Atheist Threat
Oct 10th, 2008, in News, by Patung
Young atheists on the internet, and eradicating atheism and communism in Indonesia.
Governor of North Sumatra, Syamsul Arifin, said on 8th October at an occasion marking Pancasila Day that all elements of the nation must continually fight against and eradicate atheist beliefs among the people.
Atheism, which seeks to erase Pancasila and which once threatened the nation in the guise of the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI), and still does, has to be guarded against, particularly because it still finds support among sections of the poor.
Syamsul said children should be taught from primary school through to university to hate atheism, so that the creed could as far as possible be obliterated.
A 4th ‘T’ – Rakyat tidak ateis.
The butchery of the atheist-PKI backed murderers of the September 30 Movement of 1965 (G30S PKI) could not be allowed to happen again, he said, hence the need to struggle against atheism. beritasore
Young Internet Atheists
On the internet at least some Indonesians seem happy to declare themselves as unbelievers.
Running an “affiliation” search on the social network site Friendster.com for “atheist” brings up about 144 matches friendster.com, while “ateis” produces 185 odd results friendster.com, although more than a few seem to be claiming to be atheist as some kind of joke.
On the same site, created on January 23rd, 2007 is the “Atheist Indonesia” group friendster.com, with 76 members and a fairly active message board, and some of its members seem to be active in an Indonesian language Atheist Wikipedia. ateisindonesia.wikidot.com
1,311 Comments on “Atheist Threat”
-
Patrick says:
“Atheism is the system of thought that which is formally opposed to theism” . I wish you would please read what was already posted. Since you say you are an atheist it means you are formally opposed to religion so therefore by logical conclusion you are intolerant by definition!
Yep! We got into the gutter as that is where you, yourself, chose to fight for your cause as you could do so on any other level. I don’t mind fighting there as I previously said I am a sinner so I am not above kicking your ass when or wherever you choose to do battle with me. As far as rants please read what you have written here! You are a little momma’s boy hiding behind your computer screen afraid that others may discover what a spineless lunatic wimp that you really are in life. Kind of fun fighting you in the gutter so why are you running now as I thought you said a few posts ago you were only getting started.
Actually, I am not the least paranoid of atheist and I like people like Andy who seems like a nice enough bloke and Timdog is definitely one of my very favorites here at IM. I would have no problem what-so-ever in having a few beers with either of them and discussing anything under the sun and even religion if that’s what they wanted.
Thanks for the compliment about me being among the most secure people here at IM as I honestly don’t give a rat’s ass about anything your pee brain could think to say.
I wish you God speed! Yes it is intended!
-
Janma says:
Since you say you are an atheist it means you are formally opposed to religion so therefore by logical conclusion you are intolerant by definition!
I don’t think that’s logical….firstly being an atheist doesn’t mean being formally opposed to religion; In Primus: Atheism is not formal, not does it mean ‘opposed’ it is just a lack of belief. And even if atheists are opposed to religion for themselves it doesn’t mean they are opposed to other people following religion… it may, but it is not ‘by definition’…. opposed does not mean intolerant.
-
Oppose – being in opposition to, fight, go up against, combat, contest, counter, resist. How does one tolerate something that they are in opposition to?
-
They tolerate it as long as it’s confined to others….. but oppose it for themselves maybe? that’s how I see it… besides, if I follow your argument then it also means you are intolerant, because you oppose atheism…
-
@ Janma
Patrick, that is just so illogical! Are you trying to say that I may feel it’s ok to murder people next week, even though I don’t feel that’s the right thing to do this week, simply because I don’t follow a religion??? That’s just mental!
No Janma that is logic! Why because if you follow Thomas’ astute argument the first unmoveable mover is always consistent and never changing in His goodness! All other objects are in constant motion or constant change so if there is no God there can be no constancy of good. And if man is the new force behind morality then the only conclusion is that morality will be in a permanent state of change because man is in a constant state of change. And if all men answer to no God then all men can make their own morality. Which morality will be correct since each man will assume his is correct for him?
-
Oigal says:
only conclusion is that morality will be in a permanent state of change because man is in a constant state of change. And if all men answer to no God then all men can make their own morality. Which morality will be correct since each man will assume his is correct for him?
As opposed to the religion’s unchanged defination of morality over the centuries, also perhaps a little guidance to which particular religion holds the definative guide to morality. Is it 4 wives or one, eye for an eye or compassion, sex education or no..family planning seems to create some divisions as does divorce..Permanence or consistency is not something leaping out of the page here.
Or perhaps we are getting down to it now and there is just one version of religious truth..care to share, think of the suffering it will prevent
-
Yep! We got into the gutter as that is where you, yourself, chose to fight for your cause as you could do so on any other level.
Do go and read your very first response to my comment..still hypocrisy..I should expect anything less..
-
pj_bali says:
Patrick
Surely its easy to find everyday examples of being opposed to something yet tolerating it. Smoking in public could be one such example – If I was a non-smoker I may be inclined to tolerate the smokers around me. A democratic government would be another example. The losing party opposes the victors but they tolerate the result.
As for morality being constant and unchanging well where in recorded history is this the case? Morality is constantly changing and what was thought of as right and just only 100 years ago are thought to be highly immoral today and vice versa. Here is another example for you. Today drug lords are portrayed in modern cinema as the epitomy of evil yet 100 years ago they were captains of industry and thought to be a civilising influence – go figure.Janma I have a link for you that you may enjoy.
-
You are a little momma’s boy hiding behind your computer screen afraid that others may discover what a spineless lunatic wimp that you really are in life.
ooH ooh…I missed this the first time round..maybe too busying laughing..never mind…oooh again..Patrick…Where is the love!
I wish you God speed! Yes it is intended!
Hey cool is this like a curse…I thought that was the province of witches and the like..btw how fast is that?
I honestly don’t give a rat’s ass about anything your pee brain could think to say.
Aw come on Pat…deep down you care..otherwise why would you spend so much time writing to me..besides I still need you to clarify a few things…I have gone from morally destitute drunk at the blok, uneducated yob at the bar, murderer to demi god to intellectual to pea brain..oh oops thats right.. I even changed teams in the sexual predictiion stakes as well..sheesh at least you haven’t gone all emotive on me here Pat and tried to pigeon hole or anything.
Actually I could give a personal abuse type response but usually and more correctly the personal abuse is the least resort of coward and dimwit in the defence of poorly structure agruement. I just find it easy to wait for your next howler. Anyway keep up the good work..I’ll be here (unless of course your curse kicks in)
-
ET says:
Fanglong said
…since then I studied Buddhism, later became a “practitioner” in Tibetan Nyingma Buddhism, and later again I stopped it all because all of that — Buddha, God, Paradise & Hell –, appeared to me like children stories, lullabies blinding man from his social duties, etc.
This reminds me of a Zen saying: “Before one knows about Zen trees are trees, mountains are mountains, rivers are rivers and lakes are lakes. While studying Zen trees are no longer trees, mountains no longer mountains, rivers no longer rivers and lakes no longer lakes. After knowing about Zen trees are trees, mountains are mountains, rivers are rivers and lakes are lakes again.”
I believe man can improve & that improvement is infinite. Infinite improvement may be called God, but not necessarily.
I like this. God at the end of the rainbow, not at the beginning.
-
Barry Prima says:
Well if we’re not real, that sure takes the pressure off hey? No need to do anything, because we are nothing.
No my dear janma you don’t get off that easily, ignorance of the (divine)law is not a valid defence especially when it is ignorance of the man not the law. You cannot plead ignorance as you know the reality of god within your very deepest essence, which you have buried under layers of darkened rubble of so called learning. Our own body will testify against us on judgment day.
The problem is precisely because you think you’re real, or attribute a reality and totality to yourself.
Only god is real does not mean everything else is unreal, it just mean it is a part of him and unreal in its understanding of its own realness as independent of him.
It also does not mean you are nothing either in any absolute way as nothingness only means something in contrast to somethingness.
Your mind cannot reconcile nothing and something, which is what the whole of my last two post were about…..you can grasp the concept of nothing, you can also grasp the concept of something, i assume you can also grasp then that something that is nothing and something at the same time is everything: ie god! That something is sometimes manifest as nothing and sometimes as something, because it contains both possibilities within in.
As for the rest of your post, you need to really stop recycling the same argument over and over, of them v us ….the line of argument you’re following is something that is synonymous with the early years of teen angst and confusion. Its Childs play.
For example:They tolerate it as long as it’s confined to others….. but oppose it for themselves maybe? that’s how I see it
That argument has been explained many times by me, as utterly ridiculous, without a response from you, but you keep insisting on it…its a dogma,oh yea who are above dogma have dogmas of your own.
At least Fanglalong bought us something original and deep in the guise of atheism, although his supposed atheism is not at all contrary to religious truths if understood in their essence, and could only be maintained using one of the bi polar arguments of a religion itself (Buddhism)a)stand in awe of the conviction and strength drawn from such beliefs (not the false piety and veneer rubbish so often seen).
b)said person was a such a good person in spite of religion rather than because of itSo is it a or b, you can’t have both…well you can but only if you are using a religious framework to explain it, which you deny yourself access to because of your atheism.
trying to follow but can’t.
Trying..That’s what matters..And that is where the whole concept of grace and deliverance comes in and is necessary.I follow your argument then it also means you are intolerant, because you oppose atheism…
Tolerance of the kind you seem to beliewve in is overrated….and impossible in world where it is only the creative tension between things that creates existence Thoughts lead to actions that are opposed to other thoughts and actions. …religious people are less stupid in understanding this basic principle than Atheist in that at least they don’t pretend to be tolerant or that it is possible.
Permanence or consistency is not something leaping out of the page here.
Not for those who do not understand what permanence and consistency are, and live in a world where black part does not have a white dot and white part does not a have a black dot…..religions are themselves representations of levels of maya… they have gradations within them that allow maya to become at its highest level atma once again…. many can be one my child, and one can be many, reject your mind and embrace yourself and you will come to the realisation of this truth.
Basic principle:
The eastern world views man from the point of the universe, the western world views the universe from the point of man..Even a most elementary observation will lead you to conclude in the words of ice-t that you aren’t a shit on the damn map….I believe man can improve & that improvement is infinite. Infinite improvement may be called God, but not necessarily.
Beginning and end and infinite improvement have no place in god if he exist as he is absolute and cannot improve or have beginning and end. The words “i believe” is a sure sign that whatever follows is not true!
No offense but what you and the statement from fang along have expressed is a very clichéd articulation of of Buddhism in western terms that are alein to it and in essence very far from its inherent nature. -
Hi Barry ! Thank you for the interest & shared knowledge.
I’ve got nothing to say about God / Buddhahood : it’s unspeakable, unthinkable & inexpressible ; including & transcending all & every polarity, like being & non-being, good & bad, etc., & even beyond & including the four possible extremes of any kind of assertion about it (or It) : being, non-being, being-and-non-being, neither-being-nor-non-being.
So, euh (as we say hesitatingly in French), morals is a part of those dualistic conventionalities, some of which can be taught by religions but not by God : those who feel God talks to them should be listened to with the greatest care. But those who act nicely with sentient beings, like, let’s say Soeur Emmanuelle, saint François d’Assise (in French, sorry, I don’t know his English name), etc. should be emulated & helped.
There’s not the slightest atheist threat among fair & honest people.
“I believe” is a kind of rhetorical softener…
Wassalaam ‘alay kullikum ! -
Barry at least you avoid the inane threats and abuse of the intolerant..
So is it a or b, you can’t have both…well you can but only if you are using a religious framework to explain it,
It just goes to prove that good person is just that, and that person may or may not be a believer.
Ol Pat himself offers the definative proof of the other of the scale.Not for those who do not understand what permanence and consistency are, and live in a world where black part does not have a white dot and white part does not a have a black dot…..religions are themselves representations of levels of maya… they have gradations within them that allow maya to become at its highest level atma once again…. many can be one my child, and one can be many, reject your mind and embrace yourself and you will come to the realisation of this truth.
Sorry lots of words and yet that explain the supposed consistancy of morality that belief is supposed to bring (remembering this was not my statement but big ol Pats). Surely you are not suggesting that morality as defined by any number of belief systems is not under continual change..(or are we still hanging witches as illmoral servants of devil).
The words “i believe” is a sure sign that whatever follows is not true!
and yet so many Believers…
reject your mind and embrace yourself and you will come to the realisation of this truth
Yep, never a truer word spoken.
-
@ Oigal – Sorry I have been busy with other aspects of my life. I have no idea where you dug up that quote but I can assure you that it is not mine so if you wish to explain yourself please do! I will get back to you later and answer your 4 or 5 posting since my last one. Must run as duty calls so bye for now.
-
Barry at least you avoid the inane threats and abuse of the intolerant..
I reserve the abuse for Tim dog (who is a good guy really in a do-gooder anthropologist kind of way) and Aluang(whose anti-Islamism is at least very funny and one he has a right to as he was born Muslim) in other parts of this forum.
When it comes to the big man upstairs, i can only be dead serious..Even the mud fight interlude could not arouse a humorous response from me.
Patrick has let the god squad down a wee bit, but at least he knows he is a sinner who is far from perfect and needs the grace of god to save him, so it’s all good.It just goes to prove that good person is just that
An atheist is only accidentally good, whereas a religious man is only accidently evil. In Islam there is a saying that god will not destroy the world as long as there is still one believer left, the belief of that one person is enough to maintain the world. Faith is the link between life and death, creation and Annihilation, between object and subject, when that relationship is broken you can’t have life.
You still have not answered the question of what the origin of goodness is and what a good person is? If you are an atheist, you have no parameters for measuring that, you could say common sense practicality etc, but that still does not explain what a human being is so you have to go backwards again?
Patrick is not disputing that godless people are capable of goodness or spirituality, as they are made with same potential for self realisation as the believers. But as i said that goodness is accidental and not incidental and in a way worthless (i will try to explain that further on in this post)
Sorry lots of words and yet that explain the supposed consistency of morality that belief is supposed to bring.Belief is not meant to bring consistency of morality, god is not a dictator!
Do you want god to show himself to you each day, to spoon feed you, to create the world in black and white, with clear visible lines of demarcation and thereby rob you of your much prized but ultimately delusional triumph card of freedom?
It seems that’s what you atheist are demanding, therby showing a very distinct lack of class, mystery imagination and humanity. That is Patricks point: you are dead in spiritual manner of speaking!
To Get a clue watch the film : Pleasantville…. no seriously, it is really powerful film, that never mentions god.
There are many levels within religion , and there is often seemingly contradictory moral values, as religions balance the yin with the yang. That statement displays a basic misconception about religion, which is not meant to represent an absolute moral code, but a universe in which a person can find the equilibrium between the relative and the absolute. Islam as they say is the meeting point between man as such and god as such. That means recognising the evil as well as the good in him, the sacred and the profane. You can see this in the Quran/bible which cater to all the agitations and prejudices of the mind in the attempt to diffuse them into a unity that shatters them all.
The balance is symbolised by the concept of sirat-ul-mustuqim in Islam or the bridge between fire and water (heaven and hell) leading to the pure land in Buddhism.Morality is under continual change
Only god is not changing was Patrick’s argument i believe? Morality has no inherent value itself in religion; its only value is in its efficacy in realising self/god. In fact as mentioned religion has no value in itself either, as it maya as mentioned earlier, unless it gets us closer to atma. So morality is a maya within maya and thus of course is changing.
The unity of being and the unity of religions exist on a transcendental level, not on the level of manifestation, as the manifestation caters to the multiplicity of the world. Hence the lack of apparent consistency.
Maya can only lead to Atma in the world of the ten thousand things (this world) when it is exhausted of all its possibilities and transformed into Atma ie at the peak of the religious mastery. This is possible only for a few and what is meant in the Sufi saying of dying before you die.
However when any individual dies the ruh is separated from the elements and at that point it has the capacity to triumph over the mind as long as it is grounded in belief. Without belief in the Absolute, the spirit will be unaware of its own nature and thereby cling to a personification that matches its concept of truth which is illusionary and thereby go into a kind of hell of its own making or as Buddhist would say back into the cycle of samsara and suffering.
..(or are we still hanging witches as immoral servants of devil).
Witches deserve much worse than hanging, the curse of the cursers will naturally fallback as a curse on them…if you live long enough in Indonesia, you will be convinced that witches are real!
and yet so many Believers…I am criticizing Belief as it is understood as a product of the rational mind, not belief as originating in the divine intellect, which knows intuitively of its relation to the absolute.
So a belief in god is not false, because it is not originating in the partial but the absolute, it is not a product of self, but the absolute. It is not a belief; it is an awareness or realisation, more accurately.
Believers in god, have lots of false beliefs too, but those false beliefs originate from the mind not the ruh, but by recognising the value and reality of the ruh , they have a way to transcend the mind and its false beliefs. In fact the ruh and the animal, mineral etc forces are constantly in a kind of friction and battle for supremacy. That is why only true faith can lead to the truth, not pseudo faith which is a product of the prejudices/fears of the mind.
Fang along committed a semantic faux pas which was not what he intended, but i thought id highlight it to show the fallacy of atheistic concept of belief, not the religious concept of it.Hi Barry ! Thank you for the interest & shared knowledge.
Thanks to you too for reminding me once again of the beauty of Buddhism!
-
timdog says:
Awwwww, Barry P! Thanks, sweetie: “a good guy really in a do-gooder anthropologist kind of way”!
You’ve warmed by bleeding liberal heart with your kind words! I will take any further insults from you as the very highest kind of compliments!Now, as I’ve not really been keeping up with all the cosmic chit-chat on this thread, can someone fill me in?
This “big man upstairs” – you’re talking about Pak Patung, right? -
PJ BaliMorality is constantly changing and what was thought of as right and just only 100 years ago are thought to be highly immoral today and vice versa. Here is another example for you. Today drug lords are portrayed in modern cinema as the epitomy of evil yet 100 years ago they were captains of industry and thought to be a civilising influence
Isn’t what you are saying, in the above quote, the very same point that I have been making? Correct me if I am wrong OK?
-
@ Oigal – I read your posts and you are changing tactics now and that in itself is refreshing as your losing that hard charged masculine edge you been trying to fake for the past several weeks. Now it seems I am reading postings from you that reveal your feminine side and let’s face it that is much more of a natural fit for you. I do recognize your writing, as your pattern is much more clearer now, as some of the nuances of your language gives your true identity away. The misquotes, that you attributted to me, were just the confirmation needed.
Touche’ for punking me this long as Ashton Kutcher would be very impressed but I was right about the wrestling wasn’t I?
-
@ Barry Prima – Sorry for disappointing you and the God Squad with my admission of being a sinner but are we not all sinners who toil on this earth? The point is we have a merciful God who through His good grace is ready to forgive us for our sins. All we have to do is to turn to Him and ask for His forgiveness and with a sincere heart. He is the hope for salvation even for atheists who may one day change their minds.
-
Thanks PJ….. I did enjoy that link….
-
No my dear janma you don’t get off that easily
Barry, why don’t you let me worry about ‘getting off’…. easily or not.
-
Pat my ol son..perhaps you are projecting a but too much
reveal your feminine side and let’s face it that is much more of a natural fit for you.
It’s is amusing how you continually seem to be returning to the issue of sexuality..a few unresloved issues perhaps? Certainly not unheard of in rigid religious structures. Never the less hardly relevent in this thread..(oh wait..I bet your heaven would not accept the dollar each way people eithier right?)
Misquoted you Patrica??..now why would I do that, you are vertiable gold mine of howlers in your own tight (OOPS RIGHT). Please let identify whcih quote I wrongly attributed to you and I shall correct it (puzzling as all the quotes I have used have been cut n pasted but still..)
Barry..
An atheist is only accidentally good, whereas a religious man is only accidently evil.
This statement is the inherent difference between you and the intolerant Patrica..whilst I would disagree with your emphasis, the statement at least leaves room for notion that atheists are not all evil and immoral. This simple concept despite your admirable defence of Papal Pat, is far beyond him and is essentially what the endless tirades have been about.
The endless debates about the existance of God are just that endless..requiring a significant and in most cases impossible leap of faith for believer to accept there is no God and for an unbeliever to accept there is. Therefore that debate is essentially pointless. However to accept that evil and goodness are not exclusive to a belief in any particular faith is a fair concession to demand.
Only god is not changing was Patrick’s argument i believe?
Patrica said
It’s not logical to say you are moral as an atheist because who’s morals would your morality be based upon? You see if your morals are correct on Monday who is to say they will remain correct by Friday
Sorry Barry you attributing Pat far to much credit, he is indeed saying that morals are unchanging. although to be fair he does tend to get over emotive..perhaps the point point he was trying to make that (a point I would dispute but at least not an abject howler of overkill) is that faith/religion/belief provides a general compass or guide to morality in a world of continually changing values.
Witches deserve much worse than hanging, the curse of the cursers will naturally fallback as a curse on them…if you live long enough in Indonesia, you will be convinced that witches are real!
Mmmm Interesting, I have lived a long time in Indonesia (and other places) and I certainly do not underestimate the power in “the belief” of witches or the hantu etc. I find it interesting that you condemn them so strongly..does that include so the so called white witches so common in Europe…my understanding is they believe in God? How do we decide which belief is to condemned then..Can’t be just the Bible or Koran (People of the book) as I have seen you very accepting comments to Buddhist Followers here..
I get the impression from Pat..well Athesists are out, Agnostics? Witches (from your comments although I have the feeling you would have Pat onside here) Moonies? ..Seriously is there a general rule of thumb who is out and who is in?
Whislt on the subject of Witches (and I acknowledge there is a significant issue in Indonesia, which may not be common knowledge outside of the country), am I to assume you would be a supporter of the Witch trials held thoughout Europe and the USA during the dark days of religious intimidation and oppression.
Spiritually dead ..oh well that of course is again subjective and I may consider you simliarly bound and restricted but at the end of the day not important as allowing those competing views to exist as indvidually they create no harm unless they are forced onto others.
One last point, I did like this one..
the curse of the cursers will naturally fallback as a curse on them…
A winner..If the curse aint true..then I am safe and if it is…
Laugh..Oh oH Patrick…Look out..how fast was that anyway?
Patrick..
Now it seems I am reading postings from you that reveal your feminine side and let’s face it that is much more of a natural fit for you. I do recognize your writing, as your pattern is much more clearer now, as some of the nuances of your language gives your true identity away
Oh dang.. you got me..I confess its me…Jimmy Swaggert…testing your faith..(come n share..who am i this week?)
-
@ Oigel – Read your post above the one where I denied making the quote and then get a clue nitwit LOL!!! Still don’t recall? It’s the quote below that you attributed wrongly to me. Just who do you were you quoting on IM? Please provide date and time!
Oigal says “Ol Pat himself offers the definative proof of the other of the scale.”
Not for those who do not understand what permanence and consistency are, and live in a world where black part does not have a white dot and white part does not a have a black dot…..religions are themselves representations of levels of maya… they have gradations within them that allow maya to become at its highest level atma once again…. many can be one my child, and one can be many, reject your mind and embrace yourself and you will come to the realisation of this truth.Sorry lots of words and yet that explain the supposed consistancy of morality that belief is supposed to bring (remembering this was not my statement but big ol Pats). Surely you are not suggesting that morality as defined by any number of belief systems is not under continual change..(or are we still hanging witches as illmoral servants of devil).
Oigel says “The words “i believe” is a sure sign that whatever follows is not true”!
and yet so many Believers…
reject your mind and embrace yourself and you will come to the realisation of this truth“Yep, never a truer word spoken”.
-
Ah Patricia..Comprehension and anything outside single dimension thinking is not a strongpoint..
Dearie me..do try and read the whole post, the quote is Barry’s and in his Don Q defence of your position.. here try again..I have posted slowly so read slow ok…
Not for those who do not understand what permanence and consistency are, and live in a world where black part does not have a white dot and white part does not a have a black dot…..religions are themselves representations of levels of maya… they have gradations within them that allow maya to become at its highest level atma once again…. many can be one my child, and one can be many, reject your mind and embrace yourself and you will come to the realisation of this truth.
Sorry lots of words and yet that explain the supposed consistancy of morality that belief is supposed to bring (remembering this was not my statement but big ol Pats). Surely you are not suggesting that morality as defined by any number of belief systems is not under continual change..(or are we still hanging witches as illmoral servants of devil).
Think you problem is that you assume every post is directed to you..now that might be the case between you and your big guy…(poor bugger him) but really just a tad arrogant don’t you think. Must be a shock to realise you are not the centre of the universe
Tell me are you bailing on the your assertion that morality for the believers is unchanging..
NITWIT…WOW..ouch…eek!
I know its complicated ..do try and keep up ok..
-
Barry Prima – Sorry for disappointing you and the God Squad with my admission of being a sinner but are we not all sinners who toil on this earth?
I am just messing and accept a kind of intolerance is necessary and unavoidable, for its educational value. Someone has to be the bad guy, even god himself in order to remind people of their true selves. You can be the yang to my ying here Patrick, I’m sick of playing the bad guy!
I was bought up myself in an environment of hell fire and brimstone, although it doesn’t work for me anymore, i am grateful for it, as it reminds me to never underestimate the power of evil and helps me to stop deluding myself into a false sense of goodness. Not to mention the value of drama that it fostered in me which is always useful in certain situations, especially with the opposite sex!
As a Muslim, i can’t totally accept the concept of sin as it stands in Christianity, but i don’t reject it either, as it is a useful one for emphasising the need for god for humanity and hence in manner of speaking true. In any case infinitely truer than the belief that we don’t need saving.Its also a significant departure from every other religious tradition, which maintain that the inherent nature of man is good, not evil. It is the world that is evil (if the word is permissible here!) as it is separated from god, not man who’s true nature is from god and thus can only be good.
However to accept that evil and goodness are not exclusive to a belief in any particular faith is a fair concession to demand.
It is not so much a concession; it is the suchness of things. As I mentioned earlier when the symbolic veils and keys of religious systems is unlocked, a unity emerges where everything is reconciled.
Personally I never got Islam until I started getting into Confucius, Taoism, Zen and pure land Buddhism. It just helped me to locate Islam outside of all the Arabian nights stuff.is that faith/religion/belief provides a general compass or guide to morality in a world of continually changing values.
There is no contradiction in what Patrick has said from what I am saying. Morality in religion is within the net or framework which is tied to that which is constant, a compass always points north. He said it is a guide to morality, not that morality itself is constant.
Does that include so the so called white witches so common in Europe…my understanding is they believe in God?
Magic is horizontally focused not vertical …it is practised on a level of cause and effect that is beyond the material world. White magic is still within the realm of the supernatural not the spiritual. Every positive action has an equal and opposite negative reaction, even in the realm of magic or especially in the realm of magic where the cause and effect are even stronger!
You can espouse a belief in god as a practitioner of magic, but you are actually utilising the power of demi-gods when practising it, which will prompt a response from other demi -gods who want to protect their domain, and thus you perpetuate a cycle of causes that you ultimately are in danger of losing control over. .Its a short cut and rejection of god, for something lesser and therefore not consistent with monotheism. Dependence on centeredness in god takes you outside the level of cause and effect and into a reality which is absolute.
A person, who practises magic, has rejected god, even whilst pretending to acknowledge him that is why it condemned so strongly in religion and is said to take a person out of iman. Please don’t ask me how can the demi gods exist if there is only one god..i hope you can see the meaning behind the words.
How do we decide which belief is to condemned then?
Nothing can be condemned in its entirety, not even Satanism, Crowley said a lot very true things!….the truth triumphs over evil ultimately. The fact that only 5 religions have lasted for an extended period, is for me proof of their validity until the end time, the other religions were only intended for a particular time and place and have lost their essence and going back to what is left of their shattered pieces only leads to confused type of spirituality. Even historically it is difficult to argue against the fact that Islam is the last revealed religion. It is consistent with the view that we are in the age of Kali Yuga (hinduism) or Mappa (in Buddhism, which is reflected in the emergence of pure land method particularly for this era).
Any new religion that emerges will be fake and any religion outside the five main ones is incomplete although not necessarily completely false.
Each of the 5 religion corresponds to one of the elements in its relationship to the other and thus they balance each other out. I wouldn’t stray outside of these five. Each religion though also has all the elements within it and thus they have to find balance within themselves. Fundamentalism is a sign of imbalance within the religion, between its yin and yang, mercy and wrath
am I to assume you would be a supporter of the Witch trials held thoughout Europe and the USA during the dark days of religious intimidation and oppression.
I can’t take a stand for supporting or condemning, it is cause and effect working itself out. The witch trials did free Europe from superstitious excess and was properly a good thing ultimately, even though the means were seemingly evil. Society reinvents itself on a collective level, hence the interrelatedness’ of things in the world and the concept of khilafa in islam.
and I may consider you similarly bound and restricted
I am very much bound, and I recognise the need to be unbound.
Spiritually dead..
More accurately you haven’t awakened to your spirituality, although you can’t help being spiritual as every animate being in the universe has spirit.
Allowing those competing views to exist as individually they create no harm unless they are forced onto others.
They are forced into each other, hence the reason this debate is taking place and the reason why it isn’t futile. In the words of the dream of the red chamber: when the real becomes unreal, the unreal becomes real. The greatest harm is to try and avoid harm as the Taoist saying has it.
Tim Dog :I will take any further insults from you as the very highest kind of compliments!
I never did want to get into an idiotic war words with you, and I really liked your thread on the wali songo. I only got nasty after you called me confused and a frugly little troll. I refer to you as a do–gooder anthropologist, because I don’t have a very high admiration for anthropology especially in Indonesia. To me anthropology is meaningless without an understanding of the religious symbolism or the invisible world behind it, in the same way Theology leads to absurdities in religious understanding without metaphysics.
Having said that I have never doubted your intentions and I am inclined to think that there is some Muslim blood in you. Those rogue pirates you mentioned in your gene pool were very likely moors. -
Hey twisted sister “Oigal” – You quickly regressed back to the gutter where your no doubt feel most comfortable and therefore belong. If you place a quote and you constantly make reference to a specific person than no doubt you mean that person. You got called out on the posting and of course being the absolute coward that you are, you are now trying cover up your silly mistake. Game over you lost, loser! READ WHAT YOU WROTE NITWIT! HA HA HA !
OIgal says ;
Ol Pat himself offers the definative proof of the other of the scale.
Not for those who do not understand what permanence and consistency are, and live in a world where black part does not have a white dot and white part does not a have a black dot…..religions are themselves representations of levels of maya… they have gradations within them that allow maya to become at its highest level atma once again…. many can be one my child, and one can be many, reject your mind and embrace yourself and you will come to the realisation of this truth.
Sorry lots of words and yet that explain the supposed consistancy of morality that belief is supposed to bring (remembering this was not my statement but big ol Pats).
-
Why do I doubt your HA HA is geninue, come on.. its sad but one of the problems of being a hater is then there is no room for real humour and joy in things… Fact is I have been more than a bit mean to youbut you do provide so much entertainment (granted bit like schoolkid burning ants with a magnifying glass..a low cruel sort of fun). Still on many levels you deserve it.
Anyway over to your complaint…Pat..not even nice try at shifting context with your selective comprehension, I was merely pointing that even a strong believer (Barry) can at least leave room for others to co-exist as opposed to you representing the intolerant and odious end of the scale. A point you have so aptly demonstrated time and again.
but I very much doubt if anyone else was confused, lets face it even lifes a challenge for you. The mere fact that so many people hold a different view on the world to you seems to be absolutley terrifying and it must be sad to live like that. I confess, I do find it difficult to replace the chuckles with sympathy.
Still if I did confuse anyone else, they have my apologies. Sorry not for you tho Patrick. You would need to stand up and start acting like a human being first instead of a spoilt little boy who is losing a arguement and resorts to name calling.
Not sure how cowardice comes into it, but it would seem continual, inane personal abuse knowing full well that you will never be called answer on it in the flesh would seem a qaulifier. Still no never mind to me, in the absence of any reasonable discourse from yourself, you time and again degrade yourself (even to those who would nominally be on your side of this debate). Thanks for making it so easy.
You are getting a tad boring, Patrick there is once constant in the universe and that is the intolerant ranters like yourselves are never happy with attempting to impose their views on just one group, so I look forward to next time your open up that dark little prism through which you view the world.
ta ta for now…
-
Patrick..Whilst I know it like trying to teach manners to house brick, have a look at the difference between your responses and Barry’s. Whilst I would disagree with the vast majority of his positions (and some I venture are more words than substance) at least his posts require some concentration and thought, and seem to be drawn from a deeply held belief system. You out agnst ridden friend like so many other two bob bullies simply drap a belief system over your own deep prejudices and insecurities.
Barry..
Even historically it is difficult to argue against the fact that Islam is the last revealed religion
Any new religion that emerges will be fake and any religion outside the five main ones is incomplete although not necessarily completely false
Are you not having a dollar each way here?
I can’t take a stand for supporting or condemning, it is cause and effect working itself out. The witch trials did free Europe from superstitious excess and was properly a good thing ultimately, even though the means were seemingly evil
This is a cop out..effectively you are saying that even seemingly evil (murder of innocents sanctioned or not is evil..but perhaps thats just an athesist morals) leaves you sitting on the fence…was the holocaust just cause and effect working itself out.?
A person, who practises magic, has rejected god,
subjective and I am sure the wiccas would disagree.
The fact that only 5 religions have lasted for an extended period, is for me proof of their validity until the end time
Is it only the big five or is it their “subsets” as well. Seems to be your proof of vailidty could end up rather tangled and confused not mention the fact you have just left out a signifcant portion of the human race. Are sure you have not sugar coated your “proofs” for public consumption?
Please don’t ask me how can the demi gods exist if there is only one god
Don’t worry, without the duality of language and the qantum leaps of faith no religion can stand on its own merits so most learn to live with it for the sake of discussion.
-
Are you not having a dollar each way here?
Did you read the bit about the age of mappa and kali, i am trying to place Islam in the cyclical religious view that is consistent with all the other faiths and pointing towards the unity of religions on a certain level? There has been no worldwide religion for 1400 years..i think that’s pretty solid truth!
was the holocaust just cause and effect working itself out.?
THAT is EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS..i am too trusting of you intelligence perhaps in assuming you will connect the dots..But i guess spoon feeding is necessary for the atheist here!
Subjective and I am sure the wiccas would disagree
Well try to explain their point of view for them..of course I expect them to disagree!
Not mention the fact you have just left out a significant portion of the human race.
Once again you fail to see the connection between the things I said, ignoring the very opening statement,..”. Nothing can be condemned in its entirety, not even Satanism”.
This also does not in any way mean that anyone who professes any of the 5 faiths is going to go to any kind of heaven or hell either..if you took your head out of the sand for a minute you might actually see a consistent pattern to what I am saying,…but I guess that is what is meant by ` do not cast you pearls upon the necks…’Don’t worry, without the duality of language and the qauntum leaps of faith
Much preferable and real than your black and white world that lacks any imagination and seemingly any capacity to think laterally….you’re so called atheist physicist will tell you about the quantum nature of the universe.
Are sure you have not sugar coated your “proofs” for public consumption?
Public consumption is not important in a case of establishing the true nature of things, in fact it is the enemy of truth.
Comment on “Atheist Threat”.
Related Stories
Copyright Indonesia Matters 2006-2025
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact
Well if we’re not real, that sure takes the pressure off hey? No need to do anything, because we are nothing.
and patrick…..
Patrick, that is just so illogical! Are you trying to say that I may feel it’s ok to murder people next week, even though I don’t feel that’s the right thing to do this week, simply because I don’t follow a religion??? That’s just mental!
What about people who follow religions? A certain percentage of people of a certain religion may believe their God and their religion makes it permissable to murder, say for example ‘non believers’, while the other percentage believes this to be wrong and a misinterpretation… so even in a single religion there can be various interpretations of what is moral and what is not, depending on the desire, and the ability to manipulate scripture of the followers.
Over time many religions have variously fallen into the fallacy that ‘the end justifies the means…” People can interpret this silly superiority that their religion feeds them as a right to opress other people of different faiths or of no faith.
Mao and Stalin didn’t kill in the name of atheism, so stop using them as an excuse to ‘prove’ that atheists have no morals and will murder innocent people in their beds. It’s simply not true and it’s ridiculous!
Religious people who you maintain ‘have morality on their side’ commit all kinds of heinious crimes…..child abuse, repression of women, exploitation of non-religionists and worse. Many of these crimes are side effects from repression and the falseness of the path they are trying to follow but can’t.