• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Proof of Islam?


That was a good one, here is the Qur'an:

2:91
And when it is said to them, "Believe in what Allah has revealed," they say, "We believe [only] in what was revealed to us." And they disbelieve in what came after it, while it is the truth confirming that which is with them. Say, "Then why did you kill the prophets of Allah before, if you are [indeed] believers?"

7:203
And if you do not bring them a miracle, they say: "Why have you not brought it?" Say: "I but follow what is revealed to me from my Lord. This (the Quran) is nothing but evidences from your Lord, and a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe."

29:46
And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way) that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our Allah and your Allah is One, and unto Him we surrender.

2:136
Say: We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.

3:84
Say: We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and that which was vouchsafed unto Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.
 
The number 5 is what they have in common then. The contradiction is in that you claim to believe in the Quran when you really only want to distort it.

Well, most of the Bahai people seem to have not read the Qur'an but acknowledge it due to Baha'Ullah acknowledging it or an Islamic heritage. Many Muslims I've encountered say that they believe in the Bible and are better followers of it, but they also often have not read it in its entirety or carefully, and mainly seem to assume that its contents may be acceptable enough if they believe the Jews and Christians as "People of the Book (Bible)" can be considered ok. What I was referring to earlier though was that upon closer inspection of the contents of the Bible, I don't think it can be found very acceptable, yet Muslim Dawah people, sometimes Christian converts, seem attached to the Bible and interpreting it Islamically or a melding of traditions and adoption in early times of ideas that were belonging to the Christians and Jews.

I was even just reading about how some early Islamic magico-medical literature like by a top scholar like Suyuti contained weird Jewish Babylonian seeming incantations and how ancient spirits were converted into malignant jinn being exorcised.

The Jewish corpus can not seem to contribute anything but corruption mainly, and so the Qur'an seems to at times warn against taking on of what the Jews and Christians say and teach, advice that seemed disregarded as Jewish and Christian converts seemed to bring their traditions and ideas and practices with them which then mingled with Early and Medieval Islam a lot.
 
But perhaps David really did say such a thing and there is no such thing as a true Prophet.

It seems to be a common mistake made by Muslims to assume the most hagiographic account of history must be the most accurate.

I believe in several possibilities:

1. There is no David and never was a David or any of the Prophets.
2. There were such people who said or did what one or another scripture records but were not Prophets.
3. They were such people and they were Prophets but what was recorded was false.

or whatever varieties anyone can come up with or imagine as possibilities.

The fact of the matter though is that what we have now are these influential pieces of writing and factions which adhere to them and various views about them. Not one of them has any certainty or proof about historical reality or validity of the details of what was said or done, so that doesn't even matter at all.

What matters is which is the best story and depiction which describes the best character as a role model and hero in order to manipulate and better civilize and control the believers of such.

That is why the David of the Qur'an, sterilized and barely present or mentioned, with a whitewashed history, makes for the better hero and role model. The same goes for every Prophet in the Qur'an vs any other depiction of them, especially their worst versions which seem to be in the Bible.

None of their tales are necessarily true or real, but these stories exist now and already have the ear of large populations, and psychologically influence people, and so the Qur'an is literally the superior scripture for civilizing people who believe in it (contrary to the impression made by Muslims and Islamic nations depicted in the media).

So what I react to isn't that these people really did these things or not, which can never be known or determined, but that they are saying they did, which may be true, but the fact that they are being depicted as role models and given stories and characters like this (the Prophets in the Qur'an are way more palatable figures) and these are influencing human minds and children or being considered heroic when they are totally evil teachings and unethical behaviors and figures is where my revulsion comes from, which would be the same revulsion felt for like Harry Potter if he was casually depicted as a rapist and praised for cheating people.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yay! Finally! How are each technically performed step by step? Wouldn't it be better to do more rather than less in order to outstrip the Muslims and the Qur'an? Or is it considered a relaxing of requirements?
Those websites should give you an idea how they are performed and there is much more information available on the internet.

The Baha'is are not trying to outstrip the Muslims. ;)

Yes, it is kind of a relaxing of requirements in the sense that Baha'i Laws are less harsh than Islamic Laws.

The Bab's Laws were harsher than the Laws of Baha'u'llah because they were intended to provide a transition between Islam and the Bahai Faith.
 
How do we distort the Qur'an?

Not by much probably except the Qur'an has no "manifestation of Allah" type language, nor anything which ever really hints at a shared sort of spirit or essence to the Prophets. The Qur'an has some things in it which made it seem to people that it is the last scripture to be sent to humanity before judgment day and to be used as a reforming and correcting type text. It is felt by Muslims to be entirely sufficient and modern enough, really not archaic at all or in need of revision or update.

The pilgrimage is mentioned in the Qur'an as pertaining to Mecca, the prayers are mentioned in the Qur'an with ablution procedures, the alms are mentioned and the concept of Allah as well as that of Prophets and the de-emphasis on them, they are not made extremely important overall or glorified. The archaic seeming elements of Islak tend to come from Hadiths written down and collected in Persis and medieval commentaries while the Qur'an (which you might like if and when you read it) is pretty modern and very different Hadiths and far more advanced, especially considering its a product of Late Antiquity
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
It is felt by Muslims to be entirely sufficient and modern enough, really not archaic at all or in need of revision or update.
Jews feel the same way about the Torah and Christians feel the same way about the NT.....
Is there a pattern here? ;)

By contrast, Baha'is believe that Baha'u'llah is not the last Messenger of God that will ever come to Earth. Eventually there will be another Messenger of God and another and another, throughout all time, because Revelations from God are only suited for the ages in which they were revealed.

“The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 213
 
Jews feel the same way about the Torah and Christians feel the same way about the NT.....
Is there a pattern here? ;)

By contrast, Baha'is believe that Baha'u'llah is not the last Messenger of God that will ever come to Earth. Eventually there will be another Messenger of God and another and another, throughout all time, because Revelations from God are only suited for the ages in which they were revealed.

“The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 213

The idea of messengers sent to every community and for every people may be from the Qur'an, but a distinction was made by people regarding revelatory books. It might be imagined now due to ease of transmission and the text remaining in its current shape with widespread access that it won't need updating for at least quite a while, which almost seems to suggest that the Judgment might be expected soon and that characters like Jesus and books like the Qur'an will remain well known and widely looked inti by the majority of the world population.

The 4 biggest or most influential religion texts around currently are:

1. Bible (Judeo-Christianity,mainly Christians)
2. Qur'an (Muslims)
3. Bhagavad Gita (Hindus)
4. Dhammapada (Buddhists)

Jews are a tiny population comparitively, what size is the population of the Bahai?
 
About half the size of the Jewish population, appx. 7 million.
Cool! I think its unique exclusivity (even though 7 million is a lot of people still, but compared to the world and the billions its small) might actually attract some people to it. I wonder if they are 7 million then serious Satanists might not even number beyond the hundreds of thousands if at all.

Islam (more monolithic due to less denominations), Christianity (often more nominal than Islam seems to be, plus even if they are hardcore they barely seem to "do" anything and lack the Islamic daily worship mostly), Hindus (mainly just ethnically practiced as cultural tradition relegated to India and some of the diaspora of Indians abroad), and Buddhists (Asias Christianity, mostly nominal and frequently not doing much of anything either).

Muslims and Bahai are in my view some of the only people left on Earth who perform formal worship practices daily in that Ancient fashion.
 

WonderingWorrier

Active Member
About half the size of the Jewish population, appx. 7 million.

Have you heard of Santhya Sai Baba?

Home Page | Sathya Sai International Organisation

The population of the Santhya Sai Baba faith has estimates reaching up to 70 - 100 million followers with 2000 to 5000 temples/centres in 130 countries worldwide.

This is a recent movement. Santhya Sai Baba died in 2011.

He also proclaimed himself as the second coming of Christ. He was also heralded as the messiah, the mahdi, the kalki avatar.

He taught all Gods are one God. All religions are one religion.


There was a report done:

"The report concluded, again fancifully, that the Sai Baba movement is “likely to eventually become another worldwide religion”, with its ample wealth, free healthcare and political influence allowing it to expand even after the guru’s death".

CIA files: ‘Alleged miracle worker’ Sathya Sai Baba could start world religion


What are your thoughts on that?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Have you heard of Santhya Sai Baba?

Home Page | Sathya Sai International Organisation

The population of the Santhya Sai Baba faith has estimates reaching up to 70 - 100 million followers with 2000 to 5000 temples/centres in 130 countries worldwide.

This is a recent movement. Santhya Sai Baba died in 2011.

He also proclaimed himself as the second coming of Christ. He was also heralded as the messiah, the mahdi, the kalki avatar.

He taught all Gods are one God. All religions are one religion.

There was a report done:

"The report concluded, again fancifully, that the Sai Baba movement is “likely to eventually become another worldwide religion”, with its ample wealth, free healthcare and political influence allowing it to expand even after the guru’s death".

CIA files: ‘Alleged miracle worker’ Sathya Sai Baba could start world religion

What are your thoughts on that?
I do not care how many followers he has because that is irrelevant, since how many people believe something does not indicate that it is true. That is many people believe it it must be true is called the fallacy of argumentum ad populum

My thoughts are that he had to be either deluded or a con-man if he proclaimed himself as the second coming of Christ or the messiah. He fulfilled no prophecies for either of those as did Baha'u'llah. He was not even tied in with the Abrahamic line of religion, thus not descended from Abraham.

This is what Christ meant when He said that many false Christs would come in his name claiming to be the return.

If he taught all Gods are one God and all religions are one religion 'in my opinion' he probably stole this teaching from Baha'u'llah in order to garner followers and start a new religion.

A dead giveaway that a man is an imposter if if he seeks followers for himself and takes credit for being a spiritual leader instead of giving credit to God and serving God. That is how we can assuredly know he is not a real Messenger of God.

Baha'u'llah sacrificed for the Cause of God as did Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, and humbled Himself before God as they also did.

“I have offered up My soul and My body as a sacrifice for God, the Lord of all worlds. Whoso hath known God shall know none but Him, and he that feareth God shall be afraid of no one except Him, though the powers of the whole earth rise up and be arrayed against him. I speak naught except at His bidding, and follow not, through the power of God and His might, except His truth. He, verily, shall recompense the truthful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 126

“Walk ye in the fear of God, and render not your works vain. Incline your ears to His words, and be not of them that are shut out as by a veil from Him. Say: God is My witness! I have wished nothing whatever for Myself. What I have wished is the victory of God and the triumph of His Cause. He is Himself a sufficient witness between you and Me. Were ye to cleanse your eyes, ye would readily perceive how My deeds testify to the truth of My words, how My words are a guide to My deeds.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 256-257

Those are not just empty words because His deeds aligned with His words, as can be clearly seen if one looks at His 40 year mission on earth and how he sacrificed everything for the Cause of God.
 

WonderingWorrier

Active Member
I do not care how many followers he has because thaOkt is irrelevant, since how many people believe something does not indicate that it is true. That is many people believe it it must be true is called the fallacy of argumentum ad populum

My thoughts are that he had to be either deluded or a con-man if he proclaimed himself as the second coming of Christ or the messiah. He fulfilled no prophecies for either of those as did Baha'u'llah. He was not even tied in with the Abrahamic line of religion, thus not descended from Abraham.

This is what Christ meant when He said that many false Christs would come in his name claiming to be the return.

If he taught all Gods are one God and all religions are one religion 'in my opinion' he probably stole this teaching from Baha'u'llah in order to garner followers and start a new religion.

A dead giveaway that a man is an imposter if if he seeks followers for himself and takes credit for being a spiritual leader instead of giving credit to God and serving God. That is how we can assuredly know he is not a real Messenger of God.

Baha'u'llah sacrificed for the Cause of God as did Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, and humbled Himself before God as they also did.

“I have offered up My soul and My body as a sacrifice for God, the Lord of all worlds. Whoso hath known God shall know none but Him, and he that feareth God shall be afraid of no one except Him, though the powers of the whole earth rise up and be arrayed against him. I speak naught except at His bidding, and follow not, through the power of God and His might, except His truth. He, verily, shall recompense the truthful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 126

“Walk ye in the fear of God, and render not your works vain. Incline your ears to His words, and be not of them that are shut out as by a veil from Him. Say: God is My witness! I have wished nothing whatever for Myself. What I have wished is the victory of God and the triumph of His Cause. He is Himself a sufficient witness between you and Me. Were ye to cleanse your eyes, ye would readily perceive how My deeds testify to the truth of My words, how My words are a guide to My deeds.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 256-257

Those are not just empty words because His deeds aligned with His words, as can be clearly seen if one looks at His 40 year mission on earth and how he sacrificed everything for the Cause of God.

I agree the number of followers doesn't make them more correct.

Ok. So you think he is an imposter. The followers of Baha'u'llah are correct and the followers of Santhya Sai Baba are wrong.

Is that an educated conclusion?

You sound like you are familiar with the teachings, deeds, and miracles of Santhya Sai Baba.


Do you think the teaching of many religions as one is an original teaching only brought by Baha'ullah?

And that Santhya Sai Baba stole it from Baha'u'llah?





Those who are devotees of other gods and who worship them with faith actually worship only Me, O son of Kunti, but they do so in a wrong way. Bhagavad Gita 9:23


Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. John 20:17


Say: "What has come to me by inspiration is that your Allah is One Allah: will ye therefore bow to His Will in Islam?" Quran 21:108
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Ok. So you think he is an imposter. The followers of Baha'u'llah are correct and the followers of Santhya Sai Baba are wrong.

Is that an educated conclusion?
It is the conclusion I came to because I believe that Baha'u'llah was a Manifestation of God and in believing that I know there cannot be another Manifestation of God during the same time frame. Moreover, if Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ and the Messiah there cannot be another man who is also that. It's simple logic.
You sound like you are familiar with the teachings, deeds, and miracles of Santhya Sai Baba.
No, I am not familiar with them. Miracles do not impress me but deeds do.
Do you think the teaching of many religions as one is an original teaching only brought by Baha'ullah?

And that Santhya Sai Baba stole it from Baha'u'llah?
I cannot say I know he stole it but I am suspicious.
Those who are devotees of other gods and who worship them with faith actually worship only Me, O son of Kunti, but they do so in a wrong way. Bhagavad Gita 9:23

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. John 20:17

Say: "What has come to me by inspiration is that your Allah is One Allah: will ye therefore bow to His Will in Islam?" Quran 21:108
I believe that the Gita is real Scripture and I believe the same about the NT and the Qur'an. I do not consider anything Santhya Sai Baba wrote to be Scripture, as Scripture originates from God.
 
I agree the number of followers doesn't make them more correct.

Ok. So you think he is an imposter. The followers of Baha'u'llah are correct and the followers of Santhya Sai Baba are wrong.

Is that an educated conclusion?

You sound like you are familiar with the teachings, deeds, and miracles of Santhya Sai Baba.


Do you think the teaching of many religions as one is an original teaching only brought by Baha'ullah?

And that Santhya Sai Baba stole it from Baha'u'llah?





Those who are devotees of other gods and who worship them with faith actually worship only Me, O son of Kunti, but they do so in a wrong way. Bhagavad Gita 9:23


Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. John 20:17


Say: "What has come to me by inspiration is that your Allah is One Allah: will ye therefore bow to His Will in Islam?" Quran 21:108

Is baba the guy with the fro? I can't accept that hair cut on anyone except me and Richard Simmons our blessed King and Savior of the Weighed Down:

I am such a haughty and proud person, that all Man-Obsessed religions and variants of religions and scriptures are very much in my view monkeys in love with themselves. Monkey-men are are a fleeting phenom, they will be wiped away someday and a new monstrousity will be brought forth in their stead.

So anything which glorifies and praises men, man-forms, and heroes too much is looked down upon by me, because I think humans are a wicked and insane race of scum. No matter how good a human is, they are weak, dependent, defecating, lowly creatures, and I'm not prone to follow any leaders or masters.

If God was a man, I'd happily work in the cause of destroying and killing God.

The only reason I worship God is because God is what can't be defeated. I can blow up everything else, but God is a foe that is Ultimate, so the only logic left to "win" against it, or at least try, is to grovel pathetically.

Might makes Right. The Strongest, the One Actually Responsible, the Power that is doing the stuff really, that can't be beaten, behind it all, that alone is God, nothing else is, and the humans are nothing, just a bunch of jokes, far less than so many things mightier than them which are all nothing before the True Power.

Luckily, the Qur'an makes no big deal about Muhammed at all, or any Prophets, treats them like the dust they are.

One of my favorite verses is when God basically boasts in the face of Man-lovers:

5:17
In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every - one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things."

My God is totally different from what others seem to call God, very few actually believe in the Total Power God, so there are, despite the numbers, very few very devout and aware devotees of such a concept, much smaller than the population of the Bahai even!
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
So anything which glorifies and praises men, man-forms, and heroes too much is looked down upon by me

The only reason I worship God is because God is what can't be defeated. I can blow up everything else, but God is a foe that is Ultimate, so the only logic left to "win" against it, or at least try, is to grovel pathetically.
Ditto on that, but now I gotta run. :)
 

WonderingWorrier

Active Member
Is baba the guy with the fro?

Yeah that's him.

Even though there are many videos showing his miracles are fake his followers will not accept the clear evidence. You can even see him pick up things he then makes miraculously appear. He is like a really bad magician that you can see the trick being done.

Most people will believe whatever they want to believe and will disregard anything that could disprove what they want to believe.

It seems most peoples truth seeking means selective hearing to only what confirms their own belief.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I believe in several possibilities:

1. There is no David and never was a David or any of the Prophets.
2. There were such people who said or did what one or another scripture records but were not Prophets.
3. They were such people and they were Prophets but what was recorded was false.

or whatever varieties anyone can come up with or imagine as possibilities.

The fact of the matter though is that what we have now are these influential pieces of writing and factions which adhere to them and various views about them. Not one of them has any certainty or proof about historical reality or validity of the details of what was said or done, so that doesn't even matter at all.

What matters is which is the best story and depiction which describes the best character as a role model and hero in order to manipulate and better civilize and control the believers of such.

That is why the David of the Qur'an, sterilized and barely present or mentioned, with a whitewashed history, makes for the better hero and role model. The same goes for every Prophet in the Qur'an vs any other depiction of them, especially their worst versions which seem to be in the Bible.

None of their tales are necessarily true or real, but these stories exist now and already have the ear of large populations, and psychologically influence people, and so the Qur'an is literally the superior scripture for civilizing people who believe in it (contrary to the impression made by Muslims and Islamic nations depicted in the media).

So what I react to isn't that these people really did these things or not, which can never be known or determined, but that they are saying they did, which may be true, but the fact that they are being depicted as role models and given stories and characters like this (the Prophets in the Qur'an are way more palatable figures) and these are influencing human minds and children or being considered heroic when they are totally evil teachings and unethical behaviors and figures is where my revulsion comes from, which would be the same revulsion felt for like Harry Potter if he was casually depicted as a rapist and praised for cheating people.
I understand why you wouldn’t want some of the more adult content of the Bible presented to children.

That being said there comes a time of maturity when people are old enough to learn from the mistakes of history.

When people attain that age it is ok to present people as fictional role models, and provided it is presented as fiction or mythology that’s fine.

The problem comes when we teach people by example that it is ok to whitewash history and present it as factual.

The reasons it is problematic are as follows;
1. People who are unable to learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.

2. It gives us an unrealistic view of human nature and development.

3. At its core it is dishonesty to whitewash history, and truthfulness is right up there with the most important human values such as compassion. In fact I would argue that truthfulness and compassion are the two most important values from which the others flow.

I would also like to add that there is no evidence that Islamic society is any better than secular society.
 
Ditto on that, but now I gotta run. :)

My mom just sent a message saying "ditto" too lol, interesting, but that was about two identical looking kittens laying on their backs with their arms and legs up.
I understand why you wouldn’t want some of the more adult content of the Bible presented to children.

That being said there comes a time of maturity when people are old enough to learn from the mistakes of history.

When people attain that age it is ok to present people as fictional role models, and provided it is presented as fiction or mythology that’s fine.

The problem comes when we teach people by example that it is ok to whitewash history and present it as factual.

The reasons it is problematic are as follows;
1. People who are unable to learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.

2. It gives us an unrealistic view of human nature and development.

3. At its core it is dishonesty to whitewash history, and truthfulness is right up there with the most important human values such as compassion. In fact I would argue that truthfulness and compassion are the two most important values from which the others flow.

I would also like to add that there is no evidence that Islamic society is any better than secular society.

I think, maybe not based on any examples, but theoretically a society banning alcohol, vice, pre-marital sex, strict laws against crime and theft, bans on gambling, strict laws about accusation and treachery and lying, all those things, including strict laws about children and care of children and obligation to their care and the care of orphans should produce a better society. The Muslims barely follow the Qur'an, they follow other books, and Islamic society generally used to be the gold standard in the world and was the top in cleanliness, order, education, blah blah. Its because of thr emphasis in the Qur'an. They were also extremely wealthy. Crime is very low even today in some of the stricter Islamic or Islamic inspired countries, where otherwise I have to deal with drunks on the street, insane drunk driving, drugs openly being used and sold outside my door and crimes regarding drugs. I don't like strictness but its clear to me the lifestyle and mentality of the secular, Godless, un-wrathful God type world of libertarian free for all criminality and vice leads to a poopy experience for us straight laced straight edged goody two shoes.

Nothing in the Bible appears to be historically accurate. I think its finr if people read it as an old mythological book like any mythological book. Problem is the role models are cheating filth, they are scum, and so they teach people who are being told these are favored people to cheat, steal, kill, rape, and do every sort of evil and they will win. That is not historical. Marauders were not the champions of world history, nor were cheaters, but societies which emphasized civility and order and honesty, and they were against usury, tribalism, cheating, injustice.

Who were the winners? The big boys, Persia, Rome, and the Islamic Empires up to the Turks. Even Mongols had very strict civil laws and rules and were metropolitan rather than entirely tribal, they were able to rule huge territories due to their policies. Included in here are the Diadachoi of Alexander as well, particularly the Seleucid and Ptolemic Empires which were considered Macedonian or Greek inspired World Empires (Seleucid was the biggest in the world at the time).

These were the mighty and the just, and people inside their territories generally lived more prosperously than in their tiny tribal struggle lives.

The Jewish people were never an example of a decent civilization, I know that sounds bad to say but they were possibly starting out as Hibiru marauders and then continuing as marauding villains throughout the History presented in the Bible and the Qur'an, they were extremely tribal and anti-mixing, they were violent, and thought its perfectly fine to cheat apparently, since its in all the scriptures and the role models. Abraham tricked and slyly lied and cheated whereby he pimped out his wife and acquired his wealth, Jacob cheated and stole inheritences, David their great King was a manipulative cheater and murderer. I despise every one of the criminal trash mentioned in the Bible, and so if these become the role models of people and God is blessing and heightening these lowest of filthy characters, then it is promotion of disorder and evil conduct and no one who follows the Book can be trusted as anything but a criminal in their heart with their book of thievery and marauding. Same goes for the Mormons, there is a scene in there where they murder a guy who is sleeping to steal a book, on God's command.

The much more noble conduct depicted in the Qur'an is far better for brainwashing civil society. The animalistic criminal Muslims depicted on tv scarcely know or follow the Qur'an, they are just mad marauders like their predecessors and should all be put to death for their criminal marauding antics.

Secular society has a weakness, it respects people too much, it doesn't seem to acknowledge what kind of dumb animals human beings are and that they need a stricter society and supernatural and superstitious fears to keep them in order and weed out the nihilistic psychopaths for execution and eugenics (getting rid of their psychopathic bloodlines and gene tendencies).

God is a useful tool only if that God is a Supernatural Law and Order Executor, Monitor, and Policer. Judge Dread, Lord Wrath. A people who are both stupid and don't think anything can stop them are extremely dangerous, and laws like our laws today in secular society seem to barely be doing anything to keep people decent at all. The Judges and Police are not sufficient Gods and the criminals seem to be running wild. The more secular the other countries get, they get the same bloated garbage systems which feed the murderers and delay their execution and burning. When the law fails, vigilantism is the savior, but really all that happens is the more evil elements take over and lead to a rule of corruption and favoritism. Islamic laws and rules in the Qur'an as enforced and promoted by a monitoring and retributive God seem like a good idea to put terror into the hearts of dumb animal humans, taking away all the things they use to become uninhibited, taking away all their vices and gambling and things which cause contention. Pressuring upon them meditation sessions 5 times a day making criminality all the more difficult (if there are delayed enforcers waiting to see who can't control themselves and is doing wrong). Its terrible, but might be better, and its terrible because we are in Hell, and:
"L'enfer, c'est les autres" or "Hell is other people".

"
The play begins with three characters who find themselves waiting in a mysterious room. It is a depiction of the afterlife in which three deceased characters are punished by being locked into a room together for eternity. It is the source of Sartre's especially famous quotation "

"
Three damned souls, Joseph Garcin, Inèz Serrano, and Estelle Rigault, are brought to the same room in Hell and locked inside by a mysterious valet. They had all expected torture devices to punish them for eternity, but instead, find a plain room furnished in the style of the French 'Second Empire'. At first, none of them will admit the reason for their damnation: Garcin says that he was executed for being an outspoken pacifist, while Estelle insists that a mistake has been made; Inèz, however, is the only one to demand that they all stop lying to themselves and confess to their moral crimes. She refuses to believe that they have all ended up in the room by accident and soon realizes that they have been placed together to make each other miserable. She deduces that they are to be one another's torturers.

Garcin suggests that they try to leave each other alone and to be silent, but Inèz starts to sing about execution and Estelle vainly wants to find a mirror to check on her appearance. Inèz tries to seduce Estelle by offering to be her "mirror" by telling her everything she sees but ends up frightening her instead. It is soon clear that Inèz is attracted to Estelle, Estelle is attracted to Garcin, and Garcin is not attracted to either of the two women.

After arguing, they decide to confess to their crimes so they know what to expect from each other. Garcin cheated on and mistreated his wife, and was executed by firing squad fordesertion; Inèz is a manipulative sadist who seduced her cousin's wife, Florence, while living with them—which drove the cousin to kill himself, and resulted in Florence asphyxiating herself and Inèz by flooding the room with gas while they slept, out of guilt—and Estelle had an affair and then killed the resulting child, prompting the child's father to commit suicide. Despite their revelations, they continue to get on each other's nerves. Garcin finally begins giving in to the lascivious Estelle's escalating attempts to seduce him, which drives Inèz crazy. Garcin is constantly interrupted by his own guilt, however, and begs Estelle to tell him he is not a coward for attempting to flee his country during wartime. While she complies, Inèz mockingly tells him that Estelle is just feigning attraction to him so that she can be with a man—any man.

This causes Garcin to abruptly attempt an escape. After his trying to open the door repeatedly, it inexplicably and suddenly opens, but he is unable to bring himself to leave, and the others remain as well. He says that he will not be saved until he can convince Inèz that he is not cowardly. She refuses, saying that he is obviously a coward, and promising to make him miserable forever. Garcin concludes that rather than torture devices or physical punishment, "hell is other people." Estelle tries to persevere in her seduction of Garcin, but he says that he cannot make love while Inèz is watching. Estelle, infuriated, picks up a paper knife and repeatedly stabs Inèz. Inèz chides Estelle, saying that they are all already dead, and even furiously stabs herself to prove that point. As Estelle begins to laugh hysterically at the idea of them being dead and trapped together forever, the others join in a prolonged fit of laughter before Garcin finally concludes, "Eh bien, continuons..." ("Well then, let's get on with it..."). "
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I think, maybe not based on any examples, but theoretically a society banning alcohol, vice, pre-marital sex, strict laws against crime and theft, bans on gambling, strict laws about accusation and treachery and lying, all those things, including strict laws about children and care of children and obligation to their care and the care of orphans should produce a better society.
Secular society has laws against crime, theft, accusation, treachery and lying, the care of children, and the state cares for orphans.

As far as the rest go, many things are counter-intuitive, and secular states have learned through real world examples why putting prohibition into the law of the land for example, does not work.

I acknowledge your point that it is good to have positive role models, and so long as they are not presented as real historical narratives, the role models of the Quran are fine for that.

I also acknowledge that it is fine to have laws such as prohibition of alcohol, gambling etc as part of personal honour codes, they only become a problem when they are inserted into the law of the land. Which brings us to the problem of the Quran which is that it purports to be the correct foundation for the law of the land.
 
Top