Why is disbelief condemned in a central way in Quran.

[Link]

Salam

When watching a movie or reading fiction, we often suspended our world-views and pretend the movie or story reality.

Debating whether God exists or not, whether Messengers are sent or not, whether Quran is a book from God or not, is all good and well, but the purpose of this thread is to debate the philosophy of why disbelief is so condemned in the paradigm of the Quran and if it's rational.

Disbelief is condemned from so many angles in the Quran it's hard to know where to start.

However a notable verse is disbelievers don't want God to perfect his light towards humanity. They hate the idea of God's light being manifested to humanity in a perfect manner. They rather try to advance the falsehood against it out of intention that the truth does not manifest.

Now no one in the world including Iblis himself, is going to tell themselves they hate the truth and light of God and are envying God's grace on his chosen and hate goodness and it's beauty.

So the Quran often is talking about the hidden intentions of disbelievers, intentions hidden to themselves, but also, if truthful, they will see it to be true.

Now if there is no light of God and there is no battle between good and evil regarding it, this feature of condemnation does not make sense. But again, I'm asking for the purpose of this thread, to suspend disbelief and assume the paradigm of the Quran is correct.

That is look at all features of the paradigm of Quran, and then, if they are true, is it rational to condemn disbelieve from the many angles.

Of course someone can say if you assume disbelief in the paradigm of Quran, then there is no argument to be made. So, the exception is disbelief and how it's condemned. This is not to be assumed to be true, but debated.

Assume all realities talked about in Quran make sense and are real (just like you do in a movie), then after collecting this paradigm, see if disbelief should be condemned and in a central way.

Obviously if Mohammad (s) is not a Prophet, then disbelieving in Quran for example can't be condemned.

I will be collecting features of reality per Quran. Then from these features, I will try to make the case why disbelief should be condemned and in a central way.

 

[Link]

@AlexanderG this topic may or may not interest you, but I promised I would tag you in it.

 

[Link]

Stubborn nature to God's signs

If there is no signs from God to prove he exists, then this story of condemnation of disbelief is over. One of the type of signs per Quran is the signs linked to the sky reality and connecting to that.

The Quran says to Mohammad (s):


وَإِنْ كَانَ كَبُرَ عَلَيْكَ إِعْرَاضُهُمْ فَإِنِ اسْتَطَعْتَ أَنْ تَبْتَغِيَ نَفَقًا فِي الْأَرْضِ أَوْ سُلَّمًا فِي السَّمَاءِ فَتَأْتِيَهُمْ بِآيَةٍ ۚ وَلَوْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ لَجَمَعَهُمْ عَلَى الْهُدَىٰ ۚ فَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْجَاهِلِينَ | And should their aversion be hard on you, find, if you can, a tunnel into the ground, or a ladder into sky, that you may bring them a sign. Had Allah wished, He would have brought them together on guidance. So do not be one of the ignorant. | Al-An'aam : 35

This means, if you can connect them to this reality, then do so, but why can't he?

We see in another verse, the rebellious spirit would only increase in aversion and disbelief:



وَلَوْ فَتَحْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ بَابًا مِنَ السَّمَاءِ فَظَلُّوا فِيهِ يَعْرُجُونَ | Were We to open for them a gate of the sky, so that they could go on ascending through it, | Al-Hijr : 14

لَقَالُوا إِنَّمَا سُكِّرَتْ أَبْصَارُنَا بَلْ نَحْنُ قَوْمٌ مَسْحُورُونَ | they would surely say, ‘Indeed a spell has been cast on our eyes; indeed, we are a bewitched lot.’ | Al-Hijr : 15

وَلَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا فِي السَّمَاءِ بُرُوجًا وَزَيَّنَّاهَا لِلنَّاظِرِينَ | Certainly We have made mansions/stars in the sky and adorned them for the onlookers, | Al-Hijr : 16

وَحَفِظْنَاهَا مِنْ كُلِّ شَيْطَانٍ رَجِيمٍ | and We have guarded it from every outcast Satan, | Al-Hijr : 17

إِلَّا مَنِ اسْتَرَقَ السَّمْعَ فَأَتْبَعَهُ شِهَابٌ مُبِينٌ | except someone who may eavesdrop, whereat there pursues him a manifest flame. | Al-Hijr : 18




There is a contrast. There is a people who look towards these lights and it's an adornment for them and they find it dazzling and beautiful. Then on the other hand, we have what disbelief does. A person is opened a gateway to heavens, and instead of thanking God and loving the beautiful lights, they say to themselves, that indeed, it is a work of sorcery and their vision is affected by magic.

Now it happens to be this light is not Jinn or Magic, but it's the truth. These lights of guidance are linked to God's truth, and these are the highest type of signs.

Of course, the verse in chapter 6, says God could've guided them all, but if Mohammad (s) can't connect them and should if he can, what type of guidance would it be?

It would have been forced guidance like the day of judgment where truth is displayed and no one can deny. God could've created the universe like this, where everyone can't deviate, but reward would be less and worship of God wouldn't have much meaning.

Now if no sky and no lights therein, the story is over, and this type of disbelief doesn't make sense to condemn. But this according to many Surahs is the nature of disbelief.

God and his guiding lights are there for all to see, but the disbeliever is running away from that reality, while the believer eventually moves towards that light and reality.

 

[Link]

Salam

Another perspective, is about what we want and wish.

The Quran says whoever wishes or wants of the harvest of the next world will be given that, and whoever wants of harvest of the lowest world, they will be given from it and have no share in the next world.

Another perspective is all it takes is fear of God. A verse says whoever fears God will go to paradise. Another verse says the same but follows it with that of restricting the soul from caprices.

The one who is oppressive (to themselves and others) and prefers the life of the lower world, there destiny is the fire.

Wanting the life of this world only comes out disbelief that God is the best reward. God being the best reward is linked to belief in the unseen signs and lights linked to God. And desire of God and his Messenger is linked to desire of the next world.

Of course, when God is obviously the best reward, why do people not want him? Part of it is they listen to irrational doubt that says next world is not real, heaven and hell is not true, and so are not willing to sacrifice pleasure of lower world for what they doubt.

But on investigating this is irrational as Pascal's Wager shows. To buy misguidance and sacrifice guidance, and buy this world and sell next, is so irrational, but why do it?

The Quran shows inside is a more sinister intention. Those who do it usually live life of luxury and ease, and want to feel superior to those who live in poverty and hardship. They feel blessed by their circumstances and believe the next world they are guaranteed something better.

This is because they don't see the poor and oppressed as a trial to them, that they have a duty to help them, and support them.

This is because they follow oppressive leaders and believe in falsehood that suits their ego over truth.

They also believe it's their duty to educate the rest of humanity and feel superior simply because of luxury they are in. They are not willing to see how much oppression historically occurred and still occurs for them to live in luxury.

The Quran shows it was always the oppressed and poor who believed in Messengers while those in luxury and ease that disbelieve. (Exceptions happen, but that is the norm).

This superiority through dunya eyes, and wealth, and class, Quran says, is a trial. God allows class (richer, poorer), so that some people take others to scorn - to mock. The poor and suffering are mocked by those in luxury, and they aren't will to let go of their oppressive nature towards others.

This choice not to sacrifice for others, is huge central theme. The Quran shows disbelief would be cured if any of the following are met:


Connecting to God continuously (5 daily Salahs).
Believing in the day of judgment.
Avoiding vain talking and meaningless conversations with people who always talk meaninglessly and without purpose.
Emphasizing on feeding the poor.


If any of these four are met, the Imam of time would be recognized, and the light accepted, the path walked and enough light to override the coverings of darkness, to lead to faith and acceptance of God's signs.

Of course, believers do all four, but the Quran says if any of these were done by disbelievers, then they would be cured.

Some people might argue some atheists emphasize on feeding of the poor. It's not enough to give lip service, but real emphasis and striving for society to do that is needed. A person would try to find the people who emphasize on that and not do it alone. He would also want to join a catalyst and true solution to poverty. That would eventually lead to the truth and those who guide by it.

 

[Link]

Another angle is to see that we are at tug war between an evil left handed companion (a Jinn) and the leader of time (12th successor of Mohammad (s) in this time) as the right handed companion (I talked about this in "Signs of eloquence in Quran" thread when I talk about the link between Imam Musa Kadhim (a) and Qaf)

This another way to see belief and disbelief. Someone wrote the following in another thread (@BrightShadow )

Again, I wasn't talking about your common everyday possession that you watch in movies! I was talking about something we all have (whether you are hetero or gay). Since it applies to everyone and effects everyone (but in different ways) - your implication in your above statement and other statements are still misguided.
Heterosexuals are also possessed IMO but in their case the inclinations of the soul and the companion entity is a match but they are still influenced by the entity in doing other forbidden things. I believe this is how devil delivers. Many religious doctrines have touched this matter. Seek it or don't.

I replied with expansion post to support it:

You speak truth and put it simply. Well done.

The companion (evil one) is also fed by evil deeds. But the companion (evil one) per Quran misguide from the way while thinking they are guided.

So the companion (evil one), really tells himself, he is doing you good and it's for your well-being, to disbelief in day of judgment, in harsh judgment, to be "good to yourself" and that there is nothing evil about fornication and other sexual deviances.

This is what makes it hard. Non-judgment meditation in my view, is a way to give more control to this being. Judgment and guilt although hurts, makes your skin hardened against evil and builds eventually barriers of light against darkness.

The self-blaming soul is a step below the tranquil soul, but God never leaves the self-blaming soul, but eventually through repentance, guides them out of darkness of sins into the light of beauties and majestic glories from good states and intentions. Eventually, the ravaging sins in the soul are turned to light as well, and become a source of lesson through the water of regret.

Ismail (a) desire was from paradise, his animal was from paradise, it was not seeking lower world. Yet he and Ibrahim (a) sacrificed that, and all that Ismail (a) chose to be although was creature of paradise, was sacrificed for something higher.

We have a choice. We force God to accept us despite how dark and evil we've become and say he must see us as beautiful. Or we accept God's light as beautiful and let his rain cleanse us of the ugly filth we immersed ourselves in.


It's not an easy choice, but not a hard one for humble souls. It's the easy path but for those who love God more then themselves. Who prefer God's Prophet over themselves.

Very easy for them.

 

[AlexanderG]

This is all a bit too long.

Still, my central objection is that "an old book says so, and the book also says the book is true, and the book says that everyone secretly believes the book is true" is not a good epistemology. In fact, it is a circular and self-validating argument, and is therefore useless for knowledge or truth.

If you can't point to some observable part of reality that supports the claims of your book, to the exclusion of all other alternative claims, then I have no reason to believe that the claims in your book correspond to reality. In other words, I will provisionally conclude it is imaginary. Myth. Fable.

Saying "the world exists, which is evidence of a creator" is not evidence. In the same way, plants growing are not evidence of invisible magic plant-growing turtles, and gold nuggets are not evidence of leprechauns.

You also never gave me the objective criteria for determining which piece of literature is "linguistically superior" to another.

 

[Link]

This is all a bit too long.

Still, my central objection is that "an old book says so, and the book also says the book is true, and the book says that everyone secretly believes the book is true" is not a good epistemology. In fact, it is a circular and self-validating argument, and is therefore useless for knowledge or truth.

If you can't point to some observable part of reality that supports the claims of your book, to the exclusion of all other alternative claims, then I have no reason to believe that the claims in your book correspond to reality. In other words, I will provisionally conclude it is imaginary. Myth. Fable.

Saying "the world exists, which is evidence of a creator" is not evidence. In the same way, plants growing are not evidence of invisible magic plant-growing turtles, and gold nuggets are not evidence of leprechauns.

You also never gave me the objective criteria for determining which piece of literature is "linguistically superior" to another.

You are mixing too much topics.

If for example, a person is going to look if Prophethood or Messengership or Leadership assigned from God are reasonable things, it's a different discussion one whether God exists or not.

Your objection was that what is said about disbelief is backwards and not eloquent.

This is why I responded with this. Whether Quran is true or not, is a different discussion, then the point you brought.

 

[Link]

You also never gave me the objective criteria for determining which piece of literature is "linguistically superior" to another.

But this was a different topic and there is also a thread where I'm showing precision in Quran with respect to how God picks words, and if you begin to unravel all that, it's three birds one stone.

(bird 1) You see features of eloquence at a higher level (proving there is levels of eloquence)
(bird 2) You see how precise Quran is in everything it says once you train your eye for it, of course, to untrained eye, Prophetic names for example might seem random, but I've shown not the case. Everything is so calculated and perfect.
(bird 3) You see why it's beyond human through some of these features and why it's a miracle proving it to be from God.

Also, each feature alone may not be enough, but when seen together, they add up, and I will be expanding a lot more and opening other features and dimensions to the Quran that to me, prove it from God.

The topic: Signs of eloquence in Quran | Religious Forums

 

[AlexanderG]

You are mixing too much topics.

If for example, a person is going to look if Prophethood or Messengership or Leadership assigned from God are reasonable things, it's a different discussion one whether God exists or not.

Your objection was that what is said about disbelief is backwards and not eloquent.

This is why I responded with this. Whether Quran is true or not, is a different discussion, then the point you brought.

No, it's not a different topic. It's a threshold. If I have no reason to think the Quran is true, then I have no reason to consider all of your Quran-based topics like Prophethood or Messengership or anything being assigned by a god. Your arguments are backwards because you are assuming the conclusion in the premises of your own arguments.

If I tell you that a magic unicorn is going to drown you in ice cream if you don't wear a hat every day, then we first need to establish whether the unicorn exists, before you should worry about the details of how much ice cream it would take to smother yourself, or what kind of headwear will qualify as a hat.

 

[Link]

No, it's not a different topic. It's a threshold. If I have no reason to think the Quran is true, then I have no reason to consider all of your Quran-based topics like Prophethood or Messengership or anything being assigned by a god. Your argument are backwards because you are assuming the conclusion in the premises of your own argument.

If I tell you that a magic unicorn is going to drown you in ice cream if you don't wear a hat every day, then we first need to establish whether the unicorn exists, before you should worry about the details of how much ice cream it would take to smother yourself, or what kind of headwear will qualify as a hat.

What you said is true but also false. There is an approach which I did for years, where I didn't assume Quran is false, but not true either. I would see the paradigm it's in. Anyways, the biggest thing for me that prevented me for accepting Quran for years was the notion of hell. This is why I familiarized myself with different ways it talks about the issue and have become somewhat of an expert on it's philosophy towards it.

But your objection was that is backwards and not eloquent by how it mentions non-Muslims which I think you meant disbelievers by it.

You shouldn't have made an objection on disbelief being backward and not eloquent.

Of course if no God, then no Messengers. If no Messengers, no disbelief in them is evil.

So...

But to determine whether disbelief or not you have to assume Messengers are sent.

You have to assume there is light and darkness, and we can go towards God or run away from him.

You can't push away all these things, then say, prove what it says about disbelief is eloquent and exalted.

 

[AlexanderG]

But this was a different topic and there is also a thread where I'm showing precision in Quran with respect to how God picks words, and if you begin to unravel all that, it's three birds one stone.

(bird 1) You see features of eloquence at a higher level (proving there is levels of eloquence)
(bird 2) You see how precise Quran is in everything it says once you train your eye for it, of course, to untrained eye, Prophetic names for example might seem random, but I've shown not the case. Everything is so calculated and perfect.
(bird 3) You see why it's beyond human through some of these features and why it's a miracle proving it to be from God.

Also, each feature alone may not be enough, but when seen together, they add up, and I will be expanding a lot more and opening other features and dimensions to the Quran that to me, prove it from God.

The topic: Signs of eloquence in Quran | Religious Forums

Those aren't objective criteria. I asked you how can we determine which piece of writing is more eloquent than another, and you effectively answered "if one looks more perfect and has higher eloquence." That is just restating your claim. It is not an explanation. It is completely subjective. I don't think the Quran is perfectly eloquent. It looks entirely like something that could've been written by a scholar at that time. So, how do we tell whether my opinion is correct or your opinion is correct?

 

[Link]

Those aren't objective criteria. I asked you how can we determine which piece of writing is more eloquent than another, and you effectively answered "if one looks more perfect and has higher eloquence." That is just restating your claim. It is not an explanation. It is completely subjective. I don't think the Quran is perfectly eloquent. It looks entirely like something that could've been written by a scholar at that time. So, how do we tell whether my opinion is correct or your opinion is correct?

That thread is 3 birds one stone and I believe I've shown why Quran is from God as far as signs of precise speech and subtle ways of speaking, I believe I've shown how it's too calculated to be words of humans.

 

[Valjean]

Political cohesion and unification of diverse, competing tribes and nationalities was promoted -- and enforced -- by a common religious mythos.
Similar unifying beliefs are found in many, diverse groups.

 

[Link]

Political cohesion and unification of diverse, competing tribes and nationalities was promoted -- and enforced -- by a common religious mythos.
Similar unifying beliefs are found in many, diverse groups.

I'd rather have God dictate the discourse and rely on his guidance, then, on a bunch of ignorant humans, trying to control how we think.

This is the other issue. Belief in God and his sent ones and their guidance is praised not only because it's the truth and guides to more truth, but because it's not giving falsehood the voice through misguiding leaders and not giving your mind up to the discourse of evil elite who live in luxury and don't really care about people.

Disbelieving in the truth and not giving the truthful ones the voice, and instead following evil ones and giving them the power of discourse, is one of the angles, which disbelief is condemned in Quran.

So yes power, rule, and authority - that has a lot to do with it.

 

[Valjean]

I'd rather have God dictate the discourse and rely on his guidance, then, on a bunch of ignorant humans, trying to control how we think.

Before I accept the dictates of a leader I'd like some assurance he actually exists, what his motives might be, and what these rules and values were based on.

This is the other issue. Belief in God and his sent ones and their guidance is praised not only because it's the truth and guides to more truth, but because it's not giving falsehood the voice through misguiding leaders and not giving your mind up to the discourse of evil elite who live in luxury and don't really care about people.

But how do we know it's truth? We can't question him; we don't even have any evidence he exists.
There are thousands of prophets, messiahs, pythons, seers, holy men and madmen claiming divine inspiration or authority. How do we decide?
If we're not to use the reason God gave us, why do we even have it?

Disbelieving in the truth and not giving the truthful ones the voice, and instead following evil ones and giving them the power of discourse, is one of the angles, which disbelief is condemned in Quran.

This presupposes one has the truth, that (insert god of choice) has revealed it, and that (insert prophet of choice) revealed it correctly.

So yes power, rule, and authority - that has a lot to do with it.

So might-makes-right, and "right" is whatever those in power say it is?
How are we any different from chimps, if we merely go along with the values of the group and disparage the gift of reason God gave us?
Isn't such faith and lack of skepticism an insult to God?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Salam

When watching a movie or reading fiction, we often suspended our world-views and pretend the movie or story reality.

Debating whether God exists or not, whether Messengers are sent or not, whether Quran is a book from God or not, is all good and well, but the purpose of this thread is to debate the philosophy of why disbelief is so condemned in the paradigm of the Quran and if it's rational.

Disbelief is condemned from so many angles in the Quran it's hard to know where to start.

However a notable verse is disbelievers don't want God to perfect his light towards humanity. They hate the idea of God's light being manifested to humanity in a perfect manner. They rather try to advance the falsehood against it out of intention that the truth does not manifest.

Now no one in the world including Iblis himself, is going to tell themselves they hate the truth and light of God and are envying God's grace on his chosen and hate goodness and it's beauty.

So the Quran often is talking about the hidden intentions of disbelievers, intentions hidden to themselves, but also, if truthful, they will see it to be true.

Now if there is no light of God and there is no battle between good and evil regarding it, this feature of condemnation does not make sense. But again, I'm asking for the purpose of this thread, to suspend disbelief and assume the paradigm of the Quran is correct.

That is look at all features of the paradigm of Quran, and then, if they are true, is it rational to condemn disbelieve from the many angles.

Of course someone can say if you assume disbelief in the paradigm of Quran, then there is no argument to be made. So, the exception is disbelief and how it's condemned. This is not to be assumed to be true, but debated.

Assume all realities talked about in Quran make sense and are real (just like you do in a movie), then after collecting this paradigm, see if disbelief should be condemned and in a central way.

Obviously if Mohammad (s) is not a Prophet, then disbelieving in Quran for example can't be condemned.

I will be collecting features of reality per Quran. Then from these features, I will try to make the case why disbelief should be condemned and in a central way.

In my view, disbelief is central in the Qur'an and also in the Bible for the simplest of all possible reasons: without belief, you have no religion.

However, it is also ludicrous, because the fact of the matter is you cannot make someone believe something that they simply do not believe. I couldn't make you believe in invisible dragons, although it may be that you believe in djinn, so there's no particular reason you shouldn't also believe in huge fire-breathing flying lizards. But if you don't, you don't, and nothing I say is going to make it happen.

LIkewise, everybody can preach God at me until their lungs fall out, but until they can give me just one, solitary, tiny piece of actual evidence (not something somebody said, people can say anything they want), why would it change my mind? It won't.

But religions need followers, or they aren't really religions, are they? And who then is going to pay the priests and the imams? So the next best thing religions can do is prescribe punishment for the heresy or sin of not believing. And they do indeed do that, don't they?

 

[Link]

You guys show me you can't go to Quran without circular referencing your disbelief in it and making up own paradigm of why you think it says something.

Per Quran, truth is clear from falsehood, and God guides to it and provides clear proofs for it.

Of course, if he didn't do that, I would believe "disbelief" in the guidance can't be condemned as well.

 

[Valjean]

You guys show me you can't go to Quran without circular referencing your disbelief in it and making up own paradigm of why you think it says something.

Per Quran, truth is clear from falsehood, and God guides to it and provides clear proofs for it.

Of course, if he didn't do that, I would believe "disbelief" in the guidance can't be condemned as well.

I'm missing the circularity. Clarify?
It seems to me that it's the religious who are presupposing unevidenced premises and reaching conclusions therefrom.
Any reality can be consistent with a set of premises. A conclusion may be valid, given a set of premises, but it may not be ontologically true. Before accepting a conclusion, we must verify the correctness of the premises.

Making up our own paradigms? No. We're drawing conclusions from observed, known and tested facts. We're accepting the reality indicated by these facts.
Your conclusions are based on unverified premises about God and truth.

How is truth clear from falsehood? All we have are claims, testimonies and declarations -- with no demonstrable facts backing them up.

 

[Link]

I'm missing the circularity. Clarify?
It seems to me that it's the religious who are presupposing unevidenced premises and reaching conclusions therefrom.
Any reality can be consistent with a set of premises. A conclusion may be valid, given a set of premises, but it may not be ontologically true. Before accepting a conclusion, we must verify the correctness of the premises.

Making up our own paradigms? No. We're drawing conclusions from observed, known and tested facts. We're accepting the reality indicated by these facts.
Your conclusions are based on unverified premises about God and truth.

How is truth clear from falsehood? All we have are claims, testimonies and declarations -- with no demonstrable facts backing them up.

I don't like mixing topics.

Proof for God is it's own topic.
Proof for Prophets and Messengers it's own topic.
Proof for Mohammad (s) and Quran it's own topic.
Proof for hell it's own topic.
Proof for why Quran centralizes on condemning disbelief it's own topic.

As for the last, you have to assume somethings to be true for sake of argument either way, and then see if it's reasonable.

It's a specific premise in a particular paradigm. You have to understand that paradigm to understand why it centralizes on disbelief condemnation. Sure you can dispute that paradigm or any feature of it, but that requires it's topic and own set of arguments for and against.

This is sort of like math. You don't try to understand addition all over again, when dealing with multiplication and division. It has to be understood to be true. Then you can understand multiplication after.

And then later more math, and more math, building on top.

The issue of why disbelief is so centralized is built on a lot. Of course, some people might read the Quran and be put off by how it addresses disbelief. But to understand why it does, I'm not asking you to believe in it's paradigm, just understand why with that paradigm, disbelief is so condemned.

This is a simple concept - you deal with each subject where it is at. Not go back to the things it's built upon.

Otherwise, you are arguing whole different issue, although related to it because it's built on it, doesn't really deal with the issue itself.

 

[BrightShadow]

Another angle is to see that we are at tug war between an evil left handed companion (a Jinn) and the leader of time (12th successor of Mohammad (s) in this time) as the right handed companion (I talked about this in "Signs of eloquence in Quran" thread when I talk about the link between Imam Musa Kadhim (a) and Qaf)

This another way to see belief and disbelief. Someone wrote the following in another thread (@BrightShadow )

Again, I wasn't talking about your common everyday possession that you watch in movies! I was talking about something we all have (whether you are hetero or gay). Since it applies to everyone and effects everyone (but in different ways) - your implication in your above statement and other statements are still misguided.
Heterosexuals are also possessed IMO but in their case the inclinations of the soul and the companion entity is a match but they are still influenced by the entity in doing other forbidden things. I believe this is how devil delivers. Many religious doctrines have touched this matter. Seek it or don't.

I replied with expansion post to support it:

You speak truth and put it simply. Well done.

The companion (evil one) is also fed by evil deeds. But the companion (evil one) per Quran misguide from the way while thinking they are guided.

So the companion (evil one), really tells himself, he is doing you good and it's for your well-being, to disbelief in day of judgment, in harsh judgment, to be "good to yourself" and that there is nothing evil about fornication and other sexual deviances.

This is what makes it hard. Non-judgment meditation in my view, is a way to give more control to this being. Judgment and guilt although hurts, makes your skin hardened against evil and builds eventually barriers of light against darkness.

The self-blaming soul is a step below the tranquil soul, but God never leaves the self-blaming soul, but eventually through repentance, guides them out of darkness of sins into the light of beauties and majestic glories from good states and intentions. Eventually, the ravaging sins in the soul are turned to light as well, and become a source of lesson through the water of regret.

Ismail (a) desire was from paradise, his animal was from paradise, it was not seeking lower world. Yet he and Ibrahim (a) sacrificed that, and all that Ismail (a) chose to be although was creature of paradise, was sacrificed for something higher.

We have a choice. We force God to accept us despite how dark and evil we've become and say he must see us as beautiful. Or we accept God's light as beautiful and let his rain cleanse us of the ugly filth we immersed ourselves in.


It's not an easy choice, but not a hard one for humble souls. It's the easy path but for those who love God more then themselves. Who prefer God's Prophet over themselves.

Very easy for them.

Thanks for somewhat supporting my position in one aspect. I see you mentioned and quoted me. Of course I expect we may not see eye to eye on every aspect because I do not adhere to any organized or sects of any religion.

Here is my two cents regarding the OP.

Disclaimer: My point of view may differ from traditional Muslim belief or Muslim viewpoint.

I am not an expert in Quran - but if Quran condemns disbelief in a extreme and profound way then maybe it is because of the following reason.

"Necessity is the mother of invention!" We invent things to meet our (society's) ever-changing need. We invent things to solve everyday problems. We invent things that would help us stay healthy, heal faster and live longer. We invent things to make our everyday life better, easier and more productive. So, on a similar notion lets ask - Why God felt a need to make this world or more specifically why did God decide to create humans? What is his reason behind it all?
It is a long story - but lets point out my opinion as briefly as I can...

I personally believe God created our body and send us to this world for a specific reason. The reason is that we must have total faith in his absolute authority over everything of the heavens and earth and whatever exists out there. God is the sole creator, sole proprietor and sustainer of all things. To believe in this concept and upholding it in all aspects of our life - is what is asked of us. To uphold that belief should be our main goal. Now, what path we follow to attain that goal- doesn't matter as long as - it is an innocent path. Let it be through true conviction (firmly held belief) or through a mixture of faith and a desire for self well-being (desire to be in heaven, rewards) or though a mixture of faith and out of fear of damnation etc. It doesn't matter as long as the final outcome is reached and the faith is uphold until we die. After death everything will be clear to us anyhow but key is to have faith while we are alive!

I believe - it is an unwritten covenant we have with God - before we came to this world - that we will be monotheist and we will have total faith in God's qualities such as - omniscience (all-knowing), omnipotence (all-powerful), and omnibenevolence (supremely good) etc. I think we also agreed that we will never question God's absolute authority or attributes ever again and never say that he shares his divine attributes with any partner because he doesn't. IMO.

I believe we are given a second chance to prove we can uphold this "belief" and that we will not let our guards down and get influenced again (by anything) and never let our "belief" get tainted again. We will never put anyone else on the same pedestal as God. His glory is for him only!

Obviously just believing in One God concept is not enough. One must also lead a righteous life, believe in Judgment day and sort through the doctrines available and figure out what else makes sense and what else God asked. BUT disbelief in God or believing in multiple gods or putting anyone else on the same level as God (a human god, animal god, idols worship etc.) is the first disqualification. IMO
However, I also believe that God can forgive anyone he so chooses. It is his prerogative.