The Sin of Shirk.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Patrick_Joshua
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
‘The [Muslim] believers, the Jews, the Christians, and the Sabians - all those who believe in God and the Last Day and do good - will have their rewards with their Lord. No fear for them, nor will they grieve.’ [2:62]
Is the word “Muslim” actually in the original text, it actually changes the text completely.

For example the Authorized English Translation it states; "[2:62] Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts;** anyone who (1) believes in GOD, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve."**

Which pretty much suggests the unity of submitters will not have anything to fear, nor will they grieve.
On a side point this does not mean all non Muslims are in hell necessarily since - as is also implicit from the above hadith - the Qur’an states: ‘Nor do We punish until We have sent a messenger’ [17:15]. In other words the inhabitants of hell are the ones who have had a clear (not even distorted) message and consciously rejected it.
The Israelites had a clear sign and still rejected it and commited the Sin of Shirk and God still forgave them.
Yet they [the Israelites] worshipped the calf even after Clear Signs had come to them
; even so We forgave them; and gave Moses manifest proofs of authority. – Sura 4:153

Would you agree that us Catholics are going to hell since we clearly reject Muhammad and even class him as a “false prophet” (No offence meant)

I would also like to point out that

From [Sura 6:76-78] Abraham took the sun, the moon, and the stars as idols. This is sheer polytheism.

But [Sura 6:88], after speaking of Abraham ( v83), Isaac and Jacob (v84), Moses, Job, Jesus, Joseph, Noah, David, Solomon, etc., Allah says, “Had they served other gods besides Him, their labours would have been vain indeed.”

God Bless
 
Salem related that his father said: A Bedouin came to the Prophet and said: O Messenger of Allah my father used to maintain the ties of kinship, and he was so, and he was so. So where is he? He said: In Hell-fire. He said: It was as if that disturbed him, so he said: O Messenger of Allah, where, then, is your father? The Messenger of Allah then said: Wherever you pass by the grave of a polytheist give him tidings of Hell-fire. He said: The Bedouin later accepted Islam and said:The Messenger of Allah has given me an assignment. I would not pass by the grave of a Kãfir except that I would give him tidings of Hell-fire. [Tirmidhi]

On a side point one may say that still seems a little harsh and OK I empathise (NOTE: only permissible not recommended or obligatory!) but then burning eternally is God’s judgment so in some ways it is simply stating the truth, and as the first hadith shows that by cursing the unbelievers it serves as a reminder that unless one change their ways before the grave eternal punishment awaits.
Hope that helps 🙂 (still in a rush - sorry)
There is a difference between understand what is a sin & what can happen if one persist in a sin and condemning someone by greeting some one with hell-fire. Like they say, hate the sin not the sinner. It seems like the mission of islam is to flat out condemn polytheists. Catholic Church, while it plainly teaches right from wrong & what merits heaven or hell, never condemned a single soul. You shouldn’t greet someone with hell-fire whether that person is alive or dead. Why should you hope for heaven and then hope a polytheist hell-fire?

Polytheists who were not brought the Gospel and do not know about Jesus will fair better than people who heard the Gospel but then reject it and believe what islam teaches that Jesus is not the Son of God. Denying Jesus Christ is the Son of God is a far worse sin then polytheism by those who have not heard of the Gospel.
 
no they do not mean just pagans they mean Christians also I know from personal experience I’ve been called a Polytheist. Not sure why you’re trying to compare to Catholic teachings when there is no comparison. Muslims don’t care about what our church since as far as they are concerned we are unbelievers plain and simple.
There is a difference between understand what is a sin & what can happen if one persist in a sin and condemning someone by greeting some one with hell-fire. Like they say, hate the sin not the sinner. It seems like the mission of islam is to flat out condemn polytheists. Catholic Church, while it plainly teaches right from wrong & what merits heaven or hell, never condemned a single soul. You shouldn’t greet someone with hell-fire whether that person is alive or dead. Why should you hope for heaven and then hope a polytheist hell-fire?

Polytheists who were not brought the Gospel and do not know about Jesus will fair better than people who heard the Gospel but then reject it and believe what islam teaches that Jesus is not the Son of God. Denying Jesus Christ is the Son of God is a far worse sin then polytheism by those who have not heard of the Gospel.
 
That verse you are referring to is talking about early Christians who did not believe in the Trinity. And again it all goes back to the central point yes shirk will be forgiven if and only if you repent while you are alive if you don’t and you die you will not be forgiven by God. You have to look at all the evidence to understand the versus mean. There are some videos I can recommend that explain this in detail if you would like.
Is the word “Muslim” actually in the original text, it actually changes the text completely.

For example the Authorized English Translation it states; "[2:62] Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts;**** anyone who (1) believes in GOD, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve."

Which pretty much suggests the unity of submitters will not have anything to fear, nor will they grieve.

The Israelites had a clear sign and still rejected it and commited the Sin of Shirk and God still forgave them.

Would you agree that us Catholics are going to hell since we clearly reject Muhammad and even class him as a “false prophet” (No offence meant)

I would also like to point out that

From [Sura 6:76-78] Abraham took the sun, the moon, and the stars as idols. This is sheer polytheism.

But [Sura 6:88], after speaking of Abraham ( v83), Isaac and Jacob (v84), Moses, Job, Jesus, Joseph, Noah, David, Solomon, etc., Allah says, “Had they served other gods besides Him, their labours would have been vain indeed.”

God Bless
 
no they do not mean just pagans they mean Christians also I know from personal experience I’ve been called a Polytheist. Not sure why you’re trying to compare to Catholic teachings when there is no comparison. Muslims don’t care about what our church teaches since as far as they are concerned we are unbelievers plain and simple.
 
that verse you are referring to is **talking about early Christians **who did not believe in the Trinity.
Christians were believing in Trinity, time Islam was around.

St.Thomas even proclaimed in the Gospel, “My Lord and My God”. Which according to Islam is the sin of Shirk.

Was not St.Thomas not a early Christian?

Also St.Ignatius of Antioch as you well know was a student of the Apostle John and he was an early Christian he even proclaimed in his letters that Christ was God.
“Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . predestined from eternity for a glory that is lasting and unchanging, united and chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God” (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110]).
“For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit” (ibid., 18:2).
“[T]o the Church beloved and enlightened after the love of Jesus Christ, our God, by the will of him that has willed everything which is” (Letter to the Romans 1 [A.D. 110]).
And again it all goes back to the central point is yes shirk will be forgiven if and only if you repent while you are alive if you don’t and you die were you will not be forgiven by God.
Maybe so, but at this very moment in time nobody’ provided me with reliable evidence from the Qu’ran to suggest this.
You have to look at all the evidence to understand the versus mean. There are some videos I can recommend that explain this in detail if you would like.
You a former Muslim, or secret Muslim?
Just wondering.

God Bless
 
Yes of course as Catholics we know that Christians always believed in the Trinity but again we are discussing the Islamic point of view and according to Islam there were early Christians who did not believe in the Trinity. Remember many Muslims believe that Paul corrupted Christianity. This is why I’m saying there’s no comparison here.
Christians were believing in Trinity, time Islam was around.

St.Thomas even proclaimed in the Gospel, “My Lord and My God”. Which according to Islam is the sin of Shirk.

Was not St.Thomas not a early Christian?

Also St.Ignatius of Antioch as you well know was a student of the Apostle John and he was an early Christian he even proclaimed in his letters that Christ was God.

Maybe so, but at this very moment in time nobody’ provided me with reliable evidence from the Qu’ran to suggest this.

You a former Muslim, or secret Muslim?
Just wondering.

God Bless
 

According to Islam we practice the sin of Shirk.***

***According to Islam we practice the sin of Shirk.

Yet it says in (Sura 39:53) all sins are forgivable. Yet it states in (Sura 4:48) he does not forgive the sin of Shirk.

It also says; Christians shall be saved, (2:62), (5:82) & (61:14). Yet it says Christians practice the sin of Shirk (According to Islam), (4:171), (9:30-31).
Well not all “Christians” do have a trinitarian theology… but it does seem that those Christians who do are not being viewed nicely upon (together with other religions like the Hindus).
 
You a former Muslim, or secret Muslim?
Just wondering.
God Bless

HAHA:rotfl: ** neither** Catholic of course I just wrote it in Turkish! Just because a person studies about Islam extensively does not make them a Muslim or a “secret Muslim”.
 
Well not all “Christians” do have a trinitarian theology… but it does seem that those Christians who do are not being viewed nicely upon (together with other religions like the Hindus).
How can you class yourself as Christian if you do not believe in the Trinity?
 
easy actually there is one group of Christians I’m thinking of they claim that they are practicing Christianity like the early Christians. It’s called Yahweh Restoration Ministries they completely deny the Trinity you can read it for yourself.
yrm.org/trinity-fact-fiction.htm
this is why Muslims say there are Christians who don’t believe in the Trinity in the Trinity because it’s actually true. Of course this particular group was not around during the time of the Prophet Mohammed but I’m sure there were people who held similar views. By the way I’m calling him prophet only because he is considered to be one in Islam not because I believe he is one.
How can you class yourself as Christian if you do not believe in the Trinity?
 
How can you class yourself as Christian if you do not believe in the Trinity?
I do believe in the Trinity, don’t get me wrong… But there are folks out there who consider themselves Christians without believing in the Trinity…

Some Unitarian Universalists consider themselves to be Christians. The American Unitarian Conference is non-Trinitarian and they do not include non-Christians (while Unitarian Universalists). The Creation Seventh Day Adventist Church does not have a trinitarian doctrine and they still consider themselves Christians. Christadelphians don’t hold trinitarian beliefs either and they consider themselves Christians. The Iglesia ni Cristo, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostalism and the Religious Society of Friends aren’t trinitarian faiths either. Those are just some of the groups and they are non-trinitarian in different ways. They do however consider themselves to be Christians.

While I have trouble agreeing with that they themselves view themselves as such.
 
It is a lunatics mind to take a translation of a book that is considered devine and then claim to understand the true meaning. The contradiction that is the Protestant religion has prooven this. I see no reason why the Quran would be any different. Further more as time passes the culture and language changes yet the text remains the same and therefor the meaning of the words change. This simple fact prooves the Doctrine of scripture and scripture alone wrong. So why debate a debate that requires you to stand upon desceptive ground.
 
You can probably guess what I think about the question whether or not these are actually Christians. I will leave it at the fact that they themselves are of the opinion that they are.
Considering their self-identification they might also be seen as such from a Muslim perspective, even in the days of Muhammad (as in the groups that followed teachings we today know as early heresies).
 
Is that the conclusion you get from reading the Qur’an?
No. I got that from reading your post. Do I have to read the whole Koran to ask you questions? I am not really interested in what the Koran says, just your opinion of it.
Thought it wouldn’t be fair to just answer a question with a question so: I do get that conclusion, yes.
Thanks. I thought you might conclude that.
 
Then you have the stumbling block of Arabic.
A particular alarming stumbling block given that the English translations are sanitized to be more acceptable to the Christianized western ear.
 
How can you class yourself as Christian if you do not believe in the Trinity?
Calling one’s self a “Christian” does not mean one must embrace YOUR definition of what makes a “Christian”.

While I would not in clear conscience recite the creed and claim it states the Truth…I consider myself “Christian”…but I do not point to the creed, Apostles or Nicean, and claim by believing in the tenets of the creeds…I am a Christian. I am a Christian because I believe the God is revealed in Jesus of Nazareth and I seek to conform my life to His teachings and guide my behavior and actions by it.
 
I do believe in the Trinity, don’t get me wrong… But there are folks out there who consider themselves Christians without believing in the Trinity…

Some Unitarian Universalists consider themselves to be Christians. The American Unitarian Conference is non-Trinitarian and they do not include non-Christians (while Unitarian Universalists). The Creation Seventh Day Adventist Church does not have a trinitarian doctrine and they still consider themselves Christians. Christadelphians don’t hold trinitarian beliefs either and they consider themselves Christians. The Iglesia ni Cristo, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostalism and the Religious Society of Friends aren’t trinitarian faiths either. Those are just some of the groups and they are non-trinitarian in different ways. They do however consider themselves to be Christians.

While I have trouble agreeing with that they themselves view themselves as such.
While many in the Society of Friends would not consider themselves “trinitarian” there are a large number that do. What Friends don’t do is recite or acknowledge the Creed as the baseline of determining who and who is not a “Christian”.

Friends are “non-creedal”.
 
thank you very much for answering my question may Allah bless you.
Actually reading through the previous posts suggests that the question has been answered. As Sister Amy said the ‘all’ is subject to repentance. On the Day of Judgment we believe that faith will ultimately save us by God’s grace, however we may have to be purged of sin first, for those sins we didn’t repent from. Only those who do not have faith will remain in the fire, as the following suggests: “Whoever says ‘There is no god but Allah’ and has a barley-corn’s weight of good in his heart will come out of the Fire. Whoever says ‘There is no god but Allah’ and has a wheat-grain’s weight of good in his heart will come out of the Fire. Whoever says ‘There is no god but Allah’ and has a atom’s weight of good in his heart will come out of the Fire.” [Bukhari]

Sorry to disappoint you, but I’m not Sister Amy 😛 Though maybe I can help?
The hadith you mention and quoted from the website is as follows:
Salem related that his father said: A Bedouin came to the Prophet and said: O Messenger of Allah my father used to maintain the ties of kinship, and he was so, and he was so. So where is he? He said: In Hell-fire. He said: It was as if that disturbed him, so he said: O Messenger of Allah, where, then, is your father? The Messenger of Allah then said: Wherever you pass by the grave of a polytheist give him tidings of Hell-fire. He said: The Bedouin later accepted Islam and said:The Messenger of Allah has given me an assignment. I would not pass by the grave of a Kãfir except that I would give him tidings of Hell-fire. [Tirmidhi]
Firstly we need to know that the website is a Salafi one and so may have been tampered with. It is unlikely that it is not a hadith, but the translation may be deliberately pointing one in a certain direction, nor does it mention other narrations of the same event (if they were any)
Secondly we need to ask is this a general rule or did it just apply to the Bedouin. If I say to my kids on a rainy day: ‘don’t go outside,’ a few hundred years pass by and then someone tries to ascertain what I meant and decides that I gave an absolute prohibition for all mankind would clearly be wrong. The wording suggest specificity rather than generality. There is extra information about the Bedouin being sad that his father’s good deeds hadn’t saved, that he later converted and then that he had this personal mission. If general, why this extra information? Strange though it may seem, the advice from Muhammad (pbuh) brought the Bedouin to Islam, because he realised that without faith good actions are futile. In terms of legally, no precedent can be taken that Muslims should do this, but it is also clear that it is not impermissible.
Thirdly we need to see are there any other evidences? A general instruction from Muhammad (pbuh) to the whole Muslim community was: "The believer is not one who slanders, curses or uses vulgarity (Tirmidhi). We can see why Sister Amy or most other Muslims wouldn’t have learnt the first hadith since it is a special case and not in keeping with the character of a Muslim.
Lastly we refer the the scholarly tradition and ask what did they say? Well if we refer to the pivotal work on Islamic Jurisprudence Radd al Mukhtar by the eminent ibn A’bideen we see that: it is permitted to curse the unbelievers and sinful in general, though not specifically, except those about whom it is certainly known that they died in a state of disbelief. He further adds that ‘The reality of cursing (la`n) is to distance from Mercy, which cannot be for other than an unbeliever (kafir).’ Which I think sums it up.
On a side point one may say that still seems a little harsh and OK I empathise (NOTE: only permissible not recommended or obligatory!) but then burning eternally is God’s judgment so in some ways it is simply stating the truth, and as the first hadith shows that by cursing the unbelievers it serves as a reminder that unless one change their ways before the grave eternal punishment awaits.
Hope that helps 🙂 (still in a rush - sorry)
 
While many in the Society of Friends would not consider themselves “trinitarian” there are a large number that do. What Friends don’t do is recite or acknowledge the Creed as the baseline of determining who and who is not a “Christian”.

Friends are “non-creedal”.
Thank you for the clarification. I might have put the society in there wrongly and I might have been too generalizing. Please forgive me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top