Setiap Artikel Malaysiawaves ke Email Anda.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Dipersilakan untuk Like Facebook Page T. Besi

Search Malaysiawaves

Saturday, June 21, 2008

Nice Try Haris Ibrahim, but You Missed by A Mile.

I, on the other hand, has correctly exposed your mindset, and that is, you hold supremacy of secular liberalism/humanism over Islam. So much so, that you’re willing to change the word of God just so you can justify your ideology.
The difference between Haris and my mindset is that I do not attach foreign values to the Quran. I accept what is said and tune my mind towards acceptance God’s word. Haris already have a predispose idea on how the word of God should sound. So, whenever he faced a “stop sign”, he will try to find a diversion, even to the point of changing God’s word.


Dear Haris Ibrahim,
I read your article “Understanding the mindset of Rahman Celcom”. And let me tell you, you have missed my mindset by a mile.
I, on the other hand, has correctly exposed your mindset, and that is, you hold supremacy of secular liberalism/humanism over Islam. So much so, that you’re willing to change the word of God just so you can justify your ideology.
The difference between Haris and my mindset is that I do not attach foreign values to the Quran. I accept what is said and tune my mind towards acceptance God’s word. Haris already have a predispose idea on how the word of God should sound. So, whenever he faced a “stop sign”, he will try to find a diversion, even to the point of changing God’s word.
Having said that, it doesn’t mean that I have forever given up reason and analytical thinking. Instead, what I’ve done is I’ve put my mind towards total submission to God, as opposed to Haris Ibrahim.
In the end, Haris wants Allah SWT to be a God with an ideology. He want Allah SWT to be a God of Secular Humanists, espousing secular humanists ideology through his (mis)interpretation of the Quran. He rejects the Hadeeth though.
So , a total submission mindset will always go in head-on collision with conditional submission practice by Harris.
A question was posed by Zaharuddin Abdul Rahman which is pertinent to this argument:
Satu persoalan logik bodoh juga patut dilontarkan kepada mereka ini: Apakah Allah s.w.t. hanya berhak menurunkan wahyu kepada Nabi s.a.w. dalam bentuk hadis apabila sesuatu perintah itu menepati logik dan rasional manusia sahaja? Jika ianya tidak logik atau rasional kepada manusia, maka Allah s.w.t. tidak berhak menurunkannya? Sedangkan kita diberitahu oleh Allah s.w.t. sendiri bahawa Nabi s.a.w. itu tidak bercakap berdasarkan hawa nafsu, sebaliknya semua ucapan, perbuatan dan tingkah lakunya adalah berdasarkan wahyu daripada Allah s.w.t. (Lihat Surah al-Najm: 3)
Essentially, Haris is of the group that believes God is limited in His abililty to issue orders and punishment. Haris believes God should act in certain way, speak in certain ways, dream in certain ways. Harris believes in limitations to be imposed on God.

I Never Said Apostates Should Be Executed Based on 02:54 Solely?
Your attempt to paint me as someone simplistic is also pathetic. And all I can say is that you’re failing miserably.
I always contended that this verse proves that Moses applied the death penalty to those who apostized themselves by worshipping the calf. I never said that 02:54 is the sole justification for death penalty for apostates in Islam.
I believe, by referring to the chronology of our debate is, that it started out by you condemning the act of banning Islam Hadhari. You quoted Farish Nor who is angry with the ban on Ahmadiyya movement in Indonesia.
I, then quoted 02:54 to negate your earlier contention that we shouldn’t resist the Hadharites because you say that we should allow ideas to flourish in Islam.
I used this verse to show that your argument contradicts the decree made by Moses, thus ask you to renounce Moses.
After that, Haris tries to deny that Moses actually issued a death penalty by trying to change the meaning of 02:54.
I then responded by saying that your sources are flawed especially Maulana Mohd Ali who is a leader of the deviated Ahmadiyya sect.
Then out of nowhere, you’re trying to divert the issue by arguing that 02:54 is not a clear decree for death penalty to apostates. And you allude to the idea that I have a simplistic and gory mindset. You attempting to paint a picture of me having a inhuman mindset and tries to force Islam to it..
It’s a pathetic attempt by you, Haris and let me tell you it wont work. What you’re doing is trying to paint Allah SWT as being a Secular Humanist God, which I think is a bigger lie. Please stop this fabled diversion attempts on me. It will not work. The entire discussion is about flow of ideas in Islam and what is the limit.
It is not a discussion of death penalty for apostasy and what is the basis for it.
We can open another track discussion on why death penalty should be applied for apostate from an Islamic perspective, namely from Usul Fiqh perspective..
But just to ease you into the subject, feel free to check these urls:
1.0 Diskusi Hukum Jenayah Murtad
2.0 BEBERAPA KEKELIRUAN PENENTANG HUKUM MURTAD
Trust me, there is nothing simplistic about reaching this conclusionThe conclusion to the death penalty is not a simplistic conclusion and it has been debated for thousands of years.
It’s not reference to 02:54 alone but to so many other verses and sunnah. I can assure you that. Also, please remember that Sunnah is Revelations from Allah SWT.
Haris says:
Rahman Celcom responded to this, not by way of a comment here, but in a post in another blog of his. This is what he says.
Haris quoted Yusuf Ali’s comment in his footnote. What Haris needs to ask is why has Yusuf Ali translated the part as ‘killing’ if he thinks that the verse actually carries another meaning. Plus, Yusuf Ali offers no justification for what he termed as “spiritualized way of understanding verse 02:54″ since there is no such thing as that at all. If we want to understand the Quran in a spiritualized way, why do we need translation at all?
For Rahman Celcom, there is no spiritualized understanding of the Holy Qur’an.
MY REPLY: That’s right. The way i know of understanding the Quran is the “factual way”.
In other words, you understand the Quran in a way that doesn’t change the facts mentioned in the Quran. Or doesn’t change the meaning of the Quran, period.
Your spirits must then be tuned to the facts presented in the Quran. This is the definition of “Nafsul Mutmainnah” in 89:27.
What Haris is advocating is a free and open interpretation even if it means changing the meaning of the Quran. The justification he uses that it’s a spiritual way of doing it. The trouble is how do we separate between one’s “spirit” and one’s “desires”.
And changing the words of Allah is CONDDEMNED by Allah SWT himself in 02:78:
“02: 78. There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," but it is not from Allah. It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!.”
How can you be sprititulized yet being condemned by God for changing the meaning of the Quran?
Tulang Besi


1. Latest Postings on Malaysiawaves:
i. Haris Ibrahim’s Barking Up the Wrong Tree pt 2
ii. PAS Youth Concert Protest Is Good for Malays
iii. UMNO’s Fall Will Mark The End of Malay Nationalism...
iv. Harris Ibrahim Barking Up The Wrong Tree, Again
v. Malay Nationalism Is Doomed To Fail Right From the...
vi. PAS’es Shariah Proposal: Much Ado About Nothing
vii. Keep Oil Subsidies, Charge Windfall Tax for Commod... .

85 comments:

HumanBeing said...

IMO, Haris was right on target and hit the bullseye on this issue.

From the your many postings expressing your thoughts, it is not difficult to asess your mindset.

In anycase, an individual will normally be ignorant of his own inner (subliminal) mind. That is why psychologists and psychiatrists make good living. It is also easier for a outsider to understand another person's behaviour as compare to the person assesing his own personality.

Infact we can settle this issue by using FMRI to assess our neural activities when we are in the midst of deliberating on 2:54 and capital punishment for apostasy issues. The approach will be scientific and objective.

The FMRI will indicate whether the more active areas in the brain are in the lower limbic (lesser human) or in the specific cortical areas (higher human)relating to spirituality.

My hypothesis is that your FMRI images will confirm that your level of spirituality will be low.

Tulang Besi said...

Human being,

Let's have the test first before we speak.

And i doubt high spiritual feeling is the product of denial of God's word.

Tulang Besi said...

Human Being,

U call changing the meaning of the Quran a sign of "hitting the bull eyes"?

I sometimes doubt your ability to reason

Umar Rentaka said...

Dear Tulang Besi,
if I'm not mistaken, the Holy Prophet Muhammad [pbuh] has said that every verse in the Holy Quran has two meanings. One for the normal people [external] and other for the introspective [internal], right? So, why insist only your understanding is right? Couldn't the verse in question be seen from Haris's view point when, [I am most unqualified to mention this] the verse does not directly demand a death sentence?

If not, Al-Rahman Al-Rahim makes no sense.

walking with crutches said...

When all is said & done, & the dust has settled, it is still people like you whom give religion the name it has today.

Syabas, tahniah.

Tok Mila said...

Tulang Besi

Praise be to Allah! Please continue to have these discourses with Haris, it is imperative for you to do so and God willing, the truth will prevail for the sake of the ummah.

Your analysis of Haris is correct, at least that's what I think. His close alliance or support of Sisters in Islam is testimony enough that he accepts Islam conditionally - based on his conditions!

HumanBeing said...

Human being said:
And i doubt high spiritual feeling is the product of denial of God's word.
U call changing the meaning of the Quran a sign of "hitting the bull eyes"?
-----------------

You keep mentioning ‘denial of God’s word’, and ‘changing the meaning of the Qur’an’, as if you are god (assuming it exists) and knows perfectly the original intended meaning.

No way! Humans at this phase of humanity are more ape-like than being more human and thus are too imperfect to understand God’s intention perfectly. At best, humans can only get to a crude approximation of god’s intention by inferring from various principles and characteristics of god.

One characteristic is, God is omni benevolent i.e. perfectly just, all-loving, fully merciful, infinitely compassionate, all other good characters and qualities. If God is omni benevolent, how can God be attributed with any intention of issuing a fixed policy statement re 2:54 that apostates must be killed. It is illogical to put God in a contradictory situation and you are doing it.

The most logical and rational approach to reconcile 2:54 to God’s omni-benevolence is to view 2:54 from the metaphorical and contextual perspective which is a win-win situation for all. i.e. God, the individual and humanity. There is no change in the essence of 2:54 but merely a shift in perspective in line with a 'spiritualized' (re Haris) progress. Btw, are you familiar with the popular ‘problem of evil’ debate?

TB said: I sometimes doubt your ability to reason
Note the above reasoned-out, logical, pragmatic and win-win argument.
On the other hand, you are in fact ignorant of your own twisted logic which is driven by inner psychological terror and fears from the basement of your mind.

HumanBeing said...

You asked in Haris blog, "Understanding the mindset of Rahman Celcom" the following;

As for punishment of apostasy, please show me where I said 02:54 is the basis for death penalty for apostasy?

A reply from Nanda quoting a statement from Malaysiakini and in your own words, the following;

Also, since the Israelites number is large, it is more practical for the tribe to take their own lives rather than be executed. It is still a death penalty nonetheless. The only difference is that in our time, apostates are executed while in Moses time, they were to kill themselves.

What remains, from the time of Moses until today, is THE FACT THAT APOSTATES MUST BE PUNISHED BY DEATH. THIS FACT HASN’T CHANGED NO MATTER HOW MANY TRY TO DENY IT.


The above exposes the level of integrity of your thoughts. When cornered, you deflect by saying that you did not infer 2:54 as a basis for death penalty for apostasy.

However, the Malaysiankini article showed that you had strong convictions to rely on 2:54 for death for apostasy.

You condemned others but, in fact, you are the one who is trying to change the meaning of 2:54 in the Quran as 'transmitted' by God.

Your interpretation of 2:54 is illogical based on unsound reasons, i.e.

1. God is omni-benevolent, as such,

2. God would not ask humans to commit suicide as penalty.

3. You are using the time/cultural basis to change the 1000s years old suicide penalty to current 2008 death penalty for apostasy. You are changing the word of god to justify your own personal ideology

4. Since your 3. above is time-based, you contradict yourself again when earlier you disagree with me that 2:54 is time/cultural based.

In line with the generic spiritual process in all humans, 2:54 should be viewed metaphorically as "killing" of one's lower passion emanating from the lower brain/mind, for the good of mankind and humanity.

Tulang Besi said...

human being,

read my statement again.
"Also, since the Israelites number is large, it is more practical for the tribe to take their own lives rather than be executed. It is still a death penalty nonetheless. The only difference is that in our time, apostates are executed while in Moses time, they were to kill themselves.

What remains, from the time of Moses until today, is THE FACT THAT APOSTATES MUST BE PUNISHED BY DEATH. THIS FACT HASN’T CHANGED NO MATTER HOW MANY TRY TO DENY IT"

Did I say that 02:54 is the sole basis for death penalty for apostates?

No, I said, the death penalty for apostates have existed since the time of Moses.

THere is a difference/.

Tulang Besi said...

human being,

read my statement again.
"Also, since the Israelites number is large, it is more practical for the tribe to take their own lives rather than be executed. It is still a death penalty nonetheless. The only difference is that in our time, apostates are executed while in Moses time, they were to kill themselves.

What remains, from the time of Moses until today, is THE FACT THAT APOSTATES MUST BE PUNISHED BY DEATH. THIS FACT HASN’T CHANGED NO MATTER HOW MANY TRY TO DENY IT"

Did I say that 02:54 is the sole basis for death penalty for apostates?

No, I said, the death penalty for apostates have existed since the time of Moses.

THere is a difference/.

HumanBeing said...

TB Said: Did I say that 02:54 is the sole basis for death penalty for apostates?
-------------

The above is irrelevant as the subject of the topic is death for apostasy from the Quran.
If you were to refer to sources other than the Quran, that would require a different discussion.


TB Said: No, I said, the death penalty for apostates have existed since the time of Moses.
-------------------
You did not get the essence and gist of 2:54. What you did was to try to change the meaning of 2:54 in the manner that suit your cruel intentions.

Anonymous said...

TB, you twist facts to suit your understanding as well...

HumanBeing said...

Death for Apostasy in Time-bound in quran and Hadith.

Tulang Besi,
I came across this article by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi which he asserted that death for apostasy is time-bound to Muhammad's life time only.

There is no doubt whatsoever that this death penalty was prescribed only for the ummiyyin who lived during the prophethood of Mohammad (sws), be they the idolaters or others like Waraqah Ibn Nawfal, a cousin of the Prophet's wife, Khadijah (raa), who were originally among the ummiyyin and had later accepted Judaism or Christianity. It is absolutely evident that now if a Muslim becomes an apostate and is also not a source of nuisance for an Islamic State, he cannot be administered any punishment merely on the basis of apostasy.

[url]http://www.renaissance.com.pk/novsps966.html[/url]

Do read the whole explanation and what are your counter to the above?

Tulang Besi said...

Humanbeing,
I read the url u gave me. Let me quote a passage
"Fight against those among the people of the Book who believe not in God nor in the last day, and who do not forbid what God and his prophet have forbidden and do not accept the religion of truth as their own religion, until they pay Jizyah out of subjugation and lead a life of submission. [9:29]

There is a natural corollary to this Divine law as obvious as the law itself. As stated above the death penalty had been imposed upon the ummiyyin if they did not accept faith after a certain period. Hence it follows that if a person among the ummiyyin after accepting faith reverts to his original state of disbelief, he must face the same penalty. Indeed it is this reversion about which the Prophet (sws) has said ‘Execute the person who changes his faith.’ "

The verse above talks about People of the Book, but the website talks about ummiyyin.

I think the entire article is too simplistic.

Try comparing that url with these:

http://www.zaharuddin.net/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=155

Tulang Besi said...

Anonymous said...
TB, you twist facts to suit your understanding as well...

June 22, 2008 10:40 PM

MY REPLY: Dear Anonymous, can u be a bit more specific?

Please cite specific example.

HumanBeing said...

TB Said: I think the entire article is too simplistic.
Try comparing that url with these:
http://www.zaharuddin.net/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=155
------------------

I read the link you provided. My Bahasa is not that good especially with religious terms, but i do get some idea of Zaharuddin's personality and psychological state on religious matters.

He is full of insecurities and lack reasonable sense of empathy as expected of a human being in his proclaimed status.

In point "Kedua" it would appear that he accepted that there is no explicit/direct/clearcut verse in the Quran for death penalty for apostasy. Do you agree with him on this?

He went on to condemn others,
"Begitulah logik kosong mereka,.."
and referred to the Hadiths and relied on barbaric justifications to support the death penalty for apostasy.

The easiest method to control and suppress humans is to use the threat of death. It may be effective hundreds of years ago but it is inhuman to apply the death for apostasy in our modern age. A person with any reasonable level of spiritual progress would not resort nor support death for apostasy.

Zaharuddin come across as very cold and a less human, whereas Javed Ahmad Ghamidi is being more human and more humane. Btw, he is not a deviant.

The fact that there is a split on the advocacy of death for apostasy is a good sign that there are humane and inhumane Muslims in existent. The humane with higher spiritual development will eventually prevail.

In terms of spirituality, Zaharuddin is 'primary school' while Ghamidi is 'Post Grad' level.

Notes of Ghamidi from Wiki:

Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (Urdu: جاوید احمد غامدی) (b. 1951) is a well-known Pakistani Islamic scholar, exegete, and educationist. A former member of the Jamaat-e-Islami, who extended the work of his tutor, Amin Ahsan Islahi.[1] Ghamidi is the founder of Al-Mawrid Institute of Islamic Sciences and its sister organization Danish Sara.[1] He is a member of Council of Islamic Ideology since January 28, 2006,[2][3] a constitutional body responsible for giving legal advice on Islamic issues to Pakistan Government and the Parliament.

Tulang Besi said...

Dear Human Beings,

I believe that people who are resistive to religion are very much similar to animals.

Why? Becuase Animals dont have religion.

Maybe u need to check your own FMRI.

I believe your result will be similar to that off animals.

hahahahahahaha

Tulang Besi said...

In point "Kedua" it would appear that he accepted that there is no explicit/direct/clearcut verse in the Quran for death penalty for apostasy. Do you agree with him on this?

He went on to condemn others,
"Begitulah logik kosong mereka,.."
and referred to the Hadiths and relied on barbaric justifications to support the death penalty for apostasy.

MY REPLY: it's not a problem if the order is not mentiond explicitly in the Quran.

That's because it's mentioned in the Al Hadeeth An Nabawiy.

And the Quran says, Al Hadeeth An Nabawi is REVELATIONS from GOD.

Tulang Besi said...

Human Being says:

"The fact that there is a split on the advocacy of death for apostasy is a good sign that there are humane and inhumane Muslims in existent. The humane with higher spiritual development will eventually prevail."

MY REPLY: Actually, the split is between the "wrong" and the "right" opinion.

There are tons of evidence that says Ghamidi is wrong in his opinion.

Noticed that those resisting death penalty cannot agree on one reason and their reasons contradicts each other.

What's clear is that those who reject death penalty do so under the pressure of the West.

These people knows that the law is clear yet they feel the need to conform to Western beliefs and they then decided to change.

At best, Ghamidi's argument is flimsy and try compare to Zaharuddin's argument which is more comprehensive.

Not to mention the sourced Zaharuddin quoted is numerous as compared to Ghamidi.

Tulang Besi said...

Human Being,

Ghamidi's opinion is weak considering Prophet Mohd is different from others.

Other Prophets are sent only to one nation.

Prophet Mohd is sent to all nations and his teachings are to be practiced till the end of time.

And unless there is an explicit order that such order ends with the Prophet's death, then i think Ghamidi is wrong.

Tulang Besi said...

Human Beings,

You need to get the brain scan of people likhe Haris etc who have the audacity to change God's words.

Resisting God, is a sign of disrespect for religion.

And I am sure the likes of you and many others will have brain scans closer to animals.

Animals don't have religion

HumanBeing said...

TB Said: You need to get the brain scan of people like Haris etc who have the audacity to change God's words.
---------------
Re Haris’s interpretation of 2:54, I am quite sure that his FMRI brain scan will show that he was activating his higher human and spiritual faculties.

TB Said: Resisting God, is a sign of disrespect for religion.
-------------

It was through the daringness of resisting and challenging God’s (assuming it exists) words that humanity was able to advance intellectually and technologically to face greater dangers that would be threatening the human specie. Note Gallileo. Interpretating 2:54 as killing one lower self meant respecting God, in the sense that God had created humans who are capable of thinking and advancing spiritually.


TB Said: And I am sure the likes of you and many others will have brain scans closer to animals. Animals don't have religion.
---------------

LOL.. Hey.. don’t insult yourself with this sort of thinking. It is like;
Non-human animals don’t have Physics. You are not a Physicist. Therefore you are a non-human animal. That’s very unsound logic.

Your thinking is closer to that of non-human animals is because of your lack of reasonable empathy, compassion and sympathy for another human-being when you insisted that 2:54 meant death for apostasy.

Non-human animals do not have the higher brain parts to feel for another human.
Thus when we scan a human brain that is activating empathy and compassion regarding 2:54, it will always be different from that of a non-human animal.

However non-human animals and humans have similar brain parts for killing their own kind.
In this case, your brain pattern when deliberating 2:54 will be the same as a non-human animal brain as it prepares to kill. Psychopaths and other murderers will display similar patterns.

To progress towards higher spirituality, you should not deliberate and brainwash yourself too much with thoughts of advocating ‘killing of humans’ especially for a non-violent apostasy. An apostate is merely changing their mind and not threatening anyone’s life, why are that aggressive in wanting them killed?

HumanBeing said...

TB Said: Noticed that those resisting death penalty cannot agree on one reason and their reasons contradicts each other.
--------------

There may be various reasons, but the main reason against death penalty for apostasy is empathy, compassion and being more humane as humanity progress.

You will note that primitive tribes and our ancestors (5000 years) ago would kill without much hesistation.
As noted in history, more and more humans had been giving increasing thoughts and consideration to the abolishment of the death penalty resulting in a overall decrease since 500 years ago.

You prefer to remain stagnant and insist in sticking to inhuman practices.


TB Said: What's clear is that those who reject death penalty do so under the pressure of the West.
------------------

This is paranoid thinking. Note there are many in the 'West' who are hardcore advocators of the death penalty. Similarly there are many such people in the 'East' as well.

It is your "us vs them", and "us vs West" thinking which is fundamentally diversive, barbaric and a non-human animal trait.

Those who oppose the death penalty are those humans who had progressed to be more human and more humane as a result of the development of their higher cortical brain. They come from all sectors and geographical areas of the human population.

HumanBeing said...

TB Said: And unless there is an explicit order that such order ends with the Prophet's death, then i think Ghamidi is wrong.
-----------------

Humans will not do wrong if they view matters that would contribute towards the advancement and good of the whole of humanity.

There is no explicit/specific/clearcut instructon in the Quran on death for apostasy.

By not insisting on death for apostasy, Ghamidi is rightly steering the issue towards a behavior that would not disgrace God in the eyes of the humane majority (Muslims plus non-muslims)

A normal human being (not brainwashed with threats) will never support death for apostasy.

Humans who support death for apostasy are those who being blackmailed and tyrannized by a threat and the terror of being burn in hell.

Have compassion, sympathy, empathy for another innocent human being who is not doing harm to others.

HumanBeing said...

Tulang Besi,

I have asked you similar question and will asked again. Hope you will answer this time.

If your innocent, loving, peaceful Grandmother, Mother, Father, Sisters, Brothers, had become Muslim apostates due some reasons and you are the ONLY Shariah executor available at that time.

Would you kill them?
What will you be thinking when you chop off their heads?

Try to activate your higher brain to reflect on the reality of 'death for apostasy' and its inhumane elements.

HumanBeing said...

At best, Ghamidi's argument is flimsy and try compare to Zaharuddin's argument which is more comprehensive.
Not to mention the sourced Zaharuddin quoted is numerous as compared to Ghamidi.
------------------------

This is bad logic.

In this case, it is the core principles that counts not the higher number of quotes.

Just by stating "The Golden Rule should be used as a guiding principle for the progress of humanity." would override a 11,000 quotes to support the same concept.

Tulang Besi said...

HB says:

"Re Haris’s interpretation of 2:54, I am quite sure that his FMRI brain scan will show that he was activating his higher human and spiritual faculties."

MY REPLY: Hmm, he does that by disrespecting God? How could that be spiritual.

Isn't that very animal like since animals don't have religion.

I believe those questioning religion will depict brain character closer to the animals. Animals don't have religions.

Tulang Besi said...

HB says:

"

If your innocent, loving, peaceful Grandmother, Mother, Father, Sisters, Brothers, had become Muslim apostates due some reasons and you are the ONLY Shariah executor available at that time.

Would you kill them?
What will you be thinking when you chop off their heads?"

MY REPLY: Let me turn that around, if one of your family member is caught killing and raping 7-year olds and throwing the bodies in monsoon drains for people to discover, will you support the death penalty on this man/women?

Tulang Besi said...

HB says:

"Your thinking is closer to that of non-human animals is because of your lack of reasonable empathy, compassion and sympathy for another human-being when you insisted that 2:54 meant death for apostasy.

Non-human animals do not have the higher brain parts to feel for another human.
Thus when we scan a human brain that is activating empathy and compassion regarding 2:54, it will always be different from that of a non-human animal."

MY REPLY: LOL. Animals don't have religion.

In fact, one of the difrentiating factor between man and animals is religion.

So those, who are against religion will reflect more animalistic trait in their brains.

As for death penalty for apostasy, it's a punishment for felony. A punishment for a crime.

What's so animalistic about that?

HumanBeing said...

HB Said: Let me turn that around, if one of your family member is caught killing and raping 7-year olds and throwing the bodies in monsoon drains for people to discover, will you support the death penalty on this man/women?
-------------------

In this case, i will not support the death penalty.

Even if my children or relative was the victim, i will also not support the death penalty.

What about your answer to my question.

HumanBeing said...

TB Said: Isn't that very animal like since animals don't have religion.
----------------

You are only insulting your own intelligence by insisting on the above inference.

Using your bad logic;
P1: non-human animals do not question religion.
P2: You also do not question religion.
C: Therefore you are like a non-human animal.

Your thinking is the same as the following commonly condemned immature logic, i.e.;

P1 Ah Chong is a thief
P2 Ah Chong is Chinese
C Therefore all Chinese are thief.

There are a lot of great scientists who don't have a religion.
Based on your logic, do you conclude that scientific thinking is animal-like.

Go and take some lessons in logic.

Questioning verses that are supposedly from God or religion is a sure sign that one is being more human when using the higher thinking mind given by god.
Applying critical thinking to religious verses is a check against wrong advice from Mullahs or Utaz who could be influenced by Satan.

btw, a religion can be theistic or atheistic.

HumanBeing said...

TB Said: As for death penalty for apostasy, it's a punishment for felony. A punishment for a crime.
What's so animalistic about that?
-----------------

You have this cold-hearted, lack of empathy thinking, and you are totally ignorant of it.

Your thinking and attitude is similar to that of a psychopath killer. Note,

Psychopaths are seemingly able to demonstrate the appearance of sensing the emotions of others with such a theory of mind, often demonstrating care and friendship in a convincing manner, and can use this ability to charm or manipulate, but they crucially lack the sympathy or compassion that empathy often leads to. However, it has been claimed that components of circuitry involved in empathy may also be dysfunctional in psychopathy

Brain damage people also lack empathy as in Autism, Asperger syndrome, Alexithymia. etc.

Alexithymia is defined by
(i) difficulty identifying feelings and distinguishing between feelings and the bodily sensations of emotional arousal
(ii) difficulty describing feelings to other people

I don't think you have brain damage, but your religious affiliation seem to have suppressed your empathic capabilities and make you a cold-blooded animal on the issue of death for apostasy.

As i had stated, a normal person not under any sort of religionus threat would not agree to death for apostasy.

Your insistence and persistent proposition of killing a human for merely changing their mind is similar to a non-human animal killing their own kind.

You are in fact worse than the non-human animal which kill on instincts, as you are doing the killing or 'murder' on a premeditated basis.

Tulang Besi said...

human being,

Let me get this straight. U say that if people do not have emphaty for other who have committed a crime and being punihsed for it, they're like animals?

Since when do animals have any form of a legal system?

I say those resisting religion or the legal system will have brain waves closer to animals.

Trust me HB, go and have your brain MRI Cad-scan. You'll find that your brain will show traits of animalistic tendencies

you and all the anti religion nuts that I know of.

HumanBeing said...

If your innocent, loving, peaceful Grandmother, Mother, Father, Sisters, Brothers, had become Muslim apostates due some reasons and you are the ONLY Shariah executor available at that time.

Would you kill them?
What will you be thinking when you chop off their heads?"
--------

I had replied to your turned around question, how about your turn to answer the above question I raised originally.

As for religion or god, i am not against such beliefs. If anyone want to belief in god or follow a religion, go ahead. I have mentioned this a few times somewhere.

I only have negative comments for religious people who lack empathy, psychopathic, barbaric and are more animal than being human in their behavior.

Tulang Besi said...

Human Being,

Secularists are closer to animals then religionists

So quit asking people to scan their brains because the most likely result will be pointing to secularists

HumanBeing said...

TB Said: Secularists are closer to animals then religionists
So quit asking people to scan their brains because the most likely result will be pointing to secularists.
----------------------

This is one your narrow minded thinking in terms of "us vs them" which is very more animal than being better human.

Both a secularist and a religionist are humans and all of them are humans. For every evil secularist there is an equally evil religionist and for every humane (more human) secularist there is a humane (more human) religionist.

In your case of 2:54 (topic of this article) where you insist on death for apostasy (merely changing of one mind and no harm involved), you are a lesser human/humane religionists.

Btw, i have studied and research on the neurosciences for more than 10 years and i know what i am talking about FMRI and the range of human behavior ranging from more animal to being more human.

It is unfortunate that it is a constraint to go into details in terms of comments in blogs. I will get into the details of such issue soon. Note,
http://beinghuman-humannature.blogspot.com/2008/06/one-and-only-true-spiritual-path.html
(would appreciate your experienced help, how do i html tag an url link)

You are merely just barking into thin air. Provide some reasearch and reasoned views for your assertions.

btw, what about that serious question I ask about apostasy and execution.

aku said...

ni HB,gua nak tanya, lu ni satu lain dgn farouk ke?

HumanBeing said...

aku said...
ni HB,gua nak tanya, lu ni satu lain dgn farouk ke?
--------------

Ya gua lain dgn farouk.

Tulang Besi said...

Naruto,

Where did u get the information you got?

It's all bull if you ask me

fly said...

gua ulang lagi, lu ni satu kapal dgn farouk ke?

aku said...

ni HB,maksud lu, lu tak satu kapal dgn farouk. lu bukan golongan anti hadith?

HumanBeing said...

ni HB,maksud lu, lu tak satu kapal dgn farouk. lu bukan golongan anti hadith?
----

eh.. saya bukan religious and is a non-theist.

aku said...

TB,gua nak tanya lu: si haris ni terjemah ikut selera sendiri dan menolak hadis, didalam tamadun islam dikategorikan sbg apa?

aku said...

HB, non-theist tu abende? lu cakap non-religious, tapi lu ni ada pegangan agama lah, begitu. Muslim?

aku said...

HB, non-theist tu abende? lu cakap non-religious, tapi lu ni ada pegangan agama lah, begitu. Muslim?

Tulang Besi said...

aku,

Untuk org2 yang mengubah ayat2 Quran mengikut nafsu serakah mereka:

002.078
YUSUFALI: And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.
PICKTHAL: Among them are unlettered folk who know the Scripture not except from hearsay. They but guess.
SHAKIR: And there are among them illiterates who know not the Book but only lies, and they do but conjecture.

002.079
YUSUFALI: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.
PICKTHAL: Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands and then say, "This is from Allah," that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby.
SHAKIR: Woe, then, to those who write the book with their hands and then say: This is from Allah, so that they may take for it a small price; therefore woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn.

Tulang Besi said...

aku,

human being ni kata org yang kuat agama kalau scan otak dia nampak macam dekat dengan otak binatang.

SAya cakap, hanya orang sekular je mcm tu sebab orang sekular tak suka agama.

Dan binatang mana ada agama

HumanBeing said...

HB, non-theist tu abende? lu cakap non-religious, tapi lu ni ada pegangan agama lah, begitu. Muslim?
----------------

Non-theist sama dgn atheist. gua bukan Muslim dan tak ada agama lain.

HumanBeing said...

TB:human being ni kata org yang kuat agama kalau scan otak dia nampak macam dekat dengan otak binatang.
-----------------

It is either your comprehension ability is very very bad or your intention was to twist and lie.

Note what i stated earlier.

For every evil secularist there is an equally evil religionist and for every humane (more human) secularist there is a humane (more human) religionist.

In your case of 2:54 (topic of this article) where you insist on death for apostasy (merely changing of one mind and no harm involved), you are a lesser human/humane religionists.


There are good and bad religionists. Note,
http://beinghuman-humannature.blogspot.com/2008/06/normal-distribution-awareness-no.html

The bad religionists are the ones who insist on killing another human for merely changing their mind. I was refering to these bad religionist when i stated they are lebih binatang than being lebih manusia.

HumanBeing said...

btw, how about answering this theorectical question based on your belief principles.

If your innocent, loving, peaceful Grandmother, Mother, Father, Sisters, Brothers, had become Muslim apostates due some reasons and you are the ONLY Shariah executor available at that time.

Would you kill them?
What will you be thinking when you chop off their heads?

aku said...

ni HB, kalau macam tu lu tak percayalah tentang keujudan tuhan yang esa, lantas bagaimana lu nak menerangkan kehadhiran lu di dunia ini. gua pun heran juga ni, lu bukan muslim tapi lu bertekak tentang pemahaman pengertian firman tuhan. apa yg cuba lu buktikan? lu bukan muslim tapi lu suka2 mengradekan tahap spirituality muslim? apa kelayakan lu? kaedah apa yg lu gunapakai?

HumanBeing said...

Aku said: lu bukan muslim tapi lu suka2 mengradekan tahap spirituality muslim? apa kelayakan lu? kaedah apa yg lu gunapakai?
-------------------
gua tak pandai BM, bincang English boleh ka?

Btw nota;
Spirituality Manusia Semua Sama

aku said...

HB, if u dont believe in the existence of god, how then would you account for your own existence?

HumanBeing said...

aku said...
HB, if u dont believe in the existence of god, how then would you account for your own existence?
----------------
Note:
Cogito, ergo sum" (Latin: "I think, therefore I am"), The simple meaning of the phrase is that if someone is wondering whether or not he exists, that is in and of itself proof that he does exist.

From the above, I know that i 'exist' now, there is no need for me to account for my own existence.

Therefore I do not need to believe in god.

aku said...

Hb tulis: Therefore I do not need to believe in god. - gua rasa TB cakap tu betul: TB Said: And I am sure the likes of you and many others will have brain scans closer to animals. Animals don't have religion.
u surely are one ungrateful creation.

HumanBeing said...

aku said...
gua rasa TB cakap tu betul: TB Said: And I am sure the likes of you and many others will have brain scans closer to animals. Animals don't have religion.
u surely are one ungrateful creation.
----------------
On this issue, i had shown that Tulang Besi used bad logic.

Why don't you argue against the rational points and logic i presented to Tulang Besi.

If you can be convincing with good reasons i will accept.

Btw, i do not want to discuss about god on this thread as it is off topic.
I also do NOT want to discuss such topic in this blog. if you are a member of any debate forum, give me the link and i will join and continue discussion the points as below;

You know you exist, but do you have proofs that God or Allah exists? How do you know God created you?

My philosophy is;
you can believe in god if that is your intention, but do not expect others to follow your beliefs.
You as an imperfect human is not qualified to condemn (i.e. ungrateful creation) others as well.

Anonymous said...

Funny... Animals don't have religion therefore a man without religion equals an animal?

Who told you animals had no religion? Prove that before you insult animals. I'm not saying I have proof animals do, but it's just the comparison part thats off.

And I truly doubt that there is an all-encompassing idea of the laws that you practice, unless off course you presume to fully understand what God has told you, in which case is an insult to God as you claim to have the same understanding as God. (notice anything from that line?)

aku said...

HB tulis: You know you exist, but do you have proofs that God or Allah exists? How do you know God created you? - because i belief in the Quran!and if it is not allah who created me and everything else that is seen and unseen, how then would anything come into existence?
ni HB, it doesnt matter whether others want to follow or not, the main thing is i have convey to you the message that allah exist!
HB:Why don't you argue against the rational points and logic i presented to Tulang Besi. - which one?

HumanBeing said...

HB: How do you know God created you?
Aku Tulis: - because i belief in the Quran!and if it is not allah who created me and everything else that is seen and unseen, how then would anything come into existence?
ni HB, it doesnt matter whether others want to follow or not, the main thing is i have convey to you the message that allah exist!
------------

Allah exists? True or Not?

Note your belief in Allah/God is based on faith. I agree your belief is justified. practical and rational but Allah does not exists . If you think believing in Allah is the best thing for yourself, go ahead.

BUT, note that faith means;

Wiki:
Faith is a belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that has not been proven.

Dictionary com:
belief that is not based on proof.

Since your belief in Allah is based on faith (no proof), you will NEVER be able to prove Allah exists.

There are hundreds of concepts to justify why God do not exists. One core concept amongst the hundreds is Fallibilism.

Just because many people believe in something, it does not prove that it is true. Note, once almost everyone thought the Earth was flat, but that was not true.

The above issue is very complex and to resolve it, you must first understand your own human nature.

Because it is complex, i would suggest a separate discussion elsewhere.



HB:Why don't you argue against the rational points and logic i presented to Tulang Besi.
Aku Tulis:- which one?
---------------------
You echo TB point that, TB said animal no religion, therefore man without religion equal animal.

Note my points posted on:
1. June 23, 2008 11:00 PM
2. June 24, 2008 12:07 PM

(why i do not like serious discussion is that this blog is not 'debate' friendly, i.e. bad referencing, hmtl limited, etc)

Explain why my logic in 1. and 2. is not rational.


Here is another point,

Binatang and human share the same mental qualities and psychology, assume there are only 6. Let's say No. 1 is the capable of killing own kind' quality.

Binatang: 1,2,3,4,5,6,
Human...: 1,2,3,4,5,6,

but a progressive human is different from Binatang, one major difference is empathy, compassion and conscience. Let number it (7). No 7 is a higher human quality.

As a comparision,
Binatang: 1,2,3,4,5,6,
Human(1): 1,2,3,4,5,6,
Human(2): 1,2,3,4,5,6,7

Tulang Besi do not have 7, therefore he is more like 'Binatang' then being more human(2).

Using no religion is bad logic because,

As a comparision,
Binatang: 1,2,3,4,5,6,
Human(1): 1,2,3,4,5,6,_,Religion
Human(2): 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,Spiritual

Just because Human(2) do not have religion does not mean he is Binatang.
If Human(2) do not have religion, he still has spirituality, therefore not more Binatang. Religion a sub part of human spirituality.
Note: Semua Spirituality Sama

From the above, Tulang Besi who is religious, support death for apostasy, with active No.1 killing thoughts, is Human(1) which is closer to Binatang.

Those with No.7 are also similar to Binatang, but because they have No.7 empathy, they are being more human than being more binatang.

Hope you can comprehende the above and argue against the points raised logically.

Don't simply jump to conclusion like what 'binatang' do, if not sure, better you ask.

btw, when i used the word 'binatang' it is not in the derogatory or insulting manner. It is intended to be used in terms of primatology, neuropsychological and in a scientific manner.

HumanBeing said...

Note: Semua Spirituality Sama

just in case link does not work.

http://beinghuman-humannature.blogspot.com/2008/06/one-and-only-true-spiritual-path.html

aku said...

HB:Since your belief in Allah is based on faith (no proof), you will NEVER be able to prove Allah exists. - i am here proves that allah exist. - who then created u?

HumanBeing said...

Aku Tulis: i am here proves that allah exist. - who then created u?
-------------------

I presume you will are using the Cosmological argument.

"The cosmological argument argues that there was a "first cause", or "prime mover" who is identified as God. It starts with some simple fact about the world, like its containing entities that are caused to exist by other entities."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_god


This argument won't work.

"The counter-argument against the Cosmological argument ("chicken or the egg") takes its assumption that things cannot exist without creators and applies it to God, setting up an infinite regress. This attacks the premise that the universe is the second cause (after God, who is claimed to be the first cause)."

Previously when i believed in god, I was arguing and defending the god exist theory against atheists for more than 20 years. As i mature spiritually, i got convinced human cannot prove god exist.

So far there is no convincing prove Allah or God exists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_god

Note the faith = no proof, definition is a truth unless you want to challenge universal accepted meanings.

Believe in god can only be a personal journal and to be emotionally experienced, not by proving to another person.

I could not be bothered with who created me. I know i exist in the present moment and will do my best to make the most out of this life, and contribute to humanity in anyway i can.

To understand how human came about, note,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence.
This is one of the most rational and acceptable explanation.

My theory of why the majority of humans MUST believe in god, is because their belief enable them to pacify the internal 'terrorist' that in themselves.

Note Terror Management Theory, (TMT) and cognitive dissonance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

You need to believe in Allah, because like most people, you are ignorant of your own human nature. If you do not believe in Allah, you will probably die of internal terror and fear.

Once you understand your own nature thoroughly, you can control this fear and internal terror, and can even let go of a belief in god.

If you want to discuss about god and human nature, you must cover a very wide range of knowledge to get real understandings, not based on what holy texts (Quran or Bible, etc) others said.

If you do not acquire more knowledge, then it better to keep quiet and keep Allah to yourself. Otherwise the truth can sometimes be very emotionally and psychologically painful.

HumanBeing said...

HB:Why don't you argue against the rational points and logic i presented to Tulang Besi.
Aku Tulis:- which one?
---------------------
HB:You echo TB point that, TB said animal no religion, therefore man without religion equal animal.
----------------

I presented my logical argument on the above. i.e. death for apostasy and lack of empathy is more binatang.

Do you agree? if not, what is your counter argument. Do provide at least a comment, agree, do not agree or present a counter.

aku said...

HB:I presented my logical argument on the above. i.e. death for apostasy and lack of empathy is more binatang.:- but to murtad is so much more lower than a binatang.

HB:You echo TB point that, TB said animal no religion, therefore man without religion equal animal. - are u saying that animals do have religion?

aku said...

HB:and will do my best to make the most out of this life, and contribute to humanity in anyway i can. - ya right, contributing in the process of bringing one from light to darkness!and that is why i say u are one ungrateful creation.

HumanBeing said...

Aku Tulis: u saying that animals do have religion.
------------------

You don't seem to under simple presentation, note,

As a comparision,
Binatang: 1,2,3,4,5,6,
Human(1): 1,2,3,4,5,6,_,Religion
Human(2): 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,Spiritual

Binatang/animal have 1,2,3,4,5,6, only, animals do not have Religion as Human(1).

TB said that humans who do not have Religion are like animal.

I had stated that humans who do not have Religion do not necessary like animals.
While they do not hve religion, they have spirituality and empathy.


Read my presentation again.

HumanBeing said...

Aku Said: ya right, contributing in the process of bringing one from light to darkness! and that is why i say u are one ungrateful creation.
-------------------

Can you give clear examples of how i have brought one from light to darkness?

In this thread, i had made an attempt to explain as clear as possible, while you and TB had not give sufficient reasoned and logical views.

HumanBeing said...

To aku,
I stated there can never be any proof that Allah or God exist, and had given examples, counter-examples and links from Wiki.

Can you provide a proper arguments to prove Allah/God exists. No points asking me question one by one, just present your arguments.

aku said...

HB:Can you give clear examples of how i have brought one from light to darkness? - belief - light, dont belief - darkness. simple! isnt it.

TB said that humans who do not have Religion are like animal. - it might be lower than animals, because animals cannot think like human.

aku said...

HB:I stated there can never be any proof that Allah or God exist, and had given examples, counter-examples and links from Wiki. - do u really think wiki is so much more superior than alquran?

HumanBeing said...

Aku Tulis: - belief - light, dont belief - darkness. simple! isnt it.
------------------

It is not difficult to play your game.
- belief - darkness, dont belief - light. simple! isnt it.

Your sort of thinking would definitely lead to darkness.

Come on, I am sure you have a better thinking brain.

HumanBeing said...

- do u really think wiki is so much more superior than alquran?
------------------

To me, Wiki is just a very convenient, easy reference intellectual map and a good starting point.
Whether it is reliable will depend on my own assessment, i normally depend on other researches and my own intellectual reasoning.

If do not agree to the Wiki reference, provide your views, criticism and counter arguments. I will support it or provide additional arguments to it.

As for Qur'an, i have my reservations.

As for any discussions and issues, i would not accept "because Allah say so as written in the Quran".

Discussion is an intellectual activity, thus i would expect some reasoned views to support any issues.

aku said...

HB:Discussion is an intellectual activity, thus i would expect some reasoned views to support any issues. - u call negating quran in discussion on allah existence as intellectual?

HumanBeing said...

Aku Tulis: u call negating quran in discussion on allah existence as intellectual?
--------------

Don't try to be too smart with definition, it will only reveal your immaturity. Better to focus on the discussion.

An intellectual discussion on anything is a discussion that is done intelligently with serious thinking and reasons.
(check the dictionary or Wiki)

If not intellectual, then it is emotional. i.e.

Emotional means:
actuated, effected, or determined by emotion rather than reason: An emotional decision is often a wrong decision.

dictionary.com

The majority of religionists, like yourself, often get emotional when discussing religious or spiritual issues.

When one is emotional, then one will be more animal than being more human.

aku said...

HB:Don't try to be too smart with definition, it will only reveal your immaturity. - this is not about trying to be smart, it is about stating facts, that u just cannot have a discussion on allah whithout alquran!

Anonymous said...

This is the first time I come upon a conversation of epistemological interest between post-Enlightenment thinker with muslims, so I am compelled to leave a word.

The arguments used by the muslims, e.g. "How do you know you exist if God doesn't exist", are so full of unwarranted premises that I was a little shocked. It is as if they had spared no thoughts at all on the arguments and simply regurgitated them. For example, with regard to the question of "how do you know you exist if God doesn't exist", there are just too many possibilities such that the argument has little relevance to the existence of God.

However, the fact that they are even willing to engage in purely logical arguments gives me great hope. It is a little sad however that in the end, the muslims went back to their "your arguments must be false because they don't agree with the Koran and surely you cannot know better than the Koran".

I wonder how long it will take to educate an entire people to think critically --- especially at the expense of the Imams who has no other skills except for their ability to regurgitate the Koran.

For this reason I applaud your patience. Keep up the good work.

Tulang Besi said...

Dear Anon.,

That's because only people with illogical way of thinking will deny the eixstance of God,

And only loonies believe in the Theory of Evolution

Anonymous said...

Islam was created since ADAM until today. History show the religion is not at fault but merely the faith beleivers.and faith believers carry with them their cultural values which always seems to contradict with islamic values. But still they want to try to aligned their cultural/racial values with islam by manipulation.
Any usually they strenghten their values above islam.
JUST ANSWER TO GOD AND CARRY ON LIFE NOT ONLY SUBMITTING TO GOD BUT HELPING ALL HUMAN BEINGS INSUFFERRING, NOT ONLY YOUR MUSLIM KIND !!!

Anonymous said...

Do not confused the young generations with verses and then argue. They need simple explanation and to just carry on with life.
I am not surprised if young muslims leave islam,not putting religion as priority, appreciate other religion's openess..its all due to the ederly or so called Muslims that thinks they know better about the religion than others.
STOP BRAGGING ABOUT HOW GOOD ISLAM IS AND HOW FAST IT IS IN THE USA..attend and listen to your young ones !!!

Anonymous said...

And no one can still convince me which one to follow, Shiah or Sunni?

TO ME I DONT CARE A DAMN, I JUST TALK TO ALLAH AND ONLY TO HIM I ENSLAVE MYSELF.
ALLAH LOOKS AFTER ALL HUMAN BEINGS (INCLUDING MILLIONS OF MY DEAD HINDU MALAY ANCESTORS) !!!

Anonymous said...

MALAY IS NOT ISLAM AND ISLAM IS NOT MALAY. MALAY IS MALAY, ISLAM IS ISLAM.

FULLSTOP !!!!

Anonymous said...

and teach your young ones to read quran and understand the language..it looks stupid nodding your head vigorously during tahlili but really dont understand the meaning of the language. WE ARE ALL FULL OF CRAP AND WE CALL OURSELVE 'EDUCATED'!!!
ALLAH IS LAUGHING AT OUR STUPIDITY.

neves_sort said...

I would like to ask a question about the following statement posted by humanbeing a.k.a hb:
(posted on June 27, 2008 1:37 PM)

'My theory of why the majority of humans MUST believe in god, is because their belief enable them to pacify the internal 'terrorist' that in themselves.

Note Terror Management Theory, (TMT) and cognitive dissonance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

You need to believe in Allah, because like most people, you are ignorant of your own human nature. If you do not believe in Allah, you will probably die of internal terror and fear.

Once you understand your own nature thoroughly, you can control this fear and internal terror, and can even let go of a belief in god.'

My question would be:
Let say if i have already controlled my internal terror and fear, why should i let go of my belief in God? Upon understanding this 'Terror Management Theory, (TMT) and cognitive dissonance', I believe that this is a study about what lies inside a human brain/mind/thinking. I dont seem to get your point in letting go your belief in God just because you already mastered your fear and internal terror. It is a process to understand the fact on how human works and you have already obtain to control human attributes,but still it does not justify other unknown facts about human nature.Being a little bit 'in control' of yourself doesnt mean that you have already control the whole world, or even yourself as whole. Therefore you need source that is beyond human to understand the creation of human.

Likewise you have suggested that (June 22, 2008 12:38 AM) - 'It is also easier for a outsider to understand another person's behaviour as compare to the person assesing his own personality.'

How can human (in general) assess their humanistic nature? Shouldnt we, by logic, take the other's entity (i.e God?) to assess the humanistic nature? because if human assess a human, how do we know it is right or wrong? Its like an ape assess another ape and say that the other ape is dumb, good, etc. How can the ape justify this? We need an 'Outsider' to justify the nature of human beings therefore,we still need God to explain, guide and assess our behaviour.(this is however introduce us to the religion and its effects on human behaviour)

Inconjuction with that,How can i know you are correct and i am wrong?or vice versa?how can a atheist be right and theist is wrong?or vice versa?

How can human(creation of God) prove that God exists and is not our God?how can a robot(a creation of human) proves that human exist and is not their God?The robot cant, because they dont have the level of understanding like human does unless the human provide them the knowledge. Robots are equipped with various of tools/gadgets to process/act/do/execute commands to its best capacity but cant even prove the creator who invent/create it without the introduction of who created them(for example-the programmer). This is due to their lacks of understanding about other entity. Just supposed that this robot have achieved a discovery on its behaviour due to its research (using its advance AI program-created by the programmer), it doesnt change the facts that human creates the robots. It also doesnt mean that they can go do whatever they want just because they have already unlock a small secret of themselves.

My hypothesis is that we still need God to understand how we works.

Please enlighten me on this, Tq

Anonymous said...

Maybe the GREATEST blog I have read this year :D

-Sincerest regards
Fred

Anonymous said...

Hey Emerson, that logic is flawed :D

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

ARiF merupakan jentera utama Harapan Baru di dalam membantu kelancaran gerakerja semua peringkat.

Kami ARiF Melaka memerlukan sumbangan dan bantuan kewangan daripada tuanpuan untuk kami melakukan gerakerja berkenaan. Oleh kerana kami masih baru, sumbangan diperlukan untuk menampung kos pakaian, membeli peralatan komunikasi, peralatan lalulintas dan sebagainya.

Kami amat berbebsar hati jika tuan/puan dapat menghulurkan sumangan kepada kami. Segala sumbangan diserahkan kepada pemegang amanah ARiF Melaka.

MOHD AZWAN AHMAD
a/k Maybank : 104013154427

Hantarkan makluman bank-in melalui SMS/WA ke 016-981 1315 (H.ANUAR)

Semuga Allah membalas segala jasa baik tuan/puan semua.