No resurrection and no judgment. No heaven and no hell.

[TheSounding]

Have you had any in depth discussions with JW's?

I have not. Although I had read into it some years ago. There were subtle aspects of the faith which turned my interests elsewhere.

This is what the Bible teaches.....resurrection does not mean immortality. Everlasting life is completely different to immortality. Humans are created as physical, mortal beings with external elements that make life possible. Without all these things (air, food, water, suitable environment) life on this planet could not exist. God supplied them all in abundance. The garden was a blueprint for what the whole world was to become. There would be no sitting around in the garden eating fruit all day. Humans are designed to work and to enjoy being creative like their Maker.

Since there was never a need for humans to go anywhere, or to be anything other than mortal humans until Adam's choice created the need for a rescue mission for his children, no human would ever have needed to go to heaven at all.

No one seems to understand what would have happened if Adam and his wife had told the serpent to "get lost".
Jesus resisted all temptations offered by God's adversary....no if's or but's.

There are at least 3 scenarios that were possible in Eden.

1) The serpent offers the fruit to the woman and she refuses. God punishes one rebel. Humans live forever on earth, fulfilling the mandate to "fill the earth and subdue it".

2) The woman accepts the fruit and offers it to her husband but he refuses. The woman suffers the penalty and God perhaps provides a new mate and the example of the first woman serves as a warning for all.

3) The woman accepts the fruit; her husband understands the implications of joining her in this act of disobedience and gives the human race that descended from them a death sentence from which they could find no remedy.

We know which one became our reality. But God did not leave us without hope. He sent his own son into the world to buy back what Adam lost for his children. The kingdom, of which Jesus is king, will bring fallen humanity back to the perfection that Adam and his wife lost. God's purpose for humans has always been earthly. The fact that he chose a relatively small number to rule with Christ in heaven does not alter that. That gives humans the comfort of knowing that their rulers will understand the human condition better than any spirit creature could. All of their rulers will have lived as humans, including their King.

I'm confused. What I gather you saying is that Heaven will be established on earth and accompanied by a physical resurrection of the chosen. But then again you said, “Everlasting life is completely different to immortality.” So I question what you mean.

What leads you to this conclusion? It negates everything written about him in scripture. If he was a sinner, then he is not the Messiah.

Atonement means "at-one-meant" which denotes equivalency. Jesus had to be sinless to atone for the sinless life that Adam forfeited. Adam paid for his own sin with his own life...but unless an equivalent life was offered for his children, born in sin through no fault on their part, they would be condemned to an eternal cycle of life and death. This is not the life God purposed for us....we have a collective expectation of something sooo much better.

Everlasting life as mortal beings living in paradise conditions on this earth was what God planned at the start, and this is what will result after he has dealt with rebellion in his family, once and for all. Then, whatever the Creator has planned for this vast universe can go ahead.

When I read what was written about him and compare it with what was written about other revered figures of other cultures I find they all have something in common, and that is a unique and supernatural quality. That goes against my better judgment, for it is certain that things don't happen just once, they reoccur over and over again. Things don't happen behind closed doors (as in only a single generation’s time), they happen for all without discrimination. Therefore I find no conviction in such written accounts. And the same goes for the atonement and resurrection of Jesus; it's a nice story but so are the multitude of others from around the world, and no one can substantiate any of them.

On what do you base this assumption? If he was Messiah, then he would have to fulfil all that the Messiah was prophesied to do. His purpose was to establish his kingdom and to restore God's people to physical and spiritual prosperity.
If Jesus was just a man who is now dead, how does he achieve his Messianic purpose?

In my mind prophecy is an archaic expression of good judgment when it comes to meeting the community's future needs and not clairvoyance. For example, I believe Isaiah realized the need within his community (Israel) for compassion and so he envisioned that someone would achieve it if he summoned them. Jesus read this in Isaiah, understood it and achieved it. Jesus is forever the image of compassion, the Messiah, because love requires sacrifice and he sacrificed the sum of everything—his life.

The Christian idea of how the universe came into being, how it unfolds and what that means to an individual's life is based solely on the Bible, it is not based on reflection and ideas beyond the Bible. So the notion of Jesus having a “purpose” means nothing if one doesn't accept the Bible wholeheartedly.

Who do you see as your "community organiser"?

I am always interested in how much faith people exercise in God when they have to resort to actions that God condemns to save their own skin. Jesus taught that the one who "wants to save his life will lose it, but he who loses his life for my sake will find it". (Matt16:25) Job was used to demonstrate that the devil charges humans with disobedience to God to save their own life. Job proved that the devil was a liar...what are we proving?

Jesus also taught us to 'love our enemies and to pray for those who persecute us'....so any activity that works against that directive is a betrayal of his teachings and a blatant attempt to save our own life by disobeying God. Faith in God means not deviating from his directives, no matter what. No justifications will be accepted.

Who exactly is irrelevant. And because they happen to be special to me, I take this attitude: “Do not give what is holy to dogs, or they might throw them upon the manure pile. Do not throw pearls to swine, or they might make mud of it.” Not that you are a dog or a pig.

The concept supporting my community organizer is a pragmatic one and not idealistic. It is one of governance and common good. It is one based on pure monotheism and Christian values, but not Christian theology.

If your ox is stuck in the mud on the Sabbath, will you not pull it out? If you’re the victim of a home invasion, will you defend yourself? The concept works along this principle. Loving your enemy is having mercy on them and forgiving them, not seeking revenge. It does not mean that you give into their demands. “The prospect of retaliation saves lives, O you who are possessed of minds – perhaps you will fear God.”

Do you have others who share your "lavish home" or is it one you have constructed for yourself?

Some 15–20 million globally share my lavish home, and they all consider it heavenly.

Do you believe that we can worship the true God in isolation, apart from others who share our beliefs?

Yes, but community is far more rewarding.

What is your view of scripture?

That its origination is as divine as are all things. Perhaps that answers your question.

God has always had an organized people to whom he gave his laws and of whom he had reasonable expectations....so who are these people today in your opinion?

My opinion is that God doesn't give laws, He inspires them and throughout his creation. The question is whether or not those laws lead astray or guide to a promising path—His blessings.

What is your view of the future? What will God do about the human condition, which is deteriorating rapidly at a time when we have never had better education or resources to improve it?

My view is that I don't know. It is evident that God has been merciful in providing us with the scientific means to examine His creation and the medical capability to save lives. Whatever be His will, I will be thankful.

 

[JayJayDee]

I have not. Although I had read into it some years ago. There were subtle aspects of the faith which turned my interests elsewhere.

I understand that each must find their own path. Sometimes it does not lead to where we imagine it will. There is a deceiver in the world who masquerades as "an angel of light"....he is not going to allow our choices to be easy.

I'm confused. What I gather you saying is that Heaven will be established on earth and accompanied by a physical resurrection of the chosen. But then again you said, “Everlasting life is completely different to immortality.” So I question what you mean.

Let me explain.....

What God offered Adam and his wife was not immortality...it was everlasting life. There is a distinct difference that most people never consider. The word "mortal" as used in the context of scripture means that we eat, drink and sleep and that we can die from a multitude of causes at any age. But according to the Genesis account, God offered mortals the opportunity to "live forever" in the flesh. (Gen 3:22-24) There were no "natural" causes of death...there was only one...disobedience to a single command.

There were two trees of significance in the garden..."the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" AND "the tree of life". There was a prohibition on only one....but once sin entered into the world, access to the other was denied....in fact God went to a great deal of trouble to ensure that sinful humans never partook of this tree again. (See Gen 3:22-24)

Read through the first few chapters of Genesis and see what picture emerges. Don't read over it...read all the words and form a mental image of what they say. God never designed humans as half flesh/half spirit. They were all flesh with a spiritual component to their psyche. No part of them would live on after death. They would simply go back to the dust.

"Immortality" on the other hand, literally means "the power of an indestructible life". An immortal cannot die of any cause.
Because we do not believe that Jesus was Almighty God, we can safely say that he was not immortal before he came to be born as a human child. If he was immortal, then he could not have died to offer a ransom for Adam's children. But because he was sinless, he could well have lived forever in the flesh. Sin is what causes death. Like Adam, Jesus was created without sin, so there was no "natural" cause of death for him, but he was not immortal.
Being mortal doesn't mean you HAVE to die...only that you CAN. Do you understand the difference?

When I read what was written about him and compare it with what was written about other revered figures of other cultures I find they all have something in common, and that is a unique and supernatural quality. That goes against my better judgment, for it is certain that things don't happen just once, they reoccur over and over again.

For the appearance of the Messiah...it was only supposed to happen once. The supernatural abilities he possessed and passed on to his apostles, were to prove that God was backing the new arrangement. Once the miracles had accomplished what God sent them to do, they were withdrawn. Every one of the "gifts" was a demonstration of what will be commonplace under the rule of Messiah's kingdom. The healing of the sick and the raising of the dead is something I personally look forward to.

Things don't happen behind closed doors (as in only a single generation’s time), they happen for all without discrimination.

In the context of the Bible, that is not really true. Jesus was sent only to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel". That means that the people of other nations did not benefit from his miracles or his discourses. It was only after Israel rejected him as Messiah that God cast them off and chose a new nation to serve him. (Matt 23: 37-39) This new nation, like the old, would have association with God's name. (Acts 15:14)

Therefore I find no conviction in such written accounts. And the same goes for the atonement and resurrection of Jesus; it's a nice story but so are the multitude of others from around the world, and no one can substantiate any of them.

We are free to make our own judgments about these things.

The Christian idea of how the universe came into being, how it unfolds and what that means to an individual's life is based solely on the Bible, it is not based on reflection and ideas beyond the Bible. So the notion of Jesus having a “purpose” means nothing if one doesn't accept the Bible wholeheartedly.

So you don't accept the Bible as the word of God? Or you only accept some of it as such? Do you have a holy book that you do accept as God's word? The Quran perhaps?

Who exactly is irrelevant. And because they happen to be special to me, I take this attitude: “Do not give what is holy to dogs, or they might throw them upon the manure pile. Do not throw pearls to swine, or they might make mud of it.” Not that you are a dog or a pig.

I understand completely and I have much the same attitude. it is Jesus' attitude.

The concept supporting my community organizer is a pragmatic one and not idealistic. It is one of governance and common good. It is one based on pure monotheism and Christian values, but not Christian theology.

That is what a theocracy is. JW's live by theocratic rule. Christ taught many things but he was a messenger, a faithful servant of his God and Father.....not God incarnate.

We are told to obey those who rule over us, but when their rules conflict with God's rules, the apostles demonstrated that God's rules come first. That means that we will be model citizens of our nation....we will never rebel against their reasonable laws and we will be honest and sincere in all our dealings, but we will never compromise our Christian principles for any man-made scheme, no matter how noble it may appear to be.

If your ox is stuck in the mud on the Sabbath, will you not pull it out? If you’re the victim of a home invasion, will you defend yourself? The concept works along this principle. Loving your enemy is having mercy on them and forgiving them, not seeking revenge. It does not mean that you give into their demands.

The apostles I think showed us what it means to be a disciple of Christ. Like Jesus, they never sought to overthrow the powers that ruled over them, even though these powers arrested them and threw them in jail for doing what their master commanded them to do. It didn't matter what punishment was brought on them, they continued to preach without ever seeking retaliation for their ill treatment. They had spiritual gifts and supernatural abilities but they never used these selfishly.

Some 15–20 million globally share my lavish home, and they all consider it heavenly.

Can I ask what you all call yourselves? How are you identified?

My opinion is that God doesn't give laws, He inspires them and throughout his creation. The question is whether or not those laws lead astray or guide to a promising path—His blessings.

Yes, I agree to a point. There are natural laws that exist, no doubt about it. But when God created humans there were no extensive lists of laws....there was just one rule. Obey and live...disobey and die. It wasn't more complicated than that.
But when humans decided to rebel against the authority of their God even in this simple command, the resulting decline in their ability to decide right from wrong was severely compromised. That is when God had to introduce his rules. Chaos would result if we did not have them.

My view is that I don't know. It is evident that God has been merciful in providing us with the scientific means to examine His creation and the medical capability to save lives. Whatever be His will, I will be thankful.

Me too...but whatever happens in this world will be temporary at best. God has a purpose for this earth and for all living things upon it. We have a collective desire for a better life, for the simple reason that we are programmed to live forever in paradise by our Creator...this life with all its trauma and woe, certainly isn't what we accept as "normal". Death is not "normal"...suffering is not "normal" but it is all we have ever known, thanks to the actions of our first parents. Even after all these thousands of years, humans still cannot unite the world in peace. What do you believe divides them?

Do you have no solid hope for the future in your belief system?

 

[TheSounding]

Let me explain.....

What God offered Adam and his wife was not immortality...it was everlasting life. There is a distinct difference that most people never consider. The word "mortal" as used in the context of scripture means that we eat, drink and sleep and that we can die from a multitude of causes at any age. But according to the Genesis account, God offered mortals the opportunity to "live forever" in the flesh. (Gen 3:22-24) There were no "natural" causes of death...there was only one...disobedience to a single command.

There were two trees of significance in the garden..."the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" AND "the tree of life". There was a prohibition on only one....but once sin entered into the world, access to the other was denied....in fact God went to a great deal of trouble to ensure that sinful humans never partook of this tree again. (See Gen 3:22-24)

Read through the first few chapters of Genesis and see what picture emerges. Don't read over it...read all the words and form a mental image of what they say. God never designed humans as half flesh/half spirit. They were all flesh with a spiritual component to their psyche. No part of them would live on after death. They would simply go back to the dust.

"Immortality" on the other hand, literally means "the power of an indestructible life". An immortal cannot die of any cause.
Because we do not believe that Jesus was Almighty God, we can safely say that he was not immortal before he came to be born as a human child. If he was immortal, then he could not have died to offer a ransom for Adam's children. But because he was sinless, he could well have lived forever in the flesh. Sin is what causes death. Like Adam, Jesus was created without sin, so there was no "natural" cause of death for him, but he was not immortal.
Being mortal doesn't mean you HAVE to die...only that you CAN. Do you understand the difference?

Yes, I think I see the difference.

So you don't accept the Bible as the word of God? Or you only accept some of it as such? Do you have a holy book that you do accept as God's word? The Quran perhaps?

I use whatever I find to be reasonable. The Quran is one such scripture and the 'constitution' of my community. Others I personally use are the Book of Thomas, Gospel of Thomas, and the biblical Gospels to some extent, among others.

Do you have no solid hope for the future in your belief system?

Nope. I believe that God controls all things and knows all things, and so He has put everything in its place. I am content with what God has provided and grateful for everything that happens.

 

[JayJayDee]

Yes, I think I see the difference.

I use whatever I find to be reasonable. The Quran is one such scripture and the 'constitution' of my community. Others I personally use are the Book of Thomas, Gospel of Thomas, and the biblical Gospels to some extent, among others.

Nope. I believe that God controls all things and knows all things, and so He has put everything in its place. I am content with what God has provided and grateful for everything that happens.

I am intrigued by the fact that you won't identify your faith. Is there a reason? I mean if there are 15-20 million of you, you must be somewhat easy to spot. Are you Muslim? If so, which sect do you follow?

 

[Zardoz]

The problem with the theory is, much like reincarnation, is that if each time we were recreated more worthy then the last time, shouldn't things have gotten better by now? Shouldn't we be "worthy" and more above murder, rape, crime, or sin? The very fact that we have so much of it, doesn't that prove any recreation to make things more worthy or better is failing or just not true?

With only 6 previous 'editions' of a (by necessity) imperfect physical universe, it seems a low number to me, actually.
There is an opinion that the Serpent of the Garden of Eden was actually a remnant of the previous universe.
So the last universe might not even have had mammals. Who knows how many things we take for granted are wonders?

I am curious as to how you arrived at the number seven. Why not nine?

Not my personal opinion, I just remember while in Kabbalah study of a related topic, there was a side comment that G-d created and destroyed the universe six times before. Therefore in Cosmology, I believe in the Big Bounce theory, and reject the Big Freeze or Big Crunch theories. Given that the universe had a beginning (Big Bang) and will have an End, it's comforting to believe that we will survive this, to see a new universe. World to Come, indeed!

That Seven Days is in the creation story, and not six or nine, may or may not be related to our being the Seventh cycle?

 

[TashaN]

Bismala
Peace

The most comforting idea I have come to believe is there exists nothing beyond this present life, that God's judgment is incorporated into the unfolding of creation, and that the only resurrection is recreation. I believe we relive our lives in perpetuity, as does everything else, and all substance forms again as it did, does and will. So we can make heaven of it, or we can make hell of it. And it is our actions that determine this.

I choose believe this because it makes me the most mindful and happy compared to other beliefs, and because I think it's the most reasonable.

What do you think? Is it reasonable? Would it make you happier to believe this than a resurrection and judgment in the traditional sense?

Is reality about what makes us happy or about the truth how shocking and painful it appear to be?

If a doctor broke a horrifying news to his patient that he was diagnosed with cancer, will the patient start listening to the instruction of the doctor on how to fight it, or the patient will be in denial that the disease doesn't exist because that makes him happy?

 

[TheSounding]

Is reality about what makes us happy or about the truth how shocking and painful it appear to be?

If a doctor broke a horrifying news to his patient that he was diagnosed with cancer, will the patient start listening to the instruction of the doctor on how to fight it, or the patient will be in denial that the disease doesn't exist because that makes him happy?

SA

I think you are saying that we must choose between God and disillusionment, that we must choose between believing what is true and what we would prefer. And I get the sense you are approaching this topic from a traditional Islamic standpoint.

If you are implying that the revelation of the Holy Prophet should be interpreted literally in every aspect, such as resurrection and judgment and gardens and fire, then I'll ask where is the proof for this? If those depictions are really true then there must be some evidence to support their existence. So how is a literal interpretation evident? That is to say, is the doctor who is making the diagnosis even licensed? If we are to take the Holy Prophet's word for it, if it is indeed literal, then why not someone else's word? What evidence did he give us to verify his claims? Is that evidence substantial?

I believe lasting happiness comes to us when there is no doubt about the thing for which we are happy. I doubt a literal resurrection, etc. because it can't ever be verified. The notion of my original post I believe is verifiable because it has its basis in the present moment as well as God's mercy. My take on resurrection is that God would not create us only to experience our lives just once. He recreates us in order to have us with Him forever, that He may relive our lives and our joy forever.

“Alas for you! Alas!
Then again: Alas for you! Alas!
Does man think he shall be abandoned to futility?
Was he not a sperm drop, to be discharged,
Then became a blood clot, which He created and fashioned?
And made from it a pair, male and female?
Is such a Being not capable of reviving the dead? [75:40]”

My joy is knowing I'll relive my creator once more and find Him once again. This notion is what I believe makes for lasting happiness when compared to believing the literality of quranic depictions. Correct me if I took you wrong?

 

[Sleeppy]

A circle with an infinite circumference?

 

[TheSounding]

A circle with an infinite circumference?

Sort of except there is really no discernible circumference, if that makes sense. Think of viewing an inflated balloon from the perspective of a tiny spaceship, both inside the balloon and outside. I see us as being inside the balloon, and so we are unable to examine the balloon all at once. We are only able to define it as 'balloon' (to include the face of it and gas within it). We cannot say for certain how it appears from the outside in its totality or understand it accurately from inside. So in the same way we cannot say for certain what the circumstance of the circle is.

I think both perpetual recreation and God apply to this analogy. Recreation, because it's certain that life happened once (the tiny spaceship is existent), and God, because it's certain that environment is necessary to life (the 'balloon' is existent and sustaining the tiny spaceship by not collapsing). Does this make sense to you, or did I take the wrong pill bottle from the medicine cabinet?

 

[Sleeppy]

Sort of except there is really no discernible circumference, if that makes sense. Think of viewing an inflated balloon from the perspective of a tiny spaceship, both inside the balloon and outside. I see us as being inside the balloon, and so we are unable to examine the balloon all at once. We are only able to define it as 'balloon' (to include the face of it and gas within it). We cannot say for certain how it appears from the outside in its totality or understand it accurately from inside. So in the same way we cannot say for certain what the circumstance of the circle is.

I think both perpetual recreation and God apply to this analogy. Recreation, because it's certain that life happened once (the tiny spaceship is existent), and God, because it's certain that environment is necessary to life (the 'balloon' is existent and sustaining the tiny spaceship by not collapsing). Does this make sense to you, or did I take the wrong pill bottle from the medicine cabinet?

I hear you.. Always interesting. Still thinking.

 

[TashaN]

SA

I think you are saying that we must choose between God and disillusionment, that we must choose between believing what is true and what we would prefer. And I get the sense you are approaching this topic from a traditional Islamic standpoint.

And traditional is ... not good enough for you?

If you are implying that the revelation of the Holy Prophet should be interpreted literally in every aspect, such as resurrection and judgment and gardens and fire, then I'll ask where is the proof for this? If those depictions are really true then there must be some evidence to support their existence. So how is a literal interpretation evident?

What kind of proof would be satisfactory to you?

That is to say, is the doctor who is making the diagnosis even licensed? If we are to take the Holy Prophet's word for it, if it is indeed literal, then why not someone else's word? What evidence did he give us to verify his claims? Is that evidence substantial?

It's better then to sort out some background before we go further.

Do you believe Quran to be the word of God and Mohamed to be his Messenger? if not, please explain because i don't want to make assumptions.

I believe lasting happiness comes to us when there is no doubt about the thing for which we are happy.

What is happiness?

I doubt a literal resurrection, etc. because it can't ever be verified. The notion of my original post I believe is verifiable because it has its basis in the present moment as well as God's mercy. My take on resurrection is that God would not create us only to experience our lives just once. He recreates us in order to have us with Him forever, that He may relive our lives and our joy forever.

“Alas for you! Alas!
Then again: Alas for you! Alas!
Does man think he shall be abandoned to futility?
Was he not a sperm drop, to be discharged,
Then became a blood clot, which He created and fashioned?
And made from it a pair, male and female?
Is such a Being not capable of reviving the dead? [75:40]”

My joy is knowing I'll relive my creator once more and find Him once again. This notion is what I believe makes for lasting happiness when compared to believing the literality of quranic depictions. Correct me if I took you wrong?

Did you read the verses just before the one you have posted?

No! But you love the immediate

And leave the Hereafter.

[Some] faces, that Day, will be radiant,

Looking at their Lord.

And [some] faces, that Day, will be contorted,

Expecting that there will be done to them [something] backbreaking.

No! When the soul has reached the collar bones

And it is said, "Who will cure [him]?"

And the dying one is certain that it is the [time of] separation

And the leg is wound about the leg,

To your Lord, that Day, will be the procession.

And the disbeliever had not believed, nor had he prayed.

But [instead], he denied and turned away.

And then he went to his people, swaggering [in pride].

(75:20-33)

 

[TheSounding]

And traditional is ... not good enough for you?

Not for me… no. I like to be as certain as I can. Antiquity and popularity do not equal certainty in my eyes.

What kind of proof would be satisfactory to you?

Scientific documentation.

Do you believe Quran to be the word of God and Mohamed to be his Messenger?

Yes. I believe that to be the case. I believe God originates all things, and nothing is capable of originating other than God.

What is happiness?

I don’t understand what you mean.

Did you read the verses just before the one you have posted?

Yes I did read those verses. My interpretation is that a person can either die in happiness or in frustration. The deciding factor is whether or not the person had glorified the Originator and had been grateful to Him for His originations.

“No, but in truth you people love this fleeting life,
And pay no heed to the life hereafter. [75:21]

On that Day, some faces shall be resplendent,
To their Lord their eyes are lifted;
On that Day, some faces shall be snarling,
Knowing a back-breaker shall befall them. [75:25]

But when a soul has reached the neck-bones,
And a voice is heard: ‘Can anyone cure?’
And he knows it is the final parting,
And leg is entwined with leg,
To your Lord that Day is the rounding up. [75:30]

But he neither believed nor prayed.
Instead, he cried lies and departed;
Then sauntered homewards. [75:33]

Alas for you! Alas!
Then again: Alas for you! Alas!
Does man think he shall be abandoned to futility?
Was he not a sperm drop, to be discharged,
Then became a blood clot, which He created and fashioned?
And made from it a pair, male and female?
Is such a Being not capable of reviving the dead? [75:40]”

My interpretation is that “love this fleeting life/the immediate...” refers to the point of view which posits that a life only occurs once and there is only a single lifespan. "The life hereafter...” refers to a point of view which posits that a life reoccurs indefinitely and the present moment is figuratively the Day of God, His Judgment, His act of resurrection, or recreation (a point of mine in my original post). God blesses you with the most happiness when you “Conduct yourself in this world as if you are here to stay forever, and yet prepare for eternity as if you are to die tomorrow...."

And prior to those verses came this verse of note, which seems to makes perfect sense in the context of perpetual recreation.

“In truth, man shall witness against himself,
Even as he advances his excuses. [75:15]”

And also with the conclusion, the Quran brings up the process of creating a human being and follows it with... "Is such a Being not capable of reviving the dead?" This fact has me assume the Quran is implying a redoing of that process.

Do you think someone is more inclined to suicide bomb themselves believing life only occurs once and there is only a single lifespan, or believing life reoccurs indefinitely and the present moment is figuratively the Day of God, His Judgment, and His act of resurrection? I think one of those beliefs allows for a greater degree of ignorant behavior.

 

[TashaN]

Not for me… no. I like to be as certain as I can. Antiquity and popularity do not equal certainty in my eyes.

I didn't say popular but rather, traditional which doesn't necessarily mean it's popular today because many people have abandon the way of the Prophet and have invented their own way.

Scientific documentation.

So you are going to conduct these scientific researches and document it yourself or you are waiting for someone, somewhere in the world to provide it for you?

If it's the first then you are a true seeker of truth, go a head, but if you are of the later then i think you will be disappointed to find out that there is a very good chance you might not get what you are waiting for.

Allah didn't tell us to wait for scientists to find the answer for us but to seek it ourselves.

Say, [O Muhammad], "Travel through the land and observe how He began creation. Then Allah will produce the final creation. Indeed Allah , over all things, is competent." (Quran 29:20)

What did Allah say about resurrection?

They are [presently] saying, "Will we indeed be returned to [our] former state [of life]?
http://quran.com/79/11
Even if we should be decayed bones?
http://quran.com/79/12
They say, "That, then, would be a losing return."http://quran.com/79/13
Indeed, it will be but one shout,http://quran.com/79/14
And suddenly they will be [alert] upon the earth's surface. (Quran 79:10-14)

Just read the Quran after setting yourself free from any confirmation bias and you will understand what does verses really say, not what you want it to say.

Yes. I believe that to be the case. I believe God originates all things, and nothing is capable of originating other than God.

I don’t understand what you mean.

You said earlier: I believe lasting happiness comes to us when there is no doubt about the thing for which we are happy.

So i want to know what is the nature of this "lasting happiness", and how can happiness last forever?

Yes I did read those verses. My interpretation is that a person can either die in happiness or in frustration. The deciding factor is whether or not the person had glorified the Originator and had been grateful to Him for His originations.

How do you know whether your current interpretation correct or wrong?

“No, but in truth you people love this fleeting life,
And pay no heed to the life hereafter. [75:21]

On that Day, some faces shall be resplendent,
To their Lord their eyes are lifted;
On that Day, some faces shall be snarling,
Knowing a back-breaker shall befall them. [75:25]

But when a soul has reached the neck-bones,
And a voice is heard: ‘Can anyone cure?’
And he knows it is the final parting,
And leg is entwined with leg,
To your Lord that Day is the rounding up. [75:30]

But he neither believed nor prayed.
Instead, he cried lies and departed;
Then sauntered homewards. [75:33]

Alas for you! Alas!
Then again: Alas for you! Alas!
Does man think he shall be abandoned to futility?

Was he not a sperm drop, to be discharged,
Then became a blood clot, which He created and fashioned?
And made from it a pair, male and female?
Is such a Being not capable of reviving the dead? [75:40]”

My interpretation is that “love this fleeting life/the immediate...” refers to the point of view which posits that a life only occurs once and there is only a single lifespan. "The life hereafter...” refers to a point of view which posits that a life reoccurs indefinitely and the present moment is figuratively the Day of God, His Judgment, His act of resurrection, or recreation (a point of mine in my original post). God blesses you with the most happiness when you “Conduct yourself in this world as if you are here to stay forever, and yet prepare for eternity as if you are to die tomorrow...."

Sorry i'm a bit confused here. I didn't get that the hereafter part. Can you clarify for me what is the hereafter to you and how can someone live there forever?

And prior to those verses came this verse of note, which seems to makes perfect sense in the context of perpetual recreation.

“In truth, man shall witness against himself,
Even as he advances his excuses. [75:15]”

And also with the conclusion, the Quran brings up the process of creating a human being and follows it with... "Is such a Being not capable of reviving the dead?" This fact has me assume the Quran is implying a redoing of that process.

Do you think someone is more inclined to suicide bomb themselves believing life only occurs once and there is only a single lifespan, or believing life reoccurs indefinitely and the present moment is figuratively the Day of God, His Judgment, and His act of resurrection? I think one of those beliefs allows for a greater degree of ignorant behavior.

So your conclusion is based on the behavior of some misguided psychos who blow themselves up?

This is like denying that sun exist just because it has caused some burn to some people on the beach!!!

Don't allow some current stereotyping of Muslims in the media to scare you away from the truth.

Remember how many whites in the past believed that freeing slaves would cause disorder in the society and that will cause black men to get married with their white girls and share wealth with them! That's why they were able to control the white masses at that time, with scare tactics. They shout, hey fool, the black slave will have sex with your little daughter if he became equal, free, and independent.

 

[TheSounding]

I didn't say popular but rather, traditional which doesn't necessarily mean it's popular today because many people have abandon the way of the Prophet and have invented their own way.

I think it is important to remember that the way, or path is not the same as the method. There may be many methods to any given path, but the path is always one course and the method is merely a way for following it. Innovation in regards to new methods should be a good thing because it makes the path more inclusive and diverse. I would agree with you that innovation of the path itself is a thing which cannot happen, otherwise it becomes a new path altogether and it veers from the Islamic destination.

My belief is the Quran is the path and the Sunnah (tradition) is a method, that of the Holy Prophet, and it is the path of the Holy Prophet which is sound and not his method. His method may have sound elements within it but it is wholly unsound, as are all methods.

So you are going to conduct these scientific researches and document it yourself or you are waiting for someone, somewhere in the world to provide it for you?

If it's the first then you are a true seeker of truth, go a head, but if you are of the later then i think you will be disappointed to find out that there is a very good chance you might not get what you are waiting for.

Allah didn't tell us to wait for scientists to find the answer for us but to seek it ourselves.

Say, [O Muhammad], "Travel through the land and observe how He began creation. Then Allah will produce the final creation. Indeed Allah , over all things, is competent." (Quran 29:20)

What did Allah say about resurrection?

They are [presently] saying, "Will we indeed be returned to [our] former state [of life]?
Even if we should be decayed bones?
They say, "That, then, would be a losing return."
Indeed, it will be but one shout,
And suddenly they will be [alert] upon the earth's surface. (Quran 79:10-14)

Just read the Quran after setting yourself free from any confirmation bias and you will understand what does verses really say, not what you want it to say.

Science is the systematic study of structure and behavior for the purpose reasoning, something the Quran is fundamentally based on. Quran 29:20 clearly expresses that fact, as do the various verses mentioning the processes of natural phenomena. Given this I ask myself, how is the belief in the Day of Resurrection and Judgment reasoned to be true?

I have read the Quran at face value and free from confirmation bias, and I chose to interpret it using the same logic that it used to persuade me. I am persuaded to believe in the Quran’s assertion of God because it states the fact of His existence is evident all around me. I am persuaded based on evidence.

When it comes to resurrection or judgment, however, I find no factual assertion in the Quran, as was the case for God, and therefore I am not persuaded to believe in that regard. My “confirmation bias” if any is that I believe the Holy Prophet based his perception of reality on only what he could verify. And if that be the case then many quranic depictions are poetic and figurative in meaning, such as resurrection and judgment.

You said earlier: I believe lasting happiness comes to us when there is no doubt about the thing for which we are happy.

So i want to know what is the nature of this "lasting happiness", and how can happiness last forever?

There is no doubt in absolute confidence and no shortcomings in determination. Happiness comes when we are confident about what we are doing and undeterred. I mean by “lasting happiness” that as long as we believe in God we are guaranteed happiness. And this is due to our absolute confidence in Him as the Lord of the Worlds, and also our gratitude for whatever He develops and forms.

How do you know whether your current interpretation correct or wrong?

I judge its correctness by the benefit it brings as compared to others. I choose to believe it because it provides the most practical benefit.

Sorry i'm a bit confused here. I didn't get that the hereafter part. Can you clarify for me what is the hereafter to you and how can someone live there forever?

The afterlife is not to be confused with Heaven. Afterlife is the perpetual re-experience of life and Heaven is the bounty of God at hand, the dispensation of Mercy.

So your conclusion is based on the behavior of some misguided psychos who blow themselves up?

This is like denying that sun exist just because it has caused some burn to some people on the beach!!!

Don't allow some current stereotyping of Muslims in the media to scare you away from the truth.

Remember how many whites in the past believed that freeing slaves would cause disorder in the society and that will cause black men to get married with their white girls and share wealth with them! That's why they were able to control the white masses at that time, with scare tactics. They shout, hey fool, the black slave will have sex with your little daughter if he became equal, free, and independent.

Regardless my question still stands.

 

[TashaN]

I think it is important to remember that the way, or path is not the same as the method. There may be many methods to any given path, but the path is always one course and the method is merely a way for following it. Innovation in regards to new methods should be a good thing because it makes the path more inclusive and diverse. I would agree with you that innovation of the path itself is a thing which cannot happen, otherwise it becomes a new path altogether and it veers from the Islamic destination.

My belief is the Quran is the path and the Sunnah (tradition) is a method, that of the Holy Prophet, and it is the path of the Holy Prophet which is sound and not his method. His method may have sound elements within it but it is wholly unsound, as are all methods.

Allah clearly mentioned that we have to follow Prophet Mohamed in everything he does, and that's of course when it comes to the Islamic teachings but not his personal life.

" .... And whatever the Messenger has given you - take; and what he has forbidden you - refrain from. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty". (Quran 59:7)

"But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission". (Quran 4:65)

Science is the systematic study of structure and behavior for the purpose reasoning, something the Quran is fundamentally based on. Quran 29:20 clearly expresses that fact, as do the various verses mentioning the processes of natural phenomena. Given this I ask myself, how is the belief in the Day of Resurrection and Judgment reasoned to be true?

I have read the Quran at face value and free from confirmation bias, and I chose to interpret it using the same logic that it used to persuade me. I am persuaded to believe in the Quran’s assertion of God because it states the fact of His existence is evident all around me. I am persuaded based on evidence.

When it comes to resurrection or judgment, however, I find no factual assertion in the Quran, as was the case for God, and therefore I am not persuaded to believe in that regard. My “confirmation bias” if any is that I believe the Holy Prophet based his perception of reality on only what he could verify. And if that be the case then many quranic depictions are poetic and figurative in meaning, such as resurrection and judgment.

Is there any proof that it is just poetic and figurative?

Have you reached to your conclusion because you don't imagine there could be a hereafter based on what you experienced in this life? how can you tell which part of the Quran is poetic and which to be taken literally?

One of the reasons why people didn't believe in Mohamed at the beginning because they didn't believe that after their bones decay they could be resurrected just like how the verses i have posted earlier have shown.

So, believing in the hereafter is essential, not because we *need* a hereafter but because this is what Allah told us in the Quran.

There is no doubt in absolute confidence and no shortcomings in determination. Happiness comes when we are confident about what we are doing and undeterred. I mean by “lasting happiness” that as long as we believe in God we are guaranteed happiness. And this is due to our absolute confidence in Him as the Lord of the Worlds, and also our gratitude for whatever He develops and forms.

How about the evil and injustice in this world? God will not judge people for what they have done in this life as he said in the Quran? doesn't this contradict with him being just?

(1) When the earth is shaken with its [final] earthquake
(2) And the earth discharges its burdens
(3) And man says, "What is [wrong] with it?" -
(4) That Day, it will report its news
(5) Because your Lord has commanded it.
(6) That Day, the people will depart separated [into categories] to be shown [the result of] their deeds.
(7) So whoever does an atom's weight of good will see it,
(8) And whoever does an atom's weight of evil will see it. (Quran 99:1-8)

I judge its correctness by the benefit it brings as compared to others. I choose to believe it because it provides the most practical benefit.

Sometimes we see things only from our perspective and we think it's the ultimate goodness and if you have called 10 people in a room, each will have his own version of what he sees as benefit or harm, and only God is the ultimate judge because he has the ultimate wisdom above all his creation.

The afterlife is not to be confused with Heaven. Afterlife is the perpetual re-experience of life and Heaven is the bounty of God at hand, the dispensation of Mercy.

Regardless my question still stands.

Based on the Quran, in the hereafter Allah will judge people, so some will go to heaven and some will go to hell.

Regarding your question, are you referring to the one on the first post when you asked if it was reasonable or not?

For me, it's not about what is reasonable to my feeble mind and what is not, but rather about the truth.

We acquire reason through our experience in this life, shaped by our societies, and hence we are forced to reason based on what we already know, so afterlife might be unreasonable to some of us because we are not familiar with it. Do you see the bias?

Of course not to mention the "classical conditioning" imposed on us by media and other big states and organizations, in the form of dramatically and consistently associate evilness with the beliefs of some terrorists (i.e. Islam) which has been used by you as an example of how useful the nonexistence of hereafter could be. That there is something inherently wrong with the believe in the hereafter. While on the other hand, i see no calls to abolish the American constitution because it causes some people to assassinate their own president in its name!!!

Therefore, i believe that we are comparing two distinctive entities that are difficult to compare based on pure reason alone because of all these factors involved. The same can be said about heaven and hell, if Allah didn't mention them, we wouldn't have known them.

 

[TheSounding]

Allah clearly mentioned that we have to follow Prophet Mohamed in everything he does, and that's of course when it comes to the Islamic teachings but not his personal life.

(Quran 59:7) Obeying the Holy Prophet is within the context of swearing allegiance and entering into the community. If someone wishes to join the community then they must share in its aspirations and methods. The methods are determined by the community organizer and they are merely a means of achieving a goal, nothing more. The reward for following the methods is communal prosperity, and the punishment for failing to follow them is expulsion (Heaven or Hell).

His posture, his hygiene habits, his preferred supplications - these are Sunnah and aspects of his personal life. I would even argue the exact method of ritual prayer is a matter of personal preference. Obeying the Holy Prophet is for the purpose of programming development for the community. But there is no compulsion to receive spiritual guidance and to follow it.

Is there any proof that it is just poetic and figurative? How can you tell which part of the Quran is poetic and which to be taken literally?

The proof is in reality, and that is why I take quranic depictions figuratively. And when I do and with reality in mind, the meaning of the poetry becomes quite profound. I distinguish between what is practical and what is theoretical. Exaggeration can be an effective poetic tool.

If one believes the Quran is literally true then God sent Gabriel to the Holy Prophet with the message. If one believes the Quran is figuratively true then God created the Holy Prophet with intellect and mercy, and it was his rationale that was the message—inspired. One mode is doubtful and one mode is removed of doubt. Going back to the personal preference of the Holy Prophet, what is conjecture remains to be merely his opinion and not compulsory.

One of the reasons why people didn't believe in Mohamed at the beginning because they didn't believe that after their bones decay they could be resurrected just like how the verses i have posted earlier have shown.

This statement may also apply to the idea of perpetual recreation. If perpetual recreation is what the Holy Prophet actually meant then his refutation to the people would make sense given that.

How about the evil and injustice in this world? Will God not judge people for what they have done in this life as he said in the Quran? Doesn't this contradict with him being just?

Are you saying that Almighty God cannot administer justice in real time, that He doesn't foresee injustice, and that He is somewhat clueless until a specified day? Almighty God is sovereign over all that exists. The motion of each thing carries with it Grace, Mercy, and Justice. And 'evil' was originated by God, and it is an aspect of His Rahma.

Sometimes we see things only from our perspective and we think it's the ultimate goodness and if you have called 10 people in a room, each will have his own version of what he sees as benefit or harm, and only God is the ultimate judge because he has the ultimate wisdom above all his creation.

You are saying God confined His wisdom to one book and one person, and you talk to me about confirmation bias. People may disagree about something but those who deny the reality of creation are deemed insane. I want to make clear that I am not deeming you insane, only that traveling down the path of following conjecture will eventually lead you to becoming lost.

We acquire reason through our experience in this life, shaped by our societies, and hence we are forced to reason based on what we already know, so afterlife might be unreasonable to some of us because we are not familiar with it.

You are familiar with the concept of afterlife but not the afterlife itself, there is a difference. I would say the only reason to believe in the afterlife is because your society believes so. Conformity is reasonable.

 

[TashaN]

(Quran 59:7) Obeying the Holy Prophet is within the context of swearing allegiance and entering into the community. If someone wishes to join the community then they must share in its aspirations and methods. The methods are determined by the community organizer and they are merely a means of achieving a goal, nothing more. The reward for following the methods is communal prosperity, and the punishment for failing to follow them is expulsion (Heaven or Hell).

His posture, his hygiene habits, his preferred supplications - these are Sunnah and aspects of his personal life. I would even argue the exact method of ritual prayer is a matter of personal preference. Obeying the Holy Prophet is for the purpose of programming development for the community. But there is no compulsion to receive spiritual guidance and to follow it.

The proof is in reality, and that is why I take quranic depictions figuratively. And when I do and with reality in mind, the meaning of the poetry becomes quite profound. I distinguish between what is practical and what is theoretical. Exaggeration can be an effective poetic tool.

If one believes the Quran is literally true then God sent Gabriel to the Holy Prophet with the message. If one believes the Quran is figuratively true then God created the Holy Prophet with intellect and mercy, and it was his rationale that was the message—inspired. One mode is doubtful and one mode is removed of doubt. Going back to the personal preference of the Holy Prophet, what is conjecture remains to be merely his opinion and not compulsory.

This statement may also apply to the idea of perpetual recreation. If perpetual recreation is what the Holy Prophet actually meant then his refutation to the people would make sense given that.

I humbly disagree, but i respect your views.

Are you saying that Almighty God cannot administer justice in real time, that He doesn't foresee injustice, and that He is somewhat clueless until a specified day? Almighty God is sovereign over all that exists. The motion of each thing carries with it Grace, Mercy, and Justice. And 'evil' was originated by God, and it is an aspect of His Rahma.

He can, that's why he punished the previous nations, but after Prophet Mohamed was sent as the last one to humanity from God, what remained was the end, judgement day, so Allah gave our ummah chance till that day to do good or bad.

You are saying God confined His wisdom to one book and one person, and you talk to me about confirmation bias. People may disagree about something but those who deny the reality of creation are deemed insane. I want to make clear that I am not deeming you insane, only that traveling down the path of following conjecture will eventually lead you to becoming lost.

Yes, one book and one person now, but that was not the case always because Allah has sent many Prophets and books before.

You are familiar with the concept of afterlife but not the afterlife itself, there is a difference. I would say the only reason to believe in the afterlife is because your society believes so. Conformity is reasonable.

While i agree many believe in the afterlife for following the community but that's not the case with me. I reached to a realization that there is a God, Allah, and the Quran is his message to us, and all what i have done is just to follow the Quran, as simple as that.

After submitting my will to God, i didn't impose my interpretation, i just let my thoughts dive into the words of God and understand it as it is without allowing my judgement to intervene.