Morality: The Pride of Religious Believers

Ethics Fascinating People of Religion Arab atheists rely entirely on the efforts of Orientalism and Western atheism and pre-modern myths. One of these myths is that memorization and memorization is a reason for the backwardness of the young, and the intellectual weakness of the queen in the individual, Dr. Al-Missiri spoke very heartily about this point He said in his book My Thought Journey p. 442:- And when the second surprise at Columbia University was that some of the axiology we learned that the problem in Egyptian education was to focus on memoristic. Then we learned that in many humanities the student must memorize some of the basic rules and elements by heart. Doubt entered my heart in my old absolute certainty and I felt that our complete refusal to memorize was in fact a blind bias against our heritage and a more blind bias to one of the Western progressive thought quotes and memorizing it by heart as if it were an absolute scientific statement without doubt coming from its hands or behind it). But they - Arab atheists - always come back to us on slapping and screaming and whining while there is no consolation and no loss! If we want to talk about morality; the fascination of the owners of religions, and the first and greatest argument for the people of faith, which we have the right to protest every day on the sons of Lahadan. In the beginning, there are two types of ethics: It is called the moral of society - I treat you politely so that you treat me politely - and this is called the moral of hypocrisy and this is not the authentic morals that the moralists - prophets and reformers - establish throughout all ages and times. - There is a second type of ethics and these are called authentic ethics, which are the origin and the basis and they come against the personal interest.. An unprofitable ethics in practice.. Against the substance.. Against the mind.. It has not been mortgaged practically or mentally to this day.. It is like the ethics of asceticism, wetness, sacrifice and moral work without accompanying material benefit or hypocrisy or personal benefit. - This second kind of morality does not exist in the atheist world, but its existence or recognition is the biggest blow to this thought at all, Nische says in his book thus spoke Zarathustra: (Conquer the weak go up over their bodies .. So you are the son of nature) John Locke once said, “If all human hope is limited to this world, and if we are merely enjoying life here in this world, it is neither strange nor preposterous to seek happiness, even at the expense of parents and children.” - Man from a terrestrial materialist perspective is an organic being with three dimensions. The limits of nature are its limits, which apply only to natural phenomena, it is something between things, it can be studied within the framework of its economic and material motives only. Therefore, any talk of ethics of the second type is a kind of saying metaphysics and the introduction of non-material elements to the abstract materialist model of nature. Morality is a loophole in the natural system. Here, God is the only condition for human superiority, freedom, morality, principles and values. Authentic morality derives its value from another world, a world that has absolutely nothing to do with our abstract material world. Without this other world, morality turns into a mere empty language and an illusion that is impossible to predict its existence because it does not exist. At the intellectual level almost all atheistic religious dialogues in the matter of morality end with the shameful escape of the atheist in the course of dialogue because the atheist is limited by the materialist perspective as the only explanation for any existential or human phenomenon, and therefore this material explanation is unable to analyze the phenomenon of ethics and values and sacrifice and sacrifice and asceticism and wetting. The first part: this means that the atheist denies all authentic morality and believes only in the ethics of hypocrisy and this means that atheism is indeed the religion of Satan was established as a doctrine of mind because it does not say to you do all the obscenities and masquerades and you are free from everything but the atheist and the devil .. Either the atheist says that there is an authentic morality and therefore the dialogue ended before it began because he introduced to his atheism non-physical solutions and non-physical analyses and theses outside the physical framework and thus ended the dialogue and ended atheism. The second aspect: that belief in paradise and fire is not in the first place means that we have surrendered and committed ourselves to God and worshiped Him and did morals because we believe in God and entered into Islam, and comes faith in paradise and fire and the last day according to our Islam .. We did not enter Islam because of our fear of the fire, but we did not know the existence of fire or paradise only after we entered Islam and admitted to abide by all the orders and prohibitions .. And the frankness of this last argument, which the atheist invoked on us, please find a way out of the trap of original morality reminiscent of the example of the good young man who after finishing his work went directly to his home and did not enter the gambling club as his friends did and in the morning he learned that the gambling club burned everyone in it. The atheist comes and says that this young man did not go to the gambling club for fear that the gambling club will ignite or is it more correct to say that the sanctity of the act is the direct reason that this young man did not go to the gambling club? - We go back to the first type we mentioned and take an example, Bill Gates, for example, who speaks a lot about his charitable work, he himself admits that the charity he does is in the search for happiness because he loses happiness in his life, so his charity works are for his personal interest as well, as Nietzsche says some people can sacrifice himself for his personal interest and no wonder. So Bill Gates or the atheist in general, if he finds his own interest in torturing the poor, he will not hesitate to do so, and we have a good example of this: Hitler found that emptying Germany of gentiles – Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and Dwarves – is a personal interest and considered burning these gentiles in gas ovens as nothing more than a purge of Germany. It is even surprising that this philanthropist Bill Gates supports the project of exterminating the poor by eugenics - passing the poor on high frequency X-rays leading to the destruction of fertilisation cells in the testicle and thus the inability to reproduce at all - as he sees that humanity has to shrink to only a billion people and since eugenic sterilisation is also a cumbersome process and has a bad reputation, he sees the best solution in sterilization even through vaccinations of infants. - Dr. Haitham Talaat. — Source: Brahin Center website - Published on 2020-02-24 (archived at the Internet Archive) http://braheen.com:80/mag/0th/57-ethics-and-religion