Why did God send Messenger to convey His message instead of directly coming to speak?

[Muffled]

In the Quran it says no man can see God and live.

I believe that is true but one can see a body that He is in.

 

[Remté]

I believe that is true but one can see a body that He is in.

How do you know and would that count as seeing god?

 

[ratiocinator]

So you want to have it both ways to say God doesn’t exist yet when you see a chance to attack God then all of a sudden He does exists. Lol

Not at all. I'm just pointing out some of the inconsistencies, contradictions, and general lack of coherent sense in many views of god.

The books of Samuel were recorded by an unknown author some 2 centuries after the events. They were not a Revelation from God and all indications are they were more like Hadiths that if consistent with the Quran can be considered valid but as this is completely inconsistent with the rest of the content in the Bible I do not believe it is accurate or authentic as it directly goes against the Ten Commandments and that in itself makes the account suspect.

Now you're backtracking on what you said: "God teaches only love and unity, brotherhood and mercy in the books of all religions".

The things in the Bible we can be absolutely sure of being the Words of God and true I firmly believe, are such things as are confirmed and explained by subsequent Messengers of God such as Muhammad, the Bab and Baha’u’llah.

So, we're cherry-picking. How are we supposed to tell the real words of god? It's not even like the New Testament is free of nastiness: misogyny 1 Timothy 2:12, Ephesians 5:22, homophobia Romans 1:27.

 

[viole]

Thank you. By the way, I would appreciate your feedback on my other replies to this thread, if you have time, if they weren't included in your answer(s).

Mmh, I have no notice of them.

Ciao

- viole

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I believe the answer is that He did come in the person of Jesus.

I believe that might explain why he wouldn't normally do that because there is always the enemy who wishes to kill Him and to thwart that, He would have to hurt people.

There are verses that prophecises we will see God face to face. When Jesus came, for now, saw Him through a Mirror. if you look at the OT, it prophecies about Lord of Host.
The Book also says, Elijah was taken to heaven, so, when you say God does not come, becuase they kill Him, He can go up as soon as they want to kill Him, like elijah went up.

 

[Remté]

And "god's people" wiped out entire populations sanctioned by their god. You cannot claim (as you did) that "God teaches only love and unity, brotherhood and mercy in the books of all religions", it's simply not true.

This is teaching.^

 

[Remté]

According to traditions the well grounded in knowledge are Muhammad, and His sons after Him.
The reason i brought all these, is, to point out, when it comes to interpretations of unclear verses, a believer needs to investigate and see How Muhammad and His sons interpreted the verse,

How do you think you can know how Muhammad and his....sons.... interpreted them? See, this is why the Quran is clear and complete.

 

[Tumah]

In your view, what is the metaphorical interpretation of the coming of the Lord of Hosts? How would that event take place on earth?

I'm not familiar with any "coming" of G-d. Can you give me a verse with that phrase?

 

[ratiocinator]

This is teaching.^

That genocide is OK?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

How do you think you can know how Muhammad and his....sons.... interpreted them?

Good question. There are millions of Hadithes, when their companions asked them about certain verses, and certain islamic teachings, and then they explained the verses. So, we just refer to the Hadithes. I had already said this before. The queation is, how do we know if a certain hadith is Authentic, or fabricated?

See, this is why the Quran is clear and complete.

The Quran is clear? You already refered to verse 3:7 and told me some verses are not clear, and only God (and well-grounded) knows its interpretation. Do you see the contrediction in what you just said my friend?

 

[Remté]

Good question. There are millions of Hadithes, when their companions asked them about certain verses, and certain islamic teachings, and then they explained the verses. So, we just refer to the Hadithes. I had already said this before. The queation is, how do we know if a certain hadith is Authentic, or fabricated?

I wouldn't swear on the authencity of any Hadith. The Quran warns about them and the prophet Muhammad prohibited the writing of them.

The Quran is clear? You already refered to verse 3:7 and told me some verses are not clear, and only God (and well-grounded) knows its interpretation. Do you see the contrediction in what you just said my friend?

The Quran says it is clear (12:1, for one) and it says what is in 3:7. It is not a contradiction, only, you assume the word clear has an absolute meaning while it doesn't.

 

[Remté]

That genocide is OK?

You're claim was not correct.

God knows best.

 

[ratiocinator]

You're claim was not correct.

Which claim?

God knows best.

So genocide's OK if you think god is telling you to do it?

 

[Remté]

Which claim?

And "god's people" wiped out entire populations sanctioned by their god. You cannot claim (as you did) that "God teaches only love and unity, brotherhood and mercy in the books of all religions", it's simply not true.

This one^

So genocide's OK if you think god is telling you to do it?

In the Quran God does not tell anyone to do that.

 

[ratiocinator]

This one^

I was pointing out that the bible tells us that ""god's people" wiped out entire populations sanctioned by their god." in response to @loverofhumanity's claim that "I believe God teaches only love and unity, brotherhood and mercy in the books of all religions."

What do you think is incorrect?

 

[Remté]

I was pointing out that the bible tells us that ""god's people" wiped out entire populations sanctioned by their god." in response to @loverofhumanity's claim that "I believe God teaches only love and unity, brotherhood and mercy in the books of all religions."

What do you think is incorrect?

That you didn't seem to care that punishment and war is part of teaching.

 

[ratiocinator]

That you didn't seem to care that punishment and war is part of teaching.

That makes no sense as a response to my question. I'll try again: which of my claims do you think is incorrect?

Posting short, ambiguous responses is counterproductive and rather pointless. If you have something to say about punishment, war and teaching, and what you think I care about, spit it out...

 

[Remté]

That makes no sense as a response to my question. I'll try again: which of my claims do you think is incorrect?

Posting short, ambiguous responses is counterproductive and rather pointless. If you have something to say about punishment, war and teaching, and what you think I care about, spit it out...

Your assumption that war and/or punishment is not part of teaching is incorrect.

 

[ratiocinator]

Your assumption that war and/or punishment is not part of teaching is incorrect.

You're still not making any sense, unless you think that god-sanctioned genocide is part of teaching "only love and unity, brotherhood and mercy" - which itself makes no sense...

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I wouldn't swear on the authencity of any Hadith. The Quran warns about them and the prophet Muhammad prohibited the writing of them.

In specific occasion yes, prophet prohibited someone not to write. This does not mean never write, but it means people need to be careful about them.

This is what the prophet and His sons has said about Hadithes:

If Hadithes are compatable with Quran, and have an evidence from Quran, they should be accepted:




These are recorded in the book al-Kafi:

Imam Sadiq said: "If they narrated to you a Hadith and you find a witness for it in the Book of God or in Hadith of the holy Prophet (it is acceptable), otherwise, it is better for the one who brought it to you. (Meaning you'd better attribute it to the narrator and do not accept that the hadith is from us)."


"Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) has said, ‘Everything must be referred to the holy Quran and the Sunnah, the noble traditions of the holy Prophet (s.a.) and any Hadith that does not agree with the holy Quran it is a useless statement.’"

abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) has said the following:
"The holy Prophet once addressed the people in Mina (a place in Makkah) saying, "O people, whatever comes to you in the form of my Hadith you must see if it agrees with the holy book of Allah then know that I have said it but whatever comes to you that does not agree with the book of Allah then know that I have not said it."

"The holy Prophet (s.a.) said: "Over every truth there is a reality and above every valid issue there is light. Whatever agrees with the holy Quran you must follow it and whatever does not agree disregard it."



These Hadithes tell us that For every Hadith of Imams, one must bring an evidence either from Hadith of Prophet or from Quran, to prove that the Hadith is authentic. And, for every Hadith of Prophet, you should have an evidence that it is compatible with Quran.

In my view, Those Hadithes regarding Well-grounded in knowledge Ones, are compatible with Quran, and has an evidence from Quran, as shown in verses 7:3 and 29:49. The verses are actually quoted in my previous post (at least the parts that are related).

The Quran says it is clear (12:1, for one) and it says what is in 3:7. It is not a contradiction, only, you assume the word clear has an absolute meaning while it doesn't.

Yes, the message of the Quran is clear. So, when it says some of its verses are unclear and to know its interpretations we need to refer to the people who were well grounded in knowledge, to understand them clearly. In another words, if one follows the instructions of Quran which are clear, then all things become clear. So, now, to know interpretations quran says, you need to learn from those who were well grounded in knowledge. Is this not clear? Why wouldnt you want to see how Muhammad and His sons interpreted the verses?