MrNoMorePropaganda
If you can say "people with different opinions", enemy is a big word. Though AF do indeed turns into a battlefield a lot, or more of a "minefield", but you know that's what humans should do be friends , as broad as the previous statement might appear, this can be enough to stop all our problems..Imagine the new horizons that might've sprung if all the enemies in one battlefield knew each other in a non-lethal ground.
So who's "ze german" and who's "saving private Ryan" ? :p
Being the source, if a contradiction was found in the Quran it will bring down the whole religion to ruins, without having to go through tens of thousands of Hadiths. And then again, each Muslim sect has its own set of acceptable & rejected Hadiths, technically yes : you will be wasting a lot of time.
1400 years weren't enough to solve the arguments between sects; which is all based on the Hadiths.
Tafsir (interpretation), is one way to check the different opinion about the verses. The problem in it, is that the different sects don't allow one to interpret by the themselves; restricting the individual to a narrow pass.
But personally, I never listened to them; rather I think the most logical way is to read & judge by both common sense & logic, without giving delusion a way into the conclusion.
About the "science of the Quran", it has this "twisting the verse to match a certain scientific theory or fact", that's why I don't like it too, though Saudies don't have what it takes to even come up with such theories, they had a long history of fighting them publicly in a hilarious way :
Or through embedded warnings against people who "spread such Quran science theories".
Let it be known of course, that the "religious" Wahhabies are almost against all types of science.
Nobody was meant to be immortal after all.. It's cold, grim and sad. But this life was never meant to be "lived"; at least to my personal opinion after reading the Quran.
With that already a fact -nobody knows when their death might come; nothing guaranteed-, belief in the afterlife injects optimism into the blood, yet that can't come without "doing good in this life", since the afterlife contains a hell that awaits sinners.
The death we see everyday -that touches believers & nonbelievers alike-, is the reminder that God left for the living. Flowers die too, so as animals, so as plants. It is sentenced on us to learn from it.
The standard is actually uniform : Birth & dying out on the start & end, while in between a standard set of events happen, all equal to each other.
In terms of conclusion at least.. It's all about accumulation, like this example :
Mohammed, Jack, Sonya, Rachel, Ali, David & Hideo were all born in wealthy families.
While Khalid, Robert, Selena, Maya, Cassie & Omar were all born in poor families in a war tormented region.
If wealthy individuals above thought about the hunger and misery their brethren are going through, decided to help, the efforts of them all would be accumulated to reach their needy buddies.
At the same time, if the second needy group stopped the fights between each other, accepted the help of others, and worked together, they will achieve a better life for themselves & escape the torment they fell under.
If for example one of the two groups -only- decided to do good, then that is the one who shall win it all in the afterlife. Both groups are actually facing the same exam without them knowing it : to fight greed & selfishness. The wealthy -under the influence of wealth- can be as greedy as the poor under the influence of poverty & misery.
In terms of judgement in the afterlife, everybody would get judged individually, according to their own specific exam. About this life, it's all about the efforts of the group combined. The Quran still leaves a door open to the intervention of God at any specific point to aid whomever he sees fit. And the promise was always given to those who do good.
Yet, if the individual didn't do "enough" out of laziness, greed, selfishness, then...I always imagine that's why this exam is so hard.
The as I side note I thought you'll appreciate, the origin of saying that word came from this verse :
Sura 18
( 23 ) And never say of anything, "Indeed, I will do that tomorrow,"
( 24 ) Except "If Allah wills." And remember your Lord when you forget it and say, "Perhaps my Lord will guide me to what is nearer than this to right conduct."
About what you said. If God allowed something to happen, it doesn't mean "he personally did it". This examination allows the possibility of somebody massacring masses of people, it's that flexible. He just allowed it to happen while he could've stopped it. He also created the tools that allow it to happen, yet he didn't do it by his hands.
A human being with a free will, chose to to do it.
Just like the incident at the holly mosque. The Saudi officials KNOW it's too risky to put cranes up that height, let alone the news of an approaching storm was already in the air, and it was already enough since they turned Mecca into Las Vegas. Yet they didn't listen, and caused a brutal death to 200 people.
Followed by the Menna Incident, one of the rumors is that a Saudi "royal convoy" passed by the place, which had one of its passes "shut closed" for security reasons. Which lead to the death of 700 people.
Saudies did technically, not God.
He hated & despised humans; he wanted to take as many as possible to hell. He didn't fight God; he knew he already lost before the fight even starts; actually it was a matter of jealousy.. check this verse :
Sura 7 Verses 12-18
That's why he made a final wish : "Reprieve me until the Day they are resurrected.". Vengeance, that was all. He always aims to get individuals to hell.
And that's why the exam started in the first place.
About creating him, every creature must get their chance, along with a full-free will. Satan turned mad after Adam, though he was an angel before him. Adam & Eve were Satan's test. which he failed miserably.
weak against storms, maybe.. but not against a demon described himself as being weak :
( Sura 4 Verse 76 ) Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of Taghut. So fight against the allies of Satan. Indeed, the plot of Satan has ever been weak.
And the pharaoh..Satan can't control nobody, unless that somebody opened their minds for him to control. This verse :
Sura 43 Verses 36-38
( 36 ) And whoever is blinded from remembrance of the Most Merciful - We appoint for him a devil, and he is to him a companion.
( 37 ) And indeed, the devils avert them from the way [of guidance] while they think that they are [rightly] guided
( 38 ) Until, when he comes to Us [at Judgement], he says [to his companion], "Oh, I wish there was between me and you the distance between the two sunrises - how wretched a companion."
About slavery, again it's a human sin that humans by priority need to to end first. The Quran prevented the act, yet to forged by humans once again.
Today, God guided a non-muslim to end it and so he did, though mark my words soon enough it will visit our world again once this civilization starts to crumble.
All I can say is this : humans were created in hardship. Yet, why didn't the free humans think by themselves to free their enslaved brethren ? A sin that all the ancients had on their backs.
With a specific verse ? no.
But the evidence of its condemning is pretty obvious. When people commit sins in Islam, they must do a "expiation" to remove it; an expiation must be a good act; specific too.
For example, if one broke their oath, they must expiate by "freeing a slave", Sura 5 Verse 89 . If taking slaves was okay, then how do Muslims expiate via freeing them ?
Then again, the verses you brought contain the word "Molk al Yameen" which through the hadith turned into "Abd = slave". Taking it by literal meaning,
Molk=possession,
al yameen = oath
I don't know how that turned into "slave = abd".
The scenario I draw in my mind, is the same I told you in a previous comment : poor people who swear oaths to serve a certain household/person. These are not "slaves" who were purchased. I truly think Arabs in the past couldn't bear such a rule, since it eliminates slavery, thus came up with as much hadiths as possible to twist the word "molk al yameen" into "slave".
Yameen refers to the right side, but in all the cases Molk Al Yameen was mentioned, it referred to the oath..the plural of yameen (ayman) means "oaths".
The rest if your comment is savored for later. I spent hours writing this one don't think I ignored the rest; I will come back to it.
Quote:I think if we met somewhere other than Atheist Forums we'd probably be friends. I remember there was this nice poem about an Englishman who met a German in a pub during World War One, I think it was, and he knew that if he met him on the battlefield they would certainly not be friends. Not that I consider this forum a battlefield. As we're here, I will try my best to present an argument.
If you can say "people with different opinions", enemy is a big word. Though AF do indeed turns into a battlefield a lot, or more of a "minefield", but you know that's what humans should do be friends , as broad as the previous statement might appear, this can be enough to stop all our problems..Imagine the new horizons that might've sprung if all the enemies in one battlefield knew each other in a non-lethal ground.So who's "ze german" and who's "saving private Ryan" ? :p
Quote:I really don't like Hadith precisely because it is a minefield, as you so eloquently put it yourself. If I start quoting Hadith someone doesn't think are authentic then I'm wasting my time. It's always best to stick to Quran in my opinion.
Being the source, if a contradiction was found in the Quran it will bring down the whole religion to ruins, without having to go through tens of thousands of Hadiths. And then again, each Muslim sect has its own set of acceptable & rejected Hadiths, technically yes : you will be wasting a lot of time.
1400 years weren't enough to solve the arguments between sects; which is all based on the Hadiths.
Quote:Quran: You have Tafsir for Iyaht, some Iyaht being related to certain Hadith, some people like to check what the Sahabah said and might also have to consider the time period the Tasfir was written in, and be mindful of the translation too. I don't like post science in the Quran narrative Qurans because I think they are biased and translated by Saudi stooges.
Tafsir (interpretation), is one way to check the different opinion about the verses. The problem in it, is that the different sects don't allow one to interpret by the themselves; restricting the individual to a narrow pass.
But personally, I never listened to them; rather I think the most logical way is to read & judge by both common sense & logic, without giving delusion a way into the conclusion.
About the "science of the Quran", it has this "twisting the verse to match a certain scientific theory or fact", that's why I don't like it too, though Saudies don't have what it takes to even come up with such theories, they had a long history of fighting them publicly in a hilarious way :
Or through embedded warnings against people who "spread such Quran science theories".
Let it be known of course, that the "religious" Wahhabies are almost against all types of science.
Quote:Moses story:
So Allah tests people by allowing many to die? I'm not sure I like how dismissive you are of mass killing. Like how when those hundreds of people died in Mecca this month (from the crane collapse and stampede)?
Nobody was meant to be immortal after all.. It's cold, grim and sad. But this life was never meant to be "lived"; at least to my personal opinion after reading the Quran.
With that already a fact -nobody knows when their death might come; nothing guaranteed-, belief in the afterlife injects optimism into the blood, yet that can't come without "doing good in this life", since the afterlife contains a hell that awaits sinners.
The death we see everyday -that touches believers & nonbelievers alike-, is the reminder that God left for the living. Flowers die too, so as animals, so as plants. It is sentenced on us to learn from it.
Quote:Every test is unique, which I don't think is fair. Don't you think that if life was really a test then there would be a standard set of circumstances? Teachers don't give their students different exams depending on how much they want a particular student to suffer. Every student in a class does the same test and they are judged against a standard set of criteria. So I reiterate: Life is not a fair test.
The standard is actually uniform : Birth & dying out on the start & end, while in between a standard set of events happen, all equal to each other.
In terms of conclusion at least.. It's all about accumulation, like this example :
Mohammed, Jack, Sonya, Rachel, Ali, David & Hideo were all born in wealthy families.
While Khalid, Robert, Selena, Maya, Cassie & Omar were all born in poor families in a war tormented region.
If wealthy individuals above thought about the hunger and misery their brethren are going through, decided to help, the efforts of them all would be accumulated to reach their needy buddies.
At the same time, if the second needy group stopped the fights between each other, accepted the help of others, and worked together, they will achieve a better life for themselves & escape the torment they fell under.
If for example one of the two groups -only- decided to do good, then that is the one who shall win it all in the afterlife. Both groups are actually facing the same exam without them knowing it : to fight greed & selfishness. The wealthy -under the influence of wealth- can be as greedy as the poor under the influence of poverty & misery.
In terms of judgement in the afterlife, everybody would get judged individually, according to their own specific exam. About this life, it's all about the efforts of the group combined. The Quran still leaves a door open to the intervention of God at any specific point to aid whomever he sees fit. And the promise was always given to those who do good.
Yet, if the individual didn't do "enough" out of laziness, greed, selfishness, then...I always imagine that's why this exam is so hard.
Quote:Fine; let's not dwell on that. But what I will say is that nothing happens except that which Allah wills; that's why people say insha'Allah all the time. So everything that happened was because of Allah.
The as I side note I thought you'll appreciate, the origin of saying that word came from this verse :
Sura 18
( 23 ) And never say of anything, "Indeed, I will do that tomorrow,"
( 24 ) Except "If Allah wills." And remember your Lord when you forget it and say, "Perhaps my Lord will guide me to what is nearer than this to right conduct."
About what you said. If God allowed something to happen, it doesn't mean "he personally did it". This examination allows the possibility of somebody massacring masses of people, it's that flexible. He just allowed it to happen while he could've stopped it. He also created the tools that allow it to happen, yet he didn't do it by his hands.
A human being with a free will, chose to to do it.
Just like the incident at the holly mosque. The Saudi officials KNOW it's too risky to put cranes up that height, let alone the news of an approaching storm was already in the air, and it was already enough since they turned Mecca into Las Vegas. Yet they didn't listen, and caused a brutal death to 200 people.
Followed by the Menna Incident, one of the rumors is that a Saudi "royal convoy" passed by the place, which had one of its passes "shut closed" for security reasons. Which lead to the death of 700 people.
Saudies did technically, not God.
Quote:Allah didn't have to create Satan in the first place. Satan knows that it will eventually lose. So why bother to fight Allah at all? Why defy Allah when you know it's impossible to win?
He hated & despised humans; he wanted to take as many as possible to hell. He didn't fight God; he knew he already lost before the fight even starts; actually it was a matter of jealousy.. check this verse :
Sura 7 Verses 12-18
That's why he made a final wish : "Reprieve me until the Day they are resurrected.". Vengeance, that was all. He always aims to get individuals to hell.
And that's why the exam started in the first place.
About creating him, every creature must get their chance, along with a full-free will. Satan turned mad after Adam, though he was an angel before him. Adam & Eve were Satan's test. which he failed miserably.
Quote:I'm pointing out the hypocrisy. A deity that allows slavery to take place must not value free will. If my free will was taken away by a kidnapper Allah would do nothing because apparently the free will of criminal(s) is more important than the free will of the victims.
Is Allah putting me in the position of helping to test a person if I were to take away their free will in some way? What if I don't want to? You're saying Allah allowed Satan to control Pharaoh and took away their free will. Of course, the Quran says that humans were created weak so we can't be expected to fight against Satan (even though we are).
weak against storms, maybe.. but not against a demon described himself as being weak :
( Sura 4 Verse 76 ) Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of Taghut. So fight against the allies of Satan. Indeed, the plot of Satan has ever been weak.
And the pharaoh..Satan can't control nobody, unless that somebody opened their minds for him to control. This verse :
Sura 43 Verses 36-38
( 36 ) And whoever is blinded from remembrance of the Most Merciful - We appoint for him a devil, and he is to him a companion.
( 37 ) And indeed, the devils avert them from the way [of guidance] while they think that they are [rightly] guided
( 38 ) Until, when he comes to Us [at Judgement], he says [to his companion], "Oh, I wish there was between me and you the distance between the two sunrises - how wretched a companion."
About slavery, again it's a human sin that humans by priority need to to end first. The Quran prevented the act, yet to forged by humans once again.
Today, God guided a non-muslim to end it and so he did, though mark my words soon enough it will visit our world again once this civilization starts to crumble.
All I can say is this : humans were created in hardship. Yet, why didn't the free humans think by themselves to free their enslaved brethren ? A sin that all the ancients had on their backs.
Quote:The Quran might not tell people to keep slaves (something I'd dispute), but does it expressly tell them not to keep slaves? In some verses, the Quran worded in such a way like it knows people around Muhammad take/have slaves. Quran 33:55 mentions slaves, as does Quran 33:50.
With a specific verse ? no.
But the evidence of its condemning is pretty obvious. When people commit sins in Islam, they must do a "expiation" to remove it; an expiation must be a good act; specific too.
For example, if one broke their oath, they must expiate by "freeing a slave", Sura 5 Verse 89 . If taking slaves was okay, then how do Muslims expiate via freeing them ?
Then again, the verses you brought contain the word "Molk al Yameen" which through the hadith turned into "Abd = slave". Taking it by literal meaning,
Molk=possession,
al yameen = oath
I don't know how that turned into "slave = abd".
The scenario I draw in my mind, is the same I told you in a previous comment : poor people who swear oaths to serve a certain household/person. These are not "slaves" who were purchased. I truly think Arabs in the past couldn't bear such a rule, since it eliminates slavery, thus came up with as much hadiths as possible to twist the word "molk al yameen" into "slave".
Yameen refers to the right side, but in all the cases Molk Al Yameen was mentioned, it referred to the oath..the plural of yameen (ayman) means "oaths".
The rest if your comment is savored for later. I spent hours writing this one
don't think I ignored the rest; I will come back to it.
