Why to guive proof from Koran if this isn't the book of God?

Someone

This post was deleted by me.

that was just some nonsense ? not worth sharing mrgreen

--

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

In consideration of the nature of this thread, I feel we've strayed a bit off-topic. Would you mind copying and pasting your Mutashabihat replies in a new thread. I truly appreciate your effort and would like to reply to each of them in their proper place, rather than hijack this thread.

Peace Tay

I guess if the poster of the thread is annoyed he would have told us as such, it is also a possibility that he enjoys our discussion

No hijacking here mate, but the option is still available for us to start a new thread

In the meantime, here are my replies to your first post

You stated

ok, thanks but it is not my opinion, it just happen to be the opinion of the Majority

And what does the Qur'an tell is about the majority?

I don?t understand your question mate?

However I meant the majority that I liaised with in my entire life, as well the majority as it seems from the hundreds of books that I read by many scholars and non scholars

I stated

Islamic history, as I'm sure you're aware, is tainted beyond recognition. I know they did not author books and was just illustrating that you referring to their methods cannot be validated via "history".

and you replied

Wrong, it is Satan who made it look this way to you and to others, I almost fell in the same trap,

Well, then, please, verify it for us, so that we all may learn from this valid history that you keep referring to.

Why I have to do it for ya mate?, it is there available to every one, it is even taught at many schools

but I know what make sense at the end of the day and I can't feel more peacful and confident in my life

So, you judge whether or not a historical record is valid based on how it makes you feel?

not just that, but everything in my life for that matter

History is History, and we use our minds to qualify it,

History once taught that Christopher Columbus discovered America. I'm sure many minds were quite satisfied with that fact.

but because the history statement above does not make sense, I will throw it in the rubbish bin

also part of the required belief is to believe in the messenegers of Allah

Irrelevant, but OK

how come a muslim say it is irrelevant?

Do you consider yourself a muslim?

And if you do, how you consider yourself a muslim

If your understanding is the same as Kyle then we are worlds apart and we have nothing to say to each other.

The Quran says cleary that we have to believe in all the Rusul sent. period

if I put the role of a messneger a side for argument sake,m then thoise people will be as any other historical record that we belive in like hitler and others people of the past, in fact the Quran told us that Allah will make these true affairs stories in the Quran so we learn from it, He never said it is a metaphor for just learning a lesson from it

Bro, you're slipping away here. What does historical validity have to do with metaphors?

it is nit that I?m slipping away, it is a case you want to look that way, but as I said many times now, the history of Mohammad can be validated by the Quran. period

it is personal choice to believe in any historical record

So it is subjective now? Ahmed, you have to make up your mind on this in order for us to move on.

of course it is subjective to the Quran and the common sense, not to the non sense, my mind is made up, please stop trying to give the wrong impressions because you have no string argument but some funny ideas with no verse to back it up from the Quran.

ironically most of my own understanidng is the same as the historical records and this on its own merit m akes feel happy and peaceful

I don't see the irony in that, but if it makes you feel happy,

I see the irony as common sense, and sure the common sense will always make my senses happy

who am I to argue.

1737 tell you NOT TO ARGUE IF YOU LACK KNOWEGE, this means you can argue if you have knowledge, now your statement ?who are you to argue? means that you admit you don?t have knowledge to argue

However, whether or not your beliefs match those of any thus unreferenced historical records remains irrelevant until you provide something for us to examine.

The references is there and is called the sirah of the prophet, you chose to follow others by ignoring it, then good luck to you, I guess when we die we will know who was right and who was following conjecture, unfortunately neither me or you can go back to fix it, so let?s leave it to Him

you are missing the point, prophet Mohammad was a native Arabic speaker and I was also the same, therefore most likely our unbised understanding will match

Following your logic, you and every Arab on the planet should have the same understanding. Is this what you believe?

of course not, it is the knowledgeable ones who spent plenty of times looking for the truth in the Arabic Quran, not following some ignorant non Arabs

so what you are saying that there will be humans who will crack the meaning of the Mutashabihat verse?

Bingo!

what was that?

Is that is the answer to my simple question?

If so, then who is Bingo who will crack the Quran verses?

excuse me, it is the common sense behind the clear arabic words

You keep saying this,

of course I will, because I understand arabic better than you and better than any non arabic speaker, this is a hard core fact that only the ignorant will deny, it is exactly as you speak English better than me

but your common sense doesn't seem to match the common sense of other "native Arabic speakers".

really, and who are them

Ayman?

But that is only one so far

Therefore, it is your understanding. I'm not sure why you have such a problem with this. We're all individuals bro.

because I have to do my best against the others to deploy the internet to mislead the sincere muslim brothers and sisters without compelling evidences form the Arabic Quran, this is what the Quran told me to do as a submitter, I can?t conceal the truth that Allah revealed in the clear Arabic quran, now why you have a problem with that?

There's nothing wrong with having your own understanding.

fine as long as it will not put the Quran in fault, if it does then we have a problem in hand

excuse me you said it the verse says "WE SHOULD VERIFY EVERYTHING" now there is no such thing in the arbic verse therefore it has to be a clear cut lie, sorry

Ahemd, I did not say that the verse said WORD for WORD "We should verify everything". So, please stop with the nonsense. Every translator I quoted stated, in paraphrase, that we should not accept nor follow what we have no knowledge of. The ayah ends in saying that we will be held accountable for our hearing, our sight, and our hearts.

if you go to a country that you have not been before, and you hired a car to go from point a to point b, how can you do it unless you FOLLOW a street directory, now you are following without verfying it, right? See the conflict, here is another conflict

if you are following Mohammad now that there is a god, how come you verified this data before you follow Mohammad, and if you managed to verify it you don?t need to follow mohammad any more, because you now have the knowledge to follow yourself,

The verse anyway never said to verify the info, this is a clear cut lie by some bunch of ignorant translators who want to justify their wrong translation by deception

What does this mean to you?

it means non sense to me

To me, it means that we should not follow blindly.

I?m sure you do follow blindly, you follow a street directory blindly, you follow your teacher at school blindly, we follow the prophets blindly

You argument has 0 sense because if you verify something then you will only be following yourself, not another one

How does one avoid following blindly? Answer by verifying the information presented.

then you are not following the person no more after verification, you will be following yourself

NOW PLEASE TELL ME HOW YOU VERFIED THAT ALLAH EXISTS AND THE JUSGMENT DAY EXISTS?

Now, am I stretching the understanding or are you just nitpicking at this point in order to "win" an argument?

no winners or losers here, I see it as we all should be winners

The history of the people of the past, as I said it is a personal choice to belive in it or not, however I'm really felighted that my understanding matched those historical people who were arabs as well not a confused non arabic speakers who to stick their nose in what they don't know, this is revolting mate

Sounds a bit racist to me.

very strange that the many comments degrading the arab intellect don?t sound racist to you

do you believe that your great great great great great grand pa existed?, if so can you prove it to me beyond doubt? thanks

If I'm alive, then of course he existed. There's your proof wink

then Mohammad existed because no one said he brought the quran in our hands today? but a person called Mohammad from the past, i.e. he was real, do you believe the Mohammad existed and if you do then how you verified that?

Looking forward to the new thread.

Peace,
Tay

Peace Tay

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

If your understanding is the same as Kyle then we are worlds apart and we have nothing to say to each other.

Kyle and I agree on many points, but not everything. And if that's the way you feel, then so be it. The rest of your post has become moot.

Peace,
Tay

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

If your understanding is the same as Kyle then we are worlds apart and we have nothing to say to each other.

Kyle and I agree on many points, but not everything. And if that's the way you feel, then so be it. The rest of your post has become moot.

Peace,
Tay

Peace Tay

Yeh mate that is what I wanted to confirm before I continue discussing other issues with you, as truely I'm not intested into the flawed uncomplete concept you and kyle promote

peace

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

Of course you couldn't say goodbye without one last jab. That's ok, bro...

7310 And endure with patience whatever people may say, and leave them with a noble leaving.

May peace be upon you,
Tay

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

Of course you couldn't say goodbye without one last jab. That's ok, bro...

7310 And endure with patience whatever people may say, and leave them with a noble leaving.

May peace be upon you,
Tay

Bro why I have to say goodbye?

it is not the end of discussion between us in any other subject but religion, we can talk about politics, sports, sex but not religion please, I honestly like you bro

peace be with you

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Bilal76,

Quote
Thank you for the respect and I will try to answer your questions. First though, I must adress the premise that is already assumed when we say "revealed to Muhammad". There is no proof that there was a "Muhammad", but the context of the word "muhammadun" througthout is a vehicle of "hamd". But we can speak more on that in a thread I intend to start today regarding the prefix "MU".

Maybe that M-HAMMAD is built on the same basis as MU-SALLIN.
To tell the truth it is too early for the statement because I control
not yet well the Arab language.

Yes, this is exactly my position, that MU -hammadun is the same structure as MU- salleen, Mu - Min, Mu-staqeem, etc

Quote
Because that is the book we are here discussing. However, this is not the only book I study, so we can discuss universal laws on several different levels. As "Koran" states, we are to trust in that which descended upon us AND THOSE BEFORE US. Therefore to say that the God's Words (which never run out) are confinesd to 114 chapters is aganst its own message.

according to you is "the Koran" only one means of distinguishing the
laws universal among others? correct me if I am mistaken

The book named "KORAN" is one of several means of proclaiming the truths of life. It is a guide which POINTS TO the signs of the universe. We are over and over again directed to the universe for examples and one verse states that "We will show you our signs in the horizon and within your Spirit/Minds until you KNOW this (the message) is the truth." I do not hold that it is the one and only Book and should be idolized in any way. The "BOOK" (al kitaab) spoke of inside of "Koran" is an allegory to the Universal Laws.

Quote
Sure, if you have no means of aquiring sustenance that is healthy and nutricious.

put besides this situation, the flesh of pig is not allowed?

Yes, based on the relationship of consuming pork and the response that you wil get from your body based on Universal Law. But we must keep in mind that each person has been passed down, by Universal Law, a stronger or weaker body from thier family line, so although it might appear that it is not a uniform response, it is just that some people are working with a stronger immune system and so forth.

Quote
Neither, the universe is set up in a way that all things are interdependent with each other. Therefore we can weigh and measure all things according to thier relationships. To measure something is an act of SEEING, versus hearing about something (hearsay). So it is OBJECTIVE, and therefore not subject to personal opinion.

who fixes the common limits not to exceed? Think that the limits
differ according to people's or that these limits are fixed by The
Law?

The limits of universal law? It is the God who creates this structure, humans are subject to it. I hope I answered that question, I am not sure I understood what you were asking, please advise.

Quote
The "nabi" are those that intuit knowledge from within. They "intuit" the proper relationships of things. One must attain a high degree of spiritual development to reach this level. Anyone who passes on the information that has been intuited, wether it is the "intuiter" or someone else, they are described as a messenger(rasool), one who is sent.

would it be possible for you to support your understing of the
nabi by the Koran? thank you in advance

The verses state that the 'nabi' are sent the 'Book'(universal law). When we reflect upon the message, we realize that ALL things MUST be intuited by a human FIRST, then passed on externally to others. This is not simply a mater of posting a verse, because al I can show you is how the 'nabi" is associated with having the "Book" revealed to them, we must REFLECT that ALL THINGS HAVE to be intuited by someone first. There is always a first person to do something, where did they get it from? It had to come from within.

You see, we have been "misguided" by those who dont understand science nor religion to believe that "nabi" and "rasool" are superheroes that only blossom in the Middle east in the past. No, this is a LIVING MESSAGE for all people. We have "nabi" and "rasool" potential in all of us if we cultivate it with the same vigor that many cultivate going to school and college and making money.

Quote
Furher, many of the names have more meaning to them in regards to the text. Like "muhammadun" which means one who is a vehicle of "hamd"(exaltation). Then there is Solomon, whose root is "peace"(S-L-M), giving us a clue owards understanding "his" story.

it could be interessent to referer for all the verses referant itself with SOLOMON
to see whether this assumption can be checked.

Well, I am not sure I have a clear cut assumption yet But it is indeed interesting that the name Solomon comes from the same root (s-l-m) which means Peace. And it is Solomon that is the one who has a "kingdom like no other" and is in control of the "forces". In ancient spiritual cultures, many which are still practiced today, state that being at PEACE is the only way to "control" the forces within MAN. One cannot be subject to emotions and see clearly, they are described as spiritually dead and blind.

Bilal76

Peace be upon you Bilal76,

Peace be upon you idolfree1

The limits of universal law? It is the God who creates this structure, humans are subject to it. I hope I answered that question, I am not sure I understood what you were asking, please advise.

I talk about the limit of permission to do something. The interpretation of the laws can be different according to the perception of the people. The risk is that somebody can considered something "haram" whereas an other person don't see the bad thing which justifies the "haram".
Sorry for my bad english. Tell me if i did mistake in my language in order to correct it.

Peace

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

You stated

Bro why I have to say goodbye?

So, you saw the "goodbye" but you didn't see the "jab"?

Look bro, I have no problem with you or your views. However, I come to this forum for a few reasons

To learn
To share what I've learned elsewhere with people I genuinely like, and who actually have an interest in what I'm sharing
To generally interact with somewhat like-minded people

I'm slowly learning to curb my voice when I can see that none of the above 3 reasons are a possibility. It's taking longer than I anticipated, but I think I'm making progress.

Anyway, I look forward to chatting with you in the future. I will, however, do my best to avoid your posts in the threads where you and I clearly don't see eye to eye. It does neither of us any good. I hope you'll do the same.

Peace,
Tay

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

You stated

Bro why I have to say goodbye?

So, you saw the "goodbye" but you didn't see the "jab"?

Peace Tay

obviously if I didnlt see jabs then there was no jabs intended

Look bro, I have no problem with you or your views. However, I come to this forum for a few reasons

To learn
To share what I've learned elsewhere with people I genuinely like, and who actually have an interest in what I'm sharing
To generally interact with somewhat like-minded people

cool bro, I have no issues with you either, I guess both of us have a strong opinion at the end of the day

I'm slowly learning to curb my voice when I can see that none of the above 3 reasons are a possibility. It's taking longer than I anticipated, but I think I'm making progress.

to be honest bro I'm here for a totally different purpose, but is still under the category of good will

Anyway, I look forward to chatting with you in the future.

sure, here is my email address if you would like me to contact me privately and with high priority

ahmed at epilepsy dot org dot au

I will, however, do my best to avoid your posts in the threads where you and I clearly don't see eye to eye. It does neither of us any good. I hope you'll do the same.

Peace,
Tay

didn't you notice that this what I do for your posts?, i realized quickly what you have realized, that it will do us no good and most likely both of us will stand by whatever they believe in, i was responding to you in this thread, that's all

take care mate

phoenix1

peace tay and ahmed

maybe you two shouldn't have a debate, but a dialogue.
we learned this in english class
a debate is when two people are trying to prove eachother wrong and themselves right. A debate is between two close-minded people who are not open to being wrong.
a dialogue is when two people are open-minded to eachother's views and instead of debating, try to understand eachother's views by questioning.
You all probably already knew this but...i had to.
This is what we all should be doing. First we must understand eachother's views thoroughly. Then, only if there is something seriously wrong in their views, we must debate.
Everyone has different views. And instead of just avoiding them, we must understand them. And i think learning different views is part of the learning process. You don't know the whole thing unless you know both sides of the story.

So instead of just saying "let's agree to disagree" we must find out why we disagree. Why does the other person think what he/she thinks?

sorry for the lecture.

phoenix1

peace

I have a question for you ahmed B,
what exactly is your purpose for being here?
and why exactly do you spell out the word 'dot'?

unknownuser

peace

I have a question for you ahmed B,
what exactly is your purpose for being here?
and why exactly do you spell out the word 'dot'?

Thanks for the advice mate, should be apprecited indeed, i guess the debating problem should not exist between good mates, and because we hardly know each other that is why it heats up quick

for the puropose of being here, sorry mate it will do me any good to say why I'm here, to a degree I don't know and to another degree I know, it is sort of some conflicing thoughts, but I feel I'm been forced to do it somehow, despite the lack of time,

the reason it will do me no good, is due to the fact that hardly anyone knows me therfore I can't volunteer info that certainly can be misunderstood by others who are already on the picking mode

when I type my email on forums I avoid writing the exact format as there is softwars that will scan the public forums and pickup all emails found then add it to a spam database, I already receive in access of a 1000 spam email a day

take care

Tay

Peace Phoenix1,

You're a good person, and I appreciate what you're trying to convey.

we learned this in english class
a debate is when two people are trying to prove eachother wrong and themselves right. A debate is between two close-minded people who are not open to being wrong.

I'm afraid what you learned is slightly jaded. Debate does not necessarily need to be derogatory. It does not automatically include closed-mindedness, although this may be the outcome if one is not open to considering the other's discourse. In short, a debate is two or more people presenting their perspectives.

debate
1 obsolete fight, contend
2 a to contend in words b to discuss a question by considering opposed arguments
3 to participate in a debate

dialogue
1 a written composition in which two or more characters are represented as conversing
2 a a conversation between two or more persons; also a similar exchange between a person and something else (as a computer) b an exchange of ideas and opinions c a discussion between representatives of parties to a conflict that is aimed at resolution

Everyone has different views. And instead of just avoiding them, we must understand them.

Phoenix1, I've been a member of forums for quite a few years now, and have learned in the process that sometimes arguments will simply go in circles.

Understanding is a personal choice, and one that I feel is important. But agreeing is not a given. I may understand why a person feels a certain way, but that does not mean I should agree with their view.

For instance I understand why some people are addicted to depressants, but I don't agree that this shorcut to covering anguish is the most effective treatment.

So instead of just saying "let's agree to disagree" we must find out why we disagree. Why does the other person think what he/she thinks?

I agree. But once understanding is accomplished, one realizes that further pursuit of discourse will be fruitless. That's why "agreeing to disagree" is the cleanest method of exit from the debate.

sorry for the lecture.

No need. What you said was important enough for you to post it, and I appreciate that.

Take care.

Peace,
Tay

phoenix1

peace

thanks AB and Tay.

Tay wrote

I agree. But once understanding is accomplished, one realizes that further pursuit of discourse will be fruitless. That's why "agreeing to disagree" is the cleanest method of exit from the debate.

you're right.

phoenix1

You're a good person

of course. )

unknownuser

You're a good person

of course. )

I second that

lol