What do y'all think of 42:16?, "And those who argue concerning Allah..."

[LiberalGamer]

Salaam, what do you think of the following verse, 42:16?:

Sahih International
And those who argue concerning Allah after He has been responded to - their argument is invalid with their Lord, and upon them is [His] wrath, and for them is a severe punishment.
Pickthall
And those who argue concerning Allah after He hath been acknowledged, their argument hath no weight with their Lord, and wrath is upon them and theirs will be an awful doom.
Yusuf Ali
But those who dispute concerning Allah after He has been accepted,- futile is their dispute in the Sight of their Lord: on them will be a Penalty terrible.
Shakir
And (as for) those who dispute about Allah after that obedience has been rendered to Him, their plea is null with their Lord, and upon them is wrath, and for them is severe punishment.
Dr. Ghali
And the ones who argue concerning Allah, (i.e., about surrendering " Islam" to Allah) even after He has been responded to, their argument is rebutted in the Reckoning of their Lord, and anger will be upon them, and for them is a strict torment.
In Arabic
وَالَّذِينَ يُحَاجُّونَ فِي اللَّهِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا اسْتُجِيبَ لَهُ حُجَّتُهُمْ دَاحِضَةٌ عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ وَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ



I am very confused, does this mean anyone who argues including arguing for the existence of God? Does this include arguing about God's Holy Book, The Qur'an?
very confused lads, let me know what you think.

[Iyyaka]

Peace LiberalGamer,

I have not done the structural analysis of this sura, but perhaps the answer lies in the fact of linking and connecting the verse 42:16 with those that precede it (from verse 12 and 13 notably).

God bless you.

[Emre_1974tr]

No, arguing is not criticized here, those who defend false beliefs and shirk are criticized. In short, those who defend their pagan beliefs without evidence and those who adopt these false beliefs are criticized. For example, those who adopt the belief of trinity or pantheism...

Peace

[LiberalGamer]

@ Iyyaka
Hmm, now that you mention it, the previous ayat does say this, pickthall translation:
"42:15, Unto this, then, summon (O Muhammad). And be thou upright as thou art commanded, and follow not their lusts, but say: I believe in whatever scripture Allah hath sent down, and I am commanded to be just among you. Allah is our Lord and your Lord. Unto us our works and unto you your works; no argument between us and you. Allah will bring us together, and unto Him is the journeying."

the word "argument" here, is Hjj, same as the one used in the original verse.

Maybe that's a clue but I still don't know what's up.

@Emre_1974tr
I do agree that it would be strange for God to criticize arguments in the Qur'an but how can we be so sure? I mean, I appreciate your reply but from a Quranic perspective how can be we sure?


tbh I'm still rather confused, so if anyone has any ideas & thoughts, please share!

Peace out and God bless both of you!

[Emre_1974tr]

@Emre_1974tr
I do agree that it would be strange for God to criticize arguments in the Qur'an but how can we be so sure? I mean, I appreciate your reply but from a Quranic perspective how can be we sure?


tbh I'm still rather confused, so if anyone has any ideas & thoughts, please share!

Peace out and God bless both of you!

When you read the whole book in its entirety, you will see this very easily. It may not be enough to just read the paragraph in its entirety, always evaluate the entire book together.

Questioning and arguing is never prohibited in the Qur'an. On the contrary, it is desired to reach real knowledge based on reason and proof. What is prohibited here is  not argue. To believe in superstitions prohibited here is to have pagan beliefs. 

Peace

[LiberalGamer]

@Emre_1974tr, well, yes I do agree, but Idk.
if someone who rags on islam, and claims it doesn't allow arguing, and points to this verse as an example, what are some verses that support arguing? I know there's verses on reflection and intelligence, but are there any on arguing in the traditional sense?
And also I feel like we shouldn't just dismiss this ayat, especially due to the consequences, you claim that "What is prohibited here is  not argue. To believe in superstitions prohibited here is to have pagan beliefs.  ", but I don't see anything about pagan beliefs mentioned here?

Don't get me wrong, I do really believe that this surface-level interpretation of "arguments in religion are forbidden" is wrong, I just find it difficult A). proving that it's wrong using other ayats and B). seeing what other interpertations there are [you claim "it's To believe in superstitions prohibited here is to have pagan beliefs", and I would agree, but unfortunately I feel like there's no real basis for it. If there was, for example, another ayat which also forbids arguing HOWEVER this time it specifies superstisions, that would be different]

Peace and God Bless!

[Emre_1974tr]

@Emre_1974tr, well, yes I do agree, but Idk.
if someone who rags on islam, and claims it doesn't allow arguing, and points to this verse as an example, what are some verses that support arguing? I know there's verses on reflection and intelligence, but are there any on arguing in the traditional sense?
And also I feel like we shouldn't just dismiss this ayat, especially due to the consequences, you claim that "What is prohibited here is  not argue. To believe in superstitions prohibited here is to have pagan beliefs.  ", but I don't see anything about pagan beliefs mentioned here?

Don't get me wrong, I do really believe that this surface-level interpretation of "arguments in religion are forbidden" is wrong, I just find it difficult A). proving that it's wrong using other ayats and B). seeing what other interpertations there are [you claim "it's To believe in superstitions prohibited here is to have pagan beliefs", and I would agree, but unfortunately I feel like there's no real basis for it. If there was, for example, another ayat which also forbids arguing HOWEVER this time it specifies superstisions, that would be different]

Peace and God Bless!

If you read the Qur'an in its entirety once, you would know that it is talking about pagans, who slander Allah. But either you did not read the book or you knowingly slander Allah and His verses.

What is called arguing here is insisting on the false belief, namely the pagan belief. What is criticized here is not to give up on superstitions despite the proofs.

That's why the pagan stands up and continues to defend his false belief.

The explanation here is very clear and simple. That person insists on his superstitions and does not accept the evidence. He continues to remain in the belief of Shirk.

Peace

[LiberalGamer]

@Emre_1974tr

Thank you for your response!
I know that the Qur'an does mention pagans in a negative light, and I know that especially it mentions them arguing with false arguments, more or less, and claims this in a negative light [6:136-145 being a neat example of this, more or less].
I'm just saying in this specific verse and this specific surah, how can we be sure that this is talking exclusively about the pagans?

Just as when the Qur'an states to not kill the soul which God has forbidden [17:33], and we understand it to not just be to the pagans, how can we be sure about the same thing here?

In other words I'm asking if you have some ayats which can prove that this is either restricted to the pagans, or this that arguing is encouraged for the non-pagans.

And listen dude I hope you don't think that I'm malicious or that I'm trying to get a "gotcha" moment, I just stumbled upon this verse, and I would like to understand it as such that if someone were to ask me what it means that I can explain concisely, not just saying "it's for pagans only" and leave it at that.

Thanks for responding man, really appreciate it, looking forward to hearing your response back!
Praise be to God, God bless, and peace out!

[Emre_1974tr]

As I said;

1- If you read the book in its entirety, you will see this truth.

2- If you don't have time to read the book, just read the paragraph you gave in its entirety, and even that will be enough for you to see the truth.

Holy Quran

42:14 And they only divided after the knowledge had come to them, due to resentment among themselves. And had it not been for a predetermined decision from your Lord, they would have been judged immediately. Indeed, those who inherited the Book after them are full of doubts.

42:15 For that, you shall preach and be upright, as you have been commanded, and do not follow their wishes. And say: "I believe in all that God has sent down as a Book, and I was commanded to be with justice between you. God is our Lord and your Lord. We have our deeds and you have your deeds. There is no argument between us and you. God will gather us all together, and to Him is the ultimate destiny."

42:16 And those who debate about God, after they had been answered, their argument is nullified at their Lord. They have incurred a wrath, and will have a severe retribution.

42:17 God is the One who sent down the Book with the truth, and the balance. And for all that you know, the Hour may be very near.

42:18 Those who do not believe in it seek to hasten it, while those who believe are concerned about it, and they know that it is the truth. Certainly, those who dispute the Hour have gone far astray.

****
Look, when you read the paragraph in its entirety, it is easy to see that the deniers are criticized for insisting on their denial. So it's not about arguing. Or it's not about exchanging ideas here. The issue here is that the deniers continue their denial. pagans do not give up their pagan beliefs. In other words, insisting on the wrong is criticized, not arguing here. Not believing the truth despite the evidence is criticized.

Peace

[LiberalGamer]

@ Emre_1974tr

Thank you for the response!

Yes, I see now, I do think now that hopefully the original assumption of  "does The Qur'an discourages arguing with this verse" is put to rest.
I do feel like some folks could still interpret it that way, it's unfortunately, at least in my mind, not 100% waterproof that it isn't, but honestly I do think the possibility is way lower now.
I appreciate your replies Emre! And also If anyone else has anything to say feel free to do so, while I don't think the interpretation of "all arguments are banned" is the most likely anymore, I do believe there may be a deeper interpretation, don't know what it could be, but yeah.

Anyway God Bless you, Emre, and peace out!