HOW TO GET TO HEAVEN WHEN YOU DIE

[Dawood]

so is that to say that those who don't become muslims won't "have their reward from their lord"? because by the usage of the term "their lord", that sort of indicates to me that it's not just those that become muslims.

 

however, if it is to say that only those that become muslims will have their reward, that backs up the biggest problem with religion, in that so many of them (religions) have the "we're right, they're wrong" sort of belief.

 

if i'm misinterpreting what you're saying, forgive me. just trying to figure out whether it's the "holier than thou" attitude.

That particular verse doesn't say in no unmistakable terms that Jews, christians and sabians must convert, but whenever you have a verse in the quran or a saying of the prophet Muhammad, you have to couple these verses and statements of the prophet with others that resemble it or speak on the same issue. Thats how the scholars of islam make rulings. They can't just pluck one verse from the sky and make a ruling based on that, like the critics of Islam do.

So, let me ask you xrebelheartsx , can all the religions be right? what about democracy , socialism, islam , marxism? can they all be the best system?

If one religion says worship God and the other says worship a man and the next says worship a statue, can all of those religions be calling to worship something deserving of worship or is there only one deity worthy of your worship?

 

Thats the question. It's not that everyone is wrong and I'm right, it's that SOMEONE has to be right , because everything can't be God and worthy of our worship. It can't be.

[Dawood]

Wait, let me get something straight here. If I understand you correctly, Dawood, you claim that all the biblical prophets and leaders that predate Islam and Muhammad are Muslim?

 

My other question is, do you believe in a Jewish people?

 

 

Of course I beleive that jews exist.

 

Al-Baqarah - 2:136

Say (O Muslims), "We believe in Allâh and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Ibrâhim (Abraham), Ismâ'il (Ishmael), Ishâque (Isaac), Ya'qûb (Jacob), and to Al-Asbât [the twelve sons of Ya'qûb (Jacob)], and that which has been given to Mûsa (Moses) and 'Iesa (Jesus), and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we have submitted (in Islâm)." (Al-Baqarah 2:136)

[Dawood]

Dawood stretches the term to step outside its dogmatic boundaries.

 

 

No I don't, It's right here in the quran...and also, the last verse I posted for Mar.

there's many more like it.

 

 

Ibrâhim (Abraham) was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was a true Muslim\Hanifa (Islâmic Monotheism - to worship none but Allâh Alone) and he was not of Al-Mushrikûn (See V.2:105). (Aali Imran 3:67)

[the.crooked]

Fair enough. My bad.

[russell jones]

That particular verse doesn't say in no unmistakable terms that Jews, christians and sabians must convert, but whenever you have a verse in the quran or a saying of the prophet Muhammad, you have to couple these verses and statements of the prophet with others that resemble it or speak on the same issue. Thats how the scholars of islam make rulings. They can't just pluck one verse from the sky and make a ruling based on that, like the critics of Islam do.

So, let me ask you xrebelheartsx , can all the religions be right? what about democracy , socialism, islam , marxism? can they all be the best system?

If one religion says worship God and the other says worship a man and the next says worship a statue, can all of those religions be calling to worship something deserving of worship or is there only one deity worthy of your worship?

 

Thats the question. It's not that everyone is wrong and I'm right, it's that SOMEONE has to be right , because everything can't be God and worthy of our worship. It can't be.

 

Don't agree with your last contention for two reasons,

 

1. I don't think any being is worthy of worship

 

2. Why can't everything be God and what makes one idea of God more worthy of worship than the other?

 

As far as your statement regarding conversions, you stepped right into my trap.... ba ha ha !!!

 

What you are saying is that the Quran requires context and interpretation, so it cannot really be taken literally. Thank you very much for making my point. I hope no one puts a death sentence on you for this blasphemy! Just kidding... really.

[the.crooked]

i think your talkin more about deism with your whole everything can be god bit.

[MAR]

Ibrâhim (Abraham) was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was a true Muslim\Hanifa (Islâmic Monotheism - to worship none but Allâh Alone) and he was not of Al-Mushrikûn (See V.2:105). (Aali Imran 3:67)

 

and Moshe falls into that category too?

[Dawood]

Don't agree with your last contention for two reasons,

 

1. I don't think any being is worthy of worship

 

2. Why can't everything be God and what makes one idea of God more worthy of worship than the other?

 

As far as your statement regarding conversions, you stepped right into my trap.... ba ha ha !!!

 

What you are saying is that the Quran requires context and interpretation, so it cannot really be taken literally. Thank you very much for making my point. I hope no one puts a death sentence on you for this blasphemy! Just kidding... really.

 

 

Ok, everything can't be worthy of worship because everything doesn't have the qualities and attributes of God. things don't create and provide for themselves, they need a creator and provider. Just because you go to work and make money doesn't mean you are self sufficient. Allah still brings the rain/causes things to grow/provides for you everything so because of this, you are indebted to him and he is worthy of your worship.

 

As for the quran being taken literally, of course we take it literally, but with proper understanding. Does it seem fair to take any verse from the quran and interpret it the way YOU want or is it being fair to the quran to understand it the way the prophet Muhammad and his companions understood it? That's not blasphemy, it's blasphemy to take the quran and interpret it ourselves, because the quran itself says to ask the people of knowledge concerning it's meanings. The majority of it is crystal clear, but there are other parts of it that need the scholars to give us the true understanding of it. there's no blasphemy in that.

[Dawood]

and Moshe falls into that category too?

 

 

Of course Moses was from the Jewish people, but here are some verses from the quran pertinant to Moses.

 

And (remember) when We gave Mûsa (moses) the Scripture [the Taurât (Torah)] and the criterion (of right and wrong) so that you may be guided aright. (Al-Baqarah 2:53)

 

And indeed Mûsa (moses) came to you with clear proofs, yet you worshipped the calf after he left, and you were Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers). (Al-Baqarah 2:92)

Say (O Muhammad SAW): "We believe in Allâh and in what has been sent down to us, and what was sent down to Ibrâhim (Abraham), Ismâ'il (Ishmael), Ishâque (Isaac), Ya'qûb (Jacob) and Al-Asbât [the twelve sons of Ya'qûb (Jacob)] and what was given to Mûsa (moses), 'Iesa (Jesus) and the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between one another among them and to Him (Allâh) we have submitted (in Islâm)." (Aali Imran 3:84)

 

Verily, We did send down the Taurât (Torah) [to Mûsa (moses)], therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allâh's Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged the Jews by the Taurât (Torah) after those Prophets] for to them was entrusted the protection of Allâh's Book, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed, such are the Kâfirûn (i.e. disbelievers - of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allâh's Laws). (Al-Ma'idah 5:44)

Then, We gave Mûsa (moses) the Book [the Taurât (Torah)], to complete (Our Favour) upon those who would do right, and explaining all things in detail and a guidance and a mercy that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord. (Al-An'am 6:154)

Can they (Muslims) who rely on a clear proof (the Qur'ân) from their Lord, and whom a witness [Prophet Muhammad SAW through Jibrael (Gabriel <> ÓáÇã)] from Him follows it (can they be equal with the disbelievers); and before it, came the Book of Mûsa (moses), a guidance and a mercy, they believe therein, but those of the sects (Jews, Christians and all the other non-Muslim nations) that reject it (the Qur'ân), the Fire will be their promised meeting-place. So be not in doubt about it (i.e. those who denied Prophet Muhammad SAW and also denied all that which he brought from Allâh, surely, they will enter Hell). Verily, it is the truth from your Lord, but most of the mankind believe not. (Hud 11:17)

 

And mention in the Book (this Qur'ân) Mûsa (moses). Verily! He was chosen and he was a Messenger (and) a Prophet. (Maryam 19:51)

 

 

From these verses, it's clear that Moses, was a prophet of Islam, and the torah was the book of Allah. Basically, Mar, the torah was once the guidance for the Jewish people, but another prophet was sent (Muhammad) who cancelled out previous revelations and the quran became the guadance for all mankind.

 

 

[russell jones]

Ok, everything can't be worthy of worship because everything doesn't have the qualities and attributes of God. things don't create and provide for themselves, they need a creator and provider. Just because you go to work and make money doesn't mean you are self sufficient. Allah still brings the rain/causes things to grow/provides for you everything so because of this, you are indebted to him and he is worthy of your worship.

 

As for the quran being taken literally, of course we take it literally, but with proper understanding. Does it seem fair to take any verse from the quran and interpret it the way YOU want or is it being fair to the quran to understand it the way the prophet Muhammad and his companions understood it? That's not blasphemy, it's blasphemy to take the quran and interpret it ourselves, because the quran itself says to ask the people of knowledge concerning it's meanings. The majority of it is crystal clear, but there are other parts of it that need the scholars to give us the true understanding of it. there's no blasphemy in that.

 

Don't worry, I wasn't accusing you of blasphemy, it is obviously no concern of mine. However, your statement "with proper understanding" means that you must have a contextual background. Otherwise, a literal reading of the verses leads to misunderstanding. Therefore, I contend that you do not take the Quran literally.

 

I have been reading the Quran, and I have noticed that it is not "clear" in the contemporary sense of the word. It would be extremely difficult to understand without a background knowledge of Jewish and Christian traditions. I believe that it is intentionally written to put the reader in a trance. It's repetitiveness and rhythm are like a chant. It seems to function in the same way as Islamic architecture, to bedazzle with sheer density and complexity to put the mind in a subservient state. Makes sense since the core value of Islam is "subservience to God."

[Dawood]

Do you understand arabic? If you do, you'd see the wonders of the quran.

As for the quran being clear. It is very clear in terms of what it says. We need proper understanding of it because the quran (along with the teachings of Muhammad) are the basis for a way of life and you can't possibly be reading all of it at one time, so to understand it's issues you need people who are very versed in all of it unless you yourself are versed in all of it. So, it in fact IS clear, it just depends on whether you have knowledge of the quran or not.

 

I'll give an example.

someone asked one of the Islamic scholars

 

Question:

 

What is Tawheed al-Uloohiyyah? (singling out Allah alone for all worship)

Answer:

 

It is to single out Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, with all types of worship, inwardly and outwardly, through speech and action. And to negate worship from everything besides Allaah, no matter who or what it is. As He, the Most High, said,“And your Lord has decreed that you should worship none but Him.” (al-Israa’: 23) Allaah, the Most High, says, “Worship Allaah and join none with Him (in worship).” (an-Nisaa’: 36)

 

Allaah, the Most High, says, “Verily! I am Allaah! La ilaaha illa ana (none has the right to be worshipped but I), so worship Me, and perform as-salaat for My remembrance.” (Ta-Ha: 14)

 

 

so, my point is, that someone asked the question and the scholar answered his question with 3 seperate proofs from the quran that all had the same meaning. It's not that the quran itself wasn't clear on this issue, it was , it's just that the questioner didn't have knowledge of where to find it, so he asked.

 

Thus Allâh makes clear His Ayât (Laws) to you, in order that you may understand. (Al-Baqarah 2:242

 

Allâh wishes to make clear (what is lawful and what is unlawful) to you, and to show you the ways of those before you, and accept your repentance, and Allâh is All****Knower, All****Wise. (An-Nisa 4:26)

 

Alif-Lâm-Râ. [These letters are one of the miracles of the Qur'an, and none but Allâh (Alone) knows their meanings]. These are the Verses of the clear Book (the Qur'ân that makes clear the legal and illegal things, legal laws, a guidance and a blessing). (Yusuf 12:1)

[MAR]

From these verses, it's clear that Moses, was a prophet of Islam, and the torah was the book of Allah. Basically, Mar, the torah was once the guidance for the Jewish people, but another prophet was sent (Muhammad) who cancelled out previous revelations and the quran became the guadance for all mankind.

 

Deuteronomy 4:40 You shall keep His statutes, and His commandments, which I command you this day, that it may go well with you, and with your children after you, and that you may prolong days upon the earth, which the LORD your G-d give you, forever.

Deuteronomy 4:2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your G-d which I command you.

 

Basically, G-d's laws are not subject to change or cancellation, unless your calling G-d a lier.

[russell jones]

Battle of the dogmatic all stars! Watch as both competitors fail to move one inch from their positions! It's almost as if all original thoughts stopped being made 1000's of years ago! This is one exciting match.

[Dawood]

Deuteronomy 4:40 You shall keep His statutes, and His commandments, which I command you this day, that it may go well with you, and with your children after you, and that you may prolong days upon the earth, which the LORD your G-d give you, forever.

 

Deuteronomy 4:2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your G-d which I command you.

 

Basically, G-d's laws are not subject to change or cancellation, unless your calling G-d a lier.

 

Of course I would never call the Lord of the heavens and earth a liar, but he says concerning the torah

 

Do you (faithful believers) covet that they will believe in your religion inspite of the fact that a party of them (Jewish rabbis) used to hear the Word of Allâh [the Taurât (torah)], then they used to change it knowingly after they understood it? (Al-Baqarah 2:75)

 

so, it's not God that is the liar, He speaks the truth.

[MAR]

so your trying to tell me that according to islam the torah i have today is false?

[Dawood]

Also, Mar, it's in the torah about the coming of the prophet Muhammad.

 

I'm going to give you a link to a story about a Jewish Rabbi during the time of the prophet Muhammad that became muslim (by reading the torah)

 

Abdullah Ibn Salaim..the rabbi

[Dawood]

so your trying to tell me that according to islam the torah i have today is false?

not intirely. just portions of it.

 

And when there came to them a Messenger from Allâh (i.e. Muhammad Peace be upon him ) confirming what was with them, a party of those who were given the Scripture threw away the book of Allâh behind their backs as if they did not know! (Al-Baqarah 2:101)

 

And verily, among them is a party who distort the book with their tongues (as they read), so that you may think it is from the book, but it is not from the book, and they say: "This is from Allâh," but it is not from Allâh; and they speak a lie against Allâh while they know it. (Aali Imran 3:78)

They (the Jews, Quraish pagans, idolaters, etc.) did not estimate Allâh with an estimation due to Him when they said: "Nothing did Allâh send down to any human being (by inspiration)." Say (O Muhammad SAW): "Who then sent down the book which Mûsa (Moses) brought, a light and a guidance to mankind which you (the Jews) have made into (separate) papersheets, disclosing (some of it) and concealing (much). And you (believers in Allâh and His Messenger Muhammad SAW), were taught (through the Qur'ân) that which neither you nor your fathers knew." Say: "Allâh (sent it down)." Then leave them to play in their vain discussions. (Tafsir Al-Qurtubî, Vol.7, Page 37). (Al-An'am 6:91)

[the.crooked]

Battle of the dogmatic all stars! Watch as both competitors fail to move one inch from their positions! It's almost as if all original thoughts stopped being made 1000's of years ago! This is one exciting match.

 

its all about objective viewing.

[Dawood]

It's almost as if all original thoughts stopped being made 1000's of years ago! This is one exciting match.

 

 

man, history repeats itself. You think youre original? It's all been done before.

[MAR]

Also, Mar, it's in the torah about the coming of the prophet Muhammad.

 

I'm going to give you a link to a story about a Jewish Rabbi during the time of the prophet Muhammad that became muslim (by reading the torah)

 

Abdullah Ibn Salaim..the rabbi

 

And the Christians will tell you Jesus is in the bible.

 

Shabtai Tzvi turned into a Muslim and many Rabbi's thought he was the messiah. Just because one person backs up your claim doesn't make your whole argument right all of a sudden. People make mistakes.

 

I still don't find much basis for Islams claim of the Rabbi's warping the Torah seeing as how it has remained the same over a period of 4495 years with the exception of two letters, which btw don't change any meanings.

 

Plus if you have ever examined the Jewish culture you would see that the Jews do not just accept what Rabbis say just bc they say it. They will do research and challenge each other to prove their points thus keeping the Torah and the oral law accurate.

 

Open a Mishna or a Gemarah if you don't believe me.

[russell jones]

its all about objective viewing.

 

I don't do objective well, I think it's a mythical state of being, so I stopped trying.

[suppertime]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

[russell jones]

man, history repeats itself. You think youre original? It's all been done before.

 

 

I was not implying that I am original. I just want to point out, for those who might be lurking in this thread, that taking a spiritual document that was written more than a thousand years ago, and using it to establish all manner of objective fact in defiance of ample evidence to the contrary, is not only an affront to reasonable thought, but is actually dangerous. Fundamentalism can lead to whole societies that believe it is alright to execute someone for adultery or homosexual behavior, or to sabotage an entire generation's science education because the fundamentals of biology do not jibe with a book written in the distant past. And all of these crimes are only acceptable because these people believe that an afterlife presided over by a vindictive and jealous supreme being will somehow vindicate causing suffering and death where none is warranted.

 

That is why I can't be objective, because I do not want this cancer to spread and take more lives and cause more suffering. It has already polluted our planet enough. If people truly believed in a loving God, then they would not be killing each other over it, so I can only be led to the conclusion that most are using their religion to rationalize their most basic animal instincts.

 

This is why I argue, and this is why I can't just leave it alone.

 

I will do my best to understand everyone's beliefs, but it doesn't mean I have to except the dire consequences of those beliefs simply out of deference.

[the.crooked]

I don't do objective well, I think it's a mythical state of being, so I stopped trying.

 

i was referring to watching them argue.

 

 

 

and as far as objective perspectives. there is a certain amount of objectivity that comes in appreciating that everyone is subjective in their perspectives in the same way.

[the.crooked]

I was not implying that I am original. I just want to point out, for those who might be lurking in this thread, that taking a spiritual document that was written more than a thousand years ago, and using it to establish all manner of objective fact in defiance of ample evidence to the contrary, is not only an affront to reasonable thought, but is actually dangerous. Fundamentalism can lead to whole societies that believe it is alright to execute someone for adultery or homosexual behavior, or to sabotage an entire generation's science education because the fundamentals of biology do not jibe with a book written in the distant past. And all of these crimes are only acceptable because these people believe that an afterlife presided over by a vindictive and jealous supreme being will somehow vindicate causing suffering and death where none is warranted.

 

That is why I can't be objective, because I do not want this cancer to spread and take more lives and cause more suffering. It has already polluted our planet enough. If people truly believed in a loving God, then they would not be killing each other over it, so I can only be led to the conclusion that most are using their religion to rationalize their most basic animal instincts.

 

This is why I argue, and this is why I can't just leave it alone.

 

I will do my best to understand everyone's beliefs, but it doesn't mean I have to except the dire consequences of those beliefs simply out of deference.

 

 

 

You dig dawkins don't you?

 

 

I say that in you are a much calmer and more rational version of his argument against religion. I hate the dude cus he is as much a fundamentalist as anybody else who sticks their head into their own ideological ass, but I an appreciate many of his sentiments towards religion.

 

He just has no conception of the amount of faith science requires as well. Or at least doesn't really address it publicly.

[russell jones]

I do like Dawkins, and I find him less and less of an asshole as I recognize more fully the dangers of religion. I think contemporary science requires faith in the concept that the world can be understood through study of its material properties, which is a faith of sorts. Also, the complexity of contemporary science makes it impossible for even the most talented scientists to completely understand the advances of those outside their specific discipline. That is not really faith though, since those advances in specific fields can be explained rationally to those with the background to understand them.

[russell jones]

i was referring to watching them argue.

 

 

 

and as far as objective perspectives. there is a certain amount of objectivity that comes in appreciating that everyone is subjective in their perspectives in the same way.

 

 

agreed

[Dawood]

I was not implying that I am original. I just want to point out, for those who might be lurking in this thread, that taking a spiritual document that was written more than a thousand years ago, and using it to establish all manner of objective fact in defiance of ample evidence to the contrary, is not only an affront to reasonable thought, but is actually dangerous. Fundamentalism can lead to whole societies that believe it is alright to execute someone for adultery or homosexual behavior, or to sabotage an entire generation's science education because the fundamentals of biology do not jibe with a book written in the distant past. And all of these crimes are only acceptable because these people believe that an afterlife presided over by a vindictive and jealous supreme being will somehow vindicate causing suffering and death where none is warranted.

 

That is why I can't be objective, because I do not want this cancer to spread and take more lives and cause more suffering. It has already polluted our planet enough. If people truly believed in a loving God, then they would not be killing each other over it, so I can only be led to the conclusion that most are using their religion to rationalize their most basic animal instincts.

 

This is why I argue, and this is why I can't just leave it alone.

 

I will do my best to understand everyone's beliefs, but it doesn't mean I have to except the dire consequences of those beliefs simply out of deference.

 

First off, what Mar and myself are doing is sharing information from what both of us beleive are revelations from the creator of everything. And I too beleive in what was sent to his people as it was originally revealed. As for taking a book written over a thousand yeas ago and using it to establish all manner of objective fact in defiance of ample evidence to the contrary, well what we are dicussing here is God, not murdering people unjustly over religion or any atrocious acts that most people would condemn and work to rid the earth of. Again, we are discussing the existance of God and the words of God to mankind. Now, if you believe that you have overwhelming evidence that God does NOT exist, then I would say to that you are merely speculating based on your lack of knowledge on the subject and that it's honestly your own opinion. An opinion I may add that only a small minority of the people that ever lived on this earth agrees with. It's a fact that MOST people beleive in God. So you are in a minority and really have no right to act as if you're speaking for everyone in the world as a crusader to stop the spread of the cancer (that most people think is a cure)

[the.crooked]

I do like Dawkins, and I find him less and less of an asshole as I recognize more fully the dangers of religion. I think contemporary science requires faith in the concept that the world can be understood through study of its material properties, which is a faith of sorts. Also, the complexity of contemporary science makes it impossible for even the most talented scientists to completely understand the advances of those outside their specific discipline. That is not really faith though, since those advances in specific fields can be explained rationally to those with the background to understand them.

 

my thing is this:

 

Science does require the same faith as religions do.

 

I know I have mentioned this before, but take the example of an electron. Bohr atomic model says that it is a little unobservable sphere rotating around a nucleus of an atom. Contemporary physics says it is a probability cloud which has no quantifyable variables until we seek to pin it down. Basically, it doesn't exist until we look for it.

 

At a theoretical level we give full truth to a theory until it is proven false by anamolous data. All theories are eventually shown wrong and we develope new theories, that is the way of science. So to believe in any one theory in a realist sense is to believe the laws and theories are actually true when they will necessarily be left by the way side at some point in the future.

 

I am not taking away from the pragmatic value of science, just saying its ability to say what the world actually is is just as fallacious as religion. This is why I had to stop doing physics. I realized I couldn't answer some of the metaphysical questions I had with science without the same faith any religion would require of me.

 

 

It is much easier for me to believe in the pragmatic value of science and the explicative nature of it towards the abstract entity which is mathematics, but I can not at this point see it as telling me the way the world actually is.

[russell jones]

First off, what Mar and myself are doing is sharing information from what both of us beleive are revelations from the creator of everything. And I too beleive in what was sent to his people as it was originally revealed. As for taking a book written over a thousand yeas ago and using it to establish all manner of objective fact in defiance of ample evidence to the contrary, well what we are dicussing here is God, not murdering people unjustly over religion or any atrocious acts that most people would condemn and work to rid the earth of. Again, we are discussing the existance of God and the words of God to mankind. Now, if you believe that you have overwhelming evidence that God does NOT exist, then I would say to that you are merely speculating based on your lack of knowledge on the subject and that it's honestly your own opinion. An opinion I may add that only a small minority of the people that ever lived on this earth agrees with. It's a fact that MOST people beleive in God. So you are in a minority and really have no right to act as if you're speaking for everyone in the world as a crusader to stop the spread of the cancer (that most people think is a cure)

 

So your response leads me to believe that you do not take the Quran literally, and you do not believe that it is OK to execute someone for adultery or homosexual behavior.

 

Additionally, I do not believe that more people in the world are fundamentalists than not. I was not talking about religious belief that most people have, but the fundamentalism that you and Mar seem to exhibit. I do not think religion is truly dangerous unless it is fundamentalist.