The Instigator
KanzulHuda786
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Quran is the Word of Allah(God)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
socialpinko
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/27/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,518 times Debate No: 25856
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (2)

 

KanzulHuda786

Pro

I will be arguing that the Quran can only be desrcibed as the word of God, and there is no naturilistic explanation for it.

First round for acceptance
socialpinko

Con

I Accept.
Debate Round No. 1
KanzulHuda786

Pro

Literary Challenge
In the following verses Allah has challenged the whole of mankind to try and produce a single chapter like the Qur"an. This challenge, which has remained unmet, captivated the minds of the Arabs at the time of revelat-ion.
"If you are in doubt of what We have revealed to Our Messenger, then produce one chapter like it, call upon all your helpers, besides Allah, if you are truthful." Surah al-Baqarah (The Heifer) 2: 23.
"Or do they say: "He (Prophet Muhammad, ) has forged it (this Qur"an)?" Nay! They believe not! Let them then produce a recitation like it (the Qur"an) if they are truthful." Surah at-Toor (The Mount) 52: 33-34.
The Qur"an was revealed over 1430 years ago and the challenge to produce something like the Qur"an has remained to this day. Throughout the centuries, thinkers, poets, theologians and literary critics have attempted to challenge the Qur"an. Some of these challengers in the past have included: Musaylamah; Ibn Al-Mukaffa; Yahya ibn Al-Hakam al-Ghazal; Sayyid "Ali Muhammad; Bassar ibn Burd.
 Some may argue that William Shakespeare, who was an English poet and playwright, widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language, is often used as an example of unique literature. The argument posed is that if Shakespeare expressed his poetry and prose in a unique manner " and he is a human being " then surely no matter how unique the Qur"an is, it must also be from a human being.
 However there are some problems with the above argument. It does not take into account the nature of the Qur"an"s uniqueness and it doesn"t understand the uniqueness of literary geniuses such as Shakespeare. Although Shakespeare composed poetry and prose that received an unparalleled aesthetic reception, the literary form he expressed his works in was not unique. In many instances Shakespeare used the common Iambic Pentameter (The Iambic pentameter is a meter in poetry. It refers to a line consisting of five iambic feet. The word "pentameter" simply means that there are five feet in the line.) However in the case of the Qur"an, its language is in an entirely unknown and unmatched literary form. The structural features of the Qur"anic discourse render it unique and not the subjective appreciation of its literary and linguistic makeup.
In Arabic language three different modes- poetry- 16 rhythmic patterns, common speech " mursal , saj mixture of both.
Classical scholars such as al-Baqillani and al-Rummani view the Qur"an as having its own unique literary form. This view is also supported by western scholarship which can be found in the writings of famous orientalists such as Arthur J. Arberry, Professor Bruce Lawrence and D.J. Stewart.
The Arabs, who were known to have been Arabic linguists par excellence, failed to successfully challenge the Qur"an. Forster Fitzgerald Arbuthnot, who was a notable British Orientalist and translator, states: ""and that though several attempts have been made to produce a work equal to it as far as elegant writing is concerned, none has as yet succeeded."
The implication of this is that there is no link between the Qur"an and the Arabic language; however this seems impossible because the Qur"an is made up of the Arabic language. On the other hand, every combination of Arabic words and letters have been used to try and imitate the Qur"an.

Rational Deduction
Rational deduction is the thinking process where logical conclusions are drawn from a universally accepted statement or provable premises. This process is also called rational inference or logical deduction.
In the context of the Qur"an"s uniqueness the universally accepted statement supported by eastern and western scholarship is:
"The Qur"an was not successfully imitated by the Arabs at the time of revelation"
1. The Qur"an could not have come from an Arab as the Arabs, at the time of revelation, were linguists par excellence, there was literally a shakespear of the arabic language in every corner and they failed to challenge the Qur"an. They had even admitted that the Qur"an could have not come from a human being. Arabs at that time fought many battles against the muslims to try and destroy in Islam when they could have got the best arab writers and academically produce a book like the quran but they knew they couldn't and had to fight wars against us. It also cannot come from an Arab in the present time as the arabic language to the mixing of differnt cultures dialects and languages in the arab countries has suffered something called language degenration which means the pure arabic language is not at thes stnadard as the time of the quran 1400 years ago, for example the word for teleophone in arabic nowadays is telephooon, which is basically elongated english words.
2. The Qur"an could not have come from the Prophet Muhammad due to the following reasons:
a. The Prophet Muhammad was an Arab himself and all the Arabs failed to challenge the Qur"an.
b. The Arabs linguists at the time of revelation never accused the Prophet of being the author of the Qur"an.
c. The Prophet Muhammad experienced many trials and tribulations during the course of his Prophetic mission. For example his children died, his beloved wife Khadija passed away, he was boycotted, his close companions were tortured and killed, yet the Qur"an"s literary character remains that of the divine voice and character. Nothing in the Qur"an expresses the turmoil and emotions of the Prophet Muhammad. It is almost a psychological and physiological impossibility to go through what the Prophet went through and yet none of the emotions are expressed in the literary character of the Qur"an.
d. The Qur"an is a known literary masterpiece yet its verse were at many times revealed for specific circumstances and events that occurred. However, without revision or deletion they are literary masterpieces. All literary masterpieces have undergone revision and deletion to ensure literary perfection, however the Qur"an was revealed instantaneously.
e. The hadith or narrations of the Prophet Muhammad are in a totally different style then that of the Qur"an. How can any human being express themselves orally over a 23 year period (which was the period of Qur"anic revelation) in two distinct styles? This is a psychological and physiological impossibility according to modern research.
f. All types of human expression can be imitated if the blueprint of that expression exists. For example artwork can be imitated even though some art is thought to be extraordinary or amazingly unique. But in the case of the Qur"an we have the blueprint " the Qur"an itself " yet no one has been able to imitate its unique literary form.
g. Prophet Muhammad, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, did not go to any school, study from any teacher, or even learn how to read and write. He even had no interest in poetry, which was one of the most prized disciplines of his time. Yet suddenly at age forty, he began to recite this immaculate revelation
h. He himself denied it, he had a book which as an outstanding eloquence and wisdom and people used to in that culture used to make those with the best poetry to the top this is what they cherished at that time. If he wanted money, power, he would have just said yes this is from me.
i. The Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, himself was most deeply moved by the Book. He used to stand for hours in solitary midnight prayers reciting from the Book until his feet used to get swollen. How preposterous that one should attempt to attribute the Book to him. Has there ever been another example of somebody getting so moved by his own words

3. The Qur"an could not have come from a Non-Arab as the language in the Qur"an is Arabic, and the knowledge of the Arabic language is a pre-requisite to successfully challenge the Qur"an.
4. So the only other explanation that it has come from a supernatural source ie God
socialpinko

Con

Pro's argument may be summarized as follows: The Koran was written in such a way that it makes the idea of supernatural revelation more likely than not.


(I) Rational Deduction


1. Pro argues the Koran could not have come from Arab people as at the time of it's supposed immaculate revelation the Arab people consisted of many excellent writers and poets who all admitted that the Koran could not have come from a human. The problem with this argument is that it makes an unwarranted jump in logic (as do most of Pro's arguments). The following syllogism represents Pro's argument.


P: The literary geniuses of the Arab world could not challenge the Koran's literary excellence.
C: Therefore the Koran must have been divinely inspired.


The problem with this explanation is that it fails to take into account any other possibilities and fallaciously invokes God of the gaps. For instance, there are numerous other possibilities that may have taken place. The Koran's author may have been a prodigious writer. After all we don't attribute Mozart's masterpieces or Aristotle's genius to God just because they are unparalleled. Furthermore invoking supernatural explanation is simply a God of the gaps argument wherein one invokes God or some other supernatural entity to explain something where one has ignorance as to its ultimate cause. There's nothing inherent in this point that means a God divining the book is the only rational or logical explanation.


2a. Pro argues from a similar point to (1) wherein Muhammed was an Arab and the Arabs as he pointed out failed to challenge the Koran. Apply my reasoning in point (1) then to this point. Just because we don't currently understand something doesn't mean God is necessitated as an explanation. Pro is only using lack of evidence for anything else, not positive evidence suggesting divine inspiration. Furthermore my point regarding possible literary genius on the part of Muhammed bypasses this problem.


2b. The next point argues that Arab linguists at the time never thought he was the author. This point fails in that it assumes infallibility on the part of these linguists in question. It's certainly a logical possibility that they could have been wrong in their conclusions and Pro fails to insert reasoning why they weren't. Because of this, this point is merely an argument from authority.


2c. This point argues that Muhammed went through various tragedies and tribulations in his life which the language of the Koran fails to suggest. Why should we conclude that, as Pro says, "It is almost a psychological and physiological impossibility to go through what the Prophet went through and yet none of the emotions are expressed in the literary character of the Qur"an." Pro has failed to offer a reason why compartmentalization was non-existent in Muhammed's time. Furthermore the refutation of his other points (that this is simply a Gap argument) applies here as well.


2d. Pro argues here basically from the literary masterpiece of the Koran that it was divinely inspired. He argues more specifically that it has not undergone revision or deletion like other works. Of course again this point fails as it's simply a Gap argument again. It's certainly not a logical necessity that these conditions make divine inspiration the only possibility. Furthermore it fails the evidentialist maxim that we proportion our beliefs to the evidence available. But as stated before there is no evidence provided by Pro, merely lack of evidence as to other possible explanations.


2e. The next point rests on the supposed impossibility of writing in more than one literary style. Since the Koran and the Hadith have different literary styles and were written by one author, the only possible explanation (in Pro's eyes at least) is divine inspiration. Of course like every single argument by Pro thus far this is merely a Gap argument so refer to my previous refutations for a full explanation. On top of that Pro has failed to provide warrant for his claim of "psychological and physiological impossibility" of different literary styles being expressed by one author.


2f. I'm getting tired of writing out basically the same refutation but in different words. See my previous refutations. This is an argument from ignorance by which Pro takes the lack of any explanation as positive evidence for his position. Furthermore the lack of imitation also fails the evidentialist test of justification.


2g. Pro's argument here rests on the supposed lack of formal teaching of Muhammed juxtaposed with his sudden recitation of the Koran. Not only does Pro fail to provide any reliable historical evidence which proves this, but the Gaps refutation of each of his previous points applies just as well here.


2h. The possible existence of unselfish characters is not impossible or even highly improbable. We can observe people like Gandhi without assuming the truth of Hinduism, just well there's no reason why assuming that Muhammed was a virtuous person necessarily makes the divine inspiration of the Koran a necessary conclusion.


2i. Apply the gap refutation as well as the evidentialist critique to this point, as well as the fact that one can be moved by their own words. For instance in the case that they are mistaken as to the origin of those words. There's no reason to think divine inspiration is more likely than this prophet simply being mistaken as to the origin of the words or that he was some sort of charlatan.


===Conclusion===


The majority of Pro's argument could be stated as follows: Some aspect of the writing of the Koran or the life of the prophet Muhammed makes an explanation for such instances hard to come by. Therefore God must have been the inspiration for the writing of the Koran. As stated before, Pro is taking the *lack* of explanation by other means as somehow *positive* evidence for his own conclusion. That's not the way rational deduction works though. Just because we don't know exactly how the universe originated doesn't mean there is any reason to assume it was a magical crocodile. Lack of evidence for something else is never positive evidence for a theory, unless they are the only two logical possibilities. And Pro has certainly failed to substantiate that that it the case. The resolution is negated.
Debate Round No. 2
KanzulHuda786

Pro

KanzulHuda786 forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Con

Extend refutation. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
KanzulHuda786

Pro

KanzulHuda786 forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Con

Extend refutations. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Microsuck 4 years ago
Microsuck
Yea. Either way, you win.
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
Not if he was the original author. In any case it doesn't seem to matter.
Posted by Microsuck 4 years ago
Microsuck
Oh so he plagarized the original post in that forum I see. So yes, that means it is plagarism
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
I guess I'll have to actually win this debate then.
Posted by Ahmed.M 4 years ago
Ahmed.M
Actually its from Hamza Tzortis' site under the challenge in the Quran.
http://www.hamzatzortzis.com...
Posted by Ahmed.M 4 years ago
Ahmed.M
oh... they seem to be the same person. I guess it isn't plagiarism then.
Posted by Microsuck 4 years ago
Microsuck
I looked at thw link, Ahmed, it appears that pro andthw person who wroe that link are the same. Given that both have the same username.
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
I didn't really know what to make of the squares. I assumed they were due to a formatting error due to C/Ping the case from Word or something. Though thanks for pointing that out. I'll bring it up next round.
Posted by Ahmed.M 4 years ago
Ahmed.M
the squares gave it away.
Posted by Ahmed.M 4 years ago
Ahmed.M
socialpinko, isn't the plagiarism obvious?
http://debatingchristianity.com...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
KanzulHuda786socialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: ditto
Vote Placed by Microsuck 4 years ago
Microsuck
KanzulHuda786socialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con effectively refuted con's arguments. Pro loses conduct for plagarism (see comments) and spelling/grammar as his arguments were hard to read. Arguments and Sources because Con effectively refuted pro's contentions and had more reliable sources than pro.