[shadha]

LOL.

*Eagerly awaits Khairan's reply*


shadha-

[SaidAbdullahofDarfur]

whats so funny?

[shadha]

The fact that you replied with a lengthly post that was totally irrelevant to the entire meaning and point of his post.


shadha-

[SaidAbdullahofDarfur]

Originally Posted by shadha

The fact that you replied with a lengthly post that was totally irrelevant to the entire meaning and point of his post.


shadha-

Hmm maybe we just had two different ideas about the meaning of the post.

to me saying things like Calling yourself muslim is conceit, is kind of well, a call to action...

I do personally believe we as muslims are the chosen people of god.

We were told to submit, this month of Ramadan is a great example of this.

Are the KFR fasting?
If so are they doing it for the same reasons?

This is what I addressed.

[Khairan]

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

Moral Superiority is null and void.
The point was they have different morals.

Her being Muslim id est Submitter[to Allah(SWT)]
Him being a KFR id est Disbeliever[Not a muslim]

Saying that different people have "different morals" is no point at all if you're basing it entirely on religion. It implies -- wrongly -- that people of different backgrounds can't share moral values. If "muslim" meant "moral uniformity" then muslims wouldn't have been killing each other in internecine wars over religion for hundreds of years.

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

How so? How would proclaiming yourself a submitter to the will of god make you conceited?

Read the sentence again. I said it was *a conceit* -- in other words, a merely decorative description, a label. You can call yourself the Queen of Sheba but that doesn't make it so. Likewise, just *calling* oneself a muslim -- adopting that label -- doesn't automatically mean that one is a Submitter. Only God can know who is submitting to His will and who isn't. The label you've chosen to hang your hat on in this discussion ("muslim") doesn't really mean what you think it does -- in effect, it means "one who hopes and tries to submit to the will of God." That is very different from "a Submitter." This opens the door to realizing that people can TRY to do God's will regardless of what they call themselves. It also becomes true, once we acknowledge this, that people can do God's will without consciously being aware of it, in the same way that a newborn searches for its mother's nipple without realizing what it's doing. This is precisely the reason why Islam has teaches us the notion of "spiritual Forgetfulness" (ghafl). Just like there is an instinctual rooting reflex, I believe humans (even atheists) have a spiritual instinct to search for God. In other words, our souls have always had the knowledge of Islam, but once we enter the world we become forgetful of it. The Message of the Prophet exists to remind us of what we have forgotten, but even without it that knowledge is still there (albeit confused and imperfect). Are "muslims" Forgetful too? It's pretty obvious that we are -- if we weren't we wouldn't ever disagree on matters of religion.

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

Wouldn't doing this and shahada do nothing more than increase taqwa and make you a better muslim?

It CAN. Does it always? No. You don't have to look very hard or very far to find numerous examples of "godly" men who have as little taqwa as a bear has hooves.

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

It doesn't make your average person a better person,

As a revert I'd have to disagree....
Islam has made me a better person, in my own eyes of course...

The question you've failed to ask is: can someone become a good person *without* Islam? The answer is unequivocally "yes."

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

I beg to differ.

I am a muslim, as a submitter to the will of god, I would say that does bring you closer to him than not believing in him.

I said something very specific regarding what people *call* themselves, and your point doesn't address it because you aren't using the same language I am. It leads me to think that you've missed the gist of my prior post, which I've restated above in this reply and will again reiterate here: my focus is not on "Islam" or "lack of Islam" but on labels and their relative arbitrariness.

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

This is where personal morals come into play brother.
As a muslim I believe those of great iman, taqwa and Din, are closer to god.
Because I believe in Allah(SWT) and the last day.
Ash hadu ana la illaha il allah
Ash hadu ana muhammadur rasoolallah

The problem is that (whether you actually believe this or not) you're *arguing* that people don't HAVE *personal* morals. If you acknowledge that they do, then you must also accept that what people believe on a personal level actually guides them to some degree. This must be distinguished from the contention that people are wholly guided by external belief systems. It's pretty obvious to me that people in fact use a combination of the two, and this is why you have both divergence within a single group (muslims who do not believe the same things) and convergence between groups (non-muslims and muslims who share moral values).

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

Well, we do look through different lenses do we?

You see a problem with me, what I've said, whilst I think in order for you to see that, you've made it up to appease your own consciousness...

my proof?

My post.

I'm afraid if you're looking to your post as "proof" of anything you're not looking in the right place. In order for the above comment to make sense you'll also have to establish why it is you think I need to "appease my consciousness" and what it is I'm supposedly insecure about. Otherwise you're just throwing words around.

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

No non-muslim can ever have a concept of Al-Mustaqim...

My point, Do you not agree?

If I agreed, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The concept of the "straight path" is ingrained in us, it's not some alien concept we have no knowledge of until we're told. That's why it's possible to say (as scholars do) that people are not responsible for rejecting Islam unless they truly understand it first, and at the same time say that even non-Muslims are capable of sin. In other words, regardless of whatever else, God HOLDS US RESPONSIBLE for being decent human beings. Not knowing of Islam doesn't excuse evil. It follows quite clearly from this that if non-muslims are held responsible for being decent people, then they are capable of being decent people. Not knowing of Islam DOES excuse not being "muslim," however, which further indicates that being a good person isn't tantamount to being muslim. EVERYONE has at LEAST "a concept" of right and wrong, and we will all be held to that on the day of judgement.

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

Is this not fact as dictated by surat al fatiha, and surat al kafirun?

No, it isn't. Al-Fatiha reinforces that we seek God's help on walking the straight way. Ihdin assiratul mustaqeem. The real question is whether everyone comes on the straight way simply by virtue of adopting the label "muslim" -- an idea which I have rejected above -- and whether being non-Muslim precludes one from coming near this path (an idea which I have also rejected).

Al-Kafiroon says very particularly that we will not be able to convince everyone of Islam or of God, and that we should leave people to their own devices. Lakum dinakum wa le addin. That isn't remotely the same thing as saying that non-muslims cannot have meaningful concepts of right and wrong.

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

She does not believe what he believes.
He does not believe what she believes.

You have NO idea what he believes and what he doesn't. That's why your argument is hollow.

[shadha]

Thank you Khairan, thank you.


shadha-

[wheelworks]

SIGH...

[TrentReznor858]

I think everyone is forgetting that this kid is only 16.

[Khairan]

Originally Posted by TrentReznor858

I think everyone is forgetting that this kid is only 16.

Meh. One of the nice things about the internet is that it's pretty egalitarian this way. The only thing you have going for you (or against you) is what you say. I don't really care about anyone's age as this entire medium revolves around what people express.

[Aryan_]

It's absurd to believe Allah will treat muslims and non-muslims the same, even if the Muslims aren't practicing. Otherwise, what would be the point in becoming a Muslim. It would be illogical.

[Khairan]

Originally Posted by Aryan_

It's absurd to believe Allah will treat muslims and non-muslims the same, even if the Muslims aren't practicing. Otherwise, what would be the point in becoming a Muslim. It would be illogical.

What's absurd is to think that God is bound by labels. He does not need to compartmentalize the universe with words like we do because His knowledge and understanding are not limited. He does not depend on ideas to make sense of His own creation.

To us a "muslim" is someone who professes certain beliefs. However, we are inherently creatures who struggle to understand the essence of Islam (if we didn't struggle, we would never have needed guidance to begin with). My point is that we place far too much importance on the labels we choose to give ourselves, when they are ultimately irrelevant. You are a muslim, or not, as God wills it. What you choose to call yourself has no bearing on reality.

[AceOfHearts]

Originally Posted by Aryan_

It's absurd to believe Allah will treat muslims and non-muslims the same, even if the Muslims aren't practicing. Otherwise, what would be the point in becoming a Muslim. It would be illogical.

Actually in the Qur'an, there is no such thing as a "non-practicing Muslim". In fact, we are informed of people who disbelieve, but when asked, they acknowledge Allah as the Creator:

"If you ask them who created the heavens and the earth, they are sure to say, 'Allah.' Say, 'Praise be to Allah,' but most of them do not understand." [Qur'an 31:25]

peace.

[Aryan_]

Originally Posted by AceOfHearts

Actually in the Qur'an, there is no such thing as a "non-practicing Muslim". In fact, we are informed of people who disbelieve, but when asked, they acknowledge Allah as the Creator:

"If you ask them who created the heavens and the earth, they are sure to say, 'Allah.' Say, 'Praise be to Allah,' but most of them do not understand." [Qur'an 31:25]

peace.

They say Allah but they don't believe it, that is different to someone who does submit to Allah and his Messenger Mohammed. I believe the former is a munafiq according to Islamic jurisprudence.

Originally Posted by Khairan

What's absurd is to think that God is bound by labels. He does not need to compartmentalize the universe with words like we do because His knowledge and understanding are not limited. He does not depend on ideas to make sense of His own creation.

To us a "muslim" is someone who professes certain beliefs. However, we are inherently creatures who struggle to understand the essence of Islam (if we didn't struggle, we would never have needed guidance to begin with). My point is that we place far too much importance on the labels we choose to give ourselves, when they are ultimately irrelevant. You are a muslim, or not, as God wills it. What you choose to call yourself has no bearing on reality.

Describing it as a label obscures the fact it is a declaration of religiosity, a submission to the Muslim God Allah and his prophet Mohammed. I'm not quite sure what you meant by the essence of Islam, but the fundamental theological beliefs aren't disputed in Islam, the Koran is quite clear on that.

"You are a muslim, or not, as God wills it"

That's as absurd as the last claim. Believing in Islam is an individual's choice, not the choice of Allah. If that was the case why would Allah keep non-Muslims in a state of non-belief...and then chastise them for those very beliefs?

Granted anyone can say they are a Muslim just like they say they are bigfoot, and that doesn't make it true. But using that red herring to dismiss the value of sincerely submitting to Allah - regardless of future religious conduct - is inconsistent with both logic and what I've read of Islamic religion.

For example, in Islamic thought why is hell only eternal to those who reject Allah, "kafir"?