In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth

zeemax (#284),

I asked a simple question based upon your ullema’s views.

Your honest answer should have been ” … this science-and-stuff is fine and dandy, but Allah does what He wills …”

Why keep harping that “Islam and evolution are compatible”? Let’s just call it blind faith and move on. Admittedly, superstition is part of your Islam. No?

We can then discuss Miraj, Moses parting the ocean, and Jesus raising the dead.
Deal?

Re: # 290 Farzana,

``Those posts convey much more than all those quotes you put up. Thanks again!``

I am certainly in no race for `best post` here. And I do think some of your posts were good. Each one has his own `best post` and team of admirers.
However, Farzana, sarcasm is just no measure of genius.

Re: # 293

ab iss ka naam pata bhi to batao na!

I am still trying to understand how `God` as a belief, originated.

Why do believers still quote proof for Gods existence revolving basically around the same three or four topics...for eg.

1. The boundless atom.

2. How life began years ago, and related topics

3. The inscrutable Universe.

While I have always thought it was just a matter of being told so by friends, teachers and especially, relatives, some of the answers on this board by the believers are perplexing.
I dont claim to know the answers to the ablve questions, nor does `science`.
To any reasoning mind, this does not mean that a default `super natural` has taken over.

Do religionists have any proof in our everyday lives?
Bottomline is : Why does nt God show himself and clear all doubts?

Re: # 295

urstruly,

``all of them agree with how Syed Moududi has interpretted the Quranic verse in question`` ............. do you realize how silly (or lame, as my daughter would say) that sounds !

a) why would al-lah`s word need interpretation by man - why couldn`t he make it clear the first time around ............ don`t tell me the omnieverything has a writing disability !

b) and why should we believe mardood maudoodi`s interpretation instead of first hand accounts of the meccans and ishaq or al tabari who lived around that time ........

Re: # 294

tehsin,

........... you have won this argument hands down ! .... congratulations on your victory over the evil forces of obscurantism ......

..............so now that you have proven, once and for all, that the prophet (pbuh and his camel) had allowed the worship of godesses, i would like to propose that we admit zeena and aiswariya rai to the pantheon in mecca .....

Re: # 294

``Shit``, yes because it dispels your prejudices. Just to let you know, I personally own three Tafseer of Qura`n, written by different writers, and yet more are vailable on the internet. It seems that all of them agree with how Syed Moududi has interpretted the Quranic verse in question.

``But Mr. Maudoodi had a different agenda ``

aaahh pahleez. everbody has an agenda. You do too.

#289 by Urstruly

I have gone through it and man if I may say so – what a crock of sh**t. I stand by Occam’s razor, “one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything”. This is why an FIR (first incident report) is given the top most priority in a court case. Unvarnished truth –as it happened, call it the way you see it. Let the reader, let the judge, let the jury examine the evidence for it self and come to their own conclusions.

But Mr. Maudoodi had a different agenda – he was trying to uplift (if not create) a nation. He also wanted to be their leader. So he had to come up with some explanation that could be palatable to his congregation. As usual, when you start looking for immediate or short term gains you end up making long term mistakes.

All the sources that have reported this incident as accurate are the primary, most immediately after the actual event. I confirmed this in both Ibn e Ishaq and Al Tabri. The sources that Maudoodi quotes who question them are all way after the fact and who were looking at this through the prism of history. I am quoting a passage which is on page 44 where Mr. Maudoodi makes his case in earnest.


“The reality of the incident is this:

The Holy Prophet recited Surah An-Najm and performed prostration at the end of it. At this, all the hearers, both the Muslims and the mushriks, fell down in prostration. This was what really happened and there is nothing strange about it. Let us depict the occasion: The Holy Prophet was reciting a forceful piece of the eloquent Quran in a very impressive manner. Naturally the occasion produced an emotional effect and all the listeners instinctively fell down in proatration along with him. It was because of such ecstasies produced by the Holy Prophet’s recital of the Quran as this that the disbelievers dubbed him a “sorcerer”. As regards the story that the Holy Prophet praised the deities of he disbelievers, it appears that the Quraish concocted the story to hide their “defeat”. Probably someone or other of them explained away their defeat, saying, “We ourselves heard Muhammad praising our deities. Therefore we also fell down in prostrations along with him”. As regards the migrants to Habash, they returned to Makkah when they heard the concocted story that there had been a compromise between the Holy Prophet and the Quraish. It appears that some of those people who had seen the Muslims and the mushriks falling down together in prostration, presumed that peace had been made between them, so the story traveled to the migrants in Habash who had no means to verify it and thus thirty-three of them returned to Makkah.”

I am pretty certain that this will not sway you or any of those who share your views. So I conclude by quoting the Quran may be that will have some effect.

“Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering”………………….Surah 2:7

Re: # 286

Tareef os Khuda ki jis ne inhein banaya -- aur itne roop diye:-)

Urstruly#269:

Just some trivia:
``Sirindeep`` is an anglicised version of ``Swarndeep``, which in sanskrit means ``Golden Island``, or ``Sone ki Lanka`` of your ancestor Ram`s conquest :).

It is also the source of the word serendipity, which is why many westerners choose to go there to relax.

echoboom#273:

Interestingly, I had predicted the same in my very first interact at chowk eight years ago in an article by one Rahil Khan. I had also at that time added India to the list of countries where an Islamic renaissance may take place. I was wrong about India, though, as Wahabi forces have gathered strength there and dissenting voices are unlikely to find a hospitable ground in India now.

But wonder what makes you happy? These Western Muslim intellectuals are likely to be of the ``Munafiqoon`` variety.

HamidM (245):

No, even if you said it in jest, I did not destroy your profound theory. Simply because theories are indestructible if you believe in them. Going by your interacts you do...and that has been my position. The moment we seek to convert others to our belief system, we assume a `faith`, even if it is faithlessness.
- - -
Anil (256):

You are saying pretty much what I have been. If you read my post #39 you`d know. Here is a bit: ``Who created god?`` cannot be a scientific query, for if one believes in an imaginary creation then questioning it is itself proving it. Who creates a fantasy? However, when you talk about going beyond Time and Space, then you in fact take the leap into a non-rational endeavour. It can be satisfying for the basis of all knowledge is seeking - whether it is the galaxy or god.``
- - -

Zeena (280):

Thank you. If both you and hamidm can like me - and a few others who have different ways of expressing it :-) - then life cannot be that bad...
- - -

parthaab (282):

Thanks for pointing out your posts 1-9. They are indeed silently evocative and rather the best. For they manage to cross both sides of the divide. The religious person might well say that it proves the omnipotence and invisibility of god`s powers and the non-believer can declare, here, there is nothing so god is Nothing.

Those posts convey much more than all those quotes you put up. Thanks again!

oops the hyperlink to Tafheem-ul Quran (Understanding Quran):

http://www.scholaris.com/tafheemulquranenglish.htm

Re: # 277 Tehsin;

Please at least bother to read the whole thesis before casting your judgement. The case has been dissected in over 6-7 pages; and you`ve just read the first paragraph where author mentions the alleged incident and you start jumping ``oh see author is saying the same thing``.

Here is the English version of the thesis in question, for your convenience. Go to Chapter Al-Hajj, and the argument starts from page 36 of 52 of the pdf file. May Allah give you guidance.

Re: # 277

tehsin abbasi,

.... shahbash naujawan ! ...... finally you too know the truth about jesus christ`s sisters ! ....... now, all we have to do is find al-lah mian`s great great grand daughter who, according to dan brown, is living somewhere in the north of england and we can find out the truth about this charlatan who claims to live on the seventh heaven (or is it the fourth?) .............

...................but you are as naive as ever if you actually believe that religious people like urstruly can be ``intellectually honest``............ by definition, these folks cannot be honest or kind or compassionate or truthful, or have any of the attributes that you associate with being a `good` person - they are not interested in all this nonsense because they are on a bigger mission from a higher authority .......... ordinary people have to watch out if they don`t want to suffer the fate of the jews and christians of hijaz and nijran (not to mention poor grandpa gopinath of choa khalsa) .................

#285 by khuram,

Khuram ... Mandira Bedi nam hai, Bandra Mumbai main rehti hai .. shaadi shuda hai ... leykin koi pabandi nahin hai. Now Raqeeb tau mat bano ...

Here for your further enjoyment:



Leykin asl shakl yeh hai:



Now how do you explain this transformation in the laws of physics?

:)