Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Lights on the way
by akay
Today at 03:33 AM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Yesterday at 07:04 PM

News From Syria
December 15, 2024, 01:02 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
December 15, 2024, 12:13 AM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
December 11, 2024, 01:25 PM

New Britain
December 08, 2024, 10:30 AM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
December 06, 2024, 01:27 PM

Ashes to beads: South Kor...
December 03, 2024, 09:44 PM

Gaza assault
by zeca
November 27, 2024, 07:13 PM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 24, 2024, 06:05 PM

Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 19, 2024, 11:36 PM

Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Hi from on the fence muslim

 (Read 119392 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 5 6 78 9 ... 25 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #180 - January 09, 2011, 11:36 PM


    lol, as insightful as ever. missed you bro  far away hug

    Do you agree with him Huh?

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #181 - January 09, 2011, 11:54 PM

    Good point.
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #182 - January 10, 2011, 12:10 AM

    ok, suppose eternalism was proven to be the truth, would you ticket a traffic offender? yes/no?


    I would, given that others are limited to their linear view of time.  This can only be answered philosophically though.  Once we move it to the practical,  that is where the "problems" start, as I am sure you already know.  

    Edit: let me rephrase that because the question isn't as obvious as it first appears.  Police officers are usually given discretion based on past facto and intermediate knowledge. In this same sense, if I had knowledge of all future actions then a simply breaking a traffic law would not be enough to justify a ticket.

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #183 - January 10, 2011, 01:16 AM

    @ MB

    Quote
    The imperative to kneel was not issued to Iblis. The passage in Sura al-Araf says Allah told the angels to bow. Iblis, according to the mainstream view, is not an angel. And no other class of beings are so instructed. In the light of this glaring omission, the interrogation of Iblis which follows thereafter is completely devoid of sense unless you contend that he really was an angel which raises further problems. In nowhere in the Quran is anybody except the winged boys instructed to scrape their heads furiously on the floor and stick their buttocks majestically in the sky.


    True, by default without knowing anything else, Iblis was an angel since he was supposed to kneel with angels. But Satan always justified his disobedience with his being created out of fire This already gave him away as a Jinn. You do know that the Quran claims that Jinn were created before man and were created out of fire.

    15:26-27
    And indeed, We created man from dried (sounding) clay of altered mud. And the jinn, We created aforetime from the smokeless flame of fire.
    55:14-15
    He created man (Adam) from sounding clay like the clay of pottery. And the jinn He created from a smokeless flame of fire.

    Quote
    Your distinction between sinning out of pride and out of weakness is tenuous. Pride, like all other shortcomings, is born out of weakness. I don't contest that God may shut his door of compassion on a person. That's fine. But that raises more contradictions than it solves. It belies the Quran's claim that he "forgives all sins". That's plainly false. And it blows great big holes in his claim to be the "Most Merciful". A being who will bear a grude against someone to the utmost limits of eternity for a single act of dissent in a life otherwise spotlessly virtuous is not a model of compassion.


    Pride, according to Quran, is not weakness, it does not reflect want or need. God is proud, according to the Quran. Regardless of whether you agree with the Quranic view of pride, we are discussing here why would the God of the Quran view pride as a very grave sin. If one is proud (towards God), they effectively deify themselves (refer to the Quranic story of the man who entered his garden, and was too proud, he effectively deified himself).

    As to God’s being most merciful, that’s another topic, and certainly no one needs to discuss the story of Satan’s rebellion to question this Quranic claim. The *problem of evil* is way better contestant as a counter evidence.

    Quote
    One thing may be conclusively shown from Sura al-Araf, and one thing only: Iblis was ejected from heaven after being granted immortality to sow the seeds of rebellion. Full stop. Everything else is idle speculation that cannot be borne out either by the Quran or the Ahadith. You spin a vast polemical tale of visiting rights and a garden of eden situated on the earth. That's cute. I hope you write a novel someday. But it cannot be scripturally sustained. As it presently stands the Quran drives incoherence to escape velocity.

    It would have been nice if you actually explained how exactly you think the evidence I shown you from the Quran was not convincing that Adam’s abode before he was even created was earth and that the angels and Iblis were in heaven (rather than the garden) when Iblis refused to bow down.

    Quote
    Your view seems to be that we are not given the full story, that a great deal transpired in the higher spheres not accounted for in the Quran. Here, I would agree. The conversation between Satan and God for instance strikes me forcibly as a comic strip version, with God cast in the role of the Superhero and Satan in the Supervillain. There is no emotional feeling here, no sign of a long and close friendship tragically rent asunder. Iblis must have been dear to Allah because alone among all the angels in the Choir Invisible, his devotion to him was freely chosen. And yet the few (very, very few) words exchanged between them sounds nothing like a real conversation between good friends at all, or even between a loving master and a cherished servant. Iblis switches at the drop of a hat from a life of complete devotion and piety to one of Supernatural Evil, and Allah is swift to isssue violent threats against his most valued companion (for angels are mere robots). It reads like a poorly composed Hollywood script of real life.

    I would agree that a lot of stories in the Quran seem to be missing a lot of details, but when it comes to the story of Satan’s fall of grace, no more details were needed. The guy’s devotion to God was *not real*. When the true extent of this devotion was put to the test, Satan said NO! His head was so swollen with arrogance and conceit, he forgot that his place is first and foremost, a lowly slave of God! True, I would imagine poor Satan got so full of himself because of god’s generosity towards him. Much like the man who entered his gorgeous garden, and got so full of pride he even deified himself by thinking that the God who bestowed upon him this garden is *obliged* to shower him with more gifts.  

    Quote
    It seems transparent that whoever wrote the Quran was simply retelling the scattered bits of lore that he snatched from the Old Testament. We know that Muhammad lived among Christians and Jews. So granted, the Quran does not have the full story. But that only demonstrates that so poor a composition is not Divine. To plug the missing gaps of the story of man's Fall you are free to float as many fanciful conjectures as you like about visiting rights and separate heavens for Iblis and Adam, but they are not grounded upon documentary evidence.


    Hon, the Bible does NOT have the story of Satan refusing to bow down to Adam or anything remotely similar! What gave you the idea that the Bible contained such a story?

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #184 - January 10, 2011, 01:22 AM

    I would, given that others are limited to their linear view of time.  This can only be answered philosophically though.  Once we move it to the practical,  that is where the "problems" start, as I am sure you already know.  

    Edit: let me rephrase that because the question isn't as obvious as it first appears.  Police officers are usually given discretion based on past facto and intermediate knowledge. In this same sense, if I had knowledge of all future actions then a simply breaking a traffic law would not be enough to justify a ticket.


    why? because the guy who ran the red light had no choice?

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #185 - January 10, 2011, 01:28 AM

    @ Bardhi

    I hope you won’t think me too rude as to respond to one of your posts although it wasn’t addressed to me. This is regarding this post:
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=14003.msg387790#msg387790

    Quote
    I know that Satan being an Angel is a contradiction with how angels are portrayed in Islam (non free will beings) but i think that Mohamed rather made a mistake here, since he copy pasted the story from the bible, but then later remembered that in his new story angels can't rebel like in Christianity/Judaism, so that's why the "Jinn factor" came by as a savior of the day...  ....


    Yes, in Christianity demons are fallen angels, but NOT according to Judiasm. Angels don’t fall in Judiasm, just like in Isalm.

    http://www.beingjewish.com/basics/satan.html Excerpts from the link:
    [The truth is that Satan has a job to do, just like every other angel. And angels have no free will. They do as Hashem commands them.]
    [… The angels are spiritual and holy, without any physical or unholy presence, and the presence of Hashem's holiness permeates them entirely. Angels, unlike humans, are therefore constantly and fully aware of Hashem's Presence everywhere. Could you stay dry in the ocean? An angel could not stop being holy, and can do no wrong. There is holiness everywhere in Creation, everywhere in the universe, and angels are made of the same thing. An angel could not stop serving G-d even if he tried.]
    [The truth is that Satan has a job to do, just like every other angel. And angels have no free will. They do as Hashem commands them.]
    [A man once came to a great Rabbi, very troubled. He said to the Rabbi, "Please pray to Hashem to take away my Evil Inclination. I do so many sins, and I want to stop sinning!"The Rabbi answered, "Then what would be your purpose in this world, if you had no Evil Inclination? Your purpose in life is to overcome your personal Evil Inclination. That is what you were created for! Hashem has enough angels in heaven. He doesn't need one more. He created you human, so that you could improve yourself."]


    EDIT: btw, like I explained to mount a bison, the Islamic version of satan's fall of grace is nowhere to be found in the bible.


    In the Bible, Satan wanted to overthrow Yahweh, he convinced half the angels in heaven to follow his lead... and led a rebellion against Yahweh... but the other half were on yahweh's side...  they were led by the Arch Angel Michael.. Michael's army of angels defeated Satan's army of angels and Yahweh got to keep His throne! Hallelujah!

    Satan's reward for his daring move was that he was given the keys of Hell (some say this means that he was given the reign over Hell)... the angels who fought with Satan against Yahweh all became Demons.

    If Muhammed was an imposter, then he must have been a multi-lingual scholar, who didn't like this account from the Western canonized Bible, so instead he plagiarized AND distorted another account from the book of "Life of Adam and Eve"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_of_Adam_and_Eve

    Quote
    Then Michael came; he summoned all the troops of angels and told them, "Bow down before the likeness and the image of the divinity." And then, when Michael summoned them and all had bowed down to you, he summoned me [Satan] also. And I told him, "Go away from me, for I shall not bow down to him who is younger than me; indeed, I am master prior to him and it is proper for him to bow down to me.


    What do we know about this book?

    Quote
    The ancient versions of the Life of Adam and Eve are: the Greek Apocalypse of Moses, the Latin Life of Adam and Eve, the Slavonic Life of Adam and Eve, the Armenian Penitence of Adam, the Georgian Book of Adam,[1] and one or two fragmentary Coptic versions.

       

     

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #186 - January 10, 2011, 02:01 AM

    why? because the guy who ran the red light had no choice?


     When you run a red light, you are not actually harming anyone you are just being, in a theoretical sense, negligent of others by creating a higher risk of accident.  This higher risk of accident applies because we have imperfect knowledge and without foreseeing the future we guess that if that the situation were rerun thousands of times it would elevate the number of accidents that occur.  Now with perfect knowledge a judge would have to judge according to my own personal abilities.  If I had the ability to run every red light and never get hit or perhaps that percentage is less, than I would be judged less leniently than say someone who, though perfect knowledge, it was determined had more of a risk of getting hit.  

    The this variance and even non punishment for breaking the law would occur even with free will and voluntarily breaking the law. 

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #187 - January 10, 2011, 02:11 AM

    ok,

    1- suppose eternalism was proven to be the truth.
    2- suppose you were the judge presiding over a murder case where the accused allegedly slit the throat of a 2 years old toddler and fed it to his dog.
    3- The accused was proven guilty.
    4- you do not know the future, you just believe eternalism is true.

    would you, at least, send this murderer to jail? yes/no?

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #188 - January 10, 2011, 02:57 AM

    True, by default without knowing anything else, Iblis was an angel since he was supposed to kneel with angels. But Satan always justified his disobedience with his being created out of fire This already gave him away as a Jinn. You do know that the Quran claims that Jinn were created before man and were created out of fire.

    We learn nothing about the physical form of Iblis by the description that he was made from flames because light, from which the angels are made, comes only from heat. A better illustration is from Sura al-Kahf in which, alone among all the other passages of the Quran, he is set apart from the angels and identified as a "Jinn " (consult 18:50). Setting aside the contradictions about the nature of Iblis momentarily, the problem still remains why Iblis was chastised for not bowing when only the angels are so called upon. The admonishment to Satan for not piously genuflecting makes no sense because he was not instructed to.

    Pride, according to Quran, is not weakness, it does not reflect want or need. God is proud, according to the Quran. Regardless of whether you agree with the Quranic view of pride, we are discussing here why would the God of the Quran view pride as a very grave sin. If one is proud (towards God), they effectively deify themselves (refer to the Quranic story of the man who entered his garden, and was too proud, he effectively deified himself).

    Pride may not be a weakness born of naked want, but neither is anger or jealously or deception or a countless number of other shortcomings of which Islam disapproves. If anything, Iblis was more jealous of the exalted station unfairly given to the new kid on the block otherwise known as Adam than proud. In any event pride is nowhere singled out as any worse than other sins. Agreed, pride may be one of Allah's names, but so is compassion, yet nobody suggests that compassion is the sole property of God. Pride is a naturally occuring human emotion made by God. It's hardly unexpected or at odds with human (devil?) nature. 

    As to God's being most merciful, that's another topic, and certainly no one needs to discuss the story of Satan's rebellion to question this Quranic claim. The *problem of evil* is way better contestant as a counter evidence.

    Not so. If God is marketed as the absolver of "all" sin, it's a relevant question as to why a creature otherwise spotlessly virtuous cannot be forgiven should he prove contrite. Redemption is central to the drama. Your conception of Iblis is not of a feeling, thinking, loving, hurting creature. Your view is a two dimensional pantomime villain in a cartoon strip. It's a caricature. Iblis was actively in the company of Allah for eons, and was for a time his most exalted companion owing to his capcity for free will, angels being no more than robotic yes men, but you seem to labour under the impression that a creature like Iblis who is decidedly mentally superior to you or I, is incapable of changing his mind. Ever.

    It would have been nice if you actually explained how exactly you think the evidence I shown you from the Quran was not convincing that Adam's abode before he was even created was earth and that the angels and Iblis were in heaven (rather than the garden) when Iblis refused to bow down.

    The Quran says that Adam was sent down from Jannah in the same manner as Iblis. Had he not sunk his teeth into the fruit, he would have luxuriated in the shady groves of heaven. If it is your contention that Adam was always pre-destined to be sent down to earth, then Adam and Iblis were simply following a pre-rehearsed script and cannot be held culpaple for their rebellion. Predestination abolishes free will.

    I would agree that a lot of stories in the Quran seem to be missing a lot of details, but when it comes to the story of Satan's fall of grace, no more details were needed. The guy's devotion to God was *not real*. When the true extent of this devotion was put to the test, Satan said NO!

    On display here are too many unfounded assumptions from which is drawn even more unfounded inferences. We can disern absolutely nothing about the sincerity of Iblis' devotion prior to his fall out with God. Godly men often sin in the full presence of God as Adam attests. Had Satan's devotion proved insincere it is hard to see why Allah would keep him around at all unless he was a blockhead. You maintain that all the facts are in about the incident, that the Quranic story is complete. I doubt this. Were the few words that are ascribed to the feuding parties all that was said between them? Nothing else happened, nothing else said? Is that how good friends speak to each other?

    Hon, the Bible does NOT have the story of Satan refusing to bow down to Adam or anything remotely similar! What gave you the idea that the Bible contained such a story?

    My mistake. I meant the Fall of man. The Biblical narrative from which most of the Quran's tales are lifted proceeds in a linear sequence that is richly detailed. It is more flushed out than the haphazard retellings of the Quran. Contrast the Book of Job for instance with the Quran's mini version in Suratul Yusuf.
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #189 - January 10, 2011, 03:04 AM

    ok,

    1- suppose eternalism was proven to be the truth.
    2- suppose you were the judge presiding over a murder case where the accused allegedly slit the throat of a 2 years old toddler and fed it to his dog.
    3- The accused was proven guilty.
    4- you do not know the future, you just believe eternalism is true.

    would you, at least, send this murderer to jail? yes/no?


    I would. 

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #190 - January 10, 2011, 04:13 AM

    @ MAS

    suppose the philosophical view of *eternalism* was proven to be correct, would you agree that punishing the guilty would still be appropriate? (this is a purely philosophical question, btw).

    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=8855.msg222177#msg222177

    Hi Debunker,
    I have gone through your posts and I really admire your rational approach to understanding religion.   Afro
    Coming to your question I would like to answer the one you elaborated here

    ok,

    1- suppose eternalism was proven to be the truth.
    2- suppose you were the judge presiding over a murder case where the accused allegedly slit the throat of a 2 years old toddler and fed it to his dog.
    3- The accused was proven guilty.
    4- you do not know the future, you just believe eternalism is true.

    would you, at least, send this murderer to jail? yes/no?

    I would take eternalism comparing life like a movie on a cassette (with reel) Assume fwd and rwd do not work.  All the frames are there on the reel till the end of the movie. I have knowledge of the one which is currently passing over the head (of player) and those that have already passed.
    The above crime is committed. Now I have to decide whether to punish the guilty or not. Here the problem comes. I can not be the one deciding as script was written. If the accused has to be punished I just become a means (an actor) to present the punishment.
    Similarly the victim was supposed to be killed. Killer only acted his part. It is complicated but I lean more towards the idea: "No free will means no punishment deserved" in the given scenario.

    Now if I am watching the movie, I will definitely hold the director or the script writer responsible for making a violent movie portraying injustice.

    The problem I find with eternalism is that I think everything at a given x1,y1,z1 and t1 will be result of things happening and choices being made at all other x.y,z and t where t < t1. So any action (not predetermined) happening at x,y,z,t can keep on changing x1, y1, z1, and t1 until t equals t1.

    One plausible concept I like explaining combination of free will and predetermination is to think of a website as an example.
    The contents of website are predetermined. The one browsing the site is presented two links say "Do Sin" and "Do Virtue". It is free will of one browsing to select either of these. It is predetermined though that selecting "Do Sin" will take him/her to "Welcome to Hell Page" and "Do Virtue" will take him/her to "Welcome to Heaven Page"


    BTW welcome to heaven page may have the message "Watch live virgins. You must be muslim or insane to enter"  Wink
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #191 - January 10, 2011, 04:25 AM

    I'm sorry was that a *yes* or a *no*?

    Perhaps my question was not clear. Eternalism does not have anything to do with God or religion. It's a philosophy void of any pre-assumption of a creator of time.

    My question again was: suppose that Eternalism was proven to be an accurate description of the nature of time, should governments abolish the penal system? yes/no?

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #192 - January 10, 2011, 04:44 AM


    My question again was: suppose that Eternalism was proven to be an accurate description of the nature of time, should governments abolish the penal system? yes/no?

    No. The penal system should not be abolished assuming government does not know the future. But the penal system should be fair enough to consider there is no free will. Can we do that is another question

    You are implying o assume Eternalism is true as you want a specific answer. Which is fine. However I find eternalism not making any sense. It makes every action or decision baseless. Somehow I can not comprehend the idea of asking anyone for a decision on punishment and also implying that future is predetermined.
    In case there is no eternalism it makes sense to keep the penal system as it will help in avoiding crimes in future.
    In case there is eternalism no decision on government's  part makes any difference.
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #193 - January 10, 2011, 05:04 AM

    btw welcome to the forum MAS and AbaAbdillah - you both are very likeable and I hope you stick around  Smiley


    Thanks AbuY
    Already read a lot about you  Afro
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #194 - January 10, 2011, 05:18 AM

    @ MAS

    Eternalism necessarily implying determinism is (philosophiaclly) disputed.

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #195 - January 10, 2011, 05:27 AM

    @ MAS

    Eternalism necessarily implying determinism is (philosophiaclly) disputed.

    Ok in that case I will lean more towards my answer that Penal system should be there.
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #196 - January 10, 2011, 05:30 AM

    @ MB

    Quote
    We learn nothing about the physical form of Iblis by the description that he was made from flames because light, from which the angels are made, comes only from heat.

    being created of light is different from being created from fire. Heat and light are different forms of energy. Besides, heat is not the only source of light. But let’s keep it simple: heat and light are two different things.
    Quote
    A better illustration is from Sura al-Kahf in which, alone among all the other passages of the Quran, he is set apart from the angels and identified as a "Jinn " (consult 18:50).

    I agree 18:50 is enough to explain Satan’s nature, but remember the issue is that you maintain that 18:50 contradicts the other verses regarding the nature of Iblis (being a Jinn) when it simply doesn’t because in the other verses, Iblis was always quoted as being created from fire.
    Quote
    Setting aside the contradictions about the nature of Iblis momentarily, the problem still remains why Iblis was chastised for not bowing when only the angels are so called upon. The admonishment to Satan for not piously genuflecting makes no sense because he was not instructed to.

    The best you can claim is that the verses are badly constructed (linguistically speaking), because while god says he ordered the angels to bow, we see Satan questioned for his disobedience and in his defense he reveals his non-angelic nature (being created of fire), so for linguistic coherence, the verses, should have begun with God ordering the angels and Satan. Was this viewed as a linguistic incoherence in the eyes of 7th century Arabs? I don’t know.

    Quote
    Pride may not be a weakness born of naked want, but neither is anger or jealously or deception or a countless number of other shortcomings of which Islam disapproves. If anything, Iblis was more jealous of the exalted station unfairly given to the new kid on the block otherwise known as Adam than proud. In any event pride is nowhere singled out as any worse than other sins. Agreed, pride may be one of Allah's names, but so is compassion, yet nobody suggests that compassion is the sole property of God. Pride is a naturally occuring human emotion made by God. It's hardly unexpected or at odds with human (devil?) nature.

     
    The issue is not pride per se. If I’m arrogant in my dealings with others, then that’s certainly bad, but if I’m proud with God, that’s entirely different. And yes, disobedience (out of pride) was sure singled out as a very serious sin, check out:

    7:48 (The Men of the Heights calling Hell dwellers proud, implying that they themselves did not committ this sin).

    39: 59-60; 39:72;  40:76 (Hell is the abode for the proud).

    40: 56 (the proud argues about signs with limited knowledge).

    32:15 (only the humble believes).

    See also, for example: 37:35; 4:173; 7:36; 16:29; 25:21;  7:75-76; 7:88; 7:133; 16:22-23; 6:93; 40:60; 71:7; 50:24; 74:16, among many.

    Quote
    Not so. If God is marketed as the absolver of "all" sin, it's a relevant question as to why a creature otherwise spotlessly virtuous cannot be forgiven should he prove contrite. Redemption is central to the drama. Your conception of Iblis is not of a feeling, thinking, loving, hurting creature. Your view is a two dimensional pantomime villain in a cartoon strip. It's a caricature. Iblis was actively in the company of Allah for eons, and was for a time his most exalted companion owing to his capcity for free will, angels being no more than robotic yes men, but you seem to labour under the impression that a creature like Iblis who is decidedly mentally superior to you or I, is incapable of changing his mind. Ever.

    I never said Satan was incapable of changing his mind. I said he was cast out of God’s mercy forever and thus he had no second chance.
    Now, God could absolve all sins if He *chooses* to. You think that His choosing not to forgive Satan doesn’t reflect well on the Most Compassionate. How about Eternal Hell for many people? How about the problem of evil? If you need to use what you think is valid evidence against the compassion of God, the story of Satan’s fall is not a very good candidate. But you seem to think otherwise. Btw, would you also categorize God’s rejection of the Pharoah’s repentance as cruel? If no, how’s that different from Satan’s case?


    Quote
    The Quran says that Adam was sent down from Jannah in the same manner as Iblis. Had he not sunk his teeth into the fruit, he would have luxuriated in the shady groves of heaven.

     
    No, the Quran speaks of Adam’s expulsion *independently* of Satan’s banishment. These were two consecutive events. And while the Garden was specifically named as the place from where Adam was expelled, Satan’s prior place was heaven.

    Quote
    If it is your contention that Adam was always pre-destined to be sent down to earth, then Adam and Iblis were simply following a pre-rehearsed script and cannot be held culpaple for their rebellion. Predestination abolishes free will.

    I never said such things. God told the angels He’s making man a Khalifa on earth, even before He created man, so man’s abode was earth. The Quran tells Adam first dwelled in the Garden and then was cast out of it… there’s absolutely no need to speculate that the Garden was anywhere else other than a place on Earth, since God said He would place Adam on earth. The confusing part, for you, is probably the use of the Arabic verb *Ihbitoo*, which can literally mean to descend, but it also means to go to an inferior state (and the same exact verb was used in the story of the Israelites in the Quran).

    Quote
    On display here are too many unfounded assumptions from which is drawn even more unfounded inferences. We can disern absolutely nothing about the sincerity of Iblis' devotion prior to his fall out with God. Godly men often sin in the full presence of God as Adam attests. Had Satan's devotion proved insincere it is hard to see why Allah would keep him around at all unless he was a blockhead. You maintain that all the facts are in about the incident, that the Quranic story is complete. I doubt this. Were the few words that are ascribed to the feuding parties all that was said between them? Nothing else happened, nothing else said? Is that how good friends speak to each other?

    You’re not very fond of speculation, so don’t speculate yourself. There is no reference in the Quran as to how long before Adam Iblis was *around*. Besides, I didn’t say that Satan was necessarily insincere all along, and I didn’t speculate when I said that his devotion was fake by the time the test was set for him as it is proven by his choosing his pride over God. You said elsewhere it was jealousy, that’s also a speculation on your part. He clearly expressed his pride was the reason, so we don’t know if it was jealousy too.
    Now, I said the story was, to me, complete as to explain reasons of Satan’s fall. Perhaps there were a lot more details, but they’re irrelevant to the moral of the story.

    Quote
    My mistake. I meant the Fall of man. The Biblical narrative from which most of the Quran's tales are lifted proceeds in a linear sequence that is richly detailed. It is more flushed out than the haphazard retellings of the Quran. Contrast the Book of Job for instance with the Quran's mini version in Suratul Yusuf.


    I’m sorry when you said:
    Quote
    It seems transparent that whoever wrote the Quran was simply retelling the scattered bits of lore that he snatched from the Old Testament. We know that Muhammad lived among Christians and Jews. So granted, the Quran does not have the full story. But that only demonstrates that so poor a composition is not Divine. To plug the missing gaps of the story of man's Fall you are free to float as many fanciful conjectures as you like about visiting rights and separate heavens for Iblis and Adam, but they are not grounded upon documentary evidence.


    I had to assume that you were referring to the Fall of Satan since your gripe was centered around the lack of details in Satan’s part of the story.
      

    True, the stories are short (and I admit some are actually too short as to be completely vague) but the point is the moral of the story. I don’t think the Quran’s intention was our entertainment. A notable exception to this style of retelling stories is the story of Joseph. Honestly, I’m puzzled as to why this story, specifically, was retold with much more details.    

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #197 - January 11, 2011, 09:49 PM

    Sorry I did not know I had to order my questions from simpler to complex ones &#160;Smiley
    The questions are easy. I wish the answers were not complex or impossible without making 10000s of assumptions.
    From what I understand you mean God needed a creature who can discover him and submit using its own free will. Otherwise God was known and worshiped by Angels too. God loved his creation and did not want to punish it.

    I have to admit that you have given a very plausible explanation if taken independently
    All this should have been acceptable if:
    1) The punishment was not for eternity for those sharing partners with God
    2) Or God gave equal chance to Adam and his children in passing the trial. You have mentioned that forgiveness leads to heaven however you need to be a believer in Allah to ask for forgiveness. Also remember the hadith about 99% people going to hell.
    You can say that God has given so many ways to Human to end into Heaven. Still 99% end in hell. This means humans are really dumb. &#160;Manufacturing fault is manufacturer's responsibility too.

    3) If Adam got misguided then why extend the trial to all his children.
    4) As Bardhi_i_zi mentioned how can it be a trial if result is already known.
    5) God had a selfish reason of being known and worshiped so he started this trial. And yes it does seem like a script if the conclusion is already known. What is the point of wasting time. God can put people directly in heaven and hell as he already knows where they will eventually end up.


    Bismillah

    Salam.

    I am just passing by quickly, and I do not have alot of time to write in detail.
    I apologise if I have not been empathetic and if I have misunderstood any of your points, about the person who creates a gun and knows the future.
    If I wasn't empathetic, I would not have sacrificed my time to try and help. I do not in anyway say that to make you feel as if you are burdening me. I just want you to completely understand that I am in no way whatsoever trying to sound the least bit harsh to you.
    You have come up with several points, and I will try my best to address each and every last one of them inshaAllah.

    Right now, I will answer your second point.

    2) Your point is that the MAJORITY will fail and end up in hell, right? And that not everyone of mankind is given a fair chance.
    In my previous post, I showed how difficult it is for a person to wind up in hell, given how Merciful God is, and how he forgives sins that reach up to the skies, and that it is easier to earn good deeds, than it is to earn bad ones. Also I showed how the ones who are ignorant will be spared.
    So the hadith you quoted about 99 of everyone 100, or there is a another hadith which says 999 of every 1000 (but that is talking about another group of people and not the same one) are going to wind up in hell, sounds as if the majority of humanity will not be saved.

    Also I mentioned that some scholars say that hell is not eternal, and others say it is, BUT only for the ones who shared partners.
    I also said that hell is a purification, and that the ones who are aware of the ONENESS of God, and they accept this with convincing proof and have faith, will enter paradise, but for those who are not convinced because of circumstances or they weren't sent a messenger or never heard, then Allah will be Merciful and it is hoped that they enter paradise.
    Moreover I mentioned that the insane who do not know right and wrong, the mentally challenged, handicapped, and infants, will not be taken into account, will also be saved.
    And the sinners, will remain temporarily, as long as God wills.

    So now that we are clear about all of the above.

    The hadith that you were referring to was as follows:

     The Prophet said: On the day of Resurrection Allah will say: O
    Adam! Adam will reply: Labbaik our Lord, and Sadaik. Then there will be a loud call
    (saying): Allah orders you to take from among your offspring a mission for the (Hell) Fire.
    Adam will say: O Lord! How many are they for the (Hell) Fire? Allah will say: Out of each
    thousand, take out 999
    . At that time every pregnant female shall drop her load (have a
    miscarriage) and a child will have gray hair. And you shall see mankind as in a drunken state,
    yet not drunk, but severe will be the torment of Allah. (Quran, al-Hajj, 22:2) (When the
    Prophet mentioned this), the people were so distressed (and afraid) that their faces changed (in
    color) whereupon the Prophet said: From Yajuj and Majuj nine hundred and ninety-nine will
    be taken out, and one from you.
    You Muslims (compared to the large number of other people)
    will be like a black hair on the side of a white ox, or a white hair on the side of a black ox, and I
    hope that you will be one-fourth of the people of Paradise. On that, we said: Allahu-Akbar!
    Then he said: I hope that you will be one-third of the people of Paradise. We again said:
    Allahu-Akbar! Then he said: (I hope that you will be) one-half of the people of Paradise. So we
    said: Allahu-Akbar.
    (Sahih Bukhari)

    In another variation of this hadith it says:

    the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: The first one to be called on the Day of Resurrection will be Adam. He will be shown his progeny and it will be said, This is your father Adam.; He will say,Here I am at Your service. He will say: Bring forth those who are to be sent to Hell from among your progeny He will say,O Lord, how many should I bring forth? He will say,;Bring forth from every hundred ninety nine. They said:  Messenger of Allaah, if ninety nine are taken from every hundred of us, what will be left of us?; He said, My ummah, among the other nations, is like a white hair on a black bull.

    Now to deal with these hadiths. The first one talks specifically about gog and magog. The second talks about the rest of humanity. As we all know, martyrs do not have a reckoning and will not have to go through the same ordeal as everyone else on the day of judgement.
    First of all, you claim to not follow hadith, or believe in it. And we both know that some hadiths are questionable, or weak, or fabricated.
    Regardless of that.

    This hadith should inshaAllah clear that up:
    Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said, "Mankind will go down to hell and then COME UP up from it because of their deeds, the first of them like a flash of lighting, the next like the wind, the next like a horse's gallop, the next like one riding on his pack-saddle, the next like a man's running, the next like his walking." (Tirmidhi Hadith)

    Note that this hadith says MANKIND, and it says that they would leave the vicinity of the hellfire according to their good deeds.
    This doesn't neccesarily mean that they would enter hell.

    Another four types of people would also be saved also:
    The Prophet SAW said: "Four people will 'protest' on the Day of Judgement, a deaf who does not hear anything, an idiot, a decrepit and one who dies and in a period where no Prophet was sent (Fatra).
    As for the deaf he says: "O my Lord! Islam came while I could not hear"; an idiot says: "O my Lord! Islam came while children were throwing me with dung. The decrepit says: "O my Lord! Islam came while I could not understand anything". The one who died in a period where no Prophet was sent says: "O my Lord! No Prophet came to me". Then Allah takes a covenant from them that they would obey Him and then He sends one to tell them to enter Hell. By Him in whose hand is my soul! If they enter Hell it will be cool, and a means of safety for them".

    Note also, that these people are sent a Messenger on the day of judgement, who tells them to enter the fire. To see whether they will obey him. After they obey him, and they find that it is cool, they will enter paradise.

    Another hadith says:
    Also Sulaiman Ibn Murrah said that everyone shall enter it (hell). Then he placed his fingers near his ears and said, "I would have remained silent had I not heard the apostle of Allah -pbuh- say, &#8216;There shall not remain a righteous or sinful person but shall enter hell. To the believer the fire will be cool and pleasant as it was to Abraham to the point that hell will be noisy because the believers are cold. Then Allah will save those who have avoided (evil) and greatly torment the sinners in it.&#8217;"

    Another hadith says:
    Imam Ahmad narrated that Abu Sumaya said, "We differed about the meaning of &#8216;Passing through it&#8217; (wari-duha). For some of us said that no believer will enter hell and others said all (people) shall enter it and then Allah will save those who have done righteousness. Then I met Jabir Ibn Abdallah and I informed him that we differed about the meaning of, &#8216;Pass through it,&#8217; and he replied that, "Everyone Shall Enter It".

    I will reply to the rest later. But I hope this clears up the view that people were just created to enter hell, and that the majority are for hell, and that not everyone is given a fair chance.
    inshaAllah.
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #198 - January 11, 2011, 10:05 PM

    @ Aba

    if you are here for any reason other than generally having fun, then you are wasting your time. Enjoy!

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #199 - January 12, 2011, 12:17 AM

    @ Aba

    if you are here for any reason other than generally having fun, then you are wasting your time. Enjoy!


    True  yes

    Tho we do do debating sometimes (personally not that often - very boring  grin12)

    Aba - I notice you gave two opinions - one of an eternal hell and one of a temporary roasting.

    Which one do you believe - or don't you know?

    Just curious.
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #200 - January 12, 2011, 01:01 AM

     Cry  The amount of man hours lost to faith  is staggering!

    Old man Marx was right about this shit, without banning it his theory would have fallen flat on its face.



    The World is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.
                                   Thomas Paine

    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored !- Aldous Huxley
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #201 - January 12, 2011, 01:12 AM

    @ Hassan

    Good question, I would say the latter. My personal opinion is that it is eternal, as for people remaining in it for eternity (those who joined partners) my personal opinion is based on what I have read so far, is that they will remain for eternity. But I do not know 100% I would say that I am 90% sure, as I have heard a few arguments against that opinion & they sound valid. But nobody can be certain about this, so I have decided on accepting the majority opinion, but I let others know about all the variety of opinions as every person should decide for themselves what makes most sense to them.

    I believe those people were the ones who were directly approached by messengers, & shown miracles & signs & still carried on regardless, worshipping idols. As for the ones who were not aware, the hadiths & Quran make it certain that they are going to be saved.
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #202 - January 12, 2011, 01:15 AM

    And you think eternal torture makes perfect sense for these awful people?
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #203 - January 12, 2011, 04:15 PM

    @Debunker

    A thousand apologies for the tardy reply. I've had work commitments, but I've never stopped thinking about you baby. I  wanna touch you where no man before has gone. Galloping on ...

    being created of light is different from being created from fire. Heat and light are different forms of energy. Besides, heat is not the only source of light. But let’s keep it simple: heat and light are two different things.I agree 18:50 is enough to explain Satan’s nature, but remember the issue is that you maintain that 18:50 contradicts the other verses regarding the nature of Iblis (being a Jinn) when it simply doesn’t because in the other verses, Iblis was always quoted as being created from fire.

    Point conceded. There you see, I'm a generous man.

    The best you can claim is that the verses are badly constructed (linguistically speaking), because while god says he ordered the angels to bow, we see Satan questioned for his disobedience and in his defense he reveals his non-angelic nature (being created of fire), so for linguistic coherence, the verses, should have begun with God ordering the angels and Satan. Was this viewed as a linguistic incoherence in the eyes of 7th century Arabs? I don’t know.

    Is it really your contention that God is so poor a writer that he would omit Satan from the fateful command on which the majestic currents of all Creation hangs? May Allah forgive you. It’s like a prosecuting lawyer neglecting the wrap sheet on which a defendant is being tried.  You maintain that Satan identifies himself as a Jinn created from flames. But that has no bearing on the Question of why he is being interrogated in the first place. To break God’s commandments, one has to fail to comply. There was nothing for Iblis to comply with because the order only went out to the angels.

    Of course the early towelheads could not possibly know the bowing injunction alludes to Satan because it doesn’t say so. It’s not a case of bad composition. It’s a matter of logical incoherence. One can’t be held accountable for breaking a law that doesn’t apply to one.

    The issue is not pride per se. If I’m arrogant in my dealings with others, then that’s certainly bad, but if I’m proud with God, that’s entirely different. And yes, disobedience (out of pride) was sure singled out as a very serious sin, check out ...

    It seems to me that to make your God seem faintly reasonable you have to exalt pride into an offence so great that no other sin rivals it. You offered passages in which it is condemned. Very cute. I could likewise fetch a dozen other passages about the sinfulness of some other human trait. What does it prove? Fact is, no sin under the heavens is so egregious that Allah can't absolve it except shirk. All others are pardonable for "Allah forgives all sins". I defy you to prove that pride is any more damndable than other sins. I will strip for you on the webcam and shake my hairy man tits like no other. It can't be done.


    I never said Satan was incapable of changing his mind. I said he was cast out of God’s mercy forever and thus he had no second chance. Now, God could absolve all sins if He *chooses* to. You think that His choosing not to forgive Satan doesn’t reflect well on the Most Compassionate. How about Eternal Hell for many people? How about the problem of evil? If you need to use what you think is valid evidence against the compassion of God, the story of Satan’s fall is not a very good candidate. But you seem to think otherwise. Btw, would you also categorize God’s rejection of the Pharoah’s repentance as cruel? If no, how’s that different from Satan’s case?

    To draw a moral equivalence between Pharoah and Satan is false. Here's why: The Egyptian was a genocidal child killer and the Flame One never hurt a fly. Tyrants should be mounted like a bison but dissenters no. On a wider point, as with Iblis the Quran's portrait of the Pharoah is but of a two dimensional character. We learn nothing about him except that he is a very, very bad man. He’s not a flesh and blood human being. He’s not a father, a husband, a brother, a friend. No, he is EVIL incarnate. If you listen carefully you can hear him cackling wickedly and twisting his moustache.

    This is not a convincing portrait of a life. It’s a woefully bad movie script. Ditto Abu Lahab and his wife. Another set of cardboard characters whose sole animating purpose in life is to get up every morning and plant twigs in the footpath of Mo. Fiddlesticks! Nobody is completey wicked or completly saintly. Even Hitler was a vegetarian with a delicate artistic sensibility who, could he have only sold more paintings as a budding artist, might have led a more productive life and saved us a good deal of heartache. Where's the Quran's nuance?

    I never said such things. God told the angels He’s making man a Khalifa on earth, even before He created man, so man’s abode was earth. The Quran tells Adam first dwelled in the Garden and then was cast out of it… there’s absolutely no need to speculate that the Garden was anywhere else other than a place on Earth, since God said He would place Adam on earth. The confusing part, for you, is probably the use of the Arabic verb *Ihbitoo*, which can literally mean to descend, but it also means to go to an inferior state (and the same exact verb was used in the story of the Israelites in the Quran).

    Where the Garden of Eden was located is of no import. It could be in heaven or on earth. My contention is that Iblis was ejected from the garden and because of that could not have spoken to Adam. I maintain that the garden of Eden was in heaven because that’s where the angels kneeled to Adam and because Adam was admonished to "get down" from the sky. You might claim that Adam's descent may be interpreted as a descent from a higher terrestrial plane, but that doesn’t explain why you believe that Iblis was sent down from heaven as the wording of the expulsion of both sinners is identical. It cannot mean different things in the same context.

    You’re not very fond of speculation, so don’t speculate yourself. There is no reference in the Quran as to how long before Adam Iblis was *around*. Besides, I didn’t say that Satan was necessarily insincere all along, and I didn’t speculate when I said that his devotion was fake by the time the test was set for him as it is proven by his choosing his pride over God. You said elsewhere it was jealousy, that’s also a speculation on your part. He clearly expressed his pride was the reason, so we don’t know if it was jealousy too.

    So you caught me sucking from the speculation titty did you? LOL. But doesn’t it taste so good? It’s like nibbling on the tender nipples of a hairy Fatima. Okay, let’s stick with what we concretely know. When I said that jealousy was the animating motive of Iblis, I wasn’t speculating. It’s a reasonable inference from the text. Iblis afterall was the most exalted companion of Allah till the mortal with the dangling sixth finger came along and made life difficult for the guy. As angels are not as highly regarded as free agents, it follows therefore that he was a little miffed by his demotion from the station of Allah's main poker buddy. That’s not speculation. That’s a psychological assessment of the normal mind.

    I’m not opposed to interpretation within reasonable bounds of the text. I’m opposed to making things up from scratch. Example: If the Quran says that Debunker fell off a tree. A reasonable interpretation would be that the fall was painful. To say however that in falling off he caught his pants on a branch, exposed his hairy bottom, and snapped his small penis is idle conjecture. Therein lies the difference between inference and speculation.
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #204 - January 12, 2011, 06:12 PM

    @ MB

    Quote
    A thousand apologies for the tardy reply. I've had work commitments, but I've never stopped thinking about you baby. I  wanna touch you where no man before has gone. Galloping on ...


    No worries, Bison, I wasn’t even expecting a response.

    Quote
    Is it really your contention that God is so poor a writer that he would omit Satan from the fateful command on which the majestic currents of all Creation hangs? May Allah forgive you.


    No, it is not. I only said that the only thing you could *claim* is weak composition, but you cannot claim a contradiction between verses when there’s none. If you simply claimed bad writing, I would have not contested your point (it doesn’t necessarily mean that I agree with you).

    Quote
    It’s like a prosecuting lawyer neglecting the wrap sheet on which a defendant is being tried.  You maintain that Satan identifies himself as a Jinn created from flames. But that has no bearing on the Question of why he is being interrogated in the first place. To break God’s commandments, one has to fail to comply. There was nothing for Iblis to comply with because the order only went out to the angels.

     

    But you seem to forget that Iblis did interpret God’s command as to include the entire heavenly assembly (including him).  

    Quote
    Of course the early towelheads could not possibly know the bowing injunction alludes to Satan because it doesn’t say so. It’s not a case of bad composition. It’s a matter of logical incoherence. One can’t be held accountable for breaking a law that doesn’t apply to one.


    Why? Iblis’ reply clearly indicates that he understood the command to include him. So early towelheads or not, anyaone who reads Iblis’ response understands that at least Iblis understood that he was included in the command, along with the rest of the heavenly assembly.

    Quote
    It seems to me that to make your God seem faintly reasonable you have to exalt pride into an offence so great that no other sin rivals it. You offered passages in which it is condemned. Very cute.

    Thanks.

    Quote
    I could likewise fetch a dozen other passages about the sinfulness of some other human trait.

    Please do.

    Quote
    What does it prove? Fact is, no sin under the heavens is so egregious that Allah can't absolve it except shirk. All others are pardonable for "Allah forgives all sins”. I defy you to prove that pride is any more damndable than other sins. I will strip for you on the webcam and shake my hairy man tits like no other. It can't be done.

      
    I referenced so many verses condemning the proud to Hell. Now, all you have to do is to quote at least one verse that condemns other types of the human traits to Hell, and you can go ahead and post that obscene video of yours, but I can’t promise I’ll watch it.  

    Quote
    To draw a moral equivalence between Pharoah and Satan is false. Here's why: The Egyptian was a genocidal child killer and the Flame One never hurt a fly. Tyrants should be mounted like a bison but dissenters no.

    Good point there, bison.

    Quote
    On a wider point, as with Iblis the Quran's portrait of the Pharoah is but of a two dimensional character. We learn nothing about him except that he is a very, very bad man. He’s not a flesh and blood human being. He’s not a father, a husband, a brother, a friend. No, he is EVIL incarnate. If you listen carefully you can hear him cackling wickedly and twisting his moustache.

    This is not a convincing portrait of a life. It’s a woefully bad movie script. Ditto Abu Lahab and his wife. Another set of cardboard characters whose sole animating purpose in life is to get up every morning and plant twigs in the footpath of Mo. Fiddlesticks! Nobody is completey wicked or completly saintly. Even Hitler was a vegetarian with a delicate artistic sensibility who, could he have only sold more paintings as a budding artist, might have led a more productive life and saved us a good deal of heartache. Where's the Quran's nuance?


    Too bad that you find the short stories of the Quran unentertaining. But I think that their purpose was not entertainment, anyway.

    Quote
    Where the Garden of Eden was located is of no import. It could be in heaven or on earth.

    Great, so far.

    Quote
    My contention is that Iblis was ejected from the garden and because of that could not have spoken to Adam.

    I already discussed with you this assumption (that Iblis was in the Garden when he was banished from it), and explained that in Surat Al-Araf, God banished him out of *it*, in two verses while giving him the permission to tempt man in a verse in between. Meaning? The command to Satan was: ‘Get out! And yes, you can try and avenge yourself’. What’s so confusing about this?

    Quote
    I maintain that the garden of Eden was in heaven because that’s where the angels kneeled to Adam

    Are you saying if Adam was on earth, the angels couldn’t bow down to him?
    Quote
    and because Adam was admonished to "get down" from the sky.

    No, he was told to get down from the *Garden*.

    Quote
    You might claim that Adam's descent may be interpreted as a descent from a higher terrestrial plane

    I never made such a claim. I said the descent was from a superior state to an inferior one (like in 2:61).

    Quote
    , but that doesn’t explain why you believe that Iblis was sent down from heaven as the wording of the expulsion of both sinners is identical. It cannot mean different things in the same context.

     
    Even if the order of descent for Iblis referred to a descent to an inferior state, then that still necessarily implies his expulsion out of heaven, as he was a Jinn, and he didn’t belong in the heavenly assembly except by God’s grace.

    Quote
    So you caught me sucking from the speculation titty did you? LOL. But doesn’t it taste so good? It’s like nibbling on the tender nipples of a hairy Fatima.

    I have no problem with others speculating as long as theor speculations are plausible and I’m not denied speculation myself.

    Quote
    Okay, let’s stick with what we concretely know. When I said that jealousy was the animating motive of Iblis, I wasn’t speculating. It’s a reasonable inference from the text. Iblis afterall was the most exalted companion of Allah till the mortal with the dangling sixth finger came along and made life difficult for the guy. As angels are not as highly regarded as free agents, it follows therefore that he was a little miffed by his demotion from the station of Allah's main poker buddy. That’s not speculation. That’s a psychological assessment of the normal mind.

     

    1- That still does not justify your speculation, he simply could have been ONLY too conceited to do it. YET I was wrong and you were right. Iblis did reveal his jealousy of Adam after his fall (Isra:62).
    2- regardless of the fact that he was jealous of Adam, it’s Iblis’ choosing his pride over God is what caused his fall as the verse 7:13 explains.  

    Quote
    I’m not opposed to interpretation within reasonable bounds of the text. I’m opposed to making things up from scratch. Example: If the Quran says that Debunker fell off a tree. A reasonable interpretation would be that the fall was painful. To say however that in falling off he caught his pants on a branch, exposed his hairy bottom, and snapped his small penis is idle conjecture. Therein lies the difference between inference and speculation.


    I didn’t realize I made wild speculations like that. In fact, back when you were still conversing with our friend Aba, you made so wild a speculation as to suggest that the Quranic God would accept a *fake* repentance by Satan whose purpose was to make us disbelieve in the Quranic version of God. Here, let me refresh your memory:

    Quote
    Consider number three (glance back at my last post to refresh your memory if you can’t recall). You contend that the reason why Satan will not repent is because he’s too bloated with pride. But if the animating goal of the devil is to convince the great mass of men that the Quran is a false document punctured with holes so wide through which one could drive a coach and three horses, if he wants to disprove its prophesy that he will swim in a lake of fire, all he needs to do is repent and be a Muslim again as he formally was. At a single stroke he could show the Quran to be fraudulent. If Iblis wants to invalidate the Quran, which is supposedly the all-consuming purpose of his life to which he devotes every waking hour, what remains to stop him from converting to Islam? Answer: Nothing.


    See, Bison, you are guilty of even decidedly implausible speculations, so why do you deny me the right to speculate at all?  

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #205 - January 12, 2011, 06:27 PM

    True  yes

    Tho we do do debating sometimes (personally not that often - very boring  grin12)


    Actually, I meant if he's debating for fun only, then good for him, but if he thinks that he might convince MAS to reconsider his obvious decision to apostate, then he's only wasting his time. MAS wants to leave Isalm, and that's the only thing that really counts.

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #206 - January 12, 2011, 06:34 PM

    And you think eternal torture makes perfect sense for these awful people?


     Cheesy don't you start with him, Hassan... I don't want Aba to become another Abu  Cry

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #207 - January 12, 2011, 07:28 PM

    Bismillah

    Salam.

    I am just passing by quickly, and I do not have alot of time to write in detail.
    I apologise if I have not been empathetic and if I have misunderstood any of your points, about the person who creates a gun and knows the future.
    If I wasn't empathetic, I would not have sacrificed my time to try and help. I do not in anyway say that to make you feel as if you are burdening me. I just want you to completely understand that I am in no way whatsoever trying to sound the least bit harsh to you.
    You have come up with several points, and I will try my best to address each and every last one of them inshaAllah.

    Right now, I will answer your second point.

    There is actually no need to apologize sir.
    On the other hand I do find it is impressive that you have been answering me and others patiently.


    Coming to the specific issue I was not implying that
    I will reply to the rest later. But I hope this clears up the view that people were just created to enter hell, and that the majority are for hell, and that not everyone is given a fair chance.
    inshaAllah.

    Ok I think you have focussed on establishing that most of people will not go to hell from different hadith and verses with combination of your own opinion.
    The issue that still remains:  (I know you said you are going to answer further points so I am just summarizing below to make it easy)
    You have said that polytheists will go to hell for eternity
    Even if we have .0001% of total human beings ending up in hell and these individuals are severely tortured for eternity, is it a fair punishment from a loving God to his own Creation? Also considering that trial was finite.


  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #208 - January 12, 2011, 07:41 PM

    e
  • Re: Hi from on the fence muslim
     Reply #209 - January 12, 2011, 07:59 PM

    A defence counself for Iblis (such as I) could easily puncture holes in the case against him.

    Mount A Bison = devil's advocate


    (Sorry, I couldn't help it. Tongue)

    "Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so." -- Bertrand Russell

    Baloney Detection Kit
  • Previous page 1 ... 5 6 78 9 ... 25 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »