Messages

106

General Discussions / Re: Disturbing Questions

« on: January 29, 2016, 12:54:39 PM »

Salam all

I found an interesting answer for question #2. It's weird that I'm answering my own challenges, but as I said I didn't come up with them, and we're in this together.

So the Quran says that before the advent of this life, all souls took a pledge that God was their only Lord, so that they would have no excuse on Judgement Day. I think Joseph mentioned this in one of his articles. Thus, all babies are born with the knowledge and love of their Lord. So Allah loves them by default.

It is only when they turn away from God and consciously disbelieve that He stops loving them. Allah only casts off those who cast Him off, if that makes sense.

The idea that all children are born as believers is not readily apparent unless you pay attention to the fact that every soul took a pledge before birth. This fact, along with the fact that God is essentially loving and caring, led me to the above conclusion. All verses about God not liking disbelievers have to be viewed through the lens of His natural love, which is only revoked when we shirk our duties.

Bye!

Mia

107

General Discussions / Re: Disturbing Questions

« on: January 28, 2016, 08:02:42 AM »

Salam everyone

Hassan: I agree. Part of God's justice is only loving those who deserve it. The lack of love for sinners could be seen as a punishment, I suppose.

Wakas: Thank you for the link. It was interesting

Hamzeh: I want to say this again--I myself understand that the arguments I transmitted are absolutely baseless. I didn't come up with them. I mean, God is obviously good, and we worship him because He's God, period...and I see no reason why He should love wrongdoers. However, I asked for the opinions of other forum members on these arguments in order to gain a better understanding of how to refute them.

The verses you cited are quite thought-provoking. The intensity of the oaths in these verses is something most people don't notice the first time, but when they go through it again, they realize that these verses have much deeper meanings.

A.H.A.: You said:

"'The only reason something is considered good is because it is in accordance with God's will.' Where the above premise came from, if not from a Scripture, namely the Bible?"

I didn't get that from the Bible. I got it from my own reasoning and the reasoning of others. I haven't even read the Bible beyond Genesis.

You also said:

"'Let's say that God's traits are kindness and mercy. If these traits are essentially deterministic....'

Again, Christian understanding of why we should worship God, thus based on the Scripture.

If God is perfectly loving, then He should love evil people too, right?

God is perfectly loving? does it ring any bells? yes, Jesus, Bible and Christian understanding of God's love."

Yes, well, God IS perfectly loving. This understanding didn't come from the Bible. Again, I've only read Genesis. The idea that God is perfectly loving is simply the general understanding of this issue, and the fact that He does not love wrongdoers, doesn't mean His love is imperfect. It simply means that His love is reserved for those who deserve it. This, I think, is a better definition of perfect love.

Thank you all for your replies

Mia

108

General Discussions / Re: Disturbing Questions

« on: January 26, 2016, 06:49:27 AM »

Thank you for your answer. It's a pretty good refutation, and I have one thing to add to it:

(This uses conventional definitions of good and evil)

God is better than everyone else by definition. If He has a certain attribute, He must have more of it than everyone else. So if He is evil, then He must be more evil than Satan (I can imagine Him getting mad at me right now for typing this. Sorry, God). However, He always commands justice in His scripture, and most people are decent. So He can't possibly be more evil than Satan. By this deduction, God must be good. He must be better than everyone else in the universe. Otherwise He couldn't be God.

I would have to put this much more eloquently in a philosophy paper, but I think it's alright for now.

What are your ideas on the other two points?

Mariyah

109

General Discussions / Re: Disturbing Questions

« on: January 25, 2016, 10:59:34 AM »

Again, I do not support the contentions raised in #1-3. However, I'm finding it hard to prove them absolutely wrong.

110

General Discussions / Disturbing Questions

« on: January 25, 2016, 10:56:31 AM »

Salam all

While going through a philosophy discussion in a certain class, a few rather disconcerting points were brought up. I don't personally agree with any of these arguments and I consider a few of them to be utterly ridiculous, but I thought I should show these to you all, to see if there's any way to logically refute them. (All of the following points are paraphrased since I don't remember exactly what was said, but the gist of the argument is there.) The red is my thoughts.

1) The only reason something is considered good is because it is in accordance with God's will. Agreed. However, what if God's will is to do injustice and cruelty to His creation? Such a what-if contention is unsupported and wholly hypothetical, but I can't find a way to logically refute its possibility. If such behavior could potentially be God's will, then there is no reason to believe in a loving, kind God. OK. I am genuinely disturbed now.

2) Let's say that God's traits are kindness and mercy. If these traits are essentially deterministic, then why should we worship and admire God for having them? It's like admiring a Kardashian just because they're beautiful, isn't it? This comparison is unwarranted, but the question still stands.

3) If God is perfectly loving, then He should love evil people too, right? Apparently the Bible says God loves everyone unconditionally, but the Quran says He does not love evildoers. In my opinion, the Quranic representation of God's love just shows that He is fair, but others may disagree.

I would very much appreciate the opinions of other forum members on these arguments, especially #1, which seems to be the most difficult to logically refute. Note that quoting scripture doesn't work as a defense in this case, since the argument is not based on scripture.

Thanks!

111

General Discussions / Re: Program of Creation of Man on Earth, in light of Quran.

« on: January 25, 2016, 12:40:07 AM »

Salam Hassan,

It was hilariously entertaining to watch your debate with Hicham9. Anyway, I have an actual question about this. The earth's age is 1/3 the age of the universe (4.5 bil years vs. 13.5 bil years).

"Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in TWO Days
     And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds.
+
     He set on the (earth), mountains standing firm, high above it,
     and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measured therein all things
4    to give them nourishment in due proportion, in FOUR Days
     in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance).

     Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky,
     and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth:
     "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly."
     They said: "We do come (together), in willing obedience."
+
2    So He completed them as seven firmaments in TWO Days,
     and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command.
     And We adorned the lower heaven with lights,
     and (provided it) with guard.
     Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge. "
                                            -- Sura 41:9-12 (Yusuf Ali)

The Quran says the earth was created in 2 periods and it took 6 days to create the whole universe. This fits with what we know about the age of the universe.

However, it says the earth's sustenance was "measured in FOUR days." I think this could mean its sustenance was PREDETERMINED before any of it was created, and these 4 days occurred BEFORE the heavens and the earth were actually created. This would make more sense than saying the earth's sustenance was created in 4 out of the 6 days, right?

What do you think of this interpretation?

Mariyah

112

General Discussions / Re: The Existence of Jinnaat in Islamic Point of View

« on: January 25, 2016, 12:24:02 AM »

Salam Hicham9...

Excusez-moi? My "unaesthetic mouse" is perfectly harmless, and it doesn't confuse anyone or incite rude arguments *cough*. So thank you, but I am leaving it there.

I notice your signature has not yet been changed.

Please listen to reason instead of attacking other people's choices.

Mia

113

General Discussions / Re: Alleged errors in 23:12-14 and 79:30 - clarification needed

« on: January 24, 2016, 12:13:58 PM »

Seraphina: You're totally right

114

General Discussions / Re: POV Question

« on: January 24, 2016, 12:13:17 PM »

A.H.A.: I read the next verse in conjunction with 27.91, and it makes sense now...thanks



Also, upon close examination, it appears that God is swearing on these things, not Muhammad. You're right...thank you everyone for clearing this up

Mia

115

General Discussions / Re: Husband in Hereafter and other questions - Please clear it

« on: January 24, 2016, 12:10:38 PM »

Salam,

I think you'll meet your family in the hereafter if they're righteous. If they're not righteous, then you'll have no desire to meet them, because evil desires are purged from our hearts in Heaven. However, if your family members are good, you'll meet them:

“And those who believe and whose offspring follow them in Faith, to them shall We join their offspring, and We shall not decrease the reward of their deeds in anything” ~52.21

You'll have everything you want in paradise. So no worries.

Mia

116

General Discussions / Re: The Existence of Jinnaat in Islamic Point of View

« on: January 24, 2016, 12:06:59 PM »

Salam Hicham9, when you write in Arabic, could you please translate? I can basically read Arabic, but I don't understand it, especially when it doesn't have diacriticals. I honestly have no idea what you just typed up there.

Also--this is just a request BTW--can you please change your signature at the bottom of your posts? Or at least make the picture a bit smaller? It's confusing to scroll through everything, and it's disorienting when your signature has more content than your posts.

Mia

117

General Discussions / Re: Does Quran state anything about ISIS?

« on: January 23, 2016, 10:30:14 AM »

The Quran talks a lot--like a LOT--about hypocrites. ISIS members are hypocrites. This shows how perhaps the Quran "predicted" people like ISIS members, by educating us about them in advance.

Please don't ever start believing that ISIS represents real Islam. I'm not saying you believe this, of course. I just want to explain this to everyone.

Let me give you an example. ISIS cites verse 9.5 to justify its insane wrongdoing. Verse 9.5 is talking about a war that occurred 1400 years ago, against a specific group of people who broke their peace treaties and attacked first (see 9.13 for explanation).

As you can see, terrorists like these take Quranic verses out of context, warp their meanings, and use these "new and improved" verses to justify their lunacy. The sad thing is that they believe they're doing the right thing.

ISIS and Al Qaeda members kill everyone who disagrees with them (majority Muslims), rape little girls, and train young boys to murder. They say that they're doing it for God's pleasure. They've deluded themselves into believing that they will go to heaven for their own sins. Their hypocrisy has fooled themselves, if you get what I mean.

God will get rid of them. Hopefully soon. In the mean time, we should try to prevent them from entering our countries.

And I totally get your distress. I live in the kind of place where ISIS is discussed 24/7. Namely America. I never hear the end of it. Terribly frustrating.

Mia

118

General Discussions / Re: Re: Wearing trouser/pants below ankle! & Code 19

« on: January 23, 2016, 10:12:34 AM »

Salam Sardar Miyan,

He probably didn't know it was the Khalifa translation. Or maybe he did, but either way, there's nothing really wrong with that translation. It's not necessary he's a 19er. He can't be one, since he seems to believe in hadiths.

Actually, we should just let him answer.

119

General Discussions / Re: Alleged errors in 23:12-14 and 79:30 - clarification needed

« on: January 23, 2016, 10:10:55 AM »

Hi Seraphina

Your first question about embryology:

The verse says that the "lump of flesh/muscle" is present from the beginning. The bones are also present. Then they are "clothed with flesh--" meaning that the muscle and bone are already there at the same time, but the muscle starts to form around the bone afterward.

This is my understanding

120

General Discussions / Re: Husband in Hereafter and other questions - Please clear it

« on: January 23, 2016, 09:55:04 AM »

Salam

You're welcome Your father sounds stubborn though. You could show him a reformist translation of the Quran, and if you can't find one, you could try Yusuf Ali (I think he's the least sexist of the six mainstream INCREDIBLY SEXIST Quranic translators). Instead of arguing, maybe you could just invite him and then let him decide on his own...? I don't know your situation fully so it's up to you

He seems to think God is cruel, and that seems to be the problem. I could easily use logical deduction to refute this idea, but I don't think that's what he needs. These articles/threads might help:

http://quransmessage.com/articles/suffering%20FM3.htm

http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=758.0

http://quransmessage.com/articles/tests%20FM3.htm