Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله


Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About humblemuslim86

  • Birthday 01/01/1986

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Previous Fields

  • Gender
  1. The question must be broken down into smaller questions in order for any meaningful responses to be made that will help me on this issue. Are the Hadith to be considered equal to the Qur'an? (This question is geared towards the following situtation: The Qur'an does not tell someone how to do X but the Hadith does. Therefore X is compulsory because it is in the Hadith. Therefore the Hadith that states X is equal in status of command to the Qur'an.) Are the Hadith necessary? (I have seen many arguments regarding this ranging from how to pray to how much to give in Zakat.) Is it a sin to not follow accepted Hadith? Does one have to accept Hadith to be a muslim? Since all the Hadith are in question here all meaningful responses must use the Qur'an to substantiate their claims. All responses that do not reference the Qur'an will be ignored if they make it through. I am not interested in seeing clever reasoning without the Qur'an being consulted. I have seen much clever reasoning in my days from the nonbelievers and people of the book. It does not take much to convince someone that something wrong is right. That is why we must consult the Qur'an. I look forward to the responses.
  2. Cite a valid point from it since you feel it has performed so well, and I will gladly respond. But the video had an exaggerated nature. Honestly me responding to the video would amount to citing a lack of support for the claims being made therein. Not to mention the first conclusion reached does not logically follow. If someone makes a mistake it does not follow everything they have done are mistakes or as the video puts it "a joke". The video then makes another illogical statement saying that "The prophet does not follow the inclinations of people." There is not even a thought as to whether the prophet follows his own inclinations. The subject is left untouched...Do I really need to continue? I'd rather you point me to something useful from this video, or something you beleive is useful. Talking in an loud exaggerated manner makes it difficult for me to take this seriously. Especially when he gets off on such a bad footing. A wise man does not need to raise his voice. The truth sounds perfectly fine in a normal tone. I would expect the prophet(s) to inform the people what is from God and what is not. If the prophet did not do this, then how are we to know whether some of the Hadith should have actually been included in the Qur'an or some of the Qur'an in the Hadith. Obviously during revealing the true path to God the prophet did make some distinction in what he was revealing to the people. Of course the nature of the two texts is quite different. That goes without saying.
  3. Because it is not true. An elevated status/state is being given to Allah's creation. Thereby being a step towards idolatry. I have yet to see a Qur'an verse that says all prophets are infallible. I have yet to see a Qur'an verse that says Muhammad was infallible. I have yet to see a Qur'an verse that says Imams are infallible. Repeat the above three statements in application to the Hadith as a source. What I have seen is a desire to elevate Allah's creation beyond their due status out of love and respect for them. The intention is right, the result is in a gray area. Agreed. Agreed again. The issue I have here is where is this belief originating? So far I have seen one Qur'an verse quoted that is being used to arrive at a conclusion not entirely apparent by reading the verse or the surrounding verses.
  4. Infallible is a form of perfection that is related to one's ability to not make mistakes. The word means to be incapable of making a mistake...So of course that is going to be the definition I will be using. Perfection can be applied to different concepts. The perfect food. The perfect art. The perfect man. Each has its own requirements for perfection. The term infallible applied to a person or text implies a type of perfection as it relates to error. Saying the prophet or Imams are infallible is doing just that...Not saying just because someone has taken this belief that it means they are committing idol worship, but it is a step towards it... No. That is like asking if the puppet is equal to the puppeteer. There is no comparison, because the puppet is nothing without the puppeteer, just as the prophet(s), the angels, and all creation is nothing without Allah.
  5. Okay. I am not here to dispute the details of the story or circumstances. We can agree the prophet's wives were not infallible. If one sin makes someone unworthy of being an Imam, then there must not be any Imams...If we want to go down the path of thought that be attaining Allah's mercy one can absolve themselves of their past wrong deeds, then perhaps we can say Imams are sinless in the sense of living a good life and obtaining mercy for their shortcomings. But that hardly makes them infallible... Very well. I will read through it.
  6. That is fine. I have no problem with this. That is not what I am claiming. I am claiming the prophet can and did make mistakes. He is not perfect. Only God is perfect. Considering the prophet perfect is a step towards idol worship...Like I have mentioned, why do you think that ayat 66:1 ends with the mention of Allah's mercy?.
  7. Show me Qur'an that says this and I will believe you. So far you show me your own desires. Qur'an Translation 66:1 You, you the prophet, why/for what (do) you forbid/prohibit what God permitted/allowed for you, you wish/desire your wives' approvals/satisfactions , and God (is) forgiving, merciful. So you are claiming that forbidding/prohibiting what God has allowed for us is not a mistake? Why does the verse end with Allah is forgiving and merciful if what you say is true? If the prophet did not make a mistake then why would the Qur'an have this statement associated with his action/choice? I am not calling the ayat a fabrication, I am calling your interpretation of it a fabrication. Your interpretation is a stretch that is inconsistent with other verses like 66:1. Qur'an translation of 2:124 And when Abraham's Lord tested (him) with words/expressions, so He completed them, (He) said: "That I am making you to the people a leader/example ." He (Abraham) said: "And from my descendants?" He said: "The unjust/oppressors do not receive/obtain My promise ." Where exactly does it say Imams cannot sin at all? If this is true no one is an Imam. Sin less perhaps. I hope that is the case. Because the way this response was given seemed to imply this conclusion... Fair enough. It appears I simply misunderstood your prior comment. Let's continue discussing infallibility of Imams/Prophets.
  8. This statement amounts to idolizing humans. The prophet Muhammad DID make mistakes. The Qur'an says so: [66:1] O you prophet, why do you prohibit what GOD has made lawful for you, just to please your wives? GOD is Forgiver, Merciful. God mentions the prophet made a mistake. Please do not transgress the limits of our faith. The prophets and Imams are fallible. They are human just you and I are. Only God should be praised for perfection. No it does not...Care to explain Qur'an 66:1? The verse you quoted does not even mention your claim that Imams are infallible. This is a fabrication. Allah is All-Knowing, yes. Where in the Qur'an or Hadith is it said that the Imams and prophets were given all this knowledge? Only Allah can grasp the true depth of all the knowledge in existence. Let me ask you this. Can an Imam or prophet tell me when the end of times is? Yes or no.
  9. I have discussed religion on this large forum for several years. In all my time there I have only received one warning that involved a reaction I had towards someone that was purposely baiting/flaming. The site is very active and has people of all faiths (Mostly Christians obviously). If you think those videos are offensive you should see the kinds of posts atheists make on the forum. Even their posts go mostly unchanged. Additionally you should see the kinds of things some select Christians will post about Islam. They make these videos look like child's play. One of the reasons I have stayed as long as I have is sometimes I do get through to some of the people that hold deep hatred for Islam. Sometimes it requires the use of videos like these to make a point. That point usually involving self-reflection, since many of their arguments are self-damaging. Of course there are a few people that are beyond help. One such person told everyone that he is an expert in Qur'anic Arabic. Then he claimed Al-Kitab means The Holy Bible. If you do not know already, Al-Kitab literally means "the book". Of course sometimes the Qur'an uses the words to describe other religious books as in "People of the Book".
  10. The only way to never be offensive is to never communicate at all. Not practical by any means. If Christians are willing to allow it to remain on their own turf then it is safe to say it is not offensive enough to remain silent about it. I'm sure they are not jumping up and down with joy over them. That is the nature of disagreement. One side rejoices, other does not.
  11. These videos are meant to be comedic. I personally enjoy these because some of them will quote Bible verses during the video as they make claims. Others will mimic the sort of statements you commonly hear from Christians. Seeing as I have quoted a couple of these videos on a Christian forum in response to Christians, I think it is fairly safe to say they are not overly offensive (Otherwise I would have been rebuked by now on that forum). Of course anything can be offense. Enjoy.
  12. You're not alone :!!!: Would someone care to explain what this thread's topic is about?
  13. I have been discussing this concept on a Christian forum website. I thought I would share the post here along with the original thread where everyone can see the amusing conversation one Christian is providing. I am glad to see that most people on the forum seemed to be in agreement with the original post. Original thread link: http://www.christianforums.com/t7370618/ Opening Post: Some argue that muslims worship a moon deity that pre-Islamic Arabs worshiped. There are a variety of problems with this argument, but let us focus on a few. First the verse above tells us to not worship the moon in any capacity, but to worship the creator of our universe (Who also created the moon). Second, consider the following (Some viewers probably lack the patience to read all the following. So just read my commentary at the end): Source - Allah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Source - Pre-Islamic Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNote the uncertainty on the subject matter of Pre-Islamic Arabian religion. Interestingly enough, whether by mistake or otherwise, the name "Allah" does not appear on the list of Pre-Islamic Arabian gods. The feminine "Allat" does appear. Notice that another name is even shown for a lunar deity: Aglibôl Source - Arabian mythology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Source - Aglibol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Third, all of language abstracts real world concepts, whether material or otherwise. When someone says a word it carries a meaning with it that is established in theory by common usage. However, it is possible for the meaning to change over time, be mistaken, and/or be misused. When a muslim today uses the Arabic word "Allah" they are not thinking about the pre-Islamic deity. The literal meaning of the word (The god) remains, but the application of the word has changed. Consider the following example in relation to proper names (The word "Allah" can be used both as a proper name or as a noun). If we meet a man named Joseph and several days later meet another different man named Joseph, then the proper name "Joseph" could be used to identify both men. Granted the situtation could become confusing, but if the person saying the word "Joseph" clearly identifies that he is talking about a certain person the listerning party is famailiar with, then using the same proper name to identify different people is not a problem. Muslims clearly identify what they mean when they use the word "Allah". Disregarding the clarification and proclaiming we are talking about something else isn't a sound response. Bottom line - Muslims do not worship a lunar (Moon) deity from the pre-Islamic era.
  14. Spotlight Fallacy... Source - http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/spotlight.html
  • Create New...