Well done! You certainly are the master debater here. :bravo:
The Qur'an
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
Well done! You certainly are the master debater here. :bravo:
I'm quite sure you see it that way. That would demonstrate only how dangerous your cult beliefs are to the future of mankind and the world.
If a god did in fact exist, I would eagerly pray for him to stop you lot from destroying us all.
It doesn't matter what children want to learn, indoctrinated theists will pass on their beliefs no matter what. It is this cycle of indoctrination that needs to be broken. If children want to learn about religions, then we should teach them about many religions, not indoctrinate them into one religion and demonize the others.
This is how people get educated, not brainwashed.
Clearly, you have no stake in science at all and are only here to demonize it along with your other Islamic brethren who do nothing but drive the Islamic propaganda machine with lies and deceit.
Well then maybe you should read all the pages first and get to speed before I have to keep reitterating the same thing over and over again? It is quite nausiating you know? And for you to say "...yet" would (to me) imply (sarcastically) that you "may" in future? That doesn't help if you're actually genuine.
Nope! You got it totally wrong. I am saying that the Qur'an is a book that sheds light on truth for people. These "truths" contain information about life and the universe in a fundamental way, not in a detailed or comprehensive way that is required in the study of science for example. Although, it does not mean that it doesn't contain detailed or comprehensive information on other topics. Nevertheless, we are talking about science in a science forum I believe, and as such, the Qur'an is not what you should be using as a textbook in curriculum at university or other levels of academia.
Although, this does not mean that science should not cite the fundamental aspects contained therein about science. Like Prof. Keith L. Moore for example, he uses the Qur'an in the textbooks he wrote for students at the University of Totonto. Also, about Dr. Keith L. Moore; he has co-written (with professor Arthur F. Dalley II) Clinically Oriented Anatomy, which is the most popular English-language anatomy textbook in the world, used by scientists, doctors, physiotherapists and students worldwide, by the way. And he's not even Muslim!
The point I'm trying to make at the end of the day (if you haven't already understood by now) is; that the information in the Quran is used as a guide and inspiration for all of us. The information contained is factual and credible (as many Western Scientist's also claim :: mentioned in the article above also) no matter how old or new the information is verified as "factual". There's information in there that was already known during the time it was brought down, and there is information that took science centuries to ascertain as fact in their own right. Then there's information that is still a mystery and yet to be understood in the future. All in all, it is a remarkable book that no-one has been able to deny of its facts being untrue, even to this day.
Sure.
There's alot of sources I could direct you to (as there's alot of citations used as well) and here are some of the sources you can digest if you like;
http://www.islam101.com/science/embryo.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egDYF_oQ4yc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx434UE3SYw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKGurZJO3hM&feature=related
http://www.quranandscience.com/human/135-dr-keith-moore-confirms-embryology-in-quran.html
I've checked out Moore's work on this matter; it's specious at best, I'm afraid. You're citing an old claim of prediction that - as all such claims - falls short on information. You could take any text and find some "predictive" statements within for almost anything if you look hard enough.
Since you are a member of that cult you don't see the danger in it.. That is obvious.... How much money does your cult get to keep people in the dark....?
So that you can continue your cult
Right but you MUST teach them Evolution... otherwise your membership will start to decrease... you need that money for your jobs, because that is how most of the 'research' is paid for..... You are money laundering cult
No, you brainwash them to give their money to you and act like they became educated when in fact you brainwashed them.
Clearly you're just a brainwashed fanboy of Evolution and are a member of the cult that is trying to keep their gig going so they can continue to make money off of each individual so you can keep your jobs and have the $$$ rolling.
Peace be unto you
Last edited:
Barring the occasional bit of historical trivia, there is almost no factual information in the Quran, at least not in my translation. Everything I have seen presented as significant or enlightening "factual information" is hindsight from people who obtained their information elsewhere and used it to "interpret" some Quranic phrase or assertion.bizza said:
There are some obvious "falsehoods" presented in the Quran, as is common (and probably absolutely necessary and important) in works of parable and myth and story and moral instruction. I do not know how one would inculcate human morality or ground human nature in a suitable moral and spiritual context without telling stories, with their occasional talking donkeys, angelic visitations, magic boats, and so forth. At least, it's never been done to my knowledge. That is no slight on the book, unless its readers attempt to assign the book its value by denying the book's nature as a work of parable, metaphor, myth, story, etc - as a work of human beings, with all the virtues and flaws attendant upon such efforts.
The joke is having a discussion on religion in a supposed science forum. Which is mostly what you do. And confusing a faith with a tool. Science is a tool, tools can be discarded and changed when not in use or not required. They have no existence outside their usage. Its like saying, this is a forum on automobiles where you can diss cars. Of course you can [maybe not your car]. But if you go to a womans forum and diss feminism they'll kick you out.
Your problem is you cannot tell the difference between a tool and an ideology. There is no parallel.
Or maybe, science is your ideology. In which case, its a whole other ball game.
Last edited:
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
And just maybe I don't have sufficient time for that at present. And just maybe you could follow polite forum convention by which it thought to be inconsiderate to jump down someone's throat for not reading a very long thread in its entirety when they specifically apologise, in advance, for not having done so.
I was not asking you to reiterate. I read several of your posts. A clear message emerged from them. Apparently this was not the message you intended and you decide this lack of comprehension is my fault rather than your limited communication skills. :shrug:
Well **** you. In two posts you've managed to convert my view of you from someone with whom it would be interesting to discuss an idea from two different perspectives into someone who is a rude, belligerent prat.
Apparently you haven't heard of humour. On reflection that was evident from your earlier posts. You seem committed to finding the worst interpretation of what I have posted and immediately attacking it. Do you really think that is an approach that will win over people to your point of view? Or did you just come here to be rude? You sure as **** are not conducting yourself in the manner of a true muslim. Shame on you.
Back to the meat of the discussion. Thank you for the links. I am studying them.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
Really! I never thought about that. Thanks for the suggestion.
Really! I never thought about that. Thanks for the suggestion.
You could be a supporter of FGM, that usually works. Or be a devoted wife who walks three paces behind her husband, that also works. You might even refer to your husband as pati parmeshwar [My Lord Husband]. .
Is that your rationale for Muslims being intolerant to those who criticize Islam? It's all my fault?
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
My wife normally walks three paces behind me, but that's only because she finds the shopping heavy.
I think you may be referring to the "Bible Code" (a.k.a. "Torah Code")? If so, I don't think it's anywhere near that. The Quran spells the fundamentals all in one verse and all in continuous sentences, unlike the BC, where they pick and choose words and 'mish-mash' them to their liking.
I can understand why you would say that, however, there are specific truths in the Quran that no-one knew about until the last century. For example, the verse where it talks on Cosmology and mentions the phenomena of "Tariq", relating to Black Holes.
Well, I would disagree with that. But each to their own hey?
Sure. Fair enough then. My appolagies.
okay
No thanks! But thanks for the offer.
hmmmm... turned on me have you? How ironic. And there you were preaching about politeness and consideration etc etc all that time.
Oh I'm sorry... I didn't know you could switch from being "serious" to being instantly "funny". Do I know you?
I don't really care to "win over people" at all. Especially not in this forum. I'm here to defend my religion from audacious and ignorant idiots like Michael and Q, whom have nothing intellectual to add to the discussion. One only needs to read all their posts in this thread alone and could easily see their level of contributions.
Another reason I am here is because of 'these idiots' (yes... they do show signs of it and I will never appolagise due to the way they have acted towards me and others of my faith here). The thread itself is remarkably conspicious to say the least and I honestly don't think Michael deserves ANY respect for posting threads of this nature, nor for the way he carries himself, if he is indeed genuinely asking questions to learn. But that is obviously not his intent.
When someone attacks my religion and my faith... I take it personally and I respond in retalliation. I'm not perfect, and yes, I don't conduct myself in the manner of a true Muslim, so yes, shame on me, but I'm trying my best. I draw strength and wisdom from my faith and if I did actually adhere to its moral teachings properly, I wouldn't waste my time on ignorant fools and un-moderated-hypocritical-two-faced forums like this... I assure you! The moment I do... I'm outta here!
You're welcome matey, and I look forward to your response, and towards a real dialogue for once.
That's exactly what you've been indoctrinated to do. No surprises there.
Hence, the problem and the hypocrisy. You tell us openly that you retaliate to anyone who attacks your religion and then go on to admit you don't even adhere to the very same doctrines you defend. In other words, you're a hypocrite.
It's also evidence to support indoctrination. You don't adhere to the positive aspects of the religion but only the negative, that which teaches you to lie and fight in the name of Allah. But, it appears you probably want little to do with Islam and would much rather be your own person with your own aspirations.
Whatever the case may be, the last thing you want to do is be violent and retaliate in the name of your god, for any and all reasons. You and I both know Allah isn't going to get you what you want, only you can do that.
You may just be here long enough to wish you hadn't joined. Others here have turned from the dark side, my young apprentice. They haven't gone back and are happy to be free from the slavery of cults.
Free yourself.
Bizza, I will do you the honour of being completely and ruthlessly objective about your hypothesis. Some of this will inherently appear skeptical; this, however, is the milieu of scientific discourse. I apologize if it seems excessively critical, of course, but I retract nothing.
First, you'll have to define terms here: what is "all in one verse and all in continuous sentences"? How specifically does it differ from the "Bible Code"? In what language do these purportedly mystical numerical occurrences take place?
Next: the hypothesis itself. I should start by warning you that I have no faith that the "Quran Code" will in any way better the "Bible Code". Neither are, in my opinion, indicative of anything save the desire to "validate" one's faith or promote it via fortuitous numerical constructs. Still, it is possible, and so in that sense, I have constructed a few "pass tests" you'd need to verify to support this hypothesis of yours.
1) First, it actually wouldn't matter whether or not the mystical part of this Quran number theory is drawn from one portion thereof or multiple parts. A hypothesis should be on average no less cherry-picked because it comes from a single place in some text versus a variety of places. For example, I could test a plethora of gene-phenotype associations, then conveniently only report those few that support my theory, without accounting for the independent tests of the rest, falsifying the null without making it a fair test. So, to compare your hypothesis ("Quran magic") favourably with "Bible Code" or "Torah Code" or anything-else-Code, you have to demonstrate why your "one source" is a) true and b) relevant. Bonne chance, dedans.
2) Next, to make it a real test, you would have to construct some appropriate test statistic (F, t, etc) to compare with test statistics (presumably) artificially generated from books without any claim to representation of the proof of some deity. For example, a log-linear F-stat on the number of truisms compared to non-truisms within the Quran. Or this could be phrased as a ratio with pseudoreplication over entire Ayahs. In short: you need controls. Depending on the next step (and the reviewer), this step might be avoided, although I warn strongly of the dangers of poor subject control in statistical testing.
3) Lastly, you would have to have some underlying distribution to compare it to, composed of numerical truisms generated from - at the least - thousands of texts. This would permit the comparison of your controlled ratio above to a presumed distribution of all possible truism ratios within any given body of literature. Presumably, this would be religious literature but not necessarily so unless you could demonstrate some overriding reason for this to be true.
Of course, the actual detection of all such truisms would be a monumental task, to say nothing of establishing the importance of each observation to some binary fact/falsehood in the modern world, to say nothing of potential facts they might reveal about some future world. The monumental size of such a task beggars all belief, of course, easily approaching the complexity of the Human Genome Project, which employed hundreds of sequencers working nonstop to generate sequence data on a single human being. A friend of mine worked on the Project, just loading sequencers. All day.
If I were a cruel person, I would suggest that a series of a thousand monkeys typing for a thousand years could be used to create the distributions that you would require, described above. Fortunately I am not a cruel person.
This forum is indeed a moderated one. The rest you would, again, have to illustrate.
What "valid argument", or "valid argument" of what? What are the criteria or your understanding of validity of an argument? Could it be this:
or maybe this:
You are not making an argument, at least not with anyone you are answering. You are making an argument with your demons. Just as you believe in non-existing characters of a dying fantasy, you are fighting against your "assumptions" about a group of people (atheists). Your unique problem -or sad obsession- is to argue with them for the sake of arguing and trying to prove yourself that what you believe about "creation" (a disgusting and useless word for any level) of everything out of nothingness. You are not here (in this forum or in this world, whichever you prefer) to share a logic, trying to grasp new or different things, you are here to defend your belief against atheists. These are your words:
I told you to come with verses and hadiths of some different kinds, not with the astronomic ones. Because as I said before, your Qur'an has nothing new in human knowledge other than repeating already known phenomenons. Look at this:
What you call "thaqib" does not mean "black holes" at all. The meaning of the word is "shooting star". You are quoting as "it is a star that pierces". You call it black hole as a star using scientific jargon with a twist. Science "would" accept black hole as a star only (a) as a gravitational source, or (b) as an energizer inside a center of a galaxy, -or star-. Yet we are not able to observe black holes, they do not shine as stars, that's why they are not a type of star; they are black holes. They are categorically different than other cosmic phenomenon.
Your Qur'anic verse talks about a star. Moreover; a "shooting star". And they have been observed by humans for thousands of years, if not millions. How dare you to implant a scientific knowledge into your magic discourse? You dare, because your main attitude is to "create" any type of material in order to sustain your belief. If it is a lie, it is OK. If it does not fit reality, it is still OK. That's how you can build a connection between thaqib and black hole.
1) Yes, life begun that way. But not the way that you can perceive; it took a great deal of a billion year. However you can only think one way. And your way tells you that life (or anything else) must start "all of a sudden". This is not allowed, not in this universe. Nothing can start all of a sudden. This is true for life, as much as for any other phenomenon in this universe. But you can not grasp this because in your mental dimension things can start all of a sudden. Forget about trying to understand "evolution", the guardians of your mind will not allow you to imagine that.
2) This is not a belief. It essentially differs from beliefs.
What God, what 120 Thousand prophets? What kind of fantasy you are in? What kind of impractical god and prophets who gave us all these knowledge throughout centuries and millenia? Why didn't they provide us all this knowledge "suddenly"? You claim that your fantastic hero created us out of nowhere and all of a sudden, yet he gives everything else in slow pace? If you find a logic in here, you should check out your concepts and beliefs first.
So they are simply rubbish, a lullaby.
I think you should start explaining what do you mean when you keep repeating this "God" thing, because it is getting boring. What is it , what does it look like, ohh, we can not see it, we can not measure, we can not prove, we can not detect, what else? We should only believe in it, is that so? Why should people believe in your God? How can you claim all human endevour on behalf of your mentally imagined God? Resource, evidence, connection, anything tangible? Come on man, you are trying to convince a technology infested new dynamic generation of human kind, you are not dealing with agricultural societies. You must do better than fabricating non-existing relation with science and your story. They will not believe in you. Just as past generations left their ancestors belief systems (Zeus, Apollo, blah, blah), the next generation will not relate your fantasy with their knowledge. Come up with a better strategy or you are extinct, this is a rule of thumb for evolution of anything.
I already falsify two or three of your plagiarist and miscued verses (See above). Give me more, I will falsify them too.
No, before me. Just as I am before the next generations.
If you get a kind of satisfaction when you think that I could agree with you, think it that way, it's your issue. I repeat, you are not even thinking what people are talking about, you are fighting against the "usual rhetoric" of your demons. Good luck, continue like that.
Yes, I do admit I try to poison people against your kind's idea. If you and your kind are "sensible thinkers", I am an ignorant layman. But I don't give a toss about how people would label me. I am not trying to defend my belief or world view. I have not a single respect to any kind of mumbo jumbo unless they are meant to be jokes. You are a joke too.
It is way beyond disgusting. It will be an archaic word anyway; we are probably the last generation using it (attacking or defending) in our practical discourses.
I will never leave your beliefs alone my friend, not among my species. Belief is no problem for my personal mind, but I have a big problem with humanity believing in what you believe in. You are consuming the valuable brain power of humanity, and I see it as an obstacle in front of our real issues. Yes, I will verbally attack you.
No, I can not, I tried, but I can not.
No, I don't have to convince you on anything, including my immense logic. I am trying to show your bullshit, that's all.
Your understanding of theory, philosophy, logic and science is totally against mine, so if you see it as invasion, yes why not, take it as an invasion of societies, yes take it that way.
Now let's come to your main scream: You have obviously established all your existence on your belief. You do not test it against anything, because testing your belief would be testing your existence. If your belief has a doubt, or a scar; that means your whole existence would shatter. What will you end up with? Nothing. No belief, no Bizza, simple but core. Your neurons have God connections among them, if you take God out, your software will collapse. That's why you are trying to defend it, because you are defending your whole being.
Poor "creature" you... Nothing can help you; please continue praying, maybe you can fill more black holes in your belief.
But that's not a parallel at all.SAM said:
The parallel would be dissing women, not feminism. Or the parallel would be spending a lot of effort dissing cars - all of them, automobile transport in general. And yes, that will get you kicked out of a car forum.
No one knew they were in the Quran until they had discovered them somewhere else, and used their new knowledge to "interpret" some phrase in the Quran.bizza said:
I mentioned that pattern already. It works with the Bible, too. Or the works of Nostradamus.
Not really. The error is crippling, to the person and the community. Little children die in the streets because of it.bizza said:
Last edited: