Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
If it is definitely for eternity, Allah would not have revealed verses 6:128 and 11:107.
Again, Mohamed-pretending-to-be-speaking-the-words-of-God has contradicted himself. There are verses that definitely say consignment to Hell is for eternity. He spouted 6,236 verses falsely claiming them to be divine revelation, so he was bound to trip up a few times, and he did.
It's 11:108.
Sure, I can translate, my interpretation is:
As for the happy, they will be in paradise. They will remain in it for as long as the heavens and the earth endure—it is only as your Lord wills—a gift never coming to an end.
وَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ سُعِدُوا فَفِي الْجَنَّةِ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا مَا دَامَتِ السَّمَاوَاتُ وَالْأَرْضُ إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ رَبُّكَ ۖ عَطَاءً غَيْرَ مَجْذُوذٍ
I am also proposing the words "عَطَاءً غَيْرَ مَجْذُوذٍ" show that it means paradise will never cease for anyone, so there is no doubt now, it's "it is only as your Lord wills".
Thank you, that addresses that verse, what about the other verse?
What I'm proposing is these two verses are next to each other and so the line "this is only what God wills" is in that verse about hell in chapter 11 and because of similarity, you can apply it else where for example in another chapter such as chapter 6 (Surtal Anaam).
There are many verses showing hell is forever, and I just showed how contextually by language, Quran explained the phrase to be better translated as "this only what God wills".
And you welcome.
With peace.
That would have been my response, thanks! I guess I will have to reconsider my position!
I rejected what has become of the religion of Islam since Muhammad walked the earth, but I do not reject the Qur'an, and that is all that really matters.No, you rejected Islam when you became a Baha'i.
It is interesting that Sahih's dogmatic Muhammad equates people who deny and are arrogant towards Quranic verses as criminals.Whichever comes up first when I quote a verse. That one was Sahih international.
I did not reject the Qur'an, I rejected what "you believe" certain verses mean and your apparent overlooking of other verses that say something else.No, you rejected Islam when you became a Baha'i.
Why?
This is why, for example:
Trailblazer said: ↑
I do not know if there will be any forgiveness on Judgment Day, only God knows that.
I believe that was true when the Qur’an was written and until the coming of the Bab and Baha’u’llah but I believe that the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh has abrogated all the Dispensations gone before it.Trailblazer said: I accept the Qur'an as true, so why do I need to accept Islam and become a Muslim?
Shakeel said: Accepting the Qur'an is basically becoming a Muslim. You have not accepted the Qur'an and you're making it very clear.
And why accept Islam?
Because the Quran tells you to and you supposedly believe in it.
3:85 "And whoever desires other than Islam as religion - never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers."
I think it's a fine translation. If one goes to hell as a disbeliever, is there anything strange about saying he's a criminal? Once again, you're not understanding the severity of the sin.It is interesting that Sahih's dogmatic Muhammad equates people who deny and are arrogant towards Quranic verses as criminals.
It is good to be humble of course, but I suspect anyone who openly denies the Quranic verses would be seen as arrogant towards them.
Besides, since there is no proof for God it is unreasonable to consider those who behave arrogantly towards God claims as criminals.
Therefore this verse is just the polemic of a deranged fanatic according to Sahih's translation.
In my opinion.
The strange thing about it is that it criminalises law abiding non-believers. A person could abide by every Quranic law even such trivial things as not eating pork yet be a disbeliever and many Muslims who believe in this interpretation would see them as fit to be treated no different to people who commit genuine crimes such as murder, rape, theft etc.I think it's a fine translation. If one goes to hell as a disbeliever, is there anything strange about saying he's a criminal? Once again, you're not understanding the severity of the sin.
Eating pork is one of the major sins.The strange thing about it is that it criminalises law abiding non-believers. A person could abide by every
law even such trivial things as not eating pork yet be a disbeliever and many
who believe in this interpretation would see them as fit to be treated no different to people who commit genuine crimes such as murder, rape, theft etc.
Non belief is *not* a crime, and that you see it as one could potentially cause you to treat a non-believer in a genuinely criminal manner.
After all if a person is fit to be burned for all eternity they are hardly fit to be given humane treatment.
I'm inclined to think that if your dogmatic Muhammad existed He most probably had post traumatic stress disorder from His early traumatic experiences at the hands of the polytheists that caused Him to dream up sick fantasies of all disbelievers burning in hell forever.
But sick twisted fantasies of the ill are certainly not based in justice and compassion for those who merely disbelieve.
Actually you are by criminalising disbelief.You're mixing earthly law with the day of judgment.
This is not true, a blasphemer and/or apostate who is at peace with Muslims is not protected in your brand of Islam and those who convert people away from Islam dont seem to fare to well either.The life and wealth of the disbeliever who is at peace with the Muslims, is protected by the sharia.
Both have committed a crime. The sharia law applies to Muslims as well, so it isn't something that only pertains to disbelievers.This is not true, a blasphemer and/or apostate who is at peace with Muslims
This is the root cause of problems in Islamic society, bad ideas get introduced under the guise of religion, then they are protected from competition with better ideas by blasphemy/apostasy laws.Both have committed a crime. The sharia law applies to Muslims as well, so it isn't something that only pertains to disbelievers.