Imagine ...

imagination is very antagonistic to atheism...
but a reply to the OP.. I guess I'll take my chances..

all the best

format_quote Originally Posted by glo

This morning, as I was brushing my teeth, this thought popped into my head, and I decided to share it with you here.

It is not true to any doctrine, and it is not meant to be. It may sound heretic to some, but that is not my intention.
This is really just me letting my imagination roam.

So, imagine …



I wonder, would we pass the test?

Thats the beauty of the imagination, It has the will to roam in many places it likes, even illogical places

format_quote Originally Posted by Alpha Jr

We shuldnt say illogical cus it's possible she [glo] might become a muslim and change,you can never predict,only Allah knows what is to happen to us. U never know.

Thankyou for your point Alpha and Yes I understand your point, Maybe Allah SWT is allowing Glo's Mind to ask questions which will lead her to the truth InshAllah.

format_quote Originally Posted by coddles76

Thankyou for your point Alpha and Yes I understand your point, Maybe Allah SWT is allowing Glo's Mind to ask questions which will lead her to the truth InshAllah.

I believe that God is guiding me all the time.
I am on a wonderful journey to get to know him more and more every day. Where it leads me I don't know, but I know that I am in his safe hands.

At times I may wander and stray, stumble and fall - but God will always be there to pick me up and carry me on.

Peace

format_quote Originally Posted by AntiKarateKid

And I fully agree with your post. But back on topic, you understand my disagreement with what you called "instigating deceit?"

I understand that you would not want to call it that. But, yes, I am serious, if I take the Qur'an at face value (and even more so when read in the light of Islamic commentary on the passage), that particular verse sounds to me like Allah is perpetrating a deception on those who to whom it was made to appear that Isa had been crucified when he had not been. You may think that Allah was justified in what he did. I am not debating whether or not it was justified or reasonable, only that to me, for whatever reason it took place, the event itself still amounts to a deception. But I do understand that we are just going to see that differently.



I'm curious what you might think of my initial post in this thread where I suggested that Christianity need not be seen as an exclusivist religion?

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker

I understand that you would not want to call it that. But, yes, I am serious, if I take the Qur'an at face value (and even more so when read in the light of Islamic commentary on the passage), that particular verse sounds to me like Allah is perpetrating a deception on those who to whom it was made to appear that Isa had been crucified when he had not been. You may think that Allah was justified in what he did. I am not debating whether or not it was justified or reasonable, only that to me, for whatever reason it took place, the event itself still amounts to a deception. But I do understand that we are just going to see that differently.



I'm curious what you might think of my initial post in this thread where I suggested that Christianity need not be seen as an exclusivist religion?

Sorry for the late reply, I had final exams.

Anywhoo, Back to your post. Let's end this right now so it doesn't go back and forth aimlessly for several more pages.

You keep saying "deception," so lets see its definition.

Deception- act of convincing another to believe information that is not true

If you had read my posts, you can see that this definition is contrary to Islam. Allah doesn't convince people to believe something else. He works off what they already have. The righteous will come to the right conclusion, the wrongdoers will go astray.

For example, a man starts levitating and seems as if he can predict the future or control the weather. Wrongdoers will worship him. Believers will reject him. This situation is a play on the Islamic Dajjal event.

So the word deception is inappropriate here. On a sidenote, Allah can destroy while civilizations, test people by them being tortured by their enemies, but suddenly you have a problem with him using an illusion and letting people make up their own minds?

I'll get to your other post in a bit.

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker

The reason we keep going back and forth is because we my definition of "deception" is in keeping with that of standard English dictionaries. But as you say, such a definition, even if used by every available dictionary of the English language, is contrary to Islam. I'm sorry, but I don't think I'm going to change my definition. It is as you say, the act of convincing another to believe information that is not true. Now, according to the Qur'an, it is not true that Isa actually died on the cross. He only appeared that way. And it appeared this way because Allah convinced those who were present to belief information that was not true with regard to Isa. Yep, that fits my definition of deception. If you recognizes that this is what the word deception means, and further say that Allah did indeed to those things, but still says that Allah didn't actually deceive anyone by doing those very things that convinced people to believe something that was not true and that the word in inappropriate when the actions fit the very definition of deception, then I'm afraid you are also deceiving yourself.

Did you even read my post? You keep repeating the word "convinced" but as far as I can see, disbelievers and believers made up their own mind.

1. The word deception is not applicable here. You seem unable to accept that even after I showed you the proper definition, which you dismiss in favor of your conjured one.

2. Allah made it appear to them. The disbelievers who want to believe evil, believe it. Believers denied it. It is a punishment to the evildoers.

3. It is the flip side of a miracle. Disbelievers who want to believe the worst deny it and believers believe it.


I will tell you now that for what your argument lacks in substance, it makes up for in repetition. I have shown you that your view is simply wrong and suspect that this is an imaginary problem with Islam you conjure up in your mind to convince yourself that you have a moral reason to oppose it.

I used the word convinced because (1) you used that word in your definition and (2) the Qur'an says that Allah made it appear so. That sounds like convincing to me.



As for as it being a reason that I am opposed to Islam, it is not. I only got into this discussion because Malaikah mentioned that Allah would not deceive anyone. And for all of the exuces you've provided Allah saying that the people didn't believe anyway. It still sounds like deception to me. And as I said, it sounds to me like you're willing to accept it and call it something else. But that doesn't make it so. If it wasn't Jesus who died on the cross, but Allah made it appear as if it were so, then Allah is the cause (not their unbelief) of them seeing what they saw. For surely Allah had it in his power to make it appear as it really was and chose not to. But you call it the flip side of a miracle. So be it. It is the miraclous deception of unbelievers so what is not true might appear to them as true.



And as far as being repeitious, you are correct, I can repeat that it is deception for as many times as you repeat that it is not. We differ as to what we think deception is and is not.

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker

I used the word convinced because (1) you used that word in your definition and (2) the Qur'an says that Allah made it appear so. That sounds like convincing to me.



As for as it being a reason that I am opposed to Islam, it is not. I only got into this discussion because Malaikah mentioned that Allah would not deceive anyone. And for all of the exuces you've provided Allah saying that the people didn't believe anyway. It still sounds like deception to me. And as I said, it sounds to me like you're willing to accept it and call it something else. But that doesn't make it so. If it wasn't Jesus who died on the cross, but Allah made it appear as if it were so, then Allah is the cause (not their unbelief) of them seeing what they saw. For surely Allah had it in his power to make it appear as it really was and chose not to. But you call it the flip side of a miracle. So be it. It is the miraclous deception of unbelievers so what is not true might appear to them as true.



And as far as being repeitious, you are correct, I can repeat that it is deception for as many times as you repeat that it is not. We differ as to what we think deception is and is not.

So making something appear so is convincing someone automatically? That's strange. If you saw a cow floating, you'd believe it can fly? or would you use your mind and question it? If you were a person inclined to believe such foolish things, you would decide to believe it and make up your own mind.

Your objection is very flawed.

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker

Making something appear so when it is not so is convincing.

Just answer these questions according to the Qur'an:

Was Jesus actually crucified?
Were there those to whom it was made to appear as if Jesus was crucified?
If so, who made it appear as if Jesus was crucified?

Whew. It's been a while. Sorry for the lateness Seeker. Summer got the best of me.

I hesitate to give the answer to the first one as It never mattered to me really whether he was crucified and survived but people thought him dead, or someone replaced him, or it never happened at all and was pure hearsay. So... I don't have the knowledge to answer.

As to the third one, seeing as how every event in the universe happens by Allah's permission I'd say it was Allah.

But think about this for a second. If a man knowingly allows a man to be hit by a car and be killed or get maimed, he is a murderer or sadistic. But when God allows it to happen, what is it? Nothing. Allah can do whatever he wants with us but has promised to be just and merciful. He is the judge and not the judged.

In this case, the disbelievers had a chance to reject the notion of Jesus dying but their own hatred and rebelliousness chose between the two option. Either Jesus died or he was alive. Allah simply provided them with the choice.

Besides, making something appear, is not necessarily convincing. Do you believe those magicians on TV actually make people dissappear? Of course not. If a man came to you and started floating with his eyes glowing, would you believe he was some sort of demigod? Or possessed?

Your belief as a Christian would rule out the former and opt for the latter. But a, hindu would have no qualms with the former because of what he has chosen to believe.

thought provoking posts ....A.K.K and G.S

...apologise for butting in

I wonder if it was a test to see whether one takes their 5 physical senses ie. sight,sound etc (on a what may be called materialistic basis)
or if they used their inner senses (ie the souls intellect and divine wisdom bestowed upon them ) to know and believe what they outwardly saw.

...so those using their 'inner senses' (as they were meant to) believed what God intended (ie. to know Jesus has not been crucified)
and those that used only their outer senses believed what they wanted- (ie. Jesus has been crucified) in effect they rejected their gift from God of their 'inner sense' which if they had chose to use they too would arrive at the same meaning God had intended for them to arrive at.

....wonder if that made sense ....i know what i mean but its a bit hard to put it into words.

format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah

That would necessitate that God lied to us and deceived us - and God if far removed from such things!

salams ukhtee.... and i agree with you.