Jay K wrote:

Almighty Allah says:

*{We never punish until we have sent a messenger.}* (Al-Israa' 17:15)

Imam Ibn Taymiyah(a Muslim scholar) said: "The Quran and the Sunnah have clearly indicated that Allah will not punish an individual until a message is delivered to him. When no message is delivered at all, no punishment will be due and when a message was delivered but some details were not, Allah will held the person accountable for what has been delivered to him only." (Ibn Taymiyah, Majmu` Al-Fatwa, Vol. 3, p. 493)

If it is said that how come you say that they belong to Ahl Al-Fatrah while the religion of Abraham was already there? We can simply say that although the religion of Abraham was already in place, a modified or altered version of it was practiced. Because by the lapse of time many details have been changed and altered. Therefore, we cannot say that these people are responsible for something which has not been delivered in its original form to them.

Hmmm... I have real issues with that. I realise it's from proper scholars.

But it opens the door to so many other difficult questions e.g. "What about someone who's only contact to Islam is in the news stories about terrorists?" and "What does Allah (swt) do with all the people who died before the prophethood of Muhammad (saw)? If they don't go to heaven, since they weren't Muslims, and they don't go to hell, because 'the message that was bought to them was altered/modified', then where would they go?"

Also, I remember hearing in a khutbah a hadith in which the Prophet said his father was in jahannum.

Allah knows best, and it is really none of our business. We should focus more on where WE will end up - because we have a little more control over that.

when the Prophet was two years old, Abu Talib (ra) took him to the kabah and beseeched Allah through the waseela of the Prophet (saw). now the Prophet is two years old and Abu Talib (ra) new he was someone beloved to God, this is before the announcement of Prophethood. now after 40 years, how can someone not believe in the Prophet after seeing all the miracles? Abu Talib (ra) was aware of this well before. the first majlis of dawah of tawheed took place in the house of Abu Talib (ra), this event occurred for three days, Abu Talib (ra) was the first to say i believe in the message of the Prophet and i am willing to help you in your mission.

there are so many more incidents which show the imaan of Abu Talib (ra).

Ya'qub wrote:

Also, I remember hearing in a khutbah a hadith in which the Prophet said his father was in jahannum.

maadhAllah.

you should have asked for a reference.

Many scholars ahve rejected that hadith. A three part lecture (30 minutes total) on knowledge etc... part 2 is about that hadith you mention. (I find it difficult linking to that lecture as it criticises my shaykh. How dare he!)

But it opens the door to so many other difficult questions e.g. "What about someone who's only contact to Islam is in the news stories about terrorists?" and "What does Allah (swt) do with all the people who died before the prophethood of Muhammad Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him? If they don't go to heaven, since they weren't Muslims, and they don't go to hell, because 'the message that was bought to them was altered/modified', then where would they go?"

And the ultimate answer is... 42.

More seriously, Who enters heaven will enter so by the grace of Allah(swt). It is up to Him to allow who enters.

@Ya'qub - I would like to get your opinion on that lecture.

Noor wrote:

you should have asked for a reference.

Should have. Didn't. Was just mentioning as it was relevant. The khutbah was actually about something else, it was just a side issue at the time.

Feel rude about going up to a khateeb at the end and demanding evidence, too.

The great sunni scholar Tahir ul Qadri said Abu Talib (as) was a Muslim. I think he is the head of Minhaj al Quran organisation.

He wrote a book on Iman of Abu Talib (as). i saw his tv lecture on Ahlebait tv 836 proving from sunni hadith that Abu Talib (as) was a true momin.

Ya'qub wrote:

malik wrote:

Abu Talib read Nikah of Prophet (pbuh) and Hazrat Khadija (as). How can a Kafir conduct a marriage ceremony of last messenger (pbuh).

That marriage occurred before the Prophet received his first revelation, so is irrelevant to this.

this does not mean anything, pointless point. the prophet was still a nabi before the call of prophethood was announced. they were a prophet before Adam alayhisalaam were created.

"believer"

Noor wrote:

Ya'qub wrote:

malik wrote:

Abu Talib read Nikah of Prophet (pbuh) and Hazrat Khadija (as). How can a Kafir conduct a marriage ceremony of last messenger (pbuh).

That marriage occurred before the Prophet received his first revelation, so is irrelevant to this.

this does not mean anything, pointless point. the prophet was still a nabi before the call of prophethood was announced. they were a prophet before Adam alayhisalaam were created.

Yep, but my point was that there were no 'Muslims' around to conduct the marriage.

Ya'qub wrote:

Noor wrote:

you should have asked for a reference.

Feel rude about going up to a khateeb at the end and demanding evidence, too.

Yaqub, wasn't it you who said that we shouldn't blindly follow or trust ANYONE, including scholars?
I'm not having a go but just you seem to the person that isn't fazed by something like that.

Being a Muslim means you do what God wants you to do, so Jesus, Moses and Ibrahim (pbuta) and all the other Prophets were Muslims. According to quite a few scholars Naik and Estes included you can be a Muslim even if you don't speak Arabic or call yourself a Muslim.

The Lamp wrote:

Yaqub, wasn't it you who said that we shouldn't blindly follow or trust ANYONE, including scholars?
I'm not having a go but just you seem to the person that isn't fazed by something like that.

It's about having a time and a place for things - just getting a reference such as "yeah, its hadith, innit" or "it is in bukhari" or some other book may not cut it as you may want to investigate - and that involves a more exact reference that the khateeb is not obliged to remember and quote off hand.

So there is a bit of being in the real world too.

The Lamp wrote:

Ya'qub wrote:

Noor wrote:

you should have asked for a reference.

Feel rude about going up to a khateeb at the end and demanding evidence, too.

Yaqub, wasn't it you who said that we shouldn't blindly follow or trust ANYONE, including scholars?
I'm not having a go but just you seem to the person that isn't fazed by something like that.

It wasn't in regards to a fatwa that I started to follow, so I don't see it as quite the same.

Dr Tahir ul Qadri claims in is book that Abu Talib was a true believer. He rejects majority view as false that says Abu Talib was not a muslim.

Abu Talib was not liked by people who worshipped idol. He refused to bow to idols.

The clan of Umayyads (LA) had always hated Hashmi clan of the Prophet (pbuh).

Abu Sufyan was a bitter enemy of Prophet (pbuh). His evil wife Hind (LA) was enemy of Prophet (pbuh) and killed Hamza (AS). His cursed son Muwaiyah (LA) was enemy of Imam Ali (AS) and tried to kill him at Siffin. His grandson Yazid (LA) was the killer of Imam Hussain (AS) in Kerbala.

When Prophet (pbuh) conquered Mecca, Abu Sufyan (LA) out of political reasons convereted. But he remained a hypocrite and hated Islam. He and his descendents tried to destroyed Islam. But Prophet's (pbuh) grandson Imam Hussain (as) saved the religion of Allah (swt) in Karbala.

Abu Talib (as) was protector of the Prophet (pbuh).
His son Imam Ali (as) was defender of the Prophet (pbuh).
His grandson Imam Hussain (as) was saviour of Islam.

Those who respect Abu Sufyan (LA) they do not like Imam Ali (AS) and his father Abu Talib (AS). They do not know what Islam really is.

Here is good website all about Islam in its perfect purity.

http://www.al-islam.org/

Shia Muslim Library: http://www.al-islam.org/alpha.php