Two approaches towards reforming Islam: the Bahai Faith and Ahmadiyya Islam.

[paarsurrey]

Dharma, perhaps?

The way is mentioned in the very first chapter of Quran:

[1:5]
Thee alone do we worship and Thee alone do we implore for help.
[1:6]
Guide us in the right path —
[1:7]
The path of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings, those who have not incurred Thy displeasure, and those who have not gone astray.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 1: Al-Fatihah
Whichever it is.
Right, please?
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Vinayaka said: ↑
And I believe a better job at because of greater tolerance. But that, I believe, goes right back to culture of country of origin. One is Iran, and the other is Mother India.
paarsurrey said: ↑
Let the credit go to any or all people and places who believe it. It is a universal truth. Right, please?
Regards

Believe what?

"I believe, goes right back to culture of country of origin"

Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

"Truth alone triumphs; not falsehood, through truth the divine path is spread out."

That is exactly what we Ahmadiyya peaceful Islam believe in.

In that case, forget about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad being a Mahdi.

Let the credit go to any or all people and places who believe it. It is a universal truth. Right, please?

Credit goes to people who have the guts to question.

 

[LuisDantas]

The way is mentioned in the very first chapter of Quran:

[1:5]
Thee alone do we worship and Thee alone do we implore for help.
[1:6]
Guide us in the right path —
[1:7]
The path of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings, those who have not incurred Thy displeasure, and those who have not gone astray.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 1: Al-Fatihah
Whichever it is.
Right, please?
Regards

If those are references to a Dharmic attitude, they are fairly unclear. Worse, they are badly unsupported by the Qur'an as a whole.

As given witness by the very fact that nearly no Muslims learn of such an attitude from the Qur'an, and instead learn an attitude of extreme reverence for God that I can't help but find odd.

 

[paarsurrey]

Do you have a single word which means 'Way of Life'?
That word might fit better than 'Faith', possibly?

One may like to read my post #221 , please.
Regards

 

[Jedster]

"having a living teacher outgrades having a dead one."

The Caliph of Ahmadiyya peaceful Islam provides the living teacher.

Regards

Sorry, my post was not clear.
By a living teacher , I mean someone who can show one to experience the Truth/God, within themselves.
Not one who has to refer to a book/scripture.
If you don't understand what I am saying, try reading some of Kabirs poems
Kabir - Kabir Poems - Poem Hunter


(I had the pleasure of meeting Khalifatul Masih IV, the late leader of the Ahmadis, a wonderful person.
However, while being a great Islamic community leader, he could not give followers a direct experience of Truth/God. Just like most, if not all, leaders of religion. )

 

[oldbadger]

One may like to read my post #221 , please.
Regards

Al-Fatihah? Is that right?
Thankyou....

 

[paarsurrey]

No. I mean that the point of the scripture passages saying that there there are no other gods besides G_d, is not about how many of Him there are. He has no number. He is not one god, or three, or many, or even none. Those passages are not about G_d. They are about idolatry.

Quran is very clear about it and leaves no ambiguity in this connection.
The word used in Quran is “ahud” (and not wahid that has next numerals 2,3,4 etc ) which means One who is unique and has no other being like Him.

Regards

____________
Quran Chapter "Ikhlas"
*[112:1]
In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
[112:2]
Say, ‘He is Allah, the One*;
[112:3]
‘Allah, the Independent and Besought of all.
[112:4]
‘He begets not, nor is He begotten;
[112:5]
‘And there is none like unto Him.’
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 112: Al-Ikhlas

 

[paarsurrey]

That is why I have little patience for scripture obsession. Text is just text.

That said, it seems to me that people can and should judge the wisdom of the teachings they receive. I would hesitate to say that anyone is truly religious if they refuse to.

Sorry, I don't agree with one here.
People cannot and should not judge the Word of G-d. G-d has not only provided the text/words of Quran for guidance but also the wisdom/reasons/arguments in brief with it for discerning the Truth.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

It seems to me that it is a matter of how sane one's expectations and degree of entitlement are.

We all should be honest about what inspires and motivates us - but it is necessary to respect other people's right to feel differently. We should not expect others to pay the burden of our beliefs.

I agree with one here.
We Ahmadiyya peaceful Islam feel comfortable and friendly with others rather we consider others, believers or non-believers, as our brothers in humanity.

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

Sorry, I don't agree with one here.
People cannot and should not judge the Word of G-d. G-d has not only provided the text/words of Quran for guidance but also the wisdom/reasons/arguments in brief with it for discerning the Truth.

Regards

I have a lot of difficulty understanding what you mean here. It is a common enough attitude from Muslims, but it is very clear to me that no scripture can be spared from discernment.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It’s precisely because of constant human tampering that God keeps sending the Messengers.

Is that the fault of humans. Did he not make them like that? Can he not think of a better way?

In my estimation, God "authoring" a religion if you will, is a prerequisite. Any human alteration is frowned upon in general

Who made the alterations? Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, Bahaullah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? What is God going to do with those who made the alterations?

 

[paarsurrey]

I have a lot of difficulty understanding what you mean here. It is a common enough attitude from Muslims, but it is very clear to me that no scripture can be spared from discernment.

One can question about a verse of Quran to know the wisdom, but one cannot judge G-d, rather G-d will judge the human beings*. One could deny a verse/s and become a non-believer,however.

Regards
____________
Quran
*[1:1]
In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
[1:2]
All praise belongs to Allah, Lord of all the worlds,
[1:3]
The Gracious, the Merciful,
[1:4]
Master of the Day of Judgment.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 1: Al-Fatihah

 

[paarsurrey]

So many find the idea of a God comfortable though there is no evidence. If idolatry is comforting to some, why deny it to them?
Yeah, design your own God if you want to. It is completely within your rights.

One may not deny others right to believe in idols, but one has the right to give reason/arguments that it is not reasonable. Right, please?
Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

Sure, but then, does it become necessary to accept the reason or argument? One has a right to think that the reason given or the argument is not correct.

 

[LuisDantas]

One can question about a verse of Quran to know the wisdom, but one cannot judge G-d, rather G-d will judge the human beings*. One could deny a verse/s and become a non-believer,however.

It seems to me that doubting the belief in a God that does not know how to deal with simple discernment over the text of a scripture is, if not an actual moral duty, at least very close to that.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yes, people do sincerely believe (Hindus, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Bahais, Ahmadiyyas and others), but why should they believe in absence of evidence? That gives rise to dangerous cults.

If one have a right to enter into Atheism in absence of any evidence , the same way the believers of any religion have a right to believe in G-d (with or) without reason/argument, just on faith. Right, please?
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

One may not deny others right to believe in idols, but one has the right to give reason/arguments that it is not reasonable. Right, please?
Regards

One also has the right to give arguments why believing in the Koran is not reasonable, also, right. You see, Paar, if you have the right to judge someone, then so does he have the right to judge right back. Otherwise, it's called a double standard, right? Those willing to criticise must be willing to be criticised. Fair is fair.

 

[LuisDantas]

If one have a right to enter into Atheism in absence of any evidence , the same way the believers of any religion have a right to believe in G-d (with or) without reason/argument, just on faith. Right, please?
Regards

Argh, no, not at all, @paarsurrey !

You are commiting a very gross mistake here, implying an equivalence of rights and duties where it can't exist.

Atheism is expected to happen when there is no evidence of the existence of a God. And it has very little need for justification (if any) because it has basically no consequence, or at least no moral consequence. It does not hinder moral judgement nor discernment.

God-believing has the exact opposite attributes: it can easily mislead, often towards serious disaster. It may easily need justification, particularly when taken seriously. And it is very often an obstacle for the development of morality and even of religiosity.

 

[paarsurrey]

Proselytising faiths do best amongst the illiterate and poor. The Bahai educational books, for example. are written at a Grade 3 level. So yes, Africa and other poor areas are prime targets. But individuals, after 20 years or so of any degree of education, do learn to think for themselves somewhat, and often become 'nones' with no religion, or head for more mature religious thinking like Sanatana Dharma, or more moderate sects within their own faith. Here in Canada there are lots of non-practising Muslims.

Ahmadiyya peaceful Islam is a literate community, one who enters into it they definitely improve themselves in education, please.

Regards