Every kind of similitude....
-
Peace Phoenix!
So, there is a possibility that the theories of physics are wrong, and thus there is a possibility that anything can happen against them. Maybe. But if that was true, God would give us some kind of sign. Something that would tell us that the "supernatural" can occur. So far, i seen nona dat.
So here, i'm not following blind faith in anyone's teachings. Not even the Quran. I have looked at the world through my own eyes and understood it with my own mind. From what I've experienced, no miracles exist.Well, then your approach is surely not the worst one. At least it is much better than the approach of those people who will believe every kind of strange story that they are told from second hand.
Personally, when I look at my life I see that things occured to me that seemed so extremely unlikely and wonderous that I would call them occuring against all possibilities. They were no physical miracles, though. Just occurences and so called "coincidences". But when thinking about them they impress me as much as a mountain starting to fly right in front of me would.
Maybe sometimes its just a matter of perspective. Maybe if you would have experienced the same you would not perceive these occurences as as much miraculous as I do now.
Maybe it is just a matter of personal characters.
What I can simply say is that while I never needed a mountain starting to fly in front of me or a sea parting, I definitely needed those unlikely occurences right at the time they happened.
So I already have a sign that very very unlikely things are possible when one is really in need of them. And maybe sometimes a people really is in need of the sea parting in front of it .... .
I just haven?t seen it yet.
Hmm, but who knows. Maybe one far day I will be in need of a parting sea and then this experience may enter my horizon .... winkBy the way, some scientists of modern physics would say that the newest findings of physics are not just a sign but definit proof that anything could happen against the supposed natural laws. Unfortunately, I am not deep enough into that stuff to comment on that or to form a sure opinion. I am only a lay reader of that stuff.
I just want to mention it because it it as much an opinion voiced in the modern scientific world as anything else.But it is exactly this vastness of opinions in modern science that tells me that the truth of the qur'?n is more solid than the truth of any temporal phase of modern science.
So, until I have a definit qur'?nic evidence that the stories of the qur'?n are never to be taken literally (I already agreed that there is definitely a nonliteral archetypical meaning to them) and are only metaphorical I will rather put my trust into the qur'?n's report than into some supposed or true rationality.
This because the qur'?n has already proven itself as true in my own experiences and through my own mind and I would betray that verification if such a sure evidence didn?t enter my experiences yet as well.Maybe this evidence will enter my own experiences one day. Or maybe the sea will part in front of me ....
peace again,
Leyla
-
peace Leyla,
why do you need the sea to part in front of you? If you think that's supposed to strengthen your faith, then I would say you're wrong because the parting of the sea go against God's laws. God doesnt have to do some supernatural magical stuff to prove His existence to you. I really don't understand why people need, or want to sea supernatural occurances to strengthen their faith.
Those rare things that happen at just the right moment are, in my opinion, just coincidences. If you think about it, if the opposite would have happened, you would never know. You would accept your life the way it was and move on. And sometimes it does happen that even though the odds of something good happening to you are pretty good but something bad happens. People ignore those coincidences. These coincidences happen around us all the time, and that's what I call fate. So i don't really know what i'm trying to say anymore, but i think its that "miracles" are all around us. They are everywhere. Good or bad, they're there. And because everything in God's world is a "miracle." That means there are really no "miracle miracles."
And that's the point i'm trying to make. God's world itself is a miracle enough for us. We don't need something extra, or something that goes against reality itself for us to have faith in God.
And that's what the supporters of creationism fail to see. They want supernatural. They can't appreciate God's creation the way it is. -
Peace Phoenix1!
why do you need the sea to part in front of you?
I myself said I don?t need it.
And I can?t see myself needing it.
And it never happened to me.
But who am I to know about my future?Those rare things that happen at just the right moment are, in my opinion, just coincidences. If you think about it, if the opposite would have happened, you would never know. You would accept your life the way it was and move on. And sometimes it does happen that even though the odds of something good happening to you are pretty good but something bad happens. People ignore those coincidences.
No, sorry. I?m definitely talking about something else. I am talking about very decisive things.
I would give you an example if I could. However, then I would have to reveal too many things about my personal life and I am not prepared to do so here.
So, let?s settle the issue. All I can say here should be treated as hearsay by you anyhow until you make your own experiences. I just simply have received other impressions. So, again, I think your approach is definitely not bad!!And because everything in God's world is a "miracle."
And that's the point i'm trying to make. God's world itself is a miracle enough for us. We don't need something extra, or something that goes against reality itself for us to have faith in God.
And that's what the supporters of creationism fail to see. They want supernatural. They can't appreciate God's creation the way it is.I totally agree with you here!
You are very very right about this!However, to me that does not automatically lead to
That means there are really no "miracle miracles."
Bye,
Leyla
-
I mean that if your approach is based on
I have looked at the world through my own eyes and understood it with my own mind. From what I've experienced, no miracles exist.
I will have to respect it and I can respect it. As I said, it is much better than the approach of those who trust any kind of wonderous hersay. I won?t judge your experiences. They are yours.
However, I can not accept this approach as my own because it does not reflect its own truth within my own experiences in life and especially within my experiences with the truth of the qur'?n.
And I would agree with mquran when he says
We need to able to say 'i dont have enough information to opine on that' instead of creating false epistemologies and projecting them upon al-quraan.
That?s all I mean
-
And I would agree with mquran when he says
We need to able to say 'i dont have enough information to opine on that' instead of creating false epistemologies and projecting them upon al-quraan.
That?s all I mean
You mean when mquran nitpicks words out of general statements made and falsly projects them upon al-quran, huh? Very funny.
-
Sorry, Danish.
Just some seconds ago I tried put together a translation of 9/30 for you.
But here it now becomes unfortunately very evident to me as well that it is not very fruitful to discuss with you at all.
This thread here does not even have the least to do with your discussion with mquran. Why do you carry it over here??
Very mature behaviour that you show!
Can?t you try to have an intellectual discussion without taking it personal ???
What comes next ?? verbal ad hominem attacks??
How old are you ???
And you`re calling mquran a crybaby ???!!!!!
Please, this last post of you has really betrayed you! -
Sorry, Danish.
Just some seconds ago I tried put together a translation of 9/30 for you.
But here it now becomes unfortunately very evident to me as well that it is not very fruitful to discuss with you at all.
This thread here does not even have the least to do with your discussion with mquran. Why do you carry it over here??
Very mature behaviour that you show!
Can?t you try to have an intellectual discussion without taking it personal ???
What comes next ?? verbal ad hominem attacks??
How old are you ???
And you`re calling mquran a crybaby ???!!!!!
Please, this last post of you has really betrayed you!Leyla, you don't own this forum nor this thread. I don't care what your relationship is with mquran, but no need to spew hatred, bad mouth me and get too personal. Just like you have the nerve to engage on another thread where you defend mquran helplessly, I too defended myself about correcting what you said in here, understand. What's your problem?
Just some seconds ago I tried put together a translation of 9/30 for you.
Your trying to put together was half baked and dodgy, just like mquran. 930 in its entirety, missy??? Now lets have it.
-
Just like you have the nerve to engage on another thread where you defend mquran helplessly, I too defended myself about correcting what you said in here, understand. What's your problem?
The problem is that what I said in here was answering phoenix1 with agreeing on something that mquran had answered to a previous answer of mine to phoenix1.
These answers had nothing whatsoever to do with you!And you may speculate about my reasons for defending mquran as much as you like. I do have several. But the most important one, and the one that IS very relevant to your discussion is
That I know that his methodology to study the qur'?n is the best one that I have ever come across. And I have definitely come across a lot of methodologies.Do what you like with that. I don?t spew hatred. I don?t hate you. I ust wanted to communicate as mature but also as direct as possible were in my own view your faults lie.I?m sorry if that sounded too rude.
Your rude answer came before I was able to finish my translation. And I don?t have much appetite to do it anymore. Just some hints for a clever mind like yours
al-yah?d - related to hud? (guidance)
an-naSara - related to naSr (help)
uzayr - related to wazara (to carry a ministry)
masih - derived from a root meaning to touchMissy ???
Whatever, I will definitely leave that whole issue now and wish you peace.
-
Just like you have the nerve to engage on another thread where you defend mquran helplessly, I too defended myself about correcting what you said in here, understand. What's your problem?
The problem is that what I said in here was answering phoenix1 with agreeing on something that mquran had answered to a previous answer of mine to phoenix1.
These answers had nothing whatsoever to do with you!Neither was your post on the other thread anything to do with you. But since you got yourself engaged by relentlessly supporting mquran, I did the same here. I have every right just as you. Keep this in mind when discussing on open public forums.
And you may speculate about my reasons for defending mquran as much as you like. I do have several. But the most important one, and the one that IS very relevant to your discussion is
That I know that his methodology to study the qur'?n is the best one that I have ever come across. And I have definitely come across a lot of methodologies.That's your opinion and I have mine. No wonder he was banned once for his unreasonable/unquranic behaviour.
Do what you like with that. I don?t spew hatred. I don?t hate you. I ust wanted to communicate as mature but also as direct as possible were in my own view your faults lie.I?m sorry if that sounded too rude.
Missy ???
Whatever, I will definitely leave that whole issue now and wish you peace.
You do the same but don't forget to translate 930 in its entirety as requested on the other thread. It's about time I get some answers outa ya guys instead of dodging around.
-
Neither was your post on the other thread anything to do with you.
Huh??? How can a post of mine have nothing to do with me ???
No wonder he was banned once for his unreasonable/unquranic behaviour.
By the way, just in case you don?t know
THAT`S what?s called an ad hominem attack.You do the same but don't forget to translate 930 in its entirety as requested on the other thread. It's about time I get some answers outa ya guys instead of dodging around.
Wow, you edit and change your posts faster than I can answer them. Impressive!
Peace, peace, peace. I?m gone.
-
Neither was your post on the other thread anything to do with you.
Huh??? How can a post of mine have nothing to do with me ???
Huh??? Same here.???
No wonder he was banned once for his unreasonable/unquranic behaviour.
By the way, just in case you don?t know
THAT`S what?s called an ad hominem attack.Facts, not ad hominem. Can't take the truth? Talk about defending, supporting and venerating mquran!!!
You do the same but don't forget to translate 930 in its entirety as requested on the other thread. It's about time I get some answers outa ya guys instead of dodging around.
Wow, you edit and change your posts faster than I can answer them. Impressive!Yes, impressive and quite effective.
Peace, peace, peace. I?m gone.
Peace, thank GOD.
-
Every culture and every timeperiod, of course, thinks that "they finally got it", that they are "the most evolved" and "the most progressive". Every culture and every timeperiod is horribly vain when it comes to this. But of course this vanity is not objective in any way.
Fukuyama is the latest exponent of 'endism' and he himself was deconstructed by Derrida. (read derrida and the end of history). I personally think that 'endism' is simply the propagation of one's agenda. Mankind should alway be wary of the future and not speak of which they have no knowledge.
-
salam.
salam .
so according to u the Quran only consists of simultudes ? there are no literal verses ?37 He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses - which constitute the essence of the scripture - as well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who harbor doubts in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows the true meaning thereof except GOD and those well founded in knowledge. They say, "We believe in this - all of it comes from our Lord." Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.
this verse has nothing to do with simultudes(mathalin) . this is about muhkam and mutashabey verses . both muhkam and mutashabey can contain simultudes .
It's all literal and all true; but it's not necessarily physical, but rather figurative.
based on what criteria ? just because you dont understand how Noah could live 950 years , makes that verse symbolic ?
People make the mistake of believing that allegory makes something falsehood.
many people make the verses symbolic because they think that what the verse says is non-sense and cannot happen(like in Noah's case) . so they do consider it falsehood . this is their criteria for deciding which verses are symbolic .
So rather than trying to determine what is literal and what is symbolic we must only consider what is straightforward and firm and all the remainder must be similar or allegorical verses based on 37.
what 37 says is tells is that we must not pursue the mutashabey verses to cause confusion . it also says that whether the verse is muhkam or mutashabey , we must believe in it . so regarding the story of Noah , i believe in it . all of them come from God . it must be true . he certainly would have lived 950 years .
This does not diminish the message. How does it affect anyone alive today to be told a story about a man named Noah living for 950 years?
it is part of the message . why else did God willed to tell us that Noah lived 950 years ?
If you believe it is a piece of history telling then you are turning the reading into an 'ancient tale' whereas the reading is a living message.
Quran does narrate to us information of the unseen . the stories of the prophets are also information of the unseen . and according the Quran we must believe in the unseen .
salam truth .
do u agree? if no , why ? -
Peace,
If you believe it is a piece of history telling then you are turning the reading into an 'ancient tale' whereas the reading is a living message.
Quran does narrate to us information of the unseen . the stories of the prophets are also information of the unseen . and according the Quran we must believe in the unseen .
I posted in relation to the unseen shortly after this thread...
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4694
The unseen to me is literally that. No person alive today has seen any of it - and therefore if it is simply an 'ancient tale' then its point is missed.
If the God has legitimised the use of similitude and figurative language then can you not acknowledge that these 'events' may be relayed in the way they are to explain to us messages which are not just ancient tales but are lessons applicable to you and me?
The argument is not against the underlying historicity of the accounts in the reading; the argument is that the way the events are told is figurative/symbolic and not physical.
That the God's throne or hands are figurative and not physical. That they stand for other things. And similarly that in the events told to us there are lessons for us - both superficial and deep.
Regards.
-
salam
The unseen to me is literally that. No person alive today has seen any of it - and therefore if it is simply an 'ancient tale' then its point is missed.
If the God has legitimised the use of similitude and figurative language then can you not acknowledge that these 'events' may be relayed in the way they are to explain to us messages which are not just ancient tales but are lessons applicable to you and me?
every part of every event does not need to be 'applicable' to us . maybe i dont understand , how do u want them to be applicable ?
take for example the 'parting of the sea' event . the lesson that can be learnt,without making it symbolic, is about God's power and how He can help His servants in need .
why does it need to be symbolic ?
salam.
-
salam
every part of every event does not need to be 'applicable' to us . maybe i dont understand , how do u want them to be applicable ?
take for example the 'parting of the sea' event . the lesson that can be learnt,without making it symbolic, is about God's power and how He can help His servants in need .
why does it need to be symbolic ?
salam.
So you can see the underlying message regardless. The message is literal but the event is figurative - it is not possible physically and we know that. Our experience of the world as well as physical laws make such an event impossible.
There are some who try to explain the event as a tsunami with a withdrawal of water, or a tidal motion etc. All these attempts to reconcile the event with observable events are acknowledgements of the impossibility of this event as imagined in the popular mindset.
Regards.
-
salam.
So you can see the underlying message regardless. The message is literal but the event is figurative - it is not possible physically and we know that.
see , this is the problem . the lessons can be learned from the literal understanding too . but the only reason u r calling the event symbolic , is because u say "it is not possible physically and we know that."
we are not the knower of everything , God is . when the All-Knower is informing us about some extraordinary event , then we know that it is possible .
Our experience of the world as well as physical laws make such an event impossible.
again our experiences in the world are very limited , and does not compare to God's experience . there are things beyond our experiences ,right ? and which physical laws make such an event impossble ? tell us please .
the problem is that those who support the symbolic understanding think that there is nothing that is beyond there knowledge and experience . that is the only reason for calling these verses symbolic .
-
Peace Saladin,
and which physical laws make such an event impossble ? tell us please .
Gravitation. To create a wall of water would require water being held against gravity.
Imagine a dam of water; and suddenly the dam wall is lowered - will it stay in its place as a stationary wall or will it flow obeying the pull of gravity?
Try it with a glass of water with your hand over the top. Lie the glass on its side and remove your hand in the hope it might stay in the glass.
Say someone in the past experienced such a thing and believed in the God because of it. Does that confer an advantage upon that person over you?
Say they saw many instances of it - so that they saw a man's stick turn to snake, then struck against the ground to make springs gush out of the ground, then struck against the sea to create a partition - does that person who experienced such events have an advantage over you?
If the answer is yes, then you must realise that it must be figurative. The God is fair and just. Every person who has ever lived has an equal chance to believe - and extraordinary events which people demanded from prophets and messengers never happened physically. No one gets an unfair advantage in a just system.
Regards.