Islamic Hellfire: A Description

[S.A.M.]

Ah, so you conveniently cop out with a non-answer followed by a lie. Yet, it's amazing how quickly you'll respond with Quran quotes when your agenda requires it.

I translate it based on how I read it. I put up quotes to describe my translation. Translations are not really validated by anyone. Any Mohammed, Ahmed or Ali can put up a translation. But few can back it up with reason.

Dishonest as the day is long, Sam. Why did you even bother to respond to this thread?

You're clearly looking for an interpretation that matches yours. So I'll leave you to it.

 

[(Q)]

I translate it based on how I read it. I put up quotes to describe my translation. Translations are not really validated by anyone. Any Mohammed, Ahmed or Ali can put up a translation. But few can back it up with reason.

So, there is no translation or interpretation of the Quran that represents Islam as far as you're concerned. Clearly, any language can be translated and still capture the meaning, so that excuse certainly doesn't merit acknowledgment.

So, it boils down to interpretation. You interpret the Quran as you see fit, as do all Muslims, hence the Quran is relatively useless in conveying a message from Allah. And since you claim, few if any can back up their interpretations with reason, we can discard the Quran as source.

Hence, the interpretation I linked in the OP is as relevant as any other interpretation of Islam; irrelevant.

You're clearly looking for an interpretation that matches yours. So I'll leave you to it.

That is a lie. I didn't create the website, Muslims did.

 

[S.A.M.]

So, there is no translation or interpretation of the Quran that represents Islam as far as you're concerned..

Now you're misrepresenting me:

Tafsir [explanation] of the Quran follows certain guidelines:

1. It must be sound in belief. ie not break any rules of aqida

2. It must be grounded in the language of the Quran, not the language of translations.

3. Be more than mere opinion

4. Begin with the Quran.

5. Refer to reports from the Prophet, sahaba, other scholars.

Now to be on the safe side I limit number 5 to that which is based on more than narration ie details that have some historical basis to describe them. This is usually from non-Quranic historians and scholars and has the advantage of being not biased to fit a particular interpretation.

Meanwhile, IMO, the best tafsir of the Quran is by the Quran. If I need to read what other people said about Shakespeare to read Shakespeare, then I don't really know English or poetry well enough to give an opinion.

If there is a part of the Quran that cannot be explained by the Quran, then my opinion [IMO] is as valid as anyone elses

 

[(Q)]

2. It must be grounded in the language of the Quran, not the language of translations.

Irrelevant. Any language can be translated to another.

If there is a part of the Quran that cannot be explained by the Quran, then my opinion [IMO] is as valid as anyone elses

And, that is exactly the point I was making, that your opinion of the Quran is as valid or relevant to anyone else.

Now, that you've admitted that, we can proceed to talk about Islam and not have to listen to your gripes on interpretation and translation.

 

[S.A.M.]

Irrelevant. Any language can be translated to another.

If it were that simple then there would not be arguments about interpretations. Consider the US constitution as an example.

And, that is exactly the point I was making, that your opinion of the Quran is as valid or relevant to anyone else.

Conditional on the concept not being explained by the Quran itself, or historical narratives that support Hadith narrations.

Now, that you've admitted that, we can proceed to talk about Islam and not have to listen to your gripes on interpretation and translation.

Okay

 

[(Q)]

If it were that simple then there would not be arguments about interpretations.

It should be very simple. If the Quran is open to any interpretation by anyone, then it defeats it's own purpose as guidelines to a way of living and cannot be used as a source for the intolerance it spreads.

Conditional on the concept not being explained by the Quran itself, or historical narratives that support Hadith narrations.

The Quran only explains what Muslims want it to explain based on their own interpretations.

You dismissed the website I linked entirely based on your own personal interpretations and then proceeded to tell me they were the interpretations I wanted to believe. Your argument lies with your brethren who made the website, not with me.

Clearly, the interpretations of that website in regards to Hellfire are just as valid as anything you might assert.

So, who are we to believe, you or them or someone else?

 

[S.A.M.]

It should be very simple. If the Quran is open to any interpretation by anyone, then it defeats it's own purpose as guidelines to a way of living and cannot be used as a source for the intolerance it spreads.

Thats your opinion. On my part, I see less intolerance from Muslims than against them.

The Quran only explains what Muslims want it to explain based on their own interpretations.

You dismissed the website I linked entirely based on your own personal interpretations and then proceeded to tell me they were the interpretations I wanted to believe. Your argument lies with your brethren who made the website, not with me.

Clearly, the interpretations of that website in regards to Hellfire are just as valid as anything you might assert.

So, who are we to believe, you or them or someone else?

Generally, the accepted route is to examine both, read the Quran and reach your own conclusions.

Well.. this is interesting. Why do you think the promise of an afterlife is necessary to do the right thing ?

To me, its not. But I am not all people. If you're concerned about heaven and hell, maybe you should ask yourself why.

 

[(Q)]

On my part, I see less intolerance from Muslims than against them.

That's because you're intolerant. Duh.

Generally, the accepted route is to examine both, read the Quran and reach your own conclusions.

I have reached certain conclusions about the Quran, as have many others, yet you and other Muslims dismiss those conclusions based on your own conclusions. Again, your conclusions are as relevant and valid as theirs, yet Muslims do everything in their power to censor or discredit anyone's conclusions but their own. Even amongst your own brethren,they discredit each others conclusions.

Where does the madness stop?

 

[S.A.M.]

That's because you're intolerant. Duh.

I have reached certain conclusions about the Quran, as have many others, yet you and other Muslims dismiss those conclusions based on your own conclusions. Again, your conclusions are as relevant and valid as theirs, yet Muslims do everything in their power to censor or discredit anyone's conclusions but their own. Even amongst your own brethren,they discredit each others conclusions.

Where does the madness stop?

Opinion is free. If you can dismiss other people's opinions, they can dismiss yours.

 

[(Q)]

Opinion is free. If you can dismiss other people's opinions, they can dismiss yours.

Perfect, we can therefore dismiss the Quran as opinion.

 

[S.A.M.]

Thats umm, YOUR opinion.

 

[(Q)]

Thats umm, YOUR opinion.

It's YOURS too, you opined it.

 

[S.A.M.]

I don't dismiss MY opinions.

 

[(Q)]

I don't dismiss MY opinions.

You would if you listened to them.

So, what is it exactly about the website I linked that you disagree? You said something about it not being science, but that's just stating the obvious.

Aren't you in the least bit offended by those ideas? Shouldn't those who submitted those ideas be dealt with for their opinions as you would deal with others who submitted spurious opinions about Islam?

 

[S.A.M.]

Aren't you in the least bit offended by those ideas? Shouldn't those who submitted those ideas be dealt with for their opinions as you would deal with others who submitted spurious opinions about Islam?

No. Its not science. i.e I cannot say to the person who interpreted the verses or Hadith as they did: Lookee here, Saeed, you're dumb and clueless and irrational, how can you possibly believe this?

No more than I can argue evolution with a creationist or alien abductions with a UFOlogist.

People are mostly irrational and will believe what they want. Its much better to appeal to their humanity than to challenge their dearly held notions.

The wisest course is to make them aware of alternate ways of thinking, give them options so that they feel comfortable about educating themselves, about making the rigt choices as required.

Most people will do the right thing when requested, and see no contradiction in going against what they believe in.

 

[superluminal]

So, what I gather from this is that religious "teachings" are totally a matter of interpretation and opinion, and xians and muslims, etc. think it's ok to base societies and behavioral models on these wildly varying opinions and interpretations. Hmmm. Yes. As I suspected. Stupidity, the primary hallmark of humans in general, wins the day. Too bad.

 

[(Q)]

I cannot say to the person who interpreted the verses or Hadith as they did: Lookee here, Sam, you're dumb and clueless and irrational, how can you possibly believe this?

No more than I can argue evolution with a creationist or alien abductions with a UFOlogist.

People are mostly irrational and will believe what they want. Its much better to appeal to their humanity than to challenge their dearly held notions.

The wisest course is to make them aware of alternate ways of thinking, give them options so that they feel comfortable about educating themselves, about making the rigt choices as required.

Most people will do the right thing when requested, and see no contradiction in going against what they believe in.

Why is you now state what everyone else has been saying to you?

 

[S.A.M.]

So, what I gather from this is that religious "teachings" are totally a matter of interpretation and opinion, and xians and muslims, etc. think it's ok to base societies and behavioral models on these wildly varying opinions and interpretations. Hmmm. Yes. As I suspected. Stupidity, the primary hallmark of humans in general, wins the day. Too bad.

Hi supe.

Everything in human society is a matter of interpretation and opinion.

What isn't?

PS. Where have you been?

Why is you now state what everyone else has been saying to you?

Maybe if you paid attention you'd realise I'm not saying anything I haven't said before.

 

[(Q)]

I'm not saying anything I haven't said before.

Exactly. :bravo:

 

[superluminal]

Hi supe.

Everything in human society is a matter of interpretation and opinion.

What isn't?

True, true.

PS. Where have you been?

Working. Preparing to sell my house. Freaking out over the general economic situation and the massive layoffs at my company and the companies we depend on as customers. Ya know. The usual stuff.