*!* Ants self-defence *!*

  • Thread starter Thread starter Khayal
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 45
  • Views Views 8K
perhaps god will make you an angel, good at following orders and such. while those that do good without desire for enteranl reward get mega props...
 
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ عَلَيْكُمْ أَنفُسَكُمْ لاَ يَضُرُّكُم مَّن ضَلَّ إِذَا اهْتَدَيْتُمْ إِلَى اللّهِ مَرْجِعُكُمْ جَمِيعًا فَيُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ {105}​
[Pickthal 5:105] O ye who believe! Ye have charge of your own souls. He who erreth cannot injure you if ye are rightly guided. Unto Allah ye will all return; and then He will inform you of what ye used to do.

I enjoyed the article...
That being said, the above verse I quoted to denote, that it is no use arguing with a kaffir, rather a waste of time, and by same token, you don't want to bring venerated and hallowed texts down to the level of an abject coward.
A person is as smart as they are educated, and some folks reflect as far as their diminutive brain can impart.. which only takes them so far!

:w:
 
ranma1/2 said:
i dont think any being we would call or consider a god would be so selfcentered.
i figure it would value reason, logic, selflessness and wouldnt care or perhaps be abhorent of being worshiped.
Click to expand...

LOL!


reason - i created you , you worship me, i will deal justly and send to either heaven or hell

Logic - A god created you for a PURPOSE! TO WORSHIP HIM

selflessness - you couldnt benefit him and neither does he need you. A selfish person has requirements God has none! God just deems out punishment as he see's best in his justice.



seriously whos been feeding you all this nonsense ranma? selfcentred hogwash lol, i actually laughed out loud !
 
:sl:
Oh, for goodness sake, people, stop trading insults. Doing that is a sign that you can't debate properly.

As for ants-
Quran saying ants talk to eachother: Kind of normal
Quran saying worker ants (and possibly bees as well) are female: Kind of miraculous
:w:
 
Fishman said:
:sl:
Oh, for goodness sake, people, stop trading insults. Doing that is a sign that you can't debate properly.

As for ants-
Quran saying ants talk to eachother: Kind of normal
Quran saying worker ants (and possibly bees as well) are female: Kind of miraculous:w:
Click to expand...
Looool :D and Subhanallah It is a miracle, Little insects that are soo smart :)
 
hello ranma, uve lived a good life by rejectin ur own creator? Nt spend time given him thanks for ur well being? Wow... That takes sum doin!
 
Fishman said:
As for ants-
Quran saying ants talk to eachother: Kind of normal
Click to expand...
Couple of points:
Ants communicating simple alerts to others yeah, but ants communicating or understanding such complex concepts? This is not supported by any scientific explanation.
The second pheromone mentioned is actually used to signal a search for aggressors, not retreat from them or seek shelter.
Same with the last one, the pheromone release seems to have the exact opposite effect that it should.
Ant pheromones have a range of a few centimetres.
Fishman said:
Quran saying worker ants (and possibly bees as well) are female: Kind of miraculous
Click to expand...
Not so much considering there's a Jewish story recounting a very similar scenario in which Solomon's armies come across a valley of ants and he talks to a Queen ant. If this story was passed down it would make sense that ants in the later version would be referred to as female.

Also the passage does not differentiate between ant roles (ie worker ants vs. others) as you suggest it does.
 
Muslimah_Sis said:
Other than Allah swt, who else could've known ants are able to do this? The communication between ants over 1400 years ago was unheard of since ants unlike other animals couldn't/can't be heard or studied scientifically in those times. There is also no difference in an ant saying 'Danger Alert' through chemical means and a human shouting it verbally. Each can interpret their own form of communication to mean the same.
Click to expand...


The trouble with all this is that it makes a huge assumption - that the Qur'an IS relating some sort of scientific fact about ant behaviour, before moving on to consider whether the claim is correct (or "proved by science" as you prefer). That assumption is both totally unjustifiable and grossly mistaken, just as with most other 'scientific miracles of the Qur'an'.

Nobody needed to know about "communication between ants", chemically or otherwise. The story is an anthropomorphic fable, and for hundreds of years nobody ever thought of it otherwise. The reader is no more supposed to think the ants were 'saying' "danger alert" than having a chat about Solomon. The 'miracle' explanation tries, and fails miserably, to paper over the obvious fact that the idea of ants formulating complex concepts such as "get into your habitations lest Solomon and his hosts break you" is utterly ridiculous - but that is what the Qur'an actually says. It isn't 'wrong', any more than Finding Nemo was a flawed text-book about marine biology. In both cases there was a message for the audience. In neither case did it have anything to do with 'scientific facts'.
 
It's odd where a few minutes research can take you, although I'm afraid I don't have time for any more.

From our old friend Wikipedia (and making no claims for the reliability of the article, or otherwise)

Some suppose the sura, or "chapter," in the Qur'an titled Luqman to be referring to Aesop, a well-known figure in Arabia during the time of Muhammad.
Click to expand...
 
Not at all. I'm just pointing out the cultural context.

If Aesop's fables were widely known then surely the usual (and intended) interpretation of talking animal stories of any sort would be in the same way Aesop used them, that is in a deliberately anthropomorphic style. That might be to make a moral point, philosophical point, or just to entertain. That doesn't prove it wasn't a 'scientific' point being made in the Qur'an, of course, but it is obviously far more probable that it wasn't. Not least because it is hard to think of a 'scientific fact' that could be more completely and utterly useless to most of those hearing or reading it. The Qur'an doesn't provide useless information anywhere...UNTIL people start trying to read 'science' into it where there is none!
 
Last edited:
Trumble said:
The trouble with all this is that it makes a huge assumption - that the Qur'an IS relating some sort of scientific fact about ant behaviour, before moving on to consider whether the claim is correct (or "proved by science" as you prefer). That assumption is both totally unjustifiable and grossly mistaken, just as with most other 'scientific miracles of the Qur'an'.

Nobody needed to know about "communication between ants", chemically or otherwise. The story is an anthropomorphic fable, and for hundreds of years nobody ever thought of it otherwise. The reader is no more supposed to think the ants were 'saying' "danger alert" than having a chat about Solomon. The 'miracle' explanation tries, and fails miserably, to paper over the obvious fact that the idea of ants formulating complex concepts such as "get into your habitations lest Solomon and his hosts break you" is utterly ridiculous - but that is what the Qur'an actually says. It isn't 'wrong', any more than Finding Nemo was a flawed text-book about marine biology. In both cases there was a message for the audience. In neither case did it have anything to do with 'scientific facts'.
Click to expand...


very disrespectfull, sorry but expected more from some one of your caliber.....
 
Hamada said:
to Finding Nemo maybe? Never mind if u think u did nothing wrong... it might just be me
Click to expand...

No, it was probably me, as Brok3n said something similar as well. Either way, I had no intention of being disrespectful to anyone or anything and apologise if anybody thinks that I was!
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top