I have been reading this topic everywhere that changing a religion or going against one is bad but also that we should follow only one religion so called humanism but i still have doubts.
Most of he terrorist attack's of the century are made by people following the Islamic religion but their leader their creator Prophet Muhammad his thoughts were great and according to the name of Islam it means "surrender" or "submission," while some of the followers (terrorist) are going against it and most of them says - "we'll protect our god" but a thing to think is that god who created Earth in Earth the land in land the Continents in continents Countries in Countries States in States Cities in Cities somewhere at a small place where they say "we'll protect our god" is so mall in Earth but the creator who created universe do he needs their protection? who can harm him?
If we classify gods their are two ways one- the god who created us and the one whom we created who do you support?
Bad preaching.
Problems as occur in the opening post:
- humanism is not a religion
- humanism can be a very bad thing when overdone
- which century? what country? What's your definition of terrorism? Also, number of occurance not necessarily equals causalities.
- Muhammad in its age might have been pretty mild, but the Quaran's 66% is still only about hate-speech against infidels and heretics. Not peaceful at all.
- actually this whole "protect allah by killing everyone else" is right in the Koran.
- I can harm your imaginary creator. Mostly because it is imaginary.
- the ending is a false dilemma. First: there is no god who created "me". My parents "created" me. Evolution created my species. Natural laws created life.
Also the dilemma is false, because I support no god. Why should I? But here is something for you: which you prefer, an artificial all-comfort flat, or a natural cavern? Of course this question has nothing to do with me as I serve no tyrant, I'm no mindless slave. I am Godkiller, Defender of Anarchy.
Terrorists like the IS follow a radical, extremist interpretation of the Islam. They don't follow the Islamic religion of the majority.
Actually, they are the TRUE islam, the others are just wishy-washy muslims who don't follow their religious dogmas because they are sane, and realise the rest of the worls is capable to annihilate them if they are forced to.
- humanism can be a very bad thing when overdone
Humanism values above all else the life and comfort of human beings. Unfortunately for them humans depend on sorroundings, like animals, plants and so on.
Also, humanism in absolution will save anyone considered human, and makes no regulations. Even if it'd allow "only healthy humans", so not try to help creatures who can not stay alive after birth for more than an hour or so, and would allow abortion in case eg. rape-victims, will still not try to prevent overpopulation.
In those cases humanism can, and will go bad and cause harm.
Actually, they are the TRUE islam, the others are just wishy-washy muslims who don't follow their religious dogmas because they are sane, and realise the rest of the worls is capable to annihilate them if they are forced to.
While I realized I was guilty of a No-True-Scotsman in my phrase above, so is your reply. There is no true Islam, as there is no true Christianity or a true religion for that matter.
Besides, what I said is that they are not followers of the main Islamic currents, and thus not representative of most Muslims.
Humanism values above all else the life and comfort of human beings.
Not really. The term is actually rather poorly defined. He could just mean philanthropy, or the philosophical theory, neither of which have much anything to do with glorifying humanity any more than usual.
There is no true Islam, as there is no true Christianity or a true religion for that matter.
Actually, there is, only religious people lubs to lie about it.
U know they wrote their belief in a book. That settles the questions, especially when direct commands are there on the subject (like kill everyone not in your religion, like for practically all the religions tells you).
The term is actually rather poorly defined. He could just mean philanthropy, or the philosophical theory
This is just an utter and obvious lie. Humanism is clearly defined, take a dictionary:
"Humanism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over established doctrine or faith (fideism)."
Your supposed unclearness even names the other kind of filozophies you try to equal with humanism, and mistakenly even name them. U know words have definitions, and if there are 2 words,there is always a reason why there are two words instead of only 1 in the same language.
Philanthropy's definition clearly divides from humanism: etymologically means "love of humanity" in the sense of caring, nourishing, developing and enhancing "what it is to be human" on both the benefactors' (by identifying and exercising their values in giving and volunteering) and beneficiaries' (by benefiting) parts.
First off, I'd like to thank twillight2 for effectively verifying everything I just said in no uncertain words.
U know they wrote their belief in a book. That settles the questions, especially when direct commands are there on the subject (like kill everyone not in your religion, like for practically all the religions tells you).
No, it doesn't. Following an archaic text to the letter is not an expression of the "true" faith, but a very orthodox sect.
God is imaginary, we don't know if he exists in real or not. But some people often called as terrorist fight for their God. In other words they are fighting for an imaginary thing.
Humanism
A system of thought that considers that solving human problems with the help of reason is more important than religious beliefs. It emphasizes the fact that the basic nature of humans is good.
acording to raze
god? or a reason to fight?
God is imaginary, we don't know if he exists in real or not. But some people often called as terrorist fight for their God. In other words they are fighting for an imaginary thing.
Humanism
A system of thought that considers that solving human problems with the help of reason is more important than religious beliefs. It emphasizes the fact that the basic nature of humans is good.
acording to Fishpreffered
It's just an excuse; a favourite among fanatics of any faith.
If we classify gods their are two ways one- the god who created us and the one whom we created who do you support?
Those are not classes. Those are differences in belief. Every god is a conceptual construct. Believing that one is something more doesn't change that.
u guys have diffrent things to say but i still has a question did god tld us that we'r from which relegion we belong to?
did he made them?
god is real or fake?
nobody ever saw god and even if people believe to see them did they really did?
answer these.
Actually, there is, only religious people lubs to lie about it.
U know they wrote their belief in a book. That settles the questions, especially when direct commands are there on the subject (like kill everyone not in your religion, like for practically all the religions tells you).
Ugh Twilight please. Using skeptics as your source was already a big mistake, but the "direct commands" and oll af that nonsense, please. I had debunked everything on that site of yours years ago on this same forum. Stop acting like you know anything of Islam.
But I must say, yes there is one true Islam. And that is "the Islam" of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah(Sunni). It is the mostly widly accepted and believed community of Islam. Within this community are four "ways" whtat we call Medhabs and these are accepted by the majority as the truth. ISIS and such have Wahabism and Salafism as their doctrine. Salafism and Wahabism is not one of these Medhabs and so not accepted by the majority.
And if you insist on "these commands to kill," just drop someby so I can show you how wrong you are.
Ugh Twilight please. Using skeptics as your source was already a big mistake, but the "direct commands" and oll af that nonsense, please. I had debunked everything on that site of yours years ago on this same forum. Stop acting like you know anything of Islam.
But I must say, yes there is one true Islam. And that is "the Islam" of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah(Sunni). It is the mostly widly accepted and believed community of Islam. Within this community are four "ways" whtat we call Medhabs and these are accepted by the majority as the truth. ISIS and such have Wahabism and Salafism as their doctrine. Salafism and Wahabism is not one of these Medhabs and so not accepted by the majority.
And if you insist on "these commands to kill," just drop someby so I can show you how wrong you are.
Salaam,
Reiki
you are perfectly right and does make a point.... opposition..
You can take any religious beliefs and make that a reason for killing a bunch of people. These Islamic terrorist diirtbags are just a bunch of 20- something idiots who think it's funny to blow stuff up and point guns at people. Too bad we have a liberal idiot as a president or else we would have squashed them like the ****roaches they are.
I read a report (I have no idea where from), but it was a soldier who was in Afghanistan and Iraq from about 2003-2008, and he was talking about how awful these idiots are. They literally got their training from movies.
You can take any religious beliefs and make that a reason for killing a bunch of people.
Not sure it works with any religious belief, but brainwashing and fanatism can do a lot of harm.
Too bad we have a liberal idiot as a president or else we would have squashed them like the ****roaches they are.
You mean like you did with the Taliban in Irak? That is by the way absolutely not the reason why there are groups like Al-Qaida and the IS now, no.
Joking aside, we do need an offensive against those guys (who are by the way a little better organized than you portray them here), but we need a global coordination. Can't have a single country screw up their solo mission again.
Anyone can claim to do something in the name of any religion
I don't think we screwed anything up. The mission was to hunt down and capture or kill Islamic extremists who were trying to commit mass genocide. If we never went in, and the Taliban movement gained a lot of steam, things would be a lot worse than right now. We cut the head off of the snake before it became too large and unmanageable.
I do agree on the fact that we need a higher concentration of intelligence and military forces cooperating together to hunt down and stop high level ISIS targets before we have another thing like the recent attack in Paris. (Granted I don't know, and I don't think that the media/gov't knows if they were actual ISIS operatives, but I feel it's pretty safe to assume.)
