believe' something," but have no idea where it came from or how it came to you in the form that you now hold in your hand, then, again in my opinion, you're "building your house on the sand." Someday, something's gonna come along that seriously challenges the things that you never previously allowed yourself to even question. And, it's gonna hurt real bad. But, in my opinion, "you kinda sorta set yourself up for that." Which can be avoided. "God, whoever or whatever you [don't] think He is, won't mind a bit if you ask [nosy] questions ... So, go ahead. Think."
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-22-2016 at 09:29 PM.
Like so many other comments, I find this one confuses political beliefs/organized religion and faith. Well, a lot of people, of faith and not, do that, so it's ok. Fixit7 already addressed most of whatever else I was going to say better than I anyway. +2
Btw, "They will know that you are My disciples by your love" or words to that effect: that's how you identify the Christians.
There is a reason this happens and that is that for some reason Religions of almost ALL kinds can't seem to abide with the existence of difference, let alone, dissent. They all, as a group, seek power or why organize into ever larger groups? Once in power, they historically tend to wipe out all the "competition". This has been done so often, Religions' quest for political power - the power to marginalize, jail or execute those viewed as a competing philosophy , all who surely would have done the same had they risen to power first, has evolved to have a political component inescapable as part and parcel of any Organized Religion.It seems to be a package deal. Non-believers don't belong to any group of this sort requiring an agenda that feels the need for preemptive power.
When direct access to power is denied (Separation of Church and State) then surreptitious methods are explored like lobbying and/or stuffing Political offices, including the Board of Education so that ALL "foot the bill" for such aberrations and delusions as "Creation Science" force fed to children in Public Schools. To the degree that that fails, children are removed from Public Schools (or the schools from existence) to be educated/indoctrinated to become "Warriors for Christ" or "Allah", like the Westboro Baptist Church and The Taliban and many more. When confronted with "killing the Innocent" they each claim "there are no Innocent" not "Murder is unacceptable and morally indefensible". Such aggressive, even violent quest for Political Power coupled with "doublespeak" characterized by the Power Structure of 1984 is common in History.
It is simply not practical to absolve those that may follow any nebulous "true definition" that bucks the general, historical trend. That requires a deeper knowledge of any individual's principles and track record beyond generally offering the benefit of the doubt. While I find it overly generalizing, and bordering on reprehensible, for a Jew to distrust all Germans, let alone all non-Jews, but it is akin to offhandedly offering trust to any member of the Nazi Party for an atheist to trust someone who calls themselves a Christian since the odds just aren't that good that when the chips are down, that individual won't side with his chosen philosophical "club". It brings to mind the allegory of The Frog and the Scorpion. It's just safer to not offer the Scorpion a ride.
Religions of almost ALL kinds can't seem to abide with the existence of difference, let alone, dissent. They all, as a group, seek power or why organize into ever larger groups? Once in power, they historically tend to wipe out all the "competition". This has been done so often, Religions' quest for political power - the power to marginalize, jail or execute those viewed as a competing philosophy , all who surely would have done the same had they risen to power first, has evolved to have a political component inescapable as part and parcel of any Organized Religion.
You should have stressed the "almost" rather than the "all". This attitude is characteristic of so-called revealed religions. If you believe that god has spoken, then everyone must obey. Hence forced conversion by Christians and Muslims, ethnic cleansing by Jews. It's not characteristic of pagan religions. Did the Chinese or the Japanese try to wipe out Buddhism? Do Santeria practitioners attack other religions. Of course some-one will bring up Roman persecution of Christians, but that was because they feared that Christianity would destroy the Empire. It did.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.