Do you believe in God?

[humzy]

I think there is possibility of god as we still don't know the source of life and its origins.

Religion however is more then likely made up for power and money.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

You have to understand some things in Quran were meant for a specific time period. Somethings that may have been relevant in that time period may not be relevant anymore.

So it's not a book for all time? How come polygamy is still around but not common or garden slavery. This past/present mixed with allegorical/literal interpretation means the Qur'an was not the best way to convey God's message.

I said i've seen people do black magic with my own eyes, i'm talking about watching a video or being tricked. Trust me i didn't believe in any of this like a little over an year ago. When my friend told me about this stuff i was like your are full of **. I just wasn't the type of person to ever believe in something like that until i saw it with my own eyes.

I wish you had recorded it.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

The reference to young boys is in Quran 76:19.
There will circulate among them young boys made eternal. When you see them, you would think them [as beautiful as] scattered pearls.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Darkrai

You come across as a decent, young, idealist who doesn't see issues with Islam because you see yourself and your family members as good moral beings. I bet you or them would act exactly the same if all memory of Islam was erased. I don't think you'd go round and do whatever you imagine athiest doing.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Regarding King Khans accusation that I am spreading hate for Muslims, wouldn't I be better off spewing hate on right wing sites rather than this one, to all intent and purposes I am still a cultural Muslim

 

[enkidu_]

Swearing is a human trait unnecessary for the All Mighty. It’s strange for God to swear upon fruits, animals , star, wind etc just to highlight it’s benefit. Even stranger is Allah swearing on the Pen which is a human creation, specifically an ancient Egyptian invention!!

M.A. Haleem, one of the best known translators of the Qur'an into the English, has a whole chapter on this issue in his book "Exploring the Qur'an" (pp. 177-211), quoting classical Islamic scholars like Ibn Al Qayyim, modern ones like Farahi and modern non Muslim ones like Angelika Neuwirth. That's the conclusion :

(...)
Divine oaths in the Qur’an, moreover, are not merely for emphasis; they serve, in addition to the general function of oaths in Arabic, another important function that makes them stand in a class of their own: they are evidential oaths; they furnish an argument or evidence for the statement of the oath. This was more fitting for the Qur’an. A simple oath may be readily ignored; an evidential oath has more chance of being listened to and is more likely to convince. In divine oaths, as seen earlier, the Qur’an employs obvious, tangible elements such as the following:

• astronomical: the sun, the moon, the stars, sky and earth;
• physical: the wind;
• time: dawn, mid-morning, mid-afternoon, twilight, night, ten nights,
the Promised Day and the Day of Resurrection;
• places: Mount Sinai and Mecca;
• gender and reproduction: male and female;
• relationships: parent and offspring;
• animals: horses;
• plants: figs and olives;
• others: the Qur’an, angels, the pen and what they write, the Lord
and life.

In using such elements, the oaths echo other references in the Qur’an that give further explanation and make the oaths all the more effective.
(...)
An important point about divine oaths in the Qur’an is that although they were introduced to convince, in the first instance, the disbelievers in Mecca at that time (but still seek to persuade all disbelievers), they have remained a source of awe, reflection and certainty for the believers: ‘They reflect on the creation of the heavens and earth: Our Lord, You have not created all this without purpose – You are far above that’ (Q. 3:191). The elements of the oaths inspire glorification of God and provide confirmation of the fundamental beliefs, through which ‘the faithful grow in faith’ (yazda ¯-da’lladhı ¯na a ¯manu ¯ ı ¯ma ¯nan, Q. 74:31). The proper study of the oath should therefore not stop at classifying and discussing their forms. Studying the oaths according to their functions and objectives, as shown in this chapter, brings us closer to the meaning of the Qur’an than any classification according to form or style.

One of the 99 names is Al-Mu’min, i.e The Believer. This is should be only applicable to humans not God, unless anyone here knows what/who does God believe in?
As for the name Ar-Rahman, i.e Most Merciful, even Islamic sources imply it is a borrowed name of another God who “existed” in the time of the prophet.

"Al Mu'min" comes from the trilateral Semitic root ا م ن which has different meanings, trust, safety, etc it generic sense giving "believer" (in the sense that he or she puts all his or her trust/safety/... in God), and in this context it means that God is the provider of security.

Ar Rahman was used by Christian Arabs but an adjective isn't wrong because it has been employed wrongfully by the wrong peoples ; it has its own legitimacy if you use it correctly, and obviously you'll use "human" qualities to describe God (even though always in the superlative mode) because as humans you have high chances to speak a human language.

According to the hadith (Sunan Ibn Majah, The Book of the Sunnah, Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 82), even innocent children who die may go to hell too.

Could you quote it.

The reference to young boys is in Quran 76:19.
There will circulate among them young boys made eternal. When you see them, you would think them [as beautiful as] scattered pearls.

Mawdudi's explanation of 56:17

This implies boys who will ever remain boys and stay young. Ali and Hasan Basri say that these will be those children who died before reaching their maturity; therefore, they will neither have any good works to their credit for which they may be rewarded, nor any evil deeds for which they may be punished, But obviously, this could imply those people who would not deserve Paradise. For, as for the true believers, about them Allah has guaranteed in the Quran that their children will be joined with them in Paradise (Surah At-Toor, Ayat 21). This is also supported by the Hadith, which Abu Daud, Tayalisi, Tabarani and Bazzar have related on the authority of Anas and Samurah bin Jundub, according to which the Prophet (peace be upon him) said that the children of the polytheists will be attendants of the people of Paradise.

Islamic concept of Paradise falls in line with that of all tradition until Judaism, the Torah being materialistic because of Jewish corruption, while Christian conception has been tampered by importing Greek philosophy (at one point Jesus does speak of angels drinking wine, to rebuke the Sadducee, AFAIK).

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Regarding King Khans accusation that I am spreading hate for Muslims, wouldn't I be better off spewing hate on right wing sites rather than this one, to all intent and purposes I am still a cultural Muslim

You wouldn't be welcome on a far right site. At best you might be regarded as a useful idiot, more likely just another P___ B______.

Do let me know if you need me to spell that out for you, but I suspect you won't.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

You wouldn't be welcome on a far right site. At best you might be regarded as a useful idiot, more likely just another P___ B______.

Do let me know if you need me to spell that out for you, but I suspect you won't.

_Exactly_, the same point I made to you when you were talking about tolerant brits, lol

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Mawdudi's explanation

Young boys will remain young boys and serve gents drinks? My brother died of childhood cancer at nearly 7 many years ago, you're telling me he is serving drinks for eternity?

Please don't insult my intelligence.

 

[enkidu_]

Young boys will remain young boys and serve gents drinks? My brother died of childhood cancer at nearly 7 many years ago, you're telling me he is serving drinks for eternity?

Please don't insult my intelligence.

If he was the child of polytheists yes, it's always better than burning in hell for eternity if it can give you some solace.

 

[tonmoy]

Young boys will remain young boys and serve gents drinks? My brother died of childhood cancer at nearly 7 many years ago, you're telling me he is serving drinks for eternity?

Please don't insult my intelligence.

U cannot have a sane and logical argument with the believers. They wont be believers if they were logical. Do not stress too much.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

U cannot have a sane and logical argument with the believers. They wont be believers if they were logical. Do not stress too much.

Thanks for the advice, it may seem in my words that I'm stressed but as you allude I know what the score is. Thanks, nonetheless.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

U cannot have a sane and logical argument with the believers. They wont be believers if they were logical. Do not stress too much.

I agree, but it always amazes me how much time and effort people spend having arguments with believers nonetheless, quoting scriptures and other texts in their efforts to convert those who won't listen to reason. It's an almost insane effort for no logical reason.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

If he was the child of polytheists yes, it's always better than burning in hell for eternity if it can give you some solace.

Ever heard of pederasty? What about the young girls of polytheist? Hang on aren't all children under 7 innocent, so you mean to tell me that God knew which children he created and knew which ones would be in servitude for eternity.

 

[enkidu_]

Ever heard of pederasty? What about the young girls of polytheist? Hang on aren't all children under 7 innocent, so you mean to tell me that God knew which children he created and knew which ones would be in servitude for eternity.

What pederasty ? And all has already been decided during the primordial pact (mithaq) when it comes to faith, but it's a complex theological issue more than a strictly scriptural one (not enough data's to infer a general idea let's say), I've taken all the excerpts from Mohammad Hassan Khalil's "Islam and the fate of others" pertaining to this particular issue and high-lightening the position of Islam's scholars and you can see it differs :

Returning to the Fayṣal, Ghazālī asserts that God’s mercy will encompass most Byzantine Christians and Turks, “whose lands lie far beyond the lands of Islam” and whose rejection of the Prophet could hardly be described as informed. This is in keeping with the “high” view of revelation, popular among the Ashʿarites, which holds that only those who have been exposed to the final message in its authentic form are culpable if they do not heed it and adhere to its law. This view, which is grounded in Qur’anic statements such as “We do not punish until We have sent a messenger” (17:15), was even adopted by Baghdādī. Despite his dismal assessment of non- Ashʿarite Muslims, he maintained that those “who infer the unity and justice of God but are ignorant of revealed law” are comparable to conventional Muslims and can attain Paradise. Meanwhile, unreached non-Muslims “who die in a condition of unbelief (kufr) because of a failure to make this deduction may expect neither reward nor punishment, although God may admit them to Paradise” through His grace, “just as [He] does for children who die before maturity.” Ghazālī takes this inclusivism a step further in the Fayṣal while also providing a relatively specific criterion for the salvation of non- Muslims.
(...)
As Ibn Taymiyya notes in the Fatāwā, 10:431, the notion that deceased children will reunite with their righteous fathers in Paradise may be deduced from Q. 52: 21 : “We unite the believers with their off spring who followed them in faith—We do not deny them any of the rewards for their deeds: each person is in pledge for his [or her] own deeds.” Of course if all of humanity will one day arrive in Heaven, then every child will—at some point—be reunited with his or her parents.
(...)
Ibn Qayyim, Ḥādī, 613. Here Ibn Qayyim adds that God already grants mercy to the children of unbelievers, for He has prohibited killing them, and whoever sees them is compassionate toward them.

Also discussed in Smith/Haddad's "The Islamic Understanding of Death and Resurrection" (can't copy the whole sub chapter) :

When we come to the issue of the fate of children of those clearly considered kāfirs or mushriks, there seems again to be some range of opinion. Many are loath to speculate and prefer to quote the words of the Prophet: “The Prophet, when asked about the children of the mushrikūn, replied, God knows best what they have done [Allāhu a‘lam bi-mā kānū ‘āmilīn].”

It appears that on other occasions, however, the Prophet was rather more specific in discussing the fate of such children. Sometimes he seems to have been somewhat pessimistic:

Khadīja asked the Messenger of God about two children who had died while still in the period of the jāhilīya. The Messenger of God said, They are in the Fire. And when he saw the aversion on her face he said, If you saw their place, it would be loathsome to you. She said, O Messenger of God, what about my child by you? He replied, In the Garden. Then the Messenger of God said, Truly the faithfuland their children are in the Garden and the polytheists and their children are in the Fire. Then the Messenger of God recited [S 52:21].

At other times he held out more hope: “They [the children of the mushrikūn] have no evil deeds for which they must be punished among the people of the Fire, and they likewise have no good deeds for which they are to be recompensed among the angels of the people of the Garden. Therefore they are servants for the inhabitants of the Garden.”

It is obvious, of course, that there has been nothing resembling consensus in the Islamic community on this very problematic question of the fate of children of non-believers. It is also true that the real issue in these discussions, while clearly related directly to the understanding of God's mercy and justice, is the firm condemnation of kufr and shirk and thus the punishment incumbent on offspring because of the sins of the fathers. Abū Ya‘la relates that according to certain Ḥanbalī theologians, on the day of resurrection a huge fire will be set, and all children willbe ordered to enter it. Whosoever does so willingly will be allowed to enter the Garden, but he who refuses it will be sent to the Fire. Himself a Ḥanbalī, Abū Ya‘la indicates that S 52:21 is actually a proof that the children of the mushrikūn are with their fathers in the Fire. This, he says, is supported by the above-citedquestion of ‘Ā'isha concerning her children by a husband before her marriage to the Prophet.

The Ash‘arīs were in agreement that the children of the faithful are in the Garden with their fathers. They were of several opinions concerning the children of the mushriks and kāfirs, however, as seems generally to be the case. Some felt they will be in the Fire for the express purpose of causing more pain to their parents, again indicating that the main concern of this discussion often does not lie with the fate of the children themselves. Others support the idea of the fire built to test the obedience of the children, as described above, while still others assign them to a place in the Garden but as servants of the faithful there.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

I agree, but it always amazes me how much time and effort people spend having arguments with believers nonetheless, quoting scriptures and other texts in their efforts to convert those who won't listen to reason. It's an almost insane effort for no logical reason.

There is logical reason, cheap waste of time. Occupies the brain, makes it think, makes it learn, sharpens the mind, engages it, keeps it fresh. Apart from Wi-Fi and data it costs nothing. Sometimes I do it for fun. This forum is called timepass.

There is no free will, so we bound to be what we are bound to be, but please let's stick with the matter at hand.

Btw, the fact that my only brother died if cancer at age nearly 7 is not what makes me a murtad. I was more religious after in fact.

 

[tonmoy]

I agree, but it always amazes me how much time and effort people spend having arguments with believers nonetheless, quoting scriptures and other texts in their efforts to convert those who won't listen to reason. It's an almost insane effort for no logical reason.

For two reasons.
1/ I used to be a believer because I was only taught the most sanitized version of Islam and the life of Muhammad. So some people really do not know.
2/ Also it is fun to read some of the illogical replies. I mean, imagine people defending a man marrying his own daughter in law.... Or imagine someone claiming that humans(women) 1400 years ago were more evolved than they are today. So much so that you can marry a 6 year old and have sex with a 9 year old. Darwinism in reverse. It is just funny to read.. thats all.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

What pederasty ? And all has already been decided during the primordial pact (mithaq) when it comes to faith, but it's a complex theological issue more than a strictly scriptural one (not enough data's to infer a general idea let's say), I've taken all the excerpts from Mohammad Hassan Khalil's "Islam and the fate of others" pertaining to this particular issue and high-lightening the position of Islam's scholars and you can see it differs :



Also discussed in Smith/Haddad's "The Islamic Understanding of Death and Resurrection" (can't copy the whole sub chapter) :

Too Long. Didn't read, I will try a different tack with you, bear with.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

For two reasons.
1/ I used to be a believer because I was only taught the most sanitized version of Islam and the life of Muhammad. So some people really do not know.
2/ Also it is fun to read some of the illogical replies. I mean, imagine people defending a man marrying his own daughter in law.... Or imagine someone claiming that humans(women) 1400 years ago were more evolved than they are today. So much so that you can marry a 6 year old and have sex with a 9 year old. Darwinism in reverse. It is just funny to read.. thats all.

I didn't know until 2008 when I got broadband (finally), the age of Aisha. Even later about marrying his adopted sons wife, which makes the current state and status of Muslim kids in care pitiful. Coupled with O level biology.

I truly believe Muslims would be great again if they threw off the yolk of Islam and invested in humanity in the here and now, rather than the 'afterlife.

 

[MenInG]

Ok think we are now crossing some boundaries here. You can discuss religion but do not abuse/denigrate any religious figures on this forum.

Polite request.

 

[MenInG]

Stick to religious debate - keep families out of it.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Quran 72: 8 “And (the Jinn who had listened to the Qur’an said): We had sought the heaven but had found it filled with strong warders and meteors.
Quran 72:9. And we used to sit on places (high) therein to listen. But he who listeneth now findeth a flame in wait for him;” He repeated the same absurd idea again.
Quran 37: 6/10 ”We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars, (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits, (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side, Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual penalty, Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.
And
Quran 67: 5 “And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.”

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Stick to religious debate - keep families out of it.

Thank you, I might not be close to my dad but I still love him, he is the only one I know and after all he raised me and I feel pretty good about myself, so yeah.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Quran 72: 8 “And (the Jinn who had listened to the Qur’an said): We had sought the heaven but had found it filled with strong warders and meteors.
Quran 72:9. And we used to sit on places (high) therein to listen. But he who listeneth now findeth a flame in wait for him;” He repeated the same absurd idea again.
Quran 37: 6/10 ”We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars, (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits, (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side, Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual penalty, Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.
And
Quran 67: 5 “And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.”

There are many scholars who can give your detailed commentary on such verses but the basic understanding is this is referring to body of matter from outer space that enters the earth's atmosphere and how the Lord can use any of it's creation to deter or stop another of it's creation, the unseen in this case.

Now you dont believe in the unseen so it wont make sense to you but if this is the best you can come out with for debunking a faith, you are pathetic tbh.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Stick to religious debate - keep families out of it.

Sure.

But since it's allowed to make disgusting accusations regarding young boys as rewards in heaven for Muslims, I hope you will stay consistent and allow similar accusations against other religions which may arise from such a debate.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Sure.

But since it's allowed to make disgusting accusations regarding young boys as rewards in heaven for Muslims, I hope you will stay consistent and allow similar accusations against other religions which may arise from such a debate.

The Qur'an itself states that young boys will be handing out drinks, I never said anything about sex, that is what they call a strawman, I'm sure you are familiar with that term.

 

[enkidu_]

Quran 72: 8 “And (the Jinn who had listened to the Qur’an said): We had sought the heaven but had found it filled with strong warders and meteors.
Quran 72:9. And we used to sit on places (high) therein to listen. But he who listeneth now findeth a flame in wait for him;” He repeated the same absurd idea again.
Quran 37: 6/10 ”We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars, (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits, (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side, Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual penalty, Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.
And
Quran 67: 5 “And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.”

What's even the problem if you don't believe in the ghayb (invisible), of which jinns are a part ? Explaining "rational" or "scientific" phenomena's in the light of transcending or spiritual understanding is part of any religion. For all it's worth for a murtad of your rebelliousness, that's Mawdudi's explanation on 15:16-17 :

“We have beautified it”: We have placed a shining star or planet in each of these spheres and made them look beautiful. In other words, it means; We have not made the boundless universe dismal, desolate and frightful, but so beautiful that one finds marvelous order and harmony in it everywhere, and sights therein are so attractive that each one of these charms hearts and minds. This wonderful structure of the universe is a clear proof of the fact that its Creator is not only Great and All-Wise but is also a perfect Artist. The Quran has also stated this aspect of the Creator in (Surah As-Sajadah, Ayat 7): (Allah is) that God Who has created in perfect beauty everything He has created.
(...)
That is, these spheres are so fortified that they are beyond the reach of every Satan, for all Satans including those of jinns, have been confined to that sphere in which the Earth has been placed and they enjoy no more access to visit other spheres than the other dwellers of this sphere. This has been mentioned in order to remove a common misunderstanding. The common people believed, and still believe, that Satan and his descendants have a free access to every place in the universe. On the contrary, the Quran says that Satans cannot go beyond a certain limit and they have no unlimited power of ascension.

 

[KingKhanWC]

The Qur'an itself states that young boys will be handing out drinks, I never said anything about sex, that is what they call a strawman, I'm sure you are familiar with that term.

This is what you were referring to but of course you will back track when you have been informed now. There are various interpretations, one is it refers to the youth of some in paradise, they will stay young and serve alongside their families not to them. Whichever a Muslim takes, it wont be the disgusting things which come in your mind. Perhaps you should seek some help or have personal fetishes you cant control?

 

[Devilsadvokat]

This is what you were referring to but of course you will back track when you have been informed now. There are various interpretations, one is it refers to the youth of some in paradise, they will stay young and serve alongside their families not to them. Whichever a Muslim takes, it wont be the disgusting things which come in your mind. Perhaps you should seek some help or have personal fetishes you cant control?

What if someone wanted to? Maybe never acted upon his nature all his life and now he was in Paradise? Does anyone even know if the sex will be physical?

You do know that desert cultures the only person who is homosexual is the one at the receiving end, the batsman so to speak.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

This is what you were referring to but of course you will back track when you have been informed now.l?

Lol, go back and read it was your _dirty_ mind, you took yourself there all by yourself.

 

[tonmoy]

What's even the problem if you don't believe in the ghayb (invisible), of which jinns are a part ? Explaining "rational" or "scientific" phenomena's in the light of transcending or spiritual understanding is part of any religion. For all it's worth for a murtad of your rebelliousness, that's Mawdudi's explanation on 15:16-17 :

Quick question, Does "moon splitting into two" is also a part of Ghayb (invisible)? Because there is no independent record of anyone other than some folks in Muhammad's arabia witnessing this miracle? Surely night does not befall in one place in the world at one time. There is absolutely no scientific evidence to suggest that moon was split either. On the contrary if moon was split, it would cause a change in the rotation/revolution of Earth and cause huge issues with climates.

I am not referencing sahih hadith but actual Quran here.

 

[KingKhanWC]

What if someone wanted to? Maybe never acted upon his nature all his life and now he was in Paradise? Does anyone even know if the sex will be physical?

You do know that desert cultures the only person who is homosexual is the one at the receiving end, the batsman so to speak.

Sorry im not as clued up on homosexuality as you. It seems that you have a fascination with this and cant get it out of your head but I can tell you becoming a Muslim wont help you in this life or the the hearafter. Islam is very clear, men are meant for women and vice versa.

Is there anything else you can come up with now?

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Sorry im not as clued up on homosexuality as you. It seems that you have a fascination with this and cant get it out of your head but I can tell you becoming a Muslim wont help you in this life or the the hearafter. Islam is very clear, men are meant for women and vice versa.

Is there anything else you can come up with now?

Look fella, I answered your question you answer mine, if a pious paedophile or homosexual kept it in his trousers as advised by general Muslim thinking, would they be able to in the hereafter. Yes or No?

 

[enkidu_]

Quick question, Does "moon splitting into two" is also a part of Ghayb (invisible)? Because there is no independent record of anyone other than some folks in Muhammad's arabia witnessing this miracle? Surely night does not befall in one place in the world at one time. There is absolutely no scientific evidence to suggest that moon was split either. On the contrary if moon was split, it would cause a change in the rotation/revolution of Earth and cause huge issues with climates.

I am not referencing sahih hadith but actual Quran here.

going back to Mawdudi and would advise you as well, quick research is sometimes more valuable than quick questions :

The critics raise two kinds of objections against it. In the first place, they say it is impossible that a great sphere like the moon should split asunder into two distinct parts, which should get hundreds of miles apart and then rejoin. Secondly, they say if it had so happened, it would be a wellknown event in the world and would have found mention in the books of History and Astronomy. But, in fact, both these objections are flimsy. As for the discussion of its possibility, it could perhaps find credibility in the ancient days but on the basis of what man has come to know in the present day about the structure of the planets, it can be said that it is just possible that a sphere may burst because of its internal volcanic action and its two parts may be thrown far apart by the mighty eruption, and then may rejoin under the magnetic force of their center. As for the second objection, it is flimsy because the event had taken place suddenly and lasted a short time only. It was not necessary that at that particular moment the world might be looking at the moon. There was no explosion either that might have attracted the people’s attention; there was no advance information of it that the people might be awaiting its occurrence and looking up at the sky. It could not also be seen everywhere on the earth but only in Arabia and the eastern lands where the moon had risen and was visible at that time. The taste and art of writing history also had not yet developed so that the people who might have witnessed it, should have made a record of it and then some historian might have gathered the evidence and preserved it in some book of History. However, in the Histories of Malabar mention has been made of a native ruler who had witnessed this phenomenon that night. As for the books of Astronomy and Calendars, this event might have been mentioned in them only if the event had affected the movement of the moon, its orbit and the times of its rising and setting. As no such thing happened, it did not attract the ancient astronomers’ attention. The observatories were also not so developed that they might have taken notice of everything happening in the heavens and preserved a record of it.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Look fella, I answered your question you answer mine, if a pious paedophile or homosexual kept it in his trousers as advised by general Muslim thinking, would they be able to in the hereafter. Yes or No?

I just told you there is no such thing as men for men in Islam and you still can't figure it out? The same goes for underage children. This is your personal issue, I suggest you seek professional help.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

I am not referencing sahih hadith but actual Quran here.

Apologetics will jump from hadith to Qur'an to suit their argument.

There is a verse in the Koran talking about unknowns, the weather, date of judgement day, date of ones death, ones risq or salary and one about ' not knowing what was inside a pregnant women womb, which before ultrasound or whatever can now be determined to good accuracy. So now the story is is that it refers to whether the foetus is a good or bad soul. God knows already tho.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

I just told you there is no such thing as men for men in Islam and you still can't figure it out? The same goes for underage children. This is your personal issue, I suggest you seek professional help.

Neither is drinking nor having sex with more than four woman, one at a time, will that be the limit in heaven also?

Eternity will get boring? Drugs? Gambling? Allowed?

You still haven't answered if straightforward male in female action, missionary position will be physical or allegorical, please advise.

 

[tonmoy]

going back to Mawdudi and would advise you as well, quick research is sometimes more valuable than quick questions :

Please read the explanation that you provided and please ask yourself if any of it makes sense.

1/ You wrote: "it can be said that it is just possible that a sphere may burst because of its internal volcanic action and its two parts may be thrown far apart by the mighty eruption, and then may rejoin under the magnetic force of their center"........My response: NO it CANNOT be said... it makes no Physics sense whatsover. Give one instance of such an occurrence , you cannot because volcanoes dont split the spherical body into two and gravity dictates attraction not magnetism from the core....

2/ Roman's kept data on astronomy at the time. There is absolutely NO evidence to suggest moon splitting.

3/ Climate would have changed as a result because re positioning of the moon would impact the change in earths rotation and revolution, nothing of that sort ever happened.

Anyways, if you are truly honest with yourself, you will find the arguement beyond weak. I do not feel like dissecting each and every sentence because the logic you provided is soooooo weak.

 

[tonmoy]

Apologetics will jump from hadith to Qur'an to suit their argument.

There is a verse in the Koran talking about unknowns, the weather, date of judgement day, date of ones death, ones risq or salary and one about ' not knowing what was inside a pregnant women womb, which before ultrasound or whatever can now be determined to good accuracy. So now the story is is that it refers to whether the foetus is a good or bad soul. God knows already tho.

I really find it fascinating that the God that hates adultery and wants that act to be punishable by death also at the same time creates a life inside the foetus . A life (child) that was conceived as a result of adultery. So now you kill the mother and the child inside the mother for the sin... Why allow the ******* to be conceived inside the foetus when death is the punishment?

 

[enkidu_]

Please read the explanation that you provided and please ask yourself if any of it makes sense.

1/ You wrote: "it can be said that it is just possible that a sphere may burst because of its internal volcanic action and its two parts may be thrown far apart by the mighty eruption, and then may rejoin under the magnetic force of their center"........My response: NO it CANNOT be said... it makes no Physics sense whatsover. Give one instance of such an occurrence , you cannot because volcanoes dont split the spherical body into two and gravity dictates attraction not magnetism from the core....

2/ Roman's kept data on astronomy at the time. There is absolutely NO evidence to suggest moon splitting.

3/ Climate would have changed as a result because re positioning of the moon would impact the change in earths rotation and revolution, nothing of that sort ever happened.

Anyways, if you are truly honest with yourself, you will find the arguement beyond weak. I do not feel like dissecting each and every sentence because the logic you provided is soooooo weak.

I'd trust Mawdudi more than someone who don't believe in miracles and apply a rationalist methodology everywhere, you can add the virgin birth, etc to your sooooooo long list as well.

 

[tonmoy]

I'd trust Mawdudi more than someone who don't believe in miracles and apply a rationalist methodology everywhere, you can add the virgin birth, etc to your sooooooo long list as well.

Since you insist.
Virgin birth: The Islamic idea is that if God says "Be" , it happens.

So rationality dictates that if God wants to send Muhammad to Jerusalem, he would just want it to happen and it will happen. Why would God need to create another donkey/horse with wings to carry Muhammad from A to Z. Just too much work if you ask me. Inefficient. Just like he is inefficient in the way he sent thousands of prophets over hundreds of years to spread his message.

 

[enkidu_]

Since you insist.
Virgin birth: The Islamic idea is that if God says "Be" , it happens.

So rationality dictates that if God wants to send Muhammad to Jerusalem, he would just want it to happen and it will happen. Why would God need to create another donkey/horse with wings to carry Muhammad from A to Z. Just too much work if you ask me. Inefficient. Just like he is inefficient in the way he sent thousands of prophets over hundreds of years to spread his message.

That's like asking why not block Iblis from tempting Adam-Eve, you can always put If's and But's. He sent countless messages and prophets to carry out His imperatives and test the mankind, which, contrarily to the natural elements, has accepted "iman", as per the Qur'an. If the prophet (s)'s mission didn't last 23 years, with 10 initial years of pacifist struggle, you wouldn't understand the whole pedagogy of the Qur'anic phenomenon.

You can consider believers as irrational and we can continue believing you'll be combustible for hell, no one is about to change his position.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

I really find it fascinating that the God that hates adultery and wants that act to be punishable by death also at the same time creates a life inside the foetus . A life (child) that was conceived as a result of adultery. So now you kill the mother and the child inside the mother for the sin... Why allow the ******* to be conceived inside the foetus when death is the punishment?

Defies logic, but I have heard that scholars at Mecca deny logic as a part of Islam and cite the hadith that during wudu one can wet wipe the top if the feet and not the soles or heels, therefore God does not need to be logical.

One could just say it's magic.

 

[Musakhel]

Since you insist.
Virgin birth: The Islamic idea is that if God says "Be" , it happens.

So rationality dictates that if God wants to send Muhammad to Jerusalem, he would just want it to happen and it will happen. Why would God need to create another donkey/horse with wings to carry Muhammad from A to Z. Just too much work if you ask me. Inefficient. Just like he is inefficient in the way he sent thousands of prophets over hundreds of years to spread his message.

Scholars have written books on the night journey and detailed it's significance with detailed commentary, a mere dismissial on your part shows your weak understanding.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

That's like asking why not block Iblis from tempting Adam-Eve, you can always put If's and But's. He sent countless messages and prophets to carry out His imperatives and test the mankind, which, contrarily to the natural elements, has accepted "iman", as per the Qur'an. If the prophet (s)'s mission didn't last 23 years, with 10 initial years of pacifist struggle, you wouldn't understand the whole pedagogy of the Qur'anic phenomenon.

You can consider believers as irrational and we can continue believing you'll be combustible for hell, no one is about to change his position.

Yes, the peaceful Meccan verses and the vengeful Medinan verses or is it the other way round. Chartered the rise from pacifist struggle to utter draconian dominance. For every Muslim quoting a peace verse there are as many, if not more, war verses, which coz they occurred later may have precedence. Guess like most humans Muslims cherry pick verses that best suit them, to be fair everyone wants an easy life.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Scholars have written books on the night journey and detailed it's significance with detailed commentary, a mere dismissial on your part shows your weak understanding.

Why did he need Buraq? Why a horse? Was Buraq the thing that enabled faster than speed of light travel in one night?

Do you know how silky this sounds, at the speed of light, if we travel from today, there are parts if the universe we will never reach because they won't even be there, when we get there.

The numbers involved in actuality dwarves what people in the past could have imagined.

 

[tonmoy]

That's like asking why not block Iblis from tempting Adam-Eve, you can always put If's and But's. He sent countless messages and prophets to carry out His imperatives and test the mankind, which, contrarily to the natural elements, has accepted "iman", as per the Qur'an. If the prophet (s)'s mission didn't last 23 years, with 10 initial years of pacifist struggle, you wouldn't understand the whole pedagogy of the Qur'anic phenomenon.

You can consider believers as irrational and we can continue believing you'll be combustible for hell, no one is about to change his position.

I think he explains why he did not block Iblis.. but that is not the point here. Point is that some of the things God did defies all forms of logic. God can just dictate what he wants to all his creation at the time of birth and I am sure most people will follow him. Instead he kept on creating humans for hundreds and thousands of years before deciding to sent Muhammad.. What was the purpose served by humans he created for hundreds and thousands of years before Muhammad's arrival? For God the only purpose for human is to serve God (from what I am told).. Or One of the major pillars of Islam is "fasting during Ramadan" but God created the arctic and antarctic region where sun does not set or rise for months. Why did God create human in arctic region if they cannot follow one major pillars of Islam?
You know Rationality and logic

 

[DeadBall]

You can consider believers as irrational and we can continue believing you'll be combustible for hell, no one is about to change his position.

Lolz, so after all the whataboutery, verbal gymnastics, failed arguments etc it comes down to you will burn in hell heathen for not believing in my fairy tales as usual.

 

[DeadBall]

Scholars have written books on the night journey and detailed it's significance with detailed commentary, a mere dismissial on your part shows your weak understanding.

Do the scholars explain the science to prove that such a creature could exist and do the things it did? If just providing a detailed summary based on fantasy is enough then the Harry Potter series should also be a religion. Nvm, I think it already is.

 

[Musakhel]

Why did he need Buraq? Why a horse? Was Buraq the thing that enabled faster than speed of light travel in one night?

Do you know how silky this sounds, at the speed of light, if we travel from today, there are parts if the universe we will never reach because they won't even be there, when we get there.

The numbers involved in actuality dwarves what people in the past could have imagined.

When Allāh wished to speak to Sayyidunā Mūsā, He told him to wait thirty days and then a further ten days: We appointed for Mūsā thirty nights and we completed (the period) with ten more.[4]
Allāh, however, did not tell His Beloved to wait. Rather His order came suddenly, without any warning. The Prophet’s chest was split open and his heart was washed and filled with knowledge and forbearance. The Burāq was then brought to him. Allāh could have caused him to travel without the Burāq, but it was a means of honouring and ennobling him. Jibrīl said to the Burāq after some initial obstinacy: “Are you not ashamed, O Burāq? By Allāh, no one more noble in the sight of Allāh has ever ridden you!”

 

[Musakhel]

Do the scholars explain the science to prove that such a creature could exist and do the things it did? If just providing a detailed summary based on fantasy is enough then the Harry Potter series should also be a religion. Nvm, I think it already is.

Well according to science your great grandfather was a fish, what ludicrous science do they use to come to this conclusion?

 

[DeadBall]

Well according to science your great grandfather was a fish, what ludicrous science do they use to come to this conclusion?

Great Grandfather was a fish ). Any further discussion would be an exercise in futility. I concur.

 

[tonmoy]

Scholars have written books on the night journey and detailed it's significance with detailed commentary, a mere dismissial on your part shows your weak understanding.

"Winged horse that travels at or near light speed" ....
So so lets analyze instead of a mere dismissal as you put it

1/ Why did the God create a horse when God can just say "happen" and it happens?
2/ Do you know how big the wings need to be in order to generate flight?
3/ How fast did the horse flapped the wings to generate the lift and speed?
4/ Or is it the case where the wing is just for show (decoration)... than why not just the horse.. why create a wing for the horse?
5/ The sense I get is that the winged horse is similar to Alladin's carpet...You get up, it moves and takes you anywhere u need to go. Since God will not bend space/time and insist on horse back ride, so now God needs to ensure that Muhammad is comfortable in flight and the thin atmosphere or the cold temperature in high altitude or the lack of seat belt does not impact Muhammad.. again too much work when God could have done that easily by bending space time.

I can actually go on... but I hope I proved that just like his followers, God is not rational either.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Well according to science your great grandfather was a fish, what ludicrous science do they use to come to this conclusion?

According to me I don't think you know what science says.

At the early stages of foetus, humans ones that is have gills. You know what fish need to breathe. Thereby evidence we are linked in the past at some point. At least wise up before coming out with wisecracks. In humans those gills turn to lungs and in fish they remain gills. Knowledge is your friend, my friend.

 

[DeadBall]

According to me I don't think you know what science says.

At the early stages of foetus, humans ones that is have gills. You know what fish need to breathe. Thereby evidence we are linked in the past at some point. At least wise up before coming out with wisecracks. In humans those gills turn to lungs and in fish they remain gills. Knowledge is your friend, my friend.

It's no wisecrack. He is very much serious. You should check out his posting history re women rights, blasphemy, etc.

 

[Musakhel]

According to me I don't think you know what science says.

At the early stages of foetus, humans ones that is have gills. You know what fish need to breathe. Thereby evidence we are linked in the past at some point. At least wise up before coming out with wisecracks. In humans those gills turn to lungs and in fish they remain gills. Knowledge is your friend, my friend.

Can you cite observation of this change from fish to human, or is it simply faith in scientists?

 

[enkidu_]

Yes, the peaceful Meccan verses and the vengeful Medinan verses or is it the other way round. Chartered the rise from pacifist struggle to utter draconian dominance. For every Muslim quoting a peace verse there are as many, if not more, war verses, which coz they occurred later may have precedence. Guess like most humans Muslims cherry pick verses that best suit them, to be fair everyone wants an easy life.

Where did you see I reject the Medinian verses ? All I'm saying it was a part of a long struggle, with all the divine pedagogy involved. The polytheists wanted war and they finally got it. Jews have their own philosophy of history which consists of waiting the Ha Moschiach the next day, and you don't see them asking why God didn't send the messiah already centuries ago to kick out all their invaders. It's something that you peoples can't understand.

I think he explains why he did not block Iblis.. but that is not the point here. Point is that some of the things God did defies all forms of logic. God can just dictate what he wants to all his creation at the time of birth and I am sure most people will follow him. Instead he kept on creating humans for hundreds and thousands of years before deciding to sent Muhammad.. What was the purpose served by humans he created for hundreds and thousands of years before Muhammad's arrival? For God the only purpose for human is to serve God (from what I am told).. Or One of the major pillars of Islam is "fasting during Ramadan" but God created the arctic and antarctic region where sun does not set or rise for months. Why did God create human in arctic region if they cannot follow one major pillars of Islam?
You know Rationality and logic

He sent messengers/prophets to all societies/civilizations out of His mercy. The different peoples then all altered His words. That's why anthropologists see traces of monotheism in the major civilization of the world, even if it's perturbed by human interpretations and alterations : Akhenaton with Aton in ancient Egypt ; the ancient Persians who had the idea of Zurvan, an unitary principle preceding both Ahura Mazda (the principle of good) and Ahriman (the principle of evil) ; Ometeotl for the Aztecs, the one principle behind all dualities ; etc even the Arya Samaj reformist movement of the 19th said that Hinduism was initially monotheistic.

Allah (swt) then sent the seal of prophethood, in a "virgin" civilization (Arabs had no written literature) among a "virgin" peoples, like Jesus was birthed into a pure woman - only then the Qur'an would have been a defining product even from a "secular" pov - and look at how well it has been sealed : since the prophet (s) death, there hasn't been a major religion, there have been few ones mobilizing few millions at most, and many of them accepting Muhammad (s) as prophet (like the Baha'is). There's no better definition of "seal", that even those who came after are irradiated his light. Also look at the position of the world when he was born and died : the world was literally in a state of terminal diseases ; the old Roman Empire was in a continued state of fragmentation since 476 ; the Persia of Khosrau II was crap poor, the money of an overtaxed population going into warfare with the tried Romans ; the Hindu Golden Age was already gone since a century, with the Guptas ; the Chinese of the Sui dynasty were wasting themselves in internal warfare. Let's not even talk of old seats of human civilization like Egypt or Mesopotamia, dormant for centuries.

Then the breeze of Islam came : it not only united all these oldest centers of human civilization - from the south of Europe to the Indus - but gave to them a new impetus : economic growth, urbanization, a literary culture, etc

And if you're a mumin you'd fast even on Saturn, like you'd pray even without legs nor arms. These are non issues for believers, but for rationalists like you who haven't mastered logic nor reason it totally are worth the cerebrality.

Lolz, so after all the whataboutery, verbal gymnastics, failed arguments etc it comes down to you will burn in hell heathen for not believing in my fairy tales as usual.

That's how you deal with fairies.

 

[DeadBall]

Well according to science your great grandfather was a fish, what ludicrous science do they use to come to this conclusion?

Actually I did hear stories of them being quite the slippery fellas. It all makes sense now. #ScienceProven.

 

[tonmoy]

When Allāh wished to speak to Sayyidunā Mūsā, He told him to wait thirty days and then a further ten days: We appointed for Mūsā thirty nights and we completed (the period) with ten more.[4]
Allāh, however, did not tell His Beloved to wait. Rather His order came suddenly, without any warning. The Prophet’s chest was split open and his heart was washed and filled with knowledge and forbearance. The Burāq was then brought to him. Allāh could have caused him to travel without the Burāq, but it was a means of honouring and ennobling him. Jibrīl said to the Burāq after some initial obstinacy: “Are you not ashamed, O Burāq? By Allāh, no one more noble in the sight of Allāh has ever ridden you!”

Before medical science was a thing, people believed that we think with our heart (literally).
As we know today, nothing happens when you wash someones heart...... neither, you can fill heart with knowledge and forbearance...

So Buraq was meant to honor the prophet you say,... Great.. but still why though? I mean his prophethood is an honor in itself... but sure if you say so

 

[DeadBall]

That's how you deal with fairies.

So now you don't even know the difference between fairy tales and fairies and also are an authority on how to deal with said fairies. Couldn't make this up even if I wanted to (partly because I'm not into making up and believing fairy tales). This is too much fun.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Can you cite observation of this change from fish to human, or is it simply faith in scientists?

Why would human foetus need/have gills, if God designed them?

 

[tonmoy]

Well according to science your great grandfather was a fish, what ludicrous science do they use to come to this conclusion?

Well according to science we all evolved from single celled creature.....
There is an entire section of science describing the whole process in detail including evidence presented through fossils and bones. Its called evolutionary biology. You can read up at your convenience to gather proof. Not ludicrous but fascinating.

On the other hand, where did God come from? How did he create you from clay? Care to explain?

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Why would human foetus need/have gills, if God designed them?

Sorry, I should have said structures that go on to form gills in fish and lungs in humans so this is evidence of us being linked in some way to everything since day dot.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evodevo_02

 

[Mages]

M.A. Haleem, one of the best known translators of the Qur'an into the English, has a whole chapter on this issue in his book "Exploring the Qur'an" (pp. 177-211), quoting classical Islamic scholars like Ibn Al Qayyim, modern ones like Farahi and modern non Muslim ones like Angelika Neuwirth. That's the conclusion .....“An important point about divine oaths in the Qur’an is that although they were introduced to convince, in the first instance, the disbelievers in Mecca at that time”....:

If God swearing on horses & pen makes sense, then swearing on a samosa makes sense too. Throughout the Meccan period, the Arabs were ridiculing Muhammad’s claim of prophethood. As such, swearing on figs would convince them?

"Al Mu'min" comes from the trilateral Semitic root ا م ن which has different meanings, trust, safety, etc it generic sense giving "believer" (in the sense that he or she puts all his or her trust/safety/... in God), and in this context it means that God is the provider of security.

Al Mumin just means The Believer in the Quran. Using the same title for Allah is misleading. For trustee/guardian etc there are other commonly used words for it.

Ar Rahman was used by Christian Arabs but an adjective isn't wrong because it has been employed wrongfully by the wrong peoples ; it has its own legitimacy if you use it correctly, and obviously you'll use "human" qualities to describe God (even though always in the superlative mode) because as humans you have high chances to speak a human language.

Nope. It’s not about the Arabic translation of the Bible. It’s about verse 17:110 of the Quran.

Say (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم): "Invoke Allah or invoke the Most Gracious (Allah), by whatever name you invoke Him (it is the same), for to Him belong the Best Names. And offer your Salat (prayer) neither aloud nor in a low voice, but follow a way between. (Quran 17: 110)

Verse 17:110 is actually Allah defending the prophet. If you look at the tafsir below, this revelation came as a result of the pagans were surprised when prophet Muhammad referred to God as Ar-Rahman (The Beneficent) for the first time. Until then they only heard prophet Muhammad calling God as Allah. The people also clarified that Ar-Rahman was the God of another guy who claimed prophethood during the same Meccan period, al-Yamamah & have not heard it from anyone else.

https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=17&tAyahNo=110&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

Could you quote it.

It was narrated that 'Aishah the Mother of the Believers said:
"The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was called to the funeral of a child from among the Ansar. I said: 'O Messenger of Allah, glad tidings for him! He is one of the little birds of Paradise, who never did evil or reached the age of doing evil (i.e, the age of accountability).' He said: 'It may not be so, O 'Aishah! For Allah created people for Paradise, He created them for it when they were still in their father's loins, And He has created people for Hell, He created them for it when they were still in their fathers' loins.'"
English reference : Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 82 Sunan Ibn Majah ;The Book of the Sunnah - كتاب المقدمة

 

[Mages]

Young boys will remain young boys and serve gents drinks? My brother died of childhood cancer at nearly 7 many years ago, you're telling me he is serving drinks for eternity?

Please don't insult my intelligence.

According to the sunnah, there will be 80k servants (young boys I presume) & 72 wives ( 2 houries & 70 women imported from Hell). (Vol. 4, Book 12, Hadith 2562 Jami` at-Tirmidhi » Chapters on the description of Paradise, & Sunan Ibn Majah » Zuhd - كتاب الزهد »Vol. 5, Book 37, Hadith 4337)


If you look into all the details of the rewards of Paradise in Islam, it's very telling;
God in heaven is promising big breasted virgins, pearly young boys, aphrodisiac, fruit, honey, milk, wine, clean water, gold bracelet, fine Persian silk (istabraq), mansion, couch, chicken meat, ginger ale & fine weather.
(Note: Istabraq is a luxury brocade of that time from Iran, its like God promising me Gucci today) (Q9:72,18:31,22:23,47:15,52:24,55:56,56:21,76:5,78:33,76:12-19)

These are nothing but enticement for the desert Bedouin men of 7th century Arabia.

 

[Mages]

Scholars have written books on the night journey and detailed it's significance with detailed commentary, a mere dismissial on your part shows your weak understanding.

According to this account, prophet Muhammad toured the heavens & met the earlier prophets e.g Abraham, Moses , John the Baptist and Jesus there. In Islam, it is beleived that prophet Muhammad will be the first one to be resurrected to heaven on Judgement Day. Apart from Jesus who supposedly did not die & was taken up to heaven earlier, how come all the rest were already there?

 

[enkidu_]

If God swearing on horses & pen makes sense, then swearing on a samosa makes sense too. Throughout the Meccan period, the Arabs were ridiculing Muhammad’s claim of prophethood. As such, swearing on figs would convince them?

Perhaps you should spend less time on samosas and more on critical works engaging with balagha (Arabic rhetoric), Haleem's chapter in the book quoted would be a good beginning.

Al Mumin just means The Believer in the Quran. Using the same title for Allah is misleading. For trustee/guardian etc there are other commonly used words for it.

Semitic triliteral roots are polysemic, they have a set of meaning generally inter linked, I already explained you what I had to and I'm not here to entertain your low bow childish trolling.

Nope. It’s not about the Arabic translation of the Bible. It’s about verse 17:110 of the Quran.

Say (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم): "Invoke Allah or invoke the Most Gracious (Allah), by whatever name you invoke Him (it is the same), for to Him belong the Best Names. And offer your Salat (prayer) neither aloud nor in a low voice, but follow a way between. (Quran 17: 110)

Verse 17:110 is actually Allah defending the prophet. If you look at the tafsir below, this revelation came as a result of the pagans were surprised when prophet Muhammad referred to God as Ar-Rahman (The Beneficent) for the first time. Until then they only heard prophet Muhammad calling God as Allah. The people also clarified that Ar-Rahman was the God of another guy who claimed prophethood during the same Meccan period, al-Yamamah & have not heard it from anyone else.

https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=17&tAyahNo=110&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

That has no incidence on what I said. Pre Islamic Christian Arabs used Ar Rahman as well. In fact, recently a sixth century Christian Arabic inscription has been uncovered, with the name "Allah". And it's the same : it's not because unbelievers have misused a name and/or attribute of God that it invalidates it from an Islamic perspective.

It was narrated that 'Aishah the Mother of the Believers said:
"The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was called to the funeral of a child from among the Ansar. I said: 'O Messenger of Allah, glad tidings for him! He is one of the little birds of Paradise, who never did evil or reached the age of doing evil (i.e, the age of accountability).' He said: 'It may not be so, O 'Aishah! For Allah created people for Paradise, He created them for it when they were still in their father's loins, And He has created people for Hell, He created them for it when they were still in their fathers' loins.'"
English reference : Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 82 Sunan Ibn Majah ;The Book of the Sunnah - كتاب المقدمة

It's not about the soteriology of the children of unbelievers, which has been discussed in a previous post, but a generic hadith about pre destination.

 

[Devilsadvokat]

Enkidu - can God make a weight bigger than He can carry? Have you got scripture for that?

 

[Musakhel]

According to this account, prophet Muhammad toured the heavens & met the earlier prophets e.g Abraham, Moses , John the Baptist and Jesus there. In Islam, it is beleived that prophet Muhammad will be the first one to be resurrected to heaven on Judgement Day. Apart from Jesus who supposedly did not die & was taken up to heaven earlier, how come all the rest were already there?

Different levels of Heaven.

 

[tonmoy]

Enkidu - can God make a weight bigger than He can carry? Have you got scripture for that?

lol...... Good one!!

 

[Musakhel]

Enkidu - can God make a weight bigger than He can carry? Have you got scripture for that?

This is based on the false assumption that omnipotence is a created ability, rather omnipotence is one of Allah attributes by necessity, it was never created, this also fits into the opinion of Ahlus sunnah that Allah does not change, change is something which happens within created beings not the uncretead Lord of the Universe.

 

[tonmoy]

This is based on the false assumption that omnipotence is a created ability, rather omnipotence is one of Allah attributes by necessity, it was never created, this also fits into the opinion of Ahlus sunnah that Allah does not change, change is something which happens within created beings not the uncretead Lord of the Universe.

So what is the answer to the question
Can he create a weight bigger than he can carry?

 

[Devilsadvokat]

This is based on the false assumption that omnipotence is a created ability, rather omnipotence is one of Allah attributes by necessity, it was never created, this also fits into the opinion of Ahlus sunnah that Allah does not change, change is something which happens within created beings not the uncretead Lord of the Universe.

Do you understand what you write?

 

[Musakhel]

So what is the answer to the question
Can he create a weight bigger than he can carry?

This whole assumption does not exist with regards to Allah, because it is based on the false belief that Allah can go from all powerful to not All powerful.

 

[Mages]

That has no incidence on what I said. Pre Islamic Christian Arabs used Ar Rahman as well. In fact, recently a sixth century Christian Arabic inscription has been uncovered, with the name "Allah". And it's the same : it's not because unbelievers have misused a name and/or attribute of God that it invalidates it from an Islamic perspective.

In 17:110, Allah finds it urgent enought to defend the prophet by sending a verse, saying to the Meccan Arabs, Ar-Rahman or whatever, all good names belong to Him. That's because they apprently never heard him using that name for God and questioned him. Sura 17 is chronologically chapter 50. If you look at the Quran today, the word Ar- Rahman is all over it from Chapter 1 , 1st verse till the last Chapter. If the prophet have been uttering it for the earlier 49 Suras, why would the Meccan Arabs be surprised. It doesn't make sense. Did someone edit the Quran & added the Ar Rahman in the earlier 49 suras?

It's not about the soteriology of the children of unbelievers, which has been discussed in a previous post, but a generic hadith about pre destination.

I refered the hadith because someone posted that innocent children go to heaven. The prophet is clear that even sinless children of believing Muslims may end up in Hell. Thats all. And i'm not interested in asking for justifications because there shouldn't be any.

 

[Mages]

Different levels of Heaven.

Resurrection of the Dead is ONLY after the Judgement Day. So no one can be there in heavens which ever level, before Resurrection, except for Jesus whom God took with Him. This Isra & Miraj story contradicts Islam’s most basic theology.

 

[Mamoon]

Resurrection of the Dead is ONLY after the Judgement Day. So no one can be there in heavens which ever level, before Resurrection, except for Jesus whom God took with Him. This Isra & Miraj story contradicts Islam’s most basic theology.

While I personally believe that the ascension to heaven, the buraq and journey from Makkah to Jerusalem to be highly metaphorical with no physical basis, the aspect of the story that you highlighted is not contradictory because the rules do not apply to prophets and messengers.

They were the chosen ones and do not have to go through the trial on the Day of Resurrection.

As per Islamic belief, all the prophets, messengers and the Prophet Muhammad PBUH’s companions (the ones who were given tidings of heaven during their lifetime) are in heaven already.

 

[enkidu_]

Enkidu - can God make a weight bigger than He can carry? Have you got scripture for that?

There has been many theological treatments of the "omnipotence paradox", but in few words it's a question with flawed premises because you have to admit that you definition of God isn't God anymore.

In 17:110, Allah finds it urgent enought to defend the prophet by sending a verse, saying to the Meccan Arabs, Ar-Rahman or whatever, all good names belong to Him. That's because they apprently never heard him using that name for God and questioned him. Sura 17 is chronologically chapter 50. If you look at the Quran today, the word Ar- Rahman is all over it from Chapter 1 , 1st verse till the last Chapter. If the prophet have been uttering it for the earlier 49 Suras, why would the Meccan Arabs be surprised. It doesn't make sense. Did someone edit the Quran & added the Ar Rahman in the earlier 49 suras?

Yes the basmala was revealed to the prophet (s) later on, and became a sort of marker for the beginning of a new sura as per the Companions. As Suyuti has a whole sub chapter on this in his book on the Qur'anic sciences, and that's the reason there's a jurisprudence difference between law schools on whether to consider it a part of the sura in itself or not.

I refered the hadith because someone posted that innocent children go to heaven. The prophet is clear that even sinless children of believing Muslims may end up in Hell. Thats all. And i'm not interested in asking for justifications because there shouldn't be any.

Your hadith was too generic, scholars treating of the question take more than one source, and on the specifics of the soteriology of children incl. those of unbelievers I already posted theological discussions on the issue previously.

 

[troodon]

Well according to science your great grandfather was a fish, what ludicrous science do they use to come to this conclusion?

Looks like someone was napping too much in their science class

Seriously, what kind of question is that? Your great grand father is not a fish. But if you go back millions of generations, all of our ancestors were not humans.