Arguments against polytheism against the people of that time and place in Quran (various types).

[Link]

Salam

The Quran tackles polytheism by the following ways:

If Absolute being

If there is an absolute being, there is nothing compared to him, hence the highest word of honor should be for him, and hence only God (semantic issue of not equating with God in worship).
If there would be any gods with the absolute being, it would be his chosen servants he has chosen, but he's far exalted above being compared with anyone.

If those who they worshiped from Jinn were exalted they would be angels

If those they worshipped from Jinn were real and truly exalted as they say, they would be Angels, servants like ourselves, but not gods.
They would not control intercession for us, but intercession would occur by God's permission, command and God being the true intercessor and decider in all that.
All help spiritually and sustenance from unseen would not come from them directly by them deciding but per God's command and will and permission.
Many Angels intercede but can't avail those on earth except by God permisions

If there were gods (more then one)

There would be no absolute being guiding them and being the source of their truth, sustenance, and power so they divided beings of different ranks, some over others, and disagreement between them would surely take place because there is no truth.
The judgment would not have absolute reality, and all paths would not have a direction, and so things would be in a state of corruption rather then God's sustenance truth way as it is now
The powers would not be from absolute source and things would be in disarray and the heaven and earth would be in a state of corruption as a result

The Titles and names given by them don't have reality

They can't title and tell the roles of their gods and don't know the subtle of unseen, and so it's conjecture about unseen world and order

Don't have proof for their authority and chosen status

Take away all the impossibility arguments, they would require proof of their chosen status and being chosen by God, but they have none. There exists no clear proof of them being gods and proof is required for truthful truth seekers.

It's upon God to choose not humans

Along with that, is the argument, spirituality and unseen path is sacred, and authorities whether a person saying they represent the gods or unseen entities claiming to represent the truth, they must be chosen from God and not from people choosing who to trust without proof. This is similar to the above point, except with emphasis, that they would be chosen by God if there would be gods or those who channel their will.

It's Jinn not Angels

Then comes the notion they are not Angels, but Jinn who are misguided from the path that most are worshipers and believers of.

It's Devils lead by Iblis

The Arabs were worshiping Iblis and satanic forces from Jinn in reality, and so they aren't Angels, and not even enlightened jinn, but rebellious forces against God.

Divination

An act of Satan to be avoided.

Plans of Shayateen and the plan of their Awliya

They will plan a plan but God's plan will take that account, and there is different end results, but in no way will he give them a way and power over believers and at the time of peril will come to their aid.

Devils from Jinn have friends from humans and always opposing Prophets

The killer of Yahya, the king that killed him, gave Yahya head to a prostitute while the skies cried blood!

Magic is a trial

Can be used from good if we believe in the chosen kings having power from God such as Harut and Marut (peace be upon these two kings) and use our power through God's sustenance and power through his channeling light and power, for good.

Or we can learn skills and use it for bad, in this case, our powers will stem from the cursed tree of Devils.

Magic is an intense trial, if one wants to annul the poisons out there, and cure them, and unknot the locks and knots, and untie what is tied, best to be learned under a guide and king appointed by God, not go to every person claiming to be able to teach us the unseen arts.

Shayateen teach magic, but at a cost for the soul.

Benefits of Jinn and humans from one another

Lastly Quran does not deny there are benefits and pleasures that come about from this but the benefits are not spiritually "good", but rather for pleasure, influence, and powers that are used for Dunya as oppose to getting closer to God.

If these were truly gods, they should be able to take away power from the owner of the throne

Mohammad (s) miracles showed overwhelming unmatched power, and none of the gods of Arabs were able to match his miracles, and he brought an example, when the human is about to die, and it dies, let them bring it back if they are truthful, but they can't even do that, let alone the miracle Mohammad (s) pulled in that respect and more. They had no authority but God has it, and permitted Mohammad (s) to perform the miracle and taunted the opposition to do similar if they were truthful about Mohammad (s) being a sorcerer.

Woof that was long, there is more to be said and Quran elaborates more, and has more arguments, but this is what I remember on top of my head.

 

[VoidCat]

Those arguments against polytheism are far from swaying me away from polytheism as it addresses none the reasons I am a polytheist. But thanks for sharing. Very interesting viewpoint I enjoyed reading it

 

[Link]

Those arguments against polytheism are far from swaying me away from polytheism as it addresses none the reasons I am a polytheist. But thanks for sharing. Very interesting viewpoint I enjoyed reading it

Salam

I think it addresses every type of possible polytheism. But thanks for your comment. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

 

[The Hammer]

I'm not supposed to post here. I just wanted to state that most polytheists don't believe in an "absolute being", so that isn't a good argument against the case for polytheism.

Also polytheists base their ideas on experience of the gods. Not "proof". There is no reason for a Polytheist to prove their Gods exist more then any others.

Your God (Allah), is just one more god of the Many that exist.

I can acknowledge that there is an Allah, and a Yahweh or Jehova. Without worshipping them.

Regards

 

[Link]

I'm not supposed to post here. I just wanted to state that most polytheists don't believe in an "absolute being", so that isn't a good argument against the case for polytheism.

Salam

But the Quran has "if not absolute being, but equal gods"... argument, so it addresses that too.

 

[VoidCat]

I'm not supposed to post here.

Is there a rule against nonmuslims posting in the quranic debate section? Just checking I don't want to break any rules

 

[Link]

Is there a rule against nonmuslims posting in the quranic debate section? Just checking I don't want to break any rules

It's fine, you can post.

Salam

 

[VoidCat]

It's fine, you can post.

Salam

Ah ok.

 

[The Hammer]

Salam

But the Quran has "if not absolute being, but equal gods"... argument, so it addresses that too.

I didn't say the gods were equal. They have inequalities just like us. Just no Absolute chief. The Gods only worry about their followers/worshippers, no one else.

So still not an argument.

 

[The Hammer]

Is there a rule against nonmuslims posting in the quranic debate section? Just checking I don't want to break any rules

There is. But I'm assuming if we are cordial and Link doesn't mind, we should be ok.

 

[Link]

I didn't say the gods were equal. They have inequalities just like us. Just no Absolute chief. The Gods only worry about their followers/worshippers, no one else.

So still not an argument.

Salam

The Quran agrees they would not all be equal rank, perhaps that was a bad choice of words. What I wanted to say if there were many "gods" with all rank of divinity (somewhat on par with each other and hence all "gods"), the Quran argues against this hypothesis as well. In fact, it argues against the base case (two) as well with same argument.

 

[Link]

There is. But I'm assuming if we are cordial and Link doesn't mind, we should be ok.

Why is their rules against that?

Atheist been arguing here for a long time.

 

[VoidCat]

There is. But I'm assuming if we are cordial and Link doesn't mind, we should be ok.

Maybe a mod could clarify? I didn't see anything about it in the rules last i checked I'll check again in a sec...if a mod see this feel free to clarify said rule regarding quaranic debates...

Edit: @SomeRandom another mod explained dont worry about the earlier tag

 

[The Hammer]

Why is their rules against that?

Atheist been arguing here for a long time.

I assumed scriptural debates were for believers of said holy book only.

My main issue with your arguments here is you're basing them on a book written by men.

Which is why I trust solely on experience.

 

[VoidCat]

I assumed scriptural debates were for believers of said holy book only.

My main issue with your arguments here is you're basing them on a book written by men.

Which is why I trust solely on experience.

It's not in a same faith debate section only. Those have special rules I do know that

 

[Link]

I assumed scriptural debates were for believers of said holy book only.

My main issue with your arguments here is you're basing them on a book written by men.

Which is why I trust solely on experience.

Salam

Whether written by men or not, the arguments here are solid in my view. It address soft-polytheism (Absolute God with "lesser" gods) and hard-polytheism (many gods). The first it addresses why semantically God should not be equated with, the second, it argues, it's impossible because God is the Truth, Absolute Judge, source of Light and the path of ascension is emanating from him, towards him, and by him. If not absolute being, then there is no path. The path is the Imam so I will elaborate how understanding our link to Imam is part of understanding oneness of God.

Part of the reply to both is the concept of "Imam". The Imam if there would be "lesser" gods, would be a god, but God is far above, so he is "exalted" while believers are great but not exalted, but the Imam truth is a sign from God and his light emanates from God and is blessed by God in a way that reminds of God's Absolute Nature and he points to God with infinite horizontal attributes that God contains in absolute oneness and is the ultimate origin of these aspects.

The Imam is a blessed sign of God, to understand the argument for God's Oneness, you have to understand how the Imam emanates from God's light and guides by his command and truth and authority and light.

And it's actually about the path of truth being linked to the source in a way, they are linked and can't be disconnected and the Imam is the firm handhold in this sense.

The Imam is the face of God. Face of God means he directs to God in a way that proves him and is linked to him.

 

[The Hammer]

Salam

Whether written by men or not, the arguments here are solid in my view. It address soft-polytheism (Absolute God with "lesser" gods) and hard-polytheism (many gods). The first it addresses why semantically God should not be equated with, the second, it argues, it's impossible because God is the Truth, Absolute Judge, source of Light and the path of ascension is emanating from him, towards him, and by him. If not absolute being, then there is no path. The path is the Imam so I will elaborate how understanding our link to Imam is part of understanding oneness of God.

Part of the reply to both is the concept of "Imam". The Imam if there would be "lesser" gods, would be a god, but God is far above, so he is "exalted" while believers are great but not exalted, but the Imam truth is a sign from God and his light emanates from God and is blessed by God in a way that reminds of God's Absolute Nature and he points to God with infinite horizontal attributes that God contains in absolute oneness and is the ultimate origin of these aspects.

The Imam is a blessed sign of God, to understand the argument for God's Oneness, you have to understand how the Imam emanates from God's light and guides by his command and truth and authority and light.

And it's actually about the path of truth being linked to the source in a way, they are linked and can't be disconnected and the Imam is the firm handhold in this sense.

The Imam is the face of God. Face of God means he directs to God in a way that proves him and is linked to him.

Which is your view sure.

But again I rely on experience not words. Words only muddle, mask and confuse the Truth.

No true revelation or experience from the Gods can be put into meaningful words. So to rely on them for proof imo, is a falsity to begin with.

Edit: The Hallmark of a mystical union with a God is this:

Ineffability. A mystical experience defies expression and words cannot fully relate it to others. It must be experienced directly to be fully understood, and the mystical experience cannot be directly transferred to others. Can a person who cannot see understand blue? he asks. "

William James

So if it must be directly experience and can't be expressed in words. Why should I, or you, rely on someone's written words of the Divine, which cannot be expressed as such?

 

[JustGeorge]

**Mod Post: Scriptural(including Quranic) Debates are open to all, unless otherwise stated in the OP**​

 

[VoidCat]

**Mod Post: Scriptural(including Quranic) Debates are open to all, unless otherwise stated in the OP**​

Thanks George

 

[Link]

Which is your view sure.

But again I rely on experience not words. Words only muddle, mask and confuse the Truth.

Salam

I agree experience is needed. Words go so far, but reality has to be experienced. The Imam is door to sky reality. The Ahlulbayt are lanterns and stars which are arrows and ways to stone the devils and a way to burn them.

There is a difference between claiming Ahlulbayt (a) are lights in the sky and the family of the heaven/sky, and can burn devils and give us sight and light, and actually experiencing them and witnessing them as unseen signs and realities connected to you.

Testifying by believers to experiencing them, won't bring us closer to truth about this. Testimony can't be prove unless a person experiences same and witnesses the other believers inwardly in that world by God's permission and by permission of the Imam (a).

At the end, religious debates, can't be "I know through experience but you don't" or asking a person to prove their experiences by experience.

Unseen signs and proofs and doors to the sky/heaven, that can't be proven by a person no matter what they see and how clear. In Mohammad (s) time, he testified to Salman Farsi experiencing this and Salman Farsi testified but had Mohammad (s) confirming him.