Did God punish and kill innocent children too?
-
I get what you?re saying, David, but the Quran says that the disasters that befell the disbelieving nations were punishments. God punished children too if the messengers that God sent didn?t take the children of the unbelievers along with the few believers to safe places. That?s just unacceptable to me because the children obviously didn?t commit the crimes for which their parents were punished, so why were they punished?
I know what you sayin, and it would be unacceptable for me 2. But what that is unacceptable for me or you does not matter. God has created the world in best ways, and the will of God happens through the most justice and truthful way. We does not decide over the creation or god, or decide what is acceptable or unacceptable in his rules.
And how do we now that innocent children also were punished? well, we dont know. Maybe they were saved. There is not only one possibility here. Because as far as i know, none of the verses in Quran that tell us that innocent children were punished too. They might have been saved as mentioned earlier.
2858 And how many a town have We destroyed for turning unappreciative of their lives. So here are their homes, nothing but uninhabited ruins after them, except a few. We were the inheritors.
And when god said that he saved a few of the people (the good ones), the children might have included in the people that were saved. We might then again say, what about the children that didnt understand or wanted to listen to the prophets, and rather stayed with their parents? That can have been killed. The people of those cities where transgressors. Should the prophets take their children by force with them? Should for example Noah take away the children from their parents by force and put them in the ark(the boat)? These are important questions that we need to ask ourselves.
-
Moses' companion was an angel.
No, if you read verse 1865 the word used is "abadin" (servant)
It didn't murder the boy, it terminated the boy's life because the boy's time of death had come (I'd give you a link to an article on submission.org that proves this but I'm a bit lazy right now).
That's okay I don't need a link.
I have the Quran right here with all the details. ;D
And if you read 1874 the only reason one can say that the youth's time of death had come is because the abd had, in fact, killed him. If you are implying that the youth was dying anyway, this is pure conjecture. There is no proof to substantiate that statement.
The Quran doesn't allow people to kill unbelievers, let alone people who will become unbelievers.
Are you claiming to know more than God on this subject?
The reason I ask, is because he knows what we know not even about what is to be.
In the case of 1874 the servant killed the youth under God's orders due to the reasons outlined in 1880Another verse that bothers me is 7127. Why would Noah say such an illogical thing?
Why do you automatically assume that what a PROPHET says is illogical?
Why wouldn't you first consider that you don't fully understand the verse?
To me, it is perfectly logical.
Salam,
Arnab -
Peace
how do we know that they were not spared? well, the innocent childre might not be spared in this life, but that does not mean that they are not spared in the hereafter.
Salam Supernaut and David K,
Why is it so difficult to believe that some people can be born "bad?"
Please show me a verse that says that all children or babies or youth or the like are born "good" or "believers" or "perfect" or some variation thereof.
I will surely stand corrected if you do.
Secondly the verses specifically say that the righteous are spared. So why do you continue to question this?
Should we wonder if the righteous teenagers were spared? what about the righteous people in their 20's? (sarcasm to make a point)
Salam,
Arnab -
Peace Arnab
Please read my posts before you assume that i am complaining or unhappy about any verses, because i have not done that )
I actually agree with what you said, and i supported quran in the similar ways like you. Besides, God tells us to use our brain/reflect, so there is nothing wrong in asking questions or reaching an understanding.
I think people can become bad, and that it can be destined if there parents are evil. Because if a parent is evil, then the child might become evil, because human beings are often products of their parents and they inherit their beliefs. But at the same time, we know that some people will escape "the cycle", and become righteous people, even dough their parents were murders, rapists, etc. This is socially proven. Therefore it is logical that not all children at Noah's time would become wicked since their parents were wicked. Then again, people at that time might have been forced to follow the majority, and therefore everyone of them would become a transgressor, and god knows the future, so the cycle might have continued, and never been breaken. Therefore all the rejecters were erased, both parents and childrens.
-
Salam David K,
Yes, I understand that you share some of the same understandings as I do on this topic, which is why I did not comment/question the majority of your post.
And, I did not think that you were complaining or unhappy just for clarification.
However, the two points that I wished to discuss were on the subject of people being born "bad" and why the question even arises as to whether the children were included in the verses we are discussing.
Salam,
Arnab -
Another verse that bothers me is 7127. Why would Noah say such an illogical thing?
This is why should not rely on only one translation. See Shabbirs translation on the same verse. It says different things than the free-mind translation
Shabbir 7127
If you should leave them, they will mislead Your servants and they will only beget division and ingratitude.Free-minds 7127
If you are to leave them, then they will misguide Your servants and they will only give birth to a wicked rejecter.Conclusion
As we can see in Shabbir's translation above, the word wicked rejecter is not even mentioned. the word wicked rejecter is only mentioned in the free-minds translation.
Therefore the whole meaning of the verse can change. Don't use only one translation. Cross-reference. And even better, learn arabic to understand the verses fully from their arabic meaning. -
Peace Arnab
Okey, i see
I don't know if people are born bad, but yes, that might be a possibility too. What does quran or science says about children being born bad, does you have any quranic or scientific info on children being born bad? hmm
-
No, if you read verse 1865 the word used is "abadin" (servant)
Aren?t angels God?s servants?
And if you read 1874 the only reason one can say that the youth's time of death had come is because the abd had, in fact, killed him. If you are implying that the youth was dying anyway, this is pure conjecture. There is no proof to substantiate that statement.
I did not imply that the youth was dying when God's servant killed him.
Are you claiming to know more than God on this subject?
The reason I ask, is because he knows what we know not even about what is to be.
In the case of 1874 the servant killed the youth under God's orders due to the reasons outlined in 1880The servant saw that the boy was going to be a bad person in the future, thereby suggesting that the servant was an angel messenger since only messengers are told about the future. I don?t need to know more than God to know that God doesn?t permit random killing.
Why do you automatically assume that what a PROPHET says is illogical?
Why wouldn't you first consider that you don't fully understand the verse?
To me, it is perfectly logical.
Salam,
ArnabI think what Noah said is illogical because unbelievers can have children who grow up to become believers. However, it is possible that my understanding of that verse needs improvement. Thus far however, Noah seemed to have said something completely illogical.
Salam Supernaut and David K,
Why is it so difficult to believe that some people can be born "bad?"
I don?t believe people are born good or bad. I believe people become good or bad. Children however are simply good because they?re innocent. I don?t believe God would punish children so terribly for whatever sins they?ve committed because they can?t be held accountable for their so-called ?sins?.
-
I don't know if people are born bad, but yes, that might be a possibility too. What does quran or science says about children being born bad, does you have any quranic or scientific info on children being born bad? hmm
Salam,
Here is a loosely related verse
1253(Free-Minds Translation)"And I do not make myself free of blame, for the soul is inclined to sin, except what my Lord has mercy on. My Lord is Forgiving,
Merciful."But, obviously, verse 7127 proves that it is a possibility that not everyone is born "good." Unless, this is only true pre-flood and does not apply now.
Free-Minds "If you are to leave them, then they will misguide Your servants and they will only give birth to a wicked rejecter."
But most interestingly 497-498 might put the whole subject to rest on the original question posted by supernaut
(Free-Minds Translation)
Those whom the Angels take, while they had wronged their souls; they said "What situation were you in?", they said "We were oppressed on Earth." They said "Was God's Earth not wide enough that you could emigrate in it?" To these their abode will be Hell; what a miserable destiny!Except for those who were oppressed from the men, women, and children who could not devise a plan nor could be guided to a way.
Salam,
Arnab -
Aren?t angels God?s servants?
Yes, but so can humans be God's servants. It does not say almalikah.
The servant saw that the boy was going to be a bad person in the future, thereby suggesting that the servant was an angel messenger since only messengers are told about the future.
No, this does not suggest that the servant is an Angel. However you are right that it does suggest the servant is a messenger.
I don?t need to know more than God to know that God doesn?t permit random killing.
It was not a random killing it was God's will.
Anyway, let's stick to the topic.
Everything discussed thus far has been on topic. Wording of verses is paramount to understanding the meanings. It's part of exploring the topic.
Salam,
Arnab -
But, obviously, verse 7127 proves that it is a possibility that not everyone is born "good." Unless, this is only true pre-flood and does not apply now.
God?s ways are unchanging (3362) and human nature is unchanging (3030).
But most interestingly 497-498 might put the whole subject to rest on the original question posted by supernaut
497-98 say that God won?t punish weak men, women and children for not emigrating from a land where they were oppressed by people. Those verses don?t answer my question.
Yes, but so can humans be God's servants. It does not say almalikah.
No, this does not suggest that the servant is an Angel. However you are right that it does suggest the servant is a messenger.
It doesn?t say Al Insaan (human) either.
The servant had to be an angel because no human has the authority to kill someone for being an unbeliever and much less someone who will be an unbeliever. The angel messenger was just carrying out its duty of terminating a life. This verse is interesting in that it complicates the subject of pre-destination, but we?ll not discuss that right now.
It was not a random killing it was God's will.
And God doesn?t will that we kill people for what they believe (2256 and 6151). Remember, God doesn?t change, so killing unbelievers wasn?t okay in the past; it?s always been murder and murder is evil.
-
It doesn?t say Al Insaan (human) either.
I never said it did. One can not say either human or angel.
The servant had to be an angel because no human has the authority to kill someone for being an unbeliever and much less someone who will be an unbeliever. The angel messenger was just carrying out its duty of terminating a life. This verse is interesting in that it complicates the subject of pre-destination, but we?ll not discuss that right now.
I disagree that the person had to be an angel.
And God doesn?t will that we kill people for what they believe (2256 and 6151).
Remember, God doesn?t change, so killing unbelievers wasn?t okay in the past; it?s always been murder and murder is evil.Oh, really? Then what happened to Sodom and Gommarah? Isn't this exactly what we are discussing? The fact that God does in fact destroy towns/cities full off people for their transgressions.
Salam,
Arnab -
Salam,
I read the article on submission.org
Here are my comments
-
The author uses conjecture to determain that the servant is an angel. We can not conclude either way. Although, personally, I would say the servant is a human. But this is opinion. The whole Hadith story about the man being named Khidar is not based on fact either.
-
The author mis-translates 1867 and then concludes from this that the servant is an angel.
-
The author mis-understands and mis-translates 1880 by saying that the youth did not transgress or that he was killed before he committed any sin.
He was already burdening his parents with his disobedience and one can wonder whether the youth would only continue to do so to a greater degree in the future. -
What utter non-sense! to say that the servant "disappears from the scene as mysteriously as he appears" is PURE CONJECTURE. The narrative simply ends....the servant does not disappear in a puff of smoke or some other fairytale nonsense. This author has QUITE the imagination.
The FACT is the narrative/story ends.
Salam,
Arnab -
-
Oh, really? Then what happened to Sodom and Gommarah? Isn't this exactly what we are discussing? The fact that God does in fact destroy towns/cities full off people for their transgressions.
You misunderstood what I said. It?s alright if God punishes unbelievers for disbelieving, but it?s not alright for humans to do the same. I thought we'd established this.
- The author mis-translates 1867 and then concludes from this that the servant is an angel.
You?re right. But they did not base their entire argument on their misunderstanding of 1867.
- The author mis-understands and mis-translates 1880 by saying that the youth did not transgress or that he was killed before he committed any sin.
He was already burdening his parents with his disobedience and one can wonder whether the youth would only continue to do so to a greater degree in the future.
1880 doesn?t say the youth was sinning as far as I know. It says that the youth would sin. But whether he was sinning or not or the fact that he would sin is immaterial since it would still be wrong for a human to have killed him.
- What utter non-sense! to say that the servant "disappears from the scene as mysteriously as he appears" is PURE CONJECTURE. The narrative simply ends....the servant does not disappear in a puff of smoke or some other fairytale nonsense. This author has QUITE the imagination.
The FACT is the narrative/story ends.
Yes, the author did assume the messenger vanished mysteriously, however, the other points the author made do make it clear that the messenger was an angel. But I guess you won?t be convinced he was, so let?s agree to disagree because this debate is going in circles now.
-
May be I am intruding in this subject bringing in something else.
What we see in fact is that God not only destroys evil people, He also destroys good people. In fact God destroys all people at one time or another. In fact we all die, children die independently of them committing hateful acts or not.
I wonder if what God is doing in the cases you bring forth is not simply pointing to us His natural laws. In fact it is surely true that nations and people are eventually destroyed, may be by their own wickedness, may be because they become soft and uncapable of resisting hard times, may be their time has come and God wants to have other things on earth, finally birth and death ar God's. When we get stories like the destroyed cities, Ad, the people of Noah and all those that He says were destroyed because of their bad ways what we are being told is simply that for peoples as well as for each individual person, each behaviour has its consequences and you cannot escape them. Nations that become arrogant and god-like will fall, they have always fallen, precisely because of their blindeness.
On the other hand there is no question about the good ones being punished. They die because everything dies and they suffer because life as God tells us is a trial. We all die, much sooner usually than our nation or people may die, and for the akhira God will judge each person, not the nations, the nations were already judged on earth. God has not cheated us on that, we know it. We know too that innocent people are murdered and that the murderer may live undisturbed. But that is the whole point of faith, you believe in the akhira or you don't. What about earthquakes and cyclons and uncalled for wars with all their pains? Are all those who suffer them guilty of anything?
And one of you has mentioned one name of God which I find particularly comforting the Inheritor. I am sure He inherits everything, even our sweetest dreams and most noble desires. They are not lost. They are in His hands. He is the most Merciful, and He keeps everything and makes frutiful in the wisest way.
Salaam
-
Shabbir 7127
If you should leave them, they will mislead Your servants and they will only beget division and ingratitude.In 3030 we are told all humans are born with the fitra in them, the nature of the Deen, so no one can be born as a wicked rejector. This is why the FM translation creates a contradiction.
comes from Walada means to bring forth, to give birth too. It can be used for real birth, or for creating something in society. Like saying, if I leave chocolate on my desk, it will give birth to some extra kilo's on my body.
Lane's Lexicons mentions the saying Al-Ardh Al-Balka taliduu as-Sa3frana. The land of Al-Balka produces safron.
So Walada can be used metaphorically. What is created in 7127? It says they will eventualy create
Fajran kaffaran. Fajra comes from Fajara and means to cut or divide lengthwise, break open, vent, incline/decline/deviate, dawn/sunrise/daybreak, source, abundantly and suddenly, ample bounty/generosity, a place from which water flows.
http//www.studyquran.co.uk/FA.jpg
Kaffaran comes fro Kafara, which means farmer. A farmer buries things and closes his eyes for the sun. This created the further understanding of burying the truth, burying the rights of others. To close the eyes for the obvious, the truth and to resist it and thus be ingratitude for the life given to them as they want to take it away from others.
So what is given birth too? People who are the source for division (fajara) which rises towards people who want to bury other people's rights (kafara).
-
1253 (Free-Minds Translation)"And I do not make myself free of blame, for the soul is inclined to sin, except what my Lord has mercy on. My Lord is Forgiving, Merciful."
Not loosely translated, it completely neglects the root meaning sof the words used in my eyes.
Nafs inclines more to psyche then "soul". Amaratun refers to commanding something. Bilsoo means Bi-with al-soo comes from Al-Sayi, to oppress and do evil towards other people. Rabb can never be lord, as lord in english refers to someone who does not work and has no responsibility towards people, while the Arabic Rabb means the complete opposite, it refers to a lord who is resonsible for your nourishment and upbringing towards maturity. Raheem comes from Rihum, wombs, it refers rather to giving further development and nourishment then to "mercy" in the Christian salvation sense. Ghafour cannot mean forgiveness as this would contradict 997-8 and 2147 which clearly state no deed will be neglected. Ghafour means to protect, coming from Mighfar, helmet. So a better rendition of this verse would be
"And I do not make myself free of blame, for the psyche can command oppressing other people, except that my Developer to perfection has made (us for) His nourishment towards further stages. My Developer to perfection is Provider of Protection (by giving Revelation which protects society against harm if we follow it 1829)."
-
It doesnt say Al Insaan (human) either.
The servant had to be an angel because no human has the authority to kill someone for being an unbeliever and much less someone who will be an unbeliever. The angel messenger was just carrying out its duty of terminating a life. This verse is interesting in that it complicates the subject of pre-destination, but well not discuss that right now.
Or it was a person who had received revelation? Never thought of that? Plus, the Moses story is full of metaphors. Look how in the beginning the boy dissapears and the fish also. This happened where the "streams came together". Does this story metaphorically describes Moses's journey towards maturity? The young boy representing his youth which he lost when his life (fish) was lost in the 2 streams (The human world meeting with the Divine in the form of Revelation?). Then the Abd mentioned can be a metaphor for Revelation, as Moses constantly questions that commands given in it. Many translators incline more to seeing the story as a metaphor then to a real story, we must not forget 37.