Home: <https://www.angelfire.com/realm2/truth/islam.htm>

The Christian responded again and showed his severe ignorance to Sunni and Shia. He replies overjoyed thinking he has proven me wrong by our own Scholars by get ready to laugh quoting Hadiths in regards to what Abu Bakr and Umar said....

Perhaps he should know that one of our Hadiths says Abu Ishaq al-Arjani narrates Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq(A.S) asked: Do you know why you are commanded to act contrary to the `Àmmah (the Ahl as-Sunnah Sect)?

I replied: I do not know.

He said: Verily, the Ummah contradicted ‘Ali in each and every aspect of his religion, intending thereby to destroy his cause. They used to ask him about things they did not know, and when he gave a ruling they would invent an opposite verdict from their own side to mislead the people." at-Ta‘adul wat-Tarjih by Àyatullah Khomeini, p. 82, cited in Dr. Zayd al-‘Is: al-Khomeini wal-Wajh al-Àkhar p. 131

So what can I do? Except imform you that the Hadiths you quoted are interpolations devised by the enemies of the Holy and Pure Ahlul Bayht in order to oppose their Rightful positions as Leaders of the Ummah. Quoting Sahih Bukhari or Muslim is the equivelant of me quoting the Book of Mormon.

Now allow me to quote some of the Authentic Hadiths.

Imam Baqir [a] said: "He who repents of his sins is as the one who has not any (burden of) sin." Wasa'il-ush-Shi'ah vol. 16, p. 74

Imam Sadiq, the sixth Imam, [a] said: "Shut the doors of sins through seeking refuge to God, and open the doors of obedience by (reciting) 'Bismillah'." Bihar-ul-Anwar, vol. 92, p. 216

Imam Ja'far bin Muhammad al-Sadiq [a] reportedly quotes his forefathers from the Messenger of Allah [a] as saying: "Whoever recites sincerely that there is no god but Allah enters paradise, and his sincerity should forbid him what Allah has forbidden." Hur al-Amili, Wasa'il al-Shi'ah, vol.6, chapter on Jihad al-Nafs, no. 20440.

Imam Baqir, the fifth Imam, [a] said: "There are ten things that when a person meets Allah the Almighty and Glorious, with them, he will enter Heaven:
1. Confessing that there is no god besides Allah
2. And that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah
3. Acknowledging what has come down to the Prophet [s] from Allah (the Qur'an).
4. Establishing regular prayers.
5. Giving alms.
6. Fasting in Ramadan.
7. Performing the Pilgrimage (Hajj) to the Sacred House.
8. Kindness to the lovers of Allah
9. Detachment from the enemies of Allah
10. And, avoiding any alcoholic beverage." Khisal by Saduq, p.432

The Holy Prophet [s] said: "At the (appointed) time of every prayer (salat), I hear a caller who calls and says: "O children of Adam! Keep up prayers in order to extinguish the fire you have lit against yourselves (by committing sins)." Mustadrak-ul-Wasa'il, vol. 3, p. 102

With the Holy Ayaats he quotes here are Authentic Shia Tafsirs on them.

Ayatollah Muhammad al Shirazi commentates on Holy Ayaats such as Surat Tahrim: 8 as such this can cover all of the ones such like "Such repentance should be sincere for His Sake. Sincere which implies honesty is put for 'nasuh' which in fact means to be extremely sincere in giving advice. Therefore as an adjective for repentance itself itself is figurative what is meant that pentinent should be honest and forthcoming in advising and urging himself to repent.

When a person is thus 'honest' in in repenting, it means he feels the greatest regret at having defied and disobeyed, and finds the strongest determination not to do such actions in the future and to carry out the requisites of repentance, the discharge of lasped duty 'qada' paying the penalties(if there are any) and restoring the peoples rights and such like.

"It may be ('asa an) that your Lord will remit from you your evil deeds and admit you to gardens beneath which rivers flow." It means that it is likely He will erase the effects of the acts of disobedience(see where the source of Sunni and Christian deception is?), which are called 'sayyi'at' (evil deeds) as they do the perpertrator harm. (Meaning according to Quranic Arabic the Sunni Tafsir is wrong as are the Christians implications).

All of the Holy Ayaats similar to that mean the exact same thing.

However I have decided to expose his misuse of all of the Holy Ayaats he happened to quote Insha'Allah.

Holy Quran 17:57

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

It is futile to worship prophets, angels and heroes, inspite of the fact that they are good and holy and near to Allah, because even they seek means of access or approach (wasilah) to Allah.

Some schools of thought view that obedience itself is the wasilah, but verse 35 of al Ma-idah (see its commentary) does not agree with this point of view, as the believers are asked to seek wasilah besides taqwa, therefore obedience cannot be wasilah. The Quran and the Ahl ul Bayt teach us that the Holy Prophet's blessings and his prayer for forgiveness is a means of access or approach to Allah besides man's own deeds, because the Holy Prophet is the first and the foremost in the order of submission to and worship of Allah, being the seal of the prophets, and the superior-most among them. There are traditions, accepted by those scholars who do not follow the Ahl ul Bayt, which report that the companions of the Holy Prophet used to seek his prayers as the means of approach to Allah.

Hope according to the dictionary means "To expect and desire" Meaning you expect it because it is guranteed and the crux is that you desire it. Furthermore hope can mean "Trust; confidence". So trust that you are forgiven i.e Trust in the Promise and you sincerely repent and then you obtain that which you desire.

You can see every Holy Ayaat he quotes falls in these two categorarys.

1. It may be that the effect of the evil deeds will be removed not the evil deeds themselves which are Promised to be removed so long as the intention is sincere.

2. Hope as explained above.

On Holy Quran 19:71

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

Every soul must pass through or by or over the fire, but verses 101 to 107 of Anbiya exclude those who are the first and foremost in receiving the blessings and grace of Allah, a group clearly mentioned in Waqi-ah: 10 and 11 . Also refer to the commentary of verses 58 to 63 of this surah. The two other groups, people of the right hand and the people of the left hand (Waqi-ah: 8 and 9) shall be gathered round the hell and they will pass through or by or over the hell, but the people of the right hand will come out of it to go into paradise, and the people of the left hand, the unjust, will abide in hell for ever.

In lamen terms those who have sinned and not repented (sincerely) for will pass through it and those who have repented sincerely and will simply see it no problem here how this implies that you are not forgiven or promised forgiveness is beyond me.

The rest of the Holy Ayaats that are complemented by Sunni commentary I will not go to them all they are all pretty self explanatory for any one with common sense. For example as the Christian quoted, "But as for him who shall repent and believe and do right, perhaps ('asa an) he may be one of the successful." and "Those only shall worship in the Mosques of Allah, who believe in Allah and the last day and observe proper worship and give alms and fear none except Allah; and it might be ('asa an) that these are of the rightly guided."

Now in order to cover the context I will give the Tafsir on the latter Holy Ayaah Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

It has been made clear that it is the light of spiritual teachings of Islam in the hearts and minds of the worshippers of Allah which keeps the place of worship alive, not the outward grandeur nor the frequent visits of the visitors who come to perform acts of worship as mere rituals. Islam teaches man to keep in mind the fact that the whole world is like a masjid where every moment and every activity should be in the service of Allah.

So why does it say they may be of the rightly guided etc. The general consensus amongst authentic Shia Tafsir is due to Free Will. I may wake up a Muslim and sleep a Kafir.

How this denotes the Promise of Forgiveness that Allah SWT Glorified be He of has given to believers is beyond me.

We can all see that his great abundance of Sunni Hadiths and misinterpations have no effect on the reality of what the Holy Quran means. I have not the time to refute all of the sunni hadiths quoted however in the light of the Holy Quran and the detrimental factor of what the Words mean in Quranic Arabic (we saw some where figurative and others where not even referring to forgiveness but rather removing the effects of the sin)aswell as authentic Shia Hadiths that Forgiveness is indeed Promised.

Forgiveness, and continuing Sin

He inquired what happens if you are commiting a sin. Well the obvious thing is once you realise you are doing it you desist unless of course you dont want to be a Muslim lol. However the Punishment will be a temporary stay in Hell (May Allah SWT Glorified be He Protect us from it) unless you repent sincerely at which point it may be that Allah SWT Glorified be He will remove the effects that the sin has had upon people or yourself pretty simple.

Perfection

Preposterous, Almighty God indeed will hand out Justice. Which means if someone repents He will forgive them so long as they are sincere. The whole theory you claimed was that because you need to be forgiven that implies perfection. It implies no such thing on the extreme opposite as covered before it implies that since you can sin perfection is not required just repentance (sincere that is) and effort not to revisit the sins. The sheer stupidity in thinking, that Almighty God would want to punish those who beg His Forgiveness is literally sickening and not Merciful nor Just.

Sacrifice and Justice

Judaism requires blood? Do not lie such acts are unbecoming.

A Jewish brother who is extremely wise writes According to the Hebrew Bible, sacrifices can only be offered in the Temple in Jerusalem. Since the Romans destroyed the Second Temple ~ 70 C.E., there is no place to offer sacrifices. It is believed that when the mashiach (messiah) comes, the Temple will be rebuilt and the sacrifices restored. In the meantime, our sages have taught that "service of the heart" is an acceptable substitute for the sacrifices. Our prayer schedule replicates the various Temple sacrifices, and we study the laws of the sacrifices. The sages teach that studying the verses of the Torah that command the sacrifices is, under present conditions, equivalent in merit to actually offering the sacrifices.

For a sin against another person, you must first obtain forgiveness from the person against whom you have sinned (if possible), then God. For a sin against God, you go straight to God.

http://www.aish.com/literacy/concepts/Tesh...ng_Mistakes.asp

http://www.ou.org/chagim/elul/foursteps.html

http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/timel...patterns/06.htm

Shame on you, you have now lied on two Religions is there any end to Missionarie distortions? You can see how Judaism actually coincides with Islam as we sacrifice on Hajj.

Trinity

Unitarian answers to this claptrap.

Unitarian Answer: The New Testament does not clearly present Christ as God. The names applied to Christ in the New Testament could properly be applied to one who represents God and has received `all authority in heaven and earth' from Him. McDowell claims that the following texts clearly call Christ God.

1. Titus 2:13. `Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.' McDowell assumes that the expressions `great God' and `Saviour' are in apposition, that is, that they both refer to one and the same individual. The English translation is ambiguous. The fact is that the `of' in English, which translates the Greek genitive is repeated in the Greek with the words `Saviour, Christ Jesus' so that a more literal translation would be: `the glorious appearing of our great God and of our Saviour, Jesus Christ'. There is no reason to assume that these are one and the same being. The text does not `clearly' present Christ as God.

2. John 1:1. `In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.' Our task is not to explain what this text actually means, but to demon­strate that it does not clearly present Jesus as God. The first point is that there is a difficulty in conceiving that the Word is with God on the one hand, and is God on the other. The first clause states that there is a distinction between the Word and God (since the one is with the other), while the second states that they are one and the same. As it stands the sentence does not make sense. It does make sense, however, if we realise that the word theos in Greek used here is an equivalent of the Hebrew word Elohim. Now Elohim can mean God, gods, a god, judge, exalted one, and even angel. The first word refers to God, while the second to another entity. The reference to another entity clearly shows the Word not to be the God with whom the Word is. Indeed some scholars point out that a better translation would be: `and the Word was a god'. This also appears to me to be somewhat forced. One of the other alternatives should probably be chosen.

The Christian claim depends on John 1:14, `The Word became flesh.' If this is taken to mean that the Almighty God became flesh, or became incarnate as a human being, this would entail a change in the essence of God, which is both logically and Scripturally unacceptable. Note that this text does not say that Jesus is God.

It is an interesting fact that the Qur'an calls Jesus the Word of God without any of its adherents suggesting that the expression `clearly' presents him as God. Surely referring to Jesus as the Word of God is coherent with Islamic belief and terminology, and does not imply deity.

3. Hebrews 1:8. `But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.' This is one of a series of quotations from the Old Testament. The first, Psalm 2:7 (Hebrews 1:5a), was originally spoken to David. The second, 2 Samuel 7:14 (Hebrews 1:5b), was also spoken to David about his `seed', primarily Solomon, but no doubt also secondarily and prophetically about the Messiah. The third quotation (Hebrews 1:6) is from a non-Biblical Jewish tradition which also appears in the Qur'an: `And let all the angels of God worship him.' The personage primarily referred to in the original tradition is Adam, to whom the angels are commanded to prostrate. The word `worship' in Hebrews refers to prostration before a high personage such as a king. Then comes Psalm 45:6-7 the text quoted by McDowell from Hebrews 1:8. This text was originally part of the king's wedding invocation. The word Elohim, translated `God', is applied to the king. As such, it should probably best be translated as judge' or `exalted one'. This is especially apparent from the fact that the true God Almighty is referred to in Psalm 45:7 as a different entity.

McDowell does not refer to Hebrews 1:10, which is in fact the only verse used to prove the trinity demanding careful investigation. The quotation is from Psalm 102:25­27. It is the only one of the original quotations which was originally directed to God Himself.

Let it first be noted that the quotation is not directed to Jesus in Hebrews, but is a continuation of the expression in Hebrews 1:8 pros or `in reference to' Jesus. This is in contrast to sentences spoken `to' someone, as in Hebrews 1:5. These phrases are not therefore spoken `to' Jesus, but are `in reference' to him.

The second point is that the context clearly has as its purpose to exalt Jesus Christ above even the angels. All of the quotations serve that purpose. They refer to aspects or events in the life of Jesus which show him to be in some way superior to the angels. Psalm 102 is the last of a series of martyrdom Psalms. The clear inference in this chapter is that after all of the glorious aspects and events in Jesus' life that show him to be superior to the angels, there is finally his martyrdom. This too shows his superiority and leads into the subject of the second chapter of Hebrews which is in fact that self-sacrifice.

To those of us not accustomed to the liturgical use of the Psalms, this explanation is not immediately clear. But to the Hebrews to whom these words were written, nothing could be more natural. The whole panorama of the martyr­dom liturgy immediately floods into the Hebrew mind when these words are encountered. No better introduction to chapter two could have been invented.

It is not stated that Jesus is God. Superiority to the an­gels does not necessarily imply that Jesus is God Almighty. The chapter deals in every possible superlative, but does not state Jesus to be God. Even verse three makes a clear distinction between the being which is Jesus and the being which is God, referred to here as `Majesty on high'.

4. Romans 9:5. `Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.' The implication of McDowell is again that the word `God' is in apposition to the word `Christ'. The original Greek has no punctuation. The word `amen' at the end makes the sentence more understandable as a formal benediction. In that case, it is perfectly possible to understand the divine blessing attached to the end without in the least implying that this God and the earlier Christ are one and the same being. It is not even absolutely clear whether the phrase `who is over all' should refer to Christ, which precedes it, or to God, which comes after it. There is no theological reason why it could not refer to Christ. If God has set Christ `over all', that in itself shows that Christ, being the recipient of divine favour, is not God himself (see Philippians 2:9-11).

5. 1 John 5:20. `And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding, in order that we might know Him who is true, and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.' McDowell assumes that the word `this' refers to Christ as its antecedent, thus making Christ the true God. However, we must choose between the two possible antecedents given in the first part of the verse: God and Christ. Obviously God is equal to God. This text does not clearly present Christ as God. It infinitely more clearly presents God as God and Christ as Christ.

On your theologians using Dreams as examples, lying, hiding evidence is all against the Doctrine of Christianity however you and your buddies persitently do all of the above in order to dupe people into your little ideals. Need I supply sources?

Wasalam