PDA

View Full Version : Agnostic mind



GARY
07-27-2006, 02:51 AM
But only if you've HEARD about Islam, and reject it, then you're going to hell? So what if you're confused about what to follow, and you're a very skeptic person? Like I was, and still am. What if you don't just read something and believe it just because someone else says it's true? What if you're not gullable? What if you want proof to find out for yourself? What if you're confused about which choice to make?
Ah, the very core of the problem for people with a fact driven mind (my problem). We require proof. It is difficult to just accept. No religion seems to fit because none have proof.
God blesses us with this logical mind. Should we then be punished for the inability to accept things that we cannot back with logic? I think that would be cruel. Is God cruel?
This has lead me to some questions and assumptions.

One of the assumptions is that athiests don't have the problem with all these questions, because they are running on pure logic, and that logic says that there is no god. If any athiests disagree, please correct this for me.

One question is if these questions are what an agnostic ponders? Is there another reason besides any of these questions that an agnostic would be an agnostic? Am I an agnostic? I feel like the computer/robot on a low budget movie I saw once, "need more input! need more input!"
Sometimes I would describe my thinking as confused, and othertimes not as confused, just unconvinced(need more input!).

I wonder if all agnostics think roughly the same way about these things. Or if some are confused, while others just unconvinced. Is it confusion or a lack of logic?

I think Snakelegs being an agnostic, would be a great person to contribute if she would like.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
north_malaysian
07-27-2006, 06:13 AM
I have a friend who is an Atheist (He's ex-Muslim) but why he is soooooooo Anti-ISlam? Being an Atheist shouldnt make a person anti-Religion, am I right?
Reply

GARY
07-27-2006, 08:34 AM
I guess by the strictest sense of the definition, I would be classified as agnostic. Based on my unwillingness to commit to any one belief. But in the back of my mind I feel that God does exist, and that I have a connection to him.
If any of that makes sense.
Reply

snakelegs
07-27-2006, 10:20 AM
Originally Posted by GARY
I wonder if all agnostics think roughly the same way about these things. Or if some are confused, while others just unconvinced. Is it confusion or a lack of logic?

I think Snakelegs being an agnostic, would be a great person to contribute if she would like.
hi gary,
i would guess that every agnostic is different - we are sort of like the anarchists of religion. so what i say will only be about me. i was raised in no religion and have never belonged to one. i don't really like the idea of organized religion. i don't think god belongs to any religion.
i've never really concerned myself much with religion and have only recently become somewhat interested in comparative religions.
i do not believe that there is One True Religion (one size fits all). i think ultimately, an individual's relationship with god is just that - individual - even within the same religion. i think all religions are true - for their followers - and they all have some good things to offer. on some level their differences are not as different as they seem to be on the surface.
i believe that god is unknowable and will always remain a mystery. i am quite comfortable with this because i prefer questions to answers. i am not confused about it and see no reason to be, because i don't believe in a subject called Truth. i think truth is different for each person and doesn't exist as an absolute. there is no "right" and "wrong" when it comes to religion, or belief systems.
the idea of "proof" when it comes to religion is rather absurd.
i don't understand atheists - how a person can believe in not believing. some atheists are quite missionary about it too.
personally, i think god is one, but this is more for philosophical reasons. some religions break it down into attributes and worship (or seem to worship) the attributes, but that really doesn't make any difference - it's still god - just a different way of seeing.
hmmm.... i guess that's enough for now.
there's nothing wrong with confusion - shows you're thinking. better confusion that Knowing the unknowable.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
snakelegs
07-27-2006, 10:24 AM
Originally Posted by GARY
I guess by the strictest sense of the definition, I would be classified as agnostic. Based on my unwillingness to commit to any one belief. But in the back of my mind I feel that God does exist, and that I have a connection to him.
If any of that makes sense.
hadn't read this one yet when i wrote the last post.
yes, i also feel a connection to god and much more so, as i get older. especially when you ponder the many miracles and great beauty in nature. or when you listen to music.
Reply

root
07-27-2006, 10:27 AM
I have a friend who is an Atheist (He's ex-Muslim) but why he is soooooooo Anti-ISlam? Being an Atheist shouldnt make a person anti-Religion, am I right?
I would certainly claim that Atheists are not anti-religion at all and I think your friend most probably has personal issues with regards to Islam based on his own experience.

As an atheist I attribute religion to playing a major role in forming great civilizations that we see today, I also consider religion fastly approaching it's sell by date.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
07-27-2006, 10:32 AM
Originally Posted by root
I also consider religion fastly approaching it's sell by date.
i guarantee you that wont be happening :)
Reply

snakelegs
07-27-2006, 10:43 AM
Originally Posted by north_malaysian
I have a friend who is an Atheist (He's ex-Muslim) but why he is soooooooo Anti-ISlam? Being an Atheist shouldnt make a person anti-Religion, am I right?
i've seen people like this - the ex's. they leave their religion and then spend the rest of their lives hating their former religion and call themselves "enlightened". there are all kinds of websites of "formers". they are actually just as devoted as they were when they were believers and spend hours preaching about the evils of their former religion.
seems silly to me.
Reply

united
07-27-2006, 10:52 AM
this is the way i see it.
there can be only one God.
it is up to the individual to find out about this God and accept the truth. Finding God should be done with an open mind and since there is only one God there can be only one true religion. no one religion has been around, unchanged since the begining of time, so you have to look around and find what fits your perception best. it is not as simple as "ill look for a religion which is easy to follow", you have to examine each religion and find your own truth.
may we all be guided.
Reply

root
07-27-2006, 10:58 AM
Mazed - i guarantee you that wont be happening
I am not speaking within our life-time, after our respective deaths we cannot hold any guarantee.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
07-27-2006, 11:13 AM
Originally Posted by root
I am not speaking within our life-time, after our respective deaths we cannot hold any guarantee.
if you get to know some of the muslims i know, you will realise that islam will not be dying out anytime soon. BUT our belief is that at the end of time a time will come where not a single person will even say "Allah", his name will be lifted off earth. But like i said, i doubt thats anytime soon but who knows root, no-one but God himself can tell the future. So u might be right... but if you are then expect the end of time to also approach !

:peace:
Reply

scentsofjannah
07-27-2006, 06:02 PM
Originally Posted by GARY
This has lead me to some questions and assumptions.

One of the assumptions is that athiests don't have the problem with all these questions, because they are running on pure logic, and that logic says that there is no god. If any athiests disagree, please correct this for me.

One question is if these questions are what an agnostic ponders? Is there another reason besides any of these questions that an agnostic would be an agnostic? Am I an agnostic? I feel like the computer/robot on a low budget movie I saw once, "need more input! need more input!"
Sometimes I would describe my thinking as confused, and othertimes not as confused, just unconvinced(need more input!).

I wonder if all agnostics think roughly the same way about these things. Or if some are confused, while others just unconvinced. Is it confusion or a lack of logic?

I think Snakelegs being an agnostic, would be a great person to contribute if she would like.

Islam is a logical religion..how many times does Allah tell us to 'reflect' to 'ponder His Signs' ..He reminds us time and time again that we should use our God-given faculties of reasoning, analysing etc to arrive at the truth..

Athiests dont..they would only believe in God if they saw him..they have a see-it-to-believe-it attitude which is only harmful to themselves...they dont use their minds nor do they reflect..their minds are dormant.
Reply

wilberhum
07-27-2006, 09:56 PM
I wonder if all agnostics think roughly the same way about these things. Or if some are confused, while others just unconvinced. Is it confusion or a lack of logic?
The only thing that all agnostics have in common is that they are agnostics.
I’m neither confused nor unconvinced.

I basically have two beliefs.
There is a god.
No one has any knowledge about him.
Reply

- Qatada -
07-27-2006, 10:03 PM
:salamext:


Islam is the most basic of religions. You believe that their is a Creator, and He wants to be worshipped Alone. So He sends messengers to mankind to convey that message, and Allaah himself chooses what ways people will worship Him. What's the point of God creating a creation - without having nothing to do with it? And why do some people suffer and others oppress? This is why we believe in judgement day, the ones who were oppressed will retaliate, and the oppressors will be judged accordingly.


It's that simple. Yet people think that Allaah has a son, or daughter, or dad? Or that He has associates which are made out of clay etc? What kind of logic is that.. but that is the difference between islam and any other form of belief.


Allaah Almighty knows best.


Peace/
Reply

snakelegs
07-28-2006, 02:56 AM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
:salamext:

It's that simple. Yet people think that Allaah has a son, or daughter, or dad? Or that He has associates which are made out of clay etc? What kind of logic is that.. but that is the difference between islam and any other form of belief.


Allaah Almighty knows best.


Peace/
it is only christianity who has these beliefs.
Reply

ABWAN
07-28-2006, 05:49 AM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
it is only christianity who has these beliefs.
Actually this concept is quite prevalent in polytheistic religions especially Hinduism. It is also found in ancient greek and roman religions.
Reply

mujahedeen2087
07-28-2006, 06:25 AM
Originally Posted by north_malaysian
I have a friend who is an Atheist (He's ex-Muslim) but why he is soooooooo Anti-ISlam? Being an Atheist shouldnt make a person anti-Religion, am I right?
he never was a real muslim in the first place, if he is athiest now.
Reply

snakelegs
07-28-2006, 07:13 AM
Originally Posted by ABWAN
Actually this concept is quite prevalent in polytheistic religions especially Hinduism. It is also found in ancient greek and roman religions.
hmmmm. i didn't know this, but i think you are right. i stand corrected.
Reply

scentsofjannah
07-28-2006, 08:16 AM
so nakelegs and wilberhum you believe in the existence of God..yet you believe he took a grand vacation and left us to do as we please on earth?
Reply

snakelegs
07-28-2006, 08:22 AM
Originally Posted by scentsofjannah
so nakelegs and wilberhum you believe in the existence of God..yet you believe he took a grand vacation and left us to do as we please on earth?
no - i simply don't know or understand many things. i can't pretend to know why god does what he does. (or doesn't). this is one of many things i wonder about.
Reply

adi8putra
07-28-2006, 08:26 AM
i've heard it on so many occasions. err...what actually is Agnostic?:hiding:
Reply

snakelegs
07-28-2006, 08:53 AM
Originally Posted by adi8putra
i've heard it on so many occasions. err...what actually is Agnostic?:hiding:
please read my earlier post on this thread - message #4
an agnostic is simply a person who doesn't know, who believes that god is unknowable.
but actually, agnostics are very varied in their views.
there is no Official Party Line among agnostics.
we don't know.
Reply

adi8putra
07-28-2006, 08:55 AM
:giggling: thanks dude.... no harm's in asking? ain't it?:hiding:
Reply

wilberhum
07-28-2006, 04:16 PM
Originally Posted by mujahedeen2087
he never was a real muslim in the first place, if he is athiest now.
You never knew the person. You have 30 seconds of insight from a friend he had and you think you have the knowledge level to judge him?
Seams quite vain to me. :hiding:
Reply

wilberhum
07-28-2006, 04:18 PM
Originally Posted by scentsofjannah
so nakelegs and wilberhum you believe in the existence of God..yet you believe he took a grand vacation and left us to do as we please on earth?
I don't know what he did. Now is that a good agnostic response or what. :giggling:
Reply

GARY
07-28-2006, 05:19 PM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
hi gary,
i would guess that every agnostic is different - we are sort of like the anarchists of religion. so what i say will only be about me. i was raised in no religion and have never belonged to one. i don't really like the idea of organized religion. i don't think god belongs to any religion.
i've never really concerned myself much with religion and have only recently become somewhat interested in comparative religions.
i do not believe that there is One True Religion (one size fits all). i think ultimately, an individual's relationship with god is just that - individual - even within the same religion. i think all religions are true - for their followers - and they all have some good things to offer. on some level their differences are not as different as they seem to be on the surface.
i believe that god is unknowable and will always remain a mystery. i am quite comfortable with this because i prefer questions to answers. i am not confused about it and see no reason to be, because i don't believe in a subject called Truth. i think truth is different for each person and doesn't exist as an absolute. there is no "right" and "wrong" when it comes to religion, or belief systems.
the idea of "proof" when it comes to religion is rather absurd.
i don't understand atheists - how a person can believe in not believing. some atheists are quite missionary about it too.
personally, i think god is one, but this is more for philosophical reasons. some religions break it down into attributes and worship (or seem to worship) the attributes, but that really doesn't make any difference - it's still god - just a different way of seeing.
hmmm.... i guess that's enough for now.
there's nothing wrong with confusion - shows you're thinking. better confusion that Knowing the unknowable.
Originally Posted by wilberhum
The only thing that all agnostics have in common is that they are agnostics.
I’m neither confused nor unconvinced.

I basically have two beliefs.
There is a god.
No one has any knowledge about him.
Thanks to both of you. It seems you have helped me to realize something. I am an agnostic. I believe in God, and I don't think anybody knows much about him.
Reply

- Qatada -
07-28-2006, 05:22 PM
The muslims know about their Creator, and if you have any form of opinion regarding what i said earlier. Then i'd like to see your response to that.


Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
:salamext:


Islam is the most basic of religions. You believe that their is a Creator, and He wants to be worshipped Alone. So He sends messengers to mankind to convey that message, and Allaah himself chooses what ways people will worship Him. What's the point of God creating a creation - without having nothing to do with it? And why do some people suffer and others oppress? This is why we believe in judgement day, the ones who were oppressed will retaliate, and the oppressors will be judged accordingly.


It's that simple. Yet people think that Allaah has a son, or daughter, or dad? Or that He has associates which are made out of clay etc? What kind of logic is that.. but that is the difference between islam and any other form of belief.


Allaah Almighty knows best.


Peace/
Reply

wilberhum
07-28-2006, 06:14 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
The muslims know about their Creator, and if you have any form of opinion regarding what i said earlier. Then i'd like to see your response to that.
What you know, is simply part of your belief system.
I believe that you believe. It all comes down to belief.

Besides the thread is "Agnostic mind" not "Theist mind".
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-28-2006, 09:12 PM
Greetings,

A Muslim view on agnosticism can be read here:
Agnosticism by Dr. Laurence Brown MD
Reply

wilberhum
07-28-2006, 09:45 PM
All in all it was an interesting read. But I find the following statement quite bias and does not apply to any agnostic that I have ever talked to.
Most often, however, the religiously unmotivated utilize the term to excuse personal disinterest, attempting thereby to legitimize escapism from the responsibility of serious investigation into religious evidences.
And
Most often, however, the religiously unmotivated utilize the term to excuse personal disinterest, attempting thereby to legitimize escapism from the responsibility of serious investigation into religious evidences.
And, at least for me the following is nothing more that theist bigotry.
Agnosticism has practicality for those who feel the need of a theological defense system.

As far as
a fox without a tail
I find that superior to the tail wagging the fox.

All Agnostics think alike just like all Muslims think alike.
Reply

snakelegs
07-28-2006, 10:29 PM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
The only thing that all agnostics have in common is that they are agnostics.
I’m neither confused nor unconvinced.

I basically have two beliefs.
There is a god.
No one has any knowledge about him.
:giggling: ;D ;D ;D
you said it all!
Reply

snakelegs
07-28-2006, 10:31 PM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
I don't know what he did. Now is that a good agnostic response or what. :giggling:
haha! you crack me up - you're soooo funny!
Reply

snakelegs
07-28-2006, 11:06 PM
Originally Posted by united
this is the way i see it.
there can be only one God.
it is up to the individual to find out about this God and accept the truth. Finding God should be done with an open mind and since there is only one God there can be only one true religion. no one religion has been around, unchanged since the begining of time, so you have to look around and find what fits your perception best. it is not as simple as "ill look for a religion which is easy to follow", you have to examine each religion and find your own truth.
may we all be guided.
keep in mind what wilberhum said:"The only thing that all agnostics have in common is that they are agnostics."
some agnostics are neutral about whether or not there is a god - they don't really concern themselves about this, one way or the other. i felt that way when i was younger.
now i do believe there is a god. i respect every one's religion. from my standpoint, they are all paths to god, and can all be potentially very good, depending upon how the individual interprets and applies it in their life. they can also potentially be bad - when they lead to yet more divisions and hatred among people. but i don't think some religions are right and others are wrong.
we can agree that there is only one god. but this doesn't necessarily require a religion or that belief in one god automatically requires there to be only one true religion or that those who choose to see god in 10,000 pieces are wrong. personally, i don't think one needs a religion in order to relate to god - in fact, for me i think it could even be a hindrance. so i would never be looking for a religion to get closer to god. i don't believe that god belongs to any religion. muhammad said it well "to you, your religion, to me, mine". (i would add your "religion or lack of")
from my view i am not right and you are not wrong. we're just on a different road. i agree with you 100%: "...find your own truth. may we all be guided" - for you, islam is the truth and for me no religion is. but, guidance we can all use!
i hope this makes sense.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-28-2006, 11:16 PM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
All in all it was an interesting read. But I find the following statement quite bias and does not apply to any agnostic that I have ever talked to.
Most often, however, the religiously unmotivated utilize the term to excuse personal disinterest, attempting thereby to legitimize escapism from the responsibility of serious investigation into religious evidences.
And
Most often, however, the religiously unmotivated utilize the term to excuse personal disinterest, attempting thereby to legitimize escapism from the responsibility of serious investigation into religious evidences.
First off, is it just my eyes or are the two statements the same?
You would probably say that you are not interested in a serious examination of scriptural evidences because you don't believe or don't have any way of knowing if anything in the scriptures is from God. But that is exactly what is being mentioned above. Your agnosticism is the term you are using to describe your reasons (Brown uses the word 'excuse') for being disinterested in scriptural examination. Dr. Brown's argument is, "Why should it matter?" A scriptural examination - and Dr. Brown has performed an extensive and very insightful one in his book FFC - can reveal patterns and a common theme in revelation that will lead you to a greater understanding.
And, at least for me the following is nothing more that theist bigotry.
Agnosticism has practicality for those who feel the need of a theological defense system.
It is certainly a theist assertion but I am not sure why you have chosen to label it as bigotry. Bigotry is intolerance to different opinions, no?

Regards
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-28-2006, 11:42 PM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
but this doesn't necessarily require a religion or that belief in one god automatically requires there to be only one true religion or that those who choose to see god in 10,000 pieces are wrong.
But surely you agree that the truth cannot be self-contradictory. Either someone who says there is only one God is right, or He is wrong. Either someone who says the Qur'an is the revelation from God to be implemented by human beings is right or he is wrong. Religions with mutually contradictory theologies and creeds cannot all be simultaneously true.
personally, i don't think one needs a religion in order to relate to god - in fact, for me i think it could even be a hindrance.
If we accept the proposition that there is one God, we have to look for the most plausible explanation.

Now if you believe in God, do you think that a true Lord would not be watching over His creation in Supreme Control? Do you think that God created us in sport without any purpose and left us to suffer in the confusion of this world? That is not logically coherent. I cannot fathom a God who is supposedly a divine version of a careless, umindful playful child, who creates and abandons creation in chaos. I believe such a concept of God is invalidated in light of what atheists call 'the problem of evil'. If this God is good then why does He abandon us to purposeless lives rent with chaos and evil? No, I believe in a God who is allpowerful, in control and has placed us here for a purpose.

Qur'an 21:16-18. And [know that] We have not created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in mere idle play. Had We willed to indulge in a pastime, We would indeed have produced it from within Ourselves - if such had been Our will at all. Nay, but we hurl truth against falsehood and it crushes the latter and behold - falsehood withers away. But woe to you for that which you ascribe [to God]!

The notion that God is in need of some amusement and pastime, let alone through the confusion and suffering of others, is certainly illogical.

You say that religion is a hindrance in our relationship with God. I believe this is a faulty understanding of religion. Islam means, literally, submission to God. We recognize God as the supreme Deity of Our Universe and consequently we submit to Him, accept His Will, come closer to Him through enjoining righteousness, forbidding evil and implementing the way of life He has ordained for us. Through our loving devotion to God we are able to come closer to Him and attain inner peace and tranquility.

If you agree that logic and reason should be the guiding force in our investigation - we should not accept a doctrine that is illogical, right? So then we should examine the messages to determine which is the most coherent and comprehensive. The Islamic message is all this. This is why the Qur'an says:

2:130-131. 130. And who turns away from the path of Abraham except one who befools himself? Truly, We chose him in this world and verily, in the Hereafter he will be among the righteous. When his Lord said to him, "Submit (Ar. Aslim*)!" He said, "I have submitted myself (Aslamto*) to the Lord of the Universe.

*The verb for Islam; submission

The verse is truly accurate in its wording - how can someone turn away from the path of submission to God if they believe in Him?? Surely such a person befools themselves.
i don't believe that god belongs to any religion.
It is not that God belongs to a religion, it is that submission to the Creator is the natural way ordained for all creation.
muhammad said it well "to you, your religion, to me, mine". (i would add your "religion or lack of")
Firstly, its from the Qur'an 109:6, not the words of Prophet Muhammad pbuh. Second, it is not something that should be stripped of its context. It is not validating other religions, on the contrary it is opposing compromising the pure and pristine code ordained by God by melding it with the man-made doctrines as some people in the time suggested.

Regards

ps. if Gary feels this is diverting from the thread topic I'll move it to another thread
Reply

wilberhum
07-28-2006, 11:43 PM
First off, is it just my eyes or are the two statements the same?
My cut and paste skills failed me. Sorry about that.

I meant to post and agreement.

an Agnostic is a “person who believes that the existence of God is not provable.”[
the Agnostic defends the right to such belief, just so long as proof is not claimed.
You would probably say that you are not interested in a serious examination of scriptural evidences because you don't believe or don't have any way of knowing if anything in the scriptures is from God.
Probably not. There are serious obstacles that would have to be overcome long before we get in to scriptures. We have been down this road before. You can not resolve those obstacles and I, as a guest, have no intention of stating all of those obstacles.
Reply

Abdul Fattah
07-28-2006, 11:43 PM
As for teh origenal question of this thread;
If an agnostisist truly has a lack of input , by no fault of his own, then he cannot be blamed for it. But such persons, when they start investigating Islam Ususally come to accept it. Now the key words here are: "by no fault of their own. " Because there's also a lot of people who block out imput. even if they do research they are already determined not to accept what they find.
So If I would give an agnostic any advice, it would be: Be honest to yourself!
Reply

bint_muhammed
07-29-2006, 12:03 AM
Originally Posted by steve
As for teh origenal question of this thread;
If an agnostisist truly has a lack of input , by no fault of his own, then he cannot be blamed for it. But such persons, when they start investigating Islam Ususally come to accept it. Now the key words here are: "by no fault of their own. " Because there's also a lot of people who block out imput. even if they do research they are already determined not to accept what they find.
So If I would give an agnostic any advice, it would be: Be honest to yourself!
exactly! you took the words out my mouth!
Reply

snakelegs
07-29-2006, 01:43 AM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
But surely you agree that the truth cannot be self-contradictory. Either someone who says there is only one God is right, or He is wrong. Either someone who says the Qur'an is the revelation from God to be implemented by human beings is right or he is wrong. Religions with mutually contradictory theologies and creeds cannot all be simultaneously true.
i think it is almost impossible to make my feelings understood to a person who follows a religion, but i'll try. until gary asked the question that started the thread, i've never really given my agnosticism much thought at all. so you are making me think!
what if there is nothing called "The Truth" as an absolute? what if each person has to find their own? i certainly don't feel like i have a monopoly on "The Truth" either - no one does, in my view.
so i don't agree that either someone who says there is one god is right, or wrong. god is not changed by your perception of him. he is not diminished by the unbelief of the atheist. for the atheist he does not exist, so that is true for him. if a person believes god comes in 10,000 installments, god does not multiply - he remains the same - he is a constant, if you will. to a muslim, the qur'an was revealed by god. this is his truth. he is not right. he is not wrong. it isn't an either/or thing. most of the monotheists are exclusivists - but i see no inherent reason why you have to be, in order to be a monotheist. (i guess it has to do with the revealation aspect of the "Big 3") and in this, my monotheism is different than that of the "Big 3". this may be why it is practically impossible to grasp the seriousness of apostacism in islam - because i don't think it hurts or angers god at all. he remains god.
a person's perception of god is a very intimate thing, even tho he may join with other people that share it - ultimately it is just him and god.
another thing is that to me, the seeming contradictions in various religious are more apparent than they are real - on some level, they are all the same. so it doesn't matter that theologies are different from each other on the surface.
no i would not say that just because there is one god, doesn't mean that we have to look for the most plausible explanation. god doesn't need explanations.
do i think that a true god would not be watching over his creation (not sure what you mean by Supreme Control? my answer is: i don't know. this is what makes an agnostic an agnostic, after all. i do not know why god created us. i think he cares about his creation - but how would i know for sure what god thinks - he's god, after all! and when you get right down to it, he is unknowable and more easily defined by what he isn't than by what he is. i also don't know if he put us here for a purpose.
now, you do know these things, but i do not.
as far as i am concerned, there are many questions that have no knowable answer - and i'm comfortable with that.
no, i don't think logic and reason should be our guiding force in our investigation - this would be true if we were discussing a scientific subject, but god is beyond reason and logic and requires no explanations or investigation.
i am going to have to wrap this up. i doubt that you will understand my thinking because it is so different than yours. but in my view, on the level where it really matters - we are not so different after all.
god, i hope this is coherent - there's a lot going on here and all this thinking is taxing my poor brain! these things are really hard to put in words.
do i know what i'm talking about? of course not, i'm an agnostic, after all!
peace.
Reply

scentsofjannah
07-29-2006, 06:59 PM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
no - i simply don't know or understand many things. i can't pretend to know why god does what he does. (or doesn't). this is one of many things i wonder about.
ok let me get this straight..you do believe in God but then you find him to be a bit of a mystery(which is fine since we cant comprehend God or understand how He works)..and you also donot worship Him?
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 01:37 AM
Originally Posted by scentsofjannah
ok let me get this straight..you do believe in God but then you find him to be a bit of a mystery(which is fine since we cant comprehend God or understand how He works)..and you also donot worship Him?
yes, he is a mystery. i don't worship him in the normal sense of the word, but i do feel him at times - when i see or contemplate the beauty and miracle of nature, or am moved by a beautiful piece of music. it's a feeling like of awe - non-verbal.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-30-2006, 02:59 AM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
what if there is nothing called "The Truth" as an absolute?
Simply use reason - can it be possible that life after death is true and not true at the same time? Someone who says that there is life after death is either telling the truth or he is not. Someone who says that Muhammad was the last of God's prophets is either telling the truth or he is not. Someone who says that Paradise exists is either telling the truth or he is not. Either someone who says there is Divine decree is telling the truth or he is not. This isn't a matter of relativity.
i certainly don't feel like i have a monopoly on "The Truth" either - no one does, in my view.
I believe there was a student who told his Prof something similar in protest of his poor mark on a math exam. The Prof didn't change his mark though.
so i don't agree that either someone who says there is one god is right, or wrong. god is not changed by your perception of him.
Doesn't this refute your own statement rather than mine? A polytheist percieves God as multiple entities. An atheist percieves God as a non-entity. No matter how they percieve God, it won't change the fact that He is ONE entity, alone without partners, the only one worthy of our worship, our loving devotion.
for the atheist he does not exist, so that is true for him.
What do you mean "that is true for him" ? Surely either God exists or He does not. Can you explain your statement with logic? If someone lies, is it sufficient for them to claim that what they said was "true for them" in order to escape any penalty?
Do you think this is legally acceptable? What does it mean when someone says in court, "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?? Do you think the courts would let someone go for perjury if they claimed that their statement was true for them?
Do you think this is socially acceptable? How often do you hear your friends excuse their lying by saying, "Well, it was true for me!" ?
Do you think this is politically acceptable? Do you expect a President to excuse his lying to his country by saying, "It was true for me!" ?

If such an excuse is not acceptable in our daily affairs, how could it be acceptable with regard to the greatest affairs???
the qur'an was revealed by god. this is his truth. he is not right. he is not wrong. it isn't an either/or thing.
How is this logically possible? It seems you are clearly not using truth in the sense that I am. Truth is that which is correct, in accordance with fact and reality. It seems to me that you are using the word 'truth' to refer to everyone's individual beliefs whether they are correct or incorrect.
this may be why it is practically impossible to grasp the seriousness of apostacism in islam - because i don't think it hurts or angers god at all. he remains god.
No one said our disbelief or sins hurt God. In fact, the Qur'an says the opposite:
39:7 If you disbelieve, verily God has no need of you. But He does not approve of disbelief for His servants.

29:6 Whoever strives, then verily he strives for the benefit of himself. Indeed, God is completely independent of creation.

6:18 And He is the Irresistible, transcendent above His servants.

41:46 Whoever works righteousness benefits his own soul; whoever works evil, it is against his own soul. And your Lord is not the least unjust to His servants.


The Qur'an continually protrays God as elevated above His creation, compeletely Self-sufficient and immune to any harm or hurt. But that doesn't change the fact that rejecting God's mercy and justice by commiting murder or any other crime is a sin. So think how tremendous the sin of one who rejects God in His entirety.
a person's perception of god is a very intimate thing, even tho he may join with other people that share it
A person's perception of God should be in accordance with reality. As you said God does not change.
another thing is that to me, the seeming contradictions in various religious are more apparent than they are real - on some level, they are all the same.
Several religious groups (like the Jâhilîyah arabs) believe[d] that there is no life after death. Please show me how this boils down to being the same thing as the one who believes that there is life after death.
no i would not say that just because there is one god, doesn't mean that we have to look for the most plausible explanation. god doesn't need explanations.
But we do. God did not give us the faculty of reason for no reason. He has given human beings an ingrained capability that will aid them on their search for truth. The one who does not use it and accepts whatever nonsensical doctrines thrown at them will have no excuse on the Day of Judgement. If you know your beliefs about God are not plausible, i.e. they have no basis on logical grounds, how can you even consider accepting them regardless when you are accountable?
do i think that a true god would not be watching over his creation (not sure what you mean by Supreme Control? my answer is: i don't know.
God gave you a brain. Use it. Is it reasonable to believe that an All-Powerful All-Knowing God who is good would just create us an abandon us to chaos and evil like some absent-minded child? Just use your brain and say, "No. That is not a plausible understanding of God."
this is what makes an agnostic an agnostic, after all.
Yes, you are agnostic. You don't know. But not knowing is different from wilfully rejecting any attempt to gain knowledge. You don't know what God is like - so why don't you try to find out? Why be satisfied with ignorance? You are doing exactly what Dr. Brown said - using the term agnostic to legitimize escapism from the responsibility of a serious investigation to acquire the answers to the questions you currently plead ignorance to.

I've had many debates with atheists and when I ask them some questions about morality and the origin of the universe they also respond saying, "I don't know." BUT at least they say that they are looking for the answer and are not satisfied with their ignorance. Your case is worse because not only do you not know, but you don't want to know!
i do not know why god created us.
Do you want to know? Or are you satisfied with ignorance? Are you interested in undertaking a serious logical investigation to find the truth?
as far as i am concerned, there are many questions that have no knowable answer
If you claim nothing can be known for certain - how can you be so sure??
no, i don't think logic and reason should be our guiding force in our investigation
Is is logical to believe that logic should not be used? The obvious answer is no. Why do you accept an illogical doctrine - namely, the expiry of logic when we turn to questions of theology - without any proof? You routinely use logic to negate the possibility of all sorts of concepts, entities, and occurences in your daily life - why does this ability suddenly terminate when it comes to the most important questions?

At any rate, it should be clear if you restrict the use of logic there is no point in my discussing this issue with you. It's much like solipsism, actually. There is no way to convince someone who believes in it that he is the only thing that exists. Its imposing on yourself a blindfold that you are unwilling to remove. That doesn't mean you won't be accountable for putting that blindfold on in the first place, though.

Regards
Reply

julie
07-30-2006, 03:22 AM
whoever WANTS to know God, Insha Allah God will guide him/her.
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 10:15 AM
Talking to Ansar 7-30-06
hi ansar,
first - i was in a hurry and missed the end of your previous post - thanks for the correction ("to you your religion - to me, mine." i knew better than to say that was a quote from muhammad - that was dumb. :embarrass
this is a really difficult exchange for me. i can not debate you because i don't believe that islam is wrong and i am right. this is why i'm agnostic - i don't know. and this is how i would have to answer most of your questions.
being that you are a believer in a religion - it is almost like we live in different universes - our frames of reference are soooo different. you believe in something structured - and i do not. to me there is no need whatsover for one of us to right, and the other to be wrong.
so in a way this discussion is futile. i don't want you to believe what i tell you. why would i?
can it be possible that life after death is true and not true at the same time?
i do not know whether there is life after death or not - and it really doesn't matter to me. if i use reason - it would tell me that it is unknowable. as i said before i do not feel that there need to be answers - actually i much prefer questions to answers. there are things that are unknowable by reason - they are a matter of faith or belief. you can't "prove" that there is an afterlife by quoting a book that you say was written (dictated) by god because there is no way for me to know whether or not that is true or not as it is not a matter of scientifically verifiable proof (which doesn't mean that it is not true it just means that it is only known through faith. so this holds true for muhammad, buddha, brahma, etc. this. in order to regard it as the Truth, you first have to accept (believe that a certain book is the word of god, which you can not do scientifically.
there are many things that are unknowable to logic and reason - which does not mean that they are untrue, or less true - only that you can not know this things by the same way as you can know that a snake sheds his skin. so it is a different system of knowing. you can know through reason or through direct experience. if you know by direct experience it is certainly true for you. in order for you to accept this as True - you must be willing to believe me. also in this category are a whole range of psychic phenonema. i don't deny that they could be real - i don't know, because i have not experienced them. if i tell you i heard the voice of god - there would be no way you could know whether i am being truthful or not. and most of all - it does not matter. so to me it doesn't matter whether buddhism or islam are true or not. they are most definitely the truth for people who believe them, but they are not true for me because in order for them to be true i have to be willing to enter into an agreement that their holy books are true. i don't feel any need to either accept or reject their claims. all i can say with certainty, is that they are true for people who have first agreed to base things on the premise that what they offer as proof is real - and how can i know? i feel absolutely no need to know. so all i can know is that you believe that god revealed himself thru the qur'an, the bible.
so all your questions - afterlife or not, true or false, muhammad last prophet or not, jesus divine or not - it is not an either/or thing - it is an unknowable thing. i am comfortable with living in a world where there are many many things that are unknowable. i have no way of knowing them so they don't concern me. i don't know whether or not these things are true, and i feel no need to know.
"A polytheist percieves God as multiple entities. An atheist percieves God as a non-entity. No matter how they percieve God, it won't change the fact that He is ONE entity, alone without partners"
oddly enough i can agree with this (not that it is True, only that we share the same belief.) to me it does not change god's "god-ness" whether some one perceives him in 10,000 forms or not - he is the same, whether he is in one package or 10,000 packages.
this is getting much to wordy because i am trying to help you understand my version of agnosticism - only because gary originally asked me to and you have asked me questions about it. i have no desire for you to accept it. there is absolutely no reason why you should. as there is no reason that i should accept or reject your beliefs.
for the athiest it is true that there is no god because he has arrived at this conclusion because it is scientifically unprovable. i don't understand his position because if it is unverifiable, so is knowledge of unverifiability. (i am too lazy to verify whether "unverifiability" is in the dictionary or not!). but this is his frame of reference, so it is true for him even if it is uncomprhensible to me.
" What do you mean "that is true for him" ? Surely either God exists or He does not. Can you explain your statement with logic? If someone lies, is it sufficient for them to claim that what they said was "true for them" in order to escape any penalty?
Do you think this is legally acceptable? What does it mean when someone says in court, "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?? Do you think the courts would let someone go for perjury if they claimed that their statement was true for them?
Do you think this is socially acceptable? How often do you hear your friends excuse their lying by saying, "Well, it was true for me!" ?
Do you think this is politically acceptable? Do you expect a President to excuse his lying to his country by saying, "It was true for me!" ?

If such an excuse is not acceptable in our daily affairs, how could it be acceptable with regard to the greatest affairs???"
ansar, this is not at all comparable. in court, i do not have to prove my innocence - the court is obliged to prove me guilty. this it does by proving solid evidence, calling in forensic experts to testify, gather testimonies from witnesses etc.
so of course, you could not say that "it was true for me" because in order to convict you the court will provide evidence. i can lie about an event or i can tell the truth. i will not lie because i don't think it is ethical, as well as the fact that i could get in a whole heap of trouble if i lie and evidence proves to the contrary.
what's true for the mundane is not necessarily so for the spiritual or religious realm. "saw him stab her and here is blood on the jacket he was wearing" is totally different from "muhammad was the last prophet".
" Do you think this is politically acceptable? Do you expect a President to excuse his lying to his country by saying, 'It was true for me!''"
this is another absurd question. we know he lied because there were no WMD's found so his claim was unverifiable. now, to me it was obvious he was lying long before the u.s. actually invaded because every other week he gave a different reason - it might be WMD's on tuesday, 9/11 on friday, our former pal, saddam hussein on sunday etc. etc. so anybody with common sense would know he was lying it. but even though i knew - i couldn't prove it to anyone else. because it was so obvious, when congress gave him the rubber stamp of approval, they were agreeing to accept as truth something that completely lacked evidence.
""the qur'an was revealed by god. this is his truth. he is not right. he is not wrong. it isn't an either/or thing."
you are quoting a thing i had written previously and you have taken it out of context-the way you present it, it makes no sense whatsoever. the full quote is "to a muslim the qur'an was revealed by god. this is his truth. he is not right. he is not wrong. it isn't an either/or thing."
(i could say you did in deliberately, but i would have no way of proving it lol.)
"A person's perception of God should be in accordance with reality. As you said God does not change.
when i said god does not change, all i was saying was that my concept
of god is that he does not change. i thought i made this obvious to gary that my answers would only be MY concepts as an agnostic - agnostics do not know - and they accept that certain things are unknowable, though they have their individual concepts, something that is subjective.
"Several religious groups (like the Jâhilîyah arabs) believe[d] that there is no life after death. Please show me how this boils down to being the same thing as the one who believes that there is life after death."
if you read what you have written, you will see that the answer is contained in your statement. it is not the same thing as the one who BELIEVES that there is life after
death
. it is a belief so in order for me to think that it is the truth, i have to be willing to believe that is is truth.
"God did not give us the faculty of reason for no reason. He has given human beings an ingrained capability that will aid them on their search for truth. The one who does not use it and accepts whatever nonsensical doctrines thrown at them will have no excuse on the Day of Judgement. If you know your beliefs about God are not plausible, i.e. they have no basis on logical grounds, how can you even consider accepting them regardless when you are accountable?"
what you have stated above is your belief = for you this is the truth because you believe that it is so.
of course my beliefs about god are not plausible to you - why should they be???
"God gave you a brain. Use it. Is it reasonable to believe that an All-Powerful All-Knowing God who is good would just create us an abandon us to chaos and evil like some absent-minded child? Just use your brain and say, "No. That is not a plausible understanding of God."
my brain tells me that we are speaking of things that are unknowable.
"Yes, you are agnostic. You don't know. But not knowing is different from wilfully rejecting any attempt to gain knowledge. You don't know what God is like - so why don't you try to find out? Why be satisfied with ignorance? You are doing exactly what Dr. Brown said - using the term agnostic to legitimize escapism from the responsibility of a serious investigation to acquire the answers to the questions you currently plead ignorance to.

I've had many debates with atheists and when I ask them some questions about morality and the origin of the universe they also respond saying, "I don't know." BUT at least they say that they are looking for the answer and are not satisfied with their ignorance. Your case is worse because not only do you not know, but you don't want to know!"

to you what you wrote above makes sense. to me, it does not. WHY WOULD I BE "WILLING TO FIND OUT" WHEN I BELIEVE IT IS UNKNOWABLE??? WHY WOULD I BE "WILLING TO INESTIGATE SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE TO BE UNKNOWABLE?? WHY SHOULD I BE "LOOKING FOR THE ANSWER" TO A QUESTION THAT I BELIEVE HAS NO ANSWER??
the words and phrases ""WILFULLY REJECTING ANY ATTEMPT TO GAIN KNOWLEDGE", "WHY BE SATISFIED WITH IGNORANCE?", "USING THE TERM AGNOSTIC TO LEGITIMIZE ESCAPISM", "PLEADING IGNORANCE", and, my very favorite, "YOUR CASE IS WORSE (than the atheist) BECAUSE NOT ONLY DON'T YOU KNOW, BUT YOU DON"T WANT TO KNOW!
are nothing but your judgements of me.

" Is is logical to believe that logic should not be used?"
of course, since i believe that there are certain things that can not be knowable logically!
i accept the following as TRUE ACCORDING TO YOUR BELIEFS AND NOTHING MORE:
"At any rate, it should be clear if you restrict the use of logic there is no point in my discussing this issue with you. It's much like solipsism, actually. There is no way to convince someone who believes in it that he is the only thing that exists. Its imposing on yourself a blindfold that you are unwilling to remove. That doesn't mean you won't be accountable for putting that blindfold on in the first place, though."

THIS IS WHAT I TRIED TO TELL YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!!!

this entire discussion is absurd. it is not a debate because it is not debatable. it is not a definition of agnostic concepts because they are concepts and vary with the agnostic. you are trying to convince me of something but i am not trying to convince you of anything, just co-operating with you because you have asked, out of respect for the forum. EVERYTHING I HAVE WRITTEN IS NOTHING MORE THAN MY SPECIFIC BELIEFS AS AN AGNOSTIC - AND WHY SHOULD ANYONE CARE WHAT SOME
STRANGER IN CALIFORNIA BELIEVES???????????
but obviously, you wanted people here to know what YOU believe, [AS WELL AS SHOW YOUR DEBATING SKILLS (LOL)] and that's ok, i have done it as a courtesy to the forum and also because i have an interest in social anthropology

and now, the time has come for ice cream. you do believe in ice cream, don't you?
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 10:19 AM
Originally Posted by julie
whoever WANTS to know God, Insha Allah God will guide him/her.
i agree with this, 100%!!!
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 10:30 AM
Originally Posted by julie
whoever WANTS to know God, Insha Allah God will guide him/her.

come to think of it, if one believes this to be true (which i do also),
why is there any need to proselytize??? :giggling:
Reply

cihad
07-30-2006, 11:32 AM
what does proselytize mean?
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 01:15 PM
Originally Posted by cihad
what does proselytize mean?
dawah (?) - to try to convince some one else that what you believe (a religion, in this case), is what they should believe = preaching.
if you live in the u.s. surely you've had a christian try to convert you?
i've had plenty!
Reply

- Qatada -
07-30-2006, 01:20 PM
We believe that the people who are looking for the truth, Allaah Almighty will guide them to it. But the person who is in search of it has to be willing to take the first step.

The same way, if you're looking for a job - you'll take the first step to look for it. Without that first step - you're not going to get anywhere.


Allaah Almighty knows best.


Peace.
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 01:46 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
We believe that the people who are looking for the truth, Allaah Almighty will guide them to it. But the person who is in search of it has to be willing to take the first step.

The same way, if you're looking for a job - you'll take the first step to look for it. Without that first step - you're not going to get anywhere.


Allaah Almighty knows best.


Peace.
this makes sense.
but in that case, wouldn't you wait for a non-muslim to take the first step by asking a muslim about islam, rather then telling him before he takes that step?
since i live in the u.s. i have never been bothered by muslims, but i've sure had a lot of christians bang on my door. if i wanted to learn about christianity, i would take the first step by looking for different churches in the phone book and then going to them, wouldn't i? since i don't, why do they knock on my door to tell me about jesus when i have shown no interest whatsoever.
a side note - personally i find islam interesting, which is why i'm here and read about it; for some reason - probably because i live in a majority christian country, and therefore can't escape it entirely - i have never found christianity even mildly interesting.
Reply

- Qatada -
07-30-2006, 02:53 PM
Hi snakelegs.


I've seen a site a few months back, a christian site - where they were saying that if you believe in the divinity of Jesus (peace be upon him) - you'll win a free Playstation 2. lol.. i'm not saying all christians are like that - but it seemed like the were buying people to enter their faith.


However, in islam - it is only our duty as people, and even for the messengers of Allaah to convey the message to the people, not to buy them into the faith. But to convey to them that none should be worshipped except their Creator Alone, and to warn them of the day of judgement. After this, the person who recieves the message can choose to apply that within their lifestyle, or regret it on the day when a person won't be able to turn back. If the person accepts it - then their law is established within the Qur'an and Sunnah.

If we don't convey the message, we are guilty of not warning the people. But at the same time, there's no compulsion in religion.. even though hell is the default destination for the ones who disbelieve, so the only real option is to accept that Allaah is ones Creator and that everyone should obey Him Alone.


I know it may seem harsh, but why should a person be rewarded with paradise, if they don't even accept that one should obey their Creator, and not just that - but if they don't even believe in paradise? The same way, why should a person be given a position at work, if he/she doesn't even obey the manager or boss? The boss would choose to fire the person, and remove the pay cheques that the person recieves. The same way, Allaah will remove the blessings for the disbeliever in the hereafter - even though through the Mercy of Allaah - the disbeliever is still being provided for within this world (when easily, Allaah could have removed those blessings.)


Allaah Almighty knows best


Peace.
Reply

bint_muhammed
07-30-2006, 03:03 PM
[QUOTE=snakelegs;426874]this makes sense.
but in that case, wouldn't you wait for a non-muslim to take the first step by asking a muslim about islam, rather then telling him before he takes that step?
since i live in the u.s. i have never been bothered by muslims, but i've sure had a lot of christians bang on my door. if i wanted to learn about christianity, i would take the first step by looking for different churches in the phone book and then going to them, wouldn't i? since i don't, why do they knock on my door to tell me about jesus when i have shown no interest whatsoever.
a side note - personally i find islam interesting, which is why i'm here and read about it; for some reason - probably because i live in a majority christian country, and therefore can't escape it entirely - i have never found christianity even mildly interesting.[/QUOTE

what do you find intresting about islam?
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-30-2006, 05:33 PM
Hi Snakelegs,
Originally Posted by snakelegs
can it be possible that life after death is true and not true at the same time?
i do not know whether there is life after death or not - and it really doesn't matter to me.
But I am not asking about what you know or what you don't know, I'm asking is it logically possible?

The rest of your response is essentially that nothing can be known 100% for certain. That's true. You do not know for certain if anything beyond your mind even exists. That's solipsism. But I already responded to this with the very simple answer, "So what?" It is no surprise that nothing can be known for certain. But human beings routinely go with the most plausible explanation throughout their lives, even though it cannot be objectively demonstrated with 100% certainty. Scientists do not know for certain whether theory A is true or whether theory B is true but they look for the theory that provides the most plausible explanation. If scientists just backed off saying, "I don't know [for certain], I don't know [for certain]" we wouldn't have made any of the scientific or technological we have made. In law, evidence is used to convict the accused though it can never be proven with 100% certainty. It is entirely possible that a pink dragon flew out of the sky and carried the accused to the scene of the crime, put his fingerprints on the weapons and killed the victim, and then digitally edited security cameras to frame the accused. It is possible, but it is not plausible so it is rejected. What would we think of a jury or an inquisitorial judge who backed off a verdict from a case saying that it was impossible to know with 100% certainty? Is it acceptable for a Medical physician to refuse to diagnose patients saying, "It is most likely disease A, but it is entirely possible that my patient is actually a martian species in disguise as a human, in which case it could be an unknown disease. Since it is impossible for me to known with 100% certainty I will refrain from making any conclusion even if one option is massively more reasonable and likely than the others."

So saying, "Nothing can be known with 100% certainty" is not an excuse to reject a logical investigation for the most plausible answer. It doesn't work.
there are many things that are unknowable to logic and reason - which does not mean that they are untrue, or less true - only that you can not know this things by the same way as you can know that a snake sheds his skin.
Actually EVERYTHING is unknowable as per your position. You don't know if a snake sheds his skin with 100% certainty because you do not know if snakes even exist. How do you know that it was not really a gorilla disguised as a snake? How do you know that the researchers were not manipulated by some giant blue beluga whale which created these holographic images of snakes or created an illusion in the mind of researchers? How do you know that our entire universe is not a figment of your imagination? You don't know. Why don't you be agnostic about everything?
i am comfortable with living in a world where there are many many things that are unknowable.
How do you know you are living in a world? How do you know that your entire life is part of an artificial intelligence computer simulation? You think you exist but in reality you may just be numbers on someone's computer screen.

ansar, this is not at all comparable. in court, i do not have to prove my innocence - the court is obliged to prove me guilty. this it does by proving solid evidence, calling in forensic experts to testify, gather testimonies from witnesses etc.
so of course, you could not say that "it was true for me" because in order to convict you the court will provide evidence.
So you are saying that evidence determines what is true? I thought you said earlier that any belief we hold is true for us?
what's true for the mundane is not necessarily so for the spiritual or religious realm. "saw him stab her and here is blood on the jacket he was wearing" is totally different from "muhammad was the last prophet".
In what way?! Either the accused did not stab her or he did. Either Muhammad was not the person he claimed to be, or he was. Why do you accept logical argument and circumstantial evidence in the case of the former but not the latter? You are simply asserting that the cases are different but you aren't demonstrating how.
" Do you think this is politically acceptable? Do you expect a President to excuse his lying to his country by saying, 'It was true for me!''"
this is another absurd question.
It is absurd because logic clearly dictates an answer! We ACCEPT that either he is telling the truth or he is lying. Either his statements are in accordance with fact or they are not.

And btw, I was not necessarily referring to GWB!
if you read what you have written, you will see that the answer is contained in your statement. it is not the same thing as the one who BELIEVES that there is life after
death
. it is a belief so in order for me to think that it is the truth, i have to be willing to believe that is is truth.
But you didn't answer my challenge. You told me that these apparently contradictory beliefs boil down to the same thing, so I challenged you to prove that in this case.

As for the above comment, our beliefs should be guided by logical investigation. If a person believes they are a bird, they will end up in a mental institute, even though for them it is 'true' that they are a bird but for everyone of sound mind it is not!!

of course my beliefs about god are not plausible to you - why should they be???
But snakelegs, logic is not something subjective. It is objectively verifiable. So if your beliefs about God are not logical, they won't be logical to me or to anyone else.
my brain tells me that we are speaking of things that are unknowable.
It is unknowable for you that your entire city it a group of extraterrestrial species that have lived on this planet for centuries disguised as humans and are not planning to eat you the moment you set foot outside your house. I don't think you would accept this because it is not plausible.

the words and phrases ""WILFULLY REJECTING ANY ATTEMPT TO GAIN KNOWLEDGE", "WHY BE SATISFIED WITH IGNORANCE?", "USING THE TERM AGNOSTIC TO LEGITIMIZE ESCAPISM", "PLEADING IGNORANCE", and, my very favorite, "YOUR CASE IS WORSE (than the atheist) BECAUSE NOT ONLY DON'T YOU KNOW, BUT YOU DON"T WANT TO KNOW!
are nothing but your judgements of me.
No they are my rational arguments against your position. I am criticising your position on this issue; I don't understand why you have to take it personally.
" Is is logical to believe that logic should not be used?"
of course, since i believe that there are certain things that can not be knowable logically!
I didn't ask if you believed that or not, I asked if it was logical. You can't say that it is logical that logic should not be used - that is self-contradictory!!

EVERYTHING I HAVE WRITTEN IS NOTHING MORE THAN MY SPECIFIC BELIEFS AS AN AGNOSTIC - AND WHY SHOULD ANYONE CARE WHAT SOME
STRANGER IN CALIFORNIA BELIEVES???????????
Please - caps imply shouting.
and now, the time has come for ice cream. you do believe in ice cream, don't you?
It is possible that some ice cream companies are actually part of a conspiracy which grinds snails and worms into thin paste for the production of ice cream in order to slowly spread disease amongst the human race and eventually wipe it out in preparation for a mass invasion of aliens from jupiter. I don't know [with 100% certainty]! ;)

Regards
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 08:48 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Hi snakelegs.

I've seen a site a few months back, a christian site - where they were saying that if you believe in the divinity of Jesus (peace be upon him) - you'll win a free Playstation 2. lol.. i'm not saying all christians are like that - but it seemed like the were buying people to enter their faith.

yes, i know that. thanks to tv evangelicism, they are extrememly well funded, and some do try to win converts by buying them. in fact, many indian hindus are quite upset about missionaries doing this in india.

However, in islam - it is only our duty as people, and even for the messengers of Allaah to convey the message to the people, not to buy them into the faith. But to convey to them that none should be worshipped except their Creator Alone, and to warn them of the day of judgement. After this, the person who recieves the message can choose to apply that within their lifestyle, or regret it on the day when a person won't be able to turn back. If the person accepts it - then their law is established within the Qur'an and Sunnah.
i know and accept that this is your belief. but that is not the same as believing that god will guide them if they want to know and are willing to take the first step. you have done your duty and warned me about the day of judgement. as an agnostic, i don't believe that it is knowable whether there is or is not a judgement - all i know is that is what many people believe and that's perfectly fine with me. so once a muslim has don his duty and shown somebody about islam, he has fulfilled his obligation, hasn't he?
the person who is interested enough to learn about islam (which does not necessarily imply that he is interested in becoming a muslim - i'm not interesting in becoming anything) - will take that first step. if a muslim does his religious duty (doesn't wait for that first step), actually, according to islam, he is putting that person in more danger on judgement day because if the person knows about islam and fails to embrace it he will go to hell for sure.

If we don't convey the message, we are guilty of not warning the people. But at the same time, there's no compulsion in religion.. even though hell is the default destination for the ones who disbelieve, so the only real option is to accept that Allaah is ones Creator and that everyone should obey Him Alone.

I know it may seem harsh, but why should a person be rewarded with paradise, if they don't even accept that one should obey their Creator, and not just that - but if they don't even believe in paradise? The same way, why should a person be given a position at work, if he/she doesn't even obey the manager or boss? The boss would choose to fire the person, and remove the pay cheques that the person recieves. The same way, Allaah will remove the blessings for the disbeliever in the hereafter - even though through the Mercy of Allaah - the disbeliever is still being provided for within this world (when easily, Allaah could have removed those blessings.
i don't want, - let alone expect - to go to paradise, since i believe that the existence of paradise is not knowable. your analogy of god being like the boss at work is not really an analogy. i know all to well that my boss is my boss. i do not know that god is my boss because i believe he is unknowable. i also know that this is your belief and i respect that.

Allaah Almighty knows best

Peace.
"Allaah Almighty knows best" - this is also what i believe!!
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 08:55 PM
Originally Posted by ya_Giney
what do you find intresting about islam?
ya_giney,
i will send you a PM about this later because i've already explained several times on this forum, why and how i came to be interested in islam. if it turns out that other people want to hear it, i'll post what i write to you. otherwise i don't want to subject people to it yet again (it would be like cold french fries lol) - fair enough?
Reply

- Qatada -
07-30-2006, 09:13 PM
Hi snakelegs.


Yeah i do understand that we don't have the ability to see Allaah Almighty, nor do we have the chance to talk to Him directly. But obviously, if Allaah was to show His Majesty to us, then there would be no test of faith in this world anyways.


The first description that Allaah mentions of a believer in the Qur'an is:


This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah; (2:2)

Who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them; (2:3)


Hence - it is part of our belief to believe in the unseen, and this is part of our test. If we were to see Allaah Almighty, paradise and hell - then obviously everyone would know the the truth for an assurety. And then there would be no test.

However, the signs of this world are endless to prove that the Creator hasn't just made this world without a purpose, and with every good in this world - there is an evil, and with every evil - there may be a form of good.


You may see a person with soo much wealth, that you wish you could be him/her. Yet you realise that the person is always in constant danger of his wealth being taken away from him/her, even if it costs his or her life. That is a goodness (the wealth) - but the person is in constant danger, so there is a negative aspect to it too.

Just think about anything good you got in this world, and you'll always see a negative aspect always linked to it.


Now refer to something negative in this world. Let's say, a person is being punished in this world. Now to some who don't know the truth, this may be a form of remorse. However - from the one who is being tortured's point of view (if he/she is muslim), he/she may be feeling happy that if they remain patient and steadfast - they will be rewarded with something better on the Day of Judgement/Account, and even within this world later.

Or lets say a person wasn't wealthy enough, and had a really low income. They government may let them off so that they don't have to pay taxes. Whereas for the rich person - they may have to pay a high amount of tax. The government may even allow this poorer person have benefits.

So you see how negative aspects like this can turn into positive in some ways.



The reason there is a mixture of both within a good and a negative aspect is because Allaah Almighty is showing us that everything in this world is only temporary, and everything whether its good or bad will end. All the things within this world are just a taster, so when you enjoy something good - you get a taster of how it feels like to have enjoyment. (i.e. a taster to show how enjoyment will be in paradise forever.)

Whereas if a person has a hard or sad time, they know that the agony that they go through - harms them. Hence, the person realises that this agony is just a taster of the agony of hellfire.


People experience these emotions as tasters, so they realise that i don't want to be in agony forever - so i don't want to go to hell. And i love enjoyment, so i want to be in paradise forever. These two extremes are only in the afterlife, whereas the agony in this world may end with enjoyment, and the enjoyment in this world may end with sadness.



By the way - the reason we have to convey the message is because it is part of our duty to warn anyone who is ignorant of the truth. We don't know the outcome, hence we just have to try to fulfill our duty of conveying the message. After that - it is between the person, and Allaah. If the person was sincere in searching for the truth, then Allaah may guide that person aright. Whereas if the person is just looking for an excuse to turn away - then the person may not end up being guided.

The promise satan made when he disobeyed Allaah (due to arrogance) was - "I'll misguide all of them (children of Aadam) except the sincere ones." [something similar to that] - hence we realise that the ones who are sincere will end up in paradise.


Allaah Almighty says in the Qur'an:


O ye who believe! Enter into Islam whole-heartedly; and follow not the footsteps of the evil one; for he is to you an avowed enemy. (Qur'an 2:208)


If you have anymore questions, or don't understand what i said - please do ask. :)


Allaah Almighty knows best.


Peace.
Reply

snakelegs
07-30-2006, 09:23 PM
hi ansar,
i apologize for the caps - i know they show anger and at the time, i wanted to show anger - i was frustrated and irritable (at my self) for wasting so much time trying to have a communication that i knew was impossible from the beginning.
you, yourself, wrote in your previous reply:

"at any rate, it should be clear if you restrict the use of logic there is no point in my discussing this issue with you. It's much like solipsism, actually. There is no way to convince someone who believes in it that he is the only thing that exists. Its imposing on yourself a blindfold that you are unwilling to remove. That doesn't mean you won't be accountable for putting that blindfold on in the first place, though."

i agree completely and i had told you in the beginning that this is completely pointless. we come from completely different frames of reference so it is impossible to communicate because we speak 2 different languages. i do not think that you or islam are wrong and my agnosticism is also neither right or wrong and unlike you, i am not motivated to argue because i am not trying to convince you of anything whatsoever. you can't have a debate with someone who does not disagree with you.
i am not going to pick this post apart like i have the other ones and resond to your comments one by one because you and i already agree that this discussion is completely pointless! we are trying to compare apples and oranges.

you are motivated because you want to convince me that you are right but i have no desire to convince you that you are wrong and i am right.
so i am ending this discussion but will live you with a moral of the story:next time, believe it when an agnostic tells you that he is an agnostic because he doesn't know and thinks some things are unknowable!

peace.
p.s. i realize that you were not necessarily thinking of GWB - but who else would come immediately to mind when pondering a president who is a liar? ;D

Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
Hi Snakelegs,

But I am not asking about what you know or what you don't know, I'm asking is it logically possible?

The rest of your response is essentially that nothing can be known 100% for certain. That's true. You do not know for certain if anything beyond your mind even exists. That's solipsism. But I already responded to this with the very simple answer, "So what?" It is no surprise that nothing can be known for certain. But human beings routinely go with the most plausible explanation throughout their lives, even though it cannot be objectively demonstrated with 100% certainty. Scientists do not know for certain whether theory A is true or whether theory B is true but they look for the theory that provides the most plausible explanation. If scientists just backed off saying, "I don't know [for certain], I don't know [for certain]" we wouldn't have made any of the scientific or technological we have made. In law, evidence is used to convict the accused though it can never be proven with 100% certainty. It is entirely possible that a pink dragon flew out of the sky and carried the accused to the scene of the crime, put his fingerprints on the weapons and killed the victim, and then digitally edited security cameras to frame the accused. It is possible, but it is not plausible so it is rejected. What would we think of a jury or an inquisitorial judge who backed off a verdict from a case saying that it was impossible to know with 100% certainty? Is it acceptable for a Medical physician to refuse to diagnose patients saying, "It is most likely disease A, but it is entirely possible that my patient is actually a martian species in disguise as a human, in which case it could be an unknown disease. Since it is impossible for me to known with 100% certainty I will refrain from making any conclusion even if one option is massively more reasonable and likely than the others."

So saying, "Nothing can be known with 100% certainty" is not an excuse to reject a logical investigation for the most plausible answer. It doesn't work.

Actually EVERYTHING is unknowable as per your position. You don't know if a snake sheds his skin with 100% certainty because you do not know if snakes even exist. How do you know that it was not really a gorilla disguised as a snake? How do you know that the researchers were not manipulated by some giant blue beluga whale which created these holographic images of snakes or created an illusion in the mind of researchers? How do you know that our entire universe is not a figment of your imagination? You don't know. Why don't you be agnostic about everything?

How do you know you are living in a world? How do you know that your entire life is part of an artificial intelligence computer simulation? You think you exist but in reality you may just be numbers on someone's computer screen.


So you are saying that evidence determines what is true? I thought you said earlier that any belief we hold is true for us?

In what way?! Either the accused did not stab her or he did. Either Muhammad was not the person he claimed to be, or he was. Why do you accept logical argument and circumstantial evidence in the case of the former but not the latter? You are simply asserting that the cases are different but you aren't demonstrating how.

It is absurd because logic clearly dictates an answer! We ACCEPT that either he is telling the truth or he is lying. Either his statements are in accordance with fact or they are not.

And btw, I was not necessarily referring to GWB!

But you didn't answer my challenge. You told me that these apparently contradictory beliefs boil down to the same thing, so I challenged you to prove that in this case.

As for the above comment, our beliefs should be guided by logical investigation. If a person believes they are a bird, they will end up in a mental institute, even though for them it is 'true' that they are a bird but for everyone of sound mind it is not!!


But snakelegs, logic is not something subjective. It is objectively verifiable. So if your beliefs about God are not logical, they won't be logical to me or to anyone else.

It is unknowable for you that your entire city it a group of extraterrestrial species that have lived on this planet for centuries disguised as humans and are not planning to eat you the moment you set foot outside your house. I don't think you would accept this because it is not plausible.


No they are my rational arguments against your position. I am criticising your position on this issue; I don't understand why you have to take it personally.

I didn't ask if you believed that or not, I asked if it was logical. You can't say that it is logical that logic should not be used - that is self-contradictory!!


Please - caps imply shouting.

It is possible that some ice cream companies are actually part of a conspiracy which grinds snails and worms into thin paste for the production of ice cream in order to slowly spread disease amongst the human race and eventually wipe it out in preparation for a mass invasion of aliens from jupiter. I don't know [with 100% certainty]! ;)

Regards
Reply

bint_muhammed
07-30-2006, 09:41 PM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
ya_giney,
i will send you a PM about this later because i've already explained several times on this forum, why and how i came to be interested in islam. if it turns out that other people want to hear it, i'll post what i write to you. otherwise i don't want to subject people to it yet again (it would be like cold french fries lol) - fair enough?
sorry! pm would be great!
Reply

united
07-30-2006, 09:51 PM
Originally Posted by wilberhum

I basically have two beliefs.
There is a god.
No one has any knowledge about him.
holding on to the premise that no one has any knowledge about God means that you are not keeping an open mind.
Reply

wilberhum
07-30-2006, 11:59 PM
Originally Posted by united
holding on to the premise that no one has any knowledge about God means that you are not keeping an open mind.
Provide me with a concept that the majority of the world accepts, and I will look at it.
Reply

julie
07-31-2006, 01:57 AM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
Originally Posted by julie
whoever WANTS to know God, Insha Allah God will guide him/her.

come to think of it, if one believes this to be true (which i do also),
why is there any need to proselytize??? :giggling:
Personally I think that is necessary so that the individual who havent been a Muslim will be introduced to Islam and then it's left for the individual if he/she find it interesting or not. At least he/she has heard of what Islam is about so that they have no one to blame later.

God exists and God will not created all of these for nothing.
Reply

syilla
07-31-2006, 02:12 AM
getting to know Allah...is such a wonderful feeling...
being nearer to Allah...is the best feeling ever...

Thats why in Islam...Salah is important...as it like 'dating' with someone you love. You will always miss him and wanted to be close with him. And for someone that done salah perfectly... he always wants to Salah...and wake up in the middle of the night...just to do salah.

Being close to him...you will feel safe and sound.
Reply

julie
07-31-2006, 03:48 AM
Why mentioning 'dating'? Are you influenced by my another post about 'dating'? Hehe.

Anyway which part in Malaysia are you from? How old are you? Nice to meet fellow Malaysia here.
Reply

snakelegs
07-31-2006, 06:29 AM
Originally Posted by julie
Personally I think that is necessary so that the individual who havent been a Muslim will be introduced to Islam and then it's left for the individual if he/she find it interesting or not. At least he/she has heard of what Islam is about so that they have no one to blame later.

God exists and God will not created all of these for nothing.
ok, i accept that.
actually, later i realized that my comment was uncalled for, because i know very well that once a person reverts, he is immediately forgiven for whatever he's said and done in the past, and i would be too. i'm glad you gave me the chance to say this. (hehe because i'm vain and egotistical! :giggling: :giggling: :giggling: )
Reply

julie
07-31-2006, 11:07 AM
So you like to giggle huh? It's cute. Hehe.

Why being vain? Vain for what?
Reply

snakelegs
08-01-2006, 05:07 AM
it seems that you have taken offense and i am very sorry. it was not my intention to offend anyone. the giggles were at myself - i was making fun of myself. sometimes i have a strange sense of humour. i would never deliberately make fun of someone else's religion.
Reply

julie
08-01-2006, 04:07 PM
Never mind. I also joined an apostate forum and they're far more offensive. u r not even near. good for u.
Reply

GARY
08-09-2006, 09:29 AM
Wow. Snakelegs, Ansar, wilberhum, and others. I started this thread a week ago and then have been busy until now, thank you all for your input. Many interesting thoughts, thank you all. Of course in the fashion of my newfound realization of my own agnostic mind, after reading all of these contributions, I find that.....I don't know. I believe in God, and I don't know.
I would have to disagree with the doctor though when he suggests that agnostics are lazy and use the "I dunno" as an easy way out. This is first no different than claiming all muslims think the same way on any topic, we know it is not true. Second, my own experience has been a lifetime of searching for what God is all about, not a lazy easy way out, yet here I am after all this time, finally being honest with myself and saying "I just don't know". And you know what, it feels good to just say it.
I certainly have not come to this point from being lazy, and would have words for Dr. Brown if he projected this view on me.
Reply

north_malaysian
08-09-2006, 09:36 AM
Originally Posted by syilla
getting to know Allah...is such a wonderful feeling...
being nearer to Allah...is the best feeling ever...

Thats why in Islam...Salah is important...as it like 'dating' with someone you love. You will always miss him and wanted to be close with him. And for someone that done salah perfectly... he always wants to Salah...and wake up in the middle of the night...just to do salah.

Being close to him...you will feel safe and sound.
"To know God, is to love God"
Reply

Eric H
08-09-2006, 11:24 AM
Greetings and peace be with you all,

I have just come across this thread for the first time, and looking back on my life I could probably have described myself as agnostic until about the age of fifty.

I believed there was a God, but I was never really inspired me to do anything about my beliefs.

The nagging thoughts that seemed to bother me the most, was if and only if God really existed totally and fully, then he has to be the most important thing in this universe.

If and only If God really exists then I have to do something.

The difference between belief and faith is doing something.

In the spirit of journeying together with people of all faiths

Eric
Reply

Liibaan
08-10-2006, 10:35 AM
I used to be agnostic. My parents(my father is catholic and my mum is protestant) raised me without religion. During my teen years, I was an atheist. I believed that since I cannot see God, He must not exist. And the wars fought over the years over religion also led me to believe that God would not allow such a thing to happen, but since they did happen, there must be no God. As I got older, I started to think about how the Earth was born. Everything in the universe, including the universe itself, has a beginning, and a subsequent end. I began to wonder, how did the universe begin? It certainly didn't create itself. I also thought about how life began. We certainly didn't create ourselves, and never has anyone seen something come from nothing. This universe was obviously created, and it was obviously created by Someone who has a whole hell of a lot more power than any one of us. And finally, I started thinking....what if hell really exists? And what if I would have to go there for all eternity? Just because I didn't have definitive proof of it's existence didn't mean that it wasn't a possibility. This question sometimes made it hard for me to sleep. But basically at the time, I was smoking a lot of weed and didn't really delve further into the subject more than that, and it was later that I would learn about Islam, and while you could say I found Islam, but the truth is, Islam found me. Insha Allah I will post my story on how I became a Muslim in another thread.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
08-10-2006, 03:17 PM
Hi Gary
Originally Posted by GARY
I would have to disagree with the doctor though when he suggests that agnostics are lazy and use the "I dunno" as an easy way out.
He didn't say they are 'lazy' he said they are 'disinterested'. When you start talking to an agnostic about scripture and religion, they seldom are interested in listening - though you're right that they aren't all the same.
yet here I am after all this time, finally being honest with myself and saying "I just don't know".
And what that really means is "I don't know [with 100% certainty]". Well it turns out that there is nothing one can know with 100% certainty, as I pointed out to snakelegs in my last post.

Peace.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-10-2012, 11:17 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-11-2012, 07:13 PM
  3. Replies: 135
    Last Post: 09-10-2007, 12:48 PM
  4. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-04-2007, 05:37 PM
  5. Replies: 64
    Last Post: 02-19-2007, 01:23 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!