elaborate and pointless...................

None of you agree, all of you rail against magic book.

(March 31, 2018 at 12:36 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Quran forbids following anything without knowledge. If one it's laws has no place in this century, that if is to be followed now, then either I would have to throw away the book or realize the paradigm it was meant for.

Quran tells us to feed the poor, but we aim for their to be no poor to feed. It tells us to free slaves, but we ought to aim that there be no slaves (and in fact Shiites sources have prayers praying for God to free eventually every slave).

And we are now at the point where we have made a great part of humanity economical slaves. And they ought to be freed as well, and there is a reason Moses is told by Shuaib that he will pay his due and not fall short of it and be good to him and that is important.

When a person works, they deserve a due. And this was a lesson, you are freeing Israelites slave to today, only to prepare them for Mohammad who will free all of humanity from the shackles the dark one seeks to put on them and while it is literally slavery today, don't forget about the economics slaves who are not paid their due effort, and prepare the people to await the Messenger who will be sent to whole world and bring out justice and destroy all Pharoahs.

I don't think the Shiite prayers are needed; because there is already a verse in the Quran about freeing slaves:

Quote:Sura 90, The Quran:
( 11 )   But he has not broken through the difficult pass.
( 12 )   And what can make you know what is [breaking through] the difficult pass?
( 13 )   It is the freeing of a slave
( 14 )   Or feeding on a day of severe hunger
( 15 )   An orphan of near relationship
( 16 )   Or a needy person in misery
( 17 )   And then being among those who believed and advised one another to patience and advised one another to compassion.

---

(March 31, 2018 at 12:39 pm)Khemikal Wrote:

(March 31, 2018 at 12:36 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Quran forbids following anything without knowledge. If one it's laws has no place in this century, that if is to be followed now, then either I would have to throw away the book or realize the paradigm it was meant for.

Irrelevant, it may forbid this or that but it both justifies and advises a man to acquire a sex slave.

Quote:Quran tells us to feed the poor, but we aim for their to be no poor to feed. It tells us to free slaves, but we ought to aim that there be no slaves (and in fact Shiites sources have prayers praying for God to free eventually every slave).

It also tells you to buy a girl and fuck the piss out of her.

Quote:And we are now at the point where we have made a great part of humanity economical slaves. And they ought to be freed as well, and there is a reason Moses is told by Shuaib that he will pay his due and not fall short of it and be good to him and that is important.

The inequity of others or of this century is not capable of justifying the inequity of magic book or it's century.  

Quote:When a person works, they deserve a due. And this was a lesson, you are freeing Israelites slave to today, only to prepare them for Mohammad who will free all of humanity from the shackles the dark one seeks to put on them and while it is literally slavery today, don't forget about the economics slaves who are not paid their due effort.

Big Mo's magic book didn't free anyone from shackles, it tells you to put little girls in them, buy and sell them, and fuck them - and that's exactly what the caliphate did.

You first claimed you could justify this.  You couldn't.  You then attempted to romanticize it, but failed.  Now you're driving in the opposite direction at 90 miles an hour yelling "other people do bad shit too" over your shoulder as you put ground between yourself and your own horrid fairy tale.  You knew this would happen.  You knew it going in.  You knew you couldn't justify it or romanticize it, and you knew you didn't agree with magic book on this issue.

-and yet..here we are.  Why?  Just...fucking.....why.................?

Could you please provide verses from the Quran, to support your accusations?

---

(March 31, 2018 at 12:40 pm)Grandizer Wrote:

(March 31, 2018 at 12:22 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Whether you acknowledge it or not, the ancients had our sense of compassion and justice, and this how they dealt with war. This how they deterred war, they made consequences for it. 
Otherwise, no one would care for peace, the worst thing that can happen if it were not for spoils of war, is you change rulers, and that is no big deal.

You talk about compassion, but a lot of the verses in the Qur'an don't come off as very compassionate.

And sure, the ancients had compassion and justice and all that, but for whom? Certainly not the poor people they waged war against, and definitely not for those taken in as slaves to be treated as subhuman. We know from history and from observing today's world that such atrocities have, and still, happen(ed). And if there were a compassionate god out there, I would argue that we would be in a far better world than we are in now, one with far less suffering and far more compassion for others. But we don't live in that world, we live here instead. So I don't see the odds of such a god existing to be anywhere close to good.

Modern human proved to be as barbaric; but with different colors.
The Japanese army's crimes in WW2, the Myanmar genocide against the Rohingya in 2017, the bombing of dresden,...etc.

Modern humans might be even worse if you judge by casualties.

---

(March 31, 2018 at 12:40 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Khemikal, as usual, you can't move from one perspective to another. You're stuck on assuming the worst out of the ancient people and their texts.

---

(March 31, 2018 at 12:40 pm)Grandizer Wrote: You talk about compassion, but a lot of the verses in the Qur'an don't come off as very compassionate.

And sure, the ancients had compassion and justice and all that, but for whom? Certainly not the poor people they waged war against, and definitely not for those taken in as slaves to be treated as subhuman. We know from history and from observing today's world that such atrocities have, and still, happen(ed). And if there were a compassionate god out there, I would argue that we would be in a far better world than we are in now, one with far less suffering and far more compassion for others. But we don't live in that world, we live here instead. So I don't see the odds of such a god existing to be anywhere close to good.

I understand your perspective. I been there.  It takes time, just keep reflecting and try to put more then one type of shade glasses you see the color of the world by.

The only person neglecting and dodging is you.

---

(March 31, 2018 at 1:07 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(March 31, 2018 at 1:05 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Does allah approve this excuse?

US and it's citizens have no grounds to criticize the ancients for this sorry, until, they apologize as a nation to the whole world for what they did to Japaen.

Just as a person killing humans should not talk about whether it's moral or not to eat cows.

Ok?

Because till then, all I see is vehement attack on ancient people and their texts, while no real regard for morals.

That is correct.
The west should be ashamed of the usage of nukes, and the destruction of the world due to their use.

It's bad to throw people with rocks, when your own house is made out of glass.

---

(March 31, 2018 at 1:11 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: I am saying we aren't having a honest discussion on morals. And it's not just you, but the state of the world, rather then understanding, we attack others while not looking at worse evils we do.

That is general talk. Humans in general don't care; nobody fights you on broad meanings like jealousy and grudge. They do it for interest. Not like the Shiite school teach. In other words; the words "jealousy-grudge" are too broad.

Iraq was destroyed for its oil, Syria was destroyed for unknown reasons but all experts agree they had nothing to do with "the evil within". This is romanticizing; mere gymnastics to hide something.

Why doesn't the Quran update itself magically, if some of the "ethics" it teaches are relevant only for a fixed period?

It does, in the minds of believers, lol. Atlas..for example, appears to have memory holed significant parts of it.

True, I wish they’d follow it through and produce a new sect with a Qur’an-lite that actually says what they say it says. Same with Christians.

(April 1, 2018 at 1:07 am)robvalue Wrote: Why doesn't the Quran update itself magically, if some of the "ethics" it teaches are relevant only for a fixed period?

Why does anyone of any religion buy into the claims of antiquity?

Oh, I wouldn't defend raping children, no matter what. Didn't know that was the topic. I thought it was taken them as slaves.

..and that you will defend.  How you guys manage this internal calculus is beyond me.

(March 31, 2018 at 12:40 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(March 31, 2018 at 12:40 pm)Grandizer Wrote: You talk about compassion, but a lot of the verses in the Qur'an don't come off as very compassionate.

And sure, the ancients had compassion and justice and all that, but for whom? Certainly not the poor people they waged war against, and definitely not for those taken in as slaves to be treated as subhuman. We know from history and from observing today's world that such atrocities have, and still, happen(ed). And if there were a compassionate god out there, I would argue that we would be in a far better world than we are in now, one with far less suffering and far more compassion for others. But we don't live in that world, we live here instead. So I don't see the odds of such a god existing to be anywhere close to good.

I understand your perspective. I been there.  It takes time, just keep reflecting and try to put more then one type of shade glasses you see the color of the world by.

Look out for your own biases before you focus on mine.

(March 29, 2018 at 12:43 pm)alpha male Wrote: Yes, I think vulcan is missing the bolded point. Various frameworks that are more or less objective can be devised, but it's subjective to choose one of those to live by.

Not really because the statements "X causes a lot of unnecessary suffering" and "X causes a lot of unnecessary suffering and that unnecessary suffering should be mitigated" aren't really saying anything different that actually matters for some moral frameworks. Prescriptivity isn't necessary for a moral framework.