Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Quran

Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 4:51:14 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
The Qur'an is full of grammatical inconsistencies, unintended double-meanings, nonsensical phrases and unjustified foreign-word borrowings (which serve as an indication that it was an incomplete work and heavily plagiarized from Assyrian Aramaic Christians).

Unjustified borrowings. Why would Allah, who says in the Qur'an that He sent down his book in an Arabic tongue so that you may understand, use the Assyrian word "Hanaan" for compassion and not the Arabic word "3aatefa". Ibn Massoud, who was the companion of the Prophet and later created a Qur'anic dictionary, left it blank and couldn't give an answer to what the word "Hanaan" meant. It was later non-Arab Muslim scholars who figured out it as an Assyrian borrowing. Not to mention how shared words between Assyrian and Arabi (knowing that many words are not shared) where sometimes written in their Assyrian form in Uthman's codex when addressing an Arabic audience. Prayer in Arabic "Salaat" is written in the codex as "Saloot". Same goes for "Tawraat" as "Tawroot" and so forth.

Nonsensical phrases. I don't even want to go there.

Unintended double-meanings are probably the funniest but they were fixed in the English translations, so you will not detect them if you're not an Arabic speaker. One I can remember is a verse that says, "God is innocent of all the polytheists and his prophet." It means to say, "God and his prophet are innocent of all the polytheists", but to follow a rhyme it moves words around awkwardly. Most of the Qur'an does that. There are some verses where you have to move a number of words around so you can have a meaningful sentence.

Grammatical inconsistencies. There's a false assumption that Arabic grammar was based on the Qur'an. We actually just ripped off the grammatical rules of other languages and the Pre-Islamic Jahilyah poetry. There a few grammatical rules that are genuine or exclusive to Arabic. There is at least 200 grammatical inconsistency in the Qur'an that are just limited to universal grammar standards or grammatical standards we took from other languages. Muslim apologists have various excuses to justify those exceptions that can basically turn an Arab student's 0 on his grammar test into a 100. Take for example a repeated verse which has a grammatical mistake in its second iteration. Muslim apologists argued that the second iteration has a "hidden verb" to justify the mistake, although the two verses are 100% identical and very long phrases with no contextual change that would even bring such thought to suspicion.

There's also a big mess between masculine and feminine, also justified with "hidden words". For instance, "Mercy" is considered feminine in Arabic, as you will find in classical Arab poetry preceding Islam and the Qur'an itself. But in one verse. It says, "The Mercy of God is close". But it uses the masculine form of close, "Qareeb" and not the feminine which is "Qareeba". To justify that, Muslims apologists that the "place" of the mercy of God is masculine, so it followed the masculine. That being said, I would have been laughed at as an Arabic student if I did such justification to my teacher, and just added further qualifiers and hidden words where my grammar went off. Basically, you can get away with any masculine/feminine error with this strategy. You can say Fatima is Qareeb. And when told you got the gender wrong, you can indicate that you meant her geo-location.

Fill-in-the-blank sentences. Those are very common that many Tafseers or interpretations just add the missing words. It would be something like, --[Moses]-- Went to him --[Samaritan, saying]-- and if you don't --[eat with us, we will punish you]--. I guess this is mainly because a lot of the Qur'an was lost when it was recorded on leaves and bones. There are also many conditional statements in the Qur'an that are missing their consequence, and hence incomplete. This is either an indication of incompleteness or too much pruning for desired eloquence.

Not to mention that the modern-day Qur'an we have is based on Uthman's codex (which is full of spelling mistakes), and has all the chapters mixed without a proper alignment or structure. The organization followed is conventional at best and makes the book even more confusing than it would be when it is read by organizing the Surahs by time of revelation. Not to mention that the Qur'an has no full-stops, commas or exclamation marks, making it even more confusing. It also didn't use to have verses, those were added later on and so you have different versing systems (Kufi, Mecci, etc). It also didn't have points and marks on the letters, when that in Arabic is disastrous and could render a word/sentence in many different forms. The same non-dotted word for eagle (Nisr) can be wrongly dotted for humans (bshr). Not to mention words that are very different just because of a dialectal mark. He Killed and He Was Killed just have one different dialectical mark. So since the Qur'an was never fully memorized (as now it is falsely claimed), you had more than 50 readings that had very different results in some cases, and those were narrowed down to 7 readings to go with a Hadeeth based on the popularity of the authors of those readings and not the content, so even more confusion and presumption.

tl;dr, Qur'an is like a gypsy robe. All patched up and ripped.
uncung
Posts: 3,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 6:33:40 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
The existing Quran is sufficient to deliver us to gain salvation and paradise in hereafter.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 12:02:00 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 4:51:14 AM, Roukezian wrote:
The Qur'an is full of grammatical inconsistencies, unintended double-meanings, nonsensical phrases and unjustified foreign-word borrowings (which serve as an indication that it was an incomplete work and heavily plagiarized from Assyrian Aramaic Christians).

Unjustified borrowings. Why would Allah, who says in the Qur'an that He sent down his book in an Arabic tongue so that you may understand, use the Assyrian word "Hanaan" for compassion and not the Arabic word "3aatefa". Ibn Massoud, who was the companion of the Prophet and later created a Qur'anic dictionary, left it blank and couldn't give an answer to what the word "Hanaan" meant. It was later non-Arab Muslim scholars who figured out it as an Assyrian borrowing. Not to mention how shared words between Assyrian and Arabi (knowing that many words are not shared) where sometimes written in their Assyrian form in Uthman's codex when addressing an Arabic audience. Prayer in Arabic "Salaat" is written in the codex as "Saloot". Same goes for "Tawraat" as "Tawroot" and so forth.

Nonsensical phrases. I don't even want to go there.

Unintended double-meanings are probably the funniest but they were fixed in the English translations, so you will not detect them if you're not an Arabic speaker. One I can remember is a verse that says, "God is innocent of all the polytheists and his prophet." It means to say, "God and his prophet are innocent of all the polytheists", but to follow a rhyme it moves words around awkwardly. Most of the Qur'an does that. There are some verses where you have to move a number of words around so you can have a meaningful sentence.

Grammatical inconsistencies. There's a false assumption that Arabic grammar was based on the Qur'an. We actually just ripped off the grammatical rules of other languages and the Pre-Islamic Jahilyah poetry. There a few grammatical rules that are genuine or exclusive to Arabic. There is at least 200 grammatical inconsistency in the Qur'an that are just limited to universal grammar standards or grammatical standards we took from other languages. Muslim apologists have various excuses to justify those exceptions that can basically turn an Arab student's 0 on his grammar test into a 100. Take for example a repeated verse which has a grammatical mistake in its second iteration. Muslim apologists argued that the second iteration has a "hidden verb" to justify the mistake, although the two verses are 100% identical and very long phrases with no contextual change that would even bring such thought to suspicion.

There's also a big mess between masculine and feminine, also justified with "hidden words". For instance, "Mercy" is considered feminine in Arabic, as you will find in classical Arab poetry preceding Islam and the Qur'an itself. But in one verse. It says, "The Mercy of God is close". But it uses the masculine form of close, "Qareeb" and not the feminine which is "Qareeba". To justify that, Muslims apologists that the "place" of the mercy of God is masculine, so it followed the masculine. That being said, I would have been laughed at as an Arabic student if I did such justification to my teacher, and just added further qualifiers and hidden words where my grammar went off. Basically, you can get away with any masculine/feminine error with this strategy. You can say Fatima is Qareeb. And when told you got the gender wrong, you can indicate that you meant her geo-location.

Fill-in-the-blank sentences. Those are very common that many Tafseers or interpretations just add the missing words. It would be something like, --[Moses]-- Went to him --[Samaritan, saying]-- and if you don't --[eat with us, we will punish you]--. I guess this is mainly because a lot of the Qur'an was lost when it was recorded on leaves and bones. There are also many conditional statements in the Qur'an that are missing their consequence, and hence incomplete. This is either an indication of incompleteness or too much pruning for desired eloquence.

Not to mention that the modern-day Qur'an we have is based on Uthman's codex (which is full of spelling mistakes), and has all the chapters mixed without a proper alignment or structure. The organization followed is conventional at best and makes the book even more confusing than it would be when it is read by organizing the Surahs by time of revelation. Not to mention that the Qur'an has no full-stops, commas or exclamation marks, making it even more confusing. It also didn't use to have verses, those were added later on and so you have different versing systems (Kufi, Mecci, etc). It also didn't have points and marks on the letters, when that in Arabic is disastrous and could render a word/sentence in many different forms. The same non-dotted word for eagle (Nisr) can be wrongly dotted for humans (bshr). Not to mention words that are very different just because of a dialectal mark. He Killed and He Was Killed just have one different dialectical mark. So since the Qur'an was never fully memorized (as now it is falsely claimed), you had more than 50 readings that had very different results in some cases, and those were narrowed down to 7 readings to go with a Hadeeth based on the popularity of the authors of those readings and not the content, so even more confusion and presumption.

tl;dr, Qur'an is like a gypsy robe. All patched up and ripped.

Response: Claiming the Qur'an has inconsistencies and grammatical errors is by far the most absurd claim imaginable. Even if, for the sake of argument it is inconsistent with grammar today, that only proves just that. That it is inconsistent with today's grammar. Not with how it was spoken at the time it was revealed. Yet Allah is the originator of grammar and language. Therefore grammar is inconsistent with Allah and the Qur'an. Not the other way around. Allah sets the standard. He doesn't follow your standard.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 12:45:45 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 12:02:00 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/9/2016 4:51:14 AM, Roukezian wrote:
The Qur'an is full of grammatical inconsistencies, unintended double-meanings, nonsensical phrases and unjustified foreign-word borrowings (which serve as an indication that it was an incomplete work and heavily plagiarized from Assyrian Aramaic Christians).

Unjustified borrowings. Why would Allah, who says in the Qur'an that He sent down his book in an Arabic tongue so that you may understand, use the Assyrian word "Hanaan" for compassion and not the Arabic word "3aatefa". Ibn Massoud, who was the companion of the Prophet and later created a Qur'anic dictionary, left it blank and couldn't give an answer to what the word "Hanaan" meant. It was later non-Arab Muslim scholars who figured out it as an Assyrian borrowing. Not to mention how shared words between Assyrian and Arabi (knowing that many words are not shared) where sometimes written in their Assyrian form in Uthman's codex when addressing an Arabic audience. Prayer in Arabic "Salaat" is written in the codex as "Saloot". Same goes for "Tawraat" as "Tawroot" and so forth.

Nonsensical phrases. I don't even want to go there.

Unintended double-meanings are probably the funniest but they were fixed in the English translations, so you will not detect them if you're not an Arabic speaker. One I can remember is a verse that says, "God is innocent of all the polytheists and his prophet." It means to say, "God and his prophet are innocent of all the polytheists", but to follow a rhyme it moves words around awkwardly. Most of the Qur'an does that. There are some verses where you have to move a number of words around so you can have a meaningful sentence.

Grammatical inconsistencies. There's a false assumption that Arabic grammar was based on the Qur'an. We actually just ripped off the grammatical rules of other languages and the Pre-Islamic Jahilyah poetry. There a few grammatical rules that are genuine or exclusive to Arabic. There is at least 200 grammatical inconsistency in the Qur'an that are just limited to universal grammar standards or grammatical standards we took from other languages. Muslim apologists have various excuses to justify those exceptions that can basically turn an Arab student's 0 on his grammar test into a 100. Take for example a repeated verse which has a grammatical mistake in its second iteration. Muslim apologists argued that the second iteration has a "hidden verb" to justify the mistake, although the two verses are 100% identical and very long phrases with no contextual change that would even bring such thought to suspicion.

There's also a big mess between masculine and feminine, also justified with "hidden words". For instance, "Mercy" is considered feminine in Arabic, as you will find in classical Arab poetry preceding Islam and the Qur'an itself. But in one verse. It says, "The Mercy of God is close". But it uses the masculine form of close, "Qareeb" and not the feminine which is "Qareeba". To justify that, Muslims apologists that the "place" of the mercy of God is masculine, so it followed the masculine. That being said, I would have been laughed at as an Arabic student if I did such justification to my teacher, and just added further qualifiers and hidden words where my grammar went off. Basically, you can get away with any masculine/feminine error with this strategy. You can say Fatima is Qareeb. And when told you got the gender wrong, you can indicate that you meant her geo-location.

Fill-in-the-blank sentences. Those are very common that many Tafseers or interpretations just add the missing words. It would be something like, --[Moses]-- Went to him --[Samaritan, saying]-- and if you don't --[eat with us, we will punish you]--. I guess this is mainly because a lot of the Qur'an was lost when it was recorded on leaves and bones. There are also many conditional statements in the Qur'an that are missing their consequence, and hence incomplete. This is either an indication of incompleteness or too much pruning for desired eloquence.

Not to mention that the modern-day Qur'an we have is based on Uthman's codex (which is full of spelling mistakes), and has all the chapters mixed without a proper alignment or structure. The organization followed is conventional at best and makes the book even more confusing than it would be when it is read by organizing the Surahs by time of revelation. Not to mention that the Qur'an has no full-stops, commas or exclamation marks, making it even more confusing. It also didn't use to have verses, those were added later on and so you have different versing systems (Kufi, Mecci, etc). It also didn't have points and marks on the letters, when that in Arabic is disastrous and could render a word/sentence in many different forms. The same non-dotted word for eagle (Nisr) can be wrongly dotted for humans (bshr). Not to mention words that are very different just because of a dialectal mark. He Killed and He Was Killed just have one different dialectical mark. So since the Qur'an was never fully memorized (as now it is falsely claimed), you had more than 50 readings that had very different results in some cases, and those were narrowed down to 7 readings to go with a Hadeeth based on the popularity of the authors of those readings and not the content, so even more confusion and presumption.

tl;dr, Qur'an is like a gypsy robe. All patched up and ripped.

Response: Claiming the Qur'an has inconsistencies and grammatical errors is by far the most absurd claim imaginable. Even if, for the sake of argument it is inconsistent with grammar today, that only proves just that. That it is inconsistent with today's grammar. Not with how it was spoken at the time it was revealed. Yet Allah is the originator of grammar and language. Therefore grammar is inconsistent with Allah and the Qur'an. Not the other way around. Allah sets the standard. He doesn't follow your standard.

Does your "holy" comic explain how a 6 year old child can show it likes sex?
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 1:07:51 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
Response: Claiming the Qur'an has inconsistencies and grammatical errors is by far the most absurd claim imaginable. Even if, for the sake of argument it is inconsistent with grammar today, that only proves just that. That it is inconsistent with today's grammar. Not with how it was spoken at the time it was revealed. Yet Allah is the originator of grammar and language. Therefore grammar is inconsistent with Allah and the Qur'an. Not the other way around. Allah sets the standard. He doesn't follow your standard.

Classical Arabic (used in the Qur'an) and Modern Standard Arabic (which we use today) have exactly the same grammar because Arabic was considered a holy language and preserved on that basis. The differences are in lexicons and stylistics (in other words, old words nobody uses nowadays). But Arabic existed centuries before the Qur'an was revealed and Jahilyah Pre-Islamic poets followed the same grammatical rules of Classical Arabic. You'd think God would manage to speak in the Arabic tongue as he promises and produce a book that is understandable to an average person, not re-define standards, which he didn't, as the Qur'an didn't add anything to Arabic grammar, but only came out with grammatical inconsistencies you have to explain through absurd apologetic.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:14:14 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:07:51 PM, Roukezian wrote:

Classical Arabic (used in the Qur'an) and Modern Standard Arabic (which we use today) have exactly the same grammar because Arabic was considered a holy language and preserved on that basis. The differences are in lexicons and stylistics (in other words, old words nobody uses nowadays). But Arabic existed centuries before the Qur'an was revealed and Jahilyah Pre-Islamic poets followed the same grammatical rules of Classical Arabic. You'd think God would manage to speak in the Arabic tongue as he promises and produce a book that is understandable to an average person, not re-define standards, which he didn't, as the Qur'an didn't add anything to Arabic grammar, but only came out with grammatical inconsistencies you have to explain through absurd apologetic.

Response: You were created and grammar was taught to you. Allah is uncreated and the originator of creation. So your claim to know grammar and its origin better than the one who created you and grammar is illogical. Your argument remains invalid.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:22:20 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:14:14 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:07:51 PM, Roukezian wrote:

Classical Arabic (used in the Qur'an) and Modern Standard Arabic (which we use today) have exactly the same grammar because Arabic was considered a holy language and preserved on that basis. The differences are in lexicons and stylistics (in other words, old words nobody uses nowadays). But Arabic existed centuries before the Qur'an was revealed and Jahilyah Pre-Islamic poets followed the same grammatical rules of Classical Arabic. You'd think God would manage to speak in the Arabic tongue as he promises and produce a book that is understandable to an average person, not re-define standards, which he didn't, as the Qur'an didn't add anything to Arabic grammar, but only came out with grammatical inconsistencies you have to explain through absurd apologetic.

Response: You were created and grammar was taught to you. Allah is uncreated and the originator of creation. So your claim to know grammar and its origin better than the one who created you and grammar is illogical. Your argument remains invalid.

Fati's explanation of how 6 year old children show like for sex remains invalid due to him being unable to produce one.
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:13:38 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:14:14 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:07:51 PM, Roukezian wrote:

Response: You were created and grammar was taught to you. Allah is uncreated and the originator of creation. So your claim to know grammar and its origin better than the one who created you and grammar is illogical. Your argument remains invalid.

You have personal beliefs which I don't share, hence it is illogical to evaluate my argument based on them(aka the Sally Anne Fallacy). To keep it short, I don't subscribe to creationism or theism.
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:16:41 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
Another fairy tale book, like the "Bible"!
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2016 4:09:06 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 3:13:38 PM, Roukezian wrote:

You have personal beliefs which I don't share, hence it is illogical to evaluate my argument based on them(aka the Sally Anne Fallacy). To keep it short, I don't subscribe to creationism or theism.

Response: The facts still remain, regardless of whether you accept them or believe them. You were taught grammar. Allah originated grammar. So the Qur'an cannot be inconsistent.

Even if we disregard the aspect of theism, the single fact that still remains is that you were taught grammar. So unless you can prove that the authority whom you got your info from is reliable, your points remain invalid.
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2016 5:23:48 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/10/2016 4:09:06 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: The facts still remain, regardless of whether you accept them or believe them. You were taught grammar. Allah originated grammar. So the Qur'an cannot be inconsistent.

To argue that the Qur'an cannot be inconsistent because God made grammar makes no sense unless you have definite proof that the Qur'an is from God.

Even if we disregard the aspect of theism, the single fact that still remains is that you were taught grammar. So unless you can prove that the authority whom you got your info from is reliable, your points remain invalid.

I don't think one historian would disagree that classical works of Arabic and Assyrian Aramaic are reliable sources to determine the grammar of the people at those times. If that is not enough to you, I can parallel the Islamic prophecy and say angel Gabriel visited me in a cave and taught me grammar.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2016 7:48:01 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/10/2016 5:23:48 AM, Roukezian wrote:
To argue that the Qur'an cannot be inconsistent because God made grammar makes no sense unless you have definite proof that the Qur'an is from God.

I don't think one historian would disagree that classical works of Arabic and Assyrian Aramaic are reliable sources to determine the grammar of the people at those times. If that is not enough to you, I can parallel the Islamic prophecy and say angel Gabriel visited me in a cave and taught me grammar.

Response: There is definitive proof that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah, as proven by the Qur'an challenge. For the challenge provides a hands on eyewitness account that it is humanly impossible to inspire enough followers to help you conquer and rule a nation by using human made speech/literature that goes against the likes of the people. There is also no discrepancy or indecency in the Qur'an and it is a guidance to righteousness. Both parts prove that the author of the Qur'an is reliable and truthful and divine.

Now if you disagree, then take the challenge and prove differently. I challenge you to:

1. find one indecency or error in the Qur'an.

2. Inspire enough followers to help you conquer and rule just the street you live on, by using human made speech/literature that goes AGAINST their likes and beliefs.

Your own failure to the challenge will support the fact that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2016 7:50:58 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/10/2016 7:48:01 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/10/2016 5:23:48 AM, Roukezian wrote:
To argue that the Qur'an cannot be inconsistent because God made grammar makes no sense unless you have definite proof that the Qur'an is from God.

I don't think one historian would disagree that classical works of Arabic and Assyrian Aramaic are reliable sources to determine the grammar of the people at those times. If that is not enough to you, I can parallel the Islamic prophecy and say angel Gabriel visited me in a cave and taught me grammar.

Response: There is definitive proof that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah, as proven by the Qur'an challenge. For the challenge provides a hands on eyewitness account that it is humanly impossible to inspire enough followers to help you conquer and rule a nation by using human made speech/literature that goes against the likes of the people. There is also no discrepancy or indecency in the Qur'an and it is a guidance to righteousness. Both parts prove that the author of the Qur'an is reliable and truthful and divine.

Now if you disagree, then take the challenge and prove differently. I challenge you to:

1. find one indecency or error in the Qur'an.

2. Inspire enough followers to help you conquer and rule just the street you live on, by using human made speech/literature that goes AGAINST their likes and beliefs.


Your own failure to the challenge will support the fact that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah.

Does it tell you, in that book. how 6 year old children can show they like sex, Fati?
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2016 10:18:04 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
I don't think one historian would disagree that classical works of Arabic and Assyrian Aramaic are reliable sources to determine the grammar of the people at those times. If that is not enough to you, I can parallel the Islamic prophecy and say angel Gabriel visited me in a cave and taught me grammar.

Response: There is definitive proof that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah, as proven by the Qur'an challenge. For the challenge provides a hands on eyewitness account that it is humanly impossible to inspire enough followers to help you conquer and rule a nation by using human made speech/literature that goes against the likes of the people. There is also no discrepancy or indecency in the Qur'an and it is a guidance to righteousness. Both parts prove that the author of the Qur'an is reliable and truthful and divine.

You are misrepresenting the Qur'anic challenge that is mentioned in the Qur'an. It doesn't have anything to do with followers, conquest or going against the likes of people. It is merely a linguistic challenge to "produce a Surah like it."

Now if you disagree, then take the challenge and prove differently. I challenge you to:


I don't buy that this was a Qur'anic challenge at the time of the prophet. I believe the prophet was smart enough to see the illogicality of this approach. But go ahead.

1. find one indecency or error in the Qur'an.


My post above already listed numerous examples of errors and deficiencies in the Qur'an. Nonetheless, even if I couldn't produce one, that doesn't mean the Qur'an is necessarily true. It only means that we should have an undecided position on its truth until evidence beyond reasonable doubt supports either claim, and the challenge you provided doesn't suffice as it doesn't bring any evidence to the table but shifts the burden on the questioner.

2. Inspire enough followers to help you conquer and rule just the street you live on, by using human made speech/literature that goes AGAINST their likes and beliefs.


There is no logical connection between Section 2 of your challenge and the truthfulness of the Qur'an or any religious scripture. We both can agree on examples of false religions that conquered nations with human-made scriptures(e.g Hinduism and their Vedas). Moreover, it is possible for God to have an unpopular scripture for a minority(e.g Torah for Jews).

Your own failure to the challenge will support the fact that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah.

Not at all. My own failure is only mine to be accounted for If you can't prove that global warming is false, that doesn't mean it must be true.
bulproof
Posts: 25,308
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2016 10:21:30 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/10/2016 7:48:01 PM, Fatihah wrote:
2. Inspire enough followers to help you conquer and rule just the street you live on, by using human made speech/literature that goes AGAINST their likes and beliefs.
Yeah already done that now what?
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2016 12:58:37 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/10/2016 10:18:04 PM, Roukezian wrote:

You are misrepresenting the Qur'anic challenge that is mentioned in the Qur'an. It doesn't have anything to do with followers, conquest or going against the likes of people. It is merely a linguistic challenge to "produce a Surah like it."

I don't buy that this was a Qur'anic challenge at the time of the prophet. I believe the prophet was smart enough to see the illogicality of this approach. But go ahead.

My post above already listed numerous examples of errors and deficiencies in the Qur'an. Nonetheless, even if I couldn't produce one, that doesn't mean the Qur'an is necessarily true. It only means that we should have an undecided position on its truth until evidence beyond reasonable doubt supports either claim, and the challenge you provided doesn't suffice as it doesn't bring any evidence to the table but shifts the burden on the questioner.


There is no logical connection between Section 2 of your challenge and the truthfulness of the Qur'an or any religious scripture. We both can agree on examples of false religions that conquered nations with human-made scriptures(e.g Hinduism and their Vedas). Moreover, it is possible for God to have an unpopular scripture for a minority(e.g Torah for Jews).

Your own failure to the challenge will support the fact that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah.

Not at all. My own failure is only mine to be accounted for If you can't prove that global warming is false, that doesn't mean it must be true.

Response: In other words, you cannot answer the challenge, as expected. Thus supporting the fact that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah. We see you fail to show one error or indecency in the Qur'an, thereby supporting the fact that it is truthful. Nor have you inspired enough followers to help conquer and rule the street you live on by using humanmande speech/literature . Thus your own failure is firsthand evidence that such an act is humanly possible and since it is impossible to do so with humanmade speech/literature, that means that the Qur'an used by Muhammad (saw) to inspire followers to conquer Arabia was not humanmade, but from divine origin, who is Allah.
AWSM0055
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2016 1:30:46 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 6:33:40 AM, uncung wrote:
The existing Quran is sufficient to deliver us to gain salvation and paradise in hereafter.

Everybody shut up, this Muslim thinks the Quran is just fine. Move along people.
"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"Calling my atheism a religion, is like calling my non-stamp-collecting a hobby" - MagicAintReal 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Matt8800: "When warring men kidnap damsels of the enemy, what do they do?"

Jerry947: "They give them the option of marriage."

Matt8800: "Correct! You won idiot of the year award!"

http://explosm.net...
POPOO5560
Posts: 2,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2016 4:12:13 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/11/2016 1:30:46 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 6:33:40 AM, uncung wrote:
The existing Quran is sufficient to deliver us to gain salvation and paradise in hereafter.

Everybody shut up, this Muslim thinks the Quran is just fine. Move along people.

tiptoe guy shut up its my turn!! :D
Never fart near dog
POPOO5560
Posts: 2,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2016 4:23:46 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 4:51:14 AM, Roukezian wrote:
The Qur'an is full of grammatical inconsistencies, unintended double-meanings, nonsensical phrases and unjustified foreign-word borrowings (which serve as an indication that it was an incomplete work and heavily plagiarized from Assyrian Aramaic Christians).

Unjustified borrowings. Why would Allah, who says in the Qur'an that He sent down his book in an Arabic tongue so that you may understand, use the Assyrian word "Hanaan" for compassion and not the Arabic word "3aatefa". Ibn Massoud, who was the companion of the Prophet and later created a Qur'anic dictionary, left it blank and couldn't give an answer to what the word "Hanaan" meant. It was later non-Arab Muslim scholars who figured out it as an Assyrian borrowing. Not to mention how shared words between Assyrian and Arabi (knowing that many words are not shared) where sometimes written in their Assyrian form in Uthman's codex when addressing an Arabic audience. Prayer in Arabic "Salaat" is written in the codex as "Saloot". Same goes for "Tawraat" as "Tawroot" and so forth.

Nonsensical phrases. I don't even want to go there.

Unintended double-meanings are probably the funniest but they were fixed in the English translations, so you will not detect them if you're not an Arabic speaker. One I can remember is a verse that says, "God is innocent of all the polytheists and his prophet." It means to say, "God and his prophet are innocent of all the polytheists", but to follow a rhyme it moves words around awkwardly. Most of the Qur'an does that. There are some verses where you have to move a number of words around so you can have a meaningful sentence.

Grammatical inconsistencies. There's a false assumption that Arabic grammar was based on the Qur'an. We actually just ripped off the grammatical rules of other languages and the Pre-Islamic Jahilyah poetry. There a few grammatical rules that are genuine or exclusive to Arabic. There is at least 200 grammatical inconsistency in the Qur'an that are just limited to universal grammar standards or grammatical standards we took from other languages. Muslim apologists have various excuses to justify those exceptions that can basically turn an Arab student's 0 on his grammar test into a 100. Take for example a repeated verse which has a grammatical mistake in its second iteration. Muslim apologists argued that the second iteration has a "hidden verb" to justify the mistake, although the two verses are 100% identical and very long phrases with no contextual change that would even bring such thought to suspicion.

There's also a big mess between masculine and feminine, also justified with "hidden words". For instance, "Mercy" is considered feminine in Arabic, as you will find in classical Arab poetry preceding Islam and the Qur'an itself. But in one verse. It says, "The Mercy of God is close". But it uses the masculine form of close, "Qareeb" and not the feminine which is "Qareeba". To justify that, Muslims apologists that the "place" of the mercy of God is masculine, so it followed the masculine. That being said, I would have been laughed at as an Arabic student if I did such justification to my teacher, and just added further qualifiers and hidden words where my grammar went off. Basically, you can get away with any masculine/feminine error with this strategy. You can say Fatima is Qareeb. And when told you got the gender wrong, you can indicate that you meant her geo-location.

Fill-in-the-blank sentences. Those are very common that many Tafseers or interpretations just add the missing words. It would be something like, --[Moses]-- Went to him --[Samaritan, saying]-- and if you don't --[eat with us, we will punish you]--. I guess this is mainly because a lot of the Qur'an was lost when it was recorded on leaves and bones. There are also many conditional statements in the Qur'an that are missing their consequence, and hence incomplete. This is either an indication of incompleteness or too much pruning for desired eloquence.

Not to mention that the modern-day Qur'an we have is based on Uthman's codex (which is full of spelling mistakes), and has all the chapters mixed without a proper alignment or structure. The organization followed is conventional at best and makes the book even more confusing than it would be when it is read by organizing the Surahs by time of revelation. Not to mention that the Qur'an has no full-stops, commas or exclamation marks, making it even more confusing. It also didn't use to have verses, those were added later on and so you have different versing systems (Kufi, Mecci, etc). It also didn't have points and marks on the letters, when that in Arabic is disastrous and could render a word/sentence in many different forms. The same non-dotted word for eagle (Nisr) can be wrongly dotted for humans (bshr). Not to mention words that are very different just because of a dialectal mark. He Killed and He Was Killed just have one different dialectical mark. So since the Qur'an was never fully memorized (as now it is falsely claimed), you had more than 50 readings that had very different results in some cases, and those were narrowed down to 7 readings to go with a Hadeeth based on the popularity of the authors of those readings and not the content, so even more confusion and presumption.

tl;dr, Qur'an is like a gypsy robe. All patched up and ripped.

my arabic is not that good but i can understand where u come from and if u know this guy nouman ali khan im sure he can do the job for ya because he specializing in arabic linguistic as its written in the Quran and he shows really how the Quran is so great what u see as error its not because it has other meaning behind it. if u want to check him he is all over youtube.

the problem is u dont know enough how Quranic language in structured how arabic Quran is written. he is the founder Bayyinah Institute i will contact his guy about these stuff anyway...
Never fart near dog
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2016 4:40:38 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
my arabic is not that good but i can understand where u come from and if u know this guy nouman ali khan im sure he can do the job for ya because he specializing in arabic linguistic as its written in the Quran and he shows really how the Quran is so great what u see as error its not because it has other meaning behind it. if u want to check him he is all over youtube.

the problem is u dont know enough how Quranic language in structured how arabic Quran is written. he is the founder Bayyinah Institute i will contact his guy about these stuff anyway...

I thank you for your kind response. I've heard of Nouman Ali Khan but never delved deep into his contributions. Nonetheless, please ask him for a response on the points I brought forward and reference him to the works of the Arabic Translator, Sami Al Deeb, who presented these problems (and some additional ones) in his version of the Qur'an. To be honest, I disagree with almost 95% of the errors Sami Al Deeb claims to have spotted, I think he was being too literal and strict in his approach. Yet I do not deny that I agree with him on the points which I have presented here.

I also think Sami Al Deeb has done Islam a great favor even if he is an ardent opponent. This is by ordering the chapters by time of revelation(making the scripture more understandable and linear), adding exclamation marks and commas, splitting Mecci and Madani Surahs and providing Kufi and Uthmani scripts along the modern-day Qur'anic versess. To my knowledge, this has never been done before. Saudi Arabia tried to present Kufi script at one point in the Qur'an. However, the organizing committee had inner conflicts which terminated the project, unfortunately. Thanks in regards.
Osman35
Posts: 52
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2016 10:07:06 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
The Twenty-Fifth Word The Miraculousness of the Qur"an
While there is a perpetual miracle like the Qur"an, searching for further proof appears to my mind as superfluous;
While there is a proof of reality like the Qur"an, would silencing those who deny it weigh heavily on my heart?
A REMINDER
[At the start, our intention was to write this Word in the form of five "Lights", but at the end of the First Light, we were compelled to write extremely fast in order to print it in the old [Ottoman] script.1 On some days even we wrote twenty to thirty pages in two or three hours. Therefore, writing three Lights in a brief and concise manner, we have for now abandoned the last two. I hope that my brothers will look fairly and with tolerance at any faults and defects, difficulties and mistakes, which may be attributed to me.]
Most of the verses in this treatise of The Miraculousness of the Qur"an have either been the cause of criticism by atheists, or have been objected to by scientists, or have been the subject of doubt and misgiving by satans among jinn and men. Thus, this Twenty-Fifth Word has explained the truths and fine points of those verses in such a way that the very points which the atheists and scientists imagined to be faults have been proved according to scholarly principles to be flashes of miraculousness and the sources of the perfections of the Qur"an"s eloquence. In order not to cause aversion, decisive answers have been given without mentioning their doubts. Only, in the first Station of the Twentieth Word their doubts have been stated concerning three or four verses, like, And the mountains [its] pegs,2 and, And the sun runs its course.3
Also, although this treatise of The Miraculousness of the Qur"an was written very concisely and with great speed, with regard to the science of rhetoric and sciences of Arabic, it is explained in a way so learned and profound and powerful that it has caused wonder to scholars. Although everyone who studies it will not understand all the matters discussed, there is a significant share for everyone in this garden. In spite of the defects in the phraseology and manner of expression due to its being written very fast and under confused conditions, it explains the truth and reality of most important matters.
Said Nursi

The Miraculousness of the Qur"an
In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
Say: If all mankind and all jinn were to come together to produce the like of this Qur"an, they could not produce the like of it, even if they were to help and support each other.4
[Of the innumerable aspects of the miraculousness of the All-Wise Qur"an of Miraculous Exposition, the treasury of miracles and greatest miracle of Muhammad (Peace and blessings be upon him), I have pointed out close on forty in my Arabic treatises, in the Arabic Risale-i Nur, in my Qur"anic commentary called Isharat al-I"jaz (Signs of Miraculousness), and in the preceding twenty-four Words. Now I shall explain to a degree only five of those aspects and include within them briefly the other aspects, and in an Introduction give a definition of the Qur"an and indicate its nature.]
INTRODUCTION
The Introduction consists of three parts.
FIRST PART: WHAT IS THE QUR"AN? How is it defined?
Answer: As is explained in the Nineteenth Word and proved in other Words, THE QUR"AN is the pre-eternal translator of the mighty Book of the Universe; the post-eternal interpreter of the various tongues reciting the verses of creation; the commentator of the book of the Worlds of the Seen and the Unseen; the revealer of the treasuries of the Divine Names hidden in the heavens and on the earth; the key to the truths concealed beneath the lines of events; the tongue of the Unseen World in the Manifest World; the treasury of the post-eternal favours of the Most Merciful and of the pre-eternal addresses of the Most Holy, which come from the World of the Unseen beyond the veil of this Manifest World; it is the sun, foundation, and plan of the spiritual world of Islam; the sacred map of the worlds of the hereafter; the expounding word, lucid exposition, decisive proof, and clear interpreter of the Divine Essence, attributes, Names, and functions; it is the instructor of the world of humanity; the light and water of Islam, the macroanthropos; the true wisdom of mankind; and the true guide and leader urging humanity to prosperity and happiness; it is a both a book of law, and a book of prayer, and a book of wisdom, and a book of worship, and a book of command and summons, and a book of invocation, and a book of thought, and a unique, comprehensive sacred book comprising many books to which recourse may be had for all the needs of all mankind; it is a revealed scripture resembling a sacred library which offers treatises suitable for all the various ways and different paths of the all the saints and the veracious ones and the wise and the learned, which is appropriate for the illuminations of each way and enlightens it, and is suitable for the course of each path and depicts it.
SECOND PART and complement to the definition:
As is explained and proved in the Twelfth Word, since THE QUR"AN has come from the Sublime Throne and the Greatest Name, and from the highest degree of each Name, it is God"s Word in regard to His being Sustainer of All The Worlds; it is a Divine decree through His title of God of All Beings; it is an address in the name of the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth; it is a conversation in respect of absolute dominicality; it is a pre-eternal discourse on account of universal Divine sovereignty; it is a notebook of the favours of the Most Merciful from the point of view of all- embracing, all-encompassing Divine mercy; it is a collection of addresses at the start of which are certain ciphers in respect of the tremendousness of Divine majesty; and through its descent from the comprehensiveness of the Greatest Name, it is a holy scripture full of wisdom which looks to and inspects all sides of the Sublime Throne.
It is because of this mystery that with complete fitness the title of the Word of God has been given to the Qur"an, and is always given. After the Qur"an comes the level of the books and scriptures of the other prophets. However, those other innumerable Divine Words are each in the form of inspiration made manifest through a special regard, a partial title, a particular manifestation, a particular Name, a special dominicality, a particular sovereignty, a special mercy. The inspirations of the angels and man and the animals vary greatly with regard to universality and particularity.
THIRD PART: THE QUR"AN is a revealed scripture which contains in summary the books of all the prophets, whose times were all different, the writings of all the saints, whose paths are all different, and the works of all the purified scholars, whose ways are all different. Its six aspects are all brilliant and refined of the darkness of doubts and scepticism; its point of support is certain heavenly revelation and the pre-eternal Word; its aim and goal is self-evidently eternal happiness; its inner aspect is clearly pure guidance; its upper aspect is necessarily the lights of belief; its lower aspect is undeniably evidence and proof; its right aspect is evidently the surrender of the heart and conscience; its left aspect is manifestly the subjugation of the reason and intellect; its fruit is indisputably the mercy of the Most Merciful and the realm of Paradise; and its rank and desirability are assuredly accepted by the angels and man and the jinn.
Each of the attributes in these three parts concerning the Qur"an"s definition have been proved decisively in other places, or they will be proved. Our claims are not isolated; each may be proved with clear proofs.
...from the risale-i Nur collection
...source: risale-i nur collection
Osman35
Posts: 52
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2016 10:34:28 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
FIRST LIGHT
This Light consists of three "Rays".
FIRST RAY: This is the eloquence of the Qur"an, which is at the degree of miraculousness. Its eloquence is a wonderful eloquence born of the beauty of its word-order, the perfection of its conciseness, the marvels of its style, its singularity and pleasantness, the excellence of its expression, its superiority and clarity, the power and truth of its meanings, and from the purity and fluency of its language, which for one thousand three hundred years has challenged the most brilliant men of letters of mankind, their most celebrated orators, and the most profoundly learned of them, and invited them to dispute it. It has provoked them intensely. And although it has invited them to dispute it, those geniuses, whose heads touch the skies in their pride and conceit, have been unable to so much as open their mouths to do so, and have bowed their heads utterly humiliated. Thus, we shall point to the miraculousness in its eloquence in two "Aspects".
First Aspect: It possesses miraculousness and its miraculousness exists for the following reasons. The great majority of the people of the Arabian Peninsula at that time were illiterate. Due to this, rather than in writing, they preserved the sources of their pride, historical events and stories encouraging good morality, by means of poetry and eloquence. Due to the attraction of poetry and eloquence, meaningful sayings would remain in people"s memories and be passed down the generations. In consequence of this innate need, therefore, the goods most in demand in the immaterial market of that people were eloquence and fine speech. A tribe"s poet or orator was like its greatest national hero. It was he who was their greatest source of pride. Thus, among the peoples of the world, the eloquence and rhetoric of that intelligent people, who due to their intelligence ruled the world after the establishment of Islam, was at the highest and most advanced degree. It was the thing most highly prized among them that they felt greatest need of, and was their cause of pride. They attached such value to eloquence that two tribes would do battle at the word of a poet or orator, and they would make peace at his word. They even wrote in gold on the walls of the Ka"ba the seven qasidas of seven poets called the al-Mu"allaqat al-Sab"a, and took great pride in them. It was at such a time when eloquence was thus most sought after that the Qur"an was revealed. Just as at the time of Moses (Peace be upon him) it was magic that was most sought after and at the time of Jesus (Peace be upon him), it was medicine. The most important of their miracles were in those fields.
The Qur"an, therefore, invited the Arabian orators of that time to reply to even one of the shortest of the Suras. It challenged them with the decree of:
And if you are in doubt about what We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a Sura resembling it.5
It also said: "If you do not believe, you shall be damned and shall go to Hell." It provoked them intensely. It smashed their pride in fearsome manner. It was contemptuous of their arrogant minds. It condemned them firstly to eternal extinction and then to eternal extinction in Hell, as well as to worldly extinction. It said: "Either dispute me, or you and your property shall perish."
If it had been possible to dispute the Qur"an, is it at all possible that while there was an easy solution like disputing it with one or two lines and nullifying the claim, they should have chosen the most dangerous and most difficult, the way of war? Yes, is it at all possible that that clever people, that politically-minded nation, who at one time were to govern the world through politics, should have abandoned the shortest, easiest, and most light way, and chosen the most dangerous, which was going to cast their lives and all their property into peril? For if their literary figures had been able to dispute it with a few words, the Qur"an would have given up its claim, and they would have been saved from material and moral disaster. Whereas they chose a perilous, lengthy road like war. That means it was not possible to dispute in by word; it was impossible, so they were compelled to fight it with the sword.
Furthermore, there are two compelling reasons for the Qur"an being imitated. The first is its enemies" ambition to dispute it, the other, its friends" pleasure at imitating it. Impelled by these, millions of books in Arabic have been written, but not one of them resembles the Qur"an. Whether learned or ignorant, whoever looks at it and at them is bound to say: "The Qur"an does not resemble these. Not one of them has been able to imitate it." The Qur"an is therefore either inferior to all of them, and according to the consensus of friend and foe alike, this is completely non-valid and impossible, or the Qur"an is superior to all of them.
If you say: "How do you know that no one has tried to dispute it, and that no one has had sufficient confidence to challenge it, and that no one"s help for anyone else was of any avail?"
The Answer: If it had been possible to dispute it, most certainly it would have been attempted. For it was a question of honour and pride, and life and property were at risk. If it had been attempted, numerous people would have supported such an attempt. For those who obstinately oppose the truth have always been many. And if many people had supported it, they surely would have found fame. For insignificant contests, even, attracted the wonder of people and found fame in stories and tales. So an extraordinary contest and event such as that would never have remained secret. The most ugly and infamous things against Islam have been passed down and become famous, but apart from one or two stories about Musaylima the Liar, no such thing has been related. Musaylima was very eloquent, but when compared with the exposition of the Qur"an, which possesses infinite beauty, his words passed into the chronicles as nonsense. Thus, the miraculousness of the Qur"an"s eloquence is as certain as twice two equals four; and that is how it is.

...from the risale-i Nur collection
...source: risale-i nur collection
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2016 11:01:02 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/11/2016 10:34:28 PM, Osman35 wrote:

With all due respect, the copy-pasted passages were mostly unrelated to the thread and the discussion, except for the linguistic challenge which I can address, although I am honestly discouraged in going into a lengthy refutation as you have not directly challenged any of my contentions, as opposed to Fateh, who I owe great respect for his intellectual challenges and well-thought-out responses.
lotsoffun
Posts: 1,612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 1:47:43 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
Frankly, I don't give a rat's *ss about the Koran. If people want to believe in it and are not interested in converting me and the rest of the world by force or other means or trying to change Western societies to suit their needs, then please, believe what you want - don't hurt anyone else and don't expect me to respect your beliefs or your religion. Keep it private and peacefull like all other religions and I have no issues with you. That's it
Artur
Posts: 725
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 3:04:39 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 12:02:00 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Allah is the originator of grammar and language.
some people/humans are the originator of Allah and religion

Therefore grammar is inconsistent with Allah and the Qur'an.
therefore, grammar can not be incostinent with Allah becauer that does not exist.

Not the other way around. Allah sets the standard. He doesn't follow your standard.
may be he sets your standart but not ours. humans set his standarts, he follows us, not the other way around
"I'm not as soft or as generous a person as I would be if the world hadn't changed me" Bobby Fischer
Artur
Posts: 725
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 3:07:45 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:14:14 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Allah is uncreated and the originator of creation.
true, it is uncreated. it is invented in fantasy world.

So your claim to know grammar and its origin better than the one who created you and grammar is illogical. Your argument remains invalid.
to claim a hero of a fantasy originated grammar and created Roukezian (NiqashMotawadi13) is illogical. all the letter which is programmed to be typed by you reamins invalid.
"I'm not as soft or as generous a person as I would be if the world hadn't changed me" Bobby Fischer
Artur
Posts: 725
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 3:11:32 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/10/2016 4:09:06 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: The facts still remain, regardless of whether you accept them or believe them.
true
You were taught grammar.
he is probably taugt

Allah originated grammar.
as confirmed above facts still remain and Allah is invention in fantasym he didnnot originaye anything

So the Qur'an cannot be inconsistent.
so, anything related to that heronof fantasy can not be consistent.

Even if we disregard the aspect of theism, the single fact that still remains is that you were taught grammar
the fact remains: Allah is invented in fantasy.

So unless you can prove that the authority whom you got your info from is reliable, your points remain invalid.
so, even if you can prove that the authority who invented that fantasy is reliable it does not change the fact that quran has errors and all you said remain invalid
"I'm not as soft or as generous a person as I would be if the world hadn't changed me" Bobby Fischer
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 1:58:37 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 3:11:32 AM, Artur wrote:
At 5/10/2016 4:09:06 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: The facts still remain, regardless of whether you accept them or believe them.
true
You were taught grammar.
he is probably taugt

Allah originated grammar.
as confirmed above facts still remain and Allah is invention in fantasym he didnnot originaye anything

So the Qur'an cannot be inconsistent.
so, anything related to that heronof fantasy can not be consistent.

Even if we disregard the aspect of theism, the single fact that still remains is that you were taught grammar
the fact remains: Allah is invented in fantasy.

So unless you can prove that the authority whom you got your info from is reliable, your points remain invalid.
so, even if you can prove that the authority who invented that fantasy is reliable it does not change the fact that quran has errors and all you said remain invalid

Response: People who believe that their grandmother's were ape-like monkeys swinging from trees throwing their feces at each other should not talk.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 4:35:25 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 1:58:37 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/12/2016 3:11:32 AM, Artur wrote:
At 5/10/2016 4:09:06 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: The facts still remain, regardless of whether you accept them or believe them.
true
You were taught grammar.
he is probably taugt

Allah originated grammar.
as confirmed above facts still remain and Allah is invention in fantasym he didnnot originaye anything

So the Qur'an cannot be inconsistent.
so, anything related to that heronof fantasy can not be consistent.

Even if we disregard the aspect of theism, the single fact that still remains is that you were taught grammar
the fact remains: Allah is invented in fantasy.

So unless you can prove that the authority whom you got your info from is reliable, your points remain invalid.
so, even if you can prove that the authority who invented that fantasy is reliable it does not change the fact that quran has errors and all you said remain invalid

Response: People who believe that their grandmother's were ape-like monkeys swinging from trees throwing their feces at each other should not talk.

Perhaps Fati would like to talk about how 6 year old children show how they like sex.