Archive for FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT BREAK THE CHAINS OF IGNORANCE AND FEAR
 


       FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT Forum Index -> The Qur'an
ibnishaq

absurdities in the qu'ran

i always post things that are FOR islam so why not post things AGAINST? muslims please reply!

1. you say all humans come from adam and eve. submit your proof! evolution disagrees with you

2. you say that jews were turned into apes and swine. how can you believe that?1

3. you say that the mountains were offered the covenant but they rejected it, and the humans accepted. how can a mountain reject it?

4. allah asked the heaven and earth to come willingly or unwillingly. the earth can not speak though so that does that mean!

5. the ants smiled while solomon was speaking to them. this is ridiculous!
Pazuzu bin Hanbi

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

ibnishaq wrote:
3. you say that the mountains were offered the covenant but they rejected it, and the humans accepted. how can a mountain reject it?


Interesting! I’ve never heard of this one before — can you detail a little more about it?

Although not a muslim myself I would like to raise something in response to your first question about Adam as the first human. I have an ‘Arabic root word dictionary that specifically deals with words used in the Qur’an. ‘Abdul Mannan ‘Omar has compiled it using a combination of Classical ‘Arab Dictionaries such as the famous Lisan al–‘Arab, and Edward Lane’s Lexicon Dictionary (among others). He has this to say about Adam:
Quote:
Adam, who lived about 6000 years ago, is generally taken to be the proper name for the first human being. But the Holy Qur’an does not affirm that he was the first man, or that there was no creation before him. The word Khalifah used for Adam in the Holy Qur’an (2:30) is a reference to the fact that he was a remnant or successor of an old race and was selected to bring into being a new moral revolution. The word Khalifah is also used for one who comes after and stands in the place of someone who precedes him.

Ibn ‘Abbas says there were races known as Ginn, Himm and Dinn that lived before Adam, may be he was referring to Neanderthals and similar other races…

Adam was not the first man. Mankind existed even before him, he was a Khalifah, a successor who followed someone.


This I like to view as part of the whole tactic used by religious people (not restricted to muslims) where they twist the meanings of their scriptures to fit current and prevalent scientific understanding.
ibnishaq

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

Pazuzu bin Hanbi wrote:
ibnishaq wrote:
3. you say that the mountains were offered the covenant but they rejected it, and the humans accepted. how can a mountain reject it?


Interesting! I’ve never heard of this one before — can you detail a little more about it?

Although not a muslim myself I would like to raise something in response to your first question about Adam as the first human. I have an ‘Arabic root word dictionary that specifically deals with words used in the Qur’an. ‘Abdul Mannan ‘Omar has compiled it using a combination of Classical ‘Arab Dictionaries such as the famous Lisan al–‘Arab, and Edward Lane’s Lexicon Dictionary (among others). He has this to say about Adam:
Quote:
Adam, who lived about 6000 years ago, is generally taken to be the proper name for the first human being. But the Holy Qur’an does not affirm that he was the first man, or that there was no creation before him. The word Khalifah used for Adam in the Holy Qur’an (2:30) is a reference to the fact that he was a remnant or successor of an old race and was selected to bring into being a new moral revolution. The word Khalifah is also used for one who comes after and stands in the place of someone who precedes him.

Ibn ‘Abbas says there were races known as Ginn, Himm and Dinn that lived before Adam, may be he was referring to Neanderthals and similar other races…

Adam was not the first man. Mankind existed even before him, he was a Khalifah, a successor who followed someone.


This I like to view as part of the whole tactic used by religious people (not restricted to muslims) where they twist the meanings of their scriptures to fit current and prevalent scientific understanding.

but ibn abbas lived long ago! 600's AD
BMZ

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

ibnishaq wrote:
i always post things that are FOR islam so why not post things AGAINST? muslims please reply!

1. you say all humans come from adam and eve. submit your proof! evolution disagrees with you

2. you say that jews were turned into apes and swine. how can you believe that?1

3. you say that the mountains were offered the covenant but they rejected it, and the humans accepted. how can a mountain reject it?

4. allah asked the heaven and earth to come willingly or unwillingly. the earth can not speak though so that does that mean!

5. the ants smiled while solomon was speaking to them. this is ridiculous!


I am very busy in discussing the Absurdities of Christianity and the Bible, in particular the absurdities of the New Testament here and at the Council of Ex-Muslims and would not be able to entertain you and others on this topic, which leads only to intellectual masturbation.

However, I would like to comment on item 2 of yours which can cover almost all the points.

I do not believe that the Jews were turned into apes and swines.

For example, there is a person  who chooses not to understand the message of God, does not believe in when told, disobeys God and Commandments, says that he believes in God but pays no attention to God's words, finds them strange, funny and mocks them and does not care.

In other words, that person stoops to the level of animals and behaves like the animals. There is no difference then between him and an animal.

We can thus tell the person, "Okay, be like apes and swines.", meaning 'Go on and keep behaving like a pig or an ape.'

It doesn't mean we turned that person physically into an ape or swine.

BMZ
BMZ

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

ibnishaq,

While you are at it, please take a look at this great absurdity allegedly said by Jesus and reported by Matthew.  Laughing  

"Matthew 17:20 He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."

How can a mountain hear? It does not have ears. How can a mountain move? It does not have legs.

lol!

BMZ
ibnishaq

bmz the bible is not my concern. it is ridiculous too!
AhmedBahgat

Everything that Allah created is a creature that has its own method of communicating, Allah even told us that we won't understand them, therefore, the talking and prostrating earth and mountains  can't be an absurdity for a BELIEVER, but I understand that for an unbeliever it may look absured

Salam
All_Brains

ibnishaq wrote:
bmz the bible is not my concern. it is ridiculous too!


You've started to see the light my son! Laughing
BMZ

ibnishaq wrote:
bmz the bible is not my concern. it is ridiculous too!


Why do you find it ridiculous, ibnishaq?
brainout

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

BMZ wrote:
ibnishaq,

While you are at it, please take a look at this great absurdity allegedly said by Jesus and reported by Matthew.  Laughing  

"Matthew 17:20 He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."

How can a mountain hear? It does not have ears. How can a mountain move? It does not have legs.

lol!

BMZ


This is your dishonesty, BMZ -- you ADD THE IDEA of some mountain 'hearing', and distort what the text says, yet you cry bloody murder when Apple Pie LITERALLY FOLLOWS what LANE'S DICTIONARY says as the meaning of an Arabic word.  So YOU are cheating.  I don't care if it's the Bible or the Qu'ran, STOP CHEATING.  What you call an absurdity you INSERT the absurdity, then blame the text for it, as if you didn't insert the problem.  That's eisegesis, and it's cheating.  Makes you and Islam look evil and foolish.

Bible passage here is clear, whether you believe in it, or not:  The Lord speaks a thing into existence, Genesis 1:1, Matthew 4:3.  So He's saying prayer has the same authority, if you believe it, because He confers that authority.  He is not saying the mountains have ears.  Stop cheating.  Disbelieve the Bible and believe the Qu'ran all you want, but STOP CHEATING about what it says.

Look:  I backed you up about alaqa in Sura 86.6 because it means "leech" even in the Hebrew of Proverbs 30:15, same exact word, and that is a GREAT METAPHOR for embryo, you were right.  I won't cheat about that -- never mind Mutley accuses me of being a Muslim every time I say something nice about the Qu'ran or Islam -- I can prove the meaning.  So expect that when I find similar right things in the Qu'ran I'll speak for it, devil take the hindmost.

It would be nice if you would stop lying about what Bible says, and do your homework.  Feel free to debunk it, too.  But stop doing it so INCOMPETENTLY, k?  You look like a fool, every time.  You were famous for this at FFI, and are becoming famous for it here.  You make Islam and Qu'ran look bad when you don't do your homework.
AhmedBahgat

Haha, look who is talking

the confused burntout who does the exact same of what he is accusing BMZ with

look in the mirror you hypocrite fool
brainout

Insult away, Ahmed.  I made a constructive criticism of BMZ which everyone else has observed for a long time -- and backed it up with reasons.  You just insult because that's all you seem to know how to do.  You're famous for it, just read the "Comments on one on one debates" in this forum, or look anywhere in FFI.

You make a great poster child for leaving Islam when you do that insulting, also.  Religion of peace?  When all you do is post hell videos, call everyone ignorant and insult?  When you INSIST on treating a VERB as a pronoun and then blame the person you WANTED to blame anyway (Apple Pie), without NO good argument of your own?

I had to go to both Apple Pie and ex-jinni to get a substantive answer.  Whether they are right or wrong, doesn't matter.  I went to YOU first, and after 15 posts you still played the same game as BMZ does here, INVENTING something to condemn.  And then call yourself a scholar who loves God?  Rubbish.  Shame on you both.

Yeah, you make Islam look foolish.  Keep it up.  I expected better of you both, but now -- nope.
AhmedBahgat

brainout wrote:
Insult away, Ahmed.  I made a constructive criticism of BMZ which everyone else has observed for a long time -- and backed it up with reasons.  You just insult because that's all you seem to know how to do.  You're famous for it, just read the "Comments on one on one debates" in this forum, or look anywhere in FFI.

You make a great poster child for leaving Islam when you do that insulting, also.  Religion of peace?  When all you do is post hell videos, call everyone ignorant and insult?  When you INSIST on treating a VERB as a pronoun and then blame the person you WANTED to blame anyway (Apple Pie), without NO good argument of your own?

I had to go to both Apple Pie and ex-jinni to get a substantive answer.  Whether they are right or wrong, doesn't matter.  I went to YOU first, and after 15 posts you still played the same game as BMZ does here, INVENTING something to condemn.  And then call yourself a scholar who loves God?  Rubbish.  Shame on you both.

Yeah, you make Islam look foolish.  Keep it up.  I expected better of you both, but now -- nope.


brainout

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

ibnishaq wrote:
i always post things that are FOR islam so why not post things AGAINST? muslims please reply!

1. you say all humans come from adam and eve. submit your proof! evolution disagrees with you

2. you say that jews were turned into apes and swine. how can you believe that?1

3. you say that the mountains were offered the covenant but they rejected it, and the humans accepted. how can a mountain reject it?

4. allah asked the heaven and earth to come willingly or unwillingly. the earth can not speak though so that does that mean!

5. the ants smiled while solomon was speaking to them. this is ridiculous!


Shaq, I don't think any of the above five things are absurdities in the Qu'ran.  The last four could be called a dramatic rhetorical style of "personification".  I'm not saying they are true, and #2 is definitely anti-semitic (so not of the same 'god' as the Bible), but that doesn't mean that they are literal.  In fact you know they are not.  They are anthropopathisms and morphisms (well, #2 goes the other way around, like BMZ posited).

Kinda like how we do cartoons, where we have talking lions or (my favorite movie) CARS -- it's a way of stating a principle in a colorful manner.  Everyone knows cars don't talk, but you sure could learn much from the CARS movie by Pixar.  I just saw it last night, and I want to buy everyone a copy.

So too, in ancient literature often anthropopathisms or -morphisms are used to make the subject more memorable.  So a cloud is given a voice, and in some Greek play it cries "woe, woe to the earth" -- stuff like that.  Everyone knows clouds don't talk.  Bible uses this style a lot.  My favorite passages are in Isaiah 44 and Ezekiel Chapters 6-16.

Ancient texts of literary quality (like the Qu'ran, Bible, Bhagavad Gita, Greek plays, etc) all use such rhetorical devices.  So cut the Qu'ran some slack here, and just get the point of the verse being conveyed.

Now, it is literal that a serpent talks in Genesis 3.  But that's Satan USING the serpent to talk, his own taqiyya, hiding his looks so the woman will be beguiled, not overwhelmed.  Same, with Balaam's ass, God makes it talk.  The animal doesn't have the ability and everyone knows that -- GOD is making a POINT: hi, you're so stubborn like this donkey here, so I'll have to use him to get the point across.  The point of anything supernatural is to teach.  So much for the Bible debunkers who don't bother to learn why these things are in the Bible.

So maybe the Qu'ran does mean some of the stuff as literal, and if so, you should determine why before trashing it.

As for evolution, puleese.  I've never heard a bigger bunch of garbage in my life.  Doesn't matter about what faith you are, or if an atheist, "evolution" is what's ridiculous, for evolution is FOUNDED on a need for a set to contain itself.  For the genetics of the progeny to be GREATER THAN the genetic attributes of the ancestral genes.  That's flat impossible.  You'd have to BE God to make evolution work.  It's bass-ackwards.

So be an atheist or whatever, but puleese rethink this logic:  which came first, the chicken or the egg.  Obviously, TWO CHICKENS (well, a chicken and a rooster), for there'd be no egg absent those two mating.  So Adam and Eve is not farfetched at all.

And by the way -- you'll notice Adam was a vegetarian and a taxonomist, in Genesis 2.  Not a hunter-gatherer.  Adam had full language and scientific faculties, since he was classifying all the flora and fauna.  And his son Cain built a CITY.  So no, the earth didn't begin when Adam was created, but sometime LONG AFTERwards he was created.  And you don't know HOW LONG TIME LASTED before he fell.

All you know from Bible, is that his fall began 4106BC, which is when science finds evidence of CIVILIZATION, prevalent.  Duh.

As my best friend quips, "who knows if Lucy (discovered by Dr. Leakey) had a soul?"  Duh.  Soul is immaterial, so no matter how many or how old those humanoid relics, you can't know if they were human.  Apples and oranges, science and either Bible or Qu'ran.

Believe or not, your choice. Always a private matter, free. Very Happy
Pazuzu bin Hanbi

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

brainout wrote:
which came first, the chicken or the egg.  Obviously, TWO CHICKENS, for there'd be no egg absent those two mating.

Eggs existed before birds evolved from dinosaurs. So you could, in fact, state that the egg evolved first, and the chicken hatched out of it! Very Happy
brainout

LOL Pazuzu!

I gotta say, I don't really care how it happened.  But I'd not buy evolution in a million years.  Sets do not contain themselves, and children are never greater than their parents.  GENES mutate, but you first have to HAVE the genes. So there is some set of first parents for every genus.  Can't be another answer.
Tvebak

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

Pazuzu bin Hanbi wrote:
brainout wrote:
which came first, the chicken or the egg.  Obviously, TWO CHICKENS, for there'd be no egg absent those two mating.

Eggs existed before birds evolved from dinosaurs. So you could, in fact, state that the egg evolved first, and the chicken hatched out of it! Very Happy


definitly the egg first. No doubt there.
brainout

I was still editing my post, Tvebak so it's different now.  But the PARENTS come first.  Can't have progeny, else.  Period.
Tvebak

brainout wrote:
I was still editing my post, Tvebak so it's different now.  But the PARENTS come first.  Can't have progeny, else.  Period.


The question is when do you call it a "chicken". When do we label that specific animal a "chicken", evolutionary speaking. This does not of course happens over night, but if I have to choose between the egg or the chicken it's definitly the egg.  Very Happy

Cheers
brainout

Ok, beloved Tvebak, we will agree to disagree.  I said "parents".  I meant ADULTS.  Gotta start with two propagating adults of opposite sex before there are kiddies.  So the parents come first, and they are sexually mature.  I use a human analogy, but same idea for non-human.  Not embryo-first.  Other way around.

Again, evolution has it bass-ackwards, and that doesn't mean you must believe in "God" to disbelieve in evolution.  Frankly, I think that if one believes in evolution only IF he believes in God, would it work, because it demands a miracle for its beginning.  It's a contrived theory, and it fails the first laws of math and genetics.

The so-called 'theory' really needs to go back to the drawing board.  From scratch.  Will not prove or disprove God in any event.  Not necessary, not germane.
BMZ

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

brainout wrote:
BMZ wrote:
ibnishaq,

While you are at it, please take a look at this great absurdity allegedly said by Jesus and reported by Matthew.  Laughing  

"Matthew 17:20 He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."

How can a mountain hear? It does not have ears. How can a mountain move? It does not have legs.

lol!

BMZ


This is your dishonesty, BMZ -- you ADD THE IDEA of some mountain 'hearing', and distort what the text says, yet you cry bloody murder when Apple Pie LITERALLY FOLLOWS what LANE'S DICTIONARY says as the meaning of an Arabic word.  So YOU are cheating.  I don't care if it's the Bible or the Qu'ran, STOP CHEATING.  What you call an absurdity you INSERT the absurdity, then blame the text for it, as if you didn't insert the problem.  That's eisegesis, and it's cheating.  Makes you and Islam look evil and foolish.

Bible passage here is clear, whether you believe in it, or not:  The Lord speaks a thing into existence, Genesis 1:1, Matthew 4:3.  So He's saying prayer has the same authority, if you believe it, because He confers that authority.  He is not saying the mountains have ears.  Stop cheating.  Disbelieve the Bible and believe the Qu'ran all you want, but STOP CHEATING about what it says.

Look:  I backed you up about alaqa in Sura 86.6 because it means "leech" even in the Hebrew of Proverbs 30:15, same exact word, and that is a GREAT METAPHOR for embryo, you were right.  I won't cheat about that -- never mind Mutley accuses me of being a Muslim every time I say something nice about the Qu'ran or Islam -- I can prove the meaning.  So expect that when I find similar right things in the Qu'ran I'll speak for it, devil take the hindmost.

It would be nice if you would stop lying about what Bible says, and do your homework.  Feel free to debunk it, too.  But stop doing it so INCOMPETENTLY, k?  You look like a fool, every time.  You were famous for this at FFI, and are becoming famous for it here.  You make Islam and Qu'ran look bad when you don't do your homework.


Please show me where have I lied.

I just try to educate the polemic extremist Christians, who attack Qur'aan and Islam and make them  realise that their own religion and scripture are flawed. I have been told by some blokes similar to what you wrote but that is a defeatist attitude and I don't appreciate this card.

I have never cheated. I have always presented the facts as given by your scripture. Take any post of mine, dissect it and prove to me if I wrote it wrong and whether it sounds foolish. Give your reasons for that.  

But don't just write foolish and immature remarks like you did in your post. The evangelists and others are trained to talk that way. It is not good. It is not you or me who decide. It is the international audience on the internet, who reads and understands what is being said. They can form their opinion.

While you do not believe in Qur'aan, I do believe in the Torah and the Injeel and I can easily find some parts in the Jewish Holy Scriptures, in the christians' OT and the New Testament. But that content is not much as the rest of the stuff is all stories written.

BMZ
Pazuzu bin Hanbi

But the fallacy of tu quoque does nothing for the argument at hand. If someone makes a claim about Islam/Muhammad/Allah/Qur’an/whatever, you need to deal with the issues presented and not skirt or avoid the issue by saying, in essence, ‘your religion does the same only worse’!
brainout

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

BMZ wrote:
brainout wrote:
BMZ wrote:
ibnishaq,

While you are at it, please take a look at this great absurdity allegedly said by Jesus and reported by Matthew.  Laughing  

"Matthew 17:20 He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."

How can a mountain hear? It does not have ears. How can a mountain move? It does not have legs.

lol!

BMZ


This is your dishonesty, BMZ -- you ADD THE IDEA of some mountain 'hearing', and distort what the text says, yet you cry bloody murder when Apple Pie LITERALLY FOLLOWS what LANE'S DICTIONARY says as the meaning of an Arabic word.  So YOU are cheating.  I don't care if it's the Bible or the Qu'ran, STOP CHEATING.  What you call an absurdity you INSERT the absurdity, then blame the text for it, as if you didn't insert the problem.  That's eisegesis, and it's cheating.  Makes you and Islam look evil and foolish.

Bible passage here is clear, whether you believe in it, or not:  The Lord speaks a thing into existence, Genesis 1:1, Matthew 4:3.  So He's saying prayer has the same authority, if you believe it, because He confers that authority.  He is not saying the mountains have ears.  Stop cheating.  Disbelieve the Bible and believe the Qu'ran all you want, but STOP CHEATING about what it says.

Look:  I backed you up about alaqa in Sura 86.6 because it means "leech" even in the Hebrew of Proverbs 30:15, same exact word, and that is a GREAT METAPHOR for embryo, you were right.  I won't cheat about that -- never mind Mutley accuses me of being a Muslim every time I say something nice about the Qu'ran or Islam -- I can prove the meaning.  So expect that when I find similar right things in the Qu'ran I'll speak for it, devil take the hindmost.

It would be nice if you would stop lying about what Bible says, and do your homework.  Feel free to debunk it, too.  But stop doing it so INCOMPETENTLY, k?  You look like a fool, every time.  You were famous for this at FFI, and are becoming famous for it here.  You make Islam and Qu'ran look bad when you don't do your homework.


Please show me where have I lied.

I just try to educate the polemic extremist Christians, who attack Qur'aan and Islam and make them  realise that their own religion and scripture are flawed. I have been told by some blokes similar to what you wrote but that is a defeatist attitude and I don't appreciate this card.

I have never cheated. I have always presented the facts as given by your scripture. Take any post of mine, dissect it and prove to me if I wrote it wrong and whether it sounds foolish. Give your reasons for that.  

But don't just write foolish and immature remarks like you did in your post. The evangelists and others are trained to talk that way. It is not good. It is not you or me who decide. It is the international audience on the internet, who reads and understands what is being said. They can form their opinion.

While you do not believe in Qur'aan, I do believe in the Torah and the Injeel and I can easily find some parts in the Jewish Holy Scriptures, in the christians' OT and the New Testament. But that content is not much as the rest of the stuff is all stories written.

BMZ

No, BMZ, you are famous for writing immature remarks all the time.  It's a topic of commentary at FFI and one of the reasons you got banned.  You flame and provide no evidence.  Here, I've been real specific about how you flamed Apple Pie -- Ahmed with you -- making out "kana" to be but a pronoun because in the dictionary quote the pronoun used to LIST the verb was underlined.  That's cheating.  You knew what he meant. So did Ahmed.  Fool that I was, I took Ahmed's repeated posting first as indicating he couldn't read, so made my text bigger.  But oh, you two just played off each other like spoiled children, as you have done here.  Even the thread titles prove it.  Basta.
ibnishaq

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

[quote="brainout"]
ibnishaq wrote:
i always post things that are FOR islam so why not post things AGAINST? muslims please reply!

1. you say all humans come from adam and eve. submit your proof! evolution disagrees with you

2. you say that jews were turned into apes and swine. how can you believe that?1

3. you say that the mountains were offered the covenant but they rejected it, and the humans accepted. how can a mountain reject it?

4. allah asked the heaven and earth to come willingly or unwillingly. the earth can not speak though so that does that mean!

5. the ants smiled while solomon was speaking to them. this is ridiculous!

Quote:

Shaq, I don't think any of the above five things are absurdities in the Qu'ran.  The last four could be called a dramatic rhetorical style of "personification".  I'm not saying they are true, and #2 is definitely anti-semitic (so not of the same 'god' as the Bible), but that doesn't mean that they are literal.  In fact you know they are not.  They are anthropopathisms and morphisms (well, #2 goes the other way around, like BMZ posited).

but how do we know this? when the psalms speak about silly things in the bible, the christians and jews always now that it has some other meaning to it. even then there are very few things in the bible like that. you do not see many stories of monsters, or UFO's, or anything.

the qu'ran however is very literal. look at tafsir about the mountains talking, and all the ancient commentators said that they COULD talk. even yusuf ali affirms this!

Quote:

Kinda like how we do cartoons, where we have talking lions or (my favorite movie) CARS -- it's a way of stating a principle in a colorful manner.  Everyone knows cars don't talk, but you sure could learn much from the CARS movie by Pixar.  I just saw it last night, and I want to buy everyone a copy.

So too, in ancient literature often anthropopathisms or -morphisms are used to make the subject more memorable.  So a cloud is given a voice, and in some Greek play it cries "woe, woe to the earth" -- stuff like that.  Everyone knows clouds don't talk.  Bible uses this style a lot.  My favorite passages are in Isaiah 44 and Ezekiel Chapters 6-16.

you make a great point, but i do not see the qu'ran as being like that. the muslim attitude has never been like that, nor did muhammad ever say anyhting about them being metephorical.

in fact, i believe in the qu'ran it even says to ASK the jews about the story about something with food, and they were turned into apes. it makes it literal in that sense.

Quote:

Ancient texts of literary quality (like the Qu'ran, Bible, Bhagavad Gita, Greek plays, etc) all use such rhetorical devices.  So cut the Qu'ran some slack here, and just get the point of the verse being conveyed.

in the bible i can understand, but not qu'ran

Quote:

Now, it is literal that a serpent talks in Genesis 3.  But that's Satan USING the serpent to talk, his own taqiyya, hiding his looks so the woman will be beguiled, not overwhelmed.  Same, with Balaam's ass, God makes it talk.  The animal doesn't have the ability and everyone knows that -- GOD is making a POINT: hi, you're so stubborn like this donkey here, so I'll have to use him to get the point across.  The point of anything supernatural is to teach.  So much for the Bible debunkers who don't bother to learn why these things are in the Bible.

So maybe the Qu'ran does mean some of the stuff as literal, and if so, you should determine why before trashing it.

well let us take the mountains talking in quran as example. quran says that allah offered the mountains and all the covenant but they said no, but humans said yes. the point of that is basically that humans accepted the covenant.
Quote:

As for evolution, puleese.  I've never heard a bigger bunch of garbage in my life.  Doesn't matter about what faith you are, or if an atheist, "evolution" is what's ridiculous, for evolution is FOUNDED on a need for a set to contain itself.  For the genetics of the progeny to be GREATER THAN the genetic attributes of the ancestral genes.  That's flat impossible.  You'd have to BE God to make evolution work.  It's bass-ackwards.

So be an atheist or whatever, but puleese rethink this logic:  which came first, the chicken or the egg.  Obviously, TWO CHICKENS (well, a chicken and a rooster), for there'd be no egg absent those two mating.  So Adam and Eve is not farfetched at all.

And by the way -- you'll notice Adam was a vegetarian and a taxonomist, in Genesis 2.  Not a hunter-gatherer.  Adam had full language and scientific faculties, since he was classifying all the flora and fauna.  And his son Cain built a CITY.  So no, the earth didn't begin when Adam was created, but sometime LONG AFTERwards he was created.  And you don't know HOW LONG TIME LASTED before he fell.

All you know from Bible, is that his fall began 4106BC, which is when science finds evidence of CIVILIZATION, prevalent.  Duh.

As my best friend quips, "who knows if Lucy (discovered by Dr. Leakey) had a soul?"  Duh.  Soul is immaterial, so no matter how many or how old those humanoid relics, you can't know if they were human.  Apples and oranges, science and either Bible or Qu'ran.

Believe or not, your choice. Always a private matter, free. Very Happy

evolution is a clear belief and all the pieces of the puzzle fit together. it makes perfect and absolute sense!!!
Tvebak

brainout wrote:
Ok, beloved Tvebak, we will agree to disagree.  I said "parents".  I meant ADULTS.  Gotta start with two propagating adults of opposite sex before there are kiddies.  So the parents come first, and they are sexually mature.  I use a human analogy, but same idea for non-human.  Not embryo-first.  Other way around.

Again, evolution has it bass-ackwards, and that doesn't mean you must believe in "God" to disbelieve in evolution.  Frankly, I think that if one believes in evolution only IF he believes in God, would it work, because it demands a miracle for its beginning.  It's a contrived theory, and it fails the first laws of math and genetics.

The so-called 'theory' really needs to go back to the drawing board.  From scratch.  Will not prove or disprove God in any event.  Not necessary, not germane.


Yes those scientist have surely done a purely job devising such a foolish theory  Wink

Now it seems you have more issues on the subject on evolution.

1. You deny it, or ...
2. if it was real you can only find that "god" can direct it

You are covered well in here eh?  Wink

But let us not throw usself into an unrelated discussion in this thread, which is about the "absurdities in the Qu'ran". and not, BMZ, in the Bible. You have a whole section for that.

But brainout if you want to discuss the matter on evolution you can start a thread at appropriate place. "The pub" seems to be the best place for that. So can we all contribute to a thoughtful discussion of the matter of evolution, instead of hijacking other threads.

Cheers
AhmedBahgat

Hey brother BMZ

My advice to you to totally agnore such shifty freak brainout

Take care mate
Tvebak

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

brainout wrote:

All you know from Bible, is that his fall began 4106BC, which is when science finds evidence of CIVILIZATION, prevalent.  Duh.

As my best friend quips, "who knows if Lucy (discovered by Dr. Leakey) had a soul?"  Duh.  Soul is immaterial, so no matter how many or how old those humanoid relics, you can't know if they were human.  Apples and oranges, science and either Bible or Qu'ran.

Believe or not, your choice. Always a private matter, free. Very Happy


Quote:
The earliest known civilizations (as defined in the traditional sense) developed from proto-civilized cultures in Mesopotamia between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in modern-day Iraq, the Nile valley of Egypt, while other civilizations arose in Elam in modern-day Iran (especially those parts considered to be the "Fertile Crescent"), the Mehrgarh and Sindhu Valley region of modern-day Pakistan and Northwest India, and the parallel development of Chinese civilizations in the Huang He River (Yellow River) and Yangtze River valleys of China, and on the island of Crete and in Mycenaean Greece in the Aegean Sea, Persia in modern-day Iran, as well as the Olmec civilization and the Caral civilization in modern day Mexico and Peru. The inhabitants of these areas built cities, created writing systems, learned to make pottery and use metals, domesticated animals, and created complex social structures with class systems. Proto-civilized cultures developed as a late stage of the Neolithic Revolution, and pioneered many of the features later associated with civilizations. The oldest granary yet found, for instance, dates back to 9500 BC and is located in the Jordan Valley. The earliest known settlement in Jericho (9th millennium BC) was a Pre-Pottery Neolithic A culture that eventually gave way to more developed settlements later, which included in one early settlement (8th millennium BC) mud-brick houses surrounded by a stone wall, having a stone tower built into the wall.

Civilization

Brainout there's substantial evidences that there was humans well before 4.106 BC. and this little extract from wikipedia is just a small sample. Sorry to disrubt the topic of this thread again, but I found this comment very disturbing.

Cheers.
BMZ

AhmedBahgat wrote:
Hey brother BMZ

My advice to you to totally agnore such shifty freak brainout

Take care mate


Yes, bro. That is a good advice.  Smile

Polemics is an ancient biblical art and if you read the four gospels, Acts and Paul's letters, you will find that it is inherent in the Bible. By reading the Bible day and night, the Christian mind is drilled in and gets injected with polemics.

The authors who penned the Christian scripture heard all the polemics of Jesus from various people and were inspired by the polemics between Jesus and the Jews. It is the same mindset that we experience. What is the key? Never give a straight answer.

You can see all that from "The Jews asked....." and Jesus said,"....."The Jews then said,"....", Jesus replied,"....." The gospels are full of this and I don't have to provide any proof. Blame game. lol!

You will also see Jesus never giving a direct answer. If asked a simple question, Jesus would deliver a long irrelevant lecture. He never gave a simple answer but lectured.

Please allow me to present one case to make my point:


Quote:
Matthew 15:1Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2"Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!"

3Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, 'Honor your father and mother'[a] and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'[b] 5But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' 6he is not to 'honor his father[c]' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8" 'These people honor me with their lips,
     but their hearts are far from me.
9They worship me in vain;
     their teachings are but rules taught by men.'[d]"

10Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

12Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?"

13He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14Leave them; they are blind guides.[e] If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."

15Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."

16"Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17"Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "


Just look at the simple question in v2 and finally the answer in v20, after a long-winde speech.

All the Jews did was to ask a simple question and instead received an entire passage.  Laughing This is the way that the gopsels were written and this is the way, the Christians discuss. This was not the way Jesus truly spoke. And look what happened after that simple question! All food became LAWFUL for the Christians, since the gospel writer put it in such a way that anything that went into the mouth was clean and it would go down the drain anyway. Rofl

And this is not just one case, the entire gospels have been written in the same manner and style by experts in polemics. There are many absurdities in the Christian scripture and I have started a topic on the Council of Ex-Muslims and you can read all here:

http://councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=665.0

It started well but now some burntouts have already started the same game.  Laughing

I shall be starting a similar topic at All_Brains' site here soon as I intend to show absurdities in the Christian scripture.

Salaams
BMZ
brainout

Shaq, I'm lousy with the quote thingy.  So your stuff is in blue italics, and my reply is not:


IbnIshaq wrote: "but how do we know this? when the psalms speak about silly things in the bible, the christians and jews always now that it has some other meaning to it. even then there are very few things in the bible like that. you do not see many stories of monsters, or UFO's, or anything.   The qu'ran however is very literal. look at tafsir about the mountains talking, and all the ancient commentators said that they COULD talk. even yusuf ali affirms this!"

The Qu'ran is not very literal.  People read it that way, but should not.  Any good piece of writing will have rhetorical styles and will be heavily figurative and metaphorical, as befits good writing.  Qu'ran is often poetic, so that means figurative language is used to be MEMORABLY TEACHABLE.  Same is true of Bible, and indeed most ancient writing.  So for example, when in Song of Solomon a woman's neck is described as a tower (famous example Thorleif Boman uses in his classic tome, Hebrew Thought compared with Greek) -- it means her CHASTITY, not that her neck is huge, hard and thick!  See what I mean?

Ishaq, you really need to talk to someone learned in the Qu'ran.  One of the most famous things about it, is its poetic language.  You cannot and should not interpret poetic language literally.  Please, talk to someone you respect a lot who is a real imam or teacher of good repute in your community.  This is a writing style of all ancient texts, whether famous Greek plays, holy books, or Plato, the Uphanishads, whatever.

You say, in the Bible you understand, but not Qu'ran.  Well, maybe that means you should study the Qu'ran more.

"Well, let us take the mountains talking in quran as example..."    That example I would interpret as personification, like a drama on stage where you have the mountains PRETENDING to have human attributes (anthropopathisms), and then I'd just learn the point of the passage.  I don't understand why the younger generation doesn't know about literary styles in writing.  Aren't you guys taught literature anymore?  I'm a generation older than you, so maybe colleges have changed.  Back in the 1970's you couldn't even graduate from high school English unless you well knew Shakespeare's literary styles, for example.

Evolution is bunk, Ishaq.  But you will see that yourself someday, give it time.  I've had 30 years more than you to analyze it, so golly I can't expect you to see why it's bunk so quickly, that would be rude of me!  So enjoy believing in it while that belief lasts. Very Happy
brainout

Tvebak wrote:
brainout wrote:
Ok, beloved Tvebak, we will agree to disagree.  I said "parents".  I meant ADULTS.  Gotta start with two propagating adults of opposite sex before there are kiddies.  So the parents come first, and they are sexually mature.  I use a human analogy, but same idea for non-human.  Not embryo-first.  Other way around.

Again, evolution has it bass-ackwards, and that doesn't mean you must believe in "God" to disbelieve in evolution.  Frankly, I think that if one believes in evolution only IF he believes in God, would it work, because it demands a miracle for its beginning.  It's a contrived theory, and it fails the first laws of math and genetics.

The so-called 'theory' really needs to go back to the drawing board.  From scratch.  Will not prove or disprove God in any event.  Not necessary, not germane.


Yes those scientist have surely done a purely job devising such a foolish theory  Wink

Now it seems you have more issues on the subject on evolution.

1. You deny it, or ...
2. if it was real you can only find that "god" can direct it

You are covered well in here eh?  Wink

But let us not throw usself into an unrelated discussion in this thread, which is about the "absurdities in the Qu'ran". and not, BMZ, in the Bible. You have a whole section for that.

But brainout if you want to discuss the matter on evolution you can start a thread at appropriate place. "The pub" seems to be the best place for that. So can we all contribute to a thoughtful discussion of the matter of evolution, instead of hijacking other threads.

Cheers


Yep, evolution is foolish, nope, I don't want to discuss it or open a new thread, I was just commenting on it in passing.  Been there, done that, decades ago, on evolution.  Belief in it or not, has zippo to do with belief pro or con God, because you can believe in both if you want, neither if you want, or just one of the two.  I object to evolution on logical grounds, as aforestated.  Love ya, Tvebak.   Wink
brainout

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

Tvebak wrote:
brainout wrote:

All you know from Bible, is that his fall began 4106BC, which is when science finds evidence of CIVILIZATION, prevalent.  Duh.

As my best friend quips, "who knows if Lucy (discovered by Dr. Leakey) had a soul?"  Duh.  Soul is immaterial, so no matter how many or how old those humanoid relics, you can't know if they were human.  Apples and oranges, science and either Bible or Qu'ran.

Believe or not, your choice. Always a private matter, free. Very Happy


Quote:
The earliest known civilizations (as defined in the traditional sense) developed from proto-civilized cultures in Mesopotamia between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in modern-day Iraq, the Nile valley of Egypt, while other civilizations arose in Elam in modern-day Iran (especially those parts considered to be the "Fertile Crescent"), the Mehrgarh and Sindhu Valley region of modern-day Pakistan and Northwest India, and the parallel development of Chinese civilizations in the Huang He River (Yellow River) and Yangtze River valleys of China, and on the island of Crete and in Mycenaean Greece in the Aegean Sea, Persia in modern-day Iran, as well as the Olmec civilization and the Caral civilization in modern day Mexico and Peru. The inhabitants of these areas built cities, created writing systems, learned to make pottery and use metals, domesticated animals, and created complex social structures with class systems. Proto-civilized cultures developed as a late stage of the Neolithic Revolution, and pioneered many of the features later associated with civilizations. The oldest granary yet found, for instance, dates back to 9500 BC and is located in the Jordan Valley. The earliest known settlement in Jericho (9th millennium BC) was a Pre-Pottery Neolithic A culture that eventually gave way to more developed settlements later, which included in one early settlement (8th millennium BC) mud-brick houses surrounded by a stone wall, having a stone tower built into the wall.

Civilization

Brainout there's substantial evidences that there was humans well before 4.106 BC. and this little extract from wikipedia is just a small sample. Sorry to disrubt the topic of this thread again, but I found this comment very disturbing.

Cheers.


You have no evidence of a soul, since a soul is immaterial.  So all you have is biology, and since a "human" must have a soul to BE human per Bible, it's an apples-and-oranges comparison between both science and Bible, irrelevant to both.  Again, to me this is a completely dead issue, I was mentioning it only in passing to finish off the topic.  Sorry.
Tvebak

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

brainout wrote:

You have no evidence of a soul, since a soul is immaterial.  So all you have is biology, and since a "human" must have a soul to BE human per Bible, it's an apples-and-oranges comparison between both science and Bible, irrelevant to both.  Again, to me this is a completely dead issue, I was mentioning it only in passing to finish off the topic.  Sorry.


Of course I have no evidence of a soul, that's because such things don't exist  Wink But I'm glad you introduced me to this way of thinking creationism. Had not been acquanted with it before.

Quote:
Yep, evolution is foolish, nope, I don't want to discuss it or open a new thread, I was just commenting on it in passing.  Been there, done that, decades ago, on evolution.  Belief in it or not, has zippo to do with belief pro or con God, because you can believe in both if you want, neither if you want, or just one of the two.  I object to evolution on logical grounds, as aforestated.  Love ya, Tvebak.  


Your cute too, but I must say I'm straight and have wonderful wife, so its a no go.

Again I just think its funny that you with your one hand dismisses evolution completely and then with your other hand says, "but if it's true it does not rule out my "god"". Nice touch  Very Happy

But yes we will just then have to agree on disagreeing on the fact of evolution.

Cheers
Tvebak

And not to ripe the theme of this thread completely I will just say there's other absurdities in the quran aswell, a few examples:

- jonah in the whale
- moses and the sea
- the age people had back then
- meteorites/"shooting stars"/ or whatever it is chasing jinns
- eve created from adam

Cheers
HomoErectus

It s always the same classical mistake !

BMZ as well as Ahmed fall for it, since they do not have much of other "ammunition" available !

They always fail when talking to atheists/agnostics, simply because their logic - tu quoque - look at christianism and its absurdities - does not work anymore !

Two wrongs do not make one right !

None of the arguments they bring up holds water, when looking at it...

In this thread on the council forum, I've asked a few questions, none of them got answered, just as usually brushed off, by no real argumentation at all...

The theme has not changed, they can put up as many threads they want, about other religions inconsistencies, it will not wipe away their own islamic NONSENSE !

If islam can't be defended by its own "standards", but needs other religions to justify its own existence, its a rather POOR and void attempt of making something out of nothing, and that does not work !

Here (Islam) we have some claims, nothing proved, and thats all !
Regardless if other religions claims are void just the same !

When will they ever understand ?
brainout

Re: absurdities in the qu'ran

Tvebak wrote:
brainout wrote:

You have no evidence of a soul, since a soul is immaterial.  So all you have is biology, and since a "human" must have a soul to BE human per Bible, it's an apples-and-oranges comparison between both science and Bible, irrelevant to both.  Again, to me this is a completely dead issue, I was mentioning it only in passing to finish off the topic.  Sorry.


Of course I have no evidence of a soul, that's because such things don't exist  Wink But I'm glad you introduced me to this way of thinking creationism. Had not been acquanted with it before.

Quote:
Yep, evolution is foolish, nope, I don't want to discuss it or open a new thread, I was just commenting on it in passing.  Been there, done that, decades ago, on evolution.  Belief in it or not, has zippo to do with belief pro or con God, because you can believe in both if you want, neither if you want, or just one of the two.  I object to evolution on logical grounds, as aforestated.  Love ya, Tvebak.  


Your cute too, but I must say I'm straight and have wonderful wife, so its a no go.

Again I just think its funny that you with your one hand dismisses evolution completely and then with your other hand says, "but if it's true it does not rule out my "god"". Nice touch  Very Happy

But yes we will just then have to agree on disagreeing on the fact of evolution.

Cheers


Beloved Tvebak, you're cute too but I didn't mean that pruriently.  I'm heartily glad you're married.  And I'm 54 years old, have gone over the evolution thing AD NAUSEAM for 30 years (I was of the generation when it began to be taught in America, under Eisenhower) so I am BORED with it.  Sorry!
brainout

Tvebak wrote:
And not to ripe the theme of this thread completely I will just say there's other absurdities in the quran aswell, a few examples:

- jonah in the whale
- moses and the sea
- the age people had back then
- meteorites/"shooting stars"/ or whatever it is chasing jinns
- eve created from adam

Cheers


Except for the bolded stuff, all of what you call Qu'ran absurdities were taken from the Bible.  Idea

Since you weren't there then;  since God can do miracles, duh -- atheists always want to restrict God to natural law, so that God cannot be God no matter what He does -- then these "absurdities" you label are really miracles.  Well, except for longevity.  That's an actuarial life expectancy based on the quality of the biological tissue.  I do actuarial stuff for a living, and the longevity back then is not miraculous.  Biological mass degrades with successive generations, kinda like a copy of a copy of a copy made too many times.

Like miracles or lump them.  They are NOT natural phenomenon, because God is not restricted to the laws of creation.  God doesn't do miracles to show off.  What's supernatural for us is natural for God, and He does miracles 24/7 as part of His natural being.  But He does miracles, to TEACH.  Sadly, people only want God for His miracles, as if He were a circus clown.  We Christians don't really love God, we want Him to do pet tricks.  How sad, when He's the Most Gorgeous Person in the Universe.  Well, Three of them, but I digress...

Believe or do not, that's your free right.  And I'm heartily glad you have that freedom!
brainout

Finally, beloved Tvebak, I already know God created everything.  It won't be possible for science to prove that.  I don't care that science can't prove that.  I don't want creationism taught in schools, the parents have that job.  I want evolution taught in schools, but I want the theory (really a hypothesis and a lot of bombast) CLEANED UP, because I see how goofy it is.  So I don't want our youngsters to find out how goofy it is and then reject science.

For every time we get ticked off at science we go back to religion and I hate religion.  Satan invented religion.  So we need science.

Bible and science are apples and oranges.  There are no hunter gatherers in the Bible, the story BEGINS with a fully-linguistically-capable GENIUS named Adam, who is a taxonomist (genesis 2).  Then his first son Cain, builds a city.  So the Bible's story of SOULED CREATION begins with CIVILIZED man.  What happened prior, Bible doesn't cover.  You can't say how old the earth is, because Bible doesn't begin dating until Adam's FALL (genesis 3:15ff) in 4106BC.  So prior to that, is unknown.  Big gap between initial creation instantly in Genesis 1:1 and some undefined period of chaos, in Genesis 1:2 (tohu wa bohu are the Hebrew words, adversative waw starts the verse).

See, Christians don't know their Bible either.  Not my problem.  Sorry to seem cold, but I've already spent 30 years banging my head against the wall trying to explain this stuff.   It gets old, capisce?

What fixes evolution I already wrote out in my webpage, http://www.geocities.com/brainout1/Godevol.html .  Basically there need to be three elements, not two.  The THREE are mass, energy, and LIFE, which is neither mass nor energy.  You don't need to call "life" "god", and frankly I don't want it called "god", even though it IS "god", because people should be free to independently find out what "life" means.  That you do in the home.  But "life" obviously got lumped in the definition of mass and energy, which is why evolutionary theory is tautological, failing even the first law of math that a set contains itself.  But if "life" contains but is not mass/energy, then the theory WORKS and doesn't fail the first law of math.  See, you don't need a god concept to make the theory work.. FINALLY.  But you do need that third element.

On the reason why Evolution doesn't work mathmetically I wrote a semi-rant page:  http://www.geocities.com/brainout1/Evolshort.htm .  

I'm not saying you should read what I wrote.  I present the pages only so you know I'm not giving you short shrift on the question.  Veni, vidi, vici, ad absurdum.  J'ai vue.  Estoy aburrida con ese sujeto.  Sorry, I've forgotten my Italian and Chinese. Sad
Tvebak

brainout wrote:
Tvebak wrote:
And not to ripe the theme of this thread completely I will just say there's other absurdities in the quran aswell, a few examples:

- jonah in the whale
- moses and the sea
- the age people had back then
- meteorites/"shooting stars"/ or whatever it is chasing jinns
- eve created from adam

Cheers


Except for the bolded stuff, all of what you call Qu'ran absurdities were taken from the Bible.  Idea

Since you weren't there then;  since God can do miracles, duh -- atheists always want to restrict God to natural law, so that God cannot be God no matter what He does -- then these "absurdities" you label are really miracles.  Well, except for longevity.  That's an actuarial life expectancy based on the quality of the biological tissue.  I do actuarial stuff for a living, and the longevity back then is not miraculous.  Biological mass degrades with successive generations, kinda like a copy of a copy of a copy made too many times.

Like miracles or lump them.  They are NOT natural phenomenon, because God is not restricted to the laws of creation.  God doesn't do miracles to show off.  What's supernatural for us is natural for God, and He does miracles 24/7 as part of His natural being.  But He does miracles, to TEACH.  Sadly, people only want God for His miracles, as if He were a circus clown.  We Christians don't really love God, we want Him to do pet tricks.  How sad, when He's the Most Gorgeous Person in the Universe.  Well, Three of them, but I digress...

Believe or do not, that's your free right.  And I'm heartily glad you have that freedom!


Hi Brainout

Quote:
Except for the bolded stuff, all of what you call Qu'ran absurdities were taken from the Bible.


That does not make any difference to me. I also think there's lot of absurdities in the bible. As to wether you think them as "examples" of "gods" power, feel free to. I still consider them as absurdities.

To the longevity of people back then no the livespan was short. Data suggest that people for instans around your "adams descent" lived for about an average of 35 years. Now some people might get of age, but not hundreds of years! As to your "acturial science" it is within one persons life-time you are talking about.

I will have a look at your "semi-rant" on evolution when I have the time to it. Bookmarked so I know where it is. But the URL for the second link did not work. You can sent it to me. Lets not disrubt this thread any further.

Cheers
brainout

Got your message.  Fixed the link.  Try it again, but I'm not asking you to read it.  Just wanted you to know I'm not declining discussion sans thought.  Bye, for awhile, beloved Tvebak.
Tvebak

brainout wrote:
Got your message.  Fixed the link.  Try it again, but I'm not asking you to read it.  Just wanted you to know I'm not declining discussion sans thought.  Bye, for awhile, beloved Tvebak.


Thanks. Well I'm gonna read anyway. Always love to see what I disagree with.

Cheers and by and take care.
Servatus

AhmedBahgat wrote:
brainout wrote:
Insult away, Ahmed.  I made a constructive criticism of BMZ which everyone else has observed for a long time -- and backed it up with reasons.  You just insult because that's all you seem to know how to do.  You're famous for it, just read the "Comments on one on one debates" in this forum, or look anywhere in FFI.

You make a great poster child for leaving Islam when you do that insulting, also.  Religion of peace?  When all you do is post hell videos, call everyone ignorant and insult?  When you INSIST on treating a VERB as a pronoun and then blame the person you WANTED to blame anyway (Apple Pie), without NO good argument of your own?

I had to go to both Apple Pie and ex-jinni to get a substantive answer.  Whether they are right or wrong, doesn't matter.  I went to YOU first, and after 15 posts you still played the same game as BMZ does here, INVENTING something to condemn.  And then call yourself a scholar who loves God?  Rubbish.  Shame on you both.

Yeah, you make Islam look foolish.  Keep it up.  I expected better of you both, but now -- nope.




a "tapout" lol

       FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT Forum Index -> The Qur'an
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Home|Home|Home|Home|HomeHome|Home|Home|Home|Home