What is the future of Islam?

[iBrian]

Not in the US or UK where Christianity and Islam totally rejects religious rationality. Judaism has made some advances therein but basically also still subscribes to an irrational dominant God.

It's these sort of rampant generalisations that make you seem as bad as the very people you claim to be working against: setting up misconception for misconception.

There is an absolutely massive difference between US and UK Christianity - US Christianity has become aggressive and domineering, whereas here in the UK Christianity is essentially liberal and passive - but you don't seem to understand that there is a world of difference between and Anglican and a Southern Baptist.

As for Islam - alas, I don't live in a majority Moslem area anymore, so I can't ask anyone close by for a response.

But your Judaism comments - how much Jewish thinking have you actually read? It does seem that your main understanding of Judaism comes from a Christian Literalist reading of the King James Version.

Ultimately, your own arguments often seem so generalised, and show so little understanding of what you claim to comment on, that I'm afraid your own arguments come across as dinstinctly irrational.


Oh - and welcome to CR, Karehndiujo Mohmid.

 

[kkawohl]

On the Judaism site - Questions about Torah and Talmud, I stated,

"One can of course find a million reasons why religious rationality wouldn’t work, but consider this: If religious radicals would eventually (in 100 years?) be considered mentally deficient, would they eventually disappear? I know, the present system has existed for several thousand years & will not change easily, but every new development began with the first step. The best weapon against irrationality is logic. If logic is implemented in religion, eventually the inference of reasoning has to predominate and the illogical will be considered inferior and will ridicule itself out of existence".

 

[Mus Zibii]

Eh, a lot of holy writ demands that concepts of 'logic' be purged. Maybe that'd be a good thread.

The Abrahamic story of Eden itself implies as much. Don't question God's will or you'll be excommunicated. And Paul said at length, cast away philosophy. As if God would melt away like the wicked witch if someone read a book or something. Sad, and worst of all, unnecessary.

 

[iBrian]

The trouble is that logic works in different ways - it is effectively chained to subjective interpretation.

I'm sure that bananabrain here could comment on how there is plenty of Jewish commentary that looks for the deeper logic and rationalism in the Eden account especially - and how this view will almost certainly be at odds from the the logic and rationalism of the literalist Christian perception.

Ultimately, accusing others of being irrational in their beliefs is simply telling them to follow your own system. Whereas there may be interesting ideas inherent within that, unless you are able to understand something of the logic and mindset of the very people you are criticising, then such declarations simply come across as ignorant.

Certainly there are strains in Judaism that are closest to the literalist Christian view - but certainly not all Judaism thinks in this manner. So the generalisation is flawed.

 

[kkawohl]

My key point, that Brian somehow does not grasp here, is that religious "radicals" are mentally deficient, irrational and illogical.

 

[Avinash]

Islam is not the culmination of religious thought, it is the derivative of Judaism & Christianity.

There are also specific Tantric practices in Islam which cannot be found in Judaism & Christianity.

 

[kkawohl]

There are also specific Tantric practices in Islam which cannot be found in Judaism & Christianity.

Tantric practices in Islam? My understanding is that Tantra is Hindu or Buddhist literature written in Sanskrit on ritualistic acts and ceremonial worship, and Tantric is of or pertaining to a Hindu or Buddhist Tantra. Or do you mean the adjective form of tantra that is sometimes employed to one who is deeply versed in some study--a scholar; but more accurately pertaining to the Tantras themselves and the doctrines in them?

 

[Avinash]

I agree that religion will be transformed into spiritual science when people finally start to reject dogmas and superstitions.

Where is it already going that way in educated parts of the world?...Not in the US or UK where Christianity and Islam totally rejects religious rationality. Judaism has made some advances therein but basically also still subscribes to an irrational dominant God.

Religions are anchored in people's minds that need super doses of applicable logic in order to delete its inbred illogical superstitions.

Namaskar,

In my part of the world many churches are already largely empty or turned into art-galleries (or demolished) and young people (especially in towns and cities) are massively turning their backs on dogmatic religion. I have always wondered why it is different in the U.S. The rest of the Christians here are quite liberal and rational people.

The only growing churches here are the (tiny) evangelical movements. And things like New Age, Neo-Hinduism and especially Buddhism are also growing in small numbers.

 

[Avinash]

Tantric practices in Islam? My understanding is that Tantra is Hindu or Buddhist literature written in Sanskrit on ritualistic acts and ceremonial worship, and Tantric is of or pertaining to a Hindu or Buddhist Tantra. Or do you mean the adjective form of tantra that is sometimes employed to one who is deeply versed in some study--a scholar; but more accurately pertaining to the Tantras themselves and the doctrines in them?

Namaskar,

The Tantric practices I'm talking about (unfortunately I don't know the Koran) are things like taking a half-bath (specific type of ablutions) before prayers, taking a full bath after sexual release, fighting negative tendencies (Jihad) etc., etc. Or maybe these things can also be found in Judaism?

 

[kkawohl]

Namaskar,

I have always wondered why it is different in the U.S. The rest of the Christians here are quite liberal and rational people.

Churches in the US are very influential with the Republican Party. Also vast amounts of monetary donations from elder Christians who believe that their money will sustain their beliefs, keeps religious radicalism alive.

P. S. - Paramashiva Purus'ottamah vishvasya kendram.- The Supreme Consciousness at the nucleus of the universe is known as Paramashiva or Purs’ottama.

 

[iBrian]

My key point, that Brian somehow does not grasp here, is that religious "radicals" are mentally deficient, irrational and illogical.

It's because you seem to make a continual point of painting all of these religions as being habited only by these "radicals".

 

[kkawohl]

It's because you seem to make a continual point of painting all of these religions as being habited only by these "radicals".

Any religion that preaches exclusivity (Christianity & Islam) is a breeding ground for religious radicals. Judaism doesn't preach exclusivity but also promotes religious radicalism; they originated a monotheistic God who is domineering and requires obeyance and worship. A true God is self-sufficient and requires nothing from mankind.

 

[Mus Zibii]

Its a fine line. Is believing in Jinns and Angels and Cherubs, ever sane? And then how do you define sanity and is it bound by sheer numbers, because about 98% of the human race embraces such things. And the other two percent have no moral center. But there I go with generalization. LOL

 

[iBrian]

Any religion that preaches exclusivity (Christianity & Islam) is a breeding ground for religious radicals. Judaism doesn't preach exclusivity but also promotes religious radicalism; they originated a monotheistic God who is domineering and requires obeyance and worship. A true God is self-sufficient and requires nothing from mankind.

That is exactly my point - your comprehension of these paths seems very narrowly generalised, and fails to appreciate the complexities, histories, or practices, of these paths. There's more to understanding the Bible than a literalist Christian position, and just because a handful of Saudi's flew planes into buildings does not make 2 billion Muslims aspiring terrorists.

 

[Mus Zibii]

I got kicked off the Internet Infidel's forum. And before everyone jumps me for going there in the first place, I have to say a lot of the people there REALLY know how to discuss religious literature. Anyway, the biggest problem I had, is that the criticism levelled against the various philosophies and religions originates in the assumption that all faiths boil down to the least of their practioners. If a Christian were to say, screw evolution, then no matter what the context of the next discussion was, that sentiment was attached to the dogma like a millstone.

That said, such stains DO impact religious history.

 

[kkawohl]

Brian,

In order to intelligently appreciate something there has to be complete truth. Only when the truth behind the concept is known can one accurately judge the concept. Spirituality is an interaction of man’s spirit with the Spirit of God. This interaction was often expanded upon by followers who added their own interpretations and gradually the original message was skewed to meet the agenda of the newly formed religion. Most religions today are composed of so much added on garbage to a point where they are the culmination of their own politics and have lost the original meaning of spirituality.

One does not have to be an intellectual to see that the complexities, histories, and practices of religions have always been used to indoctrinate and keep new members from questioning the composition of the God that religions have created for the masses. This God was created to intimidate and brain-wash the gullible. True spirituality and a true God is self-sufficient and requires nothing from mankind.

This is the 21st Century and many religions still promote the existence of a vindictive, dominant, domineering, judicial God who will cast nonbelievers into a everlasting fiery pit. The Taliban movement brainwashed the illiterate and will eventually be annihilated; the Christian movement claims salvation that was invented by the Catholic Church which, in order to bypass the 1st Commandment, created the Trinity, made Jesus into God and claimed that salvation can only be achieved via the Catholic Church. If the medieval practices and the medieval beliefs of Christianity, Judaism and Islam that are based on superstitions were eliminated, then we could start building a rational and logical belief system that is based on truth and an understanding of spirituality. This is the value of truthfulness and rationality.


Brian, I recommend that you read “A History of God” by Karen Armstrong. Your remark, “just because a handful of Saudi's flew planes into buildings does not make 2 billion Muslims aspiring terrorists” is nonsensical and juvenile; has anyone ever claimed contrarily?

Kurt

 

[Karehndiujo Mohmid]

Islam, in theory, is the culmination of all religious thought.

Hence, it would appear to me that the future of Islam may depend, somewhat, upon the future of its ancestoral religions.

Of course, when I say this, I mean that if I am to be a proper Muslim, I must first have a firm grasp on all other schools of thought.

(It is more a stab at rationality, per se, than an act of mere pompousness.)

One is not necessarily greater than the other. Islam for me, however, seems to wrap it all up in a nutshell.

 

[kkawohl]

Of course, when I say this, I mean that if I am to be a proper Muslim, I must first have a firm grasp on all other schools of thought.

(It is more a stab at rationality, per se, than an act of mere pompousness.)

One is not necessarily greater than the other. Islam for me, however, seems to wrap it all up in a nutshell.

A slight jest....only nuts belong in a nutshell....a stab at rationality?
Schools are a product of man.

 

[Karehndiujo Mohmid]

A slight jest....only nuts belong in a nutshell....a stab at rationality?
Schools are a product of man.

And man, a product of school.

 

[Vajradhara]

Salaam Karehndiujo,

thank you for the post.

Of course, when I say this, I mean that if I am to be a proper Muslim, I must first have a firm grasp on all other schools of thought.

(It is more a stab at rationality, per se, than an act of mere pompousness.)

One is not necessarily greater than the other. Islam for me, however, seems to wrap it all up in a nutshell.

do you consider yourself to be a "proper" Muslim?

if so, do you consider that you have a firm grasp on "all" other schools of thought?

i hope you don't mind if i find that claim a bit tenuous..