I would like to have a one on one debate about Imammate.

[Link]

Salam

I would like to have a debate about Imammate. What I would be emphasizing more as opposed to what I usually do, is the philosophy of it in Quran and Sunnah. That is I will be looking at verses that emphasize the philosophy of it, then move on to verses about the designation of the Imams from this nation in Quran and Sunnah.  We will look at specific designations but emphasize on the wisdom of the verses and how the religion of Wilayah is proven to all of humanity, and not just people who accept Quran.

Inshallah this approach will systematically look at all the Quran has to say about this matter.

[Bolani Muslim]

Why not finish your older threads you left hanging?
http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/context-of-ulil-amr-verses/msg9020/#msg9020
http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/ulil-amr-and-the-context-of-the-divine-authority-of-the-family-of-ibrahim/

I still really want to know, How do you feel about following a religion that says you must be dead?

[Link]

It convinces me there is an Imam who Allah has safeguarded the knowledge of the religion and has not given authority to scholars of any group.

[Rationalist]

It convinces me there is an Imam who Allah has safeguarded the knowledge of the religion and has not given authority to scholars of any group.

And if that Imam is not with us then he is useless.

[Link]

Although I do believe the Imam is among us and guides many people, it's better to be useless then a source of misguidance as many religious leaders ended up being to fill in the void of the guidance of God.

[Link]

Any ways, who wants to debate with me one on one about this subject?

[Rationalist]

Although I do believe the Imam is among us and guides many people, it's better to be useless then a source of misguidance as many religious leaders ended up being to fill in the void of the guidance of God.

Isn't there a famous saying in Shaykh Saduq's work where he states whoever claims to have met the Mahdi before the Sufyani is a liar.

Also, the issue is this whole Mahdi belief its filled with exaggerations. This is also applies for the case of the Mahdi in the Sunnis books as well. As you know the 12er Shia like the Yahood were massacred throughout history. Due to the oppression and hate toward them, they were put in a pressure cooker. The end result is they began to lose their rationality, dreamed of a romantic figure and began exaggerating toward an end times figure to will save them through the usage of super powers. 

Any ways, who wants to debate with me one on one about this subject?

Its not worth debating with anyone who uses extrapolation or analogical methods to convince others, or believe the other is non-Muslim for disagreeing. 

[Husayn]

@ Link

I accept your invitation to debate.

[Farid]

If a debate is going to happen, it should be about the Imamah in the Qur'an in specific. No point going into hadiths if Shias cannot prove Imamah as a concept from the Qur'an.

Also, I don't want a debate that is too long that nobody is going to read, so here are a couple of ground rules:

- The discussion should be limited to five verses only. If the five strongest and most obvious verses in the Qur'an do not prove Imamah, then it would be silly to think that others will.

- Five posts per debater per point. So, Link would provide a verse, explains why he believes it is about Imamah, and his opponent would respond. Then, Link would respond. So, five posts per person per verse. Then, the topic will move onto the next verse. Surely, Link should not need more than five posts to prove that a verse is about Imamah.

If this is acceptable, then I do not mind the debate taking place on our forums, because my biggest concern is the thread going on for twenty pages, like what happened between me and Wasil, without people reading past the second page.

[Link]

Although I do believe there is explicit verses about Imammate of Auli-Mohammad, the point of this thread is not to get into a discussion of how verses should be read as opposed to how they are not, but rather I want to get into the philosophy of it as a whole. To limit this to just five verses is not fair since it's philosophy has many dimensions, and different verses expand and explain others. I also reject that the Quran ought to be looked a lone.

I rather we have the whole of Quran to refer to, it's general themes, etc, on this topic instead of limiting it to just five verses.

If the topic was to prove Imammate then I understand five verses from Quran. However, this to talk about the philosophy of it, which I think it's unfair to limit it to five verses when Quran has emphasized about it in different contexts, dimensions, perceptions, and themes, that although similar, perfect one another from different perceptions.

This thread is to look at how much Quran has emphasized on the philosophy rather then to get into a discussion about specific verses of Auli-Mohammad which we have already debated a lot.

[Farid]

I thought you wanted to debate: Is the concept of Imamah found in the Qur'an?

Is that not the case?

Please try to be clear with what you mean by philosophy of Imamah.

[zaid_ibn_ali]

The OP knows very well there is no explicit evidence in the Quran for the shia theory of Imamate (this should suffice for all muslims). So he drags it out to 'philosophy of Imamate'. Philosophy is a very broad & vague term even when applied to one concept. Our shia friend needs such complex & long drawn extrapolations to try & prove anything from the Quran in regards to shia Imamate.

Its a kop out from the real debate: Prove the Quran explicitly mentions the shia Imamate (an impossible task).

We are not philosophers of conjecture, we are muslims:)

[Link]

Please try to be clear with what you mean by philosophy of Imamah.

I mean I want to talk about the wisdom of it emphasized in Quran used to prove to not only Muslims but Christians, Jews, Deists, and people of all religions of Nubuwa of Mohammad and Wilayah of his successors. The Quran is not a book using and emphasizing on circular reasoning.

[Link]

Its a kop out from the real debate: Prove the Quran explicitly mentions the shia Imamate (an impossible task).

We are already on stalemate on those verses like the Thaqalain and Ali Mawla interpretation.  You like to stick to the same tatabur of Quran don't you? If nothing else, this will open tatabur up over God's book as a whole over this issue if it does talk about it.

[Ebn Hussein]

Although I do believe the Imam is among us and guides many people, it's better to be useless then a source of misguidance as many religious leaders ended up being to fill in the void of the guidance of God.

I seek refuge in Allah from Rafidism and your logic and at the same time I thank ALlah for the very existence of the likes of you. Ex-Shias like myself, Husayn and many others will one day bury this logic of a useless non-guiding fairy tale who does not deserve the title Imam in any sense, he guides as much as other false deities allegedly guide.

[Link]

So can Husayn and I have the debate?

[Farid]

I'm either too much of a simpleton to understand you, or have a problem connecting your ideas with people.

I ask the other forum members: What is the topic that Link wants to debate about?

[Rationalist]

I'm either too much of a simpleton to understand you, or have a problem connecting your ideas with people.

I ask the other forum members: What is the topic that Link wants to debate about?

I never seen a 12er Shia convince anyone by using ahadith from their books. Instead they use tactics such as antagonizing the 3 Calipahs, and proving Ali is better. However, the issue is once someone is convinced that Ali is better they are automatically supposed to believe there are 12 Imams?

Now even if we go to the 12er ahadith books when the Imams are debating with 'non-12ers' Muslims they never tell them they are so and so numbered Imam or that they are 12 Imams in the Ummah. However, today the dawah is started off with the 12 Calipah ahadith.

[Link]

I'm either too much of a simpleton to understand you, or have a problem connecting your ideas with people.

I ask the other forum members: What is the topic that Link wants to debate about?

Whether or not the Quran has a philosophy about divinely appointed leadership that proves there would be Imams after Mohammad.

We know the usual debate about 42:23, 4:59, 5:55, and we know the usual debate about ghadeer declaration and so on and so forther. I'm going a different route.

I'm saying if the philosophy of Imammate is proven in Quran, then we know automatically the right interpretation to those verses and ahadith we usually debate about.

Instead of doing the same tatadabur, and ignoring a great chunk of Quran on this topic, why don't we open up new doors of tatadabur of Ayat about this subject?

[Ibn Yahya]

Akhi Link. Doesn't the fact that you have to use logic and philosophy to prove your point make you question your beliefs? Allah subhaanahu wa ta'aala says that he has given us clear proof and clear signs for our religion. If it's not clear. Then how can it be the truth?