Review by Sam Harris - Mahomet Elohim - Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason, from English: Yael Sela-Shapiro (Hebrew publishing house in cooperation with Keter), 2007
Harris, a philosopher who is working on a doctorate in neuroscience, brings here an extremely sharp, poignant, fascinating and important book that presents the secular worldview in its entirety while unhesitatingly discarding all "political correctness" and whipping the bitter truth in the reader's face. No one is free from it - the religious Jews and especially the settlers, the devout Christians from the days of the Inquisition to the conservative Bush administration and especially the Muslims to whom Harris devotes the largest part of his book while sharply attacking the foundations of Islam that call for the conquest and destruction of all other religions. He and many quotes from the Koran testify that Islam is not a religion of peace and that those "Muslim extremists" are not actually extremists but only those who truly and wholeheartedly believe in Islam.
I would like to point out that I do not necessarily agree with everything that is said in the book, and to mention that the quotes given here are quotes from the book and the author's opinion only.
The book paints a grim picture of the destruction expected of humanity in the near future by weapons of mass destruction that will come into the hands of Islamic religious extremists. "Give people different, contradictory and unverifiable concepts about the next world, and then force them to live together on limited resources. The result is the phenomenon we are witnessing: an endless cycle of murder and cease-fires. History teaches one unshakable truth, and that is that disdain and lack of interest in evidence always bring out the worst in us. Add to this cauldron also weapons of mass destruction, and you have a recipe for the collapse of civilization" (page 23).
"If we don't reach an age where we agree to at least admit that we are not sure that God composed our holy books, then all we will have left to do is count the days until the war of Gog and Magog - because God has given us many more reasons to kill each other than to turn the other cheek … How does any person claim to know the way the universe works? Because that is what is said in the Holy Scriptures. How do we know that there is no error in our scriptures? The books claim this. Such clouds of irrationality quickly darken our world" (page 33).
"We have to start talking openly about the fact that most of our religious beliefs are ridiculous. However, I fear that the fitness hour for this has not yet arrived. Because of this, everything I will write from now on is actually a kind of prayer. I pray that one day we can think clearly enough about these matters so that our children will not kill each other for their books. And if it doesn't happen in our children's lifetime, I'm afraid we'll all be behind schedule. Because meeting the Creator has never been difficult, but within fifty years, it will be too easy to drag the rest of the world to meet him." (page 47-48).
Regarding the religious (of all religions) Harris writes: "[Faith refuses to bow its head to reason when it has no good reasons to believe. On the other hand, as soon as little evidence appears to support their faith, the believers' ears are no less inclined to data than the damned... no change that will occur in the world or in their experiences, will be able to prove to them that many of the principles of their faith are unfounded. This is proof that these beliefs are not the result of an examination of the world or the world of their experiences. (They are "not falsifiable" - infalseable - in Karl Popper's terms). It seems that even the Holocaust was not able to arouse doubts in many Jews about the existence of a good, benevolent and all-powerful God." (page 66-67)
"The people who committed the atrocities on September 11...were people of faith - believers with complete faith, as it turned out - and we must finally admit that such a person is a terrible person." (page 68).
"We usually call people who hold many beliefs that have no rational basis by certain nicknames. When their beliefs are very widespread, we call them "religious"; All those with other beliefs are usually called "crazy", "psychopathic" or "delusional". Most believers are completely sane, of course, even those who commit atrocities in the name of their beliefs. But what is the difference between a man who believes that God will reward him with seventy-two virgins if he kills a dozen Jewish teenagers, and a man who believes that beings from Alpha Centauri are sending him messages about world peace through his hair dryer? There is a difference of course, but it does not compliment the religious belief... Religious people are not usually crazy, but their fundamental beliefs are completely crazy. This is not surprising, since most beliefs only sanctified some products of ancient ignorance and madness, and imposed them on us as if they were primordial truths. As a result, billions of us believe things that no sane person would believe on their own. In fact, the set of beliefs that most of our religious traditions are based on is a clear symptom of mental illness." (page 73).
"Judaism is pagan by nature, ridiculous in the literal interpretation it gives to its holy scriptures, and contrary to the insights of modern culture no less than any other religion." It should be noted that later on he gives much more negative examples of Christianity and especially Islam and points out that Judaism is actually a much less fertile breeding ground for militant extremism and mentions that it is possible to be an active Jew without believing in God, unlike Islam and Christianity.
Among other things, Harris mentions that there are many flaws in Christianity, such as the belief that Mary (the mother of Jesus) was a virgin simply stems from a mistake in the translation of the word "virgin" from the Hebrew to Greek, and that the church sowed malicious lies, created the Inquisition, witch hunts and other murderous institutions and even helped to the Nazis by giving them her genealogical records which allowed the Nazis to trace the family roots of any person. In conclusion, Harris writes: "The history of Christianity is mainly a history of the suffering and ignorance of the human race, and not of mutual love between it and God" (page 112).
Harris dedicates the fourth chapter of the book to Islam, stating unequivocally that "a war has broken out between us and Islam. The war is not between us and an inherently peaceful religion that has been "hijacked" by extremists, it is between us and the vision of life that the Koran dictates to all Muslims... In order for us to reach a future where the West and Islam are not on the brink of mutual destruction, most Muslims must learn to ignore the constitutions of their religion, as which most Christians have learned, but in light of the principles of Islam, such a change is not guaranteed." (p. 115).
"It cannot be ignored that Islam is a religion of conquest. The only future that devout Muslims can imagine for themselves - as Muslims - is a future in which all infidels will be converted to Islam, enslaved or killed... Jihad is an unequivocal imperative to conquer the world. As the historian Bernard Lewis writes, "The assumption is that the duty of jihad will continue, and that only cease-fires will interrupt it, until the entire world adopts the Muslim faith or submits to the rule of Islam" (A.M. 116-117).
Then Harris comes to one of the most topical points in the book:
"The beliefs of Muslims constitute a special problem in the field of nuclear deterrence. If we come to a real confrontation with an Islamist regime that will have long-range nuclear weapons, the chances are slim that we will wage a cold war against it. A cold war can only be waged when the danger of death deters both sides. Concepts of martyrdom and jihad trample on the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to oscillate relatively stably on the brink of doomsday for half a century. What will we do if an Islamist regime, whose eyes roll up at the mention of paradise, obtains a long-range nuclear weapon? History shows that we cannot destroy the threatening warheads with conventional weapons,... the only thing that can guarantee our survival is the landing of the first nuclear strike. It goes without saying that this would be a terrible crime... but given the beliefs of the Islamists, there may be no other choice... We will be thrown straight into war with any Muslim nation capable of posing a nuclear threat. It sounds crazy, but it is a plausible scenario that describes how a significant portion of the world's population will be destroyed because of ideas, whose proper place is the shelf on which Batman, the Philosopher's Stone, and the Unicorn currently stand. The death of so many people for the sake of a myth is a terrible absurdity... The time has come to recognize that all reasonable people have a common enemy... Our enemy is none other than religious belief in and of itself" (pp. 136-138).
The book goes on to harshly attack the Christian piety of the American government, the modern religious persecution of homosexuals and marijuana, the religious opposition to stem cell research, abortion and contraceptives, murder on the grounds of "family honor" and many other issues while continuing to sterilize the principles of faith and the foundations The absurdities behind it (according to him).
Finally, Harris provides an answer to the moral and human needs that stand behind faith, and emphasizes how it is possible to remain moral and "good" even without belief in any god, among other things while basing oneself on Buddhist principles and Eastern teachings.
In my personal opinion, this is a very interesting, readable, poignant and important book, and although I have no doubt that many of the ideas raised in the book will be controversial, in my opinion it is a must read for anyone who is interested in deeply understanding alternatives to the worldviews we are familiar with and gaining a deeper understanding behind religious views that affect our lives in almost every way Of course.
(This article is taken from Amnon Carmel's blog which deals with futurism, technology, science and more)
67 תגובות
Joseph the Destruction:
You're just a liar!
Indeed, Israel needs weapons to defend itself! As has been proven, despite all of Israel's great power and nuclear weapons, it never used it even when it was severely attacked in 73
Radical Islam is the serious problem. There are sane and sober Muslims! And there are trendsetters and murderous ones like Hamas!
There is no ethnic background and no hatred. I define myself as a moderate leftist, but I don't just go against the religion of my people like the non-moderate leftists, but against all religions in general. This is especially true of the Ilsam as a religion that was taken over by bad people, it is the source of evil. Every religion had such periods - both Christianity and Judaism, except that these periods were with the Jews thousands of years ago and with the Christians hundreds of years ago. It is a fact that no one opposes Buddhism, because Buddhism does not call for terrorism, and it has enough believers, but they do not endanger the peace of the world.
I wish that the fundamentalist Muslims in Hamas and with them the extremist Arabs wherever they are, will reach a quarter of the morality that Israel has. After eight years of sending missiles at women and children, do they still have the right to say something?
Israel did not use weapons of mass destruction. Israel is sensitive to human life, and if you didn't inflate the numbers in Gaza you would find that 90% of the dead are members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. And like all Israelis, I feel sorry for every child and every innocent person killed in Gaza. All those murderers, probably not sorry because they used civilians as protectors against their will.
In the meantime, Islam is now the deadliest religion! And this is the real danger to world peace, and Israel needs weapons to defend against the danger and not to attack!
Undoubtedly, most of those who responded here, it was on ethnic grounds and hatred of Islam and Muslims, for your knowledge, or actually I will make a point that you Zionist Jews know very well that this is the truth, Islam is not radical and does not support hatred of any religion or people, unfortunately your opinions stem from hatred of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him But all of you, every Jew and no matter where we are, deny that Israel is a danger to humanity and that it uses nuclear weapons for mass destruction, whether it was in Lebanon or Gaza
The truth behind terrorism, religion, the relationship of the United States with the establishment of the Iranian nuclear to this day, who manages the world in secrecy on the website of conspiracies, Israel has a hand in the world and it is a shame that they hide it from the public
I mean, Mr. Einstein, no matter how we spin it, you will not change your thesis that religion helped advance humanity.
Even today, she really helps hundreds of thousands of Catholic believers, who are infected with AIDS, the main thing is not to use a condom.
The conclusion is that there is no proof that religion has made humanity more murderous. Therefore there is no reason to dismiss it outright because of its results, but to discuss whether it is true/real.
As for Bin Laden, there is no doubt that he should be destroyed, but that is not the point
So what is your conclusion, to leave Bin Laden to operate freely because he will succeed in killing only 10 million people?
The three greatest murderers in history were secular. Mao Zedong (leader of Communist China) caused the death of about 70,000,000 people.
Hitler is responsible for the death of about 50,000,000
Stalin is responsible for the death of about 30,000,000 people
Asaf:
Why do you think I argue about nonsense?
Isn't this a result of the fact that those who argue with me say nonsense?
Here I am about to do it again because you are talking nonsense too.
I act without religion and without any manual.
You may be a robot but I'm not one and see it's a miracle - I'm not going back.
And if I went back I would, God forbid, start believing in nonsense, discriminating against women, persecuting gays, singing admonitions and cutting off any attempt to enforce the laws of the country, and telling others what they should eat and when.
It is true that faith prevents going back because those who believe are already there - completely behind.
Descartes and Aristotle are not contemporary philosophers.
They belong to an age when all of humanity was still behind, along with you.
We have progressed since then and no contemporary philosopher thinks so.
And by the way - an honest person does not need all the philosophers in this matter.
I don't care what the Jewish religion wants (as if a religion could want!). It bothers me what the religious want from me.
You were probably still small (actually you are still small) when the Jews eliminated the Jewish, the Frisian and the Jebusites.
In the name of the Jewish religion, murder campaigns were also carried out.
It is true that it is a less violent religion towards the rest of the world.
She compensates for this with violence towards her sons.
Read Yaron Yedan's book - Religion Rises on Its Creators - and you will see how enlightened your operating instructions book is.
Most of the population in the world is generally a population of bacteria.
According to you - this is what everyone should aspire to be.
In short - you bore me, so I will stop arguing about your nonsense.
Gentlemen, I have read the entire discussion, and although it is stupid,
Unfortunately, Michael has such a narrow view and such a blind hatred for religion, that he argues about nonsense.
With all due respect,
Without the religion and without the MANUAL of how to behave, we would go back.
As there are science books, which are based on the proofs of their predecessors,
So are religious books, which try to find solutions to life...
When the philosophers (such as: Descartes and Aristotle) try to ask themselves whether it is permissible to murder, they reason and think, in the most irreligious way possible, while using logical concepts and proofs and examples, and come to the conclusion that it is against human morality... which has already been recorded many, many years before and after. .
Religion is not free from mistakes that improve with humanity's understanding that this is not the way...
Wars have been and will be since the invention of the sprout.
Wars were fought in the name of the Christian religion, in the Crusades, and Christians grew up.
Wars have been waged in the name of the Muslim religion, and are still being waged, and they have not yet matured. Unfortunately, there is a massive need in the Muslim religion to make corrections in understanding to bridge human logic.
The Jewish religion is a peace-loving religion, whose whole desire was to receive a book of laws as a group of enlightened tribes, and to live in the area that is today called the State of Israel (and maybe some parts of our neighbor, but small parts)... This was all they wanted, and no Star of David journeys were ever made in its name .
If we are dealing with the Jewish religion, and this is one of its biggest problems, it is critical of itself, everything it has to enter and check and criticize, and part of such a process also creates self-hatred.
Stop abolishing religion.. If it wasn't a good recipe, most of the world's population wouldn't belong to it.
On the other hand, there is no possibility without a basic belief in something. Until they find the logic of emotion or alternatively the formula for every human emotion, it is impossible to analyze behavior between a person and his friend, and between his way in a world without laws that are terribly difficult to prove... and laws that we use on a daily basis... and therefore the place of religion is right for education and the improvement of society.
And Michael,
I like not to work on Shabbat, to rest and enjoy life. What was invented 3000 years ago, by a stupid religion, and today has become a part of the western world's being... can't be that bad... think what a great invention this is, in a world 3000 years ago when the people went out to the fields to plow every day, suddenly they are told they need to rest day in the week???
It's kind of like the invention of the telephone in their strength classes…
I am not a religious person, but am always looking for the essence of my existence in the world that is existence.
The hidden is greater than the visible, and until then I believe, until proven otherwise.
Welcome back. I hope you enjoyed the trip.
Hello! I returned after a trip of some 16 days in Thailand.
I have to say that I don't have the strength to read the whole discussion, but I read the article and saw the lecture that Michael linked to and I have to say that I agree with every word that Sam Harris said. Maybe except for the one she said about the Book of Leviticus that is evil.. Still, a lot was written there about the donation and help to the orphan and the widow.
Regarding the Buddha, the Buddha is considered like a god with special healing and magic abilities. Belief in him is really quite ignorant idolatry. Believers feed the statues of the Buddha every day.
Even so, the principles of the Buddhist religion are far better than all the other religions that exist.
For example, just so you understand how cool the Buddhist religion is conceptually and practically, here are its principles (which I quoted from the wiki):
# Dukha - the truth about the existence of suffering: life in the world is not satisfactory, not harmonious and includes suffering. Suffering is universal.
# Samudaya - the truth about the origin of suffering: there is a reason for suffering and it is basic ignorance - ignorance[1]
# Nirodha - the truth about the removal of suffering: there is a possibility to be freed from ignorance and thus be freed from suffering, that is - suffering is finite and the way to end it is nirvana.
# Marga - the truth about the path to liberation from suffering: there is a path that leads to the end of suffering.
virtue:
Your definitions are devoid of foundation.
There is no misuse of science. Its fruits are misused. Science is simply the search for truth and really can't be all bad. That knowing the truth allows people to do bad things is a fact but it is not a misuse of science.
Religion, on the other hand, has no fruits and is itself the motive for the actions that a person does and since these actions are often evil - religion is the cause of that evil.
It is true that there are those who make use of the religious beliefs of others to incite them to do bad deeds.
This is not an abuse of religion but an abuse of people who because of religion have a tendency to commit acts of madness.
All this in terms of definitions.
Those who watch the facts know that this is exactly what is happening
Well, after the word "articles" there is a slash followed by the number "0" and only then does it continue as written. . . Comma 7340 etc. . .
Syrian
http://www.ynet.co.ilarticles,7340,L-3564896,00.html
Something about slashes and commas, let's hope that now it is indeed okay
http://www.ynet.co.ilarticles,7340,L-3564896,00.html
http://www.ynet.co.ilarticles,7340,L-3564896,00.html
correction
Extremist Islam [as an example Al-Qaeda, Hamas, as well as any other religious extremism, of any religion] - I will define as the misuse of religion.
The weapons of mass destruction [atomic, biological, chemical, as well as any other weapon, whether used by the Nazis or the Americans or any other oppressor for the purpose] - I will define as misuse of science. The guide with hints, in which lies the way to start finding out, in order to know how to use the tools wisely, in order to grow well, is here:
http://www.ynet.co.ilarticles,7340,L-3564896,00.html
Understanding and construction are from the same root. Everyone builds their own way according to their own understanding. Therefore, the right, good and just seeker will work to expand and deepen his understanding in order to improve his construction of his life. Wishing everyone a pleasant weekend.
News in the country
Archaeological finds confirm the story of the call to kill the prophet Jeremiah
Gedaliah ben Pashchor and Jehuchel ben Shlemiah are mentioned in the Bible together with two other ministers, when they came to King Zedekiah to demand the death of the prophet Jeremiah. In one of the most difficult moments of Jerusalem, which was under siege at the time, the two ministers accused the prophet of being a sower Demoralization among the residents of the besieged city and they said to the king: "...let this man be put to death, for therefore he loosens the hands of the remaining men of war" (Jeremiah 1:4-XNUMX).
A few weeks ago, 2600 years after the moments of that drama, a stamp was discovered in the City of David excavations that was used to sign a letter with the name of Gedaliah ben Pashchor on it. The bulla was discovered only a few meters from where it was found before
A few years a different stamp, with the name of Yehuchel ben Shlomyahu on it. The two bullae with the names of the ministers who demanded the death of Jeremiah were discovered in the excavations directed by Dr. Eilat Mazar in the City of David. They were buried for many generations in the depths of the earth, in the wastes of the destruction of the days of the First Temple.
----------------------
It turns out that the Bible corresponds to its time
And it also turns out that the prophets in Judaism were actually left-wing according to today's criteria. Their prophecies were aimed inwardly at the correction of society and not at the conquest and terror of other nations. The right-wing extremists at that time demanded to shut their mouths and believed in the control of power inwardly and outwardly. This was also the case during the Second Temple.
When there were no prophets, there were the disciples of the sages such as Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai.
Judaism has always been a religion of peace. As we know, the ultra-Orthodox today's views are very similar to the extreme left from the political point of view.
Today's chief rabbis almost always advocate peaceful solutions and reasonable compromises.
In terms of supporting violent aggression and terrorist methods, there is a complete difference between the Jewish religion and the other religions. The latter translate the ways of religion into the rule of force and occupation, as it has been in all generations.
virtue:
There is no way I will find the truth in a book that claims that the rabbit rummages or in a religion whose sages claim that lice and mice are created from inanimate matter.
There is no way that I would identify with the morality of a religion that represents it and is highly respected after he banished his wife and son to the desert and was also ready to slaughter the only goat he had left.
Holgo Khan:
I stand behind my word without any problem.
I just don't argue with people who lie to "prove" their points.
I am able to argue when we agree on the basic facts and try to draw logical conclusions from them.
As soon as someone invents the basic facts, the basis for the debate is lost.
I guess you'll argue with that too, so you'll be fine.
Michael
It's good that you revealed your true face of an internet scumbag, who can't even come up with any kind of argumentation, who doesn't stand behind his word!
go out
and learn
Through you
Stray
And no
Terrible
he is
Because
Pretty
Through you
Search
The truth
Justice
the good
Right
and found
this
with us
Straighten
And check
our faith
And justice
our way
Straight
And you
the peace
Arrive
*
Amen
Holgo Khan
All the wars initiated in history without exception almost resulted from one ideology or another. Usually around the cult of the personality of the king or commander who in fact received idolatrous status among his armies. It is the urban obedience around idolatrous or personal cults that made it possible to initiate conquest campaigns and wars.
The cult of racial superiority and personality went hand in hand in both ancient and modern times. It is well known that the ideology of Nazi Germany was a distinct pagan base.
The war in Serbia and Yugoslavia stemmed from an ideology based on racial superiority.
In ancient times the emperors and kings were the representatives of the local idols.
Belief in religion was always involved under one guise or another.
and served as the power that feeds people's minds into absolute obedience.
Holgo Khan:
Lies are hard to fight so I won't argue with the falsified facts you cite.
Continue to ignore the Crusades, continue to ignore all the Islamic wars these days, continue to ignore the fact that Nazism was actually a religion and leave me alone.
What principles exactly are you talking about?
In almost all periods where wars have occurred, the main motives of
The soldiers who enlisted in this or that army were not religious at all!
The main drivers are
1) First and foremost spoils of war, plunder! In the case of the Asian nomads, war is simply livelihood!
2) National liberation
3) Liberation from the tax burden of an occupying army or tyranny!
4) Revenge! personal or national
5) Military service pay
6) To get citizenship and reach a high position in aristocracy, politics, business! And the reference is of course to Rome.
7) To enter the history books in the case of officers and generals
8) Slave soldiers served because they really had no choice (in the case of the Mamluks)
I'm sure I forgot something!
After all, the motives of almost all wars have nothing to do with religion! But mainly worldly impulses!
Can you give examples of which 30% we are talking about?
Except for the Crusaders, and the Arab conquests!
Holgo:
Claiming that all wars are because of religious people is not without any basis, but it is probably not accurate.
That's why no one claims it.
I wonder why you keep coming back to this point.
Although part of your description of history is also inaccurate, but it is not important because we are talking about principles.
Do you have any objection to eliminating the cause of - let's say - 30% of the wars?
I don't come to defend religion or religions, but to come and say that all wars are because of religious ones, has no basis!
Maybe we will make a table....how many atheists killed Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot....and others. And how many were killed as a result of religious wars?
To come and blame the Abrahamic religions for all the evil in the world can only be claimed by an idiot.
As if Greece and Rome did not enslave entire nations. As if they didn't destroy cultures and civilizations.
As if shamanist Asian nomadic tribes did not destroy peoples, cultures!
As if Anglo-Saxons and French did not destroy and rob the land of the Indians in America! Not because of religion but because of the pursuit of money and control
Holgo:
There are many stupid people who are comfortable being dragged after all kinds of irrational "teachings".
This is true, and that is why I have often defined irrationality as the real enemy.
What else? While Nazism has almost passed away because it did not build within itself preservation mechanisms based on the fear of God like religion, religion continues to hit us as before.
Just as you would not put an obstacle in front of a blind person (because he might fall), so in front of a fool you must not place an irrational system of claims such as religion or Nazism because he might be tempted and believe it.
David, what are you talking about? You sound like an innocent child!
Was Hitler told in some holy book to destroy many nations? Or the science of race, anthropology and the theory of evolution?
Did the communists all over the world murder millions because of some holy book?
Or because of the teachings of Marx and Engels?
Humanity will never be united! This is a childish utopia of people who have not seen the world except for the computer screen and the television!
Religion is the deadly disease of humanity.
Without religion, people would be more united and would manage to reach understandings regarding the distribution of resources. Everyone would understand that we are all in the same boat and we all have a common destiny. Religion contradicts this message - it differentiates between people and creates hatred. Religion is a tool of the government to divide and rule. Hate is good for leaders, but only for the short term. They are so eager to rule that they don't realize that eventually it will hurt them too.
Just as Harris writes, brilliantly.
And God said "Let there be darkness"...
....
And there will be darkness...
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART1/766/876.html#5427237
virtue:
Below is a reference to the things I said up until the moment when your dishonesty decided my willingness to continue answering.
"Are non-believers necessarily rational, with critical thinking?"
No. Has anyone claimed this to be the case?
"Do they necessarily include this in their words? their actions? their feelings? their lusts? their fears?"
No. Has anyone claimed this to be the case?
"- Is the person who believes, necessarily not like that?"
Yes.
"Do we act according to scientific mathematical axioms in real life"
When we act rationally - yes. When we rob a bank - less.
"Or were these invented as measuring tools, trying, each in his own field and way, to understand our way or the way of the world, and try to decipher its complexity and our complexity?"
You don't seem to understand what axioms are and what logic is.
None of them is a measuring tool and does not belong to any specific field.
"Yes, and it works! These tools help us to go through a process of understanding over time, what was understood a hundred years ago, is dwarfed compared to the existing knowledge accumulated today, and it will also be dwarfed compared to the knowledge in a hundred years. This is our developmental process as a race."
True - this is what happens thanks to science. Religion is trying to stop it but so far has failed.
"Physics - examines the development of states and the form of movement of matter in the energy cycles in nature.
Philosophy - examines the study of the problems of the world and its leadership, the essence of nature and its fullness, human cognition, etc. . .
Mathematics - numbers, sizes and shapes in space, measurements, etc. . .
Psychology - studies the teachings of the mind and its processes. . .”
About - I will not enter into debates about subtleties on a topic that does not belong to the matter.
"Faith - is honesty, truth, loyalty, as it is the feeling of the heart of the believer and in it principles, strength and stability."
Nonsense!
There is no connection between belief and truth. Faith neutralizes - according to its definition - logical and critical thought and therefore will never lead to the truth.
The truth is one. Do all believers believe the same "truth"? Is it because they believe in the same "truth" that they set out to slaughter each other and others?
Loyalty also exists outside of faith and in any case is not a good thing. The same goes for strength and stability.
- "Can all of these be used for good?" Yes ."
True - but to get to the truth you have to avoid belief.
- "Is it possible to abuse all of these? As well ."
As mentioned - "all these" do not define the faith (and the truth even contradicts the faith) but it does not belong. Faith can only be used for evil.
**************************
"Choice - choice, determining one thing from many others, free will, the direction of one's actions according to one's own judgment."
All these contradict religion.
"The Land of Choice - a nickname for Eretz Israel."
According to the books of deception, the chosen land was chosen by God - not by man.
"The house of choice - a nickname for Jerusalem, the place of the temple."
same as above
"He who accepts the path of the Torah must not kill. "
That is why the first settlers of the Land of Israel committed genocide on its ancient inhabitants.
This is also the reason why the prophet Elijah went on a killing spree among the priests of Baal.
There is a lack of counterexamples and of course I was only talking about Judaism.
"In contrast, of course, to the empirical way, where you might say let's try to murder and see what happens, based on this experience I can learn to choose differently, or not. In these elections, we are all experimenting and experiencing."
Cheap demagoguery - not to mention lying.
Do you really blame all rational people for murder?
Would you have become a murderer if not for religion (actually you might actually be).
Which one is smart? who learns from the experience of others.
All science is based on experience and most experiences are of others.
The religious have already killed enough for rational people to know what the consequences of murder are. Therefore they have no need to repeat the experiment.
did you understand liar!
This.
I no longer have the strength to hear the words of vanity.
My eyes still caught somewhere the phrase "the word pie is not found in the Bible" as if it had something to do with it.
If you are saying this to confuse those who understood what I wrote about the Copper Sea, then in my opinion you are imputing extreme stupidity to the public reading here.
To a point:
It is simply unbelievable how people still wave the hollow and false slogan of the "secular religion".
As everyone knows - there is no such religion and you have to be a demagogue and a liar to use the term.
Maybe point out to us - one point - one of the laws of the religion you are talking about when you say "secular religion"?
Maybe you can point us to her holy books?
When leaders want to rule they have several ways to do it.
The easiest ways to take are those that plant vain beliefs in the masses and suppress rational thinking.
The easiest way to do this is to educate the masses to believe in some religion.
Once the masses know how to defend themselves against the manipulations of their leaders they will no longer be religious.
Are people who don't believe necessarily rational with critical thinking?
Do they necessarily include this in their words? their actions? their feelings? their lusts? their fears? - Is the believing person necessarily not like that?
In real life, do we act according to scientific mathematical axioms, or were these invented as measuring tools, trying, each in his own field and way, to understand our way or the way of the world, and try to decipher its complexity and our complexity?
Yes, and it works! These tools help us go through a process of understanding over time, what was understood a hundred years ago, is dwarfed compared to the existing knowledge accumulated today, and it will also be dwarfed compared to the knowledge in a hundred years. This is our developmental process as a race.
Physics - examines the development of states and the form of movement of matter in the energy cycles in nature.
Philosophy - examines the study of the problems of the world and its leadership, the essence of nature and its fullness, human cognition, etc. . .
Mathematics - numbers, sizes and shapes in space, measurements, etc. . .
Psychology - studies the teachings of the mind and its processes. . .
Faith - is honesty, truth, loyalty, as it is the feeling of the believer's heart and in it principles, strength and stability.
- Can all of these be used for good? Yes .
- Is it possible to abuse all of these? As well .
**************************
Choice - choosing, determining one thing from many others, free will, the direction of one's actions according to one's own judgment.
The Land of Choice - a nickname for Eretz Yisrael.
Beit al-Bachah - a nickname for Jerusalem, the place of the temple.
The one who accepts the path of the Torah must not kill. In contrast, of course, to the empirical way, which you might say let's try to murder and see what happens, based on this experience I can learn to choose differently, or not. In these elections, we all experiment and experience.
For better or for worse, it is difficult, and every mistake is very costly, sometimes in our lives and in the lives of others. It is our free choice to go this way.
This is where your first part "XNUMX" [first sin] comes in. Pay attention - Genesis chapter XNUMX.
The story of the first sin is the temptation, the juicy fruit served by the snake to the woman.
She does not live up to her lust and immediately continues to tempt Adam, her partner, to do what they are not yet ready to do, knowing clearly that this is the only thing that "Father" does not allow - it is dangerous, they die from it!
Father, upon his arrival, immediately understands [as we see a three-year-old boy who has done something and tries to hide and hide his shame] what happened. But, still asking - how?
did you do And Adam [obviously], rightly disclaims responsibility and blames the woman who, without unnecessary delay, throws the responsibility on the snake, and what we are discussing,
If not in personal responsibility and its existence in the realms of faith, right?
The entire Torah is based on the idea that God tells us not to kill and that our choice is ours to make.
The expulsion from the Garden of Eden is sending us to grow up in the way of tilling the soil. To try and see [learn], what and how to do so that we grow and grow well. And we are developing, some of us even already understand that murder is not good. A long and difficult road from the days of the caves, the exterminations, the slave trade, etc. . .
Each generation renews something, advances our development in its own way and according to its achievements in the above process. From the Renaissance, the industrial period [which started as the best thing for humanity, and ended with the understanding of its contribution to the destruction of the world], the generation of flowers, etc. . It is possible that now we cling to exact science, out of an attempt to rely on its absolute accuracy in a confusing, contradictory and incomprehensible world.
Every generation must believe out of passion, that we are changing the world for the better, and there are those in it who would give their lives for it.
At the same time, understanding the historical processes, teaches us that it is never [so far] the end of the verse! Past experience shows that each stage is followed by the next stage.
In faith - this is an axiom. Man develops and learns to understand why not to do what and how to do it. First of all, not a murderer, [in the original, because that's what it says] and digs deeper and thinks why. . . [In thought and not in action.
Don't want help? Do not need ! Our God understood this a long time ago. Those who follow the paths of faith in the name, in part or in the majority [I did not check], are supposed to look for the instructions, in the pages of the Torah and the Raz, just as the mathematicians in the numbers, the psychologists in the soul and the physicists in the particles.
As in all these and other fields, also in the field of faith, we strive to reach an enlightened developmental stage in understanding these processes as well, with the hope that we will be worthy of them. Because that's the only way we can continue to exist and not destroy ourselves, together with our star.
The enemy is not the Muslim, not the person who believes, not the Negro and not the homosexual or the woman. . .
The enemy is our mistaken thought that we know everything, that we can hate without checking, that we do not understand the quality of a process and we do not have the humility to understand how much we do not understand, even though we have brought ourselves into terrible situations, wars, famine. . . Our loving enemy is the development and growth of our understanding, how to protect this world from destruction? what is the way What is the next developmental stage? And will we succeed in time?
The stage of development we have reached produces a hostile world for the most part, which gives rise to extremely violent extremists, in frightening quantities, weapons of mass destruction held by irresponsible hands, including those of us.
The collapse of the world of values touches and is experienced by all of us. Galda Meir in a speech in the Knesset of Israel [black and white, undated] is shocked!!! Where will this thing be heard? A Jew will kill a Jew?!?! Half a century has passed since then. Murder between Jews, at that time, shocked the new state, shocked ancient and strict religious values [thou shalt not murder] that were preserved and maintained throughout the generations in the Jewish world, in terms of what is done and what is heard. Even if we did not understand why, the prohibition of murder was in the first place for this people's covenant and its God.
Sam Harris claims that even the Holocaust failed to arouse doubts in the Jews. . .
Not true ! Mistake ! The pioneering secular Zionist movement was born and arose from this crisis in the people of Israel. The first "H" writes in their name - how is such a God possible?
I don't have an answer to that, just that. . .there is plenty to discover . . .
Only the invention of the X-ray makes it possible to perform operations on fetuses.
Before that they didn't know.
Only the invention of the telephone allows me to know how Aunt Shlomit is doing within a minute.
Before that it was impossible.
The world was considered flat until they found out otherwise, right?
When we know we will know, when we understand we will understand, how will we reach understanding if we don't check, study, deepen?
- Throwing away our history as a nation will teach us nothing.
- We can interpret yes as no, if we want to transform the ten commandments, according to our level of understanding, of course. This is our free choice. Even our empirical experience today is far greater than in the time of Cain and Abel, right? And we would still like to check if murder is good? - This is the real riot of God in the dirt of every religion and people of every race and gender, secular or not!
You are invited to check: Book of Names chapter XNUMX.
*************************
* The word pie was not found in the Bible.
* It was never said in the Bible that there is one God, but in our covenant with Him, Yahweh is one for us. Even if there are eight hundred different Gods, our chosen ones, throughout history, made a covenant with the God of Israel and thus renounced their belief in other Gods [as the example of the God of Baal. . .] A covenant that is not fulfilled by us for the most part, both among the secular and among the believers.
* Maimonides [1135-1204] - the greatest of the Jewish philosophers and judges in the Middle Ages, a doctor, studied the New Testament, Talmud, calculus, philosophy and natural sciences. Lived in a time when Jews were forced to convert to Islam in Arab countries and the colonialist crusades forced them to convert to Christianity. In 1180 he wrote "Mishna Torah", a book that brings the treasures of the Talmud in a concentrated, orderly and easy-to-read form.
He was mainly involved in medicine and astronomy and in 1190, he completed his main philosophical treatise "Teacher of Confusion", a philosophical defense of Judaism. In this book he tried to coordinate between Jewish theory and philosophy and especially Aristotle's theory. Among others, he was the personal physician of the King of Egypt, his son Shah Saladin.
* Ignorance and ignorance as well as gratuitous hatred will certainly not advance us at all
Greeting
virtue
nonsense. Most wars resulted from the need of the leaders to rule and the need of the people to follow their leaders. This is exactly the same kind of war that the leaders of the secular religion are waging against the ultra-orthodox in our times and those from the other direction. And it has nothing to do with religion. but for the purpose of controlling.
All I said about David is "King David was born before the final text of the Torah."
..this is a fact, and since it is clear to most people that the Torah tells a story much earlier than King David, I gave David as an example - you can take Absalom from me.
Beyond that, I don't feel like a spammer and I don't smell like a spammer.
Spamspamspamspamspamspamspamspam.
If spam is an amount of gibberish of energy in words,
So spap is a gibberish amount of energy in a bomb?
Spamspamspamspamspamspamspamspam.
Holgo:
Since you didn't say a single thing that was true or well-founded, I didn't think it was appropriate to start arguing with you and I just expressed my strong impressions of your face
Michael!
Your argumentation is simply amazing! Now I am really convinced of everything you say…
h first
Stop your spam! What is the connection between David, the king of united Israel - who is a real figure proven by archeology - to what you are writing?
Holgo:
What nonsense! Amazing!
The eternal debate between atheists and creationists is absolutely weird!
But let's leave that for a moment!
All these accusations against the monotheistic religions by the atheists are baseless!
As if before the Jewish religion - which is the basis of all religions - there were no wars, genocide. Robbery, murder and looting.
The Greeks - whom the various "scientists" see as the basis for everything they know...were among the greatest murderers in history. They destroyed entire nations, cultures and civilizations. Including Egypt and Mesopotamia!
No wonder anti-Semitism has very deep roots stemming from the fascist culture of Greece and Rome. (See Philo of Alexandria and Josephus!)
And the Greeks... actually stole their knowledge from Egypt and Mesopotamia! What remains is for Pythagoras and his friends to register a patent in their name!
I feel that I have to respond to the cultural debate of Maayansgolhemichal..
The matter is actually a scientific method -
In mathematics, theorems are supported at the bottom of the hierarchy by axioms.
In physics, the probability that a description is correct is increased by experiments.
In philosophy, positions are supported by premises.
In an attempt to derive something (moral theory) from the Bible, one must believe in the basic assumptions: {There is one God, God is good, the words of the Torah are His words.} (at least..)
And the matter is indeed faith - in basic logic -
Mathematical axioms seem to me to make the most sense, and produce theorems that are proven at our every step.
No physicist strives to prove things 100%, but rather 99.99%, and the probability arising from experiments is logical.
Philosophy does not claim to have answers without a number of basic assumptions (Are we only matter? Only spirit? Is justice absolute?) and then tries to logically build conclusions from them.
The assumptions {There is one God, God is good, the words of the Torah are His words.} are not acceptable to me, not alone and certainly not together:
1. "There is one God" why really one? Why not 6? or a thousand? or 0? There is no logical reason (not that he came to tell us)
2. "God is good" - I, the unbelieving fool, if I had the power to do things on earth (unless we are talking about an impotent God), I would neutralize a considerable part of the suffering in the world, most of which is unnecessary. Maybe I also had better ideas how to do it (as God..).
For some reason it doesn't really happen, and I personally come to the conclusion that if there is a god (or gods)...well he isn't.
3. "The words of the Torah are his words" - archeology...->
The 19th century dating of the final form of Genesis and the Pentateuch to c. 500-450 BC continues to be widely accepted regardless of the model adopted,[24] although a minority of scholars known as biblical minimalists argue for a date largely or entirely within the last two centuries BCE.
==> King David was born before the final version of the Torah.
Beyond that, similar stories were common in different forms in different peoples.
And let's put God's dresses there, too bad it's hard for me to believe that there is such a god, but let's say..
Well he is not.
In the same probability that God exists, there is also Allah and the Holy Spirit, Satan, and Satan's cat, which eats ducks with the head of Jews, and in fact, the cat is their connection with the world, like Aaron. Fear makes sense huh?
That's why I don't think it's reasonable to take a good book and believe in it like Samson and Yobb.
Ruthie Sof went to kidnap.
virtue:
Nothing will help.
You can use dictionary definitions of the word "science" and you still won't change the definition of critical thought any more than you will change the laws of logic.
People do many things, including nonsense. What does this mean other than that people are not perfect? Of course, this does not mean that nonsense should be adopted as a way of life.
You say that you are a believer and rational and I have proved to you that (religious) belief and critical thought are not mutually exclusive and therefore, despite all the talk, I do not accept that you exercise critical thought about your religious beliefs.
The distortions of the facts will not change and even if you say a thousand times that Einstein was a man of faith even though he himself said the opposite - it will not make Einstein a man of faith.
The same goes for Islam's involvement in wars around the world - a guarantee that is directly derived from its mitzvot.
Fountain:
It is possible to decide (mistakenly) that the rabbit of the Bible is not the rabbit we know, but this is a cheap evasion and in my opinion - if we decide that the words of the Bible represent other things than what we read in them, then why don't we interpret "no" as "yes" and reverse all ten commandments?
How will you decide which words we understand and which words we don't?
Maybe also the words "thirty cubits" actually mean "thirty one point four cubits" and then the pi problem is also solved?
I'm sorry but it doesn't seem serious to me.
Dear Michael,
Regarding the rabbit, you are right, it is a logical obstacle for the person who believes.
But for concern, there is a simple answer, an answer that drops any common ground for discussion.
Apparently the rabbit in the Bible is not the rabbit we know! This is a different life, maybe we will say a camel or a cow or maybe a life that became extinct, but once it was called a rabbit and what we call a rabbit today is a different life that is not mentioned in the Bible at all.
Just as we don't know the exact meaning of "Sena" (burning), we don't know the meaning of the word rabbit, "the big crocodiles" and other pearls like that.
I can't stand this solution.
He gives an escape route to every believer by dropping the basis for discussion between people - a common language.
Because every word can be said to be another word.
Have a great week everyone
Michael:
In hindsight - evaluation and analysis of things from different points of view, examination and testing, negative evaluation from seeing weaknesses and flaws.
In the Korat of the Bible - analysis and evaluation of the books of the Bible, their history, composition, wording, etc. . . From a scientific approach - free.
Science [inclusive name]- knowledge, opinion, wisdom, systematic research in a certain profession, organized and based on facts, observations or experiments that have been summarized into laws, rules and truths. Physics, mathematics, chemistry, history are sciences.
Jewish Sciences - a general name for the professions - the research related to the life of the Jews and their culture: Hebrew language, Bible, Hebrew literature, Hebrew history, Talmud, Judaica, etc. . .
Humanities - general name for humanistic subjects: literature, art, history, linguistics
Exact sciences - a nickname for the sciences of mathematics, physics and chemistry, which are built on formulas and combinations of numbers that have vigorous precision.
A scientist - a scholar engaged in researching a certain subject.
The Book of Science - the name of the first book in the "Mishna Torah" composition of Rambam.
*******************************************
I simply copied definitions for you from the Eben Shoshan dictionary.
Do you want to include the laws of exact science on humanities texts?
Want to turn the critical thought containing different points of view into one conclusion?
Flatten all the books, the articles into one clear thing?
you will not be able to !
One must be able to understand and live in a wide, multifaceted and fascinating world in which there are many contradictions that exist together, just like in literature and poetry and not at all as usual in logic: if all children are blue, Uri is a boy and therefore the conclusion: Uri is blue? These are the mathematical laws that apply in the world of logic and the exact sciences, but do not exist anywhere else and certainly not in the humanities.
Exact science also develops, grows and changes. you know why ? Because we are built to understand things in layers, in depth and width and on all sides! Remember your understanding as a child, later you changed about a million times and your conclusions in understanding the world change from time to time.
Many ways. . .
long and winding. . .
Love deeply and openly. . .
Too bad, the safest for you is from a distance. . .
We are much more complex, interesting and fascinating, so is Jewish philosophy, our history, and especially [in the light of the book], our moral theory, the basis of which was written two thousand years ago.
And in it the most beautiful laws ever written for rules of conduct between a man and his fellow man. With us, the way of the land precedes the Torah. Look how beautiful it is!!!
Einstein was a man of faith, Jean d'Arc, etc. . .
Even in the world of exact science, one should not draw conclusions without knowing the parties involved. And it doesn't seem like you know. With your words, you ignore an entire world of culture and throw away our cultures like the skin of garlic. There is no way to agree to that. My eyes are open to see the enormous wealth that exists in the worlds of the Bible and the superficial thought that guides your way. In a direct view [direct in the meaning of poetry]
All the best
And a beautiful Saturday
Critical thought does not rule out claims that are not in line with reality as perceived at one point or another in our lives, if it were so, there would be no room for the growth and development of understanding in amorphous regions, as we are built.
virtue:
All of your "proof" that what I said is wrong is based on claims that you bring from yourself and therefore you think that they cannot be examined and refuted even though they are wrong but a mistake on your part.
They can be disproved very easily.
Religion has one claim about the world and science has another claim that contradicts it on many points.
If you believe in both science and religion you believe in a contradiction.
Anyone who understands logic knows that anything can be inferred from concealment (and also its opposite which is just another thing).
Anyone who understands what critical thinking is knows that a contradiction between claims is something that cannot be accepted and one should therefore choose the more one of two contradictory claims.
For example - between the claim that the rabbit ruminates (as written in the Torah) and the claim that it does not (as written in the rabbit) one must choose only one.
Between the claim that pi is three (as written in the instructions for building the copper sea) and the claim that it is a transcendental number around 3.14 (as the mathematics reveals to us) we need to choose only one.
Between the claim that the one who wrote the Torah and gave us religion is God, he is all-powerful and all-knowing (as the believers believe) and the claim that he is not (as the two previous examples prove) you have to choose only one.
This is the nature of criticism in critical thinking. It rejects claims that are not consistent with reality or with themselves.
That's why when you say that faith and critical thought live in one subjugation, you are actually talking about the subordination (subordination) of criticism in spite of faith.
You are welcome to continue to preach morality to me, but I suggest that you open your eyes and take a direct look at yourself as well.
Islam, according to his message, came into the world to - replace - the other religions.
The very existence of Judaism presents a reasonable Muslim with an acute problem of the world's inability to progress and improve as long as the "problem" exists.
Hence the contempt, and the desire to remove from the world the obstacle on the way to Christian Europe.
For the Shias it is more serious because they were cheated by the Sunnis and the leadership of Islam was usurped from them.
Therefore they must close accounts with the Sunnis, and then step on the ashes of Judaism on their way to Christian Europe.
One day about 1300 years ago, a Muslim leader appeared "Halifa Omar" who later even ordered the construction of the Dome of the Rock on the ruins of our temple in Jerusalem, at the gates of the library of Alexandria, with a torch in one hand and a Koran in the other.
He called the guard and asked: "Is there knowledge greater than the Koran in this house?"
Something that makes the Qur'an look small and poses a challenge to it - {therefore it must be destroyed, since the Qur'an is from God in the hands of Muhammad and is whole and perfect}
Or: "Is there a little knowledge of the Koran in this house"?
Something that places the Koran as superior to the knowledge stored in the library - {therefore it must be destroyed since the Koran is new and fresh anyway and contains more knowledge than what is found and known}
and burned the building.
The fire burned for half a year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria#Muslim_conquest_in_642
For me ^ criticality lives in one subjugation [as your tongue is your pitchfork] together with faith.
In my case, there is no exchange [-“-] between them.
With me ^ each one and her contribution that enriches my life.
**********************************************
So you're saying it's not possible?
for all kinds of reasons. . .
So let's say Isaiah Leibovich too, can't it be?
And there are a few more. . . not like that ?
So what are you saying ? An enlightened and critical secularist!
It seems to me that this is a wrong assumption, isn't it? Because it does not exist!
The world of faith is made up of a great variety of opinions from all possible spectrums, as well as the secular world
To Tommy I thought everyone knew that
Opinions that originate from discrimination and stigma harm a large public for no injustice
This is not my way
virtue:
Your compromise is a virtue for disaster.
The religion claims a divine source - a source superior to humanity.
This is the reason why people observe customs that they think are "religious mitzvahs" even if they do not see any sense in them.
That's why there are monks, martyrs and other shameless people.
Belief, when it replaces critical thought (and indeed, according to its definition that contradicts critical thought, it must replace it because they cannot live in one submission) is a sure recipe for not taking responsibility and for uncontrolled and immoral actions.
So far in theory - and what about in practice?
In practice, exactly what the theory predicts happens and most of the wars that have ever been waged were waged by an attack of irrational belief. This belief did not always stem from an established religion, but it always had clear signs of religion and in many cases it was indeed a religion.
So you can ignore both the logic and the facts but that is a sure recipe for doom.
I will not walk with you this way.
The first platform, the moral-value base, of the existing moral concepts, originates from the ancient writings of the stories of the reincarnation of divinity and man, who had different experiences that were interpreted in diverse ways, according to the degree and way of development of the culture in that area.
The limited framework of laws in Judaism is the Ten Commandments, in which the imperative is "Thou shalt not". For example: Thou shalt not murder - how does this law exist together with: "Rise up for your own slaying, let him kill you" and the like?! What is fascinating here is the discussion of values and choice, when is it allowed, when is it not allowed, under what conditions? and so' . . . Discussion, the key to discernment and moral awareness and of course, contributes to the development of values and the understanding that my actions, my personal expression, are what define me.
The very engagement with the question, drags into the eye of the storm, different and diverse opinions, among them: secularists, atheists, people of different religions and not only our rabbis. We are also in the picture.
This diversity, expressed in a plurality of opinions as well as actions, seems to be classified
different music or different plants and we will understand that the selection, variation, multiplicity of shades is the essence of nature and it is desirable that we rejoice in its existence, because clearly, it enriches us.
Rather, the Bible illuminates us with a very human light, full of flaws, lust, jealousy, greed, etc. . And shows us in each and every story, what is the end of irresponsible actions resulting from anger, frustration, etc. . . From the story of Adam and Eve [the temptation and the expulsion], immediately after the story of Cain and Abel [brotherly jealousy and murder] and so on.
From the days of the Bible through the writings of Shakespeare until today, there has been no shortage of murderers and irresponsible behaviors that originate in human nature. The prisons are full of secular, religious, women, men, Mizrahim and Ashkenazim. . Everyone for their own reasons is a thief, a rapist, a murderer. . .
If you are interested in why they did what they did, most of them will answer: they gave me drink, I ate, the floor was crooked, as murderers do, pinning the reasons and responsibility for their actions on their god. The words: If he hadn't annoyed me, I wouldn't have killed him, shifting the responsibility for my actions to another, a common thing in our districts.
Taking responsibility for my actions is a cornerstone of all moral teachings, especially in our Torah, the Torah of Israel.
- See the article by Dr. Aharon Ben-Shemesh, the translator of the Koran into Hebrew, p. XNUMX at the beginning: "Normally, there are no principles in the Koran that are contrary to Judaism, therefore, various Orientalists define it as Judaism adapted to the concepts of Arab tribes and their perception. Muhammad fought the Jewish tribes in Arabia, not because of their Judaism, but only in cases where they allied with his enemies. . . The term Jihad, a mitzvah war as it later developed for the needs of politics, is directed in the Koran only to idolaters, who disbelieve in the singularity of God. . . and so' . . And for those who don't know, the Koran is a sequel to the five pentacles of the Torah and is based on them.
- Just as the plurality and variety of opinions exists in Jewish society, so it also belongs to believers in any other religion, and even to secularists without a doubt.
The one who wants to act in a bad way, gathers support for his actions through some verse, the interpretation of which is far away and sometimes the opposite of the big picture, the values, the morals, etc. . And thus sand is thrown in the eyes of the "misguided" public, the one who does not know the essence, and is busy and believes only in appearance.
If, standing on the beach, we look at the sea for a long time, will we be able to get to know it, really understand it? Its depth, its nuances, its versatility?
From afar, all the stars are shining points of light, and up close? One is frozen, while the other is boiling.
"Mahomet God" [according to the reviewer's article] - posits the reasons for the threat to the continuation of civilization in religions, but in fact, misses the main point, which is man's choice in his actions and his responsibility towards them, which of course depends on education. After all, even with us, the Jews, if a man says that he murdered his friend in the name of God, who believes him? Will we accept his words as the truth? Will this make us understand that religion is bad? This casting of doubt does not belong only to us, after all we will not maintain a double scale of values [double standard] for us and our fellow Muslims, will we?
Among the people of Islam there are people of value and measure, people of morals and intelligence, people of spirit, culture and science, good-hearted and good-hearted, who are our friends. and among them religious and secular,
as on the whole earth.
- Let's try to unite, people of value, measure, morality, from every religion, race and gender, and let's start by opening up a distinction that is not preoccupied with gross and broad generalizations that also tarnish our brothers, the people of our peace and our God.
-Shabbat Shalom .
All kinds of rightists were also not under sharia laws... or came from there..
Holgo…
You don't really know what you're talking about do you?
The "Israeli fascist left" is new..
Go to the dictionary (or to the wiki if you learned English), and check what fascism is and what the left is (I think the left is a people, and an inferior people).
The left has a spectrum of opinions, some of them refutable positions (probably those you call "left" in your ignorance, usually people who see the suffering of the other side and forget that their side also suffers) and some (what should be called the left) moral positions.
As a leftist, I believe that right-wing people should be treated the same way they treat others (yes, this is a left-wing moral opinion) - in short, if I'm stronger than you, it's a waste of time! That's what you believe, right? I hope everyone who thinks like you will fight all their life with people like him. Oh, wait, this is the idyll of the right - how beautiful, we will fight everyone and those who are left will have children and they will fight to see who is the strongest, and those who are left will have children and they will fight to...
In short, if a lion eats you, you will be more useful, chimpanzees in suppression.
People like Ami Bakr are directly responsible for extermination, genocide, terrorism, destruction of languages and cultures, land grabbing of many peoples....terror, terror, and once more terror.
Islam is responsible for all this! A religion founded by a pedophile, a terrorist who robbed merchant caravans, a mass murderer, a slave trader!
Since Muhammad, his fellow murderers have destroyed and are destroying cultures that have no trace, but only in the history books, and archeological excavations!
But the Christians also murdered, looted, and destroyed!
The problem is that Islam continues to do this when most of the world is moving towards a better future!
In most conflicts in the world, Muslims are involved, wherever they are they want autonomy, then independence, then they want a territory that they border on, etc... The Balkans is a good example. North Caucasus as well!
All kinds of leftists have never felt what it's like to live under sharia law!
The European leftists who finance the Israeli fascist left have probably had to live under Sharia law and the Islamic State where the majority are Muslims. in Europe.
Britain and France are already undergoing Islamization…..and it will not be far today that Islam will be the dominant religion on the continent….
Those who want to hear Sam Harris lecture on the subject are welcome to enter here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1232718550543562442&hl=en
It is indeed in English but there is a Hebrew caption.
light:
I assume that Isaac Shamir was asked the question more than once and had the opportunity to give both answers.
Did he indeed give both, did he give one of them or did he give neither?
I don't think it's really important.
H. the first one:
Well done.
I'm with you all the way.
Shimi: What do you think is the reason for the wars between us and Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Syria and in the past all Arab countries?
Of money?
oil?
What is the reason for Al Qaeda's war in the rest of the world and the one that the US is responding to in Afghanistan, Iraq and perhaps also in Iran? Of money? oil?
What nonsense!
Because of money or oil, almost no wars broke out at all, while those that did break out were civil wars and not wars of states.
As the former said - the reason for wars is a belief that is not based on logic.
This is a characteristic of Nazism which was behind World War II and what to do - it is also a characteristic of all monotheistic religions.
Sam Harris is right when he separates Eastern religions from monotheistic religions. Eastern religions are similar in a certain way to science. All they tell you is "go and experiment" only that the experiments they promote are experiments in the private space as opposed to the experiments in the public space that science deals with. Eastern religions/philosophies, as far as I know, will not send a person to kill or be killed. They are different from science, philosophy and systems of laws.
Ami:
Your leniency towards Islam seems dangerous to me.
The commandment of jihad is an inherent part of this religion and the amount of armed conflicts it is involved in is almost endless.
Even in Muslim places where there is currently no war, there is violence, poverty, discrimination against women, corporal punishment that induces farts and every bad thing imaginable.
It is worth listening a little to the words of Islamic refugees such as Wapa Sultan, Noni Darwish, Salman Rushdie and others.
This is priceless insider information that reveals such deep roots of violence that a Western person really has a hard time imagining themselves as their example.
Religion is not a precondition for war, but rather promotes thoughtlessness, the shedding of moral burdens and burdens, and even a flat (and sometimes negative) view of the other.
It is clear that besides religion there are other harmful ideologies, but religion does not promote anything but lies, and therefore does not deserve a positive ideological treatment.
I will not list how many wars have been started or escalated because of religion. Read history.
What is not said, and commenters for some reason insist that it be said, is that without religion there would be no wars... (?!)
Without humans there would be no wars between humans.
Beyond that, human nature works - with or without religion. With or without fascism.
What's more, if fewer people believe in religion (or fascism), it's likely that there will be fewer wars, because monstrous reasons for gratuitous hatred will fade away.
And if you don't want to understand, let him go drink Medusa!
Correction to Ami Bakr - when Yitzhak Shamir was asked what would happen if Israel was attacked with chemical weapons, he answered "A Jew will not smell gas twice".
You don't need religion to destroy the world. Even as a person who reads
The summary as it appears here - may agree with most of what is written
Here, I do not forget that the biggest threat so far, to the peace of the world is coming
From a completely non-religious movement - the Nazi movement (and also communism
- Anti-religious movement, did not add health and longevity in many
from the countries he arrived at).
It should be remembered that even in Judaism there are parts that deny the violence of Bani
Other religions - aside from verses that call for the rights of foreigners and residents
non-Jews; Therefore, especially due to the knowledge that precisely in the countries
Islam was the status of the Jews better, in a noticeable way, than the countries
Christianity - in the Middle Ages for example, I cannot accept everything that is said
here on as an indisputable truth.
for life,
Fanatical Islam has weapons of mass destruction.
Countries like Pakistan and Yemen have nuclear bombs and are fanatical Islam equivalent to the Taliban and the Iranian Ayatollahs. All the Muslim Arab countries - our neighbors ask - have chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction and of course also countless conventional bombs with weights large enough to be considered weapons of mass destruction. This situation has existed for many years and the litigation surrounding the issue also exists.
In the early nineties, Yitzhak Shamir, the Prime Minister at the time, was asked what Israel would do if attacked by Iraq with the chemical weapons it has. Yitzhak Shamir said something like: If we are attacked with weapons that the defectors claim they do not have, we will attack back with weapons we claim we do not have.
A clear separation must be made between a militant and demonstrative policy like in Iran and a large public of people who are thirsty for normalization and a good and happy life. Fanatic groups exist everywhere. Some of them, some say, are the majority in the Israeli Knesset, which closes populations of millions of people in ghettos, makes them hungry and thirsty and takes away the hope of entire generations of people - to the point where their lives are no longer worth anything to them and they are ready to give them in droves. Is this the religion? I'm not sure.
A respectful and friendly fruitful discussion for all the talkbackists who came before and who will come after.
Greetings friends,
Ami Bachar
Wait a minute, what is all the self-righteous philosophizing here, wasn't it obvious to any sane person that fanatical Islam would bring destruction on the world, if it had weapons of mass destruction in its hands?
For that, you don't need to read this book. This is clear as the noon sun to any child.
As a devout secularist, who also thinks that belief in some god is a mental illness or some genetic defect, I do not agree that religion is the cause of all wars and all evil.
Take World War II as an example, where the opposite is true.
And of course there are various communist regimes that commit murders of hundreds of thousands regardless of religion (precisely because of the faith of those people).
The secular ax is out of the bag! Well done!
True, almost everything is screwed up - and -
You can say that even to the idiot billionaires who disagree.
== to Shimi
I don't think he's saying we don't need rules. Maybe for you law and religion are related things. Law should be related to morality, as I wrote in my article "about the article". And the wars will not end, but there will probably be much less.
In any case, a person of faith assumes responsibility (see my articles below "on religion"), therefore I would not let him go vote in the elections just as I would not let a prisoner have children while in prison.
========== "On Religion"
I see a religion in which there is a god (unlike Buddhism for example) as a mental illness, and not just a mental illness that a person (like me) faces against their will, but a voluntary mental illness:
There is no need to explain the characteristics of the disease - we all know - a religious person by definition has an imaginary friend. This imaginary friend (whom no one has seen or heard from) is omnipotent! (Did you know?)
The patient is actually subject to his imaginary character and fulfills the wishes of the imaginary character that were written at a later date... Sometimes, the patient imagines that a good event that occurs is a good return from the imaginary character. In general, every event is caused by this figure, and therefore in most cases, the patient ignores his responsibility for his surroundings assuming that his figure wanted what happened to happen.
============= About the article
At one point he probably missed like many secularists.. He wrote:
"Finally, Harris provides an answer to the moral and human needs that stand behind faith, and emphasizes how it is possible to remain moral and "good" even without belief in any god, among other things while basing oneself on Buddhist principles and Eastern teachings."
When we understand that religion is a fiction, and go in the direction of science, there is one thing that religion has given that "science" does not - and that is a moral theory for building acceptable and harmless ways of life.
And I didn't even want to go to Buddhism, but to the neglected profession as if it were a grave buried in the Sahara - philosophy. There you will find moral teachings and you can debate them.
And you will give an important example - the firing of rockets from Gaza.
The UN originally wanted to take a moral stance regarding shooting at civilians, and therefore formulated the law of "proportionality" in which if there are 3 terrorists and 10 civilians in a place, it is forbidden to shoot at him, but if there are 10 terrorists and 3 civilians it is allowed.
All well and good, unless an organization uses shooting from a civilian population as a shield.
In such a case, Israel should clarify the position of... The simple morality -
When shooting, each side is responsible not to shoot from within its own population.
This should be a patch to the law, because if a missile is fired at you from within a population, the responsibility for the location of the shooting is the shooter's, who knows that there will be a response to that location.
In conclusion, we need to shoot at the sources of the shooting, and say after Gazans are injured: "It is a shame for us that people were killed in Gaza, and this would not have happened if Hamas had not fired from among the civilian population. Therefore, we see Hamas as the one responsible for killing the Palestinian civilians in Gaza. We will continue to shoot at the sources of the fire, And we hope that Hamas has mercy on the civilian population. Our condolences to the families of the martyrs."
Apparently the "enlightened" who wrote this book forgets that today's wars revolve around oil and money
One might think that before the rise of religions there were no wars on earth
I didn't read it all but what I understood is that religion is bad because.... Religion destroys because…
In short, when he comes to Tel Aviv, he will feel at home
And according to what he says, who needs laws anyway? Religion is a collection of laws, and he wants to change the laws, in short his own utopian world where everything is allowed (unless you are religious)
And then there will be no wars? If so, I'm buying his book now...in 6 copies, and going to burn some mosque or church like that for fun
You focused this article mainly on criticism of Islam and Republican populism that looks for a casus belli in every corner that smells of Arab oil. This brainwashing that is becoming more and more acceptable since September 11 and following it the age of wars since the beginning of the millennium is two-way and it is an example of one side trying to convince the world to go to war against the religion of Islam, as well as against other religions.