The steps to belief (or disbelief)

[eanassir]

The steps to belief (or disbelief)​

Doubting → wavering → thinking → discussing → preferring the belief or the disbelief → believing → confirming the belief → positive action along with the belief → sure belief or certainty. ​

The thinking, pondering and contemplating should be by a single person or only two friends who truly and sincerely intend to reach the truth.​

It can't be more by than two persons, because this will lead to confusion, and many ideas will then be displayed at the same time, and this will lead to loss of concentration.​

This is in the Quran 34: 46​

قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَعِظُكُم بِوَاحِدَةٍ أَن تَقُومُوا لِلَّهِ مَثْنَى وَفُرَادَى ثُمَّ تَتَفَكَّرُوا مَا بِصَاحِبِكُم مِّن جِنَّةٍ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا نَذِيرٌ لَّكُم بَيْنَ يَدَيْ عَذَابٍ شَدِيدٍ​

The explanation:
(Say: "I only advise you to one [point]:​

to be concerned about [discerning the religion of] God; ​

[and to go for this purpose] two by two and one by one, ​

then to think [and realize] that there is no madness in your man [: Mohammed]; ​

he is only a warner to you [of a punishment] by the hands [of angels] of severe chastisement.)​

eanassir
http://man-after-death.t35.com​

 

[eanassir]

The disbeliever may take some steps in the opposite direction:

Doubting → wavering → thinking → discussing → preferring the disbelief (for some psychological or personal cause; in fact it is the misguidance) → disbelieving → confirming the disbelief → positive action against the belief → locked disbelief.

Example:
There was an intelligent man at the time of Prophet Mohammed – salam be to him – he went to the prophet and discussed the matter with him, and said to him in a diplomatic way:

"My cousin, you are intelligent and our master and chief, and you know that our trade and advantage is centered around these idols; and you have made dissension and conflict among your people; so leave all this and we shall make you our king."

The Prophet said to him: "Waleed, [this was his name] have you finished; then hear this Quran revelation"
And he recited to him some ayat of the Quran that made him much astonished and admiring it; so he returned pale-faced to his people that sent him for that purpose; when they saw him they thought he converted.

He said to them: "What do you think about Mohammed?"
They said: "He is mad or possessed."
He said: "Have you ever seen him strangling any man?"

They said: "No, but he may be a poet."
He said: "Have you ever heard him saying any poetry?"

They said: "No; but what then?"
He said: "He is a magician; don't you see his Quran so marvelous and it separates the brother from his brother and the son from his father; all this is because of his magic."

Therefore, many ayat were revealed in the Quran 74: 11-30​

...إِنَّهُ فَكَّرَ وَقَدَّرَ . فَقُتِلَ كَيْفَ قَدَّرَ . ثُمَّ قُتِلَ كَيْفَ قَدَّرَ . ثُمَّ نَظَرَ . ثُمَّ عَبَسَ وَبَسَرَ . ثُمَّ أَدْبَرَ وَاسْتَكْبَرَ . فَقَالَ إِنْ هَذَا إِلَّا سِحْرٌ يُؤْثَرُ . إِنْ هَذَا إِلَّا قَوْلُ الْبَشَرِ . سَأُصْلِيهِ سَقَرَ ...الخ .​

The explanation:
(Indeed he reflected [on the Quran] and considered [it with wrong consideration.]
Killed is he; how he considered!
Then killed is he; how he considered! [He will be punished after being killed.]
Then he contemplated [to find a way against the Quran.]
Then he frowned and was gloomy[-faced.]
Then turned away [from believing] and was arrogant [to Our messenger.]
And he said: "This [Quran] is only an influential sorcery."
"This is nothing else than speech of mortal man."
I shall surely roast him in Saqar…etc.)
​

 

[eanassir]

The disbeliever may take some steps in the opposite direction:

Doubting → wavering → thinking → discussing → preferring the disbelief (for some psychological or personal cause; in fact it is the misguidance) → disbelieving → confirming the disbelief → positive action against the belief → locked disbelief.

Example:
There was an intelligent man at the time of Prophet Mohammed – salam be to him – he went to the prophet and discussed the matter with him, and said to him in a diplomatic way:

"My cousin, you are intelligent and our master and chief, and you know that our trade and advantage is centered around these idols; and you have made dissension and conflict among your people; so leave all this and we shall make you our king."

The Prophet said to him: "Waleed, [this was his name] have you finished; then hear this Quran revelation"
And he recited to him some ayat of the Quran that made him much astonished and admiring it; so he returned pale-faced to his people that sent him for that purpose; when they saw him they thought he converted.

He said to them: "What do you think about Mohammed?"
They said: "He is mad or possessed."
He said: "Have you ever seen him strangling any man?"

They said: "No, but he may be a poet."
He said: "Have you ever heard him saying any poetry?"

They said: "No; but what then?"
He said: "He is a magician; don't you see his Quran so marvelous and it separates the brother from his brother and the son from his father; all this is because of his magic."

Therefore, many ayat were revealed in the Quran 74: 11-30​

...إِنَّهُ فَكَّرَ وَقَدَّرَ . فَقُتِلَ كَيْفَ قَدَّرَ . ثُمَّ قُتِلَ كَيْفَ قَدَّرَ . ثُمَّ نَظَرَ . ثُمَّ عَبَسَ وَبَسَرَ . ثُمَّ أَدْبَرَ وَاسْتَكْبَرَ . فَقَالَ إِنْ هَذَا إِلَّا سِحْرٌ يُؤْثَرُ . إِنْ هَذَا إِلَّا قَوْلُ الْبَشَرِ . سَأُصْلِيهِ سَقَرَ ...الخ .​

The explanation:
(Indeed he reflected [on the Quran] and considered [it with wrong consideration.]
Killed is he; how he considered!
Then killed is he; how he considered! [He will be punished after being killed.]
Then he contemplated [to find a way against the Quran.]
Then he frowned and was gloomy[-faced.]
Then turned away [from believing] and was arrogant [to Our messenger.]
And he said: "This [Quran] is only an influential sorcery."
"This is nothing else than speech of mortal man."
I shall surely roast him in Saqar…etc.)
​

 

[Scott Free]

Do you know what a shadow argument is eanassir?

It is where one of the participants cannot admit the possibility they might be wrong. That person is said to be "shadow arguing."

For a proper argument both sides must be willing to admit they could be wrong with the presentation of persuasive evidence and proof counter to their argument.

You see, because the point of an argument is to find the truth - it isn't to prove who is right or wrong - it is possible for no one to be right, but even that should come out in a proper argument.

Someone who is shadow arguing isn't interested in the truth they only want to push an agenda or their belief.

And that would be you.

 

[TenPenny]

If one examines neodeconstructive libertarianism, one is faced with a choice: either accept the semioticist paradigm of expression or conclude that government is capable of intention, given that sexuality is equal to language. Sartre suggests the use of Batailleist `powerful communication’ to read narrativity. Therefore, the characteristic theme of the works of Burroughs is the meaninglessness of textual class.

 

[Scott Free]

That's framing the argument. We could just accept Wittgenstein's argument that all philosophy is word games but I find this unsatisfactory. It is right therefore IMO, to suggest that truth is an impossible thing to ascertain with absolute certainty but we can find degrees of truth within the confines of our times. This very much suggests to me there is no truth except within the constructions we ourselves build. Take mathematics for example. It is a beautiful language and useful in so many ways but it doesn't in and of itself have any objectivity. Mathematics therefore isn't a thing but a means to a thing. It is just a tool. Like language; like god; like sex; like government; like life...

 

[eanassir]

Do you know what a shadow argument is eanassir?

It is where one of the participants cannot admit the possibility they might be wrong. That person is said to be "shadow arguing."

For a proper argument both sides must be willing to admit they could be wrong with the presentation of persuasive evidence and proof counter to their argument.

You see, because the point of an argument is to find the truth - it isn't to prove who is right or wrong - it is possible for no one to be right, but even that should come out in a proper argument.

Someone who is shadow arguing isn't interested in the truth they only want to push an agenda or their belief.

And that would be you.

This description is applied to you in fact.

The example in my last reply about the disbeliever: Waleed, is also applicable to you.

Read it once again, and see how this disbeliever wavered, then was in dilemma, then sought after some plea to reject the belief, and he found such excuse in saying: "The Quran is some sort of magic".


eanassir
http://man-after-death.t35.com​

 

[lone wolf]

Are you describing free thought or brainwashing?

 

[Scott Free]

This description is applied to you in fact.

The example in my last reply about the disbeliever: Waleed, is also applicable to you.

Read it once again, and see how this disbeliever wavered, then was in dilemma, then sought after some plea to reject the belief, and he found such excuse in saying: "The Quran is some sort of magic".


eanassir
http://man-after-death.t35.com​

This is another shadow argument.

I know you believe that the Koranic versus have some magic power but in reality they don't.

If you want to argue with me you will have to first admit that you could be wrong.
You don't have to say you are wrong but only that you could be.

If you cannot do this thing then you cannot know the truth. If you must insist on your convictions then it is impossible for you to reason.

If you cannot know truth and cannot reason then you are no better than a lap dog on Muhammad's knee.

If that's what you want then go ahead.

But I won't waste my time on you and I doubt anyone else will either.

 

[eanassir]

Are you describing free thought or brainwashing?

And you: drying after washing?

 

[eanassir]

If one examines neodeconstructive libertarianism, one is faced with a choice: either accept the semioticist paradigm of expression or conclude that government is capable of intention, given that sexuality is equal to language. Sartre suggests the use of Batailleist `powerful communication’ to read narrativity. Therefore, the characteristic theme of the works of Burroughs is the meaninglessness of textual class.

And where is Sartre now?

 

[lone wolf]

And you: drying after washing?

Is that a response?

 

[lone wolf]

See ... there is already a religion that requires steps.... Twelve of them.

 

[eanassir]

This is another shadow argument.

​

You in fact are in the darkness of your ignorance and denial of God – be glorified.​

I know you believe that the Koranic versus have some magic power but in reality they don't.

​

You try to suggest this to some of the non-Arab; but certainly for you and your alike, the Quran will cause more blindness; according to the the Quran 41: 44​

قُلْ هُوَ لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا هُدًى وَشِفَاء وَالَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ فِي آذَانِهِمْ وَقْرٌ وَهُوَ عَلَيْهِمْ عَمًى ​

The explanation:
(Say [O Mohammed to them]: "[The Quran], to those who believe, is guidance and healing,
[whereas] those who unbelieve have deafness in their ears, and it is blindness for them.)​

If you want to argue with me you will have to first admit that you could be wrong.

You don't have to say you are wrong but only that you could be. If you cannot do this thing then you cannot know the truth. If you must insist on your convictions then it is impossible for you to reason.

Tell this to yourself.​

If you cannot know truth and cannot reason then you are no better than a lap dog on Muhammad's knee.

​

You are no better than a lap dog on Marx knee and Satan foot, to whom you will be a lowly servant in your afterlife.​

If that's what you want then go ahead.

But I won't waste my time on you and I doubt anyone else will either.

I don't want to waste my time on you, and you cannot instigate anyone else by your words.​

 

[eanassir]

See ... there is already a religion that requires steps.... Twelve of them.

The disbeliever follows the footsteps of Satan.

As in the Quran 24: 21​

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّبِعُوا خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ وَمَن يَتَّبِعْ خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ فَإِنَّهُ يَأْمُرُ بِالْفَحْشَاء وَالْمُنكَرِ​

The explanation:
(O believers, follow not [the inciting of] Satan step by step; for whoso follows the steps of Satan, then surely he commands vile deeds and evil acts.)​

 

[lone wolf]

The disbeliever follows the footsteps of Satan.

As in the Quran 24: 21​

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّبِعُوا خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ وَمَن يَتَّبِعْ خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ فَإِنَّهُ يَأْمُرُ بِالْفَحْشَاء وَالْمُنكَرِ​

The explanation:
(O believers, follow not [the inciting of] Satan step by step; for whoso follows the steps of Satan, then surely he commands vile deeds and evil acts.)​

The arrogant, too, shall go to hell

 

[Scott Free]

You in fact are in the darkness of your ignorance and denial of God – be glorified.​

You try to suggest this to some of the non-Arab; but certainly for you and your alike, the Quran will cause more blindness; according to the the Quran 41: 44​

قُلْ هُوَ لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا هُدًى وَشِفَاء وَالَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ فِي آذَانِهِمْ وَقْرٌ وَهُوَ عَلَيْهِمْ عَمًى ​

The explanation:
(Say [O Mohammed to them]: "[The Quran], to those who believe, is guidance and healing,
[whereas] those who unbelieve have deafness in their ears, and it is blindness for them.)​

Tell this to yourself.​

You are no better than a lap dog on Marx knee and Satan foot, to whom you will be a lowly servant in your afterlife.​

​

I don't want to waste my time on you, and you cannot instigate anyone else by your words.​

If you can't let your faith be challenged then you can't say you believe.

I am an unbeliever like you eanassir, we are the same, except I know I don't believe and you think you beleive. That is the only difference. What do you believe in? You can't say - you don't know, you just have empty words in an old book; your heart is empty, because if it were full you wouldn't be so afraid. You would be able to argue, but you cannot do this can you? You must rely on old words, and you must do that because you don't believe. You know as well as I do they are empty words - that is what you're really scared of eanassir. I know, I was there once too.

 

[Cannuck]

Do you know what a shadow argument is eanassir?

It is where one of the participants cannot admit the possibility they might be wrong. That person is said to be "shadow arguing."

For a proper argument both sides must be willing to admit they could be wrong with the presentation of persuasive evidence and proof counter to their argument.

You see, because the point of an argument is to find the truth - it isn't to prove who is right or wrong - it is possible for no one to be right, but even that should come out in a proper argument.

Someone who is shadow arguing isn't interested in the truth they only want to push an agenda or their belief.

And that would be you.

...and you.

 

[Scott Free]

...and you.

You're really jealous aren't you lol :lol:



I am a relativist and a realist so IMO no one can be right about anything including me. There is only process.

 

[Cannuck]

You're really jealous aren't you lol :lol:



I am a relativist and a realist so IMO no one can be right about anything including me. There is only process.

I'll believe that when your posts start backing up this claim.