Refuting wrong beliefs of a liar

[vroom]

Re: Refuting wrong beliefs of a liar

@psyah

After studying the subject matter I believe brother vroom is correct about the erroneous nature of the said material provided by Yasir Qadhi, but I believe he was mistaken as I do not have the evidence to suggest he was lying, I believe a person like Yasir Qadhi would not lie intentionally.

I love nit picking on you. yasir qadhi lied in that video, he went too far not to have. For example from what has already been highlighted he said they believed "there is no Lord other then Allah…‘’ and other statements such as saying the Muslims say “we worship this being, we make prayer to this being, we sacrifice to this being..”

Allama Syed Muzaffar Shah Hussain said it would be kufr to deny the mushrikin had gods besides Allah Most High. Makes sense, but i do not accuse yasir qadhi of this kufr. I do not think yasir qadhi denies that. Yet he has said what he said and we must conclude that it was lies meant to mislead. In which case the misleading would be deliberate

I had stated the word liar after much consideration i actually found multiple reasons for why the word liar was appropriate

The problem is less with his description of the behaviour of Muslims but rather with his inaccuracy in describing the Mushrikun of Makkah.

The problem is both. It is bringing the two together at all costs. Bringing the two together was the whole point of that particular speech

Makkan pagans were not believers in Allah (SWT) as a Personal Deity and not as Transcendent Deity. They were pantheists … This means that they believed all things manifest Divine attributes. They created their own gods to represent certain important faculties of their own lives. Such as “God of war” … They did not believe that anything could intervene in an independent decision given by a god over his own given area of expertise. Pagan gods were only as powerful as they had adherents. It was very much a numbers game. Numbers in that material wealth of a community worshiping a given idol would signify a more “powerful god”.

In theological speech “personal” God means that God has singular identity that separates Him from us, and “Transcendence” means boundless which is not compatible with pagan beliefs. Together these equate to God being utterly unlike His creation. Whereas this was not the case with pagan Arabs. Shirk is to make created things like Him and vice-versa … It does not include the functions of people and acts of God … It only includes the nature of God. If we look at our theology nothing is in place that says God cannot give power to His servants to do miraculous things … Rather the opposite is true. We understand this from the special criterion of Cause and Effect.