Concept of Imamah in Ahlul Sunnah

[muslim720]

It clearly proves that Imamah is in the Qur'an and Allah alone chooses and makes Imams. It proves that Abraham was tested by his Lord and when he fulfilled that test only then and after he was made an Imam.

It does not prove any of it, let alone all the characteristics that you lump on (like, infallibility, etc).  However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah.  Then you have no choice but to acknowledge that Prophethood is necessary for one to attain Imamah.

Allow me to teach you some "lawgic", logic that they use on law school admission tests (hence, "lawgic").

If we accept your interpretation of the verse, then we have a sufficient (Imamah) and necessary (Prophethood) and the equation is as follows:

Sufficient ----> Necessary

Meaning, if one is an Imam, he must be a Prophet.

Therefore, replacing S and N, we get:

Imamah (Imam) ----> Prophethood (Prophet)

Now, the contra-positive is "flip and negate" and it looks like this:

/Prophethood (/Prophet) ----> /Imamah (/Imam)

Reading the slash or "/" as "NOT" (that is what it symbolizes), the contra-positive says, if one is not a Prophet, he cannot be an Imam.

The two statements (conditional statement and its contra-positive) are logically sound.  In fact, "lawgically" sound too!

How will you wiggle out of this dilemma?  After all, the verse necessitates Prophethood for Imamah whereas none of your Imams (ra) were Prophets!

Stop mitigating matters and twisting and turning them to suit your belief and need.

I abided by your interpretation of the verse and still proved to you how it fails when logically applied to your theology.

[iceman]

It does not prove any of it, let alone all the characteristics that you lump on (like, infallibility, etc).  However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah.  Then you have no choice but to acknowledge that Prophethood is necessary for one to attain Imamah.

Allow me to teach you some "lawgic", logic that they use on law school admission tests (hence, "lawgic").

If we accept your interpretation of the verse, then we have a sufficient (Imamah) and necessary (Prophethood) and the equation is as follows:

Sufficient ----> Necessary

Meaning, if one is an Imam, he must be a Prophet.

Therefore, replacing S and N, we get:

Imamah (Imam) ----> Prophethood (Prophet)

Now, the contra-positive is "flip and negate" and it looks like this:

/Prophethood (/Prophet) ----> /Imamah (/Imam)

Reading the slash or "/" as "NOT" (that is what it symbolizes), the contra-positive says, if one is not a Prophet, he cannot be an Imam.

The two statements (conditional statement and its contra-positive) are logically sound.  In fact, "lawgically" sound too!

How will you wiggle out of this dilemma?  After all, the verse necessitates Prophethood for Imamah whereas none of your Imams (ra) were Prophets!


I abided by your interpretation of the verse and still proved to you how it fails when logically applied to your theology.

"However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah"

Is this a dream or reality. Lets hear this again,

"However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah"

Finally we're getting somewhere. There is proof of Imamah in the Qur'an. That wasn't too difficult was it. Lets move on.

"Then you have no choice but to acknowledge that Prophethood is necessary for one to attain Imamah"

I disagree with this. Prophethood isn't necessary for one to attain Imamah. And here is the proof straight and direct from the Qur'an.

Surah Qasas verse 41,

"And We made them Imams who call to the Fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall not be assisted"

This verse proves that Prophethood is not necessary for one to attain Imamah.

"Allow me to teach you some "lawgic", logic that they use on law school admission tests (hence, "lawgic")"

You need to learn yourself first boy. In fact you're in desperate need for some basic common sense to begin with.

Save your equation based on your version of logic for some other day. Here's how I'm going to wiggle out of this one.

Surah Qasas verse 41,

"And We made them Imams who call to the Fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall not be assisted"

Notice; "And we made them Imams" meaning Imamah is from Allah. What do these particular Imams do? They call to the hellfire. So you still think Prophethood is necessary for one to attain Imamah?

[Khaled]

I disagree with this. Prophethood isn't necessary for one to attain Imamah. And here is the proof straight and direct from the Qur'an.

Surah Qasas verse 41,

"And We made them Imams who call to the Fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall not be assisted"

This verse proves that Prophethood is not necessary for one to attain Imamah.

"Allow me to teach you some "lawgic", logic that they use on law school admission tests (hence, "lawgic")"

You need to learn yourself first boy. In fact you're in desperate need for some basic common sense to begin with.

Save your equation based on your version of logic for some other day. Here's how I'm going to wiggle out of this one.

Surah Qasas verse 41,

"And We made them Imams who call to the Fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall not be assisted"

Notice; "And we made them Imams" meaning Imamah is from Allah. What do these particular Imams do? They call to the hellfire. So you still think Prophethood is necessary for one to attain Imamah?

Are you trolling?  I'm serious here, would any Shi'a who is reading this please tell me; does this sort of thinking represent your school in any way?  Please, someone, ANYONE, please come and help this guy out.

I'm serious Amin, go and post this on Shiachat or ask any of your Shia friends about this post so you can see the level of cringe in their response.

[iceman]

Are you trolling?  I'm serious here, would any Shi'a who is reading this please tell me; does this sort of thinking represent your school in any way?  Please, someone, ANYONE, please come and help this guy out.

I'm serious Amin, go and post this on Shiachat or ask any of your Shia friends about this post so you can see the level of cringe in their response.

Is that it? I wonder what seems to be the problem. Oh yes, the problem is that you're answer less. You know the truth and you know what is right. But because I'm a Shia so you're finding it difficult to agree and be on the same page. That's the problem with you guys.

[muslim720]

"However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah"

Is this a dream or reality. Lets hear this again,

"However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah"

Finally we're getting somewhere. There is proof of Imamah in the Qur'an. That wasn't too difficult was it. Lets move on.

Allow me to re-post my statement, before you go on a victory lap, lol. 

Here it is, once again: However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah

Do you see it now or still need help?

I disagree with this.

I do not give two $hits if you agree or disagree.  The verse is cited by Shias not only to prove Imamah but also to show that it is a "promotion", something you have often alluded to as well.  Therefore, Prophethood becomes a necessary in that equation (if we accept your interpretation of the verse).

Prophethood isn't necessary for one to attain Imamah. And here is the proof straight and direct from the Qur'an.

Surah Qasas verse 41,

"And We made them Imams who call to the Fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall not be assisted"

This verse proves that Prophethood is not necessary for one to attain Imamah.

Are you saying that there are those who have attained Imamah who will call people to the Fire?  This is exactly why I said that the verse regarding Ibrahim (asws) only proves that the word "Imam" occurs in the Qur'an.  Here, in Surah Qasas, we see that the same word occurs in verse 41.

I am shocked to see you use this verse in favor of Imamah when it actually is saying that there will be "imams" who will lead people to Hellfire.

You need to learn yourself first boy. In fact you're in desperate need for some basic common sense to begin with.

You keep regurgitating nonsense when you know what I shared with you went over your head.

Save your equation based on your version of logic for some other day. Here's how I'm going to wiggle out of this one.

My version of logic?  You dimwit, ask any lawyer or law student regarding conditional statements, necessaries, sufficients and contra-positives.

Surah Qasas verse 41,

"And We made them Imams who call to the Fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall not be assisted"

Notice; "And we made them Imams" meaning Imamah is from Allah. What do these particular Imams do? They call to the hellfire. So you still think Prophethood is necessary for one to attain Imamah?

For argument's sake, let us pretend that you are right and Prophethood is not necessary to attain Imamah.  Are you saying that Allah (swt) appoints "Divinely Guided Leaders" who mislead?  Does that make sense?  No!  And this is why we reject your theology because for every one authentic hadith you report from one of your Imams (ra), there is another hadith which opposes it, equally as authentic, also reported by your Imams (ra).  So yes, in your paradigm, the Imams (ra), to whom you attribute lies, lead us to Hellfire with their dichotomous teachings (falsely attributed to them).  And this is why we reject your theology.

[muslim720]

Are you trolling?  I'm serious here, would any Shi'a who is reading this please tell me; does this sort of thinking represent your school in any way?  Please, someone, ANYONE, please come and help this guy out.

I'm serious Amin, go and post this on Shiachat or ask any of your Shia friends about this post so you can see the level of cringe in their response.

This is exactly why I entertain this guy!  His level of stupidity does not surprise me anymore.  Just when I think he has hit rock bottom, he finds a way to go even lower.

He is using a verse which says that imams will lead you to Hellfire to substantiate Imamah.  This is like using a polytheistic book to make a case for Tawheed.

[iceman]

Allow me to re-post my statement, before you go on a victory lap, lol. 

Here it is, once again: However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah

Do you see it now or still need help?

I do not give two $hits if you agree or disagree.  The verse is cited by Shias not only to prove Imamah but also to show that it is a "promotion", something you have often alluded to as well.  Therefore, Prophethood becomes a necessary in that equation (if we accept your interpretation of the verse).

Are you saying that there are those who have attained Imamah who will call people to the Fire?  This is exactly why I said that the verse regarding Ibrahim (asws) only proves that the word "Imam" occurs in the Qur'an.  Here, in Surah Qasas, we see that the same word occurs in verse 41.

I am shocked to see you use this verse in favor of Imamah when it actually is saying that there will be "imams" who will lead people to Hellfire.

You keep regurgitating nonsense when you know what I shared with you went over your head.

My version of logic?  You dimwit, ask any lawyer or law student regarding conditional statements, necessaries, sufficients and contra-positives.

For argument's sake, let us pretend that you are right and Prophethood is not necessary to attain Imamah.  Are you saying that Allah (swt) appoints "Divinely Guided Leaders" who mislead?  Does that make sense?  No!  And this is why we reject your theology because for every one authentic hadith you report from one of your Imams (ra), there is another hadith which opposes it, equally as authentic, also reported by your Imams (ra).  So yes, in your paradigm, the Imams (ra), to whom you attribute lies, lead us to Hellfire with their dichotomous teachings (falsely attributed to them).  And this is why we reject your theology.

"This is what you said in post #69,

"You could not prove Imamah and now you are out to go against the Qur'an in which there is a verse which was revealed when Abu Talib refused to accept Islam"

Let me highlight your words "YOU COULD NOT PROVE IMAMAH"

[muslim720]

"This is what you said in post #69,

"You could not prove Imamah and now you are out to go against the Qur'an in which there is a verse which was revealed when Abu Talib refused to accept Islam"

Let me highlight your words "YOU COULD NOT PROVE IMAMAH"

I still stand by those words; you have NOT proven Imamah.  However, you have proven us right on two points:

1.  You will continuously fail to prove Imamah (since it is not in the Qur'an).

2.  Imamah leads to Hellfire (as per the verse in Surah Qasas).

Thank you

[iceman]

I still stand by those words; you have NOT proven Imamah.  However, you have proven us right on two points:

1.  You will continuously fail to prove Imamah (since it is not in the Qur'an).

2.  Imamah leads to Hellfire (as per the verse in Surah Qasas).

Thank you

This is what you said in post #69,

"You could not prove Imamah and now you are out to go against the Qur'an in which there is a verse which was revealed when Abu Talib refused to accept Islam"

Let me highlight your words "YOU COULD NOT PROVE IMAMAH"

And here is what you said in post #80,

"However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah"

Are you reading this Mythbuster. Muslim 720 has accepted that IT PROVES IMAMAH.

So tell me have I proved Imamah from the Qur'an or not?

"I do not give two $hits if you agree or disagree"

Yes you do. Otherwise you wouldn't be refuting me.

"The verse is cited by Shias not only to prove Imamah but also to show that it is a "promotion", something you have often alluded to as well"

It proves Imamah, something you and others have been constantly denying all along. You tell me what it is in this particular case. Is it promotion, demotion or was Abraham given a title a grade of a similar nature and level. Or was it something else. And if it was then what was it.

"Therefore, Prophethood becomes a necessary in that equation (if we accept your interpretation of the verse)"

No it doesn't. Allow me to educate you in this matter. Messengers, are all Messengers the same, are they exactly equal? Messenger hood, is that equal and the same? Prophets, are all prophets the same, are they equal? Prophecy, is that equal and the same? 

The answer is NO. Just as all Messengers and Prophets aren't equal and the same neither are the Imams and Imamah. And this can be easily proven from the Qur'an. Obey and follow the Qur'an. Not your own instincts and assumptions.

[iceman]

I still stand by those words; you have NOT proven Imamah.  However, you have proven us right on two points:

1.  You will continuously fail to prove Imamah (since it is not in the Qur'an).

2.  Imamah leads to Hellfire (as per the verse in Surah Qasas).

Thank you

And this is what you said in post #84,

"Here it is, once again: However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah"

And this is what you said in post #80,

"It does not prove any of it, let alone all the characteristics that you lump on (like, infallibility, etc).  However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah.  Then you have no choice but to acknowledge that Prophethood is necessary for one to attain Imamah"

Look at the two statements that contradict,

"It does not prove any of it, let alone all the characteristics that you lump on"

And then you go,

"I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah"

See how you are all over the place and making a mess of yourself.

[muslim720]

This is what you said in post #69,

"You could not prove Imamah and now you are out to go against the Qur'an in which there is a verse which was revealed when Abu Talib refused to accept Islam"

Let me highlight your words "YOU COULD NOT PROVE IMAMAH"

And here is what you said in post #80,

"However, as I always do, I am willing to concede that it "proves" Imamah"

Are you reading this Mythbuster. Muslim 720 has accepted that IT PROVES IMAMAH.

Yes brother Mythbuster, can you please acknowledge Iceman's victory and give him a standing ovation before his mental breakdown becomes the cause of further complicated health issues?  Iceman seems to be dying for your approval, lol.  Also, bro Mythbuster, do not mention the quotation marks I put around the word proves.

So tell me have I proved Imamah from the Qur'an or not?

Not only did you fail to prove Imamah, you have failed to offer counter-rebuttal for my refutation.

Yes you do. Otherwise you wouldn't be refuting me.

Thank you for your admission that I have refuted you, lol.

Is it promotion, demotion or was Abraham given a title a grade of a similar nature and level. Or was it something else. And if it was then what was it.

The verse has nothing to do with Shi'i Imamah.  However, I can entertain you and pretend that it "proves" Imamah.  Then again, the verse makes it very clear that only a Prophet (asws) can become an Imam. 

As for the verse you shared from Surah Qasas (regarding Imams leading to Hellfire), the Shias run from that verse when discussing Imamah with Sunnis.  Other than the linguistic use of the word "Imam", the Shias maintain that it has nothing to do with their concept of Imamah.  I was shocked to see you use that verse to substantiate Imamah.  It actually destroys it!

No it doesn't. Allow me to educate you in this matter. Messengers, are all Messengers the same, are they exactly equal? Messenger hood, is that equal and the same? Prophets, are all prophets the same, are they equal? Prophecy, is that equal and the same? 

You say you will "educate" me and then you pose questions!

The answer is NO. Just as all Messengers and Prophets aren't equal and the same neither are the Imams and Imamah. And this can be easily proven from the Qur'an. Obey and follow the Qur'an. Not your own instincts and assumptions.

A bunch of whimsical statements concluded with the usual phrases such as "follow Qur'an" and "not your instincts and assumptions".  How original!

Look at the two statements that contradict

If you do not understand the usage of quotation marks, you have no business being on this forum.  You have more fundamental and basic things to learn.  If you choose to overlook quotation marks and prefer to act dumb, you need a date with a psychiatrist.

[Mythbuster1]

Yes brother Mythbuster, can you please acknowledge Iceman's victory and give him a standing ovation before his mental breakdown becomes the cause of further complicated health issues?  Iceman seems to be dying for your approval, lol.  Also, bro Mythbuster, do not mention the quotation marks I put around the word proves.

The poor lad craves attention from me I do give him real truths hence he needs me to cheer him up now because I don’t think his own kind acknowledge half the things he says, he needs a pat on the back or someone to say....well done.😜


Well it’s the belief in stupid ideas of divine imamates that leads him to such actions I suppose.😜

Ps.....I won’t mention the quotation mark, it will break his lil heart if he realised what you really meant.😂😂😂

[iceman]

Calm down people. You said "can you prove Imamah from the Qur'an". And I proved it. You and mythbuster both accepted it. Then came the twist and turn as such from you two "oh but this doesn't prove divine Imamah or shia Imamah" but my dears my lovelies,

you didn't say anything about any particular or specific version of Imamah. You said "can you prove Imamah from the Qur'an" or "you've failed to prove Imamah from the Qur'an" And that's what I replied to and addressed. And you accepted.

I do think I deserve a standing ovation for this. 😀

[muslim720]

I do think I deserve a standing ovation for this. 😀

Wow so you are really that shallow, lol.  Never a dull moment with you, Iceman.  Just when we think you cannot stoop any lower!

[zaid_ibn_ali]

Calm down people. You said "can you prove Imamah from the Qur'an". And I proved it. You and mythbuster both accepted it. Then came the twist and turn as such from you two "oh but this doesn't prove divine Imamah or shia Imamah" but my dears my lovelies,

you didn't say anything about any particular or specific version of Imamah. You said "can you prove Imamah from the Qur'an" or "you've failed to prove Imamah from the Qur'an" And that's what I replied to and addressed. And you accepted.

I do think I deserve a standing ovation for this. 😀

What did you prove? A verse saying Imams that lead people to hellfire lol.
You posted it & realise you messed up big by refusing to acknowledge you posted it.
So here we have it.
According to Iceman Imamah is proven from Quran & one of the things mentioned about it is the Imams will lead people to hellfire.

Amazing.

This guy came on here & refuted his own years of posts with one single refutation from himself lol.

[Mythbuster1]

Calm down people. You said "can you prove Imamah from the Qur'an". And I proved it. You and mythbuster both accepted it. Then came the twist and turn as such from you two "oh but this doesn't prove divine Imamah or shia Imamah" but my dears my lovelies,

you didn't say anything about any particular or specific version of Imamah. You said "can you prove Imamah from the Qur'an" or "you've failed to prove Imamah from the Qur'an" And that's what I replied to and addressed. And you accepted.

I do think I deserve a standing ovation for this. 😀

You liar you know EXACTLY what I asked for “divine imams” the theory of divinity how they the imams are.......DIVINE! You even answered by giving your version of a quranic verse of imams being promoted to a status higher than prophets.

Look at you poor kid you really messed up big time the verses contradicted your theory and now you think it was just imams we was talking about all along and we got it wrong. Self delusional 😂😂😜

You are even wanting an applause for your lies too.😂

The cheek!

[iceman]

You liar you know EXACTLY what I asked for “divine imams” the theory of divinity how they the imams are.......DIVINE! You even answered by giving your version of a quranic verse of imams being promoted to a status higher than prophets.

Look at you poor kid you really messed up big time the verses contradicted your theory and now you think it was just imams we was talking about all along and we got it wrong. Self delusional 😂😂😜

You are even wanting an applause for your lies too.😂

The cheek!

Post #55, Muslim 720,

"Okay, Qur'anist, show me Imamah from the Qur'an"

😊 Just give me a moment and I'll pull out your proof. Then call me a liar.

[Mythbuster1]

Post #55, Muslim 720,

"Okay, Qur'anist, show me Imamah from the Qur'an"

😊 Just give me a moment and I'll pull out your proof. Then call me a liar.

Wonder what’s taking you so long!

🤔

[zaid_ibn_ali]

Can see how dishonest iceman is.

He made a huge blunder citing the Imam leading people to hellfire verse & ignores any reference to it. Not replying to any posts asking him about this blunder.

Complete fraudster.

[iceman]

Wonder what’s taking you so long!

🤔

Just letting the dust settle 😀