Sikhism

[muslimah19]

i've heard that the reason we dont eat halal, is because your are chanting the name of God while you are killing an animal. killing is impure, blood and fear is in the room, panic scenes occour and while this happends, u say the Lords name..its like praying in the bathroom astagfarallah..

if you kill, be a man and do it in your own name .dont blasfemise Gods name by doing so..

Amardeep would you not agree that we need the nutritions provided animals? Would we nt become weak and frail? And if Allah has permitted it then how can this be wrong, bacause as you believe as long as you are worshipping your lord, then your are on the rite track are you nt?

2:173. He has forbidden you only carrion, and blood, and swine flesh, and that which has been immolated to (the name of) any other than Allah. But he who is driven by necessity, neither craving nor transgressing, it is no sin for him. Surely! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

We praise our lord by performing salah (prayer) and through the rectitation of the quran as well as obryin the commands of allah set in the quran.

I just got one query. I was reading a verse from the sggs in which is said someting along the lines of that if you do not believe in the guru you are somewhat in the wrong. Il try find the verse althouogh im sure if il succeed because i randomly chose any site.
Have u any idea what verse i am referring to.

I dont wish to cause any offence as this will lead to rivalry between all f us, which is not what i itend to do.

 

[Mohsin]

IS Dhillon, i think you are confused, i wasn't talking about our conversation debunking your statements, i was talking about the alleged scientific errors

moss: our scripture has a lot of science to, and most of the science in the quran has already been debunked. but i dont want to debate this at this thread.

My reply

Lol and those so called debunks have been debunked by muslims on live tyelevision infront of the whole world. There still remains to this one day not one scientific error, or any other contradiction in the Qur'an.

Several of these debates have happened in saudi arabia, and also several in america, the most famous one being by Dr Zakir Naik and Dr William Campbell. Dr Campbell is part of that anti-islamic website where i suppose most people see these alleged contradictions. After the debate the website was too embarressed to post the debate up and acknowledged it was an embarressing defeat. http://www.irf.net/irf/videogallery/index.htm

Amardeep said he disagreed with me he never said what I write is hard to follow but I suppose you have now debunked me in front of the whole world.

What????:?

For example christianity, they believe God has a son, that is blasphemic to God. Therefore there can only be one true way to God, no seconds

Ignore the above comment of mine, it came out all wrong.

“as reverts to islam are doing everyday left right and centre”

I don’t think so.

You can't deny this. http://www.menj.org/fastest/. Go to any mosque and you'll see how many reverts there are

and when you do reply answer the questions or at least say that I have answered all your questions instead of being annoyed that you could not debunk me.

Sorry, i dont think you have debunked my statements, but to you you obviously have since you don't believe in the law of non-contradiction and God is above logic, so i will stop there about that.

But you haven't provided any arguments to me as to why sikhism is superior, or a more righteous religion. Islam to me remains the truth, there are too many miracles to argue with, and you seem to have the same allegations against Islam that have been debunked elsewhere

 

[ISDhillon]

" the most famous one being by Dr Zakir Naik and Dr William Campbell. "

i actually saw this one the man looked like that norman kember guy and at the end of the debate he makes a rash statement about jesus having more witnesses or something like that. Anyway with respect to this debate do you think this debate was fair? do you think any debate that zakir has is fair? i certainly dont put him on this website or direct me to one of his websites i would like to debate with him.


"After the debate the website was too embarressed to post the debate up and acknowledged it was an embarressing defeat."

actually they did go to the answering islam website i think thats what its called but it doesnt matter because reading their responses they have made similar erors.



"You can't deny this. http://www.menj.org/fastest/. Go to any mosque and you'll see how many reverts there are"

when i look at people who come out of mosques the foreigners are mostly refugees although at uni many people started learning about islam but after three years they were back to partying it was a phase if anything even the kids born into muslim families are muslim by name and kaffir by nature be honest how many true muslims are their? and anyways you all have dozen kids and 3 wives lol:giggling:


"don't believe in the law of non-contradiction and God is above logic, so i will stop there about that."

oh i believe in the law on science not on god god will be the judge of you you can never use your mind to understand god and if scripture is a guide on how to live then good for you but my scripture isnt therefore logic has no purpose, when you a get older you will become wiser and realise all your babbling was in vain, logic is not important in religion. BTW do you actually listen to the argumenets by zakir or just clap because thats what everyone else is doing i find some of his arguments sickening:heated: .


"But you haven't provided any arguments to me as to why sikhism is superior, or a more righteous religion. "

because throughout history we have no bad record and thats the hallmarks of a good religion our religion does not bring us up to hate anyone that should be good enough for you ofcorse youll ask me for proof but then someone will have to invent a time machine.

Kind regards,

ISDhillon

 

[ISDhillon]

Muslimah ji let me guide you to this quote :

"What is important in mystical acts is that something happens. What is important in prophetic acts is that something is said ."

Abraham J. Herschel, "The Prophets"


We value the act more than the saying we need enlightenment not hope, think this is a fundamental difference between our 2 religions. That’s why I like the sufi side of islam:

"unlike nirvana which is merely the cessation of individuality the fana, passing away of the Sufi from his phenomenal existence involves baqa, the continuance of his real existence and personality. He who dies to self lives in God. And fana, the consummation of his death, marks the attainment of baqa, or union with the divine life."

The Mystics of Islam. 1921

I also find it hard to understand the female role of women in islam in comparison to the sikh tradition where all who are baptised are genderless and even warriors on the battlefield, when you here muslim scholars today talk about equality they confuse "same physically" with equality:

The prestigious Bayadavi in his authoritative commentary on the Koran, says that,


"Allah has preferred men to women in the matter of mental ability and their power for performance of duties"


-Anwar - ul - tanzil


Sheikh Mohammad Hussain Makhloof, the Mufti of Egypt, in a fatwa (1952) had declared that,


"There is no authority in Islamic social system for giving the women the right to vote and to be elected to Parliament owing to their inherently unstable nature, on the authority of Islamic law."


Just a thought,

ISDhillon:thankyou:

 

[Soldier2000]

Dhillion

Nothing but cryptic irrational statements emanates from your computer; it’s got so bad that you have finally managed to confuse yourself?

You willingly declare the death of logic, by denying the “Universal law of Non Contradiction” fail to relies, all you’re doing is cutting the very branch you’re sitting on, committing intellectual Hare Kari.

But then again I suppose I cannot be blame you, as it (i.e. coming intellectual suicide) is the only way you can explicate the doctrines of your religion, the only way you can justify to us that contradictions are O.K, the only way you can accept falsehood as the truth!

You refused to acknowledge my advise and stop all verbal and written communications and started participating in debates again -

Congratulations Moss, you have finally manage to ask the question that exposes the hypocrisy of Mr Dhillion-

You asked him what he would do if he was born in another religion- and his answer …

“however if I started learning about another faith I would have to use my logic to first verify scriptural truth”

…reflects the qualities that God has blessed us with i.e. use our intelligence to distinguished truth form falsehood, but also highlights the sheer hypocrisy of Mr Dhillion-

You See Dhillion, I have read through your endeavours on this thread, through out which you have denied logic, or the use of logic to distinguish divine revelations from a fake one- and now informing us all, that you will use your logic-

Post # 56

Dhillion Said

“Divine essence therefore does not have a mind it is not reasonable or rational so therefore applying reason to practicing Sikhism is a misnomer,”

If that’s the philosophy adopted in Sikhism then why would any one want to convert to Sikhism-

The only reason one would choose to convert to Sikhism is if one believed that it was the truth- how the hell can one establish the truth in Sikhism, if Sikhism prevented one from applying reason?


Post # 68

When challenged with the contradictory nature of God in Sikhism our friend Dhillion use the following smokescreen-

"Again you need to make a paradigm shift when studying Sikhism your applying a tool of interpretation which has a premise which contradicts the self-definition of Sikhism".

Now how is this consistent with your statement

“however if I started learning about another faith I would have to use my logic to first verify scriptural truth”

The paradigm shifts that you talk about only leads you to believe in an impossible GOD-

Post # 114

Dhillion Said

"we as humans cannot distinguish between truth and falsehood

truth has no opposite because truth in Sikhism is a concrete entity (spirit) it is not a claim"

Post # 122

“truth does not have an opposite so then how can anyhthing be false”

again this is inconsistent with

“however if I started learning about another faith I would have to use my logic to first verify scriptural truth

Post 116

"Mr Dhillions line of thinking anihilates logic and reason, so he is accepting the counter arguments against him as the truth-"

Dhillion Responded

WELL DONE THATS CALLED POSTMODERNISM AND LOGIC AND REASON HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR DOCTRINE BUT THAT DOES NOT MAKE ANYONE IDIOTS IT JUST MAKES THEM AWARE OF THE SIKH POSITION.

Again this exposes your hypocrisy Dhillion

Please Visit Website http://www.geocities.com/islam_sikhism/

A new article has been posted titled “the impossible God”

 

[Mohsin]

Can you tell me what poor arguments Dr Naik uses

 

[KAding]

Amardeep would you not agree that we need the nutritions provided animals? Would we nt become weak and frail?

Just as an offtopic remark. No we do not need meat. There are many vegetarians all over the world and they are living long and healthy lives.

Meat is a luxury, not a necessity.

 

[muslimah19]

"What is important in mystical acts is that something happens. What is important in prophetic acts is that something is said ."

Abraham J. Herschel, "The Prophets"

But what you do not realise is that the prophecies came true. Now you can either find out for yourself by checking out various islamic website, or i can give you one. But im afraid this res[onse will have to be short coz i have to go in a few mins. Let me know.

We value the act more than the saying we need enlightenment not hope,

What act are you referring to? The purpose of life is to become one with god. But u said yourself one cannot attain the spirutuality guru nank reache, but if that is the height of pure belief, and as idividuals cannot obtain taht, then what is our goal then? The acts the our prophet (pbuh) performed were for the sake of the poeple of the time. Ignorance prevailed, and people wanted proof, therefore allah allowed them to witness miracles. That is what made people realise, that he truely was the messenger of allah.

And im not even going to lie and say i know about sufism. My belief are that we have been given the quran as guidance, and the traditions of the prophet (pbuh) to follow. I will never call myself a sufi, sunni, shia etc etc. Is that one believes in the day of judgement and the other doesnt? NO, We are all muslims. So by al means agree with any tradition you feel relates to sikhism, but the bottom line is that they are abiding by Allahs book, The quran.


Now abour the strangth of women and men. Whome do you thikn is stronger? On the battle field Whome do you think will be stronger? Back in the days of the Prophet (pbuh) there were women who also went out on jihad. Not because they felt they had the muscle power to defeat man, but purely to by fighting in the cause of allah, to defend their religion.

So now im going to say to you, if you are a king and are to have a great battle, would you send both your men and women? Who would lookafter the kids? And would you say to to half the men to stay at home and let their women to go out and fight. Would you want to decrease the muscle power, or rather man power?


"Allah has preferred men to women in the matter of mental ability and their power for performance of duties"


Can you plz give me the chapter and verse number of this exact verse.



Sheikh Mohammad Hussain Makhloof, the Mufti of Egypt, in a fatwa (1952) had declared that,


"There is no authority in Islamic social system for giving the women the right to vote and to be elected to Parliament owing to their inherently unstable nature, on the authority of Islamic law."

Just a thought,

What is your point i dont understand?

 

[amardeep]

muslimah19
Amardeep would you not agree that we need the nutritions provided animals? Would we nt become weak and frail? And if Allah has permitted it then how can this be wrong, bacause as you believe as long as you are worshipping your lord, then your are on the rite track are you nt?


this is not an argument. the human body contains more than 10 kilos of protein so why dont u eat humans for the nutrition? is it allowed to eat monkeys, horses, camels, lions, bears etc in Islam? they contain nutrition to..

I just got one query. I was reading a verse from the sggs in which is said someting along the lines of that if you do not believe in the guru you are somewhat in the wrong. Il try find the verse althouogh im sure if il succeed because i randomly chose any site.
Have u any idea what verse i am referring to.

im not sure...if it says so there is a meaning to it, and the entire context has to be read. but yes let me see the verse and i'll try to search for the meaning of the verse.

Okay you do not believe in logic. N you do not believe in miracles. Whether you want to call it a miracle or you want to call it proof, either way the signs are there.

i do belive in logic. sikhism is all about logic, there is not one single rule or anytihng that has nothing to do with logic. our Guru Nanak said that a rule without logic behind it is just an empty ritual.

and i do belive in miracles also, they happen every day. but a miracle again is not what should attract one to a religion, as miracles are just a cheap way of fooling people.

Iblees was not an angel, he was a jinn. They were created before man himelf except they are nt mad of clay, but are made of smokeless fire. He had such obedience for allah, but when told to bow down to adam (pbuh), he thought he was an superior creation to adam (pbuh).

thanks for clearing that out sister.

Does that make sense?? If not can explain better, sorry if your confused in any way.

yes it does. the Guru Granth Sahab, the ohly scripture of the sikhs, cant be translated into english either as it gives a lot of flaws..

but shirk in islam is the major sin, So why would allah have allowed this to happen. This initself is a ssin, as you are imlyin the allmighty did not know the intention of this messenger whome he had chosen. How can you say such a lie about your creator? Im not sayin you in particular have done or havnt done, but if we read through the lines this is what one would have implied.

i know what u mean sister, and dont worry it does not upset me.
all i can say to that is "Allah Wa Alem". only He knows why he choose those profets. He knew they would go astray, and some of them would be worshipped as Gods after they had died. he knew it all.

i can then ask you.


why would Allah according to Islam send down 124.000 prophets to people who would then abondon them and corrupt the 5 scriptures? He knew the people would disobey the porphets, so why bother to send them down?

and why does the jews and christian today get thrown into hell because they follow a scripture which was corrupted 2000 years ago? why did Allah allow this corruption to find place, and at the same time punish people for following a scripture which they did not corrupt?


moss wrote

But you haven't provided any arguments to me as to why sikhism is superior, or a more righteous religion. Islam to me remains the truth, there are too many miracles to argue with, and you seem to have the same allegations against Islam that have been debunked elsewhere

nowhere in the SGGS is it said that sikhism is superioer, but it is said that this is the way of the lord. not saying that all muslims will go to hell for not followin this. saying "only muslims can enter paradise" is a racistic comment.

i'll read the rest of the posts later as im off to work.


Ma Salaama

 

[Lion King]

Hi,

Here are soem scientific errors I came across in the Koran:

The Phenomena of Thunder and Lightning

It is common knowledge, as scientists teach, that thunder is a sound caused by the impact between electrical charges found in the clouds. Yet Muhammad, the prophet of Muslims, has a different opinion in this matter. He claims that the thunder and the lightning are two of God’s angels—exactly like Gabriel!

In the Qur’an there is a chapter under the title of "Thunder" in which it is recorded that the thunder praises God. We might think that it does not mean that literally because thunder is not a living being—although, spiritually speaking, all of nature glorifies God. The expounders of the Qur’an and its chief scholars, however, insist that Muhammad said that the thunder is an angel exactly like the angel Gabriel. In his commentary (p. 329), the Baydawi comments on verse 13 of chapter of the Thunder,

"Ibn ’Abbas asked the apostle of God about the thunder. He told him, ‘It is an angel who is in charge of the cloud, who (carries) with him swindles of fire by which he drives the clouds."’

In the commentary of the Jalalan (p. 206), we read about this verse:

"The thunder is an angel in charge of the clouds to drive them."

Not only ibn ’Abbas asked Muhammad about the essence of the thunder, but the Jews did too. In the book, "al-Itqan" by Suyuti (part 4, p. 230), we read the following dialogue:

"On the authority of Ibn ’Abbas, he said the Jews came to the prophet (peace be upon him) and said, ‘Tell us about the thunder. What is it?’ He told them:

‘It is one of God’s angels in charge of the clouds. He carries in his hand a swindle of fire by which he pricks the clouds to drive them to where God has ordered them.’ They said to him, ‘What is this sound that we hear?’ He said: ‘(It is) his voice (The angel’s voice)."’

The same incident—the question of the Jews and Muhammad’s answer are mentioned by most scholars. Refer, for instance, to al-Sahih al-Musnad Min Asbab Nuzul al-Ayat (stories related to the verses of Qur’an, p. 11) and al-Kash-shaf by the Imam al-Kamakhshari (part 2, pp. 518, 519). He reiterates the same story and the same words of Muhammad. Thus, the incident is in vogue among all Muslim scholars, and the story and the dialogue between Muhammad and the Jews is well-known.

so much for now, no offence...

Lion King

 

[Lion King]

Some more scientific errors with regard to earth:

The Earth

Several thousand years ago, the Holy Bible clearly recorded that the earth is round and that it is hung on nothing.

"It is He who sits above the circle of the earth" (Isa. 40:22).

"He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing" (Job 26:7).

Yet, the Qur’an challenges these established scientific facts. In many places, it alludes to the fact that the earth is flat and its mountains are like poles which create a balance so that the Earth does not tilt. Let us consider what the Qur’an says about the Earth:

In chapter 88:17,20, it is recorded,

"Will they not regard the camels how they are created...and the Earth how it is spread?"

In page 509, the Jalalan says,

"In his phrase, ‘how it is spread’, he denotes that the earth is flat. All the scholars of Islamic law agree upon this. It is not round as the physicists claim."

The Qur’anic teaching is obvious from the comment of Jalalan that "the earth is flat and not round as the scientists claim". What made Jalal al-Din say so is that the Qur’an hints in many chapters that the earth is flat(refer to 19:6, 79:30, 18:7, and 21:30). Also the Qur’an indicates that:

"We have placed in the earth firm hills lest it quake so as not to sway and hurt people" (21:31).

Scholars who agree upon the meaning of this verse believe as the Jalalan states (pp. 270-271),

"God has founded firm mountains on earth lest it shake people."

On page 429, al-Baydawi says,

"God has made firm mountains on earth lest it sway people and quake. He also made heaven as a ceiling and kept it from falling down!"

The Zamakhshari agrees with the above authors and reiterates the same words (refer to Zamakhshari part 3, p. 114).

In the Qur’an (chapter 50:7), we find another verse which carries the same meaning,

"And the earth have we spread out, and have flung firm hills therein" (Surah Qaf: 7).

This is accompanied by the same comment by the above Muslim scholars (refer to Jalalan, p. 437; Baydawi, p. 686, Tabari, p. 589, and Zamakhshari, part 4, p. 381). All of them assure us that "if it were not for these unshakable mountains, the earth would slip away."

Zamakhshari, the Baydawi and the Jalalan say: "God has built heaven without pillars but He placed unshakable mountains on Earth lest it tilts with people." Concerning chapter 50:7, the Suyuti says that scholars indicate that "Qaf is a mountain which encompasses the entire earth" (refer to Itqan, part 3, p. 29). Qaf is an Arabic L like K.

No offence,
Lion King

 

[------]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm................

 

[Soldier2000]

Lion King

You offending our intellect- you say in post 213 that you have found scientific errors in the Quran then you give us details from the hadith, do you know the difference between them?, first go and learn the basics then may be your offences might carry some intellectual weight-

Secondly most of this alleged contradictions in your post 214 have already been refuted,!

Amardeep your comments in post 212, specially about logic is not consistent with your doctrines- Sirgun/Nargun defies logic- and your colleague ISDHILLION confirms that-

 

[ISDhillon]

Satsriakal Muslimah Ji,

“But what you do not realise is that the prophecies came true”

prophecies are rejected in Sikhism it makes people sit around for a day of jusgement which never comes but if you reel that prophecies are a hallmark of a true faith then so be it, I don’t I need the salvation whilst I am alive.


“But u said yourself one cannot attain the spirutuality guru nank reache”

I never said that we could not achieve the same level of spirituality I said that we can never be the guru cos only god ordained that.

“That is what made people realise, that he truely was the messenger of allah.”

We don’t need miracles because the supernatural is a part of gods creation when you are when with god then you will have all of these miraculous powers it will then dawn on you that miracles are in fact a part of gods creation but if you feel that the miracles are what you need to believe then personally I find that a very shallow form of faith acceptance.

“Whome do you thikn is stronger? On the battle field Whome do you think will be stronger?”

both are stronger and we have proof in our religion how women were valiant soldiers and even generals which headed many battalions we do not believe in this idea of physical strength being a measure of someone’s worth. Let me tell you something about social engineering by religion in India, The response to a lot of the issues you have raised is not about women. When a society changes in this case recognition of female equality, then the old society needs to progress smoothly and adapt to recognise (not accommodate) the change. What I have seen is that men are threatened not by women being equal but because a woman is no longer dependant on a man. This is not a fall in moral standards men have not been able to adapt to the change, this does not mean that men are chauvinistic or anything like that, the change that was required was one of least domination that women can have and cope with more than what they were entitled to and participate in society to their fullest capability.

It is the attitude of men and this attitude is a loving one that seeks to care for women primarily but in extreme cases this care became domination and suppression of women because women started to show earlier on in “unequal societies” that they are achievers independent in their own right. The equality was not born in the west or the east or Sikhism for that matter, equality exists from time zero it’s just the recognition of woman’s ability that became born in west, Sikhism etc. During feudal periods in history womens ability was directed to what they could do best ie, rear children, during battles culture was kicked through the window and women engaged in arm combat - you see its about changing society and adapting but not following a tradition because of a period of time which reflected a certain status of women.

The problem with isalm and Sikhism is a moral issue, In India there used to be a religion which existed prior to Sikhism, in this religion there was a core concept of societal moral law, this law seeked to make man responsible for the immoral acts they committed and justice was therefore seen as assuring salvation for the immoral individual so they would not have to face the wrath of god, society also had to purge its lands of immorality in order to not incur the wrath of god. In Sikhism this concept is incompatible, when the purpose of man is to achieve salvation when alive a man or a women has to live a life in balance so they can focus upon that ideal, morality is therefore an individual effort it is not a societal responsibility, there is no wrath from god there is just rebirth for all and that includes the one with the most highest moral values as well as the greatest sinner on earth. However after sometime the concept of man being a measure of his/her own morality slowly faded and the idea of moral law became an unseen cultural endeavour and there was a notion of guilt and shame that was born through such a culture. Today it is not as bad instead another religion which existed the time of Sikhism had a hierarchical structure in society and the whole of society was assimilated into its own pigeonholes and given definition by those higher up in the rungs this lead to the birth of division in Sikh society and formation of differing groups rather than sovereign individual members in the religion.

“What is your point i dont understand?”

I don’t believe women and men have to adopt assigned roles by religion or culture if a women wants to fight a war she may have passion to kill many who am I to say no to her she may be a finer soldier than 100 men together.

Well well well soldier 2000 ji,

Let shame you publicly:

“Nothing but cryptic irrational statements emanates from your computer; it’s got so bad that you have finally managed to confuse yourself?”

watch this space boy!!!!

“however if I started learning about another faith I would have to use my logic to first verify scriptural truth”

mwah mwah oops moss actually asked me if I was born in another religion such as islam for instance I would be operation in the paradigm of reason because supposedly you all believe god is logical etc etc so I am being honest here you have just taken advantage of my honesty, let me now go further I was actually born in Sikhism and I realised that god is not consistent with logic but his creation is ( however I still don’t believe in a logical universe I have actually proven that to you with the theory of indeterminacy in an earlier post), but Im not bitter!!! This btw also revokes your challenge to post 68, and its an incomprehensible god whish is impossible for you as a human being to be unless you achieve salvation. As I read more it also revokes your challenge to 122, I really hope you get this time I know it must be hard for you to think outside the box but do so otherwise I will have to shame you again.

“but also highlights the sheer hypocrisy of Mr Dhillion-“

yeah you go with that your on to a good thing their

“The only reason one would choose to convert to Sikhism is if one believed that it was the truth- how the hell can one establish the truth in Sikhism, if Sikhism prevented one from applying reason?”

because truth is god and god is within you know that you have the truth when you read bani because it enlightens you the nature of gos is unreasonale and that is the truth, how do I know that Sikhism is the most righteous path? When I practice Sikhism my answers end and I have no doubt I did all of this without ever refuting gurbani this is the power of gurshabad you wouldn’t know because your religion requires you to appease your mind by making the truth logical and miracles and prophecies but that is not a religion just mental appeasement or manmat.



Ahh so your from the islam-sikhism site – YOUR BIG FLAW GOD IS INCOMPREHENSIBLE YES WELL DONE, SIKHISM IS NOT GOD YOU DRAW THE CONCLUSION THAT AN INCOMPREHENSIBLE GOD AMOUNTS TO AN ILLOGICAL RELIGION THIS IS IN ITSELF ILLOGICAL WRITE AS MANY ESSAYS AS YOU WANT ABOUT THE CONTRADICTION OF DIVINE ESSENCE BUT YOU WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE A FOOL OF YOURSELF NO ONE ON THIS EARTH HAS EVERY BEEN ABLE TO PROOVE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD LET ALONE GODS NATURE YOU FOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!:grumbling


“Amardeep your comments in post 212, specially about logic is not consistent with your doctrines- Sirgun/Nargun defies logic- and your colleague ISDHILLION confirms that-“

how? God transcends rationality so how do you conclude that Sikhism is an illogical religion?, separate the nature of god from his creation and you will be a lot wiser!!! I bet you thought you found a refutation there didn’t you, the nature of god is not logical logic is a system of inguiry how can you apply it to the nature of god? I can understand why your so bitter now care to put my rebuttals on your site instead of debating with me offline or are you scared.:rant:


Like I said before back to the madraasaaa with you matey!!!

Gurfateh and I hope you come back and apologise for all your manmat,

ISDhillon;D

 

[Soldier2000]

Ahh so your from the islam-sikhism site

No dhillion!

I am not from the website, i am just a vistor of that site-

learnt many things from their!

because truth is god and god is within you know that you have the truth when you read bani because it enlightens you the nature of gos is unreasonale and that is the truth, how do I know that Sikhism is the most righteous path? When I practice Sikhism my answers end and I have no doubt I did all of this without ever refuting gurbani this is the power of gurshabad you wouldn’t know because your religion requires you to appease your mind by making the truth logical and miracles and prophecies but that is not a religion just mental appeasement or manmat.

and round in circles we go!

 

[ISDhillon]

No dhillion!

I am not from the website, i am just a vistor of that site-

learnt many things from their!



and round in circles we go!

great intellectual debate from deserter 2000:happy:

how are we going round in circles the defintion of truth in sikhism does not have a logical nature, a moral nature or any character it was assigned in sikhism only to god, you give god a logical character which is why we go round in circles and i dont trust you that your not from that site.

 

[amardeep]

salaam muslimah19

I dont see how the verse i gave you is out of context. Once you believe the quran is the true message for allah, then why would a true believer objest to abiding by its rules.

yes, but u take the verse as a general one which means that everything he says shall be obeyed. the verse talks about booty of war, and it is said that whatever he gives to you, you shall take and whatever he says not to, u cant have.

Does that make sense?? If not can explain better, sorry if your confused in any way.

yes it makes sence. no scripture of the world can be translated into another language unless it looses its depth, beauty and meaning.

To someone who is seeking a religion, ofcourse a religion which allows people to believe in any religion would seem appealing. Why wouldnt it. You have to ask yourself, if one faith is trying to establish an islamic state, n this is stated in the quran, we are obeying our lords command. But to another religion lilke sikhism who is in favour of all religions, then wouldnt god be doin great injustice. See now i can see why one would allah create such confusion? The basis of islam, is to accept god as being one, YES, but believing in the quran. It goes hand in hand, does that make sense.

no not exactly.what do u mean sister?

So why would allah have allowed this to happen. This initself is a ssin, as you are imlyin the allmighty did not know the intention of this messenger whome he had chosen. How can you say such a lie about your creator? Im not sayin you in particular have done or havnt done, but if we read through the lines this is what one would have implied.

Allah Wa Alem. Yes God must have known that these prophets would go astray and create their own thing, as he knows everything.
i have another question for you:

how cruel is God, if he punished people for following a corrupted scripture(bible) WHICH HE HIMSELF allowed to be corrupted? How cruel is God when he punishes people from following the religion they were born into, beliviing that this is right, even though people 2000 years ago corrupted it?

this is a cruel God. first he lets the scriptures be corrupted, and then he punishes the christians and jews with hell for following something they did not even corrupt themselves.

Okay you do not believe in logic. N you do not believe in miracles. Whether you want to call it a miracle or you want to call it proof, either way the signs are there.

we do belive in logic. sikhism as absolutely nothing but logic. every rule has logic behind it. and yes i do belive in miracles, they happen everyday.
our Gurus created lots of miracles, BUT they also said that it is not because of their miracles that we should follow the path of God. because miracles are just a cheap way of fooling people

 

[amardeep]

salaam agian muslimah19:

u wrote:

Amardeep would you not agree that we need the nutritions provided animals? Would we nt become weak and frail? And if Allah has permitted it then how can this be wrong, bacause as you believe as long as you are worshipping your lord, then your are on the rite track are you nt?

the human body contains more than 30 kiloes of protein. why dont u eat that then? its good nutretion. why dont u eat monkeys, tigers, camels, horses etc? they give nutretion too..

I just got one query. I was reading a verse from the sggs in which is said someting along the lines of that if you do not believe in the guru you are somewhat in the wrong. Il try find the verse althouogh im sure if il succeed because i randomly chose any site.
Have u any idea what verse i am referring to.

no sister i dont know this verse, but if you can find it and post it, then i will do some research aboit it and tell you what it means..

Ma Salama

 

[amardeep]

sorry i posted the same post twice as i thougth that my first did'n get posted.

soldier2000 wrote:

Amardeep your comments in post 212, specially about logic is not consistent with your doctrines- Sirgun/Nargun defies logic- and your colleague ISDHILLION confirms that-

to be honest, then i dont know what sirgun/nirgun is about, so i'll go read about it and then i'll inshallah get back to you..

Ma Saalama

 

[ISDhillon]

"to be honest, then i dont know what sirgun/nirgun is about, so i'll go read about it and then i'll inshallah get back to you.."

i can tell you, god is with attributes and god is without attributes, this is a contradiction about the nature of divine essence, but soldier 2000 then says the whole of sikhism is a contradiction because god is not logical?

if they had found something contradictory other than the nature of an incomprehensible god i would have debated and argued with them logically but after 15 pages they still dont seem to get it so for the 100th time:

a) god in sikhism is incomprehesible and transcends rationale, this does not means sikhism is illogical as a religion, nor does it mean that sri guru granth sahib ji is an illogical scripture it logically concludes without any hesitation that god has a nature which we as humans can never understand.

b) when you are baptised in sikhism you surrender your head to the guru and you concentrate your mind on the gurshabad, you do not formulate rules on how to govern society, you do not formulate punishments you do not use the scripture to judge others, you meditate on the word this is practicing sikhism. you do not refute the bani.

c) if you are a sikh or non-sikh who wishes to carry out an interpretation of religious texts then you will come to the conclusion that the god of sikhism is beyond the laws of logic but hopefully if you are a good intellectually proficient scholar you will not brand the whole religion as illogical and untrue because this has no reasonable basis and is therefore a fallacy in itself.

d) if i was seeker of the truth i would learn that in sikhism the truth has no character the truth is a property of the divine, i would learn that in sikhism right and wrong are a part of mans bibek buddhi ie, living by your conscience, and the more spiritually enlightened you are the more awake you are to all that is wrong and right, this is why debate on contraversial issues is an oxymoron it does not make any difference whther someone eats meat or not, it does not matter if someone is immoral or not because unless you acheive salvation or fana you are gonna come back onto this world again and again. i then would say hey sikhism is not like any other religion its doctrine is sovereign and this is a religion i would like to be apart of, i most definately would use logic for otherwise how would i make logical grammatical sequences when writing this post but now what does this have to do with my religion?.

ISDhillonhew