/islam/ - 8kun Masjid

>>31559

Most Muslims don't delve into the minutia. It's the same way most Christians have never read the Bible. When there are nearly 2 billion adherents to any religion, there's always going to be ignorance among the people. Muslims are not a collective hive mind, where each individual shares knowledge collectively.

I mean, do you personally understand every aspect of mathematics? Why not? After all, it exists and there are plenty of books about it.

God's nature is not essential to Islam or its practice. You don't have to understand every tiny bit, every permutation, to be Muslim. Islam, like any religion, is a lifetime pursuit. Some choose to pursue deeply into the artistry and poetry of Islam while others choose to declare their faith and live a Muslim life. There are also those, like in Christianity, who are simply born into a Muslim family and follow the tradition of their parents. I believe Jesus(pbuh) put it best when he said, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

islam qa represents a minority view among Muslims, albeit one that has a disproportionately high presence on the English speaking internet.

>Christian concept of God as Spirit

You worship the human created nature of Jesus, no? And most christians I've come across believe God is two human guys in the sky.

I guess I should also point out that we get this question all the time and it virtually always turns out to be a concern troll trying to get us to convert to Christianity. If that's your goal, OP, then you can just go on ahead and leave.

>>31562

This is true. The site "islamqa.info" is modern Salafi and doesn't represent all Muslims. It is also not peer reviewed nor editable in case of error. So, take it with a grain of salt.

>>31564

>>31562

>You worship the human created nature of Jesus, no?

Actually, no; we don't worship the "human created nature" of Jesus. It's a bit like this: One might love their mother, but they wouldn't mean by that that they love the body belonging to to their mother. Rather, they would mean they love the being who is their mother. We worship Jesus, because He is the Word of God Incarnate. It seems many Muslims believe that we believe "God is a man" - and this, of course, would be every bit as absurd and blasphemous to us Christians as it would be to Muslims. Saying "a Man is God" is closer, but it, too, would be absolutely incorrect if one would take it to mean that God is eternally, ontologically, a man in His very Being.

>And most christians I've come across believe God is two human guys in the sky.

I'm assuming that this was intended to be a bit of a caricature, but I would agree that a good percentage of those who refer to themselves as Christians are thoroughly ignorant not just on the Nature of God, but a whole lot more vis-a-vis the Faith.

I don't consider the majority of such people to be actual Christians; they are more like people who view religious identification sort of the same way they do sports team jerseys. Islam has the same phenomenon, with many self-professed "Muslims" being little more in religious substance than simply people who don't eat pork.

>>31560

> Most Muslims don't delve into the minutia. It's the same way most Christians have never read the Bible.

Yeah, but… see above. This, to me, is much, much more important than to be termed "minutia." We're talking about the very Nature of God's Being, insomuch as it can be apprehended by the human mind. It seems rather… well… foundational, really.

>>31563

> I guess I should also point out that we get this question all the time and it virtually always turns out to be a concern troll trying to get us to convert to Christianity.

I didn't know that this was a frequent question.

My apologies. Also: have absolutely no such illusions. You have my word on that.

>>31562

>>31564

Explain further. My understanding is that Salafis were just purists, really, as far as Islamic belief and praxis goes - and to that extent, it would seem like the place to go for a somewhat authoritative take on the issue. But, as I said, the same general concept seems pretty much universally taught, as far as I can tell.

>>31565

whoops:

> have absolutely no such illusions.

should have been:

> I have absolutely no such illusions.

>>31565

>This, to me, is much, much more important

>to me

And therein lies the problem. It doesn't matter what's important to you. It isn't important to us.

>>31563

You were right(not that I doubted you). Typical stick gang mushrik nonsense.

>>31565

You christians worship Jesus who is fully human(created).

>>31567

> It doesn't matter what's important to you. It isn't important to us.

True, indeed. What is important to me has no bearing on the personal concerns of Muslims - or any other person, for that matter.

Nevertheless, it certainly would be odd for the adherents of a monotheistic religion to consider the Nature of God as "unimportant" or of no concern to them. If that were true of the average Muslim, then this insouciance with regard to Allah's Nature, when contrasted with the rather voluminous corpus of ahadith detailing every aspect of Muhammad's life and conduct, would seem to bolster the claim of Islam's critics and their use of the pejorative term "Muhammadans."

I find it hard to believe that this is the common sentiment among Muslims (i.e., that the Nature of God is unimportant)

>>31568

>You christians worship Jesus who is fully human(created).

Again, this is completely wrong. Jesus was not "created." To worship ANY created being would indeed be absurd.

>>31568

I don't understand - either the hostility (I am sincerely trying to understand what Muslims believe), or the apparent hostility. Did I say something to warrant that?

>>31569

>I find it hard to believe

Then why did you come to the Muslim board to ask Muslims if you weren't going to accept the answer?

>>31570

>the hostility

There's no hostility here, but you are kind of telling us what should be important to us in our religion even though you are not a part of our religion.

I've been Muslim since 2004, declaring my faith in the mosque after 2 years of study. I've lived a Muslim life, studied Qur'an and the Sunnah, and immersed myself in Islamic study. While I may be the most knowledgeable Muslim in the world, I think that after 16 years I've gotten a fairly decent grasp on Islam. What you're claiming "should be" important is not important and never really has been. There's too much involved contextually.

Example: The Prophet(pbuh) once said that "Paradise is at the feet of the mother." Does this literally mean that when we die, we go to our mother's feet? Of course not. If you're going to study something, you study all of it. You can't just pick and choose a verse here or a surah there and have it be the whole of knowledge. That cafeteria approach is ignorant at best, dangerous at worst. Sort of like when extremists take a verse with no context and use it to blow up innocent people.

>>31578

I'm pretty sure that I've been nothing but civil. We do have IDs here, you know.

>>31584

THANK YOU, my friend!!!!

I honestly, sincerely had ZERO intention of either proselytizing (I have better sense than to think this is some rich "mission field") OR to start a fight/create hostility.

I came WITH A QUESTION, because I noted a sharp disconnect in what the average Muslim was saying, versus what their scholars are saying, and was wondering why that was

>>31590

In general it's just not important to us. We submit to God 100%. The nature of God doesn't matter as much as God's word. And, yes, I realize it's a conundrum. Even in your Christian way of thinking, the fact that God has a "word" and used "words" to bring the Universe into being (Let there be light), means that there must be some physical aspect to God. If you have no mouth, you cannot speak. It's a conundrum, but we put a lot less emphasis on the conundrum than you do.

Make sense?

There is nothing wrong with this thread except for it not keeping to the topic at hand. I won't delete it and I'm not handing out bans, but remember that people are allowed to ask questions - even if they're not Muslim.

>>31609

>This thread violates rule 5

The containment rule was put in place to stop people from preaching Christianity on this board. The OP does not preach.

>>31611

>>31612

Thanks Mr. Board Owner. I'm glad the sincerity with which I started the thread is recognized (or, at least not doubted out of hand)

>>31559

There's a difference of opinion, but no muslim takes it as a physical body, since Allah (swt) is independent of everything. We all accept the verses and don't try to explain it.

>>31618

Yes; this is pretty much exactly what I've read from Islamic scholars.

Although I obviously disagree with their theology, I thought that the way they interpreted their texts was sound and unavoidable. For example, the reasoning behind interpreting Allah's hands as literal is as follows:

Allah tells Iblis that he created Adam "with [his] own hands." Since Allah created all, and he is obviously drawing a special distinction for the creation of Adam, then it follows that his hands are literal hands (and yes; I understand the oft-repeated caveat that said "hands" cannot be directly compared to human hands).

Again, though I obviously disagree with the theology, they seem to be on very firm ground indeed, as far as Islamic scriptures go.

>>31616

>There's a difference of opinion, but no muslim takes it as a physical body,

But that's certainly not what the scholars apparently say. They absolutely regard it as a corporeal (though utterly incomparable), physical being. This is sort of illustrative of the disconnect which prompted me to ask the question in the first place.

I can give lots of ahadith which plainly state it.

>>31624

Again, like I said, take it all with a grain of salt. Remember that old Christian song: "He's got the whole world, in his hands"? If, as you say, Christians don't believe in a physical God, but rather a purely spirit God, then why would that song be written? Or why would Christ be described as "sitting at the right hand of God"? The idea of hands, feet, shins, etc allow us to understand God a little more in our somewhat primitive brains, but we can't permit ourselves to believe that God is an actual human in such forms as described by song and psalm.

Like I said here: >>31592

Also, you really should stop engaging those you see as hostile. You're losing the conversation by bickering.

Pointless arguing removed.

>>31626

>Again, like I said, take it all with a grain of salt. Remember that old Christian song: "He's got the whole world, in his hands"? If, as you say, Christians don't believe in a physical God, but rather a purely spirit God, then why would that song be written? Or why would Christ be described as "sitting at the right hand of God"?

Oh yes; I certainly understand the concept of metaphor and figurative expressions in religious texts of every sort - but, the scholars I am referring to (and it seems to be a rather unanimous assertion) flatly and explicitly exclude the possibility of taking these attributes of Allah as being anything but literal. That's my whole point, here.

>but we can't permit ourselves to believe that God is an actual human

Oh, no doubt - from either the Muslim or the Christian perspective - for we Christians do not believe that God, in His essence, is ontologically a man. And, to reiterate: the scholars are clear and unambiguous in stating that such attributes cannot be compared to human "hands," "face," "shin," etc. - but again, on the other hand, they also cannot be interpreted as metaphors or simple turn of phrase.

>Also, you really should stop engaging those you see as hostile. You're losing the conversation by bickering.

Not sure what you mean here by "losing the conversation." My first impression is that this implies some sort of contest. If that is what is meant, i.e. a debate, then again, it simply doesn't apply here. Then I thought you may mean something like what was said earlier about the tread having been derailed - in which case, I'd have to agree - but, in my defense, I'd just say that I really tried to avoid it. Thankfully, Mr. Owner is making any prior effort to create an argument into wasted time.

>>31627

A welcome modification!

Thanx again

Maybe I should be approaching it this way:

When you guys go to your mosques/masjids, are there anything analogous to the sort of expository verse-by-verse sermons one might here in, say, a Baptist church? If so, what is discussed?

>>31630

We generally only hear khutbahs (sermons) on Fridays and the topic just sort of depends on what's going on in the community. If there's nothing big going on, then the khutbah will be generalized, like yesterday the khutbah was about the obligation of seeking knowledge. It's a bit different than churches. We sit on the floor and it's more of a discussion rather than listening to speeches. The prayer leader will address the topic, read a bit from Qur'an, and we will discuss as long as we like. Then we eat a sort of potluck meal outside the mosque - weather permitting. It may be a bit different for others. I go to a small mosque of maybe 40 regular attendees (those who go to mosque at least 3 times per week). Much larger mosques may do things differently.

>>31628

>Not sure what you mean here by "losing the conversation."

I mean the conversation is getting buried in the bickering.

>the scholars I am referring to

I'm assuming you've only taken a look at Sunni scholars. Shi'a and Ibadi see things differently. Best example I can think of is when Allah refers to the kabah as "My house". Allah doesn't actually live there, it's just an extremely important place.

>>31632

>I'm assuming you've only taken a look at Sunni scholars. Shi'a and Ibadi see things differently. Best example I can think of is when Allah refers to the kabah as "My house". Allah doesn't actually live there, it's just an extremely important place.

Yes, in fact I believe all the sources I've read on the subject were Sunni. Do the Shiaa see it differently, i.e. that Allah does not have a corporeal aspect of being of any sort?

>>31633

>Do the Shiaa see it differently

Very much so. And it's not even universal among Sunni. Salafi are a hard "yes, it's literal"; but many other Sunni scholars see it as more metaphorical or share the Shi'a view.

You also have to understand that when you say "Sunni scholars", you're talking about a huge range of people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Sunni_Muslim_scholars

>The following 141 pages are in this category, out of 141 total.

That's a lot of scholars.

>>31631

> We generally only hear khutbahs (sermons) on Fridays and the topic just sort of depends on what's going on in the community.

Are these khutbahs always so… what is the word?… practical? I guess I'm asking if much focus is placed on theological concepts and expository, verse-by-verse teaching explicating the Quran? (Similar to a "spoken tafsir," I suppose)

> We sit on the floor and it's more of a discussion rather than listening to speeches. The prayer leader will address the topic, read a bit from Qur'an, and we will discuss as long as we like.

Gotta say, this sounds awesome! Though this is unlike the modern experience of attending a church, it sounds very much like the home churches of the New Testament.

>>31635

>practical?

Oh, sure. For more theological concepts we have Qur'an classes - similar to your Bible study groups.

>this sounds awesome!

You should try it some time. All are welcome and you don't have to join in the actual prayer, just hang out in the back. We'll even feed ya for free!

>>31634

> You also have to understand that when you say "Sunni scholars", you're talking about a huge range of people.

I'm sure that's true. I know that, for instance, there are different schools of Sunni jurisprudence (i.e. Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki, etc) - but I read quite a few different sources, and they were all unanimous on this.

Also, perhaps this might sound unduly exclusive, but I really don't look at less "serious" (again: if that's the word) groups as being a legitimate reference as far as Islamic teaching goes. To use a comparison from my own (nominal) Faith: I wouldn't take the teachings of Unitarian Universalists as being normative for Christianity. I think I mentioned at the start of the thread (if the post is still there) people for whom religion is like a sports jersey; I put them in that sort of camp.

I'm sure I will hear lots of disagreement on this, but I would think that, if one wants to know what it is Islam really teaches, a Salafi would be the person to ask, as they seem to be religious purists, going only by what Islam's sources say, and taking those sources at face value.

>>31637

Eh, they seem like purists because that's what most non-Muslims see. They see Saudi Arabia, read quotes from a Qur'an sponsored by the Saudi government, and find Salafi sites like islamqa when Googling. Yet, less than 15% of the world's Muslims are Arab and the modern Salafi movement was started in the 1940s. They just happen to be really, really wealthy; which allows them a louder global voice. They practice Islam the way they believe it was practiced during the life of Muhammad(pbuh) and they may very well be right; but the way things were done in the 7th century don't necessarily jibe with today's world. After all, Saudis travel by cars and airplanes - something the Prophet would have never dreamed of existing. I believe they have good intentions - which is important - and do a lot of good in the world (yes, Islam requires good works for salvation); but they don't hold the lock and key on Islam.

>>31559

Even with Salafi groups more emphasis is placed (and should be placed in my opinion) on Allah’s attributes (IE the 99 names of Allah). These have to do with the nature and perfection of Allah. Where He is isn’t as important as how He is. If you really want to understand the nature of the Creator, you have to study His attributes (the 99 names of Allah). There is a lot of depth to this study. That might explain why many Muslims aren’t as familiar with him physically existing, because most Imams would choose to focus on things like His mercy, generosity, etc instead.

There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing. (Quran 42:11)

The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded. (Quran 5:75)

>>31636

>You should try it some time. All are welcome and you don't have to join in the actual prayer, just hang out in the back. We'll even feed ya for free!

That's a really nice invitation and the sentiment is well-received - but unfortunately I know myself too well to accept it :-)

I'm the kind of person who actually got blacklisted by the Jehovah's Witnesses, so that each time they went through the neighborhood again, they were told to skip my house. It's not that I wasn't willing to talk to them - quite the opposite!

It required a bit of self-discipline to come here resolved to not have a debate; were I to go there in person, I'm pretty sure I would end up doing what might be regarded by some as evangelizing - certainly not in a direct way, but my inevitable questioning would be interpreted that way.

>>31642

You'd be surprised how tolerant the vast majority of us are when it comes to questions. As long as you're not interrupting prayer, it's all good. God's house is everyone's house.

>>31643

Well, interrupting someone's Prayer is something that I would never, ever do, no matter how much I might disagree with this or that point of theology - that is for sure. My kids see how irked I get when they do that (although it doesn't seem to stop them, being 3 and 5).

I suppose in such a situation my "saving grace " would be that I tend to not do what so many other Christians do when discussing the relative merits of our faiths, which is to insult Muhammad or impugn his sense of morality. I don't view that as helpful in any sense.

>>31623

>>31624

You can hold an opinion, but you can't tell us what is correct or not, since you're a non muslim and don't have the same understanding.

>>31648

My friend, I'm neither giving my own opinion nor telling you what is correct. I am merely repeating the unanimous or near-unanimous position of orthodox Sunni Islam, as stated by its scholars!

>>31645

>>31646

Thanx! I'll give them a read

>>31649

If you want to know why some Muslims do not follow what is made clear in the text, it would be almost impossible to give any one answer. There are many differences of opinion and there are many reasons why. They don’t like that part of the belief, It makes them uncomfortable, They would be more comfortable following something they are able to comprehend, They want to interpret the text in a way that conforms to modern scientific theory, and other reasons.

Most people find it easier to follow what other people tell them, rather than trying to go to the source, rationally think about it, and trying and come up with their own conclusion. For instance if you go up to most Shia Muslims and ask them about some of the ridiculous things that are written in their books, they have never heard about it. Most of them are ignorant and are only following what their leadership tells them is correct.

>>31649

>unanimous or near-unanimous position

Remember what I linked above? 141 pages of Sunni scholars. Have you really studied all of them in order to claim this unanimity?

>>31652

>Remember what I linked above? 141 pages of Sunni scholars. Have you really studied all of them in order to claim this unanimity?

Great question. I look at it this way:

Although it would be perhaps hyperbole to say, unequivocally, "unanimous" (and for this reason I added, "or near-unanimous," because I want to be as accurate as possible), according to all the sources I found, while searching just for whether or not Allah is a physical being, they all said the same exact thing: That those attributes which we would term "physical" (i.e. "hands," "face," leg," etc.) are not to be interpreted metaphorically, but literally. Again, because I really must stress this: I didn't pick a position and then set out to "prove" it be cherrypicking Islamic authorities; they ALL said the SAME THING.

Now, as a prior Abdul (did I get that right? It certainly wasn't intended to sound like a "racist" pejorative or anything, but I believe you guys call yourselves "slaves of Allah") pointed out, they were all, to be sure, SUNNI scholars - but each of them said the very same thing.

Now, outside of an ENORMOUS coincidence, where I just so happened to stumble upon ONLY those authorities who said this one thing, it seems pretty darned close to unanimous.

Besides this, they also claimed that to deny the literal nature of these attributes is to leave the fold of Islam - so apparently this is no trifling matter, but essential to the Islamic religion.

Those are my reasons and discoveries. I, of course, am fully open to correction. In fact, that's precisely why I came here.

>>31651

>If you want to know why some Muslims do not follow what is made clear in the text, it would be almost impossible to give any one answer. There are many differences of opinion and there are many reasons why. They don’t like that part of the belief, It makes them uncomfortable, They would be more comfortable following something they are able to comprehend, They want to interpret the text in a way that conforms to modern scientific theory, and other reasons.

WOW, man! What really interested me about this comment is the way I could substitute the Christian doctrine of the "Trinity," and every single word of it would apply just as well in regards to those who'd like to dismiss the "tripartite" Nature of our God. Interesting!

>>31653

As far as I know, most Christians believe that the afterlife is going to be more “spiritual.” To them, they believe that it is going to be more like a dream, and you aren’t going to have a physical body. Muslims believe that everyone will be resurrected and by returned to their physical forms. In the afterlife you will be able to eat and drink, and exist in a physical body.

Some Muslims like Harun Yahya, who has a widely published translation of the Quran, adopted the Christian idea of the afterlife. He has many footnotes in his Quran that blatantly try to explain away the obvious meanings of the Quran.

With regards to Allah’s physical existence RIGHT NOW, even though it is an important aspect to you personally, really isn’t that important to Muslims (in general) compared to his other attributes. Especially considering that no matter what, in the afterlife, it is going to be a physical existence.

> Besides this, they also claimed that to deny the literal nature of these attributes is to leave the fold of Islam - so apparently this is no trifling matter, but essential to the Islamic religion.

That is very, very shaky ground. You always need to be very skeptical when you hear someone saying “leaves the fold of Islam.” That basically means that if someone holds those beliefs they are a disbeliever and are no longer considered a Muslim. Most Islamic extremist groups use this to apply to huge groups of people. ISIS claims that anyone who does not follow them and hold all of their beliefs is a disbeliever, and should be fought.

Imam Bukhari related in his Sahih v. 4, p. 124 #6103, 6104 on the authority of Ibn ‘Umar and Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet Muhammad (sallaAllahu alayhie wa sallam) said, “If a man says to his brother, ‘O kafir,’ then it returns to one of them.”

Meaning if a Muslim calls another Muslim a disbeliver, and it isn’t the truth, the one who called him that will be the disbeliever. That is VERY serious. In Islamic history, when Ali Ibn Abu Talib RA was fighting a divergent, violent, heretical group called the Khwarij, he refused to call them disbelievers, even though they were engaged in all kinds of horrendous acts.

>>31654

> the "tripartite" Nature of our God.

This is a nonsensical statement. If you want to delve into this type of discussion you should go to the containment thread >>20806

>>31656

Why's that?

I was simply mentioning that we have a very similar and directly analogous phenomenon in our own faith. Is this bad?

>>31655

Interesting suff. I'm gonna reply to this a bit later, but right now I have to leave my present location - so, when I return it'll be with another ID

>>31657

That thread is entirely dedicated to discussing the Trinity.

>>31653

Well, like I said before, it's just not that important to us. It's a good topic of conversation, but it seems way more important to you than it does to us - which goes back to my original response. Whether God is literally physical or solely ethereal isn't important to salvation.

OK: I'm back…

>>31655

>As far as I know, most Christians believe that the afterlife is going to be more “spiritual.” To them, they believe that it is going to be more like a dream, and you aren’t going to have a physical body

Although this is the widely perceived belief of Christians - and for that I think the bulk of the blame lies at the doorstep of the same sort of ancient artwork mentioned before in the thread - it's actually not true at all. We believe that, in the coming Millenium, we will have physical, though perfected, bodies, which will be free from the defects wrought by the fall. In a more immediate sense, after an individual's death but prior to the Resurrection and Second Coming, yes, this would be an ethereal body, of course. But eventually? Absolutely a physical body.

> Some Muslims like Harun Yahya

Would that be the well-known Islamic Creationist?

> With regards to Allah’s physical existence RIGHT NOW, even though it is an important aspect to you personally, really isn’t that important to Muslims (in general) compared to his other attributes. Especially considering that no matter what, in the afterlife, it is going to be a physical existence.

It's not that the corporeal or non-corporeal nature of Allah is important to me personally (after all, I am not Muslim), but what is of interest to me is why the average Muslim seems to be ignorant of what the majority of their scholars say about their religion. I would suppose that this interest is probably in no small part provoked by comments such as those we saw earlier in this thread, before Mr. Board Owner cleaned it up - when Muslims make the accusation that we Christians somehow believe in some physical concept of God, i.e. that "God is a man" or whatever.

>That is very, very shaky ground. You always need to be very skeptical when you hear someone saying “leaves the fold of Islam.” That basically means that if someone holds those beliefs they are a disbeliever and are no longer considered a Muslim.

I personally share your dim view of such categorical statements.

Maybe I should ask this:

What are the essential beliefs and practices, which would qualify one as being a Muslim, and absent which, one is not a Muslim???

>>31658

Yeah again, then: I wasn't arguing for the Trinity; I was mentioning that we have a controversy with a directly analogous background to what the poster mentioned re: Islam.

>>31661

>What are the essential beliefs and practices, which would qualify one as being a Muslim

As soon as you declare shahadah, you are Muslim. Now, you may not be a very disciplined Muslim if you skip prayers or things of the like, but you're still Muslim. If you weren't born into a Muslim family or in a Muslim nation, then it takes some time to get into the routine of things; but it all starts with shahadah.

>>31661

>why the average Muslim seems to be ignorant of what the majority of their scholars say about their religion.

Because the concept of Allah currently existing in a physical form is not part of the basic fundamentals of Islamic belief. When you consider the entire body of authentic hadith, it is A LOT of material. There are quite a few Muslims that haven’t even read the entire Quran, just like the majority of Christians haven’t read the entire Bible. If you go and ask 10 different Christian priests about different aspects of Christianity, you will come back with 11 different answers. In general, Muslims scholars have a much more unified set of answers to questions about their fundamental beliefs.

Emphasis is placed on a Muslims actions, what is allowed and what isn’t allowed. With regards to a Muslim’s belief, the basic fundamental points are that God is one, He does not have any partner in creation or authority, He is to be worshipped directly (not going through any intercessors), and that Muhammad PBUH is the Messenger of Allah. Muhammad PBUH was the last of the Prophets who was sent with the final revelation for mankind, the Quran and the Sunnah. The Quran is the literal word of God. God has sent the same fundamental revelation to all of the previous Prophets, but over time the message was distorted. The Quran is eternal, not one word of it has been changed since it was revealed. Even if individual Muslims lose their way and start following different practices, the Quran is still the same, and will not be changed…unlike every other religious text.

>>31649

You only posted here to cause argumentation (fitna), I can tell you are a so called christian. Know that the reason atheists think God is a bearded sky daddy is because of your religion.

>>31653

>Besides this, they also claimed that to deny the literal nature of these attributes is to leave the fold of Islam - so apparently this is no trifling matter, but essential to the Islamic religion.

Nobody denies the literal verses, we just don't try to explain them because we can never understand. If God asks us we will say we believe he has a 'yad' and he did 'istawa' on the throne, but that's as far as we go.

>>31662

If you compare God to the trinity another time you will be banned since it counts as proselytizing.

>>31671

Are you kidding me???

It's hard to believe that you actually construed the dialogue that way. If that's the case, then please ban me.

>>31671

>>31667

>>31668

Why are you so hostile, guy??

>>31667

And this gem:

> I can tell you are a so called christian.

Well, what clues you in? The many times I clearly said as much???

>>31665

>When you consider the entire body of authentic hadith, it is A LOT of material.

Oh yeah! That I am well aware of - it is a staggering amount of material.

>There are quite a few Muslims that haven’t even read the entire Quran, just like the majority of Christians haven’t read the entire Bible

Absolutely no disagreement, here! This is something that irks me about both groups - because I feel if someone is going to claim this or that religion, they should be making it a serious course of study, and not simply the "sports jersey" I referenced before. We are, after all, speaking of The Creator of the universe, here.

>If you go and ask 10 different Christian priests about different aspects of Christianity, you will come back with 11 different answers

You'd have done better to stick with <shhhhhhh! Let's hope that other guy doesn't hear us!> the Trinity. Ask 100 random Christians to roughly describe what it means, and you'd be very lucky to get 10 accurate responses.

>Emphasis is placed on a Muslims actions, what is allowed and what isn’t allowed. With regards to a Muslim’s belief, the basic fundamental points are that God is one, He does not have any partner in creation or authority, He is to be worshipped directly (not going through any intercessors), and that Muhammad PBUH is the Messenger of Allah.

Here, I'd wonder what your thoughts are on the view of many Qurani Muslims I've heard address the subject: namely, that the Shahada itself is shirk, as it makes belief in Muhammad necessary for salvation, thus assigning him as a partner to Allah. What are your thoughts on that?

>>31679

>the Trinity

I actually enjoy that semi-famous video "St. Patrick's Bad Analogies". It's good stuff. But, we're not going to discuss it here. There's a thread for that.

>Qurani Muslims

Ah, yeah, well they're a bit screwed since Qur'an itself actually says to obey the Prophet. Abandoning the Sunnah means abandoning Qur'an itself. Abandoning Qur'an means abandoning Islam. And so on.

>>31680

lol, I vaguely remember that. I always thought it was a particularly bad analogy which someone came up with in order to fit the concept on a Irish-themed Procrustean bed.

And I think the same exact way, as far as Qurani Muslims go: Islam doesn't avail itself to bifurcating or separating the ahadith and Quran (which Muhammad himself referred to as itself a hadith), and I probably ask them the same sort of questions you guys would (though probably a bit lower-hanging fruit, since I don't know as much, not being a Muslim myself): How do you know how often to Pray, from the Quran alone? Or, what about Ramadan, etc?

btw: uhhh…. is the "T-word" sort of like the Voldemort of this board? "He Who shall not be named?" Not even when one isn't arguing for it or proselytizing?

>>31681

Forgot to add:

Nevertheless, how do you reply to the specific objection, that the Shahada's inclusion of Muhammad amounts to shirk?

>>31663

I've heard it said (by very serious Muslims, no less) that the mere utterance of the Shahada makes one a Muslim regardless of their degree of belief in its elements. Is this a common view, i.e. that saying Shahada makes one a Muslim, even if one has reservations about or even lack of sincere belief in its constituent premises?

I heard that years ago and it always stuck with me.

Also - another question I had:

What about Prayer? Do you guys Pray strictly in Arabic? I ask because, since only about 10% of Muslims speak Arabic, I would suppose many of you (if not most) are non-Arabic speakers, and thus the Prayers are memorized. But, then what about when you are Praying about something much more specific - like, some issue in your personal life?

>>31682

>the Shahada's inclusion of Muhammad amounts to shirk?

That is just stupid. But most of the statements that come out of a Quranist are ignorant and self contradicting.

>>31683

Saying the Shahada (Testimony of Faith) is what someone does when they become Muslim. But saying it and taking what you are saying seriously means that you are going to establish the 5 daily prayers, pay zakat, avoid haram things, etc. If you say the shahada and then just go about your day to day life without changing anything or praying…that is something else.

>>31684

When I first converted to Islam I used to pray in English, but I am not close to other Muslims and didn’t meet any for some time. Then I started to learn the Arabic verses after meeting other Muslims and correcting some of my practices. It is better to know the meaning of the Arabic verses you are saying in the prayer. The Arabic Quran is recited in the prayer, but you can make dua (supplications) in any language. Of course Allah knows all languages and it is easier to speak in ones native language. The Arabic Quran is recited in the prayer because that is language the Quran was revealed in. It would be impossible to translate all of the subtle meanings of the Quran into any other language. You would need to write paragraphs of additional information for many of the verses in the Quran.

>>31684

Arabic is the liturgical language, any quran that isn't recited in arabic isn't quran. But praying requests can be done in other languages, or by memorizing common prayers that are in the quran or the sayings of the prophet PBUH.

>>31681

>btw: uhhh…. is the "T-word" sort of like the Voldemort of this board? "He Who shall not be named?" Not even when one isn't arguing for it or proselytizing?

We are strict on Mushrikeens since we have a dedicated containment thread for them. You have more rights on /islam/ than we do on /christian/ anyways. I think it's fair.

>>31683

Ah, no, because there is to be no compulsion in religion. If someone declares shahadah under duress or doesn't truly believe it, then it doesn't count. Might be able to fool other Muslims, but you'll never fool God.

>>31684

I figure God understands all languages. Arabic is liturgical, like Koine Greek for Christians. It is important for all Muslims to learn Arabic in order to understand the true Qur'an. But God understands all languages.

>>31685

>Saying the Shahada (Testimony of Faith) is what someone does when they become Muslim. But saying it and taking what you are saying seriously means that you are going to establish the 5 daily prayers, pay zakat, avoid haram things, etc. If you say the shahada and then just go about your day to day life without changing anything or praying…that is something else.

This would make much more sense to me - and that is why it always stuck with me after I was told that. Seemed… odd.

Is there a reason that Prayers are said in Arabic and from the Quran? (yes, I recognize the redundancy, and that translations are at best "the meaning of the Quran", as stated here:

>>31687

>>31688

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the place. Used to go there a couple years ago, but it would be extremely rare to find someone who shared my view on the Faith (I'm "Free Grace," if you're curious and wanna look it up), and they tended to all be the "High Church" types and a few garrulous Baptist sorts ("Andersonites," as they are derisively called, after the man who has basically achieved meme status, Steven Anderson) . The "Andersonites" have a very similar Soteriological point of view (except for their stupid exclusions of homosexuals from any possibility of Salvation), but there can be no denying that there tends to be some sort of psychopathology among them. The rich irony - and I recognize that everyone says something similar - of course is that I'm simply taking Jesus at His word.

But I would be very surprised if they just banned you guys out of hand for asking serious questions. We each believe we are right, and (as it is said in a certain historical revisionist field), "Truth doesn't fear investigation." I don't remember them behaving quite so imperiously.

>>31693

>Might be able to fool other Muslims, but you'll never fool God.

This seems to be a universal and most sensible sentiment.

>>31698

>Is there a reason that Prayers are said in Arabic and from the Quran?

There is a detailed description of how the prayers are supposed to be performed in a sticky on this board. Any way that a person can worship Allah and get closer to him was taught to the Muslims by the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. If someone tries to make up a new way to worship Allah or tries to do things in his own way which is contrary to what has been taught by the Prophet, those acts of worship are not accepted. Also anything that a person is supposed to avoid and anything that will make a person go further away from Allah has been taught to the Muslims by the Prophet PBUH. All other matters and things that are not mentioned are generally considered as acceptable, unless of course it is a new matter that was not known at the Prophet’s time that is very similar to something that was prohibited.

>except for their stupid exclusions of homosexuals from any possibility of Salvation

As long as someone is not committing shirk (worshiping someone other than God, which includes worshipping Jesus Christ PBUH ), they can be forgiven. God forgives all sins except shirk. If someone is a Muslim and he has homosexual desires, he is sinful only if he acts upon his urges. It is not a sin to have sinful desires or thoughts, it is only sinful if one acts upon them. I remember a hadith where the Prophet PBUH said that if there was a person who had homosexual desires and he did not act upon them, he would be granted paradise for that reason alone, but I’m not sure about it since I can’t seem to find it.

>>31698

they just ban us when we bring counter arguments to defend islam lol

if it were up to me all christians would be banned on /islam/ but the owner is more forbearing than me

>>31709

Remember how Islam spreads. Not by the sword, but by the word. Never know when someone will come here, see how welcoming and open we are, and try to learn more about Islam because of who we are.

Yes, just like in Judaism, God has "feets" and "hands", and that's what it means for us to be born in his image.

Of course unless you're mentally retarded (which you might be, I don't know), you should understand that such a body is not physical, and is way beyond our limited physical brains to understand (although it doesn't mean that we will never be able to understand this).

>Christianity

>Spirit

Three-in-one solar pagan idol*

You can't compare Islam to Christianity, at least not today's Christianity, there is nothing in common except for superficial resemblances like belief in Jesus (a completely different Jesus in both religions).

If you really want to compare Islam to something else, you can only compare it to Judaism today; otherwise it will always be apples and oranges.

P.S. A better way to view/think-of this is to realize that God has the "essence of handedness", not hands, and he has the "essence of eyedness", not eyes, etc.

>>31565

Salafists tend to have heterodox beliefs, they really resemble the European far right nationalists more than Orthodox Sunni Muslims