Arab Woman gives Muslims a Thrashing

[fattboy]

I thought they were compiled from Hadith (oral tradition written down) - some of which were written by a man called Bukhari who collected various statements on his travels nearly 200 years after the death of Prophet Muhammad, some of which were written by other men, all long after the death of your Prophet. Please note, I am not anti-Hadith in relation to understanding Islamic history.

Who compiled the 'end times' list of signs?

Whoever compiled that list can't be a prophet according to Islam, because Islam says that Muhammad was the last Prophet. The links to the site(s) you gave verge on superstition. Half the prophecies listed have no reference to source and the other half are all drawn from Hadith. It is interesting to note the lack of specific Qu'ranic revelation on this subject.

Who is this Ahmad chap? He doesn't appear to hold women in the esteem which even Prophet Muhammed was said to have held women (who made great reforms of pre-Islamic traditions that held women/daughters as lesser citizens). He seems fearful of equal rights for women.

Where do you stand on the progress of reform in attitudes to women that was begun by Prophet Muhammed? Do you wish to revert back to a more primitive approach, or move forwards and remain progressive in the tradition you purport to claim as your own?

What is 'true' Islam - is it where everyone agrees on the basics, or is there much disagreement? I suspect the latter is true.

true Islam is Islam by the evidence of the Quran and hadith, there is no other Islam.

Ibn Kathir, one of the great scholars of Islam produced a piece of work on signs of the last days, but if this is from it or if not how much of this article is from it i dont know cos im not that familiar with Ibn Kathirs book but i do have it somewhere.

 

[butchersapron]

I don't actually know who compiled that list of end-times signs. Someone took time to compile it (the list) from the Hadith, but I can't find who compiled the list or when.

The hadith is looking good right now.

 

[Aldebaran]

anything by Bukhari and Muslim HAVE 2 be accepted by a muslim because the crireria they imposed on the hadiths they collected is so high, anyone in the chain of narration who was known 2 be of weak character or unreliable would mean the hadith would be unacceptable and not included, the collection of hadith is a detailed science and i dont have the knowledge or the time 2 be able 2 explain it, so in simple terms anything in Bukhari and Muslim is the guaranteed statements and actions of the Prophet pbuh, but the books of Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah and At-Tirmidhi and one or 2 others are also very reliable, tho not to the same extent.

salaam aleikum,

Regarding the ahadith you should always be cautious and keep in mind that no matter their isnad, they still only reflect the thoughts and memories of people.
Therefore it is the safest approach to study their meaning and intention and hold that against the commands and guidelines of Al Qur'an. If a hadith in any way contradicts the Word of God, it should be rejected.

my understanding is that the Prophet pbuh him forbade the writing of anything other than Qur'anic verses so that the 2 wouldnt be confused but dont quote me on that.

It is impossible to make historical conclusive statements considering the textual history of Al Qur'an. What comes out of the ahadith is that there wasn't a full redaction done by the prophet and that several companions knew all or almost all of it by heart and/or had parts of it in writing. (Shia believe that 'Ali had such a written text right after or even at the moment the prophet died.)

salaam.

 

[fattboy]

salaam aleikum,

Regarding the ahadith you should always be cautious and keep in mind that no matter their isnad, they still only reflect the thoughts and memories of people.
Therefore it is the safest approacho to consider their meaning and intention and hold that against the commands and guidelines. If a hadith in any way contradicts the Word of God, it should be rejected.



It is historical impossible to make conclusive statements considering the textual history of Al Qur'an. What comes out of the ahadith is that there wasn't a full redaction done by the prophet and that several companions knew all or almost all of it by heart and/or had parts of it in writing. (Shia believe that 'Ali had such a written text right after or even at the moment the prophet died.)

salaam.

yeah but no sahih hadith(Bukhari and Muslim) do contradict anything from the Qur'an or each other.
the hadith is vital 2 the Qur'an, where in the Qur'an does it explain how 2 make ablution 4 prayer and other issues?
Allah Says in the Qur'an what roughly means' Whatever the Prophet pbuh him gives u or enjoins, do it'

without the hadith u cant understand the Qur'an, thats why (im not talking down 2 u bro, this is 4 the other ppl) were called sunni muslims cos the sunnah is the way of the Prophet pbuh, what he did, what he didnt do, what he approved of and what he didnt, and all this can only be known thru the knowledge of the hadith, and Allah would not say 2 follow the Prophet pbuh and not provide the means 2 do so, ie the ahadith, the sunnah.

wa aleikum salaam

 

[butchersapron]

Take this to the allah boards please.

 

[invisibleplanet]

i dunno who compiled the list either, but most r referenced,

But not all, and you referred to the list of signs as 'revelation from G0D'.
But this is not the case, since there are NO references in 'the list of signs' to Al Qu'ran, and there are only some referenced to various Hadith (words of men, written 200 yrs after the passing of Prophet Muhammed) and now I discover one reference to a scholar, Ahmad, who collected Hadith, but was not himself a writer of Hadith (and who also had funny ideas about women which you seem to accept without question).

and anything by Bukhari and Muslim HAVE 2 be accepted by a muslim because the crireria they imposed on the hadiths they collected is so high, anyone in the chain of narration who was known 2 be of weak character or unreliable would mean the hadith would be unacceptable and not included, the collection of hadith is a detailed science and i dont have the knowledge or the time 2 be able 2 explain it, so in simple terms anything in Bukhari and Muslim is the guaranteed statements and actions of the Prophet pbuh, but the books of Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah and At-Tirmidhi and one or 2 others are also very reliable, tho not to the same extent.

Just because the list quotes verses from the Hadith of Bukhari and Muslim, doesn't mean that the list of signs has to be accepted as 'truth', especially since you have no idea who wrote it, and cannot tell us when it was compiled.

those generations didnt have tvs or playstations or other things 2 take up their time and the arabs were known well 4 their wealth of literature and poetry, they could recite poems of amazing length and would meet annually in contests, so their ability 2 recite and remember statements and the like were far superior 2 ours.

No problem with this. It was the same for many other societies though and not exclusive to Islamic societies.

my understanding is that the Prophet pbuh him forbade the writing of anything other than Qur'anic verses so that the 2 wouldnt be confused but dont quote me on that.

I haven't the foggiest idea what you mean. Are you trying to tell me that the writing of the Hadith and other contributions by Islamic scholars to the disciplines of science and art are actually haram?

And you say we have 'to go backwards to go forwards' - this doesn't make any sense either - I am mistrustful of anyone who tells me or others to walk backwards....in religious terminology/metaphor, that's a sign of *youknowwho*

(And note, I am still waiting for an answer from you to my 'thirst' question!)

 

[durruti02]

atheism is a religion, Islam is a religion, u think it strange we believe were created by an Almighty God, we think it strange u believe we came from nothing.
we have a damn sight more proof were created than atheist have that we arent.

hi fattboy .. not posted to you before so hello but i have to say that that is pretty big thing to say mate that there is MORE proof of relegion beliefs than proofs of scientific materialism/rationalism/atheism .. please sho evidence!

 

[frogwoman]

I think believing in god is both rational and irrational. It can in one sense be viewed as a rational human response to their surroundings in that it serves a function for people and for society. It is at the same time irrational in that is it a baseless, unscientific belief - and if you've got the freedom to basically pick and choose what you want to believe irrespective of evidence you can start believing all sorts of potentially dangerous nonsense

Yeah but hopefully you won't though.

And everyone has the potential to believe all sorts of dangerous bullshit, it is part of what being human is all about.

I think that's where discernement comes in. Just because you believe something doesn't mean that you're going to believe something else. And its not like everyone randomly pick and chooses what to believe, as if they were in a sweet shop. It's like saying that just because someone thinks we might not be the only planet with life on it means that they are going to think that aliens are just about to abduct us and shove anal probes up our bums, or have already done so.

If someone believes that crap it says more about them as a person than about the underlying validity of the original belief (that aliens might exist).

You have to use some common sense and I never said to abandon rationality did i.

For example ...
IMO its RATIONAL to believe that God created the world, because i dont see (in my opinion of course) how the earth etc could have come about randomly, and i don't see how it could have started on its own.

However, something like creationism is IRRATIONAL (in my opinion) because i think anything as complicated as our universe would have had to have taken millions of years to acheive and I dont believe in a god that just behaves like a sort of cosmic david blaine, just doing magic tricks willy nilly because in a way i think that diminishes the idea of god. Its as if they are saying that God couldn't have performed something as complicated as evolution. To me it is far more of an achievement to have created such a delicate process as evolution, which is still going on, than to have hastily scratched something together in six days and declared it to be perfect.

Believing that the end times (of whatever kind - whether its a apocalypse brought about by Ha Satan because of human wickedness or because of global warming which IMO has sometimes become a sort of secular end times prophecy saying that we are all gonna die in 20 years etc) are imminent is IRRATIONAL because there is so much evidence against it and becuase people have been saying this shite for thousands of years and NOTHING HAPPENED, it would be physically impossible to wake up one morning and find out the sky had turned black and the world was "coming to an end" and relying on the words of soothesayers is just a stupid idea and can only lead to you wasting your life, because if the world was gonna end we would know about it and we'd be able to see it, and not just rely on what it said in a book.

I think that miracles etc mostly have a scientific explanation behind them, but that isn't to say they aren't sometimes divinely ordained, but I dont think that they ever subvert the laws of nature because I cant see a reason why God would invent the laws of physics and biology etc and then randomly flout them every so often to save people from being hit by cars or whatever. I dont believe in a god that does that because it just seems totally illogical that this would happen, both from a scientific and from a religious point of view. And I dont think that God would, for instance, look down at everyone and see who hadn't been saying their prayers or whatever and then point a finger and shout "Cancer!!" I think everything that we know as miracles has a scientific explanation to it but that God might have made it so that this particular thing happened or seemed to happen at the "right time" like the Israelites crossing the red sea - its a recognised phenomenon that makes seas do that, but they happened to be in the right place at the right time for it to be useful. Im not saying it definitely happened but if it did it had a scientific explanation to it.

Just because I believe in god, it doesnt mean I will believe any old shite unless there is evidence to back it up, so I am perfectly happy to balance faith with rationality. I think they compliment each other. I dont think that just becuase someone is religious they have to disregard everything science teaches and vice versa.

 

[fattboy]

But not all, and you referred to the list of signs as 'revelation from G0D'.
But this is not the case, since there are NO references in 'the list of signs' to Al Qu'ran, and there are only some referenced to various Hadith (words of men, written 200 yrs after the passing of Prophet Muhammed) and now I discover one reference to a scholar, Ahmad, who collected Hadith, but was not himself a writer of Hadith (and who also had funny ideas about women which you seem to accept without question).

Just because the list quotes verses from the Hadith of Bukhari and Muslim, doesn't mean that the list of signs has to be accepted as 'truth', especially since you have no idea who wrote it, and cannot tell us when it was compiled.

No problem with this. It was the same for many other societies though and not exclusive to Islamic societies.

I haven't the foggiest idea what you mean. Are you trying to tell me that the writing of the Hadith and other contributions by Islamic scholars to the disciplines of science and art are actually haram?

And you say we have 'to go backwards to go forwards' - this doesn't make any sense either - I am mistrustful of anyone who tells me or others to walk backwards....in religious terminology/metaphor, that's a sign of *youknowwho*

(And note, I am still waiting for an answer from you to my 'thirst' question!)

IP, if this list isnt from the works of Ibn Kathir, then its pretty much identical.Ibn Kathir was a scholar who came later in Islamic history, he collected reliable hadiths regarding the last days and compiled them in a seperate work as their a seperate issue apart from issues of business dealings, interactions with ppl, manners and ettiquettes, rules of cleanliness and prayer etc.
im not saying this work is itself 2 be taken as a book of revelation, but it contains hadiths that r verified statements of the Prophet pbuh, so in that sense it does contain divine guidance.
i dunno what ur issue with Imam Ahmed is, can u please respectfully clarify ur point.

Basically i think the best way 2 see the list is a collection of guaranteed sound and other sound hadiths but 2 a lesser degree compiled 2gether because they related 2 important future events so it was seen as worthwile 2 collect them 2gether from the various hadith books.
i wasnt tryna big up the arabs, i was just explaining that those ppl had a great capacity 2 remember long and detailed accounts which was so important in preserving the ahadith,and like i said dont quote me, but i think the Prophet pbuh prohibited the writing of hadiths in his lifetime, so that they wouldnt be confused with Qur'anic verses but this prohibition, if it was prohibited, was redundant after the Qur'an had been fully revealed, or at least when the Prophet pbuh died.(just 2 note, the revelation of Qur'an came 2 an end some time b4 the death of the Prophet pbuh, and this is mentioned in a verse of the Qur'an, the last verse revealed 2 the best of my knowledge)

about going backwards, what im getting at is we need as muslims 2 return 2 the religion of Islam as our pious predeccessors practiced it and get rid of all the cultural rubbish and innovations that have been allowed 2 creep in and r causing so many problems like, racism, splitting in2 groups etc.

ur thirst question? huh?(answered in the other thread )

 

[fattboy]

Honestly, why Salafi?

what?

 

[Spion]

Yeah but hopefully you won't though.

And everyone has the potential to believe all sorts of dangerous bullshit, it is part of what being human is all about.

I think that's where discernement comes in. Just because you believe something doesn't mean that you're going to believe something else. And its not like everyone randomly pick and chooses what to believe, as if they were in a sweet shop. It's like saying that just because someone thinks we might not be the only planet with life on it means that they are going to think that aliens are just about to abduct us and shove anal probes up our bums, or have already done so.

If someone believes that crap it says more about them as a person than about the underlying validity of the original belief (that aliens might exist).

You have to use some common sense and I never said to abandon rationality did i.

For example ...
IMO its RATIONAL to believe that God created the world, because i dont see (in my opinion of course) how the earth etc could have come about randomly, and i don't see how it could have started on its own.

However, something like creationism is IRRATIONAL (in my opinion) because i think anything as complicated as our universe would have had to have taken millions of years to acheive and I dont believe in a god that just behaves like a sort of cosmic david blaine, just doing magic tricks willy nilly because in a way i think that diminishes the idea of god. Its as if they are saying that God couldn't have performed something as complicated as evolution. To me it is far more of an achievement to have created such a delicate process as evolution, which is still going on, than to have hastily scratched something together in six days and declared it to be perfect.

Believing that the end times (of whatever kind - whether its a apocalypse brought about by Ha Satan because of human wickedness or because of global warming which IMO has sometimes become a sort of secular end times prophecy saying that we are all gonna die in 20 years etc) are imminent is IRRATIONAL because there is so much evidence against it and becuase people have been saying this shite for thousands of years and NOTHING HAPPENED, it would be physically impossible to wake up one morning and find out the sky had turned black and the world was "coming to an end" and relying on the words of soothesayers is just a stupid idea and can only lead to you wasting your life, because if the world was gonna end we would know about it and we'd be able to see it, and not just rely on what it said in a book.

I think that miracles etc mostly have a scientific explanation behind them, but that isn't to say they aren't sometimes divinely ordained, but I dont think that they ever subvert the laws of nature because I cant see a reason why God would invent the laws of physics and biology etc and then randomly flout them every so often to save people from being hit by cars or whatever. I dont believe in a god that does that because it just seems totally illogical that this would happen, both from a scientific and from a religious point of view. And I dont think that God would, for instance, look down at everyone and see who hadn't been saying their prayers or whatever and then point a finger and shout "Cancer!!" I think everything that we know as miracles has a scientific explanation to it but that God might have made it so that this particular thing happened or seemed to happen at the "right time" like the Israelites crossing the red sea - its a recognised phenomenon that makes seas do that, but they happened to be in the right place at the right time for it to be useful. Im not saying it definitely happened but if it did it had a scientific explanation to it.

Just because I believe in god, it doesnt mean I will believe any old shite unless there is evidence to back it up, so I am perfectly happy to balance faith with rationality. I think they compliment each other. I dont think that just becuase someone is religious they have to disregard everything science teaches and vice versa.

Oooh, that's a long one, FW. Cheers. I may not reply immmediately but i will

 

[fattboy]

Yeah but hopefully you won't though.

And everyone has the potential to believe all sorts of dangerous bullshit, it is part of what being human is all about.

I think that's where discernement comes in. Just because you believe something doesn't mean that you're going to believe something else. And its not like everyone randomly pick and chooses what to believe, as if they were in a sweet shop. It's like saying that just because someone thinks we might not be the only planet with life on it means that they are going to think that aliens are just about to abduct us and shove anal probes up our bums, or have already done so.

If someone believes that crap it says more about them as a person than about the underlying validity of the original belief (that aliens might exist).

You have to use some common sense and I never said to abandon rationality did i.

For example ...
IMO its RATIONAL to believe that God created the world, because i dont see (in my opinion of course) how the earth etc could have come about randomly, and i don't see how it could have started on its own.

However, something like creationism is IRRATIONAL (in my opinion) because i think anything as complicated as our universe would have had to have taken millions of years to acheive and I dont believe in a god that just behaves like a sort of cosmic david blaine, just doing magic tricks willy nilly because in a way i think that diminishes the idea of god. Its as if they are saying that God couldn't have performed something as complicated as evolution. To me it is far more of an achievement to have created such a delicate process as evolution, which is still going on, than to have hastily scratched something together in six days and declared it to be perfect.

Believing that the end times (of whatever kind - whether its a apocalypse brought about by Ha Satan because of human wickedness or because of global warming which IMO has sometimes become a sort of secular end times prophecy saying that we are all gonna die in 20 years etc) are imminent is IRRATIONAL because there is so much evidence against it and becuase people have been saying this shite for thousands of years and NOTHING HAPPENED, it would be physically impossible to wake up one morning and find out the sky had turned black and the world was "coming to an end" and relying on the words of soothesayers is just a stupid idea and can only lead to you wasting your life, because if the world was gonna end we would know about it and we'd be able to see it, and not just rely on what it said in a book.

I think that miracles etc mostly have a scientific explanation behind them, but that isn't to say they aren't sometimes divinely ordained, but I dont think that they ever subvert the laws of nature because I cant see a reason why God would invent the laws of physics and biology etc and then randomly flout them every so often to save people from being hit by cars or whatever. I dont believe in a god that does that because it just seems totally illogical that this would happen, both from a scientific and from a religious point of view. And I dont think that God would, for instance, look down at everyone and see who hadn't been saying their prayers or whatever and then point a finger and shout "Cancer!!" I think everything that we know as miracles has a scientific explanation to it but that God might have made it so that this particular thing happened or seemed to happen at the "right time" like the Israelites crossing the red sea - its a recognised phenomenon that makes seas do that, but they happened to be in the right place at the right time for it to be useful. Im not saying it definitely happened but if it did it had a scientific explanation to it.

Just because I believe in god, it doesnt mean I will believe any old shite unless there is evidence to back it up, so I am perfectly happy to balance faith with rationality. I think they compliment each other. I dont think that just becuase someone is religious they have to disregard everything science teaches and vice versa.

i thought only the evangelicals pushed the idea of it literally taking 6 days

i see where ur coming from, but Allah has Knowledge of things b4 they happen, He doesnt need 2 bend the laws of physics or other laws like that, His Knowledge 4 example of someone going 2 murder someone b4 He even Created that person means that this only happened by his Will, not that He Allows murder, but that He allowed that individual 2 rebel and choose 2 murder, and He can Will that the punishment for that murderer in this life comes by way of something as mundane as him buying a car with dodgy brakes or something.

 

[fattboy]

hi fattboy .. not posted to you before so hello but i have to say that that is pretty big thing to say mate that there is MORE proof of relegion beliefs than proofs of scientific materialism/rationalism/atheism .. please sho evidence!

will do, GodWilling, and hi

 

[invisibleplanet]

what?

You don't have to explain if you don't want to - maybe it's a local/community thing for you, rather than soley based on ideology.

It's a question like 'Why Jehovah's Witness' or 'Why Liberal Reform'

I realise that there are many types of Salafi, and UK Salafi are not as Salafi are narrowly portrayed by the US media - they are however, rooted in Orthodoxy, and although I have noticed that many Masjid have facilities for women, it is not clear as to the extent of their participation in Masjid affairs in the instances that women are catered for.

 

[frogwoman]

i thought only the evangelicals pushed the idea of it literally taking 6 days

i see where ur coming from, but Allah has Knowledge of things b4 they happen, He doesnt need 2 bend the laws of physics or other laws like that, His Knowledge 4 example of someone going 2 murder someone b4 He even Created that person means that this only happened by his Will, not that He Allows murder, but that He allowed that individual 2 rebel and choose 2 murder, and He can Will that the punishment for that murderer in this life comes by way of something as mundane as him buying a car with dodgy brakes or something.

Yeah, I don't really disagree with you there.

But sometimes murderers dont get punished (except possibly in the afterlife) and i think it's a bit limiting to the idea of god to suppose that he just sits up in the sky zapping the wicked and rewarding the good.

I think that the idea of "reward" and "punishment" is a lot more complex than that and that people who commit evil acts punish THEMSELVES through their behaviour. I think "evil" always destroys itself and leads to destruction to be honest and I think there is a reason for that.

 

[fattboy]

You don't have to explain if you don't want to - maybe it's a local/community thing for you, rather than soley based on ideology.

It's a question like 'Why Jehovah's Witness' or 'Why Liberal Reform'

I realise that there are many types of Salafi, and UK Salafi are as they are portrayed in the US media, and I have noticed that many Masjid have facilities for women (though not all).

basically, i was chatting 2 a neighbour (and now like my best friend) about Iraq and things that were happening and we'd always end up chatting about Islam, and the more i learnt about it, the more i saw of muslims, the manners, the importance placed on family and dedication 2 the religion the more i loved it and realised this is like what i always kinda believed and wished christianity was more like.
anyway this brothers family never really placed much emphasis on religion, but he was kind of thru with his party days but wasnt really established in the local pakistani masjid and most of his friends he grew up with were settling down with their families and advising him 2 do the same, and they all went 2 the salafi masjid, so we did, not cos i knew enough about the difference between the groups, but as i attended classes and circles i realised the importance of following the salaf, so it was a blessing how it worked out cos i dont know how id have felt about Islam if the brother brought me 2 some of the other masjids.
whereever possible, arrangements r made 4 women, but the thing is, women arent obliged 2 attend the masjid 4 daily prayers, while men r, so if theres a lack of facilities preference has 2 go 2 the men.
most salafi masajid, have facilities 4 women and sisters can avail of all the circles and classes that the brothers can, plus they have seperate classes 4 womens issues etc.
i cant comment on all masajid cos i pretty much only ever pray in the one masjid.

 

[fattboy]

Yeah, I don't really disagree with you there.

But sometimes murderers dont get punished (except possibly in the afterlife) and i think it's a bit limiting to the idea of god to suppose that he just sits up in the sky zapping the wicked and rewarding the good.

I think that the idea of "reward" and "punishment" is a lot more complex than that and that people who commit evil acts punish THEMSELVES through their behaviour. I think "evil" always destroys itself and leads to destruction to be honest and I think there is a reason for that.

yep, in the Qur'an, Allah Tells us not 2 oppress ourselves, every action we do has a consequence, sins cause us a loss in faith(imaan), good deeds boost our faith, so the more evil we do the further from God we get and vice versa.
Hitler wasnt born a pychopathic murderer, but the deeper in2 evil he went the harder it was for him 2 recognise good from evil, in the end he went completely paranoid and even started railing against his own ppl.

 

[frogwoman]

Yeah, hell on earth ...

 

[rover07]

Was Allah born a psychopathic torturer? Or did he develop this tendency over time?

 

[kyser_soze]

IMO its RATIONAL to believe that God created the world, because i dont see (in my opinion of course) how the earth etc could have come about randomly, and i don't see how it could have started on its own.

How much have you read/know about stellar and planetary formation froggy? You're basically saying that the idea that some entity said 'create' is more convincing than a physical process of formation that is actually being observered at the moment.

Planets don't happen randomly - whether the actual universe was bought into being by the Big Bang or The Word is moot since neither can be proved and certainly it's impossible for science OR religion to answer the question 'What came first' (altho my money is on Science getting closer to an actual answer than theology), but the science of stellar and planetary formation isn't random, it's physics and chemistry.

 

[rover07]

Great list of major/minor signs Fattboy. I'll keep an eye out for the Beast. What does he look like? 7 heads with 9 horns each or 9 heads with 7 horns each?

 

[Spion]

How much have you read/know about stellar and planetary formation froggy? You're basically saying that the idea that some entity said 'create' is more convincing than a physical process of formation that is actually being observered at the moment.

Planets don't happen randomly - whether the actual universe was bought into being by the Big Bang or The Word is moot since neither can be proved and certainly it's impossible for science OR religion to answer the question 'What came first' (altho my money is on Science getting closer to an actual answer than theology), but the science of stellar and planetary formation isn't random, it's physics and chemistry.

Wot e said

Also, if one believes there had to be a creator because all this stuff couldn't arise naturally, the question is posed: who created the creator?

 

[rover07]

The sun rising in the west is going to be fantastic, i just hope he uses a bit of magic to keep us all in place and stop us flying off into space when he changes the rotation of the Earth. And don't forget the satellites Allah otherwise we will lose loads of TV channels.

 

[Poi E]

All this religious discussion sounds like geeks playing Dungeons and Dragons. brrr...

 

[Spion]

Hitler wasnt born a pychopathic murderer, but the deeper in2 evil he went the harder it was for him 2 recognise good from evil, in the end he went completely paranoid and even started railing against his own ppl.

Y'see, that's where I have a real problem with your type of simplistic argument - Hitler didn't just get into 'evil' - he came to prominence due to the late development of the German state and the problems that led to, such as WW1 and the iniquitous settlement imposed on Germany as well as economic ruin, revolution and a climate of political violence in the 1920s and 30s. He was a man that fulfilled a need for sections of the society he was part of. To reduce a complex set of historical circumstances to the presence of 'evil' in a person or people is dead wrong.

 

[Structaural]

yep, in the Qur'an, Allah Tells us not 2 oppress ourselves, every action we do has a consequence, sins cause us a loss in faith(imaan), good deeds boost our faith, so the more evil we do the further from God we get and vice versa.

You're a piece of work aren't you? I just read that Saudi women thread. I look forward to you leaving these boards and fucking back under the stone you crawled from you nasty cunt.

You don't really like women do you?

 

[frogwoman]

Fuck I just read the saudi women thread as well ...

i know a couple of muslim women that would kick your arse fattboy.

 

[frogwoman]

How much have you read/know about stellar and planetary formation froggy? You're basically saying that the idea that some entity said 'create' is more convincing than a physical process of formation that is actually being observered at the moment.

Planets don't happen randomly - whether the actual universe was bought into being by the Big Bang or The Word is moot since neither can be proved and certainly it's impossible for science OR religion to answer the question 'What came first' (altho my money is on Science getting closer to an actual answer than theology), but the science of stellar and planetary formation isn't random, it's physics and chemistry.

Yeah but what makes you think God didn't start off the process that your'e talking about? What makes you so sure that he or she didn't have anything to do with it?

I never said the big bang didn't happen, and i think evolution is still continuing so there isn't any reason why that couldn't be continuing either? I just don't see how that could have started on its own, what was before the big bang? Nobody knows, it couldn't have just been nothing could it? And I'm not saying it is random but I just don't see how a whole universe could have started forming on its own and spontaneously coming into existence with nothing to "make" it do that iyswim

 

[frogwoman]

Y'see, that's where I have a real problem with your type of simplistic argument - Hitler didn't just get into 'evil' - he came to prominence due to the late development of the German state and the problems that led to, such as WW1 and the iniquitous settlement imposed on Germany as well as economic ruin, revolution and a climate of political violence in the 1920s and 30s. He was a man that fulfilled a need for sections of the society he was part of. To reduce a complex set of historical circumstances to the presence of 'evil' in a person or people is dead wrong.

Yeah it's a very simplistic analysis. The seeds of fascism were sown long before Hitler was even born tbh and were much more to do with german society and politics and the things which were happening in germany itself - and of course the horrors of ww1 - rather than one person.

Its a mistake to think that everything would have been hunky dory were it not for the nazis, evil though they were

Putting it down to Hitler's being led astray by dark forces doesnt help us understand the third reich or more importantly help us understand how to prevent such a situation again.

 

[fattboy]

Yeah but what makes you think God didn't start off the process that your'e talking about? What makes you so sure that he or she didn't have anything to do with it?

I never said the big bang didn't happen, and i think evolution is still continuing so there isn't any reason why that couldn't be continuing either? I just don't see how that could have started on its own, what was before the big bang? Nobody knows, it couldn't have just been nothing could it? And I'm not saying it is random but I just don't see how a whole universe could have started forming on its own and spontaneously coming into existence with nothing to "make" it do that iyswim

heres a verse from the Qur'an, one of its many miracles, that relates 2 the big bang and ever expanding universe

''And the firmament, We constructed with power and skill, and verily We are expanding it.''
(translation of) Qur'an 51:47

http://www.answering-christianity.com/6_days.htm

all revealed over 1400 years and verified by western scientists in the 20th century.