Now this Unseen (Bil-ghaib) is a requisite for gaining guidance from Quran. If I’m agnostic (not believing beyond material phenomenon - unseen), do I fulfill condition mentioned in Sura e Baqara?
It is not like a grocery store though. Almost ALL sunnis are sunnis because they were born into a sunni family. Same goes for almost all other sects of Islam and it makes HATING another sect very ridiculous since your beliefs only come from what you were taught and not your own discovery after an honest effort to understand each. People did not go to a grocery store and chose the stuff they liked most. It was rather handed down by their parents.
Same goes for religion. Most jews are jews because they were born in a jewish family, etc.
Shamraz is talking about different beliefs among Muslims regarding existence of Allah(s.w.t).
have you ever seen a muslim differing in belief in God? like, some polytheist muslim, or doubting the existence of God?
That's the whole point. Miracle is something that cannot be explained by our current knowledge.
Now Atheists would argue about Noah's story that there are AT LEAST 3 million species of animals and whether it is possible for a human to gather a pair from each of, say, 300,000 species (10% of least estimate of number of species) and put them all into a ship.
They are not HATING people who believe in the story. They are just saying that the story is most likely made up and until we get a technology that can explain that event, they won't believe it.
Well, when they exhibit this, we highlight.
I am not arguing for 'why don’t they believe'. If they don’t believe in Divine power they should simply mention it in debate rather than picking out such example and making mischief to misguide common people.
There is no harm in telling people simply that you don’t believe in divine as science does not prove it, it is a separate debate then.
No. simply because , I have no doubts what is said in Quran and I have studied the circumstances in which Quran was revealed that are enough to make me believe teachings of the Prophet (which includes there will be no prophet after him).
Yes. You studied and believed in your religion like a lot of people believe in theirs. You took a leap of faith based on your study So why begrudge some one who does not want to believe without proof? I find that there are people with hate for other ideologies other than their own every where. Atheists are human like everyone else. Most of them are very nice and decent people who don't care for the concept of God but to say that they hate religions is perhaps stretching the truth a bit far. It is just that they don't care about religion. After all why should you fear something you don't believe in ?
The concept of God is very much engraved in the roots of man. Its a different thing that you disagree with the concepts of God in another faith than complete denial of God. Isn't it?
The non-believers of Arabs believed in Allah. When they were asked 'who created land and sky', they used to reply 'Allah'. They just had created shareek (partner of God). Whenever, they faced difficult circumstances, they used to call 'Allah' forgetting other 'gods'. Their problem was with the Prophet, because he was preaching for the only one God. People of Makka used to think that they will lose all trade if these gods are abandoned, as people all over the Arab world used to visit their gods (whose moortis were placed in Kaaba). It was not about the gods but about the losing of trade and then status-quo, which made them severe enemy of the Prophet.
Concept of one and only one God is not only the domain of Abrahamic religions and I think you know that it even exists in Hinduism.
Not really true. The concept of God evolved over time. It started with nature worshipping transformed to Polytheism and branched into monotheism. If anyone were attributing partners to Allah, they were only doing something their ancestors did. To claim Monotheism is the only way is arrogance based on faith not logic. As for Hinduism, you are both right and wrong. There is monotheistic philosophy but Hinduism also encompasses polytheism, pantheism, monoism and Atheism. **It does not regard one philosophy superior to the other claim it is the right one. It is upto the individual to seek and discover like a verse from the Rigveda says: Who really knows?
Who will here proclaim it?
Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
Who then knows whence it has arisen? (Sorry for the caps, can't see to get rid of it :( )**
That's the whole point. Miracle is something that cannot be explained by our current knowledge.
Now Atheists would argue about Noah's story that there are AT LEAST 3 million species of animals and whether it is possible for a human to gather a pair from each of, say, 300,000 species (10% of least estimate of number of species) and put them all into a ship.
They are not HATING people who believe in the story. They are just saying that the story is most likely made up and until we get a technology that can explain that event, they won't believe it.
I will add one more point.
Just because centuries ago, folks would have been dismissive of planes flying, AND they were shown yo be wrong, it would be ill-advised to extrapolate and assume all miracles stated in religious texts will one day be shown to be true.
Well, when they exhibit this, we highlight.
I am not arguing for 'why don’t they believe'. If they don’t believe in Divine power they should simply mention it in debate rather than picking out such example and making mischief to misguide common people.
There is no harm in telling people simply that you don’t believe in divine as science does not prove it, it is a separate debate then.
I would respectfully disagree. When someone takes a stand - an atheist for example - they provide examples to back up their stand. They need not intend it as "mischief to misguide common people".
Yes. You studied and believed in your religion like a lot of people believe in theirs. You took a leap of faith based on your study So why begrudge some one who does not want to believe without proof? I find that there are people with hate for other ideologies other than their own every where. Atheists are human like everyone else. Most of them are very nice and decent people who don't care for the concept of God but to say that they hate religions is perhaps stretching the truth a bit far. It is just that they don't care about religion. After all why should you fear something you don't believe in ?
Yes. You studied and believed in your religion like a lot of people believe in theirs. You took a leap of faith based on your study So why begrudge some one who does not want to believe without proof? I find that there are people with hate for other ideologies other than their own every where. Atheists are human like everyone else. Most of them are very nice and decent people who don't care for the concept of God but to say that they hate religions is perhaps stretching the truth a bit far. It is just that they don't care about religion. After all why should you fear something you don't believe in ?
detest and hate are not alien concepts and anyone religious or no-religious can possess these traits. If not all the atheists detest the religion, majority do have contemp religious ideologies. For some these are outdated bonding, irrational beliefs and for some only low IQ people follow such theories. As far as the question of making someone believe who don't want to believe, there is no such compulsion. Belief and faith are gifts of God and everyone don't get these gifts, how much one tries to persuade.
the very next verse says
[11:41]And [Noah] said, "Embark therein; in the name of Allah is its course and its anchorage. Indeed, my Lord is Forgiving and Merciful."
Following is reference to that event from Sura Al-Mu'minūn
[23:26][Noah] said, "My Lord, support me **because they have denied me."
[23:27] **So We inspired to him, "Construct the ship under Our observation, and Our inspiration, and when Our command comes and the oven overflows, put into the ship from each [creature] two mates and your family, except those for whom the decree [of destruction] has proceeded. And do not address Me concerning those who have wronged; indeed, they are to be drowned.
note the following points in that regards...
You don’t know the number of animals present at that time.
You don’t know the exact size of that ship.
Since that ship was constructed under the observation of Allah (s.w.t) so you cannot imagine the size of ship, virtually and physically.
You should know what a logical inconsistency is, you didn’t tell us with what part of Quran this incident is inconsistent with.
If you don’t believe in divine power and miracles then we cannot help you further.
Once again: **I am not an atheist. **Just because I question something doesn't mean I am opposed to it, and your attitude is incredibly insulting, especially since you are a mod and are supposed to foster discussion. It's quite shameful.
It clearly implies all creatures, since the *entire Earth *was supposedly flooded, which in itself is unbelievable since we have records from civilizations at the time that do not have any record of such a calamity (really, think about it, if the whole world was flooded, wouldn't someone, somewhere, have written about it?). What was the point of taking animals on board? To save them. Otherwise they would have died. Since we have millions of animals today, there must have been two of each animal that exists today, on this ark. The size of such a ship would have to be immense. That, is what's a logical inconsistency.
The flood myth is older than Abrahamic religions. Read the story of Gilgamesh from Sumeria, which originates around 7,000 BC. It is likely that the story is much older, from about 10,000 BC when the ice age first ended. That would have resulted in "flooding" as sea levels rose.
And that belief in miracles is precisely my point. You can claim anything and if someone says that makes no sense, just imply that they don't believe in miracles so they can't be helped. If that's your argument then we really have nothing more to say do we? I believe in a giant spaghetti monster orbiting Jupiter. I can't prove it but you can't disprove it either. Also, you don't believe me because you don't have faith. See how that works? To an atheist, there is no difference between the spaghetti monster and religious texts. Unless they have seen it, they don't consider it fact. That is not an unreasonable position.
Oh and I should repeat it once again since you seem to have trouble with this: *I am not an atheist. *
**If anyone were attributing partners to Allah, they were only doing something their ancestors did. **To claim Monotheism is the only way is arrogance based on faith not logic.
This same argument has been discussed in Quran at various places. people of Makka used to say these. who do worship idols, as we have seen our forefathers doing that. We are burying our daughters as our fathers used to do that. We consider angels as daughters of Allah, as our forefathers told us the same.
In Islam 'shirk - making someone partner of Allah' is the biggest sin and it has been explained with many examples in Quran logically, but thats totally a different discussion.
Atheism is not an organized religion or belief. Its not like their 'aalims' or 'bishops' gather one day and decide we should hate religion X, Y or Z. Its not even a group of people and do not make collective decisions. Some Atheists might hate all religions, some might hate some or one of them and some atheists might not hate any religion at all.
Atheism is not an organized religion or belief. Its not like their 'aalims' or 'bishops' gather one day and decide we should hate religion X, Y or Z. Its not even a group of people and do not make collective decisions. Some Atheists might hate all religions, some might hate some or one of them and some atheists might not hate any religion at all.
Chill out peeps.
but they have representation on various forums. They run various sites. Material on such forums / sites implies what? I mean which religion they talk against more on these forums / sites?
but they have representation on various forums. They run various sites. Material on such forums / sites implies what? I mean which religion they talk against more on these forums / sites?
they are small groups of likeminded people. Can you find a mullah or a pope or monk or who 'represents' atheists? I'm just saying that they, as a group, do not have an organized mission or agenda. They are simply people all around that world who do not believe in God.
I don’t know why you are fixated on that, since it is an accurate statement. The idea that a “normal” ship could hold millions of animals is absurd, ludicrous, and frankly, impossible.
You see attacks when there are none. If any criticism of religion is unacceptable to you then you’re being very close minded.
but they have representation on various forums. They run various sites. Material on such forums / sites implies what? I mean which religion they talk against more on these forums / sites?
Are you implying that atheists are the majority? I disagree. Look at the US for example: an atheist could never get elected president. More people are admitting that they are atheists because there is less of a stigma.
they are small groups of likeminded people. Can you find a mullah or a pope or monk or who 'represents' atheists? I'm just saying that they, as a group, do not have an organized mission or agenda. They are simply people all around that world who do not believe in God.
Exactly. There is militant atheism, people who, in my opinion, are almost as bad as religious extremists, but the vast majority of atheists simply do not care for religion. That's all. They may not walk around on egg shells when discussing religions which could rub religious people the wrong way, but I wouldn't expect an atheist to reverse Islam as a Muslim would.
I don't know why you are fixated on that, since it is an accurate statement. The idea that a "normal" ship could hold millions of animals is absurd, ludicrous, and frankly, impossible.
You see attacks when there are none. If any criticism of religion is unacceptable to you then you're being very close minded.
How can you imply that was a small and normal ship?
I give you reference from Quran that that ship was developed under the observation of Allah(s.w.t). But you are free to imply whatever you want to.
How can you imply that was a small and normal ship?
I give you reference from Quran that that ship was developed under the observation of Allah(s.w.t). But you are free to imply whatever you want to.
I think you said it was a normal ship. And I take "under the observation" to mean that it was a divine mission, but still a human creation. A human creation, would have to be bound by physical laws. To hold that many creatures, the ship would have to be immense, larger than any vessel humanity has ever built.
I am not implying anything, just that you are seeing attacks when there was none. "Absurdly" wasn't referring to religion, it's a synonym for "really" or "very". So "absurdly small" meant "very small" (for what it was intended to do: hold millions of animals. any ship would be too small for that).