My first post

[Come2thelight]

How do you plan to recognize it

By having civil and constructive conversations

 

[Come2thelight]

Looks from here like a whole lot of
people engaged in self deception.

If a person believes in something and they find evidence that goes against that belief and they still choose to keep believing, would it be fair to call them delusional?

What about the one that believes in something and keeps finding evidence that supports their belief. What would you call them?

 

[Come2thelight]

And how would that be determined? What "truth" is the Kafir trying to suppress? Take me for example. I don't believe we were created by a supernatural being who watches over us and occasionally sends an obscure messenger or message. Would that qualify me as a "Kafir"?

No. Let's say you saw Moses split the sea and then you still decided to disbelieve. This would make you a Kafir.

 

[Link]

What was he getting respite from when he pleaded to Allah?

From death.

 

[Audie]

By having civil and constructive conversations

Those are nice but have zero to do with
integrity.
Want to try again?

 

[icehorse]

No. Let's say you saw Moses split the sea and then you still decided to disbelieve. This would make you a Kafir.

That's an easy one. So officially I'm not a "hard atheist". If I see solid, repeatable, predictable evidence of a supernatural being, I'll change my mind.

Okay, so now perhaps a little trickier: I've read the Quran and I've read about Muhammad, and I disbelieve the extraordinary claims about both. Does that make me a Kafir?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Take me for example. I don't believe we were created by a supernatural being who watches over us and occasionally sends an obscure messenger or message. Would that qualify me as a "Kafir"?

We simply don't know.

Only G-d knows who is heading for paradise or hell.
..and that can change.

However, if somebody is actively persecuting believers only because they believe, it is assumed they are heading to hell.

 

[Audie]

If a person believes in something and they find evidence that goes against that belief and they still choose to keep believing, would it be fair to call them delusional?

What about the one that believes in something and keeps finding evidence that supports their belief. What would you call them?

Generally I would say " delusional" is too strong a word. " in denial", cognitive dissonance,
intellectual dishonesty are more likely terms.

As for the "keeps finding evidence" that is
similar some ways.

Both depend on what they believe, why they believe it, what sort of evidence they find, where they look, how the evidence is analyzed, the quality of the evidence.
It may be just confirmation bias, it may be good reseasrch that pushes the probability of error close to zero.

Depends.

A theists can show great integrity within
the confines of of the religion, following its teachings, while at the same time being totally intellectually dishonest about things outside
the religion.
For example, a Christian creationist can compose wonderfully lucid reasoning and citation about how there was a world wide flood.
You cannot be both intellectually honest and a creationist, though, if you are educated beyond the covers of one book.

What do you think of your question?

 

[England my lionheart]

You seem to be missing the point. Why is there a monotheistic call in a so-called polytheistic religion?

Is there,I’m not seeing one.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So you are saying an individual can't understand the Quran's message when they read it by understanding the Morphology, semantics, and syntax of the text? If so, can you please explain why you hold this position?

I am offering our ability of understanding is limited, unless and until we submit to Allah.

It is Allah that guides our hearts and gives it understanding. That understanding gives us the capacity to live the life offered by the Messenger, they are the Word that became flesh.

Men get hold of that Word and tend to think that they have a superior knowledge and then after they have added their interpretations, then use it against other peoples.

Muhammad gave the word, lived the Word and demonstrated how it is to be used for all the peoples.

For us it is submission, it is Allah that gives the Word through a chosen Messenger, the true understanding is known only by the Messenger and through Faith in the Messenger, to those God has instilled some understanding.

Quran 10:38 Or do they say [about the Prophet (ﷺ)], "He invented it?" Say, "Then bring forth a sūrah like it and call upon [for assistance] whomever you can besides Allah, if you should be truthful."

We have no way to produce words such as these, as we have no capacity to understand why they were offered in the light they were given, what they ultimately mean, but to study the example of the Messengers.

So when in the mid 1800's, in Persia, the Bab and Baha'u'llah were able to meet that challenge, as Allah gave the Messages, men that did not have that capacity executed the Bab and banished Baha'u'llah, even when they had become the focal point to turn to Allah in prayer, submission and understanding.

Regards Tony

 

[Redemptionsong]

No we don't believe so

Then Muslims reject a basic teaching of the Bible, found in both Testaments.


1 Kings 8:46. '(for there is no man that sinneth not,)'
Psalm 14:1-3. 'there is none that doeth good, no, not one.'
Psalm 53:1-3. 'there is none that doeth good, no, not one.'
Romans 3:9. 'for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;'
Galatians 3:22. 'But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.'

Even the greatest of the prophets fell short of the glory of God, according to scripture. Why should Muhammad be different? Was he not a man?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Even the greatest of the prophets fell short of the glory of God, according to scripture. Why should Muhammad be different? Was he not a man?

Yes .. both Jesus and Muhammad were men.
Yes, they both sinned .. but not intentionally.

I don't know of any other person who hasn't sinned intentionally, do you?

 

[icehorse]

We simply don't know.

Only G-d knows who is heading for paradise or hell.
..and that can change.

However, if somebody is actively persecuting believers only because they believe, it is assumed they are heading to hell.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply!

If I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying that we can't know for sure which people Allah is so mad at? There are some clear cases, but there are many cases where we just don't know? Is that correct so far?

==

Now persecution is a different topic. I'm going to assume that you're not in support of groups like ISIS or Boko Haram? So would you say that working to defeat those groups constitutes "persecution"?

 

[muhammad_isa]

If I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying that we can't know for sure which people Allah is so mad at? There are some clear cases, but there are many cases where we just don't know? Is that correct so far?

More or less .. except that G-d is not a person, so the concept of G-d being "mad with somebody" is not as an earthly King would be.

Now persecution is a different topic. I'm going to assume that you're not in support of groups like ISIS or Boko Haram? So would you say that working to defeat those groups constitutes "persecution"?

I can't know the intentions of individual members of these groups.
What I can say, is that anybody who believes it is right to attack civilians, effectively "stabbing them in the back" is treacherous and wrong.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I offer peace to everyone but I offer blessings to those that follow the guidance. Surely those that don't believe can't hope for blessings true?

Why not? What good is God’s grace if He is stingy with it? Not sure if a similar story is in the Quran, but in the Bible, Jesus tells many stories about stingy people.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Yes .. both Jesus and Muhammad were men.
Yes, they both sinned .. but not intentionally.

Interesting, because in 2 Corinthians 5:21 it says, 'For he [God] hath made him [Jesus] to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him'.

According to the NT, Jesus is the righteousness of God. How can he be a sinner?

In 1 Timothy 2:5 it says, 'For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;'

If Jesus Christ mediates between God and men, then he is different from other men.

 

[stevecanuck]

The Prophet was the personification of the Quran.

Correct. Especially when he oversaw the slaughter of the Banu Quraiza.

 

[stevecanuck]

Actually, it is not. The context starts from 22 and you can see that the believers are the subject.

Nope. You're absolutely wrong about that. If the believers in general were being spoken to directly as you claim, the Qur'an would have used the 3rd person plural conjugation, but it doesn't. It uses the 2nd person singular. SINGULAR. It is speaking to Mohamed. Period.

All you have is gratuitous denial and outright falsehoods. They are your only weapons.

 

[stevecanuck]

How is this ayah portraying the domination of others?

Seriously? This is given in the context of Mohamed's desire to attack the Byzantines. What part of that confuses you?

 

[YoursTrue]

Ha ha! You want humans to travel light years through space to bring you back some pics?
And if they should you'll be body-swerving off in to some other mindset.

Getting to know ya...... getting to know..........

Ok So only conjecture from you.