Marrying a Traditionalist Is As Same as Marrying a Polytheist
-
God has no image - there is nothing in the likeness of God.
I agree that there is no likeness of God, but that's not at all what I was discussing or referring to.
I totally disagree with that God has no image. Please understand what I mean with "image of God".
You have a concept of God in your mind what and how God is. You must have some sort of concept, otherwise it is not in your mind and awareness. That is called an image. I didn't refer to something physical obviously.I am a monotheist and this site is for Quran-only Muslims the way I understand it
Well, this forum is part of the mother site free-minds.org. On the main page you can read the following
This website has been created for all people who have a desire to allow God into their lives and follow His path alone...
This website invites all people of various beliefs (Sunni, Shia, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Bahai, Agnostic, Humanist, and even Atheists) to come and examine for themselves the system of Submission/Islam which is based on God Alone.
Many of you may outwardly be content with your current faith or that which you inherited from your parents and community...but to some out there, there will always be a tugging at the back of their mind that 'there is something more', and that 'some things don't always make sense'...
If you are one of those people, then open your eyes, put on your thinking cap, and welcome to an open examination of the system of Submission/Islam which very few know about...
That's whom this site and forum is for, as far as the website creators are concerned.
- so it is not really necessarily to discuss what every group thinks
No not what every group thinks, but at least what some groups think. That is sort of the whole idea of this forum. We must be able to discuss what other groups do, especially since Quran-alone is not a separate sect by itself.
- what is important is to accept the definition of monotheism as one God and live by that rather than looking to others who have their own definitions. We should not be making their definitions our definitions - this is a futile exercise as one would be arguing with anyone who passes by...
I think it is better to explore the world and ponder different ideas and points of view, and try to follow the best. I find that the Quran is encouraging this. To use the Quran as a 'furqan', we need guidance, but guidance comes gradually. Arguing with everyone is indeed futile. Sharing, to gain new insights, without becoming emotional or defensive is good however.
I do not see an OR in the concept of polytheistic gods being different from the ONE GOD or ALLAH - Polytheism IS different from Monotheism.
Yes I agree. No doubt.
Monotheists, especially Quran-only Muslims DO NOT have images of God.
See above. 'Image' doesn't mean graphical image.
Do monotheists have concepts of God???People do not call the Last Prophet a god - many do idolize him but that idolization is not akin to worshipping a god.
So idolizing is OK as long as you don't verbally call the object of the idolization a 'god'?? Perhaps we don't have the same definitions of god/God.
For more people, Trump or Beckham are more of gods than The Last Prophet for Hadithists.
Well, I don't think people have claimed that Trump or Beckham has done stuff like splitting the moon, healing eye illness by spitting into it, or having stones and trees greet them with kind greetings.
The mistake that Hadithists make is not that they are Polytheists - their mistake is similar to Christians who have a need to humanize the One God. They achieve this humanization in different ways.
I agree. And this is what I mean with having images of God. Often, people have very material images of God, as if God is a person.
Regarding this concept there is no need to over-think. Humans are flesh. it is a fact. One can make theoretical arguments of all sorts, but it is an inescapable fact that humans are made of organic molecules in the construction of flesh.
And there is no need to under-think either.
Nobody has denied that humans, at least the body, are made of flesh/molecules/atoms/tissue. (BTW, what is matter made of?)
The point was that you REAL being, is spiritual. Your body as like just an avatar, that you live through for a fixed number of years until it dies.
Do you agree that something of you lives on after the body is gone? Doesn't this mean that you are not your body? It does. You are something beyond your body. Does having a body invalidate this?This nature of organic physical molecules means that humans have a need to believe in what they can touch and eat and see. Humans cannot see THE ONE GOD.
And this is their downfall. They are blinded by the flesh. They are unable, as it seems, to believe in anything that they cannot see. So they make God into something they can see. As you say, they humanize God. Their image of God has characteristics of humanization and materialization.
But that need is no more compulsive than any other addiction or delusion. It is not a must.To prevent ones own cookie from crumbling one simply needs to read the divine Quran and stop looking at others who say that God has a son or that God is 3 or 4 or 5.
It's not so simple. You don't only have to read the Quran, you also have to grasp some of it, which is something our Rabb blesses us with... guidance. This is where sectarians go wrong... blindly accepting what the authorities say, and forbidding any independent reasoning and ijtihad.
sun sun sun
Peace brother
-
Salam Zulf,
Thank you for your thoughts and for the discussion.
I agree that there is no likeness of God, but that's not at all what I was discussing or referring to.
I totally disagree with that God has no image. Please understand what I mean with "image of God".
You have a concept of God in your mind what and how God is. You must have some sort of concept, otherwise it is not in your mind and awareness. That is called an image. I didn't refer to something physical obviously.
Well, this forum is part of the mother site free-minds.org. On the main page you can read the followingI am heartened that we agree that there is no likeness of god.
The discussion is between two parties who are discussing with one another.
Perhaps one would just need to explain further.
If one accepts there is no likeness of God, it follows there is no possible image, or at least one a human can conjure of God.
Or in other words, if one follows the Quran-only, there is no image of God. Period.
My concept of God is not an image - for example the Quran tells us there is nothing like God. Nothing. That is a concept and it defines also that there is no image of God.
Perhaps a better word in such a debate could be CONCEPT and not IMAGE.
Image is misleading in such a debate because it is used literally and graphically to give God an image by many people and cultures.This website has been created for all people who have a desire to allow God into their lives and follow His path alone...
This website invites all people of various beliefs (Sunni, Shia, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Bahai, Agnostic, Humanist, and even Atheists) to come and examine for themselves the system of Submission/Islam which is based on God Alone.
Many of you may outwardly be content with your current faith or that which you inherited from your parents and community...but to some out there, there will always be a tugging at the back of their mind that 'there is something more', and that 'some things don't always make sense'...
If you are one of those people, then open your eyes, put on your thinking cap, and welcome to an open examination of the system of Submission/Islam which very few know about...
That's whom this site and forum is for, as far as the website creators are concerned.
I think the meaningful words here are as follows "...examine for themselves the system of Submission/Islam which is based on God Alone"
So we can both feel free to examine the system of submission which is based on God Alone.
Some of the moderators actually block those who make baseless accusations against God or the Quran. I am not saying that this applies to you or me or anyone else, but it is important to realize that this is an open portal with open views yet even this portal has parameters.No not what every group thinks, but at least what some groups think. That is sort of the whole idea of this forum. We must be able to discuss what other groups do, especially since Quran-alone is not a separate sect by itself.
Whether one uses "some" or "every" boils down to semantics that are inherent to one's own parameters and definitions.
I think it is better to explore the world and ponder different ideas and points of view, and try to follow the best. I find that the Quran is encouraging this. To use the Quran as a 'furqan', we need guidance, but guidance comes gradually. Arguing with everyone is indeed futile. Sharing, to gain new insights, without becoming emotional or defensive is good however.
Another point of view could be mistaken as arguing, emotional of being defensive, but coming back to the mission statement pasted above, there is a lot of weight on the fact that one should really "examine" other points of view especially if they are guided by the Quran and by Monotheism.
Yes I agree. No doubt.
This was in response to "Or" in the following statement in your previous post "Or, polytheistic-god is not the same concept as monotheistic-god"
See above. 'Image' doesn't mean graphical image.
Do monotheists have concepts of God???Please see above. Polytheistic graphical images of gods align Hindu temples and Christian Churches so as stated above a better word that could be used in not IMAGE but CONCEPT.
So idolizing is OK as long as you don't verbally call the object of the idolization a 'god'??
Is it ok if one idolizes?
There is no statement to this affect anywhere.
Idolizing and setting up a god are similar but there is a necessity to set up a god if that is what one is going to do.
Perhaps we don't have the same definitions of god/God.
Surely it is not important to have different opinions. You have already stated that this portal welcomes different ideas.
Well, I don't think people have claimed that Trump or Beckham has done stuff like splitting the moon, healing eye illness by spitting into it, or having stones and trees greet them with kind greetings.
The Last Prophet didn't build a wall to keep out "aleins" or ban Muslims from a country -- oh yeah, I forgot neither did Trump
But seriously, One cannot deny people take today's media celebrities and idolize them?
http//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1403115/Japanese-fans-flock-to-worship-Beckham.html
You will find plenty of examples if you look around at idolization and worship - especially in pop culture.
Some Hindus have almost literally worshiped Trump apparently.
I have personal experience of seeing young British men's houses that have images of footballers in their toilets.
And all they did was to kick a ball, and drive expensive cars.By the definition you stated above, these idolized people are akin to gods.
Again, by the definition used above, one could say that someone could worship Jesus The Messiah as a God simply because he also performed miracles with God's leave.
I agree. And this is what I mean with having images of God. Often, people have very material images of God, as if God is a person.
As stated above, in the age, where polytheistic temples have literal and graphical images of god, and Churches have images of god, this debate could benefit from using CONCEPT rather than IMAGE - as image does have a definition of a graphical image, and this is being straddled here.
And there is no need to under-think either.
Over thinking a simple concept is not the equivalent of under-thinking it - if we are honest.
Nobody has denied that humans, at least the body, are made of flesh/molecules/atoms/tissue.
The reference to humans being made of molecules was not in reference to any disagreement, but as a way of suggesting that humans want to humanize CONCEPTS that they are incapable of thinking about.
(BTW, what is matter made of?)
I hope this is rhetorical?
The point was that you REAL being, is spiritual. Your body as like just an avatar, that you live through for a fixed number of years until it dies.
Do you agree that something of you lives on after the body is gone? Doesn't this mean that you are not your body? It does. You are something beyond your body. Does having a body invalidate this?I refer to the Quran perspective here. The human body is physical and the soul is not physical and there is no validated scientific physical tool today that is able to measure the parameters of the soul. However we are told in the Quran that each body does have a soul.
The body which is physical and of this earth remains on this earth and the soul passes to another realm that we cannot imagine - or should I say - a realm that we have no concept of, other than in relation to some descriptions in the Quran
And this is their downfall. They are blinded by the flesh. They are unable, as it seems, to believe in anything that they cannot see. So they make God into something they can see. As you say, they humanize God. Their image of God has characteristics of humanization and materialization.
Indeed - Agree.
This is where the image of God is being used as a graphical image of God and this is how the confusion started in this debate. There is a concept of God and then a graphical and materialistic image of god that people construct so that their concept makes sense to them.
But that need is no more compulsive than any other addiction or delusion. It is not a must.
This touches upon a debate I had with a psychology student.
The human body is material and therefore needs physical food to survive.
It cannot survive on "pretend food" - or food that another human jokes is spiritual.
I think that the human body has a need for food to survive or live in this earth and this need brings it more close to the earth and more near to being material.
This is why, when we fast, we get more spiritual (from a Quranic perspective) or delusional (from an atheist perspective).
I think that there is a concept of over-nourishing the human body with material objects like Food, Drink, Lust, etc, that make it more prone to being over-materialistic - this part of the need then becomes like a drug that is over used.
In my perspective it is this that perhaps makes the physical body and mind want to conjure up concepts or images of a god that is also physical.
Anyway, in short, there is a MUST but there is an over-doing of it which makes it a DRUG.It's not so simple. You don't only have to read the Quran, you also have to grasp some of it, which is something our Rabb blesses us with... guidance. This is where sectarians go wrong... blindly accepting what the authorities say, and forbidding any independent reasoning and ijtihad.
One thing I think we do agree on is that the Quran is not just to be recited. It needs to be read. In other words, it needs to be taken in and understood.
I have seen many Hadithists recite the Quran in Arabic but when one asks them the meaning they are lost and state that they are doing so because those before them used to do it.
It is pretty clear to me the mistakes that the Hadithists are making.
If someone invents a hundred volumes and calls themselves the Authority - and refers to the volumes as the Hadith - or even The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - then clearly the ones who reject the reading of God's word and focuses on the word of "authoritative" humans is making a tragic mistake in their quest to follow God.So
sun sun sunPeace brother
Salam and regards to you too - it has been interesting to discuss some of these aspects.
Ed -
Peace HP_TECH
This is exactly what went wrong with humanity,quote
Teaching others to recognize what a believer and a disbeliever is, is not judging and it is not wrong.Only GOD teaches His wisdom. And what we do is divide each other into "believers and disbelievers" without proper knowledge of what GOD is really saying( We ignore the forgive and be patient and offer a friendly hand - with good knowledge/argument and wisdom-)
I think we need to teach ourselves(each individual needs to do that ) to be humble,understanding and never to " label" without proper evidence that takes into consideration many factors including people s intentions.
I suppose if we were in power we will do the same as what has been done throughout history and fight each other???
Well what can I say? But GOD is in control anyway.
The wrong attitude to have brother, labelling people
GOD bless you.
PeacePeace GL,
9113-114
Not (it) is for the Prophet and those who believe that they ask forgiveness for the polytheists, even though they be near of kin, after has become clear to them, that they (are the) companions (of) the Hellfire.
And not was (the) asking of forgiveness (by) Ibrahim for his father except because (of) a promise he had promised it (to) him. But when it became clear to him that he (was) an enemy to Allah, he disassociated from Indeed, Ibrahim (was) compassionate, forbearing.How could believers ask forgiveness for polytheists without having the judgment to recognize they were so?
It is indeed clear to believers who the hypocrites are, who polytheists are and etc... -
Sometimes, some people you need to qualify them as something because it becomes necessary for you. But not every person you meet you need to qualify him or her as something. One thing is to decide for your own behaviour what you consider a person or a bunch of persons, but most of the time we do not need to do so, and do so without knowledge and presuming things we do not know.
It is obvious we are not going to enter into a business with somebody we do know is a swindler and we will advice those we cre for not to enter into such business, if we are sure of it. But we are not going to call swindlers lightly just on casual apperance or suspition.Another thing is labeling. Did Ibrahim call his father this or that for evrybody to label him? Does the Qur'an say something to that effect.
We do have to make judgements when things are not in doubt and we need to act on something. Calling people things and least of all wholesale without proper knowledge is something else, which gives rise to hypocrisy, takfirism, the cult of appearances and attitutdes that rot society from the bottom to the top.
Salaam
-
Great conversation, Peace,
If you reject what Allah has not revealed, and only accept what
Allah has revealed are you a believer? Until others do the same
are they guilty of shirk? Does intentions matter? If we
through intentions to obey Allah are led astray by misinformation
are we non-believers or just misinformed? I am a former sectarian,
who now rejects sectarianism, was I in my ignorance a non-believer
or a misguided believer &peace
-
everybody will get judge according to the ability of understanding he she have...
God is not that illogical to punish somebody just because he/she was misinformed,when i gave an example of athiest , simply people think this athiest(kaffir) is as same the one who rejects God like (pharaoh)
but here is a fundamental difference between these two catagories of kaffirs
one know the truth through moses about God..
one is searching for the truth of God of mosesone rejects the commands of God and oppress the slaves
one indirectly follow the commands like peacemaking stuffone worship the false dietes (greek gods) idols
one dnt beleive in any idol (he is not a blind follower)people who claim ignorantly that God will send all the people into hell just becoz they are confuse in demi gods that are itself products of human beings then its not an attribute to associate with God mercy and justice...
God bless you all
the system infront of God is peacemaking (under any label u inherited)
the religions in front of people are so many( only acceptable through the concepts , if one beleives in other doctrines he is hell dwellers)system of God is easy to follow for everybody(was always same from adam till today)
religions of human being are difficult to understand/follow.. (resulted in divide,sub divide and so on ...) -
It is indeed clear to believers who the hypocrites are, who polytheists are and etc...
beleivers and non beleivers only think what their mind lead them to think...
the knowledge about whats inside the heart and mind is only to God... he will judge everybody , a common person have no right to talk about the judgement of God.. while God alone knows what we conceal and what we hide and what we deserve for what we do..
dnt forget most of the times the killers ,suicide bombers , robbers, invaders are full with beleif ..
but its also clear that if somebody is doing wrong he is accountable for punishment.. then its dosent matter either he beleived or not.. -
Sister Reel,
I have always been fond of you and your judgement, but this time I think you ought to hear out sister Amra's words.
I think she did well by citing all the relevant verses in support of all her statements.
I support and endorse her statements and way of reasoning I find particularly keen and objective.
Most of us would like to excuse many of the people around us who we know in our hearts are not believers and have not submitted.
There is really no in between, sister Amra is accurate.
One thing that I also want to highlight is definitions according to Quran and according to our modern understanding.
Atheists A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
There are many kinds of ka fa ra.
Atheists are among the groups, including hypocrites.If you deny or reject anything concerning Allah's deen and Truth meaning His existence, The Day of Judgement, His Angels, His Messengers, His Books you are simply a kaf fa ra.
Just like there are different degrees or levels to a believer so for the ka fa ra
There are those who like the definition describes do not believe in the existence of God and less the Hereafter, His Angels, Messengers and Books and they follow assumptions and their own desires not REASON.
The Quran mentions those who think that they only live and die and time is the only thing responsible for their death 4523-24
Have you seen (he) who takes (as) his god his desire and Allah lets him go astray knowingly, and upon his hearing and his heart and puts over his vision a veil? Then who will guide him after Allah? Then will not you receive admonition?
And they say, "Not it (is) but our life (of) the world, we die and we live, and not destroys us except the time." And not for them of that any knowledge; not, they (do) but guess.Not being certain about the Hereafter is also an association (shirk) 1835-38, 42
And he entered his garden while he (was) unjust to himself. He said, "Not I think that will perish this ever.
And not I think the Hour will occur. And if I am bought back to my Lord, I will surely find better than this (as) a return."
Said to him his companion while he was talking to him, "Do you disbelieve in created you from dust then from a minute quantity of then fashioned you (into) a man?
But as for me, He (is) Allah, my Lord, and not I associate with my Lord anyone.
...And were surrounded his fruits, so he began twisting his hands over what he (had) spent on it, while it (had) collapsed on its trellises, and he said, "Oh! I wish I had not associated with my Lord anyone."
And not was for him a group (to) help him other than Allah, and not was (he) supported.Also I am always long winded and I do not want to reiterate what I have already stated in another thread.
I believe this particular disagreement we are having has been long settled in this thread
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607143.msg383327#msg383327I couldn't agree more! Why do people insist on making God politically correct? Believers are for Believers, or how on earth would it work? One cannot compromise when it comes to God's commands, if you do then you are either in danger, then there is no sin on you (32, or you are Ka Fa Ra disobedient/disbelievers.
-
God tells us who the "believers" are
"Mu'mens (believers) are those who have faith in God and His messenger?" (4915)
"?and attain the status of having no doubt whatsoever?" (4915)
"?and Strive with their money and their lives in the cause of God. These are the truthful ones." (4915)
"The true faithful are those whose hearts tremble when GOD is mentioned?" (82)
"?and when His revelations are recited to them, their faith is strengthened?" (82)
"?and they trust in their Lord." (82)
"They uphold the Worship (Salat)?" (83)
"?and from our provisions to them, they give to charity." (83)
"Such are TRULY THE BELIEVERS. They attain high ranks at their Lord, as well as forgiveness and a generous provision." (84)
I don't see how atheists can be considered "believers" we can marry if they reject God's revelations.. aand proudly say there is no god
bravo yay ! Thank you!