Now here's an interesting idea... I've thought about this question once before in the days where I was much more ignorant about religion and once more after Steve Jobs died. I'm not saying that I admire Jobs, but I respect his contribution to our world and would be pleased to know that he went to heaven for all that effort. So after a bit of research in our Holy book, I found an answer to your question. Allah tells us in the Qur’an, (I didn't translate it myself, it was translated by a scholar of the Qur'an. I still checked it for consistency and it's accurate) - just to avoid any trouble. “One who follows guidance does so for himself and one who goes astray does so against his soul. No one will suffer for the sins of others. We have never punished anyone without sending them Our messenger first.” [Al-Isra’(The Night Journey): 15] Based on numerous such verses in the Qur’an, great scholars such as Imam Al-Ghazali have stated that those who have not heard of the message of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, will not be punished for failing to accept his message. To punish people for failing to accept a message that they know nothing about is utterly contrary to the divine justice that is at once immaculate and beyond question. This is from Islam's perspective; I have also done a similar research on Christianity.
Since they are from the same God, they do have the same information. The bible states that God is just and will judge everyone fairly, "He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." - Deut 32:4. It also says, "By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." - Mt 13:14-15. What this is implying is that if God knew that they would convert then he would have brought them the revelation and shown them the gospel, however he didn't because there are people who will just never believe. Note that I've heard the same in Islam, like the exact same quote.
Your question Nelson is also answered in both the Bible and the Qur'an, I'm sure in other books too but I like to stay near these two books as I'm much more familiar with them. In the Bible it states, "For when the Gentiles ( non-Jews ), which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew ( show ) the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another." - Rom 2:14-15. What this is saying is that we are all born with a sense of right and wrong and that we know whether or not we've crossed that barrier of wrong. So based on this, one who believes in God would understand that people who have no idea that God exists must also act accordingly to their nature, in other words, keep away from doing what they feel or think wrong.
Islam says the same thing, Allah has created every human being with an innate knowledge of what is good for it and what is bad for it, and that everyone has a responsibility to foster such virtues that his nature recognizes as good and shun those that are abhorrent. (Surat Ash-Shams: 7-8)
So that was a perspective of the same God from two of His books, however your question has a broad end. Is this ethical? I would certainly not go as far as to prevent people from spreading their messages of their religions just so that those unenlightened people go to heaven, however I wouldn't want them to live in darkness. It might be as you suggested over-ethical to try and make sure everyone knows that they have a chance of going to hell once they've been made aware that Jesus, Muhammad, (peace be upon them) and God exist(ed).
In the eye of the law, one can't say they didn't know that the speed limit was 60 and expect the law enforcement officer to let them off the hook. There is a difference between the spirit and reality itself. In short, if Steve Jobs knew about Islam or Christianity and still didn't do much to act accordingly to that religion, then he's probably not in the best condition. But God knows best... that is if you believe in Him.
This is very interesting, Mehdi, and I appreciate you sharing some of your scriptural knowledge on this issue. I also admire your tolerance and respect toward other belief systems. However, I suppose that both Christianity and Islam cannot both be true. Both promise heaven to believers, but the beliefs are different. Both cannot be correct. As for Steve Jobs, are you saying that regardless of his good works in this life he is damned if he does not accept either Christianity or Islam (since he is aware of both)? What if he - or anyone - knows about them and just doesn't believe. Can you force someone to believe when they do not? (especially given that there is no objective evidence)?
Yes, I believe the legal concept you are talking about is called "ingorantia juris non excusat", essentially the idea that absence of knowledge of a breach of the criminal code does not exempt you from the corresponding punishment of it. Now, starting from the premise that the ignorance of the existence of a deity does not correspond to any tangible consequence in the physical world we live in. Now, your argument starts from the premise that human justice and divine justice are equal. Most legal systems operate of exactly on the opposite of that, and so does my reasoning. I believe that the absence of knowledge of religion, especially as a tool and not as a moral guide, and especially as it is used by religious leaders in the world today is a benefit and not a liability. The free-er you are from shackles of government say, or any element that ties to you to have faith in something, the better off you are.
I believe that ignorance can be synonymous with happiness. From Nelson's initial post, it is suggested that the eskimo was leaving a perfectly peaceful life without having to worry about the rules of society or religion in this case. It is interesting that our entire life we are encouraged to develop a critical mind and to acquire as much knowledge as we can, but in reality, the broader our knowledge, the deeper our confusion and frustration. Being ignorant or unaware of the rules, does in a way excuse us from being unethical.
I would just like to comment that, although this is a really insightful, humorous, and stimulating post, you are assuming that what the priest is saying in the image is what the priest would say in reality, which may not be the case...
Pour ma part, je pense que if a priest would give this answer, he would not be a priest.
Although I don't know enough about religion, really, I believe that religious doctrines like the bible do not necessarily represent the message that the prophet intended to convey. Of course, every one of us has a different interpretation of religion, especially in relation to our own lives. Think about how old religion is! People still go on believing in printed documents and need them to differentiate between right and wrong. It is within a person that the combat between right and wrong takes place, whether doctrines exist or not, in my opinion.
One idea that crossed my mind is that perhaps prophets came and come to people in need of a leadership concerning morality, and that the severe, cold environment in places like Alaska helps Eskimos or whoever to realize what really matters in life. And believe me, winning or losing a war, punishments like hanging a man or buying happiness should not exist because they are irrelevant - destructive.
I agree, Raph... Certainly, I think we should be very careful of adhering to 'sacred' texts and assuming they come directly from god (if god exists). Anyone who has studied theology knows that the compilation of 'sacred' books has involved substantial editing over a very long time...and evidence for God is really personal and subjective. I think we can find the answers for how to live best and how to treat others inside ourselves.
Now here's an interesting idea... I've thought about this question once before in the days where I was much more ignorant about religion and once more after Steve Jobs died. I'm not saying that I admire Jobs, but I respect his contribution to our world and would be pleased to know that he went to heaven for all that effort. So after a bit of research in our Holy book, I found an answer to your question. Allah tells us in the Qur’an, (I didn't translate it myself, it was translated by a scholar of the Qur'an. I still checked it for consistency and it's accurate) - just to avoid any trouble. “One who follows guidance does so for himself and one who goes astray does so against his soul. No one will suffer for the sins of others. We have never punished anyone without sending them Our messenger first.” [Al-Isra’(The Night Journey): 15] Based on numerous such verses in the Qur’an, great scholars such as Imam Al-Ghazali have stated that those who have not heard of the message of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, will not be punished for failing to accept his message. To punish people for failing to accept a message that they know nothing about is utterly contrary to the divine justice that is at once immaculate and beyond question. This is from Islam's perspective; I have also done a similar research on Christianity.
ReplyDeleteSince they are from the same God, they do have the same information. The bible states that God is just and will judge everyone fairly, "He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." - Deut 32:4. It also says, "By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye
shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed
gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have
closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with
their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be
converted, and I should heal them." - Mt 13:14-15. What this is implying is that if God knew that they would convert then he would have brought them the revelation and shown them the gospel, however he didn't because there are people who will just never believe. Note that I've heard the same in Islam, like the exact same quote.
Your question Nelson is also answered in both the Bible and the Qur'an, I'm sure in other books too but I like to stay near these two books as I'm much more familiar with them. In the Bible it states, "For when the Gentiles ( non-Jews ), which have not the law, do by
nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a
law unto themselves: Which shew ( show ) the work of the law written
in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts
the mean while accusing or else excusing one another." - Rom 2:14-15. What this is saying is that we are all born with a sense of right and wrong and that we know whether or not we've crossed that barrier of wrong. So based on this, one who believes in God would understand that people who have no idea that God exists must also act accordingly to their nature, in other words, keep away from doing what they feel or think wrong.
Islam says the same thing, Allah has created every human being with an innate knowledge of what is good for it and what is bad for it, and that everyone has a responsibility to foster such virtues that his nature recognizes as good and shun those that are abhorrent. (Surat Ash-Shams: 7-8)
So that was a perspective of the same God from two of His books, however your question has a broad end. Is this ethical? I would certainly not go as far as to prevent people from spreading their messages of their religions just so that those unenlightened people go to heaven, however I wouldn't want them to live in darkness. It might be as you suggested over-ethical to try and make sure everyone knows that they have a chance of going to hell once they've been made aware that Jesus, Muhammad, (peace be upon them) and God exist(ed).
ReplyDeleteIn the eye of the law, one can't say they didn't know that the speed limit was 60 and expect the law enforcement officer to let them off the hook. There is a difference between the spirit and reality itself. In short, if Steve Jobs knew about Islam or Christianity and still didn't do much to act accordingly to that religion, then he's probably not in the best condition. But God knows best... that is if you believe in Him.
This is very interesting, Mehdi, and I appreciate you sharing some of your scriptural knowledge on this issue. I also admire your tolerance and respect toward other belief systems. However, I suppose that both Christianity and Islam cannot both be true. Both promise heaven to believers, but the beliefs are different. Both cannot be correct. As for Steve Jobs, are you saying that regardless of his good works in this life he is damned if he does not accept either Christianity or Islam (since he is aware of both)? What if he - or anyone - knows about them and just doesn't believe. Can you force someone to believe when they do not? (especially given that there is no objective evidence)?
DeleteExcuse me for the lengthiness :3
ReplyDeleteYes, I believe the legal concept you are talking about is called "ingorantia juris non excusat", essentially the idea that absence of knowledge of a breach of the criminal code does not exempt you from the corresponding punishment of it. Now, starting from the premise that the ignorance of the existence of a deity does not correspond to any tangible consequence in the physical world we live in. Now, your argument starts from the premise that human justice and divine justice are equal. Most legal systems operate of exactly on the opposite of that, and so does my reasoning. I believe that the absence of knowledge of religion, especially as a tool and not as a moral guide, and especially as it is used by religious leaders in the world today is a benefit and not a liability. The free-er you are from shackles of government say, or any element that ties to you to have faith in something, the better off you are.
ReplyDeleteI believe that ignorance can be synonymous with happiness. From Nelson's initial post, it is suggested that the eskimo was leaving a perfectly peaceful life without having to worry about the rules of society or religion in this case. It is interesting that our entire life we are encouraged to develop a critical mind and to acquire as much knowledge as we can, but in reality, the broader our knowledge, the deeper our confusion and frustration. Being ignorant or unaware of the rules, does in a way excuse us from being unethical.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI would just like to comment that, although this is a really insightful, humorous, and stimulating post, you are assuming that what the priest is saying in the image is what the priest would say in reality, which may not be the case...
DeletePour ma part, je pense que if a priest would give this answer, he would not be a priest.
Although I don't know enough about religion, really, I believe that religious doctrines like the bible do not necessarily represent the message that the prophet intended to convey. Of course, every one of us has a different interpretation of religion, especially in relation to our own lives. Think about how old religion is! People still go on believing in printed documents and need them to differentiate between right and wrong. It is within a person that the combat between right and wrong takes place, whether doctrines exist or not, in my opinion.
One idea that crossed my mind is that perhaps prophets came and come to people in need of a leadership concerning morality, and that the severe, cold environment in places like Alaska helps Eskimos or whoever to realize what really matters in life. And believe me, winning or losing a war, punishments like hanging a man or buying happiness should not exist because they are irrelevant - destructive.
I agree, Raph... Certainly, I think we should be very careful of adhering to 'sacred' texts and assuming they come directly from god (if god exists). Anyone who has studied theology knows that the compilation of 'sacred' books has involved substantial editing over a very long time...and evidence for God is really personal and subjective. I think we can find the answers for how to live best and how to treat others inside ourselves.
Delete