Religion Spillover Thread

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by RAM PhD, Jul 28, 2013.

Loading...
  1. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Muslims might have a different perspective on whether or not "people go after" their religion. Jews, too.

    Perhaps it also has to do with the fact that no one from those religions--or any non-Christian faiths--proselytize on this board.
     
  2. unprez

    unprez New Member

    Ppl are scared to openly be Muslims in the West because of racial profiling by Christians so whats your point?...And there a lot of innocent homes being blown up by drone strikes as well just because they happen to be living in the same region as some who might be guilty of terrorism. Keep your racist comments to yourself, this is an academic forum site.
     
  3. unprez

    unprez New Member

    Right Christians didn't attack newspapers over cartoons or threaten murder over a book that degrades there religion but they didn't mind raping woman and hanging men based on there skin colour...any Christian who bashes other religions on this site needs to get a reality check. I'm surprised admins are ok with what bs is being wrote on this thread.
     
  4. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    Let's try to keep the "reading" thread clear of this from now on, ok? We can continue the religion discussion here.
     
  5. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    Every race and/or religion (at least the big ones) have skeletons in their closets. Does this mean nobody at anytime can talk about ANYTHING because somewhere in the past a wrong was done? We're talking about present day religion in the world. And don't be so quick to call on the admins, are you incapable of having an adult conversation on topics that you disagree with someone on? Do you really need to have the thought police come in and censor someone else or rescue you?

    Don't participate if it hurts your feelings.
     
  6. airtorn

    airtorn Moderator Staff Member

    You are buying into the media hysteria on what happens regarding the bolded part...lots of misinformation out there.
     
  7. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    Forgive me, nothing personal here, but my frustration has mounted, so here I go off for a bit.

    You went after my statement by first misconstruing what it meant in context, argued against the misconstruction of your own creation by providing logically unsound reasoning based upon demonstrably false assertions of fact, then ignored my next post which both politely clarified what the phrase meant in context and tried to gently demonstrate via quotidien analogy where the likely highly entertaining documentary you alluded to erred, then made this weasel-worded statement:

    President Obama may or may not have invented the lightbulb. Maniac Craniac may or not be hiding under your bed right now. Lady Gaga may or may not be Socrates reincarnated. It is a FoxNews and RT type tactic to call something into question, with the implication that the act of calling-to-question in itself demonstrates that there is a question worthy of raising to begin with. Very little of the Bible's translation is in debate among scholars and those that do debate are nearly exclusively those who do so on theological basis (that is, they don't like the idea that the Bible doesn't actually support what their church teaches, so they harp on minor ambiguities which always occur in the midst of translation while ignoring both context and grammatical correctness).

    Then this, question-begging false analogy:

    You know what, I'll just let that sentence sink in and speak for itself. Hopefully you see at precisely which point it goes awry (hint: the whole thing).

    Now, regarding your argument- if you want verifiable facts, I present to you that the Bible mentions that the earth is floating in space (Job 26:7), that clouds are formed by evaporating water and rain is formed by the vapor condensing in the clouds (Job 36:26-38), and that waves of the sea are caused by wind (James 1:6). All of which during a time when none of this could be scientifically verified and when many other ancient competing theories, now debunked, existed. Those are only a small sample of the dozens of statements made in the scriptures of a similarly scientifically precocious vein. And that's just the science, which I highlighted because I'm a big nerd of such. There's a lot of other cool stuff in the Bible worthy of the term "fact" if you are open to finding them. But that is up to you, of course :)

    Well, I'm done. In fact, I think a good policy for me is to never post again about religion again on this site. I shouldn't have to begin with. Meh. I'm pressing "Submit Reply" anyway... :crackhead:
     
  8. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    You keep using that word. - YouTube
     
  9. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    As I said before, that's true. But in addition to our being indebted to Muslims for the revival of Greek scholarship (especially Aristotle), somewhere in the back of my head I knew that Muslims had a hand in founding one or two of the first European Universities - so I went looking. I knew it had likely happened in Moorish-occupied Spain - and I found it. Here's a partial quote:

    "Spain had been invaded by the Moors in the 8th Century and they rapidly conquered most of the country up to the Pyrenees. By the middle of the 9th century their capital city, at Cordova was probably the largest and most magnificent city in Western Europe - it even had street lighting! It had a large school, which had the great advantage of being in touch with the scholars in the Middle East and, as a result, had access to much of the work of the ancient Greeks. As a result, in addition to religious topics, mathematics, philosophy and medicine were all studied in Cordova. Islam was then a more tolerant religion than Christianity, and the presence of 'unbelievers' was at least tolerated (Christians and Jews were regarded as people who worshipped the same God but had got some misguided ideas), so it was possible for students from all over Europe to study at Cordova and it became a great international school. Personally, I would rate this as the first true University in Europe. (Emphasis mine - Johann)

    However, civil wars weakened the Moorish rule. The Christians started to regain Spain, and by the 11th century they had re-occupied most of the country. The libraries at Cordova and Toledo were seized. and their books found their way into other parts of Europe, stimulating study in the developing Universities there...."

    So - Christianity indeed developed Universities -- but not entirely without Muslim contributions. :smile:

    Here's the full article - it appears from its URL to be part of Cambridge University's web-universe.

    The First Universities

    Johann
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 1, 2013
  10. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    What has Islam done for the world lately?
     
  11. ebbwvale

    ebbwvale Member

    I am all to ready to acknowledge Islamic scholarship which extended to wisdom of Plato and Aristotle. My point was that the political structure in western society was a theocracy. Europe was generally intolerant of any religions other than Christianity and when that was not enough it picked a fight with itself. The overarching influence of Christianity declined with the development of science and other scholarship. The point here is that Christianity fostered scholarship under its umbrella in Europe. No other religion could have because of the theocracy that held power there. The western secular society has its origins in scholarship developed under the Christian political structure. It is also true to say that without the Islamic earlier scholarship, and the Greeks, the development would have taken longer or perhaps not at all.

    This very scholarship forced Christianity to broaden its acceptance of new ideas and a secular society. It had to redefine itself around the new values. I would say that it probably become more "Christian" in developing tolerance. This was not a quick or a complete process. It is still ongoing and there are still great intolerances everywhere. It is just better than it was. This has nothing to do with the teachings of Christ but with how they are applied. I am not a Christian scholar but I think there are examples of tolerance in the New Testament in respect of not stoning people, selecting disciples from the less powerful social class etc. I would submit that there is little evidence of tolerance in more modern times until the latter 19th century. In the UK, you were excluded from Oxford and Cambridge Colleges if you were Roman Catholic or some other religion. Who could forget the Inquisition! I do not think that is evident in the majority of universities in the West today.

    Christianity, in the main, has learned to absorb criticism and to move on. It is not always right and it does not always deserve what it gets. Christians themselves now routinely question the tenets of Christianity that's why there are so many denominations. I think Christianity in the main has included tolerance as an issue of identity. Questioning of it has not diminished it, but made it more inclusive and acceptable to others. Gay people and women, for example, are now challenging it to go further.

    Two good books that I have read on this are (1) The Power of Identity 2nd Edition by Manuel Castells, and (2)The Idea of a University by John Henry Newman.
    In respect of the racist claims:
    1. Ideologies are not confined to races;
    2. Rapists are not Christian, Islamic, Buddhist or any other major religious adherent. If they were, they would not be rapists;
    3. As I understand it, people flying drones can be from any religion and probably are. A large number of people in my country are simply atheist and would resent being described as a Christian. I have no knowledge of any value about religiously motivated drone attacks on people.;
    4. I think western media, at times, unfairly criticizes Christianity, but growth does come from it. The Jesuits have an Admonitor to criticise the conduct of the Superior General and St. Francis of Assisi also had an assistant perform the same function for him, ergo my argument that there is nothing to fear from the criticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admonitor_(Jesuits)
    Isn't this another form of the dialectic developed by Socrates?

    I agree with a previous poster that I am finished with this thread. BTW I have little to do with any particular faith other than I lean more towards the Bahai than anything else. I made the last comment to declare my religious interest.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 2, 2013
  12. unprez

    unprez New Member

    When you turn a website that is about education into bashing a a religion then I would think admins would get involved......And bashing a religion isn't a conversation btw it's a one sided bias that is irrelevant to the facts with no thought process. Christianity doesn't just have skeletons, you guys got issues right now too...seems every year a new Priest of yours is being charged with being a pedophile.

    Maybe you should say your opinions or have your so called adult conversations outside in the real world instead of hiding behind a computer.
     
  13. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member Staff Member

    And from what year to what year was this the case?
     
  14. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    I'm not Christian and I'm certainly not religous. Yes this is an education board, but there is a little thing called sub-forums. You best start believing in sub-forums Miss Turner, cause you're in one[\Capt Barbosa].

    There's plenty of other sub forums where you can go circle jerk yourself around about "education" on here. Leave us disgusting proles to "bash" some religion.
     
  15. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Ted Heiks: And from what year to what year was this the case? (Oxford and Cambridge - no Catholics.)

    Johann: For quite a long period, Ted. A bit more than 300 years. At Oxford, such was the case from the Royal Supremacy Act in the 1560s to the Abolition of Tests Act in 1871.

    But I must agree: That was then -- this is now. :smile:

    Johann

    BTW - All Jews fled England, under pain of death in 1290 (Jewish Expulsion Act.) They were never formally readmitted, but a Sephardic colony arrived in London and were allowed to stay in 1656 - nearly 470 years later!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 2, 2013
  16. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Oops - sorry, bad math. That's 370 years that Jews weren't allowed to live in England -- not 470. Nok a mol, es tut mir vey. (Again, sorry.)

    Johann
     
  17. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Last comment. I was a tiny bit off on the re-admission dates for Catholics. Cambridge re-opened its doors to them in 1854, Oxford in 1856. A few years prior to the Abolition of Tests Act in 1871 that I mentioned. Here's an entry from the "Catholic Oxford BlogSpot"

    "1581: Undergraduates required to subscribe to the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Anglican Church. This requirement was abolished in 1871."

    There was also mention of riots in Oxford, killing of priests and nailing of Catholic heads to walls in the city of Oxford in the mid-16th Century.

    Johann
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 2, 2013
  18. ebbwvale

    ebbwvale Member

    Anti-Catholicism, according to reports, was strong in England in the Victorian era. It was thought that Catholicism was an agent of a foreign power and therefore was a threat to the British Empire. Here is an extract from the Wikipedia entry on John Henry Newman:

    "Led by The Times and Punch, the British press saw this as being an attempt by the Papacy to claim jurisdiction over England. This was dubbed the "Papal Aggression". The Prime Minister, Lord John Russell, wrote a public letter to the Bishop of Durham and denounced this "attempt to impose a foreign yoke upon our minds and consciences".[41] Russell's stirring up of anti-Catholicism led to a national outcry. This "No Popery" uproar led to violence with Catholic priests being pelted in the streets and Catholic churches being attacked."
    The period before the 1860'2 appears to be the time of the non acceptance of Catholics into Oxford:
    "When Catholics did begin to attend Oxford from the 1860s onwards, a Catholic club was formed and, in 1888, it was renamed the Oxford University Newman Society in recognition of Newman's efforts on behalf of Catholicism in that university city. The Oxford Oratory was eventually founded over 100 years later in 1993."
    If you read the book: "The Idea of a University; John Henry Newman" published in 1996 by Yale University Press, it will show the context. Not all the English Aristocracy went with the Reformation and were excluded from holding posts and Oxford.
     
  19. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Indeed it was. But we shouldn't forget that it was also even stronger - to the point of killings at other times -- particularly 16th century into 17th.

    Yes - the Newman Society is regarded as the beginning of Catholic organizations at Oxford. By and large, Catholics were excluded from Oxford for three hundred years before that. Call it self-exclusion if you will, but from around 1580 to the 1860s every undergraduate had to subscribe to the 39 articles of the Anglican Church - an act that would be in direct contravention to Catholic teachings, so...

    Johann
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 3, 2013
  20. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    As I said - true, but even more so in earlier days - 16th and 17th Century. Perhaps it was partly due to the Catholic Church's nasty habit of burning early Protestant "heretics" at the stake - John Rogers, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley, Thomas Cranmer...

    Sectarian violence and retaliation -- old story. Certainly not confined to Christianity, either.

    Johann
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 3, 2013

Share This Page