šÆšš” ššš¦š¬š¤š¢One acts like a 'Know it all' and the other 'wants to learn it all'
NoneOfUrBusinessYou do realize that's straight up not true right? As a Muslim I don't know how much of a thing biblical scholarship is, but on the Muslim side of things, uh... yeah. Literally no Muslim will say they "know everything", because the non-scholars vaguely know they don't know shit and the scholars will tell you "I don't know shit".
Iāve met a scholar who joked that these days you are called a Hafiz, if you memorize the entire Quran. During history many scholars referred to as Hafiz also memorized a hundred thousand Hadith (reports about the life of the Prophet Mohamed sas) or more.
It is really crazy how strong many peoples convictions about Islam are, with how little they usually now about Islam outside of the hate filled propaganda they have been fed for the past decades in many western countries.
Islam lives rent-free in a lot of peopleās minds. I have seen 10s or 100s of subs and websites whose entire thing are people working full time āproving islam wrongā.
It is always entertaining to read the current dumb arguments and laugh a bit. Itās more entertaining how some people are trying to force the point that religion is the opposite of science when they go hand in hand and religious books encourage science and critical thinking plus some of the brightest people in history happen to be religious (Muslim, Jews, Christians).
Atheism in its current state feels like a cult of people spewing negativity and hate rather than the ācritical thinkersā they think they are.
I interpret the image as saying: (some) religious people believe all answers worth knowing have already been revealed to us, and can only be found through study of the same few religious texts written hundreds of years ago. So those religious people donāt necessarily feel they already know everything, but they are convinced that the religious texts are the source of all knowledge.
I donāt know enough about Islam to claim that this applies, but it certainly applied to Christianity up until the enlightenment: there was no point in doing experiments to find out more about the world, the answer was already in the Bible. If you couldnāt see it yet, you needed to study the Bible more.
That wasnāt quite it. The church believed the natural sciences fit within a framework of metaphysical doctrine. The church engaged in all sorts of research and experiments because they believed it would prove the truth. People like Darwin and Copernicus and such were all commissioned by the church to develop and research their work.
What happened was there became a growing body of work that did not align with the church that could not be reconciled. They did the science, they were just subject to the demands of political power of their time.
GloomyI donāt know enough about Islam to claim that this applies, but it certainly applied to Christianity up until the enlightenment: there was no point in doing experiments to find out more about the world, the answer was already in the Bible. If you couldnāt see it yet, you needed to study the Bible more.
This is just plain wrong.
Have a look at this: ā¦wikipedia.org/ā¦/List_of_Christians_in_science_anā¦
What often happened was that rich peopleās sons became priests, because it was a respected and not very time intensive endeavor. This would give them ample free time to engage with the sciences as much as they wanted.