Pre-Cognisant Omnipotence = No Free Will Accountability.

Plain and simple.

If Allah, Subhanu Wa Ta'Ala, knows what we will do before we do it..then what is the point indeed. It becomes a robotic universe.

To me, and my limited understanding, it makes a whole lot more sense if Allah gave us the capacity to act for the good or the bad. It makes the universe infinitely more interesting and beautiful. In this scenario, Allah is all powerful. Which means, he can intervene directly in human affairs so that his will is done. Someone could choose to do something that is contrary to his will, but he intervenes and that person is not permitted to achieve their ends. He is omnipotent, which means to me, he has eyes and ears everywhere that do not fail in reporting.

Just my two cents.

What I am seeing here, is that the women here, may Allah bless them, are using the hijab as a certain type of symbol. Something to distance themself with.

Would we have the same opinion about a miswak? Or what brand of toothpaste we use?

We should be conformed to the Qur'an. Not making the Qur'an give us permissiveness to do as we see fit. Granted, the Qur'an does not say wear hijab. I am of the opinion, that in the arabic, there is a precedent for it. Yet, I am not going to force it. More a personal opinion that I can keep there.

I respect the sister saying she felt better when she stopped wearing hijab. I mean you no disrespect. Yet, it was not the hijab, but what it meant to her. To me, this is a psychological issue and has nothing to do with exegesis with Qu'ranic passages.

Another of the reasons I am no longer a christian, was people who wanted the bible to give them permission to do something. A holy book is meant to guide us and inform our life, not because we think it is politically inconvenient or old fashioned.

Let me try another illustration. Let us say you arrived in a culture that believed in women doing all that was stereotypically male.. rude behavior, bravado and profanity. (just follow me here.. lol). Male and female were both of this behavior and no one questioned it. You arrive, as a practicing muslim.. wherein, women are respected, protected and cherished. They are modest and soft of speech. After a few years, the collective peer pressure will soon make her question the wisdom of her entire being.

I think the hijab is a symbol, yes. In today's world, it identifies one as a muslim. We should use that as a means for da'wah and as a silent expression of our commitment to our deen. Same with some brothers who chose to shave their beard or wear jeans and a tshirt. We are to not emulate those who are unbelievers.

I am not trying to argue, and I truly have enjoyed the discussion going on here. Alhamdulillah.

Hijab or Niqab does not equal modesty. Islam finds itself as a religion which is both orthodox (a set of beliefs) and orthopraxic (a set of activities) that make it the complete deen. I know, Astaghfurillah, that there are sisters who wear hijab, yet their hearts are impure. A woman wearing next to nothing in an island community, can be just as modest as a woman wearing niqab for the right reasons.

Yet, my point was not to say that hijab makes one proper. What I was going for the heart of, was if Allah, Subhanu Wa Ta'Ala, is pleased with certain deeds (modesty being a sign of Iman) then we should seek to emulate them. Say, a sister is pure of niyaah inside and out.. yet, she seeks to do more (we should all be seeking to strive that much harder in the deen, as I aforementioned) then we can point her to wearing Hijab. In the states, wearing hijab, more often than not, serves as a great da'wah opportunity.

I do not have to wear a kufi and long white clothing to be muslim. Alhamdulillah, the deen is easy by the grace of Ar Rahman. Yet, it is a great da'wah opportunity for me as well. I stand out and this naturally invites the curiosity of those around me. Sure, there can be some negative reactions in other cities by the smaller minded, but in my years in this deen, I have found more genuine interest than scorn.

I thank those for their opinions and I wish all the best, Insha'Allah.

I have to admit 2106 is a bit disquieting to me too.

Why would God edit his perfect holy book as it were? Ah well.

As I understood it, there was a Qur'an in Heaven (could just be another Sunni corruption) yet it was as I was told in the beginning.

If this is accurate, then why would God send the revelation worded differently thereby giving another instruction only to edit it later with the actual verse in this presumed heavily version?

sneaks in and shuffles the topic title to 'geometrical' before anyone notices and sneaks back out

Rami,

what really can bake a person's noodle is when you tell them that the majority of myths from Sumer (creator God, savior figure, flood.. dying/rising God) are there.

Copied by the Jews later? makes one ponder lol. One needs not even go into the fact that pre-Yahwistic Jews had a Goddess and she was axed out when the patriarchy rose to power and the rabbinical reforms. ( Gotta love history which tells the whole truth that most religions would rather forget. )

I might say, no disrespect intended, that a later holy book is just the earlier one with a new spin to it.

umm.. no. I do remember that part of my study. Sabians were a people.

http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabians

Meteora,

According to that logic, which I agree with, go over to the Monotheists thread and rally against Ahmad Bilal who is heck bent on refuting 262 where it says "anyone who does deeds of righteousness.." to mean just Jews, Christians, Sabians or Muslims (as we see the term used today).

almarh0m

"Are you saying that the threat of being thrown into "the eternal fire" is all about scare mongering to keep us all in line ?"

That is precisely my argument, actually. I think it has always been a means of social control.

I must also concur with those who say, it is very hypocritical of a God who claims to be the Most Merciful to burn someone in hell even for a year for a life lived in disbelief of Qur'an or God in general when they may have lived a very honorable life and gave much to charity and aided many orphans and homeless.

Thank you all for your responses.

I could be wrong here, but if hell was not the ultimate eternal punishment and you just became worm food for good or ill.. how many people would choose to be good just because? Ah well.

I spent all my teenage years thinking I was on the razor's edge of the precipice of hell if I mis-stepped in my path as a christian. Was quite emotional/psychologically damaging.

Yet, here I still stand just now in Islam instead of Christianity about hell or not.. Thanks again for the responses.

I made a post on one point yet if I have double posted on the same topic then I apologize )

I must reiterate here.. Abraham was not a Jew, a Christian or a Muslim (as we see Islam today).

He believed in monotheism, did righteous deeds and I would think believed in a judgment. So.. one could be like his example and be saved without a holy book

Else, as Prince says, what would happen to the deeds of a righteous monotheist who was like Abraham in generality?

That would not make Allah the most just of judges if they just became nothing.

I am not a native arab speaker but I am one who went to college to polish my english as a native speaker to be that much better.. and I must say.. if the line is "Jews, Christians, and anyone who is a monotheist.." I would be inviting the first two and any other monotheist to such a meeting.

Qur'an says 'anyone' in this term.. So, question the translations of these Scholars or question the Qur'an. Your choice.

Then my former postulate stands according to your logic; God is either impotent or does not care.

For, if he knows all things, he knows those who will choose to be a benevolent (insert monotheistic religion here) and yet still sends them to hell for it.

Systems of justice and law as it once was in the states was "innocent until proven guilty." It would be like sentencing a moral and honorable man or woman to capital punishment just because they did not agree with the latest law that was passed (the case being it was an unjust and morally wrong law so they stand against it.)

In a religious sense, this is what God is doing according to scripture. "Follow my laws or go to the fire." One could be a good person, yet that does not matter here.

One can not say there are no moral atheists. I suggest this in another post. I know many honorable atheists and agnostics who are good friends and someone I could trust me life to in a bad situation. Yet, according to God's omnipotent judgment, I can not expect to see them in paradise.

57 viewers and honestly only 2 replies? This is a very important issue to me and I had hoped to get more insight into this. )

Do you really wish to argue semantics? lol.

Say I wanted to give a formal lecture and was going to write a letter on a bulletin board I could say "I invite Jews, Christians, Muslims and anyone who believes in Monotheism to attend."

I am not only including the first three but also extending an invitation to 'anyone' else who happens to be a monotheist lest I leave anyone out. If I wished to leave it as an exclusion I would say "I invite all Jews, Christians and Muslims to attend."

Surely, if I can make this logical conclusion, the creator of all things can likewise inspire his messengers to say what is intended.

Again.. we find out that free-minds are not so free.

If I recall the verse was "any one who ..." not just those who are of the Abrahamic faith. Do you wish to nit pick the verse now?

Muhsin Khan Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

Yusuf Ali Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

Pickthal Lo! Those who believe (in that which is revealed unto thee, Muhammad), and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabaeans - whoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doeth right - surely their reward is with their Lord, and there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve.

Pay close attention to the words in the ** if you would please.

Then you are saying the mentioning of hellfire being fueled by men and stones and the flesh being burned off and then given new skins to taste the fire anew is just allegory? )

Thank you for your response and introduction.

However, I do not see how you have contributed to the meat of my thoughts. I mean no disrespect and it could be I simply was not clear enough in my intent.

It seems to me, as I say, the threat of hell or reward of heaven is a societal control measure as well as an ever present guillotine above everyone's neck whether saint or sinner.. believer or atheist. Regardless of their good or bad deeds.

It relates to how I see an abusive household keeping the children in line as I outlined in my post. I was not addressing the afterlife as much as I was speaking on the whole model of how we should live and for what reason. For as I understand, the vast majority of people model their beliefs over avoiding hell and seeking heaven even if they do not say so.

I think it is more moral to seek the good even if there is no reward because it is the better of the two options. We all go to the dirt all the same. I see the question of an eternal reward/punishment system as a remnant of our former evolutionary place as a people.

I look forward to your response.

I am young..next year I shall be 30. Yet, I have been a student of religion for a time yet. The longer I live, with God's blessing to do so, the more I see that the religions that are authentic and carry weight deal with the same things. Family, Honor, Respect and Reverence for God above Man and the world.

If any man or woman can keep their virtue, honor and make the world a better place than when they found it.. I see no reason why God would deny them.. or the God they gave service to was not worth serving and can just leave a good name for their children to carry on.

It should not be about avoiding hell or seeking heaven. It should be about how we deal with our fellow man and doing our best to see that the earth is watched over.

There was an old quote in america, now seemingly forgotten, from some ten years before 1900.. "To leave a name of a man who never bullied another, or stood down against the same when a defenseless person was being harassed."

Strength and Honor Brothers and Sisters...

progressive,

It can be a misnomer actually. Like last century they called muslims Mohammadans.

There is respect for the teachings of Buddha, but its more a return to what was taught and not the teacher. As I recall its, a bit tongue in cheek, as Dhammapadans (those on the path of righteousness.)

It uses the Dhammapada as the sole text for instruction on the path and couples this with the religious aspect to one God above all else as the sole source of devotion.