The Islam Thread. Page 27

  • Page

    of 101 First / Last

  • monty2k 9 Mar 2013 20:37:00 241 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @Khanivor

    Surely you can't argue that technological advances don't require some sort of scientific method? To use your example:

    observation - "that sword is pointier! It kills people better",
    deduction - "it kills better because I accidentally/intentionally altered the forging process,"
    hypothesis - "if I continue using this forging process, I'll get better swords"
    experimentation - "I made another sword and it's still pointier than the old ones"
    reproducibility - "I made another 10 swords and they're all pointier than the old ones"
    publication - "I'll trade and sell these swords so people can see how great and pointy they are" (okay maybe I'm being a little sarcastic with this last one :-P)

    Modern science has only been around since the enlightenment but its basis, scientific method, has been around for donkey's years. Look at the example of the Egyptians. They had the Edwin Smith papyrus here. It was written in 1500 BC and has 48 surgical cures in it. The injuries are presented typically (like modern textbooks), are listed from the head down (like modern anatomical books), and contain remedies and advice for the surgeon like what to tell the patient about their chances and post-op care. It also contains the world's first example of palliative care. There is a huge amount of "modern" medical thinking and method in there.

    Also scarily enough, Scientology is already recognised as a religion in the U.S., Australia, South Africa, Italy, Spain and other countries so you've chosen a poor example there.

    EDIT - sorry for derailing the thread a bit. I'll be on-topic in future

    Edited by monty2k at 20:43:12 09-03-2013
  • mcmothercruncher 9 Mar 2013 21:54:22 6,512 posts
    Seen 30 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I don't see a difference between Scientology and any other, erm, religion.
    Others are much, much older and.... that's it?
  • RedSparrows 10 Mar 2013 00:16:55 22,105 posts
    Seen 49 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    You're mixing church and religion. Compare them to Quakers, say.

    bladdard - Where to start...
  • disusedgenius 10 Mar 2013 00:36:00 5,232 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    mcmothercruncher wrote:
    Others are much, much older and.... that's it?
    Nah, the closed 'theological' nature of Scientology and the manner and extent it exerts control over it's members is what sets it part.
  • RobTheBuilder 10 Mar 2013 01:34:51 6,521 posts
    Seen 8 months ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    There also isn't a quote from Abraham that says "The way to make money is to start a religion."
  • mcmothercruncher 10 Mar 2013 09:17:03 6,512 posts
    Seen 30 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Aren't you all in danger of splitting hairs a bit in order to find differences?
    Scientology and mainstream religions all require "believers" to buy into their unprovable creation myths, require obedience to their arbitrary laws, exert control over and pruriently examine their very thoughts and also control physically what clothing they can put on their bodies and food they can put in their mouths.

    Plenty of Abrahamic churches, the brimstone-y preacher end of the scale- are obsessed with making money. That's not the extreme end of the spectrum, for many in America that IS mainstream religion.
  • RedSparrows 10 Mar 2013 09:28:44 22,105 posts
    Seen 49 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Indeed. But that is by no means all churches, all types of faith. Scientology is not like Christianity in that it is uniform,

    Edited by RedSparrows at 09:32:19 10-03-2013
  • RedSparrows 10 Mar 2013 09:30:57 22,105 posts
    Seen 49 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I.e there's an equal danger of saying things are the same by token of a few similiarities.
  • disusedgenius 10 Mar 2013 09:35:15 5,232 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    No, we're not. Scientology requires years of service and donations to get to their truth. And when I talk about 'control over it's members' I refer to the well documented tactics they employ if you try to leave and the methods they use to keep you locked in.

    Jehovah Witnesses are similar in the second part, but not the first, if you want a slightly different example. Mainstream religions CAN be like it, but in a much more local, isolated rather than institutional way.
  • RedSparrows 10 Mar 2013 09:39:59 22,105 posts
    Seen 49 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Scientology is horribly controlling, de facto. All other religions can be, but contingent on the people concerned.
  • malloc 10 Mar 2013 10:21:12 2,301 posts
    Seen 13 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    disusedgenius wrote:
    No, we're not. Scientology requires years of service and donations to get to their truth. And when I talk about 'control over it's members' I refer to the well documented tactics they employ if you try to leave and the methods they use to keep you locked in.

    Jehovah Witnesses are similar in the second part, but not the first, if you want a slightly different example. Mainstream religions CAN be like it, but in a much more local, isolated rather than institutional way.
    Re: JWs and control to keep you locked in. I find this is frequently misrepresented as it's easy to make headlines out of. If a member changes their mind and stops practising due to having changed their minds this is their choice and up to them. The only time there is a problem is if someone tries to still claim to be a JW whilst practising things that are incompatible and then not stopping when given the chance.

    I appreciate this isn't the best example and it's possible to find examples to bolster almost any opinion... but here's an exerpt from an interview with Peter Andre (I know) who was raised in the faith but left in his teens:

    'I never rebelled against it. My greatest fear was to become an apostate (one who deserts the faith) but that didn't happen. What happened was that around the age of 17 I began to question a few things, to sit on the fence. It's very clear that you can't sit on the fence; you have to believe or not believe.
    'So I simply stopped practising. There was no family row. No bad feeling. The other aspect of my family is the very traditional Greek side. We love each other - we'd die for each other. My parents and my family have always been, and remain, the most important people in my life.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1225453/Im-ready-sleep-woman-says-Peter-Andre.html
  • Inertia 10 Mar 2013 10:44:36 676 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    How the fuck does Peter Andre creep into the Islamic thread?! Or Scientology?, or Jehovah's Witnesses?.
  • mcmothercruncher 10 Mar 2013 10:46:06 6,512 posts
    Seen 30 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then folks. Some of the things you guys cite as differences I could argue either are part of other more traditionally identified religions currently, or were example-for-example identical- and absolutely fundamental- just a couple of hundred years ago. When it gradually became apparent, through education, just how incompatible (and unreasonable) that hard line stuff is with modern thinking they had to grudgingly concede ground.

    RedSparrows wrote:
    Scientology is horribly controlling, de facto. All other religions can be, but contingent on the people concerned.
    Is certainly true. But control (or lack thereof) is not the sole measure by which you'd judge whether something constitutes a "true" religion or not. I'd argue that the factors I mentioned previously are much better yardsticks and that those factors are present, more or less, in religion across the board. Splitting hairs in order to tease out a few differences from this sub-division, or that offshoot sect is easy- religion is a very rich, fragmented thing. Nevertheless, Scientology's key similarites with mainstream religion (or the Moonies, and so on) mean it sits as just another piece of magical thinking for me.
  • disusedgenius 10 Mar 2013 10:47:00 5,232 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Why does a discussion on one religion lead to a general discussion about religion in general, you say? Be fucked if I can work that particular puzzle out.
  • Inertia 10 Mar 2013 10:49:14 676 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    I wasn't aware that Peter Andre was a religion. Second there are plenty of religion threads. Do you talk about FIFA in COD threads because it is also a game?
  • Lukus 10 Mar 2013 10:49:30 19,007 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Inertia wrote:
    How the fuck does Peter Andre creep into the Islamic thread?! Or Scientology?, or Jehovah's Witnesses?.
    He probably took a similar route to your excess punctuation. :)

    Paintings & Photographs

  • disusedgenius 10 Mar 2013 10:49:48 5,232 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @mcm

    Well sure, if you take reductionism to a high enough level everything appears the same.
  • disusedgenius 10 Mar 2013 10:52:00 5,232 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Inertia wrote:
    Do you talk about FIFA in COD threads because it is also a game?
    If the discussion started comparing COD to other games, sure. It'd be pretty stupid not to.

    Besides, sticking on the same OP subject for 27 pages? On EG? Pfft.
  • mcmothercruncher 10 Mar 2013 11:28:09 6,512 posts
    Seen 30 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Glad we agree finally disuedgenius ;)
  • ibenam 2 May 2013 00:40:37 1,352 posts
    Seen 15 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @Graveland Yeah not sure I want to watch that...The video title gives me the creepers enough.
  • Tonka 2 May 2013 05:16:08 20,029 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Shame they banned tripods...

    If you can read this you really need to fiddle with your forum settings.

  • ChronoTravis 11 May 2013 17:58:19 145 posts
    Seen 2 months ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    @Graveland Either he needs an oscar, or some serious psychotics medication!
  • Moot_Point 26 Jun 2013 16:13:41 3,921 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Mosque defaced. Who are the EDL? Are they anything to do with the BNP?

    ================================================================================

    mowgli wrote: I thought the 1 married the .2 and founded Islam?

  • THFourteen 26 Jun 2013 16:16:37 32,905 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Earth Defence Lorce
  • thelzdking 26 Jun 2013 16:18:43 4,332 posts
    Seen 15 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    They're mentally subnormal football hooligans who've decided that England needs 'defending' from Islamic extremism by means of thuggery.
  • mcmonkeyplc 26 Jun 2013 16:25:28 39,388 posts
    Seen 35 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    They should try drawing swastika's on a Hindu temple. See how that goes down.

    Shrugs

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • Moot_Point 26 Jun 2013 16:29:12 3,921 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    @mcmonkeyplc Would they know the difference?

    ================================================================================

    mowgli wrote: I thought the 1 married the .2 and founded Islam?

  • THFourteen 26 Jun 2013 16:31:00 32,905 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    mcmonkeyplc wrote:
    They should try drawing swastika's on a Hindu temple. See how that goes down.

    Shrugs
    i'd probaly wobble my head from side to side.
  • Page

    of 101 First / Last

Log in or register to reply