Completeness of Words of God and proofs of proofs of proofs ....

[noshirk]

Salaam All

Sorry, but i am going to philosophize a little more.

3:7 He is the One who sent down to you the Book, from which there are firm revelations; they are the essence of the Book; and others which are similar. As for those who have a disease in their hearts, they will follow what is similar from it seeking to confuse, and seeking to derive an interpretation. But none know its interpretation except God , and those who are well founded in knowledge say: "We believe in it, all is from our Lord." And none will remember except those who possess intelligence.

This is, for me, one of the most important verses about quran itself.
let's separate ideas of the verse that are interesting for our purpose.
1-great part of quran is clear and can be understood.
2- there is a part wich is confuse.
3-Only God have the good understanding of what is confuse
4- Well founded in knowledge accepts quaran as a whole, without understanding everything.

Science seems to be the world of facts.
In world of spirit, of free mind, apart God existence, 3-7 seems to indicate that no human will never understand everything in God words. If such a man or women existed, idea 3 will be contradicted.

Based on 3-7, i can also argue that Muhammad did'nt understand every thing in quran. He transmitted it as it is with a good understanding of a great part of it.

What i want to say is that the true set of beliefs relative to quran will  probably never be discovered and that, perhaps, two opposites opinions would be accepted as true by God.
The more i think and the more i am convinced that Quran is written in a way to allow multiple levels of understanding. The straith path is more important than the target.

That doesn't contradicts completeness of Words of God (quran). Completeness doesn't mean handle everything. Completeness means coherent and self explanatory.

18:109 Say: "If the sea were an inkwell for the words of my Lord, then the sea would run out before the words of my Lord run out;" even if We were to bring another like it as an extension.

The following verse is also interesting.

2:30 And your Lord said to the angels: "I am placing a successor on the earth." They said: "Will You place in it he who would make corruption in it, and spill blood; while we praise by Your glory, and exalt to You?" He said: "I know what you do not know."

we see there that Malaika are allowed to express an opinion that seems in contradiction with God sayings. However

2:31 And He taught Adam the names of all things, then He displayed them to the angels and said: "Inform Me of the names of these if you are truthful."
2:32 They said: "Glory to You, we have no knowledge except that which You have taught us, You are the Knowledgeable, the Wise."

In that discussion, God didn't used authority argument like "shut up the malaika". God responded to malaika by arguments.

2:33 He said: "O Adam, inform them of their names," so when he informed them of their names, He said: "Did I not tell you that I know the unseen of the heavens and the earth, and that I know what you reveal and what you are hiding?"

but, order is order:

2:34 And We said to the angels: "Yield to Adam," so they yielded except for Ibliss, he refused and became arrogant, and became of the rejecters.

Ibliss was a malaika. That means that a malaika have the possibility to think different. The sin is only when they disobey to an order from God.

Who knows ? Perhaps there will be a free-minds.org forum also in heaven ?

Peace

[StopS]

Sorry, but i am going to philosophize a little more.

Thanks for the thorough and well thought out essay. I like your approach, even if I differ with some of the contents. 

You say that
1-great part of quran is clear and can be understood.
2- there is a part wich is confuse.
3-Only God have the good understanding of what is confuse
4- Well founded in knowledge accepts quaran as a whole, without understanding everything.

and that is a valid approach.

My question here is: how do you know and who decides what is clear and what is confusing?
Why would a god "reveal" something in an undisclosed manner only to very few people in a confusing manner, if omniscience allows to identify well before the revelation that parts are confusing?

While you are saying that we can simply accept what we understand I am a bit more sceptical and wish there were more proof, or at least evidence.

Then there are things which simply don't make any sense.

"2:31 And He taught Adam the names of all things"

What things? That would imply that all things already existed whenever the time frame was that Adam was created. That ignores the fact that 99% of all living species have gone extinct. That would imply that Adam was taught about "things" we still don't know about.

I love your last question! Indeed, is there WiFi in heaven?

[noshirk]

Salaam StopS

First, we have to make an agreement. I will made assumption that God exists and Quran is his book and you have to not discuss that point.
One corollary of that is that you can't bring me a non quranic affirmation or a traditionnak belief and ask me to respond to it by quran.

My question here is: how do you know and who decides what is clear and what is confusing?

My response is: Since you have no rabb (teacher) other than God, it is you who decide what is clear and what is confusing. Seaching for a "who will" is searching for another Rabb and it is shirk/association.
We have to accept that we will not have responses to all our questions in this life.

Why would a god "reveal" something in an undisclosed manner only to very few people in a confusing manner, if omniscience allows to identify well before the revelation that parts are confusing?

Concept of omniscience is not clear for me. However, in our life, we admit that we can have differents opinions while facts are the same. One truth and only one truth is a scientific assumption in physics, mathematics and so on. In philosophy, it is in the contrary asked to create an own truth and an own vision of facts.

In fact, to allow free thinking that don't mean freedom to make only errors, confuse part of science is necessary. Confuse parts is part where God allows us to think different while being not in a wrong way. Confusion is freedom for free-minds.
If there was only one truth and only one in everything, then Robots would be better than Minds (i wrote a post explaining that human imagination is in fact what Quran call Jinns http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604954.0).

While you are saying that we can simply accept what we understand I am a bit more sceptical and wish there were more proof, or at least evidence.

Response here is complex because it implies understanding why God created humans. I will give you here my view.
From history of Ibliss, we know that having direct proof of God existence and power is not sufficient for convincing a free mind to obey God.
Despite all proofs, Ibliss made the sin. After him, Adam also made another sin.
Proving that he exists is not an objective for God.

38:67 Say: "It is an awesome news."
38:68 "From which you turn away."
38:69 "I had no knowledge of the command up high, that they had quarreled."

The important news it that there were a big quarel. The bad news is that we were probably there, on the wrong side.
To get the forgiveness of God, we have to believe in him, in his science, and in the fact that he is the only teacher, without seeing him (Bil ghaib as in 19-61).
It is a kind of repechage.

That means that God don't need in heaven people who always ask for more and more proofs of his godness.
Obeying to words of Gods, without seeing him, seems to be the more important. Huge quantity of indirects proofs are here to convince pupils of Gods.
Why god would accept to proove, at each time, that he is god, the unique teacher, to people who ask always the same question.

Moreover, direct proof means end of game as this verse shows:
6:8 And they said: "If only an angel were sent down to him?" But if We had sent down an angel, the matter would be settled, then they would no longer be respited.

Then there are things which simply don't make any sense.

"2:31 And He taught Adam the names of all things"

What things? That would imply that all things already existed whenever the time frame was that Adam was created. That ignores the fact that 99% of all living species have gone extinct. That would imply that Adam was taught about "things" we still don't know about.

What's Things. That is confuse and for me, it is not a problem.
The most important is that God made a demonstration and that malaika found it convincing. There is a funny interpretration that says that God demonstrate to malaika that the bilological entity of Adam was able to learn and that it will not be an handicap for our spirit. So, in judgement day, Spirit will not be able to say: i would have believed if the body in wich i lived hadn't technical problems.

I Know, StopS, that my response is not convincing for you. I know also that it will not even be convincing for quran believers. However, it is convincing for me and i am happy of that.
Really, StopS, Quran is a special book. The assumption that God exists and that Quran is (or at least perhaps) his book is a necessary condition to understand it. Non believers can understand nothing. Unbelievers can always  find verses they can misunderstood as they want to proove to themselves that quran is not a divine book.

The first verse after Fatiha explain for who quran is:
2:2 This is the Book in which there is no doubt, a guidance for the righteous.
I think it is a waste  of time for an unbeliever to read quran. Quran, as a whole, is a proof, and no verse is individually a proof. Take it as whole or don't take it.
You cannot understand the teachings as long as you contest the teacher or the book he gave you.
That's my opinion.

Peace

[StopS]

Salaam StopS

First, we have to make an agreement. I will made assumption that God exists and Quran is his book and you have to not discuss that point.
One corollary of that is that you can't bring me a non quranic affirmation or a traditionnak belief and ask me to respond to it by quran.

Fair enough.

My response is: Since you have no rabb (teacher) other than God, it is you who decide what is clear and what is confusing. Seaching for a "who will" is searching for another Rabb and it is shirk/association.
We have to accept that we will not have responses to all our questions in this life.

So if it is YOU who decides, HOW do you decide?

Concept of omniscience is not clear for me. However, in our life, we admit that we can have differents opinions while facts are the same. One truth and only one truth is a scientific assumption in physics, mathematics and so on. In philosophy, it is in the contrary asked to create an own truth and an own vision of facts.

In fact, to allow free thinking that don't mean freedom to make only errors, confuse part of science is necessary. Confuse parts is part where God allows us to think different while being not in a wrong way. Confusion is freedom for free-minds.
If there was only one truth and only one in everything, then Robots would be better than Minds (i wrote a post explaining that human imagination is in fact what Quran call Jinns http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604954.0).

Then let's leave omniscience out of it. I would say that a fact is a fact. This is no different in philosophy. People on different sides of a house painted different colours might see a differently coloured house, but they see the same house. A viewpoint can be different, the truth cannot.

Response here is complex because it implies understanding why God created humans. I will give you here my view.
From history of Ibliss, we know that having direct proof of God existence and power is not sufficient for convincing a free mind to obey God.
Despite all proofs, Ibliss made the sin. After him, Adam also made another sin.
Proving that he exists is not an objective for God.

38:67 Say: "It is an awesome news."
38:68 "From which you turn away."
38:69 "I had no knowledge of the command up high, that they had quarreled."

The important news it that there were a big quarel. The bad news is that we were probably there, on the wrong side.
To get the forgiveness of God, we have to believe in him, in his science, and in the fact that he is the only teacher, without seeing him (Bil ghaib as in 19-61).
It is a kind of repechage.

That means that God don't need in heaven people who always ask for more and more proofs of his godness.
Obeying to words of Gods, without seeing him, seems to be the more important. Huge quantity of indirects proofs are here to convince pupils of Gods.
Why god would accept to proove, at each time, that he is god, the unique teacher, to people who ask always the same question.

Moreover, direct proof means end of game as this verse shows:
6:8 And they said: "If only an angel were sent down to him?" But if We had sent down an angel, the matter would be settled, then they would no longer be respited.

In other words there is only faith, no proof.

What's Things. That is confuse and for me, it is not a problem.
The most important is that God made a demonstration and that malaika found it convincing. There is a funny interpretration that says that God demonstrate to malaika that the bilological entity of Adam was able to learn and that it will not be an handicap for our spirit. So, in judgement day, Spirit will not be able to say: i would have believed if the body in wich i lived hadn't technical problems.

I Know, StopS, that my response is not convincing for you. I know also that it will not even be convincing for quran believers. However, it is convincing for me and i am happy of that.
Really, StopS, Quran is a special book. The assumption that God exists and that Quran is (or at least perhaps) his book is a necessary condition to understand it. Non believers can understand nothing. Unbelievers can always  find verses they can misunderstood as they want to proove to themselves that quran is not a divine book.

The first verse after Fatiha explain for who quran is:
2:2 This is the Book in which there is no doubt, a guidance for the righteous.
I think it is a waste  of time for an unbeliever to read quran. Quran, as a whole, is a proof, and no verse is individually a proof. Take it as whole or don't take it.
You cannot understand the teachings as long as you contest the teacher or the book he gave you.
That's my opinion.

Peace

Hahaha, you know my response: yes, it is not convincing for me - but what is important is that YOU are happy with it.

[noshirk]

In other words there is only faith, no proof.

Salaam StopS
Enormous quantity of indirect proofs are not no proof.

You are, dear Stop, like a turbulent pupil in a classroom where other pupils try to understand their teacher and his teachnings.
You are here to contest both teacher and teachings.
When i asked you why you are here, you responded that you are here to understand pupils.

You are not searching truth but just reasons to not to believe. You entered classroom for bad reasons and seems to believe that you have both knowledge and reason while you have no book between your hands. You are asking your own questions to pupils without trying to understand lessons of the teacher.

Really, dear StopS, you are a very interesting case for me.
You are facing a big universe with rich examples of life and astonishing complex mechanisms and you are trying to convince yourself that all what you see is coming by chance from the big bang microscopic hole. You are so happy with the tales of your white bloused priests that you cannot see how it is ridicoulous.

7:172 And your Lord took for the children of Adam from their backs, their progeny; and He made them witness over themselves: "Am I not your Lord?" They said: "Yes, we bear witness." Thus you cannot say on the Day of Resurrection that you were unaware of that.
7:173 Nor can you say: "It was our fathers who set up partners before and we were simply a progeny who came after them. Would You destroy us for what the innovators did?"
7:174 It is such that We explain the revelations, perhaps they will return.
7:175 And recite to them the news of the person whom Our revelations were given to him, but he removed himself from them, and thus the devil followed him, and He became of those who went astray.
7:176 And if We had wished, We could have raised him with it, but he stuck to the earth and he followed his desire. His example is like the dog, if you scold him he pants, and if you leave him he pants; such is the example of the people who deny Our signs. So relate the story; perhaps they may reflect.


Peace

[StopS]

Salaam StopS
Enormous quantity of indirect proofs are not no proof.

Sorry, I disagree. Several misses do not constitute a hit, no matter how close the misses are.

You are, dear Stop, like a turbulent pupil in a classroom where other pupils try to understand their teacher and his teachnings.
You are here to contest both teacher and teachings.
When i asked you why you are here, you responded that you are here to understand pupils.

There are no teachers here and I see no pupils. I see human beings discussing their opinions and viewpoints. Because I am more interested in understanding I ask questions. If I have an opinion I offer it to see whether I have this opinion fro a reason or whether I need to change it.

You are not searching truth but just reasons to not to believe. You entered classroom for bad reasons and seems to believe that you have both knowledge and reason while you have no book between your hands. You are asking your own questions to pupils without trying to understand lessons of the teacher.

I do not require reasons NOT to believe but I DO require reasons to believe something. This is not a classroom. There is no authority here. Everybody here is interested in discussing their point of view and comparing it to what others think. Otherwise they would not be here.
Yes, I DO have a lot of knowledge in some topics, a little bit of knowledge in others, no knowledge in most areas and some beliefs. I am here to understand people and not to find "the truth".

Really, dear StopS, you are a very interesting case for me.
You are facing a big universe with rich examples of life and astonishing complex mechanisms and you are trying to convince yourself that all what you see is coming by chance from the big bang microscopic hole. You are so happy with the tales of your white bloused priests that you cannot see how it is ridicoulous.

No, I am not "facing a big universe". I am part of a Universe. I am made from the dust of stars which don't exist any more. Chance? What chance? What "white bloused priests"? It looks as though you are starting to talk about something you have little knowledge of. Don't. It does not work.

The rest does not make any sense to me in this context.