44 replies to this topic

[sameerjafri]

These are things i do or agree with doing:

• Salat (Prayers)
  
• Saum (Fasting)
  
• Hajj (Pilgrimage)
  
• Zakat (Poor Rate)
  
• Khums (Wealth Tax)
  
• Jihad (Striving)
  
• Amr-Bil-Ma'roof (Enjoin what is good)
  
• Nahi-Anil-Munkar (Forbid what is wrong)
  
• Tawalla (To love and respect the Ahl-ul-Bait and their friends)
  
• Tabarra (To disassociate from the enemies of the Ahl-ul-Bait)

Amr-Bil-Ma'roof & Nahi-Anil-Munkar is where things gets confusing.

These are things i am:

I watch tv shows, movies, documentries, sports , news etc. ALL western. I love listening to music of all kinds and I playing my guitar and piano.

I am also a support of science and things such as theory of evolution or any other scientific theory of the day.

I believe in equal rights of women and men but i do understand that women are the care takers and men are the providers.

I belive that islamic law/shaira law on running governments or states should be ended. I believe in a separation of church and state or in our case mosque and the state. I believe in democracy and trying out new political and economic system which truly create wealth for all.

I believe that countries SHOULD have a secular law which provides equal rights to all and not one group. Therefore i think in a Muslim country GAY people should be allowed to "marry" each other, abortion should be allowed etc but i know these people who commit such acts are not Muslims and this marriage or act cant be recognized by Islam.

Reading so far down the list do you guys see where i am going with this. I am the most Liberal muslim you can find. LOL. But let me tell you, I never miss reading the namaz, roza etc and i always to treat people with respect and love no matter what.  I would even like to perform blade matam in muhhram.

So i am a mixed bag. Am i a muslim? ( in your opinion) and which of the following beliefs stated above do you guys disagree with?

thank you

[ireallywannaknow]

Of course you're a Muslim. It says so next to your religion.

[bilal6542]

well a Muslim abides by the word of Allah, the Quran. Since you believe gay  marriages are okay while the Quran clearly says it is not by the story of lut. You put your opinion over Allah's word. So what is the point of saying god has no partners in salaat. Islam doesn't have terms as liberal. It is either you submit to Allah or you think your conclusions are better then Allah's which is shirk. And muslims dont do shirk. I reccomend reading the Quran even if it is a little bit a day it will enlighten you with the scientific facts and Allah will guide you.

[titumir]

Quote

I belive that islamic law/shaira law on running governments or states should be ended. I believe in a separation of church and state or in our case mosque and the state. I believe in democracy and trying out new political and economic system which truly create wealth for all.

I don't understand what you are trying to say. Isn't Iran a democracy (they have free and fair elections to choose the president). Maybe the Zionist media has brainwashed you into believing that Islam == Saudi Arabia, and if you're opposed to KSA then you can't be Muslim.

[JimJam]

sameerjafri, on 05 October 2011 - 05:45 PM, said:

These are things i do or agree with doing:

• Salat (Prayers)
  
• Saum (Fasting)
  
• Hajj (Pilgrimage)
  
• Zakat (Poor Rate)
  
• Khums (Wealth Tax)
  
• Jihad (Striving)
  
• Amr-Bil-Ma'roof (Enjoin what is good)
  
• Nahi-Anil-Munkar (Forbid what is wrong)
  
• Tawalla (To love and respect the Ahl-ul-Bait and their friends)
  
• Tabarra (To disassociate from the enemies of the Ahl-ul-Bait)

Amr-Bil-Ma'roof & Nahi-Anil-Munkar is where things gets confusing.


These are things i am:

I watch tv shows, movies, documentries, sports , news etc. ALL western. I love listening to music of all kinds and I playing my guitar and piano.

I am also a support of science and things such as theory of evolution or any other scientific theory of the day.

I believe in equal rights of women and men but i do understand that women are the care takers and men are the providers.

I belive that islamic law/shaira law on running governments or states should be ended. I believe in a separation of church and state or in our case mosque and the state. I believe in democracy and trying out new political and economic system which truly create wealth for all.

I believe that countries SHOULD have a secular law which provides equal rights to all and not one group. Therefore i think in a Muslim country GAY people should be allowed to "marry" each other, abortion should be allowed etc but i know these people who commit such acts are not Muslims and this marriage or act cant be recognized by Islam.

Reading so far down the list do you guys see where i am going with this. I am the most Liberal muslim you can find. LOL. But let me tell you, I never miss reading the namaz, roza etc and i always to treat people with respect and love no matter what.  I would even like to perform blade matam in muhhram.

So i am a mixed bag. Am i a muslim? ( in your opinion) and which of the following beliefs stated above do you guys disagree with?

thank you

Why do you ask us? Who are we to judge? This is a matter between Allah and you.

Im a Geologist. In my line of work I see the validy of theory of evolution and science. Those who are against science and evolution, to me, are stupid.
I myself listen to music, although not desi thumka or rap music.
Women and men are ultimately equal before Allah,  but have different roles in human society since they are physically different.
And for secularism I do consider it to be practical, most Muslim societies like Pakistan dont seem to deserve Islamic law. Its better if they stop calling themselves an Islamic Republic and keep discrediting Islam like they are doing now. The situation of Muslims in secular India being much better than those in the "Islamic republic" of Pakistan.
I agree with you on most things except gay marriage, i dont consider it something that should be encouraged, but i certainly dont want pogroms against gays

[SD2]

sameerjafri, on 05 October 2011 - 05:45 PM, said:

These are things i do or agree with doing:

• Salat (Prayers)
  
• Saum (Fasting)
  
• Hajj (Pilgrimage)
  
• Zakat (Poor Rate)
  
• Khums (Wealth Tax)
  
• Jihad (Striving)
  
• Amr-Bil-Ma'roof (Enjoin what is good)
  
• Nahi-Anil-Munkar (Forbid what is wrong)
  
• Tawalla (To love and respect the Ahl-ul-Bait and their friends)
  
• Tabarra (To disassociate from the enemies of the Ahl-ul-Bait)

Amr-Bil-Ma'roof & Nahi-Anil-Munkar is where things gets confusing.


These are things i am:

I watch tv shows, movies, documentries, sports , news etc. ALL western. I love listening to music of all kinds and I playing my guitar and piano.

I am also a support of science and things such as theory of evolution or any other scientific theory of the day.

I believe in equal rights of women and men but i do understand that women are the care takers and men are the providers.

I belive that islamic law/shaira law on running governments or states should be ended. I believe in a separation of church and state or in our case mosque and the state. I believe in democracy and trying out new political and economic system which truly create wealth for all.

I believe that countries SHOULD have a secular law which provides equal rights to all and not one group. Therefore i think in a Muslim country GAY people should be allowed to "marry" each other, abortion should be allowed etc but i know these people who commit such acts are not Muslims and this marriage or act cant be recognized by Islam.

Reading so far down the list do you guys see where i am going with this. I am the most Liberal muslim you can find. LOL. But let me tell you, I never miss reading the namaz, roza etc and i always to treat people with respect and love no matter what.  I would even like to perform blade matam in muhhram.

So i am a mixed bag. Am i a muslim? ( in your opinion) and which of the following beliefs stated above do you guys disagree with?

thank you

They are the things you do, are the following the things that you believe

Monotheism (Tawheed)
Judgement Day (Qiyamah)
Justice (Adl)
Prophethood (Nabuwwat)
Imamate (Imamat)

Click on the links for more information on each one.

If you believe in them then you are muslim however like the others said you should read the Qur'an as there are stuff which you "believe" to not be Haraam whereas Allah (swt) has said that they are, and there are no opinions when it comes to Allah's (swt) Law.

Now we can be arrogant and say "He created me but I have freedom I don't have to believe it to be bad" but what we need to understand is Allah (swt) created us, he gave us a set of rules, we Have to abide by them rules due to the fact that he has ultimate authority over us, he can give us any rules he wishes and we have to abide by them.

Now there isn't compulsion in religion but if you don't follow his Law you are disobeying him which will only do harm to yourself either in this world or the hereafter. Plus by following his Law you will be awarded in the next life and maybe in this life too.

As for science if it doesn't contradict Islam I don't see how there is anything wrong with it.

For gay rights and abortion, Allah (swt) tells us being gay is Haraam and also abortion is Haraam (unless specific circumstances) so if a Muslim country allowed these to take place in effect they are allowing people to disobey Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì, if the people in that country don't like it they can leave and get an abortion elsewhere.

If you are confused by anything I wrote please tell me and I will elaborate.

[Replicant]

sameerjafri, on 05 October 2011 - 05:45 PM, said:

These are things i do or agree with doing:

• Salat (Prayers)
  
• Saum (Fasting)
  
• Hajj (Pilgrimage)
  
• Zakat (Poor Rate)
  
• Khums (Wealth Tax)
  
• Jihad (Striving)
  
• Amr-Bil-Ma'roof (Enjoin what is good)
  
• Nahi-Anil-Munkar (Forbid what is wrong)
  
• Tawalla (To love and respect the Ahl-ul-Bait and their friends)
  
• Tabarra (To disassociate from the enemies of the Ahl-ul-Bait)

Amr-Bil-Ma'roof & Nahi-Anil-Munkar is where things gets confusing.


These are things i am:

I watch tv shows, movies, documentries, sports , news etc. ALL western. I love listening to music of all kinds and I playing my guitar and piano.

I am also a support of science and things such as theory of evolution or any other scientific theory of the day.

I believe in equal rights of women and men but i do understand that women are the care takers and men are the providers.

I belive that islamic law/shaira law on running governments or states should be ended. I believe in a separation of church and state or in our case mosque and the state. I believe in democracy and trying out new political and economic system which truly create wealth for all.

I believe that countries SHOULD have a secular law which provides equal rights to all and not one group. Therefore i think in a Muslim country GAY people should be allowed to "marry" each other, abortion should be allowed etc but i know these people who commit such acts are not Muslims and this marriage or act cant be recognized by Islam.

Reading so far down the list do you guys see where i am going with this. I am the most Liberal muslim you can find. LOL. But let me tell you, I never miss reading the namaz, roza etc and i always to treat people with respect and love no matter what.  I would even like to perform blade matam in muhhram.

So i am a mixed bag. Am i a muslim? ( in your opinion) and which of the following beliefs stated above do you guys disagree with?

thank you

So when Imam Mehdi (af) returns, are going to oppose his government?

[133ali]

You are not seeking our approval, you want to know how we can merge with modern thinking and remain muslim.

There is a very simple rule to follow as our Imam advised us regarding the validity of Ahadith: compare the Ahadith with the Holy Quran, if it is according to it, it is true, otherwise false.

Compare all these modern notions with the saying of the Holy Quran and you will have your answer. There are many valid commentaries regarding its verses by the  Ulama and Maraje, take their help if needed.

Va Menallah Towfiq,
Ali

[Basim Ali]

The question is not whether you're Muslim or not.

The question really is what good approbation by some folks, who know nothing about you more than what you have managed to describe in one post, will do to whatever state you're in.

Islam is really like a flight of stairs. Once you assent to the Oneness of God and Prophethood you're on the first step. If this belief is firm, you'll continue climbing the stairs to success. If it's not, you remain your entire life on the first step thinking of what you're doing there in the first place.

wa

[bilal6542]

Look Islam isn't this backwards religion as it is made out to be. Muslims can be modern but in the laws of Shariah. Yes men and women are equal in the eyes of Allah, but they have different roles. Islam has never said that man and women are not equal. And to your point about science, science should make one's faith in religion stronger. The theory of evolution it has many significant holes like the lack of finding intermediatery species fossils. And to reply to your point about the Islamic Republic, the media just blows up the point about a slim minority who opposes the government, most the people there are happy. Before you makes conclusions like muslims being happier in secular India watch your news from non biased sources or multiple sources. Bottom line, you will answer for your actions in front of Allah, study his book and inshallah you will be rewarded after this short life.

[Saviour]

A muslim by definition is someone who Submit's his will to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì. So Submitting one's will is arguable or can be regarded as being arguable. So the basic principles of Islam, by following with them you are Submitting to Allah (SWT) will. Therefore you are a Muslim. by following the five pillars Of Islam.

But whether  one is a good Muslim is hard to say and the only Judge of that Is Allah (SWT) For surely he is the Most merciful of the Merciful and the Most Just of the Just and there is no one as great As him nor is there any God But him.

[alimohamad40]

a muslim means submitter to the will of god.

you are submitting to some things and rejecting some others so you can answer your own question whether you are a submitter or not

[iSilurian]

bilal6542, on 08 October 2011 - 10:03 PM, said:

nd to your point about science, science should make one's faith in religion stronger. The theory of evolution it has many significant holes like the lack of finding intermediatery species fossils.

As a geologist with published work in paleontology, i will say that, that is false. There are thousands of intermediate fossils.  If you would like, i can show you.

On the actual topic though.   Sameerjafri, you sound like a muslim to me. You are what you claim to be, and we are not in any position to judge you.  You judge yourself.

[Ruq]

iSilurian, on 10 December 2011 - 02:43 PM, said:

As a geologist with published work in paleontology, i will say that, that is false. There are thousands of intermediate fossils.  If you would like, i can show you.

On the actual topic though.   Sameerjafri, you sound like a muslim to me. You are what you claim to be, and we are not in any position to judge you.  You judge yourself.

ooOOOoo...get you! (joking) =)


I dont think the issue is about submission, surely all muslims agree that your aim is to submit to God. The issue at hand is what submitting means and this depends on how you interpret Quran/ahadith and how your conscious/subconscious will understand/reckon/accept that information and how that filters through into the way you think/feel and live your life. I dont think this process ends, we're all at one stage or another in it and there is no cookie cutter muslim machine we can pop ourselves into and all emerge the other side agreeing with each other. So investigate the things that trouble you and approach it from as many angles as you can. Dont rush, the process is the most important thing and your intention to find truth.

[alimohamad40]

Isulirian don't be fooled by anything that atheists throw at you , you have to take everything in a scientific approach and not in a political approach... you cant twist science to fit your ideology but rather your ideology should agree with true science to give an indication that you have the right ideology. maybe ill take this argument to other threads.

[iSilurian]

alimohamad40, on 10 December 2011 - 09:08 PM, said:

Isulirian don't be fooled by anything that atheists throw at you , you have to take everything in a scientific approach and not in a political approach... you cant twist science to fit your ideology but rather your ideology should agree with true science to give an indication that you have the right ideology. maybe ill take this argument to other threads.

I am a scientist, and i am about to have paleo research published, which would essentially deem me a paleontologist.  This has nothing to do with religion, this is all science, and yes there are thousands of transitional fossils.  And yes, please do go make an argument on one of my other threads and i will gladly respond to you.

[JawzofDETH]

JimJam, on 06 October 2011 - 10:09 AM, said:

Im a Geologist. In my line of work I see the validy of theory of evolution and science. Those who are against science and evolution, to me, are stupid.

I am opposed to Darwinism when it comes to cross species evolution, it's daft and unfounded. I mean monkeys, really?
Intra-species evolution, yes. I do believe species adapt to their environment, hence we have black, white etc. etc.
I am definitely opposed to Social Darwinism as I am Muslim.
But as a geologist you would deal with evolution of the environment itself, no opinion on that, only that when they say it took billions and billions of years for this and that to form I think it's completely unfounded junk-science and when we as humans have a recorded history greater than 50,000 years at least to record the way this rock and that plateau adapt and change, then maybe, just maybe they can begin theorize. We came to the earth just yesterday yet we claim to know how everything works and how long it's been here.

Was-Salaam

Edited by JawzofDETH, 11 December 2011 - 11:20 AM.

[iSilurian]

JawzofDETH, on 11 December 2011 - 11:18 AM, said:

I am opposed to Darwinism when it comes to cross species evolution, it's daft and unfounded. I mean monkeys, really?
Intra-species evolution, yes. I do believe species adapt to their environment, hence we have black, white etc. etc.
I am definitely opposed to Social Darwinism as I am Muslim.
But as a geologist you would deal with evolution of the environment itself, no opinion on that, only that when they say it took billions and billions of years for this and that to form I think it's completely unfounded junk-science and when we as humans have a recorded history greater than 50,000 years at least to record the way this rock and that plateau adapt and change, then maybe, just maybe they can begin theorize. We came to the earth just yesterday yet we claim to know how everything works and how long it's been here.

Was-Salaam

It is far far from junk science.  Perhaps i will make a topic on it.  We have, many many many cross correlating ways of determining the age of the planet.

Also, in regards to evolution, we did not evolve from monkeys.

And for Alimohamad40, this subject has nothing to do with atheism.  This is science.  There is nothing political nor anything religiously bias about me finding fossils in the ground.

[iSilurian]

iSilurian, on 11 December 2011 - 01:00 PM, said:

It is far far from junk science.  Perhaps i will make a topic on it.  We have, many many many cross correlating ways of determining the age of the planet.

Also, in regards to evolution, we did not evolve from monkeys.

And for Alimohamad40, this subject has nothing to do with atheism.  This is science.  There is nothing political nor anything religiously bias about me finding fossils in the ground.

http://www.shiachat....e-of-the-earth/

just for you.

and for Alimohamad40

http://www.shiachat....tional-fossils/

[ÓßíäÉý]

Salaams,

Everyone who says the shahadah is Muslim... so yes alhamduliAll-h, you are

None of us can answer the question you're asking- one of the greatest things about this religion is how personal it is.

If you have to ask that question, its best think about why you even asked that (was it something someone said, a feeling you had, etc.?) and what you're willing to do about it.

If there are Islamic concepts you don't understand, ask someone who does! There is wisdom behind the religion, and you'll see that when you're searching for answers

[JawzofDETH]

iSilurian, on 11 December 2011 - 01:00 PM, said:

It is far far from junk science.  Perhaps i will make a topic on it.  We have, many many many cross correlating ways of determining the age of the planet.

As to what you've said in the other topic about recording the time, I must admit it's completely logical and rational therefore I shall yield that it is not as much junk-science as thought. However, I still feel we haven't been on the earth long enough to affirm any of these dating methodologies are true over extended periods of time. Don't get me wrong I am not doubting that all these methods have their validity, I'm just saying theoretically you and the other scientists have a point here, BUT as we know there are many factors to consider when looking at long periods of time, like environment itself, no one can deny that environmental changes can affect some dating methodologies, Now apply that to a few thousands years alone where extreme environmental changes may theoretically occurred and we start to develop serious margins of error before we come close to billions of years. Another question is say we used 7 different methods of dating, 5 of them confirm our hypothesis and 2 don't, what shall we say about the 2? Can you tell me definitively that absolutely all of all the methodologies agreed to get the 4.56 Billion number?

In conclusion: I admit your point. But I hold this number to be highly theoretical.

Was-Salaam

[iSilurian]

JawzofDETH, on 13 December 2011 - 05:33 PM, said:

As to what you've said in the other topic about recording the time, I must admit it's completely logical and rational therefore I shall yield that it is not as much junk-science as thought. However, I still feel we haven't been on the earth long enough to affirm any of these dating methodologies are true over extended periods of time. Don't get me wrong I am not doubting that all these methods have their validity, I'm just saying theoretically you and the other scientists have a point here, BUT as we know there are many factors to consider when looking at long periods of time, like environment itself, no one can deny that environmental changes can affect some dating methodologies, Now apply that to a few thousands years alone where extreme environmental changes may theoretically occurred and we start to develop serious margins of error before we come close to billions of years. Another question is say we used 7 different methods of dating, 5 of them confirm our hypothesis and 2 don't, what shall we say about the 2? Can you tell me definitively that absolutely all of all the methodologies agreed to get the 4.56 Billion number?

In conclusion: I admit your point. But I hold this number to be highly theoretical.

Was-Salaam

This is why i made the topic silly , go post there.

Now, i will have to respond here for the viewers.  You said.

"we know there are many factors to consider when looking at long periods of time, like environment itself, no one can deny that environmental changes can affect some dating methodologies"

In actuality though, we know very much about environmental affects on certain dating methods, however...we have examined in great detail these environmental affects, we know when and how they occur and we know what they do and how they may or may not affect the dating process.

Often, for example, if there are environmental processes eroding away at a particular environment, what you get are erosional surfaces.  Its not too hard to understand them and how they affect things.  Also, as i had mentioned before, dating concepts are cross correlated.  So not only do we think about these things ahead of time, but we deliberately go out of our way to make sure we arent making the mistake of having them mess up our results.

Please do not doubt our intelligence.  Yes, we are a young species, but we are very intelligent.

"5 of them confirm our hypothesis and 2 don't, what shall we say about the 2? Can you tell me definitively that absolutely all of all the methodologies agreed to get the 4.56 Billion number?"

From my understanding, yes all methods used for that number have yielded ages of roughly that amount of time.  Thats why i deliberately gave the example of the K-T extinction, to show you and everyone that the numbers correlate and give an age that is...most likely, 99% true.

"Theoretical" is a good thing.  Gravity is theoretical, germs and atoms are theoretical.  The word you want is "hypothetical" in which case, i will say, these arent hypothesis were discussing, theyre well supported theories.

[JawzofDETH]

iSilurian, on 13 December 2011 - 09:48 PM, said:

"Theoretical" is a good thing.  Gravity is theoretical, germs and atoms are theoretical.  The word you want is "hypothetical" in which case, i will say, these arent hypothesis were discussing, theyre well supported theories.

I got it right the first time. "Theoretical," thanks.
There is some basis (as you have shown and I admit this) so I reserve that,
but no - it's definitely not a good thing and clearly you can see that my aim is not to be uncharitible to your data or science, nor was I at all confrontational to the information. - BUT -


Now I shall state a few things:
There's no such thing as a 'well supported theory' ; there's only a hypothesis, a working hypothesis, a substantiatable/ unsubstantiatable theory and lastly fact, if you don't subscribe to this than you get the abomination we now have of inconclusively substantiated 'theories' taken to be fact to support one more hypothesis, that's the so-called "scientific method" we have today.

- The big-bang theory, not yet established fact. Yes we can say that the universe is expanding but we cannot prove conclusively that it originated from a single-cell organism or an single atom (of what structure?) then there is the question of how the electrons and protons came together to form an atom and then where did these smaller bodies come from?

- Primordial Broth/ Soup Theory? ...no comment.

- The theory of large bodies in the universe bending the fabric of space or time by their sheer presence in the known galaxy or universe. Need I say more?

- Darwin's theory of evolution, the human link. Alleged billions of years in which to record into the rocks, ice and earth - to extract their proof from and what do we get? " Piltdown Man " Someone went to lengths to create a forgery and what did "scientists" of time say? “None of the experts who have scrutinized the specimens and the gravel pit and its surroundings has doubted the genuineness of the discovery.” — William Gregory, in Natural History reporting on the Piltdown Man fossils

Sure, that aught to inspire much confidence of the masses in the 'great minds' of our age. Nowadays we have a myriad of such fossils purported to fill the "missing link" and "answer one of our big questions" but with such great powers of observation at the helm of the 'authentication' process forgive me if I am not that in awe or enamoured of the 'experts' word.'

The story of "Archie" Cochrane comes to mind when dealing with "authorites" in the feild of medicine; he showed a room full of doctors how their great "consensus" was left in wanting. All I am saying at the end of the day is that people (like myself) have every right to question the science, but these days questioning the science has become as taboo as questioning a religious concepts of yesteryear. It's good for all to question lest scientists become the priesthood of our times.

- Black-hole theory, which is presented to us time and time again by science channels, National Geographic, Discovery etc. But no one has actually ever seen a black-hole physically!

It's funny how it's okay for so-called "scientists" to believe in in many things they have never seen like this, but religious people are seen as kooks for believing in a an Omniscient Being beyond the limitations of the realms of matter and anti-matter, one that never had an innitial-point or beginning, like with the theory of cause an effect, there has to be an inital cause which is uncaused. Nor will ever end (kind of like the theory of Conservation of Energy) created this universe.

I think it's great that we have people like you coming to our forums and I respect anyone who can teach me (personally) anything.

Peace.

Edited by JawzofDETH, 14 December 2011 - 08:19 AM.

[iSilurian]

JawzofDETH, on 14 December 2011 - 05:48 AM, said:

- The big-bang theory, not yet established fact. Yes we can say that the universe is expanding but we cannot prove conclusively that it originated from a single-cell organism or an single atom (of what structure?) then there is the question of how the electrons and protons came together to form an atom and then where did these smaller bodies come from?

The material we do know about the Big Bang theory is absolutely well established.  Our knowledge of the origins of the big bang, is simply incomplete.  Also, take notice of how youre comparing something complex like the origins of the universe, with something simple like the age of the earth. Its like comparing PhD calculus based physics with elementary geography.  You cant sit around saying because u cant solve a PhD calculus based physics problem, that you cant figure out where Saudi Arabia is located on a map.  And thats a very good analogy actually.

JawzofDETH, on 14 December 2011 - 05:48 AM, said:

- Primordial Broth/ Soup Theory? ...no comment.

Again, something complex like the origins of life, vs something simple like the age of the earth.

JawzofDETH, on 14 December 2011 - 05:48 AM, said:

- Darwin's theory of evolution, the human link. Alleged billions of years in which to record into the rocks, ice and earth - to extract their proof from and what do we get? " Piltdown Man " Someone went to lengths to create a forgery and what did "scientists" of time say? “None of the experts who have scrutinized the specimens and the gravel pit and its surroundings has doubted the genuineness of the discovery.” — William Gregory, in Natural History reporting on the Piltdown Man fossils

The theory of evolution is actually extremely well supported, you simply are unfamiliar with the material.  I have a topic on the theory of evolution as well, feel free to comment over there.  We have things like ERV phylogenetic trees and observed mutations.  There are no scientists who do not accept evolution.  Its a no brainer.

JawzofDETH, on 14 December 2011 - 05:48 AM, said:

Sure, that aught to inspire much confidence of the masses in the 'great minds' of our age. Nowadays we have a myriad of such fossils purported to fill the "missing link" and "answer one of our big questions" but with such great powers of observation at the helm of the 'authentication' process forgive me if I am not that in awe or enamoured of the 'experts' word.'

The masses, are simply unfamiliar with science, thats the problem.  And you and i both know, that is true.  Earlier i mentioned ERV phylogenetic trees, but i garauntee nobody on this website knows what im talking about.  Now, ask yourself, how can people believe in evolution if they dont even know the evidence?  Our great minds do have great theories, evolution and the age of the earth are very well established and very easy to understand.  Of all of the scientists ive met, which ammounts to hundreds, if not thousands, no geologist i know, nor biologist disagrees with these things, because theyre very simple.  We can observe evolution, i made a topic about the transitional fossils.  The age of the earth, i made a topic for too, and i responded to your response.


All youre doing now is saying "i dont think its right", but you arent actually saying what is wrong with it.  So i will leave you with that, your opinion vs my degree.

JawzofDETH, on 14 December 2011 - 05:48 AM, said:

- Black-hole theory, which is presented to us time and time again by science channels, National Geographic, Discovery etc. But no one has actually ever seen a black-hole physically!

Obviously nowhone has seen a black hole because they suck in light, last i checked, we need light to see things. But we know they exist because we can see them sucking things in Including light, thats right, we can see the light being sucked into a hole.  Are you seriously trying to say that black holes dont exist?  You can still see pictures of them, its not that hard to google images.  Come on now...

Then you throw out some random criticism again without actually giving actual refutations of the age of the earth, just your opinion as a layman.

here are my links for fossils, evolution and the age of the earth.  Bring me real arguments as opposed to simply bringing me your opinion.  I could easily say that evolution isnt true, but when you actually break down the evidence, you will find that its pretty obvious.

http://www.shiachat....e-of-the-earth/
http://www.shiachat....y-of-evolution/
http://www.shiachat....tional-fossils/

Bring me some real arguments.  Lets see how far you get. I will be waiting.

[alan25usa]

We all hope to be muslims.  Only Allah knows whether we have submitted our whole selves, mind body soul and desires to His Will.  Every time someone asks me if I am a muslim I say Insha'Allah.  I try to be muslim.  I consider myself to be muslim in that I believe in His Islam, and I pray He counts me as one of His servants.  If you ask whether you are muslim due to factors that you list, then you already know that these are things that are unislamic, contrary to what we know from Allah is a muslim.  I do believe you are a muslim in the areas that you listed--the muslim areas.  I believe that the areas you listed in the not sure of part, are in fact parts that you are sure of--they are not muslim.  We all do our best, but we cannot have permission to be un-muslim in any respect.  Secular is not islam.  Islam is submission.  Secular is not submission.  I definately see you are a muslim in some ways, and some ways not so, based on the definition.  This is the case with all of us at times.  The only exception among men are Allah's Beloved Infallibles.  We should all pray for each other that we can do better, and be complete muslims in His religion.  I recommend you drop the gay thing and the secularized mentality. That is actually talked against in Quran.  If you insist on it, do not think of Islamic countries as a target for these things.  Its not necessary, there are plenty of non muslim countries for those who reject the totality of Islam.  I believe you can do it though, that is , I believe you can actualize your islam more fully.  Start by asking Allah before the shiachat forum akhi.