PDA

View Full Version : A review of baseless assertions



Ansar Al-'Adl
05-29-2005, 03:41 PM
:sl:

I have moved a discussion to this thread which exposes the blatant ignorance and inability of one anti-islamist to provide evidence to support his claim. The reader will observe how the anti-islamist, mansio, simply repeats his allegation (a logical fallacy known as argumentum ad nauseam) without provide any proof to back up his assertion (namely, that the Qur'an contains a man-made story) and makes numerous other logical fallacies in the process. If mansio tries to lie low and resurface in other threads with the same allegations, as he has done in the past, we will challenge him to return to this thread and substantiate his claim, which he will never be able to do. This discussion he initiated will serve as an example of his own incompetence.

:w:
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
mansio
01-18-2006, 11:39 AM
If you have proofs that Christianity is more or less man made then OK.

I don't understand why that critic comes from Muslims who believe in the Quran which contains a number of man-made stories.

It looks like a case of seeing the mote in one's neighbor's eye and not the beam in one's own eye.
Reply

Ghazi
01-18-2006, 01:24 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
If you have proofs that Christianity is more or less man made then OK.

I don't understand why that critic comes from Muslims who believe in the Quran which contains a number of man-made stories.

It looks like a case of seeing the mote in one's neighbor's eye and not the beam in one's own eye.
Salaam

Care to share these so-called man made stories in the quran
Reply

mansio
01-18-2006, 02:44 PM
The legend of the Seven Sleepers from Christian folklore for example.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
akulion
01-18-2006, 03:50 PM
You claim its taken from the bible however the stories in the Quran are completely different from the bible and show the truth of what occured.

As the church changed every story in the bible just like they changed the Limbo thing, Allah swt sent the Quran to show the people the truth from the falsehoods
Reply

mansio
01-18-2006, 04:34 PM
There are no Seven Sleepers in the Bible. It's just a legend from folklore that became famous with Christians and was adopted by the Quran in sura al-Kahf.
Reply

akulion
01-18-2006, 05:39 PM
yes exactly it was probably one of the things taken out of the bible by the church
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-18-2006, 06:01 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
I don't understand why that critic comes from Muslims who believe in the Quran which contains a number of man-made stories.

The legend of the Seven Sleepers from Christian folklore for example.
Do you have any EVIDENCE that the story of the sleepers from the Qur'an is from folklore? No, of course not. More of your baseless lies. Are you incapable of providing even a shred of evidence to support your claims? If you could prove to me that this story was folklore I would gladly accept your proof, but of course you can't. So by making claims that have no basis you're just wasting our time and your time.
Reply

Takumi
01-18-2006, 06:11 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
There are no Seven Sleepers in the Bible. It's just a legend from folklore that became famous with Christians and was adopted by the Quran in sura al-Kahf.
Mansio,

I've been reading your posts (not all of them) and Ansar's posts refuting your claims and hallucinations countless times.

For once, just write sensibly and don't blabber.

If Christianity is your faith, that's fine with me, I shan't force you to become muslim or anything like that, but coming up with such horrendous claims as above without anything to back you up just exposes you as a hoax.

If you can't handle the burden of proof then stop writing and let other people who are sincere in finding the truth write and reciprocate.

Truly, your posts are an embodiment of blatant ignorance.
Reply

Abu Zakariya
01-18-2006, 06:19 PM
People often ask Muslims how the Bible could've been corrupted.

Well, mansio is a great example of how it could've been corrupted. We have something called isnad, you don't. It is okay to just burst out claims without giving proof, whereas in islam, this is a no-no.
Reply

mansio
01-18-2006, 09:48 PM
Look for "seven sleepers wikipedia" then follow every link you find.
If you don't like wikipedia, try encyclopaedia universalis for example or just "seven sleepers".
We have a cleric and writer Grégoire de Tours (Gregory of Tours) who lived from 538 to 594. He wrote many books of history and theology. One of his books is a translation in Latin "Passion of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus" of a book in Greek about the Seven Sleepers written in Ephesus in the middle of the 5th century.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-18-2006, 09:53 PM
Does mansio provide evidence to support his allegation that the story fo the sleepers is man-made? let us see...
Originally Posted by mansio
Look for "seven sleepers wikipedia" then follow every link you find.
This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.
If you don't like wikipedia, try encyclopaedia universalis for example or just "seven sleepers".
This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.
We have a cleric and writer Grégoire de Tours (Gregory of Tours) who lived from 538 to 594. He wrote many books of history and theology. One of his books is a translation in Latin "Passion of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus" of a book in Greek about the Seven Sleepers written in Ephesus in the middle of the 5th century.
This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.

Once again mansio fails to support his baseless lies with even a shred of evidence!!
Reply

mansio
01-18-2006, 10:53 PM
I'm happy that at least the origin of the Seven Sleepers story as predating the Quran is not denied. One of my "lies" that dissolves. The Seven Sleepers were Christians by the way.
Why do most links say it is a legend ?
Reply

Abu Zakariya
01-18-2006, 11:26 PM
If the story indeed circulated amongst Christians before Islam, this really isn't a problem at all. I mean, it is only natural. I would be worried if it didn't, because then it would seem that there is no basis to the story.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-18-2006, 11:49 PM
Does mansio provide evidence to support his basless lie that the Qur'an contains a man-made story? Let us see...
Originally Posted by mansio
I'm happy that at least the origin of the Seven Sleepers story as predating the Quran is not denied.
Red herring. This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.
The Seven Sleepers were Christians by the way.
Red herring. This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.

Why do most links say it is a legend ?
Appeal to authority.This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.

Once again mansio fails to support his baseless lies with even a shred of evidence!! Instead he makes three logical fallacies in all of the three points he makes!
Reply

Chuck
01-19-2006, 02:44 AM
There are no Seven Sleepers in the Bible. It's just a legend from folklore that became famous with Christians and was adopted by the Quran in sura al-Kahf.
This is doesn't prove that the event of Seven Sleepers never happened.

I'm happy that at least the origin of the Seven Sleepers story as predating the Quran is not denied.
Because the story is a narration of event that happened before lifetime of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). How can you even make this an issue? Here is an advice, read and understand from a valid source on the topic before making a comment.
Reply

mansio
01-19-2006, 11:36 AM
1) My opinions, you call "lies", are not originally "my" opinions, but are opinions shared by most of educated people from the Western world.

2) On an history forum for example, my "opinion" on the Seven Sleepers would be accepted without discussion. The discussion would be on who wrote the 5th century legend in Ephesus and from which older folklore elements did it derive.

3) Our Western scholarship has given us enough information to be able to distinguish between what is legendary and what is real. We trust that scholarship and we do not walk around with proofs in our pockets that the earth rotates around the sun or that Cinderella is an imaginary character. It is just assumed as such.
To give another example, I was taken aback when some of you denied that there were creation stories from clay in pagan religions. Here in the West every cultured person knows there are such stories and will not deny it. As I did not have the proofs of what everybody believes as true, why should I, it took me a while until I found texts from historians that corroborated my "opinion".

4) When we will have finished discussing the Seven Sleepers legend, we will have to address the legends of Alexander the Great, of Noah and the Flood, of Abraham and the Idols, of Cain's raven, of Moses and al-Khidr, of Solomon and the queen of Sheba, just to mention the most important in the Quran.

5) At the moment, the only "proofs" I have that the Seven Sleepers story is man-made, is that there is no proofs that the Seven Sleepers have existed (unless you are going to give me some), and the fact that most sites call it a legend.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-19-2006, 06:16 PM
Does mansio save himself from the humiliation of being caught red-handed making an allegation he cannot support? Let's see...
Originally Posted by mansio
1) My opinions, you call "lies", are not originally "my" opinions, but are opinions shared by most of educated people from the Western world.
Fallacy of appeal to majority. Mansio has just committed what we call argumentum ad populum. This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Even if the majority of people believed this, it still doesn't make it true. The majority of educated people in the world are also either Christian, Muslim or Hindu.

2) On an history forum for example, my "opinion" on the Seven Sleepers would be accepted without discussion.
Red herring. This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.

3) Our Western scholarship has given us enough information to be able to distinguish between what is legendary and what is real.
Yet mansio refuses to present this so-called 'information' he allegedly posesses!
We trust that scholarship and we do not walk around with proofs in our pockets that the earth rotates around the sun or that Cinderella is an imaginary character. It is just assumed as such.
Red herring. This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.
To give another example, I was taken aback when some of you denied that there were creation stories from clay in pagan religions. Here in the West every cultured person knows there are such stories and will not deny it. As I did not have the proofs of what everybody believes as true, why should I, it took me a while until I found texts from historians that corroborated my "opinion"
Red herring. This is not evidence that the story of the sleepers is man-made. Mansio brought the allegation so he should bring the evidence.

As an aside, all you did in the discussion of clay was produce quotes from some historians that agreed with you as opposed to bring historical evidence like that which I brought concerning the babylonian mythology where I exposed your ignorance concerning Berosus's narrative and the missing fragments. Why have you abandoned that debate?

4) When we will have finished discussing the Seven Sleepers legend, we will have to address the legends of Alexander the Great, of Noah and the Flood, of Abraham and the Idols, of Cain's raven, of Moses and al-Khidr, of Solomon and the queen of Sheba, just to mention the most important in the Quran.
Instead of providing evidence, mansio brings up other allegations!!

5) At the moment, the only "proofs" I have that the Seven Sleepers story is man-made, is that there is no proofs that the Seven Sleepers have existed (unless you are going to give me some), and the fact that most sites call it a legend.
Argument from ignorance.. We refute this with the simple statement, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"! Mansio now wants us to prove that the story of the sleepers is NOT man-made!!

Wrong move! Mansio brought the allegation so HE should bring the evidence.

If mansio attempts to respond in any thread other than this one, we will challenge him to return here and continue this discussion until he recants his baseless assertion and admit that he has made claims against Islam without any evidence - something an honest person would not do.
Reply

mansio
01-19-2006, 07:41 PM
Ansar

Show me YOUR proofs of the existence of the Seven Sleepers. I think that would be the final argument against my position.
Do you also have proofs of Adam and Eve's existence btw ?
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-19-2006, 07:49 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
Show me YOUR proofs of the existence of the Seven Sleepers.
Wrong! YOU made the allegation so the burden of proof is upon you. Are you admitting that you called the story of the sleepers 'a man-made tale', without any evidence to support your claim??

If you do have evidence then show it to me. You're going to learn now that you shouldn't raise these allegations if you don't have evidence to support them!

The ball's in your court mansio. You made the claim and this time we won't let you weasel out. You will either provide evidence to support your claim or recant your original allegation as a baseless assertion.

The burden of proof is on you to prove what you said. If I had claimed that the story of the sleepers is confirmed from historical evidence, then the burden of proof would be on me. But I never said that. You claimed that the story was man-made, so either support your claim, or admit your mistake.

Do you also have proofs of Adam and Eve's existence btw ?
Redherring!
Reply

mansio
01-20-2006, 09:43 AM
Let us assume the Seven Sleepers have existed and let us have a look at the theological implications for Islam in such a case.

The Seven Sleepers were Christians and were protected by God from the persecutions of the Roman emperor Decius.
What does that story prove if it is true ? That the Christian God protected people who believed in the Trinity. It is a proof that Christianity is true.

Another theological problem: Catholics (and Orthodox) are well known for their cult of the saints. You cannot imagine the extension of that phenomenon if you do not live in Catholic countries. In some places nearly every village has its saint. The lives of those saints are often as incredible as the Seven Sleepers story.
That cult is denounced by the Quran in 9:31 "They have taken their scholars and their monks as lords instead of/besides God...". As the Seven Sleepers were revered as saints (and still are in Orthodoxy) accepting that story goes against the Quran.

You are asking for proofs that the Seven Sleepers have not existed. Here is one : the Catholic Church reformed its liturgy in 1969. It suppressed the cult of the Seven Sleepers and some other saints as mythical.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-20-2006, 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
The Seven Sleepers were [trinitarian] Christians
Prove it.
and were protected by God from the persecutions of the Roman emperor Decius.
Prove it was Decius.

All you have done is just assume that the Christian account of this story is correct and not the Qur'anic account. But there is no basis for this assumption. We find that you consistently advance ideas and opinions as though they are established fact, and this is why you close yourself off from learning because you do not engage in scientific discussion - that is discussion that is based on the analysis of EVIDENCE.

What does that story prove if it is true ? That the Christian God protected people who believed in the Trinity.
Where in the Qur'an does it say that these people believed in a trinity? It doesn't. So there is no basis for such a claim.

Why do you assume that the Christian description of this story is correct and the Qur'anic description is incorrect? You have to PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR ALLEGATION!

Another theological problem: Catholics (and Orthodox) are well known for their cult of the saints. You cannot imagine the extension of that phenomenon if you do not live in Catholic countries. In some places nearly every village has its saint. The lives of those saints are often as incredible as the Seven Sleepers story.
That cult is denounced by the Quran in 9:31 "They have taken their scholars and their monks as lords instead of/besides God...". As the Seven Sleepers were revered as saints (and still are in Orthodoxy) accepting that story goes against the Quran.
This doesn't prove anything! That's like saying the Muslim belief in Jesus as a Prophet goes against the Qur'an because Christians view him to be God!!

You are asking for proofs that the Seven Sleepers have not existed. Here is one : the Catholic Church reformed its liturgy in 1969. It suppressed the cult of the Seven Sleepers and some other saints as mythical.
This isn't proof that they didn't exist! The Catholic church suppressed anyone who opposed trinity- is this proof that God must be a trinity?!?!

Summary:
On one hand we have a christian source (C) and Qur'anic source (Q) describing the story of the sleepers.

Mansio's argument can be paraphrased as follows:
Even if we accept the story to be true, (C) establishes that the sleepers were trinitarians, contrary to (Q).

Flaw in argument:
Since mansio has not provided any evidence that the account given in (C) is correct to the exclusion of (Q), his entire argument collapses. Just because (C) says that the sleepers were trinitarian does not make it correct. Mansio needs to bring HISTORICAL EVIDENCE that the story DESCRIBED IN THE QUR'AN is a man-made myth.

Conclusion
Instead of providing evidence for his baseless allegation, mansio seeks to save face by throwing out more unsubstantiated claims and logical fallacies. But once again, his fallacious method of reasoning has been exposed. Someone who refuses to provide evidence for their conclusions and allegations against others has no place in intellectual dialogue.
Reply

mansio
01-20-2006, 09:16 PM
Ansar

The Seven Sleepers are from a CHRISTIAN legend from the 5th century and the Quran is from the first half of the 7th century.

That legend is not the only one that has been incorporated in the Quran from Rabbinical and Christian folklore.

Let us suppose that the Quran has drawn from a unknown non-Christian source. You like so much to ask for proofs, so what and where is that source ?
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-20-2006, 09:24 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
The Seven Sleepers are from a CHRISTIAN legend from the 5th century and the Quran is from the first half of the 7th century.
So because the christian source predates the Qur'an it means that the Christian source is automatically correct?!

That legend is not the only one that has been incorporated in the Quran from Rabbinical and Christian folklore.
Instead of providing evidence for your previous allegation, you now bring a NEW ONE!

First you have to bring evidence for your claim that the Qur'anic account of the sleepers is man-made. If you can provide no evidence then you must admit such or else this will continue and your fallacies will continue to be exposed.

Let us suppose that the Quran has drawn from a unknown non-Christian source. You like so much to ask for proofs, so what and where is that source ?
God.

As I pointed out before, you are bringing the allegation that the story is man-made so you must support your allegation with proof. If you cannot do so, then you must be honest and admit that you made a baseless claim.
Reply

mansio
01-20-2006, 10:03 PM
Ansar

You do not prove your allegation that the Seven Sleepers legend is from God.

I gave you the following proofs:

1) Historians know it is a legend. See all the links that say it.

2) The Catholic Church knew that it was legendary and has suppressed the worship of the Seven Sleepers in 1969.

3) When two similar stories appear in books in the Middle-East and one book has been written long after the other, every sensible person will assume that the second has copied from the first, keeping in mind that the second book is a compilation of various Middle-Eastern elements.
One must also not forget that the Seven Sleepers legend, as the Alexander the Great legends, were widely popular.
Reply

czgibson
01-20-2006, 11:36 PM
Greetings,

Sorry to interrupt like this, but, Ansar, I don't think you're being entirely fair here.

Originally Posted by Ansar Al-Adl
So because the christian source predates the Qur'an it means that the Christian source is automatically correct?!
As I understand the discussion so far, mansio is not arguing that the story of the Seven Sleepers is actually true, as the Christian sources say.

Earlier on you said:

Prove it was Decius
All the internet sources I've seen say the persecution happened under Decius, as does Yusuf-Ali in his commentary on the Qur'an and Gibbon in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. However, since the story is unlikely to be true anyway, and was probably placed in that historical time frame because vehement Christian persecutions took place then, I'm not sure what you mean when you ask for proof.

Originally Posted by mansio
I gave you the following proofs:

1) Historians know it is a legend. See all the links that say it.
True.

2) The Catholic Church knew that it was legendary and has suppressed the worship of the Seven Sleepers in 1969.
True.

3) When two similar stories appear in books in the Middle-East and one book has been written long after the other, every sensible person will assume that the second has copied from the first, keeping in mind that the second book is a compilation of various Middle-Eastern elements.
Absolutely. The Qur'an's version seems to be derived from earlier Christian sources, either directly or indirectly. I would suggest that the same is true of the Virgin Birth and several other stories found in both Christian and Islamic lore.

Peace
Reply

mansio
01-21-2006, 08:50 AM
Czgibson

Thanks a lot for your help. I am 58 and I have been reading and studying all my life and travelled too. It is the first time that I see such simplistic ways of thinking on a forum.
Is that rigid type of reasoning from pre-established patterns the main reason for the downfall of the magnificent Islamic civilization of old ?
We had in Europe a society based on such rigid mental patterns called Communism. It floundered as everything which stifles creativity.
Reply

Abu Zakariya
01-21-2006, 11:42 AM
I am 58 and I have been reading and studying all my life and travelled too. It is the first time that I see such simplistic ways of thinking on a forum.
Is that rigid type of reasoning from pre-established patterns the main reason for the downfall of the magnificent Islamic civilization of old ?
Oh yeah, mansio.
Our demand for proof is really something awful.
We should accept everything everyone claims at this forum.
Thanks for the wake up-call.
Reply

Chuck
01-21-2006, 12:35 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
The Qur'an's version seems to be derived from earlier Christian sources, either directly or indirectly. I would suggest that the same is true of the Virgin Birth and several other stories found in both Christian and Islamic lore.
If thats is your personal opinion then there is no issue, otherwise, if you are presenting this as a fact then it is fallacies of non-sequitur (specifically affirming the consequent), post hoc ergo propter hoc, and false dilemma, unless you have an irrefutable evidence to support your argument.

Originally Posted by mansio
Thanks a lot for your help. I am 58 and I have been reading and studying all my life and travelled too. It is the first time that I see such simplistic ways of thinking on a forum.
Is that rigid type of reasoning from pre-established patterns the main reason for the downfall of the magnificent Islamic civilization of old ?
We had in Europe a society based on such rigid mental patterns called Communism. It floundered as everything which stifles creativity.
You have many logical fallacies in the above post of yours, but I'll point out the main one: argumentum ad hominem
Reply

Chuck
01-21-2006, 01:07 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
Let us suppose that the Quran has drawn from a unknown non-Christian source. You like so much to ask for proofs, so what and where is that source ?
We are not saying that you should believe this story, because hypothesis like existence of God or existence of Adam and Eve can not be falsified by science, in other words, they can't be proved or disproved at present. However, when you make claims like that the story is false because it doesn't have clear-cut proof or copied from bible because similar story exits in Bible then that's wrong because that falls into the fallacies of post hoc ergo propter hoc, argumentum ad ignorantiam, and false dilemma.
Reply

mansio
01-21-2006, 02:54 PM
Abu Zakariya

I am also asking for proofs ! Are you ready to provide them for me or would it be to awful for you ?
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-21-2006, 03:12 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
You do not prove your allegation that the Seven Sleepers legend is from God.
That is not an allegation. It is a belief. An allegation is a negative claim against someone else. Perhaps you could tell me who I am attacking with my belief?

Never have I taken my personal beliefs as proof against others. If you want to belief that the story of the sleepers is man-made, then go ahead, but if you are going to advance these allegations here you have to support them with evidence.

Read what Chuck wrote here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/161897-post30.html

1) Historians know it is a legend.
Which historians? On what basis? On what evidence?

Mansio won't tell us.

2) The Catholic Church knew that it was legendary and has suppressed the worship of the Seven Sleepers in 1969.
I already answered this. The Catholic church suppressed anti-trini9tarians- does that means that the trinity is true?

3) When two similar stories appear in books in the Middle-East and one book has been written long after the other, every sensible person will assume that the second has copied from the first
'Every sensible person'? I think sensible people are those that draw their conclusions upon evidence, not conjecture.

Callum,
There's not much for me to say in response to your post except that you've simply affirmed mansio's fallacious arguments without providing evidence. I am amazed that you would accuse me of being unfair. Perhaps it would be more fair if I allowed mansio to continue in his compaign of attacking Islam without providing evidence to support his allegations?

A forum is a place for discussion. If I go on a Christian forum and start chanting phrases like "Christ isn't God" "the Bible is a compilation of pagan myths" "the biblical prophets are mythical" - is any of that going to bring about any benefit or productive discussion? Of course not, that is simply abusing their forum. If I want to discuss something I have to at least provide some evidence to support my claims.

I have no problem if you and mansio wish to hold these opinions. But when you advance these opinions as fact without substantiating your claims, you are abusing the forum and that will not be tolerated.

Regards
Reply

*Hana*
01-21-2006, 04:18 PM
Salam Alaikum, peace:

I think anyone that has taken the time to look around the forum can see how Mansio chooses to "dialogue". He makes a statement and that's it. He provides nothing more except to say he's educated, reads a lot, has travelled and lives in France. Well, I'm educated, I read a lot, have travelled and live in Canada. And the point would be??? Sorry, but that's not proof of anything.

To ask for and provide proof of statements is only fair and Mansio needs to learn to think or research before he makes accusations and false statements about Islam.

As an example, he made a statement similar to this: Most historians agree the crucifixion took place. That was it....nothing more to show who these historians are. So I responded something like this: Most historians agree the crucifixion did NOT take place.

Both are just statements. One is no more valuable than the other, so now what? The difference is, Mansio will then ask us to prove it whereas he doesn't feel he needs to do that.

You don't come to an Islamic Forum, make accusations with no basis in fact and then expect the Muslims to provide the proof. If you have something to say, say it with the ability and knowledge to back it up or remain silent. It's just that simple.

So before anyone accuses Brother Ansar Al-'Adl of being unfair please make sure you understand the process of debating/discussing with logic and reason. It is not unfair to request proof, but it is definitely unfair to make statements or accusations without them and expect everyone else to just accept them as fact. Brother Ansar Al-'Adl has gone to great lengths to give Mansio the opportunity to respond and provide proofs and he is still waiting. That alone should tell you that he is being more than fair in his efforts to continue dialogue.

Wa'alaikum salam, Peace
Hana
Reply

czgibson
01-21-2006, 04:31 PM
Greetings Chuck,
Originally Posted by Chuck
If thats is your personal opinion then there is no issue, otherwise, if you are presenting this as a fact then it is fallacies of non-sequitur (specifically affirming the consequent), post hoc ergo propter hoc, and false dilemma, unless you have an irrefutable evidence to support your argument.
Yes, this is my opinion, but I don't think I've made the fallacies you accuse me of. Why is it a non-sequitur to say that if the same story appears in two places separated in time by several centuries that the latter appearance is probably derived, either directly or indirectly, from the first? That is a common principle of textual scholarship. If you deny this, I suppose you'd say that Shakespeare actually created the plots of most of his plays himself, rather than deriving them from older works of history and literature, as we know he did.

Also, with regard to the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, that applies to causation, and is inapplicable in cases of textual similarity, unless you hold that the similarity between the Qur'an's version of the story and older versions is entirely coincidental.

You have many logical fallacies in the above post of yours, but I'll point out the main one: argumentum ad hominem
I can't see an ad hominem argument in mansio's post - can you point it out to me?

Hello Ansar,
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-Adl
There's not much for me to say in response to your post except that you've simply affirmed mansio's fallacious arguments without providing evidence. I am amazed that you would accuse me of being unfair. Perhaps it would be more fair if I allowed mansio to continue in his compaign of attacking Islam without providing evidence to support his allegations?
Forgive me, but I think mansio has provided evidence. He has referred you to encyclopedias which report the story being a legend or myth; I have referred you to Yusuf-Ali and Gibbon, who do the same. Does all of this not count as evidence for some reason?

Here is a link to Gibbon's account of the story, from chapter 33 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (the last paragraph on the page is the one to look at):

http://www.ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/volume1/chap33.htm

I have no problem if you and mansio wish to hold these opinions. But when you advance these opinions as fact without substantiating your claims, you are abusing the forum and that will not be tolerated.
I don't want to cause trouble, and I'd certainly like to stay on the forum; let me make that clear.

I am not suggesting that the opinion mansio and I hold on the story of the Seven Sleepers is fact, simply that we have good reasons for having this opinion. I have tried to substantiate this claim by reference to historians and websites, as has mansio, but you do not see these references as evidence. If you explain why they do not count as evidence, then it might be possible to make progress.

Peace
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-21-2006, 04:43 PM
Forgive me, but I think mansio has provided evidence. He has referred you to encyclopedias which report the story being a legend or myth;
He has done no such thing. Instead he has told me to "look it up" in various encyclopedias but has yet to bring me specific historical evidence which suggests that the story is man-made.

Even if he does bring a quote of from some historians that say that the story is man-made it still would not substantiate his claim. These historians begin with the assumption that Islam is not true and the Qur'an is not a divine revelation, and on that basis they explain the presence of the Qur'anic stories by suggesting that they were taken from previous works. But this is all constructed upon the assumption that Islam is false, because if it were true then these stories would be explained by process of divine revelation.

The problem with mansio's argument is that he is trying to use this claim that the story is man-made as proof that Islam is false, even though it is constructed upon that assumption. Consequently, this is an example of circular reasoning.

From an Islamic perspective, the story was revealed by God and just posting opinions of some historians does not constitute sufficient evidence to negate that view. Mansio must bring evidence which demonstrates that the story given in the Qur'an COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE FROM GOD. If he cannot do so, then his allegation fails.

He has referred you to encyclopedias which report the story being a legend or myth; I have referred you to Yusuf-Ali and Gibbon, who do the same.
Yusuf Ali says the story is a myth?! I think you are not paying attention here. Yusuf Ali and Gibbon speculate that the emperor in the story may have been Decius - that is all. What you have here is the opinion of two human beings - not nearly enough to prove that the story could not possibly have been from God.

Does all of this not count as evidence for some reason?
How could it possibly be considered evidence that the story is man-made?
Reply

czgibson
01-22-2006, 12:28 AM
Hi Ansar,

I must admit I'm struggling to understand your position, but I suppose that's to be expected in a discussion of this nature. It's kind of you to put up with this sort of questioning of your beliefs, as I know that you take them very seriously. I'm not trying to prove Islam to be false - I'm sure that's not possible - I'm just finding it difficult (and interesting) to try and understand something that would be relatively uncontroversial among Western scholars, yet which seems to have ignited such a heated discussion here.

Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
He has done no such thing. Instead he has told me to "look it up" in various encyclopedias but has yet to bring me specific historical evidence which suggests that the story is man-made.
So are these encyclopedias not to be trusted?

Even if he does bring a quote of from some historians that say that the story is man-made it still would not substantiate his claim. These historians begin with the assumption that Islam is not true and the Qur'an is not a divine revelation, and on that basis they explain the presence of the Qur'anic stories by suggesting that they were taken from previous works. But this is all constructed upon the assumption that Islam is false, because if it were true then these stories would be explained by process of divine revelation.
So what you're saying, basically, is that any historians who oppose the view that the story comes from god are biased and shouldn't be trusted?

From an Islamic perspective, the story was revealed by God and just posting opinions of some historians does not constitute sufficient evidence to negate that view. Mansio must bring evidence which demonstrates that the story given in the Qur'an COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE FROM GOD. If he cannot do so, then his allegation fails.
Not necessarily. It's my view that it is far more likely that the story as it appears in the Qur'an was taken from earlier sources. That's different from saying it "could not possibly be from god". Of course, you know that's what I believe anyway, since I don't believe in god, but let's put that to one side for a moment. Your view seems to be that any similarity between the Qur'anic story and earlier sources, such as Gregory of Tours, is entirely coincidental. For the record, is that what you're saying?

Yusuf Ali says the story is a myth?! I think you are not paying attention here. Yusuf Ali and Gibbon speculate that the emperor in the story may have been Decius - that is all. What you have here is the opinion of two human beings - not nearly enough to prove that the story could not possibly have been from God.
Yusuf-Ali calls it a "floating Christian story". I misunderstood that as implying that he thought it was a myth - my mistake, sorry. Gibbon refers to it as a "fable", which surely implies that he thought it was a myth. Gibbon also says that the story was placed by many tellers as beginning in the reign of Decius. Of course, this detail is irrelevant, since Gibbon, a man of the Enlightenment, did not believe in miracles such as the one in the story.

Ansar, I think it would help if you made your position clearer.

1. Do you believe that the story is actually true? Of course, since it is in the Qur'an I would assume you do; could you clarify how long you believe the sleepers to have slept?

2. How do you explain the similarity between the Qur'anic story and previous versions? Are you suggesting it is impossible that it could have been transmitted to the Prophet (pbuh) by human agency?

Peace
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-22-2006, 01:52 AM
Originally Posted by czgibson
I must admit I'm struggling to understand your position, but I suppose that's to be expected in a discussion of this nature. It's kind of you to put up with this sort of questioning of your beliefs, as I know that you take them very seriously. I'm not trying to prove Islam to be false - I'm sure that's not possible - I'm just finding it difficult (and interesting) to try and understand something that would be relatively uncontroversial among Western scholars, yet which seems to have ignited such a heated discussion here.
To be honest, I'm amazed that you would defend mansio here and even claim that he had provided evidence despite the fact that he initiated his posts on this topic as follows:

Originally Posted by mansio
If you have proofs that Christianity is more or less man made then OK.

I don't understand why that critic comes from Muslims who believe in the Quran which contains a number of man-made stories.
Originally Posted by mansio
The legend of the Seven Sleepers from Christian folklore for example.
These kind of comments are completely unproductive. Here mansio has advanced his personal beliefs as though they are universal facts, yet none of these claims can be proven. If I went to a Christian forum and started claiming that the Bible was a collection of pagan myths it would serve no purpose but to provoke, unless I had concrete evidence which seriously put the divine authorship of the Bible into question.

So are these encyclopedias not to be trusted?

So what you're saying, basically, is that any historians who oppose the view that the story comes from god are biased and shouldn't be trusted?
I never said that the encyclopedia or historians should not be trusted, my point was very plain and simple. Mansio can quote a list of non-muslim historians who believe the Qur'an to contain man-made stories. I can quote just as many muslim historians who would disagree. What does this prove? Nothing. I have never attempted to validate this story on the basis of historical evidence alone. The problem with mansio's claim is that there is no way for him to prove it. Do you honestly believe that a couple of non-muslim historian's opinion on this story constitutes complete proof that the story could not have been from God?

If you don't, then perhaps you can see the problem when mansio continues to post these kind of statements on the forum.

Not necessarily. It's my view that it is far more likely that the story as it appears in the Qur'an was taken from earlier sources.
1. Mansio was not speaking about a balance of probability here. That is why your attempt to defend him is fallacious. He was advancing this as evidence that the Qur'an is not the word of God and contains man-made sotries, which is of course circular reasoning as I pointed out.
2. If there is a God, then the probabilites that you speak about vanish completely because there is no way to asses the chance of God revealing a particular story. Therefore, to claim that the story of the sleepers is man-made is built on the assumption that the Qur'an is not the word of God. Thus, if one is to have a productive debate they need to discuss whether God exists and whether the Qur'an is tghe word of God. To simply raise these kind of unsubstantiated allegations is a waste of time.

That's different from saying it "could not possibly be from god". Of course, you know that's what I believe anyway, since I don't believe in god, but let's put that to one side for a moment.
I would indeed find it absurd if an atheist began their debate that the Qur'an is not the word of God by stating that stories such as that of the sleepers are man-made, because that is circular reasoning.

Your view seems to be that any similarity between the Qur'anic story and earlier sources, such as Gregory of Tours, is entirely coincidental. For the record, is that what you're saying?
No. If the story actually happened then it is only logical that it would be spoken about in various historic communities and folklore. This was pointed out by Br. Abu Zakariyya in his second post in this thread.

Yusuf-Ali calls it a "floating Christian story". I misunderstood that as implying that he thought it was a myth - my mistake, sorry. Gibbon refers to it as a "fable", which surely implies that he thought it was a myth. Gibbon also says that the story was placed by many tellers as beginning in the reign of Decius. Of course, this detail is irrelevant, since Gibbon, a man of the Enlightenment, did not believe in miracles such as the one in the story.
Surely you would know that the opinion of a handful of human beings in such a matter does not constitute evidence, either of its veracity or falsity.

1. Do you believe that the story is actually true? Of course, since it is in the Qur'an I would assume you do; could you clarify how long you believe the sleepers to have slept?
18:25. And they stayed in their Cave three hundred (solar) years, and add nine (for lunar years).

Of course this is a miracle and of course I don't expect you to believe it. But there is a difference between you not believing it and between telling Muslims that the Qur'an can't be true because it contains this story which must be man-made.

2. How do you explain the similarity between the Qur'anic story and previous versions? Are you suggesting it is impossible that it could have been transmitted to the Prophet (pbuh) by human agency?
No, on the contrary the Qur'an mentions this story in response to what was being said about it.
18:22. (Some) say they were three, the dog being the fourth among them; (others) say they were five, the dog being the sixth, guessing at the unseen; (yet others) say they were seven, the dog being the eighth. Say (O Muhammad ): "My Lord knows best their number; none knows them but a few." So debate not (about their number, etc.) except with the clear proof (which We have revealed to you). And consult not any of them (people of the Scripture, Jews and Christians) about (the affair of) the people of the Cave.

I don't believe in the story simply on the basis of historical evidence; I believe in it because I have first established the Qur'an to be the word of God on the basis of logic and evidence, and consequently I believe in what the Qur'an says.

Regards
Reply

mansio
01-22-2006, 08:14 AM
Ansar

This whole discussion has become senseless because you have started to ask for proofs. How can you ask for proofs if yourself you cannot give proofs of what you say.
I gave you opinions which, once and for all, are not "mine" but are opinions shared by millions of people.
You are allowed not to accept those opinions but you are not allowed to call them lies. What would you think if called you a liar because you say the Quran is true ?
Do you say also that the Book of Mormon is true ? No you do not say that, and one could call you a liar for that and ask you for proofs.
What I am using are arguments from common sense. Common sense says for example that when an opinion is shared by a majority of scientists and scholars from different countries it is most probably true.
I never asked for proofs that the earth rotates around the sun or that Cinderella is a fairy tale. I just accepted it as true.
Reply

czgibson
01-22-2006, 02:18 PM
Greetings Ansar,

Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
These kind of comments are completely unproductive. Here mansio has advanced his personal beliefs as though they are universal facts, yet none of these claims can be proven.
Has he really claimed them to be universal facts? I certainly wouldn't claim that.

If I went to a Christian forum and started claiming that the Bible was a collection of pagan myths it would serve no purpose but to provoke, unless I had concrete evidence which seriously put the divine authorship of the Bible into question.
But god didn't write the Bible, did he? It was written by different people over many years. (If god did write the Bible, he frequently contradicts himself, which puts a question mark over his omniscience.)

I never said that the encyclopedia or historians should not be trusted, my point was very plain and simple.
What you say below pretty much amounts to saying that.

I have never attempted to validate this story on the basis of historical evidence alone.
Right, you have the evidence of the Qur'an, which cannot be questioned.

The problem with mansio's claim is that there is no way for him to prove it.
True, just as there is no way for you to prove your belief.

Do you honestly believe that a couple of non-muslim historian's opinion on this story constitutes complete proof that the story could not have been from God?
Of course not. I would not claim that my belief on this matter can be proven, simply that it is far more likely that the story is a myth in the first place, and that the Qur'anic story derives from earlier sources.

1. Mansio was not speaking about a balance of probability here. That is why your attempt to defend him is fallacious. He was advancing this as evidence that the Qur'an is not the word of God and contains man-made sotries, which is of course circular reasoning as I pointed out.
OK, but saying there is evidence to support a particular point of view is not the same as saying that it has been proven. For example, there is evidence to suggest that playing violent computer games can lead someone to become a violent person; there is also evidence that the opposite is true - it has not been proven.

2. If there is a God, then the probabilites that you speak about vanish completely because there is no way to asses the chance of God revealing a particular story. Therefore, to claim that the story of the sleepers is man-made is built on the assumption that the Qur'an is not the word of God. Thus, if one is to have a productive debate they need to discuss whether God exists and whether the Qur'an is tghe word of God. To simply raise these kind of unsubstantiated allegations is a waste of time.
Good point. The existence or non-existence of god cannot be proven, just as the veracity of this story or where it came from cannot be proven.

No. If the story actually happened then it is only logical that it would be spoken about in various historic communities and folklore. This was pointed out by Br. Abu Zakariyya in his second post in this thread.
The same would be true if it did not happen.

Surely you would know that the opinion of a handful of human beings in such a matter does not constitute evidence, either of its veracity or falsity.
Since I don't have any evidence from non-humans, it's the only evidence I can rely on.

18:25. And they stayed in their Cave three hundred (solar) years, and add nine (for lunar years).

Of course this is a miracle and of course I don't expect you to believe it. But there is a difference between you not believing it and between telling Muslims that the Qur'an can't be true because it contains this story which must be man-made.
Right, because I don't believe that people can sleep for 309 years and then wake up.

No, on the contrary the Qur'an mentions this story in response to what was being said about it.
18:22. (Some) say they were three, the dog being the fourth among them; (others) say they were five, the dog being the sixth, guessing at the unseen; (yet others) say they were seven, the dog being the eighth. Say (O Muhammad ): "My Lord knows best their number; none knows them but a few." So debate not (about their number, etc.) except with the clear proof (which We have revealed to you). And consult not any of them (people of the Scripture, Jews and Christians) about (the affair of) the people of the Cave.
This really sounds like a human talking, not an omniscient being. Here, it's as if god has looked at various human sources of the story and is unable to give a definitive answer on how many sleepers there were. Why should this be? And what is the "clear proof" referred to here?

I don't believe in the story simply on the basis of historical evidence; I believe in it because I have first established the Qur'an to be the word of God on the basis of logic and evidence, and consequently I believe in what the Qur'an says.
OK, so each side in this discussion relies on evidence which the other side sees as inadmissible, or as proving nothing. The reasoning is circular on both sides, and our beliefs depend, as you rightly say, on one's view of the existence and workings of god.

Peace
Reply

mansio
01-22-2006, 02:54 PM
So let's talk about something else.
Reply

azim
01-22-2006, 03:16 PM
If Mansio believes the story of the Seven Sleepers/People of the Cave is false, that's no problem.

The problem is if Mansio says the story of the Seven Sleepers if false, and that's why the Quran is false, then he needs proof. If he doesn't provide proof, these statements should not be made.

The accusation that we should bring proof of the story of the Seven Sleepers/People of the Cave is true is not valid, because no one on this forum has said: -

The story of the Seven Sleepers is true, and so the Quran is true.

Ansar clearly shown from this thread that Mansio can't provide proof.

Do you agree with what I have said?

If so, do you (Mansio) agree, that if statements are made in attempt to disprove something, then the validty of the statements should be proven?
Reply

*Hana*
01-22-2006, 03:56 PM
Salam Alaikum:

I couldn't agree with you more brother Azim! What you said is exactly right and people need to learn that personal opinion is one thing but facts to back what you say are totally different.

I didn't revert because someone said, "The Qur'an is true and Muhammed is the messenger of Allah". Before reverting that was a blank statement to me....I could have gone and found many people who had a different opinion. But, when you make that exact statement and provide the proofs....it becomes a whole different ball game.

Wa'alaikum salam,
Hana
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-22-2006, 04:23 PM
Originally Posted by mansio
This whole discussion has become senseless because you have started to ask for proofs. How can you ask for proofs if yourself you cannot give proofs of what you say.
It is senseless to ask for proofs?!
I never said that the story of the sleepers is a historical fact that you should accept. But you claimed that the story was man-made, which is a completely useless thing to say if it is just your personal belief and you cannot substantiate it. If you are not interested in factual discussion, then what is your point? I can say that it was revealed by God, you can say it was man-made, that isn't going to lead the discussion anywhere.

I gave you opinions which, once and for all, are not "mine" but are opinions shared by millions of people.
There are millions of people who believe that God doesn't exist - does that prove anything?

I can give you the opinion of BILLIONS of people, historians includes who believe that the story was revealed by God, but of course you want accept them because they're Muslim.

You are allowed not to accept those opinions but you are not allowed to call them lies.
If you advance your personal opinions as fact on this forum, I will consider them allegations and if they are unsubstantiated I will call them lies.

Do you say also that the Book of Mormon is true ? No you do not say that, and one could call you a liar for that and ask you for proofs.
If I went to a Mormon forum and simpy stated that the Book of Mormon is false and contains myths, they would call me a liar and they would have full right to do so, because my comments would have absolutely no purpose but to provoke.

What I am using are arguments from common sense.
Common sense?! It is common sense that the story is man-made?!

Common sense says for example that when an opinion is shared by a majority of scientists and scholars from different countries it is most probably true.
For every historian you bring me who thinks the story was false I can bring you ten historians who think the story was true.

So let's talk about something else.
Nice try, but you're not going to escape that easily. All you have ever done on this forum is post these unsubstantiated claims as though they are facts. If you're not interested in factual discussion, there's no need to talk with you at all.

Callum,
Has he really claimed them to be universal facts? I certainly wouldn't claim that.
it seems you have not read his posts. What else can we say about someone who cites this story as proof that Islam is false?

But god didn't write the Bible, did he?
Well if I wanted to prove that I would have to bring evidence. There's no point in simply stating that "the Bible is not the word of God" and then not backing up the statement. It is pointless.

I hope you see the point now.
It was written by different people over many years. (If god did write the Bible, he frequently contradicts himself, which puts a question mark over his omniscience.)
Christians would disagree with your claim that the Bible has contradictions and they would challenge you to provide examples.

Right, you have the evidence of the Qur'an, which cannot be questioned.
Of course it can be questioned. I've challenged people to bring evidence that the Qur'an is not the word of God, but the challenge remains unanswered.

The problem with mansio's claim is that there is no way for him to prove it.
True, just as there is no way for you to prove your belief.
So if you admit that mansio cannot prove that statement, please tell me, what is the point of him posting such statements all over the discussion forum? Is it going to lead to any factual discussion?

Do you honestly believe that a couple of non-muslim historian's opinion on this story constitutes complete proof that the story could not have been from God?
Of course not.
Good. So now do you see how saying "the Qur'an contains man-made stories" will serve no purpose but to provoke?

I would not claim that my belief on this matter can be proven, simply that it is far more likely that the story is a myth in the first place, and that the Qur'anic story derives from earlier sources.
The assumption here is that there is no God - an assumption which has yet to be validated. Therefore, it is impossible to speak about the probabilites not knowing if God exists or not.

Good point. The existence or non-existence of god cannot be proven, just as the veracity of this story or where it came from cannot be proven.
Right. So what do you think of a non-muslim who comes on this forum and only posts statements like "Allah does not exist" "Muhammad was a false prophet and a liar"? Don't you think we have the right for him to either provide evidence to support his allegations or to leave and keep his personal opinions to himself?

Surely you would know that the opinion of a handful of human beings in such a matter does not constitute evidence, either of its veracity or falsity.
Since I don't have any evidence from non-humans, it's the only evidence I can rely on.
The keyword in my sentence was 'opinion'.

This really sounds like a human talking, not an omniscient being.
Your opinion.
Here, it's as if god has looked at various human sources of the story and is unable to give a definitive answer on how many sleepers there were. Why should this be?
Of course God could have mentioned their number but this verse sets a very important principle for Muslims. Sometimes we argue over insignificant details and forget the main point. God was teaching us to simply say "Allah knows best" when asked about such things and to focus on the lesson behind the story. The same is true in arguing if it was Ishmael or Isaac who Abraham was going to sacrifice, or what kind of tree it was that Adam and Eve ate from.
And what is the "clear proof" referred to here?
Divine revelation.

OK, so each side in this discussion relies on evidence which the other side sees as inadmissible, or as proving nothing. The reasoning is circular on both sides, and our beliefs depend, as you rightly say, on one's view of the existence and workings of god.
My reasoning would be circular if I said that the Qur'an is true because it contains divinely revealed stories, such as the sleepers of the cave. But I never said that.

Mansio however said, that the Qur'an is false because it contains man-made stories, such as the sleepers of the cave.

Now that is circular reasoning and a completely pointless thing to say.

Regards
Reply

mansio
01-22-2006, 08:30 PM
Ansar

I said this discussion is senseless because I can return to you every argument you use.
What are your proofs that the story is from God ?
The people I take my opinions from do not give their opinions only on the Seven Sleepers story but on all facets of life from astronomy and medecine down to history.
You can find a part of that knowledge in schoolbooks and university lectures. I must say that I have never been deceived by it, I always found it to be true.
I am sorry that I cannot have the same trust in the Quran with its incredible stories of birds chasing away an invading army by throwing stones, of an army made up of genies, men and ants, or stars used as missiles to chase devils away.
Reply

tahir
01-22-2006, 09:01 PM
hey mansio, could you please tell me which facts in the Quran that science disagrees with?
Reply

mansio
01-22-2006, 09:56 PM
Tahir

For example the three stories I mention in my previous post(#44).
Reply

tahir
01-22-2006, 10:18 PM
whereabouts in the Quran does it say there is an army made of genies? or stars used as missiles? chapter and verse please
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-23-2006, 02:17 AM
Originally Posted by mansio
I said this discussion is senseless because I can return to you every argument you use.
What are your proofs that the story is from God ?
I already responded to this:
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
My reasoning would be circular if I said that the Qur'an is true because it contains divinely revealed stories, such as the sleepers of the cave. But I never said that.

Mansio however said, that the Qur'an is false because it contains man-made stories, such as the sleepers of the cave.

Now that is circular reasoning and a completely pointless thing to say.
So again, you're free to believe what you want but don't try to advance your beliefs as though they are proofs againsty our religion, that's nonsensical.

The people I take my opinions from do not give their opinions only on the Seven Sleepers story but on all facets of life from astronomy and medecine down to history.
Good for them. I can give you quotes from Muslim historians, doctors, astronomers, etc. as well. What does that prove? Nothing.

I am sorry that I cannot have the same trust in the Quran with its incredible stories of birds chasing away an invading army by throwing stones, of an army made up of genies, men and ants, or stars used as missiles to chase devils away.
This is just another example of how useless your posts are. I refuted this comment of yours, almost a year ago, in March 2005, and here you are again repeating the same comments. You have no place in a factual discussion because all you do is post personal ideas and speculation. Can you point out for me any factual error? No, you cannot.

And once again you're trying to deviate the topic. Now that we've exposed your shallow claims on the sleepers you are eagerly seeking to hide behind some more baseless assertions. You can either bring concrete facts or you can leave the discussions.

But first you need to admit that your claim about the sleepers was a baseless assertion.
Reply

mansio
01-23-2006, 09:00 AM
What must be trusted : Western science and scholarship or the Quran ?

The Quran is not a history or science book. It is of book of religion. It is not important if the stories are man-made. What is important is the religious message they give.
Reply

mansio
01-23-2006, 09:12 AM
Tahir

Do I have to teach you where you find those verses ? OK here they are : 27:17, 67:5, 105:1.
Reply

tahir
01-23-2006, 09:37 AM
"And they were gathered together unto Solomon his armies of the jinn and humankind, and of the birds, and they were set in battle order" 27:17

Not genies, it was jinn and can science disprove this happened?

"And verily We have beatified the world's heaven with lamps, and We have made them missiles for the devils, and for them we have prepared the doom of flame" 67:5

Can science disprove that stars are missiles for the devils?

"Hast thou not seen how thy lord dealt with the owners of the Elephant?" 105:1

Can science disprove this happened?
Reply

mansio
01-23-2006, 12:59 PM
Tahir

Science does not bother to disprove tales, it has more important matters to deal with. Common sense is enough for that.
(Genie is one translation of jinn in English)
Reply

tahir
01-23-2006, 01:01 PM
Mansio what you really mean is that science can not disprove any of it, not that it does not want to
Reply

mansio
01-23-2006, 01:13 PM
Tahir

Don't be ridiculous. The Quran is more than tales. Don't you have anything more brilliant to discuss about ?
On Christian forums they debate the subtilities of the Trinity and here one has to debate if fairy tales could possibly be true.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-23-2006, 01:47 PM
Mansio,
I see you are avoiding responding to me. Instead of backing up your first allegation you simply bring new ones.

What must be trusted : Western science and scholarship or the Quran ?
There is no conflict between the two.

It is not important if the stories are man-made.
Then why did you claim that they were?! Why do you always make these claims on the forum without providing proof?

This is your opportunity to either back up what you have said or admit that you made an allegation without sufficient evidence.
Reply

czgibson
01-23-2006, 09:55 PM
Greetings Ansar,

If you'll permit me, I'd like to take up a few points from your last response to me.

Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
it seems you have not read his posts. What else can we say about someone who cites this story as proof that Islam is false?
Well, perhaps I haven't read all of mansio's posts. I don't have that much time on my hands! :)

Well if I wanted to prove that I would have to bring evidence. There's no point in simply stating that "the Bible is not the word of God" and then not backing up the statement. It is pointless.
I don't know of anyone claiming that the Bible was literally authored by god, as Muslims claim for the Qur'an. Inspired by god, perhaps, but surely no-one seriously claims god was the author of the Bible? As far as I know, it was written by humans, and we even know most of their names.

Christians would disagree with your claim that the Bible has contradictions and they would challenge you to provide examples.
Phew! Where to start? Here's one that springs to mind:

After this, Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean countryside, where he spent some time with them, and baptized. (John 3:22)
And right over the page:

The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John, although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples. (John 4:1-2)
So, did Jesus baptize people or not? Who knows?

Of course it can be questioned. I've challenged people to bring evidence that the Qur'an is not the word of God, but the challenge remains unanswered.
It's a difficult thing to prove, since there's no proof one way or the other on god's existence - hence Muslims can repeat the claim that the Qur'an has never been contradicted.

So if you admit that mansio cannot prove that statement, please tell me, what is the point of him posting such statements all over the discussion forum? Is it going to lead to any factual discussion?
That is hardly the point. Many parts of religious texts such as the Qur'an contain assertions which cannot be verified as factual, just as opposing views cannot be so verified. What is wrong with discussing our differeing views and their relative chances of being true?

Good. So now do you see how saying "the Qur'an contains man-made stories" will serve no purpose but to provoke?
If that's mansio's opinion, he should be free to express it. If he asserts that it is certainly true, then I can see that that would not be acceptable. That must be what he has done, and I must have missed it, for I know that your faith (and the faith of others in the Muslim community) is strong enough not to be provoked by someone expressing a mere opinion.

The assumption here is that there is no God - an assumption which has yet to be validated. Therefore, it is impossible to speak about the probabilites not knowing if God exists or not.
True. As a matter of interest, would you say that you know god exists, or would you simply say you have faith in god?

Right. So what do you think of a non-muslim who comes on this forum and only posts statements like "Allah does not exist" "Muhammad was a false prophet and a liar"? Don't you think we have the right for him to either provide evidence to support his allegations or to leave and keep his personal opinions to himself?
I think it's difficult to talk about evidence in such cases, because there are too many unknowns involved - chief among them being 'does god exist?'

Your opinion.
Absolutely. I've read many, many books, but I've never read one that wasn't written by a human. Religious texts seem to me to have the fingerprints of human authorship all over them. I can see no difference between works by humans and works reputed to have been written by supernatural beings. Again, my opinion, but there it is.

My reasoning would be circular if I said that the Qur'an is true because it contains divinely revealed stories, such as the sleepers of the cave. But I never said that.
Sorry for not being clear; let me explain what I meant:

You believe in god.
You believe god can perform miracles.
You believe ('on the basis of logic and evidence') that the Qur'an was written by god, and is therefore true.
The Qur'an contains descriptions of miracles.
You believe they happened because
You believe in god and
You believe god can perform miracles.

That reasoning seems to be circular. Have I understood you correctly?

Peace
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-23-2006, 10:42 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Well, perhaps I haven't read all of mansio's posts. I don't have that much time on my hands! :)
Then isn't it a little bit imprudent to defend someone when you are not certain what they are saying? All mansio has ever done on this forum is post attacks against the Qur'an and Islam calling them man-made yet failing to provide evidence. If he wants to believe such then he is free to do so, but this forum is for factual discussion and such comments are completely pointless.

I don't know of anyone claiming that the Bible was literally authored by god, as Muslims claim for the Qur'an. Inspired by god, perhaps, but surely no-one seriously claims god was the author of the Bible? As far as I know, it was written by humans, and we even know most of their names.
Most Christians I have come across will say that the Bible is the inspired word of God.

Phew! Where to start? Here's one that springs to mind
I'm not the one denying that there are contradictions (if you want to debate them feel free to start a thread where you can debate the Christians). The point however is that one needs to provide evidence for what they say. Here you have claimed that the Bible is not the word of God but you have attempted to substantiate your claim with evidence - internal contradictions. Mansio, however, makes claims but does not support them with evidence.

It's a difficult thing to prove, since there's no proof one way or the other on god's existence - hence Muslims can repeat the claim that the Qur'an has never been contradicted.
You misunderstand - one can attempt to prove the Qur'an is not the word of God without having to prove God doesn't exist.

That is hardly the point. Many parts of religious texts such as the Qur'an contain assertions which cannot be verified as factual, just as opposing views cannot be so verified.
Those assertions themselves may not be verifiable but the Qur'an as a whole can be.

Besides, the point is that I never told mansio or anyone else, "the Qur'an is true because it contains divinely revealed stories, such as the sleepers of the cave." That would be circular reasoning.

Mansio however said that the Qur'an is false because it contains man-made stories, such as the sleepers of the cave. A logical fallacy.

What is wrong with discussing our differeing views and their relative chances of being true?
You can't have a discussion with a person who simply says, "The Qur'an contains man-made stories, such as the story of the sleepers." To have a discussion, that person needs to provide evidence. If no evidence is given then there is no discussion, only assertions from both sides - or in mansio's case, baseless allegations.

If that's mansio's opinion, he should be free to express it.
I have no problem if manio wants to say, "personally, I don't believe the Qur'an is the word of God" or "in my opinion, the story of the sleepers is not from God". But to assert that the Qur'an is false because the story of the sleepers is man-made, is an example of circular reasoning because the second point cannot be proven.

If he asserts that it is certainly true, then I can see that that would not be acceptable.
Exactly.

True. As a matter of interest, would you say that you know god exists, or would you simply say you have faith in god?
An interesting question - Of course, it depends on how you define knowledge and faith. I would be inclined to say that I know God exists, but of course that's part of the existence of God debate.

Sorry for not being clear; let me explain what I meant:

You believe in god.
You believe god can perform miracles.
You believe ('on the basis of logic and evidence') that the Qur'an was written by god, and is therefore true.
The Qur'an contains descriptions of miracles.
You believe they happened because
You believe in god and
You believe god can perform miracles.
Based upon logic and evidence I believe in God and that the Qur'an is the towrd of God. I believe that the miracles in the Qur'an happened because I believe the Qur'an to be the word of God. Its not the other way around. I dont "believe [the miracles] happened because I believe in a God who can perform miracles".

Regards
Reply

czgibson
01-25-2006, 05:56 PM
Greetings Ansar,
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
Then isn't it a little bit imprudent to defend someone when you are not certain what they are saying? All mansio has ever done on this forum is post attacks against the Qur'an and Islam calling them man-made yet failing to provide evidence. If he wants to believe such then he is free to do so, but this forum is for factual discussion and such comments are completely pointless.
Yes, I suppose so. I've only read mansio's posts on this thread and one or two others, and I haven't seen him say that his understanding of the Seven Sleepers story is certainly true, and therefore the Qur'an is false. If you say that is his intention, then I believe you, since you've read more of his posts than I have.

I have to say that while I believe mansio's understanding of the story is closer to my own, I do not believe it can be proven.

Most Christians I have come across will say that the Bible is the inspired word of God.
Right, but that's different from god actually authoring the Bible, as Allah is said to have authored the Qur'an, surely? Or perhaps you think of the Qur'an in the same way as the Christians you've met think about the Bible?

You misunderstand - one can attempt to prove the Qur'an is not the word of God without having to prove God doesn't exist.
I think it's still intimately bound up with that question, though. After all, there seem to me to be three possible positions:

1. God exists; the Qur'an is the word of god.
2. God exists, but the Qur'an does not come from him.
3. God does not exist, therefore the Qur'an cannot have come from god.

If you wanted to prove the second half of any one of those positions, you'd need to have certainty about the first half.

Those assertions themselves may not be verifiable but the Qur'an as a whole can be.
I've never come across any system like this before. Normally, individual assertions need to be verified before the whole can be.


You can't have a discussion with a person who simply says, "The Qur'an contains man-made stories, such as the story of the sleepers." To have a discussion, that person needs to provide evidence. If no evidence is given then there is no discussion, only assertions from both sides - or in mansio's case, baseless allegations.
I'd call them assertions based on probability - that's my position on it anyway. Do you really think saying that "the story of the Seven Sleepers is likely to be a fabrication" is an entirely baseless assertion? Would Western historians and the Catholic church call it a myth or a fable solely because they are (allegedly) anti-Islamic?

Based upon logic and evidence I believe in God and that the Qur'an is the towrd of God. I believe that the miracles in the Qur'an happened because I believe the Qur'an to be the word of God. Its not the other way around. I dont "believe [the miracles] happened because I believe in a God who can perform miracles".
I think I see what you're saying, but surely you wouldn't believe in miracles unless you believed there was a being who could perform them?

Peace
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
01-26-2006, 04:12 PM
Hi Callum,
Thanks for your post.
Originally Posted by czgibson
I have to say that while I believe mansio's understanding of the story is closer to my own, I do not believe it can be proven.
Absolutely. And that is why it is nonsencial to attempt to use such ideas as 'proof' of the Qur'an's falsity.

Right, but that's different from god actually authoring the Bible, as Allah is said to have authored the Qur'an, surely? Or perhaps you think of the Qur'an in the same way as the Christians you've met think about the Bible?
You're right that Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the revealed word of God, not just the inspired word of God.

I think it's still intimately bound up with that question, though. After all, there seem to me to be three possible positions:

1. God exists; the Qur'an is the word of god.
2. God exists, but the Qur'an does not come from him.
3. God does not exist, therefore the Qur'an cannot have come from god.
I agree. Although, while I have to be able to establish God's existence in order to establish the Qur'an to be the word of God, the critic of the Qur'an does not have to negate God's existence in order to negate the Qur'an's divine authorship.

Would Western historians and the Catholic church call it a myth or a fable solely because they are (allegedly) anti-Islamic?
We would have to examine their reasons for calling it a fable.

I think I see what you're saying, but surely you wouldn't believe in miracles unless you believed there was a being who could perform them?
True.

Regards
Reply

afriend
01-26-2006, 08:23 PM
I am sorry for a post that was deleted and Jazaakallah for deleting it, whoever it was.....Astaghfirrullah......I shouldn't have lashed on Mansio like that, forgive me
Reply

Abdul Fattah
01-27-2006, 04:02 PM
Sorry for not being clear; let me explain what I meant:

You believe in god.
You believe god can perform miracles.
You believe ('on the basis of logic and evidence') that the Qur'an was written by god, and is therefore true.
The Qur'an contains descriptions of miracles.
You believe they happened because
You believe in god and
You believe god can perform miracles.

That reasoning seems to be circular. Have I understood you correctly?
I can't speak in other persons places, but personally I believe the othe rway around, it would go something like this:

I recognise the Qur'an as being devine.
Therefor I Believe both in the existance of the mentioned God as well as in his capability of performing miracles. Because the Qur'an is a miracle by itself and it contains miracles within it and it mentions other miracles that happens in the past (I only put in that third one to stress that those miracles weren't the ones the first two are refering to).
But, that's only the "logical reasoning" part. My biggest source of faith is still my feeling not my logic, the two just go well together. Like I've repeatedly said on this forum, on the end of the day, personal expierience goes a long way.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-12-2011, 11:47 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-06-2010, 11:51 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-13-2009, 03:51 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-29-2008, 09:20 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-19-2006, 10:50 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!