The fate of Non-Muslims in the hereafter

[cat eyes]

my mother did not have any clue about islam before she died. all she knew is that there was a god

the day before she had passed away she had a dream that an Angel came to her and told her not to be afraid and that everything was going to be okay the next day she woke up and she was so happy started puting on her make up and everything as if she was never sick and laughing and joking with us i think she told my father on the way to the hospital about the dream that evening she died and she knew it was her time. now its upto the non muslim whether they wana believe this or not but i just thought id share it with yous

 

[Muslim Woman]

...If you don't believe in Allah, how can you fear His punishment? If you fear His punishment, you believe in Allah, therefore will not receive His punishment.

I like your this brief ans :statisfie

Who has strong faith in his/her religion must not bother what others think about his/her fate. If any non-Muslim rejects Islam , it means s/he does not believe Allah can punish him/her . So , why the objection ?

Let the bad Mozlems burn non-Muslims in hereafter , what's the problem ? :hmm:

Allah oredered to be kind to all ( except those who openly declared war against Islam and Muslim ) . If any Muslim ever misbehaves with any non-Muslim , just remind him/ her about this verse :

Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for your faith, nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them. For Allah loves those who are just. Allah only forbids you with regard to those who fight you for your faith, and drive you out of your homes and support others in driving you out, from turning to them for protection (or taking them as wali). Those who seek their protection they are indeed wrong- doers.] (Al-Mumtahinah 60: 8-9)

 

[aamirsaab]

...

And as I showed in the same thread, given the terms and conditions for those who reject Islam, someone who is born Muslim is many times less likely to go to Hell for eternity, whereas someone who is born a non-Muslim is far more likely, even if we assume that many non-Muslims do not know about Islam.

Born muslims do have an advantage on that basis because like you said there's a much smaller percentage of ex-muslims than non-muslims.

But, from my understanding (and any and all are free to disagree with me!), God will judge us all FAIRLY. Meaning, He would factor in your birth surroundings into His judgement. God is not going to put you in a **** environment and then send you to hell for it.

When you say 'we are all on equal footing', I think you are ignoring facts.

Equal footing to begin with. If I die as a kafir, no heaven for me. If you die as a muslim, congrats you earned heaven. Who knows, in the next 24 hours I may apostate and suddenly die and you at the same time may accept Islam and die. So unless you can see the future, we're still on equal footing!

Just because something is simple, it does not make it logical.

How bout now?

.....So, according to this thread, the person who dies a Christian is going to face eternal punishment, while the Muslim is going to eternal paradise. So why would a just and merciful God have it set up so that where you were born was the biggest factor in whether or not you were going to go to Hell?

Again, as already stated above God would factor that into His judgement on the Last Day - that's what is meant by being Allah being 'The most merciful'

 

[Ummu Sufyaan]

I like your this brief ans

i couldn't agree with the both of you more. all it really boils down to sometimes is just belief...how do you convince someone whose heart is not tranquil with the belief of Allah, about matters of the unseen? i guess we just have to explain it to them as best as we can...other than that, clearly some people in this thread have some kind of complex as well :hmm:

its so weird, in the past, people would just think that every religion says that whoever doesn't believe in it will go to hell. that was it. nothing more, nothing less. i don't know why people insist on exaggerating with "discrimination" and other such jargon, especially considering knowledge like this http://islam-qa.com/en/ref/31174/muslims in hell

so, if Allah wills, some Muslims will also abide in hell the whole point is to carrying out justice. a person put in prison isnt being unjust as they are paying for thier crime <---look at it that way.

 

[Skavau]

It's actually very simple.

God gave you earth to walk on, air to breath, ears to hear with and eyes to see with. He gave you the ability to choose to live your life in the manner you see fit, and even provides those who don't believe in Him with sustenance.

Let's say you're a good person to others; you help old ladies crossing the street, feeding the homeless and donating to the poor; maybe you even sponsor a child in Africa. These are all noble things regardless of what religion you belong to.

Sure.

The key, however, is the intention. You are living your life not trying to thank God in any way, Who gave you all of this (including the sustenance which allowed you to be so generous). Because you were a good person, God gave you rewards in this life. Maybe because of your charity God helped you get a job you had wanted, or blessed you with another child. These are all signs, if you were to pay attention, of His Mercy and His Grace upon you.

Okay. Perhaps you believe that God works in mysterious ways.

But He does that all for you, even though you do not thank Him or praise Him (or even believe in Him) at all.

That is because I do not believe 'him' to exist. It is not through contempt, or ill-intent that I do not but purely because I am not convinced by the evidence or 'logical arguments'.

So how can you honestly expect God to give you a reward in the next life, when all you were doing is working towards your reward in this life? If you don't even believe in a Hereafter it makes even less sense. You live your whole life in denial of the Hereafter and you do nothing except focus on this worldly life.

?

This paragraph reeks of absolutely no common ground. I don't even understand what it is supposed to mean. If you don't believe in the 'hereafter' then why would you focus on it?

When you come to realize you were wrong after you die, then why should God suddenly grant you entrance into Paradise when you had lived your entire life in denial of God and His Bounties?

Actually, this is a misnomer. The complaint is amongst Non-Muslims about the penalty of hell for disbelief does not focus on a desire to reach paradise (well, perhaps some do - but most do not). The complaint states that it is morally wrong for any being to allow people to go to a place of eternal torture purely for - 'thought-crime'. The punishment for not believing correctly, for not adhering properly and for not recognising sufficiently. It ignores the reasons for disbelief and stomps over the reality that disbelief is not a choice - but a conclusion.

So with that, how is it moral for people to be 'sent' to hell', or 'arrive' in hell wholly for disbelief in god? How is it a proportionate response?

 

[Skavau]

I like your this brief ans :statisfie

It was a cheap point.

Who has strong faith in his/her religion must not bother what others think about his/her fate. If any non-Muslim rejects Islam , it means s/he does not believe Allah can punish him/her . So , why the objection ?

Because Islam is proposed as the solution to all of mankind's problems. It is decreed the most moral system on the planet by its adherents. If it wants to be capable of backing up these claims it needs to answer these questions: What of the alleged and frankly (I consider) obvious injustice in the concept of eternal torture for 'thought-crime'?

 

[aamirsaab]

It was a cheap point.

It was also (and still is) completely valid.

Because Islam is proposed as the solution to all of mankind's problems. It is decreed the most moral system on the planet by its adherents. If it wants to be capable of backing up these claims it needs to answer these questions: What of the alleged and frankly (I consider) obvious injustice in the concept of eternal torture for 'thought-crime'?

1) How is it unjust? Islam tells you outright (which you guys don't like...) : follow the teachings and heaven awaits you. Deny the teachings, and you go to hell.

If you don't believe that those two concepts exist, don't complain about the existence of them! I actually raised this point several times (once before on LI and once in a youtube convo) and was mocked for it both times. It really isn't my or Islam's fault you cannot comprehend this.

2) Here's some food for thought: those gauranteed a place in hell are awarded their ''paradise'' in this life via health and wealth. How's that for justice?

3) If heaven's door was opened to every and all individual, why would you as a human, lead on an honest life? The payout is the same whatever your behaviour ----> that is not fair! And this is what YOU would be saying to ME if that was the case.

I honestly don't even know why I'm typing this response.

 

[Skavau]

It was also (and still is) completely valid.

No it wasn't. We are having a discussion about the morality of a divine being of sending people to hell. No-one is 'scared' of this just because they are critical of it. I do not fear hell, or hellfire or any hereafter punishment because I do not believe they exist. This does not mean however that I believe that such claims are moral. Your point was cheap audience-pleaser.

1) How is it unjust? Islam tells you outright (which you guys don't like...) : follow the teachings and heaven awaits you. Deny the teachings, and you go to hell.

To respond to this I will give you analogy. Let us say that I become your employer. I tell you that you must work 18 hour shifts, 6 days a week on minimum wage with no holiday. I say to you that you already agreed to that before by simply signing the contract. I then say to you that should you fail me, I will terminate your contract with immediate effect and deny you future references. Does the fact that you know that I will do this make my actions just?

The contention concerning the morality of eternal torture for essentially 'thought-crime' is not based upon the fact that it might surprise some of us, but that it is wholly unjust to its very foundation. You have missed the point.

If you don't believe that those two concepts exist, don't complain about the existence of them! I actually raised this point several times (once before on LI and once in a youtube convo) and was mocked for it both times. It really isn't my fault you cannot comprehend this.

I am not complaining about the existence of them. I do not believe that they exist. I contend that a belief system is hardly as rosy, as utopian and ideal as believed if it endorses concepts such as endless torture and thought-crime. Particularly when the two are in tangent.

2) Here's some food for thought: those gauranteed a place in hell are awarded their ''paradise'' in this life via health and wealth. How's that for justice?

Meaningless.

The core issue (well, the one that I hold most important) is that eternal torture for 'thought-crime' is unjust.

3) If heaven's door was opened to every and all individual, why would you as a human, lead on an honest life? The payout is the same whatever your behaviour ----> that is not fair! And this is what YOU would be saying to ME if that was the case.

Did you read my last post? The issue is not about admittance to heaven, but rather compulsory attendance in hell for ridiculous and unjust reasons. I am not arguing against heaven, or who is admitted to it.

 

[aamirsaab]

No it wasn't. We are having a discussion about the morality of a divine being of sending people to hell. No-one is 'scared' of this just because they are critical of it. I do not fear hell, or hellfire or any hereafter punishment because I do not believe they exist. This does not mean however that I believe that such claims are moral. Your point was cheap audience-pleaser.

I'll say it one more time in caps:
YOU CANNOT COMPLAIN ABOUT THE MORAL EXISTENCE OF SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T BELIEVE ACTUALLY EXISTS. It's a simple concept to grasp!

To respond to this I will give you analogy. Let us say that I become your employer. I tell you that you must work 18 hour shifts, 6 days a week on minimum wage with no holiday. I say to you that you already agreed to that before by simply signing the contract. I then say to you that should you fail me, I will terminate your contract with immediate effect and deny you future references. Does the fact that you know that I will do this make my actions just?

That is not a parable to Islam's concept of heaven and hell.

The contention concerning the morality of eternal torture for essentially 'thought-crime' is not based upon the fact that it might surprise some of us, but that it is wholly unjust to its very foundation. You have missed the point.

It is not thought-crime at all. If you don't believe in God, which is one of the main things to do to get in to heaven in Islam, you don't go to heaven.

I am not complaining about the existence of them. I do not believe that they exist. I contend that a belief system is hardly as rosy, as utopian and ideal as believed if it endorses concepts such as endless torture and thought-crime. Particularly when the two are in tangent.

Again, it is not thought crime. It is an active decision to DENY the existence of Allah and His teachings - which you are told outright in Islam that this will send you to hell. There is no injustice here!

Did you read my last post? The issue is not about admittance to heaven, but rather compulsory attendance in hell for ridiculous and unjust reasons. I am not arguing against heaven, or who is admitted to it.

Ok I think I know what the problem is. You missed Uthman's earlier post (same topic, different thread), so I'll put it here:

.....
- A Muslim who fulfils all of their obligations and avoids the major sins is guaranteed a place in paradise without any punishment.

- A Muslim who does not fulfil all of their obligatory duties and/or does fall into major sins might be punished for a time in Hell, but they will eventually enter paradise on account of their belief that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad saws is his messenger.

- A Non-Muslim who knows that Islam is the truth and rejects it will not enter paradise.

- A person who is not aware of Islam will be tested by Allah on the day of judgement and they will enter either paradise or Hell based on whether or not they pass the test.
....

 

[Skavau]

I'll say it one more time in caps:
YOU CANNOT COMPLAIN ABOUT THE MORAL EXISTENCE OF SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T BELIEVE ACTUALLY EXISTS. It's a simple concept to grasp!

Yes you can. Let me ask you, do you complain about any immorality (or perceived immorality) in Christianity? Do you see any immorality in Christianity? What about in the ideals of Scientology or other beliefs? I don't believe that thetans exists, but that doesn't stop me complaining about the ridiculous immorality that has come from those beliefs.

In fact, how do you intend to get anyone into Islam, or convince anyone of Islamic ethics if you simply scream that you can't comment unless you believe in them? That's like a politician telling his constituents that if they can't ask him questions unless they vote for him.

Just to note, I am stating that the belief that a divine arbiter that subjects people who do not believe in him to hell is immoral.

That is not a parable to Islam's concept of heaven and hell.

I agree. But it is comparable to your statement that, "well - it's all written down and well known to everyone, therefore it must be just".

It is not thought-crime at all. If you don't believe in God, which is one of the main things to do to get in to heaven in Islam, you don't go to heaven.

I have never seen such a self-contradictory statement. You tell me that the criteria is not thought, and then you go and tell me that the dividing line is whether you think that God (presumably specifically Allah) exists?

Again, it is not thought crime. It is an active decision to DENY the existence of Allah and His teachings - which you are told outright in Islam that this will send you to hell. There is no injustice here!

I do not 'deny' the existence of Allah and his teachings. I am not convinced that Allah exists. You may attempt to conflate them, but nonetheless you are talking about something different (which might I add does not justify it).

Irrespectively: Can you tell me how it is fair that say, someone who might actively 'deny' the existence Allah and his teachings to go to hell? How is eternal torture at all a proportionate response for a finite 'crime'?

How does it make amends?

Ok I think I know what the problem is. You missed Uthman's earlier post (same topic, different thread), so I'll put it here:

Actually, I did see that. But it only removes half of the problem. I still think the fact that an alleged benevolent being would allow a realm such as 'hell' to exist. Even worse that he would put people in there on the basis of what they believe (or don't believe).

Anyway, I am offski for now. I will get back however and reply to any other posts you might put out. Cheers.

 

[جوري]

I'll say it one more time in caps:
YOU CANNOT COMPLAIN ABOUT THE MORAL EXISTENCE OF SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T BELIEVE ACTUALLY EXISTS. It's a simple concept to grasp!

:

Brilliant..

I am a vegetarian, I don't believe in eating meat, I am disgusted by the inhumane murder and ill treatment of these animals and thus have come to question you here on eating that juicy burger..

Do you find absurdity in the above?
Enjoying personal views and holding them in strong convictions, doesn't make them correct, nor does the concept of morality even enter the picture. It is a conscious decision that you have made about the way you choose to live your life from which others can't be made to suffer..

Also what is with all the hypotheticals and inane comparisons from which one can't draw any semblance to topic discussed?

(12:108) Say : "This is my way: Resting upon conscious insight accessible to reason, I am calling [you all] unto God- I and they who follow me.


If you don't want to follow this path, then don't, but don't bother the crap out of the rest of us because of your own perceived flaws.

 

[aamirsaab]

Yes you can. Let me ask you, do you complain about any immorality (or perceived immorality) in Christianity? Do you see any immorality in Christianity? What about in the ideals of Scientology or other beliefs? I don't believe that thetans exists, but that doesn't stop me complaining about the ridiculous immorality that has come from those beliefs.

We aren't talking about immortality - we are talking about the moral existence of hell in Islam. But to answer your question: I'm not wasting my time on Christian forums or scientology forums complaining about moral existence of their teachings. I do have my own opinions about them but I honestly cannot be asked to go on to their respective forums and debate about things I don't believe exist.

In fact, how do you intend to get anyone into Islam, or convince anyone of Islamic ethics if you simply scream that you can't comment unless you believe in them?

Oh you can comment and have your own opinions. But you just cannot complain about the moral existence of something that you believe doesn't exist! It's a logical fallacy. And a waste of time.

I have never seen such a self-contradictory statement. You tell me that the criteria is not thought, and then you go and tell me that the dividing line is whether you think that God (presumably specifically Allah) exists?

Think is not the word I used - it was BELIEVE. The word ''Think'' leads us to pascal's wager, which is not why we follow Islam. You can argue this is semantics, but I honestly don't care.

Irrespectively: Can you tell me how it is fair that say, someone who might actively 'deny' the existence Allah and his teachings to go to hell? How is eternal torture at all a proportionate response for a finite 'crime'?

How does it make amends?

Simple, you denied His existence - you shouldn't expect heaven. It's an all or nothing situation. This is what is meant by submission to Allah. You fully submit yourself to God and His teachings because you believe in His existence.

Actually, I did see that. But it only removes half of the problem. I still think the fact that an alleged benevolent being would allow a realm such as 'hell' to exist. Even worse that he would put people in there on the basis of what they believe (or don't believe).

In this life, jail is the equivalent of hell. It's where you go if you've ''broken'' the law. Why? Justice. Same type of thing in the afterlife: break the law (that is written clearly for all to comprehend) and you go to jail. One of those laws is the Belief in Allah.

Anyway, I am offski for now. I will get back however and reply to any other posts you might put out. Cheers.

Take as long as you need. Who knows, by the end, you might even become muslim .

 

[Skavau]

We aren't talking about immortality - we are talking about the moral existence of hell in Islam. But to answer your question: I'm not wasting my time on Christian forums or scientology forums complaining about moral existence of their teachings. I do have my own opinions about them but I honestly cannot be asked to go on to their respective forums and debate about things I don't believe exist.

I think that when you say 'moral existence', you mean something different to me. What do you mean by it exactly? There is some confusion of terms here.

Irrespectively, well - be that your prerogative that you do not enter other people's forums and discuss this. I came back here because it was one of the most open muslim forums around and it allowed people to ask these questions and have these debates.

Oh you can comment and have your own opinions. But you just cannot complain about the moral existence of something that you believe doesn't exist! It's a logical fallacy. And a waste of time.

Again, you might have to tell me what you mean by 'moral existence'. When I am 'complaining' about the ethics of eternal torture in hellfire I of course operate from the immorality I believe would happen from of it and because of it.

Think is not the word I used - it was BELIEVE. The word ''Think'' leads us to pascal's wager, which is not why we follow Islam. You can argue this is semantics, but I honestly don't care.

Well I will argue that you are being semantic here. I use the term 'think' and 'believe' interchangeably in this context. Nonetheless, it makes no odds. The terms 'belief' and 'think' still apply to thought, and whether you decree the dividing either - it is still thought-crime.

Simple, you denied His existence - you shouldn't expect heaven. It's an all or nothing situation. This is what is meant by submission to Allah. You fully submit yourself to God and His teachings because you believe in His existence.

First of all, and I have clarified this - I am not expecting heaven. The argument is not about expecting that.

Secondly, this is simply a rephrasing of what (according to your beliefs) will happen. You have not given a justification for as to why it is ethically sound, or in the slightest bit just. Why should someone who simply has not seen enough evidence in their life to believe and 'submit' to Allah be punished for their conclusion? And in such a horrific way?

In this life, jail is the equivalent of hell. It's where you go if you've ''broken'' the law. Why? Justice. Same type of thing in the afterlife: break the law (that is written clearly for all to comprehend) and you go to jail. One of those laws is the Belief in Allah.

Right. And we know that some nations like to put people in jail unjustly. We do not claim that all laws in all lands are sound purely because that they are there (which has been about half of your argument concerning hell).

So just because something happens to be does not make it ought.

Take as long as you need. Who knows, by the end, you might even become muslim .

Lol. Well, I've been on these internet circuits for years. I'm interested personally in getting specific people to concede certain statements they might otherwise not, and I am interested in understanding specific mindsets towards this.

Remember I look at this from a completely humanitarian context. The idea of 'thought-crime' (which I do not believe you have attempted to refute) is honestly nauseating to me, as I am sure it would be to you in most other things that happen on earth! (N. Korea, China, etc.)

 

[جوري]

Right. And we know that some nations like to put people in jail unjustly. We do not claim that all laws in all lands are sound purely because that they are there (which has been about half of your argument concerning hell).

There is no justice or lack of as far as you are concerned when the place of punishment doesn't exist according to you.. how could you feel injustice over something that you hold in the imagination? As far as we are concerned it isn't unjust, for there is no greater transgression against God save to deny all his blessings which you can't fathom and pass off to a lesser god, nature or whatever. If your entire purpose of being is devotion to the one who gave you everything and you have spent it slacking off on pleasure and self-made purpose then it is indeed a fitting judgment that you are thrown in hell for all eternity. The same way when you slack off on the job in real life can you expect to be fired, lose your pension and health-care benefits.
There is a consequence for everything, you believing that there isn't one or shouldn't be one is a personal grievance from which no one else should be made to suffer except for you!

all the best!

 

[Skavau]

There is no justice or lack of as far as you are concerned when the place of punishment doesn't exist according to you.. how could you feel injustice over something that you hold in the imagination?

Huh?

I am told to me by Muslims, and by many Christians of the concept of hell - who goes there, why and for how long. I then decide based on my understanding of morality that such is wrong. I don't need to believe in something to understand that perhaps it is all a bit shaky.

As far as we are concerned it isn't unjust, for there is no greater transgression against God save to deny all his blessings which you can't fathom and pass off to a lesser god, nature or whatever.

I know that you believe this. These are things that are important to you. On another day I may challenge the specific claims made above both morally and logically - but not now.

If your entire purpose of being is devotion to the one who gave you everything and you have spent it slacking off on pleasure and self-made purpose then it is indeed a fitting judgment that you are thrown in hell for all eternity.

How so?

The same way when you slack off on the job in real life can you expect to be fired, lose your pension and health-care benefits.

No, no, no, no.

Completely incomparable. Is your previous employer torturing you? Is he telling you that you must remain shackled, imprisoned and in agony for the rest of time? No - he is simply removing you from your position. You are still free to find another job.

The punishment of eternal torture for simply, and it is what it is - getting your information wrong is nothing short of outright disproportionate. Keep in mind that most Non-Muslims are not vindictive of Islam, do not feel contempt towards Allah or wish to be 'selfish' and ignore the call. They (we, I should say) simply do not believe that Allah exists. We are not convinced of Islam's claim to divinity. Some of us such as myself, are not even wholly convinced of Islam's claim to objective morality. I have an intellectual disagreement with Islam bought on by my experiences in life. Keep in mind that I cannot arbitrarily, through pure will change these disagreements because, and as I specified in another thread belief is not a choice.

Which is another massive reason why I feel that torture in infinity for 'disbelief' is immoral.

There is a consequence for everything, you believing that there isn't one or shouldn't be one is a personal grievance from which no one else should be made to suffer except for you!

?

Sorry, I've not argued that consequences ought not to exist.

 

[جوري]

Huh?

I am told to me by Muslims, and by many Christians of the concept of hell - who goes there, why and for how long. I then decide based on my understanding of morality that such is wrong. I don't need to believe in something to understand that perhaps it is all a bit shaky.

Huh ^2 .. You have a different baseline for morality, what your mind conceives as 'normal' or rationalizes as 'moral' isn't the same for religious folks. be that as it may it is of no concern to you since the threat isn't immediate. If you were a sodomite or pederast practicing publicly and made to suffer under a particular country's laws over what you conceive to be human and moral can be understandable, however it is indeed very peculiar to find something that you have made up your mind not to believe in threatening or to fall within the confines of morality all together..
How is it moral or immoral? Do you worry about a poisoned apple that you'll eat in your dreams?

I know that you believe this. These are things that are important to you. On another day I may challenge the specific claims made above both morally and logically - but not now.

This isn't a question of what is important to me... you are investing yourself of something that you deem imaginary and most people can only find that ludicrous if not down right laughable!

How so?

Which part of that was difficult to understand?
If there is a theme to your existence, whatever it maybe, say exercising for argument' sake, and you are told that you should get at least 30 mins three times a week, but you decide AMA and go about eating pickled pork feet and watching married with children and living a sedentary life, then you drop dead, who is at fault here? You or your health-care provider? Try to make that applicable in everything else in life and it should make clearer sense..

No, no, no, no.

Completely incomparable. Is your previous employer torturing you? Is he telling you that you must remain shackled, imprisoned and in agony for the rest of time? No - he is simply removing you from your position. You are still free to find another job.

It doesn't matter, since you can always start over, the general theme is, if you wish to butter your bread, get health-care benefits and a pension, take care of your kids and put food on the table that you have to do something to earn it. You can always walk away from your current boss but you'll still have to find some means to do what needs to be done to sustain your life.. the theme will never change, it is your attitude that needs changing!

The punishment of eternal torture for simply, and it is what it is - getting your information wrong is nothing short of outright disproportionate. Keep in mind that most Non-Muslims are not vindictive of Islam, do not feel contempt towards Allah or wish to be 'selfish' and ignore the call. They (we, I should say) simply do not believe that Allah exists. We are not convinced of Islam's claim to divinity. Some of us such as myself, are not even wholly convinced of Islam's claim to objective morality. I have an intellectual disagreement with Islam bought on by my experiences in life. Keep in mind that I cannot arbitrarily, through pure will change these disagreements because, and as I specified in another thread belief is not a choice.

Well then be able to bear the consequence of your 'moral objections' -- I don't think anyone is forcing you to be Muslim, and since you don't believe in Allah or Islam as the final message, then I fail to understand why this is so threatening to you?

(18 29) And say: "The truth [has now come] from your Sustainer: let, then, him who wills, believe in it, and let him who wills, reject it.

you are certainly free to exercise your free will.
What more do you want?

Which is another massive reason why I feel that torture in infinity for 'disbelief' is immoral.

That is your prerogative, but punishment isn't without reason and it isn't based on personal opinion!

?

Sorry, I've not argued that consequences ought not to exist.

is that is what you believe, then you should be happy with such a belief.. Again, I am not sure I understand why your own personal beliefs have a bearing on what is or what should be?

all the best

 

[Skavau]

Huh ^2 .. You have a different baseline for morality, what your mind conceives as 'normal' or rationalizes as 'moral' isn't the same for religious folks.

I know this. Part of my efforts on here, and in other places is to get specifically devout religious people to admit and understand these differences. They are astoundingly important, and from my perspective - very worryingly important.

be that as it may it is of no concern to you since the threat isn't immediate. If you were a sodomite or pederast practicing publicly and made to suffer under a particular country's laws over what you conceive to be human and moral can be understandable, however it is indeed very peculiar to find something that you have made up your mind not to believe in threatening or to fall within the confines of morality all together..

This isn't about whether the threat is immediate or not. This is about a discussion on the fate of non-muslims in the hereafter according to Islam. I am giving you my perspective on why I will argue that it is wrong.

How is it moral or immoral? Do you worry about a poisoned apple that you'll eat in your dreams?

I am not worrying about anything here. We're having a discussion/debate. I have already responded to this accusation earlier by another poster. As for why it is immoral, see any of my posts - even excerpts to quickly note my objection: thought-crime.

This isn't a question of what is important to me... you are investing yourself of something that you deem imaginary and most people can only find that ludicrous if not down right laughable!

This is the last time I will address this. I choose of my own free choice to come to this forum, to return to this forum and debate. I enjoy these debates and discussion just as I enjoy reading works of fiction, and playing works of fiction (video games). Whether or not you think I am wasting my time or not really does not concern me.

Which part of that was difficult to understand?

None of it. You made a claim that you did not back up, you just asserted it.

If there is a theme to your existence, whatever it maybe, say exercising for argument' sake, and you are told that you should get at least 30 mins three times a week, but you decide AMA and go about eating pickled pork feet and watching married with children and living a sedentary life, then you drop dead, who is at fault here? You or your health-care provider? Try to make that applicable in everything else in life and it should make clearer sense..

This has nothing to do with what is being claimed concerning hell. You are confusing what is with what ought (although, on reflection - this does not entirely surprise me. I have noted many religious people fail to make this distinction).

The correct analysis is that there is a sentient being who decrees people to heaven or hell based on an immoral seperation: thought. The very idea of sending people to eternal torture based on what they didn't do, on what they had no idea they had to do. Punishing people for getting their information wrong, for being misled, for perhaps not quite understanding properly. This is under all circumstances the exact proposition that is being claimed in this thread by every Muslim that has participated. Everyone who is not convinced of Islam will go to hell and languish in eternal torture.

How is this so? I am 'guilty' of not being convinced. I cannot as of yet be convinced. Suppose I die in this state. I remain an atheist as I do now. Do you seriously agree that I deserve eternal ****ation purely for not thinking properly?

It doesn't matter, since you can always start over, the general theme is, if you wish to butter your bread, get health-care benefits and a pension, take care of your kids and put food on the table that you have to do something to earn it.

Yes it does. Do you understand nothing of how analogies are supposed to represent and support claims? To make them more understandable?

You cannot compare an employer firing someone from a job and someone being sent to hell by Allah. It doesn't work. The employee believed that they were in a job. They believed the employer exists and has very physical powers. I do not believe Allah exists. I also do not believe I am under any divine compulsion to embrace Islam.

This is completely different than the job-scenario you invokes. And again: I repeat - who is being tortured? who is being made to suffer for being fired? I am glad that you mention that you can "always start over" in your job analogy, since in the context of the omnibenevolent superpower you invoke - after life, that is no longer possible.

Well then be able to bear the consequence of your 'moral objections' -- I don't think anyone is forcing you to be Muslim, and since you don't believe in Allah or Islam as the final message, then I fail to understand why this is so threatening to you?

Oh dear me. I am not saying that anyone is forcing me to be a Muslim! This thread has nothing to do with that! I was giving you more expansive reasons as to the problem with eternal torture for thought-crime!

And again, this is not threatening to me! We're having a discussion!

you are certainly free to exercise your free will.
What more do you want?

Omniscience vs. Free-Will is another discussion for another thread. Right here, if you'll focus, we are discussing the morality or immorality of eternal torture for Non-Muslims.

is that is what you believe, then you should be happy with such a belief.. Again, I am not sure I understand why your own personal beliefs have a bearing on what is or what should be?

What the...?!

I never said that my own personal beliefs have any baring on anything. I am giving my perspective on why I believe hellfire to be an unjust concept. You can either debate me with it, or not. Please do not come here though and ad infinitum question my being here, or complain that perhaps I am being demanding.

 

[جوري]

I know this. Part of my efforts on here, and in other places is to get specifically devout religious people to admit and understand these differences. They are astoundingly important, and from my perspective - very worryingly important.

It is nice to assume that lab rats will react in a specific fashion to a particular stimulus but it is safe to say, that you can't expect the same reaction from people!
By my standards you subscribe to lesser morals at a primitive basic level, the ones that animals might possess although at times even to a lesser degree, since animals lack the calculating factor and react on instinct!

This isn't about whether the threat is immediate or not. This is about a discussion on the fate of non-muslims in the hereafter according to Islam. I am giving you my perspective on why I will argue that it is wrong.

There is no right or wrong when it comes to an assumed hypothetical situation as you have clearly extricated yourself from subscribing. You don't get to have feelings about something that doesn't exist (per you) it is absurd-- and obviously we don't share your perspective making this an exercise in futility!
You do understand that I don't see things from your perspective?

I am not worrying about anything here. We're having a discussion/debate. I have already responded to this accusation earlier by another poster. As for why it is immoral, see any of my posts - even excerpts to quickly note my objection: thought-crime.

I have glimpsed over your notes, I can't find an issue on immorality, at least not an objective one!

This is the last time I will address this. I choose of my own free choice to come to this forum, to return to this forum and debate. I enjoy these debates and discussion just as I enjoy reading works of fiction, and playing works of fiction (video games). Whether or not you think I am wasting my time or not really does not concern me.

That is fine and well, however, even fiction games that you subscribe to have a particular theme that you have to follow in order for you to achieve a particular end result!
you don't for instance play a murder mystery game and complain that your guide is Alex Trebek instead of hercule poirot- you should make minimal effort to understand your situation and surrounding, especially that which you choose of your own free will!

None of it. You made a claim that you did not back up, you just asserted it.

Again, if the composition isn't suitable for you in any front, you are free to exercise your free will!

This has nothing to do with what is being claimed concerning hell. You are confusing what is with what ought (although, on reflection - this does not entirely surprise me. I have noted many religious people fail to make this distinction).

The correct analysis is that there is a sentient being who decrees people to heaven or hell based on an immoral seperation: thought. The very idea of sending people to eternal torture based on what they didn't do, on what they had no idea they had to do. Punishing people for getting their information wrong, for being misled, for perhaps not quite understanding properly. This is under all circumstances the exact proposition that is being claimed in this thread by every Muslim that has participated. Everyone who is not convinced of Islam will go to hell and languish in eternal torture.

The problem again lies with you.. If I go away on a vacation, pay you to be a house sitter, ask you to take care of my cat, provide you with everything you could possibly want with a few propositions which is to take care of my house, feed my cat and live of the fat the land and do as you please and in the end not only do I find my house in shambles, my cat dead and everything laying in utter ruin but you go so far as to accuse me of being negligent and not beneficent I am pretty sure any sane person would clearly see that the fault lies with you.
Everything is plainly laid out for you and you have mind to reason, failure to recognize it doesn't except you from responsibility. Be that as it may, people who were truly denied the message:

17: 15 Whoever chooses to follow the right path, follows it but for his own good; and whoever goes astray, goes but astray to his own hurt; and no bearer, of burdens shall be made to bear another's burden. Moreover, We would never chastise [any community for the wrong they may do] ere We have sent, an apostle [to them].

as per Quran will not be punished, since God is just! rather rendering your who analogy worthless .. and that is usually what happens when you argue before you read!

How is this so? I am 'guilty' of not being convinced. I cannot as of yet be convinced. Suppose I die in this state. I remain an atheist as I do now. Do you seriously agree that I deserve eternal ****ation purely for not thinking properly?

see previous verse.. only God can judge you based on your intentions!

Yes it does. Do you understand nothing of how analogies are supposed to represent and support claims? To make them more understandable?

Apparently in this case the error indeed lies with you!

You cannot compare an employer firing someone from a job and someone being sent to hell by Allah. It doesn't work. The employee believed that they were in a job. They believed the employer exists and has very physical powers. I do not believe Allah exists. I also do not believe I am under any divine compulsion to embrace Islam.

So what is the problem? I have already explained to you the themes you find yourself in, failure to recognize them doesn't exempt you from punishment, though you are not forced to work in life, or forced to work for the hereafter, be prepared to suffer consequences in either situations..

It is so funny how you write of analogies, but throw a tantrum when one isn't to your liking!

This is completely different than the job-scenario you invokes. And again: I repeat - who is being tortured? who is being made to suffer for being fired? I am glad that you mention that you can "always start over" in your job analogy, since in the context of the omnibenevolent superpower you invoke - after life, that is no longer possible.

You have many chances to start over in life.. it isn't over until it is over!
But it doesn't change the fact of the matter.. you are here on earth now, contemplating all of this, making a conscious decision? You don't get to complain about the exam results after you find out the answers when you were given ample room to study and reflect over course work!

Oh dear me. I am not saying that anyone is forcing me to be a Muslim! This thread has nothing to do with that! I was giving you more expansive reasons as to the problem with eternal torture for thought-crime!

I am finding no problems with eternal torture for a person such as you. I certainly can't equate someone who works hard to attain someone who slacks off and expects, but even with, surely God has declared:

[And when those who believe in Our messages come unto thee, say: "Peace be upon you. Your Sustainer has willed upon Himself the law of grace and mercy — so that if any of you does a bad deed out of ignorance, and thereafter repents and lives righteously, He shall be [found] Much-forgiving, a Dispenser of grace.}(Al-An`am 6:54)

Again, it would really pay if you read before you write!

And again, this is not threatening to me! We're having a discussion!

And what is your hope from this discussion?

Omniscience vs. Free-Will is another discussion for another thread. Right here, if you'll focus, we are discussing the morality or immorality of eternal torture for Non-Muslims.

It isn't a matter of morality.. it is a matter of justice!

What the...?!

I never said that my own personal beliefs have any baring on anything. I am giving my perspective on why I believe hellfire to be an unjust concept. You can either debate me with it, or not. Please do not come here though and ad infinitum question my being here, or complain that perhaps I am being demanding.

If you speak of morality vs. immorality of hypothetical situation which already doesn't exist according to you, then I can't find another heading for it save for 'personal beliefs'

I find you under-educated especially in Islamic jurisprudence, I can't understand why you'd discuss a topic of which you are ignorant!

all the best

 

[aamirsaab]

....
Again, you might have to tell me what you mean by 'moral existence'. When I am 'complaining' about the ethics of eternal torture in hellfire I of course operate from the immorality I believe would happen from of it and because of it.

By moral existence I mean ethics.

Well I will argue that you are being semantic here. I use the term 'think' and 'believe' interchangeably in this context. Nonetheless, it makes no odds. The terms 'belief' and 'think' still apply to thought, and whether you decree the dividing either - it is still thought-crime.

It's not thought crime if you don't believe what you are doing IS a crime nor that you don't believe in the punishment for that crime actually exists! If you go to hell for denying God's existence, you cannot cry foul-play when you go to Hell (which you have been told outright already).

On the other hand, if saying (bare minimum that is) the shahadah (with proper conviction) is all that it takes to escape from hell - then hurry up man!

Secondly, this is simply a rephrasing of what (according to your beliefs) will happen. You have not given a justification for as to why it is ethically sound, or in the slightest bit just. Why should someone who simply has not seen enough evidence in their life to believe and 'submit' to Allah be punished for their conclusion? And in such a horrific way?

This is why I repeated Uthman's post. It might be better overall if you could narrow down which of the four categories there actually is any unjustice to?

Right. And we know that some nations like to put people in jail unjustly. We do not claim that all laws in all lands are sound purely because that they are there (which has been about half of your argument concerning hell).

It was a basic example to illustrate a point. And you're being awfully negative as seems to be the per with critics of Islam who keep demanding answers!

Remember I look at this from a completely humanitarian context. The idea of 'thought-crime' (which I do not believe you have attempted to refute) is honestly nauseating to me, as I am sure it would be to you in most other things that happen on earth! (N. Korea, China, etc.)

Well, could you please explain to me how exactly the punishment of hell is thought-crime, in light of all the posts so far (especially brother Uthmans)?

Because, I'm not seeing it right now.

 

[sevgi]

When one is blind to the truth and deaf to the calling of the truth, nobody can help them.

Arguing, discussing and debating get us nowhere. We are always posed with the same questions and the same rebuttles. I spent my life trying to make people see...but my heart has grown tired of seeing these people and their arrogance.

I call my brothers and sisters to leave them be and let them face the truth in the hereafter; where they realise it all and beg for a second chance to come back.