[Musa]

I like this hadith a lot.

The Prophet (S) said "If you failed to commit sins, then Allah would destroy you and create those who would sin and seek His forgiveness and He would forgive them." (Muslim)

----------------




"I heard Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) saying: ‘There isn’t a man who, when he commits a sin, rises, makes ablution, and offers two rak'as of prayers, but Allah forgives his sins.’

"Those (are the true believers) who, when they commit an evil deed, or wrong their souls, remember Allah, and seek forgiveness for their sins - and who but Allah forgives sins? They do not insist upon the sins they have committed, and they know (that Allah is forgiving)." (Qur'an 3:135)

This post has been edited by Musa: 13 April 2010 - 01:07 PM

[Rhoda]

The Prophet (S) said "If you failed to commit sins, then Allah would destroy you and create those who would sin and seek His forgiveness and He would forgive them." (Muslim)

Huh? I guess this makes sense to Allah, but to ordinary logical humans? No, don't tell me the context. My head already hurts.

But in response to your opening post, let's remember we don't all define sin the same way, which makes this question moot, in both senses of the word.

[Musa]

Huh? I guess this makes sense to Allah, but to ordinary logical humans? No, don't tell me the context. My head already hurts.

But in response to your opening post, let's remember we don't all define sin the same way, which makes this question moot, in both senses of the word.

What about it don't you understand? Repentance is an act of faith. No human is expected to be perfect, and if there were, there would be no way of testing one's faith. The most devout are not necessarily the sinless, but the ones who when they commit a sin, feel regret and turn towards Allah (swt).

[Rhoda]

"If you failed to commit sins, then Allah would destroy you

Excuse me? So people should sin in order to have something of which to repent?

So people should cut their ears off in order to have reconstructive surgery?

So people should burn their houses down in order to get a big insurance payoff?

Between you, the Muslim Next Door, the Qur'an, and various ahadith, I am convinced that the Alzheimer's is proceeding apace. Because it just doesn't make sense to me.

[Musa]

^Huh? Where did the hadith encourage sin? Sin is something natural that happens by nature of humans having temptations and lack of faith. If mankind were short of temptation, and in turn, did not sin, then there would be no test and no purpose of this life. When he truly feels regret and truly asks for forgiveness...that is a testimony of his faith and a testimony of God's mercy.

There are those who think they have sinned so much that they will never be accepted back into the folds of Islam. And yet, here God is saying that sin is totally okay so long as true regret and sincere repentance follows. Humans are not infallible, and all of our lives have their ups and their downs. No human should ever feel that he is so deep in sin that the mercy and forgiveness of Allah (swt) is not there for him. But no Muslim should sin and think, "I will just repent afterwards," either.

This post has been edited by Musa: 13 April 2010 - 03:23 PM

[Rhoda]

If mankind were short of temptation, and in turn, did not sin, then there would be no test and no purpose of this life.

So the pupose of life is to exercise one's will power? I think I have a higher opinion of life than you have.

[Billy]

Seems to me that God needs worship more than we do.

[Fathima]

The Noble Qur'an - Az-Zaariyaat 51:56
And I (Allâh) created not the jinns and humans except they should worship Me (Alone).

Although I wouldnt consider it a matter of God 'needing' worship.

Personally Rhoda, analysing different situations that we come across in life, it does seem that a majority of those do require an exercise of one's will power. But I am interested in knowing what you think is the purpose of life.

[Rhoda]

Good question. I wish I knew. But I'm afraid a definition is beyond me.

I guess I think the purpose is for each of us to make the world a tiny bit better for our fellows and for the next generation. In the case of medical researchers, for example, to make it a lot better.

Of course, I approach the subject with the idea that we are not trying to earn rewards to get us to paradise but are living according to the dictates of our consciences.

Not that I personally can do that any better than those who fear eternal burning. But I do try.

[spike]

Instead of wasting all that time physically praying for whatever and then arguing about it, why not, with a prayer in your heart, spend that same amount of time working to make the world a better place. That could be equally "rewarding" if that is what one is after.

[Ruggedtouch]

^Huh? Where did the hadith encourage sin? Sin is something natural that happens by nature of humans having temptations and lack of faith. If mankind were short of temptation, and in turn, did not sin, then there would be no test and no purpose of this life. When he truly feels regret and truly asks for forgiveness...that is a testimony of his faith and a testimony of God's mercy.

There are those who think they have sinned so much that they will never be accepted back into the folds of Islam. And yet, here God is saying that sin is totally okay so long as true regret and sincere repentance follows. Humans are not infallible, and all of our lives have their ups and their downs. No human should ever feel that he is so deep in sin that the mercy and forgiveness of Allah (swt) is not there for him. But no Muslim should sin and think, "I will just repent afterwards," either.

Most of humanity has never heard of the "allah' god who, as far as humanity is concerned, is a relatively recent creation. So:

>most of humanity was unaware of and not bounded by this test, and,
>the test being poorly conceived calls into question the allah gods test-making capability.


That suggests the following statements and conclusions based on premises which are based upon orthodox Islamic theology:
Those being:
a) Allah is omniscient.
b) Nothing happens except by Allah's will.
c) Allah cannot make a mistake.

Now, if we suspend logic and rationality are to dogmatically presume the statements above are all presumed to be true, they can serve as a baseline for determining consistency with the concept of the "it's a test" slogan.

1. Because Allah is omniscient (item a), Allah knows the eventual fate of every person even before the moment of their creation. How you reconcile that with the allah god being a relatively recent invention in the timeline of humanity should be an interesting series of profoundly silly excuses, exceptions and inventions.
2. Because nothing happens except by Allah's will (item b), all human beings are created only according to Allah's will. The second sentence accompanying item 1 above applies here, too.
3) Because Allah cannot make a mistake (item c), He has the free will to create or not create any human existence as fundamentally being "a test". The second sentence accompanying item 1 above similarly applies.

1-a) At the moment of creation, Allah has chosen to create some people that he already knows (and has determined – per items a, b and c) will be saved, and others that he already knows will be condemned to hell. He could have made other choices, but he did not.

1-b) Since the results of the lifetimes of every human (excepting that majority of humanity that existed before the allah god), are already known even prior to creation, the results of "the test" for each and every individual is already determined even before the created individual is born, (at least for those individuals created within the last 1,400 years).

Therefore: Life on earth cannot be a "test". The test is already complete before life on earth takes place, at least for those who have existed from 1,400 years ago, forward.

This post has been edited by Ruggedtouch: 15 April 2010 - 07:15 AM

[marinli]

How you reconcile that with the allah god being a relatively recent invention in the timeline of humanity should be an interesting series of profoundly silly excuses, exceptions and inventions.

Who says that God is a relatively recent invention? (i am not speaking about what you define as "Allah God", but a deity of some kind whatsoever)

[Rhoda]

Or multiple deities. It's hard for me to imagine why the worship of one god is superior to the worship of several. After all there are plenty of religious traditions that do not limit their beliefs to one god.

Who's right? Who's wrong? In my opinion, nobody knows.

[Ruggedtouch]

Who says that God is a relatively recent invention? (i am not speaking about what you define as "Allah God", but a deity of some kind whatsoever)

The god referred to as “allah”, does not exist in historical references prior to the invention of islam. There were, of course, many gods that preceded the invention of Islam by Muhammad. Those gods may have been similar in certain ways to the Islamic “allah”, but we already have an explanation for that. Those earlier religions and the gods they were subordinate to were not practicing Islam, and therefore, they were not Muslims, hence no allah.

“Gods” of any number of descriptions have been claimed to exist by many societies. Can you demonstrate for us which ones are extant and which are not?

This post has been edited by Ruggedtouch: 15 April 2010 - 10:16 AM

[marinli]

The god referred to as "allah", does not exist in historical references prior to the invention of islam. There were, of course, many gods that preceded the invention of Islam by Muhammad. Those gods may have been similar in certain ways to the Islamic "allah", but we already have an explanation for that. Those earlier religions and the gods they were subordinate to were not practicing Islam, and therefore, they were not Muslims, hence no allah.

Well, that is only one (your) interpretation. Your whole line of argumentation presented earlier is based on this (your) interpretation of the "invention of God". Accordingly, it is invalid (or useless) for anybody with a different interpretation.
As a muslim i obviously believe that God has not been invented, but has existed since all times. And he has sent Messengers to all of humankind (not only Muhammad, peace be upon him). Islam is not merely Muhammad and everything that comes after him. Seems hard to understand for some people.

But sure, from an atheist point of view, your argumentation seems logical. But if you want to make your point to a muslim (or any other religious person), i believe you gotta come up with something better.

[Musa]

The purpose of creation is to worship Allah (swt). But it is not God that needs our worship...it is we that need him. It's apart of structuring our lives and humbling ourselves. Muhammad (saws) said "If the prayers are in order, than all other matters of life are in order." Prayer sets in place that all man is created equal and has something greater to thank. Whether it is the big CEO on top of the world or the homeless man sleeping on the street, if both Muslim, they must humble themselves 5 times a day in the exact same manner and give thanks for what they have.

Allah (swt) gave us a manual to life. Similar to a manual for anything else, if you don't follow it, you can still hit the mark accurately. But here, Allah (swt) gave us a gift in which he outlined how to live a healthy and prosperous life. It is our choice whether or not we choose to follow it. But those addicted to drugs, those in abusive relationships, those alcoholics, those in prison, are there only for disobeying Allah (swt). They would never have gotten into that state had they followed Allah's (swt) manual. And first and foremost, Allah (swt) told us that prayer and repentance are the ways to keep life in order. As Muhammad (saws) said, the five prayers are a spiritual cleaning to the equivalence of if you were to step into a stream five times throughout the day and wash your body- only prayer cleans off your minor sins and cleanses your spiritual side.

[Ruggedtouch]

Well, that is only one (your) interpretation.

Not at all. Please show us a single historical reference to a god named "allah" that preceded mohammed.

Your whole line of argumentation presented earlier is based on this (your) interpretation of the "invention of God". Accordingly, it is invalid (or useless) for anybody with a different interpretation.

My interpretation of the "invention of God(s)" is not interpretation but an assessment of the claims made on behalf of these god(s) and the veracity of those claims. I have read claims that there are countless philosophical, scientific and logical "proofs" for the existence of god(s). Nowhere has anyone provided a single one. I make no claims about existence other than its perceivable and it's natural. Consistently, this claim relies on logic and reason to uphold itself. The theist, in this case, you, asserts that logic and reason are not up to the task of envisioning the "reality" of the "man behind the curtain" paradigm, i.e., the supernatural realms of gods.

As a muslim i obviously believe that God has not been invented, but has existed since all times. And he has sent Messengers to all of humankind (not only Muhammad, peace be upon him). Islam is not merely Muhammad and everything that comes after him. Seems hard to understand for some people.

That seems like arrogance on your part to dismiss all the other gods in favor of the more recent god(s). I already conclude that requiring claimants to substantiate their claims is logical. I must conclude that reality is logical, and reasonably -- that reality is rational. But what do you claim?

That logic is flawed and reason is flawed and limits our perception. Well, if you are right, you are admitting that the very tools you use to make your perceptions/assertions -- are flawed and not to be trusted!

If you are wrong -- then you are simply wrong, or illogical and irrational. And why should we listen to the assertions of someone who admits they are making irrational and illogical statements? What discerns any difference between the assertions of the god(s), assertions made without reason or logic, and a man in a padded room who thinks himself Napoleon (to use the cliché)

But sure, from an atheist point of view, your argumentation seems logical. But if you want to make your point to a muslim (or any other religious person), i believe you gotta come up with something better.

I think I've made my point. I was hoping you could make your point defining god(s).

One or more of these asserted "divine beings" should know enough to not confuse the mortal beings he seeks to communicate with. Many doctrines alleging supernatural entities allow people to believe in god(s) that have such an appalling lack of integrity and morals and then when we don't "get it" he assigns us to an eternal damnation in Hell!

Why are these god(s) so bereft of ethics?

I'll surmise, it is because DIFFERENT men over HUNDREDS OF YEARS wrote these books (and we know that to be a fact), that these claims to "divinity" self-destruct. Hell, even the writers of such things as hadith couldn't get the same story written right. There are countless studies showing that people start embellishing stories even an hour after they've occured, and here you have biographies of a man told multiple decades after he's dead. Clearly, there is a building towards legend-making in these stories, based upon the dating of these tales and fables.

Little conflicts regarding facts may seem trivial and dismissible, but there should be PERFECTION in the PERFECT word of god(s). And there isn't perfection.


If you're the one claiming perfection is defined by falsehoods, inconsistencies and contradictions, then it is you who needs to come up with something better.

[Rhoda]

Allah (swt) gave us a manual to life.

So did Karl Marx, for that matter. It is indeed a manual to life, one of many.

But here, Allah (swt) gave us a gift in which he outlined how to live a healthy and prosperous life.

More confusion. Certainly millions of Muslims, especially women, are not living healthy and prosperous lives. They would be better off with Dale Carnagie.

And I thought life was all about preparing for the period after death, that the trials of this life were not to challenge us to work to make sure others don't have to suffer so, but to verify that we will submit to whatever is sent us.

(When I say 'we' above, I don't include myself.)

[Jim]

Allah did not give us a manual for life.

The Quran is not a manual and the hadith are certainly not manuals. Allah and the Prophet (pbuh) never called them that or claimed that they were that. If they are considered that by us, they must be considered the most grossly incomplete set of instructions every written, especially since they are not all in one easy to read book.

When I think of a manual, it is a complete set of instructions (no questions asked), like the manual to my lawn mower and how to operate it. Id never reduce the Quran to a lifeless and dull book like a manual.

All we have are basic guidelines, but all of the details are up to us (be it scholarly ijtihad or using our own brains) to make judgments on.

I hate to play devil's advocate here but there is much much more to the hadith than are recorded.

The Prophet (S) said "If you failed to commit sins, then Allah would destroy you and create those who would sin and seek His forgiveness and He would forgive them." (Muslim)

By the logic of that statement alone, without knowing what the prophet was teaching at that time (since the hadith was authenticated hundreds of years later and is only a small blurb or sound byte of the whole conversation....

If we follow this logic of this blurb then Allah wants us to disobey and repent so he can forgive. If we didnt then he would destroy us for obeying him perfectly. That just doesnt make any sense.

This is why the hadith should never be reduced to blurbs and slogans, a hallmark mistake of many Muslims on all sides of the liberal to conservative spectrum.

[Rhoda]

My point exactly. Thanks, Jim.