The fact still remains that you believe in their expertise without having any “objective” knowledge of surveying building. This is the salient point. The rest of your reasons are frankly obscurantism. i.e. Because they are controlled by law, ..can be made to pay compensation, etc, all of these may not be good enough reasons for somebody else to make the same decision as you. However, what everyone must necessarily do is to arrive at the same decision of having to submit to the authority of those who they “believe” to be qualified experts in the area… Failure to arrive at this point of “Faith” implies they would never be able to get their house surveyed and obtain the needed re-assurance of its safety. In fact, they would not be able to do decide on anything in life.

So, you think that the fact that you are human and I am human is an analogy,…?

Good question. Very good question.

And the Answer:

Therefore there is no reason to think that whatever is verified is the same thing at all.

“Is this an OBJECTIVE definition? You could be seeing a mirage in the sky thinking you were seeing God’s signature.”

I didn’t say it was an objective definition. I said it was objective evidence- something that everyone agrees as to what it apparently is. After that we can discuss what it is and how it came to be and how good it is as evidence compared with evidence against it.

“I did explain to you why this is so using the example of Equality and loving someone for the sake of something else. You need to extrapolate from some of these points. There isn’t enough time to go over every single detail.”

Do you mean this? “As for “Equality” and loving someone… When we love someone or anything, we love them for the sake of something else. So for example, you love your wife/husband for the sake of that comfort you have in your heart (which is in turn conditioned by some bounded and/or spacially localisable attributes). It is completely utilitarian, but of a limited and deficient type. So, if such is the basis of your actions to demonstrate equality, you would never be able to demonstrate it! It would be deficient. Because you will never find two (‘similar’ attributes) in life. Hence, you need to re-arrange the sake for which you love someone/something to a more Grand - One, Unbounded and Complete Basis.” Since you insist, how, precisely, does this show that different virtues, such as truth and compassion do not often contradict one another in the long run?

“1 + 1 = 2 is true now or in a context (based on Peano’s axioms) . There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is His Prophet is true Eternally. “

Which of Peano’s axioms shows that? What- apart from its repeated assertion- is the evidence that “There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is His Prophet”? Was it true before Mohammed was born?

” Outside space and time, 1+1 doesn’t make sense.”

Actually, according to some theorissts, it is only outside time and space- in the realm of abstractions- when the numbers exist independently of anything except other numbers- that 1+1=2 makes sense.

” So, we are short of words to describe these things in temporal time, especially if it takes Eternity to evaluate the answers. So, Religion is a better bet. “

So, because evidence isn’t absolutely reliable, reject all the evidence. “Never mind the facts. Print the legend.”

This teaching [when legally warring …muslims should not kill civilians, women, children, livestocks, poison water, destroy trees, and so on] is for all times.”

Again, when and where have muslims actually followed this injunction? Or have muslims never legally made war?

“So finally, you had to submit to the experts because you had no knowledge in the area. … If I may ask further, how did you come to believe in their qualification?” Because they are controlled by laws and if they make mistakes they can be made to pay compensation for them. If for some reason they cannot pay compensation they belong to a professional organisation which, through insurance, will pay it. In short, there are many outside factors -“objective proofs” to you- which are evidence of their reliability and which guarantee they have good reasons to be accurate in their assessments. They have to assess actual pohysical things and can judge the reliability and safety of an actual building, not, as is the case with religion, what someone said someone said someone meant when they allegedly said god said something.

“Thersites, if something is different, they cannot be similar except by making an analogy between them. ” So, you think that the fact that you are human and I am human is an analogy, as is the fact that you are alive and an aardvaark is alive. The fact that if we fulkfil and have in common a certain number of criteria- are similar in those ways- means that they are human and are alike in that respect. There is as much evidence that we have souls as there is that we and aardvarks have souls.

“Objective evidence is something which both of us and others can verify the existence of. A signed message, say, going across the sky, saying “I made you. God.

Some interesting verses to consider.”

All of your verses have in common the claim that objective evidence shouldn’t be necessary before belief. I don’t have a high opinion of belief- I prefer to think things more or less probable and to alter my opinion according to the evidence- and I only think that on the basis of what I can judge and assess, including the credibility of those who say things.

Not me in particular, but all qualified experts of Islamic law, and by extension - the majority of muslims.

Some interesting verses to consider.

Koran 20:10 Are they waiting that Allah comes to them in canopies of clouds, with angels (in His train) Then the case would be already judged…..

Ask the Israelites how many a clear sign have We given them…

Koran 15:14 Even if We opened out to them a gate from heaven, and they were to continue (all day) ascending therein,

They would only say: “Our eyes have been intoxicated: Nay, we have been bewitched by sorcery.

Koran 17:90 They say: “We shall not believe in thee, until thou cause a spring to gush forth for us from the earth,

Or (until) thou have a garden of date trees and vines, and cause rivers to gush forth in their midst, carrying abundant water;

Or thou cause the sky to fall in pieces, as thou sayest (will happen), against us; or thou bring Allah and the angels before (us) face to face:

Or thou have a house of gold; or thou ascend up into heaven, and even then we will put no faith in thine ascension till thou bring down for us a book that we can read. Say (O Muhammad): My Lord be Glorified! Am I aught save a mortal messenger?

What kept men back from belief when Guidance came to them, was nothing but this: they said, “Has Allah sent a man (like us) to be (His) Messenger?”

So it isn’t verifiable by someone else.

It is verifiable by someone else, but it won’t be exactly in the same way for everybody. Everyone has what makes them tick which is different to the other person. We just have different personalities as human beings.

Please clarify what you mean by objective evidence? We need definitions before we can move forward here. The word objective is so much abused these days.

So is the word evidence. Objective evidence is something which both of us and others can verify the existence of. A signed message, say, going across the sky, saying “I made you. God.” This would not be proof, but it would be objective evidence.

Is this an OBJECTIVE definition? You could be seeing a mirage in the sky thinking you were seeing God’s signature.

I have told you many times that they don’t contradict each other in the eternal long-run.

However, you haven’t said why this is so.

I did explain to you why this is so using the example of Equality and loving someone for the sake of something else. You need to extrapolate from some of these points. There isn’t enough time to go over every single detail.

For example if you take a measuring tape to source your height now. The measurement is only true for few seconds. If you repeat the same exercise again say after 1 year (I could have said after 10 seconds or less!), your height would be completely different. Hence, the passage of time cause facts at one time to be false at another time.

Completely different? Is “1+1=2” or “There is no god but god and Mohammed is his prophet.” true now and completely untrue in a few seconds then?

1 + 1 = 2 is true now or in a context (based on Peano’s axioms) . There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is His Prophet is true Eternally.

Outside space and time, 1+1 doesn’t make sense. In fact, it is statement of insanity. It is time that makes it seem sensible. So, it is wiser to base one’s actions and intentions on an Eternal reference. The cliche goes “For God’s Sake”. If you love, love for the sake of God, if you speak the truth, speak the truth for the sake of God, if you help people, help people for the sake of God, etc. Otherwise, time will erode the significance of your actions and they would come to waste. Why? Because the basis on which they were acted was localised in time, etc, I hope that sounds clear. Sorry, I am not a good and/or patient writer, and may not be writing as clearly as befitting the subject.

“So, the proof is simultaneously objective and subjective, or you could say neither.

Or not proof.

It is a proof, but the problem with proofs is that they are known to be proofs only in retrospect. Answers become Answers after they have been evaluated to be correct, and so on. So, we are short of words to describe these things in temporal time, especially if it takes Eternity to evaluate the answers. So, Religion is a better bet.

Their interpretation of the Koran and hadith is not in line with the interpretation offered by the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

You mean what you interpret as “the interpretation offered by the Companions of the Prophet.

That is correct!

And who decides which is “a scholarly chain of transmission”?

You decide using everything at your disposal. You work with what you’ve got. Just as you decided on the “qualified experts” to survey your property before you bought it, a point we shall come to shortly, inshallah.

The well-known teaching in Islam that when legally warring …muslims should not kill civilians, women, children, livestocks, poison water, destroy trees, and so on.

Of course. Exactly when and where did they follow this teaching?

This teaching is for all times.

And btw the using of any form of explosive weapons that kill indiscrimately is also against our Religion of Islam.

Perhaps the shortage of such weapons at Mohammed’s time is not unconnected with it.

Nothing to do with the shortage of such weapons. It has to do with morality. The ruling is concerning indiscrimate killing methods, not concerning a particular kind of weapon. I used explosives as an example for you.

So, I repeat the question, how did you come to the conviction that your house is safe to live in? Did you think through the architect’s calculations, and the builders extrapolation, etc.

When did you ask the question? The house was thoroughly surveyed by qualified experts before I bought it

Thank you for the answer.

So finally, you had to submit to the experts because you had no knowledge in the area. Ultimately your faith in the safety of your house is resting on qualified surveyors in a very fundamental way. You are a pretty trusting person then. If I may ask further, how did you come to believe in their qualification?

How come when it comes to issues concerning the safety of your soul (which is no different from the safety of your body under the roof of your house) you start looking for so-called “objective” proofs, you want to do it all by yourself, etc, you don’t trust nobody. You are not consistent with your views on life. One time you are comfortable submitting yourself to “qualified experts”, the next minute you are looking for objective proofs. We are not calling for blind faith btw. There is a lot to be said in this area.

A metaphor? It is an adjective. It means having many features in common with something else. Humans are different to one another. that doesn’t stop them being very similar to one another too.

Listen to yourself. “Humans are different to one another. that doesn’t stop them being very similar to one another too.”

Thersites, if something is different, they cannot be similar except by making an analogy between them. You are getting into contradictions again - for understandable reasons. This is something you need to meditate about in your quiet time.

And perhaps the only way you would resolve this contradiction is that you begin to consider or evaluate things against an Eternal yardstick. This is the what Religion teaches. Hence, you would be saved from the problems of contradiction say nepotism, racism, anti-semitism, injustices, and so on. If you see human beings as different, you can’t act fairly. But in order to see them as not-different, you need look at their Eternal qualities, you need to believe they have a soul, look beyond the different temporal attributes that strike your eyes in temporal time (Remember, I said, time do erode facts!).

Okay, Thersites. It’s nice talking to you. I am sorry I may not be able to respond to your reply. But I would certainly come to have a read. I have got to take care of few things over the coming weeks.

I hope we have exchange few mutually useful information, inshallah a seed that would grow one day. Thanks for your time, and apologies if I have made any personal insults.

And please note, there are most likely typos in my posts.

So it isn’t verifiable by someone else.

“Please clarify what you mean by objective evidence? We need definitions before we can move forward here. The word objective is so much abused these days.”

So is the word evidence. Objective evidence is something which both of us and others can verify the existence of. A signed message, say, going across the sky, saying “I made you. God.” This would not be proof, but it would be objective evidence.

“I have told you many times that they don’t contradict each other in the eternal long-run. “

However, you haven’t said why this is so. Presumably, then, if a judge is compassionate to a criminal that does serve justice in the eternal long-run.

“For example if you take a measuring tape to source your height now. The measurement is only true for few seconds. If you repeat the same exercise again say after 1 year (I could have said after 10 seconds or less!), your height would be completely different. Hence, the passage of time cause facts at one time to be false at another time.”

Completely different? Is “1+1=2” or “There is no god but god and Mohammed is his prophet.” true now and completely untrue in a few seconds then?

“So, the proof is simultaneously objective and subjective, or you could say neither.”

Or not proof.

“When I say teacher, I mean someone who has a scholarly chain of transmission back to his Teacher and so on until you reach the Divine Source. Not some shaky Sheikh who graduated from an Islamic University. Knowledge is not in the lines of paper, but rather in the hearts of men. “

And who decides which is “a scholarly chain of transmission”? So, you know how to drive a car without benfit of instruction because you need only look into your heart to do so?

” However, anybody is entitled to die for the cause they believe in based on any teaching. “

Certainly. The problem comes when they decide they want company when they die.

“Their interpretation of the Koran and hadith is not in line with the interpretation offered by the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him).”

You mean what you interpret as “the interpretation offered by the Companions of the Prophet”.

“The well-known teaching in Islam that when legally warring …muslims should not kill civilians, women, children, livestocks, poison water, destroy trees, and so on.”

Of course. Exactly when and where did they follow this teaching?

“And btw the using of any form of explosive weapons that kill indiscrimately is also against our Religion of Islam.”

Perhaps the shortage of such weapons at Mohammed’s time is not unconnected with it.

“So, I repeat the question, how did you come to the conviction that your house is safe to live in? Did you think through the architect’s calculations, and the builders extrapolation, etc. “

When did you ask the question? The house was thoroughly surveyed by qualified experts before I bought it.

“Basically, the consequence of any two …actions can never be the same… Because they are two. Does that make sense?” The consequences can be so similar that for all practical purposes they are the same. A lot of corpses as a result of someone blowing themselves to bits is very similar to another lot of corpses as a result of someone else blowing themselves to bits. So similar that we may say they are the same. In the eyes of the corpses and their relatives they are the same.

“”Similar” is just a metaphor or analogical adjective in human language.”

A metaphor? It is an adjective. It means having many features in common with something else. Humans are different to one another. that doesn’t stop them being very similar to one another too.

“They are both a form of sacrifice, whether they are right or wrong is a different matter.”

I saw what you said. I still don’t think ittrue. How is “hurting your foot while fetching a little boy’s toy in a nearby forest” a form of sacrifice?

It is verifiable through individual experience. Are you alive? How did you verify this? By checking your heart beat, eye lids, pulse, breath, etc? Btw, these are pointers for you, not answers. There are no answers, there are signs. You don’t just look out for your destination, do you. You lookout for the signs.

“What kind of evidence … The subjective type or the objective type?”

If it isn’t objective it isn’t evidence

Please clarify what you mean by objective evidence? We need definitions before we can move forward here. The word objective is so much abused these days.

” Honesty is a virtue in all cultures, so is compassion, justice, etc. On the other hand lieing and treachery are frowned upon, etc.”

Again they can contradict one another. If a judge is compassionate to a criminal that does not serve justice. If you are threatened with death or pain if you tell the truth you are entitled to lie. Treachery to a tyrant is regarded as heroism.

I have told you many times that they don’t contradict each other in the eternal long-run. They only contradict each other if you are looking at the short term; or it could be that what you are seeing has nothing to do with truthfullness, compassion, etc in the first place…i.e it is a bogus form of those virtues. i.e. they have been learnt from other than Prophetic traditions.

“The reason you cannot be TruthFull in the short term is because time do erode facts.”

If time erodes facts, then more time erodes more facts. How does time erode facts?

For example if you take a measuring tape to source your height now. The measurement is only true for few seconds. If you repeat the same exercise again say after 1 year (I could have said after 10 seconds or less!), your height would be completely different. Hence, the passage of time cause facts at one time to be false at another time.

“That [that the quran claims to be easy to understand and isn’t] is not a Koranic problem. It is a human problem.”

The quran is supposed to be addressed to humans. If understanding it is a problem it is a problem with the quran, so it is a quranic problem.

It is not a Koranic problem. The Koran is One, men are many. One to many relationship. There are those who are at the Complete Perfection of their souls, like the Prophets, they would have no problem understanding the wisdom of the Koran. In fact they are Koran in person. There are those on the other extreme who are enveloped in their desires of the lower self, on their necks is a yoke, their heads are covered up, they cannot see, such men regardless of any stretched interpretation would not be able to benefit from the Koran. And there are multitudes of men in between these two extremes -people: some would understand parts of it and gradually go on to understand other parts and so on.

If what you are saying is that the Koran is not a divinely inspired book, then that is a different subject. Then you are calling for a proof of the Koran as the word of Allah. Again here, there is no one size fits all proof (as you are probably looking for, the so-called objective proof). What is a proof to me may not be a proof to you. Yet, there is a proof for everyone, otherwise Allah’s attribute of Justice would be meaningless - which is impossible. So, the proof is simultaneously objective and subjective, or you could say neither.

“Not if their belief is absurd. Come on, that is absurd. They need to account for how they got themselves into such absurdity. Did they follow the right teachings or did their ego lead them to a warped version.”

Then your claim that dying as a martyr is always a virtue is not true. In what way are the teachings followed by the July 7th bombers “warped” compared with other teachings?

The teachings they follow is warped because most of the neo-jihadist don’t seem to believe in any Teacher’s authority. When I say teacher, I mean someone who has a scholarly chain of transmission back to his Teacher and so on until you reach the Divine Source. Not some shaky Sheikh who graduated from an Islamic University. Knowledge is not in the lines of paper, but rather in the hearts of men. This the problem of mass education brought about by western syfilis-ation. However, anybody is entitled to die for the cause they believe in based on any teaching. God judges, not us.

How were the actions of the July 7th bombers inconsistent with their beliefs? How were their beliefs inconsistent with the quran and hadith? What makes you think the versions you follow are more consistent than theirs?

Their interpretation of the Koran and hadith is not in line with the interpretation offered by the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

What makes you think the versions you follow are more consistent than theirs?

The well-known teaching in Islam that when legally warring (which is not the case with virtually all bombers including the state sanctioned one, US, UK , Israel, etc) muslims should not kill civilians, women, children, livestocks, poison water, destroy trees, and so on.

And btw the using of any form of explosive weapons that kill indiscrimately is also against our Religion of Islam. All of these criminal idiosyncrasies are not from the sunna of our Exemplar, rather it is the way of the so called liberal secular world. People with the worst weapons of destruction calling for a Nuclear non-proliferation. …Worst record of civilian bombing fighting a war on terror. …worst record of racism, anti-semitism, xenophobia etc calling for democratic equality. Sounds quite schizrophrenic. Sorry to go off track.

Next point…

If you claim that what someone taught is different from what their students learn - implying thereby that you are not going to trust any authority, then you cannot do anything in life.” Implying that you are not going to give absolute trust to any authority. If you believe an authority just because it is an authority you have abandoned any ability to think or act for yourself

So, I repeat the question, how did you come to the conviction that your house is safe to live in? Did you think through the architect’s calculations, and the builders extrapolation, etc. This is a serious question which you haven’t answered?

How is the action different if someone blows a few people to bits because they believe they are following the dictates of the quran from when they do it believing they are following the dictates of L. Ron Hubbard, say? Is someone who blows themselves and other people to bits because they believe they are following the quran no different nto someone who doesn’t blow themselves and other people to bits because they are following the quran?

They are very different. Now I can see that you have not understood much of my previous posts. I won’t go into much details with this, rather I would give you the following pointer. Basically, the consequence of any two (wrong/right) actions can never be the same. Why not? Because they are two. Does that make sense? They are two, they are different. The word “Similar” is just a metaphor or analogical adjective in human language.

“Because they [hurting your foot while fetching a little boy’s toy in a nearby forest and blowing yourself and several other people to bits] are both a form of sacrifice.”

I see.

I am glad you see this. They are both a form of sacrifice, whether they are right or wrong is a different matter.

“What kind of evidence … The subjective type or the objective type?”

If it isn’t objective it isn’t evidence.

” Honesty is a virtue in all cultures, so is compassion, justice, etc. On the other hand lieing and treachery are frowned upon, etc.”

Again they can contradict one another. If a judge is compassionate to a criminal that does not serve justice. If you are threatened with death or pain if you tell the truth you are entitled to lie. Treachery to a tyrant is regarded as heroism.

“The reason you cannot be TruthFull in the short term is because time do erode facts.”

If time erodes facts, then more time erodes more facts. How does time erode facts?

“That [that the quran claims to be easy to understand and isn’t] is not a Koranic problem. It is a human problem.”

The quran is supposed to be addressed to humans. If understanding it is a problem it is a problem with the quran, so it is a quranic problem.

“Not if their belief is absurd. Come on, that is absurd. They need to account for how they got themselves into such absurdity. Did they follow the right teachings or did their ego lead them to a warped version.”

Then your claim that dying as a martyr is always a virtue is not true. In what way are the teachings followed by the July 7th bombers “warped” compared with other teachings?

“I am trying to say, you need to be consistent.”

How were the actions of the July 7th bombers inconsistent with their beliefs? How were their beliefs inconsistent with the quran and hadith? What makes you think the versions you follow are more consistent than theirs?

” If you claim that what someone taught is different from what their students learn - implying thereby that you are not going to trust any authority, then you cannot do anything in life.” Implying that you are not going to give absolute trust to any authority. If you believe an authority just because it is an authority you have abandoned any ability to think or act for yourself.

“What people believe makes a difference, because it would eventually guide their actions (Actions are different based on the belief from which they spring). Even when they appear similar, they are usually not.”

How is the action different if someone blows a few people to bits because they believe they are following the dictates of the quran from when they do it believing they are following the dictates of L. Ron Hubbard, say? Is someone who blows themselves and other people to bits because they believe they are following the quran no different nto someone who doesn’t blow themselves and other people to bits because they are following the quran?

“Because they [hurting your foot while fetching a little boy’s toy in a nearby forest and blowing yourself and several other people to bits] are both a form of sacrifice.”

I see.

” It is not different from hurting yourself in the foot whilst fetching a little boy’s toy in a nearby forest. Sound ridiculous?” Yes. How is it “not different from hurting yourself in the foot whilst fetching a little boy’s toy in a nearby forest”?

Because they are both a form of sacrifice.

Certainly. What people believe makes a difference, because it would eventually guide their actions (Actions are different based on the belief from which they spring). Even when they appear similar, they are usually not.