Would you commit shirk if God told you so ?

hawk99

Peace,

@ reel There is no reason for a monkey to become a jackass (human being).

There is no reason for a reptile to become a schizophrenic (person)

&

HP_TECH

But the question is, why is there a need for a common ancestor for all living things? Cant different ancestors for different creatures come together at the same time?

Yes, they can theoretically (which I do not agree with) but the theory wants to push that all living organisms came from ONE common ancestor. You see there are three domains of life archaea, prokaryotes(bacteria) and eukaryotes(us, plants, animals an surprisingly yeast). Scientists believe all three came from one common ancestor but an honest study of archaea suggests that they are too structurally diverse to have come from the same common ancestor. Meaning there was a separate ancestor of no relation to prokaryotes and eukaryotes. To claim that there may have been multiple "primordial" ancestors is compromising from the atheist dogmatic view that randomness and chance (lightning, heat) gave rise to polypeptides from inorganic compounds and then these peptides gained complexity and eventually gave rise to cells. The chance of that occurring is already statistically impossible and I would like to if I get a chance some day clearly illustrate that God Willing(in another thread), so imagine the chance of that happening twice to a completely different organism or even possibly multiple organism....bye bye atheist propaganda fake science bs!

I like to remain open to possibilities. If you read my earliest posts you will notice I do not take things at face value and I have a great aversion to worshiping of authority whether it is a scientist or some scholar from Islam.

handshake

Great! Keep at it! handshake )

reel

Reel,

I am not changing any verses. I am correcting the translation and interpretation of the ancient language. Certain things are so obvious the clergymen got it right too in their very flawed interpretation. In many cases it is just common sense. And the secterian interpretation of Quran does not say Satan is of the bodily and is an affecting factor of who you are right now. There are many things that the sectarian interpretation does not say because its space is filled instead with mumbo jumbo.

Be well
Amenuel

Everyone here is trying to do the same. We all know some meanings of the words have been massacred by the uneducated scholars. But some of your claims truly are far fetched. I think you should first translate all of Quran or some Surahs. Present them here so all of us can see if they are in line with the environment.

Yes, they can theoretically (which I do not agree with) but the theory wants to push that all living organisms came from ONE common ancestor. You see there are three domains of life archaea, prokaryotes(bacteria) and eukaryotes(us, plants, animals an surprisingly yeast). Scientists believe all three came from one common ancestor but an honest study of archaea suggests that they are too structurally diverse to have come from the same common ancestor. Meaning there was a separate ancestor of no relation to prokaryotes and eukaryotes. To claim that there may have been multiple "primordial" ancestors is compromising from the atheist dogmatic view that randomness and chance (lightning, heat) gave rise to polypeptides from inorganic compounds and then these peptides gained complexity and eventually gave rise to cells. The chance of that occurring is already statistically impossible and I would like to if I get a chance some day clearly illustrate that God Willing(in another thread), so imagine the chance of that happening twice to a completely different organism or even possibly multiple organism....bye bye atheist propaganda fake science bs!
Great! Keep at it! handshake )

Science departments aren't so different from the "departments" of Sheikhs.

Man_of_Faith

Not exactly, Reel. I have translated a substantial part of a certain main chapter. The whole understanding of Arabic needs to be reassessed, not only some mere words.

The real face of Quran speaks of something in very high contrast to the sectarian interpretation, and it does approve of association with allah and that it seems not to is due to linguistic misconception.

While people say my work is farfetched I see it farfetched to believe in whatever the secterian interpreation says due to how crappily the language is presented and how weak the language is. It took me only a few months when I finally got around to see for myself what the hell was wrong with it. The reason people are stuck with it is because they accept it the way it is and accept its dogmatic level.

Rekkd

Not exactly, Reel. I have translated a substantial part of a certain main chapter. The whole understanding of Arabic needs to be reassessed, not only some mere words.

The real face of Quran speaks of something in very high contrast to the sectarian interpretation, and it does approve of association with allah and that it seems not to is due to linguistic misconception.

While people say my work is farfetched I see it farfetched to believe in whatever the secterian interpreation says due to how crappily the language is presented and how weak the language is. It took me only a few months when I finally got around to see for myself what the hell was wrong with it. The reason people are stuck with it is because they accept it the way it is and accept its dogmatic level.

How can you say it approves of association with Allah. Thats just crazy since the Quran clearly stated a million times not to associate anything with Allah.

Man_of_Faith

How can you say it approves of association with Allah. Thats just crazy since the Quran clearly stated a million times not to associate anything with Allah.

That is what you have been made to believe. But before each instance it uses which is erroneously interpreted as "not" while it does not mean that so this is clear issue.

The only word for negation is although it can be used in compounds at times.

But like I wrote, the issue is with the whole of Quran and its traditional interpretation could be equalled with nonsense. I wish people would understand what a joke it actually is.

People are led into meaningless worship of something they cannot understand. That is an instinct, but the instinct is referred to as Satan in Semitic languages. In reality "God" seeks associates and not mindless worshipers. The successful ones will be incorporated.

Be well
Amenuel

imrankhawaja

you know what?

lets read chapter 112... the defination of God is there... and its enough to prepare an apparatus for the death of MOF claims regarding asociation... and in the end i will fit la in positve way the way he wanted .. and you guys will analyise by your own...

1121 Say, "He is God, the One,
1122 God is Absolutely Independent
1123 "He does not beget, nor was He begotten
1124 "None is equal to Him.

( secterian lies according to MOF),,, interestingly the verses are not contradicting with each other in any sense.... all four

now its mof version of understanding when we dnt consider la as negetive or no

fasten you seat belts guys. and may God forgive me for this moment ... but anyway God knows whats inside my chest...

1121 Say, "He is God, the One,
1122 God is Absolutely Independent
1123 "He does beget, and he was begotten
1124 "everyone is equal to Him.

1 now a first mistake is contraditing first two verses with last two = error
2 i did not see any son of God or father of God... atleast the followers of jesus claim he is the son of God in a sense godly person , for a moment consider him son of God,, but why no prophet claim till date that they are father of God... historical and logical error...
NOTE (in reality as per quran he was not a son of God he was a messenger and prophet same like others)
3 lack of care while introducing God specially the hardcore chapter of God oneness... did the author was not sure about it...

hence the understanding of MOF regarding anyclaim = 0 when filter in the light of quran

may God bless him to right path ...

Man_of_Faith

Somewhere on the forum I presented a translation of chapter 112. Where do you find "he" in 1123? Have you even tried to interpret it yourself?

Say "He/she Who Is united
Is Who Is independent
Such for was to be begotten and such for is begotten
And such will he/she become into the unity."

Quick translation on-the-fly which is not fluent in English but yet understandable for the witted.

The very short chapter describes the optimal person and his/her path. Allah is any subject in this life's test.

Be well
Amenuel

Man_of_Faith

I told you, you need to reinterpret the whole Quran to bring forth its true message or else you will obviously get inconsistency as you compare a sour apple with a sweet one.

imrankhawaja

brother dnt bring he she it, they them , who , you inside it...

he lingually we used for male...

is God male ?

thats the problem , when somebody dnt have any answers they bring things like this... inside the discussion....which are very easy to tackle...

and moreover gender is not a discussion... skip the gender and even you skip the gender then look again what i represent ...

or show the translation what you are suggesting... but i already exposed your transaltion without using la

whatever grammer will use to pronoun God... it will just consider methphorically( he) does not indicate gender it indicate the metaphorical pronoun...

these things when you ask,, i remeber my niece when she was very young she used to ask these questions ...

but i hope you are not that young so that i will teach you pronouns...

lets talk what you claim and i represent.... simple is that....

HP_TECH

This MOF guy has been trolling people long enough. he is not a Muslimin nor a mu'min.
I patiently await for him to be permanently banned...
Unless he changes his ways then I will gladly overlook
But not he can change unless Allah wills and Allah knows what he conceals and what he reveals

imrankhawaja

no you can say that he is a farmer... according to his weird lexicon...

becoz the one who disbeleif in verses of quran is kafir in arabic and according to MOF kaffir means farmer or deluded...

so its better if we let him live the way he thinks... there is no need to ban him...

the message of God is not a cup of tea tht everybody come and try to challange it..

there is a history behind the message of quran and not anybody till date fullfil that challange..... becoz at first there is not any mistake in quran,, thats what i beleive... mistake is in the interpretation or in understanding of people...

may b he is sincear but his mind is not mature/intelligent enough to understand... becoz when somebody ask childish questions like God is he or she its mean we need to understand .. he need care ...

although two three people in last five years i see who are partially agree with some of the understanding of MOF but they all are also the rejector of quran.. partially or fully... on other words only three four farmers are agree with mof...

now if we consider him as insightful person or prophet atleast he have three four followers...

one of them was athiest
one of them was ancient alien theorist..
one of them is somebody i beleive is from same id and bring questions everyday.... inspite of knowing the answers of questions very well... u can say that a small group of agenda of new age religion is started..

and when our kids will read prophet amanuel discussions.. about new age at that time everybody will be claiming the new age religion is new version of religion inwhich anybody can be prophet, anybody can be God, or a portion of God..

i hope one day he will b as successful as other prophets are... if he is a real prophet ... otherwise he will be in a big trouble...

so dnt worry at all this is free mind place , let him and everybody claim whatever they want... and express whatever is in the heart of everybody... thats how everybody learn...

he is our brother after all ,, if we can tell him the difference between wrong and right its our duty...

HP_TECH