Digging a deeper hole won't get you out, unless you are digging to get to China.If it's landed us here, same appeals could get us out.
Correct. Go back to the divine artifact.An atheist becomes what he is through human artifacts. Only the divine can show him the way.
You are not the first one to think that way and most certainly not the last one.I think it's all fraudulent.
No reason. I suggest you read them all. If guidance is what you are seeking, you will find it. If it is a little bit of spotlight on this forum, then I will oblige. It might get painful though.Look buddy, why should I read the Quraan over any other religious book?
) here.me tooas2153 wrote:Grayson, Its my hope that you will continue contributing on this forum. I'm more a casual reader than a contributor but I find your thoughts strongly aligned with my own. I too am in the fold and I too have my doubts about much of what happens in our community and the lack of transparency with finances and other issues. I also have the same limitations on what I can or am willing to say and do because of family obligations and I also find a few of the posters here to be sometimes on the offensive side about community members that are overwhelmingly a kind and good people. Some of these posted views (even when valid) can be so excessive that it would be difficult to be internalized by the moderates and doubters that are still within the fold. I agree with you on the need for verifiable facts rather than conjecture but as I pointed out, I find my own thoughts strongly aligned with your own.
I got you thinking, but you were ineffective in using it with others. Do you know why? Because I believe in what I say.Your point of view, whether it's actually right or not, gets me thinking (which is much appreciated); but I've found it ineffective when I've tried using it in reason with others.
But it is ok to damn others for what they stand for? Didn't you call the religion that I believe in, fraudulent?I don't see it as much of a dilemma but don't appreciate being damned by others for what I stand for.
Have you figured out which God that is?Whether I make it to heaven in the end, I'll leave that to God.
And what point was that?I said it's 'fraudulent' to make a point
Tawheed is a concept of Islam given to us by the Quran and the prophet (saw). You have made your position clear (but you haven't) that the Quran is a fraudulent manuscript because the prophet (saw) didn't deliver it to you personally. But you said that only to make a point which was what again?The one God. We can atleast agree on tawheed, can't we?
The goal here is not to convert nonbelievers. The goal was to discuss the misdeeds of the kothar and their misuse of the Quran. Your words are just as confused as your thoughts are!!Cause that's precisely what converts nonbelievers, isn't it?
I showed why you're attempt to convince (based on your staunch views) is ineffective in convincing.anajmi wrote:When you failed arguing your point as a believer, you pretended to be an atheist. When you failed arguing your point as an atheist you pretended to be a believer. I sincerely hope you do not respond anymore as I expect you to start pretending to be God himself now!!
Changing goalposts are we? My point's on how to tackle the situation. I'm on that topic. You're losing track.anajmi wrote:The goal here is not to convert nonbelievers. The goal was to discuss the misdeeds of the kothar and their misuse of the Quran. Your words are just as confused as your thoughts are!!
Tackle the situation by pretending to be something you are not? And then pretending some more?My point's on how to tackle the situation.
My attempt to convince doesn't take into consideration split multiple personalities. Even so, I was able to convince you to shed your pretense of being an atheist in only 3 posts.I showed why you're attempt to convince (based on your staunch views) is ineffective in convincing.
What do you mean information comes form top. These were common people who deposed to the commissions. What they said were facts (proofs) then as they are now. In fact things have only become worse.Grayson wrote:
This isn’t the 70s or 80s (thank God) where information solely comes from the top; truth is more transparent than ever.
It has happened to you. You have started questioning yourself internally without the availability of proofs. Why can't the same thing happen to them?Grayson wrote:My words target the fence sitters (and those unafraid of honesty), to start them going a little. People need to talk about these issues (and silence/dumbstrike) the fanatics to a point where they question themselves internally. In a way, it’s what’s happened to me.
These scandalous allegation are important inasmuch as they lend credence to reformists' criticism of the Kothar's evil and corrupt ways. However, the Nafisa Ali affair is not crucial to proving the venality of the Kothar.Grayson wrote:All these little things such as incriminating the top brass, is crucial as the system as a whole is woven together. You see the human flaws and hypocrisy of the mid-level bhaisahebs taking your moola, and your mumbles turn to actual voices. Let’s not pretend they’re separable from the core issues; things like this matter. I(/we) can challenge accountability based on known specific events.
You mean to say that you need the proof of the ownership of the Ambassador Hotel to challenge the machinations of the Kothar?Grayson wrote:An “abde” such as myself on my own? Who the hell am I to challenge the machinations of Kothar without hard proof or support? I’ll be castrated, sidelined and bitter like everyone else (worse, it'll affect my family). Remaining silent and complaining about issues amongst themselves and on forums.
More than the proofs what you and the people you are trying to influence NEED is knowledge. Knowledge of the Quran, it's basic message, knowledge of Ismaili/Fatimid history. Without understanding the past, without understanding our history and faith you cannot know how far the clergy has strayed. That knowledge is available here and elsewhere. Therefore I said, ignorance is no excuse. Yes, it would good to have proofs when they become available, but don't hitch your wagon to that thing alone, you'll get nowhere. While you wait or look for proofs try to educate yourself and those whom you are trying to influence.Grayson wrote:We have no excuses; but at this point, with a look towards gradual change, I don’t think there’s any proof that’s unneeded. Not from my point of view.
Take Dawkins' approach by all means, but don't let it be your final destination. Rationality in my view is overrated. Allow your intellectual and spiritual explorations to take you beyond that.Grayson wrote:I'll take Dawkins agnostic approach. Seems most rational. No debunkings needed.
