The Instigator
FuzzyCatPotato
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
GoOrDin
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Resolved: The Qur'an contains scientific foreknowledge

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
FuzzyCatPotato
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/10/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 572 times Debate No: 73233
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Resolved: Qur'anic Scientific Foreknowledge Exists

I negate.

RULES
1: The Burden of Proof is on Pro, as Pro is making the positive claim while Con makes no such claim.
2: Pro will forfeit Round 4.
3: Pro must present no more than 1 central claim of Qur'anic scientific foreknowledge in this debate.
4: Failing to fulfill any of these rules is grounds for a 7-point forfeiture.

ROUND SCHEDULE
Round 1: Con states rules, round schedule, and definitions. Pro makes opening arguments.
Round 2: Con rebuts Pro's arguments. Pro rebuts Con's arguments.
Round 3: Con rebuts Pro's arguments. Pro summarizes the debate.
Round 4: Con summarizes the debate. Pro forfeits the round.

DEFINITIONS
Qur'anic scientific foreknowledge
is defined as "through Allah's revelations to the prophet Muhammad, the Qur'an accurately predicts scientific knowledge that could not have been known at the time of its writing".
GoOrDin

Pro

Thank you Con for defining Scientific Foreknowledge:
Admittedly, though I put faith in the Quran and do not doubt it, I find the term 'Prophet' has been largely misconstrued by the Bastard Religion of Islam. A Prophet - as you have defined in your Opening statement - must provide Information which could not have been known at 'That' time, in order to be proclaimed a prophet. Muslims often regard a Prophet as being any individual who has been regarded by God or whom has a regard for God, even if they have no Prophetic message. I think that is a false belief.

To move forward with the functional application of the debate.

Paragraph A:
Social sciences are in fact science: The recording of true facts as data to be analyzed is Science. Therefor,
when the Quran states, "make sure you can tell the difference between Pagan Muslims (non believers) and Muslims," this is a reference to scientific applications regarding the false judgment of People of Faith in direct association with false followers. Because the Quran is a book of enlightenment for the wellbeing of society in this world yet, This true scientific statement regarding associating false religion with true religion is in fact a True FACT which could not have otherwise been guaranteed, but the Quran says there will be false followers of even itself. [ It then goes on to say int eh same sentance to, "know the difference between pagan Christians (non believers) and Christians", so that you do not confused them with one another, or judge one for the others actions, or associate the positive behaviors of one as reflecting qualities of the others. ]{ which is a common struggle nowadays regarding Agnostics claiming to be atheist (leaving woman to believe true atheists are part of a community associated with moral standards instead of selfish comfort zones.) }
Definitions:
Theism - certainty God is real.
**atheism - belief God is not real.
**Agnosticism - admitting one does not know/is not sure of Gods person.
Agnostic-atheist - does not understand religion, nor seeks understanding because they do not believe.
Agnostic-theist - Does not know who God is, but is sure he exists.

You might claim such a scientific fact however, is not Foreknowledge, so please allow me to have you discontinue any rebuttals regarding Paragraph A.

Paragraph B:
Muhammad took 32 years to preach the Quran. He did so in multiple villages, and when he died, all the accumulative villages gathered and brought all his scriptures, compiling them as true knowledge, facts, and words worthy of unifying a nation under one faith. They became the Islamic Quran.
This KNowledge was in fact the KNowledge which unified an entire Nation, converting the entire middle east.
Because one man was capable of leading such a task, and overcoming such odds, when in reality people quickly abandoned Gods who were not self serving, was a miraculous accomplishment. It is Scientific Foreknowledge to Spread word that would for over 1000 years unify a people in faith after successful converting their ancestors without creating a conflict within the message. That is, regardless of Divine INTERVENTION, a Prophetic deed. That is scientifically accurate.

Admittedly, I wanted to Take Con in this debate, and argue, no modern sciences regarding Biology or Physics are given to us in an enlightening manner in this debate however, I will progress:

Paragraph C:
The Bibles account of Creation is scientifically accurate: you can actually prove it occurred. But, this was not in the Quran, and in fact it was not foreknowledge, except that it wasn't available for us to scientifically prove until modern day, it was past-hand-knowledge.
The Quran however, says clearly, "God is the God of Many Lights."
and so,
-As Light was miraculously conceived on Earth as a child, it Can likewise miraculously and spontaneously appear anywhere where Light energy does not already exist in open space. Causing another universe to appear in the same Space proximity Model as our own.
-Light as wisdom: can be perceived from many angles and conditions, meaning true wisdom has variable forms and cannot always be offered in the form of certain words of advice. This is of prophetic genius to spread regarding the past inhabitants of the words arrogance and incompetence.

Justly, I am arguing the Quran provides true Social sciences.
and Accurate Theories and Philosophies regarding the Universe.

I anticipate your response, and please humble acknowledge my error.
Debate Round No. 1
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

PARAGRAPH A:

[A] "Social sciences are in fact science: The recording of true facts as data to be analyzed is Science."

1: Sure.

[B] "Therefor, when the Quran states, "make sure you can tell the difference between Pagan Muslims (non believers) and Muslims," this is a reference to scientific applications regarding the false judgment of People of Faith in direct association with false followers. .... This true scientific statement regarding associating false religion with true religion is in fact a True FACT which could not have otherwise been guaranteed, but the Quran says there will be false followers of even itself."

1: Pro fails to cite any specific sura or verse. To prove that the foreknowledge is in the Qur'an, Pro must show *where* in the Qur'an the foreknowledge is.

2: Basically, Pro states that the Qur'an miraculously predicted that people would pretend to be Muslim. I don't think that this demonstrates foreknowledge; it's a common thing for people to lie, and even in Muhammad's day surely people hid their religion to prevent getting punished for their beliefs. In other words, this "foreknowledge" is merely normal human knowledge, which anyone could have picked up without needing Allah's help. As such, it fails the definition of Qur'anic scientific foreknowledge.

[C] "It then goes on to say int eh same sentance to, "know the difference between pagan Christians (non believers) and Christians", so that you do not confused them with one another, or judge one for the others actions, or associate the positive behaviors of one as reflecting qualities of the others."

1: Basically, Pro states that the Qur'an tells us to differentiate nonbelievers and Christians, and not to associate their behavior. This isn't foreknowledge -- it's not hard to find out that nonchristians and Christians act differently.

[D] "which is a common struggle nowadays regarding Agnostics claiming to be atheist (leaving woman to believe true atheists are part of a community associated with moral standards instead of selfish comfort zones.)"

1: I don't understand Pro's point here.

[E] "You might claim such a scientific fact however, is not Foreknowledge, so please allow me to have you discontinue any rebuttals regarding Paragraph A."

1: Erm, that's the whole point of this debate -- to point out that such facts aren't foreknowledge.

PARAGRAPH B:

[A] "This KNowledge was in fact the KNowledge which unified an entire Nation, converting the entire middle east. Because one man was capable of leading such a task, and overcoming such odds, when in reality people quickly abandoned Gods who were not self serving, was a miraculous accomplishment. It is Scientific Foreknowledge to Spread word that would for over 1000 years unify a people in faith after successful converting their ancestors without creating a conflict within the message. That is, regardless of Divine INTERVENTION, a Prophetic deed. That is scientifically accurate."

1: By this logic, any religion that spreads would have scientific foreknowledge -- including Christianity and Hinduism, for example.

2: Pro basically argues that Muhammad's success story in evangelizing Islam proves the Qur'an's foreknowledge. This isn't *scientific* foreknowledge, which should predict a fact of science. This is merely good evangelism. You don't need knowledge of the science of the future to spread a religion in the now, but merely convincing rhetoric.

PARAGRAPH C:

[A] "The Bibles account of Creation is scientifically accurate: you can actually prove it occurred."

1: Nope [1][2].

[B] "But, this was not in the Quran, and in fact it was not foreknowledge, except that it wasn't available for us to scientifically prove until modern day, it was past-hand-knowledge."

1: So... It's not *Qur'anic* scientific *fore*knowledge?

[B] "The Quran however, says clearly, "God is the God of Many Lights." and so, -As Light was miraculously conceived on Earth as a child, it Can likewise miraculously and spontaneously appear anywhere where Light energy does not already exist in open space. Causing another universe to appear in the same Space proximity Model as our own."

1: How does "the God of Many Lights" relate to the 2nd point?

2: What is the point Pro's making? Light doesn't spontaneously appear. What is a "space proximity model" as our own?

[C] "Light as wisdom: can be perceived from many angles and conditions, meaning true wisdom has variable forms and cannot always be offered in the form of certain words of advice. This is of prophetic genius to spread regarding the past inhabitants of the words arrogance and incompetence."

1: Past wisdom can be reinterpreted, but light really can't. Light comes from one direction and goes to another, along a single path. If light is wisdom, then wisdom must be a single path.

REMARKS

[A] I anticipate your response, and please humble acknowledge my error.

1: No prob.

SUMMARY

1: Pro has not shown any areas in which the Qur'an made a statement about scientific fact that could not have been known at the time of its writing.

REFERENCES

[1] http://rationalwiki.org...
[2] http://rationalwiki.org...
GoOrDin

Pro

GoOrDin forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Pro has forfeited Round 2.
GoOrDin

Pro

GoOrDin forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Pro has forfeited Round 2 and Round 3.

Pro must forfeit Round 4.

Pro has no standing arguments.

You must vote Con.
GoOrDin

Pro

AS I need to forfeit my right to argue in this round four, I will simply rant and ramble as my opponent can no longer argue.

I have stated that the Quran says people will intentionally or unintentionally spread false religion, this is a scientific fact, and because there was no evidence that the Quran would sustain itself as a world leading religion, the fact that the Quran is used as a false religion makes it very relevant as foreknowledge considering societies scientifically recorded events. So, although I forfeit this debate round, I reinforce my confidence in what I have already stated and established prior.

I did admit I want to be on the other side of this debate. However, apart from science, the Quran suggests that multiple big bangs could have occurred. Which is a scientific statement which has yet to be proven, but it is the only source anywhere stipulating such things are possible.

I can go on and on about how my opponent never indicated I needed to source my claims or information, seeing as we should have both been well verse in the Quran before hand to have this debate,
but what was irritating was my opponent did not even make mention of a single claim he has heard of in which a Muslim referenced the Quran indicating it held scientific foreknowldge that has been since discovered, therefor entirely disbanning his BoP which was 'that the Quran does not Have Scientific Foreknowledge'. " in a debate you should have had a cause for debate, and so referencing a scientific fact Muslims claim is in it, which was not foreknowledge should have been your primary debate component; the substance which instigated it.

Apart from that, it was scientific, however not foreknowledge to indicate Hell comes to sinners.
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
My opponent says in debate round 2, it is easy to tell the difference between faithful and non faithful people. Yet in todays society the difference is never indicated. They call the non believers Christians and Muslims. The Quran foretold this arrogance**
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
If I am forgivable, for my variation of Faith, I would consider myself under all circumstances a Muslim. However, not all muslims would acknowledge me as such, both true and pagan Muslims may not understand or agree with me.
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
I can still win. anticipate a debate.
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
alright. I fawked up. I thought I was Con.
I will take a moment to read my Quran, and I will respond thereafter accordingly.
I haven't finished reading either of my 2 Qurans before. so this will be interesting for both of us.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 1 year ago
FuzzyCatPotato
@Andy: What am I looking for?
@missmedic5: I agree.
Posted by missmedic 1 year ago
missmedic
All of the verses which contain supposed scientific miracles are very vague and can be taken to mean a number of things, and very often, the supposed scientific miracle is one of the least likely meanings. People often use a psychological tendency called "confirmation bias" which means to interpret information to confirm one's preconceptions and to avoid information and interpretations which contradict prior beliefs.
Posted by AndyHood 1 year ago
AndyHood
Foreknowledge may not be the word you're looking for...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
FuzzyCatPotatoGoOrDinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff