I challenge Ahmed Bahgat the wonderful Islamic scholar

Author

Message

Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertsing.

Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments

Posted: Post subject:

Mutley
Senior Member

Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 249

Location: US
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 2:38 am Post subject:

AhmedBahgat wrote:

Are you still here mute, LOL

No more bones you doggy

well if Ball continue, I will use Thultha as 2/3 and still slam dunk him

you watch freak

Well thank you for the admission that you have more interest in what sort of stories you can invent, then what the truth is. This seems to be what all Muslims do. Very odd, and yet very typical.
_________________
If it is peace you want, seek to change yourself, not other people. It is easier to protect your feet with slippers than to carpet the whole of the earth. --Anthony DeMello

AhmedBahgat
Golden Member

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 671

Location: Australia
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject:

Mutley wrote:

AhmedBahgat wrote:

Are you still here mute, LOL

No more bones you doggy

well if Ball continue, I will use Thultha as 2/3 and still slam dunk him

you watch freak

Well thank you for the admission that you have more interest in what sort of stories you can invent, then what the truth is. This seems to be what all Muslims do. Very odd, and yet very typical.

I don't get it mute?

firstly you asked me for a debate, then we made up some rules, then when I presented my first argument you broke the rules so i dismissed you, now it seems you learnt to be polite again so I will give you one more chance to continue the debate, but I hope you observe the rules this time

firstly let me explain my first refute that spun you really hard, my first refute is gramatical refute, it has nothing to do with the sum of the shares, I stated that, for the Noon to be ommitted from Thulthan we need a gramatical rule and asked anyone in here to find such gramatical rule for me, NONE was presented other than typical kafir rants, now, let me tell you that I found such gramatical rule, you won't even understand it i guess, however I'm going to inform baal and a_b with it because they have better chance to understand it, that gramatical rule however is not starightforward application to the sentence we have in hand as it appeared in 4:11, it's actually more complicated than that, but let me explain the gramatical rule first:

if a dual word gramatical position is Muddaf then the noon must be ommitted and the word must end with a Ya or an Alif depeniding on Irab

a straightforward example to a Muddaf and a Muddaf Ilaih that include a dual word in the position of Muddaf is like this:

firstly I will show the example in singular mode

Saiarat Al Talib, car of the student, in here Saiarat is Muddaf and singular, Al Talib is Muddaf Ilaih and singualr

now, let me show you the dual form of each word above indpendently from any grammar

Saiaratan = 2 cars

Al Talbayn = the 2 students

now making the above two duel words to be Muddaf and Muddaf Ilaih in one sentence:

Saiarata Al Talibayn = two cars of the two students

now as you can see the last Noon in the dual word Saiaratan must be ommitted if the word is in Muddaf gramatical position

The case with 4:11 is more complicated than that because what we have is not a straighforward Muddaf and Muddaf Ilaih

let me remind all with what is said in 4:11

Falahunna Thultha Ma Tarak

See, Thulthat Ma Tarak is not a straightforward Muddaf and Muddaf Ilaih, this is because Ma Tarak is another sentence NOT A WORD WITH AL, however under Arabic grammar, a whole sentence can take the position of a Muddaf Ilaih and in here the whole sentence "Ma Tarak" which suppose to be "Ma Hua Tarak" but we have an ommiotted Hua, is in a position of Muddaf Ilaih to the Muddaf Thultha and in such case the last Noon in the Thulthan must be ommitted BASED on the assumption that the whole sentence "Ma Tarak" is considred Muddaf Ilaih which is a very valid assumption that I can not deny.

it is like I presented the argument and yet replied to myself on the behalf of the ignorant kafirs in here, keep in mind that 2 of them claim to know Arabic well

anyway, the objective in anything for me is not to really to win an argument, I actualy never lost one btw LOL, however it is all about increasing my knowledge and finding the truth, not for anyone, BUT TO MYSELF ALONE, but I'm happy to share it with you

now, you don't need to reapeat your argument becaause, you have nothing to add nor you had any refute to my first GRAMATICAL refute, however I hope I have given you a lesson on how to refute a gramatical argument using the same gramatical argument, you will never be able to do that I guess

My second refute which is going to take me some time to prepare and will be based that the word Thultha in 4:11 is 2/3, but I'm getting really busy in Jan and possibly Feb, in fact I may shoot OS all of a sudden during these two months and beyond, therefore no rants about time because I'm planning to put this silly argument to bed in my next refute

Salam
_________________
And say: Truth has arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is bound to perish.
[The Quran ; 17:81]

Mutley
Senior Member

Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 249

Location: US
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:57 am Post subject:

AhmedBahgat wrote:

Mutley wrote:

AhmedBahgat wrote:

Are you still here mute, LOL

No more bones you doggy

well if Ball continue, I will use Thultha as 2/3 and still slam dunk him

you watch freak

Well thank you for the admission that you have more interest in what sort of stories you can invent, then what the truth is. This seems to be what all Muslims do. Very odd, and yet very typical.

I don't get it mute?

firstly you asked me for a debate, then we made up some rules,

No, you made them up, not me. And they are ridiculous. It's ironic that you demand respect before you will debate somebody, while you're probably one of the most disrespectful people there is. And I do not buy into the demand for respect. It's just a diversion or excuse to prevent one from addressing the real points. This debate ended a long time ago when we established that Allah was retarded because he recommended 1/2 of the inheritance for one daughter, but recommended that 3 daughters only share 1/3 of the inheritance. You lost the debate right there. No denying it, and you know it. But you think that if you ignore it, nobody will notice. Well, obviously you're wrong. Why do you bother? I'll make it crystal clear for you. IT DOESN'T WORK, and neither do your stupid dismissals. So stop trying. How could you possibly think they work? How could you be so retarded? Whoops, I'm sorry, I forgot, you're a Muslim. Scratch that last question.

AhmedBahgat wrote:

then when I presented my first argument you broke the rules so i dismissed you, now it seems you learnt to be polite again so

STFU

AhmedBahgat wrote:

I will give you one more chance to continue the debate, but I hope you observe the rules this time

STFU

AhmedBahgat wrote:

firstly let me explain my first refute that spun you really hard,

It didn't spin me hard you stupid moron. You made Allah look like a retard. Aren't you even intelligent enough to realize this very simple fact? How can anybody possibly discuss anything with you if you can't even realize simple things?

AhmedBahgat wrote:

my first refute is gramatical refute, it has nothing to do with the sum of the shares, I stated that, for the Noon to be ommitted from Thulthan we need a gramatical rule and asked anyone in here to find such gramatical rule for me, NONE was presented other than typical kafir rants, now, let me tell you that I found such gramatical rule, you won't even understand it i guess,

And I am not the only person that showed you that if we accept your grammatical rule, then Allah ends up looking like a complete retard. What does it take to get that simple point through your thick brainwashed skull?

AhmedBahgat wrote:

however I'm going to inform baal and a_b with it because they have better chance to understand it, that gramatical rule however is not starightforward application to the sentence we have in hand as it appeared in 4:11, it's actually more complicated than that, but let me explain the gramatical rule first:

<snip>

It doesn't matter. Either Allah can't add fractions properly, or Allah is completely retarded by offering more to a single daughter, then the amount that three daughters get to split. Eihger way, it's completely retarded. You have completely embarrassed Allah.

AhmedBahgat wrote:

anyway, the objective in anything for me is not to really to win an argument, I actualy never lost one btw LOL,

An admission that you did. I know that's the best we're going to get from youm because you aren't a particularly honest and forthcoming person. And you know that, and you don't care. You actually take pride in your ability to invent untrue angles if need be, and I've caught you doing this numerous times. That's why I harass you, because you are disho9nest and you take pride in it. You think it's some sort of game as to who can be the more clever deceiver. Very twisted. But then again, you're a Muslim. That's what Muslims do.

AhmedBahgat wrote:

however it is all about increasing my knowledge and finding the truth, not for anyone, BUT TO MYSELF ALONE, but I'm happy to share it with you

Even you don'tbelieve what you just said.

AhmedBahgat wrote:

now, you don't need to reapeat your argument becaause, you have nothing to add nor you had any refute to my first GRAMATICAL refute, however I hope I have given you a lesson on how to refute a gramatical argument using the same gramatical argument, you will never be able to do that I guess

I accepted your grammatical argument, because it ended up making Allah look even more retarded. But, if you are retarded yourself, hen obviously you won't see that. This is downright pathetic.

AhmedBahgat wrote:

My second refute which is going to take me some time to prepare

You mean your second invention, and you have to go back to the lab to concoct it. If you have to concoct anything, then what does that say? Can't you see how you are admitting your disregard for the truth in favor of making up any idea that you think might work? You don't care about the truth, you pride yourself in your ability to make things up. And the most pathetic part, is that you can't even see that you are actually, inadvertently admitting this.
_________________
If it is peace you want, seek to change yourself, not other people. It is easier to protect your feet with slippers than to carpet the whole of the earth. --Anthony DeMello

AhmedBahgat
Golden Member

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 671

Location: Australia
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:04 am Post subject:

You are dismissed again mute, now fuk off or I will make a lot of movies about your stupid arse in here Baal or A-B, are you want to continue this debate or just let it go? please let us know _________________ And say: Truth has arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is bound to perish. [The Quran ; 17:81]

Mutley
Senior Member

Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 249

Location: US
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:17 am Post subject:

AhmedBahgat wrote:

You are dismissed again mute, now fuk off or I will make a lot of movies about your stupid arse in here

Baal or A-B, are you want to continue this debate or just let it go?

please let us know

You lost the debate a long time ago. Aren't you at least intelligent enough to see this?

_________________
If it is peace you want, seek to change yourself, not other people. It is easier to protect your feet with slippers than to carpet the whole of the earth. --Anthony DeMello

FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT