99 names and "nothing like him". Koranic contradiction.

[LukeS]

Allah in the Koran has 99 names. There can be found in wikipedia, and include terms like "king", "loving", "hidden", "highest", "merciful" etc.

Then in the Koran we have surah Ikhlas, the last line of which states "there is nothing in existence like unto/similar to him".


Now the point is that He must be similar to secular things, people and places, if he is as his names describe.

If he is "loving", then he is like certain people at cetraion places. If he is "forgiving" then the same holds true again.

Certain Muslims (finding an open forum is difficult) have said "No, who has all those attributes at once!", but that is an invalid point. You see, by means of analogy, a red car is similar to a red pen, even though the pen does not have an engine or wheels. Similarly, even if he is not a king, a merciful person is like Allah.

A second objection, which is rather incoherent, is that the "love" of Allah is different from human love, his "forgiveness" different from ours. That though leads to 2 objections.

The first objection is that ordinary Muslims, when not in a 'theological corner', talk of His love and forgiveness in ordinary terms. EG. if you are forgiven, you will not be punished; if he is hidden you cannot see him etc.

The second objection is a little more profound, but simply boils down to using the proper terms to describe things. If in fact Allah is unlike anything, then secular descriptive terms cannot be properly used to describe or define him.

Even "tawhid" or the unity of Allah is in crisis. This is because the concepts of singularity, oneness, without, 'partner', association etc are all terms which derive their meaning from material objects and relations. We might for example talk of "one apple", or the "unity of opinion", or "a man without a wife". So, even if he is one as they say, he is like unto existent things.

Q.E.D> Islamic theology faces a stern challenge.

[technomage]

Allah in the Koran has 99 names. There can be found in wikipedia, and include terms like "king", "loving", "hidden", "highest", "merciful" etc.

Then in the Koran we have sureh Ikhlas, the last line of which states "there is nothing in existence like unto/similar to him".

This means "comparable to him," and is not referring to similarity, but to magnitude.

A second objection, which is rather incoherent, is that the "love" of Allah is different from human love, his "forgiveness" different from ours. That though leads to 2 objections.

I have seen this argument, with identical or similar wording, used in Christian apologetics. Does that mean it is incoherent for Christians as well?

[smaneck]

So, even if he is one as they say, he is like unto existent things.

Q.E.D> Islamic theology faces a stern challenge.

All conceptions of God including the proposition that God is One are ultimately inadequate. Mystics in both Christianity and Islam have recognized this.

[mosabdullah]

This is definitely not a contradiction. Apologetics have been trying to find contradictions in the Quran for over a 1000 years but have been unsuccessful. They resort to mis-quoting verses in order to try and prove something contradicts only to find it back fires on them and more people accept islam because of it.

The Chapter (Surah) 112. Al-Ikhlas (Closest meaning is SINCERITY) sates the following (meanings provided inline):
1. Say, He is Allah the Ahad (Uniquely One).
2. Allahu Samad (the Eternal, Absolute, On Whom all depend).
- There is nothing that is born that will not die. Allah or God if you like does not die, so therefore was not born
3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten.
4. And there is none comparable unto Him.
- This means that there is non that are similar to Him, non equal to Him and there is nothing like Him. He created the Heavens and the Earth and everything in them, Glory be to Him, meaning He owns everything so how can he have a peer among His creatures who can be equal or similar to Him, or a relative who can resemble Him. Glorified, Exalted and far removed is Allah from such a thing.

Allah Says in the Quran:
Chapter Mary (Q19:88-95) And they say: "The Most Gracious (Allah) has begotten a son.'' Indeed you have brought forth (said) a terrible evil thing Whereby the heavens are almost torn, and the earth is split asunder, and the mountains fall in ruins that they ascribe a son to the Most Gracious. But it is not suitable for the Most Gracious that He should beget a son. There is none in the heavens and the earth but comes unto the Most Gracious as a slave Verily, He knows each one of them, and has counted them a full counting. And everyone of them will come to Him alone on the Day of Resurrection.

Now lets look at the names (more like attributes than names) of Allah.
You give examples like loving and forgiving. Firstly it is All-Loving, All-Forgiving. The All is what distinguishes between His creation and Himself. Yes some of his attributes can be applied on the creation to a certain extent. The terms used for His attributes bring the meanings closer to the Humans intellect as we are far beyond the capabilities of understanding Allah. For example Allah is the All-Seeing, All-knowing. We see and He Sees. We know and He knows. What is the difference. The difference is that He sees everything as a whole. He knows everything including that from the past and the future, that which is in the minds and the hearts of everything and everyone. He sees and knows what you will be doing a day, a month, a year from now. This is far beyond out intellect to even understand how he does it. So the attributes that he used to describe Himself is only to give us a sense of understanding in human terms as we would not be able to comprehend in terms of His Majesty. Also does Allah the All-Seeing mean that he has eyes like us. No we don't know how he sees even if He tells us that he has Eyes we don't know anything of how these eyes work or look like etc. Do we have eyes like the eye of a needle or eye of the storm?

The descriptions Allah gives of Himself are so that we might be able to understand and comprehend Him in our own Human terms.

So you cannot compare your love or your forgiveness to the way that Allah loves and forgives. You don't know how He loves and forgives. As a human being if you claim to know how Allah does these things then all you are doing is bringing Allah (God) down from His High status to be like His creation and that is because the Human intellect can only understand in terms of the creation.

A similar example can be giving in terms of Allah speaking about his foot stool in heaven.

(The Cow) Q2:255: Allah! There is no god but He,-the Ever Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth? He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) before or after or behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His Kursi (Footstool) doth extend over the heavens and the earth, and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them for He is the Most High, the Supreme (in glory).

So does the Kursi (Footstool) mean that Allah has feet like humans. If I ask my wife where did you put my hat and she says it is at the foot of the bed does this mean the bed has a foot like humans have feet. The answer to most humans beings would be of course not because the foot of the bed means at the bottom end of the bed. If I say I have a foot and an ant has a foot does this mean that we have the same or similar feet. Of course not. Some insects actually communicate and even taste things with their feet. We don't do this as humans and most definitely our feet don't look like insect feet.

So why is it ok for us as humans to say no our feet don't resemble and ants feet but ok for us to say God resembles his creation? This is a major flaw in Christianity. This is what allows Priests to be allowed to change the law and religion because they see themselves as being part of God or worthy of obedience by the masses or that God resembles them etc. This is why most Christians need to ask Saints and Priests to intercede for them with God because they are not worthy of asking God directly. We should not accept these kind of changes from anyone without proof that God has ordered it. Yet Christians accept this kind of thing so easily. Christian history is available and is clear for anyone to understand. If you truly are accepting of it then you truly have not opened your mind.

I am as equal in the sight of God has the most learned scholar in Islam. I have the right to ask God directly for forgivness or anything else that I need to and if I am sincre then God will answer. Many Christians fail to see that the Romans have influenced and changed the religion far from what it was at the time of Jesus (peace be upon him). The History is clear.

In the end it comes down to the humans intellect to reason and their knowledge. It is things like what this post is referring to that makes Islam the most widely accepted religion that people come into, specifically Christians.

Islam is perfect. This does not mean that Muslims are perfect. That is why most non Muslims that become Muslims say the same thing. Islam was the last religion that I even thought about. I never would have accepted Islam. It was only because I was sincrely looking for the truth that Allah guided me. Others say had I known what Muslims where like I would have not looked into Islam. Thank Allah that I found Islam before I found Muslims. Even christian priests and preachers from various denomenations have accepted Islam.

Far exalted is Allah beyond what people claim and He is beyond the intellect of His creation.

[LukeS]

I will be back to read that last post aetc but have to get to the other side of the city fast.

Luke.

[LukeS]

The descriptions Allah gives of Himself are so that we might be able to understand and comprehend Him in our own Human terms.

So the descripions do not really describe him. Couldn't he do any better than produce a faulty set of descriptions that mislead people as to what he is like? Plus+ I am not a Christian, I am "theologicall disabled".

[technomage]

So the descripions do not really describe him.

A semi-equivalent example would be "natural language" descriptions of phenomena such as a black hole or a quantum event: there are no natural language terms that can really describe any proposed omni-being.

Couldn't he do any better than produce a faulty set of descriptions that mislead people as to what he is like?

Could any human being have understood if he did (assuming, of course, that Allah exists, and provided the descriptions)? More importantly, if he tried to do so, would not Mohammad (again, assuming he wrote the Qur'an) have had to translate into human terms, as best as he was able, such a description?

[smaneck]

[QUOTE=LukeS;2436915] Couldn't he do any better than produce a faulty set of descriptions that mislead people as to what he is like? QUOTE]

Since no words can really describe God all descriptions being made in words will be in some sense faulty at least for the literalists.

Maybe the fault is with the literalists, not the text.

[mosabdullah]

So the descripions do not really describe him. Couldn't he do any better than produce a faulty set of descriptions that mislead people as to what he is like? Plus+ I am not a Christian, I am "theologicall disabled".

That's the point luke. We are so limited that for us to understand him is impossible. Even if all the water in the oceans where ink and you quadrupled that and he wrote descriptions of Himself you would not be able to understand Him.

He is the creator and we are the creation.

[mosabdullah]

A semi-equivalent example would be "natural language" descriptions of phenomena such as a black hole or a quantum event: there are no natural language terms that can really describe any proposed omni-being.



Could any human being have understood if he did (assuming, of course, that Allah exists, and provided the descriptions)? More importantly, if he tried to do so, would not Mohammad (again, assuming he wrote the Qur'an) have had to translate into human terms, as best as he was able, such a description?

Firstly Muhammad was illiterate. The Quran was revealed to Him by God through the Angel Gabriel and he memorised it and taught it to the Muslims. The literate Muslims wrote it down during his lifetime and also memorised it. God did give us the best description of himself with those attributes. He did not reveal all His attributes though.

If I tell you that I am knowledgable in designing super computers that the world hasn't seen the likes of you would understand what I mean but you would not be able to imagine what kind of knowledge I have that if you are say a chef and are computer illiterate. In terms of God nobody is even close to God to even begin to try and understand Him. We can only understand through the knowledge that He has given us.

Secondly if you compare the Quran to other religious books you will notice that it is so concise yet so much more informative about every aspects of life, science, history, past, present, future events than any other books ever written. The beauty also is that all scientific facts in the Quran are 100% accurate and proven correct by science. We are talking about things that require the most advanced technological equipment that have only been available in the last 100 - 200 years. This in it self is an evidence and testament to the validity of the Quran.

Many people have tried to write in a similar fashion but this is impossible. The way that the Quran flows covering every aspect of life in an easy way to memorise the entire Quran. This Quran remains in its original form through memorisation not through printing. We know today that the bible is not in its original form since every time they find manuscripts the bible needs to be compared and corrected.

For those Christians that say this is not so then you truly are deluding yourselves since this is a know fact by all Churches.

Destory all religous books and see which will be brought back exactly as it was. Only the Quran. You would have to kill all Muslims if you want to eliminate the Quran. That's 1.5+ billion people.

[technomage]

Firstly Muhammad was illiterate.

Excuse me, the term ummi can mean illiterate, but can also mean "unscriptured" or "not taught in a madrasah." A certain amount of writing would have been necessary for Muhammad's work as a merchant.

The beauty also is that all scientific facts in the Quran are 100% accurate and proven correct by science.

This is a false claim, but one I assume you make in good faith, having been taught it as "true" by others. We can discuss specifics if you like.

Many people have tried to write in a similar fashion but this is impossible.

The quality of writing of any piece of text is not an exemplar of the truth of that text.

Destory all religous books and see which will be brought back exactly as it was. Only the Quran. You would have to kill all Muslims if you want to eliminate the Quran. That's 1.5+ billion people.

I have no desire to kill or harm even one Muslim, nor to destroy the Qur'an. My only desire is for truth.

[smaneck]

[QUOTE][QUOTE=technomage;2437760]Excuse me, the term ummi can mean illiterate, but can also mean "unscriptured" or "not taught in a madrasah." A certain amount of writing would have been necessary for Muhammad's work as a merchant.

The quality of writing of any piece of text is not an exemplar of the truth of that text.

As Barmasha will assuredly point out, the Qur'an is primarily an oral text. The miracle of the Qur'an is in its hearing, not its reading. As the Bible says, "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God." Why do we regard anything as scripture accept that when we hear it we hear the Word of God?

Unlike the miracles of most religions which cannot be witnessed today, the miracle of the Qur'an is witnessed every day.

warmest, Susan

[technomage]

As Barmasha will assuredly point out, the Qur'an is primarily an oral text. The miracle of the Qur'an is in its hearing, not its reading. As the Bible says, "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God." Why do we regard anything as scripture accept that when we hear it we hear the Word of God?

The problem with such a view is that it can stir the emotions and deceive the listener.

There is, as always, a difference between rhetoric and truth. Rhetoric is designed to persuade, and while rhetoric is not intrinsically dishonest, a lie is just as useful to a rhetoritician as a good truthful argument.

Unlike the miracles of most religions which cannot be witnessed today, the miracle of the Qur'an is witnessed every day.

When one calls emotional reaction a "miracle," one is far to easily lead astray.

[barnasha]

What is a miracle? It is in your point of view. I see each breath I take as a miracle.

Imagine not being able to take the next one. Do you fully appreciate it?

I do not consider the Quran as a miracle. I consider all of creation as a miracle, my ability to live and love as a miracle. God's majesty is a miracle. One revelation comes to us, mankind, and we say that is the only miracle? What myopia!!

There is nothing like the Quran. But also, there is nothing like all of God's creation.

[technomage]

What is a miracle? It is in your point of view. I see each breath I take as a miracle.

Not "point of view": a better distinction is "definition."

If you count each breath as a miracle, then the word becomes so diluted as to mean nothing ... though by the same token, you will have a much greater enjoyment of each moment of your life.

Defines as such, the "miracle of the Qur'an" is something that can be experienced everyday from any stimulus, even if there is not a Qur'an within a mile.