Posts Tagged ‘piety’

I have studied Bible, both OT and NT, from cover to cover | paarsurrey

May 4, 2013

Hank Kimball Says:

(While commenting on one of posts <>)

“The claims you listen to other people make about the bible, without having studied it yourself, doesn’t really make you appear as a seeker of truth. It makes you lazy and apathetic at best.”

Paarsurrey says:

This is just to dispel one’s apprehensions about my study of the Bible, OT and/or NT.

I have studied Bible, both OT and NT, from cover to cover several times; both Catholic and Protestant versions. While I studied Bible, both OT and NT, I also prepared notes; so one should be satisfied on that count. I give arguments as I perceive them myself or I concur with somebody whose arguments I honestly and sincerely believe in to be truthful.

I am an ordinary person, a man in the street. I have no claims to piety or scholarship. I believe religion is for everybody; it is not worth the name if it is not for the guidance of the ordinary people in the world in their day to day lives.

I am an open mind that is why I welcome others who comment on my posts though they may differ with me to whatever level. This provides the viewers a choice to discern truth themselves from both views with their own search and research and to the satisfaction of their hearts and souls.

I don’t debate; I believe in peaceful dialogue and peaceful discussion.

I think it to be a reasonable and rational approach.


I deny deity to Science and the Scientists; if any

February 11, 2010

paarsurrey wrote:

Hi friends

I am an ordinary man in the street. I don’t have any claim to scholarship or any piety. I respect scientists; they are intelligent people; they discover and invent things and I am thankful to them. I buy things from the market discovered and invented by them and I am entitled to use those things as I have paid for them. I am grateful to the technicians and other artisans who make things convenient for me and I pay them for their services. I enjoy sports and I pay for that. I enjoy artists; they paint beautiful paintings; and I do pay for their paintings if I like to buy them. They are my partners in my life; but I don’t think I have any reason to prefer one for the other. Why should I consider a Scientist to have any hegemony over me? Science is not the whole of human life; it is only a part of it. The Scientists never create anything from nothing; they only discover things that are very much already in existence in the Universe. I respect the Scientists but I admire, thank and gratify the Creator- God Allah YHWH who had in fact created everything in me and around me. I think I have a right to do so. Am I right?


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

the PC apeman wrote :

Yes, science is just a way of knowing and knowing isn’t the whole of human life. More to the purposes of this forum, do you claim to have a way of knowing other than science?

paarsurrey wrote:

Hi friend the PC apeman

I think science is a product of philosophy; rather it is one branch of philosophy, please correct me if I am wrong. Knowledge could be acquired by many means never ever limited by Science or patented by the Scientists. I consider this Universe as the Work of the Creator -God Allah YHWH; yes science is a good faculty of human beings; but it exists only as the Universe has a system in its creation which alludes to a Creator of it, in my opinion. Had the Universe not been created / evolved in a natural system; the Scientists would have not been able to bring it in a system or create a system in it? Science, therefore, presupposes things in a system and not chaotic.

Another source of knowledge, to me, rather a superior source is Revelation from the Creator- God Allah YHWH.

When I pay the customary fees to my Physician for the treatment he has given to me; what more morally I am supposed to do or feel about him? After all the Physician is not my god; he gives treatment to me not from anything created by him; but from things already in existence; courtesy the Creator- God Allah YHWH.

I deny deity to Science and the Scientists; if any


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Rather than revealing, spreading the faith and the piety the sword conceals it and shrouds it in ambiguity

May 2, 2009

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the Promised Messiah, the Second Coming says:

It would be a mistake to declare that in this age physical wars should be waged in order to spread faith and piety.The sword, rather than revealing the piety, conceals them and shrouds them in ambiguity.

Those who hold such beliefs are foes, not friends, of Islam. They are mean-natured and lack moral fibre, their hearts are cloaked in uncertainty, they are gullible and ignorant, and they provide the opponents of Islam with the opportunity to object that the progress of Islam depends upon the sword. This belief is detrimental to Islam.

No religion has to resort to force when it is capable of establishing its truth through rational arguments, undisputed testimonies, and heavenly signs. On the other hand, no further argument is required to falsify a religion
which does not possess these qualities and turns to the sword to compensate for its own weakness. Such a religion
is in effect slain by its own sword.

Critics wrongfully object that if Jihad is considered unlawful in this day and age, why was it practiced in the
early days of Islam? These people do not seem to be aware that Islam rejects the use of force to spread religion under any circumstances. The Holy Quran categorically says:
‘There is no compulsion in religion.’

The sword was raised [by the early Muslims] because the savages
of Arabia, who had lost all sense of morality and human values, had become the sworn enemies of Islam.
When the Unity of God and the truth of Islam was shown to them through unequivocal arguments, and it was impressed upon their minds that idolatry was wrong and against the dignity of man, they were unable to counter these arguments.

The sensible among them, therefore, inclined towards Islam resulting in the separation of brothers from brothers and sons from their fathers. At this
point the idolaters were reduced to severely punishing those who became Muslims as a means of preserving their
false religion and dissuading people from Islam. These crimes were perpetrated by the Chiefs of Mecca, Abu Jahl being one of them.