Total Posts:36|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

These are a few of my favorite things

Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2016 8:35:18 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
https://www.youtube.com...

With a few modifications, this could just as easily apply to all Abrahamic religions.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2016 11:10:00 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 9:06:22 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Perhaps parts the video takes metaphor literally, but not all of it. Claiming it is a strawman suggests Muslims don't take any of these parts literally. Is that your assertion?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
UtherPenguin
Posts: 3,682
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2016 11:25:11 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 11:10:00 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/9/2016 9:06:22 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Perhaps parts the video takes metaphor literally, but not all of it. Claiming it is a strawman suggests Muslims don't take any of these parts literally. Is that your assertion?

Context is removed, misrepresenting the meaning, hence it's a strawman.
"Praise Allah."
~YYW
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2016 11:38:54 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 11:25:11 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
At 1/9/2016 11:10:00 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/9/2016 9:06:22 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Perhaps parts the video takes metaphor literally, but not all of it. Claiming it is a strawman suggests Muslims don't take any of these parts literally. Is that your assertion?

Context is removed, misrepresenting the meaning, hence it's a strawman.

What context makes a 950 year old man plausible? What context makes the moon being split in two plausible? In what context does semen coming from between the backbone and ribs become plausible?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2016 4:39:45 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 11:10:00 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/9/2016 9:06:22 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Perhaps parts the video takes metaphor literally, but not all of it. Claiming it is a strawman suggests Muslims don't take any of these parts literally. Is that your assertion?

People of all religions cherrypick in taking things literally or not. For example the conservative Christians who do this:

Homosexuality declared as sin - "Yes. You see it clearly what it is written. Homosexuality is a sin!"
Paul in the Bible telling how he wants women not to wear braids, gold or pearls - "Woah woah woah you shouldn't read the Bible literally and also read this from a historical perspective!"
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2016 4:43:31 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 11:38:54 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/9/2016 11:25:11 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
At 1/9/2016 11:10:00 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/9/2016 9:06:22 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Perhaps parts the video takes metaphor literally, but not all of it. Claiming it is a strawman suggests Muslims don't take any of these parts literally. Is that your assertion?

Context is removed, misrepresenting the meaning, hence it's a strawman.

What context makes a 950 year old man plausible? What context makes the moon being split in two plausible? In what context does semen coming from between the backbone and ribs become plausible?

Same as in Christian apologetics. By pointing at

* Things allegedly lost in translation
* Things written "symbolically"
* Things written "poetically"
* The need of reading things "from a historical perspective"
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2016 5:53:26 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/10/2016 4:39:45 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 1/9/2016 11:10:00 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/9/2016 9:06:22 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Perhaps parts the video takes metaphor literally, but not all of it. Claiming it is a strawman suggests Muslims don't take any of these parts literally. Is that your assertion?

People of all religions cherrypick in taking things literally or not.

That has been my experience.

For example the conservative Christians who do this:

Homosexuality declared as sin - "Yes. You see it clearly what it is written. Homosexuality is a sin!"
Paul in the Bible telling how he wants women not to wear braids, gold or pearls - "Woah woah woah you shouldn't read the Bible literally and also read this from a historical perspective!"
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2016 5:57:38 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/10/2016 4:43:31 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 1/9/2016 11:38:54 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/9/2016 11:25:11 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
At 1/9/2016 11:10:00 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/9/2016 9:06:22 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Perhaps parts the video takes metaphor literally, but not all of it. Claiming it is a strawman suggests Muslims don't take any of these parts literally. Is that your assertion?

Context is removed, misrepresenting the meaning, hence it's a strawman.

What context makes a 950 year old man plausible? What context makes the moon being split in two plausible? In what context does semen coming from between the backbone and ribs become plausible?

Same as in Christian apologetics. By pointing at

* Things allegedly lost in translation
* Things written "symbolically"
* Things written "poetically"
* The need of reading things "from a historical perspective"

True, but I got the impression from Uther that he took them literally. I haven't had much interaction with him, so I may have misread his response and the silence following. Maybe he will clarify soon.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2016 5:20:36 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 8:35:18 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

With a few modifications, this could just as easily apply to all Abrahamic religions.

- LOL! That channel is the epitome of stupidity.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2016 5:22:37 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/11/2016 5:20:36 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/9/2016 8:35:18 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

With a few modifications, this could just as easily apply to all Abrahamic religions.

- LOL! That channel is the epitome of stupidity.

Perhaps. I ran across it and thought it was funny, and then I wondered how much of it was a valid criticism.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2016 5:25:04 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/11/2016 5:22:37 AM, Skepticalone wrote:

Perhaps. I ran across it and thought it was funny,

- I won't deny it has its funny moments.

and then I wondered how much of it was a valid criticism.

- None.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2016 5:31:45 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/11/2016 5:25:04 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/11/2016 5:22:37 AM, Skepticalone wrote:

Perhaps. I ran across it and thought it was funny,

- I won't deny it has its funny moments.

and then I wondered how much of it was a valid criticism.

- None.

Okay, maybe you will clarify a few things:

Do Muslims consider a 950 yo man building an ark and a global flood to be literal?
Do Muslims consider the moon being split in two by Muhammad to be literal?
Do Muslims consider semen coming from between the backbone and ribs to be literal?
Do Muslims consider man being created from a blood clot to be literal?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,866
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2016 6:28:39 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 8:35:18 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

With a few modifications, this could just as easily apply to all Abrahamic religions.
You really should get a hobby. The moon is separated by two different spheres based on crust thickness. The far side of the moons crust is a lot thicker than the near side. Kinda difficult to translate old languages to current thinking, aren't you suppose to be skeptical? Aren't you skeptical about the video itself?
Oh, and Abraham's religion merely says Eve came from the "curved side" of Adam ,not actually the rib, then Adam slept. Maybe God took DNA from Adam, allowed him to feel it in a way of sorts, then put him to sleep....or Adam smoked some good stuff and Eve was just a hole in a really sexy tree. Either way, debate a vid from YouTube. You're deteriorating into an abysmal routine of arguing simplisms. I'm joking of course.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2016 6:59:32 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 8:35:18 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

With a few modifications, this could just as easily apply to all Abrahamic religions.

That is totally hilarious.
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2016 7:06:48 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/11/2016 5:31:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:

- As expected, all are mistranslations or misrepresentations.

Do Muslims consider a 950 yo man building an ark and a global flood to be literal?

- The 950 yo part, yes. The global flood part, no. The Qur'an speaks of a local flood within the mountains between Syria & Turkey, not a global one.

Do Muslims consider the moon being split in two by Muhammad to be literal?

- No such verse mentioned in the Qur'an! As for the actual verse, some do indeed interpret it literally, thus conclude that the moon split is an event which will happen at the end to time. Some chose to interpret the verse using accounts of 'splitting' during the Prophet (pbuh)'s life, thus conclude some form of split, either phenomenal or real, happened. Some chose to interpret the verse relying on other accounts of 'eclipse' rather than a 'splitting', such as an astroid occultation.

Do Muslims consider semen coming from between the backbone and ribs to be literal?

- One: there is no mention of semen! Two: linguistically, the verse is polysemous. Literal meaning is this case is impossible. Long story short, some interpret the verse to mean Man comes from man & woman (coitus), some interpret it to mean semen emerge through the abdomen area, which technically isn't wrong.

Do Muslims consider man being created from a blood clot to be literal?

- This 'literal' business is nonsensical. Human languages are not programming languages. They are never meant to be taken literally. Most of the time they indeed aren't. When you say "break a leg", you don't really mean literally break a freaking leg! The Qur'an, as it is in Arabic, is meant to be taken LITERARILY, not literally, for that would be absurd. "blood clot" isn't even the literal meaning of the original Arabic word. Anyways, as for the question, the description is certainly pretty accurate.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2016 4:22:48 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/11/2016 7:06:48 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/11/2016 5:31:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:

- As expected, all are mistranslations or misrepresentations.

Do Muslims consider a 950 yo man building an ark and a global flood to be literal?

- The 950 yo part, yes. The global flood part, no. The Qur'an speaks of a local flood within the mountains between Syria & Turkey, not a global one.

Even with the help of modern medicine we have never known a human to live much passed 100 yo, but Noah, without such advantages and in a primitive time manages to live 9 times longer than anyone we've ever observed?! Pffft - get out of here! You're pulling my leg right?! ;-)

Also, if the flood was local, why was it necessary for Noah to collect two of every species? Did the ark land on a mountain because of mountain-high rogue wave? Why was seeking the safety of a mountain not adequate to save the prophet's son from the local flood?

We'll take this as a yes.

Do Muslims consider the moon being split in two by Muhammad to be literal?

- No such verse mentioned in the Qur'an!

Now, you're not being honest. It took me all of five (maybe 47) seconds to look it up. It does seem true that the whole tale is in other ahadith, but here is the verse referring to the same event in the Q'uran (at least this is the verse Muslims, besides yourself, point to).

http://quran.com...

As for the actual verse, some do indeed interpret it literally, thus conclude that the moon split is an event which will happen at the end to time. Some chose to interpret the verse using accounts of 'splitting' during the Prophet (pbuh)'s life, thus conclude some form of split, either phenomenal or real, happened. Some chose to interpret the verse relying on other accounts of 'eclipse' rather than a 'splitting', such as an astroid occultation.

We'll take that as a yes.

Do Muslims consider semen coming from between the backbone and ribs to be literal?

- One: there is no mention of semen! Two: linguistically, the verse is polysemous. Literal meaning is this case is impossible. Long story short, some interpret the verse to mean Man comes from man & woman (coitus), some interpret it to mean semen emerge through the abdomen area, which technically isn't wrong.

Meh. I don't have the energy to argue this one.

Do Muslims consider man being created from a blood clot to be literal?

- This 'literal' business is nonsensical. Human languages are not programming languages. They are never meant to be taken literally.

Language is not all rainbows and butterflies. It is most commonly used for precise observations/instructions regarding actual things. Literal is about as far from "nonsensical" as you can get. Now, if you think the descriptions provided by the Q'uran in these cases is metaphorical - that should be your answer. However, my questions about a literal understanding are completely valid.

Most of the time they indeed aren't. When you say "break a leg", you don't really mean literally break a freaking leg! The Qur'an, as it is in Arabic, is meant to be taken LITERARILY, not literally, for that would be absurd. "blood clot" isn't even the literal meaning of the original Arabic word. Anyways, as for the question, the description is certainly pretty accurate.

How do you figure that man being created from a blood clot is "pretty accurate"?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2016 6:07:53 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/11/2016 7:06:48 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/11/2016 5:31:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:

- As expected, all are mistranslations or misrepresentations.

Do Muslims consider a 950 yo man building an ark and a global flood to be literal?

- The 950 yo part, yes. The global flood part, no. The Qur'an speaks of a local flood within the mountains between Syria & Turkey, not a global one.

This makes no sense. So when God sent the rainbow - it was to tell Noah there would never be another "local" flood? Are you aware there's lots of local flooding around the world. And what held all that water?
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2016 6:08:39 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/9/2016 8:35:18 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

With a few modifications, this could just as easily apply to all Abrahamic religions.

You may like this one too
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2016 6:15:44 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/11/2016 7:06:48 AM, Yassine wrote:


As a side note, I notice language interpretation is important when understanding the Qur'an, as none of us read Arabic we must defer to your interpretation; But how would Allah expect the world to convert linguistically to Arabic? If Allah wanted numbers saved the correct language would have been Mandarin.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2016 6:16:32 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/12/2016 6:08:39 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 1/9/2016 8:35:18 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

With a few modifications, this could just as easily apply to all Abrahamic religions.

You may like this one too

Yes, thank you! That was amusing!
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 9:52:24 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/12/2016 4:22:48 AM, Skepticalone wrote:

Even with the help of modern medicine we have never known a human to live much passed 100 yo, but Noah, without such advantages and in a primitive time manages to live 9 times longer than anyone we've ever observed?!

- True. That's the same argument brought up by scholars concerning the age of normal human beings & the age of Noah. But, it's widely understood that the humans of then aren't the humans of now, in both size & age. You know, evolution & such.

Pffft - get out of here! You're pulling my leg right?! ;-)

- I am just transmitting what the scholars say. Not much focus is put into the age of Noah, as the term 'Sana' (year), & 'Am (also, year) are not very exact in the Qur'an.

Also, if the flood was local, why was it necessary for Noah to collect two of every species?

- They need them to survive after the flood?!

Did the ark land on a mountain because of mountain-high rogue wave?

- Wat?!

Why was seeking the safety of a mountain not adequate to save the prophet's son from the local flood?

- Can't say, Wasn't there. But, I reckon given all the rain & the water that is flowing, there is vey little chance of surviving.

We'll take this as a yes.

- Is that in the literal or the allegorical sense though?! Um, how can one literally take something as a 'yes'?!!!

Now, you're not being dishonest.

- Fixed it.

It took me all of five (maybe 47) seconds to look it up. It does seem true that the whole tale is in other ahadith,

- Case in point.

but here is the verse referring to the same event in the Q'uran (at least this is the verse Muslims, besides yourself, point to) : http://quran.com...

- Don't see no mention of Muhammad (pbuh) splitting it, do you?!

We'll take that as a yes.

- Literally or allegorically though?!

Meh. I don't have the energy to argue this one.

- Indeed.

Language is not all rainbows and butterflies.

- Do you mean, literal 'rainbows' & literal 'butterflies' or allegorical ones though!

It is most commonly used for precise observations/instructions regarding actual things.

- I guess you missed about 99% of literature studies in school. Worry not, you can always catch up.

Literal is about as far from "nonsensical" as you can get.

- Do you mean 'Literal' is literally far from 'Nonsensical' though! How many miles precisely are they far apart?!

Now, if you think the descriptions provided by the Q'uran in these cases is metaphorical - that should be your answer.

- The Qur'an is primarily understood as an Arabic text, based on all the linguistics Arabic adheres to & with all the literary diversification it offers, literal or allegorical.

However, my questions about a literal understanding are completely valid.

- Well, questions will be questions after all. The real feat lies in the answers.

How do you figure that man being created from a blood clot is "pretty accurate"?

- Man created through the phase of 'Alaq'a (the word used in the original verse) is indeed pretty accurate description, as is the entire verse. 'Blood clot' is not even the literal meaning of the original word.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 9:53:30 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/12/2016 6:07:53 AM, Bennett91 wrote:

This makes no sense. So when God sent the rainbow - it was to tell Noah there would never be another "local" flood?

- What rainbow?!

Are you aware there's lots of local flooding around the world.

-_-

And what held all that water?

- Wat?!
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 10:05:15 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/12/2016 6:15:44 AM, Bennett91 wrote:

As a side note, I notice language interpretation is important when understanding the Qur'an, as none of us read Arabic we must defer to your interpretation; But how would Allah expect the world to convert linguistically to Arabic?

- The interpretation of the Qur'an requires mastering Qur'anic sciences, mastering classical Arabic, & mastering the prophetic tradition. You can't interpret the Qur'an just because you're Arab, & you don't need to be Arab to be able to interpret the Qur'an. Very few people actually master classical Arabic, from Arabs or non-Arabs alike. The interpretation is a matter of qualification, not a matter of native tongue!

If Allah wanted numbers saved the correct language would have been Mandarin.

- There are indeed Mandarin interpretations/translations of the Qur'an, as there are in any other language. Anyone is capable of superficial or personal understanding of the Qur'an, original or translated, but only those qualified would have an authoritative understanding of it. Laymen Arabs don't understand the Qur'an any much better than laymen Mandarin speaking people. Arab scholars or Chinese scholars, however, share the same position when it comes to authoritatively interpreting the Qur'an. Many of the most renown exegetists of the Qur'an aren't Arab: Persians, Turks, Indians, Berbers, Chinese...
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 1:17:24 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/14/2016 9:53:30 PM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/12/2016 6:07:53 AM, Bennett91 wrote:

This makes no sense. So when God sent the rainbow - it was to tell Noah there would never be another "local" flood?

- What rainbow?!

Not a fan of Genesis? After the Great Flood God made a rainbow to remind the people that he would never flood the earth again. Although I guess they don't mention it in your book.

Are you aware there's lots of local flooding around the world.

-_-

And what held all that water?

- Wat?!

Local floods tend to dissipate quickly. How did the Great Flood only cover a small patch of earth for serveral days? and why did Noah need to save all the animals from around the globe for a local flood?

- The interpretation of the Qur'an requires mastering Qur'anic sciences, mastering classical Arabic, & mastering the prophetic tradition. You can't interpret the Qur'an just because you're Arab, & you don't need to be Arab to be able to interpret the Qur'an. Very few people actually master classical Arabic, from Arabs or non-Arabs alike. The interpretation is a matter of qualification, not a matter of native tongue!

I never suggested one had to be Arab. One must speak arabic to trurly understand the quran. Translations are never 100% accurate so how can you say a translation will do? Dont muslims criticize the Bible because it has undergone many translations unlike your "unaltered" word of God? And you still don't address my concern. If God wanted us to understand his word why make it so esoteric?

Arab scholars or Chinese scholars, however, share the same position when it comes to authoritatively interpreting the Qur'an. Many of the most renown exegetists of the Qur'an aren't Arab: Persians, Turks, Indians, Berbers, Chinese...

Unless the chinese scholar understands arabic and the context that it requires then non-arabic speaking people are a direct disadvantage. .
Gentorev
Posts: 2,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 2:14:19 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/12/2016 4:22:48 AM, Skepticalone wrote: Do Muslims consider a 950 yo man building an ark and a global flood to be literal?

Noah was 950 when he died, 350 years after the flood. He was not even 600 when the Ark was being built.
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 2:16:33 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/15/2016 1:17:24 AM, Bennett91 wrote:

Not a fan of Genesis?

- Can't say I am.

After the Great Flood God made a rainbow to remind the people that he would never flood the earth again

- OK. Never knew that.

Although I guess they don't mention it in your book.

- Nope.

Local floods tend to dissipate quickly.

- What?! No.

How did the Great Flood only cover a small patch of earth for serveral days?

- That's too short a duration for any serious flood. You think the water evaporates or something?! Unless you're takling about the rainfalls, which can last for about any amount of time from 1 min to 1 year.

and why did Noah need to save all the animals from around the globe for a local flood?

- Did he now?!

I never suggested one had to be Arab. One must speak arabic to trurly understand the quran.

- One must master Classical Arabic, not just speak Arabic.

Translations are never 100% accurate so how can you say a translation will do?

- For laymen, there isn't much difference in understanding a translation or an original. Although, reading the original shows the poetic quality of the Qur'an, unlike a mere translation. But, in meaning, nothing much changes on the surface. Interpretation requires deep & comprehensive understanding of the linguistic, literary, textual & circumstantial context of all verses of the Qur'an.

Dont muslims criticize the Bible because it has undergone many translations unlike your "unaltered" word of God?

- No better version than the original. That's a given.

And you still don't address my concern. If God wanted us to understand his word why make it so esoteric?

- It's not esoteric the same way Science isn't esoteric! Anyone can learn & achieve the necessary qualification to interpret the Qur'an, the same way anyone can learn & achieve the necessary qualification to interpret Nature through natural sciences. The Qur'an is not meant to be interpreted by everybody. That, according to the Qur'an itself. Only those with the appropriate knowledge can have authority to interpret it. Aside from that, everybody else can chose to understand it on his own, on a personal level, but still follow the interpretation of scholars.

Unless the chinese scholar understands arabic and the context that it requires then non-arabic speaking people are a direct disadvantage. .

- No they aren't. Arabs or non-Arabs will have to put out the same effort in learning the same subjects & sciences to achieve the necessary qualifications for interpreting the Qur'an. You think ordinary Arabs have any real grip on Classical Arabic? No, they don't. They, too, would have to learn its rules first. The only ones who aren't at a disadvantage when it comes to this, are the companions of the Prophet (pbuh). Classical Arabic is their native tongue (hence 'classical'), & they lived through the revelation of the Qur'an, thus know all the circumstances surrounding these revelations.
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 5:30:34 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/15/2016 2:14:19 AM, Gentorev wrote:
At 1/12/2016 4:22:48 AM, Skepticalone wrote: Do Muslims consider a 950 yo man building an ark and a global flood to be literal?

Noah was 950 when he died, 350 years after the flood. He was not even 600 when the Ark was being built.

Point taken. However, 600 yo old and building an ark is still pretty spry for those of comparable age today (to say the least).
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 5:53:17 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/15/2016 2:16:33 AM, Yassine wrote:
At 1/15/2016 1:17:24 AM, Bennett91 wrote:

Not a fan of Genesis?

- Can't say I am.

After the Great Flood God made a rainbow to remind the people that he would never flood the earth again

- OK. Never knew that.

Although I guess they don't mention it in your book.

- Nope.

And I thought you were a religious scholar. The Jews and Christians recognize the symbolism in the rainbow, why does islam omit this?

Local floods tend to dissipate quickly.

- What?! No.

Name one verifiable flood that lasted longer than 6 months. Most floods are seasonal.

How did the Great Flood only cover a small patch of earth for serveral days?

- That's too short a duration for any serious flood. You think the water evaporates or something?! Unless you're takling about the rainfalls, which can last for about any amount of time from 1 min to 1 year.

Has rain ever fallen for a year in the middle east .... ever?

and why did Noah need to save all the animals from around the globe for a local flood?

- Did he now?!

You're not very familiar with the western/christian conception of the flood are you?

I never suggested one had to be Arab. One must speak arabic to trurly understand the quran.

- One must master Classical Arabic, not just speak Arabic.

Not only that, but one must have a cultural understanding of the words used in context, otherwise what is literal or metaphorical is up for interpretation.

Translations are never 100% accurate so how can you say a translation will do?

- For laymen, there isn't much difference in understanding a translation or an original. Although, reading the original shows the poetic quality of the Qur'an, unlike a mere translation. But, in meaning, nothing much changes on the surface. Interpretation requires deep & comprehensive understanding of the linguistic, literary, textual & circumstantial context of all verses of the Qur'an.

So again, one must understand classical Arabic, a language that is extremely remote. So unless a person wants their religious knowledge filtered by a "scholar" one must learn classical Arabic - a language many will never have the chance to learn even if they wanted to.

Dont muslims criticize the Bible because it has undergone many translations unlike your "unaltered" word of God?

- No better version than the original. That's a given.

Then all this talk about translations is pointless, one must read the words as they were originally written.

And you still don't address my concern. If God wanted us to understand his word why make it so esoteric?

- It's not esoteric the same way Science isn't esoteric! Anyone can learn & achieve the necessary qualification to interpret the Qur'an, the same way anyone can learn & achieve the necessary qualification to interpret Nature through natural sciences.

The quran is not a scientific document. To compare your religion to the scientific method is laughable. Why do you have many different sects of Islam? Each sect has their legitimate scholars with their own distinct interpretations. We don't see this in the science community, at all. The only reason science seems esoteric is because religious people purposefully obscure it.

The Qur'an is not meant to be interpreted by everybody. That, according to the Qur'an itself. Only those with the appropriate knowledge can have authority to interpret it. Aside from that, everybody else can chose to understand it on his own, on a personal level, but still follow the interpretation of scholars.

"Appropriate knowledge", how subjective.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 6:20:39 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/15/2016 2:16:33 AM, Yassine wrote:


According to the Quran how long was Noah at sea during the flood?