Sorry I haven’t read all the comments, just have time to provide some thoughts on the main quote.
“Nature is warlike, nature is
bloodthirsty, nature is tyrannical, for nature is unaware of
God the Almighty. That is why these cruel qualities are
natural to the animal world.”
Nature is not bloodthirsty, nature is ambivalent. Natural processes thereby result in everything from daisies to cholera. The different is, we as a product of nature which happens to be sentient and relatively intelligent, can make choices as to what sort of world we wish to live in and thereby hopefully reduce unnecessary suffering. I also beg to differ with the suggestion that nature is all things negative (which it isn’t) because of it’s lack of awareness of god. First, this is unsubstantiated meaningless conjecture. Second, it implies that those of us who are also unaware of god (i.e. me) are warlike, bloodthirsty and tyrannical, and those who are aware of god are peaceful and democratic. Associations which I find difficult to reconcile with history.
“Therefore the Lord of mankind, having great love and
mercy, has caused the appearance of the prophets and the
revelation of the Holy Books, so that through divine education
humanity may be released from the corruption of
nature and the darkness of ignorance, be confirmed with
ideal virtues and spiritual attributes, and become the
dawning-place of merciful emotions. ...”
Development of the scientific process helped to ease the darkness of ignorance.
I fail to see any sign of divine guidance in any religious text, but I do see abundant evidence of ignorance, prejudice, and violence (yes there is good stuff too, but good stuff entirely consistent with the thinkings of an intelligent social primate). I think the greatest advancements in ethics and in the general wellbeing of societies have taken place in those countries which developed or embraced and advanced on what may be seen as enlightenment principles to head towards democracy, free speech, the right to a fair trial, freedom of religion, abolition of slavery, women’s rights, children’s rights, etc..etc. In addition we all owe an enormous debt to the advancements in our understanding of what causes disease based suffering through the refinement of the scientific method which continues to this day.
Basically the quote provided conveniently brushes over the role dogma has played as a means of retaining and cultivating the darkness of ignorance rather than fighting it.
“A hundred thousand times, alas! that ignorant prejudice,
unnatural differences and antagonistic principles are
yet displayed by the nations of the world toward one another,
thus causing the retardation of general progress.”
Yes. I still believe though there has been general progress. I far prefer to live in the society I live in today than to be thrown back in time to any period one chooses to pick. But of course it all depends on what factor you measure and where in the world we’re talking about. Cool talk on poverty here.
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_on_poverty.html
“This retrogression comes from the fact that the principles
of divine civilization are completely abandoned, and the
teachings of the prophets are forgotten.”
So society has massive complicated problems, but trust us, we have the answers if only everyone belonged to our faith and followed our rules as provided by our chosen prophets which we’ll kindly interpret for you. No thanks. Sounds like a well worn path to theocracy. I won’t bother making a list of the truly shithouse things that if said by anyone else would have ignored ages ago, but because they get burdened with similar “divine wisdom”, they become timeless truths making them unnecessarily impervious to reasoned argument.
If an idea is a good one, it will stand the test of time. But if we tie our ideas to arguments from authority (especially divine ones), then ideas get propagated regardless of merit. Take the unsubstantiated divine out of the equation and allow ideas to compete on their own merits, rather than pretending that some ideas are special because of who or what book they came from. Dogma is a recipe for ignorance, not enlightenment.