You can't honestly believe that charity is always related to religion....lol...........?

When you say "charity center", does that include charitably supporting the pastor and his family? Beyond that, most churches here don't have "charity centers", and we commonly see them as scams (especially the religious, appraising each others "holy" places). When you consider Mecca, what do you see? The commercialization of religion, perhaps? That's what we see on every other street corner.

(January 14, 2018 at 11:58 pm)Khemikal Wrote: You can't honestly believe that charity is always related to religion....lol...........?

When you say "charity center", does that include charitably supporting the pastor and his family?  Beyond that, most churches here don't have "charity centers", and we commonly see them as scams (especially the religious, appraising each others "holy" places).  When you consider Mecca, what do you see?  The commercialization of religion, perhaps?  That's what we see on every other street corner.

It's not that "charity" was created out of commercialization; but it is used as a justification and a lubricant for stripping people off money.

In other words; your problem is not charity itself: your problem is the institution behind the charity.
Look at this verse from the Quran:

Quote:Sura 9. The Quran:
( 34 )   O you who have believed, indeed many of the scholars and the monks devour the wealth of people unjustly and avert [them] from the way of Allah. And those who hoard gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah - give them tidings of a painful punishment.

It's known since ancient times that charity is abused many times to devour the wealth of people unjustly.
So it's more of the monks'/pastors' issue: have a group of greedy scholars, and you will have a church that strips your cash in the name of "charity".

Mecca is invaded by the Sauds; not by Muslims.

I admit I haven't been keeping up with this, so I apologise if it's been addressed; but there's one glaring thing about why Atlas isn't a terrorist missing from the OP which stands out like an iceberg at a Titanic convention:

"Because I don't want to be."

(January 15, 2018 at 6:48 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: It's not that "charity" was created out of commercialization; but it is used as a justification and a lubricant for stripping people off money.

In other words; your problem is not charity itself: your problem is the institution behind the charity.
Look at this verse from the Quran:

Magic books says: "grifty people are grifty".

Thx magic book!  We'd never have figured it out otherwise.  

What I find deeply amusing about this, is that in a pre-literate society (like the umma..lol) the statement amounts to one holy schmuck saying "Don't listen to those other holy schmucks, they're all conmen." Yet here you are hundreds of years later, quoting one cons critique of other cons as if it were deep wisdom.......in response to the question of whether or not you really believe what you just said; that charity is always related to religion.

(January 15, 2018 at 10:30 am)Cyberman Wrote: I admit I haven't been keeping up with this, so I apologise if it's been addressed; but there's one glaring thing about why Atlas isn't a terrorist missing from the OP which stands out like an iceberg at a Titanic convention:

"Because I don't want to be."

It's not an "interpretation of the interpretations" or an "opinion of the opinions".
It's actually a direct, explicit verse in the Quran that forces me into not being one:

Quote:Sura 5, The Quran:
(44 )   Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses thereto. So do not fear the people but fear Me, and do not exchange My verses for a small price. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers.

( 45 )   And We ordained for them therein a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution. But whoever gives [up his right as] charity, it is an expiation for him. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

Eye for an eye.
When ISIS kills 2 years old Sam; does that equates to punishing Mark for bombing Khalid?

Taking the soul of a child, in response to a grownup's crime against another child, is giving the real killer a go; it's not an eye for an eye.
An eye for an eye = Kill Mark for killing Khalid.

Do terrorists apply this holy rule? or at least govern their operations according to constraints dictated by the Quran?
It influenced how I think; that's for sure.

BTW; with the underlined verse, you can surround any Jihadi of the new era terrorist groups, and strip them off arguments. That's why they hate the guts of Quran readers.

---

(January 15, 2018 at 12:02 pm)Khemikal Wrote:

(January 15, 2018 at 6:48 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: It's not that "charity" was created out of commercialization; but it is used as a justification and a lubricant for stripping people off money.

In other words; your problem is not charity itself: your problem is the institution behind the charity.
Look at this verse from the Quran:

Magic books says: "grifty people are grifty".

Thx magic book!  We'd never have figured it out otherwise.  

What I find deeply amusing about this, is that in a pre-literate society (like the umma..lol) the statement amounts to one holy schmuck saying "Don't listen to those other holy schmucks, they're all conmen."  Yet here you are hundreds of years later, quoting one cons critique of other cons as if it were deep wisdom.......in response to the question of whether or not you really believe what you just said; that charity is always related to religion.

The whole world was pre-literal; and in terms of history, China and India have the oldest cultures; so nothing on early Arabs. And Mohammed Peace be Upon Him didn't know how to read; so..

If he's a con; then why did the book he authored stayed long after his death?
Many scientists believed in his book too.

For God's sake; Muslims got an inch close from dominating the whole world; even !

(January 15, 2018 at 1:37 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(January 15, 2018 at 10:30 am)Cyberman Wrote: I admit I haven't been keeping up with this, so I apologise if it's been addressed; but there's one glaring thing about why Atlas isn't a terrorist missing from the OP which stands out like an iceberg at a Titanic convention:

"Because I don't want to be."

It's not an "interpretation of the interpretations" or an "opinion of the opinions".
It's actually a direct, explicit verse in the Quran that forces me into not being one:

I never said it was, but are you saying that if your kerrang failed to include this handy direct and explicit verse that there would be nothing stopping you from being a terrorist?

I'm so glad I don't have to consult a magic book to find out what I'm not supposed to do. I simply happen to know it. That makes me way more moral than anything your or any religion pretends a god wants. How about that!

(January 15, 2018 at 1:37 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: And Mohammed Peace be Upon Him didn't know how to read; so..

If he's a con; then why did the book he authored stayed long after his death?

Fear threats and stupidity.

(January 15, 2018 at 1:37 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: The whole world was pre-literal; and in terms of history, China and India have the oldest cultures; so nothing on early Arabs. And Mohammed Peace be Upon Him didn't know how to read; so..

Charity is always related to religion...and now the whole world was pre-literate in 700ad?  

Quote:If he's a con; then why did the book he authored stayed long after his death?
Many scientists believed in his book too.

You ask this as though it hadn't happened before and since.

Quote:For God's sake; Muslims got an inch close from dominating the whole world; even !

Yup, moved on it like a bitch....but couldn't get there.  Maybe they should have let jesus into their hearts?  His conquerors were much more competent..and his fairy tale is even longer lived.  That makes it even truer by the magic book logic on display in this thread. Ofc there were even earlier and more competent conquerors, and they believed in all sorts of interesting gods. Even more truthy.

(January 15, 2018 at 7:40 pm)Cyberman Wrote:

(January 15, 2018 at 1:37 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: It's not an "interpretation of the interpretations" or an "opinion of the opinions".
It's actually a direct, explicit verse in the Quran that forces me into not being one:

I never said it was, but are you saying that if your kerrang failed to include this handy direct and explicit verse that there would be nothing stopping you from being a terrorist?

I'm so glad I don't have to consult a magic book to find out what I'm not supposed to do. I simply happen to know it. That makes me way more moral than anything your or any religion pretends a god wants. How about that!

It would be like a "Butterfly Effect": I don't know the amount of variables that would change.
All I care about is that it is containing the verse in the current time stream.

Every single person has a book to follow; even if that book was imprinted into their minds as neuron connections. Most behaviors we do are taught to us from somewhere. Note the word "most".
So I consult it.

---

(January 15, 2018 at 7:45 pm)Cod Wrote:

(January 15, 2018 at 1:37 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: And Mohammed Peace be Upon Him didn't know how to read; so..

If he's a con; then why did the book he authored stayed long after his death?

Fear threats and stupidity.

No. That is the Catholic Church's inquisitions.
And, the Islamic institution represented in countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran in modern times.

The equation is easy: a fuckface comes to rule; he gives himself a holy blanket to hide behind, the sellers of the blanket are corrupt beards from the religious institution of choice; the buyers of the blanket are the people.

---

(January 15, 2018 at 10:58 pm)Khemikal Wrote:

(January 15, 2018 at 1:37 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: The whole world was pre-literal; and in terms of history, China and India have the oldest cultures; so nothing on early Arabs. And Mohammed Peace be Upon Him didn't know how to read; so..

Charity is always related to religion...and now the whole world was pre-literate in 700ad? 

Yes?
Knowledge was biased; and only elites knew how to read; the slave market needed ignorant slaves; and the battlefields needed unaware teenage men.
We never seen the standard of living "advance" for the normal human until the Industrial Age.

Quote:

Quote:If he's a con; then why did the book he authored stayed long after his death?
Many scientists believed in his book too.

You ask this as though it hadn't happened before and since.

No; I'm asking to support what I'm saying with the question I gave.
It's quite weird that the Quran is still intact just like the day it was written. Also; all the religions of Abraham are still quite strong.

Quote:

Quote:For God's sake; Muslims got an inch close from dominating the whole world; even !

Yup, moved on it like a bitch....but couldn't get there.  Maybe they should have let jesus into their hearts?  His conquerors were much more competent..and his fairy tale is even longer lived.  That makes it even truer by the magic book logic on display in this thread.  Ofc there were even earlier and more competent conquerors, and they believed in all sorts of interesting gods.  Even more truthy.

Well; they abandoned the Quran and believed in the Hadith instead; no wonder they lost.





Very early Muslims (the generation of Mohammed) fought Rome and Persia together; and won.
But that was then. When they believed.

(January 16, 2018 at 4:10 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: Every single person has a book to follow; even if that book was imprinted into their minds as neuron connections. Most behaviors we do are taught to us from somewhere. Note the word "most".
So I consult it.

Yeah, my book is called 'It's a bad idea to do as a book tells you book'  I read it every day.