Total topics: 88
the prophet of islam muhammad married Khadijah a 40 years old very rich woman when he was 25 , she was 15 years older than him
he didn't have a harem or 13 wives he didn't dare to have a harem since his wife was the one with the money , the person giving him his allowance , she was his work boss , now after her death muhammad inherited her money and he's 50 years old
so he built his own harem including a 9 years old kid -aisha-
===================================================================
that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that `Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine years (i.e. till his death).
Authentic Hadith
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5134
In-book reference : Book 67, Hadith 70
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 62, Hadith 65
===========
in case you don't know being mentioned in sahih al bukhari means that any muslim that say it's wrong hadith will be leaving islam and becomming apostate or kaffer
=======
why didn't muhammad married a 9 years old kid bacck when he was with 15 years older woman than him ? the answer is simple he didn't dare since he was digging gold from her
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Muslim woman, 26, is sentenced to death by hanging for blasphemy in Pakistan after sending caricatures of Prophet Mohammed over WhatsApp
- A Muslim woman, 26, has been sentenced to death in Pakistan for blasphemy
- She was convicted of sending caricatures of Prophet Muhammad via WhatsApp
- Blasphemy is punishable by the death sentence in Muslim-majority Pakistan
- But an execution has never been carried out as courts have overruled sentence
Not the first person that gets the death penalty for insulting the prophet of islam the worst person to ever walk the earth
The trial court in the northern Pakistani city of Rawalpindi on Wednesday sentenced Aneeqa Ateeq under the country’s strict blasphemy laws, which impose a mandatory death penalty for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.
===============================================================================
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (ﷺ) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (ﷺ) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (ﷺ) was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.
Grade:Sahih (Al-Albani)-authentic-
Reference: Sunan Abi Dawud 4361
In-book reference: Book 40, Hadith 11
English translation: Book 39, Hadith 4348
Not the first time someone is killed for insulting muhammad
===================================
islam have been killing people for insulting the benevolent or should I say malevolent prophet of islam since the beginning of islam
in the hadith mentioned before muhammad stated that " no retaliation is payable for her blood " sounds extremely benevolent
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Why hasn't a "god" ever healed an amputee?
I've just copied this question from facebook and I'm just asking for help here .
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Hijjab in islam is mandatory on every adult Muslim woman , many muslims and muslim activists claim that islam is being attacked whenever hijjab is banned ,
and I have the solution for that , its actually just copying IRAN which is basically whenever a muslim woman leave her house without hijjab give her a fine
that way you'll get multiple benefits which include:
1.increase the revenue of the country
2.muslim women themselves will get out of there homes and ask that hijjab get banned
this will get muslim women to fight against hijjab , and will prove that many muslim women don't want to wear hijjab in the west
"
Is it mandatory to wear hijab in Islam?
Modern Muslim scholars believe that it is obligatory in Islamic law that women abide by the rules of hijab (as outlined in their respective school of thought).
"
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Do you agree or not on that
jesus true father would have been known if they had DNA tests back then ?
instead of this garbage about god's son .
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
the people living in mecca the quraysh tribe were very open to religious freedom and around mecca before islam came lay many Idols uniting all the arabs as each tribe worshiped multiple idols depending on time , the existence of both christians like waraqa bin naufal and jews like :
the freedom of religion in pre-islamic times in the Arabian Peninsula along with the diversity of the gods worshipped shows a great example of freedom of religion , as long as no one insult the gods of the other that's until muhammad came with his new religion and insulted his tribes god and tried to destroy their idols,
muhammad was caught before he could do anything , being of high born in his tribe he managed to leave with slab on the rest however his followers suffering have just began since the holy book of islam which they need to recite contains insults towards the idols of the tribe claimed that those idols couldn't defend themselves therefore they are not gods .
----------------------
now let us analyze this, imagine a person walk into a church 1500 years ago in the middle of the sermon breaks the cross and claim that jesus isn't god otherwise the cross would have defended itself , what would happen to that person ?
--------------------
let me give you another example , imagine that I rode a bulldozer and used it to demolish a mosque, burned all the qurans in there and then I claimed that allah doesn't exist otherwise the mosque would have defended itself , how would muslims feel especially in a muslim majority country .
-------------------------
after Conquest of Mecca by islam muhammad prohibited all the arabic tribes from worshiping their idols
muhammad also destroyed all the idols ,
--------------------
before islam the Arabian Peninsula had many cultures , many religions
after islam it had only one religion and one culture islam ,
---------------
this tradition of destroying the land marks of other cultures like what isis did in iraq came from muhammad destroying the idols back in mecca and then in the entire Arabian Peninsula , you might not now this but one of islamic caliphate's son tried to destroy egypt pyramids sadly or luckly he failed after only managing to leave a massive gash at one of them
==================================
In AD 1196, Al-Aziz Uthman, Saladin's son and the Sultan of Egypt, attempted to demolish the pyramids, starting with that of Menkaure. Workmen recruited to demolish the pyramid stayed at their job for eight months, but found it almost as expensive to destroy as to build. They could only remove one or two stones each day. Some used wedges and levers to move the stones, while others used ropes to pull them down. When a stone fell, it would bury itself in the sand, requiring extraordinary efforts to free it. Wedges were used to split the stones into several pieces, and a cart was used to carry it to the foot of the escarpment, where it was left. Despite their efforts, workmen were only able to damage the pyramid to the extent of leaving a large vertical gash at its northern face.
======================================
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
the holy quran 18-74 & 18-80 it tells the story about a murder of child , and why was that child murdered ???
the murder
verse 18-74 :
So, they moved ahead until when they met a boy, he killed him (the boy). He (Mūsā) said, “Did you kill an innocent soul while he did not kill anyone? You have committed a heinous act indeed.”
— Mufti Taqi Usmani
So they (both) went off until, when they (both) met a youth, then he killed him. He said, "Have you killed a most cleansed self without (his having killed another) self? Indeed you have already come with a (highly) maleficent thing."
— Dr. Ghali
And so they travelled on. Then, when they met a young boy and the man killed him, Moses said, ‘How could you kill an innocent person? He has not killed anyone! What a terrible thing to do!’
— Abdul Haleem
So they twain journeyed on till, when they met a lad, he slew him. (Moses) said: What! Hast thou slain an innocent soul who hath slain no man? Verily thou hast done a horrid thing.
— Pickthall
Сўнг яна йўлга тушдилар. То бориб бир болага рўбарў бўлганларида (Хизир) уни ўлдирди. (Буни кўрган Мусо) деди: «Бировни ўлдирмаган бир бегуноҳ жонни ўлдирдинг-а. Дарҳақиқат, (сен) бузуқ иш қилдинг!»
— Alauddin Mansour
Puis ils partirent tous deux; et quand ils eurent rencontré un enfant, [l’homme] le tua. Alors [Moïse] lui dit : "As-tu tué un être innocent, qui n’a tué personne ? Tu as commis certes, une chose affreuse !"
— French Translation(Muhammad Hamidullah)
So they set out, until when they met a boy, he [i.e., al-Khiḍr] killed him. [Moses] said, "Have you killed a pure soul for other than [having killed] a soul? You have certainly done a deplorable thing."
— Saheeh International
Then the two went forth until they met a lad whom he slew, whereupon Moses exclaimed: "What! Have you slain an innocent person without his having slain anyone? Surely you have done a horrible thing."
— Tafheem-ul-Quran - Abul Ala Maududi
the justification :
verse 18:80
As for the boy, his parents were believers. We apprehended that he would impose rebellion and infidelity upon them.
— Mufti Taqi Usmani
And as for the youth, then his parents (Literally: his two fathers) were believers; so we were apprehensive he would oppress them with (his) in ordinance and disbelief.
— Dr. Ghali
The young boy had parents who were people of faith, and so, fearing he would trouble them through wickedness and disbelief,
— Abdul Haleem
And as for the lad, his parents were believers and we feared lest he should oppress them by rebellion and disbelief.
— Pickthall
Ҳалиги боланинг эса ота-оналари мўмин кишилар эдилар. Бас, биз у (бола) туғён ва куфр билан уларни қийнаб қўйишидан қўрқдик.
— Alauddin Mansour
Quant au garçon, ses père et mère étaient des croyants; nous avons craint qu’il ne leur imposât la rébellion et la mécréance.
— French Translation(Muhammad Hamidullah)
And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared that he would overburden them by transgression and disbelief.
— Saheeh International
As for the lad, his parents were people of faith, and we feared lest he should plague them with transgression and disbelief,
— Tafheem-ul-Quran - Abul Ala Maududi
— Tafheem-ul-Quran - Abul Ala Maududi
.............
because he was going to make his parents become disbelievers in the future according to a man's imaginary friend (ALLAH)
............
while people studying ethics and morals are still debating whether it's ok to kill adolf hitler if he was a child, islam is ok with killing a child for a crime he has not yet committed
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
and what is that crime exactly ??? making his parents disbelievers in the future . wow what great crime
--------------------------------------------
AN OMNIPOTENT GOD ordered the death penalty of a child
couldn't allah order his follower to help that child until his future change or couldn't ALLAH change the FATE OF ONE CHILD!!!
-------------------------------------------
why would you worship a god who couldn't change the fate of one child and had to order his follower to kill a child out of fear that this child would mislead his parents when he grow up
------------------------------------------------
where is the freedom of religion exactly I wonder
-----------------------------------------------
my questions are :
if allah couldn't save one child how is he going to save anything or anyone ?
the verse mentioned we as in al khader and his god -allah-
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
1. muhammad was a child rapist :
-
that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she
was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that `Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine
years (i.e. till his death).
Sahih al-Bukhari 5134
In-book reference
: Book 67, Hadith 70
USC-MSA web (English) reference
: Vol. 7, Book 62, Hadith 65
In-book reference
: Book 67, Hadith 70
USC-MSA web (English) reference
: Vol. 7, Book 62, Hadith 65
======================================================================
2. he lusted after his adopted son's wife -zinab bit jahsh- , Qur'an 33:37
his adopted son mindset was " I'm so lucky to have the greatest man alive wanting my wife , I'll just divorce her , IF only I was a woman to marry the prophet "
just to show you how much brain damage one need to have to join such a cult.
================================================================================
3. he was a male gold digger -used the money from his first wife after her death to marry 12 more and built his own theocracy -(she was his sugar mummy) NOTHING can say I love you more than using all your money to marry 12 more woman after you especially that muhammad didn't dare to marry any other wife back when she was alive.
===================================================================
4. he was incestuous - his adopted son's wife was also his own cousin "zinab bit jahsh "-
===============================================================================
5.he took over 100000 slaves and distribute them among his followers and the believers in his religion over multiple wars and battles with the disbelievers of the tribes around him , muhammad cared about ending the slavery of muslims as for non-muslims their slavery is totally fine in islam.
muhammad did free many slaves but all of them happen to be muslims
=============================================================
6. encouraged child marriage :
Narrated Jabir bin `Abdullah:
While we were returning from a Ghazwa (Holy Battle) with the Prophet, I started driving my camel fast, as it was a lazy camel A rider came behind me and pricked my camel with a spear he had with him, and then my camel started running as fast as the best camel you may see. Behold! The rider was the Prophet (ﷺ) himself. He said, 'What makes you in such a hurry?" I replied, I am newly married " He said, "Did you marry a virgin or a matron? I replied, "A matron." He said, "Why didn't you marry a young girl so that you may play with her and she with you?" When we were about to enter (Medina), the Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Wait so that you may enter (Medina) at night so that the lady of unkempt hair may comb her hair and the one whose husband has been absent may shave her pubic region.
While we were returning from a Ghazwa (Holy Battle) with the Prophet, I started driving my camel fast, as it was a lazy camel A rider came behind me and pricked my camel with a spear he had with him, and then my camel started running as fast as the best camel you may see. Behold! The rider was the Prophet (ﷺ) himself. He said, 'What makes you in such a hurry?" I replied, I am newly married " He said, "Did you marry a virgin or a matron? I replied, "A matron." He said, "Why didn't you marry a young girl so that you may play with her and she with you?" When we were about to enter (Medina), the Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Wait so that you may enter (Medina) at night so that the lady of unkempt hair may comb her hair and the one whose husband has been absent may shave her pubic region.
Collection
Sahih Bukhari
Dar-us-Salam reference
Hadith 5079
In-book reference
Book 67, Hadith 17
USC-MSA web (English) reference
Volume 7, Book 62, Hadith 16
==============================================================
7.anyone that insult islam/ muhammad must die :
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse -insult- the Prophet (ﷺ) and
disparage -insult- him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but
she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander -insult- the
Prophet (ﷺ) and abuse -insult- him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly,
pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was
smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the
Prophet (ﷺ) was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage -insult- you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood-she deserved it-.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage -insult- you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood-she deserved it-.
Grade:
Sahih (Al-Albani)
Sahih (Al-Albani)
: Sunan Abi Dawud 4361
In-book reference
: Book 40, Hadith 11
English translation
: Book 39, Hadith 434
and this is why muslims kill anyone that insult islam or muhammad
letting the murderer of a woman go since she deserves to die for the crime of insulting muhammad
the dude sounds totally benevolent more like malevolent
========================================================================================================
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
If you looked at the stories mentioned in the holy quran you'll find that most of them if not all of them came from both the bible and the talmud with few edits here and there to make them seem different .
The cause of that is muhammad went every year with merchant caravan together with Waraqah Ibn Nawfal which is the maternal uncle of Muhammad via Khadijah, Muhammad's first wife. His presence in the story of Muhammad is so problematic. Most people who believe in Islam never heard about him. Those few who did, are just given a "quick" passing by mentioning in their Islamic classes. Yet, even by Islamic standards, he was a very important figure. Some see him as the first person to believe in Muhammad even before the first message had arrived.
Who is this man? Waraqah was a priest in Christianity and Judaism. He is Nestorian priest. Waraqah lived a long life and died of old age shortly after Muhammad got his first message also muhammad went with him as he would go with merchant caravan.
His story throws big concerns to the claim that Muhammad's message came from Allah or via his angel Gabriel - especially when Islam ended up near carbon copy of Nestorian faith (a mixture of Christianity and Judaism). It shows Muhammad had access to the knowledge. On top of that it shows even more that the Kuffar of Mecca tolerated all faiths, including having a priest among their ranks (Waraqah would have been a Quraishi). It proves what Islamic text sort of admit, that the Kabaa was open liberal place for all people to practice whatever faith they have in peace by the fact many gods were allowed on display. It proves that the Kuffar never harmed those who did not follow their gods. Khadijah, a very successful business women in her own right, was a monotheist and most probably Christian Nestorian like her uncle - some Islamic scholars may disagree this shows the feminist view of those Kuffar and place any nonsense about how women were treated back then into the trash -like islamic claims of women being oppressed back then- .
When did the people of Mecca have issues with Muhammad? When Muhammad started to insult their gods, when they would wake up in the morning and find the statues of the gods dessicated and damaged, when Muhammad mock them that their gods are useless! Talk about tolerance??
But for me, this hadith throws the doors wide open on the story of Waraqah. The hadith suggest that shortly after Muhammad started getting the revelations "....But a short while later Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was paused (stopped) for a while so that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was very much grieved." Sahih al-Bukhari 4953
This proves Muhammad knew the man very well, and likely behind his inspiration!
islam plagiarized stories from Christianity and Judaism
here is few that are mentioned in both the quran and the talmud/torah :
- Gideon/Saul (Tālūt)
- Saul, David and Goliath (Tālūt, Dāwūd and Jalut)
- The Queen of Sheba
- Jonah (Yūnus) and the big fish
- Haman
here is few stories that are mentioned in both the bible and the quran :
- Zechariah (Zakariya) and John (Yahya)
- Mary (Maryam)
- Jesus (ʿIsa, Yeshuaʿ)
- Moses (Mosa)
- Abraham (ibraham)
- Lot (Lut)
- AntiChrist
- Adam and Eve
- Noah the ark and the flood
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
if you ask me ,who the devil opposing god is , I would answer organized religion ,
they make assumptions about god , they talk about the creation of the world , they claim to know the answer to everything , their holy books are tiny and very small .
a doctor would need to study hundreds of books and can barely scratch the tip of the knowledge they need to know about the human body and how to cure it
an astrophysicist would spend a lifetime studying the universe and they wouldn't know 1 of 1000000000 about it
and yet their holy books claim to know everything ? with what vague verses that can be interpreted to support anything ?
imagine a scientist discovering something new and then they decide to write about it like god and write about it vaguely , their research will be thrown away , no one will accept it , everyone will think that they are fraud , it quite funny how our thoughts change when the target change from a person to a god ?
what better way to worship god then :
1. studying the world since it's literary god's creation
2.striving to be a good person (kindness)
you can have both without joining a religion
as a matter of facts religions are just factions used to make people look down on each other and feel self-righteous for doing something bad
let me give you an example :
-oh yea we killed those people , it's totally ok since they are ,,,,,,, apostates /blasphemers/heretics/infidels
-look at those people I can't believe that they are worshiping ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, are they idiots , if they had brains they wouldn't have worshiped ,,,,,,,,,,,
you can fill it with whatever god you don't believe in ,
it's funny how each religion can see what wrong with the other religions but can't see what's wrong with their own religion
=============================================================================================================================
if their religion can't handle criticism they are not ready to face the world ,
I'd really hate to be shackled by islamophobia or Christianophobia or IDK maybe anti Semitism/anti Hinduism for attacking religion
===================================================================================================
let me finish this with this last question for you to wonder about ,
I have yet to learn how does doing weird rituals benefits god ?
some copy the benefits of meditation and claim praying to god help since it's a form of meditation but then just meditate no need to involve god
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Let us begin with one of my favorite :
1."The quran provides that the length of a normal gestation (pregnancy) is six months (Luqman 31:14; al-Baqarah 2:233; al-Ahqaf 46:15). Luqman 31:14 and al-Baqarah 2:233 provide a nursing period of 24 months. Al-Ahqaf 46:15 provides a total of 30 months for both gestation and nursing combined. This leaves only six months for the period of gestation. We know that this is not true. Normal gestation lasts nine months.
==================================================================================================
2.the great whale carrying the earth on it's back , also the earth is flat
quran 68:1
and here I would like to reference islam wiki
while many islamic scholars deny this the 8 big books that explain the quran -the books of tafseer- mention it , which muslims return to to understand the quran like:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tafsir At-Tabari
At-Tabari mentions several interpretations. One of them is this:
هو الحوت الذي عليه الأرَضُون
It is a whale (الحوت), which on it the Earths.
At-Tabari tafsir on 68:1
In Islamic cosmology there are seven flat Earths, just like there are seven heavens:
Allah is He Who created seven heavens, and of the earth the like of them
They are placed on the whale like flapjacks on a plate, stacked one atop the other.
Tafsir Al-Qurtubi
Al-Qurtubi mentions several interpretations. One of them is that the Nun is the whale which is under the 7th (lowest) Earth:
نۤ> الحوت الذي تحت الأرض السابعة>
<Nun> - the whale (الحوت), which is under the Earth the seventh.
Tafsir Al-Qurtubi on 68:1 [9]
From his use of the word "tahat" or "under" it can be surmised that in Al-Qurtubi's cosmology the earth is seen as flat.
ِTafsir Al-Kabir (by Ar-Razi)
بالحوت الذي على ظهره الأرض وهو في بحر تحت الأرض السفلى
..with the whale (بالحوت) which over its back is the Earth and it is in the sea under the Earth (الأرض) the lowest.
Tafsir Al-Kabir on 68:1[10]
Al-Kabir here repeates the idea that there are multiple flat earths balanced on the back of the whale.
ِTafsir Fath Al-Qadir (by Shawkani)
This tafsir is from the 18th century and it mentions several interpretations. One of them is the idea that the world is carried on the back of a whale:
Hadith Al-Kafi (shia)
Hadith Al-Kafi, one of the most prestigious Shi'ite hadith, also confirms that a whale carries the earth upon its back:
H 14813 – From him, from Salih, from one of his companions, from Abdul Samad Bin Basheer, who has reported the following: Abu Abdullah (asws) has said that: ‘The whale which is carrying the earth secretly said to itself that it is carrying the earth by its own strength. So Allah (azwj) the High Sent to it a fish smaller than a palm’s length, and larger than a finger. So it entered in its gills and shocked it. It remained like that for forty days. Then Allah (azwj) Raised it and was Merciful to it, and Took it out. So whenever Allah (azwj) Intends the earth to be in a quake, He (azwj) Sends that (small) fish to that (big) fish. So when it sees it, it becomes restless, so the earth gets engulfed by the earthquake’.
Al-Kafi, vol. 8, part 6, [12]
Tafsir Al-Tusi (shia)
The first comprehensive Shia tafsir[13] says this about the Nun:
وقال ابن عباس - فى رواية عنه - إن النون الحوت الذى عليه الارضون
And said Ibn Abbas (ابن عباس) - in his narration - that Nun (النون) is a whale (الحوت) which on it are the Earths (الارضون).
Al-Tibbyan by Al-Tusi on 68:1 [14]
There is thus attestation of Nun the whale in both the Sunni and Shi'ite tradition.
=======================================================================================================
the rising and setting place of the sun
quran 18:86
the sun sets in muddy water spring
hadith :
a).Abu Dharr said: I was sitting behind the Apostle of Allah who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: Do you know where this sets? I replied: Allah and his Apostle know best. He said: It sets in a spring of warm water. - Sunan Abu Dawud 3991
--------------------------------_______________________________-----------------------------------------------___________________________________
b).The Prophet (ﷺ) asked me at sunset, "Do you know where the sun goes (at the time of sunset)?" I replied, "Allah and His Apostle know better." He said, "It goes (i.e. travels) till it prostrates Itself underneath the Throne and takes the permission to rise again, and it is permitted and then (a time will come when) it will be about to prostrate itself but its prostration will not be accepted, and it will ask permission to go on its course but it will not be permitted, but it will be ordered to return whence it has come and so it will rise in the west. And that is the interpretation of the Statement of Allah: "And the sun Runs its fixed course For a term (decreed). that is The Decree of (Allah) The Exalted in Might, The All- Knowing." (36.38) sahih bukhari
Quran 18:90:
Until, when he came to the rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had not made against it any shield.
=============================================================================================================
and here's a few more scientific errors from the same website :
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
why do islam fears satire ?
I mean it's a very good-if not the greatest- way to advertise your own religion .
I get that making fun of a religion is an act of sacrilege and blasphemy, but we are in 2021
muslims consider any drawing of the prophet or allah to be an act of sacrilege and blasphemy ,
islam consider all drawings of any living being to be forbidden but you'll not be killed for it
whoever you'll be killed if you draw the prophet or allah
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
God is not good nor is it bad, God wouldn't interfere in the world -under the assumption that god do exist-
god is just a judge,
if you're good, Then you go to heaven, Reincarnate in good environment, , , , , , , , Etc
if you're bad you go to hell, Reincarnate badly
as
an agnostic, I don't believe in organized religion, But if god do
existed, It wouldn't interfere with reality, And all the religions where
god interfere with reality are obviously wrong, At the very least in
this life, So if you expect god to pull off some miracle and reverse
gravity just because you prayed and asked him to, Then I'm sorry to disappoint
you but, But we live in reality and not in some fantasy world, And god
is just an observer at the very least in this life, At the very least
god wouldn't interfere with reality in this life, If praying could solve
problems then why do we need the police, The army, Doctors, Prisons, , ,
, , Etc.
God wouldn't interfere with reality because if he does it
will restrain the freedom of choice of people in this life, Rendering
his right of judging them in the afterlife invalid, This is evil but
it's people's/humans's evil not god's evil
===========================================================
why should god help you ?
are you narcissistic that you believe that god should leave all the children and the people suffering from malnutrition and lack of food and life necessity and interfere with reality just to help you , because you have faith, then you should see a psychotherapist to solve your narcissism
would the death of the ants living under our bed by other ants matter to you ? what if those ants are worshiping you as a god ? would you really care ?
the answer is no
==========================================================
if god interfered with reality in this life god would lose his right to judge in the afterlife, since the punishment/reward have already been delivered
==========================================================
organized religion
God doesn't have an organized religion, organized religion is usually due to one's parents and his geographic location
" how many religions do you really know ? only one and yet you're so sure that it's the right one ? why ? , because your parents and society told you so ? you're not the only one "
people from other religions in areas where those religions are dominant have been told the same ,
god wouldn't judge people based on the geographic location of their birth or whom they were birthed to .
since that would be unfair
============================================================
god created nature placed the laws that govern it and then lift it alone .
god doesn't control nature , natural disasters , cause diseases , disabilities ,,,,,,etc
while god did place the laws govern them he just lift after that and doesn't interfere with it
but nature shows us how god is not evil nor good but neutral just by being the same
============================================================
god judge people based on actions/circumstances
this is why god wouldn't interfere with reality in this life
if god interfered with reality in this life god would lose his right to judge in the afterlife, since the punishment/reward have already been delivered
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
if your religion tell stories about magic , or magical creatures , or about people with super powers then you've been lied to
this include : reviving the dead , stones walking , people flying . animals talking , walking on water , walking in the air , angels , devils , dragons , fairies, going to outer space on flying donkeys ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,etc
spoiler alert : our world is science based NOT magic . fantasy , or supernatural based world in case you didn't know
..............................
note that god will not reverse the direction of gravity no matter how hard you pray or how strong your faith is , this applies to all the humans on the world .
under the same logic if you're expecting god to interfere with the world just to solve your problem then you're in for a big disappointment .
god is just a judge who would judge people if they are good the meet a good end , reincarnate , go to heaven,,,,,,,,no one know but he will treat them good
bad people would meet bad in the afterlife or in their next life or whatever
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
why is it that people are willing to believe magical stories that they would have dismissed as nonsense once they are mentioned under religion ,
many of the stories mentioned under religion are just crazy and if you remove the religious background of the story it would be placed under fiction and if someone came and told the story - without the religion- , you would probably tell them that they are lying , because such thing can't happen at the world
or at the very least not on our world .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
when I hold the bible or the quran and read them , I feel like I'm living in a magical world like I've entered the world of harry potter.
but when I look at reality I remember that I'm living in a science based world , and magic just doesn't exist ,
many of the stories mentioned in religion wouldn't be believed by anyone if you remove the religious background of it and if someone came to you and told it to you and said something like this really happened in the world , you would be like WTF man at least try to keep the lie within the believable limits so ,since when did our world have such fantasy based elements ?
is our world based on magic like how those holy books portray it ?
splitting the red sea with a cane ?
talking with animals ?
going to outer-space (and beyoned) on the back of living being ? (how did they breath out there)
flying on swords ?
splitting the moon ? (no one saw it , very irresponsible move that would have left our planet moonless and effected the tides)
walking on water ?
reviving the dead (why the F*** are they talking about mundane daily life stuff/ shouldn't they be like " you should believe in god , hell is real , heaven is real , and spend every second worshiping since they found the truth ?)?
so much more illogical stories that have been achieved by the people who lived thousands of years ago
=======================================================================================
now think about those stories , someone came to you and told you did you know our neighbor split the red sea with a cane would you take him seriously ?
or he went to outer space on the back of a donkey would you believe that
or split the moon
or revived the dead from their graves
==========================================================================================
why is we accept those stories when they come from religion but without religion they become just nonsense
is our world magic based ?,
does our world have such a thing ?,
is our world not science based ,
why don't you people replicate any of those acts ? , feel free to use your faith in any way you like to achieve that .
.............
religion is evil because it's either deceiving people or being (allowing) deceived by people .
.........
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
if logic Doesn't apply to god how do we decide which god should we follow ?
after all god/s(it) is beyond our limited human logic ,
if we argue about the supernatural nonsense written in any holy book or religion they will tell you god created the world so he can do it ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
and if you argue about their god/s actions they will tell you that you can't understand the logic of a supreme omnipotent being with your limited logic
==========================================================================================================================
when arguing with a religious person , whenever you try to apply logic to their god you'll hear the saying "our human logic doesn't apply to god/gods" ,or "god/gods is omnipotent and logic doesn't apply to it "
so here is a questions
1.how are we humans supposed to discuss god if logic doesn't apply to it
2.if god is omnipotent then every single god/gods from each religion has the chance of being the true god since god is omnipotent + logic doesn't apply to it + god can do whatever it wants
by saying logic doesn't apply to god and god is omnipotent being you're not asserting the existence of your god , you're saying that each and every god out there have a chance of being the true one , since we can't judge god to begin with and they all could be wrong too
===============================================================================================================================
1.muslims claim that there's only one god and god wouldn't take a wife or a child, why ? because if there's 2 gods and they had different opinions they will have a fight , your judging god according to human logic you're telling god what he can and can't do .
2.hindu claim that god took a wife and had children to teach us the importance of building a family as it's the corner stone of society , but that's also according to our human logic if you ask them how do they decide things if two gods have 2 different opinions , they will tell you that's the matter of the gods and our logic doesn't apply to them .
3.christains claim there's one god with different vessels , I argued with a christian and he said ,:"it's something like an pc rpg , you can play a worrior ,a mage,or an assassin , you are the player controlling them , each one is different but you are one , god is one but he is represented by multiple being , vessel "
but that is also according to our human logic.
religious people telling god what he should and shouldn't do
also judging god according to our limited human logic
but when it's our turn to apply logic to their god/s we are doing something wrong after all logic doesn't apply to god
=========================================================================================================================
this may look confusing but basically religious people apply logic to god/s when it's convenient for them. when it's not, logic doesn't apply to their god/s
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
If I don't want to answer, I won't answer.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Personal
RELIGION POLL #1: What is the best argument for/against the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus, and why?
Feel free to discuss below. I have been doing a lot of research into the matter recently.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
I welcome people of many perspectives to post their view on this thread's title.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
When horrific acts are done by people who claimed, carried out traditions and see/saw themselves as members of a religion, often what is done by the politically correct media is to sympathise with the religious group and encourage peace by denouncing those people away from being considered genuine members of the religious group.
This goes for literally any incident or scandal you can think of, I am not just talking about the horrific acts that make the headlines.
The reason this strikes me as somewhat worrying is that while this is done, it then begins to highlight a hypocrisy when we see that people can define themselves, readily and happily, as members of religions we sometimes really resent those who do actually do it just to be part of the group. What I am saying is that let's say you're a person who wants to blend in with your very Christian, Islamic, Jewish, Buddhist etc family, if not friendship circle as well, you'd probably just say you're a member of that religion right? As long as you didn't do anything too scandalous or let's say you weren't caught, you'd be deemed a genuine member of that religion and anyone who would say 'wait no, that's just a poser' would instead get the backlash. What, then, actually qualifies someone as a genuine member of the religion?
To make it very clear what I am saying and the contradiction happening, I will explain it as an either/or statement.
Either
The evil people who know their holy scriptures off by heart and understand their religion's history very well are incorrectly being denounced as 'fake Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus etc'
Or
The not-so-evil posers who use religion to either blend in or get some kind of societal privilege are not actually posers, since the only real disqualifying factor appears to be how troublesome it would be to admit you're an adhering member of that religion.
The further thing to ask is whether it's morally correct and appropriate for people to 'raise their child into a religion' when we don't know which religion is the actual true one, right?
The very fact that entire families are commonly all of the same faith, if they're not atheist, isn't a coincidence and it is a reflection on religion being nothing more than a social construct. Even more disturbing is the fact that things like circumcision and animal abuse involved with many Islamic, Satanic and Wiccan sacrificial festivals are actually completely contradictory since we should be disqualifying them as they're justifying mutilation in the name of their religion. We actually did this with Muslims who endorsed (and a select minority still endorse) female circumcision, as well as many other examples such as what Christians used to do to suspected 'witches'. Similarly, Saudi Arabia has recently begun to cave into international pressure to move away from the strictly sexist elements of its Sharia Law, legalising women to drive and compete in the Olympics. Women are made to be pure subjects of men in the Qur'an, although it's true to say that in Islamic history there have been fierce female empresses and in Pakistan and Afghanistan in particular there have been female politicians who actively have been in charge of taming and handling negotiations with the Taliban.
The problem is that I am not exactly saying that it would be politically wise to be honest when a member of a religion does a very evil act. It's a very appropriate lie to suddenly say 'no they are nothing like what our religion stands for and are 100% fake' but that person probably knew more about the religion and lived more devout in terms of the traditions and lifestyle than most posers who call themselves 'casual followers' or 'modern, progressive' variants of their religion. The thing is, at what stage is religion nothing more than a fancy name to associate your 'group' or 'clique' with? What truly qualifies or disqualifies a genuine Muslim for example? It can't just be whether they're evil or not.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist
3. Therefore the universe has a cause.
Stage 2
1. The universe is the totality of all time space and matter.
2. Whatever caused time space and matter must be timeless, space less, and immaterial.
3. Therefore something immaterial, timeless, and space less caused the universe, and these properties are said of God.
4. Therefore we conclude God exists.
Obviously a lot to unpack and defend,
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
I believe god created us for entertainment purposes. I believe in a rather deistic god overall. How about you?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
P1. If atheism is true, our sensory perception and cognitive faculties were not designed to fulfill a specific telos, namely, the acquisition of truth and discerning of reality as it actually is, but rather, evolved through processes which aimed solely at the passing on of the creature's DNA.
P2. The passing on of the creature's DNA does not necessarily entail truth.
P3. Therefore the atheist's sensory perceptions and cognitive faculties do not necessarily yield truth.
P4. Therefore if atheism is true, there is no justification for believing anything to be true.
P5. We intuit some things are in fact true, and do so with proper justification.
P6. Therefore atheism is false.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Some of the qualities I have found admirable in the atheists I have met is their knowledge of science. It always seems no matter who I'm talking to, if they're an atheist their knowledge of science is on point.
I like their proclivity to debate as well. In a good way though. I'd rather spend my time discussing or debating with an atheist than someone in a cult or aberrant sect of some religion. Due to the fact the atheist is usually a far better debater
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
P1. There is no possible world where the truthfulness of universals are falsified (i.e. no state of affairs where 2 plus 2 equals 9, or triangles have four sides)
P2. If universals are true across all possible worlds, they are not dependent on human cognition.
P3. If they are not dependent on human cognition, they are dependent on another cognition. Namely a universal cognition.
P4. A universal cognition that apprehends the truth value of all necessary propositions (universals) can apprehend the truth value of all particular and contigent propositions.
P5. Any mind that apprehends the truth value of all propositions is omniscient.
P6. An omniscient mind exists.
P7. Therefore God exists.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
If there are any Reformed folks on this forum, grace and peace. I usually don't spend too much time with in house discussions right now as I'm currently pursuing natural theology, however this topic is one I love pondering.
I had a very brief flirtation with Calvinism this past year, I ultimately didn't go down that path as I believe Molinism offers a superior solution to the classic questions of divine sovereignty and human freedom.
Here's my thoughts:
In Reformed theology God is absolutely and meticulously sovereign over His creation because nothing happens outside of His decree. If it happened it is because God decreed it.
In the Molinist paradigm however, God is still absolutely and meticulously sovereign over His creation, but not because nothing happens outside of His decree, but because He uses His middle knowledge to achieve His will and purposes through the free undetermined actions of His creatures.
Why is this important?
Well in the Reformed schematic, I don't see how determinism can be affirmed without sourcing the origin of sinful acts in God.
In the Molinist schematic, God can perfectly enact and accomplish His will through completely free creatures.
In other words, under Molinism God doesn't have to play the chess pieces on the board (i.e. decree everything they will do). He can let each piece move freely themselves on their own while still getting His will accomplished. This seems like a superior understanding of God.
Any thoughts?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
What if god directly contacted you and proved they were god but told you that the only way you can stay in touch and experience your privileges (which may include getting into the heaven) is if you never talked about the god to others and kept it a secret, perhaps even masquerading as an atheist or at least agnostic?
Would you lie to everyone you knew?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
The modal ontological argument as developed by philosopher Alvin Plantinga:
1. It is possible that a maximally great being* (mgb for short) exists.
2. An mgb exists in some possible world.
3. If an mgb exists in one possible world, then an mgb exists in all possible worlds.
4. An mgb exists in the actual world.
5. Therefore God exists.
*for our purposes an mgb is defined as a being that possesses all great making properties, and lacks no great making property.
Out of all the classical theistic arguments, this one is my personal favorite. Albeit, somewhat paradoxically, although I believe it to be a sound proof , it seems to be the less convincing for many people.
I realize each premise needs expounding, hence the reason I started the thread. This thread is open for discussion to anyone. Atheists are welcomed and encouraged to comment.
Thank you
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
A mandated reporter is a person who is legally required to report any suspicion of child abuse or neglect to the relevant authorities. Teachers and psychologists are some examples of people that are required to report any known abuse. The laws are in place to prevent children from being abused and to end any possible abuse or neglect at the earliest possible stage.
Historically, American law has protected a clergy-penitent privilege for a religious confessional that is similar to attorney-client privilege. In other words, clergy are not required to tell anyone about any abuse or rape they know about. Only seven states have laws requiring priests to report this information.
Catholic priests are not the only people who hear people's confession in religious contexts. Scientology uses a process known as auditing which allegedly helps people "rid themselves of their spiritual disabilities." Like priests they are exempt from having to report any abuse they've learned about in a confession or similar process, and do not have to provide testimony in a court of law.
A lot of people have come forward to report their experience of sexual abuse within all kinds of religious institutions. Many times people in the church know what is going on, but do nothing to stop it. A bill that started making its way through the California legislature last year would have made CA the first since 1999 to require priests to choose between violating the law or violating the seal of the confessional.
As predicted, virtually every religious institution fought back and the law was withdrawn. One bishop argued, "If any legislature can force believers to reveal their innermost thoughts and feelings shared with God in confession, then truly there is no area of human life that is free or safe from government. Another added, "Surely murder, theft, spousal abuse, child neglect and rape are terrible crimes. Would the state determine that priests are obligated to report these offenses to the authorities, should they hear of them in the confessional?"
Um... sure, why not?
The argument is that forcing individuals to choose between the most sacrosanct part of their religious beliefs and imprisonment is what the Bill of Rights was entirely meant to avoid. Do you agree, and if so do you agree to the point where that applies to clergy and confessionals from ALL religious denominations? For instance, if I said I shouldn't have to report child molestation that I know is occurring because of my devout Pastafarianism and belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, would that be acceptable? And if you don't agree, explain why you think the 1st amendment does not apply to rape or child abuse.
(Posting in the Religion forum to see if perspectives differ from the Politics forum.)
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
A mandated reporter is a person who is legally required to report any suspicion of child abuse or neglect to the relevant authorities. Teachers and psychologists are some examples of people that are required to report any known abuse. The laws are in place to prevent children from being abused and to end any possible abuse or neglect at the earliest possible stage.
Historically, American law has protected a clergy-penitent privilege for a religious confessional that is similar to attorney-client privilege. In other words, clergy are not required to tell anyone about any abuse or rape they know about. Only seven states have laws requiring priests to report this information.
Catholic priests are not the only people who hear people's confession in religious contexts. Scientology uses a process known as auditing which allegedly helps people "rid themselves of their spiritual disabilities." Like priests they are exempt from having to report any abuse they've learned about in a confession or similar process, and do not have to provide testimony in a court of law.
A lot of people have come forward to report their experience of sexual abuse within all kinds of religious institutions. Many times people in the church know what is going on, but do nothing to stop it. A bill that started making its way through the California legislature last year would have made CA the first since 1999 to require priests to choose between violating the law or violating the seal of the confessional.
As predicted, virtually every religious institution fought back and the law was withdrawn. One bishop argued, "If any legislature can force believers to reveal their innermost thoughts and feelings shared with God in confession, then truly there is no area of human life that is free or safe from government. Another added, "Surely murder, theft, spousal abuse, child neglect and rape are terrible crimes. Would the state determine that priests are obligated to report these offenses to the authorities, should they hear of them in the confessional?"
Um... sure, why not?
The argument is that forcing individuals to choose between the most sacrosanct part of their religious beliefs and imprisonment is what the Bill of Rights was entirely meant to avoid. Do you agree, and if so do you agree to the point where that applies to clergy and confessionals from ALL religious denominations? For instance, if I said I shouldn't have to report child molestation that I know is occurring because of my devout Pastafarianism and belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, would that be acceptable? And if you don't agree, explain why you think the 1st amendment does not apply to rape or child abuse.
(Man I wish I could pose this question to Q-Anon.)
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
All in the title. I've decided that if Jesus existed, he most likely resurrected.
But did Jesus exist at all? Is the whole thing myth, or is it history? Share.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
RELIGION POLL #3: Is Genesis Compatible With Science?
A couple of points I'd like to share. From a non-literalist perspective, many of the "days" in Genesis happened without the presence of a sun. That suggests to me that perhaps the time schemes are longer. Even If you were to come from a Biblical literalist perspective, in context, Genesis does not necessary make for full-fledged historical accuracy. At the time of Genesis' writings, no Jew would have a scientific background to understand concepts like evolution and the old earth. So it makes sense that God would present a simplified account that had some symbolic meanings.
But that is just my limited knowledge on the subject. Feel free to share your take.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
I thought I'd discuss the Kalam a bit.. As this seems to be one of the most discussed arguments for the existence of God.
1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore the universe has a (transcendent) cause.
Why do you agree or disagree with this argument?
1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore the universe has a (transcendent) cause.
Why do you agree or disagree with this argument?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Philosophy
This edition of ERT we have a proud Christian known as Dr. Franklin.
He hasn't revealed much else in his application than that he is a devout Christian.
Please introduce yourself, Dr. Franklin!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Welcome one and all to the first interview of the show! It is none other than Mr. Eternal AKA EtrnlVw!
He says this of his beliefs:
At the very, very core of your being, you and God are one and the same (surprise), God is the Watcher of all your observations.
and it is to the very, very core of his beliefs that we wish to get!
He seems to believe that God is essentially the head of a complex web of heirarchy of conscious entities and within all, at the core of it all is God pulling the strings... Alternatively, is God the one inside going along the ride and we are the ones experiencing it for this entity?
We shall find out here on the Exploration of the Religious Thinker!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Welcome to the ERT, the place where we endeavour religious thoughts.
Today on the show, we have DPR [TheDredPriateRoberts] who identifies as Agnostic on his profile but seeks to not be labelled at all. It is important that we take note that he is unlabelled and non-theistic rather than a non-denominational Theist or Deist, so that we take into account that this individual doubts God's existence altogether.
Doubting doesn't just mean lacking conviction and that is something we certainly wish to prove on this show.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Welcome, one and all, to the ERT!
Today, on our show, we have someone who isn't religious but who wishes to speak on religion, he's an agnostic and an atheist (which he refers to as agnostic atheism) who goes by the name Press.
Since he has left very little in terms of his beliefs or thoughts on reality, it would be best to let him introduce himself and his stance.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
As just a small thought experiment, I'd thought I'd let any non Christian in this forum give their personal biggest objection to Christianity, and I will try to go about answering it. There are a few rules however.
1. Two objective per person. No more. You can do one as well, but two is the limit. If this thread doesn't become all that popular I may revisit some original posters and have them give more.
2. Be specific. Overly vague objections like "religion is false" or "God doesn't exist" aren't really going to be helpful. Try to articulate any objections in a meaningful way.
Any Christians in the thread feel free to give your own answer.
I will try my best to offer a reasonable response to the objections raised. That doesn't mean I will have an answer right away
Hopefully we have fun and all learn something. Let's have at it.
1. Two objective per person. No more. You can do one as well, but two is the limit. If this thread doesn't become all that popular I may revisit some original posters and have them give more.
2. Be specific. Overly vague objections like "religion is false" or "God doesn't exist" aren't really going to be helpful. Try to articulate any objections in a meaningful way.
Any Christians in the thread feel free to give your own answer.
I will try my best to offer a reasonable response to the objections raised. That doesn't mean I will have an answer right away
Hopefully we have fun and all learn something. Let's have at it.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Or are religious people deluded to start with?
If we look at the first question, we would need to consider the effect religion has on followers.
For example, followers are required to believe in an entity that is invisible, silent and completely unproven.
Also, the fundamental principals of religions state that humans have a "soul". Again there is not one piece of evidence to support such a concept and the word soul is normally used as a metaphor.
To this extent, could we say that religion influences or even, forces followers to become deluded.
It could be that religious followers are deluded regardless of religion and find themselves attracted to the abstract, nature of believing in an unknown, contrived entity. For example, comprehensive research and authoritative studies have concluded:
"The God gene hypothesis proposes that human spirituality is influenced by heredity and that a specific gene, called vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2), predisposes humans towards spiritual or mystic experiences."
Could the delusion in some religious followers be due to both factors, i.e., hereditary and conditional? In which case would some religious followers be more deluded than others
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion