182 replies to this topic

[MysticKnight]

Miracles were suppose to be proof. Firon asks for an indication of Musa being truthful to his claim, and a miracle is presented.

[MysticKnight]

I would also like to add that the miracles of Moses were called "manifest/clear signs/proofs/indications"

[Lanatin]

Yeah but you still didn't answer my first question: is there any proof at all demons can channel their powers through humans?

Edited by La'nat Ma Man, 04 March 2012 - 05:25 PM.

[Ugly Jinn]

@Jebreil

I said what I had to say and explained my prerequisites clearly. You've gave your own prerequisites. We'll just agree to disagree on this.

If you are just going to use fallible actions (ex. caring, nice, sane, etc.) then you'd consider a divine agent Khizr a murderer/tyrant. You would NEVER trust a man claiming to be divine yet murders a boy in front of you. Even a divine Prophet like Moses was questioning his actions, you think a fallible like you has a chance using your fallible conditions?

There is no way out of this historical scenario using your fallible prerequisites.

I rest my case.

Edited by Ugly Jinn, 04 March 2012 - 07:39 PM.

[Lanatin]

Jebreil, on 04 March 2012 - 05:30 PM, said:

To La'nat

Apparently there is. Such a belief seemed to have been widespread. It's a logical possibility, and evil spirits were said to have inspired corrupt hearts. A bit like being possessed, I suppose. Or some bad demon conspiring with a fraud to do his bidding and display supernatural stuff. Maybe Dajjal-style.

The point is not whether this would happen - since we don't know. But if convincing illusions and demonic magic can happen, then what's to differentiate between that and a miracle?

If the Dajjal's sorcery is a true story, then what demarcates sorcery and miracle?

In the end much of occult magic is superstitious and has been shown countless times to have no actual effect on the physical world, at the most it will only produce illusions. Miracles would be the complete opposite. And the latter is coming from a sincere and emotionally balanced man.

We do agree on the veracity of prophecies though, right?

[MysticKnight]

لَٰكِنِ الرَّسُولُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَعَهُ جَاهَدُوا بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنْفُسِهِمْ ۚ وَأُولَٰئِكَ لَهُمُ الْخَيْرَاتُ ۖ وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ
But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper.


لَقَدْ مَنَّ اللَّهُ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِذْ بَعَثَ فِيهِمْ رَسُولًا مِنْ أَنْفُسِهِمْ يَتْلُو عَلَيْهِمْ آيَاتِهِ وَيُزَكِّيهِمْ وَيُعَلِّمُهُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ وَإِنْ كَانُوا مِنْ قَبْلُ لَفِي ضَلَالٍ مُبِينٍ
Allah did confer a great favour on the believers when He sent among them a messenger from among themselves, rehearsing unto them the Signs of Allah, purifying them, and instructing them in Scripture and Wisdom, while, before that, they had been in manifest error.



مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ۚ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ ۖ تَرَاهُمْ رُكَّعًا سُجَّدًا يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَانًا ۖ سِيمَاهُمْ فِي وُجُوهِهِمْ مِنْ أَثَرِ السُّجُودِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ ۚ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِي الْإِنْجِيلِ كَزَرْعٍ أَخْرَجَ شَطْأَهُ فَآزَرَهُ فَاسْتَغْلَظَ فَاسْتَوَىٰ عَلَىٰ سُوقِهِ يُعْجِبُ الزُّرَّاعَ لِيَغِيظَ بِهِمُ الْكُفَّارَ ۗ وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ مِنْهُمْ مَغْفِرَةً وَأَجْرًا عَظِيمًا
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward

وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ أُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الصِّدِّيقُونَ ۖ وَالشُّهَدَاءُ عِنْدَ رَبِّهِمْ لَهُمْ أَجْرُهُمْ وَنُورُهُمْ ۖ وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَكَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا أُولَٰئِكَ أَصْحَابُ الْجَحِيمِ
And (as for) those who believe in Allah and His messengers, these it is that are the truthful and the faithful ones in the sight of their Lord: they shall have their reward and their light, and (as for) those who disbelieve and reject Our communications, these are the inmates of the hell.

وَالسَّابِقُونَ الْأَوَّلُونَ مِنَ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالْأَنْصَارِ وَالَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوهُمْ بِإِحْسَانٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَضُوا عَنْهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي تَحْتَهَا الْأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ
And (as for) the foremost, the first of the Muhajirs and the Ansars, and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flOw, to abide in them for ever; that is the mighty achievement.



لِلْفُقَرَاءِ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ الَّذِينَ أُخْرِجُوا مِنْ دِيَارِهِمْ وَأَمْوَالِهِمْ يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَانًا وَيَنْصُرُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ أُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الصَّادِقُونَ {8}
(It is) for the poor who fled their homes and their possessions, seeking grace of Allah and (His) pleasure, and assisting Allah and His Messenger: these it is that are the truthful.


Now I know this doesn't include every person whom witnessed the Prophet and converted...but it includes a great amount of people and describes them as

1) Truthful
2) People whom sought God's pleasure
3) People whom God was pleased with
4) People whom were promised paradise (I understand Shias see this promise as conditional)
5) Strove for the sake of God and sacrificed wealth in the way of God
6) People whom the Prophet purified.
7) Indirect thing, is those promised paradise by the verse that those whom desire the life of this world will have nothing but fire in the next, are then people devoid of the desire of the life of this world.

Sure there were hypocrites, sure not everyone truly believed, but a great portion of people certainly qualify for the praise of these verses.

So my question to Jebreil, did none of them change after the Messenger died?

Another thing that was not addressed was that Abu Baker was one of the first to believe, spent a lot of wealth for Islam, was companion in the cave with Messenger, etc... at least he appears to be good...so what happened there?

Edited by MysticKnight, 04 March 2012 - 09:52 PM.

[Ugly Jinn]

Jebreil, on 04 March 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

Agha Khan example

Khizr example

Yeah, I'm breaking my own rule because you love examples.

And you didn't answer my question about Khizr.

[MysticKnight]

They sought the pleasure of God for years - all of sudden they don't care about displeasing him.
They were obedient towards God and his Messenger - all of sudden they are disobeying him
They had no desire of the world, believed in the wisdom of the messenger - all of sudden their greed is taking over them and they are disregarding the wisdom taught by the Messenger....
They were purified by the Messenger - all of sudden they are disregarding what is right due to corruption
They were compassionate amongst themselves - all of sudden disregard the rights of one of them (Ali)


Your saying their is dormant bad traits...yet they done away with those traits for years...they were purified, taught the wisdom, were seeking God's pleasure, had no desire of the world, were truthful, and you are talking about dormant bad traits.

How do you know a person of apparent high character doesn't have dormant bad trait- how do you know he doesn't have some desire for power? Here the description of these people is that they don't desire the world and are purified..that they love God and his Messenger and striving in his way over the life of this world, and their wealth, etc...yet you believe they have dormant traits that can change them all of sudden, but don't believe a person that appears to be of high character to you, then claims to be an authority over you, possibly can have a dormant desire of the world that he didn't show?

Honestly I would agree it's highly unlikely, which is why we really trust really high character to remain that way, but it's not impossible. In fact, it being unlikely makes it highly unlikely that majority of companions turned on their backs. I understand some here and there changing, but most..that's what is absurd to Sunnis, because it's highly unlikely of an individual to do so.

While it's highly unlikely of a person to do change drastically, it's not impossible.

The thing is we always have free-will. We can always change. It never becomes impossible. It becomes highly improbable.

[MysticKnight]

You just repeat your argument which you have no shownanyproof for. I've shown people with high character, high honor, can change from a Shia perspective. In fact, example of the companions was unnecessary. Simple logic dictates we have free-will, and free-will implies the ability to do evil or good. A person whom is truthful for years has chosen to be truthful, he doesn't become immune to lying, he can still chose to lie.

A person whom is apparently good on the outside, has good character, can have inner struggle of evil motives, and those evil motives can over take them if he let's them.

If you see something wrong from what I see of verses (and what all Sunnis see of the verses as well), just state where I went wrong. I don't see how they can be interpreted in another way, so if you know how, then go ahead and show how.

[Ugly Jinn]

Jebreil, on 05 March 2012 - 07:00 AM, said:

Let's just say that if a man murdered a boy in front of you and you had no indication from God Almighty that this man is infallible, then you're religiously obliged to take them to court for retribution. Luckily, Moses had prior knowledge who Khizr was.

That's the point. You would take a divine agent Khizr to court because of your approach, hence your fallible based prerequisite formula isn't consistent, it's flawed.

Any other fallible actions performed before by Khizr would be a moot point because he failed to meet your 'caring or sane or helping' prerequisite.

Edited by Ugly Jinn, 05 March 2012 - 02:40 PM.

[Ugly Jinn]

@Jebreil

Your religion orders you to obey a divine agent. Moses obeyed him, you think you are an exception with your fallible formula? Obeying divine agent > taking a divine agent to court All divine agent's actions are justified, hence you are not obeying your religion by taking a divine agent to court, rather disobeying.

In this case you wouldn't even be able to figure out Khizr is a divine agent with your approach - that's the whole point.

Your 'fallible achievable' formula will be a monumental failure using it on Khizr (and many other divine agents I can use but it's kinda pointless). As I've stated "Any other fallible actions performed before/after by Khizr would be a moot point because he failed to meet your fallible 'caring or sane or helping' prerequisites.

Edited by Ugly Jinn, 05 March 2012 - 03:21 PM.

[MysticKnight]

Jebreil, on 05 March 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

I've not seen you show anyone with high character and high morals. Which Shia takes Abu Bakr and Umar - or anyone who rejected Imam Ali - as individuals with high character and high morals?

What do you do of the verses that I shown? Take for example: "This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. " This shows those with the Prophet were generally of this character.  What do you make of this description of those with the Prophet?

Also, if they were promised paradise, and those whom desire the world were promised nothing but fire in the next world, wouldn't it mean they had no desire of this world? There is verses stating those whom fought before and spent money in the way are higher rank then those whom fought later and spent wealth, but that God has promised good to all.

Shia stance is majority turned on their backs, except a few. So obviously people whom were described to be high character changed from this perspective.

Quote

do you know x to be scrupulously truthful and sane - yes I do

I contend the premise that you can know for sure a person is totally 100% truthful. All you can know is that you don't know of him lying. You can't be sure he didn't lie. But even suppose you did know..the following premise:

Quote

would x lie for his gain - no he won't

Doesn't follow.  As I repeated, a person being truthful means he has not lied. It doesn't mean he would never lie.  You haven't proven because person has been truthful, that he will remain truthful his whole life. You haven't proven that he has no free-will to change and lie.

Quote

So, Mysticknight, tell me, if your dad is scrupulously truthful and sane and if you know he wouldn't lie for his gain, then should he claim to be a prophet, would you accept?

If I knew for certain he would not lie, then obviously I must accept he is being honest, which would leave room for sanity problems. If I knew for certain  he was sane and would not lie, then I would have to accept the claim, but either of these you can't know for sure. Not every person whom is hallucinating things will lose control over himself and aside from hallucinations, he might not have anything to indicate he is crazy.  But the question is does anyone know for sure a person would not lie? I don't think so.  You don't know what a person can do or not do out of free-will. You can trust a person would not do something, you can strongly believe he wouldn't based on his character, but you can't be sure he would not change. The reason is we have free-will, and if people remain good, they are not on auto-good mode, they are constantly choosing to be good while they can chose to be evil.

The problem with your argument, is that you think you know what a person would or wouldn't do. This is wrong. You can strongly believe a person would not or would do something, but you can't be certain.  As I stated before, a person may have hidden motives you are not aware of, he might have lust for power, and it over takes him. A person having lust for power, doesn't mean he can't act good or have other good. He can chose to ignore that desire or one day perhaps he will let it overcome him and change him for the worse.

You haven't shown a truthful person would not lie. A truthful person has not lied, but he can lie, out of free-will. If you say he cannot chose to lie, basically you are taking his trait of choosing to be truthful as not being of free-will but of some sort of automatic mode he is now currently in after choosing to be for a long time.

Edited by MysticKnight, 05 March 2012 - 03:48 PM.

[MysticKnight]

Jebreil, on 05 March 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

کل یعمل علی شاکلته

So what happened to people are as they appear. A person appearing to be caring must be caring, etc... What happened to knowing people by their actions? That actions aren't divorced from character?

[Lanatin]

I've said all I wanted to in this thread, but just one word i'd like to impart to Jebreil; this debate would be more laxed if you refrain from using the term 'scrupulously truthful' all the time lol, it makes me want to buy a pack of Doritos and munch on them scrupulously.

And Jinn, the example of Khizr is very poor. Step up your game.

[MysticKnight]

Being certain I won't, would mean I can't. And that would imply it's impossible. I could strongly believe I won't.  I can believe my family would never either. But I can't be certain. I can be 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% certain, but not 100% certain.

People don't change drastically usually. That I have to agree. Which is why I find the Sunni stance on companions to be more logical then Shia. But there is people whom break the generality and are an exception. Is it logical to believe 99% of the people praised with the verses I posted changed for the worse. No. Because it's highly unlikely a person changes drastically like that. But it does happen with some people, and it's not impossible.

And some people do change drastically. Most people don't.


I would appreciate if you address my points and not ignore them. I had a point regarding free-will which you skipped....do you believe a truthful person choose not to lie, or can't chose to lie? Do you believe high character people chose not to be evil or can't chose to be evil?

Edited by MysticKnight, 05 March 2012 - 04:33 PM.

[Ugly Jinn]

Jebreil, on 05 March 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

The point is not figuring out Khizr. The point is figuring out people who claim to be prophets, like Moses, Christ, Mani, Muhammad, and Bahaullah. These people whom God sent to guide a society must not offend society's morality. Society must be perplexed: "such good, honest, altruistic men of wisdom, and yet they want us to break our idols and follow these laws?"

The point is to figuring out all divine agents. Your approach cannot - it's incomplete. I don't think there is anything else that could be added. There shouldn't be any logical issue you should have with a formula where an infallible prerequisite exists for an infallible claim.

I'll end here, because it's going nowhere.

La, on 05 March 2012 - 04:01 PM, said:

And Jinn, the example of Khizr is very poor. Step up your game.

Rather then just saying it's poor, why don't you explain why it's poor.

The point of that example is pretty simple. Even a divine Prophet like Moses questioned Khizr's actions. Khizr's actions can be achieved by a fallible (ex. murdering). Hence, actions which a fallible can achieve cannot determine whether a man is infallible or not = subjective = erroneous.

Edited by Ugly Jinn, 05 March 2012 - 05:17 PM.

[MysticKnight]

Jebreil, on 05 March 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Ir means that their actions arise from their character; know the actions and you shall know the character within.

This goes back to my point about "disbelievers" and their actions. How come some of them have really good actions, if they are not good people? Good people surely don't deserve hell fire. So how do you judge their character?