Question for the people with knowledge
-
55.6.
And the stars and trees prostrate.
4.154.
And We raised over them the mount for their covenant; and We said to them, "Enter the gate postrating", and We said to them, "Do not transgress on the sabbath", and We took from them a solemn covenant.
7.161.
And , when it was said to them, "Dwell in this city and eat from it wherever you will and say, 'Relieve us of our burdens,' and enter the gate postrating; We will forgive you your sins. We will increase the doers of good ."
12.4
when Joseph said to his father, "O my father, indeed I have seen eleven stars and the sun and the moon; I saw them prostrating to me."
16.48.
Have they not considered what things Allah has created? Their shadows incline to the right and to the left, prostrating to Allah , while they are humble.
Salaam
-
Peace Ju5,
You have done poorly explaining 234 and have become boring. I think it's
time you moved on to another subject don't you? BTW don't move
on to the cut off the hand thingy nope but if that's all you got then..........peace
Salam Hawk99 check the posts i shared (i didn't made these)
Actually there is two forum posts on cutting off thieves hands by sister Reel and brother Uq (a moderator)
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608291.msg384220#msg384220
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608169.msg382178#msg382178 -
@good logic i didn' t say i don't like 1315. I was emphasing that you were pushing your own hypothesis which had no basis, you keep yelling HE CONTROLS EVERYTHING, like it had anything to do with the subject and move on to say that everything submits to him, yet its not written "everything submit to him" in 1649 and 1650, but "creatures and malaika do everything commanded are fearful etc... and the subject is not everything, it is the moving creatures and the malaika
you would have seen it if you did read above the "nope", which apparently is the only thing you saw in my post? because you didn't answer to what i said, you just kept saying "i am right and you are wrong"
Try again if you can find other verses that contradict 234 because 1649 is not doing it for you.
it is doing it for me, you just don't answer and put yours hands before your eyes while saying "you lost no contradiction move on", no it is not done as you had not debunked my last answer.
It is not a contradiction "because i say so" it is a contradiction because it is written in the qur'an. It is said CLEARLY in the qur'an SUBJECT malaika and moving creatures ARE fearful, DO what they are commanded, ARE NOT arrogant. I don't care that he controls everything. Allah gave us a qur'an in which is written that malaika do what they are commanded. You say, no they don't, because god controls everything and you can't single malaika. IRRELEVANT.
A sentence has a subject, verbs, adjectives etc..If you can understand that, you can't say 1649 doesn't tell us that malaika do what they are commanded. You can shout that god controls everything all day, even according to others verses that are not even involved in the two verses i am talking about( bravo), the sentence is still pretty basic and clear. If the qur'an is right and without contradiction allah is probably planning to send thunder on your head right now for your lies about god...
@novice you can repeat the most beautiful things over and over, it doesn't change the fact that you swim in conjecture, have a good time guessing the words of god
@novice and huruf
the verses you are quoting confirm what i am saying in that it is not a synonym for "doing what you are commanded", you can't use sujud to say" i told him do do this and he did that", because while submitting can mean that you conform, it does not confirm that you actually did the action, you just agreed to do it, and maybe to do it, in 1650 it is more clear, f ayn lm is used as well as hamza mm r, so you have an order, and it is accomplished, by the word ~do. It is not exactly the same, also saying sujud means obeying would be a bit stretched, its more about humiliating, submitting (like novice said), prostrating, etc...And anyway even if you managed to say prostrate means do what you are commanded, it wouldn't change that malaika do what they are commanded. -
Peace Ju5,
You have done poorly explaining 234 and have become boring. I think it's
time you moved on to another subject don't you? BTW don't move
on to the cut off the hand thingy nope but if that's all you got then..........peace
is this supposed to be your argumentation to my post?
-
its more about humiliating, submitting (like novice said), prostrating, etc..
Novice didn't say anything about humiliating.
-
Ju5 some one did mentioned 712 earlier which confirm that iblis was commanded sajada by God and he refused. So it was not only malaika but at least iblis was also commanded for sajada.
said, "What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?" said, "I am better than him. You created me from fire and created him from clay."
-
My take on the Iblees topic,
2/34
As His command to Iblees, now do give respect to Adam which Iblees fail to honour and so he is arrogant and becomes a disbeliever, I do think Iblees is of the Malaikah.16/49
As Everyone/Everything of the creatures and Malaikah, prostrates/shows their respect to Allah / act as per his Command and that they are not arrogant.i think, It doesnt say all are not arrogant, it says everyone who prostrates to Allah, here prostrating is showing their respect to Allah's commands, and so they are not arrogant.
So for everyone of the creations that Allah's command is clear to them and they do respect to Allah and they are not arrogant.Yet some of Human and Jinns/Iblees of the Malaikah clan that do not show respect to Allah's command and so they are arrogant.
-
i think, It doesnt say all are not arrogant
peace, see thread https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=8438.msg413877#msg413877
2164 and disperse therein min/of (type) kulli/every (individual) dabbatin/creature
2445 and the god creation kulla/every (individual) dabbatin/creature from water
1649-50 and to god yasjudu what in the heavens and what in the land min/of (type) dbbatin/creature (includes human type) wal-malikatu/and the controllers (various types) and they not arrogant being fearing lord theirs from above them and fulfilling what yu'marna/commanded being
-
Peace Ju5.
It is you who is not answering the majority of the questions here.1- What living creatures do you mean in 1649?
2- What does "Min" mean in 1649( "Min Dabbatin" not Min fawkihim)?
3- Why do you not accept that Iblis was ordered as well as Malaika(712)?
4-Why are you sticking to your own meaning of words when it was clearly pointed out to you there are different other meanings that make more sense?
5-For example why do you translate "Yakhafoon" to Fear? Why could it not be "Reverence/aware of His power...etc"?I do not know if you believe in GOD or not, I am guessing even you must "Takhafu Rabbika Min Fawkika"-Must be aware of GOD s awesome power (Look at the vast universe around you that He created)?- Or are you not one of the earthly "Dabba" that He created and talked about in 1649?
Fine by me if you keep ignoring the answers in your thread..
This is not about winning a debate or who is right or wrong ,this is about two verses that deal with two different subjects
1- 234 -Sujud to Adam_.
2- 1649- Sujud to GOD.
No questions about any contradiction between the two. Miles apart in subject and context.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Peace Ju5.
It is you who is not answering the majority of the questions here.1- What living creatures do you mean in 1649?
2- What does "Min" mean in 1649( "Min Dabbatin" not Min fawkihim)?
3- Why do you not accept that Iblis was ordered as well as Malaika(712)?
4-Why are you sticking to your own meaning of words when it was clearly pointed out to you there are different other meanings that make more sense?
5-For example why do you translate "Yakhafoon" to Fear? Why could it not be "Reverence/aware of His power...etc"?I do not know if you believe in GOD or not, I am guessing even you must "Takhafu Rabbika Min Fawkika"-Must be aware of GOD s awesome power (Look at the vast universe around you that He created)?- Or are you not one of the earthly "Dabba" that He created and talked about in 1649?
Fine by me if you keep ignoring the answers in your thread..
This is not about winning a debate or who is right or wrong ,this is about two verses that deal with two different subjects
1- 234 -Sujud to Adam_.
2- 1649- Sujud to GOD.
No questions about any contradiction between the two. Miles apart in subject and context.
GOD bless you.
Peace.1- i don't know, but it could mean anything, it wouldn't change anything. Or you are implying that Allah talked about every living, and since they can be arrogant and rebellious, allah wasn't REALLY meaning that... this hypothesis doesn't stand for me, God is talking, not some guy at the bar.
2-will you ask me the meaning of every damned word in arabic? or is there a conspiracy to change the most basic arabic words meaning?
3-What are you saying? i never said that iblis wasn't ordered ?!!! in fact the contradiction lies in the fact that he didn't obey ! is that a joke?! iblis is a malaka because the sentence says "allah told the malaika", and not "allah told to the malaika and to iblis", and then " they "sujud", except iblis. Of course if you didn't went to elementary school you wouldn't know that. brickwall, quit playing the stupid games please
4-i didn't change the meanign of any single word, you are very bold to dare say that!
5-irrelevant
finally the link between the two verses that you do not want to see
- 234 iblis is a malaka and disobeys
- 1649 malaika do what they are commanded are not arrogant etc
i don't care about your sujud thing, to allah adam or santa claus, allah could have asked iblis to clean the dishes it would have been the same. i am typing the same things for several posts now, when will you understand??
end note did you actually read my previous posts ?? >(
-
end note did you actually read my previous posts ?? >
Salam, Good Logic did say it
Peace Ju5.
You are insisting on your contradiction despite these facts1- 1315 and 1649 are both talking about all the creations.
2- 1315 and 1649 are both about "sujud" to GOD . Unlike 234 which is about "sujud" to Adam.
3-1315 and 1649 are both talking about GOD s will and purpose not about the creations obedience or disobedience.
4- You are mixing up GOD s will and free will.I read every word you have written in this thread and I found your knowledge of Qoran poor and hasty, I am sorry to say.
All there is left to say to you is you are entitled to your free will of staying put with your contradiction.
I have been where you are before, my challenge to Qoran with many contradictions failed . In fact I found my arguments built on false knowledge, men s interpretations and assumptions.
My study of Qoran at the moment is ongoing.
Your choice and decision.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
finally the link between the two verses that you do not want to see
- 234 iblis is a malaka and disobeys
- 1649 malaika do what they are commanded are not arrogant etc
Here's a simple logic test perhaps you'll finally see do these sentences contradict?
- People min/of Mexican heritage in America are humble and they obey the law
- Pablo (a Mexican immigrant living in America) is arrogant and disobeyed the law
-
Sheepish to be conformist, it is.
What does that mean dear brother?
-
Peace Ju5.
So according to your answer1 in your last post you would agree that humans are living creatures?
Therefore 1649 leaves you with two alternatives
1- Humans have free will yet they too "La yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands", so why do you assume Malaika have no free will?
2-Or Some living creatures and some Malaika "La yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands"(This is from your understanding) Because it says "Min dabbatin WA mailaika..." Which means "from the living creatures and from Malaika" since the WA carries the Min in Arabic.
It cannot be some living creatures and all the Malaika otherwise the verse would have said "Wa kullu Malaika...If the verse wanted to convey your understanding?As I explained verse 13;15 confirms verse 16;49 and both are talking about GOD s sujud.
As far as your understating is concerned ,and as I have shown you, there is no contradiction either way.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
@good logic I will begin my answer by reminding that you arguments were
-Iblis is not a malaka
after which you proceeded to say
-whatever, because it was about sujud to god and not to adam
after which you proceeded to say
-malaika can disobey because god doesn't talk about all malaikaso for someone who studied the qur'an, you really seem to not be standing on solid foundations to say the least!whatever the conclusion of this discussion you'd have to do a lot of work on the qur'an. But even if people are unhappy atleast they can think and sharpen their understanding. That is a good thing
answer
So according to your answer1 in your last post you would agree that humans are living creatures?
could be all living, could be only animals, but the verses says that what prostrates ? wa ma on the heavens and the earth, what is on the earth and the heavens, but the sentence is not about everything, it is about "of the living creatures and malaika", so prostrates the living creatures and malaika on earth and heavens. The verse doesn't specify that only a part of them does so. They are they creatures and malaika on earth and heaven, and they "sajada", are nto arrogant etc...i think the creatures can refer to mens, but often it also refers to animals only.
1- Humans have free will yet they too "La yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands", so why do you assume Malaika have no free will?
I don't want to go into religious technical babble, I only quote the qur'an by saying that malaika do what they are commanded and are not arrogant.
As I explained verse 13;15 confirms verse 16;49 and both are talking about GOD s sujud.
You keep ignoring my previous posts about this. This discussion is going nowhere.
-
I don't want to go into religious technical babble, I only quote the qur'an by saying that malaika do what they are commanded and are not arrogant.
Forgive me but i don't see any religious babble from brother Good Logic.
-
Peace Ju5.
Can I remind you of what I said
There are no clear verses that state clearly Iblis is a malaika. You say 234 does and I disagree.
I also said Qoran clearly says Iblees is of the Jinns. I believe Jinns and Malaika are different creatures. What they were before they were Malaika or Jinns Qoran does not say.
Then I said as far as 1649 is concerned "Iblees is a Malaika "is irrelevant because there is no contradiction with 234.You cannot have it both ways, either all living creatures and malaika is meant in 1649 ,then one can see that humans have free will ,they and Malaika are" la yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands" . You cannot then single Malaika and say they have no free will. How do you know?
So 1649 agrees with 1315 that this is GOD s plan and purpose for all creatures. No contradiction with 234.Or ( this is your understanding) that some living creatures "La Yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands",then it must follow that also some Malaika "La Yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands" because the verse says ;..."Min Dabbatin WA Al Malaika..." Which means "From both the living creatures and Malaika..." You cannot ignore "Min" then translate it only with living creatures, WA makes Min follow with Malaika. i.e Min both living creatures and Malaika.. Simple Arabic if you do not know.
In this case there is also no contradiction with 234.
You know you cannot have some living creatures and all Malaika if you follow your understanding . This is clear from the words in the verse.
Sorry brother, you have not understood verse 1649 like I have shown you again.
Surely you can clearly see that verse 1649 does not contradict 234,or are you just going to prolong your argument?
Well, your choice brother. But I hope you ponder verse 1649 properly and reflect on what you are saying.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Peace Ju5.
Can I remind you of what I said
There are no clear verses that state clearly Iblis is a malaika. You say 234 does and I disagree.
I also said Qoran clearly says Iblees is of the Jinns. I believe Jinns and Malaika are different creatures. What they were before they were Malaika or Jinns Qoran does not say.
Then I said as far as 1649 is concerned "Iblees is a Malaika "is irrelevant because there is no contradiction with 234.You cannot have it both ways, either all living creatures and malaika is meant in 1649 ,then one can see that humans have free will ,they and Malaika are" la yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands" . You cannot then single Malaika and say they have no free will. How do you know?
So 1649 agrees with 1315 that this is GOD s plan and purpose for all creatures. No contradiction with 234.Or ( this is your understanding) that some living creatures "La Yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands",then it must follow that also some Malaika "La Yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands" because the verse says ;..."Min Dabbatin WA Al Malaika..." Which means "From both the living creatures and Malaika..." You cannot ignore "Min" then translate it only with living creatures, WA makes Min follow with Malaika. i.e Min both living creatures and Malaika.. Simple Arabic if you do not know.
In this case there is also no contradiction with 234.
You know you cannot have some living creatures and all Malaika if you follow your understanding . This is clear from the words in the verse.
Sorry brother, you have not understood verse 1649 like I have shown you again.
Surely you can clearly see that verse 1649 does not contradict 234,or are you just going to prolong your argument?
Well, your choice brother. But I hope you ponder verse 1649 properly and reflect on what you are saying.
GOD bless you.
Peace.As of right now, i have not seen a verse that says Jinn & Malaika are the same.
-
Peace Ju5.
Can I remind you of what I said
There are no clear verses that state clearly Iblis is a malaika. You say 234 does and I disagree.
I also said Qoran clearly says Iblees is of the Jinns. I believe Jinns and Malaika are different creatures. What they were before they were Malaika or Jinns Qoran does not say.
Then I said as far as 1649 is concerned "Iblees is a Malaika "is irrelevant because there is no contradiction with 234.You cannot have it both ways, either all living creatures and malaika is meant in 1649 ,then one can see that humans have free will ,they and Malaika are" la yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands" . You cannot then single Malaika and say they have no free will. How do you know?
So 1649 agrees with 1315 that this is GOD s plan and purpose for all creatures. No contradiction with 234.Or ( this is your understanding) that some living creatures "La Yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands",then it must follow that also some Malaika "La Yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands" because the verse says ;..."Min Dabbatin WA Al Malaika..." Which means "From both the living creatures and Malaika..." You cannot ignore "Min" then translate it only with living creatures, WA makes Min follow with Malaika. i.e Min both living creatures and Malaika.. Simple Arabic if you do not know.
In this case there is also no contradiction with 234.
You know you cannot have some living creatures and all Malaika if you follow your understanding . This is clear from the words in the verse.
Sorry brother, you have not understood verse 1649 like I have shown you again.
Surely you can clearly see that verse 1649 does not contradict 234,or are you just going to prolong your argument?
Well, your choice brother. But I hope you ponder verse 1649 properly and reflect on what you are saying.
GOD bless you.
Peace.1-If iblis isn't a malaka why have you been arguing that not all malaika obey, or that it was about "sujud"ing to God?
2-You can disagree that iblis is a malaka but then you'll have to disagree with 234.
You cannot have it both ways, either all living creatures and malaika is meant in 1649 ,then one can see that humans have free will ,they and Malaika are" la yastakbirun and obey GOD s commands" . You cannot then single Malaika and say they have no free will. How do you know?
So 1649 agrees with 1315 that this is GOD s plan and purpose for all creatures. No contradiction with 234.I never said that malaika obeyed and moving creatures did not. I am only quoting the qur'an, and not changing the meaning. Both said creatures and malaika do what they are commanded and are not arrogant. You can disagree if you want, but you'll have to disagree with the qur'an. If Allah contradicts himself by saying some group obey while it does not, it is not my problem.
You cannot then single Malaika and say they have no free will. How do you know?
I don't know if malaika have free will or not in the qur'an as it is contradictory because in 1649 they obey and iblis disobeys in 234; I don't care about anything written anywhere else in the qur'an, in 234 allah commands MALAIKA and they obey EXCEPT iblis. You can disagree with me, the qur'an and your god if you want to. I don't need to single malaika from 1649. Maybe moving creatures means only animals. Or maybe Allah contradicts himself. in both cases he does. If you say malaika don't do what they are commanded, you contradict the qur'an as it is written in it.
