What about … #27

Isaac Newton was an English scientist of the 17th century, thanks to him we know that the white light is actually a mixture of different colors of light, as well as the general laws he had formulated to describe motion and how it relates to its causative forces, among other theories which made of him a Legend. In his book Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy we find his biography at the beginning, this four pages are extracts of it. Lots of philosophers and scientists at that time (even nowadays) were almost non-believers (called philosophical theism). Such as Descartes, Kant, Huygens, Da Vinci or Spinoza.

Very few were religious, as if philosophy was a religion of its own. The philosophy is a way of seeing things or a way to live. We can be philosophers while being a religious person.
I find quite astonishing that a renowned scientist such as Newton was a religious man fond of the Bible. It is a pity that the western philosophy turned out to be quite an anti-religious system linked to secularism. You may find out more in two previous posts called faith, religion and secularism I & II.

People of the Book – part 11

So far what I have done is to prove only one point out of the whole prophecy- that is proving the phrase ‘like unto thee – ‘Like You’ – ‘Like Moses’. The Prophecy is much more than this single phrase which reads as follows : “I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee…….” The emphasis is on the words- “From among their brethren.”
Moses and his people, the Jews, are here addressed as a racial entity, and as such their ‘brethren’ would undoubtedly be the Arabs. You see, the Holy Bible speaks of Abraham as the “Friend of God”. Abraham had two wives – Sarah and Hagar. Hagar bore Abraham a son – his first born- ‘……And Abraham called HIS SON’S name, which Hagar bare Ishmael.’ (Genesis 16:15). ‘And Abraham took Ishmael his son……” (Genesis 17:23). ‘And Ishmael HIS SON was thirteen years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.'(Genesis 17:25). Up to the age of THIRTEEN Ishmael was the ONLY son and seed of Abraham, when the covenant was ratified between God and Abraham. God grants Abraham another son through Sarah, named Isaac, who was very much the junior to his brother Ishmael.

If Ishmael and Isaac are the sons of the same father Abraham, then they are brothers. And so the children of the one are the BRETHREN of the children of the other. The children of Isaac are the Jews and the Children of Ishmael are the Arabs – so they are BRETHREN to one another. The Bible affirms, ‘and he (ISHMAEL) shall dwell in the presence of all his bretheren’ (Genesis 16:12). ‘and he (ISHMAEL) died in the presence of his bretheren (Genesis 25:18). The children of Isaac are the brethren of the Ishmaelites. In like manner Muhummed is from among the brethren of the Israelites because he was a descendant of Ishmael the son of Abraham. This exactly as the prophecy has it- ‘FROM AMONG THEIR BRETHREN’.(Deut.18:18). There the prophecy distinctly mentions that the coming prophet who would be like Moses, must arise NOT from the ‘children of Israel’ or from ‘among themselves’, but from among their brethren. Muhammed therefore was from among their bretheren!

The prophecy proceeds further: “…….and I will putmy words into his mouth…….’ What does it mean when it is said ‘I will put my words in your mouth’? You see, if I asked you to open Deuteronomy chapter 18, verse 18, at the beginning, and if I had asked you to read, and if you had read: would I be putting my words into your mouth?
But If I were to teach you a language like Arabic about which you have no knowledge, and if I asked you to read or repeat after me what I utter would I not be putting these unheard words of a foreign tongue which you utter, into your mouth? In an identical manner, the words of the Qurân, were revealed by the Almighty God to Muhummed.

People of the book – part 6

There are hundreds if not thousands of prophecies regarding the supposed coming of Jesus in the Old Testament. Out of the ‘thousands’ of prophecies referred to, there isn’t a single prophecy where Jesus is mentioned by name. The term ‘Messiah’, translated as ‘Christ’, is not a name but a title. The word “Messiah” comes from the Arabic and Hebrew word masaha, which means to rub, to massage, to anoint. The religious significance is “the one who is anointed” – priests and kings were anointed in consecration to their offices. Messiah translated Christ does not mean God. Even the heathen Cyrus is called “Christ” in the Bible, (Isaiah 45:)
Is there a single Prophecy where it says that the name of the Messiah will be Jesus, and that his mother’s name will be Mary, that his supposed father will be Joseph the Carpenter; that he will be born in the reign of Herod the King? No! There are no such details! Then how can we conclude that those ‘thousand’ Prophecies refer to Jesus?”
To find the solution let’s see what Deuteronomy, chapter 18, verse 18 (Old Testament) says:

“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” Remeber this verse, it is a very important one which we’ll be studying.

To whom does this prophecy refer? Without the slightest hesitation you will answer: “Jesus!”

Why Jesus? his name is not mentioned here.
You might say “no but it is said like unto thee – like you- i.e like Moses, and Jesus is like Moses”

So let me ask you who says that Jesus is like Moses? In which way is Jesus like Moses?

You might reply: In the first place Moses was a jew and Jesus was also a jew; secondly, Moses was a prophet and Jesus was also a prophet – therefore Jesus is like Moses and that is exactly what God had foretold Moses – “like unto thee”.

People of the book – part 5

Millenials have passed, and we still refuse God’s teachings by applying our own laws and way of life. We preferred to submit God to our will by interpreting His word the way we needed it, rather than to lose power and wealth by obeying His will. This is they way we declared wars against nations, enslaved races, murdered children, stole lands, ploted against believers…. We changed God’s word for our convenience and then we accuse a religion for what our hands do.
This is just an example : I don’t believe that Jesus turned water into wine. Let’s face it, we know the harm alcohol does to the body in long term, if you don’t because you’ve been living in another world, here read it here: https://www.quitalcohol.com/the-truth-about-what-alcohol-does-to-your-body.html

How can a person chosen by God be so stupid to give a harmful substance to anyone? Didn’t he know that, that action of his will be remembered forever? Didn’t he know that thousands of years later people will abuse of it and die on the roads because they drank too much? People will fight and be beaten because they’re drunk? I think that a messenger of God is far more informed than we are, hence he turned wine into water. You may not agree with me, that’s ok, but think about it.
We can easily see what the Church has done in the Middle Age by burning women accusing them of heresy, torturing men accusing them of treason….. In the name of God while in fact it was in their name.
God would never have asked his people to punish other people for their deeds while He could have punished them Himself if He wanted to.

Due to the people’s forgetfulness and lack of faith he warned us in the Bible that He will send us a final and last messenger once and for all.

What about…. #16

My faith doesn’t prevent me from being what I want to be

For those who are not yet aware of my religion, I’m a muslim.
Unfortunately Islam is stigmatized by some for being a religion of war, anti feminism,  dressing everyone in black,  or even of hate. Which is totally absurd. Those clichés were invented by people who have little knowledge about the Islamic faith.

To tell you the truth, some muslims have bestowed these clichés upon themselves; traditions, misunderstanding, hate and dictatorship have turned some believers into rebels who wish to enhance their belief into something that never existed before.

Let me explain: Me for instance, I’ve never worn a headscarf, I’ve never been dressed in black, I wear short skirts and bright colors, I wear make-up everyday; even on Sundays and that doesn’t prevent me from being a muslim. Does it? Of course not. The Quran isn’t a Cosmopolitan magazine suggesting what to wear and how to use make-up. It teaches us how to behave, to learn, to seek knowledge, to help those in need, to respect everyone; whatsoever its religion, to do the best of ourselves for our sake and those around us, to explore, to invent, to teach, to make peace, to respect the woman and to give her her rights, to respect the orphans and to help them till their adulthood, to stop saying bad things, to give charity; whatsoever its faith…. I can’t make a list of all the good that the Quran teaches us. So all of the mischiefs and crimes committed in the name of a religion, were all made by human beings who wanted to support their actions by introducing God as their mentor. How diabolic this is? 

Here follows a few pictures found online about how muslim women or men dress in different cultures.

Look at the way the headscarf is worn, most of the Turkish women wear them like this.

In Malaysia women wear short sleeves while it is forbidden in other countries.

In Morocco you can see this kind

And that kind.

Now you might have seen this in your country

While famous people are not less muslim.

The way you dress has nothing to do with your faith, you could wear a monk’s robe and be a thief. Your actions, your inner belief makes of you, who you are; a person, a human being belonging to a certain religion which only God can judge. Some Christians or Deists are more Muslims than some born such as. The early Christians didn’t have the same belief as the people do now, they were closer to Jesus’ teaching back then, so they were more monotheist.

So Islam doesn’t stop anybody from being what he/she wants to be. The believer is free to do whatever she/he wants as long as it’s not evil. 

What about … #9

Faith is something you believe in, very deeply. Some say they have faith in the president or in their husband or even in oneself. But those faiths are just a way to say that they trust whomever it is. The true faith is toward God. If someone has it, then he owns the world. Let me explain, if you are standing alone in the middle of a peaceful but huge forest, lost, having no idea where the highway is but you have to put your trust in God, it’s for sure that you won’t be lost for long, somehow you’ll find a way out, you just need to have faith in the Almighty. Another example, you’re taking an exam this afternoon, you know the answers but you’re freaking out, if you have faith in God, you’ll feel relieved knowing that He’ll sustain you, if you put your trust in Him.

Religion is the way you’ll practice your faith. You’ll have certain rules to follow. Not every believer follows the rules of its religion, that’s why some people describe themselves as non practitioners. Having a religion means, believing in God’s rules, following them or not isn’t the question. People may follow a religion but having no faith, i.e they’ve been following a routine since childhood but without knowledge.

Secularism is a way of life that allows a person to live his life without showing his belief, so that everyone may live in harmony, but it doesn’t forbid a person to show his belief if he wishes to. Unfortunately some people took advantage of the present situation in he world to change the intent of the word, and that’s the issue in France. They achieved their goal by turning the word Secular into a symbol of anti-religion.

What about … #8

We may read a brief description between faith and religion here:

 Ncwritings

<<“There is a difference between religion and faith,” Irma replied. “When you are solely responsible for your beliefs no one can question you faith nor tell you what is right or wrong. That is something only you have the right to decide. We all have an inner guiding system which, when we are synchronized to it, never takes us off the right track. Religion, on the other hand, is on organized set of beliefs and shared values where certain rules and discipline determined by a few need to be obeyed by everyone.

Also, religion and politics go hand in hand. Unfortunately, religion has often been used as an instrument to control and scare people. That is why we don’t have organized religion in Aire. This is how it has been since our foundation. Everyone is free to believe in whatever they please, but it is considered a private matter. We don’t need monumental buildings to protect our faith,” her father added. “In the outer world, religion is still causing more suffering than good, like it always has throughout history. Since gods will never come down on Earth and fight against each other, why should we fight in their name between ourselves?”

“You see, Taya,” Irma continued, “faith requires nothing more than what you are willing to offer. No sacrifices, no pain. Your beliefs are your private religion.”>>

According to me, I would described it as follows: When you are solely responsible for your beliefs no one can question you faith nor tell you what is right or wrong. That is something only you have the right to decide. We all have an inner guiding system which God granted us, we may call it conscience with which, when we are synchronized to it, never takes us off the right track but most of us don’t pay attention to it and do what it seems right for our own ego. Religion, on the other hand, is on organized set of beliefs and shared values where certain rules and discipline needs to be obeyed by everyone to remain on the right track.

Also, some say that religion and politics go hand in hand while others don’t. Unfortunately, religion has often been used as an instrument to control and scare people. Well all depends of who rules. If you look for state religion in wikipedia you’ll find this:

Roman CatholicismEdit

Jurisdictions where Roman Catholicism has been established as a state or official religion:

  •  Costa Rica: article 75 of the constitution of Costa Rica confirms that “The Roman Catholic and Apostolic Religion is the religion of the State, which contributes to its maintenance, without preventing the free exercise in the Republic of other forms of worship that are not opposed to universal morality or good customs.”[5]
  •  Liechtenstein: the constitution of Liechtenstein describes the Catholic Church as the state religion and enjoying“the full protection of the State”. The constitution does however ensure that people of other faiths “shall be entitled to practise their creeds and to hold religious services to the extent consistent with morality and public order.”[6]
  •  Malta: Article 2 of the Constitution of Malta declares that “the religion of Malta is the Roman Catholic Apostolic Religion”[7]
  •  Monaco: article 9 of the constitution of Monaco describes “La religion catholique, apostolique et romaine” [the catholic, apostolic and Roman religion]” as the religion of the state.[8]
  •   Vatican City: the Vatican is an ElectiveTheocratic, or sacerdotal Absolute Monarchy[9] ruled by the Pope, who is also the Vicar of the Catholic Church. The highest state functionaries are all Catholic clergy of various national origins. It is the sovereign territory of the Holy See (LatinSancta Sedes) and the location of the Pope’s official residence, referred to as the Apostolic Palace.

Jurisdictions that give constitutional privileges to Roman Catholicism without establishing it as the state religion:

Eastern OrthodoxyEdit

  •  GreeceChurch of Greece[16]
  •  GeorgiaGeorgian Orthodox Church is not the state church of Georgia but has a special constitutional agreement with the state, with the constitution recognising “the special role of the Apostolic Autocephalous Orthodox Church of Georgia in the history of Georgia and its independence from the state.”[17] (See also Concordat of 2002)
  •  Bulgaria: in the Bulgarian Constitution, the Bulgarian Orthodox Church is recognized as “the traditional religion” of the Bulgarian people, but the state itself remains secular.

ProtestantismEdit

AnglicanismEdit

In the 19th century, there was a campaign by Liberalsdissenters and nonconformists to disestablish the Church of England. The campaign for disestablishment was revived in the 20th century when Parliament rejected the 1928 revision of the Book of Common Prayer, leading to calls for separation of church and state to prevent political interference in matters of worship. Nevertheless, the Church of England remained the state church.

LutheranismEdit

Jurisdictions where a Lutheran church has been established as a state religion include the Nordic countries.

  •  Denmark: section 4 of the Danish constitution confirms the Church of Denmark as the state church.[19]
  •  Iceland: the Icelandic constitution confirms the Church of Iceland as the state church of Iceland.[20] (73.8% of population members at 1 January 2015) [21]
  •  Norway: the Constitution of Norway stipulates that The Church of Norway, an Evangelical-Lutheran church, will remain the Established Church of Norway and will as such be supported by the State.”[22] This was amended in 2012, from“Evangelical-Lutheran religion remains the public religion of the State”. The church is granted autonomy in doctrine and appointment of bishops.[23][24][25]
  •  Finland: the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland has a special relationship with the Finnish state, its internal structure being described in a special law, the Church Act.[26] The Church Act can be amended only by a decision of the synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church and subsequent ratification by the Parliament of Finland. The Church Act is protected by the Finnish Constitution and the state can not change the Church Act without changing the constitution. The church has a power to tax its members and all corporations unless a majority of shareholders are members of theFinnish Orthodox Church. The state collects these taxes for the church, for a fee. On the other hand, the church is required to give a burial place for everyone in its graveyards.[27] (77.2% of population members at the end of 2011).[28]The President of the Republic of Finland also decides the themes for intercession days. The church does not consider itself a state church, as the Finnish state does not have the power to influence its internal workings or its theology, although it has a veto in those changes of the internal structure which require changing the Church Act. Neither does the Finnish state accord any precedence to Lutherans or the Lutheran faith in its own acts.
  •  Sweden: the Church of Sweden was until year 2000 the official state church of Sweden and Lutheran Christianity was therefore the state religion of Sweden. In spite of the separation between the state and the church in 2000, theChurch of Sweden still has a special status in Sweden. Sweden is therefore often seen as a midway between having a state religion and not. The church has its own legal regulation in the Church of Sweden Act, which regulates the church’s basic structure, creeds and right to tax members of the church (ca 70% of the population). According to the Act, the Church of Sweden must be a democratic, Lutheran people’s church. Only the Swedish Riksdag can change this fact. The connections to the Swedish royal family are complicated. For example, the Swedish constitution stipulates that the Monarch of Sweden must be a true Lutheran, accepting the doctrine of the Church of Sweden. All members of the royal house must accept the same doctrine to be able to inherit the Throne of Sweden. The parishes of the Church of Sweden are still the smallest administrative entities in Sweden and are used as civil registration and taxation units.[citation needed][original research?]
MethodismEdit

In 1928, Queen Salote Tupou III, who was a member of the church, established the Free Wesleyan Church as the state religion of Tonga.[citation needed] The chief pastor of the Free Wesleyan Church serves as the representative of the people of Tonga and of the Church at the coronation of a King or Queen of Tonga where he anoints and crowns the Monarch. In Opposition to the establishment of the Free Wesleyan Church as a state religion, the Church of Tonga separated from the Free Wesleyan Church in 1928.

Calvinism (Reformed Tradition)Edit
  •  Tuvalu: The Church of Tuvalu is the state religion, although in practice this merely entitles it to “the privilege of performing special services on major national events”.[29] The Constitution of Tuvalu guarantees freedom of religion, including the freedom to practice, the freedom to change religion, the right not to receive religious instruction at school or to attend religious ceremonies at school, and the right not to “take an oath or make an affirmation that is contrary to his religion or belief”.[30]
  •  Scotland: The Church of Scotland is recognized as the national church of Scotland, but is not a state church and thus differs from the Church of England. Its constitution, which is recognised by acts of the British Parliament, gives it complete independence from the state.

Islam (non-denominational)Edit

Main article: Non-denominational Muslim

States which define Islam as the state religion, but do not specify either Sunni or Shia.

  •  Bangladesh : The 1972 constitution did not include any religion as the state religion. However, in 1988, general Ershad inserted Islam as the state religion by the Eighth Amendment Act. 1988; section 2A specifies “The state religion of the Republic is Islam, but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in the Republic.”.[33] As part of a series of rulings, on 4 October 2010 the High Court ruled that Bangladesh is a secular state.[34] Section 12 of part II of the constitution identifies Secularism and freedom of religion as fundamental principles of state policy[35]
  •  Djibouti[36]
  •  Iraq : Article 2 of the Constitution of Iraq confirms Islam as the official religion of the State.
  •  Pakistan : article 2 of the Constitution of Pakistan confirms Islam as the state religion.[37]
  •  Palestine: the Palestinian Constitution defines Islam as the state religion, but ensures “‘respect and sanctity of all other heavenly religions shall be maintained'”.[38]
  •  Tunisia: Art. 1, Constitution of Tunisia

Sunni IslamEdit

Shiʾa IslamEdit

IbadiEdit

Mixed Shia and SunniEdit

Buddhist countriesEdit

Governments where Buddhism, either a specific form of, or the whole, has been established as an official religion:

Theravada BuddhismEdit

  •  Cambodia[39]
  •  Sri Lanka: the constitution of Sri Lanka accords Buddhism the “foremost place”, although it does not identify it as a state religion.[40]
  •  Thailand: the 2007 Thai constitution, recognises Buddhism as “the religion of Thai tradition with the most adherents”, however, it is not formally identified as a state religion. It requires the government to “patronize and protect Buddhism and other religions”.[41]
  •  Myanmar: Section 361 of the constitution states that “The Union recognizes special position of Buddhism as the faith professed by the great majority of the citizens of the Union.”.[42]

Vajrayana BuddhismEdit

Status of religion in IsraelEdit

See also: Jewish state

Israel is defined in several of its laws as a “Jewish and democratic state” (medina yehudit ve-demokratit). However, the term “Jewish” is a polyseme that can describe the Jewish people as both an ethnic or a religious group. The debate about the meaning of the term “Jewish” and its legal and social applications is one of the most profound issues with which Israeli society deals. The problem of the status of religion in Israel, even though it is relevant to all religions, usually refers to the status of Judaism in Israeli society. Thus, even though from a constitutional point of view Judaism is not the state religion in Israel, its status nevertheless determines relations between religion and state and the extent to which religion influences the political center.[44]

The State of Israel supports religious institutions, particularly Orthodox Jewish ones, and recognizes the “religious communities” as carried over from those recognized under the British Mandate. These are: Jewish and Christian (Eastern Orthodox, Latin [Catholic], Gregorian-Armenian, Armenian-Catholic, Syrian [Catholic], Chaldean [Uniate], Greek Catholic Melkite, Maronite, and Syrian Orthodox).

Everyone is free to believe in whatever they please, but it is considered a private matter. We don’t need monumental buildings to protect our faith. God didn’t ask us to judge people in his place. Who are we to judge and punish in his name? He knows what to do of us when our time comes.

In Secular countries such as France, they’ve associated the word secularism with Atheism, it is the biggest non-believing country in europe.

Among the founders of secularism such as James Madison, Thomas Jefferson or Jules Ferry, none of them has made any religious discrimination as they do now.

But it is also true that “Your beliefs are your private religion”.