Question Everything To Get To The Truth

Is it wrong to question everything Islam as a Muslim?

“Too much questioning will lead you astray” Read the explanation below.In Islam, you can ask question in regards to know something for a clear understanding. Islam supports ones belief rationally. However if we look about the questioning in Quran, there are certain things which Allah swt warns us and should keep in mind. For exmple:"O you who have believed, do not ask about things which, if they are shown to you, will distress you. But if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be shown to you. Allah has pardoned that which is past; and Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing." (5:101)A people asked such [questions] before you; then they became thereby disbelievers.(5:102)This verse forbade the believers to ask the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) about matters concerning which Allah had not said anything in His Book and had not said anything concerning them; splitting hairs and asking too many details about them might lead to them being prohibited, which would cause them hardship. It also forbade them to ask about things that were hidden from them and if they came to know about them it would upset them, such as how sound their attribution to their fathers was.

Why do humans have to question everything?

We’re not forced at GunPoint, so I wouldn’t state it as ‘have to’.When we do Question things, we try to get answers. Having answers is useful.If Einstein hadn’t been open minded enough to pretend there were restrictions in Newton’s Laws of Physics, he wouldn’t have even tried to theorize Relativity.In other words, Einstein tried to get a different answer to the same question Newton answered, because ol’ Steinein wasn’t satisfied with that being the only perspective.Innovation cam happen only when we attempt to expand existing boundaries.Creativity, literally the driving force of creation itself, is all about thinking new ideas.Even if there are minds surpassing the IQ level of Einstein, I wouldn’t necessarily consider them as more genius than him.A Genius mind is one which has a proficient collection of neuron connectivity. New neuron pathways means new ideas. A person’s thought process can be recorded in terms of their usage of their own neural potential.An Idiot mind wouldn’t exercise their most oxygen consuming muscle and would then end up having fewer neural pathways, in turn causing thinking to be tougher and slower to achieve.Information is key, the way of gaining information is by asking for it. It is the law of nature.After getting answers we could study it thoroughly to gain insights. Facts are always useful, different opinions give new point of view to think from, there are a lot of ways we humans can apply our thinking abilities[Types of Thinking] to optimize available tools for our usage.Even if we know something about a topic, we should still question more to get deeper understanding. By Questioning is how we discern Truth. Questioning an accusation in a legitimate manner leads us to crack a liar. If an accusation is the truth, we get more proofs for the accuser’s side by simply gaining clearer insight of the details.Questions and Answers are just as important as the number 0. While there isn’t a need to Question things(we could revert back to primal ways), we humans do find it rewarding to have our questions answered.

If everything I say is a lie, when am I telling the truth?

Your question is a variation on  the liar's paradox. The obvious response is that if everything you say is a lie, then you obviously never tell the truth.  The truth is, however,  that given your question it's impossible to say when you're telling the truth or not. To make this dilemma clear we'll need to take a hard look at a very similar statement, "This sentence is false."  If the sentence is true, then we must conclude that the sentence is false, but wait...if "This sentence is false" is false, then the sentence is true. We could go on chasing our logical tails until our sanity deserts us OR we could just admit the obvious that both your sentence and the the one I included are  unresolvable paradoxes. If they are true, then they're  false and if the sentence is  false, then it's also false. If you aren't shrieking in frustration,  and you continue to wrestle with this insanity, you'll finally come to the realization that there are some sentences which are perfectly fine grammatically and even syntactically but about which it's impossible to assign a truth values to -- there is no way to  say  that they are either true or false. I could waste even more of your time telling you about philosophers who offered resolutions to the problem -- Prior, Kripke and even Kurt Godel -- but I'll just say that a lot of ink has been spilled trying to come to grips these inherent contradictions, and I'll refrain from spilling any more ink. Still,  if your tolerance for this stuff is high  or you enjoy punishment, you could take a look at Raymond Smullyan's great book What's the Name of this Book? It's guaranteed to drive you to fits of delicious insanity. Have fun!

Can I doubt everything?

According to the French philosopher Descartes, you can doubt everything except your own doubt. He found this conclusion because during his life there was a lot of confusions and divisions between rational exercises and religious practices. Both disciplines were struggling to find a safe place together, so even Descartes wasn’t free from theological explanations. Indeed, the final law of existence, as much as the first one, couldn’t be explained otherwise than through the narrative of a supernatural creation that is above us all. It was back in 1637, though, and Newton exposed his thesis only around 1666 (which helped a lot the study of science to become methodical and experimental, especially since the principles of empiricism exposed by Francis Bacon). Why did Newton’s law on gravity changed so much the way people could understand the world? Because before Newton, our understanding of the laws of the universe was mostly based on Aristotle’s philosophy: the fact that a stone falls on the ground “because the fate of the stone is to go back where it comes from”. However, between Aristotle and Newton, there’s at least 1500 years between the two, so humans have been able to grow a lot of tools since then!Why am I telling you this little part of history? Because it reveals the way things were understood during the development of human thoughts. For instance, it is well known that Descartes was the one who exposed the claim “I think therefore I am” (Cogito, ergo sum), however, he is not the only one who started to understand this way of seeing the limits of our thoughts (St Augustine, from something around 400 A.D) already stated that “I err therefore I am”).But, Descartes, from his statement, could affirm a methodological existence of a “limit”: we cannot, as a thinking being, doubt of our own doubt, as doubting is a process of thinking itself and thus doubting of that process cancel the rational understanding that “I am thinking”, which might lead to a loop or to some sort of absurdity.So, if you want to get an answer to your question, yes you can doubt everything, but not of your own existence (shortcut).