Evil Muslim conspiracy...

It says that in Shi'ism it has a strict usage and a metaphorical usage. That's odd, when I use google it produces more than one page as a result. Like this, for example. And this. And this.

No, it says calling a teacher of theology imam's, as the Sunni's do, is considered metaphorical. The Shi'a do not do this.Giving someone the title of Imam because they believe he is the 12th Imam is strict usage. Having trouble with opening links on my laptop, can you quote names of a few Shi'a imam clerics (two or three, even just one, since I'm claiming there were no others) and I will google the name myself.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

I was able to look at thelinks, other than the "Missing Imam" the other is just called "imam" by who ever wrote the news article. But in the following sentence is refered to as simply a 'cleric'.The "missing imam" is a different story. Googling I found this:

quote:

---

[Musa al-Sadr]... Aṣ-Ṣadr, who became known as Imm Ms

---

Became known as Imam, not, given the title of Imam because it was thought he was an actual Imam of the House of the Prophet, like Khomeini.- Oni

I have not ignored this post. I was inspired to write a new thread, and I called it "The evolution of hell: how rhetoric changes religion." It is a full explanation of how criticism affects the evolution of religions.

No, look, it's from an article on Shi'a doctrine, and it says: it is perfectly possible for a shi'ite to call someone an imam without meaning that he's the Mahdi; and there is, of course, no obligation for any shi'ite to believe that any particular person is the Mahdi.Of course, they can if they want to, but then a Christian, if he wanted to, could believe that I was the Second Coming of Jesus. And a number of Jewish leaders have in fact been suspected of being te messiah by their followers, but again, they don't have to.

No, Dr. A, that is not from the Shi'a doctrine. Here is where you got that from, and you were selective as to what you quoted, hopefully, unintentionally.Here is the right quote:

quote:

---

Imamah (Shi'a doctrine)

​

Immah is the Shia doctrine of religious, spiritual and political leadership of the Ummah. The Shīa believe that the A'immah ("Imams") are the true Caliphs or rightful successors of Muḥammad, and Twelver and Ismā‘īlī Shī‘ah, further that Imams are possessed of supernatural knowledge, authority, and infallibility (‘Iṣmah) as well as being part of the Ahl al-Bayt, the family of Muhammad. Both beliefs distinguish the Shī‘ah from Sunnis.

---

What you quoted was the etymology of the word "imam."From the wiki link:

quote:

---

Etymology

​

The word imam denotes the one who stands or walks in front. He is the guide. It is commonly used to mean the person who 'guides' the course of prayer in the mosque; in many cases it means the head of a school. From the Shi'i point of view, this is merely a metaphorical usage of the word. Properly and strictly speaking, the term is applicable only to those members of the House of the Prophet (ahl al-bayt) designated as the infallible.

---

The Shi'a doctrine that I quoted is clear, Imams are the true Caliphs and rightful successors of the Prophet, and applicable to only those members of the House of the Prophet.As it says, these different view points are what distinguishes Sunni from Shi'a.Further more - as I have repeatedly said and provided links for this - no other Iranian cleric has been given such a title of Imam, other than Khomeini. And other than him, you have only shown me a vague reference in an article and one other man who simply became known as Imam. Who then went missing. Source

quote:

---

Khomeini was the first and only Iranian cleric to be addressed as "Imam", a title hitherto reserved in Iran for the twelve infallible leaders of the early Shi'a. He was also associated with the Mahdi or 12th Imam of Shia belief in a number of ways. One of his titles was Na'eb-e Imam (Deputy to the Twelfth Imam). His enemies were often attacked as taghut and mofsidin fi'l-arz (corrupters of the earth), religious terms used for enemies of the Twelfth Imam. Many of the officials of the overthrown Shah's government executed by Revolutionary Courts were convicted of "fighting against the Twelfth Imam". When a deputy in the majlis asked Khomeini if he was the 'promised Mahdi', Khomeini did not answer, "astutely" neither confirming nor denying the title

---

Also, Iranian's believed he was the 12th Imam.

quote:

---

Tears of joy were shed and huge quantities of sweets and fruits were consumed as millions of people jumped for joy, shouting 'I've seen the Imam in the moon.' The event was celebrated in thousands of mosques with mullahs reminding the faithful that a sure sign of the coming of the Mahdi was that the sun would rise in the West. Khomeini, representing the sun, was now in France and his face was shining in the moon like a sun. People were ready to swear on the Qur'an that they had seen Khomeini's face in the moon. Even the Tudeh Party [the party of "Scientific Socialism"] shared in the [enthusiasm]. Its paper Navid wrote: 'Our toiling masses, fighting against world-devouring imperialism headed by the blood-sucking United States, have seen the face of their beloved Imam and leader, Khomeini the Breaker of Idols, in the moon. A few pipsqueaks cannot deny what a whole nation has seen with its own eyes

---

He didn't claim to be the Mahdi, millions of people believed he was.He didn't give himself the title of Imam, since that is a title in the Shi'a doctrine held for only for those members of the House of the Prophet. He was given that title because it was believed he was the Mahdi, the 12th Imam of the House of the Prophet.Given all this information, how do you see it now?- Oni

No, intentionally. Because what I quoted makes it clear that even Shi'ites, even Twelver Shi'ites, even Usuli Twelver Shi'ites can call someone an imam without saying that he is the second coming of the Mahdi. As they have often done, and as they do.---Once more. Islam per se does not require that anyone should require any particular person as being infallible. Twelver Islam leaves it open that if the Mahdi returns, they should follow him, just as Christians should follow the Second Coming of Jesus if he comes back; and Jews should follow the Messiah if he ever turns up. Sure. But there is nothing in Islam per se that requires devotion to any particular person; and you are wrong.

What you quoted was the etymology of the word Imam, Dr. A. I quoted the actual Shi'a doctrine that explained it is only in reference to the 12 Imams of the House of the Prophet.If they OFTEN name clerics Imam, then you should be able to find more proof than just a vague reference in an article and a guy who became known as imam. There would be, as you claim, thousands. Like for the Sunni's. But you have no other evidence to support the claim, no other clerics named imam. My position is that an Imam, for the Shi'a, as the Doctrine I quoted explains, is considered infallible. On that point, I am right. You quoting the etymology of the word imam doesn't trump the actual Shi'a doctrine which states that very thing.I don't care about devotion, my point has always been infallibility.- Oni

Another link I foud that supports my position: Source

quote:

---

Imamah (Shi'a Ismaili doctrine)

​

The Ismaili view on the Imamah differs from the Twelver Shi'a view, in particular because the Imam in Ismailism is the Noor of Allah. Ismailis believe that the Noor of Allah is present in the Imam, and that there is only a Zahiri (exoteric) difference between each one. Therefore Ali and every Imam are one in essence.

​

Like other Shi'ites the Ismailis reserve the position of Imam for descendants of ʿAl ibn Ab Ṭlib, though they reserve a special status to Ali himself.

---

Like other Shi'ites, they reserve the Imam position for only those descendants of Al ibn Ab Ṭlib ...not just any old dude.C'mon good Dr., you rarely ever loose one, you can admit this one. - Oni

No. The usage. Yeah, look, how much work should I have to do? I did a quick look round for the words "shiite imam" and I found references to people who aren't Khomeini, this proving your current argument wrong, and who is dead and therefore doesn't apply to your original argument.Sheesh. Well, it depends what you mean by Imam. And what they mean by imam.I concede that any Twelver Shi'ite Muslim who thought that you were the Mahdi would therefore have to believe that you were infallible. Just like any Catholic who thought you were the rightful Pope, or any Christian who thought you were the Second Coming, or any Orthodox Jew who thought you were the Messiah.I have never denied this. And it is a long long way from what it was that I did in fact deny, or from what you originally asserted.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

I am happy to "admit" the correctness of my own argument.

Look, let's go back to the start. You said, and I quote: Now, it is certainly possible for a Shi'ite Twelver Muslim to identify you, me, or (more plausibly) a Grand Ayatollah as being the Mahdi; just as it is possible for a Catholic to identify me as the Pope; a Protestant to identify me as the Second Coming; or for a Jew to identify me as the Messiah. But there is nothing in those religions that says that you have to so identify some random person such as me as the Mahdi/Pope/Second Coming/Messiah.And in fact most Shi'ites, and indeed Protestants and Jews, do not make such an identification. And if they did, they still don't have to.So I conclude that there is nothing in Islam that makes Muslims have to follow a leader --- and the mostobvious and practical proof of this fact is that they don't.You remind me a bit of creationists talking about genetics. You're using every argument you can to prove that no matter what happens in practice something completely different should happen in principle.Well, it doesn't. Which kinda proves that the principles that you have laid down for Islam are not the principles followed by Muslims.

Is this not what you quoted:

quote:

---

Etymology

​

The word imam denotes the one who stands or walks in front. He is the guide. It is commonly used to mean the person who 'guides' the course of prayer in the mosque; in many cases it means the head of a school. From the Shi'i point of view, this is merely a metaphorical usage of the word. Properly and strictly speaking, the term is applicable only to those members of the House of the Prophet (ahl al-bayt) designated as the infallible.

---

From wiki...?It says etymology, so I just assumed it was the etymology. Why else then would it say etymology? This is crazy talk.My point was that Shi'a reserve the name Imam to those of the House of the Prophet, which the Shi'a doctrine confirms:

quote:

---

Immah is the Shia doctrine of religious, spiritual and political leadership of the Ummah.

​

Properly and strictly speaking, the term is applicable only to those members of the House of the Prophet (ahl al-bayt) designated as the infallible.

​

Like other Shi'ites, the Ismailis reserve the position of Imam for descendants of ʿAl ibn Ab Ṭlib, though they reserve a special status to Ali himself.

---

Which it seems the evidence favors my position.I also said that Imam's are considered infallible:

quote:

---

further that Imams are possessed of supernatural knowledge, authority, and infallibility (‘Iṣmah) as well as being part of the Ahl al-Bayt, the family of Muhammad.

---

And the evidence confirms that too.I also said Iranins have never given the title Imam to anyone before or after Khomeini, a title only reserved for the 12 Imam's:

quote:

---

Khomeini was the first and only Iranian cleric to be addressed as "Imam", a title hitherto reserved in Iran for the twelve infallible leaders of the early Shi'a.

---

And that too is confirmed.Other than those 3 points, I have stated nothing else. Where am I wrong? Not that I can't be, it just seems from the evidence that what I've argued for is supported.- Oni

And I have not!, even in the quote you provide, said that anyone HAS TO believe any of this crap.But the fact remains that, even if you don't believe the Pope is infallible, Catholic doctrine still says he is.Likewise, you don't have to believe that an Imam is infallible, but Shi'a doctrine still says they are.The Pope is infallible. Imam's in the Shi'a branch are considered infallible. My arguement has never been that anyone actually has to believe that they are, just that the doctrines of these specific religions say they are. And these are the only two current, active religions who have infallible authorites.Which again brings me back to my original point, the religion can promote violence as a resolution to problems, but that doesn't mean that the muslims themselves are violent because of it. As you say, and I agree, no one has to believe what the religion's leaders preach.Where am I mistaken in any of the above?- Oni

But there is nothing in Shi'a doctrine saying that you are the Imam, any more than there is anything in Christian doctrine saying that I am the Second Coming or anything in Orthodox Judaism saying that Percy is the Messiah or anything in Hinduism that says that RAZD is an avatar of Shiva. Oh, that was your point?What a strange way you have of making it.