The Purpose of Life

babyvaio

(part of the text PURPOSE OF LIFE, the complete text can be found on the link posted below)

PURPOSE OF LIFE
What Does Islam Say About Life's Purpose?
_________________________________

Have you ever asked yourself these questions?
"What is the purpose of L I F E?"
"My life?"
"Your Life?"

People everywhere are asking the questions; "What is the purpose of life?" and "Why are we here?" You might be amazed to learn, that Islam is providing clear and concise answers for these questions.

...

Those who are in search of truth, having open minds and hearts will recognize this as a message in truth and sincerity. Open your heart and your mind now and ask the Almighty God of the Universe [Allah] to guide you now to His True Way. And then be ready to accept your true purpose in life.

(taken from http://www.islamtomorrow.com/purpose.htm)

Dades

As per your invite on the Christianity thread I came to see what you had to say. If this is your idea of being open minded, it explains a lot about the world we live in. I bid you adieu.

babyvaio wrote:

For a disbeliever the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them.

babyvaio

The Atheist wrote:

As per your invite on the Christianity thread I came to see what you had to say. If this is your idea of being open minded, it explains a lot about the world we live in. I bid you adieu.

It is an invitation for you to use your God given senses the right way - to think harder and to observe the world around you better.
The problem is that human wants to be independent, not responsible for anything and similar.

How can you by independent even after knowing that you don't control your life? In other words, how can you claim independency when it's so obvious that you don't control the moment of your death? Hmmm, weird gets weirder...

Dades

babyvaio wrote:

The problem is that human wants to be independent, not responsible for anything and similar.

No the problem is your assumption that all people require the threat of a God, or the promise of reward to live a worthy life. I put it to you that perhaps it is better to live a noble life out of compassion for your fellow man, rather than out of obligation or fear.

the_new_mr

Both are required (compassion for your fellow man and a feeling of obligation and fear).

Let's not let this thread degenerate into a round and round in circles kinda thread guys

babyvaio

The Atheist wrote:

No the problem is your assumption that all people require the threat of a God, or the promise of reward to live a worthy life. I put it to you that perhaps it is better to live a noble life out of compassion for your fellow man, rather than out of obligation or fear.

Ever heard of love? :rolleyes:

pH

For a disbeliever the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them.

The Atheist wrote:

As per your invite on the Christianity thread I came to see what you had to say. If this is your idea of being open minded, it explains a lot about the world we live in. I bid you adieu.

Just a quick question, would you allow that text posted in the Atheism forum with the word 'disbeliever' replaced with 'Christian' or 'Muslim'?

Also as an aside - Isn't posting large amounts of text copied and pasted from websites was prohibited by this forum's charter?

babyvaio

pH wrote:

Also as an aside - Isn't posting large amounts of text copied and pasted from websites was prohibited by this forum's charter?

Forgive my ignorance, it must have been Next, Next, Finish approach.
I can remove the text and just glue the link?

Wibbs

babyvaio wrote:

I can remove the text and just glue the link?

Maybe half and half. Some quotes and some links(more work though). If you just link on it's own, many people may not click and read it. Just my opinion though.

the_new_mr

Good point pH. Sorry babyvaio, please remove or shorten the text considerbly in the post. Thanks.

babyvaio

the_new_mr wrote:

Good point pH. Sorry babyvaio, please remove or shorten the text considerbly in the post. Thanks.

Done

Dades

pH wrote:

For a disbeliever the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them.

Just a quick question, would you allow that text posted in the Atheism forum with the word 'disbeliever' replaced with 'Christian' or 'Muslim'?

There'd certainly be a warning - before being thrown to the wolves.

pH wrote:

Ever heard of love?

Apparantly it's all you need. A singer wrote that once. Then someone shot him in the back.

babyvaio

The Atheist wrote:

There'd certainly be a warning - before being thrown to the wolves.

Apparantly it's all you need. A singer wrote that once. Then someone shot him in the back.

You didn't get me. General rule is (from everybody's experience I'd say) that if you love some one, then you can't just say the words of love, but you have to act in a way to show this love.

In other words - if one claims one loves Allah swt then ones has to show some obedience, one has to do works so that Allah swt - His Creator would be pleased with him/her. The more one is obedient to Allah swt, the more noble works one will try do to, the more sincere one will be.

And no, of course that's not all I need, there are things I need way before love. :cool:

babyvaio

pH wrote:

Just a quick question, would you allow that text posted in the Atheism forum with the word 'disbeliever' replaced with 'Christian' or 'Muslim'?

A Muslim is not a disbeliever. So I would never replace a word disbeliever for a word Muslim. A Christian (or a Nazarian more precisely as they were originally called) is a disbeliever is they believe that Allah swt is one of the three, or if they believe that Jesus, peace upon him, is divine, or if they associate divinity to Mary, the mother of Jesus, peace upon him. Those Christians who said so - disbelieved. So yes, I would call them so.

Dades

Originally Posted by pH
Just a quick question, would you allow that text posted in the Atheism forum with the word 'disbeliever' replaced with 'Christian' or 'Muslim'?

babyvaio wrote:

A Muslim is not a disbeliever. So I would never replace a word disbeliever for a word Muslim. A Christian (or a Nazarian more precisely as they were originally called) is a disbeliever is they believe that Allah swt is one of the three, or if they believe that Jesus, peace upon him, is divine, or if they associate divinity to Mary, the mother of Jesus, peace upon him. Those Christians who said so - disbelieved. So yes, I would call them so.

I'm not sure you understood the question.

What pH was asking was asking what your reaction would be if somebody had posted this on another forum:

"For a Muslim the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them."

Medina

The_New_Mr, I'd be interested to see what you think of Babyvaio's statement:
For a disbeliever the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them.

To me this appears to be the type of statement that gives Muslims a bad name with the rest of the world. And I don't think all Muslims would even agree with him.

Babyvaio forgets that there are very pious Christians all over the world and Buddhists live a very peaceful humble life...there are many good people all over the world who either do/don't believe in God and yet can live a life respecting morality, ethics, compassion and modesty.

This makes Babyvaio appear to have a very superior attitude in my view and a cornercase of judgemental and intolerant behaviour

babyvaio

Medina wrote:

The_New_Mr, I'd be interested to see what you think of Babyvaio's statement:
For a disbeliever the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them.

To me this appears to be the type of statement that gives Muslims a bad name with the rest of the world. And I don't think all Muslims would even agree with him.

Babyvaio forgets that there are very pious Christians all over the world and Buddhists live a very peaceful humble life...there are many good people all over the world who either do/don't believe in God and yet can live a life respecting morality, ethics, compassion and modesty.

This makes Babyvaio appear to have a very superior attitude in my view and a cornercase of judgemental and intolerant behaviour

babyvaio never claimed he was superior.
babyvaio didn't write the text - babyvaio posted the link.
babyvaio thinks the text was talking specifically about those who don't even consider there is God, The Creator.
babyvaio thinks that Christians who say Jesus, son of Mary, peace upon him, is God Almighty or His son, or any other people who associate partners to Allah swt or a son or a daughter even or any such thing are a nonbelievers - and that's according to Allah's Law - indeed they disbelieved.

Here is why babyvaio thinks so:


The Noble Qur'an
Surah/Chapter 005 - Al-Mâ'idah. Verse 17.

They indeed have DISBELIEVED who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary (Jesus). Say : Who then can do aught against Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of Mary (Jesus), and his mother and everyone on earth? Allah's is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. He createth what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things.


babyvaio over & out

Medina

babyvaio wrote:

babyvaio never claimed he was superior.
babyvaio didn't write the text - babyvaio posted the link.
babyvaio thinks the text was talking specifically about those who don't even consider there is God, The Creator.
babyvaio thinks that Christians and any other who associate partners to Allah swt or a son or a daughter even or any such thing are a nonbelievers - and that's according to Allah's Law - indeed they disbelieved.

You have actually contradicted yourself in this post.

By 'disbelievers' to you mean

A) specifically about those who don't even consider there is God, The Creator.

OR

Christians and any other who associate partners to Allah swt or a son or a daughter even or any such thing are a nonbelievers - and that's according to Allah's Law - indeed they disbelieved.

babyvaio

Medina wrote:

You have actually contradicted yourself in this post.

By 'disbelievers' to you mean

A) specifically about those who don't even consider there is God, The Creator.

OR

Christians and any other who associate partners to Allah swt or a son or a daughter even or any such thing are a nonbelievers - and that's according to Allah's Law - indeed they disbelieved.

A) atheists and similar = disbelievers

Christians who believe in Jesus as he was their Lord (God) - disbelieved = disbelievers

A = B = disbelievers.

No contradictions there. They all who believe so are disbelievers in Allah swt (in On True Almighty God, The Creator)

Medina

Well then my post stands

Medina wrote:

The_New_Mr, I'd be interested to see what you think of Babyvaio's statement:
For a disbeliever the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them.

To me this appears to be the type of statement that gives Muslims a bad name with the rest of the world. And I don't think all Muslims would even agree with him.

Babyvaio forgets that there are very pious Christians all over the world and Buddhists live a very peaceful humble life...there are many good people all over the world who either do/don't believe in God and yet can live a life respecting morality, ethics, compassion and modesty.

This makes Babyvaio appear to have a very superior attitude in my view and a cornercase of judgemental and intolerant behaviour

Hobbes

Let me make something clear on the thread before anyone continues.

The forum is not open for you to abuse other religons (or lack there of). Linking off to a site that does it for also counts as if you where posting the abuse.

Its one of the few things that can get you permantly banned from all religous forums.

babyvaio consider yourself warned.

babyvaio

Hobbes wrote:

Let me make something clear on the thread before anyone continues.

The forum is not open for you to abuse other religons (or lack there of). Linking off to a site that does it for also counts as if you where posting the abuse.

Its one of the few things that can get you permantly banned from all religous forums.

babyvaio consider yourself warned.

Abuse depends on perception.

You might think so, some might not.

BTW, please cancel my account then. U have the authorization from me.

Because I don't wana be a part of a forum where double standards are applied.

Sorry.

Hobbes

babyvaio wrote:

Abuse depends on perception.

The link you posted contained comments that others found offensive. You then proceeded to acknowledge these comments as true.

You might think so, some might not.

Read the charter. Regardless if you find them offensive or not some people did and your comments broke the charter. Kindly refrain from doing so in the future.

BTW, please cancel my account then. U have the authorization from me.

I just moderate this forum. Account stuff is handled by admins. Try the feedback forum.

Because I don't wana be a part of a forum where double standards are applied.

What double standards is that then? If you have a problem with someones post as being offensive or double standards then use the report the post function and it will be looked at.

If you wish to continue to contribute to the forum I recommend you read the charter and follow it.

If you wish to continue this moderation issue discussion do so on the charter thread or in Private messages.

babyvaio

Hobbes wrote:

The link you posted contained comments that others found offensive. You then proceeded to acknowledge these comments as true.



Read the charter. Regardless if you find them offensive or not some people did and your comments broke the charter. Kindly refrain from doing so in the future.



I just moderate this forum. Account stuff is handled by admins. Try the feedback forum.



What double standards is that then? If you have a problem with someones post as being offensive or double standards then use the report the post function and it will be looked at.

If you wish to continue to contribute to the forum I recommend you read the charter and follow it.

If you wish to continue this moderation issue discussion do so on the charter thread or in Private messages.

I had a wish to contribute, but no more.
So please let's not waste time - could you be so kind to alert the admins (or let me know how to do that) to terminate my account? I'd appreciate that. Thanks.

Wibbs

babyvaio wrote:

You didn't get me. General rule is (from everybody's experience I'd say) that if you love some one, then you can't just say the words of love, but you have to act in a way to show this love.

Perfectly logical and correct for want of a better word. But I think like The Atheist that you're missing the point.

What pH was asking was asking what your reaction would be if somebody had posted this on another forum:

"For a Muslim the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them."

IMO Your original line is a blanket statement couched in apparent arrogance, disregard and ignorance about the morals of others. With respect to Christian/Nazarine types the line "Judge not lest you be judged" springs to mind. I wouldn't be too surprised to find a similar sentiment in the teachings of Islam.

And no, of course that's not all I need, there are things I need way before love. :cool:

If you take love as the sexual kind I agree. If you take love towards your fellow man as the bigger concept I'd be worried by that statement.

babyvaio never claimed he was superior.

You're claiming your doctrine is and by association you are. Fine on the former. That's part and parcel of most faiths. The latter is the problem, because by extension you believe others who don't believe exactly what you do(inc I suspect Shia Muslims) are seriously lesser. That's the dangerous part.

babyvaio thinks the text was talking specifically about those who don't even consider there is God, The Creator.

I can see why the text says that. part and parcel of all faiths etc.

babyvaio thinks that Christians who say Jesus, son of Mary, peace upon him, is God Almighty or His son, or any other people who associate partners to Allah swt or a son or a daughter even or any such thing are a nonbelievers - and that's according to Allah's Law - indeed they disbelieved.

The same people of the book whom the Muslim texts say you should respect. Indeed the quran says you should respect even their holy books. Now of course there is the charge that the Christians and the Jews corrupted their books, but that's another debate. Indeed the Quran seems to be variable in it's attitudes to the people of the book, sometimes harsh, sometimes not. Why not take the less harsh stance?

babyvaio

Wibbs wrote:

The same people of the book whom the Muslim texts say you should respect. Indeed the quran says you should respect even their holy books. Now of course there is the charge that the Christians and the Jews corrupted their books, but that's another debate. Indeed the Quran seems to be variable in it's attitudes to the people of the book, sometimes harsh, sometimes not. Why not take the less harsh stance?

U can respect a person or not, but U cannot respect claim like that. Sorry.

Same way as U don't respect other views, like mine for instance.

BTW, it's The Ultimate Sin. That's why. Same way as Muslims are heretics to Christians for not believing that Jesus is what they claim he is.

babyvaio

??

Wibbs

Missed the last few posts while typing. Sorry

babyvaio wrote:

Abuse depends on perception.

You might think so, some might not.

What Hobbes said sums it up.

Because I don't wana be a part of a forum where double standards are applied.

Agree again with Hobbes. I honestly can't see the double standard. You posted stuff(some inflammatory especially to Christians), people responded. Now because you don't get your way you appear to throw your toys out of the pram? Things like this can get heated. Hey I know I have, but seriously do the discussion the favour of at least seeing the point of view of the other. I'd be only too happy to discuss further by PM with others.

Hobbes

I am locking the thread as its just focusing on Babyviao and not the post (as you all should be doing).

Babyviao, based on your other posts you contribute to the forum fine and threatening to leave over one incident is a big over-reaction in my honest opinion. However if your that intent on leaving the easiest way is to just not read the forum. Or you can post on the helpdesk forum (you are less likely to receive random abuse there).

However the ruling still stands and generalisations like the comment mentioned are not welcome on the forum. Sometimes in order to respect other people it means not always expressing your opinion so publically.

the_new_mr

I know the thread is closed but there were a couple of things needed to be addressed if Hobbes will excuse me

Medina wrote:

The_New_Mr, I'd be interested to see what you think of Babyvaio's statement:
For a disbeliever the purpose of this life is to collect and amass great wealth, money, power and position. Over indulging in eating, drinking, drugs, sex and gambling are a high priority to them.

The short answer is that I honestly don't agree with such a statement and neither does Islam to be honest (I'm not a spokesperson for Islam... nor am I a scholar... just someone talking from experience of teachings and principles). Blanket statements are not okay and I've met a few athiests in my life which have a stronger moral code than the ones implied in the paragraph.

Sorry babyvaio but I honestly think you're overreacting a bit. You know that we are taught to hold witness in things which are correct even if it be against our ownselves so I feel it is my responsibility to tell you that. You shouldn't leave though because, as Hobbes said, you make good contributions to the forum. There are no double standards set here. The same goes for a non-Muslim offending a Muslim and the forum charter is very well setup for mutual respect amongst people.

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding on the "disbeliever" issue. The word disbeliever literally means someone who doesn't believe so to call a Christian a disbeliever of Islam is nothing the Christian should find offensive. The same goes for a Muslim being called a disbeliever of Christianity. Neither should really find it offensive... it's just a disagreement on the theological level at the end of the day.

As for equating a Christian disbeliever in Islam with someone who looks to amass wealth, money etc, that's not on and is not correct. Same goes for Buddhists, Jews, etc.

Wibbs wrote:

Indeed the Quran seems to be variable in it's attitudes to the people of the book, sometimes harsh, sometimes not. Why not take the less harsh stance?

Just wanted to address this quickly. Any harshness towards people of the book in the Quran must be understood in its correct contexts as mentioned elsewhere on this forum. Harsh verses were with respect to times when there was war against them. Otherwise, in the abscence of fighting, Muslims are commanded to be good and show birr (a high level of kindness) towards people of the book and not doing so is considered a very bad action indeed.

Al-Mumtahina:8
"Allah forbiddeth you not those who warred not against you on account of religion and drove you not out from your homes, that ye should show them kindness and deal justly with them. Lo! Allah loveth the just dealers."