5 ms·

> to create narratives in which blackness is not looked down upon. This is good, needed work. so like: In the Nation of Islam, both God and the devil are huma

by cat199 8y ago

> to create narratives in which blackness is not looked down upon. This is good, needed work. so like: In the Nation of Islam, both God and the devil are human beings. Elijah Muhammad identified the devil as the white man, the Caucasian race. According to Elijah, though the black race is many trillions of years old, the white race began a mere six thousand years ago with Yakub, one of the Black Gods of this time cycle.[15] Elijah explained, "The white race is not equal with darker people because the white race was not created by the God of Righteousness. . . . They were made by Yakub, an original Black Man—who is from the Creator. Yakub, the father of the devil, made the white race, a race of devils—enemies of the darker people of the earth. The white race is not made by nature to accept righteousness."[16] is 'good, needed work'?? https://www.answering-islam.org/NoI/noi2.html https://www.answering-islam.org/NoI/noi2.html

aeturnum 8y ago
Hah, no, I would not say that's the "good" part of the the Nation of Islam. However, just like Christianity has been able to do some amount of "good work" while insisting that "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says"[1], the Nation is not "all bad." I personally would judge its good works to be more crippled by its doctrine than most faiths. If you want to read a good thinking wrestling with the Nation of Islam I recommend The Fire Next Time by James Baldwin. I think he does a good job of capturing the contradictions and attractions of Elijah Muhammad (another undeniably hateful man) in the flesh. [1] 1 Corinthians 14:34, NIV
- TheRealDunkirk 8y ago
  That was PART of the apostle Paul's admonition about keeping order in a gathering of the saints, from a wide variety of angles. I think the context is explained by the next verse: If they have questions, let them ask their husbands at home. Ergo: don't disrupt the proceedings with distractions. (And even if you accept this interpretation, you may now commence criticizing Paul for inferring that only women needed to be told this.) People who look down on Christianity love to bring up this scripture, but do you actually know any significant branches of Christianity that enforce this? I'm a fan of one of the most stringent denominations around, and even we have A LOT of women speakers and ministers in our organization. I honestly don't know any which abides by a literal application of this scripure. I've only ever seen it used as a wedge issue against strict biblical interpretation.
  - cat199 8y ago
    nevermind the glorification of mary, spreading the practice practicing of monogamy instead of male:multi-female polygamy, being anti-prostitution, etc.. oh right, but those things are really 'supressing women'.
  - aeturnum 8y ago
    > do you actually know any significant branches of Christianity that enforce this? Not universally. I think there are denominations that use that passage as justification to keep women from being Deacons but I couldn't cite one off the top of my head. That said, I used it as an example and I'm sure if you're that knowledgeable about scripture you're familiar with the other parts of scripture that are (or have been) used with questionable intent. If I wanted to be less fair I could have cited the passages that slave owners used to argue that slavery was "christian." I could also have talked about the anti-homosexual (or perhaps anti-decadence) passages in romans. I also could have cited the Mormon church's doctrine around skin color, but that's a bit of a horse of a different color. My point, which I think is preserved, is that scripture and practice are two different things. Scripture colors practice - but the Nation of Islam is not (as far as I know) going around hurting white people because they're demons any more than Christian denominations go around forcing women to be silent because there's a passage from Paul.
colordrops 8y ago
As if other religions had a sane non violent healthy mythology. Please.
- DtnB 8y ago
  Other religions that have kept their popularity and adherents over the centuries(and much in the past century) have, part, reformed and toned down the significance of these violent mythologies especially in their relevance to doctrine. To assert otherwise seems like arguing in bad faith.
  - colordrops 8y ago
    Yes, you are arguing in very bad faith to ignore the millions dead in the middle east in the last 20 years due to sectarian fighting between abrahamic faiths.
    - Fellshard 8y ago
      Just one.
      - colordrops 8y ago
        The level of discussion in this thread is unfortunate.
        Fellshard 8y ago
        I get pretty irritated with intentional imprecision, as usually it's attempting to obfuscate what's actually happening. Unidirectional violence from exactly one religion should not be then generalized to a family of religions.
    - pmarreck 8y ago
      Hate to break the news to you, but... https://qr.ae/TWIst4 https://qr.ae/TWIst4 "...Anti-religion has caused more deaths than religion" I'm no fan of abrahamic faiths nor religion in general, though. I just try to separate fact from fiction. I'm kept very busy. ;)

by cat199 8y ago

aeturnum 8y ago

Hah, no, I would not say that's the "good" part of the the Nation of Islam. However, just like Christianity has been able to do some amount of "good work" while insisting that "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says"[1], the Nation is not "all bad." I personally would judge its good works to be more crippled by its doctrine than most faiths. If you want to read a good thinking wrestling with the Nation of Islam I recommend The Fire Next Time by James Baldwin. I think he does a good job of capturing the contradictions and attractions of Elijah Muhammad (another undeniably hateful man) in the flesh. [1] 1 Corinthians 14:34, NIV

TheRealDunkirk 8y ago
That was PART of the apostle Paul's admonition about keeping order in a gathering of the saints, from a wide variety of angles. I think the context is explained by the next verse: If they have questions, let them ask their husbands at home. Ergo: don't disrupt the proceedings with distractions. (And even if you accept this interpretation, you may now commence criticizing Paul for inferring that only women needed to be told this.) People who look down on Christianity love to bring up this scripture, but do you actually know any significant branches of Christianity that enforce this? I'm a fan of one of the most stringent denominations around, and even we have A LOT of women speakers and ministers in our organization. I honestly don't know any which abides by a literal application of this scripure. I've only ever seen it used as a wedge issue against strict biblical interpretation.
- cat199 8y ago
  nevermind the glorification of mary, spreading the practice practicing of monogamy instead of male:multi-female polygamy, being anti-prostitution, etc.. oh right, but those things are really 'supressing women'.
- aeturnum 8y ago
  > do you actually know any significant branches of Christianity that enforce this? Not universally. I think there are denominations that use that passage as justification to keep women from being Deacons but I couldn't cite one off the top of my head. That said, I used it as an example and I'm sure if you're that knowledgeable about scripture you're familiar with the other parts of scripture that are (or have been) used with questionable intent. If I wanted to be less fair I could have cited the passages that slave owners used to argue that slavery was "christian." I could also have talked about the anti-homosexual (or perhaps anti-decadence) passages in romans. I also could have cited the Mormon church's doctrine around skin color, but that's a bit of a horse of a different color. My point, which I think is preserved, is that scripture and practice are two different things. Scripture colors practice - but the Nation of Islam is not (as far as I know) going around hurting white people because they're demons any more than Christian denominations go around forcing women to be silent because there's a passage from Paul.

colordrops 8y ago

As if other religions had a sane non violent healthy mythology. Please.

DtnB 8y ago
Other religions that have kept their popularity and adherents over the centuries(and much in the past century) have, part, reformed and toned down the significance of these violent mythologies especially in their relevance to doctrine. To assert otherwise seems like arguing in bad faith.
- colordrops 8y ago
  Yes, you are arguing in very bad faith to ignore the millions dead in the middle east in the last 20 years due to sectarian fighting between abrahamic faiths.
  - Fellshard 8y ago
    Just one.
    - colordrops 8y ago
      The level of discussion in this thread is unfortunate.
      - Fellshard 8y ago
        I get pretty irritated with intentional imprecision, as usually it's attempting to obfuscate what's actually happening. Unidirectional violence from exactly one religion should not be then generalized to a family of religions.
  - pmarreck 8y ago
    Hate to break the news to you, but... https://qr.ae/TWIst4 https://qr.ae/TWIst4 "...Anti-religion has caused more deaths than religion" I'm no fan of abrahamic faiths nor religion in general, though. I just try to separate fact from fiction. I'm kept very busy. ;)