WHY IBLIS CANNOT BE AN ANGEL...

Someone

Peace,

I would say that some, if not most, of humans are driven by their hidden thoughts, the thoughts that they never share with others, their vainglorious egotism. They seems like driven by some jinns.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Priest B,

Quote
Are all humans at loss?

No.

What was the point of your last question to me?

I asked you if all humans are at loss, you answered no. But this reading(quran) indicates otherwise in the following verse;

(1032) That truly the human/mankind (is) in loss.

So why did you answer "no"?

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

I asked you if all humans are at loss, you answered no. But this reading(quran) indicates otherwise in the following verse;

(1032) That truly the human/mankind (is) in loss.

So why did you answer "no"?

Because, Allah says..."except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy".

What is your point?

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Priest B,

Quote
I asked you if all humans are at loss, you answered no. But this reading(quran) indicates otherwise in the following verse;

(1032) That truly the human/mankind (is) in loss.

So why did you answer "no"?

Priest B
Because, Allah says..."except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy".

What is your point?

My point is this, you give us the following reasoning regarding "malaika"

They all revere their Lord, high above them, and they do all that they are commanded.

And you try to limit the reasoning to the one verse, just as I did regarding humans, but as with my example, there is an exception to verse 1032, which you correctly gave.

So why can't you use THE VERY SAME REASONING when it comes to "malaika"? The God says "they ALL prostrated EXCEPT iblis".
THAT is the exception.

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

My point is this, you give us the following reasoning regarding "malaika"

They all revere their Lord, high above them, and they do all that they are commanded.

And you try to limit the reasoning to the one verse, just as I did regarding humans, but as with my example, there is an exception to verse 1032, which you correctly gave.

So why can't you use THE VERY SAME REASONING when it comes to "malaika"? The God says "they ALL prostrated EXCEPT iblis".
THAT is the exception.

Sura 103 ASR

By (the Token of) Time (through the ages),
Verily Man is in loss,
Except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy.

You will notice in Sura 103, there is no mention of "all" of man being in loss...except, it just says "man is in loss" and then Allah goes on to qualify what He means by that. If Allah had said..."all" of man is in loss, except, then, that would constitute a contradiction, because all means all without exception.

16.49 And whatever dabbatan that is in the heavens and that is in the earth makes obeisance to Allah (only), and the malaika (too) and they do not show pride.

They all revere their Lord, high above them, and they do all that they are commanded.

It may be a function of this translation, but, once again, "all" is used in regard to the absloute obediance of the dabbatan and malaika and there is no qualifier such as..."except" in those ayats. Even if "all" isn't in the Arabic, the same result follows, that is, there is no..."except" in those ayats, hence, they dabbatan and malaika never disobey Allah.

Ayat 1850 tafseers ayats 234, 1649 and 1650, meaning, Iblis refused to obey Allah's command not because he was a malaika, but because he was a Jinn and had the power of choice.

And when We said to the angels Make obeisance to Adam; they made obeisance but Iblis (did it not). He was of the jinn, so he transgressed the commandment of his Lord. What! would you then take him and his offspring for friends rather than Me, and they are your enemies? Evil is (this) change for the unjust.

I hope this answers your question.

Looking forward to your reply.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you,

Sura 103 ASR

By (the Token of) Time (through the ages),
Verily Man is in loss,
Except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy.

You will notice in Sura 103, there is no mention of "all" of man being in loss...except, it just says "man is in loss" and then Allah goes on to qualify what He means by that. If Allah had said..."all" of man is in loss, except, then, that would constitute a contradiction, because all means all without exception.

Yes, all means without exception UNLESS THE EXCEPTION IS GIVEN IN THE VERY SAME VERSE!! If I say to you'

"All" of the people on this forum are posting "Except" Layth, what does that mean to you? Have you never used this type of speaking before? Have you never heard this before?

16.49 And whatever dabbatan that is in the heavens and that is in the earth makes obeisance to Allah (only), and the malaika (too) and they do not show pride.

They all revere their Lord, high above them, and they do all that they are commanded.

It may be a function of this translation, but, once again, "all" is used in regard to the absloute obediance of the dabbatan and malaika and there is no qualifier such as..."except" in those ayats. Even if "all" isn't in the Arabic, the same result follows, that is, there is no..."except" in those ayats, hence, they dabbatan and malaika never disobey Allah.

Ayat 1850 tafseers ayats 234, 1649 and 1650, meaning, Iblis refused to obey Allah's command not because he was a malaika, but because he was a Jinn and had the power of choice.

And when We said to the angels Make obeisance to Adam; they made obeisance but Iblis (did it not). He was of the jinn, so he transgressed the commandment of his Lord. What! would you then take him and his offspring for friends rather than Me, and they are your enemies? Evil is (this) change for the unjust.

Tell me this, who was commanded to prostrate? And next, does the God punish innocent bystanders?

YankeeDoodle

Sura 103 ASR

By (the Token of) Time (through the ages),
Verily Man is in loss,
Except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy.

You will notice in Sura 103, there is no mention of "all" of man being in loss...except, it just says "man is in loss" and then Allah goes on to qualify what He means by that. If Allah had said..."all" of man is in loss, except, then, that would constitute a contradiction, because all means all without exception.

Yes, all means without exception UNLESS THE EXCEPTION IS GIVEN IN THE VERY SAME VERSE!! If I say to you'

"All" of the people on this forum are posting "Except" Layth, what does that mean to you? Have you never used this type of speaking before? Have you never heard this before?

Hmm lets see other translations.

103.001
YUSUFALI By (the Token of) Time (through the ages),
PICKTHAL By the declining day,
SHAKIR I swear by the time,
KHALIFA By the afternoon.

103.002
YUSUFALI Verily Man is in loss,
PICKTHAL Lo! man is a state of loss,
SHAKIR Most surely man is in loss,
KHALIFA The human being is utterly lost.

103.003
YUSUFALI Except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy.
PICKTHAL Save those who believe and do good works, and exhort one another to truth and exhort one another to endurance.
SHAKIR Except those who believe and do good, and enjoin on each other truth, and enjoin on each other patience.
KHALIFA Except those who believe and lead a righteous life, and exhort one another to uphold the truth, and exhort one another to be steadfast

I cannot fully agree with you Idolfree because there must be a reason for man's loss of something and this is aswered in the next verse which are loss of faith,righteous deeds ,truth,patience and conistency.

cheers.

unknownuser

Peace be upoin you Yankee,

I am not asking you to agree with me that all men are in loss. I was proving a point. There is an exception to all mean being in loss. The same way there is an exception to the maliaka all doing as they are commanded.

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

Yes, all means without exception UNLESS THE EXCEPTION IS GIVEN IN THE VERY SAME VERSE!! If I say to you' "All" of the people on this forum are posting "Except" Layth, what does that mean to you? Have you never used this type of speaking before? Have you never heard this before?

By (the Token of) Time (through the ages),
Verily Man is in loss,
Except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy.

Yes, I have used this language before and it is incorrect usage, and exactly why Allah doesn't use it. Think about it, Allah cannot say ALL and then say except, because all means all, hence, to follow all with except, is to create a discrepancy/contradiction. This is why He didn't say

Verily, all of man is in loss, except...

Yes, all means without exception UNLESS THE EXCEPTION IS GIVEN IN THE VERY SAME VERSE!!

And to Allah doth obeisance all that is in the heavens and on earth, whether moving (living) creatures or the angels for none are arrogant (before their Lord).
They all revere their Lord, high above them, and they do all that they are commanded.

You can see that...no "except" or other qualifier, follows these ayats.

Also, He makes it clear in Sura Asr that, man can disobey Him, however, in ayats 1649-50 He makes it clear that the dabbatan and malaika do not disobey Him. Given that, man can disobey Him, man, then, cannot be included with the dabbatan-beasts of the earth.

http//www.submission.info/servlet/qtbrowse

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Priest Bokmei,

Yes, I have used this language before and it is incorrect usage, and exactly why Allah doesn't use it. Think about it, Allah cannot say ALL and then say except, because all means all, hence, to follow all with except, is to create a discrepancy/contradiction. This is why He didn't say

Verily, all of man is in loss, except...

So how do you explain the following phrase that is repeated throught this reading(quran)?

(2255) The God, no God except He...

The first instance we have "all" + the exception, this verse we have "none(no)" + exception. This is both ends of the spectrum. How do you reconcile this contradiction in your reasoning?

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

So how do you explain the following phrase that is repeated throught this reading(quran)? (2255) The God, no God except He... The first instance we have "all" + the exception, this verse we have "none(no)" + exception. This is both ends of the spectrum. How do you reconcile this contradiction in your reasoning?

Three things. 1. I checked out five translations and none of them use therm "except", now, this may be important or it may not. 2. I don't understand your example/why you feel there is a contradiction in my reasoning. Your example is not relevent to 234 or Sura 103; they are different things.

2.255 Allah is He besides Whom there is no god...

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Priest,

"They ALL prostrated Except iblis"

"There is no god but(except) The God"

How can you disagree with one but not the other?

I leave you in peace

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

They ALL prostrated Except iblis"

"There is no god but(except) The God"

How can you disagree with one but not the other?

I'm sorry, Idol, but I cannot see how these two statements are alike.

Dhul's first post on this thread really explains things well; he covered all of the bases regarding this discussion.

Iblis, cannot be a malaika, because what they are composed of is an unknown, however, Iblis, was created of fire. We cannot, therefore, extrapolate that the malaika were composed of fire as well; that would only be conjecturing and not knowledge.
234 , is further clarified by 1649-50 and 1850.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Priest,

If that works for you, that is fine.

I leave you in Peace.

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

If that works for you, that is fine.

Given the evidence from Al-Quran...nothing else can work.

And peace to you too, Idol.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you,

Iblis, cannot be a malaika, because what they are composed of is an unknown, however, Iblis, was created of fire. We cannot, therefore, extrapolate that the malaika were composed of fire as well; that would only be conjecturing and not knowledge.

I had to address this part I forgot. Who is it that needs to extrapolate what the malaika were made of anyway?

I will try one more time, what does the following statement say to you;

The teacher commanded the students to put there pencils down, they ALL did EXCEPT Paul, He was a trouble maker.

I am not asking you to tell me what the students are made of, I am asking you IS PAUL A STUDENT? D

Or,

If I asked you to put the pencils in the pencil case, and when I came back there was one still left out of the pencil case, couldn't you respond "they are all in the pencil case except one"?

Why can you not understand this simplest of grammar?

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

I had to address this part I forgot. Who is it that needs to extrapolate what the malaika were made of anyway? I will try one more time, what does the following statement say to you;

The teacher commanded the students to put there pencils down, they ALL did EXCEPT Paul, He was a trouble maker.

I am not asking you to tell me what the students are made of, I am asking you IS PAUL A STUDENT?

Idol, I know you are frustrated, however, and I could be wrong, but I don't think the above example is grammitically correct. As far as a I know...all means exactly that...ALL. It is contradictory, in my view, to say they all put the pencils down and then say..."oops, my bad, Paul didn't", because once you say that you admit that you made a mistake when you used the word ALL in the first place. This is why I asked you to post an ayat where Allah says "all" and the follows it up with..."except". Do you know of such an occurance in Al-Quran? Now, as I said, I could be wrong in my assumption here. Perhaps someone here is well schooled in English grammar.

Or,

If I asked you to put the pencils in the pencil case, and when I came back there was one still left out of the pencil case, couldn't you respond "they are all in the pencil case except one"?

Why can you not understand this simplest of grammar?

No, in order to be accurate, in my view, I would have to say..."no, they are not all in the case yet one is still out". This, to me, sounds much more accurate than the other way...do you agree?

Also, going back to the ayats themselves, you cannot disregard the information given by Allah that, Iblis was created of fire. This is an essential element, because, as I said to you in prior post, the composition of the Jinn, of which Iblis was one, is clealy defined in Al-Quran. However, the composition of the malaika is not known and it would be inappropriate to extrapolate/conjecture that they are created of fire too, because Iblis was.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Priest,

Idol, I know you are frustrated, however, and I could be wrong, but I don't think the above example is grammitically correct. As far as a I know...all means exactly that...ALL. It is contradictory, in my view, to say they all put the pencils down and then say..."oops, my bad, Paul didn't", because once you say that you admit that you made a mistake when you used the word ALL in the first place.

well there is one way we can easily solve this dilemma regarding the english language that we are speaking. Here is the website for

Merriam-Webster Dictionary
http//www.m-w.com/

Please look up the word EXCEPT and you will see 4 entries. Here are some of the example sentences that you will find in those 4 entries;

with the exception of <everyone was gone except for me>

-with the exclusion or exception of <daily except Sundays>

-transitive senses to take or leave out from a number or a whole

with this exception , namely <was inaccessible except by boat>

Please take a look for yourself and see that my position is supported by english grammar.

This is why I asked you to post an ayat where Allah says "all" and the follows it up with..."except". Do you know of such an occurance in Al-Quran?

"They all did except Iblis"

"There is no god except The God"

I think you already have the verse numbers.

Now, as I said, I could be wrong in my assumption here. Perhaps someone here is well schooled in English grammar.

According to Merriam Webster Dictionary you are incorrect. Do you agree that you have made an error regarding this and that iblis was indeed a malaika, and that the God IS just and does not punish beings that He did not give commands to?

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

well there is one way we can easily solve this dilemma regarding the english language that we are speaking. Here is the website for According to Merriam Webster Dictionary you are incorrect. Do you agree that you have made an error regarding this and that iblis was indeed a malaika, and that the God IS just and does not punish beings that He did not give commands to?

No, I don't agree I've made an error regarding Iblis being of the malaika and yes, I was already familiar with the m-w definition for "except" and "all", however, you may have noticed that, in the examples provided, none used all before except, it is simply akward to do so. I'm sorry Idol, but you have not conclusively made your case for the following reasons

None of the translations regarding Iblis and the angels, that I've found anyway, uses the term "all" in regard to the angels. What translation did you use which includes "all" in it? Please post it.
Sura 103, does not use the term "all" and then "except" in any translation that I've seen. If you have one, then please post it.

But, even if "all" were used in those ayats it still wouldn't matter, because the following precludes Iblis, from being a malaika

You cannot disregard the information given by Allah that, Iblis was created of fire. This is an essential element, because as I said to you in a prior post, the composition of the Jinn, of which Iblis was one, is clearly defined in Al-Quran. However, the composition of the malaika is not known and it would be inappropriate to extrapolate/conjecture that they are created of fire too, because Iblis was.

Main Entry EXTRAPOLATE to project, extend, or expand (known data or experience) into an area not known or experienced so as to arrive at a usually conjectural knowledge of the unknown area.

Main Entry CONJECTURE supposition inference from defective or presumptive evidence b a conclusion deduced by surmise or guesswork.

Can you effectively, by way of Al-Quran, refute item #3, yes or no?

Given these three conclusive items, there is no way Iblis was of the malaika. Besides, Iblis, was human being.

Looking forward to your reply and conclusive evidence.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Priest,

Yes, I was already familiar with the m-w definition for except and all, however, you may have noticed that, in the examples provided, none used all before except, it is simply akward to do so.

The very first example that I gave, which was listed under the 4th listing for except, was the following;

with the exception of <everyone was gone except for me>

What does EVERYONE mean to you, if not ALL?

i'm sorry Idol, but you have not conclusively made you case for the following reasons

None of the translations regarding Iblis and the angels that I've found, uses the term "all" in regard to the angels. What translation did you use which includes "all" in it? Please post it.

Even better, now there is no reason for you to be adverse to the word EXCEPT. The "all" is implied.

Sura 103, does not use the term "all" and then "except" in any translation that I've seen. If you have one, then please post it.

"All" is implied when you get an exception, do you disagree to that?

But, even if "all" were used in those ayst, the following precludes Iblis, from being a malaika

You cannot disregard the information given by Allah that, Iblis was created of fire. This is an essential element, because as I said to you in a prior post, the composition of the Jinn, of which Iblis was one, is clealy defined in Al-Quran. However, the composition of the malaika is not known and it would be inappropriate to extrapolate/conjecture that they are created of fire too, because Iblis was.

If Kenny is in the class, and the class is made up of African American children, then Kenny is African American. Simple mathematics. I have not even discussed anything about the makeup of any being. That doesn't even factor into this conversation. You keep using this to escape the clear verse that iblis was a malaika.

Given these three conclusive items, there is no way Iblis was of the malaika. Besides, Iblis, was human being.

Iblis can be any human being, it is a descriptive word, just like "muhammadun" can be any person.

I'm sorry you cannot see this. I leave you in peace unless you have more to add to your position.