If you insult one aspect of a belief system it can be treated like you are insulting one’s mother. So how would you feel if someone called your mother false or insulted your wife as simple and easy or your children as bastards? If the belief system is intimate enough to a person, the same feelings of wrath and anger can be triggered as if you were insulting his family.
By batsman
In my earlier write-up I argued that faith and beliefs are 2 very different things (Faith Re-Visited) and that faith cannot be questioned while belief systems being built up of sets of beliefs over time and which have logic of their own can.
Having said that, it is not as if belief systems can be questioned any which way. Being built up over time, a belief system can in a way become a way of life. It can be as intimate as one’s own family. So if you insult one aspect of a belief system it can be treated like you are insulting one’s mother. So how would you feel if someone called your mother false or insulted your wife as simple and easy or your children as bastards? If the belief system is intimate enough to a person, the same feelings of wrath and anger can be triggered as if you were insulting his family.
So now, there is a need to treat belief systems different from a simple argument over economics, for example. Arguments over belief systems need to be treated with much greater mutual respect. To discuss belief systems, there is a need for long term engagement and exchange of opinions and ideas. Not just that, there is also an even more urgent need to show sincerity with good deeds, integrity and decent actions. I believe this is what RPK is trying to do with Malaysia Today, unlike some people who piggy back on the strenuous efforts of others and shout insults from across the river or even from across oceans. Hopefully Malaysia Today will be with us for a very long time and be part of our lives for the long term.
Let me try to show how belief systems can be built up with a simple example. This story is by courtesy of antares ….
Albert Einstein was enjoying tea with his fellow professors. He was smiling while lighting his pipe, a fellow professor asked, “Why are you smiling? Einstein replies “I wonder if God has any choice when he created the universe?
When one thinks about this story, it would appear as if Einstein having consumed too much cakes and tea gave a silent fart which is why he smiled probably with embarrassment. He probably was also thinking about the creation of the universe as academics often discuss these questions over tea. It is then likely that Einstein associated God with himself and with his well known fertile mind, thought if God did not create the universe (without any choice in the matter) with a tremendous big fart called the Big Bang and that since it occurred in the vacuum of space there was no sound energy generated and was just as silent as Einstein’s own fart.
Obviously this story is meant to tickle people’s sense of humour in a perverted way and likely spread by the secularists. Whether this story actually happened in reality is anybody’s guess, but Einstein’s name has now being used in a silly joke as has God’s name. Whether Einstein appreciates the use of his name in this way is now out of his control. In time, people actually began to believe that Einstein actually said all these things. It has been built into the belief system by the secularists to make fun of God by using Einstein’s name.
Although this story is superficial and has no important consequence, it does illustrate how belief systems are built up. In a more serious way, it is believed that Marie Antoinette said “Let them eat cake” when starving rioters were at her palace gates demanding bread. Whether she actually said it or not is of no consequence anymore since it is now a famous folklore and has been built into the belief system of the capitalists. Even when historians recently claimed that she never actually uttered these famous words, it has not affected the folklore. Although this sounds also superficial to us these days, in the days when kings’ heads were rolling in the guillotine, it was no joke and was probably used by the capitalists to blacken the name of the royal family.
So it is that victors in a fight often add to the belief system because it supports their control and rule. So it is that belief systems have structure and logic of their own and serves the purposes of the people in power and is different from faith which is independent of logic and reason and serves only the person who holds that faith. This is true in religious belief systems as it is equally true in scientific belief systems or even political belief systems.
In Malaysia, UMNO has shown no inclination whatsoever to engage in a serious way in debate such that people of various religions and faiths can understand each other. Instead it has used the ISA and threats of violence and race riots to stop people from trying to understand each other.
PAS on the other hand has shown it can engage in a mutually respectful way with people of other faiths and religions. So although the language and terminology that PAS and UMNO use may sound the same, the ACTIONS are very different.
When one talks about belief systems, one talks about communities which hold on to these belief systems. In a community, there will be good people and bad people. Those who are positive will think that there are more good people than bad people. This is part of the belief system of the positivists.
Unfortunately when people argue about belief systems in a stupid way especially when they shout insults from across oceans through the internet, both good and bad people on the other side are insulted. This can only benefit UMNO as it feeds UMNO’s negativist belief system that people are essentially immature and must never be allowed to discuss anything serious about religion to the extent of justifying the use of ISA and threats of race and religious violence.
Luckily, most people with formal religious training have the “cool” and maturity to handle such debates seriously and professionally. It is the secularists and self-interested religionists with bloated egos that go around blasting at everyone. So now there is a need to treat different people differently, giving mature and intelligent people the respect they deserve and the super egos the treatment that THEY deserve, again always differentiating words from actions.
So I guess it is up to you whether you have faith in people or not, how you treat faith and beliefs – whether you wish to treat them as one and the same thing or to understand them as 2 different and separate concepts. I have absolutely no control except to engage in constructive and long term debate (if Malaysia Today continues to last for the long term and if they still generously wish to post my write-ups apart from other “ifs” and limitations.) as well as in very enjoyable cowboy style rough and tumble “slug fests” with other commenters in the comments section, just to expose the hypocrisy of some commenters who think nothing of insulting the belief systems of others but become hurt and angered by the cowboy style rough and tumble. heeheehee

written by truthbespoken, August 26, 2010 09:34:23
written by batsman, August 25, 2010 22:01:17
In the Malaysia Boleh style of debate, someone makes an argument but then everyone else ignores it and repeats their own viewpoints ad nauseum sometimes even regardless of the topic. This is how Malaysians debate apparently. The topic is lost completely. Malaysia Boleh again. I leave you guys with what a wise man observed of silly debating style….
"I witnessed a meeting which included every kind of group: Sunni Muslims and heretics, and all kinds of ….. materialists, atheists, Jews and Christians. Each group had a leader who would speak on its doctrine and debate about it. …… I never went back."
written by Better My, August 25, 2010 18:33:27
There are more nutty religion die-hards here.
Look at the end of the day, it is simple proposition.
Faith, good religious beleifs and religion act as a guide to good governance.
Never mix faith, religious beliefs and religion with politics.
A secular nation will do infinitely better.
written by truthbespoken, August 25, 2010 18:16:44
Dear batsman, one must realise that no matter how one wants to feel exclusive about his faith, religion or God or even wanting to jump out from this world altogether because of his conviction in his so-called faith, his feet will still have to land on ground eventually. That nature's gravity. Be realistic, after three articles over three straight days on the same topic, you should realise by now most of your fellow commentators here are least convinced about the type of faith you preached in MT. No offense meant but I do seriously think you should consider commenting on politics where your forte appears to be. Otherwise, you will likely be indulging again "the open-hearted-open-minded-but-just-as-determined-us" to run in circles. Haha, best regards, batsman.
written by batsman, August 25, 2010 18:00:00
written by batsman, August 25, 2010 17:10:56
The world are not made up of robots nor plants, but humans that will never see eye to eye. Save an Armageddon.
Your fatalistic and nihilistic thinking will get you into trouble. Sounds like you would use Armegeddon to wake people up. This can only mean that everything you say and do is designed to hurt people. Are you a psycho by any chance? heeheehee
written by batsman, August 25, 2010 17:07:34
written by batsman, August 25, 2010 17:05:26
Am I wrong that you seem to think that anyone who succeeds in using a belief system to get what he wants is seized by blind faith? Think again - it is not faith but manipulation.
written by Logger123, August 25, 2010 14:39:22
Logger123 - if you already know that a person's faith is irrational and personal, what is the point of challenging it? Unless of course one is intent on proving how smart one is or to exert superiority of opinion? Of course you can challenge faith, but what is the point? Just as Red1 says - to force someone to eat cake?
Well that’s precisely the point and the primary reason we have terrorists in abundance today. If we don’t engage a person who has an irrational faith or point of view, we get misfits who would think nothing of blowing themselves up along with other innocent beings. Engaging irrational faith is not about being smarter than the other person. Its about rescuing a lost soul and preventing him from doing damage to others in society.
Imagine if someone could have successfully engaged Mahaterrorist on racism and the right way to power when he was just a young man. Malaysia would have been a better place today, correct?
So in saying this, what have Muslims done to successfully eradicate terrorism from being linked to the good name of Islam? What have the Palestinians done to successfully change the thinking that the Jews need to be in control of Jerusalem?
Engaging and questioning a person’s faith is fundamental to the growth of society. If Paul had not questioned the Christian Jews faith and decide not to preach to the non-Jews, there will be no Christianity today, only a Jewish school of Christ’s teaching. Similarly if Alexander did not challenge the faith of the Greeks to take on the Persian superpower, the world would have been a different place today.
Questioning a person’s faith makes the world go round.
written by truthbespoken, August 25, 2010 13:18:17
written by batsman, August 24, 2010 10:06:29
truthbespoken - peace to this world, but antares seems to suggest that Einstein thinks this universe was created by God when He farted in an awfully Big Bang. What you you think?
----------------------------------------------------------------
written by truthbespoken, August 24, 2010 12:30:56
Hi morning, batsman, still scouting around, huh? Likewise here, haha. OK, what do I think? Not thinking too much this morning actually, that's why didn't offer comment to any posting so far. Gotta take these things in good stride from time to time otherwise this habit of commenting relentlessly tend to overwhelm oneself. Agree? But since you asked bro, here goes.. my train of thought.....
It just occurred to me that we are all actually going for the incomprehensible when we discuss on the subjects of God, faith, fate, destiny, birth of the world, so on and so forth. Talk on either of these topics, the layman would normally accept and not bother to question the essence of these ‘words’. Most people have become accustomed from young, some indoctrinated, it doesn't matter, but all of them would almost without exception, accept without questions the death of someone even if that someone had died in an accident or under abnormal circumstances, murders aside. Why so? To me, it has always been the human natural instincts playing its part on most occasions. They know that no answer will be forthcoming even if they ask. So, they say, it's destiny, his fate to die young. No more questions. No other answer would seem palatable even if the words destiny and fate seem 'empty' in nature. Hence, sometimes it is smart of humans not to overstretch the rubber-band when it appears fully stretched. Lest it tears apart and becomes wasted. Likewise, this applies to the functions of the human brain on subjects which are still considered beyond human comprehension. We can go bonkers too if we are not careful and go over the unknown limit. Not that we don't try but should be done one step at a time. Relax, then pursue and relax again, pursue again.
Frankly, I am of the opinion that NO ONE, NO HUMAN should impose on another, the dogmas “found in all holy scriptures of yesteryears” which I suspect, are all written by outstanding men, not God. It's the work of clever men. At best, the scriptures, which emanate goodness, should be professed as guidelines to do good onto others. Let God be the only One to decide on the outcome of this life on earth for only God can do this job, not man ... Eh, where am I now? Sorry batsman for digressing but I am just writing what comes to my mind.
Anyway, about antares and Einstein. Why bother whether the universe is created or farted by God through the Big Bang? Even when one of them is still living and the other is dead, with due respect to both intellectuals, the fact remains that the answers are still not known, cannot be ascertained and the 'rubber-band' brain is still also being stretched by some other clever people. The time to know hasn't arrived yet. Maybe, maybe someday THE ANSWER will come.
My parting shot, batsman, do you believe in the 'legend' that Mary had given a 'virgin birth' in the form of Jesus Christ? Fact or fiction? Why do so many people insist it is the truth? Can virgin birth in humans be proven if it is a fact? So, there goes, we are in circles again. It is expected that those words, God, faith, fate, destiny, all coined by man, are also in turn used by man to neutralize unexplainable situations without questions. Haha, peace brother, and peace to the world!
written by batsman, August 25, 2010 13:01:04
written by batsman, August 25, 2010 12:59:43
written by eloofk, August 25, 2010 12:59:31
We all have a choice given to us whom we want to emulate, whether the likeness of the Devil incarnate or the Son of God, so all these behavorial aspect of life is through the image of man himself. Let each one of us be answerable to our own thinking and belief, good or bad.
written by batsman, August 25, 2010 12:53:59
written by red1, August 25, 2010 12:40:19
written by red1, August 25, 2010 12:34:51
written by Milo, August 25, 2010 12:23:16
written by Milo, August 25, 2010 12:17:31
written by Logger123, August 25, 2010 12:10:28
For example, we have faith that the sun will rise every morning, and that is based on empirical data that indicates the sun has enough gas and the earth will continue to rotate.
Another example, we have faith that we should wake up the next morning. That is based on past experience that we have been waking up every morning. So the doctor can say that if we don't stop smoking, we may not wake up in six months time. So that questions the faith that we will wake up, no, yes?
Essentially I propose that faith can be challenged and questioned in a rational manner.






















