|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
posted December 11, 2016 07:05 PM |
|
Edited by Neraus at 19:33, 11 Dec 2016.
|
That discussion reminds me of the Romans when the Turks were at the gates of Constantinople.
@JJ
I won't sugar coat this, I find it castrating to think that one shouldn't believe in an almighty deity only because it's an he.
By the way, gender-equality is a social construct, so I don't think I have to believe in it.
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 07:10 PM |
|
|
@Sal : But here, the guy with saber lost it, and doesn't even have a club. Have values like respect known "evolution" with the ages? Respect is respect, no matter in which era you put it.
@Neraus : Yes it has, Siciliano. But islam values made muslims humble, which is the first step when dealing with knowledge, in taking what the others have left and building upon it in humility. If ubi did that with Heores we would have avoided major losses.
@artu : That's the point.
About the pagan roman empire : it is easy, as you said, to defeat your enemies when you have the technicity to do. Same for colonial Britain, when you surpass most nations of the world, and when the world is still not interlinked like it is today, it is likely you'll expand fast.
And I just hope you don't expect some apologist site/book claiming how Quran is so miraculous or how all the scientific facts were already written in it or how it is logically impossible to deny Ouran etc by cherry-picking some vague verse and interpreting it as far fetched as possible to convince anyone. As someone from a secular Muslim country who has seen it all when it comes to such non-sense, I can tell you that the logic used in those arguments is so absurdly far fetched, the arguments are so kindergarden level, they only serve two functions: Muslims who read nothing else mentally masturbate reading them by themselves and non-Muslims just pity the Muslims for going along with such abysmal material.
Well well well well. What did I state in my previous post mate? That mostly today qorān is misunderstood and therefore values taken from it are twisted. That's what, for example leads some people to explode themselves to kill people. You'll still not deny that even if people are not convinced by what is written in it, it brought many enhacement to the people it came to meet.
And believe sir, some people don't convert to islam because they can't imagine living without wine, some others don't wanna bother learning arabic, some just can't figure living whil having to pray 5 times in a day, fast a whole month, and so on. Yes artu, this is not THE MAIN reason, that's why I said "some" people. The main reason, is probably because they don't get the whole point about it, because it's not easy to get it anyways. The mere difference between dīn and religion is already hard to get. Not to mention misinformation.
You said you read the book, you did in turkish, not in arabic. Why do you think it hasn't been translated? Well of course it has been for people to understand, but for cantillation, you have to read it in arabic, and to read it in arabic, you have to know arabic, again a barrier. I tell you that because indeed, when you read a sentence in a language than in another, it's not the same, and there I'm teaching nothing to any of you. And anyways, do you think I understand all what is written? The arabic is really old, you have to take a look to the tafsir to get all the meanings which are complex.
Yet the book has to be "read" in multiple ways. Here's something for you :
Some simple details are still interesting in the book.
The word Radjul (man) is mentioned 23 times in the whole book.
The word Mar'a (woman) is mentioned 23 times in the whole book too.
23 + 23 = 46
Does it ring any bells? Yes it does. Basically, caryotype. Now call it pure chance, I am pretty sure the arab dudes didn't know about chromosomes in that time. How come, in that patriarchal arab mentality, that they used as many times the word woman as they used the word man, and moreover, the numbers are those of the chromosomes every cell of your body inherited equally from your mum and dad?
If you don't believe me, take the book and count.
This, is a proof, that the book is indeed interesting to check out. Now if you think this example is the kind of cheerpicking stuff and all, that is something else.
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
Baronus
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 07:22 PM |
|
|
|
Western civilisations are former barbarians too. French, Italian, Spain peoples are not Rome descendents but wild barbarians conquerrors. So Arabs are conqerror too. Its the same. But Arabs dont received christianity and sink in stagantion for 1000 and more years. Western barbarians became christians and in result we have rapid civilisation growth in West. In year 700 Arabs were higher than West in 1900 very very low. Only reason of it is christianity.
|
|
Gryphs
Supreme Hero
The Clever Title
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 07:23 PM |
|
Edited by Gryphs at 19:24, 11 Dec 2016.
|
Neraus said:
I won't sugar coat this, I find it castrating to think that one shouldn't believe in an almighty deity only because it's an he.
I never said that. Artu said it could be more complicated and I pointed out that it isn't. I do not believe in a god and I am not going to sugar coat it but I find it hard to understand why someone would praise such an ego maniacal brute as the christian god male or female.
Neraus said:
By the way, gender-equality is a social construct, so I don't think I have to believe in it.
So is Christianity.
____________
"Don't resist the force. Redirect it. Water over rock."-blizzardboy
|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 07:29 PM |
|
Edited by Neraus at 19:30, 11 Dec 2016.
|
@Al Hazin
But, if we go by that reasoning then what the arabs did isn't something unique, neither did it produce something greater than the rest of the world.
Unfortunately for the west until Rome it was inhabited by brutal savages that knew no culture, the east harboured Greeks, Persians and Egyptians, so there was already a substrate of culture there.
When the Roman Empire fell the western provinces remained poorer than their Eastern counterparts, so when Charlemagne did the same thing that arabs did he had less success in the immediate, although his reforms overhauled Europe.
Then stagnation occurred in the south, while the north continued its progress, while Islam "united" the Middle East and North Africa, Europe continued to be harshly divided, and that division became the engine of the explosive progress that ensued.
Let's not forget that the start of the Renaissance was in Italy, between little warring states that tried to prevail against one another.
Islam wasn't capable of producing a Galileo, a Descartes or a Newton, just as it wasn't capable of producing a Michelangelo or a Leonardo.
@Gryphs
That wasn't targeted at you but at JJ, shame on me for not making it obvious.
There is a difference though, I'm openly religious, and I'm open to being called an idiot for saying: "It's God, I don't have to explain anything", while to believe in gender equality you'd have to make a case for it.
Or we can do the simple solution to call it a religion.
I choose to remain a Catholic, it's a faith, I'm not going to deny that you'd have to have faith.
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 07:35 PM |
|
|
Neraus said:
I won't sugar coat this, I find it castrating to think that one shouldn't believe in an almighty deity only because it's an he.
By the way, gender-equality is a social construct, so I don't think I have to believe in it.
Because the specific gender tells it's FAKE, that's why. It makes too much of a difference, if there is only ONE god, that has ONE gender and gifted the second one to the one in his own image.
It's obvious that's bollocks. It makes females 2nd class humans - and THEY are to blame for humanity's downfall as well, man's only fault being him LYING to god to protect her.
As a woman there is no reason whatsoever to believe in this crap - or in the other monotheistic gender-oppressive bull. Why accepting you are inferior?
Male story for males = instrument of oppression through the ages, and the theory equals the practise. Why would you believe in such a thing?
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 07:45 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 19:56, 11 Dec 2016.
|
Baronus said:
In fact western civilisation is only there where is christianity. There is nothing in western which is non christian. Western way of thinking is christian. Its good lokking if we compare with another civilistations.
There is a lot in Western civilization that is not Christian, the Ancient Greek/Roman roots are just as significant. And every time you draw this wrong conclusion, I will remind you that the Western civilization got on the rise when it applied a distance to religion both in law and in philosophy, what was unique about its advance was secularism leading to scientific thinking, advanced technology among other things, not Christianity. You were just as Christian when you were eating everbody else's dust in the Middle Ages, there are Christian countries in Africa or South America also, their religion doesn't "westernize" their social standards.
@Neraus
Well, the political correctness is not my concern mostly but a supposedly perfect entity beyond our cognition being a male or father or son etc is quite self-explanatory in terms of anthropomorphism.
Btw, it is not gender equality that is a social construct but the very concept of equality itself. Nature has no abstractions such as equality. Normative morality is also a social construct, you don't seem to have a problem with that.
Also, what I said to Baronus, about your "producing a Galileo, a Descartes or a Newton" That is the Enlightenment, it is something happening against the religious authority and a Catholic using Galileo as such an example is inevitably ironic. Not to mention, there are many individuals also in the Islamic world like this guy but since the social dynamics does not change like they did in the West, they remain as individuals, not triggering an accumulative change and they are less famous. Newton wouldnt be any different in a Christian Europe without the Enlightenment.
@AlHazin
Dude, I wouldn't like to break your heart but it's just overwhelmingly naive that you think everybody would become Muslims only if they understood the Quran properly and the ones who don't, do it cause they like wine etc sometimes. But I guess, that's what faith is and that's why it's called blind mentality. Just let me inform you that things like that "23" are not exclusive to Quran, there is even a book called "the Bible Code" which applies the same to Bible (which, according to Islam, is distorted and flawed.) Any mathematician will tell you that using such free association and an endless set of arbitrary coincidences, you will be able to project meaning to such things, even if you apply it to a phone book. If 23 wont match, something else will, there are just too many things to pick from... It's the perfect nest for confirmation bias.
Also, I find it quite absurd that a God wishing, no, actually, demanding to be recognized, sending his universal message in such a way that to truly get it, you have to learn Arabic. That's quite a favor to you guys. 
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 07:58 PM |
|
|
Neraus said:
Let's not forget that the start of the Renaissance was in Italy, between little warring states that tried to prevail against one another.
Islam wasn't capable of producing a Galileo, a Descartes or a Newton, just as it wasn't capable of producing a Michelangelo or a Leonardo.
You mean the same renaissance that took a lot from our civilization? Indeed.
Well, we just invented hospitals and observatories, amongst other little useful things, such algorithms that play a little role in the fact your able to post.
artu said:
Also, I find it quite absurd that a God wishing, no, actually, demanding to be recognized, sending his universal message in such a way that to truly get it, you have to learn Arabic. That's quite a favor to you guys.
It is! Lol I never said I was an Arab though. Then please don't break my heart, I'll keep my beliefs with me since I'm an irrational romantic 
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 08:02 PM |
|
|
@JJ
In pagan times one of the stories regarding the birth of mankind was that it was initially an hermaphrodite being, and then because of a crime it was separated into man and woman.
In the beginning Adam was created, he was a man, and that's it.
There wasn't another human being created with him, actually, there wasn't even a way for him to breed this way.
Then he became lonely, and so God created a new human out of him, this time though it was a different kind, and that became the first woman, Eve.
Basically, there wasn't an initial intention to create a woman, so that may fit in the view that if we were to give a gender to God it would be male, because in the initial plan man was "gender-less"...
Am I grasping at straws? Sure. And I'm also sure that this was an heretical theory that sprung up in history, so don't take me into account for this.
@artu
The difference is that I wasn't ascribing to a religion like Baronus does, although I picked some names in a certain bias...
I know the "irony", and I hoped someone would mention it, but you see, Galileo's case is one of the most interesting in history because of the misinformation that ensued, at the point that it's said that he died at the stake, which is false, but mentioning him was to drive the point further that he didn't take his ideas from the Bible, did he?
Anyway, I picked the first two names especially because they were Christian, but their way of thinking didn't conform to a literalist interpretation, like what this din thing would imply to produce great minds.
I could have mentioned Blaise Pascal as a great Christian mind, but he was too entangled in theology to make this same point.
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 08:06 PM |
|
Edited by Neraus at 20:07, 11 Dec 2016.
|
@AlHazin
Oh no you didn't.
It's already debatable how much you did create, but to even appropriate yourself of the Greek knowledge that came to Italy after the fall of Constantinople is conceited at best.
Your thinkers that influenced us were Aristotelian commenters, your mathematicians took the numbers from India, and your architects basically mixed Roman architecture with Persian architecture.
Also, hospitals and observatories were a thing even before Rome, medics existed throughout Europe, and didn't I mention an astronomer some posts ago?
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
Gryphs
Supreme Hero
The Clever Title
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 08:08 PM |
|
Edited by Gryphs at 20:10, 11 Dec 2016.
|
Neraus said:
There is a difference though, I'm openly religious, and I'm open to being called an idiot for saying: "It's God, I don't have to explain anything", while to believe in gender equality you'd have to make a case for it.
Or we can do the simple solution to call it a religion.
I choose to remain a Catholic, it's a faith, I'm not going to deny that you'd have to have faith.
It is not hard to make a case for given how they are half of the population with the same capabilities as a man. Honestly, if something is going to be immune from public discourse because faith then I do not want it ruling over anything.
Neraus said:
@JJ
In pagan times one of the stories regarding the birth of mankind was that it was initially an hermaphrodite being, and then because of a crime it was separated into man and woman.
In the beginning Adam was created, he was a man, and that's it.
There wasn't another human being created with him, actually, there wasn't even a way for him to breed this way.
Then he became lonely, and so God created a new human out of him, this time though it was a different kind, and that became the first woman, Eve.
Basically, there wasn't an initial intention to create a woman, so that may fit in the view that if we were to give a gender to God it would be male, because in the initial plan man was "gender-less"...
Am I grasping at straws? Sure. And I'm also sure that this was an heretical theory that sprung up in history, so don't take me into account for this.
How is a story that came before the catholic church existed heretical?
____________
"Don't resist the force. Redirect it. Water over rock."-blizzardboy
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 08:16 PM |
|
|
@Neraus : just give some time, and I'll show you how Algerians invented architecture.
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 08:17 PM |
|
Edited by Neraus at 20:18, 11 Dec 2016.
|
@Gryphs
It's not the story at the beginning that is heretical, but rather this:
ME said:
Basically, there wasn't an initial intention to create a woman, so that may fit in the view that if we were to give a gender to God it would be male, because in the initial plan man was "gender-less"...
It's the application of the hermaphrodite to Genesis.
I think I've seen this story in a treatise regarding heresies, but I might be wrong.
@AlHazin
Come on, if you're going to go with such a blanket statement I can easily tell you that Aztecs didn't need Algerians to tell them how to build pyramids.
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
Gryphs
Supreme Hero
The Clever Title
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 08:24 PM |
|
Edited by Gryphs at 20:41, 11 Dec 2016.
|
Neraus said:
@Gryphs
It's not the story at the beginning that is heretical, but rather this:
ME said:
Basically, there wasn't an initial intention to create a woman, so that may fit in the view that if we were to give a gender to God it would be male, because in the initial plan man was "gender-less"...
It's the application of the hermaphrodite to Genesis.
I think I've seen this story in a treatise regarding heresies, but I might be wrong.
I am sorry if god did not create a female off the bat while having the intent that humans would reproduce (Adam had fully functional reproductive organs), than create her later because poor Adam was wonely, he is an idiot.
While we are making national claims to inventions I am sure I could find someone in the US who believes America invented the earth.
____________
"Don't resist the force. Redirect it. Water over rock."-blizzardboy
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 08:25 PM |
|
|
Not a problem neraus, everything will get in time mate 
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 08:33 PM |
|
|
Look, if we'll get into who started what and the developments of Antiquity, I think, with a broader perspective, it mostly revolves around the Mediterranean rather than "East or West" at a certain period of time, since that sea was the main route of trade and flow of ideas and prosperity. (Hence, it is the Medi - terranean). Before that, it was Mesopotamia with its fertile lands or after the "discovery" of the New World, and new routes, Western Europe got the upper hand, it's no coincidence that the Dutch, the British and the Portuguese flourished right after that, is it? They are all ports to the Atlantic.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Baronus
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 09:51 PM |
|
|
God is a Spirit so he has no gender in human sense. But Jesus was born as human so He has male gender. Woman is not second class because Mary have the same nature as Jesus. We have two ideal people Jesus and Mary. Two genders. Dont forget that Church praise to Mary. We have gender equality in Church. Only crazy can tell that one gender is more needed.
In 600 year in West civilisation was completly ruined. After that its new civilisation. Builded by Church. If it is Greek and Roman why Arabs dont built something like that? Why Turks are not progress champions? They conquer all Greek goods. Have more and more ancients books than West. Byzantium was more and more rich. Arabs and Turks are normal people like all. Only answer is: Because they dont join to Church. Roman law? But it was very cruel. Crucifixion? We dont do it. For Romanians it was normal. In fact our ,,roman law" is ,,roman catholic" law. England dont use it! Has own barbarian law! And was catholic country in 1500 year.
I like Arabs. And im pro Arab Spring. I want to win Free Syria. I want they believe in God!
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 10:05 PM |
|
|
Bible says God created Adam in HIS image. Tells the whole story. Male oppression crap.
And real life confirms it for as long as monotheistic religions are around. Women have always been oppressed. And the excuse has been RELIGION. Draw your own conclusions.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 10:14 PM |
|
|
I already answered that. There is no causality or even correlation between religion and progress, why aren't the Mexicans or the Albanians the champions of progress then? What put some of the West (and not even all Wesern Europe in the beginning) in a significantly more progressive jump compared to its comtemporaries was secularization and the Church losing power, not the opposite. Of course, that's not the only reason and I mentioned some of the other stuff in my post above. Religion wont define anything by itself, on the contrary, usually social dynamics will mold religion more than it molds social dynamics. That's why new communions, sects or reforms are born.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Baronus
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted December 11, 2016 10:46 PM |
|
|
God created human as HIS IMAGE! AND NEXT! MAN AND WOMAN HE CREATED HUMAN!
Man as image of Jesus.
Woman as image of Mary.
And next you can read thay sin in paradise is a reason woman opression. NOT RELIGION!
Logic.
America is a bad example of christianisation. Was conquered by bandits. There was genocide local people. Great tragedy. There was in fact all but not christianisation. This continent is poor of christianity.
Albanians are in 80% muslims.
In Mexico you had masonic revolution and christian martyrology. See last film about it. Cristeros. There was hard atheisation. Big secularisation its XIX century. And what next?
Secularization effect is II World Wars communism, nazism and fall of West. Present West is ruined. No religion no kids barbarian invasion...
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
