Show of HandsShow of Hands

Praetorianus June 6th, 2018 3:00am

On the one hand, Islam sees the consumption of alcohol as a sin/wrong (haram), on the other, they basically invented alcohol distillation and produce/consume alcoholic beverages such as Arak/Raki. Do you see this as an insurmountable contradiction?

13 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

MannIsMe Did You Assume My Party
06/06/18 5:34 pm

And who among us stays true to every principle of morality we support?

Reply
suppressedID IMEACH BIDEN
06/06/18 9:05 am

And Christians’ Commandment is to not kill, yet it was they who invented the atomic bomb.

Your point?

Reply
RussianThunder Russia and USA
06/06/18 10:43 am

It’s “do not murder”, not “do not kill”.

I have no idea what the point is

rons WOKE is sick
06/06/18 4:30 am

When they come here the first thing they do is go to a girly bar.

Reply
macforme
06/06/18 2:30 am

Alcohol is a sin in some countries... but stoning people for having sex out of wedlock is just fine. And they consider a woman had sex out of wedlock if she is raped.

Reply
DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/05/18 9:45 pm

No. Why would it be a contradiction? There are plenty of Christians who don't follow their religion. Why would Islam be different in that respect?

Reply
Praetorianus Fair enough.
06/05/18 10:23 pm

Still, do you consider a Muslim who drinks alcohol as nonobservant, or can this be reconciled with Islamic teachings?

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/06/18 3:00 am

I don't think it can be reconciled with Muslim teachers, but it's not my job to judge which Muslims are observant or nonobservant.

theNobamist Silicon Valley
06/05/18 8:50 pm

The religion of peace, kills joyously.

Reply
bower8899 ...
06/05/18 9:16 pm

This has nothing to do with that. Shoo. Go away

ComradeJames nationalism
06/05/18 8:42 pm

@DoctorWasdarb probably knows.

Reply
ctskapski x
06/05/18 8:05 pm

Provide background for the alcohol distillation, please.

(I know our modern term for alcohol comes from arabic, but I thought the distillation process was older.)

Reply
ctskapski x
06/06/18 8:38 am

Huh. Thought it was older. Not much, but a bit.

ScenarioNations California
06/05/18 8:05 pm

Yes. It'd be like God creating pork and then calling it a sin to eat it *looks over at the Jews, Muslims, and some sects of Christianity that follows Old Testament law*

Reply
ComradeJames nationalism
06/05/18 8:42 pm

To be fair, God created humans, and you’re not supposed to eat those, either.

ScenarioNations California
06/05/18 8:52 pm

According to Western Religions, the world is ours to rule over. Thus it'd be illogical to create animals that are edible, yet off limits. If all we need is to cook pork to make it edible or good for the person, why wouldn't this God teach it to his people? I don't know about the Christian groups or Muslim groups and their views on pork but the Jewish god tells Israel not to eat pork. He never gave that instruction to non Israelites.

Praetorianus Fair enough.
06/05/18 9:06 pm

The Bible has the old vs new testament, it's quite the quarrel:

www.openbible.info/topics/eating_pork

Eventually, Jesus seems to have nixed the old dietary restrictions.

bower8899 ...
06/05/18 9:16 pm

James 😂

ScenarioNations California
06/05/18 9:23 pm

When it comes to pork in the NT, some Christians have interpreted some passages in a way that would allow them to eat pork, while some reject this interpretation. The facts are that the Gentiles have never been restricted from eating pork, and this wouldn't change under Christianity as the promises for Israel and the church do not transfer over. With that, neither would the covenants and rules for each. While a Jew can leave his rules for Christianity, I don't see anyway a Christian can become a Jew under Jewish law as interpreted by Christians.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/05/18 9:58 pm

That doesn't make sense, SN. God shouldn't have created pigs, because he told people not to eat them? That's a new one.

Praetorianus Fair enough.
06/05/18 10:13 pm

Could it be that God created pigs (who originally were nothing like the domesticated pigs we have now) just to create? Like flamingos or butterflies or hyenas? Not everything created was created for eating.
Most farm animals we see now, and most plants, weren't created (or evolved) that way. They were bred by humans.

Praetorianus Fair enough.
06/05/18 10:15 pm

Every domestic pig, or dog breed, every corn cob or banana, they all were bred by humans, not created by God.

ScenarioNations California
06/05/18 10:24 pm

If a God creates something that is edible and good to eat if you cook it, that God should teach people how to eat it, not ban it like a primitive caveman.

Seriously though. Your God is a "God of Science" according to his followers, yet created meat that humans could eat if cooked but instead of telling them to cook it, he demands you don't eat it.

You may say that's a new one Doctor, but if you really think this is logical then you're beyond redemption lmao. If a God created food, which can be eaten, yet bans it's use, he is beyond redemption as well.

ScenarioNations California
06/05/18 10:32 pm

I'm pretty sure you can eat birds so birds are a fine example of food a God would create for his people.

Butterflies can be observed and one would argue it points towards God's design or beauty. It has utility outside of meat.

Hyenas can be used for meat and if you believe all of earth is for humans, then hyenas could be a food source. I don't see any utility outside of that.

Pigs on the other hand have been traditionally viewed as a food source. Nothing more, nothing less. They're ugly, gross, and even Muslims agree with both. Jews likely agree with both as well. Why then would God create them except for food? They don't show the wonder of God and if they do then other species do a better job at that. Why then the waste? Why create pigs for humans to watch over and utilize? It's nonsense to do so. Either he would create pigs for use, or he doesn't create everything for us (Jews and Muslims traditionally disagree), or he doesn't create (which is what I believe)

Praetorianus Fair enough.
06/05/18 10:33 pm

Maybe in the old testament, God should just have said:"you live in a hot climate, and pork spoils fast, so without refrigeration and preservatives, it's best not to eat it. Beef can be preserved by salting and drying it in the sunshine."
A scientifically inclined God may have done this.

ScenarioNations California
06/05/18 10:40 pm

Exactly. This is why I'm inclined to not believe in these versions of God.

It is more likely humans observed that meat spoiled fast and people died from eating pork, so they stated "this is a sign that this food is bad for us" rather than a God not straight us telling his people why they shouldn't eat pork, even though he could have and uses vague terms like "unclean"

Pigs may be smart but in a human centered existed, where everything on the earth is made for us, I don't see any utility for pigs besides for their meat.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/06/18 2:59 am

But the world doesn't revolve around humans. Humans are a recent evolutionary development. Your argument is predicated on the idea that all which exists serves the purpose of improving the lives of humankind. That's where the flaw lies.

ScenarioNations California
06/06/18 3:35 am

Considering Christian, Jewish, and Islamic doctrine was founded on an idea of special creation, the histories of all of these religions are centered around beliefs in human centrism. To suggest this is a lie, is to suggest that theists were evolutionists before Darwin. No. Before Darwin, each of these religions were very human centered. I can't speak of Islam but it's safe to say that they follow this pattern as its based on previous theistic and polytheistic viewpoints. All of which were very human centric. While you may not hold a similar view as them, must I go and list the various Muslims pre and post Darwin that hold this view? That is religion. You can try to reform it but who decides which religious view is the true view? Likely it's the one that originated first.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/06/18 3:39 am

What about that whole "God cares about the sparrow" thing, or "look at the lilies of the field"? That's about how God cares about all creation, not just humanity.

ScenarioNations California
06/06/18 3:43 am

It also places humans above the animals and tells us to watch over them and that we have dominion over them. This is the same mentality slave masters had over their slaves. It's a "God gave me a divine right to watch over your wellbeing because you're here for my wellbeing". This mentality in Christianity has led to imperialistic ideologies.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/06/18 3:49 am

In the Bible when it says humans are to watch over creation, it means take care of, not control and exploit.

RussianThunder Russia and USA
06/06/18 10:57 am

In addition, not rating pork was a way to keep the Jewish people separate from non-Jews. It was a sign of cultural identity. It still is.
In addition, and perhaps most importantly, pigs eat anything and I mean anything. Long time ago a serial killer in Canada fed his victims to his pigs. The pigs already entered the food chain so stickers were placed on pork products for a while saying “product may contain human meat”. That’s kind of a deal breaker for me.
As a person who has studied Jewish law and history since I was 3, I would say the rule against pork is because 1) they ate everything...disease in pigs was therefore more common at the time. 2) pigs are dirty. They have to wallow in mud and it’s often their own waste. People shared their homes with many of their animals (humans upstairs, animals downstairs) and pigs reeked. 3) pigs require more water than the ancient Middle East could easily accommodate.

RussianThunder Russia and USA
06/06/18 11:03 am

Though not listed, clean animals give birth in singles or twins. Pigs have litters. Therefore a community would quickly be sharing precious water supplies with an ever increasing bunch of pigs that had to be watered and share the downstairs of their owners home.
Pretty easy to see why they were off limits. Xians arose outside of the Middle East. Judaism and Islam arose in the Middle East and shared the same practical problems. Converts to Xianity were found mostly in European countries which could better accommodate pigs.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/06/18 11:51 am

You mention at the end about the environmental unsustainability of pig farming. It's also important to note that this is the case for cattle as well. Beef uses a ton of water, and the famous cow farts put methane in the air. We probably shouldn't be eating beef either.

ScenarioNations California
06/06/18 11:51 am

Doctor, again "you have dominion over the animals" doesn't necessarily mean take care of. God consistently tells the Jews to use animals for a sacrifice as the odor is pleasant for him. Having dominion typically can mean "take care of them and use them". This is the tricky thing about biblical interpretation. You and I can read the same passage and get multiple meanings out of it. This is likely why the Jewish God is either stupid or non existent. If I was an intelligent God and I wanted to convey a message, a book would be a pretty bad way of doing this lol. I would make sure even if I used a book, that there can only be one proper interpretation. I'd make it clear.

RT, while your interpretation is good from a naturalistic view, a Pig Creating God could easily teach the Jews how to cook, purify, and store it. It's also a rare thing to use as national pride. "I created a pig for food, but it's gross and don't eat it!" How about God doesn't make it gross? Or he has them create art or

ScenarioNations California
06/06/18 11:54 am

...democracy first? I mean the Greeks are a proud people because they created democracy essentially and philosophy. They created Mathematics as well. It'd be like America being proud of its placing bacon on ice cream. Not eating pig is about as pride worthy as eating bacon on ice cream lol.

ScenarioNations California
06/06/18 11:57 am

Both of you are bringing up good practical reasons for not eating beef or pork. The issue is that religions didn't teach these as the reasons for not eating them. They use terms like "unclean". Well we cleaned the meat now. Now what? The one reason God gave them is a piss poor reason especially since he could've taught them to clean it lol.

RussianThunder Russia and USA
06/06/18 2:41 pm

You are an atheist. It’s not my place to explain my religion. I’m not looking for converts.

I do always find it odd that atheists feel the need to slam the concept of a deity and the people who believe but if anyone slams an atheist, it’s awful. Personally, I believe in G-d, live (or try to) by Jewish law. We have the written law and the oral. I study both and try to live by both. That fact, should be of no concern to anyone.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/06/18 2:47 pm

RT, you're making this personal. It doesn't need to be personal. I have nothing more to say on the subjective just because I don't really enjoy debating atheism and the merits of religion (which is evident based on the concision of my responses), but you shouldn't feel attacked just because someone questions the logic behind your faith.

ScenarioNations California
06/06/18 2:52 pm

RT, actually it is your job. Your bible tells you to spread the gospels, meaning that it is your job to find converts. Also it tells the believer to give an account, reasons for why he believes and arguments backing up their views.
You can criticize atheism all you want, in fact I welcome the challenge. As long as you understand my views, I'm fine with you arguing that they're wrong. I'm not upset when someone challenges my views. I don't have a sacred cow. You insult Richard Dawkins? Okay cool. Was it a valid criticism or was it a vacuous claim? See I'm fine with you criticizing any atheist or any idea as long as it's a good argument and not vacuous.

Doctor is right, I respect both of you and just because I find your views silly doesn't mean that I mean disrespect to either of you. It's like my view of free condoms and making them available. You might find it crazy or laughable, and I'm fine with that. I want to have a discussion. Worst case scenario, I'm wrong and my view changes

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
06/06/18 2:53 pm

From my comment, subject* not subjective.

RussianThunder Russia and USA
06/06/18 4:53 pm

No. I’m not Xian. It is not my job to spread my faith whatsoever. Xians think that’s their job. Jews do not.

ScenarioNations California
06/06/18 4:55 pm

Ahhhh. So you're Jewish and not Christian?

RussianThunder Russia and USA
06/06/18 4:59 pm

The issue is debating a belief. I will debate the divinity of Jesus based on the xian bible. I will debate the earth is not flat (well, actually, not really....those people are too stupid to debate). I won’t debate belief in life on other planets. I have no proof one way or the other. I have a belief there probably is. Can I prove it? Nope. Can I prove to a non-believer G-d exists, nope. I believe he does. I will discuss my beliefs but I won’t hold them up to a non believer and say “here, believe this”. Jews just don’t do that.

ScenarioNations California
06/06/18 5:06 pm

Well that's where Jews and Christians diverge then as Christians are commanded to do just that. When debating one of the things listed, one argues probability instead of evidence. This is a model based on logic and liklihood.

RussianThunder Russia and USA
06/06/18 6:29 pm

My dad is a nuclear and quantum physicist. He is a literal genius who currently works at a think tank. He’s a religious Jew. To him, G-d makes total sense and that’s good enough for me.

Praetorianus Fair enough.
06/05/18 8:03 pm

It *does* look a bit hypocritical but can probably be integrated with more tolerance and looser interpretation of scripture. Christians have done the same with issues like women's rights and homosexuality.

Reply