Tag Archive | "Religion."

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cosmic Religious Optimism

Posted on 07 March 2012 by Tea Server

This post is a shorter chopped up version of the article Reincarnation and the Meaning of Life by John Hick. I edited the article to reduce its length and make it more accessible for readers who do not relish long reads (though I’m afraid it’s still long for a blogpost), and to emphasize more on the central thesis. If it titillates your interest, do read the complete article; it is definitely worth it.
——-

Reincarnation and the Meaning of Life
John Hick

Nietzsche puts forward the idea of eternal recurrence, the endless repetition in every detail of the entire history of the universe, including our own lives, and including this present moment. In his own books the idea comes as the most penetrating possible question about the value of each individual’s life and of human life generally. Has your life thus far been such that you would want to live it again and again endlessly, exactly the same in every minutest detail? And would you want human history as a whole to be repeated endlessly, just as it has been? To say Yes is, for Nietzsche, the ultimate affirmation of life by his ideal type, the Over- or Higher- or Superman, who however does not yet exist except in his imagined Zarathustra. 
Let us turn to David Hume who asks the same challenging question but, as the cool and lucid thinker that he was, without the poetic extravagance of eternal recurrence. He has one of the characters in his Dialogues, Demea, say ‘Ask yourself, ask any of your acquaintance, whether they would live over again the last ten or twenty years of their life. No! but the next twenty, they say, will be better’. For however satisfying our life as a whole may have been during the last ten or twenty years, we can all think of innumerable points at which it could have been better, so that, if we are comparing the way it has been with the way it might have been with these improvements, we would say No to the actual in comparison with the improved version. But we must eliminate this comparison in our thought experiment. I have to try to look back on my life as a whole during the last ten or twenty years and ask whether I would wish to live it again just as it has been, not changed or improved in any way, and without knowing that it had all happened before. It would be exactly as though one was living it for the first time, the alternative being not having existed at all.
Setting the question up in this way I think that Hume (though not the Demea in his dialogues), and also Nietzsche, and indeed all of us would opt to live it again. Only very few very unhappy people living in deep depression or in utterly unbearable circumstances of some kind would, I think, wish not to have existed. I suspect that even the millions in our world now living in dire poverty, anxiety and danger hope, with Demea, that the next years will be better and will thus make the past span of life worthwhile, not in itself but because it will have led on to that better future.
But on the other hand, still focussing on those millions who have lived in hope that life would in the future become better for them, or perhaps for their children, when we look back over human history we see that in a very large proportion of cases that hope was not in fact fulfilled. And so we have to ask whether we would want that entire history to be endlessly repeated in an eternal recurrence, or indeed in a single recurrence. If we think of ourselves simply as individuals, I would say Yes, as one of those who have been fortunate in the lottery of life. But should I say Yes on behalf of humanity as a totality, including those who have been desperately unlucky in that lottery? Would I want those who have lived in miserable slavery, or in constant fear and anxiety, or with debilitating and painful diseases, to have to live that life again and again without knowing, as they did not, that their situation was never in fact going to change for the better? Would I want those who have become sadistic monsters, from serial rapists and murderers to evil dictators, to live again and again? Would I want all the wars, persecutions, tortures, murders, rapes, cruelties and all the famines, droughts, floods, earthquakes and diseases to happen again and again? This is a challenge to the world religions, because each of them is in its own way a form of cosmic optimism, affirming the positive value of the totality of the process of which human history in this world is, according to them, a phase.
Moving within the realm of religious possibilities, and on the culturally forbidden subject of death, we are confronted by two very different options. Most westerners, whether they accept, or more often reject, the idea of a life after death think in terms of an eternal heaven and hell. For most easteners, on the other hand, what they either accept or reject is the idea of a journey through many lives. Which of these options is for us the standard idea to be either accepted or rejected depends in the great majority of cases on where we were born. However philosophy, in contrast to theology, tries to transcend this global postcode lottery. And it seems to me that, given the possibility of more life than the present one, then from a religious point of view the eastern model is to be preferred. For at the end of this short life very few, if indeed any, are ready for either eternal bliss or eternal punishment. But on the other hand all are ready for further growth and development. And if such a process is indeed taking place, we are all clearly at an early stage in it. If it is to proceed it requires further interactions with others within a common environment. It seems that this must take the form of further mortal lives, lived within the boundaries of birth and death, because it is the inexorable pressure of these boundaries that gives life the urgency that an unlimited horizonless future would lack. The cosmic scenario that best meets these requirements is some form of the concept of rebirth or reincarnation. So this is the option that I now want to explore a little.
Let me bring in at this point Milan Kundera’s strange but striking novel The Unbearable Lightness of Being. At one point he has his central character Tomas reflect as follows: ‘Somewhere out in space there was another planet where all people would be born again. They would be fully aware of the life they had spent on earth and of all the experiences they had amassed here. And perhaps there was still another planet, where we would all be born a third time with the experience of our first two lives. And perhaps there were yet more planets, where mankind would be born one degree (one life) more mature. . . Of course we here on earth (planet number one, the planet of inexperience) can only fabricate vague fantasies of what will happen to man on those other planets. Will he be wiser? Is maturity within man’s power? Can he attain it through repetition? Only [Kundera says] from the perspective of such a utopia is it possible to use the concepts of pessimism and optimism with full justification: an optimist is one who thinks that on planet number five the history of mankind will be less bloody. A pessimist is one who thinks otherwise’. This points very well to the sense in which, within the multiple lives option, religion involves the cosmic optimism which believes that through a series of lives in which any moral/spiritual maturing achieved in one is carried forward to the next, human existence will eventually be perfected. Each life story, and the human story as a whole, will lead eventually to a limitlessly good state. This cosmic optimism anticipates an end state that has a value in itself so great as to make worthwhile the long path that has led to it, so that in retrospect we will all be profoundly glad to have travelled it.
In Kundera’s imagined scenario he looks forwards from human life as it now is to a supposed better future. But let us try the thought experiment of thinking back from that imagined future better state. Suppose that on the fifth planet human beings have become distinctly more caring towards one another, distinctly more inclined to care for their neighbour as much as for themselves, no longer able to be stirred to communal hatreds and wars, sharing the earth’s resources equitably – by no means yet perfect beings in a perfect society but manifestly having moved in that direction. If we were part of that future world, and could see the emerging projectory, would we think that the earlier stages are now justified retrospectively by the increasingly better states to which they have led? We know what pain and suffering and despair and unhappiness there is in the world today. Would even this be justified within Kundera’s imagined scenario?
I think that most of us, perhaps all of us, including those who now suffer most, would say Yes. We would all think that if that is indeed what is going on then we are glad to exist rather than not exist as part of this process. It is not a matter of a balancing compensation in the hereafter for pain suffered is this life but of the ultimate fulfilment of the human potential. In the course of this some may well have suffered much more than others – at any rate this is certainly the case within any one particular lifetime, – and yet all will have come by their own individual paths to the same end. Some may well have had a harder journey than others, and in this respect life may very well not be fair. It may be more like the situation in Jesus’ parable of the workers in the vineyard who all receive the same reward even though some have done much more work than others. Further, in the scenario we are considering, it is not the case that the particular experiences which happen to each individual were specifically necessary to lead them to the future great good, or that the events of each person’s life had to be just as they are, nor that the course of our lives is planned or directed by an omnipotent and loving God. Rather what happens occurs through the unpredictable interactions of very imperfect free beings. Remember that much the greater part of human suffering is caused by human actions or inactions. But whatever may be the largely accidental course of our life, or our many lives, it can – according to the religions – become the path by which we shall eventually have arrived at what John Bunyan symbolised in Christian terms as the Celestial City.
In both east and west the rebirth or reincarnation idea is popularly understood in an unsophisticated way as the present conscious self being born again in this world, including even sometimes being born in lower forms of animal life. But this popular picture is far from the conceptions found in some of the Buddhist and Hindu philosophies. These are themselves diverse, and there is no one official doctrine. But three major differences from the popular idea are fairly standard. The main one is that it is not the present conscious self that is re-embodied, not the persona gradually formed by the set of circumstances into which we are born – by our genetic inheritance, our various innate gifts and limitations, the family of which we are part, our short or long span of life, the region of the world and the society and culture and historical epoch in which we find ourselves, and the way things go in the world around us. That which is re-embodied in a future new conscious self is a deeper unconscious dispositional structure which Hindu philosophers speak of as the linga sharira, or subtle body – though this has to be understood within a whole philosophical framework in which it is not a body at all in our ordinary sense, – and which Buddhist philosophers speak of as a karmic bundle or complex. For them the conscious self is entirely evanescent, not an enduring substance. I suppose the most obvious Christian term for the deeper on-going self would be the soul. It is an aspect of our nature that exists far below the level of consciousness. All of the various factors in terms of which we live our conscious lives constitute, so the speak, the hand of cards which this deeper self has been dealt in this particular life, the stream of challenges and opportunities, capacities and limitations, with which life presents us. A major question, which I do not take up here, is whether or not some automatic process provides the reincarnating ‘soul’ with a ‘hand of cards’ appropriate to its need for further development. But what both affects and is affected by our basic dispositional structure is what the conscious personality makes of these cards. We are all the time both expressing and forming our deeper self by our responses to the circumstances, both agreeable and disagreeable, in which we find ourselves. And it is this cumulative quality of response that is built into the basic moral/spiritual character that will be re-embodied in another conscious personality.
Yet another difference from the popular conception is that in the more philosophical eastern reincarnation, or rebirth, doctrines there is generally no conscious memory of previous lives, even though such supposed memories abound in popular folklore. As Gandhi wrote, ‘It is nature’s kindness that we do not remember past births. Where is the good of knowing in detail the numberless births we have gone through? Life would be a burden if we carried such a tremendous load of memories’. A latent memory of the totality of our experience is however integral to the dispositional or karmic continuant which is expressed in each successive new conscious personality. There may or may not, as some claim, be occasional leakages of fragments of this complete memory into someone’s consciousness. But normally not. However the full accumulation of memory nevertheless exists beneath normal consciousness. According to the traditional story, when the Buddha attained to full enlightenment during his night of deep meditation under the Bo tree at Bodh Gaya he remembered the complete succession of his previous lives. It is in virtue of this normally inaccessible thread of memory that the many lives are different moments in the same life project.
Returning now to Kundera, in his imagined scenario we do not now, in the first world, know what the future holds. Suppose however we had come to the belief that we are in fact taking part in a journey from world number one to world number five and then to yet further worlds beyond. Would not this change the way in which we experience and engage in our present life in world number one, the world as he says of immaturity? Would it not give a new and different meaning to what is now happening?
This is the place to note that this basic cosmic optimism is marred within the monotheisms by their traditional doctrine of an eternal hell. And given the prior assumption that this present life is the only one there is, so that there is no possibility of continued maturing and moral growth beyond death – and the traditional doctrine of purgatory does not allow for this, – it is natural to think that some have proved themselves to be so wicked that their destiny can only be either hell or, more mercifully, annihilation. The fear of hell was of course also, notoriously, been used for many centuries as a tool of social control. Julian of Norwich was one of the minority of pre-modern Christian thinkers, and Jalaluldin Rumi a hundred years earlier one of the minority of Muslim thinkers, who have been hospitable to the idea of universal salvation; and it may well be significant that they were both mystics, that is to say experiencers, rather than writers of dogmatic theology. Buddhism and Hinduism, on the other hand, believing in many further lives to come, have much less need for an eternal hell. Their cosmologies do indeed include many states that are generally called hells, but these are states through which people pass, not to which they consigned for eternity. It may even be that we are in one of these now. But the cosmic optimism of these faiths, shared by various strands of Christianity, holds that the fundamental element of good at the core of our nature, the atman, or the universal Buddha nature, or the image of God within us, or ‘that of God in everyone’, will eventually come to its complete fulfilment through the course of many lives, each bounded by birth and death and thus subject to the creative pressure of mortality.
Bringing all this to bear on the question of the meaning of our present lives, the hypothesis before us is that we are presently engaged in one phase, by no means necessarily the first, of a multi-life process of moral and spiritual growth within a universe which is, as the world religions affirm, ultimately benign or, speaking metaphorically, friendly. But how can it be said to be benign when it involves all the suffering, all the agony and despair, all the cruelty and wickedness that exist around us? Only, I think, if we grant the very high value of moral freedom and the consequent principle that goodness gradually created through our own free responses to ethically and physically challenging situations is enormously, we could even say infinitely, more valuable than a goodness implanted in us without any effort on our part. Putting this in the terms in which it appears in the intra-Christian theodicy debates, this is the Irenaean suggestion (as distinguished from the Augustinian theology) that God created humanity, not as already perfect beings who then disastrously fell, but as spiritually and morally immature creatures who are able to grow, through their own free decisions within a world that functions according to natural law and is not designed for their comfort, so that there are pains as well as pleasures, hardships to be endured, problems to be solved, difficult choices to be made, the possibility of real setbacks and accidents and of real failure and tragedy.
But – to voice the obvious objection – surely a loving God would not allow the extremities of human, and also animal, suffering that actually occur. The intra-Christian debate involves at this point the question whether God could intervene to prevent ‘man’s inhumanity to man’ or nature’s perils without infringing either human freedom or the autonomy of the physical world. But since I am not postulating an omnipotent loving personal God, I leave that debate aside. I am postulating instead a cosmic process of which we are part, which we do not understand, which we often find to be harsh, sometimes extremely harsh, which we find to involve both great happinesses and great miseries, but which is nevertheless found in mystical experience within each of the great religions to be, from our human point of view, ultimately benign.

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Sheraz Upal Worries | Music | Debates | Religion

Posted on 03 March 2012 by Tea Server

So actually i was all concerned about the worlds most famous singer and zillion times grammy winner Sheraz Upal not making anymore music.. and I was all concerned on top of my career, job, life, money matters because Sheraz Upal meant so much to me… then I saw http://scaleofuniverse.com/ and all of a sudden a fuckin singer reverting to religion… all these relious matters of IF this than That seemed so meaningless.

The world is way vaste than you ever imagined, Sheraz Upal, debates on whether hes right or wrong and stuff like that, all of this, including you and me is passively small as compared to each and every problem that you face or get worried about.

Seriously ! get over insane stuff. Whether you believe in God / Allah / mother nature / any super natural force governing the world, or Not, he/she has more things to worry about whether you stopped singing or not. The mentality of God can’t be this small where he puts you in heaven or hell just on basis of you giving up singing or I just said dil dil Pakistan in my washroom for fun.

 

Syndicated from: Sarmad Hassan

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , ,

Allow

Posted on 27 February 2012 by Tea Server

If free will leads to inevitable suffering, was it moral on God’s part to allow us free will?

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Beyond Belief

Posted on 25 February 2012 by Tea Server

The circumstances which led to copies of the Holy Quran and other religious material being burned at a rubbish-pit in Afghanistan are gradually coming to light. A NATO official has said that it was suspected that some detainees were using religious texts as a means of covert communication and consequently the material was confiscated. This is shamefully lame. Assuming it is true – if the matter had ended there it would have been at least understandable, even if we do not condone the manner in which Afghan people are being detained without trial. But the matter did not end there, and for reasons which have yet to be satisfactorily explained the confiscated material was sent to be burned at a pit used for the incineration of waste from the Bagram base. Locally-employed Afghans spotted the material and pulled some from the fire, but the damage was done and it was revealed that copies of the Holy Quran were indeed burned. (Bagram Base in Afghanistan is in use of US and NATO forces)

NATO apologised for what had happened, but failed to give any explanation as to why the burning was ordered or authorised, and by whom. Violence inevitably followed, with angry protests in Kabul, Jalalabad and other Afghan cities and, as these lines are written, two have died as a result and dozens have been injured. This is a seismic event. There can be few events more likely to arouse anger and outrage in a Muslim country than the burning of the Quran. It would be bad enough, were the desecration committed by a local person, but to have it committed by what is an unwelcome force of occupation heaps indignity upon indignity. There will be anger in the coming days as the story spreads around the world, and the entire affair will enter the iconography of anti-Americanism that pervades here in Pakistan and in varying degrees across the Muslim world generally. No apology is ever likely to appease the feeling of disbelief that an incident such as this could ever have happened in the first place. Nothing can ever justify such a gross, criminal act of desecration. The reverberations and consequences of this are going to echo for long.

Editorial The News International

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Reflections on Marx, Religion & Pakistan

Posted on 15 February 2012 by Tea Server

“Religion is the opiate of the masses.” That’s what Karl Marx said, and in a recent final exam, that’s what my political science professor asked us to analyze. Needless to say, one’s opinion of this quote ties directly into one’s religious beliefs, or lacking those, one’s ideas about religion in general. Throughout human history, wars … Continue reading »

Syndicated from: Zainab Khawaja’s Blog

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , ,

On the Edge of Darkness and Light

Posted on 08 February 2012 by Tea Server

When your life comes to a halt and you feel like you are going nowhere… Stillness makes for a good resting place.

Your mind is racing in all directions.

Your heart is pounding.

You are finished, done with all the worry, all the planning.

The sun rises low on the horizon pouring across the grass like blazing lava.

You stand there shaking slightly as the chilled night air at your back reminds you the night is over. It’s all behind you.

Having been in the darkness for so long, the light is new to you.

You tilt your head left and then right. Squinting, rubbing your eyes releasing the last tear drop left behind from all too many tears shed over this.

It is, as they say, a new dawn, a new beginning.

You rise up, stand taller to face the sun.

A peaceful smile appears freed from all the pain and your arms spring upward suddenly without explanation.

Then words slip out, quietly at first, and you marvel at the idea that you can finally say something good, something liberating, that frees you from the ugliness and desperation.

You whisper, “Thank you!” as the sun now warms your very being blanketing you from head to toe.

You shout, “It’s over!”

Your body slowly sways back and forth to the rhythm of hope. Your arms raise and lower like you are about to conduct a masterpiece written only for you.

A gentle breeze interrupts.

You close your eyes knowing that this time, and from now on, there will not be the darkness that once consumed you.

You have given your life over to Him and with Him comes the Light.

This is what faith is. This is what prayer does.

Syndicated from: Uzair Ahmad

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , ,

God and Chaos

Posted on 07 February 2012 by Tea Server

“It’s hard to accept the idea that there cannot be an order in the universe because it would offend the free will of God and His omnipotence. So the freedom of God is our condemnation, or at least the condemnation of our pride.”
I dared, for the first and last time in my life, to express a theological conclusion: “But how can a necessary being exist totally polluted with the possible? What difference is there, then, between God and primigenial chaos? Isn’t affirming God’s absolute omnipotence and His absolute freedom with regards to His own choices tantamount to demonstrating that God does not exist?”
Umberto Eco, The Name of the Rose

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Birth of Prophet(p.b.u.h)

Posted on 04 February 2012 by Tea Server

BISMILLAH-HIRRAHMAAN-NIRRAHEEM
(IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE MOST COMPASSIONATE, THE MOST MERCIFUL)

The coming of a Prophet
it was a bright morning when at dawn
a beautiful baby boy was born

This long awaited and anticipated being
the likes of which no-one had ever seen

His entry into this world was met with wonder
as in prostration he looked unto the sky from under

A “star” in Medina was seen by a Jew
the coming of a prophet everybody knew!

It was in Makah that a light raised to the sky
this light was seen in Syria ”a prophet has been born” was the cry!

His mother amazed at this gift of hers
filled with joy she shed many tears

An angel whispered to her that this was to be
“Muhammad the praised one” whose message would spread to eternity!

Who would suckle this precious baby? The question asked
many aspirant eyes upon him were cast

By the command of Allah Bibi Halima appeared
taking Muhammad to the countryside where he was to be reared

In a home which was empty suddenly blessings were abound
a celestial light encompassed the land all around!

Beautiful Muhammad grew up healthy and strong
fostered for four years until he had to move along

Bibi Amina was overjoyed, for Muhammad did she pray
two joyful years had passed, then Allah took her away

This child of six by his grandfather Abdul Muttalib was taken
where after two years, by his grandfather’s death was shaken

Aboo Talib his uncle, took him at the age of eight
he was very fond of his nephew, although he did not have faith

Four years later, to Syria did they go
a Christian priest Bahira, of this future prophet, he did know

Take care of this boy, Aboo Talib was told
this child is special, this secret, do not unfold!

Many years later, as a businessman, did Muhammad marry
Bibi Khadija a widow, who had many burdens to carry?

At the age of forty, she was relieved by this twenty five years old being
a person such as Muhammad, she had never before seen

It was Ramadan, when in the cave of Hira Muhammad prayed
angel Jibraeel appeared, and an appeal to Muhammad he made

Read in the name of thy lord! A powerful voice was heard
Muhammad was frightened, almighty’s anger, he feared

Comforted by Khadija, who told him not to lament
Muhammad accepted his prophet hood, and thus he felt content.

Waraqa bin Naufal, a learned man said, the angel was the same
that had appeared before prophet Moosa as well, in Allah’s name!

So was the beginning of a long tale to tell
the rest of which, all of humanity knows well.

 

Syndicated from: Just Bliss

Comments (0)

Tags: , , ,

Faith, Rationality and Consequences

Posted on 03 February 2012 by Tea Server

Faith, for me, is a private matter. What I have in my heart regarding myself and the God, is to remain within confines of my heart and others have no right to judge or base their acts on it. But this assumption gets tested most of the times.

Islam is different in the sense that it involves various issues that relate to society in general, for example, guidelines related to divorce, matters 

Syndicated from: yeah.. that too…

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , ,

Some Thoughts on Islamic Feminism

Posted on 01 February 2012 by Tea Server

Saying that Quran is not inherently a patriarchal text does not automatically imply that Quran is inherently feminist either. Of course, feminist interpretations of Islam are possible but patriarchal interpretations are not just possible, they are already existing and dominant, and one cannot see much objective reason as to why a feminist interpretation should have more theological validity than a patriarchal interpretation as being the true interpretation, apart from the fact that it corresponds to feminist morality. If Quran cannot be read and understood at all without some sort of interpretation being imposed on it during the process, as the enthusiastic liberal Muslims who play the interpretation card would like to believe, then it implies that the text alone is devoid of meaning and there is nothing inherent to the Quran. It is inherently neither patriarchal nor feminist; it becomes either of these by virtue of the interpretation we choose to see it through. Yet this conclusion is something that would make most Muslims feminists uncomfortable, because they would like to believe that the “true Islam” conforms to their moral values of feminism. Apart from the uncommon Islamic variants which de-emphasize the centrality of textual interpretation in religion, such a deconstructed view of scripture is indeed awkward for most practising Muslims.
Some Islamic feminists say that Islam recognizes men and women as equal but prescribes different gender roles for them given their biological differences. Sounds neat, but it is a problematic position from a feminist point of view. It is not entirely clear how much biological gender can determine social gender roles. The tendency has been to view gender as primarily a socio-cultural construct (‘One is not born a woman, but becomes one’) and feminism has been in many ways a rebellion against the social norms of what women are and aren’t supposed to do. If Islam does indeed prescribe different gender roles, and it is a conclusion hard to avoid unless you resort to radical leaps of interpretations, then it is rendering itself an easy target for feminist attacks. All prescriptions of gender roles have a certain oppression about them. Furthermore, this is guilty of a binary conception of gender and ignores androgyny in its entirety.
The problem of reconciling Islam and Feminism becomes all the more apparent when we consider a topic like homosexuality. In this case Islamic feminists who support homosexuality have to explain away many Quranic verses (story of Lot, for instance) and hadiths which admonish against homosexuality, and even if we presume that this explaining away can be done successfully, there is still nothing left that is in favor of homosexuality. It may be possible to say that Islam can be interpreted in a way that makes it compatible with homosexuality, yet no one can demonstrate that Islam supports homosexuality, that Islam argues for homosexual rights. There is simply no textual evidence in positive acceptance of homosexuality, and this leaves a big chasm at the very heart of Islamic feminism. Clearly, the justified and well-cherished feminist support of homosexuality cannot be derived from the Quran. Therefore, feminism has at least some moral values on which Quran is, at best, silent.
Another example that can be brought up is that of the moral status of pre-marital consensual sex. Western Feminists are vastly accepting of consensual sex regardless of the marital status and do not deem it to be morally objectionable. Islamic Feminists tend to tip-toe around this. We may see them arguing that Islam doesn’t treat fornication as a legal crime, even though it does; the 4 witnesses requirement may be an unlikely possibility to fulfill in practice but it exists in theory. Let us give the benefit of doubt to the Islamic feminists and suppose that this can be successfully explained away and consensual sex is de-criminalized. Nonetheless, there is still no moral approval or acceptance of a casual sexual encounter in Islam. Islam morally prohibits pre-marital sex and all Islamic feminists who may believe that consensual sex is not to be morally judged and disapproved have a lot of explaining to do. And all Islamic feminists who disapprove of consensual sex also have a lot of explaining to do because it is a seemingly un-feminist stance to morally restrict sex to marriage.
These examples can be used to demonstrate the two grades of Islamic Feminism: 
Weak Islamic Feminism: Islam and feminism are not mutually exclusive.
Strong Islamic Feminism: The feminist principles and values are already present in Islam and can be derived from them.
The feminist support of homosexuality and consensual sex, among other things, is in my view a refutation of Strong Islamic Feminism. Weak Islamic Feminism is a position that can be consistently argued for, though it still requires feats of creative interpretations, and has the accompanying (awkward) conclusions that Islam is not inherently feminist and that there are at least some feminist moral values that are meta-Quranic. Either way it shows that Islamic Feminism is yet to explore these questions in philosophical depth and is not likely to be successful unless it is accompanied by a broader reformative theology that tackles the problems of textual interpretation.

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , ,

A Vocabulary of Delights

Posted on 28 January 2012 by Tea Server

A young monk, with little exposure to the company of women, finds himself aroused and seduced by a peasant girl:
“What did I feel? What did I see? I remember only that the emotions of the first moment were bereft of any expression, because my tongue and my mind had not been instructed in how to name sensations of that sort. Until I recalled other inner words, heard in another time and in other places, spoken certainly for other ends, but which seemed wondrously in keeping with my joy in that moment, as if they had been born consubstantially to express it. Words pressed into the caverns of my memory rose to the (dumb) surface of my lips, and I forget that they had served in Scripture or in the pages of the saints to express quite different, more radiant realities. But was there truly a difference between the delights of which the saints had spoken and those that my agitated spirit was feeling at that moment?” [Umberto Eco, The Name of the Rose]
Unacquainted with the vocabulary of love, this young man caught in the moment of passion finds himself helplessly uttering words from the scripture.
We may also imagine its converse, a more familiar example: devoid of a proper vocabulary, a mystic caught in divine ecstasy finds himself helplessly uttering words of passion, love and desire.

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Donkey, Lord, Potter, and Punjab Assembly

Posted on 25 January 2012 by Tea Server

There is a famous Punjabi saying that says, “Potter faced the anger when lord fell from the donkey”.  Our politics seems to be the same lord that drops all his anger and frustration on poor potter when the real culprit is donkey. There are many issues need urgent solution but authorities are busy in moulding non issues to be issue, ultimately potter like nation suffers. This Afternoon, Punjab Assembly passed a resolution to seek ban on the concerts causing ‘problem’.

Apparently, the donkey in this case is the stampede that caused some major loss recently at a concert. Again name of religion been used to support the argument, re-pledging the aim to be the guardian of the “culture” is core of this resolution, or calling it sugar coating might be the better word. However, is this a Wiseman’s way to put ban in order to deal with the problem, if there is any?

In case the musical concerts are creating “evil” and have no “positive contribution” to the society, than what about the fuss on the theatre in the name of “poetry of body parts” and “culture of Punjab”. The bigger evil should be controlled first in order to redirect all the affairs. The kind of culture of theatres in Punjab showing is beyond wisdom, as a Punjabi (honestly I am not trying to sound nationalist or something)  and culture of Punjab cannot be as shameless as the theatre has been showing since past many years. If a ban was required to save the “Islamic” and cultural values of the country than the ban should have been imposed on the “culture” that stage dramas are showing.

In a society that is in deep bog of gloom and frustration there are hardly any real modes of recreation and entertainment left that people can enjoy coming up with such legislation is pure folly.

I am not in favour of freedom that can cross limits anytime, but still banning something just with one flick of a pen is not the solution. Youth is considered to be rebel; there are many under the hood options that youth can follow, when they are pushed to the wall.

It has been said many times that real issue of Pakistan is education, and realisation that help in setting the priority. If there is something bad than there should proper education and information be given to streamline the issues, imposing ban is nothing but counter-productive. Sanity should be prevailed and right to access the entertainment must not be violated. Gone are the days when there used to be lords and donkey was a common ride, but still today poor potter faces the infuriation.

Related Articles

Syndicated from: My Land Pakistan

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Islamic Welfare State

Posted on 21 January 2012 by Tea Server

Flag of islamic state of iraqThe concept of welfare state has become very popular these days; the term means a state in which the government assumes responsibility for minimum standards of living for every citizen. The term is generally used to describe a state which possesses all or some of the following features:

  1. Provision of social security for unemployment, health issues, old age and disability.
  2. Provision of free or subsidized education and medical services.
  3. Social justice through fair distribution of income and wealth among all citizens by through effective system of taxation.
  4. Provision of full-time employment to everyone as per his education and skills.
  5. Public ownership of utility services to make sure uninterrupted supply on affordable rates and even further subsidized rates for low-income groups.

 Welfare State in Islam aims at achieving the total welfare of mankind, the Islamic concept of the Welfare State is based not only on the manifestation of economic values but also on moral, spiritual,   social and political values of Islam.  Islamic welfare state ensures socio-economic welfare of its citizens. Its functions for material welfare of its people include provision of basic necessities of life for all, ensuring of a comprehensive social security system, establishment of social justice, etc., since its functions for the spiritual well-being of its people include the establishment of  Islamic system of life for the Muslims and full religious freedom for the non-Muslims.

  1. The Islamic welfare will make sure the share of revenues for the poor and the needy; it is the responsibility of state to give basic needs to its citizens. Islam has made no distinction between the Muslims and non-Muslims. Caliph Umar once found a Zimmi begging alms. He granted him pension and absolved him from payment of Jizyah. Khalid, the famous general of Islam, concluded a treaty with the non-Muslims of Hira which made a provision for financial help to the poor and destitute of non-Muslims.
  2. The Prophet of Islam Peace be upon him has also defined the least necessities of life. He is reported to have said: “The son of man has no better right than that he would have a house wherein he may live, and a piece of cloth whereby he may hide his nakedness, and a piece of bread and some water”-(Tirmizi). From this tradition of the Prophet also, the barest necessities of human life include food, water, clothes and a house.
  3. Every person living in the Islamic state is entitled to these basic needs, but if he is unable to procure them for himself or for his family then the Islamic state is duty bound to provide him the same. Many Muslim jurists have held that Islamic state is responsible to give minimum standard of living, in the form of basic necessities of life, to all those persons who being poor, needy, sick, disabled, old or unemployed, are somehow unable to do the same.
  4. The economic philosophy of an Islamic state is based on the concept of social justice. An Islamic state provides equal opportunities to all its citizens to earn their livelihood. In order to meet social justice, Islam takes two major steps: Firstly it discourages rather condemns concentration of wealth in few hands; secondly it ensures fair and equitable distribution of wealth through effective measures. To check concentration of wealth in few hands, unlawful and unfair means of acquiring wealth like interest, games of chance, bribery, business malpractices such as short measuring, short weighing, hoarding, embezzlement, theft and robbery have been strictly prohibited. Fair and equitable distribution of wealth has been ensured by Islam through Zakat and charity, through taxes and compulsory contributions levied by the Islamic state, and last of all through the laws of inheritance and will. In order to meet its ideal of socio-economic justice, Islam imposes social rights over personal wealth such as rights of the poor relatives for financial support, rights of the needy neighbors for assistance, rights of the slaves and servants for help, rights of the wayfarers, friends and general Muslims who need financial aid. Since afore mentioned social rights of others are to be fulfilled and payment of Zakat may not be enough for the same, the Prophet of Islam is reported to have said: “In one’s wealth there are other rights to besides Zakat”. Thus the followers of Islam are required to fulfill the needs of the poor and if Zakat revenues are insufficient, the Islamic welfare state can ask them to give more so that the needs of the poor can be met.
  5. Islamic welfare state is also duty-bound to protect the weak against the strong. For this purpose many steps have been taken by Islam. Usury which is a strong instrument of human exploitation has been totally abolished. Unfair means to acquiring wealth and exploiting the weak such as bribery, usurping the wealth of orphans, gambling, speculative business, embezzlement, spurious weights and measures, fraudulent business practices have been banned in the Islamic state. Rights of the weak like orphans, women, slaves and servants, laborers and workers, tenants, consumers, etc., are also protected in the Islamic welfare state from the onslaught of the usurpers, oppressors, capitalists, feudal lords, industrialists, etc., as discussed in the previous chapter.
  6. Education and health play very vital role in the welfare of the people as well as in the development of a nation. So a welfare state to achieve its socio-economic goals cannot ignore these two sectors. Therefore, to provide education and healthcare to all of its citizens free or at heavily subsidized rates is one of the foremost duties of the Islamic welfare state. Islam’s emphasis on education can be understood from the very fact that the first verses of the Holy Qur’an which were revealed to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) laid stress on reading. The Prophet of Islam has made it obligatory upon every Muslim, whether male or female, to acquire education and knowledge. Islam also lays much stress on health and the Prophet of Islam has enjoined upon his followers to look after the sick. Providing healthcare and medical aid to the sick is thus another onerous duty of the Islamic welfare state.
  7. The last, but not the least, important duty of the Islamic welfare state is to look after the spiritual welfare of its citizens. To discharge this duty, the Islam welfare state establishes the Islamic system of government as contained in the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Muslim citizens are enabled to lead their lives in accordance with the teachings of Islam; because non-Muslim citizens are provided with full religious freedom so that they may do their religious practices in their places of worship without any restriction. The Islamic state is obliged to work for the spread of Islam because the salvation of humanity ultimately lies in Islam. But this is done through preaching, persuasion and not through coercive measures or exercise of pressure which has been strictly prohibited by Islam.


Syndicated from: Wise… or Otherwise?

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why Christmas ?

Posted on 21 January 2012 by Tea Server

Courtesy: Ms Virginia
I am grateful to her for providing me such comprehensive information.

HOLIDAYS
Definition: Days usually marked by time off from secular work and school for commemoration of an event. Such days may also be occasions for family or community festivities. Participants may view them as being religious or as being largely social or secular affairs.
Is Christmas a celebration based on the Bible?

Date of the celebration

M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia says: “The observance of Christmas is not of divine appointment, nor is it of N[ew] T[estament] origin. The day of Christ’s birth cannot be ascertained from the N[ew] T[estament], or, indeed, from any other source.”—(New York, 1871), Volume II, page 276.

Luke 2:8-11 shows that shepherds were in the fields at night at the time of Jesus’ birth. The book Daily Life in the Time of Jesus states: “The flocks . . . passed the winter under cover; and from this alone it may be seen that the traditional date for Christmas, in the winter, is unlikely to be right, since the Gospel says that the shepherds were in the fields.”—(New York, 1962), Henri Daniel-Rops, page 228.

(Luke 2:8-11) There were also in that same country shepherds living out of doors and keeping watches in the night over their flocks. 9 And suddenly Jehovah’s angel stood by them, and Jehovah’s glory gleamed around them, and they became very fearful. 10 But the angel said to them: “Have no fear, for, look! I am declaring to YOU good news of a great joy that all the people will have, 11 because there was born to YOU today a Savior, who is Christ [the] Lord, in David’s city.

The Encyclopedia Americana informs us: “The reason for establishing December 25 as Christmas is somewhat obscure, but it is usually held that the day was chosen to correspond to pagan festivals that took place around the time of the winter solstice, when the days begin to lengthen, to celebrate the ‘rebirth of the sun.’ . . . The Roman Saturnalia (a festival dedicated to Saturn, the god of agriculture, and to the renewed power of the sun), also took place at this time, and some Christmas customs are thought to be rooted in this ancient pagan celebration.”—(1977), Volume 6, page 666.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges: “The date of Christ’s birth is not known. The Gospels indicate neither the day nor the month . . . According to the hypothesis suggested by H. Usener . . . and accepted by most scholars today, the birth of Christ was assigned the date of the winter solstice (December 25 in the Julian calendar, January 6 in the Egyptian), because on this day, as the sun began its return to northern skies, the pagan devotees of Mithra celebrated the dies natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the invincible sun). On December 25, 274, Aurelian had proclaimed the sun-god principal patron of the empire and dedicated a temple to him in the Campus Martius. Christmas originated at a time when the cult of the sun was particularly strong at Rome.”—(1967), Volume III, page 656.

Wise men, or Magi, led by a star
Those Magi were actually astrologers from the east. (Matthew 2:1-2, NW; NE) Although astrology is popular among many people today, the practice is strongly disapproved in the Bible. (See pages 144, 145, under the main heading “Fate.”) Would God have led to the newborn Jesus persons whose practices He condemned?

(Matthew 2:1-2) After Jesus had been born in Beth′le•hem of Ju•de′a in the days of Herod the king, look! astrologers from eastern parts came to Jerusalem, 2 saying: “Where is the one born king of the Jews? For we saw his star [when we were] in the east, and we have come to do him obeisance.”

Matthew 2:1-16 shows that the star led the astrologers first to King Herod and then to Jesus and that Herod then sought to have Jesus killed. No mention is made that anyone other than the astrologers saw the “star.” After they left, Jehovah’s angel warned Joseph to flee to Egypt to safeguard the child. Was that “star” a sign from God or was it from someone who was seeking to have God’s Son destroyed?

(Matthew 2:1-16) After Jesus had been born in Beth′le•hem of Ju•de′a in the days of Herod the king, look! astrologers from eastern parts came to Jerusalem, 2 saying: “Where is the one born king of the Jews? For we saw his star [when we were] in the east, and we have come to do him obeisance.” 3 At hearing this King Herod was agitated, and all Jerusalem along with him; 4 and on gathering together all the chief priests and scribes of the people he began to inquire of them where the Christ was to be born. 5 They said to him: “In Beth′le•hem of Ju•de′a; for this is how it has been written through the prophet, 6 ‘And you, O Beth′le•hem of the land of Judah, are by no means the most insignificant [city] among the governors of Judah; for out of you will come forth a governing one, who will shepherd my people, Israel.’” 7 Then Herod secretly summoned the astrologers and carefully ascertained from them the time of the star’s appearing; 8 and, when sending them to Beth′le•hem, he said: “Go make a careful search for the young child, and when YOU have found it report back to me, that I too may go and do it obeisance.” 9 When they had heard the king, they went their way; and, look! the star they had seen [when they were] in the east went ahead of them, until it came to a stop above where the young child was. 10 On seeing the star they rejoiced very much indeed. 11 And when they went into the house they saw the young child with Mary its mother, and, falling down, they did obeisance to it. They also opened their treasures and presented it with gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh. 12 However, because they were given divine warning in a dream not to return to Herod, they withdrew to their country by another way. 13 After they had withdrawn, look! Jehovah’s angel appeared in a dream to Joseph, saying: “Get up, take the young child and its mother and flee into Egypt, and stay there until I give you word; for Herod is about to search for the young child to destroy it.” 14 So he got up and took along the young child and its mother by night and withdrew into Egypt, 15 and he stayed there until the decease of Herod, for that to be fulfilled which was spoken by Jehovah through his prophet, saying: “Out of Egypt I called my son.” 16 Then Herod, seeing he had been outwitted by the astrologers, fell into a great rage, and he sent out and had all the boys in Beth′le•hem and in all its districts done away with, from two years of age and under, according to the time that he had carefully ascertained from the astrologers.

Note that the Bible account does not say that they found the babe Jesus in a manger, as customarily depicted in Christmas art. When the astrologers arrived, Jesus and his parents were living in a house. As to Jesus’ age at that time, remember that, based on what Herod had learned from the astrologers, he decreed that all the boys in the district of Bethlehem two years of age and under were to be destroyed.— Matthew 2:1, 11, 16.

(Matthew 2:1) After Jesus had been born in Beth′le•hem of Ju•de′a in the days of Herod the king, look! astrologers from eastern parts came to Jerusalem,

(Matthew 2:11) And when they went into the house they saw the young child with Mary its mother, and, falling down, they did obeisance to it. They also opened their treasures and presented it with gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh.

(Matthew 2:16) Then Herod, seeing he had been outwitted by the astrologers, fell into a great rage, and he sent out and had all the boys in Beth′le•hem and in all its districts done away with, from two years of age and under, according to the time that he had carefully ascertained from the astrologers.

Gift giving as part of the celebration; stories about Santa Claus, Father Christmas, etc.
The practice of Christmas gift giving is not based on what was done by the Magi. As shown above, they did not arrive at the time of Jesus’ birth. Furthermore, they gave gifts, not to one another, but to the child Jesus, in accord with what was then customary when visiting notable persons.

The Encyclopedia Americana states: “During the Saturnalia . . . feasting prevailed, and gifts were exchanged.” (1977, Volume 24, page 299) In many instances that represents the spirit of Christmas giving—an exchanging of gifts. The spirit reflected in such gift giving does not bring real happiness, because it violates Christian principles such as those found at Matthew 6:3-4 and 2 Corinthians 9:7. Surely a Christian can give gifts to others as an expression of love at other times during the year, doing so as often as he wants to.

(Matthew 6:3-4) But you, when making gifts of mercy, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, 4 that your gifts of mercy may be in secret; then your Father who is looking on in secret will repay you.

(2 Corinthians 9:7) Let each one do just as he has resolved in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
Depending on where they live, children are told that gifts are brought by Santa Claus, St. Nicholas, Father Christmas, Père Noël, Knecht Ruprecht, the Magi, the elf Jultomten (or Julenissen), or a witch known as La Befana. (The World Book Encyclopedia, 1984, Volume 3, page 414) Of course, none of these stories are actually true. Does the telling of such stories build in children a respect for truth, and does such a practice honor Jesus Christ, who taught that God must be worshiped with truth?—John 4:23-24.

(John 4:23-24) Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for, indeed, the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.”

Is there any objection to sharing in celebrations that may have unchristian roots as long as it is not done for religious reasons?

Ephesians 5:10-11: “Keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord; and quit sharing with them in the unfruitful works that belong to the darkness, but, rather, even be reproving them.”

2 Corinthians 6:14-18: “What fellowship do righteousness and lawlessness have? Or what sharing does light have with darkness? Further, what harmony is there between Christ and Be′lial? Or what portion does a faithful person have with an unbeliever? And what agreement does God’s temple have with idols? . . . ‘“Therefore get out from among them, and separate yourselves,” says Jehovah, “and quit touching the unclean thing”’; ‘“and I will take you in, . . . and you will be sons and daughters to me,” says Jehovah the Almighty.’”

Genuine love for Jehovah and a strong desire to be pleasing to him will help a person to break free from unchristian practices that may have had emotional appeal. A person who really knows and loves Jehovah does not feel that by shunning practices that honor false gods or that promote falsehood he is in any way deprived of happiness. Genuine love causes him to rejoice, not over unrighteousness, but with the truth. (See 1 Corinthians 13:6)

(1 Corinthians 13:6) It does not rejoice over unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth.

Compare Exodus 32:4-10. Notice that the Israelites adopted an Egyptian religious practice but gave it a new name, “a festival to Jehovah.” But Jehovah severely punished them for this. Today we see only 20th-century practices associated with holidays. Some may appear harmless. But Jehovah observed firsthand the pagan religious practices from which these originated. Should not his view be what matters to us?

(Exodus 32:4-10) Then he took [the gold] from their hands, and he formed it with a graving tool and proceeded to make it into a molten statue of a calf. And they began to say: “This is your God, O Israel, who led you up out of the land of Egypt.” 5 When Aaron got to see this, he went to building an altar before it. Finally Aaron called out and said: “There is a festival to Jehovah tomorrow.” 6 So on the next day they were early in rising, and they began offering up burnt offerings and presenting communion sacrifices. After that the people sat down to eat and drink. Then they got up to have a good time. 7 Jehovah now said to Moses: “Go, descend, because your people whom you led up out of the land of Egypt have acted ruinously. 8 They have turned aside in a hurry from the way I have commanded them to go. They have made a molten statue of a calf for themselves and keep bowing down to it and sacrificing to it and saying, ‘This is your God, O Israel, who led you up out of the land of Egypt.’” 9 And Jehovah went on to say to Moses: “I have looked at this people and here it is a stiff-necked people. 10 So now let me be, that my anger may blaze against them and I may exterminate them, and let me make you into a great nation.”

Illustration: Suppose a crowd come to a gentleman’s home saying they are there to celebrate his birthday. He does not favor the celebration of birthdays. He does not like to see people overeat or get drunk or engage in loose conduct. But some of them do all those things, and they bring presents for everyone there except him! On top of all that, they pick the birthday of one of the man’s enemies as the date for the celebration. How would the man feel? Would you want to be a party to it? This is exactly what is being done by Christmas celebrations.

This is some additional information about something else.

What underlies holidays in memory of the “spirits of the dead”?

The 1910 edition of The Encyclopædia Britannica states: “All Souls’ Day . . . the day set apart in the Roman Catholic Church for the commemoration of the faithful departed. The celebration is based on the doctrine that the souls of the faithful which at death have not been cleansed from venial sins, or have not atoned for past transgressions, cannot attain the Beatific Vision, and that they may be helped to do so by prayer and by the sacrifice of the mass. . . . Certain popular beliefs connected with All Souls’ Day are of pagan origin and immemorial antiquity. Thus the dead are believed by the peasantry of many Catholic countries to return to their former homes on All Souls’ night and partake of the food of the living.”—Volume I, page 709.

The Encyclopedia Americana says: “Elements of the customs connected with Halloween can be traced to a Druid ceremony in pre-Christian times. The Celts had festivals for two major gods—a sun god and a god of the dead (called Samhain), whose festival was held on November 1, the beginning of the Celtic New Year. The festival of the dead was gradually incorporated into Christian ritual.”—(1977), Volume 13, page 725.

The book The Worship of the Dead points to this origin: “The mythologies of all the ancient nations are interwoven with the events of the Deluge . . . The force of this argument is illustrated by the fact of the observance of a great festival of the dead in commemoration of the event, not only by nations more or less in communication with each other, but by others widely separated, both by the ocean and by centuries of time. This festival is, moreover, held by all on or about the very day on which, according to the Mosaic account, the Deluge took place, viz., the seventeenth day of the second month—the month nearly corresponding with our November.” (London, 1904, Colonel J. Garnier, p. 4) Thus these celebrations actually began with an honoring of people whom God had destroyed because of their badness in Noah’s day.— Genesis 6:5-7; 7:11.

(Genesis 6:5-7) Consequently Jehovah saw that the badness of man was abundant in the earth and every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only bad all the time. 6 And Jehovah felt regrets that he had made men in the earth, and he felt hurt at his heart. 7 So Jehovah said: “I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground, from man to domestic animal, to moving animal and to flying creature of the heavens, because I do regret that I have made them.”

(Genesis 7:11) In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on this day all the springs of the vast watery deep were broken open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.

Such holidays honoring “spirits of the dead” as if they were alive in another realm are contrary to the Bible’s description of death as a state of complete unconsciousness. — Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10; Palms 146:4.

(Ecclesiastes 9:5) For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten.

(Ecclesiastes 9:10) All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in She´ol, the place to which you are going.

(Psalm 146:4) His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; In that day his thoughts do perish.

Regarding the origin of belief in immortality of the human soul, see pages 101, 102, under the main heading “Death,” and pages 379, 380, under “Soul.”

What Bible principles explain the viewpoint of Christians toward ceremonies commemorating events in a nation’s political history?

John 18:36: “Jesus answered [the Roman governor]: ‘My kingdom is no part of this world.’”

John 15:19: “If you [Jesus’ followers] were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own. Now because you are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, on this account the world hates you.”

1 John 5:19: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.”

(Compare John 14:30; Revelation 13:1-2; Daniel 2:44.)

(John 14:30) I shall not speak much with YOU anymore, for the ruler of the world is coming. And he has no hold on me,

(Revelation 13:1-2) And it stood still upon the sand of the sea. And I saw a wild beast ascending out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, and upon its horns ten diadems, but upon its heads blasphemous names. 2 Now the wild beast that I saw was like a leopard, but its feet were as those of a bear, and its mouth was as a lion’s mouth. And the dragon gave to [the beast] its power and its throne and great authority.

(Daniel 2:44) “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;

Comments (0)

Register your blog:

Enter your blog address below to become a part of the TeaBreak network.

About TeaBreak:

TeaBreak.pk is a blog aggregator that syndicates pakistani blogs and categorizes them appropriately. Our mission is to give our readers a break from work and let them enjoy their blog time. And we are doing this by bringing all the popular blogs of Pakistan on one platform.