Man’s freedom of beliefs is the origin of his existence, God’s creation of the universe, and the idea of the hereafter. This is how far the roots of freedom of beliefs in Islam go. If man wants to be free, he will be, and if he wants to be a slave to another man or any thought, he will be too. What is important is man is able to choose, and through choice, man can use his freedom however he wants. However, man will choose to be a non-believer, and deny his inner instinct and God’s existence when others try to dominate him with their human laws and seize his right of being a non-believer. To this extent, God Almighty created man with free will. And man’s free thought can lead him to deny the existence of God, the Almighty.
Adam's Free will leads to a secret that nobody knew as only in his mind lies a 'Dream' for a Soul Mate...
A ‘dualist’ is someone who believes that Good and Evil—or God and the Devil—are independent and more or less equal forces in the world. Dualism contrasts with monism, which is the theory that there is only one fundamental kind, category of thing or principle; and, rather less commonly, with pluralism, which is the view that there are many kinds or categories. In the philosophy of mind, dualism is the theory that the mental and the physical—or mind and body or mind and brain—are, in some sense, radically different kinds of thing. Because common sense tells us that there are physical bodies, and because there is intellectual pressure towards producing a unified view of the world, one could say that materialist monism is the ‘default option’. Discussion about dualism, therefore, tends to start from the assumption of the reality of the physical world, and then to consider arguments for why the mind cannot be treated as simply part of that world.
Ashes to Ashes, Dust To Dust...
Of Clay and Dust... Behold a Masterpiece Arise!!!
Adam’s Dark Secret Upon Reaching Puberty... (FREEWILL)??? PART I
In the Beginning, Adam was All Alone To Be With A Creator supposedly the great educator...
Adam was Busy Naming All Creations Whole Heartedly, To be created with the gifts Of Free Will...
When is freedom not freedom?
God did not authorise some people to punish, in His name, others just because they have different opinions or because they disbelieve in God. And those who proclaim their right to punish others spoil the case from its roots and play the role of God – as there is no god but Him. They dominate what God Almighty wanted to control as He created human mind free without restraints, able to think with no limits, and believe or disbelieve if it wants. They fake God’s religion and assault His powers that He saved for Himself to practice in the Hereafter, on grounds that there is no need for punishment and reckoning in the hereafter, as long as there is a compulsion in faith and religion. They form a bad, extreme, bloody, stubborn and fusty image of God’s religion, and contribute to get most people away from it. This bad image has nothing to do with God’s religion. It is their image and religion that is entirely opposing to God’s religion.
How do we determine what is freedom and when is freedom not freedom?To do this we need to study the history of humankind over the last 10,000 years (or the last 6,000 years if we use the Bible as our guide). Freedom has evolved over thousands of years and has transformed into what we see today. Possibly, 10,000 years from now, the interpretation of freedom may change. The notion of freedom today may not be the notion of freedom 10,000 years from now. Hence, when we talk about freedom, we are merely looking at it from the perspective of the year 2019. In the year 1000 or the year 1000 BC, the notion of freedom at that time was very different and will, again, be different 1,000 years from now in the year 3000.
And that is why values change over time and place, and good becomes bad and bad becomes good depending on which era and which area you happen to be living in.
How do you know what the difference between good and bad is? Are you sure good is good and bad is bad? You think you do because you are applying today’s values according to the country you happen to be living in.
For example, Bibles can be printed in Bahasa Malaysia but you are forbidden from using the word ‘Allah’ as the name for God in the Bahasa Malaysia version of the Bible. But even then this applies to some parts of Malaysia and not to the entire Malaysia. Hence you can plus you cannot use Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible depending on where you live.
You may say this is bad. How come you cannot use the Allah name in the Bahasa Malaysia version of the Bible in West Malaysia but you can in East Malaysia? So this is bad because according to freedom of religion and all those other freedoms you should be able to use Allah as the name for God in the whole of Malaysia.
That may be a good argument today. However, 1,000 years ago, that would have been a bad argument because Bibles could only be in Latin and not in English, German, French or whatever, especially not in Bahasa Malaysia. Hence, in the first place, there should not even be a Bahasa Malaysia version of the Bible let alone using Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible going by the values of 1,000 years ago.
So, is denying the use of the Allah word in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible a violation of your freedom of religion, etc? You may think so today. But in the year 1000 you did not even have the freedom to translate the Bible into any other language outside Latin. And doing so is heresy and will result in you being put to death.
What is going to happen 1,000 years from now in the year 3000? I am not clairvoyant but it is not farfetched to imagine that 1,000 years from now religion may be totally banned because it causes so much pain and suffering due to the religious conflicts all over the world. Hence, Bibles, too, may be totally banned. Hence, also, the issue of Bahasa Malaysia Bibles and the use of the Allah word in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible may no longer be relevant since Bibles would not exist anyway.
After many years of delighted dreams, so as to Feel Like Heaven... Adam Fall Upon Deep Sleep; And a secret Reveals of which God says: "Be Fruitful & Multiply!!!"
And it took a Thousand Years More for Bad to Be Good... I have died everyday, waiting for you Darling, don't be afraid, I have loved you for a thousand years I'll love you for a thousand more...
Is that farfetched? Sex changes and gay marriages were farfetched 1,000 years ago but today it exists. So nothing is farfetched or impossible. If it can happen then there is always a possibility that it will happen. Only if it cannot happen (like humans can naturally fly like birds without any aid of a device) will it not happen (unless scientists eventually discover a way to crossbreed humans and eagles and they are called heagles or something like that).
Freedom, therefore, is just a notion based on the value system that you adopt. In a different time and in a different place this notion would change. Your notion of freedom in the year 2019 in Malaysia would not be the same if you lived in another country or in another time.
For example, can I say that we must be allowed the freedom of not being brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing in God or in a religion? Can a law be passed making it illegal for parents to deny the freedom of choice of their children by brainwashing and indoctrinating their children into following the religion of their parents?
Adam's Secret Revealed Finally.... Adam gave God 'two thumbs up when he created Eve for it's just a 'spare' rib anyways... GE 2:22
You may argue that parents should be allowed the freedom of raising their children as, say, Catholics. But that is the freedom of the parents. What about the freedom of the children? Are you not denying your children the freedom to be free of all religious doctrine by raising them as Catholics? If you did not brainwash and indoctrinate them with the Catholic faith would they grow up as Catholics or grow up as atheists? And is being an atheist once you turn 18 not part of freedom and are you not denying your children this right?
Hence true freedom is to not program your children with a religious faith. Your children should be free to choose what they want to believe. And you are denying them this freedom.
Did your children choose to be born into a Catholic family? No one gave them any choice in the matter. And if they were given a choice would they become Catholics? We will never know until they are old enough to decide for themselves but because they have been brainwashed and indoctrinated as Catholics then most probably they would remain Catholics once they grow up. That is the power of programming, brainwashing and indoctrination. Even monkeys can be taught to fly to the moon when properly programmed.
So, when you talk about freedom and demand freedom that is merely your notion of what the word means. That may not necessarily be my notion as well. And you are applying your notion of freedom and forcing it upon me. So I must adopt your notion of freedom and if I do not then I am violating your notion of freedom.
But notions of freedom are subject to time, place and upbringing (such as society’s norms, education, indoctrination, manmade laws, and so on). This does not mean you are right. It just means you think you are right.
You say you have freedom to speak. What about my freedom of not having to listen to what you say? Do I not have that freedom as well? Hence by speaking you are actually denying me my freedom of not having to listen to you. Can I then demand that you be banned from speaking so that my freedom of not having to listen to you is protected and respected?
KIDS CONTENTS
OMG!!!
There's a Legal Regulation
Coming our Way!!!
Best Be Careful
What You Upload & What You Say... Today!!!
Youtube Got Fined... $170 Million...
For Tracking the little Kids...
So you see, once we debate the subject of freedom we need to take so many issues into consideration. But if we just debate your notion of freedom then that is not democracy because in such a debate my notion of freedom is being ignored.
The bottom line here is, if you feel you are ready to debate the subject of freedom then you need to open your mind and think beyond just your notion of what the word means. But are you ready and mature enough to do that? If we apply very narrow boundaries and just debate within those boundaries then we are not debating true freedom. We are just debating your notion of freedom. And that means it is not freedom because my freedoms are being denied.
Not easy is it when we need to think outside the box and reject what we perceive as norms and accept the fact that norms are not normal after all?
3,500 years or so ago, Moses was considered an extremist, at least as far as the Pharaoh was concerned. And because of that the Pharaoh wanted the full might of the Egyptian government to come down hard on Moses and his rag-tag gang of dissidents. Today, of course, Moses is a revered Prophet in the eyes of the Jews, Christians and Muslims.
2,000 years or so ago, Jesus Christ was considered an extremist, at least as far as the Jewish authorities of that time were concerned. Today, of course, there are some who believe Jesus is the Son of God.
1,400 years or so ago, Muhammad was considered an extremist, at least as far as the Mekah authorities of that time were concerned. Today, of course, Muslims who view Muhammad as a Prophet would get very upset and would probably lob of your head if you were to call him an extremist.
The People of the Book believe in the story of Moses (Musa) and how God commanded him to go meet the Pharaoh and deliver God’s message to him. The message was simple. Moses was asked to abandon his evil and misguided ways and to allow his citizens the freedom to practice their religion as outlined by God.
But the Pharaoh would not listen. He was stubborn because he thought he was God and that Moses’ God was bullshit. God then commanded Moses and his people to leave the country so that they could be free to speak and free to practice their beliefs.
But the Pharaoh would not allow them to leave and he tried to stop them. So God drowned him in the Red Sea.
Then, 1,500 years later, another man came along, according to the belief of the People of the Book. And this man was named Jesus (Isa). And God commanded Jesus to sort out those who walked in the corridors of power at that time. These people were all corrupt, cruel, oppressed the rakyat, discriminated against those less fortunate than them who happened to have come into this world through the ‘right’ pussy and were therefore the Bumiputeras of that era, and whatnot.
But those who walked in the corridors of power resented Jesus and would not allow him freedom of speech. So they plotted to kill Jesus so that they could silence him.
Freedom of speech was regarded as dangerous because the people might start believing all those ‘lies’ from Jesus. This would mean the government would be in trouble if the people started believing Jesus instead of believing those who walk in the corridors of power.
But what these people did not know is that Jesus spoke the word of God and they also did not know that God wanted Jesus to speak so that the truth can emerge and the corrupted government of the day could be exposed for what it is, a bullshit government.
And God proved that those who stood on the side of truth would prevail while the bullshit government will eventually crumble to dust and will be blown by the wind to disappear into the desert.
Then, about 600 years later, another man came along who faced the same problems as those faced by Moses and Jesus. And this man, whom Time magazine labelled as the most influential man in history, was named Muhammad.
And that is why many Malays like to name their sons Muhammad, because he was the most influential man in history.
Some even have two Muhammads in their name because their parents thought the more Muhammads they have in their name the more influential they will grow up to become. Sometimes, however, the more Muhammads they have in their name, the more corrupt they become.
In fact, many Malays with two Muhammads in their name have become more like the Pharaoh than like the Prophet.
Furthermore, people with names like Isa (Jesus) or Musa (Moses) are the biggest crooks / scammers in the World.
Eventually, they plotted to kill Muhammad, like how they did to Jesus and Moses before that. This was because Muhammad, like Jesus and Moses before that, believed in freedom of speech and that an oppressive and corrupt government should be toppled. So the oppressive and corrupt government tried to silence them just to protect their interest. This happened 3,500, 2,000 and 1,400 years ago.
Thousands of years ago, the corrupt governments of that time also tried to stifle freedom of speech in an effort to ensure that the truth does not surface. And the People of the Book believe that all these people are enemies of God and that their blood is Halal. These are enemies of the truth, who are therefore also enemies of God, and they should not be allowed to live. They must die.
And it is the duty of the followers or believers to kill them, like how God did thousands of years ago to those who stifled freedom of speech and would not allow the truth to surface for Man’s freedom of opinion is the origin of his existence, God’s creation of the universe, and the idea of the hereafter. This is how far the roots of freedom of opinion in Islam go. And this puts an end to every pretext of people supporting suppression of opinion in the name of religion.
If man wants to be free, he will be, and if he wants to be a slave to another man or any thought, he will be too. What is important is man is able to choose, and through choice, man can use his freedom however he wants. However, man will choose to be a non-believer, and deny his inner instinct and God’s existence when others try to dominate him with their human laws and seize his right of being a non-believer. To this extent, God Almighty created man with free will. And man’s free thought can lead him to deny the existence of God, the Almighty.
God did not authorise some people to punish, in His name, others just because they have different opinions or because they disbelieve in God. And those who proclaim their right to punish others spoil the case from its roots and play the role of God – as there is no god but Him. They dominate what God Almighty wanted to control as He created human mind free without restraints, able to think with no limits, and believe or disbelieve if it wants. They fake God’s religion and assault His powers that He saved for Himself to practice in the Hereafter, on grounds that there is no need for punishment and reckoning in the hereafter, as long as there is a compulsion in faith and religion. They form a bad, extreme, bloody, stubborn and fusty image of God’s religion, and contribute to get most people away from it. This bad image has nothing to do with God’s religion. It is their image and religion that is entirely opposing to God’s religion.
Because they are the real enemies of God, He legislated militancy against them, not to force people to get into Islam, but to assure people’s right of faith or infidelity, as well as their right to get rid of the domination of insincere religious leaders. The insincere religious leaders (priesthood advocates) are those who pretend to be talking in the name of God, and controlling – in His name – people’s minds and thoughts. Islam fought them with the legislation of militancy. Yet the insincere religious leaders of Abbassids and Sheiks succeeded in reversing these concepts and misrepresented Islam.
When we read the Holy Quran we find that God, the creator of the universe, doesn’t want to force people to believe in Him, His books, and messengers. And because God created people with free will, he conducts a dialogue with them to believe if they want to believe, and not because of force and compulsion used against them. As insincere religious leaders refuse to have a dialogue with people, and instead issue decrees condemning them — because they have opinions that are different with theirs — as being disbelievers and renegades, God conducts a dialogue with His worshippers, Adam’s sons, to convince them that He is the only God who has no companions.
When we think about the verses of the Quran and look at ourselves, we feel sorry for what some of us, who bear the banner of Islam, do. They impose their own opinions and suppress others the right to express their opinions.
Moreover, they offend and hurt these people through deeds and words. And they proclaim these people as disbelievers who must be killed, thinking they are fighting for the cause of God. If they properly considered the verses of Quran, they would find that they are repeating the deeds of the tribe of Quraish at the time of the Prophet (pbuh).
The problem is that some people grant themselves an authority higher than that of the Prophet.
And so Adam had the freedom of choice... To be Enlightened or To be Misled by his own dreams... If Adam had focus on 'Do, Without' state to do meditation instead, He be the '1st Man' to be enlighten but he chooses to dream bout beauty as in tat dream is where Adam truly feel like Heaven!!! 😥
Between Free Will & Choices...
Does Cain chooses to kill Cain because of Beauty?
Would a Radical Cain Kill his own Brother? Would a Moderate Cain convince his brother to share Abel's Beauty?
In the Bible, Cain and Abel (Hebrew: הֶבֶל ,קַיִן Qayin, Hevel) are two sons of Adam and Eve. The Qur’an mentions the story, calling them the two sons of Adam (Arabic: إبني آدم) only.
Cain is described as a crop farmer and his younger brother Abel as a shepherd. Genesis 4:2 Cain is portrayed as sinful, committing the first murder by killing his brother, after God rejected his offerings of produce but accepted Abel’s sacrifice “from the firstborn of his flock and from their fats”.Genesis 4:1,3 Thus, Cain was the first human born, and Abel the first to die.
The oldest known copy of the Biblical narration is from the 1st century Dead Sea Scrolls. Cain and Abel also appear in a number of other texts, and the story is the subject of various interpretations. Abel, the first murder victim, is sometimes seen as the first martyr; while Cain, the first murderer, is sometimes seen as an ancestor of evil.
Till this day there is no clear cut answers, such as why “God accepts Abel’s, but rejects Cain’s sacrifice? Why would God prefer one sacrifice (blood) to another (grain)?”, and “If Adam and Eve only had two sons, how did they populate the earth?”
In regards to the sacrifice, it is still unclear as to why God was receptive of one form of sacrifice and not the other, the reactions to this selectivity are what is interesting here. When God makes His acceptance, this makes Cain both jealous and angry, and filled with resentment. Many scholars believe that the challenge to Cain from God was to recognize and accept that his brother has insights, gifts, and talents that he doesn’t. Another famous theory, especially in Islamic beliefs, was that Abel’s heart was righteous, and Cain’s was not, and that God knew this. But, what if there were other causes? What if there were other unspoken reasons in which God had shown preference?
According to some Hebrew and Islamic scholars, the reason Cain’s heart was not righteous was because of a woman: their sister, Awan. It is believed that Awan was intended for Abel, but Cain fell in love with her. This can be seen in the Book of Jubilees.
Adam & Eve had nine (9) children. And this is where the story takes an interesting turn. Genesis, by the way, has no problems with incest, specifically brothers an sisters marrying. That is because there is no other option at this point. So, from this point of view, God has favored Abel in both marriage AND sacrifice.
Adam used to marry the son of a birth to the daughter of another birth. Abel (Habil) wanted to marry the sister of Cain (Cabil). Cain who was older than Abel and his twin sister was very beautiful. So Cain wanted to preserve his sister for it. Adam you order Cain who married his sister, with Abel, but he refused to do so. Then he ordered them both to offer a sacrifice and left for Mecca for the Hajj. Then Adam coammand his sons, to offer their sacrifices to solve the issue since Cain is unwilling to letgo of his sister to Abel.
Abel sacrificed a better offering (a robust lamb), he was pastor. While Cain offered a bale of the worst harvest which he had cultivated; a fire descended and ate the offering of Abel, and the sacrifice of Cain leaving untouched. He was infuriated and threatened Abel: "I will kill you so you will not be able to marry my sister." Abel replied: "Allah only accepts from those who fear Him".
The First War between Men, Over a Woman...
In another version of Abdullah ibn Amr (radiallahu ´anhu) mentions the following: "by Allah" the victim (Abel) was stronger. "" But his obedience ¹ restricted it to lift his hands against his brother. According to Abu Ya´far, Adam was watching them to offer their sacrifices, and saw that God accepted Abel's sacrifice. Cain said to Adam: "the offering of Abel was only accepted because you prayed for him and not for mine". Then he threatened his brother that he will kill him. One night, Abel does not return his flock grazing. Adam then sent to Cain to see what had happened. When Cain was looking for him, he found him and he complained again: "your offering was accepted but mine was not" Abel replied: "only Allah accepts from those who fear Him".
Cain was angry to hear this, and hit his brother with an iron that was in his hand and then killed him. It was also said that it killed by tapping it in the head with a rock while he slept. It was also said that he strangled it to kill him and hit him as if it were a beast. But Allah knows best.
Is Abel a Coward? Did he chooses to be coward?
The attitude of Abel against the threat of his brother is a sign of his noble character and piety. He controlled himself from having with his brother have the same treatment in which his brother addressed him, as it clarifies the following verse: "Although you lay your hand to kill me I do not extend mine to do so, I fear Allah Lord of the universe". (5: 28)
Would a Man;
Stand Up for Himself for What He Wants & Needs???
In a place of the living Is a place to be fighting But should one abandon the fight so as to die cock standing or should one keep on fighting till its last breadth? Cain kill Abel to fight for the sake of Beauty so as to be standing as in accordance to an ancient teachings but scientifically it is said that only the fittest survive for the best genes to survive. Even a god re÷enters creation to fight for its existence. Tat is such a place of the living to have a life worth dying for but there are those who say to have a life worth dying for is to stand up and fight for the God so as to be rewarded with 72 virgins in the Afterlife for in a temporary stage it shsll only be one. So it means to fight cock standong to be gifted by the loving creator. #standupandfight
Wahhabis hate Shias more than they hate Jews. That is why Iran and Saudi Arabia are mortal enemies and both countries finance civil wars in other Muslim countries that involve Sunnis versus Shias. Most of the trouble in the Middle East is sectarian Islam related.
The point of all this is there is no such thing as liberal Islam or liberal Muslims, as what we are being led to believe. By nature, Muslims are intolerant of views that contradict their own beliefs. Even so-called liberal muftis such as Maza will never accept Muslims drinking, living together outside wedlock, indulging in gay unions, leaving Islam to become atheists, etc. In fact, he cannot even accept Muslims of different sects.
Liberal Islam or liberal Muslims is a fallacy. Why they keep perpetuating this myth of liberal Islam or liberal Muslims is beyond me. It is as fake as Santa or the tooth fairy. The only reason they keep talking about liberal Islam or liberal Muslims is so that they can say the other group are extremist Muslims because when you have liberals then you must have extremists as well.