No one religion can be correct

[ImAj]

Several responses

1. Katzpur: Even if hell isn't eternal, that still doesn't resolve the issue of circumstance playing a role in a person's acceptance of Christianity in this life. Even if someone born into a Hindu family goes to hell and gets the chance to accept Jesus there, then he still got the shaft, because he wouldn't have had to go to hell even for that short time had he been born into a Christian family. Does that makes sense?

2. Victor: How do you figure?

3. Jaywalker: Well, one problem I have with Buddhism is that it claims that life is full of suffering and that we need to achieve nirvana to escape the endless cycle of rebirth. But for me, personally, I really wouldn't mind being reborn for all of eternity. I'm actually having a pretty good time being alive, very little suffering here. Although there is some suffering in life, Buddhism completely ignores the beauty, happiness, and peace that can be found in life as well. Although I suppose this doesn't 'preclude' Buddhism from being the 'correct' religion, that's at least why I'm not Buddhist.

4. Feathersinhair: That's a very pretty answer. However, do you really need your religion for to love other people and to celebrate yourself? Why does your love for other people need to come from an external source? Why do you need religion to celebrate yourself? I totally understand the comfort part, though.

5. Jonny: I'm not entirely sure how this would be possible given the various degrees of 'opportunity' people have to accept or reject religions. For instance, how would a true 'opportunity' be defined? I was raised as a Muslim in the Bible Belt, and I certainly had several instances where I was exposed to Christianity by Christians and could have converted, but I chose not to do so. But what if I had been raised a Christian in the Bible Belt? That certainly would have been a much better, 'opportunity' because I wouldn't have had to make the decision with all the prejudices and biases in judgment that come from being raised by non-Christians. So if Christianity is the one, true religion, unless we can all somehow be born into Christian families in Christian environments that are completely identical, then the 'opportunity' to convert to the faith would be completely different for each person. If we will all be exposed to the one, true religion after we die and have all of our acquired life knowledge, bias, experience, etc. taken away and then are asked to choose whether or not to accept the religion, then that would make this life completely obsolete.

Furthermore, whether or not everyone is willing to admit it, decisions of faith are made based upon logic, even if that logic is irrational. Irrational logic sounds like an oxymoron, but people often believe things that are completely logical to them, but are actually irrational. Regardless, people make decisions of faith based on logic, and that's why we're all in the 'religious debate' forum. And I already know the response to this: faith shouldn't be made based upon decisions of logic, which is fallible, but upon decisions of the heart. That's all well and good, but if we could all just 'ask our heart,' then no one would be here debating anything. So the question of faith is inherently unfair, because people are born with very different levels of intelligence, different personalities, etc.

There are some people of all faiths that are just really, really stupid, but they're still really good people. They blindly follow the religions of their parents, but they do it with such compassion and love, that even though their beliefs make no sense whatsoever it's hard to imagine that they deserve to go to hell for being born stupid.

My point, again, is that there can be no one, true religion, because circumstance and logic play too large a role in people's choice of faith.

Therefore: All good people go to heaven, regardless of their faith.

 

[Jaymes]

Have you looked into Taoism, ImAj?

 

[jonny]

5. Jonny: I'm not entirely sure how this would be possible given the various degrees of 'opportunity' people have to accept or reject religions. For instance, how would a true 'opportunity' be defined? I was raised as a Muslim in the Bible Belt, and I certainly had several instances where I was exposed to Christianity by Christians and could have converted, but I chose not to do so. But what if I had been raised a Christian in the Bible Belt? That certainly would have been a much better, 'opportunity' because I wouldn't have had to make the decision with all the prejudices and biases in judgment that come from being raised by non-Christians. So if Christianity is the one, true religion, unless we can all somehow be born into Christian families in Christian environments that are completely identical, then the 'opportunity' to convert to the faith would be completely different for each person. If we will all be exposed to the one, true religion after we die and have all of our acquired life knowledge, bias, experience, etc. taken away and then are asked to choose whether or not to accept the religion, then that would make this life completely obsolete.

Lucky for me, I'm not the judge of who has and who hasn't had an opportunity in this life. Christ will be the judge of that, and since I believe He is perfect, I don't see a problem.

 

[Malus 12:9]

Therefore: All good people go to heaven, regardless of their faith.

What about good people that do not believe in heaven??

 

[Malus 12:9]

Thought: You claim not one religion can be correct, right?

Believers see their own religion as correct. whilst you may not.
You may see your thread as correct, but believers may not.

 

[Green Gaia]

Well, one problem I have with Buddhism is that it claims that life is full of suffering and that we need to achieve nirvana to escape the endless cycle of rebirth. But for me, personally, I really wouldn't mind being reborn for all of eternity. I'm actually having a pretty good time being alive, very little suffering here. Although there is some suffering in life, Buddhism completely ignores the beauty, happiness, and peace that can be found in life as well. Although I suppose this doesn't 'preclude' Buddhism from being the 'correct' religion, that's at least why I'm not Buddhist.

I think you have some misconceptions about the Buddhist idea of suffering. Let's look at the first two of the Four Noble Truths. First, the Buddha said that all life is dukkha. We generally translate this to mean suffering, which is certainly applicable. But it can also mean dislocated, or out of joint. So life is dislocated, something is out of whack. In the Second Noble Truth, we find out why: The cause of life's dislocation is tanha. Again, we generally translate this to mean desire, but it's a more specific kind of desire; the desire for personal fulfillment, selfishness. The Buddha did not say that all desire is bad, in fact he advocated some desire - the desire for liberation, for example, or for the happiness of others. When we are selfless we are free, tanha breaks that freedom and causes suffering and life to be out of whack. So, it is destorying of the ego, not all desire that the Buddha was talking about. The Buddha saw that life as typically lived is unfulfilling and filled with insecurity. That doesn't mean there cannot be joys, beauty, happiness, and peace. But have we not all felt sorrow and pain? From where does this come? That is what he was trying to answer in saying that all life is dukkha and tanha is its cause. There is something screwing it up, and that is why we are not happy. That's why we don't feel the joys, beauty, happiness, and peace all of the time.

I'm not saying you should follow Buddhism, just wanted to clear that up.

 

[TashaN]

So if you've just read all that and still believe that your religious beliefs somehow entitle you to a better afterlife than me, explain it to me. Please.

I gave you frubals because of your wonderful questions that every body must ask him/her self about it and you will see through my answers and you by yourself judge my words so we can guide each other to the truth and correct me if i'm wrong please so we can get benefit from each other.

Of course, the whole circumstantial aspect of faith argument can be used for Islam as well. If one must accept Islam to go to heaven, then people born into Muslim families have a ridiculously large advantage over other people, and that would be unfair.

Allah gave an fair advantage for both Muslims and non-Muslims and definitely God will show anyone the truth and he/she will decide whether to accept it or to reject it and being a Muslim that is not enough at all to enter to heaven but the responsibility will be much higher because a Muslim knows will what is Islam so if he didn't believe in God so his punishment will be more than the non-Muslim.

Some common Muslim responses include that it is not just Muslims that go to heaven, it is all of the good, believing 'People of the Book' which includes Christians and Jews as well. However, people born into, say, Hindu families would be screwed in that case, and that would be wrong.

according to Islam both "people of the book" and the other non-Muslims like hindu for exaple are all the same and they will not go to heaven if they didn't worship the only God, believe in the last Messenger Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) and accept Islam as thier religion.

Another common Muslim response is that all good people go to heaven, but that Muslim people perhaps go to a 'higher level' of heaven, either because their faith gives them extra brownie points with the man upstairs or because the Qur'an gives them guidance and a code of behavior with which to live by and be a really really good person. Either way, it does not resolve the inherent unfairness of being born into a Muslim family. If you are born into a Christian family and go to heaven because you are a good person, but a person who was born into a Muslim family gets into a higher level than you because he followed the Qur'an and you followed the Bible, then that would be unjust and wrong.

who said so? :sarcastic

I wish that you have any source for this because you can't judge a religion through what a person from that particular group tell you according to his/her understanding because that person may not depend in his information in any source from Quran or Hadith.

So, given the huge role that circumstance plays in the faith people choose in their lives, religion cannot be a standard by which we are judged. The only fair way to do it would be to determine how good a person was given their circumstances.

Religion can't have anything to do with it.

And we've all observed this. There are good people in all faiths who don't deserve to go to hell, and there are ******* people in all faiths who probably do.

This unacceptable reason ... Do you know why?

I'll give you a simple example.

If you are a good person and everybody knows that but at the same time with your dealing with your father there is igonrance and disrespecting and you don't give him
a **** and you don not acknolwedge him and you don't even place him in his real place in your life and you are so mean to him so do you think that being a good person to starngers is much better than being loyal,respectbale and giving honor to your father?

It's the same when you deny the existance of God and you worship other creatures with him whether they were human beings or idols. Then, it's so rediculous after all this to ask for his heaven.

I hope you got my point, if not so please inform me.

 

[Scott1]

according to Islam both "people of the book" and the other non-Muslims like hindu for exaple are all the same and they will not go to heaven if they didn't worship the only God, believe in the last Messenger Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) and accept Islam as thier religion.

Can you give me a quote from the Koran?

 

[Feathers in Hair]

4. Feathersinhair: That's a very pretty answer. However, do you really need your religion for to love other people and to celebrate yourself? Why does your love for other people need to come from an external source? Why do you need religion to celebrate yourself? I totally understand the comfort part, though.

No, I love other people, and that love does not need to come from an external source. Oddly enough, I'd say my path helps me to keep the love within 'safe' bounds. If I don't have the reminder that I am worth something to the universe, I tend to get overwhelmed with caring for the feelings of other people. I'm not sure if that makes sense, but it's what happens.

 

[Bennettresearch]

Hi AJ,

By the responses to your question we see people signing on with their particular religion. One would expect me to take the Christian perspective, but I am objective about my relgion. What history teaches us is that the religions of the book sought to exhault their superiority and make theirs the only faith. It spoke of the competition between different ethnic groups or civizations. Therefore, WE (meaning said religion) have found the one true god or gods and we are better than the others. This is probably why this discussion even exists.

As to a kind of universal religion that encompasses everything, even the religions that aren't aggressive still represent their preferred path to enlightenment or a concept of an ultimate good place. And so, the question which is the best religion goes unanswered.

 

[Mike182]

As to a kind of universal religion that encompasses everything, even the religions that aren't aggressive still represent their preferred path to enlightenment or a concept of an ultimate good place. And so, the question which is the best religion goes unanswered.

erm, i think the question "which religion is the best?" is an irrelivant question, as the definition of what is 'best' comes down to personal feelings - so you have nothing to measure how better one religion is compared to another

it is my firm belief that all religious beliefs are 100% valid to the holder, and thus each are of equal standing

 

[ImAj]

Responses:

Scott1: I know you weren't talking to me, but I can provide a Qur'anic quote to the contrary:
Surah Bakara verse 62, or 'The Cow' verse 62 or just 2:62.

'Lo! Those who believe (in that which is revealed unto thee, Muhammad), and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabaeans - whoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doeth right - surely their reward is with their Lord, and there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve.'

Although a strong argument can be made for just the opposite as being true, there are a good many Muslims who believe that 'People of the Book' who do good works on earth will go to heaven.

Maize: Without hunger, could one truly appreciate food? Without thirst, drink? Without suffering then, could one truly appreciate happiness? The bad parts in life help me appreciate the good, and I believe my life is happy and fulfilling enough that I don't desire to seek release from its eternal cycle, if there is one. Again, I'm not saying that makes it wrong, I'm just saying that that's why I'm not Buddhist.

Malus01: Those people will be pleasantly surprised upon their death

Jonny: So if people are given the opportunity to accept Christ after they die if they didn't receive it before, what biases and prejudices from their life would they bring to that decision? If they would have those biases erased, then wouldn't all non-evil people accept Christ? And wouldn't that just be the same thing as the idea that all good people go to heaven?

The Truth:

Allah gave an fair advantage for both Muslims and non-Muslims and definitely God will show anyone the truth and he/she will decide whether to accept it or to reject it and being a Muslim that is not enough at all to enter to heaven but the responsibility will be much higher because a Muslim knows will what is Islam so if he didn't believe in God so his punishment will be more than the non-Muslim.

Simply put, according to you, there are two conditions that must both be met in order to go to heaven. First, in that a person believes in Islam and second in that they must be a good person.

But if being a Muslim is a prerequisite for going to heaven, then the person born into a Muslim family still starts off with an advantage over everyone else. I believe you are ignoring the large role circumstance plays as to whether or not a person accepts or rejects Islam, which was essentially the point of my post. Objectively, a person born into a Muslim family has a much higher chance of accepting Islam than a person who is born into a Christian family. We would have to agree on this point in order for this discussion to continue. So even though the Christian person may have been exposed to Islam, which we will hypothetically assume as the correct religion, it is still an entirely different circumstance than someone who was born into the religion. The Christian will be viewing Islam from the perspective of a Christian.

And I believe you are saying that the system is fair because a person born into a Muslim family will be punished more severely than a person who did not have that advantage. I can understand the concept that if a person believes in Islam and still goes against it, then that is worthy of harsher punishment than a person who does not believe in Islam. But a person who is born into a Christian family, no matter how good of a person they are, has very little chance of going to heaven whatsoever, because being a Muslim, according to you, is a prerequisite.

But there are countless examples of non-Muslims who are good people, better people in fact, than most Muslims. Mother Theresa, for instance, was super-human in her compassion for others, but she was not a Muslim.

according to Islam both "people of the book" and the other non-Muslims like hindu for exaple are all the same and they will not go to heaven if they didn't worship the only God, believe in the last Messenger Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) and accept Islam as thier religion.

I would say that Islam according to you says this Please see my response to Scott.

I wish that you have any source for this because you can't judge a religion through what a person from that particular group tell you according to his/her understanding because that person may not depend in his information in any source from Quran or Hadith.

I'm not saying their response is correct, I'm saying that is a common response that I get. And it could almost seem logical, given that there are different levels of heaven, according to the Prophet's account of his ascension at least. Also, these are people that don't believe that all non-Muslims go to hell, but they are trying to find a reason why they should practice their own faith.

I'll give you a simple example.

If you are a good person and everybody knows that but at the same time with your dealing with your father there is igonrance and disrespecting and you don't give him
a **** and you don not acknolwedge him and you don't even place him in his real place in your life and you are so mean to him so do you think that being a good person to starngers is much better than being loyal,respectbale and giving honor to your father?

It's the same when you deny the existance of God and you worship other creatures with him whether they were human beings or idols. Then, it's so rediculous after all this to ask for his heaven.

I hope you got my point, if not so please inform me.

This analogy is faulty for several reasons. First, good people who are non-Muslims do not believe that they are worshipping the wrong god, or not 'respecting their father' as it were. A better analogy would be a good person who believes incorrectly that some man is his biological father, and with no knowledge of his actual biological father, does not give him a place in his life. He does, however, love and honor that man, and his actions show that his intentions are honorable and he is trying to do the right thing.

Where our main difference lies, I believe, is that you think that everyone knows in their hearts that Islam is the one, true religion, and once exposed to it they only reject it out of stubborness or evilness. This is simply not the case. Many people reject it through logic. And if it turns out that Islam is the true religion and they simply made a logical error, that does not warrant hellfire.

People can believe in something that is wrong or illogical, and believe in their heart of hearts that they are correct. I'll give you an example. Consider the 'Monty Hall Problem':
You are on a game show, and are asked to choose one of three numbered doors. Behind two of the doors lies an undesirable prize, such as a goat. Behind one of the doors lies a desirable surprise, such as a car. Suppose that you choose door number 1. At this point, the host, who knows what is behind each door, opens door number 3 and reveals that it has a goat behind it. At this point, he gives you the option of changing your answer to door number 2 or sticking with your answer of door number 1.

Should you change your door, stick with your original door, or does it not matter?

Most people say that it doesn't matter, and that there is a 50% chance of you getting the car no matter what you do. But most people would be wrong. There is actually a 2/3 chance of you getting the car if you switch to the other door.

Now, when most people hear the answer, they simply don't believe it, and they will argue to the death that there is a 50/50 shot with either door. And they really, truly believe that they are correct, but they aren't. This does not make them bad people.

So people do have logical reasons for rejecting 'the truth', which would be Islam in this hypothetical. And if, for instance, a person rejected Islam because he or she thought it hypocritical that Islam expects homosexuals to bottle up their sexuality indefinitely, but it allows for married men to have sex with their wives whenever they please without their wives' consent (Qur. 2:223), because it is unreasonable to expect men to contain their sexuality indefinitely (see Catholic priests), then that would be a logical reason for rejecting Islam. Even if there is a flaw in that logic, he or she is not rejecting Islam because they are evil, stubborn, or an otherwise bad person.

More proof that decisions of faith are made based upon logic is that we are all here in this forum, debating religion. And although we will all probably come to different conclusions, we are all at least trying to find some higher truth, which is a lot more than can be said for most of the population at large. If there is one 'correct' religion, then the people in this forum who find it will probably be the ones with the best logic, which is unfair because some people are better at reasoning than others.

So, again, we must come to the conclusion that religion cannot be the standard by which people are judged.

 

[Merlin]

It is worse than that. Even withing same faiths there are those that think if you are not from their sect you are damned. There are 1000's of people wandering about trying to convert people from one Christian sect to another. I never understood that.

 

[Ex Machina]

I practice Taoism because it makes me feel complete. It fascinates me and I feel I can learn something new from it every day. It's what motivates me to be the best person I can be, not because I have a reward, but because I know it's the right thing to do.

This is exactly how religeon should serve our society and our person. Though even as an agnosic I have a strong sense of morality, and whatever the eternal torrure of any being is, it is not just under any curcumstances.

 

[TashaN]

Can you give me a quote from the Koran?

We read in chapter 98:

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

[1] Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them clear Evidence,


[2] A Messenger from Allah, rehearsing scriptures kept pure and holy:


[3] Wherein are laws (or decrees) right and straight.


[4] Nor did the People of the Book make schisms, until after there came to them Clear Evidence.


[5] And they have been commanded no more than this: to worship Allah, offering Him sincere devotion, being True (in faith); to establish regular Prayer; and to practise regular Charity; and that is the Religion right and Straight.

[6] Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures.


[7] Those who have faith and do righteous deeds; They are the best of creatures.


[8] Their reward is with Allah: Gardens of Eternity, beneath which rivers flow; they will dwell therein forever; Allah well pleased with them, and they with Him: all this for such as fear their Lord and Cherisher.

 

[blueman]

Exactly. So you don't need to follow a specific religion to go to heaven. Therefore, no single religion is 'correct.'

I disagree. If you follow a religion, you are following what you believe to be a truth, otherwise, what is the purpose of following something that has no substance of truth? If you do believe in what you are following is truth, anything that is diametrically opposed/in contrast with that belief is considered false, at least in that person's eyes. If truth is not exclusive, then no assertion of a truth claim is being made, it is then just an opinion.

 

[blueman]

Quite; I am a Christian, but I would never say that anyone who isn't a Christian will go to hell - Christ's teachings were about Love, he could never (IMO) be so 'unfair'; that simply would not be 'Christian'.

Michel, it is a slippery slope to speak for God Almighty. I agree with you that God is a loving and merciful God, but He is also just. Jesus stated that I am the way, the truth and the life, no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. That does not sound like an ambiguous statement to me. Jesus makes it clear that all judgement has been given to Him by the Father and all will be judged, both saved and unsaved one day (John 5:22-28). We either have to take him at His word or not believe Him at all. Unfortunately, there is not in between. God is the same yesterday, today and forever more.

 

[TashaN]

But there are countless examples of non-Muslims who are good people, better people in fact, than most Muslims. Mother Theresa, for instance, was super-human in her compassion for others, but she was not a Muslim.

I never claimed that a non-Muslim is a bad person and i said in this forum like a 100 times that i love peace among all human beings whatever they believe in because i'm not a God to judge them but we are here in a religious forum to discuss about our beliefs and religions if there is.

So, i'll give you an example so you may understand me more and more God willing

assume that there are two men and both of them have cars and they used to go to the same petrol station.

one of them used to spend about 50$ as a fuel for his car and the second one go to the petrol station to fill his care with 10$ only of petrol.

the petrl station made a special offer "card" for thier customers and who so ever reach to specific points of filling his car will get a gift.

the one with the 10$ filling perday took this card and the one with the 50$ didn't.

after few weeks the one who was filling his car with 10$ only everyday won a gift because he had that card. Nevertheless, the one who used to fill his car with 50$ of petrol everyday got nothing because simply he didn't "register" to take that car.

is it fair or not now?

it dosn't matter how much you earn or how much is your faith if you didn't "register" and i tell you again and all over again that being a Muslim dosn't mean that you are a good person and ofcourse being a non-Muslim dosn't mean that you are a bad person.

I would say that Islam according to you says this Please see my response to Scott.

in your response to Scott i saw that you are referring to 2:62 in the Quran.

i didn't response to you until i check that verse out because i can't defend it because i'm a muslim directly without any evidence and being aware of it and also i can't confirm it.

So, i opened my Quran then i saw the verse before and the verse after it and i mean 2:61 & 2:63 and i hope that you will check it as i did so.

Actually, I didn't used while observing verse from Holy Books whether the bible,
Quran .. etc to take a verse or a word out of it's context or out of it's story or what does it mean in that particular place.

Therefore, when you go to 2:61 you will read this verse:
[61] And remember ye said: "O Musa! (Moses in arabic) We cannot endure one kind of food (always); so beseech thy Lord for us to produce for us of what the earth groweth its pot-herbs, and cucumbers, its garlic, lentils, and onions." He said: "Will ye exchange the better for the worse? Go ye down to any town, and ye shall find what ye want!" They were covered with humiliation and misery: they drew on themselves the wrath of Allah. This because they went on rejecting the Signs of Allah and slaying His Messengers without just cause. This because they rebelled and went on transgressing".
as you can see this verse is talking about Moses and sons of Israel.

let's see now the verse you mentioned earliar which is 2:62
[62] Those who believe, and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians, any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

and i'll give you two more verses:

[63] And remember We took your Covenant and We raised above you (the towering height) of Mount (Sinai) (saying): "Hold firmly to what We have given you and bring (ever) to remembrance what is therein: perchance ye may fear Allah."


[64] But ye turned back thereafter: had it not been for the Grace and Mercy of Allah to you, ye had surely been among the lost.

Fristly, as you can see all this was about Moses and his followers (sons of israel) and that all people who followed Moses(Jewish) and after that the people who followed Jesus(Christians) after Moses and the people who followed David (Sabians) before God send Mohammed (PBUH) shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

and it came in the middle of the story of Moses to show us what will happen to people who were before Mohammed (PBUH).

Secondly, the same verse 2:62 is a reply for a follower of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) and his name is "SALMAN AL-FARSY" because he was a christian before Islam and he asked Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) about his old friends that they couldn't catch up with him and they died before that so as Prophet Mohammed knowledge about this case his respond was that "they will go to hell" then "Salman" felt so sad for that and he didn't know what to do because they were good christians and how come they will go to hell fire, then God said this verse as an answer for "SALMAN AL-FARSY" and to tell us about the people before Mohammed (PBUH) like sons of Israel for example and what will happen to them in the future.

Thirdly, Don't forget this verse 3:85

[85] If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good).

Nevertheless, I don't blame you for not understanding the system of Quran but
insha Allah "God willing" i'll try to help you out with any verse you are confused with.

This analogy is faulty for several reasons. First, good people who are non-Muslims do not believe that they are worshipping the wrong god, or not 'respecting their father' as it were. A better analogy would be a good person who believes incorrectly that some man is his biological father, and with no knowledge of his actual biological father, does not give him a place in his life. He does, however, love and honor that man, and his actions show that his intentions are honorable and he is trying to do the right thing.

I do agree with you that many people don't know and may Allah gauide them but i met many people and when we reach to a critical point in our talk about the truth then they go back in thier words saying that i'm true and they do agree with me but thier socity and thier family and relative will not accept them as Muslims and this was the "only" valid reason for them but not logical misunderstanding as you said so, and that dosn't mean on the other hand that there are no people who really lack for the truth but i just mentioned only the people i met and also some members in here too.

Where our main difference lies, I believe, is that you think that everyone knows in their hearts that Islam is the one, true religion, and once exposed to it they only reject it out of stubborness or evilness. This is simply not the case. Many people reject it through logic. And if it turns out that Islam is the true religion and they simply made a logical error, that does not warrant hellfire.

I never think of people this way because it's not fair at all to think of people like that while they are trying to cooperate with me or with other members in here.

and i'm so excited to hear from you what is the thing you think of it as a logical error in Islam so i may explain for you if you misunderstand it.

Now, when most people hear the answer, they simply don't believe it, and they will argue to the death that there is a 50/50 shot with either door. And they really, truly believe that they are correct, but they aren't. This does not make them bad people.

i explained for you earliar that i never said being a non-Muslim that would make you a bad person because i don't have the right to say so and also some non-Muslims may definitely surpase many Muslims in term of thier honesty and behavior.

So people do have logical reasons for rejecting 'the truth', which would be Islam in this hypothetical. And if, for instance, a person rejected Islam because he or she thought it hypocritical that Islam expects homosexuals to bottle up their sexuality indefinitely, but it allows for married men to have sex with their wives whenever they please without their wives' consent (Qur. 2:223), because it is unreasonable to expect men to contain their sexuality indefinitely (see Catholic priests), then that would be a logical reason for rejecting Islam. Even if there is a flaw in that logic, he or she is not rejecting Islam because they are evil, stubborn, or an otherwise bad person.

the verse you mean is 2:223 which is:
[223] Your wives are as a tilth unto you: so approach your tilth when or how you will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah, and know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe.

I Don't know really how did you conclude from this verse your claim but i'll explain for you this verse and in what case Allah said it.

some arabs were mentioning some conditions in sex to each other then a jew told them that this is an animal act and he( the jew ) do sex in one condition only because if he didn't so if they had a baby so he/she will be a cross-eyed in case they didn't stich to a specific condition of sex, so then God said this verse to Mohammed (PBUH) to tell the Muslims that they can have thier wives and they can use any condition of sex.

 

[TashaN]

consentMore proof that decisions of faith are made based upon logic is that we are all here in this forum, debating religion. And although we will all probably come to different conclusions, we are all at least trying to find some higher truth, which is a lot more than can be said for most of the population at large. If there is one 'correct' religion, then the people in this forum who find it will probably be the ones with the best logic, which is unfair because some people are better at reasoning than others.

logic is not the only way to examine any faith but there are many things made a faith a wonderful and comperhensive one.

So, again, we must come to the conclusion that religion cannot be the standard by which people are judged.

we didn't conclude yet because we didn't reach to a real fair point yet and you can't just assume and conclude unless that concern with you own belief but not an assumption which cover all of us.

 

[chuck010342]

What does telling a Christian apologist something have to do with the questions ImAj asked?

Ravi is From INDIA.