On the Nature of Things | Forum

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 2:44 am she may have been right that western academies don't treat the subject seriously or are deferential to a degree no other religion gets treated for social reasons and furthers the disrepute of academia.

its so "otherly" to most middle class atheist types whos entire point of reference is the politics they need to play with their collegues to retain funding.

the contradiction between respect for multi culti foreigner diversitty (tm) vs battle for morality with their own religous conservatives (tm) is about the only thing interesting about any of it.

Can't argue with those points.

In addition to my own broad strokes, I'd add a lot of these sorts of disciplines get stuck in a rut where the attitudes and frameworks always remain from whatever the peak era of the discipline was.

It's forever (a now embarrassing) Orientalism, with Islam as a quirky thing on the decline and somewhat of a mystical plaything for the upper classes.

Parodite wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 4:48 pm Yea it is self serving... he wants to sell the idea that you are waaaaaay better of with Jesus than with Muhammad. But is he about 80% right? 20%?

Investigating the past scientifically seems to me a necessary part of any equation. Jews and Christians are rather relaxed about such investigations and open to debate. If it would turn out that Hero Prophet and Quran are not at all what you believed them to be, that's a very red pill to swallow for a dedicated Muslim. Too red I'm afraid. Expect trouble, death threats.

A provocative answer, if one is to toss aside a prophet/revelator categorically from the start, is that we are dealing with the outgrowth of a qaric community that was once subordinate and threw off the the upper orders. It was something which grew up in the shadows of the Bible but not its presence and its relation to "The People of the Book" is diplomatic, not theological; and yet, we Westerners only want to engage with it in theological terms-- and mostly for the sake of tearing it down, at that.

the muslim (tm) that the university crowd over here deals with is most likely a middle class , urban Turk or someshit who attended oxford , or atleast has spent alot of quality time in london.

they are barely different to each other - its only the working class and sub cultures that are different from country to country,

the uni educated middle class isnt quite steralised to a global norm, but its suspiciously close

noddy wrote: ↑Fri Dec 08, 2023 5:22 am the muslim (tm) that the university crowd over here deals with is most likely a middle class , urban Turk or someshit who attended oxford , or atleast has spent alot of quality time in london.

they are barely different to each other - its only the working class and sub cultures that are different from country to country,

the uni educated middle class isnt quite steralised to a global norm, but its suspiciously close

Yes, everything we see coming out of universities is what those inside desire them to be; that includes the prerogative to declare the moral superiority and inferiority of groups of people.

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Fri Dec 08, 2023 2:47 am I think it's fair to say that just because someone has a partisan angle doesn't make them suspicious or incorrect.

That's how I listened to his exposition too.

At the same time there is a difference between marshalling a case as a lawyer would, by arranging a tremendous amount of evidence to support a theory; and inferring a theory from the evidence at hand as a historian-in-the-broad is (hopefully) trained to do.

I interpret it closer to the former; not just because of the style, manner and forum for the speech but in his use of certain material that I'm aware of as an interested laymen sprinkled in there (and at this point I'm in the middle of session 2.)

I'm starting from near zero on the history of Islam, Quran of which I know very little. Did read the Quran however, obviously in English, but no matter the glasses and filters I put on, it left me with a sense of revulsion and disgust. Like reading the diary of a psychotic mentally ill person, extreme emotions and mood swings. That probably tells more about me, I guess.

In my teenage years I read most of the old and new testament. The old testament I found boring, obscurantist, filled with events that didn't seem very awesomely important but were made to appear magic by adding meta-physical context I just couldn’t buy into. The new testament felt like a paddo trip, but I did like the Jesus persona. A good, innocent guy who was tortured to death for the mere fact of wanting to help others, teaching friendship, love, sharing, forgiving. Made sense. As for the mentioned miracles... probably not but that is no reason to throw away the baby with the magic bath tub water.

Years ago I made some small inroads into the historical Jesus. Reading theology I found unbearably boring however, word salads without end.

As for my own interpretations, of course I think it's better to be a Christian- I am a Christian. And obviously I have no special attachment to Muslim histography, records and to the Quran itself.

I do think there is a very, very interesting story to the construction of the Quran that we just don't have. Maybe the greatest disappointment of the region at the end of the late classical period is that our scribes in the 2 empires for the area both ended up inveterate liars. Both were certainly in a period where the politically correct answer was more important to record than actual chronology and accounts or facts. Why that is a question unto itself but it leaves us in the dark for source material where all this activity is taking place.

There must be a lot left to be discovered about Islam and Quran. In general, empirical science is what ultimately will keep our beliefs and theories grounded enough in reality to not one day find ourselves flying on the back of a horse with wings, landing on the air strip of Al Quds with a mad crowd welcoming, devouring us, forcing you to then run for your life over water, back in time, into the womb of your mother again… who you overheard whispering, just before all went silent, again, forever: Read my lips, I never had sex with any guy, none!

For a male child being told you never had, never will have a biological father... must be rather harsh. It makes the soul search places nobody went before. Finding, reconnecting with your archetypical father and mother seems to me a core thread of these religions.

Parodite wrote: ↑Fri Dec 08, 2023 10:25 pm
Did read the Quran however, obviously in English, but no matter the glasses and filters I put on, it left me with a sense of revulsion and disgust. Like reading the diary of a psychotic mentally ill person, extreme emotions and mood swings. That probably tells more about me, I guess.

People seem to have a strong reaction to it one way or another, that's for sure.

It's a complicated text in a complicating language and it's very much arguable in all sorts of manner, but without external constrains, it's just arguing.

Then again, I think the whole thing was composed by argument. It is very intertextual and it's almost like multiple parties talking to or criticizing one another.

We know something of the internal conflicts as historically recorded between parties, is it out of the realm that pericopes came from this party or that? Additionally, there were several warrior-poets running around naming themselves prophet at the time.

I think the Marwanids party got the ball rolling with a furqan (a criterion) of selected qurans and then every party jumped in as it became a war of authority (who could issue the most or best) that eventually became synthesized as a whole. This sort of speculation would at least account for the two temporal periods assigned to a "Medina" and a "Mecca" period.

My major criticism of the Q’uran is that it too vague and non-specific. The hadith can be bizarre, but the Q’uran is mostly boring.

1) realise folks mistake the map for the territory, the symbol for the thing all the time
2) get worked up about idolatory (protestants and muslims)
3) take the symbol of non symbology as a symbol of superiority

unf. wrong thread.

The real challenge is how to read ancient texts. Things no doubt get lost in translation and it is not easy to imagine how people were feeling and thinking exactly, how their daily lives were at that time in a certain location.

When it comes to religious text and experience, without knowing for sure obviously, I imagine "dreaming out loud" was more pronounced and present in daily life. It also is not obvious how people experienced and interpreted "their own thoughts". Are they mine? Ours maybe? Are they external entities whispering in my ears? Voices of demons, angels, of God himself maybe? Did they even wonder? Was doubting things, asking questions even common?

It might be relatively recent that people consider thoughts their own thoughts. Voices, visions, music... some great composers, painters, writers, mathematicians however, can still describe in similar way that things can come to them like a revelation "out of nowhere".

Given that in these ancient times people were also capable of some incredible engineering with enough TOOL-TECH going on in society in general... one cannot say they lived in a fictional lala-land only. Maybe they had less urge to consider one superior over the other. Fact versus Fiction might be something less of an issue back then.

Nonc Hilaire wrote: ↑Sat Dec 09, 2023 3:04 am My major criticism of the Q’uran is that it too vague and non-specific. The hadith can be bizarre, but the Q’uran is mostly boring.

Shahad Ahmed was of the opinion that the hadith themselves are discursive parties, with the legalist-moralizer generally on one side and the biographers and tasfir on the other.

Parodite wrote: ↑Sat Dec 09, 2023 12:49 pm The real challenge is how to read ancient texts. Things no doubt get lost in translation and it is not easy to imagine how people were feeling and thinking exactly, how their daily lives were at that time in a certain location.

When it comes to religious text and experience, without knowing for sure obviously, I imagine "dreaming out loud" was more pronounced and present in daily life. It also is not obvious how people experienced and interpreted "their own thoughts". Are they mine? Ours maybe? Are they external entities whispering in my ears? Voices of demons, angels, of God himself maybe? Did they even wonder? Was doubting things, asking questions even common?

It might be relatively recent that people consider thoughts their own thoughts. Voices, visions, music... some great composers, painters, writers, mathematicians however, can still describe in similar way that things can come to them like a revelation "out of nowhere".

Given that in these ancient times people were also capable of some incredible engineering with enough TOOL-TECH going on in society in general... one cannot say they lived in a fictional lala-land only. Maybe they had less urge to consider one superior over the other. Fact versus Fiction might be something less of an issue back then.

metaphor and irony dont travel well in text - its a problem for reading modern text, let alone ancient ones with different in-jokes

one of things dealing with history in all its forms is how its nearly always interpreted through the most literal and earnest of viewpoints.

i dispute that the ancients didnt have the same various personality types we have around now.

I think on some levels, magic/spiratuality/religion is just the study of emotional regulation and manipulation - something the modern mind just shoves in the background, not front and centre like it perhaps a bit more in times past - things that inspire, things that depress.

take some pills, see a therapist.

Parodite wrote: ↑Sat Dec 09, 2023 12:49 pm The real challenge is how to read ancient texts. Things no doubt get lost in translation and it is not easy to imagine how people were feeling and thinking exactly, how their daily lives were at that time in a certain location.

"Writing, dear Phaedrus, preserves a solemn silence." The same goes for history. And a hundred other caveats- like there is no perfect language everything translate to- yet there is no need to erect barriers where there aren't any.

Which is why collecting data... do science and help lay the jigsaw puzzle of history should never stop, or we all be damned.

Controversial as it may be, worth to watch till the end (especially if you like Indiana Jones movies):

The Most Controversial Archaeological Discovery - The Lost Tomb Of Jesus - Archaeology Documentary

Other scientists conclude the evidence and proof that this tomb contained remnants of Jesus and his family is flimsy to say the least:

Talpiot Tomb (wikipedia)

Not surprising that a highly sensitive subject like this is controversial given the vested interests associated with it. Everybody with an emotional skin in the game of course hopes to find evidence that validates a personally preferred theory. But if all data are open to everyone and people can further investigate, try prove each other wrong, the scientific method is alive and kicking.

This particular tomb is now a no-go zone and sealed again... which will probably stimulate the conspiracy-minded to not let it go that easily and instead see it as a location that probably hides facts inconvenient for religious and political institutions.

This begs the question: is it possible to love scientific truth for its own sake without bias? Even if you have no bias and are simply very curious wanting to discover things no matter what they are... you still might have a job with an income that depends on other people who do have a badly biased skin in the game and tell you to stop and go-no-further... or lose your job, mob floors instead. Woke university style.

Nope.

“Truth” would be killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Parodite wrote: ↑Sun Dec 10, 2023 12:33 pm Which is why collecting data... do science and help lay the jigsaw puzzle of history should never stop, or we all be damned.

Sure, knock yourself out. Collect all the soil samples 'ya want then get back to me when that adds up to Alexander being the son of Philip.

Parodite wrote: ↑Sun Dec 10, 2023 12:33 pm

Controversial as it may be, worth to watch till the end (especially if you like Indiana Jones movies):

The Most Controversial Archaeological Discovery - The Lost Tomb Of Jesus - Archaeology Documentary

Nah, it's just silly. I watched the original broadcast of that and felt awfully bad that Simcha got blowback- my memory is it pretty much ended his show (whether that was planned or not, I don't know.) That said, memory also has it that the controversy was about as manufactured as everything else in media.

His show and his "investigative archeology" was entertaining.

certainly shake up the reliquary market.

noddy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 8:56 am certainly shake up the reliquary market.

------------------------


If one is interested in another silly Indy Jones rabbit hole, look up the Shirpa Scroll.

Dismissed as a forgery in the 19th century, (it's finder a character/charaltan as it usually goes in these fields) then periodically brought back up as maybe being a genuine article, the "first of the dead sea scrolls"-- in this case, a proto-Deuteronomy.

The big problem is that it went missing long ago and we just have bad copies of the original.

noddy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 8:56 am certainly shake up the reliquary market.

Indeed Finding leftover skulls 'n bones of Jesus and his family, who just died like any other human soul, would not be material to found a new world religion on. We need magic and miracles. It would also be bad for tourism in Israel.

Parodite wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 4:47 pm

noddy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 8:56 am certainly shake up the reliquary market.

Indeed Finding leftover skulls 'n bones of Jesus and his family, who just died like any other human soul, would not be material to found a new world religion on. We need magic and miracles. It would also be bad for tourism in Israel.

Virtual Jesus VS real Jesus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYW1lKNVI90

Yeah I would like quantum fries with that, as long as they have Higgs sprinkles. Kind of hungry so virtual fries aren't going to cut it.

I don't care if it rains or sneezes long as I have/have not Higgs boson + Virtual Jesus sitting on the dash board of my car.

Doc wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2023 12:22 am Virtual Jesus VS real Jesus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYW1lKNVI90

Yeah I would like quantum fries with that, as long as they have Higgs sprinkles. Kind of hungry so virtual fries aren't going to cut it.

I don't care if it rains or sneezes long as I have/have not Higgs boson + Virtual Jesus sitting on the dash board of my car.

For people who believe we live in a simulation all of your desires can be arranged
Of particular interest to me is the so far only allegedly proven massless particle to exist: the photon.

Parodite wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2023 3:06 pm

Doc wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2023 12:22 am Virtual Jesus VS real Jesus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYW1lKNVI90

Yeah I would like quantum fries with that, as long as they have Higgs sprinkles. Kind of hungry so virtual fries aren't going to cut it.

I don't care if it rains or sneezes long as I have/have not Higgs boson + Virtual Jesus sitting on the dash board of my car.

For people who believe we live in a simulation all of your desires can be arranged
Of particular interest to me is the so far only allegedly proven massless particle to exist: the photon.

Often mistaken for the fauxton, which is much more massless.

Parodite wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2023 3:06 pm

Doc wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2023 12:22 am Virtual Jesus VS real Jesus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYW1lKNVI90

Yeah I would like quantum fries with that, as long as they have Higgs sprinkles. Kind of hungry so virtual fries aren't going to cut it.

I don't care if it rains or sneezes long as I have/have not Higgs boson + Virtual Jesus sitting on the dash board of my car.

For people who believe we live in a simulation all of your desires can be arranged
Of particular interest to me is the so far only allegedly proven massless particle to exist: the photon.

Photon have no mass but they do have energy. Hence when they hit light sails the light sails move. The amount of mass =
E*Higgs field(1/c^2)
Under relativity the math works better with more than 3 dimensions plus time. I am thinking there may be many more dimension than that. It has been speculated that Gravity is weak because it is spread out over more than the three dimension plus time. IN any event I think there must be more parameters associate with quantum particles that we are unaware of due to an extended number of dimensions which we cannot see.

.
The Jesuit Pope
authorizes blessings for same-sex couples


Interesting to see how Catholics take this .. Bible is clear on this (not so Koran) ..

Good to see what Patriarch Kirill of Moscow has to say.