Discussions
99% non-muslims
Posted by unspunomer • 5/01/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: about all religions, christian's holy books, christianity, holy books, Islam, islamic laws, Jewish, jewism, Religions, religions history
why 99% non-muslims don't read reality about there religion? that, what there religion says?, what is its history?, when it begun?, is it true religion or not? what its religious books says?
User Comments
-
You give Muslims a bad name. -
tru dat -
Where did you get this 99% figure from?
-
probably the same place he learned to spell o_0
-
even worst than me
-
same here... i've begun proofreading
-
How ironic your comment is, considering you accused me of being the "spelling police" just the other day...
www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/klapitolism-klonfederacy-and-klonstitutio...
-
-
I think he means he doesn't understand secularism and how anyone can live without extreme religious beliefs.
Of course, I am a woman and therefore, probably worthless in my opinion.-
where did he say that?
-
-
Why do you say 99% of non-Muslims don't know about their own religions? Have you interviewed them and have you done extensive research to come up with this number? -
-
GC - read your post and left a comment. You make very good points!
Everyone needs to start focusing on being good themselves and getting their priorities straight. -
@busylizzy
Thank you very much indeed. -
Me too. Your writing is awesome.
I'd love to be your student. -
@timethief
I'm very flattered. Thank you.
-
-
@unspunomer
You sound distressed and I'm sorry to hear that. I believe your are not alone there are many believers in many religions, including Christians, who feel the same way you do about their fellow believers.
It's my experience that all fundamentalists, regardless of the religion they ascribe to, tenaciously adhere to simple black and white and/or right or wrong thinking patterns, and doctrine and dogma, and literal interpretations of ancient texts. I believe they fail to see shades of gray (different interpretations derived from deeper thinking), and feel threatened when others dissent with their literal interpretations of what is truth.
is it true religion or not?
How do you define truth?
This is my take on it. Truth (impartial truth) is a concept we abstract from personal experience with true-false propositions. IMO the ability to discern truth from falsehood is not a mere introspective feeling. To be true it must be something that can be observed, charted, and tested.
Impartial Truth = an intellectual, relational, unified, reliable, universal aspect of reality that we humans can discern in a limited but useful manner.
Useful means that we humans can learn bits of impartial truth, apply aspects of impartial truth to our lives, and work toward making improvements. These improvements are not absolute because human knowledge of the totality of truth is always limited. If we can break away from the confines of our own conceit, we develop a hunger to learn. We become seekers and when we reach this stage, each truth we learn feeds our appetite for more. In this manner we learn truths and continue to seek truth at the same time.
It's my position that if you have an open mind you will continue to learn truth and seek truth throughout your entire life. But of you have closed your mind and embraced "one and only one truth" written in ancient times and reflecting the reality of those times, and ripped it out of its context and applied it to the times we live in now, or defaulted to spouting dogma and doctrine, rather than practicing deep thinking, then you will be begin to display egocentric righteousness (the natural tendency to feel superior in the light of your confidence that you are in the possession of THE ONLY TRUTH). -
For starters, I suspect that the vast majority of people who say they adhere to any system of belief are not scholars. The thirst for knowledge - coupled with the drive and abilities needed for intense intellectual pursuits - isn't any more common, I think, than the qualities it takes to be a really good athlete.
There's a reason why, at most games, the stands are full: while only a dozen or so people are down on the field.
I'm not making value judgments here. People who aren't top-rate rugby players, or who aren't very good at dribbling a basketball, are no more or less worthy of consideration than people who are. The same goes for scholars/non-scholars.
On the other hand, when you're putting together a team, it's well to get people who have at least average competence.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
