Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Yesterday at 07:11 PM

What's happened to the fo...
by zeca
Yesterday at 06:39 PM

New Britain
Yesterday at 05:41 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
Yesterday at 05:47 AM

Iran launches drones
April 13, 2024, 09:56 PM

عيد مبارك للجميع! ^_^
by akay
April 12, 2024, 04:01 PM

Eid-Al-Fitr
by akay
April 12, 2024, 12:06 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
February 01, 2024, 12:10 PM

Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 10:44 AM

Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 01:53 PM

Pakistan: The Nation.....
January 28, 2024, 02:12 PM

Gaza assault
January 27, 2024, 01:08 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Agnostic Muslim Rambling

 (Read 20730 times)
  • Previous page 1 23 4 5 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #30 - July 29, 2015, 06:17 AM

    I think its one of the best tv series that has been made for a long time
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #31 - July 29, 2015, 08:22 AM

    I used to watch the old series as a kid religiously.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #32 - July 29, 2015, 09:27 AM

    I think its one of the best tv series that has been made for a long time


    Agreed and there are some memorable lines and speeches in it that a full of wisdom. I think I've even used a few things Gaius Baltar has said lol.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #33 - July 29, 2015, 09:28 AM

    I used to watch the old series as a kid religiously.


    I never saw that. Wasn't it an old 70s or 60s film?
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #34 - July 29, 2015, 10:17 AM

    Hey, no it wasnt a film, i think it was a late 1970's series in the US, but probably hit the UK in the early 80's.  I have a new touch phone and can't for the life of me figure out how to provide a link to it lol.  I must check out the new bg. It better live up to the old one ; )
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #35 - July 29, 2015, 10:36 AM

    Well not seen the old one but love the new one.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #36 - July 29, 2015, 10:41 AM

    K, I will take a look at this new series soon.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #37 - July 29, 2015, 12:32 PM

    If you have Amazon Prime you can stream all 4 seasons for free.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #38 - July 29, 2015, 03:45 PM

    Thanks Hassan..  i don't have amazon prime, but i shall look it up also : )
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #39 - July 29, 2015, 03:50 PM

    http://putlocker.is/watch-battlestar-galactica-tvshow-online-free-putlocker.html 

    watch it free..........

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #40 - July 29, 2015, 07:50 PM

    Really interesting stuff (up to the movie bit where I got lost) on how to relate and or define yourself from within Islam when you've humanised its scared text and only prophet -- by the way, did you know about Mohammed Abed al-Jabri and his humanising and Arab-awakening project?
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #41 - July 29, 2015, 08:15 PM

    ^yes i played my part as usual in derailong the thread..

    thanks Yeeze also
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #42 - July 29, 2015, 08:18 PM

    Let me too ramble a bit here and see what I could say on living with undefinable doubt within any communitarian arrangement.

    I personally do not think about myself in terms of where I stand from Islam anymore, because I taught myself I do not need to justify to anyone and anything how I relate to anything and anyone. This excluded 'anyone/anything' includes me because I am my biggest, fattest enemies. One of the practical things that helps me not to see myself as an Ex Muslim (i.e in light of what I'm not anymore) is that I have changed my name by deed poll to a neutral name without any Islamic connotation. (And to keep with the movie theme, if Isis the dog in Downton Abbey, as rumour has it, has been killed off for sharing a name with the bearded ones, should I uncomplainingly share a name with the incumbent ISIS caliph?)

    I believe it was Humbert Humbert who said that a change of environment is the traditional fallacy upon which doomed loves and lungs rely. Well, to hell with him if this is true. What I did, however, is that I have surrounded myself by normal everyday (anodyne) things and tried really hard to fill my life with joyous things and lovely people where I do not carry the betterment of any many-headed Ummah on my tiny shoulders anymore. I do not want to be amongst the new crop of Al-Ghurabaa-- no, just as I'm through watching my actions and policing my intentions in the hope of becoming in the eye of Allah a goody-good moralist fart, I now do not want to do the same for a nosy god of my own invention -- nor do I eagerly wait to take up residency in a palatial and arboreal gated community as soon as rigor mortis sets in. I do not want to go down in history; I do not want to go up in history. When my time's up, I just want to be me silently disappearing forever in the manner described in Alexander Pope's Ode on Solitude.

    After Islam, I have become self-absorbed -- away from positive belief and positive disbelief -- because I finally accepted I'm weak, limited, vulnerable, ignorant, hypocrite, lazy, relatively fat, liar and a thief. As you can see, I have a lot to work and to improve on. How about, I increasingly started asking myself, being nicer towards those I immediately interact with on a daily basis? Beyond this rigid square of influence, I'm kidding myself when I intend to make meaningful, positive waves. I was a busy fool for having volunteered to work for Amnesty International for two years, passionately campaigning for the immediate release of administrative prisoners in Egypt, Libya and Morocco -- more precisely, administrative Islamist prisoners whom I, at the same time, loathed to the marrow of my bones.

    What was I trying to prove to myself now? That even though I left Islam, I was still a good caring person in a self-effacing manner?

    Yes, I was trying to work out this new me without Islam. But deep down I knew that I did not leave one ideology that made me feel guilty for enjoying and experiencing pleasure (for having always had more than enough food, clothes, money and been physically healthy -- Youm Al Qiyamah, the poor are fast tracked to Jenah on account of not always having these items about their persons) to join another that made me feel the same under a different guise. No. The thing with Islam is that it didn't send you an account statement at the end of each day informing you how badly or well you're getting on with your duties. This could've better informed your decision to not pass on doing good deeds - nawafil/mustahabbat - or indulge occasionally in low-level delicious syaats. This creative information paucity has had the effect of me feeling, with good reason, it was not enough that I regularly kept my side of the mano-a-mano bargain between me and Allah - ibadat - but also I always needed to do something for the betterment of other people as though I really could, something for the betterment of the nebulous Ummah at the back of whose massive body I seemed to be, inter alia, a hair follicle in terms of significance.

    "Until you have won some victory for humanity" said Horace Mann "you should be ashamed to die". Beautifully expressed by the educator but laughably and impossibly quixotic all the same when it comes to Islam, superstition and human credulity. I often wondered how different is such a motivational imperative from the deliberate gradation in Jenah; where we were encouraged not only to secure entrance but to compete to reside in al-Firdaws al-A'la. Placing impossible demands on one in Islam has poisoned the well for me so that every time people say "sky is the limit", I seem to hear "Allah's throne is the limit".

    I didn't come away from Islamic existential guilt (i.e. feeling I should be unbelievably grateful for merely existing, and feeling I should thank Allah, the Boss, for providing me with interest free loans, providing me with the means of Hasanat production) in order to join another ideology/culture that made me feel ethically obligated and guilty just the same for different reasons. This time, guilty for being fortunate, for enjoying civil liberties and other freedoms for which I didn't work. Thus, I somehow now need to free Muslim minds and hearts from the scourge of Islam. This type of secular post-Islam guilt -- if it exists for you -- is so incredibly sophisticated in its missionary endeavour to beat Islamo-Christianity at their own game that it can only be spiritual noblesse oblige in reverse.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #43 - July 29, 2015, 10:11 PM

    Nice effort Hassan. You'd make a brilliant leader. I fear they are mostly not ready for you yet though.

    (and nice rambling whabbist)

    Hi
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #44 - July 29, 2015, 10:54 PM

    Hey Wahabist it was really a great pleasure meeting you the other day (what's all this nonsense about being fat? For others reading this, he is a handsome son of a gun).

    Well since this is a ramble-fest:

    You remind me of the character Will in the film Goodwill Hunting. I'm not taking about looks but in the sense that Will was young, highly intelligent, very well read and full of quotes on all aspects of life but as the professor Sean Mcguire explained, words sometimes need actual experience to bring them to life and Will was young and still had much of life's road to travel.

    As I said rather clumsily the other day, you are who you are. That includes past present and future. Who you were and who you want to be. The very stuff you are made of and what you made of yourself. In my own limited experience you can't escape any aspect but you can embrace it and make it yours and define it for yourself.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #45 - July 29, 2015, 10:57 PM

    BTW if you haven't seen the Film "Goodwill Hunting" then I highly recommend it.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #46 - July 29, 2015, 11:15 PM

    I think the above was not what I really wanted to say but I seemed to have galloped off towards another direction when I started typing -- and they try to convince me volition is real and independent!!

    The chief problem with the Qur'an lies in its dizzying disunity, in its uncategorisability rendering any serious systematic refutation of it very hard to come by. It contains stories but it is not a history book; it contains Islamic commands but leaves out a lot to Sunnah (thus Islam isn't in its entirety contained with in it, intertextuality takes place on many levels) ; it deals in topical generalities so that context invariably gets supplied by its dynamic readers (thus, the meaning is necessarily contingent, always being made and never is or has been made) ; it contain words it says they are letters -- i.e. Alif, Lam, Meem etc -- whose meaning not exactly but even roughly nobody knows (is Allah teasing us by telling us something we cannot understand?) ; it rhymes but it is not poetry in the Arabic sense, and its prose has undeniable rhythms; its narrative shifts unexpectedly so that beguiling displacement -- ie chronological distortion and talking about the future in the past tense using, as it does, incredibly complex grammatical structures and flowery style -- catches the already conditioned and receptive reader unawares; it refers to sciency, embryological stuff even though it is not a biology book; it seeks legitimacy from asserting it is on a continuum with older traditions, thus its discourse outside the scope of its home-grown believers tends to be directed at the people of the other 'revealed' books, a hostile takeover and pinching other religions' faithful customers. More frightfully rehashed stuff and then some.

    Now, how can anyone have a successful go at refuting something so multifarious and menacingly complex? This is without taking into consideration the prohibitive effect of the usual death threats and living in fear that this ideal refuter would have to endure for having the audacity to undertake such an insulting project. This refuter someone needs to be a grammarian extremely familiar with an admissible type of Arabic, which by the time of the second Caliph, Umar Ibn Al Khattab, has become "impure", it has to fall within 150 years before the inception of Islam ( thus, an expert in Arabic philology). This refuter someone needs to be extremely familiar with but not prejudiced against the Bible and the Torah in order to cross reference the different and disparate versions of the same stories in the Qur'an. This refuter someone needs also to be a historian, a muhaddith. Basically, an encyclopedic before standing the slightest chance at coming abreast of the nomenclaturally elusive Qur'an and beating it on its own terms.

    Thus, any attempt to engage the Qur'an on its own terms, in my opinion, is futile because it deals with so many things at once that it really does not deal with anything at all. Take surat Al-Nasr (110) and you'll find it a private message between Allah and Moe and topically nothing more. Strangely, it uses the future conditional tense to refer to past events (a problematic tense -- using the past to talk about the future -- also happens in Al-nahl 16:1). Yet, all the mufassireen spill precious ink on contextualising it to the point where you'd think this surat was a historical record for the conquest of Mecca. Not orders for Moe to seek forgiveness and glorify Allah. Well, wait! Because other mufassireen then said it was Allah hinting to Moe he was about to die. So, even those supposed to be in the inner circle of Islam cannot make up their minds on what a very simple surat actually means (they would of course say, as its their wont, that this was complimentary variation, as if this fact alone gets them out of the other bigger philosophical problem; that of indeterminacy --- which this final, perfect and completest of all books has in abundance).

    The Qur'an is undefinable ragtag heap of things, things that do not easily give themselves up to taxonomic, systematic examination necessary for modern understanding and or adaptation. So is Islam.

    Recently, I was invited to tea by Arabist sandal-wearing lefty friends of mine who live in a salubrious part of London (in leafy Chiswick). The subject of conversation shifted towards - yes, you guessed it! - ISIS. "This is not Islam, is it?" asked me one of them. I said no, this is not all of Islam.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #47 - July 30, 2015, 08:57 AM

    The chief problem with the Qur'an lies in its dizzying disunity, in its uncategorisability rendering any serious systematic refutation of it very hard to come by. It contains stories but it is not a history book; it contains Islamic commands but leaves out a lot to Sunnah (thus Islam isn't in its entirety contained with in it, intertextuality takes place on many levels) ; it deals in topical generalities so that context invariably gets supplied by its dynamic readers (thus, the meaning is necessarily contingent, always being made and never is or has been made) ; it contain words it says they are letters -- i.e. Alif, Lam, Meem etc -- whose meaning not exactly but even roughly nobody knows (is Allah teasing us by telling us something we cannot understand?) ; it rhymes but it is not poetry in the Arabic sense, and its prose has undeniable rhythms; its narrative shifts unexpectedly so that beguiling displacement -- ie chronological distortion and talking about the future in the past tense using, as it does, incredibly complex grammatical structures and flowery style -- catches the already conditioned and receptive reader unawares; it refers to sciency, embryological stuff even though it is not a biology book; it seeks legitimacy from asserting it is on a continuum with older traditions, thus its discourse outside the scope of its home-grown believers tends to be directed at the people of the other 'revealed' books, a hostile takeover and pinching other religions' faithful customers. More frightfully rehashed stuff and then some.

    Now, how can anyone have a successful go at refuting something so multifarious and menacingly complex? This is without taking into consideration the prohibitive effect of the usual death threats and living in fear that this ideal refuter would have to endure for having the audacity to undertake such an insulting project. This refuter someone needs to be a grammarian extremely familiar with an admissible type of Arabic, which by the time of the second Caliph, Umar Ibn Al Khattab, has become "impure", it has to fall within 150 years before the inception of Islam ( thus, an expert in Arabic philology). This refuter someone needs to be extremely familiar with but not prejudiced against the Bible and the Torah in order to cross reference the different and disparate versions of the same stories in the Qur'an. This refuter someone needs also to be a historian, a muhaddith. Basically, an encyclopedic before standing the slightest chance at coming abreast of the nomenclaturally elusive Qur'an and beating it on its own terms.

    Thus, any attempt to engage the Qur'an on its own terms, in my opinion, is futile because it deals with so many things at once that it really does not deal with anything at all. Take surat Al-Nasr (110) and you'll find it a private message between Allah and Moe and topically nothing more. Strangely, it uses the future conditional tense to refer to past events (a problematic tense -- using the past to talk about the future -- also happens in Al-nahl 16:1). Yet, all the mufassireen spill precious ink on contextualising it to the point where you'd think this surat was a historical record for the conquest of Mecca. Not orders for Moe to seek forgiveness and glorify Allah. Well, wait! Because other mufassireen then said it was Allah hinting to Moe he was about to die. So, even those supposed to be in the inner circle of Islam cannot make up their minds on what a very simple surat actually means (they would of course say, as its their wont, that this was complimentary variation, as if this fact alone gets them out of the other bigger philosophical problem; that of indeterminacy --- which this final, perfect and completest of all books has in abundance).

    The Qur'an is undefinable ragtag heap of things, things that do not easily give themselves up to taxonomic, systematic examination necessary for modern understanding and or adaptation. So is Islam.

    Recently, I was invited to tea by Arabist sandal-wearing lefty friends of mine who live in a salubrious part of London (in leafy Chiswick). The subject of conversation shifted towards - yes, you guessed it! - ISIS. "This is not Islam, is it?" asked me one of them. I said no, this is not all of Islam.


    Wow! My thoughts exactly but somuch more perfectly articulated. This is going on cemb greatest hits.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #48 - July 30, 2015, 09:06 AM

    You are a gem. Your experience within Islamic society and your linguist stic knowledge, clarity of thought and enchanting turn of phrase leads me to think there are books there that could reach and touch millions.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #49 - July 30, 2015, 02:51 PM

    You are a gem. Your experience within Islamic society and your linguist stic knowledge, clarity of thought and enchanting turn of phrase leads me to think there are books there that could reach and touch millions.

     Hassan, I'm happy to exchange the following treasures for that one fatherly hug you gave me after I had got very silly: the choicest books in my home library, my signed copies, first editions and penciled writings on their margin (the small, most Satanic ones), my first ever going on a holiday last month to picturesque Fort William where I, for five days, camped and tried to commune with nature, maybe more peacefully when midges were not being very optimistic.

    What I didn't tell you about my childhood swamp is that my dear father was always there, always at hand to ogre the swamp. The best way he knew how to get me to do something, when beating didn't always work, was reverse psychology (the twenty five or so beating scars on my body have fooled a torture and injury expert to write a report substantiating my asylum application: this is using the United Nations' 1999 Istanbul Protocol -- I was, in other words, scientifically beaten). Thus, I have always felt that in order for me to be right, I must prove others wrong. And for a very long time, I lived in perpetual watchfulness of what others thought and said about me. Just like my father who has always had set incredible store by his clannish reputation.

    My father, with whom I didn't speak for 9 years now, is only one year older than yourself, Hassan. So, on the journey home from meeting you the second time, I furiously thought to myself; why was it so easy for you to make me feel good about myself, valued (as an end in myself) without saying anything? I felt crushed and defeated all over again because it should've been his unconditional hug to give, it should've been him.

    I'm unashamedly full of quotes because I'm not always able to verbalise that which I know that I know but cannot name; I started to want exactly what #three has in her signature -- want not to be good but to be right (I think I need to PM her about this lest it gets across as a subtweet). I stopped caring about what other people think of me - what father thinks of me. (That doesn't mean in some strange, circuitously creepy, unshakable way I don't love him -- in fact, to do another subtweet, I find it incredibly insensitive and crass for anyone to merrily tell #Aqua to cut all parental ties as if it were pushing an open door!!!)

    I had to stop caring what others thought of me as a person to limit my self perception from being massively informed by people whose regard for and link to my inner world (my unknowable consciousness and developing character) could not be more tenuous. Some people choose to focus on the tangible, positive side of me because they are good people, like yourself, Hassan. Other more people, in unconnected instances, found me a stupid, misanthropic, fatalist weirdo. But I don't see these things mutually exclusive, after all stupidity and wisdom are on the same continuum of what it really means to be human. I think more of my flaws and soberly consider, at the one and same time, my capacity for good as well as for bad. I think of myself as Popeye The Sailor Man thought and said of himself: I am what I am, and that's who I am.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #50 - July 30, 2015, 03:42 PM

    Good person? Bad person? You know better than that. We are all flawed. You are far too hard on yourself and I'm not as fatalistic as you ☺
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #51 - July 30, 2015, 10:56 PM

    The paragraph long short story below somehow sprung to my mind yesterday whilst I was posting on the futility of refuting the Qur'an on it's own terms.  

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

    On Exactitude in Science
    By Jorge Luis Borges (Collected Fictions, translated by Andrew Hurley)

    In that Empire, the Art of Cartography attained such Perfection that the map of a single Province occupied the entirety of a City, and the map of the Empire, the entirety of a Province. In time, those Unconscionable Maps no longer satisfied, and the Cartographers Guilds struck a Map of the Empire whose size was that of the Empire, and which coincided point for point with it. The following Generations, who were not so fond of the Study of Cartography as their Forebears had been, saw that that vast Map was Useless, and not without some Pitilessness was it, that they delivered it up to the Inclemencies of Sun and Winters. In the Deserts of the West, still today, there are Tattered Ruins of that Map, inhabited by Animals and Beggars; in all the Land there is no other Relic of the Disciplines of Geography.

    —Suarez Miranda,Viajes devarones prudentes, Libro IV,Cap. XLV, Lerida, 1658
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #52 - July 30, 2015, 11:14 PM

    Stories are told. So if you really want to hear it instead of reading it --- with a little bit of contextualing necessary to unfold the navigationally endless possibilities; possibilities that can easily make up for the apparent lack of characterisation in the narrative --- then be my guest:
    https://soundcloud.com/guardianbookspodcast/will-self-reads-on-exactitude
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #53 - July 31, 2015, 12:26 AM

    Good person? Bad person? You know better than that. We are all flawed.


    What are your views on Adolph Hitler?  Tongue

    how fuck works without shit??


    Let's Play Chess!

    harakaat, friend, RIP
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #54 - July 31, 2015, 01:24 AM

    I love him the the most.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #55 - July 31, 2015, 02:17 PM

    I think our talk here has already become Qur’anic, in that we are talking about everything and nothing in particular. I think at least #suki wouldn’t disagree with this.

    About Hitler, I do not think he was uniquely the most evil man in the world. Nor do I think that a nation like Germany – of learning and sophisticated culture — had lost its mind and gone completely mad for 12 weird years, so that whatever wickedness in Hitler’s person and Nazi Germany could thus be compartmentalised. George Orwell started off in England, your England by felicitously saying “As I write, highly civilised human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me.” It was not a lack of civilisation that led to the atrocities and pogroms that followed. Hitler loved his dog, his daughters, loved Wagner (damn it, I myself cannot listen to the "Ride of the Valkyries" in the shower without getting all goose-bumped) and I’m sure there was at least one thing about him that was personable, one thing that you - dear reader - and I are most likely to share with him. Rather, I think too much has been made about the evilness of Nazism and Stalinism as if they were an aberration and not something that we are all capable of doing if left unchecked with propitious conditions.
     
    Very little is out there about the estimated 9 million German non-combatant civilians who were rounded up in the streets of many highly civilised European cities, made to wear or had the swastika painted on their coats, spat at, punched, lynch mobbed, and systematically shot in cold blood after the Second World War. Unless you dig really deep, you wouldn’t know about the concentration camp that was set up by the Poles for ordinary German people calling it “Punishment Camp”. Let’s not start talking about flattening Dresden and the undisputable wickedness of what A.C. Grayling called “the deliberate mass bombing of civilians” by the Allied Forces in WW II. Let’s not talk about carpet bombing, about cluster munition. About using white phosphorus in Iraq (considering it not a biological agent even though it melts and slowly breaks down its alive victim's bones) and then turn around tut-tuting the evilness of Assad’s barrel bombs and Sarin (A Higher Form of Killing: The Secret History of Gas and Germ Warfare by Jeremy Paxman and Robert Harris is a very readable book on how we humans dream up ever more cruel ways to kill each other, and more broadly, on how no one empire, ethnicity, nationality, culture can claim monopoly on evil. I used to think that there was something uniquely evil about the US for dropping atomic bombs on Japan, I fooled myself that this wouldn't happen if other warring nations had the means and capability. No you nincompoop!! Have you not so recently read the Saudi jihadi cleric Nasir al-Fahd on the admissibility of biological agents in sharia?? ). Moving on to lesser evil crimes against the person and what do we find? We find rape. In the UK, marital rape was not illegal until 1990s. That’s not very long ago, considering this was tolerated as a 'private family matter' by the House of Lords in a civilisation that celebrates Hobbs’ Leviathan and had given the State - not men over women - complete monopoly on violence.

    The inconvenient truth is that we, as a species, are not nice. When we are nice, we are being nice. We are not innately good or ethical and this goes for all of us. This is truism of course and it doesn't need much adumbration. Yet, I was shocked to learn that the author of the timeless masterpiece, Alice in Wonderland, was probably a kiddy-fiddler, a non-practising paedophile (according to a recent investigation by Martha kearney). Felt unease when the evidence for Vladimir Nabokov’s homophobia towards his brother, Sergei, started to corroborate. Again and again, we find that nobody’s completely good, completely bad. And to cash my return ticket to agnosticism, I particularly include Islam in not being completely good nor completely bad.  
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #56 - July 31, 2015, 03:39 PM

    Completely agree with you, Wahabist.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #57 - July 31, 2015, 03:59 PM

    Yes, cracking post.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #58 - July 31, 2015, 04:02 PM

    Not sure why, Whabbist, but this just came to mind.

  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #59 - July 31, 2015, 04:03 PM

    Yes, cracking post.

    Agreed.
  • Previous page 1 23 4 5 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »