Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'atheism'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Special Forums
    • Muharram 1439/2017
  • Welcome to ShiaChat!
    • Guest Lounge
    • Tech Support and Feedback
  • Main Forums
    • Theology and General Religion
    • Personalities in the Islamic World
    • Jurisprudence and Islamic Law
    • Politics and Current Events
    • Social, Family, Personal, and Cultural Issues
    • Science, Technology, Economics, Education, and Health
    • Off-Topic
  • Other Forums
    • Interfaith Dialogue
    • Other Languages
    • Local Community Forums
  • The Hadith Club's Topics
  • University Students Club's Academic Questions
  • Food Club's Topics
  • University Students Club's Advice and Counseling
  • Food Club's Restaurants
  • Reverts to Islam's Topics
  • Sports on ShiaChat's Football (Soccer)
  • Sports on ShiaChat's Basketball
  • Sports on ShiaChat's Cricket/Baseball
  • Sports on ShiaChat's American Football
  • Travel Club (Pilgrimages, Vacations, Business)'s Ziyarat, Hajj, Umrah
  • University Students Club's Housekeeping
  • Travel Club (Pilgrimages, Vacations, Business)'s General Travel Discussion
  • Mental health and Psychological wellbeing's Topics
  • Sports on ShiaChat's Boxing/Wrestling/MMA
  • Sports on ShiaChat's Other Sports
  • Travel Club (Pilgrimages, Vacations, Business)'s Vacations/Business Trips
  • Art, Crafts, DIY's Topics


  • Community Calendar


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Found 39 results

  1. Proof of God

    I recently did an article on the existence of god on one of the threads which I think would benefit everyone: In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings be upon our Master and Prophet, Ab-al-Qassem al-Mustafa Muhammad and upon his immaculate, pure and chosen household, especially the one remaining with Allah on earth. So the topic here is about Atheism, which as an Ex-Atheist myself can say is like relying on elephants to walk on a spiders web, but unfortunately nowadays "Atheism" or how I label it as "Lack of common logic" has been equalled with being enlightened or somehow intelligent. Leaving out of course the great Muslim and Christians Scientists and Philosophers like Isaac Newton, Mullah Sadra, Ibn al-Haytham etc. out of the picture completely but nevertheless let us dive into this. First Question: Is the universe Eternal? Well there are many reasons why the universe cannot have existed forever: The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: The Second Law of Thermodynamics is about the quality of energy. It states that as energy is transferred or transformed, more and more of it is wasted. (https://www.livescience.com/50941-second-law-thermodynamics.html) So if the universe was eternal how come we still find ourselves with energy? Why has it not been wasted already if our universe had existed for ever? The Theory of relativity: Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity means that the universe had a beginning and was not eternal as he had previously believed (Einstein was originally a pantheist). His theory proved that the universe is not a cause, but instead one big effect—something brought it into existence. Einstein disliked his end result so much that he introduced a “fudge factor” into his theory that allowed for an eternal universe. But there was only one problem. His fudge factor required a division by zero in his calculations—a mathematical error any good math student knows not to make. When discovered by other mathematicians, Einstein admitted his error calling it “the greatest blunder of my life.” After his acknowledgment, and upon confirming further research that showed the universe expanding just as his theory of relativity predicted, Einstein bowed to the fact that the universe is not eternal. Galaxy seeds: Scientists believe that, if the Big Bang is true (first, there was nothing, then, BANG, something came into being), then temperature “ripples” should exist in space, and it would be these ripples that enabled matter to collect into galaxies. To discover whether these ripples exist, the Cosmic Background Explorer – COBE – was launched in 1989 to find them, with the findings being released in 1992. What COBE found was perfect/precise ripples that, sure enough, enable galaxies to form. The radiation echo: Bell Labs scientists in 1965. What is it? It is the heat afterglow from the Big Bang. Its discovery dealt a death blow to any theory of the universe being in a steady state because it shows instead that the universe exploded. Hydrogen turning into helium: In the basic Hydrogen fusion cycle, four Hydrogen nuclei (protons) come together to make a Helium nucleus. If the universe is eternal then how come we still have hydrogen? Why has it not already turn into helium? This is as far science can go with my argument, since now on it is based on Mathematics, Logic and Philosophy. Some Atheists insist that energy could have exited at a quantum level, however there are 3 major flaws in this: 1) How can the laws of the universe apply before the universe even existing? 2) How can this simple quantum energy create such precision in the universe we reside in? There is something interesting they point out by saying ' This energy could've needed some time to heat up and BOOM! Flaws: 1) Time is an aspect that governs this universe. 2) This is implies an impossible infinity. For example, if someone tells you he has been counting down since infinity for ever and has recently reached the number 2,1,0,-1 etc. How come he has reached these numbers now? Has he not had a infinite amount of time to reach this level? There are many Mathematical and logical aspects to this, I do not have the knowledge to further delve into this matter therefore I move on. Could the universe have come out of nothing? This is as absurd as saying that my glass of water came into existence out of nothing, but let us look at the law of non-contradiction: In classical logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (or the law of contradiction (PM) or the principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) is the second of the three classic laws of thought. It states that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_noncontradiction) So how can there be nothing but then out of absolute nothingness get something like mass or laws etc? Could the universe have been merely by simple chance? The word renowned math mathematician Roger Penrose who is a friend of Stephen Hawkings delved into this and found out this was the number: 1/10 to the power of 10 to the power of 123. Let me point out that mathematically a number is 1/10 to the power of 50 it is regarded as 0 probablity. As Penrose puts it, that is a “number which it would be impossible to write out in the usual decimal way, because even if you were able to put a zero on every particle in the universe, there would not even be enough particles to do the job.” A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.” –Cambridge University astrophysicist and mathematician Fred Hoyle . “Fred Hoyle and I differ on lots of questions, but on this we agree: a common sense and satisfying interpretation of our world suggests the designing hand of a superintelligence.” –Former Harvard University Research Professor of Astronomy and the History of Science Owen Gingerich, who is now the senior astronomer at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. Gingerich is here reflecting on Fred Hoyle’s above comment. For those in search of truth I recommend this website: http://godevidence.com If you want me to continue with these kind of posts on this thread please leave a reply saying yes or no.
  2. The accusations of the atheist's

    I start this in the Name of Allah the most beneficent the most Merciful all praise is due to Him Master of all the worlds. I was listening through a lecture about atheism and etc, and i came about this accusation from one atheist who explained why God is not beneficent nor merciful (naudhubillaah) by stating that for example bone cancer in children is something that is ruthless and kills without the fault of the person, and is not in our control... How do we Muslims reply to this crooked accusation and how do we debunk it? How can we prove Allah's goodness even with the existence of cancer's etc... Jazakallah... By the way this is the video
  3. Another version of the Proof of the Sincere given by Sadr al-Muta’alihin occurs in his commentary on the passage from the Qur’an: “Allah witnesses that there is no god but He” (3:17). Mulla Sadra writes: Know that the greatest of proofs and firmest of ways, the brightest path, the most noble and most secure is reasoning to the essence (dhat) of a thing by its essence (dhat). And that which is the most manifest of things is the nature of absolute existence (al-wujud al-mutlaq) in so far as it is absolute, and it is the Truth (haqiqah) of the Necessary Itself, the Exalted, and there is nothing except the First Truth (al-Haqq al-Awwal) which is the Truth (haqiqah) of existence itself, for whatever is other than It is either a whatness (mahiyyah), or an imperfect existence mixed with imperfection, or impotence and nothingness. There is nothing among them to be an instance of the meaning of existence by its essence (dhat). The Necessary Existent is pure existence than which nothing is more complete [more properly an instance of existence]. It has no limit [or definition] and has no end and it is not mixed with any other thing, whether a universality or specificity, nor [is It mixed with] one attribute in contrast to another besides existence. So we say: If there were not a Truth of Existence in existence, there would not be anything in existence, for whatever is other than the Truth of Existence is either a whatness (mahiyyah), and it is obvious that in respect to its essence (dhat) it would be other than existent, or it is an imperfect and incomplete existence, so there would be no alternative but to require composition and specification at a determined level and specific limit of all existence. Then a cause would be needed to complete its existence, and that which limits by a specific limit and brings it from potentiality to actuality and from contingency to necessity, for everything whose truth is not the truth of existence will not in its essence require existence, and neither will its ipseity require a specific limit of existence. So it will need something to dominate and limit it to benefit it with a determinate level. And that is the preponderant that is prior in existence to all, with a priority in simplicity over the composed, over the imperfect, the rich over the poor, and the gracious over the graced. So the Truth of the First Truth is the proof of its essence (dhat) and is the proof of all things. As is said by God: “Is it not sufficient for your Lord that He is a witness over all things?” (41:53) So this is the way of the Sincere, those who rely upon Him by Himself and who reason from Him to Him and who witness by His existence to other things, not by the existence of things to Him.[1] Here again, we find elements drawn from the Muslim peripatetics and from the ‘urafa. The passage begins with an affirmation of the Sufi claim that the sole reality is God, identified with absolute existence: “there is nothing except the First Truth (al-Haqq al-awwal) which is the Truth (haqiqah) of existence itself”. In order to prove that absolute existence must be God, i.e., the Necessary Existent, it is argued that no other candidate is independent, not whatness, not existence mixed with imperfection, and certainly not impotence and nothingness. So, if there is a God, it must be pure absolute existence, and if it can be shown that this Truth of Existence itself exists, is instantiated, this will amount to a proof of the existence of God. The next move is typical of the ‘urafa. It is claimed that if there were no Necessary Existent, no Truth of Existence, then there would be nothing at all. At this point, however, Sadra ceases to follow the line of the Sufis and takes a more peripatetic form of reasoning, claiming that the Truth of Existence is needed by all other existents as a cause. Whatness by itself cannot be responsible for existence, for if we consider merely the properties exhibited by reality, it will be a contingent fact that they are instantiated. If someone claims that there is no pure existence but only mixed imperfect existences, Sadra replies that they rely upon pure existence in two respects. First, the imperfect existent will require a cause, since no imperfect being in and of itself can be responsible for its own existence; and second, a cause is needed for the imperfect to determine its level of limited actuality, for the imperfect will not be able to determine a specific level or grade of being for itself on its own, but needs to be dominated from above, as it were. As in the statement in the Asfar, we find reference to the Sufi theme of the unity of existence, but this comes to be explicated in terms of the major principles of Sadra’s own transcendental philosophy: the fundamentality of existence and the gradedness of existence. Necessary and contingent are defined in terms of causal dependence, as in Ibn Sina, and the ultimate cause is then shown to be the Truth of existence. There is also a discussion of the Proof of the Sincere in the Epilogue to his Kitab al-masha’ir.[2] Here it is first admitted that there are many paths toward God, but that the strongest and most noble is that in which He alone can be the middle term of the argument, and that this direct route is that of the Prophets and of the Sincere. The discussion is punctuated with passages from the Qur’an, including those mentioned regarding the Proof of the Sincere by Ibn Sina. Those who take the route of the Sincere first consider the reality or Truth of existence, haqiqat al-wujud, and understand that this is the principle or origin (‘asl) of each thing, and that this is the Necessary Existent. Contingency, need and privation do not attach to existence because of its haqiqah, but because of flaws and privations external to this original haqiqah. This realization is said to give rise to an understanding of the unity of the Divine Attributes, and then from the Attributes to the qualities of His states and their effects. Then it is confessed that the sun of haqiqah arises from ‘irfan (gnosis), by which it is known that existence is a simple haqiqah, without genus, difference, definition, description or proof. The differences among the particular instances of reality are attributed to differences in grade of perfection, causal priority and independence. Pure existence is identified with infinite intensity of being, ultimate perfection. All other existences are of various degrees of imperfect existence. It is denied that deficiency in existence is implied by the Truth of Existence itself, because deficiency is a privation lacking positive ontological status. Rather, limitation and imperfection are a by-product of creation, since the effect is necessarily inferior to its cause. In his al-Hikmat al-arshiyah we find yet another statement of the Proof of the Sincere by Sadr al-Muta’alihin.[3] This work opens with the definition of the Truth of Existence as pure being without the admixture of generality or particularity, limits, whatness, imperfection or privation. This pure being is identified with God, the Necessary Existent, and it is argued that if the Truth of existence did not exist, nothing would exist. This is taken to establish the existence of the Truth of existence. In order to show that the Truth of Existence possesses necessary existence, it is argued that everything which exists imperfectly depends on being while pure being itself depends on nothing. The imperfect is that which results from the mixture or composition of being with some whatness or particularity. That which is mixed is posterior to and dependent on its simple elements. The element of whatness is really a privation or limitation of being without any independent reality of its own, so the imperfect is totally dependent on the perfect. Mixed being is dependent on the Truth of existence which itself is without need of anything. This statement is followed by another argument which is similar to that given by such ‘urafa as Ibn Turkah and al-Jami, to the effect that true predication presumes being: For to affirm any concept of something and to predicate it of that thing—whether (the concept be) a whatness or some other attribute, and whether it be affirmed or denied of something—always presupposes the being of that thing. Our discussion always comes back to Being: either there is an infinite regression (of predications and subjects) or one arrives in the end at an Absolute Being, unmixed with anything else.[4] The philosophical theology which finds expression here is far from any sort of pantheistic identification of the world or nature with God, but rather is an attempt to strike a balance between extreme immanence and extreme transcendence while retaining both. The pantheistic tendency sacrifices transcendence for the sake of immanence while more traditional theologies do the reverse. In Sadr al-Muta’alihin, divine immanence is maintained by identifying the deity with existence, while transcendence is maintained by insisting that what is meant here is not the imperfect world, but absolutely pure existence. The synthesis discovered by Mulla Sadra has inspired and continues to inspire numerous commentaries and elaborations on the themes of his philosophy. [1]Sadr al-Din Shirazi, Asrar al-ayat, ed. Muhammad Khajavi (Tehran: Iranian Academy of Philosophy, 1981), pp. 25-26. [2]Translated by Parviz Morewedge as The Metaphysics of Mulla Sadra (New York: The Society for the Study of Islamic Philosophy and Science, 1992). [3]Translated as The Wisdom of the Throne by James Winston Morris (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981). [4]Ibid., p. 96. Can someone explain this argument to me in simpler words. It seems really hard to grasp
  4. Salam everyone, So a (shia) friend of mine has been recently watching videos about atheism and is now asking me question like why is shia islam right.. stuff like that. He is now asking me why Shia islam is right out of the thousand religions in the world and what about everyone else who was born as Christian, Hindu etc. I do not have enough knowledge, and I hope you guys can help this person.
  5. Salaamu alaykum everyone, Please check out this new series that absolutely destroys all these anti-Islam YouTube atheists who think true Muslims are ISIS terrorists. If you like the video, please upvote it on YouTube + share on social media because the atheists are rushing to downvote them without watching them because they know they are getting exposed. Please also share your thoughts below in the thread:
  6. My brother has left Islam

    Salam, My brother has left Islam, he is now an atheist. For some time he was questioning things and questioning Quranic verses and used to say he is searching, now he says he is not a muslim anymore. My family still had hope and all of us were trying hard to bring him back to the right path... we would argue logically with him but he replies and acts like a typical atheist and is not willing to accept anything. Still... because he is young and immature we still hoped that he will eventually realize - up until now we took it as a theoretical problem, we were so confident of him that he wouldn't be practically living the life like an atheist, we thought atheism was only in his mind we didn't know it had make it to his life and his ways. We just learnt that he's been committing great sins. He lives on his own, my parents live in a different country with my brother and his family, I live in a different country and my sister lives close to him but he doesn't listen to anyone. He is independent and rich and alone. . . though he's only 24. We're religious and when we learnt of how sinful life he's living ..it was like a majlis on skype, my mom cried so much, my sister in law, my siblings and me... we have been crying for him for what irreversible sins he's done and how he has broken our trust.. but what I need advice for now, is that what should we do now ? Should we confront him of what we've come to know.. should we break ties with him ? Should we stop talking ? Should we let him know that we know ? Or should we, like my mom says, be silent for the time being... My mom plans to go to him and compel him to live with her in a Muslim country so that he will be in front of her eyes. And my father keeps saying we should force him to marry and things will get better.... but obviously if he isn't Muslim we can't marry him to a muslim girl, it would be something if we get him to marry anyone.. as obviously marriage is now unnecessary and uninteresting to him. It's that if we all take a stand against him he will (most probably) not pay much heed to it and can even go without talking to us for months.. what we fear is that deserting him would only cause him to sink even deeper into the sinful lifestyle... such as taking drugs and other substances. But on the other hand I think that if we keep silent we would ourselves be committing a sin... I really want sincere advice on what we all should do... I know that only Allah can guide him now but if there's anything WE can do...
  7. hello, I'd like to know if most of iranians are atheists or believers, and if young people believe in iran, someone knows? some people here have said that most of people that live in iran do believe in islam. thank you.
  8. Why doesn't God tell us directly which religion is the right one? In response to the above-mentioned question, the following humble piece of writing is put forth to you. He has already told everyone what to do and what not to do. But most of the people seem to be essentially careless in this respect. Some of His explicit words that have directly stated which religion has to be chosen are as following: 1: إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِندَ اللَّهِ الْإِسْلَامُ ۗ وَمَا اخْتَلَفَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ إِلَّا مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَهُمُ الْعِلْمُ بَغْيًا بَيْنَهُمْ ۗ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِآيَاتِ اللَّهِ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ سَرِيعُ الْحِسَاب Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam. And those who were given the Scripture did not differ except after knowledge had come to them - out of jealous animosity between themselves. And whoever disbelieves in the verses of Allah, then indeed, Allah is swift in [taking] account. Holy Quran 3:19. 2: وَمَن يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الْإِسْلَامِ دِينًا فَلَن يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ وَهُوَ فِي الْآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ And whoever desires other than Islam as religion - never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers. Holy Quran 3:85. 3: الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ۚ فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ فِي مَخْمَصَةٍ غَيْرَ مُتَجَانِفٍ لِّإِثْمٍ ۙ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. But whoever is forced by severe hunger with no inclination to sin - then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. Most of the people obey their conjectures and surmises, as the Glorious Quran has predicted and depicted this bitter reality in the verse below: وَمَا يَتَّبِعُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ إِلَّا ظَنًّا ۚ إِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ بِمَا يَفْعَلُونَ And most of them follow not except assumption. Indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all. Indeed, Allah is Knowing of what they do. Holy Quran 10:36. Moreover, don't think I have put forth these verses due to a sympathetic argument rather the Quran is a book beautifully written in accordance with everyone’s innate nature. None would ever get tired of reading and reciting its glorious verses; because Allah, it is wrapped up with a beauty of a miraculous nature. وَمَا كَانَ هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَىٰ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَلَٰكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ مِن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah, but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds. Holy Quran 10:37. Thanks May God Bless Us All realize the truth of the matter on His religions.
  9. Do good non-Muslims get sent to hell? First. We must clarify who do we mean by the word 'non-Muslims'? The term 'non-Muslims' includes many groups of people such as 'the people of the book' i.e. the Jews, the Christians, the other adherents of the pre-Islamic heavenly-sent religions, pagans, atheists, disbelievers and etc. Second. To have a methodical and systematic treatment of the issue, the question must be addressed from two different angles: A) 'confessional' and B) 'non-confessional'. By the word confessional I mean from religious [Islamic] point of view and by the word 'non-confessional' a purely 'rational' perspective. Third. Non-Muslims cannot be called ‘good’ if they abide by their own hereditary dogmas and show no flexibility towards the truth. Good non-Muslims should be beautified with the actual qualities. Fourth. To tackle the very question from a non-confessional perspective, we can argue that a wise man has always the will and intention to live a prosperous life, even if he restricts the realm of life to the earthly one. To win a prosperous life, all necessary means and measures must be taken. Theoretically talking, an important part of his worldly prosperity rests on intellectual harmony he should enjoy while explaining the world, the purpose of his life and his status after death. He who -committed to no monotheistic values- lacks a coherent system of beliefs on the purpose of his life in this world and his status in the hereafter, will not be able to experience the sweet taste of success and joyful moments; because the darkness of doubt, sheer ambiguity and pure uncertainty about the aftermath can cause him aggravating pain. To avoid such disturbing thoughts, everyone is expected to conduct reliable researches on the validity or invalidity of propositions pertaining to the afterlife. Finall, a rational agent can never remain indifferent to his destiny particularly if he gives the probability that his destiny might be of a fatal kind. Fifth. To treat the issue from a confessional perspective, to a Muslim it is clear that since Allah is the Creator, Benefactor and Possessor of all, and All-Aware of everyone's intentions and actions, He has the existential power and legitimate authority to put conditions for every one's salvation. According to His final say sent to the prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him and his progeny), only those who meet the two conditions of observing sincere 'faith' and carrying out 'virtuous deeds' will win eternal paradise. Indeed, Allah, the All-Wise, has not meant by the word ‘Muslims’ those who are nominal Muslims. Only the real Muslims whose actions translate their thoughts in the concrete world, will be granted salvation. Those who hold Muslim names and identities but their true interior beliefs are not reflected in the exterior world, will be deprived of a happy life in the hereafter. The true practicing Muslims who absolutely surrender their intentions and actions to Allah, will be awarded or granted eternal paradise. Non-Muslims can follow the suit. The conclusion: What Allah, the Almighty, hates most is his creatures' blatant ingratitude (Chapter al-Isra/ 67,89; Chapter al-Furqan/ 50) and their stubbornness and obstinacy in abiding by sheer falsehood (Chapter Yonus/ 33). Those non-Muslims who find the truth and again defy their Lords' commands obstinately, should wait the grave consequences of their actions and the choices they make. Those non-Muslims who have not found the truth altogether, or are deeply involved in polemic doubts or are in their ways to find the truth in coming days, will not be sent to hell; because Allah, the All-Wise, will act in accordance with the implications of His attributes of absolute justice and mercy. As such, the people of the book will win eternal salvation on condition that they remain committed to their true religious worldview and act upon their religious-moral principles. May Allah, the Compassionate, bless us all a happy life in this world and a happier life in the hereafter. References: 1. The Quran.
  10. Salams to all, Great excerpt from David Bentley Hart's book, "The Experience of God."
  11. Salaamun Alaykum There is a person who is very close to me. His relative advised that they needed help with regard to the person's beliefs, and I have noticed this need too. Basically, the person is from a Shia background in one of thise quite religious families (i.e. hijab, prayer but not necessarily boycotting a haram gathering, a bit suspicious of ulama baselessly etc). He seems to be more concerned with music than many other things- spends his days playing his various instruments. He seems quite lazy and disrespectful to others but is actually quite a compassionate and caring guy. He is a qualified scientist. Unmarried, recent graduate. He is very much suspicious (for no real reason) of Shia clerics. However, I think he is (based on his statements) quite interested in the works of Dr Shariati (who by the way is not against Shia clerics). He is quite sceptical of organised religion, doesn't pray but fasts. I think he is a Muslim but clearly has a lot of ideological issues. He seems highly influenced by secular humanism in general. He didn't used to be like this but he started playing haram instruments and it all went downhill from there. In reality, his world view (e.g. how we should behave with others) seems to be entirely copied from secular humanism. However, he is quite interested in art and Middle Eastern art/culture in general. I wanted to know what I can do to help ideologically. I.e. books I can suggest for him to read, works I or his relatives can read in order to try to get new ideas for him to reform himself ideologically. I understand the ethical side of it but I want ideological help. Personally, my Islamic knowledge is limited to akhlaq and fiqh. I'm not to strong on aqaid, history or Qur'an. I haven't read much Shariati but I will start soon. I wanted to get a bit of help in what to read, what to recommend etc. I am thsu tagging some members who I think can help. I really want to help this person so I greatly appreciate your help @baradar_jackson @notme @Gaius I. Caesar @Abu Hadi @hameedeh @mostafaa @narsis @magma @starlight @Marbles
  12. https://www.al-islam.org/discursive-theology-volume-1-dr-ali-rabbani-gulpaygani/lesson-6-argument-contingency Can someone explain this to me in a laymen fashion. How does the second law of thermodynamics prove god
  13. Salaamu alaykum all, It's been a long while, but some of you may remember from my suggested Shiachat Wikipedia Project which did not take off due to a lack of participation. I've decided to do something more within my reach inshaAllah - so I've started a blog addressing more philosophical and mystical topics. I feel that it is essential for Muslims to be pushing the Divine mission into cyberspace. My aim in starting this blog is 3: 1. To create a forum for spirituality. The Islamosphere is seriously lacking in blogs that promote spiritual material that will help us grow in our journey towards Allah 2. To bring back a traditional Islamic worldview. Because we live in the modern world, we do not realize the extent to which we assimilate values that are antithetical to Tawheed. I wish to share what I've learned along this philosophical journey. 3. To refute atheism. Currently there are hundreds of atheist blogs attacking God and religion - we have barely given a response, let alone a serious one. I view this as a wajib kifaa'i which we are currently failing to fulfill. If this sounds interesting to you - see my first post Intentions to learn more. I'd also really appreciate any likes on my facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/themuslimtheist/ . You can also follow me on twitter for updates: https://twitter.com/TheMuslimTheist Setting up this blog was A LOT of work (there's still more to be done, but I wanted to get the ball rolling.) I'd really appreciate any comments or shares! JazakAllah Khayr
  14. A research project

    Fill this form I have to conduct a psychology research for my final exams. I need Orthodox religious people who follow traditional roles to fill up this form. It only takes about 5- 10 minutes at most. Be honest and answer the test according to how you really behave and what you believe in. Your identity isn't recorded so you can be sure nobody knows what you have answered. it is confidential. Thanks.
  15. Asalamu alaikum, I am a devoted Muslim in my early teens. I pray and read Quran everyday and have never drank, fornicated (sex out of marriage) , or gambled in my life. Yet I feel that my faith is just waning away. It stared a few years back when I was still in school. Most of my friends either believe in God only or are atheists and do the opposite of whatever I do. Aside from that the knowledge that I have read and saw across the internet that proves that things like homosexuality being alright and that its fine to just have sex without being married has gotten me to the point were I feel I don't need Islam in my life. I always do go back to it thought and try my best to not give up on it but I feel that someday it will disappear. I have talked to my parents many times about this yet I have realized that if I keep on asking they'll start to get angry and disappointed of me. For now I am trying my best to stay strong but I feel that on the inside I really don't want to be a Muslim anymore and just do what the west does since it seems so successful. I still believe in God but I'm losing hope in Islam just to remind you. I hope someone can help me get over with this and help stand strong against all the temptations of the shaitan and what the west has to offer since I feel like Nabih Musa when he was constantly seduced by maids and asked God for help but was still forced to stay there instead of God sending him to prison.
  16. Darwin's quote

    "I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidae with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice." - Charles Darwin (1860) If God is benevolent, why did he deliberately create a natural system in which animals have no option but to cause other animals suffering? Why did he deliberately allow birth defected children to be born (both animal and human)? Why did he deliberately create all these viruses and bacteria that cause both human and animal suffering? And from a religious perspective, will the suffering of such animals be compensated? And regarding natural disasters like hurricanes, it is difficult to believe that they are sent to remind people or warn them of sins because many victims of these disasters are children and people who have lived relatively good lives. I would prefer that you guys don't cluster these questions into one question and rather answer each one specifically, unless you believe your clustered response is sufficient to address all these problems.
  17. Salam, I hope to find you all in good health. I have tried to find information about the concept of soul/"being alive v/s being dead" in atheism. I have been largely unsuccessful. Background- The following is my perspective and/or what i am aware of- When a 'being' is being born, various molecules are processed in a manner which become relevant cells. The supply of the relevant molecules is provided by the 'mother' or taken directly from nature. The body mass of the 'being' keeps on increasing and at a certain point of time, it becomes an 'entity', separate from the mother, to the extent that, in some cases, if separated prematurely it will continue to survive, with sufficient 'outside' care. During this process, the 'being' is said to have received a 'soul', as per the theists. After the 'being' passes away, the 'brain consciousness'/soul is no more with the body. Scenario Now, it may seem repulsive, but- For example, if someone is strangulated in a manner that the body is not hurt, and only the supply of air is stopped, the person 'dies'. My questions are- Why does the body not gain consciousness when the air supply is restored? Does the brain decide that the body should 'die'? If so, why? My contention is (I may be wrong) that- If a body does not have a 'soul', it is like an intelligent machine. And if it is a machine, then shouldn't the supply of resources should bring the 'dead' body back to 'life'?
  18. I came across this the other day on my Facebook feed. I hadn't the pleasure to actually attend—that evening I had a prior engagement with Miss Fisher and Earl Grey. But it really is an elegant thing. May it stimulate discussion and provoke much thought! I F'ing Freely, by Albert Newton Bell. ^_^
  19. Let's help a few brothers and sisters strengthen their iman. It is quite hard to hold onto religion in our time, especially in the west as all finds explanation through science. All while divine books are explained as part of the evolution of our intelligence/knowledge (God of the gaps). Even the moral lessons and actions are no longer viewed as divine but barbaric or simply ancient. Rather than arguing which religion speaks the truth, let's start with the origin of it- the Almighty. My proof is fitra, though for many this isn't proof enough. Even for myself at times my feelings sway, though thankfully my rope to God never snaps. Some claim it is caused by indoctrination/condition from a young age. However, if so, why do many members of non-religious families turn to religion? Then comes the idea of cultures and our way of thinking. Anyhow, what is yours?
  20. This is one of the oldest theological questions around, but I'm not a fan of any of the solutions I've heard. Assuming there is a God, is an omniscient, omnipotent, and good God consistent with a world where innocent people suffer? Since indisputably innocent people are hurt, get sick, and are killed, (like babies and children), we know that God doesn't stop bad things from happening to good/innocent people. Below are some of the explanations I've heard, but I'd any others that you might have. There are a number of simple ways to explain this: -a) God could be omniscient and good, but be unable to act because he isn't omnipotent. -b) God could be omnipotent and good, but doesn't know all the bad things that happen because he isn't omnipotent. -c) God could be omniscient and omnipotent, but at best just not care what happens to people (because God isn't good). All of these scenarios are incompatible with the theology of abrahamic religions, and the main way I've heard people attempt to resolve this is by justifying/modifying scenario c). For example: -d) Heaven is so amazing it makes up for the suffering good people experience. -e) God cannot intervene because it would interfere with free will. -f) Everything that happens for a reason because it is part of Gods plan, and is better overall. -g) God is by definition good, so everything that happens is good. -h) Without bad things we wouldn't have any reference point for what is good. I have issue with all of these: d) this doesn't explain why there had to be the suffering in the first place, or why it's better to have some suffering. e) It isn't clear why having free will and atrocities is better than no free will and no atrocities f) It is unclear how children dying from cholera makes anything better. g) This implies that bad things are good, which is illogical. h) it isn't clear why we need a reference point for good, and even if why do why the bad has to be so horrific. Anyone have any explanations that are logically sound and fit the world?
  21. Hi. I'm going through a period of skepticism and would like to ask any ex-Muslims on here why they chose to leave Islam. What specifics were the final straw that broke the camel's back? In particular, since this is a Shia forum, I'd be interested in how your view of the following changed once you'd left Islam compared to when you were a Muslim: 1. The sacrifice of Imam Hussain at Karbala along with 72 of his followers. 2. The infallibility of the Prophet and His Miracles and 3. how do you interpret the lives of Sufi saints such as Rumi, Hallaj and Bulleh Shah after leaving Islam? These answers from you I hope will help me to elucidate my own thoughts and questions. (Moderators: perhaps this could go in the Thinkers' Discourse section; secondly, is there a way of changing one's username without making a new account?)
  22. The Case For God By Karen Armstrong

    Salam 'Alaykum. Hi, guys. I was wondering if any of you have read Karen Armstrong's "The Case for God". I really admire Ms.Armstrong's work and think this book is a good defense of theism in the traditional sense. However, there are a couple of points I can't seem to agree with her on. For the sake of a productive discussion I'd like to limit this conversation to those who've read the book. She says that the physical world cannot tell us anything about God. While I don't have a problem with this per se, I do think this type of doctrine can become a problem. If this is the case, then how can we conclusively say that the good tings that happen to us in life are actually the product of God's mercy. How can someone cultivate an attitude of gratitude towards their creator if concrete reality can tell us nothing about Him. Problem number two arises when she gets to discussing the divinity of Christ. Throughout her book, she makes it clear that religious doctrines cannot be taken literally for that would be anthropomorphic. Ergo, Christian doctrine cannot be taken literally. She illustrates the teachings of Eastern mystics like Denys and the Cappadocians to show that this has generally been the educated Christian's stance. To paraphrase Ms.Armstrong: The trinity was not a rationale doctrine--that was the whole point behind it. By realizing the futility of reason to apprehend the Divine, we would enter a state of transcendence. But Allah(swt) clearly condemns the Trinity in the Holy Qur'an. Therefore, the logical conclusion that us Muslims must draw from this in relation to Armstrong's explanation is that the Trinity DID NOT lead to transcendence. The Qur'an condemns the Trinity on rational grounds, and yet Armstrong says that an irrational doctrine can lead to transcendence. It is quite clear that Armstrong's case is made very weak by the Qur'anic attack on the Trinity since it implies that reason must be present in the contemplation of any doctrine. What do you think? Are these points problematic for Karen Armstrong's polemic? Is there a way around it?
  23. Here is an interesting, short, and simplified answer that Shaykh Hamid Waqar gives to a question posed by an Atheist university professor who tried to insinuate that the God in Islam is taken from the Jewish concept of God. Allah...Jewish?
  24. Please watch the whole video since his discussion on Mahdi A.S comes a few minutes later. (wasalam)
  25. Why is Islam the best religion? What is our position as humans? Whats the purpose of life? Why do I have problems? Why doesnt my prayers get answered? Why does Imam Hussain's sacrifice matter? Why is karbala so important? Why cant I see God? (wasalam)
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.