Moderators:Best First, spiderfrommars, IronHide
That's just disgusting. Besides, the only thing I've known Best First to administer is ribald commentary.Rebis wrote:Maybe, but what if you knew that it was really Admin on Admin action?Shanti418 wrote:Am I the only one who's digging the sweet Mod on Mod action? Damn, that's hot. :P
Best First wrote:I thought we could just meander between making well thought out points, being needlessly immature, provocative and generalist, then veer into caring about constructive debate and make a few valid points, act civil for a bit, then lower the tone again, then act offended when we get called on it, then dictate what it is and isn't worth debating, reinterpret a few of my own posts through a less offensive lens, then jaunt down whatever other path our seemingly volatile mood took us in.
It's 72 virgins, apparently.Yaya wrote:Can someone tell me where they get this information about "thousand virgins" from? As a Muslim, I have never seen this referenced anywhere.just have visions of Islamic suicide bombers arriving in the afterlife, looking for their thousand virgin reward
Essentially, you want to check with 2: 25, 4:57, 56:35-38 and 78:31-34 in your Koran before you want to call this one.Hadith number 2562. The Hadith reads literally as follows: "Sawda (Tirmidhi’s grandfather) reported that he heard from Abdullah, who received from Rishdin b. Sa’d, who in turn learned from Amr b. al-Harith, from Darraj, from Abul-Haytham, from Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, who received it from the Apostle of God [Muhammad]: The least [reward] for the people of Heaven is 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome of pearls, aquamarine and ruby, as [wide as the distance] between al-Jaabiyya and San’a." That these 72 wives are virgin is confirmed by Quran (55:74) and commentaries on that verse.
Don't knock it until you've tried itRebis wrote:Btw, would this be a bad time to mention that just because politicians think Ubuntu is a good idea, doesn't mean it isn't?
Digital Missionaries, Ahoy!Metal Vendetta wrote:Don't knock it until you've tried itRebis wrote:Btw, would this be a bad time to mention that just because politicians think Ubuntu is a good idea, doesn't mean it isn't?
2: 25 "There for them are pure companions; there for ever they will abide."Metal Vendetta wrote: Essentially, you want to check with 2: 25, 4:57, 4:57 and 78:31-34 in your Koran before you want to call this one.
The fact that the same word is translated variously as "maidens", "spouses", "damsels with swelling breasts" and "companions" makes it fairly obvious what the original meaning was. Please, stop me if I've got this all wrong, but surely having companions, spouses, maidens or even damsels in the next life is written right there in the text.Verily for the Righteous there will be a fulfilment of (the heart's) desires; Gardens enclosed, and grapevines; Companions of equal age; And a cup full (to the brim).
Surely for those who guard (against evil) is achievement, Gardens and vineyards, And those showing freshness of youth, equals in age, And a pure cup.
Verily, for the Muttaqûn, there will be a success (Paradise); Gardens and grapeyards; And young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age; And a full cup (of wine).
The righteous have deserved a reward. Orchards and grapes. Magnificent spouses. Delicious drinks.
But, for the God-fearing is a blissful abode, Enclosed gardens and vineyards; And damsels with swelling breasts, their peers in age, And a full cup:
No, I knew that for those who were not happy with their spouses in this life, the next life would grant them the opportunity for perfect companions, I just never saw it translated as "virgins".Metal Vendetta wrote: So what's your point exactly? Or were you just quibbling over numbers?
as long as you also know that i hate you and yours.IronHide wrote:Thats why I love this place, some many different points of view. Besty knows I respect him and his opinions/commentary/beliefs.Shanti418 wrote:Am I the only one who's digging the sweet Mod on Mod action? Damn, that's hot. :P
Fair enough, but from what I've read, the whole "large-breasted" thing is something that even scholarly Muslims are divided over, and as my ancient Arabic is a bit shaky I can't say for sure whether WakawaAAiba implies large-breastedness or not. I believe Wa refers to companions and kawaAAiba refers to some feature or aspect of these companions. From reading various translations available to me, it would appear that large-breastedness (or round-breastedness, or full-breastedness) is implied, as the words crop up independently in unrelated translations of the same passage. In others, the words have been omitted or euphemised - in other words, the kawaAAiba part has been left out altogether.Yaya wrote:No, I knew that for those who were not happy with their spouses in this life, the next life would grant them the opportunity for perfect companions, I just never saw it translated as "virgins".Metal Vendetta wrote: So what's your point exactly? Or were you just quibbling over numbers?
Perhaps this is appropriate translation, but I'm not sure about the "big breasted" part. I will leave that to the scholars and translators, as for me to speak out of my own opinion about what I think this verse means would be wrong of me.
So essentially it's a case of po-tay-to, po-tah-to - there will be virigns in heaven for the good Muslim (unlike, say the good Christian) and they will be of a similar age to him, but the exact qualiities of their breasts is best left to the individual believer, interpreter or translator. After all, he may be a leg man.Surely for the godfearing awaits a place of security, gardens and vineyards and maidens with swelling breasts, like of age, and a cup overflowing.
If there's some kind of argument in there, I can't find it...BB Shockwave wrote:Umm... EmVeee - if we could prove that God exists by scientific and logical means, people would be stupid NOT to believe in God.
Thing is, faith - not just in God but in all things - is based on BELIEF, not on KNOWLEDGE. Ask any priest, catholic, protestant, muslim, buddhist... they won't come up with ridiculous proofs of God's existance.
People who need physical proof that God exists are pretty stupid, regardless of religion, IMHO.
yip - goodness here:Rebis wrote:
As a sidenote, it's a shame to see that any actual info on the concept gets shoved to the 6th page of Google, due to various 'groups' trying to cash-in on their various tailor-made Linux distros.
Just one of the many reasons I enjoy Satanism. Awesome concepts with no invisible person.Brendocon wrote:Aye. Most religions encourage positive behaviour and preach awesome concepts. It's the compulsory "believing in an invisible person" aspect inherent in most of them that puts off new applicants...
snarl wrote:Just... really... what the **** have [IDW] been taking for the last 2 years?
Brendocon wrote:Yaya's money.
Without belief in a diety, religion then is philosophy, not religion.Brendocon wrote:Aye. Most religions encourage positive behaviour and preach awesome concepts. It's the compulsory "believing in an invisible person" aspect inherent in most of them that puts off new applicants...
And then there's the old "Wrath of God" trick. Fear makes for an efficient control mechanism.Best First wrote:and also creates the dangerous aspect of 'because God says so'Brendocon wrote:Aye. Most religions encourage positive behaviour and preach awesome concepts. It's the compulsory "believing in an invisible person" aspect inherent in most of them that puts off new applicants...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReligionYaya wrote:Without belief in a diety, religion then is philosophy, not religion.
Seeing the practical significance in a religion, and following it for that reason, does not make that person a "believer".
