Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Lobotomize94

Pages: [1] 2
General Discussions / Can you hate Allah yet still be a good Muslim?
« on: September 29, 2020, 05:51:02 AM »
This is a serious question. I believe Allah exists and I believe there is nothing more perfect or worthy of worship besides Allah.

But I don’t love Allah. I’ve never loved anyone whatsoever.

But it’s worse. I try to love Allah, but internally, if I were to be honest, I hate him. I’ve been struggling with this for a while—I can pretend I love Allah, but it’s not genuine.

I never asked to exist. All the benefits of life are worthless because death is better and it would’ve been nice not to have those benefits and not exist in the first place. Honestly, if I could choose between heaven/paradise and permanent death, I’d choose death. I want nothing to do with Allah and I don’t want to go to heaven (I certainly don’t want to go to hell either—but death is better than heaven for me).  You can offer me mountains of gold and all the pleasures of life and I still don’t want any of it.

I don’t want any of the rewards Allah offers, I just don’t want the punishment.

Internally, I hate Allah and I don’t want anything at all to do with him. I don’t want to meet him or speak to him—I don’t want his presence. I want nothing to do with him or anything else for that matter.

But I continue to do what is right, believe in Allah, do everything I’m supposed to.

Is it a commandment for us to love Allah? There’s nothing in the Quran that’s says you’re supposed to love him, right? Because if there is: then there simply is no hope for me. I don’t even love my parents. I’ve never loved anything or anyone.

Please if you are reading this, delay your judgment. I ask that you answer the question whether loving Allah is required to be a Muslim. It’s not like I can flip a switch and magically love Allah.

General Discussions / Does "Khamar" mean you can't have Ice Cream?
« on: August 06, 2020, 02:48:40 PM »
A lot of ice cream uses a little bit of vanilla extract which has 35% alcohol in it.

Does "khamar" mean alcohol or does it mean a substance that intoxicates you? If you drink regular drinking water for example, there will be trace amounts of alcohol in the water (there may even be a molecule or two of Lead for example--not significant, but it's there)--so how are you supposed to avoid alcohol?

Maybe the issue isn't "alcohol" but substances that intoxicate? So drinking water, while it has alcohol is not significant enough to intoxicate and so is okay to eat. Likewise, Ice cream which uses vanilla extract is not enough to intoxicate and so is okay to eat?

Let's start with:

[Quran 36:36] Exalted is He who created (in) pairs all things.

This is an example of the inferiority of the English translation compared to the original Arabic. This verse does not say "in" pairs all things. Rather, if you look at a word for word translation, it says "the pairs", not "in pairs". That is, Allah created "all the pairs" of the Earth.

[Quran 51:49] And of all things We created two pairs...

In Arabic, (مِنْْ) “min“ could mean "some of"

Definitions:  from, some, some of .

Some of, of. Indicating a segment of; a portion of. In other words, "Some of all things we created pairs" in essence: "a part of all things are made into pairs".

[Quran 13:3] and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates

Same thing as above. A part of all the fruits have in them pairs. In other words: of all the fruits, there are pairs within them (fi-ha). This could be referring to some of the fruits with seeds which are diploid (have two sets/pairs of chromosomes, from the male and female components of the plant)

Believe it or not, this verse is a significant MIRACLE. It is something, the prophet Muhammad could not have known! Let me explain. This verse uses the terminology "zawjayni ith'nayni"--which is weird terminology. Zawjayni means "two"/"pair" and Ith'nayin also means "two". That means 4 in total! (2 pairs)! What???! That doesn't make any sense?!! Actually it does:

Double fertilization: "The launch of seed development in flowering plants (angiosperms) is initiated by the process of double fertilization: two male gametes (sperm cells) fuse with two female gametes (egg and central cell) to form the precursor cells of the two major seed components, the embryo and endosperm, respectively." From:  

This is a peer reviewed scientific article, so cut the BS from those atheist/anti-Muslim websites that claim this Quranic verse is a contradiction because plants only have 1 sperm and 1 egg and that no plants have 2 pairs of sperm and eggs. WRONG THEY ARE!! Double fertilization happens in some fruits (not single fertilization, DOUBLE fertilization). I cannot believe the stupidity and ignorance of anti-muslim apologists and the BS they spew on their websites and forums!

Now, did 7th century Arabs have a concept of double fertilization? How did Muhammad (pbuh) know??
It seems to be that Allah is appealing to 7th century Arabs' astonishment with duality/dualism of the world and is saying "you see that thing that you are astonished by?--Allah created it". Allah said this in such a way to appeal to 7th century Arabs' dispositions while not making it a contradiction for future generations. Allah may have wanted to make it sound like at first glance to the 7th century Arabs that he was talking about duality in the world (Quran must support 7th century belief and relate to their dispositions) AND the objective nature of reality that will be discovered through science). If Allah said "and everything that exists in the heaven and the Earth are made in pairs", that would be a clear scientific error, but notice how the Quran was careful to avoid this. It is only human interpretation that messes things up; It is only the English translators that mess things up.

Quran 3:7 says that some 'verses' ('Ayats') are ambiguous. But we have verses that have both ambiguous and unambiguous elements, for example:

[Quran 56:75] I swear by the setting of the stars

The "I swear" is clear, decisive and unambiguous. But "setting of the stars" is ambiguous, and we are not sure what exactly it is referring to. So this verse has both ambiguous and unambiguous elements, and the full message of the verse is saying that Allah is swearing by something very significant.

But, since this verse has both ambiguous and unambiguous elements (and this is only one example, many verses have the same thing going on), then why does Quran 3:7 says only 'Ayats' can be ambiguous and not parts of 'Ayats'?

Maybe Ayats doesn't mean "verses", maybe it means "signs" or something. And even a part of an Ayat is a sign. Any part of the Quran is an Ayat. The Quran is a miracle/sign for 7th century Arabs and the Quran even challenges them to try to write any part of the Quran--so maybe any part of the Quran (even part of a verse) is an "ayat" or a sign?

Are we sure an "ayat' must be the whole verse and not just a part of a verse? Why must it mean the whole verse, why can't it be a part of it? If it was just a part of a verse, then 3:7 would make sense.

General Discussions / How is the Quran "fully detailed"?
« on: July 11, 2020, 11:22:29 AM »
[6:114] Shall I seek other than GOD as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed?*

The Quran says there are parts in the Quran that are not detailed, that only Allah knows what they mean (3:7, 2:26). So how is it fully detailed if there are ambiguous verses?

Additionally, the Quran does not speak about the Christian Paul? So how is it fully detailed with respect to religion?

What is meant by the term "fully detailed"? Does it mean "having all details"? If that's the case, then its a false statement, no?

General Discussions / Why is following your desires shirk?
« on: July 07, 2020, 03:43:15 AM »
According to the article,

JosephIslam writes:


"Have you seen him who takes his desires (passion, impulse, lust) (Arabic: Hawahu) for his God
(Arabic: Illahahu)? Will you then be a protector over him?"

But what exactly does it mean to take up your desire as your God?

Does that mean if you have two simultaneous interests (one to worship Allah and one to become a doctor) that you are putting up partners with God? Is this shirk?

How is having desires and following them considered shirk? Everything we do stems from our desires. Even the worship of Allah stems from our desire to do so!

How about wanting things in this world, like wealth, career, food etc--and doing what it takes to get them. Is that taking your desires for your God?

If that is the case, then having worldly desires and doing things to meet those desires is Shirk. And Shirk is unforgivable and it nullifies all your good deeds. So we are all destined for hell?

General Discussions / What's wrong with Quran 9:31?
« on: May 02, 2020, 05:29:31 PM »
"They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him."

Weren't the Jews/Christians commanded to do more than just worship one God? They had 617 commandments. However, this verse says that the only commandment is to worship one God?

Something seems off. Perhaps this is just a rhetorical exaggerrative statement like we use in English language, or perhaps it is referring only to foundational commands?

We also see this in Quran 98:5 --they were only commanded to worship God, establish prayer and give Zakat...but they were commanded MUCH MORE than just that. They were commanded to keep Sabbath for example. Or perhaps this verse is referring to the new commandments of the Jews/Christians, to be Muslims and abandon their previous rituals (like abandoning sabbath) and instead become Muslims who are commanded to worship God, establish prayer and Give Zakat. Or again, maybe this is just another rhetorical exaggerative statement showing how easy it is to be a Muslim?

General Discussions / Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 01, 2020, 05:43:30 PM »
Quran 2:62 and Quran 5:69 are interpreted in English as being in the past tense. "those who believed"

Is the Arabic actually in the past tense, or is it in the present tense or is there no tense being shown at all?

If both of the above are true, then this is in direct contradiction to Quran:

[Quran 48:13] And whoever has not believed in Allah and His Messenger - then indeed, We have prepared for the disbelievers a Blaze.

This verse makes it clear that you must believe in Allah and the prophet Muhammad, otherwise you are a disbeliever.

So is Quran 2:62 and 5:69 actually in past tense (or is no tense being specified) as far as Arabic grammar? Especially 5:69. The context of 2:62 fits with the past tense, but what about Quran 5:69?

General Discussions / What are the odds? Quran and moon landing.
« on: April 13, 2020, 06:06:50 PM »
[54:1] The Hour has come closer, and the Moon has split.

Sura (Chapter) 54 of the Quran is THE ONLY chapter in the Quran titled “Al-Qamar” which means “The Moon”.

The form of the word "splitting" in arabic language when the Quran is describing this event can also be used as a form of ploughing the lands because there ARE other verses in the Quran using this "splitting" word, for example when the Quran describes rain waters "splitting" the ground )

And now If we are to count all the remaining verses right after this specific verse right all the way to the end of the Quran, we will count exactly 1389 too! The year 1389 Hijri in the Muslim calendar corresponds exactly to the year 1969 AD in the Gregorian calendar, the year in which man landed on the moon for the very first time and ploughed the moon's surface of about 21kg of moon soil. On July 20, 1969 ( 6th day of the 5th month of 1389 Hijri ), as part of Apollo 11 mission, astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the Moon, and bring back to earth about 21 kg of moon soil.

We should note that it is true that the Quran was NOT numbered at the time of the prophet. But the Quran is from God and God said that he would compile it. So the numbering of the Quran later than the prophet Muhammad was influenced by Allah who promised he would do it and preserve the Quran. So if the Quran is true, and Allah exists, wrote it and promised he would compile it, then he would compile the verses and their numbering in the Quran--which this evidence would indicate that indeed Allah did and that the numbering of the Quran after the prophet was indeed influenced if not caused by Allah by virtue of these miracles.

It is very telling that the number of verses after the moon verse is exactly the year of the moon landing. This is quite interesting. July 1969 corresponds to the year 1389 (not 1390, don't make that mistake, the Hijri calendar is different, so the years are not 1:1, look it up for your own reference).

What are the odds there would be exactly 1389 verses after that moon verse? That verse could have been any number, but what are the odds it was exactly 1389, the year humans landed on the moon? It could've been 1390, 1391, 1400, 1500, 3000, any other number, but it was 1389--the year of the moon landing.

Lets read the following verses after (54:1) –
“The moon has split and the hour has drawn closer. Then they saw a great miracle; but they turned away and said, “Old magic.” They disbelieved, followed their opinions, and adhered to their old traditions.” (The Quran, from 54:1 to 54:3)
Here, the author of The Quran specifically states – “the moon has split”, then people will see “a great miracle”, yet they still “disbelieved”. Could the “great miracle” be the fulfillment of prophecy? The quran makes it clear that the moon has split when the hour has drawn closer--which is already hinting that this is a future event when the hour has come nearer.

(One of the signs of the Day of Judgement. The Arabic uses the past tense, as if that Day were already here, to help the reader/listener imagine how it will be. Some traditional commentators hold the view that this describes an actual event at the time of the Prophet, but it clearly refers to the end of the world: cf. the same expression with reference to the sky, 55: 37; 84: 1.)

But non-withstanding what that verse actually means, let's ignore what the verse means--what are the odds that the number of verses after the first verse of the only chapter titled the moon would be 1389--the exact year humans land on the moon. The chances of this are very low. It seems like 99.9999999+% chance that it could have been literally any other number, but why was it this significant number?? It could've been any number, but it was this one, the one number that has direct significance to the first Apollo mission...Why did the quran have the number of verses it does and not more/less, why was that chapter conveniently placed in a spot such that there was exactly 1389 verses after it? What are the odds, it could have been any number, any number of verses could have existed etc etc!

I would also appreciate the help of JosephIslam on this one if possible!

Let's say you are uncertain as to whether Christianity or Islam is true.

Islam says in [Quran 2:62] that Christians and Jews will go to heaven.

Christianity says that anyone who does not believe Jesus died for our sins will not go to heaven.

So therefore, if you become a Christian, believe Jesus died for your sins, but do not believe Jesus is God, you are saved to paradise in BOTH Christianity and Islam (because in Islam, Christians go to heaven). Note: Many Christians are Unitarian and do not believe Jesus is God.

So, shouldn't one become Christian for extra protection/Insurance?

Judaism (Jewish) does not believe in hellfire, so not being Jewish is not a risk. So should't we become Christian to be safe from hell? Quran says Christians will go to heaven.

I'm really sorry for asking these questions. I have been thinking about these for a while and I understand this is my third on here. I do need your help and guidance.

Many historians accept Hadiths as historical truth. For example, when talking about Khadija, they say she was a businesswoman etc etc. These are acknowledged facts by historians. If academic institutions accept them, and they know better than us, isn't that a significant attack on what we believe?

The one question that I want answered is:
"If many different sources said X, then why should be deny X"?

For example, there are SO MANY independent Hadiths on the Dajjal, doesn't that mean that they had a concept of Dajjal that came from the prophet? If so many testify to the truth of it, isn't that significant?

Some contradictions in the hadith does not mean that they are all false, of course some may be false, but the idea is if one concept (Dajjal, Khadija etc etc) is mentioned so many times---then we can reasonably say this is what happened? Right?

General Discussions / Is this a Quran contradiction? "Thumma" vs "Fa"
« on: December 23, 2019, 07:55:20 AM »
Background: So "thumma" means "then" in English, but it means a long period of time has commenced before the two events. "fa" also means "then" in English, but it means a short period of time has commenced before the two events.

If that is the case, then this would necessarily be a contradiction:

[Quran 40:64]...formed you, then ("fa") perfected your forms...


[Quran 7:11]...created you, then ("thumma") fashioned your forms...

So the first verse says that the time between human formation and human form perfection is brief ("fa")
The second verse says that the time between human formation and human form perfection is long ("thumma")

On the surface it looks like a direct contradiction. Which is it, did our creation and perfection of our forms take a short period of time or a long period of time?

But, maybe I'm missing something in the Arabic language?

General Discussions / What is a "grave" in the Quran?
« on: December 23, 2019, 07:30:50 AM »
My understanding is a grave means a literal place of burial.

So when the Quran says:

[Quran 36:51] And the Horn will be blown; and at once from the graves to their Lord they will hasten.

but the Quran also says

[Quran 17:49] And they say, "When we are bones and crumbled particles, will we [truly] be resurrected as a new creation?"

So this tells me the resurrection will not be in our original bodies, we will be in a different body as a new creation (perhaps a similar creation with new set of bones/appearances etc). And there does not seem to be any evidence in the Quran that God will return us to our original form that we died in--more like we will be resurrected in soul into a new body as a new creation.

Now the question is: Why does the Quran mention Allah reviving us from our "graves" if our physical graves will disintegrate as the Earth/universe are destroyed and "lifted with one blow of the trumpet". The grave will not exist. Also many times graves in the Earth get destroyed by natural causes and the grave won't exist either. So why does the Quran say that Allah will bring us out of our graves if not all dead humans are in graves? Pharaoh also did not have a grave, he died in the sea...

Is the Quran talking about a physical grave or a non-physical spiritual grave? And can the Arabic word for Grave be used to describe a non-physical grave? Tell me about the Arabic and whether it necessitates that the grave mentioned in the Quran must be a physical grave?

There are many different versions of the Quran, different variants that were compiled *after* the prophet Muhammad died. The different versions of the Quran are detailed on their authenticity following the same narration trail of the Hadiths (if there are trustworthy people in the trail, then that version of the Quran is regarded 'sahih').

So the version of the Quran we use today used the same narration methodology the Hadiths did. So if you accept the Quran and the Methodology of the Quran, shouldn't you also accept the Hadiths?

One of the interpretations on Lane's Lexicon of the word 'Janabah' is:

He was, or became, in the state of one who is termed جُنُب; (S, IAth, Mgh, L, Msb, K;) i. e., under the obligation of performing a total ablution, by reason of sexual intercourse and discharge of the semen. (IAth, TA.)" [Edward Lanes].

However, I believe this came from hadith and inserted itself into the lexicons. This happens with Ghusl as well as Lane's lexicon made a statement that Ghusl means washing every part 3 times (which is sourced from a hadith).

With that said, I reject this non-quranic view of the word 'Janabah'. The quran explicitly clarifies what it means by Janabah...Twice.

[Qural 4:43] O you who have believed, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying or in a state of janabah, except those passing through [a place of prayer], until you have washed. And if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and find no water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and your hands [with it]. Indeed, Allah is ever Pardoning and Forgiving.

On the underlined quote above, it is clear the Quran says [paraphrasing] "if you happened to be dirty and not find water, do this alternative thing". So the Quran explained what it means to be dirty (Janabah). You are in a state of Janabah: when you are ill (sickness and infectious processes), Traveling (imagine a 7th century Arab traveling for days--very dirty), come from a bathroom (imagine 7th-century toilets and their dirtiness), or had contacted women. These are what constitute a state of Janabah. And if you don't have water when you are in that state, then use some clean earth and wipe face and hands.

[Quran 5:6] O you who have believed, when you rise to [perform] prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over your heads and wash your feet to the ankles. And if you are in a state of janabah, then purify yourselves. But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and do not find water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and hands with it. Allah does not intend to make difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favor upon you that you may be grateful.

Again it clarified what that word Janabah means. It elabored on what to do if you don't find water and can't wash yourself when in Janabah.

In conclusion: I believe the Lexicon's inclusion of Ghusl to mean washing every body part 3 times, and Janabah to mean after having sexual intercourse/seminal discharge is based on hadith influence. It also means being in a journey, and ____, ____, etc. The Quran clarified this above right after discussing what to do when in Janabah.

I prefer JosephIslam's input on this. Anyone else, please comment on this and what you feel.

I believe this is very simple. "If you are dirty: wash yourself before prayer. And if you cannot find water do x,y,z".

Pages: [1] 2