God and punishment

[iSok]

No. You demonstrated that we do feel, the fact I never disputed. You have not shown that emotion is what guides our judgement when it matters in a majority of cases.

400 atheists in an airplane, plane stalls. Will all 400 refuse a desperate plea to God?

I am going to the point that I want to make clear that:

1) God can not be described.
2) Man is more a being of emotion then of reason and logic.
3) The Quran, the Bible and other religious scriptures have one thing in common, FEAR.
4) Concept of threatening man is simple yet brilliant --> works well for the common man.
5) If scriptures were full of passages of love and mercy and reason, common man would not listen.
6) This does not mean that God wants to torture us all.

If God really liked torturing us, then He would not warn us.

Qur'an - [15:89] - "and clearly tell the unbelievers: "I am most certainly a plain warner."

[The Magic Pudding]

This plane scenario isn't going anywhere unless I use my godless cunning to find the only parachute and somehow get the door open.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru

[iSok]

This plane scenario isn't going anywhere unless I use my godless cunning to find the only parachute and somehow get the door open.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru

You forget that the 399 others also possess godless cunning.

[Asmodean]

400 atheists in an airplane, plane stalls. Will all 400 refuse a desperate plea to God?

400 who never believed in a god probably would never even think of pleading to such a being. 400 who converted to atheism from a religion... Who knows. They'd go both ways, I think.

1) God can not be described.

..! We are getting to the point, yes?  

Ok. Let's say you're right.

2) Man is more a being of emotion then of reason and logic.

Let's just for the fun of it disregard the problems I have with that claim and say ok here too, shall we...

3) The Quran, the Bible and other religious scriptures have one thing in common, FEAR.

...And hope. That's two things, yes?

4) Concept of threatening man is simple yet brilliant --> works well for the common man.

Agreed with prejudice. The outcome will not always be what you expect.

5) If scriptures were full of passages of love and mercy and reason, common man would not listen.

Agreed with prejudice.

6) This does not mean that God wants to torture us all.

That there is the point, yes? That god appeals to basic instincts in order to get people to believe in it? How do you know that a being which can not be described would even want to do that, for starters?

If God really liked torturing us, then He would not warn us.

How do you know that? I would probably warn my torture victim to be of his impending doom and let him stew if there was no authority to reel me in.

Qur'an - [15:89] - "and clearly tell the unbelievers: "I am most certainly a plain warner."

...Who wrote that line?

[The Magic Pudding]

]If God really liked torturing us, then He would not warn us.

How do you know that? I would probably warn my torture victim to be of his impending doom and let him stew if there was no authority to reel me in.

Normal procedure is to let the prospective victim to hear the screams of the current victim.

[Asmodean]

Normal procedure is to let the prospective victim to hear the screams of the current victim.

Precisely.

[iSok]

That there is the point, yes? That god appeals to basic instincts in order to get people to believe in it? How do you know that a being which can not be described would even want to do that, for starters?
How do you know that? I would probably warn my torture victim to be of his impending doom and let him stew if there was no authority to reel me in.
...Who wrote that line?

When Islam found it's way, it was not hope that lead people into belief, but fear.
People actually rejected the message, they didn't want to face their action, so hope did not play a part.
Hope now for many believers can be a second aspect, I agree.
But without the fundamental aspect of fear, majority of people will not believe; 'Ah..God will forgive us all if he's there.'

We can only trust that God will not torture us.
I think Evil takes and Good gives.
Last line is from the Qur'an, God adressing the Prophet that he shouldn't worry about people's believe, but he should regard himself as a warner.

[Asmodean]

When Islam found it's way, it was not hope that lead people into belief, but fear.

I don't think that's accurate at all. Fear got them to listen. Hope got them to obey - and that IS oversimplifying the matter, but it's a relatively close rendition. It still works today, but those pulling the hope and fear strings are people, not gods.

People actually rejected the message, they didn't want to face their action, so hope did not play a part.

Those who feared, probably obeyed in hope of avoiding the realization of those fears

Hope now for many believers can be a second aspect, I agree.

One of the cornerstones of religion, more like it.

But without the fundamental aspect of fear, majority of people will not believe; 'Ah..God will forgive us all if he's there.'

Oh, they might have believed, but they would not obey. And that brings us to the point of whether or not Allah the Tyrant is worthy of obedience.

We can only trust that God will not torture us.

There are alternatives. One is not caring, the other is fighting back. There are probably others; took two examples from the top of my head.

I think Evil takes and Good gives.

Of course, most things both give AND take... A disease, for instance, can give you blisters. And yet you die from it. Is that disease then good for giving blisters or evil for taking your life? I see where you are going, I think, but giving and taking are as much twoi sides of the same coin as good and evil and the way the coin lands is highly subjective to the individual.

Last line is from the Qur'an, God adressing the Prophet that he shouldn't worry about people's believe, but he should regard himself as a warner.

Uh-huh. And we should not simply disregard the warnings as insubstantial and quite possibly not of the claimed source because..?

[iSok]

I don't think that's accurate at all. Fear got them to listen. Hope got them to obey - and that IS oversimplifying the matter, but it's a relatively close rendition. It still works today, but those pulling the hope and fear strings are people, not gods.

Why does man have hope?
Nonetheless, you draw a line between hope in an afterlife and fear of punishment. That is wrong, there is no connection.
There is however a connection  between hope in avoiding punishment that is caused by fear of punishment.
The fear of punishment was first established and lead to hope in avoiding it.

Oh, they might have believed, but they would not obey. And that brings us to the point of whether or not God is worthy of obedience.

Believe in God --> fear of punishment --> reflecting on your actions --> improving your character.
The fear of punishment would not be established if scriptures did not contain passages of punishment.
Pre-Islamic arabs buried their daughters alive after they were born. They abolished this tradition, because of the chain of thoughts as described above.

This is how weak man is, like a child.

Uh-huh. And we should not simply disregard the warnings as insubstantial and quite possibly not of the claimed source because..?

Because evolution is the answer, we are simply going to enjoy life and then die, no matter the odds.
You took the interpretation of the absolute, as the absolute. Everything beyond your perception does not exist.
Is that a prison or freedom?

Do you know why modern world has rejected God?

[Asmodean]

Nonetheless, you draw a line between hope in an afterlife and fear of punishment. That is wrong, there is no connection.

No, I'm saying that hope of escaping the punishment is what gets the sheep to obey the master.

There is however a connection  between hope in avoiding punishment that is caused by fear of punishment.

...In other words, this right here. Afterlife does contribute with a fair share of hope, but that IS a different matter. Fear of punishment and hope of avoiding it are, however, the same sides of the abovementioned coin (Afterlife follows exactly the same pattern, actually)

The fear of punishment was first established and lead to hope in avoiding it.

Chicken came before the egg, yes?  

They are two sides of the same coin. A fertilized chicken egg is STILL a chicken, only in its embryonic stage. Without one, the other is meaningless. Remove hope and you will have blind panic, accomplishing nothing at all (If that's the point, then your god is not doing too good a job of it). Remove fear, and you kick the ladder from under this particular hope's feet.

Believe in God --> fear of punishment --> reflecting on your actions --> improving your character.

--> Suicide belt --> Game over.

Your line of thought is flawed. Why would fear of punishment lead to improvement of character rather than to looking for holes in the letter of the law? People who ARE "good" tend to be that regardless of the punishments involved in being bad. Peoplke who are less good, however, will be less good regardless of the punishment.

Pre-Islamic arabs buried their daughters alive after they were born. They abolished this tradition, because of the chain of thoughts as described above.

Am I to assume you are against burying daughters alive..? Why is that bad then? Because to me, the defensibility of such an action does not have anything to do with punishment for it.

Because evolution is the answer, we are simply going to enjoy life and then die, no matter the odds.

Enjoying life is subjective. Not everyone does. Evolution is not the answer - it is a process. An explanation, if you are refering to the Theory of Evolution, but the explanation part lies in the word "theory"

[Asmodean]

Side comment to one of the aboveraised points.

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/stoning.htm

If the people in that vid and others like them are doing it wrong, then Allah failed in explaining to them how to do it right. Because they most likely genuinely believe they are following its will.

[iSok]

Chicken came before the egg, yes?  

If the concept of the afterlife would appeal to the early followers, they would not reject the message.
So after they were convinced of the truth, they feared the punishment after that hope followed by avoiding punishment by improving your character.

As you say it, and I agree, that is how it works.

No, I'm saying that hope of escaping the punishment is what gets the sheep to obey the master.

Your line of thought is flawed. Why would fear of punishment lead to improvement of character rather than to looking for holes in the letter of the law? People who ARE "good" tend to be that regardless of the punishments involved in being bad. Peoplke who are less good, however, will be less good regardless of the punishment.

Let's stay at the example of Pre-Islamic Arabs. I stay at my point of view that fear of punishment leads to improvement of character.
If you disagree, then what other factor played a role when the Arabs abolished this tradition?

Am I to assume you are against burying daughters alive..? Why is that bad then? Because to me, the defensibility of such an action does not have anything to do with punishment for it.

I don't  think whether in our reality there is an absolute of good or evil. I consider God as the infinite of Good, and His guidance as coming as close as possible to the infinite of Good in our reality.
Burying your daughter alive because she's a woman goes against His guidance (Not just scriptural guidance).

Enjoying life is subjective. Not everyone does. Evolution is not the answer - it is a process. An explanation, if you are refering to the Theory of Evolution, but the explanation part lies in the word "theory"

You see evolution as the explanation in the absence of God. This is your answer, your view of life. Leading to rejecting God because evolution provides a good explanation.

[Asmodean]

I don't  think whether in our reality there is an absolute of good or evil. I consider God as the infinite of Good, and His guidance as coming as close as possible to the infinite of Good in our reality.
Burying your daughter alive because she's a woman goes against His guidance (Not just scriptural guidance).

I will get back to the rest later. Going home from work in a few.

As for the quoted point, a question? If god was cool with it, would you do it? Because I would not, and I'm a morally bankrupt atheist with no fear of god to stop me.

[iSok]

I don't  think whether in our reality there is an absolute of good or evil. I consider God as the infinite of Good, and His guidance as coming as close as possible to the infinite of Good in our reality.
Burying your daughter alive because she's a woman goes against His guidance (Not just scriptural guidance).

I will get back to the rest later. Going home from work in a few.

As for the quoted point, a question? If god was cool with it, would you do it? Because I would not, and I'm a morally bankrupt atheist with no fear of god to stop me.

The morals without scriptures that I have Asmodean before I became religious, I see them as a favour of God, His guidance. Some people can sleep after
they have massmurdered thousands, I can't, I am lucky that I can't.

About your link, I think the topic is quite controversial, especially in our western society.
But one thing is sure, Islam is against any form of sexual relationship outside marriage.
It says that marriage is sacred and the bond between a man and woman should be healthy and one and other
should find tranquility in eachother to get rid of nature's desires.

Why? Because if we see it here in our society. Adultery causes more problems than it fixes.
Most single parents are women, left behind by their husbands for no reason. (Look at the divorce rates here, caused most of the time by adultery)
I might be wrong, but it seems that people here in the west tend to see themselves as important, since life is short and should be enjoyed.
Why be in a relationship that is no fun? This is the picture that the media sketches here and people often follow it.
Compare the crime rates of Saudi-Arabia or Oman with the U.S.A....you'll be surprised, If children do not grow up in an healthy environment, there will be rage.

As for stoning, the prophet (pbuh) wasn't really fond of stoning.
A man came and asked the prophet for his punishment, as you can see he did everything to avoid the punishment.

I have committed adultery, please purify me." (In another report, Prophet Muhammad asked Ma'iz that the reports he heard about him are correct or not[6]) prophet Muhammad turned his face away from him and said "Woe to you, go back and pray to Allah for forgiveness." But the man again came in front of prophet Muhammad and repeated his desire for purification. The act was repeated three times, until Abu Bakr, sitting close by, told the Ma'iz to leave, as the fourth repetition of the plea would get him stoned. But the man persisted.Prophet Muhammad then turned to him and said "you might have kissed or caressed her or you might have looked at her with lust (and so assumed that you committed Zéna)". Ma'iz replied in the negative. Allah's Apostle said "did you lie in bed with her?" Ma'iz replied in the affirmative. He then asked, "did you have sexual intercourse?" Ma'iz replied in the affirmative. Then Prophet Muhammad got quite uncomfortable, and asked "Did your male organ disappear in the female part?" Ma'iz replied in the affirmative. He then asked, once more, whether Ma'iz knew what Zéna means. Ma'iz replied "yes, I have committed the same act a husband commits with his wife." Prophet Muhammad asked if he was married, and he replied "yes".Prophet Muhammad asked if he took any wine, and Ma'iz again replied in the negative. Prophet Muhammad then sent for an inquiry from the neighbors of Ma'iz, whether or not Ma'iz suffered from insanity. The replies all came in the negative. Prophet Muhammad then said, "had you kept it a secret, it would have been better for you." Prophet Muhammad then ordered Ma'iz to be stoned to death. During the stoning, Ma'iz cried out, "O people, take me back to the Holy Prophet, the people of my clan deluded me." When this was reported to Prophet Muhammad, he replied "Why did you not let him off, he might have repented, and Allah may have accepted it."


Stoning itself is a punishment described in the Torah, not in the Qur'an.

The Jew brought to the Prophet a man and a woman from amongst them who have committed (adultery) illegal sexual intercourse. He ordered both of them to be stoned (to death), near the place of offering the funeral prayers beside the mosque."

Who brought the man to the prophet? A Jew, that follows the Torah. If the prophet did not give this order according to the Mosaic law, the Jewish community would riot in his time.
The Jewish community voluntarily applied the Mosaic laws on themselves and did not accept the teachings of the Qur'an.

Stoning however is still applied in some countries, the Qur'an clearly does not support this. But in general, society has accepted this (in recent years more and more countries are abolishing it.)
Asmodean, I remember now why I left this forum a few weeks ago.
Being here is a full-time job.

[Stevil]

Islam is against any form of sexual relationship outside marriage.
It says that marriage is sacred and the bond between a man and woman should be healthy and one and other
should find tranquility in eachother to get rid of nature's desires.

Desires are to be embraced not got rid of. I desire my wife and I am certainly not ashamed to admit it and if anyone tries to tell me that my desires are a sin then they can just go away and have a nice little chat to their imaginary god instead. Without sexual desires we would see the end of the human race.

The thing I struggle to understand is how do two people meet and fall in love if they are not allowed to spend time together alone? In some "Muslim" countries the woman's face even remains hidden until after they are married. It seems there is much more of a sexual focus (be it avoidance of sexual desires) than in non "Muslim" countries. I find it appauling to simply treat woman as if they are sexual objects and hence hide them away from society. Women need to be treated first and foremost as people. If you have sexual desires for their image and you think that is a problem, then that is your problem, don't make it their problem. IT IS NATURAL TO DESIRE A POTENTIAL PARTNER.
Once a relationship starts, especially in the early times, lust does play a part, it brings people much closer, they break personal barriers and they desire touch. I don't agree with the whole celibacy thing before marriage, I feel it causes young people to marry before they are ready, it causes them to marry simply because they lust for sex. (IMHO). I have seen many young Christian couple getting married very young.

I married out of love. The wife and I had been living together for three years, most of that as a couple, as lovers (shock, horror). We had the whole lust thing behind us, we knew we were compatible with regards to living together and putting up with each others crap. I am certainly going to recommend to my daughters to live with their partners for a while before considering marriage. Which way they go will be their choice though, I am not going to be pushy.

Look at the divorce rates here, caused most of the time by adultery

Adultery is not a cause but generally a symptom (IMHO). People stray for three reasons:
1. They have strong desires to have sex with new partners
2. They fall in love with someone else
3. They are having relationship problems with their partner

Unfortunately many religions only see black and white in the world.
The world is much more complex.
If 1. is your thing then you could discuss with your partner. Some people have open relationships, some people have arrangements that they know their partners will stray but tell each other not to let each other know when it happens
If 2. is your thing then this can be difficult. Being in love with two people at the same time. I am sure the new relationship seems a little more exciting than the old one. This may stem from 3. but may not. Certainly decisions should be made one way or another rather than having a hidden affair.
If 3. then it might be good that the partner finds out about the affair and then breaks the relationship. People get too comfortable in a relationship and often are resistant to change. If you have fallen out of love with your partner then either try and fix it or move on. An affair is one way to break the relationship.

If children are involved then things get much more complicated.