Turning to G-d does not stall progress of science. Does it ?

[paarsurrey]

Actually it does. Because the method that Science uses to determine truth is the most reliable method we know of. If the truthful religion rejects that method then you must offer a better one, and if there is no method to determine which religion is true, then why should anybody believe it?

Also, if a religion makes claims about reality which is contradicted by reality itself, then it hinders scientific progress.

Religious issues are sorted out by the reasonable and truthful religion itself, it is totally unscientific approach to sort out them with science. Science has never taken them up. Right, please?
When did science take up Atheism, please?

Regards

 

[Samael_Khan]

Religious issues are sorted out by the reasonable and truthful religion itself, it is totally unscientific approach to sort out them with science. Science has never taken them up. Right, please?
When did science take up Atheism, please?

Regards

If one can't determine whether the religion is true using science then how does anybody know the religion is truthful in the first place?

Actually the various sciences have investigated claims of religions. Especially with regards to archaeology. I mean many religious study books use findings by the sciences to get further clarity on the context of the times the religion was written.

Science doesn't take up atheism. Science is independent of theism and atheism. It does have a method of discovering things about reality which atheists agree with.

You still haven't answered the question:

If the truthful religion rejects that method then you must offer a better one, and if there is no method to determine which religion is true, then why should anybody believe it?

 

[paarsurrey]

I'm not sure what else I can say - those are our beliefs about Jesus (pbuh). I'm not claiming that my religion's claims count as evidence to support my religion. I'm just trying to explain why I believe Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim (which is always going to be wrt my religion's key texts, which we believe supersede all previous religion's texts).

We believe in Jesus but we don't believe Christianity, and it does no harm to the truthful religion Islam and Muslims.
We believe in Moses but we don't believe Judaism, and it does no harm to the truthful religion Islam and Muslims.
Why, because believing in Jesus and Moses does not affect our truthful religion? As we have all the commandments that we follow in Quran and we follow Sunnah of Muhammad.
Similarly, many Muslim scholars because of guidance of Quran in many a verse of Quran and also as the name Zul-Kifl is mentioned in Quran, believe that Buddha was a prophet/messenger of G-d. It does us no harm, as we follow the teachings of Quran and acts of Muhammad and nothing is added practically. It only creates a feeling of peaceful friendship with other religions and that is great. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Jedster]

Because to be a Muslim means to submit to God, and I believe Jesus (pbuh) did just that. Moreover, I believe him to be one in a long line of Prophets of Islam - all preaching the same essential Message about the Oneness of God and how we should relate to God and our fellow humans.

Most non-Muslims tke the word Muslim as to mean someone following the religion of Islam, which includes the belief that Muhammad was the last & final prophet as per the sha'ada.
People like Moses, Jesus, Adam etc did not follow the Islamic religion as per today,although they do fulfil the emboldened above., but there certainly didn't say the sha'ada.

So my point is that saying to non-Muslims that these people were Muslims is a little disingenuous when conversing with non-Muslims.

ETA So under your definition above, Jews & Bahais, who also claim to be submitting to God, are also Muslims? Right?

 

[The_Fisher_King]

We believe in Jesus but we don't believe Christianity, and it does no harm to the truthful religion Islam and Muslims.
We believe in Moses but we don't believe Judaism, and it does no harm to the truthful religion Islam and Muslims.
Why, because believing in Jesus and Moses does not affect our truthful religion? As we have all the commandments that we follow in Quran and we follow Sunnah of Muhammad.
Similarly, many Muslim scholars because of guidance of Quran in many a verse of Quran and also as the name Zul-Kifl is mentioned in Quran, believe that Buddha was a prophet/messenger of G-d. It does us no harm, as we follow the teachings of Quran and acts of Muhammad and nothing is added practically. It only creates a feeling of peaceful friendship with other religions and that is great. Right, please?

Regards

And many other Muslim scholars do not believe that Dhul-Kifl refers to the Buddha. I prefer to stick to what is clear in the Qur'an and Hadiths. To be clear, there is nothing definitive about the Buddha in the Qur'an and Hadiths. We don't have to believe in the Buddha as a Messenger/Prophet of Allah to be peaceful and friendly in our dealings with those from other religions.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Most non-Muslims tke the word Muslim as to mean someone following the religion of Islam, which includes the belief that Muhammad was the last & final prophet as per the sha'ada.

This is why I try to explain in what sense Jesus (pbuh), being an Islamic Messenger/Prophet, was a Muslim.

ETA So under your definition above, Jews & Bahais, who also claim to be submitting to God, are also Muslims? Right?

See my earlier response below for why a Catholic living today could not be considered a Muslim. The same would apply to Jews living today and Bahais.

God sent a long line of Messengers and Prophets with the same essential teachings re the Oneness of God and the correct way to relate to Them and one's fellow humans. These Messengers and Prophets (including Jesus, pbuh) were Muslims and that Message was/is the essence of Islam. Some of the original followers of those Messengers and Prophets remained true to their teachings, but most went astray, necessitating the sending of more Messengers and Prophets, culminating in Muhammad (pbuh) and the most up-to-date and protected-from-corruption version of the Message (contained in the Qur'an and authentic Hadiths). So a true follower of Jesus (pbuh) living at the same time or soon after him would have been a Muslim. But if we are referring to people living today, the Criterion for judging whether they are a Muslim or not is the Qur'an. In that sense, certainly a Catholic living today cannot be called a Muslim.

 

[paarsurrey]

If one can't determine whether the religion is true using science then how does anybody know the religion is truthful in the first place?

Actually the various sciences have investigated claims of religions. Especially with regards to archaeology. I mean many religious study books use findings by the sciences to get further clarity on the context of the times the religion was written.

Science doesn't take up atheism. Science is independent of theism and atheism. It does have a method of discovering things about reality which atheists agree with.

You still haven't answered the question:

If the truthful religion rejects that method then you must offer a better one, and if there is no method to determine which religion is true, then why should anybody believe it?

"Science is independent of theism and atheism."

So, one has accepted in principle my reasonable argument that science has got nothing to do religion and or no-religion. Right, please?
There are following root articles of faith of Islam:

• Unity of God
• His Angels
• His Books
• His Prophets
• The Last Day
• Divine Decree

It is out of the domain of science to say anything reasonable about all of the above. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Jedster]

This is why I try to explain in what sense Jesus (pbuh), being an Islamic Messenger/Prophet, was a Muslim.



See my earlier response below for why a Catholic living today could not be considered a Muslim. The same would apply to Jews living today and Bahais.

I was not challenging the why, I have been conversing with Muslims for several decades and it has been explained before. So what you have said is not new to me.
I was only trying to point out that by saying, Moses & Jesus, for example, were Muslims , will only upset many Jews & Christians who feel insulted. I have observed this repeatedly over the years and it really isn't conducive to real interfaith dialogue.

Anyway,no big deal.
Stay safe & well.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

I was not challenging the why, I have been conversing with Muslims for several decades and it has been explained before. So what you have said is not new to me.
I was only trying to point out that by saying, Moses & Jesus, for example, were Muslims , will only upset many Jews & Christians who feel insulted. I have observed this repeatedly over the years and it really isn't conducive to real interfaith dialogue.

Anyway,no big deal.
Stay safe & well.

Thank you for that. I guess my position wrt interfaith dialogue is to try to explain how I as a Muslim see things as dispassionately as I can, and I would hope that adherents from other religions would do the same. I personally certainly don't get upset when adherents of other religions, e.g. Jews and Christians, reject Muhammad (pbuh), though I prefer it if they try to do so dispassionately and wrt their religion's position on relevant matters.

 

[Samael_Khan]

"Science is independent of theism and atheism."

So, one has accepted in principle my reasonable argument that science has got nothing to do religion and or no-religion. Right, please?
There are following root articles of faith of Islam:

• Unity of God
• His Angels
• His Books
• His Prophets
• The Last Day
• Divine Decree

It is out of the domain of science to say anything reasonable about all of the above. Right, please?

Regards

When I say that Science is independent of theism or atheism I am saying that neither viewpoint should influence scientific research. It has the most reliable method for determining truth and its gradual discoveries will reveal which side is true or not.

It is out of the domain of science to say anything reasonable about all of the above. Right, please?

If those things are out of the domain of science to discover then on what basis should anybody believe that they are true? There is no reason to believe in them in the first place if there is no way to determine whether they exist and anybody doing is so isn't thinking critically.

So... they could be true. But there is no valid reason to believe that they are true yet. Since we don't have any evidence for them there is no reason to believe they are true.

In fact there is no reason to conclude that Islam is the true religion in the first place.

 

[paarsurrey]

When I say that Science is independent of theism or atheism I am saying that neither viewpoint should influence scientific research. It has the most reliable method for determining truth and its gradual discoveries will reveal which side is true or not.

It is out of the domain of science to say anything reasonable about all of the above. Right, please?

If those things are out of the domain of science to discover then on what basis should anybody believe that they are true? There is no reason to believe in them in the first place if there is no way to determine whether they exist and anybody doing is so isn't thinking critically.

So... they could be true. But there is no valid reason to believe that they are true yet. Since we don't have any evidence for them there is no reason to believe they are true.

In fact there is no reason to conclude that Islam is the true religion in the first place.

"When I say that Science is independent of theism or atheism I am saying that neither viewpoint should influence scientific research."

The truthful religion does not interfere with science and it lets science free to do its homework.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I was not challenging the why, I have been conversing with Muslims for several decades and it has been explained before. So what you have said is not new to me.
I was only trying to point out that by saying, Moses & Jesus, for example, were Muslims , will only upset many Jews & Christians who feel insulted. I have observed this repeatedly over the years and it really isn't conducive to real interfaith dialogue.

Anyway,no big deal.
Stay safe & well.

We are just giving the point of view of our religion for our own consumption from our own truthful Quran, no intention to injure others feelings. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Samael_Khan]

"When I say that Science is independent of theism or atheism I am saying that neither viewpoint should influence scientific research."

The truthful religion does not interfere with science and it lets science free to do its homework.

Regards

Here is a question for you then:

What scientific research would your religion fundamentally be against? Could an expert of a specific field who isn't muslim travel to Mecca to do research?

 

[paarsurrey]

Here is a question for you then:

What scientific research would your religion fundamentally be against? Could an expert of a specific field who isn't muslim travel to Mecca to do research?

How is it related to my comments:

"The truthful religion does not interfere with science and it lets science free to do its homework."

Sorry,one's question is not related to it.
Regards

 

[Samael_Khan]

How is it related to my comments:

"The truthful religion does not interfere with science and it lets science free to do its homework."

Sorry,one's question is not related to it.
Regards

Am I right to say that non muslims aren't allowed in Mecca for religious reasons?

If so, and science wants to do its homework, but wants to do it in Mecca, and because of the religion non muslim scientists cant enter Mecca, then the religion would interfere with science.

Also, if science uses human evolution to investigate certain matters, yet muslims believe that humans didn't evolve, wouldn't that mean that hinder muslim scientists ability to do their homework?

 

[rational experiences]

Science was always religion, for spirit in first science were the references to gases.

God was stated to be stone philosophy, and Gd references declared to be a theory.

As you cannot practice science unless you build a machine for inventive science for a formula and a theory. And the machine is taken out of the planet stone mass.

Old science references and symbolic speech is the old ways, and new ways in science simply removed a self inference in science, to depict that the practices of science were above and beyond just discussing life on Earth as if you owned scientific rights to do so....yet claim all LAWS about relativity are only experienced whilst living inside of an atmosphere.

Which makes no sense other than science, which was wilfully arrogant, changed its scientific status, which had been forbidden as a practice by all countries spiritual leadership which once owned all rulings, medical science, human law, all teachings under one structure, to a separation by monetary gain.

It is what humans in peer groups with money achieved via coercive tactics, as the same old, same old human history.

 

[Tiberius]

I'm not sure what else I can say - those are our beliefs about Jesus (pbuh). I'm not claiming that my religion's claims count as evidence to support my religion. I'm just trying to explain why I believe Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim (which is always going to be wrt my religion's key texts, which we believe supersede all previous religion's texts).

How could Jesus have been a Muslim anyway when Islam didn't start until several hundred years after Jesus died?

 

[The_Fisher_King]

How could Jesus have been a Muslim anyway when Islam didn't start until several hundred years after Jesus died?

It depends on what you think counts as 'Islam'. If you believe, as many Muslims do, that there have been many Messengers and Prophets of Islam, starting with Adam and continuing on through the likes of Noah (pbuh), Abraham (pbuh), Moses (pbuh), Jesus (pbuh), amongst many others, right up to and including Muhammad (pbuh), then 'Islam' has been around for a long time. If you believe that 'Islam' was founded by Muhammad (pbuh), or even by people after Muhammad (pbuh) had died, then clearly it doesn't make sense to speak of Jesus (pbuh) as a Muslim. It comes down to what you believe.

 

[Tiberius]

It depends on what you think counts as 'Islam'. If you believe, as many Muslims do, that there have been many Messengers and Prophets of Islam, starting with Adam and continuing on through the likes of Noah (pbuh), Abraham (pbuh), Moses (pbuh), Jesus (pbuh), amongst many others, right up to and including Muhammad (pbuh), then 'Islam' has been around for a long time. If you believe that 'Islam' was founded by Muhammad (pbuh), or even by people after Muhammad (pbuh) had died, then clearly it doesn't make sense to speak of Jesus (pbuh) as a Muslim. It comes down to what you believe.

So if you define Islam as whatever you want it to mean, then you can make any point you want?

Are you serious?

Congratulations, all you've done is prove that there have been many figures important in various religions since before Islam was a thing.

Oh wait, you redefined Islam so it means something completely different now, haven't you?

 

[The_Fisher_King]

So if you define Islam as whatever you want it to mean, then you can make any point you want?

Are you serious?

Congratulations, all you've done is prove that there have been many figures important in various religions since before Islam was a thing.

Oh wait, you redefined Islam so it means something completely different now, haven't you?

It's not me who has redefined Islam in this way, these are pretty standard Muslim beliefs.