Predestination and fatalism . . .

[monster_gardener]

Ibs, step back a bit and look at what you've written above. Have you no sense of propriety whatsoever?


Why anyone continues to try and engage you is beyond me . . your hubris, vile accusations, and foul mouth utterly preclude any possibility of productive exchange.

If anything you get off easy, given your behavior. You post unsubstantiated claims and make excuses when you are unable to support them. I've never seen you engage in a productive discussion.

Your insults directed at me, in light of your own actions, are merely hypocritical. As always, you gave up on your arguments and are now talking about individuals.

No, that's not the case . . I'm not talking about you as much as I'm talking about your manner and manners.

Excuses in the form of semantics. You made your claims, won't back them up, and now this instead. Confirms what I said above.

There is, in my experience, no possibility of discussion with you. As soon as anyone disagrees with you, they are posting blatant lies, are racist,

Some people on this forum are liars, some are racists, some are both. But you never event attempt to argue anything. You make claims, then give up and start with personal attacks or "funny" jpegs.

I, on the other hand, can always substantiate my claims or argue my subjective positions as the case may be. This thread has devolved into mud slinging precisely because you refused to even attempt to support claims that you made, instead choosing to insult me in conversation with racist troll m_g.

In that regard, you're your own worst enemy and a piss-poor example of supposedly "reasonable" Islam. Your rants and attacks are but the verbal form of lopping off heads and hands and the Muslim inability to countenance contrary opinion.

If your appalling personal behavior is supposed to be indicative of Protestants or Alaskans imagine how low my opinion of them would be. But I don't subscribe to this kind of irrational thinking you are engaging in with this claim. This is textbook racist thinking.

Clean up your act.

More hypocrisy. Spare me this trash and stick to the original topic.

Thanks for the post, iBS.

I, on the other hand, can always substantiate my claims

Really?

Like your claim "that 90% of America is a dump"

That you know the contents of posts you don't read.

That all I post is worthless trash............... Even though I sometimes agree with you!

And especially the lie that Marcus never backs up what he says.....

[monster_gardener]

.


New genetics discovery says biologically & physically human body is pretty much per-programmed .. what diseases and when one gets it, characters, mindset and and and

This pretty much given

Dr. Oz said, 40% is genetic, 60% life style

but

lifestyle itself is also per-programmed by genetic predisposition

Only thing not per-programmed in one's life is "random" events .. like one leaving home and over run by a bus

The rest .. what one does .. is very much influenced or even "unconsciously" lead by genetic predisposition one has .. we might think, most things we do or direction our life moves to, is, somehow, our intelligent decision .. but .. this just perception , in reality our genetics predisposition influences and unconsciously guides us in our daily decision in life, micro and macro

In that sense, "Predestination and fatalism" has been validated and I fully believe in it




.

Thank You Very Much for your post, Azari.

However there is also the epigenetic component of nurture...


In biology, and specifically genetics, epigenetics is the study of changes in gene expression or cellular phenotype, caused by mechanisms other than changes in the underlying DNA sequence – hence the name epi- (Greek: επί- over, above, outer) -genetics, some of which are heritable.

It refers to functionally relevant modifications to the genome that do not involve a change in the nucleotide sequence. Examples of such modifications are DNA methylation and histone modification, both of which serve to regulate gene expression without altering the underlying DNA sequence. These changes may remain through cell divisions for the remainder of the cell's life and may also last for multiple generations. However, there is no change in the underlying DNA sequence of the organism;[1] instead, non-genetic factors cause the organism's genes to behave (or "express themselves") differently.[2]

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

[Marcus]

So in the few instances in which you posted debatable sources people didn't immediately agree with them, therefore you no longer feel the need to attempt to support your claims. Sounds airtight.

A number of the people on this small forum are racists. That's simply reality. I'm the bigot for identifying racism and dishonesty? A feeble excuse for your own acceptance of those views.

Then keep your mouth shut and don't insult me in your banter with m_g. You started this first with your false claims about Islam which you couldn't support, and second by insulting me personally. You can't accept responsibility for your actions any more than you can support your arguments.

Again, no, that's not the case. It isn't that you disagree with contrary sources, you dismiss them out-of-hand. After a while, why bother?

As for forum members who are liars and racists, that's your opinion. Start a poll, Ibs, and ask who here will admit to being a liar or a racist. As someone here is fond of pointing out, just saying something doesn't make it so. And, yes, you are a bigot for your so-called "identifying" racism and dishonesty. Ninety-nine-point-nine percent of what you so label is nothing more than a contrary opinion.


"Keep [my] mouth shut"? Gotta do better than that . . .

wink.jpeg (6.21 KiB) Viewed 491 times

[Marcus]

New genetics discovery says biologically & physically human body is pretty much per-programmed .. what diseases and when one gets it, characters, mindset and and and

This pretty much given

Dr. Oz said, 40% is genetic, 60% life style

but

lifestyle itself is also per-programmed by genetic predisposition

Only thing not per-programmed in one's life is "random" events .. like one leaving home and over run by a bus

The rest .. what one does .. is very much influenced or even "unconsciously" lead by genetic predisposition one has .. we might think, most things we do or direction our life moves to, is, somehow, our intelligent decision .. but .. this just perception , in reality our genetics predisposition influences and unconsciously guides us in our daily decision in life, micro and macro

In that sense, "Predestination and fatalism" has been validated and I fully believe in it

More or less, ALI, but entirely compatible with the Reformed view:

I. Although, in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first Cause, all things come to pass immutably, and infallibly; yet, by the same providence, He orders them to fall out, according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.

Every second of time, every atom of matter lie within God and fall out according to his eternal decrees by secondary means—necessarily, freely, or contingently.

[Ibrahim]

So in the few instances in which you posted debatable sources people didn't immediately agree with them, therefore you no longer feel the need to attempt to support your claims. Sounds airtight.

A number of the people on this small forum are racists. That's simply reality. I'm the bigot for identifying racism and dishonesty? A feeble excuse for your own acceptance of those views.

Then keep your mouth shut and don't insult me in your banter with m_g. You started this first with your false claims about Islam which you couldn't support, and second by insulting me personally. You can't accept responsibility for your actions any more than you can support your arguments.

Again, no, that's not the case. It isn't that you disagree with contrary sources, you dismiss them out-of-hand.

Ridiculous. For example I explained, in detail, why that C.S. Lewis quote was logically flawed, you just spammed "ironclad, irrefutable" for pages and pages like a child. Or when you and your sock account started telling me not to worry about what Rushdoony actually said in his book, you know him personally and he's a great guy.

As for forum members who are liars and racists, that's your opinion.

In most cases its demonstrable.

"Keep [my] mouth shut"? Gotta do better than that . . .

It doesn't matter to me either way, but if you don't want conflict then don't antagonize people.

[monster_gardener]

So in the few instances in which you posted debatable sources people didn't immediately agree with them, therefore you no longer feel the need to attempt to support your claims. Sounds airtight.

A number of the people on this small forum are racists. That's simply reality. I'm the bigot for identifying racism and dishonesty? A feeble excuse for your own acceptance of those views.

Then keep your mouth shut and don't insult me in your banter with m_g. You started this first with your false claims about Islam which you couldn't support, and second by insulting me personally. You can't accept responsibility for your actions any more than you can support your arguments.

Again, no, that's not the case. It isn't that you disagree with contrary sources, you dismiss them out-of-hand.

Ridiculous. For example I explained, in detail, why that C.S. Lewis quote was logically flawed, you just spammed "ironclad, irrefutable" for pages and pages like a child. Or when you and your sock account started telling me not to worry about what Rushdoony actually said in his book, you know him personally and he's a great guy.

As for forum members who are liars and racists, that's your opinion.

In most cases its demonstrable.

"Keep [my] mouth shut"? Gotta do better than that . . .

It doesn't matter to me either way, but if you don't want conflict then don't antagonize people.

Thanks for the post, Ibs

In most cases its demonstrable.

Especially so in the case of pompous liars afflicted with Best of Peoples delusion...

but if you don't want conflict then don't antagonize people.

Likewise Ibs........... Likewise..........


Note:

Worth noting that it can be VERY hard not to offend some Muslims.

Remembering that per the Muslim manual of Fiqh, The Reliance of the Traveler, it is considered slanderous to tell the TRUTH about a Muslim if that truth is damaging.........

Online Reliance of the Traveller

http://www.shafiifiqh.com/maktabah/reli ... veller.pdf

From:

About Us

The aim of Shafiifiqh.com, a part of the Shafi’i Institute, is to revive and support the the Sunni Islamic jurisprudence of the guild (madhhab) of Imam Muhammad ibn Idris Ash-Shafi’i (May Allah have mercy upon him and be please with him). This support includes, but is not limited to, answering the questions and/or doubts that followers of the Shafi’i school may have in respect to Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). Shafiifiqh.com was created to help fill the void of Sunni (traditional) knowledge in western languages. Currently we have a Dutch (Nederlands) site, and we have translated fatawa into french too (www.shafiifiqh.com/francais). We are looking forward to provide fatwa in other languages in the future too, insha’Allah/God willing.

http://www.shafiifiqh.com


Comments and excerpts from Amazon.com where the book is available in printed form for purchase

Slander, in the Western context, is the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation. Within the Sunni Islam tradition, slander means mentioning anything concerning a person that that person would dislike. The truth, then, becomes slanderous when an author or source mentions "anything concerning a person that that person would dislike."

The Reliance of the Traveller further discusses slander. "Slander means to mention anything concerning a person that he would dislike, whether about his body, religion, everyday life, self, disposition, property, son, father, wife, servant, turban, garment, gait, movements, smiling, dissolution, frowning, cheerfulness, or anything else connected with him." (p.730) 'Do you know what slander is?' They answered, 'Allah and His Messenger know best.' He said, 'It is to mention of your brother that which he would dislike.' Someone asked, 'What if he is as I say?' And he replied, 'If he is as you say, you have slandered him, and if not, you have calumniated him. The Muslim is the brother of the Muslim. He does not betray him, lie to him, or hang back from coming to his aid. All of the Muslim is inviolable to his fellow Muslim: his reputation, his property, his blood. Godfearingness is here (the heart). It is sufficiently wicked for someone to belittle his fellow Muslim." (p.730.) This passage has implications for objective assessments of those who do wrong. It may be "improper" to tell the truth and say they have done wrong.

http://www.amazon.ca/Reliance-Traveller ... 0915957728

Also worth noting that lying is VERY much allowed.......

Lying is permitted in war, settling disagreements, and a man talking with his wife or she with him. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable by lying but not telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory. (p. 745)

"When, for example, one is concealing a Muslim from an oppressor who asks where he is, it is obligatory to lie about him being hidden. Or when a person deposits an article with one for safekeeping and an oppressor wanting to appropriate it inquires about it, it is obligatory to lie about having concealed it, for if one informs him about the article and he then seizes it, one is financially liable (to the owner) to cover the article's cost."(p. 745) Law Enforcement Investigations looking for people or evidence may find this problematic.

"Whether the purpose is war, settling a disagreement, or gaining sympathy of a victim legally entitled to retaliate against one so that he will forbear to do so; it is not unlawful to lie when any of these aims can be obtained through lying. But it is religiously more precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression, meaning to intend by one's words something that is literally true, in respect to which one is not lying, while the outward purport of the words deceives the hearer, though even if one does not have such an intention and merely lies without intending anything else, it is not unlawful in the above circumstances." (p.745)

"Lying is permissible when there is a legitimate desired end. And the legitimate desired end may be a personal one." "One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie." (p.746)

Legal provisions for Giving a Misleading Impression (Book R, Section 10 Giving a Misleading Impression) is contained on page 748. "Giving a misleading impression is among the most important topics, being frequently met with and often abused. It befits us to examine the matter closely, and whoever learns of it should reflect upon it and apply it." "Giving a misleading impression means to utter an expression that ostensibly implies one meaning while intending a different meaning the expression may also have, one that contradicts the ostensive purport. It is a kind of deception. It often takes the form of the speaker intending a specific referent while the hearer understands a more general one, as when a person asks a householder, "Is So and so here?" to which the householder, intending the space between himself and the questioner rather than the space inside the house, replies, "He is not here." "Scholars say that there is no harm in giving a misleading impression if required by an interest countenanced by Sacred Law that is more important than not misleading the person being addressed, or if there is a pressing need which could not otherwise be fulfilled except through lying."

Reliance of the Traveller gives insight to a wide variety of problems confronting the current era of law enforcement and a noticeable skewing of the truth in Islamic scholarship and news coverage.

http://www.amazon.ca/Reliance-Traveller ... 0915957728

The page numbers above are not the same as in the online edition but the material about lying is available in the online edition though not text searchable because of the type of pdf used.

[Taboo]

A quote from an 1899 book by Winston Churchill, "The River War", in which he describes Muslims he apparently observed during Kitchener's campaign in the Sudan" "How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient" Rome.

I don't think there is any doubt that Churchill was, like most people of the era, blatantly racist. The paragraph above strikes me as strangely sanitized. Here's a more telling version:

For more than a thousand years the influence of Mohammedanism, which appears to possess a strange fascination for negroid races, has been permeating the Soudan, and, although ignorance and natural obstacles impede the progress of new ideas, the whole of the black race is gradually adopting the new religion and developing Arab characteristics. In the districts of the north, where the original invaders settled, the evolution is complete, and the Arabs of the Soudan are a race formed by the interbreeding of negro and Arab, and yet distinct from both... The qualities of mongrels are rarely admirable, and the mixture of the Arab and negro types has produced a debased and cruel breed, more shocking because they are more intelligent than the primitive savages.

Ugh. I don't think this sort of pseudo-scientific dribble of nonsense deserves the respect of 21st century netizens.

PS:

were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled

Makes you wonder if "it" is Islam or Christianity. Both seem quite appropriate.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled

Makes you wonder if "it" is Islam or Christianity. Both seem quite appropriate.

I think people innately have an opposition and resistance to science, and their religious viewpoint isn't the matter. Whether Christian or Muslim, people like their magical thinking and their sloth and their quaint unexamined habits. Science is such a bother, you can't be considered wise just because you're old, for example.....'>>......

[Ibrahim]

were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled

Makes you wonder if "it" is Islam or Christianity. Both seem quite appropriate.

I think people innately have an opposition and resistance to science, and their religious viewpoint isn't the matter. Whether Christian or Muslim, people like their magical thinking and their sloth and their quaint unexamined habits. Science is such a bother, you can't be considered wise just because you're old, for example.....'>>......

"Like an ox, they grow in size but not in wisdom." -Gautama Buddha, Dharmapada.

[monster_gardener]

were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled

Makes you wonder if "it" is Islam or Christianity. Both seem quite appropriate.

I think people innately have an opposition and resistance to science, and their religious viewpoint isn't the matter. Whether Christian or Muslim, people like their magical thinking and their sloth and their quaint unexamined habits. Science is such a bother, you can't be considered wise just because you're old, for example.....'>>......

Thank You VERY Much for your post, Lzzrd Grrl.

Your post made me think of this..............

Arthur C. Clarke's dictum that "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C._Clarke

[noddy]

were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled

Makes you wonder if "it" is Islam or Christianity. Both seem quite appropriate.

I think people innately have an opposition and resistance to science, and their religious viewpoint isn't the matter. Whether Christian or Muslim, people like their magical thinking and their sloth and their quaint unexamined habits. Science is such a bother, you can't be considered wise just because you're old, for example.....'>>......

capacity for change is quite low in most humans and those of us who have a larger tolerance for it are probably either rock bottom and looking for change or come from unstable childhoods and dont actually expect stability.

[Mr. Perfect]

were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled

Makes you wonder if "it" is Islam or Christianity. Both seem quite appropriate.

I think people innately have an opposition and resistance to science, and their religious viewpoint isn't the matter. Whether Christian or Muslim, people like their magical thinking and their sloth and their quaint unexamined habits. Science is such a bother, you can't be considered wise just because you're old, for example.....'>>......

"Like an ox, they grow in size but not in wisdom." -Gautama Buddha, Dharmapada.

Pretty racist against ox.

[Torchwood]

We are definitely not preprogrammed. Epigenetic silencing.