The BN Village - View Single Post - Does It Make Sense For A *Personal* God to Exist???

Shemsi en Tehuti · (#32 (**permalink**))

One Zero Seven wrote:

Quote:

Salaam (Peace) to all...

Very Good question(s), in my opinion.

"What should be used to determine RIGHT and WRONG? Religion or Humanism?" Well, my answer would be neither of the two...not because either of them is wrong, but because I believe the truest answer is common to both/all of them.

[highlight=yellow]I am of the view that the standard of "right" and "wrong" is intimately connected to the common principle of SURVIVAL. [/highlight]

There was a certain man who learned that the one thing that all Men...and indeed, all LIFE...have in common is the Urge to Survive; and that Man, in particular, is constantly seeking to surviveat the Highest possible State...and doing this on many levels, which he called dynamics.

In short, he stated that Man is seeking to survive on at least eight (8) levels or dynamics:

1. Self
2. Family
3. Group - Race, Nation, Fraternity, Organization, etc.
4. Humanity - The whole human family.
5. All Life
6. Physical Universe
7. Spirit
8. Infinity (Supreme Being)

We all exist as part of each of these dynamics. Therefore, he postulated,for anything to be considered"good" or "Right"it mustbring about more benefit than harm across these dynamics. In other words, the more helpful my actions are to the survival of all these dynamics, the more "good" or "right" those actions are. Conversely, the more harmful my actions are to the survival of all these dynamics, the more "bad" or "wrong" those actions are.

[highlight=yellow]I think this is a good way to look at it...and it does not conflict with my beliefs as a Muslim. Are not all Sacred Texts ultimately concerned with the Survival of Man? [/highlight]

What do you think?

RM

Quote:

I think that this was a good attempt at defining "good" and "evil", but where it is flawed is it assumes common morale amongst all stocks of humanity. If we look at the classical Black civilization of Sumer, our people wrote about their first contact with Whites. They called them "habiru", and said they were unclothed, travelled in dead silence, and destroyed everything. The influx of Whites/Semites into West Asia is what destroyed all of our classical Black civilizations except perhaps Absynnia (although it was extremely altered). I am sure that when the Whites were raiding our peoples civilizations back then, Whites and Semiteslooked at it as a deed for survival. Of course ancient Sumer saw it quite differently, and so erectedmassive walls to keep the Whites outin their mountains andcaves north of civilization. In the instinct of survival, the Sumerians tried to starve the Whites, killedand enslaved to protect their women, children, livestock, and agriculture; however, in the end the White's willfor "survival" was stronger than ours.

This is the problem, and it even persists today where theMaafa has continuedever since ancient Sumer throughout West & South Asia, Africa, as well as the African Diaporagoing long and strong forover 6000 years.Indo-European and Semitic (White) peoples have theunremitting desire to exploit and destroy the dark man at all costs because it is the only way they know how to survive. When they are not exploiting others, they are steep into barbarism. This is why when non-White peoples do what is "right" for themselves, they are labelled as "extremists", "terrorists", "militant", and other names by Whites.

As for your mention of the "Sacred Texts", I assume you mean the Judeo-Christian-Islamo texts. The survival they all seem interested in is only that our their own...much like White men.