I do believe in god (allah)
but I get doubts when they say that you should kill all gays and that they will burn in hell(mentioned in the bible too so maybe i'm not alone)
my best friend is gay and he's not like what they(the extremists) portray gays as (lustful monsters or whatever), he's kind and loves to help the poor and needy.
so will god burn him in hell even if he had done all those good things just because he's gay? isn't Allah supposed to love all his creations? same goes with Jesus.
This really bothers me
The reason they wrote that being gay is bad is that they were worried that if too many people pursued same sex relationships then they wouldn't reproduce and the religion would die out. If they weren't so transfixed on bumping up their numbers, which most controversial concepts of a religion are essentially to do with, then they wouldn't care if two men or two women got together.
It's the same for stoning women who have sex outside of marriage, they or their children were more likely to die because they didn't have a man to protect them. Women are purposefully left uneducated so that they can be treated like baby factories to boost religions followers.
So because a couple of apes matched pictures of animals together (recognition of animals being something they do every day to survive - snake = bad, bug = good, if I point at two things, researcher will give banana, real abstract thinking there)? Sorry, but I find both the thesis and the experiment questionable on many levels.
There are more complex experiments, they have taught animals the concept of money. Which led to them creating prostitution. That is pretty abstract thinking.
On what grounds has it been deduced that they can and how did that lead to them having a concept of the afterlife? Complete nonsense that omits several steps between the observation and the conclusion.
On what grounds has it been deduced that they don't? We can't know because we can't communicate with them. We have no idea to what extent they can communicate with each other. If people hadn't learnt to communicate as well as they have then we would have no concept of the afterlife, we would essentially be uneducated.
Call me speceist, but most animals don't think about anything beyond the present. My girlfriend's cat's cognitive abilities are apparently insufficient for him to recognize his own reflection, to give an example, and it's a comparatively smart cat.
Alot of Animals provably think beyond the present, a lot of humans provably cannot.
Again, back to the cat - he doesn't have to tell me that it's pissed off - all he has to do is hiss - I get the idea.
Sure, but getting the idea of their mood is a very simple communication. It would take a much more complex system of communication before you could discuss politics etc.
Despite having these capabilities, not a single species other than humans has ever exhibited any creative or spiritual activity beyond things they were coerced to do by humans (painting elephants and all that jazz). Since nothing to the contrary was ever observed, I have no reason to believe otherwise - animals don't bother with concepts like spirituality because they're likely alien to them and the very idea that they might sounds ridiculous to me.
Did you exhibit any creative or spiritual activity beyond things you were coerced to do by humans?
I keep hearing about "smart animals", but that doesn't mean they posess any form of higher intelligence - they're just smart in comparison to other animals. The best animals can do in terms of their smarts is create basic social structures - that's it. Anything beyond that seems like an exaggeration to me.
That is all a lot of humans can do too.
See, your line of thinking is the problem we face these days. Religion doesn't exist to explain the world - that's a job for science. It used to be as you said, but that's the root of religion, not its current function. We don't say that a thunder just struck a tree because it was God's will - we know how weather works. Religion is a source of meaning and guidiance, anyone who uses it in lieu of science is an idiot.
All religions were started because they didn't know how weather worked and used god being angry to explain why natural disasters happened.
Once you start peeling away and understanding why things really happen then god doesn't need to exist.
I believe in god, yes. That god is mostly the one in Islam (Although we believe that Christians and Jews also believe in the same god). The thing I don't believe in is most of the interpretations of the Qur'an and the mostly fabricated hadeeths (Basically re-tellings of what the prophet said). I don't believe that I should hate people for believing in something different. I just need to disagree with what they believe in. I have many non-muslim friends and we're practically bros. I pray 5 times a day and listen to music. I fast ramadan and go to parties (Not at the same time lol).
This is the cause of the problem that muslims face today. ISIS say you aren't a real muslim, you say you are. ISIS says that real muslims should kill, you get upset that everyone thinks you want to kill them. You finally get so upset that you start wanting to kill people. I know muslims that are very liberal who are now really angry because of the bombing in Syria. When all we want to do is stop ISIL killing other muslims. ISIL are very good at manipulating anyone who identifies as muslim.
The way I see it is: Even if God was just a big lie I wouldn't really lose anything. At least I won't feel like I I'm losing anything. If God is real, then I go to heaven lol.each other.
You might not be losing anything, but all your actions affect other people. Which is pretty selfish.
I'd quite like to see organised atheism, people often chose religion because they see a benefit from the social side of that religion rather than anything to do with it's theological side. People are willing to delude themselves if they perceive a payoff (look at anyone who is addicted to drugs).
I do not personally believe in a higher power, but I won't berate those that do. I used to be the "angry atheist" type, taking pleasure in disproving your faith of choice. These days I won't even argue with people about god because it's never about the flaws in their system of logic - it's a psych evaluation as to why I think the way I do. Anyone that's ever buried a child or held hands with someone as they die of cancer has to at least question the notion of an omnibenevolent supreme being. After having done both - and living with the aftermath - I believe that if there exists a god/gods of some sort they are as flawed as we are, nothing more. My friends and family have allowed various addictions to destroy them, and my brother currently is being eaten alive by his. Is suffering a Grand Design, a Fate? Are some of us Destined to be wasted existences? Or has our collective ego grown to the point where we cannot accept an eventuality that places what truly remains of us after we die in the same place as everything else we claim to have transcended? I also feel that no matter how "user-friendly" a belief system may be, none of it is truly believable because none of them encourage you to ask all the questions. Spirituality should be universal - no hierarchy, no secrets, no mysteries, no paywall. If you're a deity and built your following on any of those things, you did it wrong and deserve all the war and disbelief and chaos that ensues.
He asked that Galileo keep it hypothetical, though, and instead Galileo used the opportunity to push the Copernican model while insulting those following the Ptolemaic model.
It's difficult to avoid insulting someone who is so vehemently promoting something that is ludicrous in the way the Catholics were.
It's entirely plausible that if he had some tact with his approach instead of biting the hand that fed him, he could have gotten his ideas out to the public with the Pope's support (not public agreement, but perhaps an ally to get his enemies in the College Of Cardinals off his back).
Sure like the Christians that want intelligent design taught in schools because Evolution is "so obviously" flawed, you shouldn't be forced to teach something obviously wrong just to maintain the peace. Galileo did the right thing by fighting back against the corrupt and idiotic church that were stifling progress purely to maintain their entrenched position. If that contradicts someones religion that was built on taking power and control of the masses then so be it.
