maqroll Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Two British brothers have been jailed for travelling to fight in Syria, the first of many you'd expect. So when are the executions? Too late for that, it's not America you know. Actually, we only execute the mentally disabled; who said eugenics is dead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Yes and no Omariqy. Yes only a tiny percentage of followers of the various religions engage in these acts but I still think it is fair to say that for most that do their religion plays a significant part in their actions. In terms of the motivation, organisation, recruitment, funding and jusification (to others and themselves) for their actions. Sure other things come into play and without question some of those involved are simply either paid guns or bad eggs that would find another vehicle for their actions and desires in the absence of religion. But, religion (all not just the Muslim faith) remains a central element in the actions of many of the people involved with these sort of actions especially those at the head of the snake. What is wrong is the assertion from some that its the Muslim faith, or Muslim's in general (or other ethnic or religious groups) that are the problem rather than the people who make up their number. At the head of the IS organisation, there is clearly a desire to return to 7th century practices or at least what they believe them to have been but as you argue the reality may have been very different but was certainly more complex. nutjobs and adventurers often need a hook to hang their mental shit on as they lack the imagination to come up with their own justification for their rape and bloodlust It's probably quite a high score draw on whether 'religion' has been at the root of the most killing, or whether Nazism, Stalinism, Maoism, drugs cartels, the Shining Path, ETA, Sandanistas, slave traders, Khmer Rouge, Kim Jung Il, Pinochet....... Well anyway, we've done it before, lots of people choose their own dubious reason for mass slaughter, doesn't excuse it, doesn't make it a legit cause, doesn't make the cited cause actually responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 7th Century? Pretty sure that kind of stuff has been going on forever. *cough* British empire *cough* On topic I kind of see Awol's point but at the same time I would say that no British person should really be going to another country to fight in a war for another country. Especially in a horrific war such as this. never say never? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 26, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 26, 2014 nutjobs and adventurers often need a hook to hang their mental shit on as they lack the imagination to come up with their own justification for their rape and bloodlust Yes. I wonder how many people are turned into nutters by a religious upbringing. Many aren't. The majority aren't. The opposite is true I guess in most cases - I think that religions are based or have tenets about kindness and peace and so on and even helping people who are different. yet they also foster a "we're special" kind of vibe. Our God is the true God, and whilst other Gods may be acknowledged , they're not the main man. And it is always man (er, or Elephant or Cat etc. yes I know). And when you have this ethos of we're better than them, then you get a they're worse than us... and ultimately they are worthless or bad and we can or must kill or mistreat them. It's kind of valid to say "well that's not the religions as written in holy scripture. But it's, I think, unarguable that it is parts of religion that are as practiced. So it's an easy cop out "That's not Christian/Islamic/etc." Unfortunately the practicality is that it very really is. it's wrong to demonise people of faith for their (whichever) faith, quite wrong. But I would prefer it if more were done by Jews/Christians/Islamic faith people to root out and decry and really stop the evil done. Basically more "not in my name" stuff would be helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted November 26, 2014 Administrator Share Posted November 26, 2014 it's wrong to demonise people of faith for their (whichever) faith, quite wrong. But I woukld prefer it if more were done by Jews/Christians/Islamic faith people to root out and decry and really stop the evil done. Basically more "not in my name" stuff would be helpful. Agreed. I can't see the Catholics starting the process though. Whole layers of cognitive dissonance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 26, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 26, 2014 Totally agree regarding that last point, it happens of course it does but it's relatively rare and small scale. I'm sure will argue that that stuff doesn't make the media, isn't what the press are looking for and I'm sure that is true but you do get the sense that the 'not in my name' stuff from all religions is rather limited.and that breads mistrust and even great division and that just fuels things yet further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 I can't speak for others, but in the limited circles I move in I've never (literally never) heard anybody claim their god is better than someone else's or claim it's ok to do down known believers or others shades of the same thing. Quite the absolute opposite in my experience. Perhaps the plotting starts once I've left the room. But granted that doesn't make it true for millions of people in millions of other locations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Some very good points. From an Islamic perspective we believe in the same God as Christians and Jews. I think there's elements in every religion they can be interpreted to commit evil doesn't mean that's what the original intention was. In Islam people use verses applicable to the times of the Prophet pbuh specifically to justify all sorts of heinous acts. For example the law about how young a girl could be before you married her was brought in as there were lots of infant brides at the time. It was done so as to protect young children. Now that was at that point in time when it was more readily accepted. People still try and apply it to modern times. It just doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted November 27, 2014 Administrator Share Posted November 27, 2014 Some very good points. From an Islamic perspective we believe in the same God as Christians and Jews. I don't think they do. Christians believe that Jesus is literally both the son of God and God at the same time. Cognitive dissonance at it's finest (even Jesus gets confused about this in "his own" words). This with the addition of the Holy Ghost (aka blanket to fill the gaps) compromises a triumvirate godhead which makes Christianity polytheistic. I don't think that Islam or Judaism would recognise their God as the same as the Christian God if they actually understood all this drivel. They are all adapted from previous religions though. There's nothing original in the Abrahamic mythos or it's derived story lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Yes true, sort of. Original scriptures before they were modified show that there is no mention of Jesus being labelled the son of god or even god himself. I believe it is the Greek Orthodox who still hold some of the earlier copies of the bible. As we all know by now the bible has been heavily adapted over time. Yes there are common themes amongst various religions, even pre-dating the Abrahamic religions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 27, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 The biggest common theme being they are all the creation of mans invention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Well I am not going to start God v No God debate on here but it is true that many religions have elements that have been altered by men over time. I can't speak about other religions but the Quran has never been changed from it's original iteration. The Hadith however are based on individuals accounts on what they saw the Prophet pbuh do and say over his lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 ... the Quran has never been changed from it's original iteration... Not true. The Quran disseminated currently by the Saudis, and going into hotels worldwide, has beefed up intolerance towards other creeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 I real enjoy the pure paganism of the Christmas tree. Some wonderful traditions survived the onslaught of Rome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 (edited) Maybe but the Quran in its original format is still distributed for the main and is widely available. I wasn't aware that the Saudis had changed it? I look forward to the day the Saud family are not around, if that ever happens. Edit: I'm aware there is a dispute around missing chapters/verses but wasn't aware there has been change to the actual text Edited November 27, 2014 by omariqy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Excuse my ignorance here but I've seen and heard it mentioned a few times recently that the Quran has never been changed. Does that mean that the actual words written in a copy I could buy in a shop today are the same words the original was written with 1,400 years ago? Also, is there any chance the use and meaning of the words, even if they are still written the same, could possibly have changed over 1,400 years? I just find it hard to believe there has been absolutely no development of written or spoken language in well over a thousand years and there is absolutely no need for any translation or knowledge of earlier writing, context, meaning etc.. Given that the english language, both spoken and written can be almost unrecognisable over just a hundred years or so. Err, possibly the wrong thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 The Quranic Arabic is taught today as it was 1400 years ago. Arabic spoken in countries is different to Quranic Arabic. Quranic Arabic is like poetry both in terms of sound, tone, pitch and placement in a sentence. Modern Arabic is more slang and a bit harsher on the ear. You will hear reports that scientists have found old copies that differ but other scientists have found copies that are apparently from the 7th century that are the same as todays versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted November 27, 2014 Administrator Share Posted November 27, 2014 The Quranic Arabic is taught today as it was 1400 years ago. Arabic spoken in countries is different to Quranic Arabic. Quranic Arabic is like poetry both in terms of sound, tone, pitch and placement in a sentence. Modern Arabic is more slang and a bit harsher on the ear. You will hear reports that scientists have found old copies that differ but other scientists have found copies that are apparently from the 7th century that are the same as todays versions. I think what chrisp65 was asking was has the language changed; do words still mean the same thing? Of course the language has changed. Languages always change. Words written 1400 years ago do not mean the same thing now as they did then. Even if the written words are the same, the meaning has changed. Otherwise God wouldn't allow any languages other than the one he guided others to write down in the first place (which certainly wasn't Arabic). Why would he want such an enormous barrier to "knowing" him? He'd make sure that anyone had easy access to his words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted November 27, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 I think there's more than religion at play here - religion is the banner under which money and power are fought over. In most of the cases that were originally held up as religious wars earlier in the thread, they're also wars of rich against poor, haves and have nots. When you've got bugger all, God's probably something worth having; he can get you fed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 27, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 God's probably something worth having; he can get you fed. All he needs is a few fish and some bread though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts