[quote]Oleena wrote:
Oh my god.
[/quote]
Whose your god?
[quote]THE_CLAMP_DOWN wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Oh my god.
Whose your god?
[/quote]
I haven’t decided yet. I think I’m going to go with the spagetti monster because he’s the coolest, hippest thing around, but I might go with myself afteral. We’ll see.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
I don’t blame Christianity for the actions of man - as you do. But you do blame Islam for the actions of man?
[/quote]
I blame Islam Based on what it actually teaches (no questions about interpretation as all Muslim scholars agree on this verse - they only disagree on how badly the husband can beat the wife). . . Sura 4:34 - “The men are made responsible for the women, and God endowed them with certain qualities, and made them the bread winners. The righteous women will cheerfully accept this arrangement, since it is God’s commandment, and honor their husbands during their absence. If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then desert them in bed, then you may beat them. if they obey you, you are not permitted to transgress against them. God is most high, Supreme.”
There you have the most striking distinctions between Christian and Muslim views on women.
For Muslim Women:
Women cannot earn money, own businesses, undertake contracts, etc.
They are considered property and polygamy is encouraged - other pasages - not going to do all your homework for you.
They must OBEY their husbands and if they do not - the husband can berate them, neglect them and then beat them - AND IS ENCOURAGED/ENDORSED by Allah himself because nothing in the Quran can be ignored or altered . . .
and young girls as young as 2 and 3 years old can be “married” to grown men for “enjoyment” and this is allowable under Sharia (Islamic Law) Mohamed himself married a 6 year old girl with Allah’s blessing . . .
hope these Muslim scholars can open your eyes:
If you cannot understand the fundamental differences still - you’re willingly blind to them.
[quote]mbm693 wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
mbm693 wrote:
I want know the parts I’ve asked you about, not the parts you’ve already written over and over again. Sorry that’s too complicated a distinction for you. Now answer my questions.
sorry that you can’t read or think . . . I already answered your control question.
No you haven’t. If alcohol can interfere with the control my ‘soul’ has over my mind and body, then why not testosterone, or dopamine, or serotonin. Since the last three chemicals I’ve named are ALWAYS in the brain, but ALWAYS in flux, how can you say the soul ever has control of the mind and the body. You keep ducking this question b/c you know that if you answer it, your religious beliefs will fall apart in a storm of absurdities and logical fallacies right here on the internet. Also, clever how you refrain from re-posting my remarks. Do you feel more comfortable ignoring most of them when you do that?[/quote]
Just trying to keep the clutter of your insanity to a minimum - I copy in the last post by every person I am discussing with. . .
Look back, you will find my answer . . .wait better yet, let me put it here for you again . . .
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
mbm693 wrote:
Let me get this straight… I have total free will, even after I’m drunk? Except that my soul will be all like “get up and walk out of the bar” and then I’ll walk into the bathroom and fuck some girl that I’m not married to. If that’s true, seems like the only thing my soul did wrong was have that first beer, or glass of wine if Jesus was bartending. After that one, my soul probably wanted me to quit, and my body just wouldn’t listen… it appears to have made its own decisions, independent of the soul. Is this why you think most people make it to heaven? They just aren’t responsible for a lot of what they do?
Also, and this is a question I asked you a few pages back that you’ve been all to happy to forget about, given the degree to which brain chemistry disrupts the soul’s ability to control the body, how can you reliably say the soul is ever in control? I mean, nobody’s brain chemistry is alike, and single person’s brain chemistry is the same from moment to moment. If alcohol can have that profound of effect, then surely testosterone creates short circuits too.
How can I dumb this down for you? . . . I guess it is time to break it down as simple as possible for your willing ignorance.
There are three components of the individual - A physical component (the Body), and mental component (the Mind),and a spiritual component (the Soul). You have correctly identified the physical and mental components and freely admit that science has proven them to exist. What you have no concept of, whether by choice or ignorance, is the Soul. Your soul is you, that state of self-awareness, it is that part that makes the morally culpable decisions. The concept of Free Will is the ability of the soul to make Morally Culpable decision free of cause/influence. It is an attribute of the soul, not a mechanism of the brain.
When God created man, he created a body and mind and breathes into each person the Breath of Life - the Soul. It is the soul that animates the body and creates what we see as personality and humanity. When it says that we are created in His image, we have been given attributes that reflect his attributes - the soul can create, the soul can love, the soul can choose, etc.
Your soul does not act in opposition to your brain (which is the part you’ve been trying to force all along) The soul is what animates the brain and thus the body.
I never said ingesting the alcohol was wrong - I only said that you had exercised free will by choosing to ingest the alcohol - if you then choose to commit a moral wrong under the mental impairment of the alcohol, from a spiritual perspective you are still morally guilty of the wrong that you commit. Since you chose to impair your mental faculties, you cannot blame that impairment (slow reaction time, etc) for the actions that follow because you made the first choice and then you still make another free moral decision to commit the wrong . . . the linear progression of those events is not divisible.
Again, the impairment of your mental faculties does not remove moral culpability from the moral choices you make while under the influence of that alcohol.
I never said that the soul was not in control of the mind or body, but only that the soul could choose to ingest substances that impair the functioning of the mind and body.
All of your arguments have consisted of adding words to mine or wrongly restating what I actually said.
As for your illustration at the beginning - no, your soul (you) chose to drink, and then to walk into the bathroom and fuck some girl you are not married to and then chose to try to blame it on the alcohol . . .
Go ahead and keep trying to avoid yourself . . .[/quote]
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
I don’t blame Christianity for the actions of man - as you do. But you do blame Islam for the actions of man?
I blame Islam Based on what it actually teaches (no questions about interpretation as all Muslim scholars agree on this verse - they only disagree on how badly the husband can beat the wife). . . Sura 4:34 - “The men are made responsible for the women, and God endowed them with certain qualities, and made them the bread winners. The righteous women will cheerfully accept this arrangement, since it is God’s commandment, and honor their husbands during their absence. If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then desert them in bed, then you may beat them. if they obey you, you are not permitted to transgress against them. God is most high, Supreme.”
There you have the most striking distinctions between Christian and Muslim views on women.
For Muslim Women:
Women cannot earn money, own businesses, undertake contracts, etc.
They are considered property and polygamy is encouraged - other pasages - not going to do all your homework for you.
They must OBEY their husbands and if they do not - the husband can berate them, neglect them and then beat them - AND IS ENCOURAGED/ENDORSED by Allah himself because nothing in the Quran can be ignored or altered . . .
and young girls as young as 2 and 3 years old can be “married” to grown men for “enjoyment” and this is allowable under Sharia (Islamic Law) Mohamed himself married a 6 year old girl with Allah’s blessing . . .
hope these Muslim scholars can open your eyes:
If you cannot understand the fundamental differences still - you’re willingly blind to them.[/quote] You are right.
Please answer the question: what traites do all monotheistic religions have in common?
[quote]Oleena wrote:
You are right.
Please answer the question: what traites do all monotheistic religions have in common?
[/quote]
They worship One God . . . you didn’t know that? its in the adjective mono-theistic, mono = one, singular; theistic = having to do with theos/deos God . . . wow - you’re in worse shape than I thought . . .
By the way O - I hope you are not going to apply your Sesame Street version of history to monotheism as well and claim that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the only monotheistic religions . . .
You would be ignoring the beliefs of the ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, Hindus, Sikhs, Moabites, Philistines, - well you get the idea - or maybe you don’t.
Monotheism needs to be clarified between exclusive monotheism, inclusive monotheism, henotheism or kathenotheis, pluriform monotheism, religious dualism . . . monotheism is a complex issue - but I am sure you had a grossly oversimplified view in mind with your question . . .
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
By the way O - I hope you are not going to apply your Sesame Street version of history to monotheism as well and claim that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the only monotheistic religions . . .
You would be ignoring the beliefs of the ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, Hindus, Sikhs, Moabites, Philistines, - well you get the idea - or maybe you don’t.[/quote]Oh good, so you admit that christianity wasn’t the first monotheistic religion. When I said traits, I wasn’t referring to a definition of the word itself, but a definition of the society’s traits which turn monotheistic.
[quote]Monotheism needs to be clarified between exclusive monotheism, inclusive monotheism, henotheism or kathenotheis, pluriform monotheism, religious dualism . . . monotheism is a complex issue - but I am sure you had a grossly oversimplified view in mind with your question . . .[/quote] Good job researching that one on wikipedia, but you missed the biggest defining factor of monotheism. What does monotheism historically come after and in contrast to (and we can clearly see how god as portrayed in the bible told early believers to deal with this)?
THIS THREAD ROCKS!!
[quote]Buff HardBack wrote:
THIS THREAD ROCKS!![/quote]
Why you always gotta be shoutin all the time?
Its the only way I can portray my extreme level of excitment/arousal while reading these arguments. My nipples are hard.
[quote]Buff HardBack wrote:
Its the only way I can portray my extreme level of excitment/arousal while reading these arguments. My nipples are hard.[/quote]
I’ll give you something to shout about…
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Buff HardBack wrote:
Its the only way I can portray my extreme level of excitment/arousal while reading these arguments. My nipples are hard.
I’ll give you something to shout about…
[/quote]
Hmmm…probably not what she was talking about.
…some British humour to lighten the mood: Religion ala Eddie Izzard - YouTube
More tea vicar?
[quote]Buff HardBack wrote:
Its the only way I can portray my extreme level of excitment/arousal while reading these arguments. My nipples are hard.[/quote]
The Great Satin makin’ ye hard again, eh?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…some British humour to lighten the mood: Religion ala Eddie Izzard - YouTube [/quote]
That guy’s hilarious! Thanks for that! hah!