Competitor for the Holy Qur'an

[Isambard]

Nah, not true. Firstly, one can't really appreciate the miraculous nature of the Quran if you aren't fluent in Arabic. Most people aren't. Secondly, most people haven't read the Quran in the first place. Thirdly, people don't care either way. Fourthly, people witnessed more obvious miracles, such as the splitting of the moon, and still didn't believe. So, no, I don't think that would be the case.

Yea...about the splitting of the moon....Something like that it pretty big potatoes regardless of where you live. I mean something so grand as the very moon splitting should be recorded across multiple historical texts...yet....its found nowhere else except for Islamic texts...so forgive me, I call into the question said miracle...

As per the miraculous nature of the Qur'an...wel despite having read it and agreeing it is a pretty well written piece of poetics and theology, I still dont see what so great about it. I mean comparatively, its actually pretty small and deals with a limited amount of issues if you but it beside just about any other religious book.

In terms of complexity, Id say the Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost, the Vedas, Diamond Sutra, are all more poetically diverse and complex. With the exception of Paradise Lost, all the aforementioned texts are also much larger.

I guess you could say that because I cant read Arabic, I am missing on something, but cant the same be said for every religion? I mean how can you deny "superior complexity" (using it from a subjective perspective of respective believers) of Buddhist or Hindu texts if you dont know Sanskrit? The torah if you dont know Hebrew, the bible if you dont know Aramaic/Hebrew/Latin/Greek etc.?

But you didn't produce miracles, a Holy Book to prove it, nor were you known unanimously as a trustworthy person (no offence, but the Prophet excelled in that), nor did you bring a message that was in accordance with what has come before it and also human instinct (that is, to believe in God).

But you only believe that because the Qur'an and Hadiths tell you to. You are using your holy book to tell you it is holy and that the miracles are true. Thats circular logic.

[Abdul Fattah]

But you only believe that because the Qur'an and Hadiths tell you to. You are using your holy book to tell you it is holy and that the miracles are true. Thats circular logic.

I don't think it's circular for the following reason:
The Qur'an is proof for it's own divine origin due to it's characteristics. I believe the Qur'an is God's word not only because it says so, but because I cannot Imagen any other plausible explanation for it's amazing characteristics, it's profound wisdom, it's superior style, and so on, ...

The Qur'an itself challenge mankind regarding this to:
And if you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your witnesses besides Allah if you are truthful. (Al-Baqara:23)

Anybody taking that challenge seriously, would first have to examine the Qur'an to see what the criteria are for making something "like it". And would then see that the standards are to high to be reachable.

[ranma1/2]

I don't think it's circular for the following reason:
The Qur'an is proof for it's own divine origin due to it's characteristics. I believe the Qur'an is God's word not only because it says so, but because I cannot Imagen any other plausible explanation for it's amazing characteristics, it's profound wisdom, it's superior style, and so on, ...

The Qur'an itself challenge mankind regarding this to:
And if you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your witnesses besides Allah if you are truthful. (Al-Baqara:23)

Anybody taking that challenge seriously, would first have to examine the Qur'an to see what the criteria are for making something "like it". And would then see that the standards are to high to be reachable.

What are these characteristics?
Any wisdom in it isnt that special, at best it might be a collection of knowlege that you assume comes from a uneducated source.
what else? Ive read many books that are much better written. More poetical and more imaginative.
What is so god like about the quran?

[Woodrow]

What are these characteristics?
Any wisdom in it isnt that special, at best it might be a collection of knowlege that you assume comes from a uneducated source.
what else? Ive read many books that are much better written. More poetical and more imaginative.
What is so god like about the quran?

Mahabrah, Wesh t'cal B'el Arbeea?

If that what I just wrote does not make any sense to you, there is no way you can know if you have ever read a better book.

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

[ranma1/2]

Mahabrah, Wesh t'cal B'el Arbeea?

If that what I just wrote does not make any sense to you, there is no way you can know if you have ever read a better book.

so you cant give special characteristics?

please list them. Im betting they arent special.
As stated before there is nothing great about the book.
Nothing special about its writings.
And structurally and poetically i have read better.

[Woodrow]

so you cant give special characteristics?

please list them. Im betting they arent special.
As stated before there is nothing great about the book.
Nothing special about its writings.
And structurally and poetically i have read better.

1. It is the only book ever written in that form of Arabic. Nobody else has been able to write one single comprehensible sentence in Qur'anic arabic.

2. Arabic is a very gutteral language and it is difficult to write any sensible paragraph, poem or song using words that make logical sense. Yet, the Qur'an carries a certain melody or sound quality throughout it's entirity and does not break down into gibberish.

3. Arabic has many dialects, It is difficult for the speaker of one dialect to understand the speaker of another. For example I speak a Moroccan Dialect, I can carry on conversations with people from Morocco, Algeria and Lybia fairly well. But I can not understand the Arabic spoken in Syria, Palestine, Egypt or Saudi Arabia. the miracle is all Arabic speaking people have no trouble understanding the spoken Qur'an, even the ones who are not Muslim. (Many Arabs are not Muslim)

4. It has been preserved completly. the Qur'an of today is identical of all past copies.

5. In spite of it's size Approximentaly 400 pages in normal font size. Millions of people have memorized it completly with no trouble. Even many 10 year olds have memorized it.

Nothing special about its writings.
And structurally and poetically i have read better

Since you are certain that you have read better. it is safe to assume that you have read it. You are aware than that the Qur'an can not be written in English and can only be written in Arabic. since you are fluent in Arabic, I will be justified in answering your posts only in Arabic.

T'araf

Zahreet t'araf el maana deeal deek al kelma.

[ranma1/2]

Thanks for a reply,

1. It is the only book ever written in that form of Arabic. Nobody else has been able to write one single comprehensible sentence in Qur'anic arabic.

2. Arabic is a very gutteral language and it is difficult to write any sensible paragraph, poem or song using words that make logical sense. Yet, the Qur'an carries a certain melody or sound quality throughout it's entirity and does not break down into gibberish.

3. Arabic has many dialects, It is difficult for the speaker of one dialect to understand the speaker of another. For example I speak a Moroccan Dialect, I can carry on conversations with people from Morocco, Algeria and Lybia fairly well. But I can not understand the Arabic spoken in Syria, Palestine, Egypt or Saudi Arabia. the miracle is all Arabic speaking people have no trouble understanding the spoken Qur'an, even the ones who are not Muslim. (Many Arabs are not Muslim)

4. It has been preserved completly. the Qur'an of today is identical of all past copies.

5. In spite of it's size Approximentaly 400 pages in normal font size. Millions of people have memorized it completly with no trouble. Even many 10 year olds have memorized it.



Since you are certain that you have read better. it is safe to assume that you have read it. You are aware than that the Qur'an can not be written in English and can only be written in Arabic. since you are fluent in Arabic, I will be justified in answering your posts only in Arabic.

T'araf

Zahreet t'araf el maana deeal deek al kelma.

Edit; i typed this part earlier but the pc died on me..
1 i think god should have chosen a better language then.
2 hey give me 40 years to write something im sure i can write lymeric or two.
Nothing special about this.
3 see point 1 and god seems to ahve trouble getting everyone to agree on what it means.
4 ill agree that the current quran is the same as the oldest version available. before it was written though who knows. Still nothing special. its been preserved through human means only.
5 so? your pretty much required to do that. if we made kids memorize harry potter im sure they could. Still nothing special.


None of these are anything beyond human capablity. So nothing god like about i.

As for reading i never said i have read it in arabic. The fact that it can not be perfectly written in english seems to detract from it more. Surely a god could write it and present it so it cna translate perfectly.

[Keltoi]

Thanks for a reply,


None of these are anything beyond human capablity. So nothing god like about i.

As for reading i never said i have read it in arabic. The fact that it can not be perfectly written in english seems to detract from it more. Surely a god could write it and present it so it cna translate perfectly.

The issue of the Qu'ran being divinely inspired aside, I'm sure you would agree that when a work of literature, especially poetry, is translated into another language it loses its character to a large extent? The words do not flow in the same way. It is often difficult to find an appropriate word that completely captures the intent of a word in a different language. Theoretically, if God passed down a message to an Arabic speaker, that message would obviously be revealed in an Arabic script. Naturally, if one wishes to read the Qu'ran in the way in which it was intended to be read, it would have to be done in Arabic.

[ranma1/2]

The issue of the Qu'ran being divinely inspired aside, I'm sure you would agree that when a work of literature, especially poetry, is translated into another language it loses its character to a large extent? The words do not flow in the same way. It is often difficult to find an appropriate word that completely captures the intent of a word in a different language. Theoretically, if God passed down a message to an Arabic speaker, that message would obviously be revealed in an Arabic script. Naturally, if one wishes to read the Qu'ran in the way in which it was intended to be read, it would have to be done in Arabic.

I agree that a work will change. The point is if god wrote the book and supposedly divinly keeps it in its form then it should have no problem insuring that translation are also correct.

[Abdul Fattah]

Ranma if you are sincere, can you tell me which book is superior to the Qur'an? Maybe we could compare and see if any book you suggest even comes close. Sorry if that's offensive, but I'm inclined to think you're just speculating without having knowledge.

[ranma1/2]

Ranma if you are sincere, can you tell me which book is superior to the Qur'an? Maybe we could compare and see if any book you suggest even comes close. Sorry if that's offensive, but I'm inclined to think you're just speculating without having knowledge.

superior how?

well i could name a few.
Wheel of time series.
harry potter, the illiad.
the text of the GFSM.


of course its alll a matter of subjectiveness.

You still havent shown how your book is superior. Especially in a divine way.

[Uthman]

:sl:

I'll try to give you a comprehensive answer as to why the Qur'an is regarded the way it is by so many people.

1. The Power of the Qur'anic Message:

-it is universal, unrestricted by time and applicable to any nation/culture. The Qur'an is by far the most widely followed and acted-upon book in the world. As for the Bible, most Christians follow the Church over the Bible, and each denomination has its own bible anyway. The fact that there is no other book in the world that forms the constitution of the lives of billions of followers is itself a sign.
-it is practical and logical, it can be established practically in society and is logically able to address the fundamental questions relating to all aspects of our universe.
-it is comprehensive, addressing all fundamental sectors of human life, be it spritual, physical, mental, social/societal, politcal, environmental, economic, etc.
-it is natural, in concordance with a person's nature and what they feel deep inside to be the truth.
-it is clear and consistent, free of the changes in worldview and understanding that dominate the works of human beings.
-it is deep, having provoked thousands upon thousands of volumes of exegesis, expounding upon its meaning and revealing fascinating details that many people otherwise miss in their reading of the Qur'an.

2. The Power of the Qur'anic Style:

-it is Interactive, the text seems alive as it responds to the very questions that arise in one's mind at that moment. It speaks to the reader and delivers specific yet universal advice.
-it is Inerrant, free from contradictons and discrepancies, or other errors that would normally be found in the works of human beings.
-it is Memorizable; the Qur'an is the only book in the world which is continuously being memorized by millions of people and recited daily. No other book has been committed to memory by so many followers, as though it fits in one's mind as a key in a lock.
-its Language, the Qur'anic arabic is a stunning miracle in itself, its style is powerful and its recitation is melodious. More info: Here, Here, Here.

3. The Power of the Qur'anic Text:

-it is Preserved, even after fourteen and a half centuries, the Qur'an is recited today exactly as it was first revealed. Thus it was free of the tampering that befell other religious scriptures.
-its other Remarkable features; many Muslims find a striking concordance between many Qur'anic statements and established scientific truths, which could not have been known by any normal human being 14 centuries ago. (see here). Many Muslims have also found the Qur'anic perfection extends even to various mathematical miracles within the text. As well, there are the Qur'anic Prophecies.
-its Authorship; the context in which the Qur'an was revealed leaves the reader with no other conclusion than the fact that it could only be the word of God.

This is just my summary of the miraculous features Muslims find in the Qur'an. For more information, please see section 3c of The First and Final Commandment.

:w:

[ranma1/2]

1. The Power of the Qur'anic Message:
-it is universal, unrestricted by time and applicable to any nation/culture

Hardly one big problem is that it can only be perfectly understood if you know Arabic, heck even with that you have to have scholars tell you what it means. Not to mention how it is not accepted by the majority of the world.

-it is practical and logical, it can be established practically in society and is logically able to address the fundamental questions relating to all aspects of our universe.


Once again hardly. It cant be established in society. That’s all ill say on that.
And what fundamental questions relating to all aspects of our universe?
It seems to say nothing about the creation “except god did it or similar answers.”


-it is comprehensive, addressing all fundamental sectors of human life, be it spritual, physical, mental, social/societal, politcal, environmental, economic, etc.

whats special about this if it did it. Not to mention it doesn’t do it well. It seems to have problems with sex, alcohol and many things. What does it say about global warming?


-it is natural, in concordance with a person's nature and what they feel deep inside to be the truth.

If this was so then I must be unnatural

-it is clear and consistent, free of the changes in worldview and understanding that dominate the works of human beings.

Once again no it isn’t. It needs hadiths. You need scholars to tell you what it means not to mention again the need to speak or read Arabic.

-it is deep, having provoked thousands upon thousands of volumes of exegesis, expounding upon its meaning and revealing fascinating details that many people otherwise miss in their reading of the Qur'an.

So is harry potter, Hamlet, illiad, Japanese poems, etc… its interesting you mentioned that 1000s of exegesis expounding upon its meaning. I though you said it was clear and consistent.

2. The Power of the Qur'anic Style:
-it is Interactive, the text seems alive as it responds to the very questions that arise in one's mind at that moment. It speaks to the reader and delivers specific yet universal advice.

Subjective opinion. Of course I assume you are referring to the Arabic versions as I have had no interactivity with the English ones. If only god could give me this Arabic knowledge since its so important..

-it is Inerrant, free from contradictons and discrepancies, or other errors that would normally be found in the works of human beings.

False, well as false as a non muslim can show. First off we are not and never have been made from clay “unless you reject science” and that’s all ill say about this. Its been discussed and it amounts to we think your wrong and you think we need to read it right.


-it is Memorizable; the Qur'an is the only book in the world which is continuously being memorized by millions of people and recited daily. No other book has been committed to memory by so many followers, as though it fits in one's mind as a key in a lock.
-its Language, the Qur'anic arabic is a stunning miracle in itself, its style is powerful and its recitation is melodious. More info: Here, Here, Here.

Wow so Harry potter is Holy. Heck I know 8 year olds that have memorized books longer than 400 pages. The fact is that you and others are instructed to memorize. Purely human intervention here.


3. The Power of the Qur'anic Text:
-it is Preserved, even after fourteen and a half centuries, the Qur'an is recited today exactly as it was first revealed. Thus it was free of the tampering that befell other religious scriptures.

Once again through human intervention. Nothing special.

-its other Remarkable features; many Muslims find a striking concordance between many Qur'anic statements and established scientific truths, which could not have been known by any normal human being 14 centuries ago. (see here). Many Muslims have also found the Qur'anic perfection extends even to various mathematical miracles within the text. As well, there are the Qur'anic Prophecies.

Im not going to even bother with this one. It has been discussed many a time and simply put we disagree.

-its Authorship; the context in which the Qur'an was revealed leaves the reader with no other conclusion than the fact that it could only be the word of God.

Um false again. Ive read it and I get that it was composed by humans.

[Woodrow]

Quite a lengthy reply ranma1/2. Since you did acknowledge you do not speak Arabic I will keep my replies to you in English.

It would be senseless for me to even begin to address your lengthy reply. I will agree you did base your reply on logic, to the degree you believe logic to be.

Logic is an excellent tool and can help us formulate rational explanations. It is also difficult to fully apply to all circumstances. Even logic has it's flaws, as it is limited to the facts we know and excludes the use of facts we do not know.

Science is also a very valuable tool for understanding. In it's simplest form science is observing and measuring. But, it also has it's limits as we can only measure that which we can detect and quantify. Measuring tools can only accuratly measure what they are designed to measure.

To limit oneself to the use of logic and science, is dogmatic as they become the only acceptable means of determining truth. It takes a lot of faith to have faith in the belief that all things can be quantified and qualified. You also have faith. You have faith that all of reality can be observed directly or indirectly and is measurable.

Now with that said, those of us who attest to being theists also work with logic and measurements. Our logic is based upon the knowledge that God(swt) exists. That is no less valid than your knowledge that the sun exists. We do have to use a different set of measuring devices and a different form of observational techniques. But, what we use are just as much measuring devices and observation tools as scales, rulers, spectroscopes and microscopes. Remember, a tool can only measure what it is designed to measure and observe what it is designed to measure.

There is no way you could accept any statements about the Qur'an unless you know how to use and understand the methodology and measurement system that needs to be used to Qualify and quantify it.

Peace be with you and remember, you have the freedom to believe as you do.

[Abdul Fattah]

Ranma you can deny all these features and look for alternative explenations, but the point is no book in the world comes even close. Are there people claiming Harry potter's books witness of scientific knowledge that was not known to mankind at the time of it's origin? Sure it has bee debated a lot, but so far no serious refutations have been brought. So to ignore it just because it has been "debated" is just closing your eyes.

Does the wheel of time serve as a guide for millions of people by showing them how to live their lives and has the impact of making some of the most hardest toughest people fall in their knees in tears and turn them into caring soft people?

Is the GFSM writen in poetical rhyme? In such a way that if you change only a single word from it that it can only decrease in strenght and meaning without having to result to off-topic and ranting for the purpose of maintaining rhyme?

Again, if your serious in comparing those books, you 'll see that none of them can balance all these characteristics to the same degree as the Qur'an. If you want to deny that the Qur'an is divine, go ahead, that is faith related, and I will agree to disagree. But what you are doing now, blindly ignoring it's characteristics is just stupid.

[Isambard]

Ranma if you are sincere, can you tell me which book is superior to the Qur'an? Maybe we could compare and see if any book you suggest even comes close. Sorry if that's offensive, but I'm inclined to think you're just speculating without having knowledge.

I have mentioned several in my previous post, but to refresh, Id say the Divine Comedy is superior to the Qur'an in all fields of importance.

[جوري]

lol divine comedy was actually stolen from Islamic literature, if you'd do some reading, you'd have already learned so, he'd be sued for plagiarism .. the irony is the ba$tard steals from us only to put Muslims in hell... never saw your old post, but glad I have the opportunity to point it out in this one...

[Isambard]

lol divine comedy was actually stolen from Islamic literature, if you'd do some reading, you'd have already learned so, he'd be sued for plagiarism .. the irony is the ba$tard steals from us only to put Muslims in hell... never saw your old post, but glad I have the opportunity to point it out in this one...

If your referring to the 7 layers...Muhammed "stole it" from Paul, Paul "stole it" from Zorasterism. If history wasn't so flaky back then, Im sure youd find the the "stealing" goes even further. No matter. Its still a fine piece of literature with a unique style of poetry and perhaps the best form of Christian apologetics and philosophy. Hell, I were the pope, id replace the bible with it lol

Sry, forgot to mention, Paul stole ir from the romans, who stole the idea from the greeks, who stole it from Zorastraism. :D

[Abdul Fattah]

I have mentioned several in my previous post, but to refresh, Id say the Divine Comedy is superior to the Qur'an in all fields of importance.

Hi Islambard
I'm glad to see someone has taken this argument serious instead of just listing fantasy books for children (yes ranma, that description includes gfsm).

So, Divine comedy. vs Qur'an. I'll try to be fair.

• Both are poetic in nature.
  Divine comedy uses ABA BCB CDC ...
  The Qur'an uses a large numer of different poetic styles not only rhymes but using rythms to accentuate and using rhymes that match not only vocal but also in meaning. Take Al-Asr for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-H73PD1aq8
  (videolink takes 26 sec, shortest surah of the Qur'an with english translation))
  
• Both have religious content.
  Devine comedy is basically a very detailed description of what the afterlife looks like, next to that it also has some political messages (limited to politics of Dante's time)
  The Qur'an on the other hands is much richer giving a description of the hereafter giving out detail only where it is required and leaving it out where it adds no value, but also a description of the different classes of mankind. How to recognize a firm believer, what some of the mistakes of the hypocrite are. With numerous stories that show important messages on how to live ones life. With different descriptions of what the difference is between a believer and a disbeliever; and so on... The Qur'an changed the face of the earth and leads millions of people by it's religious content. I never heard of a serious group of "Danteists".
  
• Only one of them has miraculous characteristics.
  The Qur'an has by giving prediction that actually came true and by giving descriptions that later were found corrrect. Example on the expansion of the universe:
  And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (Qur'an, 51:47)
  Note that the Arabic word used here is: [ سماء] heaven/firmament.
  It does not mean the heaven of the afterlife which is called: jannah [جنة ] in Arabic. So it does refer to the universe and not to some metaphysical place.
  
• Both have mathematical codes.
  In the divine comedy there's constantly references of three, and multitudes of three. Verses are rhymed by three, there' are 9 spheres of each destination, there's 33 verses in each cantus and there are three destinations.
  In the Qur'an there also seems to be a hidden mathematical code embedded but here the number is 19, not 3.
  http://www.-----------------------/mathematical_03.html
  Next to this code there's also the word repetitions:
  http://www.-----------------------/mathematical_01.html
  Example:
  The word "land" appears 13 times in the Qur'an and the word "sea" 32 times, giving a total of 45 references. If we divide that number by that of the number of references to the land we arrive at the figure 28.888888888889%. The number of total references to land and sea, 45, divided by the number of references to the sea in the Qur'an, 32, is 71.111111111111%. Extraordinarily, these figures represent the exact proportions of land and sea on the Earth today.
  
• Source
  The prophet peace be upon him was illiterate and didn't receive schooling. Yet he brought us the Qur'an.
  As for Dante's source, here's an interesting copy paste from wikipedia:
  [I]In 1919 Professor Miguel Asín Palacios, a Spanish scholar and a Catholic priest, published La Escatología musulmana en la Divina Comedia ("Islamic Eschatology and the Divine Comedy"). This was an account, compiled after years of extensive study, of parallels Asín Palacios had discovered between Islamic philosophy and the eschatology of the Divine Comedy. The perceived similarities pervade the entire poem. Asín Palacios concluded that Dante derived most of the features of and episodes about the hereafter from two main sources: the Hadith and the Kitab al Miraj (translated into Latin in 1264 or shortly before[3] as Liber Scale Machometi ["The Book of Muhammad's Ladder"]) concerning the Prophet's ascension to Heaven, and the spiritual writings of Ibn Arabi. The Divine Comedy was therefore not, in Asín Palacios's opinion, an entirely original work—as had been heretofore assumed—since Dante had before him a ready-made pattern based on Islamic writings on the afterlife. (This would be particularly ironic if true, in light of the fact that in Canto XXVIII of the Inferno Dante consigned the Islamic supreme prophet Muhammad to the eighth circle of hell, as a "seminator di scandalo e di scisma"—a "sower of scandal and schism"—in line with Catholic dogma regarding Islam, as evidenced by the title of the first Latin translation of the Qu'ran: Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete.)

I think it's fair to say that although there might be some skin deep similarities, that divine comedy simply doesn't cut the mustard, especially not if you're looking at the core of the two books. But I'm of course open to listen to any arguments you would like to add here.

[ranma1/2]

Ranma you can deny all these features and look for alternative explenations, but the point is no book in the world comes even close. Are there people claiming Harry potter's books witness of scientific knowledge that was not known to mankind at the time of it's origin? Sure it has bee debated a lot, but so far no serious refutations have been brought. So to ignore it just because it has been "debated" is just closing your eyes.

Does the wheel of time serve as a guide for millions of people by showing them how to live their lives and has the impact of making some of the most hardest toughest people fall in their knees in tears and turn them into caring soft people?

Is the GFSM writen in poetical rhyme? In such a way that if you change only a single word from it that it can only decrease in strenght and meaning without having to result to off-topic and ranting for the purpose of maintaining rhyme?

Again, if your serious in comparing those books, you 'll see that none of them can balance all these characteristics to the same degree as the Qur'an. If you want to deny that the Qur'an is divine, go ahead, that is faith related, and I will agree to disagree. But what you are doing now, blindly ignoring it's characteristics is just stupid.

the point is that all of these features are not in the quran or subjective opinons. I refuted many of your characteristics. For poetry i would just about any doctor sues book. Heck those often have great morals stories to.

[Abdul Fattah]

the point is that all of these features are not in the quran or subjective opinons. I refuted many of your characteristics.

Oh so the Qur'an is not the guide of millions of people?
The Qur'an has not touched millions of people?
The Qur'an has not converted atheist (like me)?
The Qur'an isn't unique from a literacy aspect?
The Qur'an doesn't have scientific miracles?
Well then how about you refute all those features! You didn't refute anything. All you did is deny the charesteristics, and possible mentioned unsubstantiated alternative speculation. But there's a huge difference between denying and refuting. There's plenty of threads in this very section about them. And so far I haven't seen a single argument hold up against these characteristics of the Qur'an.

InshaAllah we can continue the discussion here so the origenal thread doesn't go further off-topic

[Isambard]

Hi Islambard
I'm glad to see someone has taken this argument serious instead of just listing fantasy books for children (yes ranma, that description includes gfsm).

So, Divine comedy. vs Qur'an. I'll try to be fair.

• Both are poetic in nature.
  Divine comedy uses ABA BCB CDC ...
  The Qur'an uses a large numer of different poetic styles not only rhymes but using rythms to accentuate and using rhymes that match not only vocal but also in meaning. Take Al-Asr for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-H73PD1aq8
  (videolink takes 26 sec, shortest surah of the Qur'an with english translation))
  
  That has more to do with lingistics on the Qur'an's part. You find similar 'impossibilities' across different language groups' syntax. For example certain english works are very diffcult to translate into other languages without them becoming ugly. This is especially true with German because of the complexity of male, female and neutral words. Or latin languages (spanish/italien/portugeseetc) into english. Arabic poetry such as the Qur'an is then complex because of the language barrier.
  
  In regards to the Dante's opus magnum, well there are a few other styles embedded within the ABA BCB etc. its just it doesnt translate well and is usually omitted to keep the language.
  
• Both have religious content.
  Devine comedy is basically a very detailed description of what the afterlife looks like, next to that it also has some political messages (limited to politics of Dante's time)
  
  It also has a great deal personal issues (the entire 3 volume work is basically a giant love poem to Beatrice) and an advanced form of christian apologetics and philosophy as it gives a critical eye to past and current state of christianity (current in his day) and oddly enough, acknowledging the value of other cultures [he places some famous non-christians (and even muslims) in authorative positions in heaven and purgatory]
  The Qur'an on the other hands is much richer giving a description of the hereafter giving out detail only where it is required and leaving it out where it adds no value, but also a description of the different classes of mankind. How to recognize a firm believer, what some of the mistakes of the hypocrite are. With numerous stories that show important messages on how to live ones life. With different descriptions of what the difference is between a believer and a disbeliever; and so on... The Qur'an changed the face of the earth and leads millions of people by it's religious content. I never heard of a serious group of "Danteists".
  
  Really? The Qur'an struck me as a poltical manifesto with some religion sprinkled in. Alot of the stories and messages are reptitive and alot of the rules become self-contradictory in later surah's damaging the whole, universal message aspect and relegating it contextal. It is an awsome piece of communitarian politics, but compared to wide imagery of the Comedy, all the different aspects addressed, the different personal stories etc. Id still place the comedy above the Qur'an.
  
  I think the number of worshippers has little to do with how good something is. I mean the Comedy and Dante himself were enemies of the church and catholism for a long time.....and just look at some of the stuff ppl follow...*cough* Scientology *cough*
• Only one of them has miraculous characteristics.
  The Qur'an has by giving prediction that actually came true and by giving descriptions that later were found corrrect. Example on the expansion of the universe:
  And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (Qur'an, 51:47)
  Note that the Arabic word used here is: [ سماء] heaven/firmament.
  It does not mean the heaven of the afterlife which is called: jannah [جنة ] in Arabic. So it does refer to the universe and not to some metaphysical place.
  
  Id say this is subjective. I personally find the "scientific miracles of the Qur'an!" to br neither miracles, nor scientific. Often when questioned about some apperent inaccuracy I usually get a response from a muslim apologetic that its really some bizarre metaphor that seems more like an attempt to twist the meaning.
  
  That aside, there is also the issue of every other religion claiming "scientific miracles".
  
  For the sake of focus, perhaps its best we avoid this aspect of comparison ;)
  
• Both have mathematical codes.
  In the divine comedy there's constantly references of three, and multitudes of three. Verses are rhymed by three, there' are 9 spheres of each destination, there's 33 verses in each cantus and there are three destinations.
  In the Qur'an there also seems to be a hidden mathematical code embedded but here the number is 19, not 3.
  http://www.-----------------------/mathematical_03.html
  Next to this code there's also the word repetitions:
  http://www.-----------------------/mathematical_01.html
  Example:
  The word "land" appears 13 times in the Qur'an and the word "sea" 32 times, giving a total of 45 references. If we divide that number by that of the number of references to the land we arrive at the figure 28.888888888889%. The number of total references to land and sea, 45, divided by the number of references to the sea in the Qur'an, 32, is 71.111111111111%. Extraordinarily, these figures represent the exact proportions of land and sea on the Earth today.
  
  Hmm never heard of this. Ill have to look into it and respond in due time :)
• Source
  The prophet peace be upon him was illiterate and didn't receive schooling. Yet he brought us the Qur'an.
  As for Dante's source, here's an interesting copy paste from wikipedia:
  [I]In 1919 Professor Miguel Asín Palacios, a Spanish scholar and a Catholic priest, published La Escatología musulmana en la Divina Comedia ("Islamic Eschatology and the Divine Comedy"). This was an account, compiled after years of extensive study, of parallels Asín Palacios had discovered between Islamic philosophy and the eschatology of the Divine Comedy. The perceived similarities pervade the entire poem. Asín Palacios concluded that Dante derived most of the features of and episodes about the hereafter from two main sources: the Hadith and the Kitab al Miraj (translated into Latin in 1264 or shortly before[3] as Liber Scale Machometi ["The Book of Muhammad's Ladder"]) concerning the Prophet's ascension to Heaven, and the spiritual writings of Ibn Arabi. The Divine Comedy was therefore not, in Asín Palacios's opinion, an entirely original work—as had been heretofore assumed—since Dante had before him a ready-made pattern based on Islamic writings on the afterlife. (This would be particularly ironic if true, in light of the fact that in Canto XXVIII of the Inferno Dante consigned the Islamic supreme prophet Muhammad to the eighth circle of hell, as a "seminator di scandalo e di scisma"—a "sower of scandal and schism"—in line with Catholic dogma regarding Islam, as evidenced by the title of the first Latin translation of the Qu'ran: Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete.)

I think it's fair to say that although there might be some skin deep similarities, that divine comedy simply doesn't cut the mustard, especially not if you're looking at the core of the two books. But I'm of course open to listen to any arguments you would like to add here.

I disagree with your conclusion and I think in the interest of dispelling bias, you may want to read the Divine Comedy and then make your comparison. Its the only piece of literature that ever made me feel remotely religious and even if you still disagree, its still a masterpiece:thumbs_up

[Isambard]

the point is that all of these features are not in the quran or subjective opinons. I refuted many of your characteristics. For poetry i would just about any doctor sues book. Heck those often have great morals stories to.

Perhaps you got some bad bananas!

Honestly thou, I remember my frist Qur'an. It was a god awful translation that I think was done for folks completely devoid of any knowledge of science, history, and philosophy. The author made it sound as if Muhammed was responible for the wheel, fire, and buttered bread. I was actually really mad after reading it:raging:

Then my girlfriend's (at the time) dad gave me a reeeaaalllyy nice Qur'an. The translator focused excusively on preserving the poetry as opposed to making up BS to promote his religion. Lemme tell yaa, HUGE DIFFERENCE. My second Qur'an also has the original arabic beside the english and has caligraphy all around it :D

All the about the translation my friend:sunny:

[Md Mashud]

For the skeptic, evidence is needed, and for the believer, evidence is not needed.

I wanted to question this signature :). No one really becomes a believer without evidence for your information... The statement is incomplete. You can say once someone becomes a believer he may not need further evidence to support his belief - but initially something must spark it. At our prophets :saw: time, understanding the environment, It would be ignorant to believe that all those who did convert was from nothing!

[ranma1/2]

Oh so the Qur'an is not the guide of millions of people?
The Qur'an has not touched millions of people?
The Qur'an has not converted atheist (like me)?
The Qur'an isn't unique from a literacy aspect?
The Qur'an doesn't have scientific miracles?
Well then how about you refute all those features! You didn't refute anything. All you did is deny the charesteristics, and possible mentioned unsubstantiated alternative speculation. But there's a huge difference between denying and refuting. There's plenty of threads in this very section about them. And so far I haven't seen a single argument hold up against these characteristics of the Qur'an.

InshaAllah we can continue the discussion here so the origenal thread doesn't go further off-topic

the quran is not universal as stated earlier. I do not despute that muslims exists or people have converted. "like wise poeple have deconverted as well"
The fact is that its not universal.
It is also no more literally unique than the bible "which it borrows from" or harry potter.
the quran has zero scientific miracles.

[ranma1/2]

I wanted to question this signature :). No one really becomes a believer without evidence for your information... The statement is incomplete. You can say once someone becomes a believer he may not need further evidence to support his belief - but initially something must spark it. At our prophets :saw: time, understanding the environment, It would be ignorant to believe that all those who did convert was from nothing!

its more of a commentary on PA sig. In general i would say the evidence needs to be scientific.

p.s. i like the link kitty hes cute..

[Abdul Fattah]

the quran is not universal as stated earlier. I do not despute that muslims exists or people have converted. "like wise poeple have deconverted as well"
The fact is that its not universal.
It is also no more literally unique than the bible "which it borrows from" or harry potter.
the quran has zero scientific miracles.

I'm troubled
I really don't know what your angle is here. I could think of the following posibilities:

1. You keep comparing the Qur'an with Harry potter as an argument ad absurdum, in which case you don't understand how argument ad absurdum works and where it is applicable.
2. You genuinely believe Harry potter is a competitor for the Qur'an which means the book is probably at the top of your comprehensive capabilities and the Qur'an thus went way over your head. In this case I think I should just leave you be untill you grow up.
3. You do so intentionally to mock my argument and flame Islam.
4. Some other angle I haven't thought of.

Untill you can give me an explanation of which of those four it is I will move your further posts to the recycle bin and give you refractions for mocking the Qur'an. Some arguments to consider in case you're willing to take this discussion serious:
*Since million of people of different culture nationality and from different era's find guidance in the Qur'an means it is universal. In fact, It can't get more universal than that.
*Number of people converting and number of people apostating is irrelmevant. Point is, it's a religious book, whereas Harry potter is fiction and accepted as fiction by it's readers.
*Wheter or not the Qur'an is a copy from other books is pure speculation and unsubstantiated. Maybe you can get away with such statements on other forums, but here you have to either back your statements up, or keep them for yourself.
*Finally about the miracles of the qur'an. If You want to insist in debate they are false, then first make me a refutation of these:
http://www.-----------------------/scientific_index.html
These have been discussed on different threads before, and so far I haven't seen a single argument hold up against the Qur'an. So untill you show differently, The miracles are accepted as genuine around here.

[Keltoi]

Am I the only one who find this debate rather odd? Comparing the Qu'ran or the Bible to Harry Potter just seems a little off to me. Comparing the Qu'ran to The Divine Comedy makes a little more sense, but not much, sense you are only comparing writing styles for the most part. To a believer, a Holy Book isn't there for entertainment, it is there as a life guide. Perhaps to an athiest a holy text is only words on paper, but to a believer it is so much more than that. Just seems fairly pointless to debate about some piece of writing that one considers of equal or of more importance than a text intended as a religious and philosophical guide. To a follower of that religious text there is no work of literature of more importance.

[wilberhum]

Hay Steve, remember me? :muddlehea

http://www.-----------------------/scientific_index.html
These have been discussed on different threads before, and so far I haven't seen a single argument hold up against the Qur'an. So untill you show differently, The miracles are accepted as genuine around here.

You only proved that you were more strbron than me. :thumbs_do

You lost and you know it. :shade:

[Isambard]

Am I the only one who find this debate rather odd? Comparing the Qu'ran or the Bible to Harry Potter just seems a little off to me. Comparing the Qu'ran to The Divine Comedy makes a little more sense, but not much, sense you are only comparing writing styles for the most part. To a believer, a Holy Book isn't there for entertainment, it is there as a life guide. Perhaps to an athiest a holy text is only words on paper, but to a believer it is so much more than that. Just seems fairly pointless to debate about some piece of writing that one considers of equal or of more importance than a text intended as a religious and philosophical guide. To a follower of that religious text there is no work of literature of more importance.

Was just trying to point out that poetry and complexity =/ divinity. For those who have read the Comedy (with proper commentary) know what I am talking about.

I guess I couldve used the Vedas or some other religious text, but I didnt want this to become "my religion is better than your religion!" sort of discussion.

[ranma1/2]

Ok lets get back to the subject for clarification.

The Qur'an itself challenge mankind regarding this to:
And if you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your witnesses besides Allah if you are truthful. (Al-Baqara:23)
I asked for list of these characteristics.
Osman gave a reply
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...tml#post817364

I replied. Refuting many of those as subjective opinions at best and just plain wrong at worst.

The best you come up with is that people follow the book “like the bible,” its poetical “like the divine comedy.”

The writing style is of course different than harry potter and other books but that does not make it superior. Its like saying this couch is made from black leather and so its better than yours with only cloth. Its just subjective. The content of the books also differ but in quality of writing we once again get into subjective opinion. I see Harry potter to be a better written book. Its apparently more easily translatable into other languages. I find the morals presented in other books to be better than the quran “once again a subjective opinion”. I also find that the billions of books written out there that are much longer and better written as well as written in a much shorter time. It seems to me however that if it took someone 40 years to write a book I would hope they would get there rhymes right.　

The subject of scientific miracles has been discussed many times on this forum and you being a mod surely have read them. It amounts to any actual knowledge in the quran was known at the time and borrowed from other sources. Any supposed knowledge is just misreading or changing meaning of words to fit some new concept. And some are just plain wrong. If you want to discuss this please post in the scientific miracles of the quran thread. Your side says that Mohammad couldn’t have known any of this. “despite likely having access to these known knowledge’s if he actually wrote them and not others.” Or they may say we are not reading it right.

Its been discussed the quran is universal. Here we seem to disagree on what universal means in this case my view universal is….

Universal : Common to all members of a group or class.
I do not deem the quran as a book to be accepted universally since I find its morals, its science and other parts to be flawed, poor, many times immoral etc… “of course that’s my opionon on morality” . The fact that others can not read the quran “correctly” unless they know Arabic “and even then you need scholars to tell you what it means” prevents it from being universal.

[Basirah]

Since you are certain that you have read better. it is safe to assume that you have read it. You are aware than that the Qur'an can not be written in English and can only be written in Arabic. since you are fluent in Arabic, I will be justified in answering your posts only in Arabic.

Dear Woodrow,

You have brought up two problems. The first being that godcreated a book that he expects the entire world follow, yet it is only able to be "understood" in one language. The second problem is that Christians and Jews have lived for centuries in Islamic countries, so may I ask why they are not attesting to this Quranic miracle?

I have read the Quran, and I had to memmorize it at such a young age, yet all I saw was the removal of critical thinking skills. You merely accept it as god's without analyzing it.

By the way, Have you ever listened to Mozart? I thought it was a miracle as well when I first listened and saw his work.

[Abdul Fattah]

Hay Steve, remember me? :muddlehea



You only proved that you were more strbron than me. :thumbs_do

You lost and you know it. :shade:

Believe whatever you want to believe. But I didn't lose nothing. I refuted all your arguments. Just because you keep repeating them after I refuted them doesn't mean I'm stuborn.

[Basirah]

Our logic is based upon the knowledge that God(swt) exists. That is no less valid than your knowledge that the sun exists.

Excuse me? Could you please tell em how you came to such a conclusion!?!

[Basirah]

Oh so the Qur'an is not the guide of millions of people?
The Qur'an has not touched millions of people?

Please read: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/app...opularity.html

[Woodrow]

Dear Woodrow,

You have brought up two problems. The first being that godcreated a book that he expects the entire world follow, yet it is only able to be "understood" in one language. The second problem is that Christians and Jews have lived for centuries in Islamic countries, so may I ask why they are not attesting to this Quranic miracle?

Peace Basirah,

There is free will and our choice to accept or deny. If we accept, to learn Arabic is no great obstacle. For it to be revealed in a form that can not be adequatly translated, some perceive as a problem, some perceive as a chance to perform an act of love. We are humans, we have our limitations, this can either be seen as a need for us to acknowledge our limitations or we can just give up. as far as why the Jews and Christians do not accept it as miraculous. Ask them. Anything I say regarding that would only be my opinion and I can not speak for any one except myself.

I have read the Quran, and I had to memmorize it at such a young age, yet all I saw was the removal of critical thinking skills. You merely accept it as god's without analyzing it

.

I went through over 60 years denying it was God"s word.

By the way, Have you ever listened to Mozart? I thought it was a miracle as well when I first listened and saw his work

.

Back when my hearing was intact and I had not reverted I loved classical Music. Yes I have listened to Mozart, Chopin, Schroeder, Schubert, Beethoven, and many others. I did prefer Beethoven and would listen to him for hours. Yes, I viewed Beethoven as a miracle, considering that he never heard any of his music. However, he was also a very gifted mathematician and his works were the result of excellent analytical skills in the field of mathematics. what we perceive as music he perceived as order in mathematical composition.

[جوري]

Basirah was adequately refuted by bros Ansar, yet keeps bringing the same recycled rhetoric to the table as if we collectively suffering lapses in memory. I was asked not to participate in this discussion to keep it along the lines of comparative rather than a refutation. Which I'll honor, But I think I'll just stick this in here as a refresher

http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...l-kafiroon.htm

[Abdul Fattah]

Hi Ranma
I'm glad to see you decided to drop the hit and run tactics from before. So I'll try to be nicer to.

The writing style is of course different than harry potter and other books but that does not make it superior. Its like saying this couch is made from black leather and so its better than yours with only cloth. Its just subjective.

The challenge from the Qur'an you mentioned, has some intrinsic wisdom to it. It's very purpose is to make people consider how hard it is to write such a book and how implausible it is that Muhammed (pbuh) made it up. You are right that "better" is a relative term. Then again I wouldn't use that specific term. Instead I would say that if you look at all the characteristics it has, it makes it unthinkable that a human wrote it, because I cannot imagen a human combining all these characteristics in one book with such elegance and balance. Even if it took 22 years.

The content of the books also differ but in quality of writing we once again get into subjective opinion. I see Harry potter to be a better written book.

I think you're forgetting like Keltoi pointed out that we shouldn't be comparing books, but instead religious books. The main feature of the Qur'an is that it is a guide for mankind. To use your own analogy, when you start comparing Harry potter to the Qur'an that is very similar to comparing a chair to a sofa and then saying: "The chair is a better sofa then the sofa is because I prefer sitting in a sofa."
But you're forgetting the chair isn't a sofa at all, the similarity of the two objects is that both are objects to sit on. Just as the only similarity between child-novels and spiritual guidance is that both messages are written on pages binded in book form. But If I were a sofa-manufacturer who's competing for the title of ultimate sofa and challenge my competitors, and you bring a chair. Obviously you would have mocked me sofa-building techniques. I hope you understand now why I lost my patience earlier.

Its apparently more easily translatable into other languages.

I would argue that translatability is of lesser importance. If somebody who doesn't know Arabic wants to get the full message they can always read a tafsir. See the thing is, translatability would make it's style less unique. It would mean that it's style is easily copied in other languages. Which would make it less special and hence less of a "proof" for mankind.

I find the morals presented in other books to be better than the quran “once again a subjective opinion”.

I don't think morality itself is subjective. I do think that when people have a preference of morality that it is subjective. To give an example:
It is immoral to get drunk, because once you get drunk you'll loose your inhibitions and be immoral. So getting drunk enables immorality and is hence immoral by itself. Now, an alcoholic might say he doesn't like this morality I just presented, be that as it may, I think everybody in his right mind will see that the alcoholic himself will be much better off without alcohol. Ther might be other books that present morality. But so far I haven't found a book that presents it in such a complete, workable and universal way.

I also find that the billions of books written out there that are much longer and better written as well as written in a much shorter time.

I would argue, that quality is more important then quantity.

The subject of scientific miracles has been discussed many times on this forum and you being a mod surely have read them. It amounts to any actual knowledge in the quran was known at the time and borrowed from other sources. Any supposed knowledge is just misreading or changing meaning of words to fit some new concept. And some are just plain wrong. If you want to discuss this please post in the scientific miracles of the quran thread.

Inshaallah I will do so after this post.

Its been discussed the quran is universal. Here we seem to disagree on what universal means in this case my view universal is….
Universal : Common to all members of a group or class.
I do not deem the quran as a book to be accepted universally since I find its morals, its science and other parts to be flawed, poor, many times immoral etc… “of course that’s my opionon on morality” .

It's not universal because you don't like it? There are people out of all classes and groups that have accepted it, like your definition requires. Just because you don't accept it does not mean it's not universal. It seems to me that you're implying that for universality all people should have to accept it. But that would defeat the purpose of testing us. Or to say it in the Qur'an's words:

Surely Allah is not ashamed to set forth any parable-- (that of) a gnat or any thing above that; then as for those who believe, they know that it is the truth from their Lord, and as for those who disbelieve, they say: What is it that Allah means by this parable: He causes many to err by it and many He leads aright by it! but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors, (al-baqara:26)

The fact that others can not read the quran “correctly” unless they know Arabic “and even then you need scholars to tell you what it means” prevents it from being universal.

To this argument I would reply with the same verse as before. But there are levels to its meanings. some parts are very literal and easy to understand whereas others are metaphorical. Some parts are stories of the other prophets, where other parts are direct answers to events in the life of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) and his followers. Although most people indeed do not understand many parts without proper explanation; the little I understood out of reading the translations was already sufficient proof for me and many other people to revert to Islam. I would even say that if the Qur'an was of such nature that anybody understands it to it's full depths from the first go, then it wouldn't be very special now would it?

So as a general conclusion I would say that most of your criticism comes from not seeing all the characteristics as one. The miracle of it is not only that it has several characteristics, but also that they are well balanced even though one characteristic makes the other harder. All the more reason why any book you'd bring foreward for this challenge should have all of the characteristics.

[Woodrow]

Dear Woodrow,



I have read the Quran, and I had to memmorize it at such a young age, yet all I saw was the removal of critical thinking skills. You merely accept it as god's without analyzing it.

.

How would you answer this?

Hal ata AAala al-insani heenunmina alddahri lam yakun shay-an mathkooran

[ranma1/2]

Hi Ranma
I'm glad to see you decided to drop the hit and run tactics from before. So I'll try to be nicer to.


.....So as a general conclusion I would say that most of your criticism comes from not seeing all the characteristics as one. The miracle of it is not only that it has several characteristics, but also that they are well balanced even though one characteristic makes the other harder. All the more reason why any book you'd bring foreward for this challenge should have all of the characteristics.

just to hit these points.
I have not been hit and running as you say. Ihave made my opinons and shown that we have different ones. I would also say that books out there share the same arbitrary characteristics of the quran. The quran also does not have many of the characteristics you believe it has so it falls short. The best case you have is its a work of poetry which i wont disagree with. I will disagree with the quality of the writing and poetry being unmatchable.

One other important point to bring back up is that all these supposed characterisitics some how are supposed to support it being divine. this is just not shown. its poetical yes. "so are other books". its a religous book, yes. "so are other books" it has what some people believe to be miracles, yes. "but thats only opinion and not supported by science." And of course so do other books.

Summary . There is no reason to believe that the book is nothing more than a book of religous poetry with no divine guidance.

[Abdul Fattah]

Oh so the Qur'an is not the guide of millions of people?
The Qur'an has not touched millions of people?

Please read: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/app...opularity.html

Hi Basirah

I understand that when you arrive at a thread that has been going for a while it's not pleasant to go trough every single posts before replying. However if you don't, you can easily misinterpret arguments.

I am very much aware of logical fallacies. And I try very hard not to resort to them. And I'm quite confident that the argument you quoted from me wasn't a logical fallacy. Allow me to explain what you missed:

*First of all I mentioned that Muslims believe that the Qur'an is divine not because it says so, but rather because of it's intrinsic features. And Allah subhana wa ta'ala challenges people to make a book like it, knowing fully well that it is not possible for mankind to do so. And I asked for people to come and present any book that they think fit the bill.
*Ranma replied to this by listing children novels.
*I replied to that (among other arguments) that those books are not religious guidance which is apparent by the fact that there are no people leading their live by those books as opposed to millions of people leading their lives by the Qur'an.
*To this Ranma replied (in general) that he disagrees with the Qur'an having the characteristics I mentioned.
*Not knowing which of the characteristics he meant by that statement, I listed them saying among other items on my list: Oh so the Qur'an is not the guide of millions of people?

So you see, my argument was not a logical fallacy at all. If I were to have argued that the Qur'an is true because millions of people follow it, yes then you would have been right. But that is clearly not the case here.

[ranma1/2]

Hi Ranma
.....I think you're forgetting like Keltoi pointed out that we shouldn't be comparing books, but instead religious books. The main feature of the Qur'an is that it is a guide for mankind. To use your own analogy, when you start comparing Harry potter to the Qur'an that is very similar to comparing a chair to a sofa and then saying: "The chair is a better sofa then the sofa is because I prefer sitting in a sofa."......

The point was that there is no better writing and my point is there are much better written books. there are better guides to living and better books of poetry. Even if the quran is a excellent book of poetry "which is subjective" it seems to me that there are many books out there that are better guides for humanity.
Being a guide for mankind i find the quran a poor one. it, like many religious books, creates seperatism "mine is better than yours etc..." and has some very poor morals. "its very puritanical toward sexuality to name some."
Of course morality is also subjective and varies from culture to culture so this is expected.

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

superior how?

......
harry potter,

.

;D


So , u believe reading Harry P will save us from hell fire ???

H P is a guide line for the whole humanity for this life & hereafter ?



:giggling: :giggling:





HP can be memorized by millions whose mother tongue is not Eng ? :hmm:

So many things can be said …but may be it will be a wastage of time to debate with a person who does not believe in God.


verses we all need for this life & the hereafter

Consider the heavens and that which comes in the night!

And what could make you conceive what it is that comes in the night? It is the star that pierces through [life's] darkness: [for] no human being has ever been left unguarded.


-Quran (86:1-4)




God invites [man] unto the abode of peace, and guides him that wills onto a straight way.

-Quran (10:25)

[barney]

Ranny, the miracle of the Quran is felt in Muslims hearts.
They cant prove that it's divine...they just "know" it is because they "feel" it is.

Imagine that you read harry potter. That it had been read to you from birth, every day. that you were coerced into reciting the Adventures of Ron Weasley by society. Imagine that the whole of society was wrapped up in Potterism (even more than it is :) ), Imagine that there were special places to go and listen to Potter and that respected Adults accross the World read it and discussed it's wonders again and again endlessly. Imagine that Rowling wrote it over a millenia ago and it had absorbed millions of peoples lives.
Imagine that everyone you ever mixed with or met said it was the word of God.

Would you say , Yeah..it's not bad?

No...you would get caught up in it all. You FEEL it in your heart, that feeling that you get is wonderful and surely this is a sign in itself!

The other kicker is that since you were born you have been under no illusion what whould happen if you DIDDNT like this book or feel it's wonder.

There is no point argueing with Logic this point. I certainly agree with all you have said, but it's pointless. The Quran will be miraculous because it is the "word of God", we know it is because it says it is and repeats how authentic it is inside itself, multiple times. Circular logic? Sure. it's religion dude... :)

[ranma1/2]

Salaam/peace;
So , u believe reading Harry P will save us from hell fire ???

H P is a guide line for the whole humanity for this life & hereafter ?

HP can be memorized by millions whose mother tongue is not Eng ? :hmm:
....
verses we all need for this life & the hereafter
..

Nope, of course i dont believe in hell either. However i do see the morals presented in HP to be good in general. Loyalty to friends, the desire to combat evil selfishness. the willingness to stand up and admit was is real and contiue fighting despite how tough it may get. these i find to be good morals over all.

Also the fact that its not presented as a way of life I am able to take my own morals from it without fear of others judging me.

However religous books that are often deemed as guides to life often have racism, the subjugation of women or others, slavery, genocide , wars etc often done in the name of god...
I find what i deem as the oppresion of women in islam "including the quran hadiths." to be horrible. I find the hatred often created in gays to be disgusting. I find the oppresion of music and art horrible and close mineded.

[Isambard]

No one has addressed my points...which means no one has read the Divine Comedy and the Qur'an....that makes me really sad...especially how I an atheist, seems to be more well versed in religious literature that your everday theist :S

[Abdul Fattah]

Nope, of course i dont believe in hell either. However i do see the morals presented in HP to be good in general. Loyalty to friends, the desire to combat evil selfishness. the willingness to stand up and admit was is real and contiue fighting despite how tough it may get. these i find to be good morals over all.

Well that's a start, but that's hardly a guide for life and all it's aspects.

However religous books that are often deemed as guides to life often have racism,

O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). (Qur'an 49:13)

the subjugation of women or others,

“For Muslim men and women,- for believing men and women, for devout men and women, for true men and women, for men and women who are patient and constant, for men and women who humble themselves, for men and women who give in Charity, for men and women who fast (and deny themselves), for men and women who guard their chastity, and for men and women who engage much in Allah's praise,- for them has Allah prepared forgiveness and great reward.” (Qur’an 33:35)
“And their Lord hath accepted of them, and answered them: 'Never will I suffer to be lost the work of any of you, be he male or female: Ye are members, one of another: Those who have left their homes, or been driven out therefrom, or suffered harm in My Cause, or fought or been slain,- verily, I will blot out from them their iniquities, and admit them into Gardens with rivers flowing beneath;- A reward from the presence of Allah, and from His presence is the best of rewards.' ” (Qur'an 3:195)

slavery,

It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and to set slaves free; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere. Such are the Allah-fearing. (Qur'an 2:177)
Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe: A slave woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe: A man slave who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But Allah beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind: That they may celebrate His praise. (Qur'an 2:221)

genocide

On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (Qur'an 5:32)

, wars etc often done in the name of god...

And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.
But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. (Qur'an 2:191-193)

I find what i deem as the oppresion of women in islam "including the quran hadiths." to be horrible.

Maybe you could direct us to the specific verse? Have you ever heard of Yvonne Riddley?

I find the hatred often created in gays to be disgusting.

The Qur'an does not preach that. It only implies that sodomy is forbidden. You cannot hold the Qur'an responsible for the hatred that simple-minded people keep just because the Qur'an states states that rule.

I find the oppresion of music and art horrible and close mineded.

Well music has more vices then virtues, making the ban of it justified. I would say this is yet another case of "the alcoholic being angry for a prohibition on alcohol".
As for Art, it is only forbidden in two cases. If it's disrespectful like the case of the danish cartoons (if you can even call that art). Or if the object of art is being worshiped. In fact there's many art in the Muslim history just think of calligraphy and architecture.

[Isambard]

Abdul, I am curious how you see the ban of music is justified w/o creating a double standard. Perhaps thou, a different thread is needed for that discussion :D

[ranma1/2]

Well that's a start, but that's hardly a guide for life and all it's aspects.

As stated before. Neither is the quran. "it may be a guide but not a good one in my opinion"

... ... ... ...
Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe: A slave woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe: A man slave who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But Allah beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind: That they may celebrate His praise. (Qur'an 2:221)[/B]

im not sure how most of those quotes relate but this one above seems to show the accpetance of slavery as well as seperatism. "believers are better than non believers"

On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - ..... (Qur'an 5:32)

So what is mischief?

And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

Im getting a little confused here. Kill them everywhere except church. this once again seems to drive the idea of we are better than than them.

But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. (Qur'an 2:191-193)

cease what?

Maybe you could direct us to the specific verse? Have you ever heard of Yvonne Riddley?

The Qur'an does not preach that. It only implies that sodomy is forbidden. You cannot hold the Qur'an responsible for the hatred that simple-minded people keep just because the Qur'an states states that rule.

there is plenty to interpretation and implication. And remember my comment was that many religions create this justification for certain actions.

Well music has more vices then virtues, making the ban of it justified. I would say this is yet another case of "the alcoholic being angry for a prohibition on alcohol".
As for Art, it is only forbidden in two cases. If it's disrespectful like the case of the danish cartoons (if you can even call that art). Or if the object of art is being worshiped. In fact there's many art in the Muslim history just think of calligraphy and architecture.

I disagree as i imagine most non muslims would. Could you list these vices? And whats bad about them.

prohibited substances.
I think the best thing to say is this.
In all things moderation. There is no reason why i cant drink beer, smoke, etc... as long as i dont harm others. "sure it may be better not to but its not a imperative" Also these prohibitted items may often have good uses. "medicianal to name a big one"

And the view on art goes against the idea of free speach that i value. "not to mention i would never worship a god that is so vain as to want to be worshipped."

[Basirah]

How would you answer this?

Hal ata AAala al-insani heenunmina alddahri lam yakun shay-an mathkooran

What does this verse have to do with critical thinking? A few verses later you will read: "Ina aatadna lilkaafireenasalasilah waaglalan wasaaeeran", which if you understand arabic is basically another threat against the unbelievers.

Oh yes, if you do not believe god chokes you and chaines you and blazes you with flames!!! Very intimidating. I'm sorry, woodrow, I don't understand what the verse signifies. Please tell me if I complety missed something.

[Basirah]

Back when my hearing was intact and I had not reverted I loved classical Music. Yes I have listened to Mozart, Chopin, Schroeder, Schubert, Beethoven, and many others. I did prefer Beethoven and would listen to him for hours. Yes, I viewed Beethoven as a miracle, considering that he never heard any of his music. However, he was also a very gifted mathematician and his works were the result of excellent analytical skills in the field of mathematics. what we perceive as music he perceived as order in mathematical composition.

Wait, are you saying your conversion to Islam stopped you from listening to classical music?

[Abdul Fattah]

As stated before. Neither is the quran. "it may be a guide but not a good one in my opinion"

Well then the difference is that the completeness of guidance in the Qur'an is a matter of opinion whereas the incompleteness of guidance of Harry potter is obvious and not even worth debating.

[quote]im not sure how most of those quotes relate but this one above seems to show the acceptance of slavery[quote]
"and to set slaves free"

as well as separatism. "believers are better than non believers"

First of all, it's obvious that it is better for a muslim to marry another muslim albeit only for practically. Second of all yeah the believer is better then the disbeliever, That is because the believers follow a much stricter morality.
Like the other verse said: Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you.

So what is mischief?

Google has this feature where you can type "define:" and then the word you needed to know and it will show a list of definitions from different sites.

Im getting a little confused here. Kill them everywhere except church. this once again seems to drive the idea of we are better than than them.

Yeah you are obviously confused I can agree to that much. the place mentioned here was mekka. And the polytheists were living there at that time.

cease what?

well what do you think? Cease giving water to your plants and trimming your hedges? Cease fighting of course!

there is plenty to interpretation and implication. And remember my comment was that many religions create this justification for certain actions.

Yes but remember I already refuted that with the stalker analogy.

I disagree as i imagine most non muslims would. Could you list these vices? And whats bad about them.

Made a separate thread for it.

prohibited substances.
I think the best thing to say is this.
In all things moderation. There is no reason why i cant drink beer, smoke, etc... as long as i dont harm others. "sure it may be better not to but its not a imperative" Also these prohibitted items may often have good uses. "medicianal to name a big one"

You're building on the assumption that people are capable of limiting themselves. Or perhaps you would have found it more fair if Allah subhana wa ta'ala said: some of you can and some of you can't? Or perhaps we would have been better guided if Allah subhana wa ta'ala would have said: "figure it out for yourself"? Yeah, I don't think so. and even then I disagree with these small doses being harmless to. The effects might not be that visible but even small doses do have an effect on mentality and morality.

And the view on art goes against the idea of free speach that i value.

did you know that even in the west there are limits to free speech and that if you look at it from a juridical pov that in most western countries slander is an exception to freedom of speech to, and is punishable by law?

"not to mention i would never worship a god that is so vain as to want to be worshipped."

That's like saying I would never consume a beverage that is so liquid it can only be "drunk". And I think what this shows is that the one who is vain is you, not God.

[ranma1/2]

Google has this feature where you can type "define:" and then the word you needed to know and it will show a list of definitions from different sites.
I know what mischief is but im not sure what it is ment in this case.
Should we kill children that cause mischief? Adults? Perhaps if you play a prank on your buddy. Should you die? Sounds pretty steep to me.

well what do you think? Cease giving water to your plants and trimming your hedges? Cease fighting of course!

It seems to me that it is referring to fighting, and not being muslim.
“Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah;”

You're building on the assumption that people are capable of limiting themselves.

We are. I can assume it because I can and others can.

did you know that even in the west there are limits to free speech and that if you look at it from a juridical pov that in most western countries slander is an exception to freedom of speech to, and is punishable by law?

Yes and in general the limits have to do with safety “no yelling fire in a theater” And lying. Giving your opinion and expressing yourself is not limmited


That's like saying I would never consume a beverage that is so liquid it can only be "drunk". And I think what this shows is that the one who is vain is you, not God.

No its not. Lets say a god did exists and it made is self known but did not demand being worshiped, that one might be worthy of it.

[Abdul Fattah]

I know what mischief is but im not sure what it is ment in this case.Should we kill children that cause mischief? Adults? Perhaps if you play a prank on your buddy. Should you die? Sounds pretty steep to me.

Yeah, we all know thousands of childrens are killed each year for their use of slingshots. Real tragedy ... :(

It seems to me that it is referring to fighting, and not being muslim.
“Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah;”

I geuss that you are the one guilty of adding extra interpretation then.

We are. I can assume it because I can and others can.

Yet I've seen thousands of people fail. With repugnant results might I add. In fact I would even say that the large majority of people do not seem to be able to control it as desirable. But I geuss this is just like the case of the non-existing bad male drivers. You'll never hear a guy say he's a bad driver. Yet when you're on the road...

Yes and in general the limits have to do with safety “no yelling fire in a theater” And lying. Giving your opinion and expressing yourself is not limmited

No, you can be punished for slander even if what you say is true and does not compromise safety.

No its not. Lets say a god did exists and it made is self known but did not demand being worshiped, that one might be worthy of it.

If God exists, that alone makes him worthy by definition. Any objectives you add to that have nothing to do with God's features but with your vanity. You are to vain to worship. Instead you would give it compulsory when you see fit. If he exists, well geuss what, he made you, he owns you, he feeds you gives you air holds the universe together, gave you intelligence and emotions. And then you're telling me it's vain if he tests us to separate the good from the evil by putting those who are unwilling to worship him in hell and those who are willing in heaven. Well like I said, that is more an indication of who you are then it is an indication of who God is.

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

However i do see the morals presented in HP to be good in general. .

I did not read H P. Here is few lines from an article.

Harry Potter: Facts about Fiction

By Khalid Baig



The fight between good and evil in this book is actually a conflict between "good magic" and "evil magic", both of which are evil.



The books are in effect promoters of paganism.



They glorify magic and paganism while non-magical people, called Muggles, are despised and portrayedas boring, narrow-minded, and paranoid of magic.



Not surprisingly, the main characters in the story have few noble qualities; they lie with impunity, use profanity, don't respect their elders, break rules regularly, and are unrepentant.


And for all these qualities and more, the books are popular and are having an effect. It is the "in" thing to purchase the book.


And not just the book. Children have gone crazy over Harry Potter memorabilia, surrounding themselves with Harry Potter T-shirts, posters, toys, costumes, wands, hats, etc. The media has been glorifying the book that glorifies sorcery.



For More Information on Islam please visit http://www.muslimconverts.com

However religous books that are often deemed as guides to life often have racism

,


Quran does not teach us racism . God says in Quran that ( not the exact words ) ..... best among u who fears God most.


.......does not matter if s/he is black , white , rich or poor , Japanese Or Indian or American.

the subjugation of women or others, slavery, genocide , wars etc often done in the name of god...

ya ...in the name of god people did / do many evil things . So , put blame on those people ...why bash religion ? Islam teaches us to be good , not the opposite.

I find what i deem as the oppresion of women in islam "including the quran hadiths." to be horrible.

lol .....funny :p

women are embracing Islam more than men...why is that ? why not ask our revert sisters ? Many of them are active in dawah online. U will find some revert sisters in this forum also.

In another thread , a non-Muslim sis was complining against women's right ....later boooommmmm .....she became our sis in Islam :D

...Alhamdulillah.


a related link

Number of Jewish Women Embracing Islam to Double in 2006 visit

base URL: http://www.israelnationalnews.com


posted by toronto 398 days ago




With all the islamophobia (especially instigated by Jews around the world), you would think that Jewish people aren't learning about Islam?

Think again!



http://www.muslimshout.com/story.php...Double-in-2006

PS. i can't see video online. If possible , anybody pl. let me know if the link is working properly . Thanks in advance :)

I find the hatred often created in gays to be disgusting.

it's pathetic that some/many people show sympathy to the sinners. Thus creating injustice , unrest in the society.


If anybody goes against nature / God's commands , s/he should be punished if does not repent .....it's not the hatred ....it's for the sake of establishing peace in the society.



And why worry about gays ??? What's their problems ??

They are enjoyng gay parade , they have thier legal marriage , they have their own churches even in a Muslim majority country like Malaysia ...so , what more do u want for them ?????

Save some sympathy for their eternal punishment . Yes , i know u don't believe in hereafter ...but what if really it's true ????

So , save some tears for them....they will need that badly on the last day.

I find the oppresion of music and art horrible and close mineded

we have many threads on it...pl. visit those .

[Uthman]

Sister, Muggles are not despised. :embarrass

And the main characters aren't perfect but they do have quite a few noble qualities. :embarrass

Especially Dumbledore. I wish he didn't die. He is my Sheikh. :( :laugh:

Ok, carry on now. :embarrass

[ranma1/2]

Sister, Muggles are not despised. :embarrass

And the main characters aren't perfect but they do have quite a few noble qualities. :embarrass

Especially Dumbledore. I wish he didn't die. He is my Sheikh. :( :laugh:

Ok, carry on now. :embarrass

He died.. Nooo you ruined it for me. I hope your happy..."just kidding"

[Basirah]

With all the islamophobia (especially instigated by Jews around the world), you would think that Jewish people aren't learning about Islam?

You realize that the number doubled from something like 16 to 32. More Muslims in the Palestinian territories are leaving Islam and becoming enlightened faster than the amount of Jews. But either way, if Israel becomes less oppresive because of it, then fine, but they are at least an enlightened society in the sciences.

[Basirah]

ya ...in the name of god people did / do many evil things . So , put blame on those people ...why bash religion ? Islam teaches us to be good , not the opposite.

What is good? We may have different views of good I am afraid. I believe the entire "ummah" cannot agree on what is actually good either. Osama Bin Laden believes that 4,000 dead in New York City is "good", Muslims in Michigan believes freedom is "good".

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

. More Muslims in the Palestinian territories are leaving Islam

Really ????

Palestines are suffered since decades for their Muslim identity. If they leave Islam & become Jews , then they will be surely benifitted in this world.

Still , i don't know how many Muslims in Palesntian left Islam. Can u give me the link for ur claim ?

In the west , if Chrisitians become Muslims ...they become minority & come under harrassment . Still they are accepting Islam . It's not easy to be a Muslim in the west ...but even anti-Muslim media are reporting that so many western men & women accepted Islam.


U can't compare this with few people leaving Islam in a country where Muslims are poor & oppressed.

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

Osama Bin Laden believes that 4,000 dead in New York City is "good", Muslims in Michigan believes freedom is "good".

Hitler killed millions jews ...nobody put blame on Jesus (p) or Christianity . So , don't blame Islam pl. for Laden.

BTW , if u have any proof that Laden really is responsible for 9/11 , then give it to FBI .

In their official website , they did not claim that Laden is the culprit becuase they don't have any solid proof.

[Basirah]

Salaam/peace;



Really ????

Palestines are suffered since decades for their Muslim identity. If they leave Islam & become Jews , then they will be surely benifitted in this world.

Still , i don't know how many Muslims in Palesntian left Islam. Can u give me the link for ur claim ?

In the west , if Chrisitians become Muslims ...they become minority & come under harrassment . Still they are accepting Islam . It's not easy to be a Muslim in the west ...but even anti-Muslim media are reporting that so many western men & women accepted Islam.


U can't compare this with few people leaving Islam in a country where Muslims are poor & oppressed.

Who says they are becoming Jews? They are becoming enlightened. They are putting faith in science and discovery.

As for woman, why are they equal to men? The Quran says, that the witness of a female is worth half of that of male (see - 2:282) Explain to me why you are not worth the same as a male witness! I would be insulted if I was female.

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

What is good? We may have different views of good I am afraid.

Read Quran & u will understand what is good. If anybody failed to do so , dont blame religion .



O you who believe! Be upright for Allah, bearers of witness with justice, and let not hatred of a people incite you not to act equitably;

act equitably, that is nearer to piety, and he careful of (your duty to) Allah;

surely Allah is Aware of what you do.


holy Quran , 5.8



Surely Allah commands you to make over trusts to their owners and that when you judge between people you judge with justice;

surely Allah admonishes you with what is excellent; surely Allah is Seeing, Hearing.

[4.58]

& many many more

[Isambard]

Salaam/peace;



Really ????

Palestines are suffered since decades for their Muslim identity. If they leave Islam & become Jews , then they will be surely benifitted in this world.

Still , i don't know how many Muslims in Palesntian left Islam. Can u give me the link for ur claim ?

In the west , if Chrisitians become Muslims ...they become minority & come under harrassment . Still they are accepting Islam . It's not easy to be a Muslim in the west ...but even anti-Muslim media are reporting that so many western men & women accepted Islam.


U can't compare this with few people leaving Islam in a country where Muslims are poor & oppressed.

I dont see how the media is "anti-Muslim", it simply reports the naughty things muslims do. Besides, atheists are the most looked upon and mistrusted.

[Basirah]

Hitler killed millions jews ...nobody put blame on Jesus (p) or Christianity .

Hitler was a Christian and he should be blamed as one! The pope did little to save Jews as well unless they converted. Another example of religious intolerance. Europe has now been elightened to secularism.

Here is Hitler. Maybe all Christians are not like him, but he had his inspirations against a Jewish people who did nothing except practice there own religion:

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

[wilberhum]

Believe whatever you want to believe. But I didn't lose nothing. I refuted all your arguments. Just because you keep repeating them after I refuted them doesn't mean I'm stuborn.

Oh short memory. You stated that you were proving how stuborn you were.

Of course you didn't loose anything, you just denied all relivent "con" information and only assepete "pro" information.

Using that stratagy, I can prove Bush is a great president. :-\

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

Who says they are becoming Jews? They are becoming enlightened. They are putting faith in science and discovery.

LOL ...it's becoming too funny now. So , u believe Islam is aginst science ???? Where is the Quranice verse that says so ???

As for woman, why are they equal to men?

i guess ...type error ..u wanted to say not equal .

men & women have different responsiblities & duties . It's men's duties to go out & earn & spend for women . Normally women stay at home when men work for them . So , naturally men are more exposed to the outer world , get used to with financial transactions etc.

May be because of the practical reason , in some cases 2 women need to testify .... But not in all cases .

If a husband brings adultery charge against his wife , her solo testimony is enough / equal to him . In such a sensitive & imp issue , wife & husband's testimony carry equal value .


Islam is a practical religion . So , some commands may sound unpleasant , but God knows these are better for us .

Take the example of polygamy . God made it legal with condition ...human being made it almost illegal & made unethical relationships acceptable to most . Now see what's going on around us . Men can't have more than one wife & can have unlimited illegal wives.

Pl. read Quran & hopefully u will understand ......no east , no west ...Islam is the best :D :)

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

I dont see how the media is "anti-Muslim",

it's late night .....i have to go . A short reply.


media always mention of religion if the alleged criminal is a Muslim . Media don't do the same when even a proven culprit is a non-Muslim.

V tech tragedy .....who is responsible ? A Jew or christian or Buddhist ??? WE don't know. Surely that student was not a Muslim . Otherwise , it's hard to believe that media missed a chance of bashing Islam.


In India , when riot takes place ( to my knowledge most riots take place in that country ) , media never put blame on Geeta or Veda ( hindus religious books ). Media like BBC normally say , angry mob , unruly people etc.

Jewish kids are always brutally murdered by Palestines & Palestines kids are always killed accidently .....see the difference ???

[Basirah]

LOL ...it's becoming too funny now. So , u believe Islam is aginst science ???? Where is the Quranice verse that says so ???

The Quran says, "Hata itha ataw aalawadi alnamli qalat namlatoon yya ayuhaalnnamlloo odkhulu massaakinakoom lah yahtimanakoomsulaymanoo wajunuduhu wahuom lah yashaauruuna, fataabasama dahikaan minn qawlihawakala rabee awziany ann ashkoora niaamataqa allatyanamta aalayah waalah walidaya waan aammalah salihaanntardahoo wadkhilny birahmatikah feey aaibadiklsalihyna"

Now you believe this is all scientific?

If a husband brings adultery charge against his wife , her solo testimony is enough / equal to him . In such a sensitive & imp issue , wife & husband's testimony carry equal value .

Really where in the Quran does it say this? Remember "We did not leave anything out of this book".

[جوري]

The Quran says, "Hata itha ataw aalawadi alnamli qalat namlatoon yya ayuhaalnnamlloo odkhulu massaakinakoom lah yahtimanakoomsulaymanoo wajunuduhu wahuom lah yashaauruuna, fataabasama dahikaan minn qawlihawakala rabee awziany ann ashkoora niaamataqa allatyanamta aalayah waalah walidaya waan aammalah salihaanntardahoo wadkhilny birahmatikah feey aaibadiklsalihyna"

Now you believe this is all scientific?

what do abilities possessed by prophet Solomon have to do with science or not? I am not following? this is a non sequitur, I believe the sister asked you for the verse to prove that Islam is against science.. try to be coherent!

[جوري]

I haven't been participating in this topic, because I find the parties involved puerile and have been adequately answered else where on various forums.. but some of the stuff huckstered here is really droll!

[جوري]

[QUOTE=barney;818254]

Ranny, the miracle of the Quran is felt in Muslims hearts.
They cant prove that it's divine...they just "know" it is because they "feel" it is.

The miracle of the Quran is understood by those who bother actually read it.. it is gratifying to the heart and the mind! Any person with half a brain would recognize the transcendency just by the period of time when such a book was produced when not 150 years ago doctors in Vienna couldn't make the connection between washing your hands and lowering maternal mortality... Try to put things in context, so you wouldn't appear so confused all the time!

Imagine that you read harry potter. That it had been read to you from birth, every day. that you were coerced into reciting the Adventures of Ron Weasley by society. Imagine that the whole of society was wrapped up in Potterism (even more than it is :) ), Imagine that there were special places to go and listen to Potter and that respected Adults accross the World read it and discussed it's wonders again and again endlessly. Imagine that Rowling wrote it over a millenia ago and it had absorbed millions of peoples lives.
Imagine that everyone you ever mixed with or met said it was the word of God.

what an asinine analogy.. I would further comment but what an infra dig it is to have even read it!

[جوري]

just another comment about the so-called Palestinians that are leaving Islam daily.. I guess 20,000 americans make up for that yearly.. and over the world it is the fastest growing religion. 1.86 billion Muslims and growing.. I guess we are not sucked into the nonextant vortex just yet, so I wouldn't hold my breath!

http://news.netscape.com/story/2007/...runs-to-islam/

[Basirah]

what do abilities possessed by prophet Solomon have to do with science or not? I am not following? this is a non sequitur, I believe the sister asked you for the verse to prove that Islam is against science.. try to be coherent!

"Abilities"? Solomon could not have heard any of the ants speak. Why do you think that is? Do you think ants "speak" or use "sound"? Any ant that uses sound could not be understood by the human ear because ants do not converse by modulating sounds.

Don't claim such to be out of the realm of discussion.

[جوري]

"Abilities"? Solomon could not have heard any of the ants speak.

Indeed that is what a miracle is, an event manifesting a supernatural act of a divine agent, some common basic grounds would have to be established, before you quote me the text from the middle!

Why do you think that is? Do you think ants "speak" or use "sound"? Any ant that uses sound could not be understood by the human ear because ants do not converse by modulating sounds.

Again that is by definition what a miracle is, however, many apes are able to communicate with people modern day using sign language an article for your viewing pleasure, not such a terrible impossibility even under suspension of natural laws!
lots of creatures communicate, I am not sure where you are going with this, or how it relates?
http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural...himpanzee.html

Don't claim such to be out of the realm of discussion.

it doesn't answer the question she posed you, thus it isn't the realm of discussion.. Don't divert the topic to suit your ends, if you can't handle the questions that flummox you!

[Woodrow]

What does this verse have to do with critical thinking? A few verses later you will read: "Ina aatadna lilkaafireenasalasilah waaglalan wasaaeeran", which if you understand arabic is basically another threat against the unbelievers.

Oh yes, if you do not believe god chokes you and chaines you and blazes you with flames!!! Very intimidating. I'm sorry, woodrow, I don't understand what the verse signifies. Please tell me if I complety missed something.

Just satisfying my own curiosity. I was finding how well you understood the Qur'an, so I would have more insight in what further questions I may decide to ask you.

[Basirah]

Indeed that is what a miracle is, an event manifesting a supernatural act of a divine agent, some common basic grounds would have to be established, before you quote me the text from the middle!

PurestAmbrosia, science does not recongnize these types of miracles. In my understanding of the verse, it shows either Mohammad's or a scribes belief in a myth that ants can speak. When you have to claim that it is a miracle, that is understandable, but miracles cannot be excluded from a critique by the scientific method.

[Basirah]

Just satisfying my own curiosity. I was finding how well you understood the Qur'an, so I would have more insight in what further questions I may decide to ask you.

Okay. I'm no scholar of course, because I don't believe it, but I have read, and was sent to a school to memmorize verses aimlessly (sp?). Either way, woodrow, did your conversion to Islam prevent you from listening to classical music?

[جوري]

PurestAmbrosia, science does not recongnize these types of miracles.

Sure it does-- may not be necessarily be of this exact nature, but 'miracles exist in science, people in coma whose cells are supposed to be arrested in G1 somehow break the cycle and are aroused from their state of unconsciousness-- cancers go into remission by means no one can explain. I had a patient with small cell ca who was given 3 months to live and here she is 2 years later after mets to the brain and all. If you are not a scientist, then kindly don't speak for them!

In my understanding of the verse, it shows either Mohammad's or a scribes belief in a myth that ants can speak.

indeed that is your understanding!

When you have to claim that it is a miracle, that is understandable, but miracles cannot be excluded from a critique by the scientific method.

the 'scientific method', can't prove or disprove such an event, it is simply beyond scientific capabilities-- until such a time when science conquers time travel, it will remain just that a miracle which many believe based on the results and recorded history of the time, some others prefer the linear approach, avert or mock it is all inconsequential. it is a simple as all that, and still leaves open the question of where in the Quran it states science is against religion?

[Isambard]

Mmm gonna try and take this thread back on topic....

Seeing as noone has read the Divine Comedy, (or any epics Im assuming) *grumpy face* It may be useless to compare poetics

Instead, perhaps its better to focus on the political nature of the Qur'an and reasoning.
Some contenders that are (nearly) identical to the Qur'an in regards to its communitarian politics are

The Republic - Plato
Discourses- Machievelli

These two books have similar outlines to the Qur'an with some noteable exceptions. The Republic of instance has a similar ethical system to the Qur'an except....it does away with God(s)! I wont spoil it for you, but it makes an excellent arguement for communitarianism and republicanism without invoking a hell or heaven, it actually argues that using such arguements make the whole idea weaker!

Then we have the Discourses. This is Machievelli's masterpiece (and oddly enough) lesser known piece. It too follows the same line of general outline as the two former, but instead of using the line of reasoning "because if you dont Ill torture you" of the Qur'an, Machievelli insteads goes into real world consequences and alternatives which makes his cases much stronger.

These two books also have had and still have a major following. Plato even had a religion behind his ideas. They also contain "prophecies" that are in more detail than those of the Qur'an and accurate.

Another piece I would like to add, but it more philosophical, is Nietzche's "Thus Spoke Zarathrusta"

Although it focuses on Nietzche's idea of the ubermench, it is also strangely prophetic in that it successfuly predicts later and current political environments and societal conditions. It also uses some complicated prose. Though its good, Id say the Qur'an is still superior in terms of poetry though. Still, this piece trumps the Qur'an in terms of philosophy in my opinion.

Now....has anyone read any of these to compare the two? :P

[Abdul Fattah]

PurestAmbrosia, science does not recongnize these types of miracles. In my understanding of the verse, it shows either Mohammad's or a scribes belief in a myth that ants can speak. When you have to claim that it is a miracle, that is understandable, but miracles cannot be excluded from a critique by the scientific method.

I'm sorry but that's just being single-minded that is like saying supernatural stuff can't happen because it's not natural. Well of course it's not natural, that's why they call it supernatural.

Try this analogy:
There's a thin two-dimensional metal plate with 2 dimensional beings residing on it. Every few seconds, a person with a drill drills a hole in that plate. ow for the beings that looks like a small metal point that all of the sudden grows into a large metal circle and then shrinks to a point again and vanishes leaving air in the place it occupied.

Now if you would do that at a regular time interval in a regular pattern, and you little beings are somewhat intelligent, they might figure out the pattern and time-interval and give this a name like: "The theory of the holes". They might even predict the next hole you drill. Let's say for some reason all of the sudden for whatever reason the person decides just for once not to follow the same pattern and time interval as usual. The little beings notice this, some call it a freak occurrence, other call it supernatural and even others call it a miracle.

Now Imagen this person drilling holes sends a messages to the little beings that says: "Verily I am the one drilling the holes, and I drill them by a set pattern and time interval, safe when I desire to do different, remember 12 holes ago I abandoned my pattern?"
The beings call it the revelation of the holes. Then years pass, and some of the 2D beings are having a debate. One says: nothing that is in "the revelation of the holes" contradicts with science. Then the other being says: that isn't true, the revelation of the holes speaks of a hole that occurred of pattern, but according to the law of the holes it's impossible for holes to occur off-patern because they always occur in a certain pattern. So clearly the revelation has scientific errors.

Now obviously that story apart from being cute doesn't teach us a whole lot. But I hope you do understand now that if you claim the Qur'an has scientific inaccuracies based on the miracles that your argument is logically flawed. What we are dealing with here is a false dilemma.

Please read: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/falsedilemmas.html


Hi Islambard

The Republic - Plato
Discourses- Machievelli

Now....has anyone read any of these to compare the two? :P

I haven't read them so I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that they weren't poetical. that they weren't religious, that they aren't universal. (they suggest only political systems, but fail to advice people on personal lives).

So that's already a huge number of characteristics missing. So judging by this characteristics they do worse then divine comedy.

it makes an excellent arguement for communitarianism and republicanism without invoking a hell or heaven, it actually argues that using such arguements make the whole idea weaker!

Then we have the Discourses. This is Machievelli's masterpiece (and oddly enough) lesser known piece. It too follows the same line of general outline as the two former, but instead of using the line of reasoning "because if you dont Ill torture you" of the Qur'an, Machievelli insteads goes into real world consequences and alternatives which makes his cases much stronger.

Is it ok to steal when nobody will notice and the person who is stolen from will not even miss it or ever now that you stole it from him? Or to put it in more general terms, is it ok to do immoral acts when due to the circumstances there won't be any negative consequences in this life?

[Woodrow]

Okay. I'm no scholar of course, because I don't believe it, but I have read, and was sent to a school to memmorize verses aimlessly (sp?). Either way, woodrow, did your conversion to Islam prevent you from listening to classical music?

My partial deafness did that long before I reverted. Oddly about the only thing I can now hear clearly are Qur'anic recitations. They have completely filled me and made up for any loss i had by loosing the ability to hear Music.

[Isambard]

Hi Islambard


I haven't read them so I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that they weren't poetical. that they weren't religious, that they aren't universal. (they suggest only political systems, but fail to advice people on personal lives).

So that's already a huge number of characteristics missing. So judging by this characteristics they do worse then divine comedy.



Is it ok to steal when nobody will notice and the person who is stolen from will not even miss it or ever now that you stole it from him? Or to put it in more general terms, is it ok to do immoral acts when due to the circumstances there won't be any negative consequences in this life?

I never claimed they were poetic. I see the Qur'an as a poetic piece + political manifesto. The Divine Comedy was used to compare religious imagery and poety.

The other books are used to compare the latter. Im not sure what you mean by not universal, both books make great arguements as to why it should be universal and lays out how it works unlike the Qur'an where is merely says it works because God says so.

As per your last point, thats addressed exactly as you put it in the Republic and the parable of the Ring of Gygees (sp?). I wont spoil it for you to leave you a little mystery that will hopefully motivate you read texts outside of islamic literature :D

[Basirah]

I'm sorry but that's just being single-minded that is like saying supernatural stuff can't happen because it's not natural. Well of course it's not natural, that's why they call it supernatural.

Try this analogy:
There's a thin two-dimensional metal plate with 2 dimensional beings residing on it. Every few seconds, a person with a drill drills a hole in that plate. ow for the beings that looks like a small metal point that all of the sudden grows into a large metal circle and then shrinks to a point again and vanishes leaving air in the place it occupied.

Now if you would do that at a regular time interval in a regular pattern, and you little beings are somewhat intelligent, they might figure out the pattern and time-interval and give this a name like: "The theory of the holes". They might even predict the next hole you drill. Let's say for some reason all of the sudden for whatever reason the person decides just for once not to follow the same pattern and time interval as usual. The little beings notice this, some call it a freak occurrence, other call it supernatural and even others call it a miracle.

Now Imagen this person drilling holes sends a messages to the little beings that says: "Verily I am the one drilling the holes, and I drill them by a set pattern and time interval, safe when I desire to do different, remember 12 holes ago I abandoned my pattern?"
The beings call it the revelation of the holes. Then years pass, and some of the 2D beings are having a debate. One says: nothing that is in "the revelation of the holes" contradicts with science. Then the other being says: that isn't true, the revelation of the holes speaks of a hole that occurred of pattern, but according to the law of the holes it's impossible for holes to occur off-patern because they always occur in a certain pattern. So clearly the revelation has scientific errors.

Now obviously that story apart from being cute doesn't teach us a whole lot. But I hope you do understand now that if you claim the Qur'an has scientific inaccuracies based on the miracles that your argument is logically flawed. What we are dealing with here is a false dilemma.

Please read: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/falsedilemmas.html

Your basing your entire assumption based on the premise that there is a god that can control nature. Yet how about your prove it. Until you can establish such a premise than you cannot operate under the assumption that ants speaking to Soloman in the Quran is not contradictory to science, because your saying that a being like god which we cannot see, and you cannot prove exists is the cause. Since you failed to prove that your premise is a reality your entire argument is in shambles. Interestingly enough the link you posted has an example which I like:

(1) Either a Creator brought the universe into existence, or the universe came into existence out of nothing.
(2) The universe didn’t come into existence out of nothing (because nothing comes from nothing).
Therefore:
(3) A Creator brought the universe into existence.

The first premise of this argument presents a false dilemma; it might be thought that the universe neither was brought into existence by a Creator nor came into existence out of nothing, because it existed from eternity.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/falsedilemmas.html

Thanks for the post. Peace be upon you.

[Abdul Fattah]

Hi Islambard

I never claimed they were poetic. I see the Qur'an as a poetic piece + political manifesto. The Divine Comedy was used to compare religious imagery and poety.

Well that isn't really fair now is it. The Qur'an has a balance between several characteristics. and sometimes one characteristic hold another back. Making a book that stands out for only one or two of them is obviously a lot easier because you don't have to balance it and can completely ignore other fields. In fact what you're doing is comparing one book with a set of books.

Hi Basirah
Peace be upon you to

Your basing your entire assumption based on the premise that there is a god that can control nature. Yet how about your prove it. Until you can establish such a premise than you cannot operate under the assumption that ants speaking to Soloman in the Quran is not contradictory to science, because your saying that a being like god which we cannot see, and you cannot prove exists is the cause. Since you failed to prove that your premise is a reality your entire argument is in shambles.

This is a straw man argument please read: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/strawmanarguments.html

To explain your fallacy more in depth, here are the steps of your reasoning:
1. You (referring to me) claim that God definitely controls nature.
2. You haven't proven this.
3. Therefor you made a fallacy of building on unwarranted assumption.

However I made no such assumption. I didn't build any arguments on my belief that God controls nature. I only pointed out that you left out that possibility in a false dilemma. Pointing out something as a possibilities is not the same as building on it as assumption.
I guess that sets the score to 3-0 in my favor, seems your own website is working against you. :)

Interestingly enough the link you posted has an example which I like:

euhm... You're not considering to make the fallacist's fallacy, right?

[Basirah]

This is a straw man argument please read: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/strawmanarguments.html

To explain your fallacy more in depth, here are the steps of your reasoning:
1. You (referring to me) claim that God definitely controls nature.
2. You haven't proven this.
3. Therefor you made a fallacy of building on unwarranted assumption.

However I made no such assumption. I didn't build any arguments on my belief that God controls nature. I only pointed out that you left out that possibility in a false dilemma. Pointing out something as a possibilities is not the same as building on it as assumption.
I guess that sets the score to 3-0 in my favor, seems your own website is working against you.

I'm afraid your completley wrong. I will explain why: I did not write a straw man argument because I did not misrepresent your argument.

1. Your analogy uses a god like figure in it.
2. Your analogy assumes that a god like figure exists.
3. You did build on an unwarranted assumption.

a.) If you remove the god like figure who changed nature in your analogy then it doesn't work with the situation you need the analogy for, because then ants will never speak.
b.) Your premise in the analogy is that god or a god like figure exists controling nature, one that you did not prove but assume to be true so that is fallicious.

Oh, and about the 'fallacists fallacy', I am not rejecting your arguments because they are fallicious, I am telling you why they are fallicious and explaining why they are implausible because what science tells us about ants that people in arabia during Mohammads time did not know.

Now let us get to the fact that you did not prove anything by the analogy. Your assuming that some god like being controls nature and therefore can change it at anytime. Since you have offered zero proof for this claim, you cannot rest on the assumption that it is a 'miracle'. And since your claim is that an ant spoke to soloman, even though ants do not "speak" or use sounds at all when communicating but use chemicals and other means, this means that the only way you can form a logical argument against the scientific answer and conclusion that the passage is scientifically impossible is by claiming that some god came and bent nature and a miracle happend as purestambrosia said.

But the only way you can make that claim is if you prove that there is a god controling nature. Have you done so? No.

[Isambard]

Well, if you wanted a true comparison, then Buddhist Sutras or the Vedas would be more suitable. I simply doubted that many folks on the forums have read that sort of material. Lets not forget that some of these texts are simply massive (ie. Rig Veda) so it wouldnt really be fair to the modest size of the Qur'an. And as I said earlier, didnt want this to be a "my religion is better than your religion" type of thread.

Anyways, the Qur'an does delve into alot of different things, but I see it as a jack-of-all-trades master of none sort of deal though I still think it is still primarily a political text with poetry to make it easier to remember and religion to lesten the amount of questions and make it pretty. :)

[Abdul Fattah]

Hi Basirah
You have made the straw-man fallacy again.

b.) Your premise in the analogy is that god or a god like figure exists controling nature, one that you did not prove but assume to be true so that is fallicious.

No, that is not my premise.
My premise is:
1. There are three possible classifications for the (alleged) event: "talking ants".

a)It is an event that is scientifically accurate (that is to say it goes according to the laws of science).
b) It is an event that is scientifically inaccurate (that is to say it violates the laws of science).
c) It is an event that is not examined by science (that is to say, it is an event not described by any of the known laws of science we have, so we don't have any laws to check it by for posibility of violation).

2. Your premise failed to consider that third option.
3. By not considering all options you made the fallacy of false dilemma.

I guess making this straw man fallacy again sets the score to 4-0 in my favor.

Oh, and about the 'fallacists fallacy', I am not rejecting your arguments because they are fallicious, I am telling you why they are fallicious and explaining why they are implausible because what science tells us about ants that people in arabia during Mohammads time did not know.

This is again a strawmen argument. My comment about the fallasist's fallacy were not in response to your rejections, but in response to your comment:

Interestingly enough the link you posted has an example which I like

But since this fallacy can easily be accounted for as a result of miscommunication I won't add this one to the score :)

Now let us get to the fact that you did not prove anything by the analogy.

Yes of course, that was never my intention either, the only reason I posted that whole analogy was to open your mind to this third possibility that you left out in your false dilemma. You could say it was sort of a warm-up. My actual refutation was nothing more then mentioning which fallacy you committed. I was assuming that since you gave me that site you would have been familiar enough with these fallacies to figure out your mistake by yourself after me mentioning the third possibility and mentioning the kind of fallacy.

Your assuming that some god like being controls nature and therefore can change it at anytime. Since you have offered zero proof for this claim, you cannot rest on the assumption that it is a 'miracle'.

I am not resting on the assumption. I'm enjoying the benefit of the doubt.

And since your claim is that an ant spoke to soloman, even though ants do not "speak" or use sounds at all when communicating but use chemicals and other means, this means that the only way you can form a logical argument against the scientific answer and conclusion that the passage is scientifically impossible is by claiming that some god came and bent nature and a miracle happend as purestambrosia said.

Yes true.

But the only way you can make that claim is if you prove that there is a god controling nature. Have you done so? No.

Well the thing is, I don't have to prove it for it to be an acceptable possibility. In fact it's the other way around. Since you are the one making false dilemma, you are the one who has to disprove in order to save your argument. Allow me to explain that:

1. You argued the following dilemma:

a) Either an event follows the law of science, or it breaks it.
b) The ants speaking is not possible under any law we know.
c) Therefor the Qur'an has scientific inaccuracies

2. I replied:

a) You made a false dilemma by failing to consider that the event is supernatural (thus neither following known laws neither breaking them)
b) Therefor your alleged scientific inaccuracy is refuted

3. The dilemma you presented is fallacious by a mere possibility, even if I don't prove it.
4. Unless you are willing to abandon your argument you have the burden of finding proof (or in this case disproof) if you want to repair your refuted argument.

[جوري]

that is a nice flowery speech but not an active comparison firstly built upon the false assumptions-- one of the most pathologically obvious-- this patronizing speech where you feign to know what members of the forum have read or have not read!

You drop various terms and then expose us to your gasconade-- that by itself isn't sufficient for a respectable debate! You assume the modest size of the Quran, in fact if we were to go by volumes alone then the compendium of Muslim text between the Quran and the Hadith is rather incomparable in size to any other religious or poetic text out there, but it was/is never of size but of content and in fact deals with every facet of life, from inheritance, to marriage to cleaning yourself to medicine to running a government and everything there is in between.
The book is transcendent and its wonders never cease in

Shakespeare's play, Henry the Fourth, some of the characters discuss bees and mention that the bees are soldiers and have a king. That is what people thought in Shakespeare's time - that the bees that one sees flying around are male bees and that they go home and answer to a king. However, that is not true at all. The fact is that they are females, and they answer to a queen. Yet it took modern scientific investigations in the last 300 years to discover that this is the case. http://thetruereligion.org/modules/w...p?articleid=90

Already mentioned in the ancient Quran as God addresses the bee in the female form.. which is very significant because in Arabic the male form can be used to cover both sexes but to use the feminine is to exclude affirmatively the masculine .. this is of course just one of its many wonders and that is what is meant by transcendence. things that might not have been known then and people accepted anyhow are known to us now.. there was a time when people used to worship the Quran as an entity because they simply couldn't understand where such a text came from.. and again I mention somewhere in the middle of the 1800's a Dr. Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis couldn't make the connection between maternal mortality and washing your hands until his friend the pathologist died performing an autopsy and cutting himself with an infected fomite accidentally...I can't expect you to be able to put such things in perspective because well you are so very learned -- thank God for your presence here to put it all in perspective..
If it were a simple case of comparing the most beautiful of Anna Akhmatova's poems ( see I too can pull a braggadocio) to what you deem a jack of all trade and a master of none, the world wouldn't have seen the rise of some of the greatest empires under Muslim rule!
Prophet Mohammed didn't write a beautiful poem and then it became a memorable relic of history. It became history..
Therein lies the difference..

[Abdul Fattah]

Well, if you wanted a true comparison, then Buddhist Sutras or the Vedas would be more suitable. I simply doubted that many folks on the forums have read that sort of material. Lets not forget that some of these texts are simply massive (ie. Rig Veda) so it wouldnt really be fair to the modest size of the Qur'an. And as I said earlier, didnt want this to be a "my religion is better than your religion" type of thread.

Anyways, the Qur'an does delve into alot of different things, but I see it as a jack-of-all-trades master of none sort of deal though I still think it is still primarily a political text with poetry to make it easier to remember and religion to lesten the amount of questions and make it pretty. :)

Well you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I geuss that all what's left then is to agree to disagree. For what it's worth I have enjoyed discussing this issue with you and have learned from it.

[Isambard]

Depends by what you mean PA.

The works of Homer where worshipped for thousands of yrs, and even today among literature scholars.

If you want to go the great-grand daddies of "miraculous texts" then I suggest the Rig Veda. Sitting at around 4000yrs old, being massive and well preserved, containing all sorts of insightful facts about the universe and still have a massive following after all these yrs is very impressive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAdiJ8ZMurA

Then of course...there is the God father of religion.

The Epic Gilgamesh. It is the origin of Gensis, in particular, creation of Adam and Eve, the flood, Cain and Abel.
Its incredibly ancient and if you think about it, the empires revolving around the Abrahamic religions owe alot to them, so the Qur'an may have been responsible for some empires..but how many exactly did the stories taken out of Gilgamesh inspire? Exactly :D

[Isambard]

Well you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I geuss that all what's left then is to agree to disagree. For what it's worth I have enjoyed discussing this issue with you and have learned from it.

Ditto :)

If you have any questions about any of the books mentioned dont be afraid to ask.

On a side-note, was wondering if anyone could recommend some arabian literature (islamic or otherwise). As it stands, the books I have on this subject are few consisting only of the Qur'an, Book on Islamic History, Necronomicon....and some Rushdie..lol

So yeah, recommendations would be great :D

[Abdul Fattah]

On a side-note, was wondering if anyone could recommend some arabian literature (islamic or otherwise). As it stands, the books I have on this subject are few consisting only of the Qur'an, Book on Islamic History, Necronomicon....and some Rushdie..lol

So yeah, recommendations would be great :D

I take it you mean non-fiction right?
The first one that comes to mind is Tafsir ibn Kathir
www.tafsir.com
It's an explenation of the Qur'an, but not the writers interpretation, just explaining a general verse with a detailed verse, or explaining a verse with a hadeeth or with the event that happened right before it's revelation. I have it in hardcopy at home. It's about 7000 pages

Another good read (and a whole lot shorter) is the three fundamentals by Abdul-Wahab which explains the three things that every Muslim is obliged to know. For the rest, most of the books on my shelf are in dutch.

The books presented here are very good: http://www.darussalam.com/
But I expect some of them will be a bit to boring for non-Muslims by focusing on religious law (for example I doubt it you'd be interested in reading a 100 pages about exactly how prayer should be performed). So you'll probably enjoy reading the books that explain a bit of the history more.

[جوري]

Depends by what you mean PA.

The works of Homer where worshipped for thousands of yrs, and even today among literature scholars.

If you want to go the great-grand daddies of "miraculous texts" then I suggest the Rig Veda. Sitting at around 4000yrs old, being massive and well preserved, containing all sorts of insightful facts about the universe and still have a massive following after all these yrs is very impressive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAdiJ8ZMurA

Then of course...there is the God father of religion.

The Epic Gilgamesh. It is the origin of Gensis, in particular, creation of Adam and Eve, the flood, Cain and Abel.
Its incredibly ancient and if you think about it, the empires revolving around the Abrahamic religions owe alot to them, so the Qur'an may have been responsible for some empires..but how many exactly did the stories taken out of Gilgamesh inspire? Exactly :D

I don't believe such texts to be divinely inspired ( I obviousely don't expect that to have any sort of impact on you) if you find similarities in Abrahamic religions it is simply because they come from the same God!.. you can go read the ahura Mazda and it will be even more ancient than hindu texts.. and in it you'll see references to the coming of Christ and Mohammed PBUT..

you can see how this is the beginning, very early drawings have been made of the expulsion from heaven, and I am not talking neoclassicism or romanticism, I am talking cave paintings-- simply that even though Abraham is considered the father of monotheism, as he himself was an island, he wasn't the first Muslim.. and Yes he was Muslim because to be Muslim is to submit yourself to God and in that essence is the oldest religion.. before Abaraham were many others, starting with Adam the first prophet.. he might not have had texts or scrolls, but any compilation hence forth was a proliferation from that single basic idea... I have spend a great deal of my life in museums trying to piece this world together, and that is what I have concluded.. you can see a degeneracy of societies and from their midst comes a man to speak of the one true God, hence the prophets we know and those we don't-- people stray again they build their statues they make their own gods.. some have later compiled books, with some basic tenets that draw from or toward those divinely inspired -- a text that is untampered with is very easy to pick up on by a lingual and exegetical expert..

the simple difference between the Quran and the hadith is enough to be spotted by the naked eye.. if you were a but more discerning and this is really something that comes with experience you can and will pick up on how profound a text it is.. I can spend some time going over some suras just in show of exactly what that means-- it is clear that the suras no two are the same and very different from the written hadiths of the prophet PBUH.. further some suras are revealed practically 22 years apart and yet in style, rhythm, meaning and context there is an absolute flow, I have written a great deal of prose and poetry, in Arabic and English, you just can't come up with Quranic text, it is an impossibility whether or not you think the size of it is 'small' comparatively, the Quran is actually comprable to the bible volume wise and I believe I have written quite extensivly on that in a previous post.. ... its wonders truly never cease.. you just need to be able to navigate your way to understand exactly what that means, and if/when you do, it will do nothing short of make you shudder..

p.s
if you wanted some great Arabic literature, tell me which lines you are going for, poetry? novels? religious?


peace!

[Basirah]

Hi Basirah
You have made the straw-man fallacy again.

No I have not.

1. There are three possible classifications for the (alleged) event: "talking ants".
a)It is an event that is scientifically accurate (that is to say it goes according to the laws of science).

That is false since science proves otherwise.

c) It is an event that is not examined by science (that is to say, it is an event not described by any of the known laws of science we have, so we don't have any laws to check it by for posibility of violation).

We know how ants communicate. Your simply placing your hope on there being a scientific discovery that we do not know yet. That is basically ridiculous. You believe the Quran hoping that science comforms to it... Same as Bible pushers.

2. Your premise failed to consider that third option.

No it did not, because no one in any seriousness would say, the Quran is right and all the scientists are wrong, and they will wait for that day. It is idiotic I am afraid.

Such a method makes common sense for Muslims, because they have been trained to think that the Quran is faultless. Nevertheless, to use this method in a dispute is a completely diverse story. Muslims can’t anticipate that everyone will interpret Muhammad’s statements in the most sympathetic light conceivable when his dependability as a prophet is what is being investigated. The Muslim argument is intended to establish that Muhammad was a true prophet, but in order to prove their point, Muslims have to assume that Muhammad was a true prophet and that he consequently, couldn’t have made any errors. This makes the Muslim process of scriptural explanation a standard illustration of circular reasoning.

Use your mind, the Quran says that ants spoke and understood soloman. Stop being an apologetic and actually look at the ridiculous claim which disputes all scientific doscovery in regards to ants communication. Then judge for yourself.

3. By not considering all options you made the fallacy of false dilemma.

That is not an option when dealing with science and the Quran. If you want to be taken seriously in regards to speaking ants and soloman, when ants do not communicate using sounds, but instead things like chemicals, than to leave the option open that all the scientists are wrong is in itself naive.

I guess making this straw man fallacy again sets the score to 4-0 in my favor.

Not even worth my time.

Yes of course, that was never my intention either, the only reason I posted that whole analogy was to open your mind to this third possibility that you left out in your false dilemma. You could say it was sort of a warm-up. My actual refutation was nothing more then mentioning which fallacy you committed. I was assuming that since you gave me that site you would have been familiar enough with these fallacies to figure out your mistake by yourself after me mentioning the third possibility and mentioning the kind of fallacy.

In regards to this argument, you will have a very difficult time proving that any human can "hear" an ant.

Well the thing is, I don't have to prove it for it to be an acceptable possibility. In fact it's the other way around. Since you are the one making false dilemma, you are the one who has to disprove in order to save your argument. Allow me to explain that:

The burden of proof is on you. Science has already proven that the Qurans myth/tale of soloman hearing ants could not have occured without proving the existance of a god. We know how ants communicate. Hoping that some day science will be proven wrong is insane. Your not using any critical thinking and your letting your mind be controlled by a scripture and you let it define science and judge all of man discovery based on that book. I let myself go of such a thought process. Belive what you wish if it leads you to peace, but please do not tell me that the Quran is some scientific book and everything in it is from god, nor impose it on my family in places like Pakistan.

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

...only thing I can now hear clearly are Qur'anic recitations.

woowww , MashaAllah

Surely this problems ...partial deafness is good for ur life hereafter :)

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

....

Seeing as noone has read the Divine Comedy, (or any epics Im assuming) *grumpy face* It may be useless to compare poetics

.....Now....has anyone read any of these to compare the two? :P

I find it amazing that Quran can be memorised by non-Arabs.

A person who does not know the language …just learnt how to pronounce the words / know Alphabets only … can recite Quran from memory verbatim.

Pl. bring a single person who memorised his/her holy book or other book that has more than 6 thousands sentences in a language s/he does not understand.


God has made Quran easy to memorise . So , u will find millions people memorised it …..from 5 yrs to 50 yrs …. Boys , girls , young women , old men etc…all over the world. Each year , Quran memorising competition held in different countries.


Pl. let me know which book has such unique characteristic & followers since last more than 1000 yrs ?

[Isambard]

Salaam/peace;



I find it amazing that Quran can be memorised by non-Arabs.

A person who does not know the language …just learnt how to pronounce the words / know Alphabets only … can recite Quran from memory verbatim.

Pl. bring a single person who memorised his/her holy book or other book that has more than 6 thousands sentences in a language s/he does not understand.


God has made Quran easy to memorise . So , u will find millions people memorised it …..from 5 yrs to 50 yrs …. Boys , girls , young women , old men etc…all over the world. Each year , Quran memorising competition held in different countries.


Pl. let me know which book has such unique characteristic & followers since last more than 1000 yrs ?

The Rig Veda
Most of the Bible
Gilgamesh
Buddhist Sutras
etc.

What you mentioned isnt impressive if you remember how tiny the literate populace was compared overall population. Pretty much ever book central to to a culture was memorized. Reading was done in public to crowds which is why in alot of ancient texts youll find repetition and some specialized form/poetry/pattern so its easier to remember for listeners.

The current folks who memorize the Qur'an are large because its part of the culture and pretty much every other culture's reliance on easily printable books and internet.

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

The Rig Veda
Most of the Bible
Gilgamesh
Buddhist Sutras
etc.

What you mentioned isnt impressive .

Don’t make simple matter complicated pl.

Just tell me one name who memorised a book in a foreign language that has more than 6000 verses

[Isambard]

Salaam/peace;






Don’t make simple matter complicated pl.

Just tell me one name who memorised a book in a foreign language that has more than 6000 verses

You have entire cultures based around this. Basically any culture with bad literacy had to memorize. Just read up on some ancient culture.

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

. Basically any culture with bad literacy had to memorize. .

In India , south Africa …million people are illiterate. So , how many Hindus , Christians are there who memorised holy book in other language ?

Ok , take ur time …ask in other forums if anybody know of any such people.


Verses we need for this life & hereafter



Who is of better faith than he who submits himself to God while doing good and following the creed of Abraham, the true in faith?

For God chose Abraham as a friend.

-Quran (4:125)

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

Really where in the Quran does it say this? .

Qur’an chapter Nur/ Light (24:6-9)


And for those who accuse their wives, but have no witnesses except themselves,

let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies by Allah that he is one of those who speak the truth


And the fifth (testimony)



invoking of the curse of Allah on him if he be of those who tell a lie


But she shall avert the punishment from her, if she bears witness four times by Allah, that he is telling a lie

And the fifth; should be that the wrath of Allah be upon her if he speaks the truth


And had it not been for the grace of Allah and His mercy on you! And that Allah is the One Who forgives and accepts repentance, the All-Wise


Details of Al-Li`an




This Ayah offers a way out for husbands. If a husband has accused his wife but cannot come up with proof, he can swear the Li`an (the oath of condemnation) as Allah commanded.



This means that he brings her before the Imam and states what he is accusing her of.



The ruler then asks him to swear four times by Allah in front of four witnesses

[إِنَّهُ لَمِنَ الصَّـدِقِينَ]

(that he is one of those who speak the truth) in his accusation of her adultery.

[وَالْخَامِسَةُ أَنَّ لَعْنَةَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ إِن كَانَ مِنَ الْكَـذِبِينَ ]

(And the fifth; the invoking of the curse of Allah on him if he be of those who tell a lie.) If he says that, then she is divorced from him by the very act of this Li`an;


she is forever forbidden for him and he must give her Mahr to her.




The punishment for Zina should be carried out on her, and nothing can prevent the punishment except if she also swears the oath of condemnation (Li`an) and swears by Allah four times that he is one of those who lied, i.e., in what he is accusing her of;

[وَالْخَامِسَةَ أَنَّ غَضَبَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهَآ إِن كَانَ مِنَ الصَّـدِقِينَ ]

(And the fifth; should be that the crath of Allah be upon her if he speaks the truth.)



Allah says:

[وَيَدْرَؤُاْ عَنْهَا الْعَذَابَ]

(But she shall avert the punishment) meaning, the prescribed punishment.

[وَيَدْرَؤُاْ عَنْهَا الْعَذَابَ أَن تَشْهَدَ أَرْبَعَ شَهَادَاتٍ بِاللَّهِ إِنَّهُ لَمِنَ الْكَـذِبِينَ - وَالْخَامِسَةَ أَنَّ غَضَبَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهَآ إِن كَانَ مِنَ الصَّـدِقِينَ ]

(if she bears witness four times by Allah, that he is telling a lie. And the fifth; should be that the wrath of Allah be upon her if he speaks the truth.)



The wrath of Allah is mentioned specially in the case of the woman, because usually a man would not go to the extent of exposing his wife and accusing her of Zina unless he is telling the truth and has good reason to do this, and she knows that what he is accusing her of is true.



So in her case the fifth testimony calls for the wrath of Allah to be upon her, for the one upon whom is the wrath of Allah, is the one who knows the truth yet deviates from it.



Then Allah mentions His grace and kindness to His creation in that He has prescribed for them a way out of their difficulties.


Allah says:

[وَلَوْلاَ فَضْلُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَتُهُ]

(And had it not been for the grace of Allah and His mercy on you!) meaning, many of your affairs would have been too difficult for you,

[وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ تَوَّابٌ]

(And that Allah is the One Who forgives and accepts repentance,) means, from His servants, even if that comes after they have sworn a confirmed oath.

[حَكِيمٌ]

(the All-Wise. ) in what He prescribes and commands and forbids.



There are Hadiths which explain how we are to put this Ayah into effect, why it was revealed and concerning whom among the Companions it was revealed.

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=24&tid=35532



Next

Verses we need for this life & hereafter



Who is of better faith than he who submits himself to God while doing good and following the creed of Abraham, the true in faith? For God chose Abraham as a friend.

-Quran (4:125)

[rav]

Salaam/peace;






Don’t make simple matter complicated pl.

Just tell me one name who memorised a book in a foreign language that has more than 6000 verses

My Rabbi.

[Isambard]

Salaam/peace;



In India , south Africa …million people are illiterate. So , how many Hindus , Christians are there who memorised holy book in other language ?

Ok , take ur time …ask in other forums if anybody know of any such people.


Verses we need for this life & hereafter




Who is of better faith than he who submits himself to God while doing good and following the creed of Abraham, the true in faith?

For God chose Abraham as a friend.

-Quran (4:125)

As I mentioned, nowadays accessability to books, internet, news etc has rendered memorization of entire texts obsolete.

Memorization of the Qur'an then is cultural and not in any way special beyond that as necessity dictated the same be done across many cultures in the past.

Only ones I know of these days are street evangelists.

[جوري]

As I mentioned, nowadays accessability to books, internet, news etc has rendered memorization of entire texts obsolete.

Memorization of the Qur'an then is cultural and not in any way special beyond that as necessity dictated the same be done across many cultures in the past.

Only ones I know of these days are street evangelists.

memorization of the Quran isn't cultural, simply because the Quran isn't here for a particular culture.. Muslims of the middle east make but 18-20% of the Muslims world...
Memorization of the Quran has many pervading meanings and reasons other than what is patently obvious to you..
You'd have to understand some basic tenets to appreciate--
for instance being a Muslim is probably the lowest of humbled states for one who submits himself to God, then comes a Mo'min, then a mokhlis, then a a mo7sin... I am sure each of those states is novel to you? ( I could be wrong)
each are states of religiosity and by same token memorization of the Quran has stages and purposes..
Again going over these would require some place of confluence other than what loans itself to savage mordant wit, which unfortunately is a degenerative quality I have come to observe in many a posts!-- there is no point in discussing issues from the most fundamental to the most eminent of laws or jurisprudence or interpretation or transliteration when the issue of whether or not God exists seems to be an extraneous concept. You can't write with assertion on an a priori judgment of why something is exercised universally by those who are devout!

peace!

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

....Only ones I know of these days are street evangelists.

keeping holy Quran in heart / memorising is one of the reasons it is intact as it was in the past.

I mean , of course God is the keeper of the Quran but God made it possible that in the earth , there are / were always a lot of Qurani Hafiz ( who memorised the Quran ) .

So, it's not possible for any one to change any single word / add/ edit anything .....Hafizs' will catch them immediately. Followers of other holy books did not bother to memorise it ...so lost their original one.

Anyway , i don't want to urgue about the importance of memorising Quran. I m just asking to show me proof that other holy books or any book can be memorised in a foreign language . If u know anybody , pl. show enough proof . Who took his/her exam , when , how etc.


rav , pl. give more info about ur Rabbi. Does he know about ur claim ?

Pl. let me know where is he from , if hebrew is his mother tongue or not , who took any test of him that if he really memorised the wholy torah or not ? A Hafiz needs to pass the test ....this test can be viewed online .....anybody can check this matter. So , justify ur claim.

[Abdul Fattah]

Hi Basirah
You are denying to have made a strawman fallacy yet I see that in your previous post you told me that my premise is:

Your premise in the analogy is that god or a god like figure exists controling nature, one that you did not prove but assume to be true so that is fallicious.

while my actual premise was:
"There are three posibilities of which you failed to consider one."
So by arguing that I made a premise which I never did; you commited the straw men fallacy. Please note that is regardless of who is right and who is wrong about the ants. That is a simple matter of you misquoting me.
For more details on the straw man fallacy: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/strawmanarguments.html



I would also like to point out that in your last post you made the "argument from ignorance" fallacy.
I said that one of the three possible clasifications for the event is:
a)It is an event that is scientifically accurate (that is to say it goes according to the laws of science).
To this you replied with:

That is false since science proves otherwise.

So the argument you made is:
1. Science deos not know how it is possible.
2. Therefor science shows that it is impossible.
For more detail on argument from ignorance: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/arg...ignorance.html
I guess that makes it 5-0 in my favor.



Further you claimed that science knows how ants communicate. But that isn't completely true. We know some parts of it, but a lot of it is unknown. Furthermore you are again ignoring the posibility that next to the standard natural method there could be alternative supernatural methods (which is simply a repetition of your initial false dilemma fallacy and a repetition of the argument from ignorance I just explained above).



Next to that you have made a double fallacy!
When I said:
Your premise failed to consider that third option
You replied by:

No it did not, because no one in any seriousness would say, the Quran is right and all the scientists are wrong, and they will wait for that day. It is idiotic I am afraid.

Later on in your post you repeated that with:

That is not an option when dealing with science and the Quran. If you want to be taken seriously in regards to speaking ants and soloman, when ants do not communicate using sounds, but instead things like chemicals, than to leave the option open that all the scientists are wrong is in itself naive.

Now how is that a double fallacy? Well alllow me to explain:
First of all, it's a strawman's argument again. I never claimed that the third opton is:
"the Qur'an is right and scientists are wrong"
Instead what I claimed was that it could be an event not yet examined by science. (Hence neither being affirming nor violating)
Secondly, it's a fallacy of relevance. Because even if that would have been my argument (which it is not); even then failing to consider it would make your argument flawed. That is because even if an option is judged as idiotic (which by the way is a personal judgement and not "logic") even then you would have to add it to your dilemma as a valuable option and first refute it thouroughly before accepting the remaining option by elimination. In other words, my complaint was that you failed to consider it, wheter it is justifiable or not that you did.
For more information about the fallacy of relevance please look here: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/fal...relevance.html
Now since this is only one argument, I'll only count this double fallacy as a singly fallacy and set the score to 6-0 in my favor.

Such a method makes common sense for Muslims, because they have been trained to think that the Quran is faultless. Nevertheless, to use this method in a dispute is a completely diverse story. Muslims can’t anticipate that everyone will interpret Muhammad’s statements in the most sympathetic light conceivable when his dependability as a prophet is what is being investigated. The Muslim argument is intended to establish that Muhammad was a true prophet, but in order to prove their point, Muslims have to assume that Muhammad was a true prophet and that he consequently, couldn’t have made any errors. This makes the Muslim process of scriptural explanation a standard illustration of circular reasoning.

I am not expecting you to accept that the the Qur'an is perfect out of faith. that would indeed be circular as you pointed out. Instead I expect you to accept it is perfect due to a lack of flaws. So far you have shown no flaws. The story of the ants speaking is not a flaw. in fact if you claim it to be, then you are the one guilty of circular reasoning. You pointed out yourself that:

the Qurans myth/tale of soloman hearing ants could not have occured without proving the existance of a god.

That is a double-cutting sword. It is true that I cannot prove that the myth is true before first proving the existance of God, but it also means you cannot disprove it happened without first disproving God! that is exactly why we need that third option in your initial dilemma!

Use your mind, the Quran says that ants spoke and understood soloman. Stop being an apologetic and actually look at the ridiculous claim which disputes all scientific doscovery in regards to ants communication. Then judge for yourself.
...
In regards to this argument, you will have a very difficult time proving that any human can "hear" an ant.

Maybe you are the one who should open your mind. I think the problem is you are being hung up on the word speaking. Somehow you are convinced that such a term refers to making vocal resonanties picked up by the middle ear. Although that description is accurate, it is incomplete, there are other posibilities. For example the ants might have spoken to solomon telephatacally. This is just an example, but it clearly refutes your arguments that believing in this communication goes against science and is ridiculous. No, I'm sorry, it is not ridiculous at all, you are being close-minded.

The burden of proof is on you. Science has already proven that the Qurans myth/tale of soloman hearing ants could not have occured without proving the existance of a god.

I already refuted this by showing it's a double cutting sword. If you want to use the talking ants as an example of a flaw of the Qur'an you will first have to disprove the existance of God.

We know how ants communicate.

Like I said, we only know it partially

Hoping that some day science will be proven wrong is insane.

Like I said, science doesn't rule out the posibility, so that is a argument from ignorance fallacy.

Your not using any critical thinking

I beg to diffrence the score is 6-0 in my favor in terms of using fallacys.

and your letting your mind be controlled by a scripture and you let it define science and judge all of man discovery based on that book. I let myself go of such a thought process. Belive what you wish if it leads you to peace, but please do not tell me that the Quran is some scientific book and everything in it is from god, nor impose it on my family in places like Pakistan.

Actually that is not true either. See you are talking to someone who reverted to Islam at a later age. I first read the Qur'an, analysed it critically, and then made my conclusions from it and then reverted to Islam. So any claims that my opinion about it is biased by my faith is ungrounded since I formed my opinion about it before acquiring my new faith. Furthermore I will not ceise to tell people that the Qur'an is scientificly accurate simply because you disagree with it. Maybe if you first prove to me it has scientific innacuracies, then I might comply with your request.

[Basirah]

Hi Basirah
You are denying to have made a strawman fallacy yet I see that in your previous post you told me that my premise is:

while my actual premise was:
"There are three posibilities of which you failed to consider one."
So by arguing that I made a premise which I never did; you commited the straw men fallacy. Please note that is regardless of who is right and who is wrong about the ants. That is a simple matter of you misquoting me.
For more details on the straw man fallacy: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/strawmanarguments.html

Then your argument is flawed because the third possibility you offer is that science is wrong and the conclusions that science has PROVEN are wrong or must be understood as wrong by you because the Quran says different. That is being mindless. Accepting a book over actual proof.

So the argument you made is:
1. Science deos not know how it is possible.
2. Therefor science shows that it is impossible.
For more detail on argument from ignorance: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/arg...ignorance.html
I guess that makes it 5-0 in my favor.

On the contrary, you show your ignorance if you think science just "does not know". Science does know. In fact science has proven that ants do not use sound at all when communicating. And science has proven that it is impossible for the human ear or the human at all to interpret what an ant is communicating into language.

Further you claimed that science knows how ants communicate. But that isn't completely true. We know some parts of it, but a lot of it is unknown.

We know enough to not take seriously a tale of a humans and ant speaking with one another.

Furthermore you are again ignoring the posibility that next to the standard natural method there could be alternative supernatural methods (which is simply a repetition of your initial false dilemma fallacy and a repetition of the argument from ignorance I just explained above).

Give me one example.

Now how is that a double fallacy? Well alllow me to explain:
First of all, it's a strawman's argument again. I never claimed that the third opton is:
"the Qur'an is right and scientists are wrong"
Instead what I claimed was that it could be an event not yet examined by science. (Hence neither being affirming nor violating)

You claimed it. However, the event has been examined by science. Please tell me one alternative to a god like figure changing nature, in regards to how soloman spoke to an ant.

I am not expecting you to accept that the the Qur'an is perfect out of faith. that would indeed be circular as you pointed out. Instead I expect you to accept it is perfect due to a lack of flaws. So far you have shown no flaws. The story of the ants speaking is not a flaw. in fact if you claim it to be, then you are the one guilty of circular reasoning. You pointed out yourself that:

It is flawed though. I showed a passage which speaks of ants using 'sound' to communicate. That is a flaw in the Quran because it could not have occured.

That is a double-cutting sword. It is true that I cannot prove that the myth is true before first proving the existance of God, but it also means you cannot disprove it happened without first disproving God! that is exactly why we need that third option in your initial dilemma!

No one needs to disprove god. A bunch of books or 'scriptures' make the claim so the burden of proof rests on you to prove gods existance. If you ask me to disprove god's existance, i ask you to disprove the flying speghetti monsters existance.

You entire post rests on this flaw that there is this third option. Science has shown ants do not speak or use sound to communicate, and science has shown that humans cannot naturaly understand what ants are communicating. Therefore, the burden of proof is with you to disprove these existing proven methods. Until you do that, then what your doing is not basing any of your belief that the Quran is right based on logic.

___

Recap:

1. The Quran tells us that Soloman heard an ant.

2. Science tells us that it is not only completly unnatural and humans have no capacity to do this, but that ants do not even communicate by sound anyway, so the fact that soloman "heard and ant" means that this verse contradicts science.

3. Therefore, since science has proven that it is not natural and that ants do not use sound to communicate, it is now up to you to disprove this, or to come up with another way (which you have not done).

So please show me another alternative and cease with using this thrid alternative but being vague and not telling us what it is.

Maybe you are the one who should open your mind. I think the problem is you are being hung up on the word speaking. Somehow you are convinced that such a term refers to making vocal resonanties picked up by the middle ear. Although that description is accurate, it is incomplete, there are other posibilities. For example the ants might have spoken to solomon telephatacally. This is just an example, but it clearly refutes your arguments that believing in this communication goes against science and is ridiculous. No, I'm sorry, it is not ridiculous at all, you are being close-minded.

Please read the arabic again. It is very clear on what occured.

I already refuted this by showing it's a double cutting sword. If you want to use the talking ants as an example of a flaw of the Qur'an you will first have to disprove the existance of God.

No, I will use what science has proven and any other belief that contradicts science on this issue must be proven. It is not my job to prove god doesn't exist. Remember the Quran makes the claim.

<sarcasm>
If it is then my cousin spoke to ants as well and understood them. You see, he was about to step on there pile and they say "O' Rasheed, please stop!" so he stopped! It was amazing. I don't care what science says, it happend! Prove it didn't! Oh yeah, and while he was speaking to ants, the ants said that they were prophets and we really need to worship ants all day...</sarcasm>

Remember Rasheed makes the claim.

Like I said, science doesn't rule out the posibility, so that is a argument from ignorance fallacy.

Yes it does. Science does indeed rule it out until someone proves science wrong, and btw, science has proven this in a very solid way.

Argument from Ignorance says that a proposition is true from the fact that it is not known to be false. You wrote: "science doesn't rule out the posibility".

Oh and by the way. Science does rule out the possibility that ants use speech. It is ruled completly out that a human could hear what an ant was 'saying'.

Actually that is not true either. See you are talking to someone who reverted to Islam at a later age. I first read the Qur'an, analysed it critically, and then made my conclusions from it and then reverted to Islam. So any claims that my opinion about it is biased by my faith is ungrounded since I formed my opinion about it before acquiring my new faith. Furthermore I will not ceise to tell people that the Qur'an is scientificly accurate simply because you disagree with it. Maybe if you first prove to me it has scientific innacuracies, then I might comply with your request.

Ask anyone who studied Myrmecology if the Quran's account of talking ants is scientificaly inaccurate and then see what they say. You could always plead that there could be another option or a third alternative that we do not yet know, but that is on you to prove. Not the scientists who have shown how ants communicate to 'disprove'.

[Isambard]

Salaam/peace;

keeping holy Quran in heart / memorising is one of the reasons it is intact as it was in the past.

I mean , of course God is the keeper of the Quran but God made it possible that in the earth , there are / were always a lot of Qurani Hafiz ( who memorised the Quran ) .

So, it's not possible for any one to change any single word / add/ edit anything .....Hafizs' will catch them immediately. Followers of other holy books did not bother to memorise it ...so lost their original one.

Except literary analysis and historic finds tells us that the "corrupted" versions (Im thinking you are referring to the bible) are the original versions. What has been changed is the retro-fitting of the philosophy that also exists in islam in the form of making Islam more liberal or bizarre metaphors into "miracles of science"

Anyway , i don't want to urgue about the importance of memorising Quran. I m just asking to show me proof that other holy books or any book can be memorised in a foreign language . If u know anybody , pl. show enough proof . Who took his/her exam , when , how etc.


As I said, its no longer a requirement. Closest youll find now are evangelists who memorize the bible to continuously harass other by spouting verses, and some other religious leaders.

As per another language...so? I memorized some parts of Goethe's Faust and some Rammstein songs. Its just a matter of interest.

:thankyou:

[Woodrow]

I'm just posting this to give a view about "Talking Ants"


When Ants Squeak
Eavesdropping on lesser-known bulletins from the hill

Susan Milius

If you haven't stuck an ant in your ear recently, don't write the insect off as the strong, silent type.



Leaf cutting Atta cephalotes ants often make noises while they work, generating the sound by rasping a filelike widget on one body segment against a specialized rough spot on a neighboring segment. Here, two ants are cutting a leaf as smaller nestmates loiter.
James K. Wetterer/Florida Atlantic University

Many species make tiny squeaks that people can hear if they hold an ant close enough. The rich chemical communication of ants has claimed more attention from scientists in recent decades, but a small band of researchers has been sorting out ant sounds


Source:http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20000205/bob12.asp

[Abdul Fattah]

Hi Bashirah, since you chose not to add new information in your latest post but instead just recycle the arguments I already refuted I am not going to put much effort in it either and just recycle the previous refutations.

Then your argument is flawed because the third possibility you offer is that science is wrong and the conclusions that science has PROVEN are wrong or must be understood as wrong by you because the Quran says different. That is being mindless. Accepting a book over actual proof.

You just don't learn do you? Strawmen fallacy again. 7-0

On the contrary, you show your ignorance if you think science just "does not know". Science does know. In fact science has proven that ants do not use sound at all when communicating. And science has proven that it is impossible for the human ear or the human at all to interpret what an ant is communicating into language.

Well Woodrow has already refuted that with his article. And I already refuted this line of thinking before by showing you you're hung up on your limited definition of speaking.

Give me one example.

I already did. You know, it wouldn't hurt you to actually read the full post first and only then start to form replies! Albeit only for the sake of consistency.

You claimed it. However, the event has been examined by science. Please tell me one alternative to a god like figure changing nature, in regards to how soloman spoke to an ant.

Argument from ignorance fallacy again. 8-0

It is flawed though. I showed a passage which speaks of ants using 'sound' to communicate. That is a flaw in the Quran because it could not have occured.

Hung up on definition again. + Argument of Ignorance. 9-0

No one needs to disprove god. A bunch of books or 'scriptures' make the claim so the burden of proof rests on you to prove gods existance. If you ask me to disprove god's existance, i ask you to disprove the flying speghetti monsters existance.

Listen, I ain't got to prove nothing. If you don't want to believe that's your problem. And that's just fine with me. The relevance here is, that you are the one who started this whole thing by claiming the ants is an example of the Qur'an being scientifically incorrect. But that is based on the assumption God doesn't exist. So unless you are willing to abandon your argument you are the one with the burden of proof. If neither of us prove anything, then we're just back at square one like it was before you started commenting since all your comments have been refuted. So no, I don't need to prove anything.

You entire post rests on this flaw that there is this third option. Science has shown ants do not speak or use sound to communicate, and science has shown that humans cannot naturaly understand what ants are communicating.

Well yes, there you said it, science shows it could not have happened naturally. Exactly. But I never claimed it did! I claimed it happened supernaturally!

Therefore, the burden of proof is with you to disprove these existing proven methods. Until you do that, then what your doing is not basing any of your belief that the Quran is right based on logic.

Well strawman fallacy again as I showed in previous line you got my premise all wrong (again sigh).

1. The Quran tells us that Soloman heard an ant.
2. Science tells us that it is not only completly unnatural and humans have no capacity to do this, but that ants do not even communicate by sound anyway, so the fact that soloman "heard and ant" means that this verse contradicts science.

No that's wrong. The Qur'an says he spoke with it. It doesn't clarify "how". It doesn't mention the words "mouth"; "sound" or "ear". You just assumed it meant that because that is the way of speaking you are most familiar with.
Furthermore Woodrow has shown that ants do make sound.

So please show me another alternative and cease with using this thrid alternative but being vague and not telling us what it is.

I have every right being vague when I am simply refuting your fallacys. If I would have been teh one making claims, and you were the one refuting them, I would be forced not to be vague. When I am the refuter, it is sufficient for me to refute without taking clear positions. You might think that's unfair, well sorry, but that's what you get from stubbornly holding on to flawed arguments.

No, I will use what science has proven and any other belief that contradicts science on this issue must be proven. It is not my job to prove god doesn't exist. Remember the Quran makes the claim.

Like I said, you are the one making claims about scientific inaccuracies. So if you want to defend your arguments I have refuted, it boils down to disproving the existence of God.

<sarcasm>
If it is then my cousin spoke to ants as well and understood them. You see, he was about to step on there pile and they say "O' Rasheed, please stop!" so he stopped! It was amazing. I don't care what science says, it happend! Prove it didn't! Oh yeah, and while he was speaking to ants, the ants said that they were prophets and we really need to worship ants all day...</sarcasm>

I guess using sarcasm like that shows how serious you are.

Yes it does. Science does indeed rule it out until someone proves science wrong, and btw, science has proven this in a very solid way.

You don't understand science. Science analyses how events work. It doesn't rule out the possibility that it happens trough other methods.

Oh and by the way. Science does rule out the possibility that ants use speech. It is ruled completly out that a human could hear what an ant was 'saying'.

-refuted by woodrow
-strawmen fallacy
-argument from ignorance fallacy

Ask anyone who studied Myrmecology if the Quran's account of talking ants is scientificaly inaccurate and then see what they say.

Oh that's a new one. They call it the fallacy of appeal to authority.
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/appealtoauthority.html

You could always plead that there could be another option or a third alternative that we do not yet know, but that is on you to prove. Not the scientists who have shown how ants communicate to 'disprove'.

See, let me explain this one last time. When there is a third option, regardless of it being right or wrong. If you use law of elimination in an argument; then you have to eliminate all those options. So if you insist on your argument, you have to first disprove this possibility (and hence disprove the existence of God).
Good luck with that

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace

i don't want to urgue about the importance of memorising Quran. I m just asking to show me proof that other holy books or any book can be memorised in a foreign language

...As I said, its no longer a requirement..

Conclusion :)

Quran is the only holy book in the earth ever that is memorised by millions & is being recited ( from memory ) 5 times daily by millions...Amazing :D


&&&

The Divine Book Of Allah



Quran – A living miracle!



Quran was preserved by different ways and means;


one of the most wonderful was the way of memorizing (Hifz-e-Quran) It seems very difficult, perhaps even impossible for an individual to learn a whole book by heart.



Yet, Quran being the living miracle of Allah, it has supernatural qualities in its words. Millions of Muslims all around the world memorize the whole Quran.




Additionally, it is a reality that 85&#37; of Muslims world wide are non-Arabs. Quran in the original Arabic language is easily memorized by a 9-10 year old; non-Arab children whose native language is not Arabic, memorize Quran word to word; such is the way that Quran is preserved 100% in the hearts and minds of the Muslims till the Day of Judgment.




1,400 hundred years after its revelation, Quran remains the exceptional book of God on earth, which is comprehensive and unassailable (that is to say it has been impossible to make any amendments and alterations to the words, text or meaning of Quran so far).


It is a firm belief of Muslims that there will not be a change in even the sound of Quran till the Day of the Resurrection.



In the words of Quran regarding its authenticity for all times to come:

"Those who disbelieve in the Reminder when it comes unto them (are guilty), for indeed it is an unassailable Scripture. Falsehood cannot come at it from before it or behind it. (It is) a revelation from the Wise, the Owner of Praise" (Quran 41 :41-42).

(Further details about miracles of Quran will discussed in forthcoming chapters).

http://www.suite101.com/lesson.cfm/19183/2774/3
&&


More than 10 million people living today (mostly non-Arabs) have memorized the Quran in the Arabic language on earth today



Are there scientifically proven "miracles" in the Quran? -


Find out what many professors and scientists actually say... - QURAN Miracles




http://www.islamtomorrow.com/quran


Verses we need for this life & hereafter

'Did you think that We had created you without any purpose and that you would never return to Us (for accountability)?'

-Quran (23:115)

[Isambard]

You arnt listening.....

Catholics have a Pope, no other groups has a Pope

Therefore Catholism is the one true religion.

(There is no difference in arguement)

If you want to prove the Qur'an's divinity, do it thru comparative literature.

[Isambard]

I just remembered that some of the books I mentioned can be found online.

For Poetics

Paradise Lost
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Paradise_Lost

The Divine Comedy
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Divine_Comedy/Inferno
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Di...edy/Purgatorio
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Di...omedy/Paradiso

The Rig Veda
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Rig_Veda

For politics/ Philosophy

The Republic
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Republic

Thus Spoke Zarathrusta
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Thus_Spake_Zarathustra

I dont expect anyone the read the whole thing online, but at the very least, to whet your appetite ;)

[جوري]

You arnt listening.....

Catholics have a Pope, no other groups has a Pope

Therefore Catholism is the one true religion.

(There is no difference in arguement)

If you want to prove the Qur'an's divinity, do it thru comparative literature.

ha? we need to reduce your argument to its bare structure.. your premise and your conclusion don't follow .. I am afraid that is what we'd call an equivocation... dreadful indeed... in order for you to prove the Quran's divinity it can be done comparatively indeed but only to similar texts and that would be those of Abrahamic origin... but in fact I think some pieces stand alone, if there is nothing to compare them to.. and certainly the Quran has multitudes of events, that not only have never occured in similar texts, but that we are only discovering for the first time and only recently hence 'transcendence' and as new as today.. so how can such events be compared?

further in the style which they were written... some deem as sheer poetry but it isn't a poem! that is just on a very basic denominator.. I have read everything from Rimbaud to proust to baudelaire, to your 'divine comedies' to all kinds of existential crap don't assume we burry our heads in Islamic literature all day, I think it is very insulting these presumptions --no matter--- ( nothing is even remotly superior or similar) to the Noble Quran
An Analogy:
That is how research is done on orphan drugs you see for instance

Someone comes up with an antihypertensive drug say Reserpine by extracting the root of the plant Rauwolfia serpentina..It is first of its kind, there is really nothing to compare it to, thus you run some studies (phase I, II, III, and in some cases IV) see how actions, contraindications etc etc you run an abstract.... someone in the discourse of the trial notices that indeed there is a lowering of blood pressure but as a result all the control group end up in a downward spiral of depression.. another person comes up with the idea to test depression of these neurotransmitters which they deem responsible for depression, find out that indeed if you block these alpha-adrenergic agents, a person might end up depressed and thus decides to branch out and make medications that target these particular neurotransmitters to treat depression.

Both studies might be related by a common theme, but both are very new ventures, and there is nothing to compare them to... they are a first of their kind.. every drug from henceforth whether or not a distillate, 2nd , third even fourth generation, of the original or targets some other mechanism all together will be constructed from the original research not vice versa.. and the original will always stand whether or not people choose to accept it as a the lead point or even to use or archive... thus it isn't an object for comparison.. if it were, it would be measured against its ownself... simply since, there is nothing out there like it.. nothing to compare it to!
peace!

[Isambard]

ha? we need to reduce your argument to its bare structure.. your premise and your conclusion don't follow .. I am afraid that is what we'd call an equivocation... dreadful indeed... in order for you to prove the Quran's divinity it can be done comparatively indeed but only to similar texts and that would be those of Abrahamic origin... but in fact I think some pieces stand alone, if there is nothing to compare them to.. and certainly the Quran has multitudes of events, that not only have never occured in similar texts, but that we are only discovering for the first time and only recently hence 'transcendence' and as new as today.. so how can such events be compared?

*Yawn* I see you missed the post mine was in response to. Dont worry, it happens when one only does selective reading and quote mining.

Anyways, I dont see why you feel the Qur'an is unique in terms of material. if you are looking for content, it is simply a retelling and altered compilations of "The Life of Adam and Eve", "Infancy Gospel of Thomas", assorted arabian pre-islamic myths etc.

further in the style which they were written... some deem as sheer poetry but it isn't a poem! that is just on a very basic denominator.. I have read everything from Rimbaud to proust to baudelaire, to your 'divine comedies' to all kinds of existential crap don't assume we burry our heads in Islamic literature all day, I think it is very insulting these presumptions --no matter--- ( nothing is even remotly superior or similar) to the Noble Quran

Im sorry to say, but your one comment (which incorrect btw) was word for word taken off of wikipedia in what I can only assume to be an attempt to feign knowledge over something you dont know about.

And why do you find what i say offensive? You would have me believe the Qur'an is unique and above all other literature, yet you havent read anything similar. I have, and in my opinion it is a good piece but hardly divinely inspired.

How bout you try reading some of the stuff I contest the Qur'an with and then we discuss, fair?

[جوري]

*Yawn* I see you missed the post mine was in response to. Dont worry, it happens when one only does selective reading and quote mining.

Anyways, I dont see why you feel the Qur'an is unique in terms of material. if you are looking for content, it is simply a retelling and altered compilations of "The Life of Adam and Eve", "Infancy Gospel of Thomas", assorted arabian pre-islamic myths etc.

I haven't missed the point at all, I just can't find one in the midst of all that gallimaufry-- Tell me where in the stories of 'old' is there a mention of As7ab Al fil, Qawm toba3, A'ad, Thamud, Erum just a few for starters and how they are 'mythical' if NASA just found the lost city of uber long thought to be a Quranic myth and wasn't even known to the Arabs of the time, since there was nothing else to 'validate' it in previous scriptures, tell me where I should find the story of Zho El-Qarnyen or the Christians of the Cave, neither mythological nor found in any other but Quranic text.. I should also expect that it should be an easy navigation given how much studying you have done?

Im sorry to say, but your one comment (which incorrect btw) was word for word taken off of wikipedia in what I can only assume to be an attempt to feign knowledge over something you dont know about.

And why do you find what i say offensive? You would have me believe the Qur'an is unique and above all other literature, yet you havent read anything similar. I have, and in my opinion it is a good piece but hardly divinely inspired.

Please pretty please show me 'my one comment which is incorrect by the way and taken word for word from wiki' I'd love to see it .. as for the later part of that sentence, that is what we call projecting.. terrible when you swagger and then get deflated?--

Last points!
1-You don't see how the Quran is unique simply because you are ill read, not because you have a point. stifling a Yawn is a very mature defense mechanism? but hardly the basis of a debate!
2- please show me where my words are taken from wikipedia word for word! I really do insist and show me in which way they are incorrect!
3- bring your superior material and let's discuss it, after all it is a child that blathers and a man that speaks his mind!
4- I don't find mindless drivel offensive at all, I just find it a waste of band width, probably it is your wish that I'd find it offensive as a measure of credence? but unfortunately I don't find tantruming the basis for a viable debate!

peace!

[جوري]

for people who are taking this sort of debate seriousely, who are not sophomoric, bring me this from another text.. and let's compare

Ancient Peoples in Oman


The Lost City of Ubar
(This short article is from: source

At the beginning of 1990, there appeared press-releases in the well-known newspapers of the world declaring "Fabled Lost Arabian city found," "Arabian city of Legend found," "The Atlantis of the Sands, Ubar." What rendered this archaeological find more intriguing was the fact that this city was also referred to in the Qur'an. Many people who, since then, thought that 'Ad recounted in the Qur'an were a legend or that their location could never be found, could not conceal their astonishment at this discovery. The discovery of this city, which was only mentioned in oral stories of Bedouins, awoke great interest and curiosity.

Well, what was it that proved this city to be the city of the people of 'Ad mentioned in the Qur'an? Right from the moment remains started to be unearthed, it was understood that this ruined city belonged to 'Ad and of Iram's pillars mentioned in the Qur'an, because among the structures unearthed were the towers particularly referred to in the Qur'an. A member of the research team leading the excavation, Dr. Zarins, said that since the towers were alleged to be the distinctive feature of Ubar, and since Iram was mentioned as having towers or pillars, this then was the strongest proof so far that the site they had unearthed was Iram, the city of 'Ad described in the Qur'an.

The Qur'an mentions Iram as follows:

"Seest thou not how thy Lord dealt with the 'Ad (people), Of the (city of) Iram, with lofty pillars, The like of which were not produced in (all) the land?"

(The Holy Qur'an: Surat al-Fajr, 6-8)



Check Out These Great Exibitions:
NASA Observatorium Ubar The Lost City

NOVA Online-Lost City of Arabia

Slide Show of the Current Excavations

What happened to cause the destruction of the city of Ubar and its people, the Ad? Read the Quranic version of their demise in this interesting article:

The Prophet Hud

The Shrine of the Tomb of the Prophet Job ("Ayoub" in Arabic), peace be upon him, is in the southern Omani city of Salalah. Read here the story of Prophet Job:

[QUOTE]
THE LOST CITY OF UBAR

THE PEOPLE OF 'AD AND UBAR, THE ATLANTIS OF THE SANDS

source]

[جوري]

mmmmmmm just for fun in case this is what you are referencing us to copied 'WORD FOR WORD' from wiki... in fact I challenge you to find this article at all on the web!

Reserpine: Drug information
Copyright 1978-2006 Lexi-Comp, Inc. All rights reserved.



(For additional information see "Reserpine: Patient drug information")

PHARMACOLOGIC CATEGORY
Central Monoamine-Depleting Agent
Rauwolfia Alkaloid

DOSING: ADULTS
Hypertension:
**Manufacturer's labeling: Initial: 0.5 mg/day for 1-2 weeks; maintenance: 0.1-0.25 mg/day
**Note: Clinically, the need for a "loading" period (as recommended by the manufacturer) is not well supported, and alternative dosing is preferred.
**Alternative dosing (unlabeled): Initial: 0.1 mg once daily; adjust as necessary based on response.
**Usual dose range (JNC 7): 0.05-0.25 mg once daily; 0.1 mg every other day may be given to achieve 0.05 mg once daily

Schizophrenia (labeled use) or tardive dyskinesia (unlabeled use): Dosing recommendations vary; initial dose recommendations generally range from 0.05-0.25 mg (although manufacturer recommends 0.5 mg once daily initially in schizophrenia). May be increased in increments of 0.1-0.25 mg; maximum dose in tardive dyskinesia: 5 mg/day.

DOSING: PEDIATRIC — Children: Hypertension: 0.01-0.02 mg/kg/24 hours divided every 12 hours; maximum dose: 0.25 mg/day (not recommended in children)

DOSING: ELDERLY — Oral: Initial: 0.05 mg once daily increasing by 0.05 mg every week as necessary (full antihypertensive effects may take as long as 3 weeks).

DOSING: RENAL IMPAIRMENT
Clcr <10 mL/minute: Avoid use.

Not removed by hemo- or peritoneal dialysis; supplemental dose is not necessary.

DOSAGE FORMS — Tablet: 0.1 mg, 0.25 mg

DOSAGE FORMS: CONCISE
Tablet: 0.1 mg, 0.25 mg

GENERIC EQUIVALENT AVAILABLE — Yes

USE — Management of mild-to-moderate hypertension; treatment of agitated psychotic states (schizophrenia)

USE - UNLABELED / INVESTIGATIONAL — Management of tardive dyskinesia

ADVERSE REACTIONS SIGNIFICANT — Frequency not defined.

Cardiovascular: Peripheral edema, arrhythmia, bradycardia, chest pain, PVC, hypotension, syncope

Central nervous system: Dizziness, headache, nightmares, nervousness, drowsiness, fatigue, mental depression, parkinsonism, dull sensorium, paradoxical anxiety

Dermatologic: Rash, pruritus, flushing of skin, purpura

Endocrine & metabolic: Gynecomastia, weight gain

Gastrointestinal: Anorexia, diarrhea, dry mouth, nausea, vomiting, increased salivation, increased gastric acid secretion

Genitourinary: Impotence, decreased libido

Hematologic: Thrombocytopenia purpura

Neuromuscular & skeletal: Muscle ache

Ocular: Blurred vision, optic atrophy

Respiratory: Nasal congestion, dyspnea, epistaxis

CONTRAINDICATIONS — Hypersensitivity to reserpine or any component of the formulation; active peptic ulcer disease, ulcerative colitis; history of mental depression (especially with suicidal tendencies); patients receiving electroconvulsive therapy (ECT)

WARNINGS / PRECAUTIONS — Use with caution in patients with impaired renal function, inflammatory bowel disease, asthma, Parkinson's disease, gallstones, or history of peptic ulcer disease, and the elderly. At high doses, significant mental depression, anxiety, or psychosis may occur (uncommon at dosages <0.25 mg/day). May cause orthostatic hypotension; use with caution in patients at risk of hypotension or in patients where transient hypotensive episodes would be poorly tolerated (cardiovascular disease or cerebrovascular disease). Avoid concurrent use of MAO inhibitors and/or drugs with MAO-inhibiting properties. Some products may contain tartrazine.

DRUG INTERACTIONS
Antihypertensives: Hypotensive effects may be increased.

CNS depressants, ethanol: Additive CNS effects may occur.

Digitalis glycosides: Concomitant administration may predispose some patients to cardiac arrhythmias.

MAO inhibitors: Reserpine may cause hypertensive reactions; concurrent use is not recommended. Theoretically, risk is decreased if reserpine is initiated several days prior to MAO inhibitors.

Quinidine, procainamide: Reserpine may increase the risk of cardiac arrhythmias effects.

Sympathomimetics: The effects of direct-acting sympathomimetics (eg, epinephrine, norepinephrine) may be modestly increased/prolonged. However, the effects of indirect-acting sympathomimetics (amphetamines, dopamine) may be blocked by reserpine.

ETHANOL / NUTRITION / HERB INTERACTIONS
Ethanol: Avoid ethanol (may increase CNS depression).

Herb/Nutraceutical: Avoid dong quai if using for hypertension (has estrogenic activity). Avoid ephedra, yohimbe (may worsen hypertension). Avoid valerian, St John's wort, kava kava, gotu kola (may increase CNS depression). Avoid garlic (may have increased antihypertensive effect).

PREGNANCY RISK FACTOR — C (show table)

LACTATION — Enters breast milk/use caution

PRICING — (data from drugstore.com)
Tablets (Reserpine)
**0.25 mg (30): $11.90

MONITORING PARAMETERS — Blood pressure, standing and sitting/supine

INTERNATIONAL BRAND NAMES — Hiposerpil&#174; (RO); Raunevril&#174; (RO); Raupasil&#174; (PL); Resapin&#174; (ID); Reserpina&#174; (BR); Reserpin&#174; (BG); Serpasil&#174; (ID)

MECHANISM OF ACTION — Reduces blood pressure via depletion of sympathetic biogenic amines (norepinephrine and dopamine); this also commonly results in sedative effects

PHARMACODYNAMICS / KINETICS
Onset of action: Antihypertensive: 3-6 days

Duration: 2-6 weeks

Absorption: ~40&#37;

Distribution: Crosses placenta; enters breast milk

Protein binding: 96%

Metabolism: Extensively hepatic (>90%)

Half-life elimination: 50-100 hours

Excretion: Feces (30% to 60%); urine (10%)


Use of UpToDate is subject to the Subscription and License Agreement. REFERENCES 1.*Chobanian, AV, Bakris, GL, Black, HR, et al. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: The JNC 7 Report. JAMA 2003;

[Isambard]

I haven't missed the point at all, I just can't find one in the midst of all that gallimaufry-- Tell me where in the stories of 'old' is there a mention of As7ab Al fil, Qawm toba3, A'ad, Thamud, Erum just a few for starters and how they are 'mythical' if NASA just found the lost city of uber long thought to be a Quranic myth and wasn't even known to the Arabs of the time, since there was nothing else to 'validate' it in previous scriptures, tell me where I should find the story of Zho El-Qarnyen or the Christians of the Cave, neither mythological nor found in any other but Quranic text.. I should also expect that it should be an easy navigation given how much studying you have done?

Comment below

Please pretty please show me 'my one comment which is incorrect by the way and taken word for word from wiki' I'd love to see it .. as for the later part of that sentence, that is what we call projecting.. terrible when you swagger and then get deflated?--

Your post, #14.
"lol divine comedy was actually stolen from Islamic literature, if you'd do some reading, you'd have already learned so, he'd be sued for plagiarism .. the irony is the ba$tard steals from us only to put Muslims in hell... never saw your old post, but glad I have the opportunity to point it out in this one..."

And where you stole that info from....

"In 1919 Professor Miguel Asín Palacios, a Spanish scholar and a Catholic priest, published La Escatología musulmana en la Divina Comedia ("Islamic Eschatology and the Divine Comedy"). This was an account, compiled after years of extensive study, of parallels Asín Palacios had discovered between Islamic philosophy and the eschatology of the Divine Comedy. The perceived similarities pervade the entire poem. Asín Palacios concluded that Dante derived most of the features of and episodes about the hereafter from two main sources: the Hadith and the Kitab al Miraj (translated into Latin in 1264 or shortly before[3] as Liber Scale Machometi ["The Book of Muhammad's Ladder"]) concerning the Prophet's ascension to Heaven, and the spiritual writings of Ibn Arabi. The Divine Comedy was therefore not, in Asín Palacios's opinion, an entirely original work—as had been heretofore assumed—since Dante had before him a ready-made pattern based on Islamic writings on the afterlife. (This would be particularly ironic if true, in light of the fact that in Canto XXVIII of the Inferno Dante consigned the Islamic supreme prophet Muhammad to the eighth circle of hell, as a "seminator di scandalo e di scisma"—a "sower of scandal and schism"—in line with Catholic dogma regarding Islam, as evidenced by the title of the first Latin translation of the Qu'ran: Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete.)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_...mic_philosophy

Which I pointed out later one, is a silly thing to say as the Islamic philosophy regarding the layered heavens can be found even earlier in Paul's writings, which then can be traced back to the Boof of Arda Virafh. If you want to get techinical, then he also borrows alot from Vigil, but Dante makes no secret of that.

Last points!
1-You don't see how the Quran is unique simply because you are ill read, not because you have a point. stifling a Yawn is a very mature defense mechanism? but hardly the basis of a debate!

Inability to understand what is being discussed does not make the point invalid. Read the thread again.
2- please show me where my words are taken from wikipedia word for word! I really do insist and show me in which way they are incorrect!
Done
3- bring your superior material and let's discuss it, after all it is a child that blathers and a man that speaks his mind!
Re-read the thread. If you want an added challenge, busy yourself with this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_%28god%29
Or trying to explain why there is absolutly no evidence for the Qur'ans version of the Injeel. If anything, everything contradicts the claims
4- I don't find mindless drivel offensive at all, I just find it a waste of band width, probably it is your wish that I'd find it offensive as a measure of credence? but unfortunately I don't find tantruming the basis for a viable debate!
The irony....lol
peace!

Will comment on your first point in a bit.

[جوري]

Will comment on your first point in a bit.

I still don't see your point, the fact that he plagiarized is common knowledge to anyone who picks up a book and reads it and makes a comparison. by the way I had answered you sufficiently but my two posts were removed! thus I still insist you show me where I have copied it word for word from wiki? If you are going to accuse little boy at least stand by your charges..
The rest is just a bunch of drivel.. if you bring a topic to the table it becomes incumbent upon you to prove your point.Point out the downfalls, the similarities, I expect that you have some dextrity of language of exegetical and critical interpretation, I expect that you meet the challenge on every level
1- political
2- economical
3- governmental
4-poetical
5-social
6- as well as infleunce including that which deals with every day life -- show me where another text has had that kind of profound and prophetical impact..

This has nothing to do with what I have read or haven't read.. there is no way for you to judge that until you bring some actual beef to the table.
This isn't a contest of machismo and insults.. you can't handle a topic don't bring it up or decide the cowards insults are the best way out.
peace!

[جوري]

تَبَارَكَ الَّذِي جَعَلَ فِي السَّمَاء بُرُوجًا وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا سِرَاجًا وَقَمَرًا مُّنِيرًا {61}

[Pickthal 25:61] Blessed be He Who hath placed in the heaven mansions of the stars, and hath placed therein a great lamp and a moon giving light!
[Pooya/Ali Commentary 25:61]
says:
Buruj (constellations) refers to the signs of the Zodiac, which mark the path of the planets in the heavens. See commentary of Hijr : 16.

A conundrum indeed are these Quranic verses.. to insaan 7aqeer, zhaleel wo kaffir!....

The Qur'an And Modern Science
The Qur'an, as the final word of God, anticipated many of the modern scientific discoveries which were beyond human imagination 14 centuries ago. The Muslim scientific revolution, which produced the renaissance that put Muslims at the top of the civilized world for 8 centuries, was a result of contemplating the clues in the Qur'an about the physical world.

This separates the Qur'an from other religious texts which were limited to the knowledge of the people at the time the text was completed.

Muslims always considered the Qur'an a miracle. The Qur'an is a living miracle that can be verified today by anyone and does not depend on accepting ancient accounts of miracles without question.

The following examples show modern discoveries that are consistent with the Qur'an:

The heavens and the earth were one before they were ripped apart. Life started in the water and living things are mostly water [21:30]. Today when scientists look for traces of life on Mars or Jupiter moons, they look for water!
Reptiles came out of the water and were followed by two legged then 4 legged creatures [24:45].
The heavens are expanding [51:47]. Modern science tells us that the universe was started from a singularity. The pictures taken by Edwin Hubbell in Mount Wilson observatory in 1929 showed that the universe was expanding which led to the Big Bang theory. The Qur'an anticipated this "discovery" by 14 centuries.
The heaven used to be smoke [41:11]. We know that smoke is a mixture of hot gases and suspended particles.
The atom is not the smallest unit of matter in the universe which indicates the presence of subatomic particles! [34:3]
The Universe was created over a very long period. For God, some days last 1000 lunar years [22:47, 32:5]. This was used by Professor Mansour Hassab-Elnaby, an Egyptian physicist, to calculate the speed of light C=299792.5 km/s !!!
The Qur'an predicts that the speed of light is not the fastest speed in the universe. Spirits and angels proceed to God at 50 times the speed of light [70:4]
The earth rotates around its axis [27:88], rotates around the sun [7:54], is not flat but is like a ball [39:5] or an egg [79:30].
The lowest point on earth is near the dead sea [30:3].
Iron was sent to earth by God [57:25]. Scientists now believe that iron was introduced to earth by meteors.
The oceans have layers of waves and layers of darkness in which some creatures have light [24:40]. Scientists discovered recently different currents at different depths.
When different seas ( i.e. different in salinity, temperature, oxygen content, etc. ) meet, there is a barrier between them that they do not violate [55:19-20]. This is not apparent by visual observation but temperature sensitive satellite pictures confirm this.
Mountains are pegs that have roots extending below the surface of the earth [78:7], mountains stabilize the earth's crust by minimizing earthquakes [16:15].
Earthquakes precede volcanic eruptions [99:1].
The earth's core is heavier than its crust [99:2].
Our sun is not the only sun in the universe [25:61]. Modern astronomy tells us that the sun is actually a star and therefore the universe is full of suns. Astronomers are looking for other planets like ours. The Qur'an predicts they will find other planets [65:12] The Bible differentiates the sun and the moon by size only: "God made two great lights--the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars" [Genesis 1:16]. The Qur'an tells us that: the sun is a shining glory while the moon is a light [10:5]; the sun is a lamp and the moon is a light [25:61,71:16]; the sun is a blazing lamp [78:13] .
The solar system is travelling through the universe to a final destination [36:38].
At the end of time, the sun will stop radiating energy and will be folded into a ball [ 81:1] (quasar? Black hole?)
Morning is associated with breathing [81:18]. Now we know that plants produce oxygen in presence of light and consume carbon dioxide.
Sperm attaches itself to the egg to form an attachment or a leach then a chewed-like lump which develops bones which are covered with flesh and then changed into a different form [ 23:14]. This refers to facts discovered only recently when scientists, using special scopes, followed the development of the fetus from a fertilized egg to a form resembling lower vertebrae before turning into the human form.
After contemplating the descriptions of embryonic stages as a leach then a chewed-like lump [23:14], Professor Keith Moore, a Canadian embryologist, compared pictures of different embryonic stages to pictures of leaches and chewed clay and confirmed the amazing accuracy of the Qur'anic verses.
Human pregnancy passes through 3 trimesters [39:6]
Different clouds (positively and negatively charged?) are harmonized to produce droplets of water and lightning [24:43].
This is not surprising since The Qur'an came to detail and explain everything and to settle differences of opinions [12:111, 16:64, 16:89].


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the meaning of the verse is highlighted.. try not to be so ambiguous when looking for the nature or significance in a verse... Make your intentions known, and hat min el'akher so we'd know what it is you are looking for?

[جوري]

only befitting if he wrote in these Arabized English that he is looking for an answer in Arabic after all?.. here is tafsir ibn Kathir.. which I think is excellent

تَبَارَكَ الَّذِي جَعَلَ فِي السَّمَاءِ بُرُوجًا وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا سِرَاجًا وَقَمَرًا مُنِيرًا

يَقُول تَعَالَى مُمَجِّدًا نَفْسه وَمُعَظِّمًا عَلَى جَمِيل مَا خَلَقَ فِي السَّمَوَات مِنْ الْبُرُوج وَهِيَ الْكَوَاكِب الْعِظَام فِي قَوْل مُجَاهِد وَسَعِيد بْن جُبَيْر وَأَبِي صَالِح وَالْحَسَن وَقَتَادَة وَقِيلَ هِيَ قُصُور فِي السَّمَاء لِلْحَرْسِ يُرْوَى هَذَا عَنْ عَلِيّ وَابْن عَبَّاس وَمُحَمَّد بْن كَعْب وَإِبْرَاهِيم النَّخَعِيّ وَسُلَيْمَان بْن مِهْرَان الْأَعْمَش وَهُوَ رِوَايَة عَنْ أَبِي صَالِح أَيْضًا وَالْقَوْل الْأَوَّل أَظْهَر اللَّهُمَّ إِلَّا أَنْ يَكُون الْكَوَاكِب الْعِظَام هِيَ قُصُور لِلْحَرْسِ فَيَجْتَمِع الْقَوْلَانِ كَمَا قَالَ تَعَالَى " وَلَقَدْ زَيَّنَّا السَّمَاء الدُّنْيَا بِمَصَابِيح" الْآيَة وَلِهَذَا قَالَ تَعَالَى " تَبَارَكَ الَّذِي جَعَلَ فِي السَّمَاء بُرُوجًا وَجَعَلَ فِيهَا سِرَاجًا " وَهِيَ الشَّمْس الْمُنِيرَة الَّتِي هِيَ كَالسِّرَاجِ فِي الْوُجُود كَمَا قَالَ تَعَالَى " وَجَعَلْنَا سِرَاجًا وَهَّاجًا " " وَقَمَرًا مُنِيرًا " أَيْ مُشْرِقًا مُضِيئًا بِنُورٍ آخَر مِنْ غَيْر نُور الشَّمْس كَمَا قَالَ تَعَالَى " وَهُوَ الَّذِي جَعَلَ الشَّمْس ضِيَاء وَالْقَمَر نُورًا " وَقَالَ مُخْبِرًا عَنْ نُوح عَلَيْهِ السَّلَام أَنَّهُ قَالَ لِقَوْمِهِ " أَلَمْ تَرَوْا كَيْف خَلَقَ اللَّه سَبْع سَمَوَات طِبَاقًا وَجَعَلَ الْقَمَر فِيهِنَّ نُورًا وَجَعَلَ الشَّمْس سِرَاجًا

I know exactly your purpose of the above verse, and I even know which websites you go to to get your explanation but I believe the answer lies in what the difference is between
Alshams sirajan wahajan and Alqamar nooran
Ashams dya'a walqamar noor ( daw, and noor are the same thing then I think they would have both been used interchangeably but they are NOT!.. ibn katheer has done an immaculate job highlighting the difference, since you have this very unusual and impressive ability to write Arabized english yet have a difficult time interpreting text, I hope that sufficed an answer to your query?

[Basirah]

I do not know why some of my posts are deleted, but anyway, my "arabized english" is a result of me not having an arabic typing keyboard like you do.

Either way the answer your provided is interesting... However, in Islam are commentaries like this deserving of being put on an infallible level?

[جوري]

I do not know why some of my posts are deleted,

When you use Anti-Islamic websites they get removed. I don't use anti anything websites and still have my posts removed.. deal with it!

but anyway, my "arabized english" is a result of me not having an arabic typing keyboard like you do.

presumptuous yet again, I don't have an Arabic key-board yet this forum is Arabic enabled, all you need to do is but cut and paste from Any Quran that is in Arabic.. and it will show! lastly, it would be oh oh oh so very easy for you to reference us to the verse and the chapter that you need discussed.. we are not going to suddenly recognize how you were mistreated at the hands of Muslims who coerced you into memorizing the Quran, which surprisingly you grew up to question and think of its errors on your own accord.. especially when you quote us infi**ls website -- I think everyone here sees through the transparency of your charade so how about you cut the cr@p and tell us what you want?

Either way the answer your provided is interesting... However, in Islam are commentaries like this deserving of being put on an infallible level?

is that a rhetorical question? it is infallible, until a lucid mind without an agenda can find fallacy in it! Ibn Kathir was born in 1301.. far away is he from the discoveries of modern day to try to incorporate islamic text to fit the tides.. further I believe bros. Ansar answered your orientalists adequately, unless you are really into recycling?
peace!

[barney]

Jumping back to a point earlier.
Part of the "miracle" is that it can be Remembered & Recited.

If you take a billion people and get them to hear something 5 times a day every day of their lives and out of those billion several million Choose to spend the rest of their days for all of their lives reading and reciting the same book....then it's likely that a few of them will have remembered it all.

You could do the same with any book if it's not too long, and The quran isnt that long really.

[جوري]

the Quran is comprable to the bible in length!
from another post

there are 114 chapters 6236 verses in the Quran whilst there are 260 chapters 7958 verses in the NT... go ahead and confirm that for yourself... So I fail to see why it should take years to read the NT whereas the Quran or the OT can be covered in a shorter span of time say a (month)?... it is also one thing to read the book and a whole other thing to discern and understand what you are reading...

I can cover Marker a 672 page book by Robin Cook in as much time as it took me to board from London Heathrow to New York JFK, and it will be satisfactory read--whereas a comparable book in thickness--like Wheater's Functional Histology (413 pages) slightly less page wise ( would take me 3 months to read-- & a life time's experience to implement and become familiar with its contents as relates to my every day needs-- and maybe even supplement it with Robbins Review of Pathology) for the whole picture to be adequate! .... compare that analogy to reading the Quran before stating, look at the double standards of that convert :rollseyes

The Quran isn't about reading parables, and having a strict or loose interpretation every century as per whims; The Quran is about implementing morality into your every day, and supplementing with the hadiths.. it is in fact a way of life.. a Constant as it has been since first revealed. I will not turn this into another ugly debate... I am glad you love Christianity but stop these infantile & obscene comparisons ... You are not in every household to see who has learned what or who has converted due to what reasons.

Enough!...


peace

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

....You could do the same with any book if it's not too long, and The quran isnt that long really.

So , here is the Conclusion :)



Quran is the only holy book in the earth ever that is memorised by millions & is being recited ( from memory ) 5 times daily by millions...Amazing :D :okay:





The Divine Book Of Allah



Quran – A living miracle!


Subhan Allah

Alhamdulillah

Allahu Akbar


verses we all need for this life & the hereafter

Consider the heavens and that which comes in the night!

And what could make you conceive what it is that comes in the night? It is the star that pierces through [life's] darkness: [for] no human being has ever been left unguarded.


-Quran (86:1-4)

God invites [man] unto the abode of peace, and guides him that wills onto a straight way.

-Quran (10:25)

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace


The mystery in Iron Miracle of the Quran


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMr-quZaZZE

( did not see the video ...if by any chance it has any anti Islmaic info , pl. let me or mod know...thanks )


The Miracle of Iron



HARUN YAHYA


Iron is one of the elements highlighted in the Qur'an.


In Surat al-Hadid, meaning Iron, we are informed:

And We also sent down iron in which there lies great force and which has many uses for mankind… (Qur’an, 57:25)



The word “anzalna,” translated as "sent down" and used for iron in the verse, could be thought of having a metaphorical meaning to explain that iron has been given to benefit people.



But, when we take into consideration the literal meaning of the word, which is, "being physically sent down from the sky," as in the case of rain and Sun rays, we realize that this verse implies a very significant scientific miracle.



....The fact that particular attention is drawn to iron in the Qur’an also emphasises the importance of the element.


In addition, there is another hidden truth in the Qur’an which draws attention to the importance of iron: Surat al-Hadid 25, which refers to iron, contains two rather interesting mathematical codes.




“Al- Hadid” is the 57th sura in the Qur’an. The abjad of the word “Al-Hadid” in Arabic, when the numerological values of its letters are added up, is also 57.



The numerological value of the word “hadid” alone is 26. And 26 is the atomic number of iron.

http://www.harunyahya.com/articles/70miracle_of_iron.php

[ranma1/2]

numerlogical value? and apart from isnt that cool, so what?

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace

numerlogical value? ...... so what?

So , without the help of any computer / calculator , Muhammed (p) ..an illiterate person ‘ wrote ‘ a book that has so many miracles including the numerical one .. think about it .

**
Quran A Living Miracle-God Speaking Direct


Today on TheDeenShow we have a man who has memorized the entire verbatim words of God since the age of 9


http://www.metacafe.com/watch/688960..._direct_listen

did not see /listen ...if by any chance it has any anti Islmaic info , pl. let me or mod know...thanks
**

Eternal Miracle

Al-Quran is the only ever living miracle.





Today no other miracle of any prophet exists. According to a survey, the number of Huffaz (persons who have memorized the whole Quran) today is more than 10 million.



Millions of editions and copies were printed and handwritten in almost every part of the world.





They were also translated into most of the languages of mankind. During the period of over 1400 years since the Quran was revealed, not a single letter was changed. This is one of the greatest miracles of the Quran.

http://www.islam101.com/dawah/WhatIsQuran.html

**

verses we all need for this life & the hereafter



"Neither did you (O Muhammad) read any book before it (the Qur'an) nor did you write (any book) with your right hand, in that case the followers of falsehood might have doubted."










'Did you think that We had created you without any purpose and that you would never return to Us (for accountability)?'

-Quran (23:115)

[جوري]

Salaam/peace

So , without the help of any computer / calculator , Muhammed (p) ..an illiterate person

‘ wrote ‘ a book that has so many miracles including the numerical one .. think about it .

verses we all need for this life & the hereafter

"Neither did you (O Muhammad) read any book before it (the Qur'an) nor did you write (any book) with your right hand, in that case the followers of falsehood might have doubted."

'Did you think that We had created you without any purpose and that you would never return to Us (for accountability)?'

-Quran (23:115)

he isn't here to think dear sister, he is here to mock you.. I really think we should focus our efforts on the sincere folks who come to learn.. I see Masha'Allah a few would be converts with questions.. and I sense sincerity in their heart and a willingness to learn and politeness in mannerism.
I think that is where we need to channel our efforts.
Every forum has a few trolls and jesters.. so ukhty for me pls. don't allow Allah or his prophet to be an object of ridicule by his ilk... There is plenty of forums where he can do that freely-- and his reward and his like shall lie with his maker.. as far as I am concerned it is our job to clarify that which is shady.. when we have done so to a level that is satisfactory and the topic still takes these degenerative turns then I suggest we just cease.. eventually they'll go away. Yesterday I provided three articles under the dinosaur thread and they weren't even read as the same questions were posed yet again!
it is clear what this is about by definition.. I am starting to find so much wisdom in the way Bros. Qatada presented his posts!..

Jazaki Allah khyran :smile:
:w:

[Basirah]

Today no other miracle of any prophet exists. According to a survey, the number of Huffaz (persons who have memorized the whole Quran) today is more than 10 million.

Yes, when you tell children to memmorize something at an early age, you will generally out of a pool of a billion people get those results.

When you use Anti-Islamic websites they get removed. I don't use anti anything websites and still have my posts removed.. deal with it!

Secularweb is an anti-islamic site? I posted a debate on god's existance after a muslim member was under the allusion the burden is on me to prove his non-existance!

[جوري]

Yes, when you tell children to memmorize something at an early age, you will generally out of a pool of a billion people get those results.

It seems a sore point for you? You keep bringing it up on every post as if you wish to extinguish the Quran from their memory? I suppose you should advocate so staunchly on behalf of all those children forced to learn piano (I was one of the by the way) and all those forced to go to their dance recital... You are no more forced to dance than you are to recite, if it is your curriculum.. Let's all just sit home and play all day to your satisfaction?

Secularweb is an anti-islamic site? I posted a debate on god's existance after a muslim member was under the allusion the burden is on me to prove his non-existance!

hansta3bat 3la ba3d? You know very well the purpose of that site.. hence you keep quoting it in disguise as if the rest of us have never navigated our fingers there to see exactly the sort of bull they write which you arabize later in the guise of 'forced to learn, forced to memorize' has that worked well for you? Being deceptive that is?
if you are happy in your state, then I suggest you not waste your life in highlight of what has led you to become non-Muslim... I don't believe you were ever one to begin with!
I wasn't following you debate with him to know exactly what sort of lines it fell under.. but given your previous history here, I can very well have a clear picture.
If the burden did indeed fall on you.. might I suggest some free thought instead of borrowing someone else's homework, that would make for basic ethics?

[Basirah]

hansta3bat 3la ba3d? You know very well the purpose of that site.. hence you keep quoting it in disguise as if the rest of us have never navigated our fingers there to see exactly the sort of bull they write which you arabize later in the guise of 'forced to learn, forced to memorize' has that worked well for you? Being deceptive that is?
if you are happy in your state, then I suggest you not waste your life in highlight of what has led you to become non-Muslim... I don't believe you were ever one to begin with!
I wasn't following you debate with him to know exactly what sort of lines it fell under.. but given your previous history here, I can very well have a clear picture.
If the burden did indeed fall on you.. might I suggest some free thought instead of borrowing someone else's homework, that would make for basic ethics?

You do not know me at all, and I really could care less to share anything with you. Please show me where I have gotten anything from secularweb without posting the link to it, which I did in my posts which were deleted.

I could care less if you believe I was a Muslim or not, when one grows up in Pakistan they are forced fed religion. To say I was ever a true believer is of course false!

Anyway, the burden never fell to me in the argument. But the false belief that it did motivated me to find some quick material that the person arguing with me could look over.

As for copy and pasting "scientific miracles" of the Quran which are others homework, well I can find plenty of guilty.

[جوري]

You do not know me at all, and I really could care less to share anything with you. Please show me where I have gotten anything from secularweb without posting the link to it, which I did in my posts which were deleted.

I don't need to.. I can have a clear picture from your writing-- linking us to the website doesn't qualify for free thought, especially not for someone who supposedly broke away from his prison. The saddest part isn't the parts you link, it is what you feign was your own, like writing something in Arabized English, as I see the exact same argument made on that site.. in the least cover your tracks so the story appears more believable. If you are going to argue against something, please pick up the book and tell us what you think ails it, not have argument number 59 from a kaffir website. Shame on you!

I could care less if you believe I was a Muslim or not, when one grows up in Pakistan they are forced fed religion. To say I was ever a true believer is of course false!

if you couldn't care less then there is no point in injecting the post with your sad upbringing and your so-called Pakistani roots.. should have at least stuck to an Arabic country where you were whipped with a cane, to make the discussion more animated.

Anyway, the burden never fell to me in the argument. But the false belief that it did motivated me to find some quick material that the person arguing with me could look over.

That doesn't make for a very good debate at all now does it.. anything you 'believe' with some conviction should require some abstract free thought, even in the event you can't save face right away!

As for copy and pasting "scientific miracles" of the Quran which are others homework, well I can find plenty of guilty.

it seems you were dissatisfied no matter what was presented you.. and I have seen under the refutation section people expending a large chunk of time rebutting your borrowed nonsense with good honest effort that was never to your satisfaction. What is the point? my website can kick your website's A$$?
The way I see it, is if you are happy as a kaffir, then be happy and go eat up life. it is just much too short for these made up stories with the intent to deceive others!

[Isambard]

[QUOTE=PurestAmbrosia;820018]for people who are taking this sort of debate seriousely, who are not sophomoric, bring me this from another text.. and let's compare

THE LOST CITY OF UBAR

THE PEOPLE OF 'AD AND UBAR, THE ATLANTIS OF THE SANDS

source]

Well finally got around to reading the article and the original interview that the article you presented draws from.

From what ive read, alot of the claims in your article are neither miraculous nor are they as concrete as it presents.

For one, if you look at when the city was lost after its water perished around 300-500CE. The legend of the ancient city was also wide-spread among both Arabs and europeans and the city is documented by Ptolemy.

Being such a staple of trade its hardly any surprise people would talk about it when it mysteriously disappeared.

I still dont undertsand why this discovery makes the Qur'an true or miraculous as the folks that discovered the city found a few other reasons for its decline aside fromt he natural disaster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Ad#The_Fall_of_.27Ad

Nor is there any proof that God personally destroyed it or that Hud ever visited there aside from the Qur'an.

I mean you have other lost cities/civilizations. Pompeii, Mayans, Former inhabitants of Easter Island, Rohenok (dont remember spelling >.<)

Typically these places give rise to all sorts of legends so this article proves nothing but that the folks on the article you cited jump to conclusions.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ubar/zarins/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubar#Re...of_Ubar.2FIram

[Isambard]

I still don't see your point, the fact that he plagiarized is common knowledge to anyone who picks up a book and reads it and makes a comparison. by the way I had answered you sufficiently but my two posts were removed! thus I still insist you show me where I have copied it word for word from wiki? If you are going to accuse little boy at least stand by your charges..

You acted as thou you read the book yet it was apperent it was simply a paraphrase of the article on Wiki. That damages your credibility
The rest is just a bunch of drivel.. if you bring a topic to the table it becomes incumbent upon you to prove your point.
I have, its just noone has read the material I put forth as equivolents so any arguement then would be one-sided
Point out the downfalls, the similarities, I expect that you have some dextrity of language of exegetical and critical interpretation, I expect that you meet the challenge on every level
1- political
2- economical
3- governmental
4-poetical
5-social
6- as well as infleunce including that which deals with every day life -- show me where another text has had that kind of profound and prophetical impact..

I focused on the political and poetical as well as try and delve into prophecy, but as I said, noone has read said works to its pointless to go further

This has nothing to do with what I have read or haven't read.. there is no way for you to judge that until you bring some actual beef to the table.
This isn't a contest of machismo and insults.. you can't handle a topic don't bring it up or decide the cowards insults are the best way out.

Actually it does. Argueing from a point of ignorance of the material presented doesnt make you correct. To avoid appearing close-minded, sometimes its best to admit you simply dont know and leave at that until you can properly educate yourself.
peace!

Now what sort of political and/or economic texts have you read and lets see if we can try this again on equal footing

[جوري]

Addendum 2: Iram

Additionally, the 89th chapter of the Qur'an (Surah al-Fajr 89:7) mentions a certain city by the name of 'Iram (a city of pillars), which was not known in ancient history and which was non-existent as far as historians were concerned. However, the December 1978 edition of National Geographic introduced interesting information which mentioned that in 1973, the city of Elba was excavated in Syria. The city was discovered to be 43 centuries old, but that is not the most amazing part. Researchers found in the library of Elba a record of all of the cities with which Elba had done business. Believe it or not, there on the list was the name of the city of 'Iram. The people of Elba had done business with the people of 'Iram!

In conclusion I ask you to consider with care the following (Surah 29:50-51):

"And they say, 'Why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord?' Say, 'Indeed, the signs are with Allah, and I am but a clear warner.' But it is sufficient for them that We have sent down to you the Book [i.e., Qur'an] which is rehearsed to them? Verily, in that is mercy and a reminder to people who believe."

Page: 1 2 3

source
written by Dr. Gary Miller who dedicated 20 years of his life to the study of the Quran, a former missionary.. if you are going to quote a source.. please step up to the task and don't bring me cheesy articles from wikipedia for many reasons discussed here already up to and including

Wikipedia 'shows CIA page edits'

here is a source of from the BBC on the matter,http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6947532.stm
though it is a digression I believe it, is appropriate to set the bar on what sources we are going to use for a discussion!
The second source you used was one I had enclosed in my post ( what is that all about?). if you are not going to take this seriousely please don't waste my time. Further don't claim you have done your reading and compared if you are going to take time out to do a quick wiki search to be all uptodate. This is reserved for people who have spent a life time in pursuit, not some kid who has read cliff notes and uses wiki.
as for what is so amazing.. well I'll leave that to those more discerning members of the forum.

[جوري]

You acted as thou you read the book yet it was apperent it was simply a paraphrase of the article on Wiki. That damages your credibility

I don't quote wiki, anyone who has been on this forum a while already knows so about me-- further I have already stated, in the above text why wiki isn't a credible source at all. It is very deceitful of you to use the affirmative of copied word for word, then state paraphrased, then state acted like you've read it.. which is it?-- or are you a dynamo of a hyperbole?

I have, its just noone has read the material I put forth as equivolents so any arguement then would be one-sided

you haven't put equivalents. to put equivalents is to do more than attest that you have! therein lies the credibility.. anyone can list a bunch of books from their library, is there a point in doing so? You remind me of a chap from a couple of months ago who stated a match for the Quran has been found in Khalil Jibran yet failed to prove how?

I focused on the political and poetical as well as try and delve into prophecy, but as I said, noone has read said works to its pointless to go further

incorrect you ASSUMED no one has read the text. I had already made two replies to you, which got deleted by a mod, on the account the forum was meant to compare not refute. Which I accepted and bowed out gracefully.judging from the sources you used and the time you took to 'educate' yourself, I believe enough of a testament to who has done the reading. Perhaps if you had some measure of humility in your approach we wouldn't be highlighting your downfalls so publicly!

Actually it does. Argueing from a point of ignorance of the material presented doesnt make you correct. To avoid appearing close-minded, sometimes its best to admit you simply dont know and leave at that until you can properly educate yourself.

it will take so much more than peddling in rhetoric. Bring your material forth and let's see who is ignorant.. instead of taking a couple of days off to educate yourself of the Quran from wikipedia and not even do it properly enough as to see exactly how old the city is or which city from above listed we are even talking about to make a moot point, in the least use proper sources, so you can avoid publicly humiliating yourself whilst claiming you are so well read!!

I think everyone knows where this thread is headed.. yet another one has reached the end of its value!

[Woodrow]

Temporarily closed. It will reopen. But, at the moment it needs to be closed for possibly a day or so.