The current quranic text might contain some falsehoods!

Man_of_Faith

If you find ambiguity or inconsistency, it is as I said before, the interpretation to blame and not the text itself primarily.

Salaa.

mmkhan

I think what you wrote above makes sense.
Hmm... this... I still don't know what to say about this.

Salaam,

I doubt and disagree with everything that alQuraan fails to prove. And 1400 years is NOT supported by alQuraan.

Yea, I think I agree. Only Allah Who can save us from that doubt.
I like what you told above, to be honest.
But I still can't say much about that, because my knowledge still not reach that understanding.
I feel that could be true and that makes sense, and somehow I like that idea.

InshaAllah, our Lord will clear all our doubts when we seek His help.

Okay, I'll check that, God willing. Thank you for sharing the example, big brother.
I hope someday I can understand about this better.

You are welcome sister.
InshaAllah.

Thank you for the input.
So, do you think Adam is the first person who received the first part of the Qur'an?

Yes, that is how I believe.
If not, and alQuraan was given to Muhammed as his book, then why are there stories of Adam, Nooh, Ibrahim, Musa, etc.. Specially when we are not following them but Muhammed. AlQuraan should contain information ONLY about Muhammed if there were many books from Allah.

Hah, I like that idea! Because I feel the Bible is suspicious, I think it contains mixing between truth and falsehood.
Yes, to my knowledge, the Qur'an never mentions "Bible". And I think Bible Injeel.

Peace.

Bible is nothing but a hadith of Eisa. In which some things are taken from the word of Allah and added to false made up stories.
And yes, I agree with the red part above.

May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan

mmkhan

Peace mmKhan,

Earliest manuscripts had no dialectic marks (added years later) which without context we won?t know if talking about males/remembrance or sheep, goats or people. It's verses were memorized like a song.

to the male similitude apportion the two (females)

say the male two prohibited or the two (females)

and indeed made easy we the Qur?an to the remembrance

9129
so if turn they of so say ?
21109 so if turn they of so say

sufficient for me the god ?
3938 sufficient for me the god

not deity except he on him I put my trust ?
1330 not deity except he on him I put my trust

and he lord the throne the great ?
2726 the god not deity except he lord the throne the great

Peace brother Noon,

You are seeing only one side of the coin, please try turning the coin and try to see the other part of it. InshaAllah, you will find it more clearer than what you are seeing.

As sister JavaLatte said how can you believe so strongly in something which was not confirmed by Allah in His book?
I believe that when they started writing hadith, they remove the diacritical marks and made some fake copies of alQuraan, just to create doubt in the Book of Allah. And almost all of us get trapped in their preaching. May Allah protect us pr

Do you have any prove from alQuraan bro? Or do you have any proof that alQuraan was given or sent down only 1400 years ago? There was no alQuraan before that? No body can prove it, that what is the point in believe such things so strongly which cannot be proven? Allah is our best guide bro, better to seek His help on such matters instead seeking help from so called human experts.

May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan

mmkhan

I think I'm going to put this thought into my consideration/pondering, insha'Allah.

Thank you for sharing your thought, brother mmkhan.

Insha'Allah.

Salaam,

You are welcome sister. Praise Allah.

I wanted to add another point to understand it clearly, inshaAllah. As we know people say that previous Books were given in different languages like Hebrew or Aramaic, etc. Now please take a look at this 3928 specially the words means The Reading was made in Arabic which has no crookedness.

That means Allah gave other books to other prophets and messengers which was in other languages. Hence they were not straight and the text in them was crooked so that those people should be get astray? If so, then what is the use of sending the Book to misguide people, better to leave them alone. As Allah clarifies that there is no crookedness in Arabic in the aayat given above.

Again, I believe the Book of Allah is ONE Book that is in Arabic because it has no crookedness since Adam till date.

May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan

truthseeker11

Salaam Altaf,

Before I get into the 3 kinds of "wahi" and the real nature of "shaitaan", some background discussion to make sure we are on the same page.

I will make a series of statements. Please let me know if you agree or disagree.

Humans have been given free will to choose between positive and negative. I will call this the Law of Free Will.
The Law of Free Will implies the existence of both positive and negative.
If only positive existed, there would be no Law of Free Will.
So negative has to exist in order for there to be the Law of Free Will.
The infinite Creator allowed the existence of negative due to creation of Law of Free Will.
In reality there is no negative because the infinite Creator is all there is.
It follows that the negative that exists must be a temporary illusion in the physical state of existence.
The positive entities can sometimes pretend to be negative in this temporary physical illusion, in order for negative to exist and create a polarity with the positive, to make it feasible to choose between positive and negative and for Law of Free Will to take effect.
The stronger the polarity, the stronger the electric current, the greater the diversity of experiences, and more chances of faster spiritual progress.
"Service to other" or STO entities are positive and "service to self" or STS entities are negative. Selfishness (service to self) is at the root of everything negative.
In order for the Law of Free Will to be applicable, every human should have equal exposure to both positive and negative, so that the human can make the choice freely (without coercion or fear).
If the human has exposure only to positive the whole life and never gets chance of exposure to negative, then the Law of Free Will is moot.

Does all of that make any sense?

Finally, what is your understanding of 6112?

6112 And as such, we have permitted the enemies of every prophet, shayateen of mankind and jinn, to inspire (yoo7a) each other with fancy words in order to deceive. Had your Lord willed, they would not have done it. You shall disregard them and their fabrications.

Do you agree that shayateen can "yoo7a" each other? And do you agree that the infinite Creator allowed them to do it?

As a side note, looks like you still haven't gotten the quote thing right. Please note the two commands and
without the space in the first one. When you highlight a quote and click on the quote icon, these 2 commands will appear at the two ends of the quote. The first command will be before the quote and the second command after the quote. Make sure each quote has those 2 commands at its two ends and delete any extra commands in the message if present.

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

altafalvi

Salaam Truthseeker,

Regarding free will, well initially I was under this belief that a person will be accountable for his/her actions before the Creator and as such we have been given a choice to choose between right and wrong/positive and negative.

But later on I just realized that there really isn't any free will so to speak, I mean, if I take this belief that I will be accountable for my deeds and I have to follow the right/positive way/path then technically I am not doing what I really want to do, I am just doing it for fear of reprimand from the Creator. And the other part if I do and walk the negative/wrong path or deeds then I have this lingering thought in my mind I will be brought to the books for my actions...so where exactly is the free will. I think, the illusion of free will, is instituted in our selves by the Creator. That's what I feel. To tell the truth, I m pretty much in a haze regarding this.

I strongly agree with your Point no. 10 and 11. (that's what I believe)

As for 6112, hmmm...my understanding is this for this ayah

Remember, We have appointed to every Prophet enemies. The rebellious among the urban (mankind) and the rural (jinn) populations rose in opposition, (since the message struck at their personal interests.) They plotted and inspired each other with fancy words. If your Lord willed, they would not do that. Disregard them and whatever they fabricate.

Now if we consider the selfish interests of the people as being "Shayateen" then shayateen can inspire or conspire with each other. As for the Creator allowing them to do it...well the Creator always lets the rope hang loosely until IT can tighten the noose. However I want to read your views too and of course about the "wahi" also.

About the quote thing, I think I will just manage without it until I can do it correctly.

Salaam

JavaLatte

I doubt and disagree with everything that alQuraan fails to prove. And 1400 years is NOT supported by alQuraan.

Hmm... that's right.

By the way, I've checked this, brother.

For example 225 and 2237 and 4159. Why these changes if it is not required? The diacritical marks in these words defines what does it mean and that shows the perfectness of the Book.

= before .
= before .
= before .

Please note this example and try to check in your copy of alQuraan and see how perfectly it fits. This way you will understand how important the diacritical marks are and it is highly impossible for any human being or jinn to add those markings to the Book of Allah so precisely.

And yes, I think I noticed the difference, wow, praise be to Allah. )

Also, if I remember Allah whom I know, then it is very possible that my Master indeed already completed the Quran with diacritical marks, in order to make it easy for His servants to read and study His messages.

JavaLatte

Bible is nothing but a hadith of Eisa.

Do you think so?

Brother, what do you think when you read about Jesus in the Bible?

Did you notice something strange?

I think the way Jesus speaks and behaves (in the Bible) seem quite different with how prophet Isa speaks and behaves (in the Qur'an). To me, it seems that they are not the same person.

Peace.

runninglikezebras

Moses was driven away from Mesr because he said things they did not like rather than him killing someone. He tried to be prophet as the enlightened person he was but he got no positive response.

Well that reminds me entirely of ... you! I think you are seriously suffering from a messiah complex bro. You should try to get over it.

truthseeker11

Salaam Altaf,

The reason I am slowly building up to my full view is because the truth I have discovered is radically different from the quranic model of humans created by a god as slaves/servants/worshippers of itself, existence of hell and hellfire, and the polytheists being sent to hell for eternity with no chance of forgiveness etc. The quranic model is based on a needy, vengeful, wrathful god that is separate from the creation and uses fear based tactics. This model has the logical fallacies of Appeal to Consequences of a Belief, Appeal to Fear and Circular Reasoning (Begging the Question) and hence my conscience and reasoning couldn't accept some of it as the truth.

http//www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

Regarding free will, well initially I was under this belief that a person will be accountable for his/her actions before the Creator and as such we have been given a choice to choose between right and wrong/positive and negative.

But later on I just realized that there really isn't any free will so to speak, I mean, if I take this belief that I will be accountable for my deeds and I have to follow the right/positive way/path then technically I am not doing what I really want to do, I am just doing it for fear of reprimand from the Creator. And the other part if I do and walk the negative/wrong path or deeds then I have this lingering thought in my mind I will be brought to the books for my actions...so where exactly is the free will. I think, the illusion of free will, is instituted in our selves by the Creator. That's what I feel. To tell the truth, I m pretty much in a haze regarding this.

The truth that I have discovered talks about fair and just accountability for actions (not before the Creator) in form of karmic implications or repercussions in the next life which could be repeated on Earth or another similar 3rd density planet. No hell or hellfire, but just and fair accountability of actions. For example if I kill someone, I will be killed in the next life so I can experience the same what someone else experienced because of me. Similarly, if I raped someone, I will be raped in next life and so on. (Quran also talks about reincarnation, see 4011, 228, 2259. 2259 is clear cut example of reincarnation on the same Earth!).

That truth talks about the free will to choose between negative and positive without coercion and fear, not because it is a test but for EXPERIENCE and LESSONS TO BE LEARNED. We are in this 3rd density state of existence, not because we are being tested, but so that we can freely choose between and learn the lessons of service to others (STO) or service to self (STS).

That truth talks about the infinite Creator not creating us to serve/worship itself or as slaves, but so that the infinite Creator can EXPERIENCE ITSELF!

Does that make any sense to your conscience and reasoning?

I strongly agree with your Point no. 10 and 11. (that's what I believe)

handshake

As for 6112, hmmm...my understanding is this for this ayah

Remember, We have appointed to every Prophet enemies. The rebellious among the urban (mankind) and the rural (jinn) populations rose in opposition, (since the message struck at their personal interests.) They plotted and inspired each other with fancy words. If your Lord willed, they would not do that. Disregard them and whatever they fabricate.

Now if we consider the selfish interests of the people as being "Shayateen" then shayateen can inspire or conspire with each other. As for the Creator allowing them to do it...well the Creator always lets the rope hang loosely until IT can tighten the noose. However I want to read your views too and of course about the "wahi" also.

The problem that I see in this is that "jinn" means "hidden", and rural populations are not hidden. What is your knowledge about aliens, UFO's etc.? Have you studied that phenomenon in detail?

The second problem is that the verse talks about "shayateen" jinn and "shayateen" mankind, meaning beings/entities and not just the interests, and these beings/entities sending "wahi" comprising fancy words on other beings/entities. Sounds like telepathic channeling between two entities to me.

What if the shayateen jinn are actual negative higher density beings or "aliens" (who have chosen the STS path), and the shayateen mankind are the negative spiritually advanced humans who have chosen the STS path?

Shaitaan is any NEGATIVE being/entity who uses its free will to choose and walk the service to self (STS) path of selfishness.

Putting 4251 together with 6112, the 3 kinds of wahi would be as follows

Wahi from the infinite Creator directly to humans (intuition, conscience are examples)
Wahi from the POSITIVE higher density beings (such as Gabriel, positive jinn/"aliens" etc.)
Wahi from the NEGATIVE beings among the jinn/"aliens" and spiritually advanced humans.

What if I told you the infinite Creator allows access to all these 3 kinds of wahi and free will to choose and act upon them, without coercion and fear?

Currently I have the following hypotheses about the current text of al-quran

It consists only of wahi type 1 (very unlikely).
It consists only of wahi type 1 and type 2.
It consists of wahi type 1 and type 2 and type 3.

I am leaning more towards hypothesis #3 based on my conscience, reasoning, knowledge and real world evidence.

Your thoughts on this will be appreciated.

Like you said before, wahi never stops and has continued to this day. The infinite Creator sends wahi constantly to everyone; it's us who are not receptive and don't open up ourselves to the wahi. Similarly the advanced positive and negative entities will send wahi on anyone who freely chooses to receive it, due to the Law of Free Will, to guide either on STO path or STS path.

I have read quite a few wahis so far including the Bible, and the Quran, but two wahis that were sent recently to two humans in the 1980's have made the most sense to me, using my conscience, reasoning, knowledge and real world evidence. Those two wahis are type 2 wahis and guide on STO path. One of the "wahis" mentions Muhammad, Jesus, and Moses in positive terms and gives startling information about the source of "wahi" to Moses and describes the reality of what Moses experienced on the mountain, which makes total sense. Finally I think I know who "Allah" of the Torah, Injeel and Quran is! (hint it's not the infinite Creator!!!).

For example, please ponder on the following verse

8922 And your Lord comes with the angels row after row.

Does that sound like the infinite Creator to you? The infinite Creator is everywhere, so how can it "come" (implying a movement from one place to another), "with angels" (as if it is a separate, distinct, finite entity)?

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

Man_of_Faith

Runninglikezebras,

No I do not suffer from some Messiah syndrome. What is that anyway?

There are other accounts that say Moses was conspired against and he had to flee Mesr. Moses tried to preach about God among his people, but they did not listen to him. He was a prophet and obviously he was to inform/enlighten people.

Prophets did preach, as in to convey the information they possessed from the Rabb. They taught what people needed to know and most importantly they showed the way.

Just as people had trouble believing Jesus they had problems with Moses and thus Moses was backed up with stronger signs such as the white hand and "magic" staff. And to boost his confidence his brother Aaron was also made enlightened so that he was not alone.

And it is just the symbiotic state between Creator and Creation that people have a problem with. People tend to draw a separate image for God rather than tread in the one image.

Salaam

truthseeker11

Salaam Arman Aziz,

Thank you for your input and taking your time to reply to some of the points I have raised. I noticed your post soon after you posted it but got a bit busy to formulate an appropriate reply. I will give a detailed reply soon if the infinite Creator wills, but I would like to resolve some logic issues first.

I happen to be a fan of yours and we agree on some basic truths. At the same time, I understand our human limitations and tendency to be error prone. I have made logical and factual errors in the past from which I have tried to learn and improve my reasoning process, and I hope you take the following as constructive advice.

Please study the logical fallacy of Circular Reasoning, fallacy of Division, and Strawman fallacy

http//www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

Let's dissect and analyse a very popular argument

Al-zikr is protected by God and no falsehood can enter it (159, 4141-42) - premise #1
Quran is zikr (3669) - premise #2
Inference #1 The current text of al-quran is the divinely protected al-zikr.
Inference #2 The current text of al-quran is protected by God and no falsehood can enter it.
Conclusion Whatever the message of the current text of al-quran, it must be the truth.

This argument is an example of fallacy of circular reasoning of the form "this book says it is protected, so it must be protected and must be the truth", or "this book says falsehood cannot enter it, so falsehood has not entered it and it must be the truth".

I can reject this argument right away based on this circular reasoning. Subsequently the premises stated as true based on this logical fallacy can also be rejected (for example a premise is stated as true just because al-quran says so), and the conclusion formed based on those premises can also be rejected. The whole thing falls apart like a house of cards.

There is also the fallacy of Division in the above argument. 159, 4141-42 and 3669 referring to al-zikr and quran, does not mean they are referring to the current text of al-quran, because the current text of al-zikr or quran could be different from the original text of al-zikr or quran. Additional evidence is needed to first prove that the current text is the same as original text.

This is why even al-quran asks us to verify its truth based on outside evidence (4153, 1736), and stresses the importance of our inner compass/conscience (3030), and reasoning (many verses mentioning aql and fikr), instead of believing something as the truth just because it says so!

Now my reasoning is that the infinite Creator knows that putting 159 and 4141-42 in an inspired book will make it a logical fallacy of circular reasoning. Therefore, the infinite Creator will never put such statements in the inspired book because the infinite Creator does not commit logic errors. Therefore 159 and 4141-42 could not have been divinely inspired.

If you notice any flaws in my logic in this post, I will appreciate if you point them out. Once we have resolved this issue, then we can proceed to discussion of your earlier reply, because IMHO your reply contains some logical fallacies.

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

Armanaziz

Salam truthseeker11.

"Qur'an cannot contain any falsehood and Qur'an says it is protected by God.. so it cannot contain any falsehood."

The above is a circular argument. No doubt about it. I fully agree with you on this point. But your initial post didn't just stop there.

I am fascinated by Qur'an not because it says it is the guidance or light, nor because it says it is protected by God (which is only one possible interpretation of the verse), nor due to any numerological verification... rather I appreciate and have faith in Qur'an because I see the signs of my Master in this book. And by "my Master" I mean the One who gave me my intellect and conscience to determine right vs. wrong and good vs. bad.

Whenever I ponder over the verses of Qur'an it makes my reasoning stronger, it helps me get clarity on ethical issues on which I was otherwise confused and it encourages me to live a pious, enlightened and overall conscious life. The more "strange" a verse appears in the first glance - the more it seems to have to offer when I think about it thoroughly. This has fully convinced me that the book holds key to right guidance and that's all that matters for me.

You highlighted 13 points why one could doubt that the Qur'an in its entirity is a book coming from the wisdom of the Infinite Creator. To me those 13 points seemed weak and unreasonable. I shared my views on those 13 points with you, the way I see the signs of the Infinite Creator in the book, rather than the opposite.

Looking forward to your detailed response.

May Allah guide us both to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman

JavaLatte

I appreciate and have faith in Qur'an because I see the signs of my Master in this book.

Same here.

truthseeker11

Salaam Arman Aziz,

Before I make any Strawman fallacy in my reply, I want to clarify your viewpoints.

Premise #1 - your reply did not mention you noticing any flaw in my logic in my previous post.
Premise #2 - 159 and 4141-42 could not have been of divine origin.
Deduction - you agree that my logical conclusion about 159 and 4141-42 is true.
Conclusion - you agree that the current quranic text might contain some falsehoods.

Is the above accurate?
If not, then what was the flaw in my logic in my previous post?
Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety?
If yes, please provide external evidence proving your premise.

I also see the signs of the infinite Creator in some parts of the current text of al-quran, doesn't mean that the entire current text of al-quran is the truth, because otherwise it will be the logical fallacy of Composition.

Have you pondered over all the verses of the current text of al-quran and verified them as the truth using the external signs? If not, then can you still say that the entire current text of al-quran is the truth?

Thanks and regards,

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

Armanaziz

Salam truthseeker11.

Salaam Arman Aziz,

Before I make any Strawman fallacy in my reply, I want to clarify your viewpoints.

Premise #1 - your reply did not mention you noticing any flaw in my logic in my previous post.
Premise #2 - 159 and 4141-42 could not have been of divine origin.
Deduction - you agree that my logical conclusion about 159 and 4141-42 is true.
Conclusion - you agree that the current quranic text might contain some falsehoods.

Is the above accurate?
If not, then what was the flaw in my logic in my previous post?

No, your deduction is not accurate. In your deduction you are assuming that my acceptance of ?circular reasoning? was an indication that I agreed with your earlier proposition that 159 and 4141-42 could not have been of divine origin.

Sorry, your above assumption is not valid.

Your deduction that ?159 and 4141-42 could not have been of divine origin? ? suffers from Fallacist?s Fallacy (Ref http//www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/fallacists/). The fallacist?s fallacy involves rejecting an idea as false simply because the argument offered for it is fallacious.

For example ?Barak Obama says he is the President of the USA. The President of the USA knows best who the President of the USA is. Hence Barak Obama is the President of the USA.?

The above is a fallacious circular argument.

But it does NOT mean that Barak Obama is NOT the President of the USA.
Nor does it mean that the statement ?I am the President of the USA? cannot come from Barak Obama or if it does, it becomes an incorrect statement.

Similarly, "Qur'an cannot contain any falsehood and Qur'an says it is protected by God.. so it cannot contain any falsehood." ? is a fellacy. But it does not mean that the statement ?God protects the Qur?an? is necessarily false or cannot have divine origin.

===

Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety?
If yes, please provide external evidence proving your premise.

I have faith that the Qur?an, in its entirety, contains signs from the Infinite Creator which lead to the truth.
The verses themselves cannot be considered as true or false as such ? because the interpretation of virtually every verse depends on careful and sincere application of human intellect and and conscience.

For example, ?Indeed your Master is Allah, who created the heavens and the earth in six days ?? as mentioned in 754 is a statement in which I have faith that leads to a certain truth. Whether the statement itself is true or false depends on the following

A correct conceptualization of ?Allah?
A correct understanding of what the word ?created (kha-la-qa)? means
A correct understanding of what the word ?days (yawm)? means

However a sincere approach to take the best meaning from this verse would leave one with the conclusion that the creation of the expanding space that we call the ?universe? is a finite activity completed within a finite time period ? which is a trivial job for an Infinite Creator. I also believe the wording that I chose here (in blue) as interpretation are inferior to the wording chosen by Qur?an to serve the need of an audience that spans from 7th century AD till the end of humanity.

Thus whether Qur?an contains truth or falsehood is really a subjective question depending on the intension and approach of the reader.

I also see the signs of the infinite Creator in some parts of the current text of al-quran, doesn't mean that the entire current text of al-quran is the truth, because otherwise it will be the logical fallacy of Composition.

I also see the signs of the infinite Creator only in some parts of the current text of al-quran, which only makes me curious to continue to search for more signs in remaining parts of the Qur?an. And my pursuit, till now, has NOT led me to a dead end.

Have you pondered over all the verses of the current text of al-quran and verified them as the truth using the external signs? If not, then can you still say that the entire current text of al-quran is the truth?

No, I am only a student of the Qur?an and I have not pondered over all the verses of the current text of al-quran as of yet. I have experienced only when I approach the Qur?an with full faith and confidence, I can see the signs of my Master. The signs that I have already seen are good enough for me to put the text in highest esteem and always approach it with the same esteem irrespective of whether I immediately see clear signs or not.

I have faith that Qur?an, deriving from the Infinite Creator, offers unlimited wisdom which can guide conscious people irrespective of era or society. I am a limited existence human bound to an era and a society. I?ll only have the ability to see signs that are essential for me in my era and society. So whatever sign I get from Qur?an I take ? whatever is beyond my reach I keep trying.

For me Qur?an is a light. If helps to see the path which leads to the truth. If I choose to keep my eyes closed or do not know how to project the light on my path ? and thereby get into the wrong path - I have only myself to blame, not the light.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman

altafalvi

Salaam Truthseeker,

Reincarnation and karma seem to offer a better account of evil and suffering than does theism. For example, it seems exceedingly unfair that one child is born healthy into a wealthy, loving family, whereas another child is born sickly into a poor, cruel environment. If there is a personal, creator God who brought these two persons into the world, God seems to be unloving and unjust. But if the two children are reaping the consequences of actions they performed in previous lives, this seems to provide a justification for the inequalities. The effect of one?s karma determines the circumstances of one?s past, present, and future lives. We reap what we sow. Just the way you mentioned.

The above theory is good and looks very just but there is a problem in its application. According to the karmic law of cause and effect, a person?s present life circumstances are explained by his/her actions in a previous life; and his/her life circumstances in that life are explained by his/her life circumstances in a life previous to that one; and so on indefinitely. So the solution hoped for regarding inequalities never seems to come to an end. Furthermore, does it really seem fair that when a person who has lived a long life dies and is reincarnated, he/she must start all over again as a baby with her maturity, life experiences, wisdom, and memories completely erased?

Another difficulty for the karma/rebirth solution has to do with free will. An initial advantage of this solution to the problem of evil is that real moral agency is preserved. In fact, moral agency is central to the karma/rebirth solution our moral decisions self-determine our future experiences, making us responsible for our own destiny. Upon further reflection, the view seems to run contrary to free moral agency.

Consider the example of a man contemplating the rape and murder of a woman. Suppose he has done so before, and has thus far not been caught. He is considering redirecting his life by turning himself in to the authorities and receiving the consequences of his actions. But just as he is pondering this option, a woman strolls by and his mad passions for rape and murder begin to burn within him. He now has the choice to continue down the path of destruction or put a stop to it. If he decides to attack the woman and does so, then on the karmic account the woman was not completely innocent after all; she is paying the price for her former evil actions. In that case, the rapist is not truly free to act as he does, for he is simply following mechanistically the effects of karmic justice. He is merely the instrumental means for meting out the justice requisite for this woman?s previous moral failings. If, however, the woman does not deserve such moral recompense, then karmic justice will ensure that she does not receive it. In that case, the rapist will be unable to engage in the attack.

The problem that arises has to do with locating the moral freedom in this system. If the rapist is deterministically carrying out justice on his victim, then it seems that he is not truly a free moral agent after all. He is simply a cog in the karmic justice machine. It is disconcerting to affirm a moral system in which we understand raped and murdered victims to be themselves morally culpable for such acts of brutality against them. On the other hand, suppose the rapist really is free to attack the woman. If she was not deserving of such an act, this would be a serious violation of the law of karma whereby suffering occurs only because of one?s previous evil actions. If in attempting to justify such actions, the defender of the karmic system replied that the woman would in a future life receive a reward for such a morally gratuitous act, this does not appear to be consistent with karma, for this would run counter to the central principle of karma in which evil and suffering are the effects of one?s previous deeds.

As with theistic replies to evil, karmic solutions may be helpful at some level, but they nevertheless leave one with less than complete answers to the variety of problems of evil and suffering. Your views please.

About the Jinns and shayateen, you are right when you deem jinns to be hidden and yes rural populations are not hidden but i guess it's like when you go to some place it's the city that you encounter first and later on as you continue trekking ahead it's then that the rural areas are encountered. Maybe in this case rural populations are hidden figuratively.

No brother, my knowledge about aliens, UFO etc is limited to Hollywood's Independence Day, Aliens, The Day the Earth stood Still etc. Actually I haven't thought about it much. But yes I have seen people who have been possessed by (jinn, shayateen, angels, higher celestial beings or positive/negative energy or i don't know what to call them) such things. I have seen these people speaking in somebody's (the one who is possessing) voice and even telling their own cause of death. And no this time it's not Hollywood's The Exorcist. It's real. I mean, i dont know how to explain such stuff.

Maybe they (shayateen and jinn) are negative higher density beings, like you said. It could be a possibility.

Hmmm...your definitions for the 3 types of wahi do carry a plausible appeal. But at this stage, I can neither confirm nor deny your hypothesis. Yes some of the current quranic text does "appear" to be an amalgamation of all 3 types of wahis. But somehow I think and I have really come to believe that the compilers of the Uthmanic era really didn't comprehend at all as to what task they were doing. I feel, the true essence of the text/wahi is there but it is so scattered that now every ayah and every word feels like a jigsaw puzzle to be solved. And frankly, we just cant hide behind the facade of translation each and everytime the brick is thrown at us. But what i am thinking is that if according to type # 3 it's from "spiritually advanced human" then how can the wahi be Negative...i mean, if a human is spiritually advanced, he/she should emanate positive transparency and energy, right? only a spiritually degraded human would transmit Negative wahi...that's what i think...your thoughts please.

Your last point came like a jolt! I would like to have more details on it as to who were the two humans and what wahi did they receive exactly. and who is "Allah?"

8922 what if the ayah means like this And your Lord comes, and Its angels, rank upon rank...yeah but still the inherent problem of omnipresence is not solved...

Salaam

truthseeker11

Salaam Arman,

No, your deduction is not accurate. In your deduction you are assuming that my acceptance of ?circular reasoning? was an indication that I agreed with your earlier proposition that 159 and 4141-42 could not have been of divine origin.

Sorry, your above assumption is not valid.

Your deduction that ?159 and 4141-42 could not have been of divine origin? ? suffers from Fallacist?s Fallacy (Ref http//www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/fallacists/). The fallacist?s fallacy involves rejecting an idea as false simply because the argument offered for it is fallacious.

For example ?Barak Obama says he is the President of the USA. The President of the USA knows best who the President of the USA is. Hence Barak Obama is the President of the USA.?

The above is a fallacious circular argument.

But it does NOT mean that Barak Obama is NOT the President of the USA.
Nor does it mean that the statement ?I am the President of the USA? cannot come from Barak Obama or if it does, it becomes an incorrect statement.

Similarly, "Qur'an cannot contain any falsehood and Qur'an says it is protected by God.. so it cannot contain any falsehood." ? is a fellacy. But it does not mean that the statement ?God protects the Qur?an? is necessarily false or cannot have divine origin.

I am glad you saw the fallacy!

The statement "God protects the Quran" could be of divine origin or it could not be of divine origin. Currently there is no evidence that it is of divine origin. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. To prove this statement is of divine origin, it has to be proven that God made that statement.

Why did God inspire this statement and then not give concrete proof of its divine origin and proof of protection of al-zikr to all the readers? Otherwise it just becomes a meaningless statement. For example, the original complete text of al-quran could have survived until now, verifiable by carbon dating, and could have been used as evidence of divine origin of verses and protection of al-quran. For an infinite Creator, that would have been no problem at all.

I have faith that the Qur?an, in its entirety, contains signs from the Infinite Creator which lead to the truth.

You avoided answering my question. No discussion can proceed further if the other person starts performing evasive maneuvers rather than answering the questions posed.

Here it is again

Do you know with 100% certainty that the current text of al-quran contains the truth in its entirety? Simple yes, no question.

If yes, then please provide external evidence proving your premise. (as per 4153, 1736).

The verses themselves cannot be considered as true or false as such ? because the interpretation of virtually every verse depends on careful and sincere application of human intellect and and conscience.

You just pointed out some more inherent contradictions in al-quran.

Some verses in al-quran cannot be interpreted by humans because their interpretation is known only to God (37). Human intellect, conscience and real world evidence are useless in interpreting those verses. So how can humans verify that those verses are the truth using external evidence and knowledge as per 4153 and 1736? Why did God insert unclear verses in al-quran that only It knows the interpretation of and then expect humans to be able to verify their truth?

Why did God insert unclear verses in al-quran that only It knows the interpretation of and then say that the revelations are clear? (1015, 2216, 579, 6511 etc.) Why does God ask us to use our intellect, conscience, and real world evidence to understand Its revelations when some of them can only be interpreted by God? Why didn't God make all the verses simple and clear and verifiable as the truth when It could easily have done that?

If you now say that God will show signs that will help us interpret those verses and know their meanings, then 37 will be falsified because

37 ................... none know its interpretation except God. ...........

will be falsified for the future readers!

For example, ?Indeed your Master is Allah, who created the heavens and the earth in six days ?? as mentioned in 754 is a statement in which I have faith that leads to a certain truth. Whether the statement itself is true or false depends on the following

A correct conceptualization of ?Allah?
A correct understanding of what the word ?created (kha-la-qa)? means
A correct understanding of what the word ?days (yawm)? means

However a sincere approach to take the best meaning from this verse would leave one with the conclusion that the creation of the expanding space that we call the ?universe? is a finite activity completed within a finite time period ? which is a trivial job for an Infinite Creator. I also believe the wording that I chose here (in blue) as interpretation are inferior to the wording chosen by Qur?an to serve the need of an audience that spans from 7th century AD till the end of humanity.

This statement seems to belong to the category of verses that only God knows the interpretation of per 37. Whether the statement itself is true or false will thus also depend on the following

Proof that this statement is of divine origin.
What the true meaning is according to God since only It knows its true meaning.

What if it turns out to be a fabrication when the original text is discovered or when direct communication occurs with God?

I also see the signs of the infinite Creator only in some parts of the current text of al-quran, which only makes me curious to continue to search for more signs in remaining parts of the Qur?an. And my pursuit, till now, has NOT led me to a dead end.

I, on the other hand, have seen signs from the infinite Creator that indicate that some parts of the current text of al-quran may not be the truth.

I have faith that Qur?an, deriving from the Infinite Creator, offers unlimited wisdom which can guide conscious people irrespective of era or society. I am a limited existence human bound to an era and a society. I?ll only have the ability to see signs that are essential for me in my era and society. So whatever sign I get from Qur?an I take ? whatever is beyond my reach I keep trying.

How do you know with certainty that the current text of al-quran is the same in its entirety as the original divinely inspired al-quran? You can have as much faith as you want in a corrupted version of al-quran, that it is divinely inspired and offers unlimited wisdom and can guide people, but that won't make it actually of divine origin, offering unlimited wisdom and guidance. It will actually be dangerous because you will have faith and will blindly follow something that in reality is not the truth.

For me Qur?an is a light. If helps to see the path which leads to the truth. If I choose to keep my eyes closed or do not know how to project the light on my path ? and thereby get into the wrong path - I have only myself to blame, not the light.

That is true for the original Quran inspired by the infinite Creator. You will have only yourself to blame also if you don't use your conscience, intellect/reasoning and real world evidence to verify that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety before blindly following and having faith in all of it.

Regards,

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

Armanaziz

Salamun Alaikum

Why did God inspire this statement and then not give concrete proof of its divine origin and proof of protection of al-zikr to all the readers? Otherwise it just becomes a meaningless statement. For example, the original complete text of al-quran could have survived until now, verifiable by carbon dating, and could have been used as evidence of divine origin of verses and protection of al-quran. For an infinite Creator, that would have been no problem at all.

The proofs are clear enough for those who have faith. As to why the Infinite Creator did not make the proof evident to everyone - the answer is also in the Qur'an. The day the proof will become clear and evident to everyone - it will be already GAME OVER. Don't be impatient for that day - for indeed it would be a mighty day for all of us.

You avoided answering my question. No discussion can proceed further if the other person starts performing evasive maneuvers rather than answering the questions posed.

Here it is again

Do you know with 100% certainty that the current text of al-quran contains the truth in its entirety? Simple yes, no question.

All questions do not have yes, no answer. Say a passenger on a ship is asking the sailor - can you say with 100% certainty that the compass that you are using correctly directs us to our destination port all the time? Simple yes, no question.

But the answer is not so simple, is it?

Feel free to discontinue the discussion at any point when you are convinced I am performing evasive maneuvers.

You just pointed out some more inherent contradictions in al-quran.

Some verses in al-quran cannot be interpreted by humans because their interpretation is known only to God (37). Human intellect, conscience and real world evidence are useless in interpreting those verses. So how can humans verify that those verses are the truth using external evidence and knowledge as per 4153 and 1736? Why did God insert unclear verses in al-quran that only It knows the interpretation of and then expect humans to be able to verify their truth?

Perhaps the Infinite Creator does not want them to be verified. Perhaps they serve the intended purpose (i.e. guidance and reminder) better as unverified and allegorical text. And humans will never know their interpretation for certainty does not mean that they cannot be guided by it. You are presuming "external verification" as a prerequisite for truth. That itself is another fallacy.

If you now say that God will show signs that will help us interpret those verses and know their meanings, then 37 will be falsified because

37 ................... none know its interpretation except God. ...........

will be falsified for the future readers!

By "interpretation" I understand a fixed confirmed meaning. But the verses of Qur'an, per my humble understanding, are living texts - they offer new insight given changing circumstances. Although the fixed interpretation will never be known to us, but the living words of God will continue to guide us in all ages. Those firmly rooted in knowledge will say, "We have faith in it, all of it is from our Master."

How do you know with certainty that the current text of al-quran is the same in its entirety as the original divinely inspired al-quran? You can have as much faith as you want in a corrupted version of al-quran, that it is divinely inspired and offers unlimited wisdom and can guide people, but that won't make it actually of divine origin, offering unlimited wisdom and guidance. It will actually be dangerous because you will have faith and will blindly follow something that in reality is not the truth.

That is true for the original Quran inspired by the infinite Creator. You will have only yourself to blame also if you don't use your conscience, intellect/reasoning and real world evidence to verify that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety before blindly following and having faith in all of it.

I blindly follow nothing. Not anymore than a sailor who "blindly" follows a compass. Under all circumstances I have accepted upholding my God gifted conscience and intellect as my primary and inviolable obligation to my Master. Searching for signs of my Master in Qur'an or in the universe is secondary to the earlier statement. Those who are blind are not equal to those who can see.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman

truthseeker11

Salamun Alaik Arman,

The proofs are clear enough for those who have faith.

What proofs are you talking about? If by "the proofs" you mean 159 and 4142 then it's circular reasoning by your own admission. The absence of proof/evidence of protection of al-zikr makes 159 and 4142 meaningless statements and makes their divine origin doubtful.

The statement "the proofs are clear enough for those who have faith" is a dangerous statement.

Let's assume Arman and I stumble upon 10 glasses full of water. The water seems to be identical as far as human senses are concerned. Odorless, colorless, tasteless. There is a note next to the glasses saying "this water has been sent to you from God". Arman immediately starts drinking the water (despite my attempts to stop him) and after finishing the first 8 glasses everything is fine. So far, no harm caused by the water seems to be "the proof" that the water has not been poisoned. Unbeknownst to the two of us, in reality the final glass was not sent from God but was sneaked in by someone else and contains a deadly poison which is odorless, colorless, tasteless, mixed with water.

Arman says he has faith in the note and "the proof", and advises me to drink the remaining two glasses without any fear because "the proofs are clear enough for those who have faith". I happen to disagree with Arman and take half of the remaining two glasses to the laboratory to conduct further tests to determine the truth. Arman drinks the remaining two half glasses. I, on the other hand, discover the deadly poison and avoid drinking the water. Guess what happened?

Even al-quran contains 3030, 1736, 4153, and numerous verses on fikr and aql, in addition to faith. Additionally, 262 and 569 mention faith in God, but not faith in the current text of al-quran.

As to why the Infinite Creator did not make the proof evident to everyone - the answer is also in the Qur'an. The day the proof will become clear and evident to everyone - it will be already GAME OVER. Don't be impatient for that day - for indeed it would be a mighty day for all of us.

Where does the infinite Creator say "I did not make the proof evident to everyone because the day the proof will become clear and evident to everyone - it will be already GAME OVER"?

What al-quran allegedly says is

4153 We will show them our signs in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth .............

1736 And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and heart, all these you are responsible for.

Where are the signs in the horizons and within ourselves that makes it clear that the current text of al-quran has been protected and no falsehood has entered it?

In reality, signs have started appearing that indicate that the current quranic text might contain falsehoods.

I also disagree with the part in red because it doesn't make any sense. In my water example, it is analogous to you advising me to drink the last two glasses of water now, because the proof will become clear tomorrow, but if I wait until tomorrow it will be game over because the water will not be available any more. This tactic is actually used by salesmen of dubious products. Their marketing encourages people to buy now otherwise the product will no longer be available after a certain time and it will be GAME OVER.

Why does high pressure salesmanship work

http//econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/06/why_does_high-p.html

If my product is excellent and actually works, I will have no problem providing all the evidences and studies that proves it works, before the customer decides to buy it.

All questions do not have yes, no answer. Say a passenger on a ship is asking the sailor - can you say with 100% certainty that the compass that you are using correctly directs us to our destination port all the time? Simple yes, no question.

But the answer is not so simple, is it?

Feel free to discontinue the discussion at any point when you are convinced I am performing evasive maneuvers.

It is a simple question. If you cannot say yes the answer would be no! If the sailor cannot say yes then the sailor is doubtful about the compass being 100% reliable and the answer would be no.

If you cannot say yes to my question, it would mean that you are not 100% sure that the current text of al-quran contains the truth in its entirety, which means that you think that the current text of al-quran might contain some falsehood, in which case we are on the same page and this discussion is over and I can handshake

Perhaps the Infinite Creator does not want them to be verified. Perhaps they serve the intended purpose (i.e. guidance and reminder) better as unverified and allegorical text. And humans will never know their interpretation for certainty does not mean that they cannot be guided by it.

How can something that you don't know and can't know the interpretation of, serve as guidance and reminder? Arman .... Come on bro! You don't and can't know the interpretation of a sentence; then how can it guide you?
If the infinite Creator does not want them to be verified then why did It include them in a book of "clear" revelations and then advise us to use our intellect, knowledge, and real world evidence to verify them as the truth?
How can the infinite Creator say that its book contains clear revelations, and then insert unclear verses and say only It knows their interpretation? How can you not see this contradiction?

You are presuming "external verification" as a prerequisite for truth. That itself is another fallacy.

Where did I say that "external verification" is a prerequisite for truth? (Strawman)

What I am trying to say is as follows

The Quran says that external evidence will verify the truth of its verses. It also says that only God knows the interpretation of some verses. So how can the truth of those verses be verified by external evidence when we don't even know their interpretation? To verify the truth of those verses we have to know their interpretation. But then if God tells us the interpretation of those verses so that truth is verified, then 37 will be falsified!

Similarly

The Quran says God protects the book and falsehood cannot enter it.
Then it says we will be shown evidence in the horizons, and within ourselves, until it becomes clear to us that the verses are the truth.
There is no evidence in the horizons and within ourselves that makes it clear to everyone that God has protected the book and no falsehood has entered it. This contradicts #2.

It would have been EXTREMELY EXTREMELY EXTREMELY (to infinity) EASY for the infinite Creator to preserve/provide evidence that the current text of al-quran has been protected and no falsehood has entered it.

By "interpretation" I understand a fixed confirmed meaning. But the verses of Qur'an, per my humble understanding, are living texts - they offer new insight given changing circumstances. Although the fixed interpretation will never be known to us, but the living words of God will continue to guide us in all ages. Those firmly rooted in knowledge will say, "We have faith in it, all of it is from our Master."

37 does not say "none know its FIXED interpretation except God" but says "none know its interpretation except God". "Interpretation" means any valid interpretation and includes all valid interpretations. How can a verse that none can know the interpretation of except God, guide anyone?

For example

"He killed it" can mean "he did very well" or it could mean "he murdered it". Both are valid interpretations. If God says that only It knows the interpretation of "he killed it", then no one else can know both interpretations, irrespective of the context. So to everyone else "he killed it" will appear the same as "hrkbsgdjkgbmcxz". In that case, why would God include the sentence "he killed it" in any passage that it inspires, knowing it would be incomprehensible to anyone else?

Even if "interpretation" is a fixed meaning, then only that meaning is acceptable as the truth and all other "new insights" and "alternate interpretations" will be falsehood and cannot be used for guidance. Only the fixed original interpretation known by God can be the truth and useful for guidance. Hence it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to include verses that no one can correctly comprehend, in a book meant for guidance of mankind.

I blindly follow nothing. Not anymore than a sailor who "blindly" follows a compass. Under all circumstances I have accepted upholding my God gifted conscience and intellect as my primary and inviolable obligation to my Master. Searching for signs of my Master in Qur'an or in the universe is secondary to the earlier statement. Those who are blind are not equal to those who can see.

handshake

Regards,

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.