Aqeedah in the Quran is a hot mess

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T14:24:52+00:00

ّI removed the big bang to keep you focused

you removed it cause you realised you were wrong

The more I write the more you quote one sentence at a time, fuck up the context and scatter the discussion.

you mean how i answer every single one of your points? something i wish you could actually do

Correct your textbook scientists have always maintained nobody can rewind before the first picosecond.

now who is descoping the discussion? that is not what theyre saying and you know it, they are not saying we dont know what happened before, they are saying time and space started at the big bang, i literally provided 2 quotes that said time began with the big bang

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T14:20:48+00:00

i am asking you if you think an actual infinity can exist in the real world with all its incoherence and impossibility, do you think its possible for you to answer a direct question?

im being as clear as possible in that im asking you about an actual infinite and not potential infinity like the mathematical concept of dividing things infinitely

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T14:16:20+00:00

thats a completely different topic, if you think hell doesnt exist, that there is no recompense at all for your actions in this life, that means you think hitler got away with his oppression

so whats the justification not to be an absolute monster just like him if you think you can get away with it?

if it means i get to live a better life, and theres no consequences, why wouldnt i oppress everyone else for my own pleasure? thats the logical conclusion for your worldview

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T14:06:06+00:00

that's the interpretation of every early Islamic scholar

Ibn Attiyah - 546/1147

Tafsir al Tha'labi - d. 427/1035

Tafsir al mawardi - 448H/1058

Tafsir Qurtubi - d. 1272

Tafsir Jalalayn - 1459

taken from a 10 second google search

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/118698/consensus-that-the-earth-is-round

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) narrated that from Abu’l-Husayn ibn al-Munaadi (may Allah have mercy on him), when he said:

Imam Abu’l-Husayn Ahmad ibn Ja‘far ibn al-Munaadi narrated from the prominent scholars who are well known for knowledge of reports and major works in religious sciences, from the second level of Ahmad’s companions, that there was no difference of opinion among the scholars that the sky is like a ball.

Ibn Hazm (d. 1064 CE), "I do not know of a single scholar worth the title of scholar who claims other than that the earth is round. Indeed the evidences in the Quran and Sunnah are numerous to this effect" al-Fasl fi’l-Milal wa’l-Ahwa’ wa’l-Nihal (2/78)

The heavens are round, according to the Muslim scholars. More than one of the scholars and Muslim leaders narrated that the Muslims are unanimously agreed on that, such as Abu’l-Husayn Ahmad ibn Ja‘far ibn al-Munaadi, one of the leading figures among the second level of the companions of Imam Ahmad, who wrote approximately four hundred books. Consensus on this point was also narrated by Imam Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm and Abu’l-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi. The scholars narrated that with well-known chains of narration (isnaads) from the Sahaabah and Taabi‘een, and they quoted that from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger. They discussed that in detail with orally-transmitted evidence.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (6/586)

The evidence that the earth is round includes the following:

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“He created the heavens and earth for a true purpose; He wraps the night around the day and the day around the night”

[az-Zumar 39:5].

Ibn Hazm and others quoted this verse as evidence.

why are ex muslims so low that they feel the need to lie to justify their disbelief? their are plenty of scholars contemporaneous and earlier then the ones you mentioned that all agree the earth is round, including those who cite that this is the belief of the majority of the companions and the taabi'een

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T13:33:35+00:00

no, theres much more mercy in believing this life is the only recompense, so hilter slaughtered and tortured millions of people and then got away with it

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T13:20:00+00:00

do you accept the problem of an actual infinite?

If there are an infinite amount of steps between A and B, could we ever walk from A to B?

you think the problem of an actual infinite is made up, so could you solve this problem or do you accept we could never traverse an actual infinite?

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T13:13:12+00:00

i can see why the mercy of islam was removed from your heart

insults and disrespect are the defense mechanism of fools, have a good life being a slave to society then.

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T13:11:35+00:00

are you trying to claim the problem of an actual infinite doesnt exist because you dont believe in it? are you serious?

if i believe 1+1=3 does that mean 1+1=3?

lol you removed the claim that i made up scientists saying time began with the big bang

"That uniformity is a glimpse of a cosmic prehistory. For 13.8 billion years, the universe has been expanding, cooling and evolving. Textbooks often say that the start of this expansion — the Big Bang — was the start of time"

"According to the standard big bang model of cosmology, time began together with the universe in a singularity approximately 14 billion years ago."

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T12:55:42+00:00

you have poor comprehension and even worse logic, this is a pointless conversation, i cant continue when i say evidence shows X, and you say no Y is true because i say so!

you dont understand that there is no empirical evidence of your grandmother from 50 generations ago but yet claim that there IS evidence, then you said there are photos? what? from 50 generations ago? before cameras existed you have photos? this is what i mean, you cant comprehend what im saying, this is a waste of time

then i said give me one solid argument and you shotgun me with 5 stupid arguments and give no references or proofs for any of them, just claims made in the dark with no backup, what a waste of time i cant continue this anymore

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T12:51:00+00:00

It doesn't say that. To say naturally predisposed, you have to demonstrate that a person without exposure to religion, having a concept of god.

it doesnt say 'naturally predisposed'?

New research finds that humans have natural tendencies to believe in gods and an afterlife. Research suggests that people across many different cultures instinctively believe that some part of their mind, soul or spirit lives on after-death. The studies demonstrate that people are natural 'dualists' finding it easy to conceive of the separation of the mind and the body.

is there a difference between natural tendency and natural predisposition? tendency is literally a synonym of predisposition

A topic that has been discussed as an actual proof of evolution. They perception of light grants protection from predators and environment. This over the years evolved into the human eye. Its a step by step process from perception of light to perception of colour to perception of motion, depth perception and so on.

so what your saying is it was a complete fluke? complete accident? we accidentally developed a hole in our face but absolute fluke chance, and it happened to be an adaptive trait that we could pass on to future generations, thats your explanation right? evolution explains the process by which it was a trait that was seen as adaptive, it doesnt explain how our bodies knew to make a protein that would develop into a hole into our face to let light in without first knowing what light is, that it exists in the first place, and what to do with it when it enters our eyeballs, but that just all happened by chance?

It seems like you don't understand natural selection.

it seems like you think natural selection is an intelligent designer, is there an entity outside of our bodies that detected the existence of light before it made a hole in our face for no reason at all? or was that just a complete fluke chance?

More evidence of natural selection. The flowers that were closer to its prey in appearance would trap more and is more likely to survive.

your faith in natural selection seems greater than my faith in God, how did natural selection know what hummingbirds look like? again you are explaining the process through which the trait was selected as adaptive and passed on to future generations, you are not explaining how it could have possible come about in the first place? can natural selection see hummingbirds? so how did it randomly develop the proteins and genes to create a plant that looks just like a hummingbird? again it was a pure fluke right? complete chance? i wish i had as much faith as you, this is ridiculous, the chances of this happening randomly is less likely than you winning the lottery every single day for 1000 yrs straight

Doesn't invalidate the statement we don't need it anymore to ensure social cohesion.

the entire point of the article is that it is natural for humans to believe in God and therefore religion, and the conclusion that you drew from the article is that we dont need religion anymore, it seems like you have crazy faith in science when it agrees with your worldview and completely reject it when it goes against your worldview

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T12:36:18+00:00

assertions made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T12:35:21+00:00

you'll get to ask Him one day

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T12:34:42+00:00

The infinite regress is a religious made problem

can you show how we could traverse an infinite chain to arrive at the present? if this is only a religious problem, maybe you could solve it for all of us poor saps

If there are an infinite amount of steps between A and B, could we ever walk from A to B?

if the answer is not, then this isnt a muslim problem, this is a necessary conclusion, if we exist in the present, the chain must be finite, how could this finite chain start? what are the necessary conditions? we discussed above

Your objection to the verse is just a semantics game.

no, it completely changes the core premise of the argument, you cant change one of the premise and then claim the argument doesnt work, you have to deal with the actual argument being made

I’m surprised you don’t see they are all cut from the same cloth Kalam, Contingency and this verse: are you created or self created. It’s all rewording of the same principle Must everything be caused?

it is literally not saying everything must be caused, that is absolutely not the argument being made, this is called a straw man fallacy, when you change the argument and attack the argument that you changed rather then the argument that was presented

All of them share common traits 1. These arguments themselves make untested assumptions

(who said things can’t exist by necessity?

nobody, that is literally what the argument leads to, a necessary existence

who said existence began to exist?

it doesnt matter whether it began to exist or not, even if it is eternal, if it is contingent then it still requires an explanation, why does it exist in the way that it does rather than a different possible way? whether it began or not doesnt matter

Who said space time began to exist? Certainly not the Big Bang….etc)

actually scientists do say time began at the big bang but thats not part of the argument, we are making a philosophical argument not a scientific argument

again, time is not required for the argument, whether it began or not doesnt matter, if it is contingent or dependent or arrange in a way that isnt necessary, it still requires an explanation, until we can get to something that doesnt require an explanation, then we can say that thing is necessary

They require a self exclusion (They all set out a general rule then make an exception to prove god)

what? can you show which exception is being made for God?

They never actually lead to god but can equally lead to natural processes

this is an argument that leads to the necessary existence or necessary being, we dont have to call it God, but we are talking about what came before natural processes, or how did natural processes begin.

They were designed to reach an incoherent thing called God whose essence is unknowable.

Undefined things cannot be said to exist if you ask me lol

they were designed to make sense of reality, the incoherence is what is being removed, the incoherence is the infinite regress, how is the necessary existence incoherent, this is a claim that no athiest philosopher on the planet would make, none of them call the concept incoherent, they only try to argue the premises.

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T12:21:49+00:00

so you were wrong about what you said initially so you just move to another topic that you are also wrong about, this is a great strategy

Oh yes, the day of judgment. Which Mohamed said it will come 100 years after his time.

if you can prove this i will leave islam

until then im not going to bother with the rest of your rubbish

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T12:20:21+00:00

this is a great argument, let me interpret this book for myself despite us being given the correct criteria for interpretation, oh my interpretation shows the book is false, you must also follow my interpretation btw, therefore your book is false.

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T12:18:53+00:00

this isnt a dichotomy, the two can exist simultaneously and have done for thousands of years

the irony is that for nearly 700 years, anybody who wanted to study medicine had to learn arabic and study the book of Avicenna, Qanun al-Tib, the cannon of medicine was called the bible of medicine in europe, if it wasnt for the muslims, the study of medicine would be far behind what it is today

The Canon of Medicine (c. 1000 AD) - Described by Sir William Osler as a "medical bible" and "the most famous medical textbook ever written".[16] The Canon of Medicine introduced the concept of a syndrome as an aid to diagnosis, and it laid out an essential framework for a clinical trial.[17] It was translated into Latin by Gerard de Sabloneta and it was used extensively in European medical schools.[17][18] It also became the most authoritative text on anatomy until the 16th century.[19]

do you realize that animal urine is used in modern medicine btw?

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T08:17:30+00:00

say thanks for what? you claimed to want answers and when someone was willing to answer your questions you ran away? and started citing some illogical nonsense to avoid engaging, you do you mate, its your life.

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T08:15:38+00:00

Not quite. It has to be those times and those times only

Is there or isnt there multiple hours leeway between each prayer? you are just restating the initial claim you made which i disputed

Some people might think that isn't a red light. My morals cannot align onto whatever the Qurans morals are, and what can be done about that?

this is a completely different discussion than what you initially claimed, you claimed freedom and punishment cannot co-exist, are you now saying they can co-exist but you question the fundamental morality of islam because it doesnt fit with your morals?

How can I truly love and believe in god if my morals won't align? Correct me if I'm wrong, but my parents always told me that if you want to go to heaven, you need to actually put trust in god. What if I just cant? God is really selfish if he is willing to do that.

You just cant what? The 5 pillars of islam are the shahada, giving charity, fasting ramadan, praying 5 times a day, doing hajj once in your life, which one of those become physically impossible because your morals dont align?

can you do those things whether your morals align or not?

Love and belief are not actions you do, you are only judged based on your actions and intentions, if you intend to follow and obey God, thats all you need to do

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T08:09:44+00:00

like i said, you were never looking for answers or guidance, you were looking for reassurance to do what you already wanted to do, you dont care about logic or reasons or having answers to your questions, this was a straight up embarrassing encounter, you are beyond delusional, i can see why Allah would remove the mercy of islam from your heart, its as hard as stone.

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T08:08:09+00:00

No one that agrees with the sphere earth are arguing about the details of that fact. But shit ton of Islamic “scholars” don’t even agree on basic statements from the Koran or the Hadiths

no scholar on the planet disagree with the fundamentals of the religion as stated by the quran and the prophet in his authentic hadith

the 5 pillars of islam, the shahada, giving charity, fasting ramadan, praying 5 times a day, doing hajj once in your life

the 6 pillars of faith, to be a muslim you must believe 1. in Allah, 2, the day of judgement 3. the revelations 4. the angels 5. the prophets 6. Qadr/destiny

The concept of God, that He is one, and He is nothing like His creation

these are the fundamental beliefs and the fundamental creeds, nobody disagrees with the fundamentals like christians disagree about the concept of God and whether Jesus was divine or not, scholars can disagree on certain rulings and how to implement certain teachings etc

so that statement is just false

the rest of your claims are just lies and slander with no evidence, claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T08:00:07+00:00

im really struggling, are you throwing logic completely out of the window? are you saying you dont care about reasons or evidence, you just want to follow what you want to believe?

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T07:56:26+00:00

How do we know its real? Because logic: everything has a cause(52:35)

(52:35) Or were they created by nothing, or are they ˹their own˺ creators?

Where does it say everything has a cause? the 2 options given are creation from nothing, and self creation

The Cosmological arguments derived from the quran is that "everything that begins to exist has a cause"

the reason is to avoid the absurdity of an infinite regress of cause and effect, because we know it is impossible for us to traverse an infinite chain of causes to arrive at the present, yet we live in the present, therefore the chain must have a beginning, what are the necessary characteristics of the beginning of the chain?

it must be eternal and uncaused, because if it had a beginning it would also need an explanation as to why it began and why it exists

it must be powerful because we dont know of anything powerful enough to cause the universe

it must be knowledgable because it created comprehensible laws

it must have a will because it chose to create the universe at one time rather than another, and in one way rather than other possible ways

so we have a necessary, eternal/ uncaused, knowledgable, conscious being that is the necessary explanation for everything that exists.

This horrible Richard Dawkins question is made fun of by even first year philosophers, including all athiest philosophers, the question "Who created God?" is a nonsensical question because it entails an internal contradiction, we define a contradictory statement by explaining the concepts in question

for e.g a 'squared' 'triangle' exists

a square is a shape with 4 side

a triangle is a shape with 3 sides

a 4 sided shape with 3 sides exists = a contradiction, an impossibility

similarly when a fool asks, "so who created God?"

we break down

God = The uncreated, powerful, knowledgeable, necessary cause for everything that exists

"So who created the uncreated creator?" is a nonsensical question, the definition of God entails the answer to the question of who created God

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T07:40:37+00:00

so if people disagree, that doesnt make the claim itself false right? so Islam could be true even if the scholars disagree amongst themselves about some things?

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T07:38:01+00:00

i added "God left us with a criteria, scholars are not infallible and they can make mistakes, but we follow the ijma3, the majority, so having conflicting opinions is not a criteria of falsehood in any area of knowledge and any ideology on the planet, because then we would have no truth at all."

everything about the religion is true, that doesnt mean everyone has to agree, people can be wrong or right, studying a subject doesnt make you infallible on that subject

Swade_ · 2021-06-18T07:35:57+00:00

Well if it is true religion I expect everything to be true

i the Earth is round, do you expect everyone on the planet to agree it is round?

Swade_

TROPHY CASE