Inter-faith relations

DinoBot

I have a background in Islam and still have many muslim friends.

So I was having a discussion with a friend on the subject of inter-faith
relations and in particular inter-faith prayer. Now I am not for this and never
was. I understand its important to have relationships with people from
different faiths but I think when it comes to matters of faith then you can no
longer have agreement. I always feel when this type of meeting takes place
is so false because each person there is thinking they are right and the
other is wrong.So the conversation eventually got onto the base subject
which is:

Is it possible to really like someone when your faith tells
you that they are destined for hell ?

I know thats very very simplistic but at the back of all religions I feel it
preaches that its followers are good, God abiding people and
"others" are not that good. Now I know some will come back and say "nobody can
know the state of someone when they die", true. But I know people who will never
except Islam, so their state is talked about.

My main point is How do religious people deal with this ? I find this point very
difficult.

wes

I think Jews and Christians can still go to heaven as they are people of the book. So it isn't as clear cut as you think. All 3 of the major Abrahamic faiths actually have a lot of similarities and not to mention a common origin.

Still getting together and understanding each other and still thinking your right isn't insincere. It doesn't mean you can't respect one another's beliefs.

InFront

Salaam DinoBot, these fatāwā are not exact answers for your question, but maybe might help
One

And Two

The second makes it obvious that we must simply be tolerant of people of other faiths.
AFAIK If someone doesn't accept Islam, all we can do is make dawah and be a good Muslim ourselves. I think it would be wrong to spend a long time pondering over another's faith when that is between themselves and Allah and we must consider our own weaknesses and try to fix them. Allah knows best, so we shouldn't worry about what he decides.

Say: 'Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if you turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and you for that placed on you. If you obey him, you shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message)) (An-Nur 24:54).

DinoBot

wes wrote:

Still getting together and understanding each other and still thinking your right isn't insincere. It doesn't mean you can't respect one another's beliefs.

Thanks guys. Its good to know I wasnt alone in my thinking.

Yes, thats my thoughts, in that there is always this air of each side pitying the other and hoping to bring the other into the truth. So I think its
1. Impossible to have inter-faith relations
2. A waste of time.

Now of course Im only speaking about issues of religion, of course its always good for people of different faiths to get together to realise we all the same underneath the labels we put on ourselves.

PeakOutput

i know very little about islam and things but do muslims not say "there is no god but god"????? and assuming that is the case then as long as you worship that god,however you do it, you have a chance of not ending up in hell


im sure im way off but am interested in an answer

InFront

That is the shahadah, translated to mean 'there is no God but God, and Muhammad is the messenger of God'.

There is an interesting piece about the shahadah here, which describes that there are 'conditions' attached.
Whether or not belief in one God alone, like the Jews or Christians (I'm not sure how the Trinity fits), is enough to save a person is not really something we should dwell on. No matter how much we try to think about it, God will have already made his decision, a decision that is out of our control. He knows best, and so the fate of others is not something we should have reason to worry about.

It is impossible to know the mind of God, so what you say is possible. He does say positive things about the Christians and Jews, people of the book, in the Qur'an. I don't think there is any doubt that Christians and Jews are closer to Allah and to Islam than atheists, for example.

Schuhart

InFront wrote:

There is an interesting piece about the shahadah here, which describes that there are 'conditions' attached.

I loved this bit.

Similarly, many brothers and sisters nowadays are spending hours at a time with the computer news groups and bulletin boards. A lot of nonsense and falsehood are posted on those news groups and bulletin boards. Again, the one who is not very knowledgeable of his religion may easily be influenced and affected by the misconceptions and false arguments that he reads in those bulletin boards. He should remain away from those things and get a deeper knowledge of Islam through the authentic sources of the religion.

Nothing upsets the faithful like the free movement of ideas.

InFront wrote:

It is impossible to know the mind of God, so what you say is possible. He does say positive things about the Christians and Jews, people of the book, in the Qur'an. I don't think there is any doubt that Christians and Jews are closer to Allah and to Islam than atheists, for example.

This question of knowing God’s mind is out there on a couple of threads in the atheism and Christianity forums at the moment. The question raised is how it is possible to reconcile the idea that we don’t know God’s will to which faith, if any, most closely approximates that will. Christianity and Judaism are most certainly in the same broad family as Islam. Whether any of them is close to God is a very different matter.

InFront

Schuhart wrote:

I loved this bit.Nothing upsets the faithful like the free movement of ideas.

Schuhart you're always so suspicious! I think all they meant by this is that people should be careful about their sources.
I recently signed up to a very dodgy "Islam" forum which actually turned out to be full of Muslim teens with too much political baggage in the name of their religion, and who would be better served listening to their teachers or kicking a football.
Real Muslims and others who want to talk about Islam, doing so in a quiet and rational manner, can only be a good thing surely.
I don't think the learned scholar was thinking of boards.ie in general!

This question of knowing God’s mind is out there on a couple of threads in the atheism and Christianity forums at the moment.

If you don't mind me saying so it is only under discussion in the context that the atheism forum largely tends to work like a comparative and critical theology forum, would you agree? I have respect for atheists, but my point is just that Muslims, but also Christians and Jews are closer to God, atheists would presumably not place themselves as close to God, by choice, since they don't believe He is there.

The question raised is how it is possible to reconcile the idea that we don’t know God’s will to which faith, if any, most closely approximates that will.

That is true from the point of view where one does not adhere to any belief in God. From a Muslim's point of view, that's got to be different. A Muslim believes in the Qur'an, by its very definition a recitation (of God's will). It is just that we cannot know God's mind in terms of what he chooses for us after our individual deaths, whether we are Muslims or Christians or Jews or Atheists. But we can know, or strive to know, what he wants for us now on earth, which is what we should focus on.

Schuhart

InFront wrote:

Schuhart you're always so suspicious! I think all they meant by this is that people should be careful about their sources.

Always, particularly when a religious authority figure suggests self-censorship.

InFront wrote:

I have respect for atheists, but my point is just that Muslims, but also Christians and Jews are closer to God, atheists would presumably not place themselves as close to God, by choice, since they don't believe He is there.

If we don’t know God’s mind, then maybe we are. Maybe God wants us to pretend he’s not there, and gives particular grace to people who deny him altogether. By assuming worship in some form is better than none is an implicit statement that the mind of God is knowable – you are saying he wants a relationship with people.

InFront wrote:

A Muslim believes in the Qur'an, by its very definition a recitation (of God's will). It is just that we cannot know God's mind in terms of what he chooses for us after our individual deaths, whether we are Muslims or Christians or Jews or Atheists. But we can know, or strive to know, what he wants for us now on earth, which is what we should focus on.

This is suggesting, effectively, that God’s mind is knowable to a very large extent. As someone said in a similar context on the Christianity forum, it amounts to saying ‘We don’t know anything about God’s mind, but we know he hates fags’.

InFront

By assuming worship in some form is better than none is an implicit statement that the mind of God is knowable

God's mind is not knowable. Knowing his mind is certainly not the same thing as understanding his will for us on Earth, which we can try to do.

His will can be understood by careful interpretation of His message to the Prophet s.a.w. and can be understood in light of the ways of the Prophet.

To say that we can know his mind is not really accurate, though. This suggestion endows us with greater intelligence or equal intelligence as God, and I don't understand how that could be possible.
Some things are ghayb, the unseen that lies beyond the horizon of human intelligence and things only God can know, including the fate of non-Muslims. It's not something any of us can really decide or make pronouncements on.

All that I am saying is that based on the Qur'an and they way of the prophet pbuh, it would seem that those who are related to our faith in a monotheist God - the Jews and the Christians - they would seem closer to Him and to Islam than atheists. They are making declarations of submission just like we do.
Atheism is not simply a lack of submission to God, it is when a person chooses to reject God completely, it is an act of revolt. From the Muslim point of view, this isn't a good idea.
But because a Muslim is only a human, and cannot understand al-Ghayb, cannot know the mind of God, it is not for us to judge such a person. That will happen irrespective of what we humans say or think or do.

Schuhart

InFront wrote:

God's mind is not knowable. Knowing his mind is certainly not the same thing as understanding his will for us on Earth, which we can try to do.

His will can be understood by careful interpretation of His message to the Prophet s.a.w. and can be understood in light of the ways of the Prophet.

The distinction between ‘mind’ and ‘will’ seems artificial in this context. I think it’s possible to start just with whether or not a human can glean what God wants of him. If the answer to that is yes, then we are saying God is at least partly within human comprehension. If, on the other hand, we admit that we really don’t have a clue what God is about, then we are agreeing that we cannot glean what God wants, if anything.

Now, what someone might say is ‘I know God gave us this book, but I have no idea why’. That’s, to an extent, what we mean by saying ‘we don’t know want God wants, but we know he hates fags’. The focus then shifts, naturally, to how it is we know that God has issued these arbitrary instructions.

InFront wrote:

All that I am saying is that based on the Qur'an and they way of the prophet pbuh, it would seem that those who are related to our faith in a monotheist God - the Jews and the Christians - they would seem closer to Him and to Islam than atheists. They are making declarations of submission just like we do.

Simply saying that Judaism, Christianity and Islam have an amount in common holds water. It’s speculating that they are collectively close to anything that needs explanation.

InFront

No matter how much you focus on knowing God's mind, it is an impossible question. It is a beyond a human's intellectual parameters to comprehend Him, all that can be known is the 'ghayb' He has chosen to reveal through His Messengers. Revealing information is an expression of a relationship with us and prepares the possibility that we could understand His will.

You say this is an artificial distinction but I disagree, I don't think we can or should try to conclude whether we even 'partially know his mind' based on what we know of his will. It is a question I think only for a scholar. But it is definitely true to say that realistically His mind cannot be known by man, but His will can be known because it has been sent to us.

Schuhart

You can probably guess the response - if God's beyond our understanding, how do we know he sent a message? And what gives a scholar a higher status in the quest to understand the divine mind/will/message?

InFront

I think the question reached a level where you can get into false conclusions, so I asked the Imam about partially knowing the mind of God today and this is his written answer. As to your question why people ask questions of their elders or those who are more learned, I think the answer is obvious.

1) The attributes (qualities) of Allah are not like the qualities of human beings in any way. He says in the Qur'an : "There is none like Him, and He is the All-Hearing the All-seeing."

2) The only way to have authentic knowledge about Allah is through what He has told us about Himself, and what His Messenger has told us i.e. only through Wahi, revelation.

3)It is inappropriate to say anything about Allah (like partially know his mind) without the authority of authentic knowledge. So, it is not right and unsafe to say such a things - that we can partially know his mind-. Saying something like this without authority can amount to empty arrogance - as you have put it.

the_new_mr

Nice one InFront.

Schuhart wrote:

And what gives a scholar a higher status in the quest to understand the divine mind/will/message?

A scholar means he has more knowledge. For example (although Islam is beyond such a comparison). If there's something wrong with my washing machine, I don't go to a carpenter to ask his opinion on it. Anyone can be a scholar, if they know enough. That's all it means. Perhaps it's important here to outline the difference between a priest and an Islamic scholar for the two are not the same. An Islamic scholar has only more knowledge and no more spiritual authority. Someone who knows only the basics of Islam could potentially be more spiritual than an Islamic scholar.

At the same time, I once heard a saying of an old scholar that said something like "A scholar remains a scholar as long as he searches for knowledge. If he then considers himself a scholar then he has become one of the ignorant" (loose translation).

On the subject of inter-faith relations, I don't think they are a waste of time at all.

DinoBot wrote:

Thanks guys. Its good to know I wasnt alone in my thinking.

Think there was a misunderstanding here. Didn't Wes say that he thinks that "... getting together and understanding each other and still thinking your right isn't insincere. It doesn't mean you can't respect one another's beliefs."

And finally for this post, as InFront has already pointed out, there's no point in contemplating on who's going to heaven and who's going to hell. Only God knows for sure.

InFront

I think that the very last sentance of above response gives the answer to this whole thread... "Only God knows for sure".
Personally speaking, that tends to make our own conclusions in perspective

None of us ever know more than God. Praise God. (Al-hamdulillah).

Schuhart

InFront wrote:

As to your question why people ask questions of their elders or those who are more learned, I think the answer is obvious.

The gap from my perspective, you'll understand, is deeming someone to be 'more learned' in relation to God's intentions because of their intimacy with a particular collection of holy books.

In the final analysis, that gap rests unanswered by the quote from the Imam as it assumes what is to be proven. How does he know the books he studies bring him any closer to answers? In truth, he doesn't and hence has to brush past the matter as if the question was not asked.

This kind of obvious issue avoidance is, of course, ultimately shared by all religions. It seems to work for a lot of people, but I'm left in the company of Mark Twain, thinking "Faith is believing something you know ain't true."

the_new_mr

Well, some clarification is in order.

Assuming that someone is a Muslim, then reading the Quran or authentic hadeeth are the only way of gaining sound religious knowledge. If someone reads the Quran and relfects on its meaning with the belief that it's from God, then it can open up a lot of paths of thought and perhaps God will even guide that person to a certain understanding. Anyone can do this, not only a scholar.

A scholar is not necessarily 'more learned' in relation to God's intention. But you could say that he's 'more learned' in religious knowledge and can therefore give opinions based on this knowledge (which of course he is always expected to back up with a verse from the Quran or an authentic hadeeth). And if that knowledge includes a certain action to take or whatever because it's what God says in the Quran then you could, for want of a better word, have a better idea of God's intention in that respect.

It seems to me Schuhart that you just have a problem with anyone having faith and your frustration is obvious. You're free to your own opinion but, personally speaking, I think you have a closed mind. You reject the argument even before you read/hear it because you've already made your mind up on having faith. You of course will no doubt think the same of me but consider for a moment my readiness to question the authenticity of a hadeeth. I only want to know the truth and, as a Muslim, I believe I'm on it.

You and Mark Twain can hold to your opinions if you want. I won't force you otherwise. But perhaps you might sincerely ask yourself whether your mind (and more importantly, your heart) is open or closed. I think that as long as you've decided that you're not going to believe no matter what then there's no point trying to see it from our point of view.

Al-Jathiya:23
"Hast thou ever considered [the kind of man] who makes his own desires his deity, and whom God has [thereupon] let go astray, knowing [that his mind is closed to all guidance], and whose hearing and heart He has sealed, and upon whose sight He has placed a veil? Who, then, could guide him after God? Will you not, then, bethink yourselves?"

Schuhart

the_new_mr wrote:

But perhaps you might sincerely ask yourself whether your mind (and more importantly, your heart) is open or closed. I think that as long as you've decided that you're not going to believe no matter what then there's no point trying to see it from our point of view.

The gap in preception may simply be irreconcilable - there's no particular reason why an understanding should be possible.

As to what's an open or closed mind, that's hard to define. From my perspective, starting from the position that there is something called an authentic Hadith suggests a degree of closure. What I mean by this is that we've already opened those books with a feeling the answer must be in there somewhere.

At the end of the day do I positively know the Quran is not a message from God? No, but I feel its very, very unlikely. Indeed, I feel its so unlikely that we can discount the possibility completely. I don't see that as being closed, because its really just the outcome of reflection. There's plenty of different ways of asking the question. At the moment, I'd probably express it as 'have we just created the God we want to be there?'

The alternative, to me, looks like simply closing enquiry within one area and saying 'Give me that old time religion, its good enough for me'. Which is what many people of many faiths do. Funny creatures, people.

the_new_mr

Schuhart wrote:

The gap in preception may simply be irreconcilable

Isn't this the problem? The assumption that there's no point trying to see the other person's point of view because it's not going to happen? There have been people before you who have rejected the idea of God and religion in a much more intense manner and they still changed their minds so ya never know what might happen.

Schuhart wrote:

From my perspective, starting from the position that there is something called an authentic Hadith suggests a degree of closure.

In fairness, a conclusion like that should really only be brought around after some research. Granted, I'm not a scholar and most Muslims wouldn't be but the books of knowledge are out there if people want to read them. God tells us in the Quran to go out in search of knowledge.

If you feel you've given yourself an honest chance when thinking about, say, whether the Quran is the word of God and you've come to the conclusion that it's "very, very unlikely" (as you put it) then that's your choice and you're free to it.

On the subject of things which are unlikely, I find it hard to believe that anyone could think that the universe 'just happened'. Who was it that said that, in terms of mathematical probability, the likelihood of the universe and the earth forming in the way that they have just by chance is a lot less likely than a tornado going through a junk yard and leaving behind a fully functional Boeing 747?

Schuhart wrote:

At the moment, I'd probably express it as 'have we just created the God we want to be there?'

The old argument of the atheist God knows how many times I've heard this one Personally speaking, I've had enough experiences in my life to know that there is a God. I've mentioned one in particular on there forums before I think. I had another quite recently but I feel it was quite a private experience so I'd like to keep it to myself if you don't mind. Trust me, it's not one of those 'in my head' things and it's most certainly not a coincidence.

Schuhart wrote:

The alternative, to me, looks like simply closing enquiry within one area and saying 'Give me that old time religion, its good enough for me'. Which is what many people of many faiths do. Funny creatures, people.

This is just an extension of the idea of the atheist point of view that people have created God out of convenience. Islam (as well as other religions) is very clear on this point. Don't just believe because it's convenient. Believe because you really believe it and strive to achieve the certainty of faith that someone like Abu Bakr Al-Sadeeq had. Everyone may have doubts from time to time but these doubts can actually serve to strengthen your faith in the end.

Schuhart

the_new_mr wrote:

There have been people before you who have rejected the idea of God and religion in a much more intense manner

I’m just back off a ban. How intense would you expect me to be?:D

the_new_mr wrote:

On the subject of things which are unlikely, I find it hard to believe that anyone could think that the universe 'just happened'. Who was it that said that, in terms of mathematical probability, the likelihood of the universe and the earth forming in the way that they have just by chance is a lot less likely than a tornado going through a junk yard and leaving behind a fully functional Boeing 747?

Believe it or not, the ‘747 in a junkyard’ statement was coined by an atheist astronomer, Fred Hoyle. The response by people like Richard Dawkins is, of course, that they are not saying all this happened by chance. They are saying it happened as the outcome of an understandable physical process. I think Fred Hoyle's point was that he doubted they had identified the correct physical process, and that life must have come to Earth from outer space.

By coincidence, I happened to be in the Natural History Museum earlier today. One exhibit is simply a human skeleton standing beside skeletons of a gorilla, chimp and orang-utang. The similarities do look too close for chance. In other words, it would seem very, very unlikely that the first man was made out of clay by a divine creator. Unless God wants to fool us into thinking we have a common ancestor with apes.

the_new_mr wrote:

Trust me, it's not one of those 'in my head' things and it's most certainly not a coincidence.

I’m not denying that people report mystical experiences. I’d only add that comment from before – lots of people from lots of different religions report miracles and divine intervention. Including this guy.

President George Bush has claimed he was told by God to invade Iraq and attack Osama bin Laden's stronghold of Afghanistan as part of a divine mission to bring peace to the Middle East, security for Israel, and a state for the Palestinians.

the_new_mr

Schuhart wrote:

The response by people like Richard Dawkins is, of course, that they are not saying all this happened by chance. They are saying it happened as the outcome of an understandable physical process

It may be an understandable physical process and all but the probability that it works out the way it has is still ridiculous.

Schuhart wrote:

I think Fred Hoyle's point was that he doubted they had identified the correct physical process, and that life must have come to Earth from outer space.

I took a quick look at Hoyle's wikipedia link there. Interesting stuff. I was a little surprised to see the term "Intelligent design" in there. I thought it was a relatively new phrase. In any case, I think that if someone accepts that life came from outer space or something like that then they are only one step away from accepting the existence of God and that He was the origin of life. I think that (and this is pure speculation on my part) people like Hoyle are simply rejecting the idea of God on the subconscious level (or even deeper) because they don't like the idea. Having said that, I still like his Boeing analogy

Schuhart wrote:

By coincidence, I happened to be in the Natural History Museum earlier today. One exhibit is simply a human skeleton standing beside skeletons of a gorilla, chimp and orang-utang. The similarities do look too close for chance. In other words, it would seem very, very unlikely that the first man was made out of clay by a divine creator. Unless God wants to fool us into thinking we have a common ancestor with apes.

Well, I was talking more in terms of the origin of all life as in how earth came about rather than evolution as we've already gone into that.

Also by coincidence, I was watching the west wing the other day (which I've never watched before) and the subject of evolution vs intelligent design came up.

I've been to the zoo before and seen apes and have seen how they behave. They are incredibly similar to ourselves. It's quite amazing. But that doesn't necessarily say anything.

As for the idea that God would want to fool us or something. I think that's a very wrong statement. It Could be (with a capital C there) that it's some kind of test. More likely, it's a misunderstanding on our part. Either a misunderstanding on the science of the origin of life or a misinterpretation of what God says about the origin of life.

As I've already mentioned on a couple of other threads on this forum, there are two opinions on the matter of evolution from apes in Islam (one that it happened and one that it didn't) and, as I've said before, there's no point going on and on about it and I don't think we need to go into all that again.

Schuhart wrote:

I’d only add that comment from before – lots of people from lots of different religions report miracles and divine intervention.

And I'll only add the same comment I made then and that is that my experience is about the existence of God and not proof that Islam is the right religion (although I think it is... obviously).

I heard about this Bush statement before. Let me assure you, my experience was a much more tangible situation and one which would interest a scientist even if they were an atheist as they would feel there has to be an explanation behind it even if it's on some paranormal level. As for me, I already know it's explanation.

If Dubya heard voices in his head then I would recommend that he see a psychologist about it as he may have schizophrenia (may God protect us from such a condition). Honestly speaking, I don't know 100% whether or not the idea of someone hearing God directly is okay in Islam but I don't think it will happen as this would make them a prophet or messenger after the seal of the prophets and messengers. I know that if I thought I was hearing God's voice, I don't think it would be wrong of me to ask God to prove that it wasn't just my imagination so that I could have certainty about such a thing.

Then of course, there are dreams but that's a whole other story.

Schuhart

the_new_mr wrote:

It may be an understandable physical process and all but the probability that it works out the way it has is still ridiculous.

There’s honestly no basis for working out the probability that things are as they are. What we do know is, given a Universe subject to the physical laws that we are aware of, billions of stars form with billions of planets circling them. Whether life on Earth is a one in a billion chance, or one in a million, or less, I doubt if anyone can absolutely say. Its just the sheer scale that, intuitively, suggests that what happened here could equally happen elsewhere.

the_new_mr wrote:

I think that if someone accepts that life came from outer space or something like that then they are only one step away from accepting the existence of God and that He was the origin of life.

If it is, it’s a step away from any God we’ve heard about on Earth. Is the Quran also a final message for life on other planets? If so, how do they get the message? Does that mean Mohammed is not the only prophet? Given that much of the Quran is only understandable in the context in which a particular revelation was given, does that mean that aliens also need to study the Hadith?

I’d read Hoyle’s point as saying just because we cannot answer a particular question doesn’t automatically mean we if we say ‘God’ the problem goes away. Put another way, replace the word ‘God’ in the above quote with ‘Santa Claus’ or ‘the Magical Tooth Fairy’ and see how it reads.

the_new_mr wrote:

Let me assure you, my experience was a much more tangible situation and one which would interest a scientist even if they were an atheist as they would feel there has to be an explanation behind it even if it's on some paranormal level.

If you can produce tangible evidence of paranormal events, there’s a million dollars waiting for you.

the_new_mr wrote:

Then of course, there are dreams but that's a whole other story.

How is it different if someone feels God spoke to them in a dream? I don’t see any immediate difference between someone saying God speaks to them a) in dreams, b) by doing things for them, or c) by voice in the head.

I think there is a bit of a jump in your outlook from conviction that God will reach in and sort something for you, but if someone else says ‘he actually talks to me’ saying this might be a sign of mental illness.

the_new_mr

Schuhart wrote:

Its just the sheer scale that, intuitively, suggests that what happened here could equally happen elsewhere.

Yeah, it could. The Quran says nothing about alien life but it also doesn't say it doesn't exist for certain.

Schuhart wrote:

If it is, it’s a step away from any God we’ve heard about on Earth.

How so?

Schuhart wrote:

Is the Quran also a final message for life on other planets? If so, how do they get the message? Does that mean Mohammed is not the only prophet? Given that much of the Quran is only understandable in the context in which a particular revelation was given, does that mean that aliens also need to study the Hadith?

I'm not sure if you're posing an honest question or taking the piss. I hope it's the former.

I would imagine that, if there is life on other planets, then God would guide them in the best way He sees fit.

Schuhart wrote:

I’d read Hoyle’s point as saying just because we cannot answer a particular question doesn’t automatically mean we if we say ‘God’ the problem goes away.

Yes well, I think it's quite obvious what his opinion on the matter was given he was an atheist. I don't see your point in pointing this out.

Schuhart wrote:

If you can produce tangible evidence of paranormal events, there’s a million dollars waiting for you.

Well, I don't think my experience can be verified as I don't have any evidence. All I have is my word... which I suppose isn't enough when a million dollars is at stake.

Schuhart wrote:

How is it different if someone feels God spoke to them in a dream? I don’t see any immediate difference between someone saying God speaks to them a) in dreams, b) by doing things for them, or c) by voice in the head.

Actually, I meant that someone could see the Prophet Mohamed (peace be upon him) in a dream. I think that there's a hadith that says that the devil can pretend to be anyone in a dream and that he can even pretend to be God but that he can't pretend to be the prophet. Maybe that's only for Muslims. I don't know and I'm not sure how authentic the dream is. Obviously, there isn't a difference between God apparently talking to someone in a dream and apparently talking to someone while awake. I think that's pretty clear. It seems to me Schuhart that you tend to underestimate other peoples' understanding

As for doing things for people. That's a little different. As I said, my own recent experience was quite unreal and I'd like to keep it private but it's not the only one I've had.

Schuhart wrote:

I think there is a bit of a jump in your outlook from conviction that God will reach in and sort something for you, but if someone else says ‘he actually talks to me’ saying this might be a sign of mental illness.

Don't really follow you here. Are you saying that you think that my saying that God can do things in your life is fine but that people thinking that they can literally hear Him is a sign of mental illness an unreasonable suggestion? If so, I don't agree with you. If things can happen, then they are things you can see with your own eyes. This is especially true of a recurring situation. If something happens more than once, then the possibility of coincidence falls dramatically.

Schuhart

the_new_mr wrote:

How so?

I’m not aware of any religion that works of the basis of us being just one life form among many. They pretty much all work on the basis of the Earth being a special creation, with us have a special place in that creation.

the_new_mr wrote:

Yes well, I think it's quite obvious what his opinion on the matter was given he was an atheist. I don't see your point in pointing this out.

The point is simply to suggest that seeing his view as a step that leads naturally to God is not a useful statement as, in this context, ‘God’ just means ‘we don’t know’.

the_new_mr wrote:

All I have is my word... which I suppose isn't enough when a million dollars is at stake.

I’d guess you’re right there, otherwise GWB could claim it too.

the_new_mr wrote:

It seems to me Schuhart that you tend to underestimate other peoples' understanding.

Possibly, but from my perspective I’m chiefly trying to establish what’s being said. Bear in mind (and I think you have clarified this in your recent post) you did say dreams were ‘a whole other story’ so that, to me, requires explanation.

the_new_mr wrote:

Actually, I meant that someone could see the Prophet Mohamed (peace be upon him) in a dream.

You’ll understand, from my perspective this is not a significant difference. Whether it’s a question of God appearing in a dream or sending an image of Mohammed to appear in a dream is much the same thing.

the_new_mr wrote:

Are you saying that you think that my saying that God can do things in your life is fine but that people thinking that they can literally hear Him is a sign of mental illness an unreasonable suggestion? If so, I don't agree with you.

I’ll try to set out the point as I see it. We have identified three ways that God might intervene in an individual case. He might speak directly to someone, he might send a message in a dream (possibly via some intermediary like a prophet) or he might intervene directly and do something.

You seem to be saying that there’s no problem believing he might intervene directly or send a message in a dream, but hearing voices is not on. In other words, its acceptable to believe that God might, say, send a car ahead of you so that you’d know a road was icy. Its equally acceptable that someone might say ‘Mohammed appeared to me in a dream last night and said the road is icy’. But if someone says ‘when I was in the bathroom right now I heard a voice saying ‘the road is icy’. I’m sure it’s a message from God’ is not ok.

I don’t see why, if we’re swallowing the horse of saying God intervenes in individual cases, we hesitate at swallowing the gnat that he might do that sometimes by just putting a voice in someone’s head.

DinoBot

the_new_mr wrote:

Think there was a misunderstanding here. Didn't Wes say that he thinks that "... getting together and understanding each other and still thinking your right isn't insincere. It doesn't mean you can't respect one another's beliefs."

And finally for this post, as InFront has already pointed out, there's no point in contemplating on who's going to heaven and who's going to hell. Only God knows for sure.

Well pointed out. My little brain did not even allow me see the words. The statement is so wrong to me that my brain fixed it as I read it :rolleyes:

Any interfaith meetings Ive been to were a complete waste of time and ALWYAYS ended with the christians wanting to pray together to our "common god". The whole notion was wrong to me.

How can a meeting be sincere when each group is so right, abolute. I think there has to be give and take on both sides to have effective meetings. I always have to question the motives of the people attending. Each side wants to bring the other into the light.

the_new_mr

Schuhart wrote:

I'm not aware of any religion that works of the basis of us being just one life form among many. They pretty much all work on the basis of the Earth being a special creation, with us have a special place in that creation.

Well, I can't speak for other religions (and strictly speaking, I can't officially speak for Islam either) but as far as I know, Islam doesn't have anything against such a possibility.

Schuhart wrote:

The point is simply to suggest that seeing his view as a step that leads naturally to God is not a useful statement as, in this context, 'God' just means 'we don't know'.

I didn't mean that it's necessarily a step that leads naturally to God. I meant that it's "one step away". As in, someone who already believes that life must have come from outside of earth is closer to the idea of God than someone who doesn't.

Schuhart wrote:

otherwise GWB could claim it too.

I could be wrong but I don't think he needs it

Schuhart wrote:

Bear in mind (and I think you have clarified this in your recent post) you did say dreams were 'a whole other story' so that, to me, requires explanation.

Fair enough.

The only reason I said that you tend to underestimate other peoples' understanding is because you were making the point that you don't see the difference between God talking to someone during the day and the same in a dream. This is obvious enough I think. Of course, I did mention the thing about Prophet Mohamed (peace be upon him) and dreams but that's only if you're a Muslim in the first place if you know what I mean.

Schuhart wrote:

You'll understand, from my perspective this is not a significant difference.

Yes I do.

Now, concerning the 3 individual cases. Let's divide them into two groups. One group contains hearing God in your dreams and while awake. The other group contains only intervention or giving a sign in some way or another.

The big difference is that it's very difficult to verify whether God is really "talking" to you. Some very real proof would have to be witnessed in order to believe for certain. Such as in the cases of Moses or Abraham (peace be upon them both).

Al-Baqara:260

"And when Abraham said (unto his Lord): My lord! Show me how Thou givest life to the dead, He said: Dost thou not believe? Abraham said: Yea, but (I ask) in order that my heart may be at ease. (His Lord) said: Take four of the birds and cause them to incline unto thee, then place a part of them on each hill, then call them, they will come to thee in haste. And know that Allah is Mighty, Wise."

Ta-Ha:17-21

" "Now, what is this in thy right hand, O Moses?"; He answered: "It is my staff; I lean on it; and with it I beat down leaves for my sheep; and [many] other uses have I for it."; Said He: "Throw it down, O Moses!"; So he threw it - and lo! it was a snake, moving rapidly.; Said He: "Take hold of it, and fear not: We shall restore it to its former state."

However, in the case of intervention or a sign, the person who experiences this may have asked God for guidance in some shape or form (sometimes even being specific) or a recurring "sign" may appear before them. Or the intervention may seem so far out that it would be judged to be much more than just a coincidence. Granted, a person who doesn't have faith to begin with may be more likely to see them as just a coincidence especially if they don't like the idea that God exists but some things have happened in my life that are just too incredible to be a coincidence.

DinoBot wrote:

How can a meeting be sincere when each group is so right, abolute. I think there has to be give and take on both sides to have effective meetings. I always have to question the motives of the people attending. Each side wants to bring the other into the light.

Well, although there is little doubt that each group of people would like "bring the other into the light" as you put it, that doesn't mean that they can't have good feelings towards each other. These meetings are usually a very good idea in my opinion as they can help to alleviate any potential tensions that may there as a result of ignorance or just simple fear of the unknown.

Schuhart

DinoBot wrote:

How can a meeting be sincere when each group is so right

Speaking from the outside, I think you have a point. In fact, if all that stuff is really supposed to be taken seriously I don’t even see what the ‘respect’ concept amounts to as in “I really respect your right to burn for all eternity”. That said, I think the_new_mr’s view that simply promoting mutual awareness is helpful in relieving fear of the unknown is practical.

Although, from my perspective I would wonder how two people of different faiths could meet up, exchange a similar conviction about the utter truth of their particular belief, notice that the other is a perfectly decent human being, and part without figuring out that this might have implications for what they believe.

the_new_mr wrote:

as far as I know, Islam doesn't have anything against such a possibility.

I’d suspect it would cause issues for the faith being seen as universal.

the_new_mr wrote:

someone who already believes that life must have come from outside of earth is closer to the idea of God than someone who doesn't.

Not really, as they are not necessarily seeing any supernatural element. Getting closer to God would mean leaving explanations based in the physical world behind and reaching outside of this reality for an answer. As I understand it, the idea that life might have come to Earth by, say, an asteroid crashing is a view that seeks to point out that life did not have to form here from scratch within the few billion years that the Earth has existed. Instead, the building blocks might have evolved during the 15 billion years that the universe has existed, and come here. That’s not giving God any particular role.

the_new_mr wrote:

The big difference is that it's very difficult to verify whether God is really "talking" to you.

But this is hardly that great a difference. I have a dream the road the icy, and then I see it’s icy. I hear a voice in my head saying ‘the road is icy’, and then I see it’s icy. In both cases I can say I’ve a feeling something supernatural has happened. A car skids ahead of me and I see its icy. On the face of it, I’ve less reason to believe something supernatural has happened, as the car might have just been going that way anyway.

If you say ‘you don’t know it was God speaking’, presumably the same goes for coincidences. Even if something supernatural is causing the coincidences, how do I know its God?

I know we risk circling, but I still feel unconvinced that there’s any real difference between saying God communicates via coincidences and saying God just puts a voice in someone's head.

the_new_mr

We're already circling.

Schuhart wrote:

Although, from my perspective I would wonder how two people of different faiths could meet up, exchange a similar conviction about the utter truth of their particular belief, notice that the other is a perfectly decent human being, and part without figuring out that this might have implications for what they believe.

When I see you type things like this, it makes me think that you've forgotten some of the stuff that's been said on this forum before.

Schuhart wrote:

I’d suspect it would cause issues for the faith being seen as universal.

I don't think so. I'm ready to be corrected if anyone can point out otherwise.

Schuhart wrote:

Not really, as they are not necessarily seeing any supernatural element.

Yes but I'm sure you can see how the idea that life came from outer space is closer to the idea of God sending life from out of earth than the idea of life just happening on earth.

Schuhart wrote:

But this is hardly that great a difference. I have a dream the road the icy, and then I see it’s icy. I hear a voice in my head saying ‘the road is icy’, and then I see it’s icy. In both cases I can say I’ve a feeling something supernatural has happened.

This is a little different. People can sometimes get a glimpse into the future through dreams. My sister once dreamt that my cousin's car was stolen and that day we found out that my cousin's car radio had been nicked the night before.

As for the idea of a voice in someone's head telling them the road is icy, there may be any number of explanations for it. And in fairness, this is quite a bit different to the example of God talking to someone and telling them to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. How can he be so sure that God really talked to him? He'd need proof. I know if I thought that God was talking to me directly that I would politely ask God to prove to me that I'm not going crazy.

Schuhart wrote:

If you say ‘you don’t know it was God speaking’, presumably the same goes for coincidences. Even if something supernatural is causing the coincidences, how do I know its God?

Well, I guess that kind of has two answers.

Firstly, some of these 'coincidences' happen directly after a prayer to God and the conditions are too peculiar to just be a coincidence.

Secondly, I believe that nothing can happen unless God wills it so something happening which seems supernatural could only happen if God lets it happen. Obviously, that might seem like a circular argument to an atheist but there you go.

By the way, that link is not okay Schuhart. It's belittling to Islam and Christianity and to religion in general and is not in keeping with the forum charter.

Schuhart

the_new_mr wrote:

We're already circling.

Indeed. From my perspective, you have failed to demonstrate that your reluctance to accept that voices in the head is fundamentally the same thing as dreams or coincidence is based on anything. I can appreciate that you understand the connotations that go with voices in the head, but I just see a reluctance to follow that where it leads.

the_new_mr wrote:

When I see you type things like this, it makes me think that you've forgotten some of the stuff that's been said on this forum before.

Maybe I’ve forgotten loads. Alternatively, maybe we’ve been taking different meanings out of the same discussions.

the_new_mr wrote:

Yes but I'm sure you can see how the idea that life came from outer space is closer to the idea of God sending life from out of earth than the idea of life just happening on earth.

Not really. Bringing God into the picture has to do with reaching outside of this physical reality. Looking further into this physical reality is quite a different idea. I’d also point out that, once again, we could replace that word ‘God’ in this context with either ‘the Magical Tooth Fairy’ or ‘something we don’t know’ and discover that what you are saying is, objectively, meaningless.

the_new_mr wrote:

Firstly, some of these 'coincidences' happen directly after a prayer to God and the conditions are too peculiar to just be a coincidence.

Secondly, I believe that nothing can happen unless God wills it so something happening which seems supernatural could only happen if God lets it happen. Obviously, that might seem like a circular argument to an atheist but there you go.

In fairness, it’s a circular argument from anyone’s perspective.

I’m reading a book on anthropology at the moment, which cites a study of belief in witchcraft among a particular tribe conducted in the 1930s.

It gives the example of a group sitting under an elevated granary on poles (to protect the cereals against wild animals), which suddenly collapses and hurts them badly. They can appreciate that the immediate cause is that termites have slowly perforated the poles until they were no longer capable of keeping the granary stable. But they’ll go on to say it was extremely unlikely that they should sit beneath the granary at the precise moment that it fell, seeing this coincidence as proof of witchcraft.

As I’ve said, all kinds of people professing all kinds of religions have assigned all kinds of meaning to coincidence. I see no objective reason for distinguishing between your belief that God has personally intervened in your life, or a Christian who believes he has been granted some favour that he prayed to Jesus for, or a person who believes a witch is responsible for an accident.

the_new_mr wrote:

By the way, that link is not okay Schuhart. It's belittling to Islam and Christianity and to religion in general and is not in keeping with the forum charter.

True, but I though you wanted me to be more intense. Incidently, Stephen Colbert – the guy on the right doing the fundamentalist Christian thing – is reputed to be a practicing Catholic in real life. Not all theists see a problem in recognising when religion is risible.

DinoBot

the_new_mr:

At what point would you stop listening to the voices in your head

http://www.theage.com.au/news/iraq/god-told-me-to-invade-says-bush/2005/10/07/1128562952070.html



But really, do you think god speaks to you in your head ? Is god interacting with you on a daily basis ?