The Qur'an
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
Just as I know you're fantasizing.
I see, your version of "enlightenment" is fantasizing, which is what I assumed in the first place.
In other words, take a fact, like nature's existence, and fantasize it was created by magic, while ignoring the facts of how nature actually came into existence. Well done.
You're right. I can't possibly understand your gibberish based fantasies.
The definition of a word is irrelevant to your misuse of it.
Enlightenment: Education that results in understanding and the spread of knowledge.
No... If I was simply going to match everything to my own understanding and only accept that then there would be no point in discussion in the first place. I said if someone does not have a satisfying philosophy then it is natural to stay with your own. You seem to like to jump to conclusions. But I think in your case everything goes back to a cult, so no surprise there
Peace be unto you
Funny thing is I don't think I ever said that the meaning behind nature being God or something of the sort, it could be for me but we were discussing the general idea of enlightenment. Goes on to show that you didn't understand anything and are basically making pre-conceived assumptions (knowing that I believe in God).
Yes you are right you can't understand without reading what was written. Because "enlightenment" has nothing to do with "magic" which you were using in substitute for God (I presume). I was speaking in utmost general terms of what enlightenment is. But since you are such a strong believer in cults how can I possibly fantasize that you will read my arguments without pre-conceived notions
Really now? Re-read what I said and re-read the definition. Then say something about cults :bugeye:
Peace be unto you
Seems like you did.
No, you were using YOUR version of "enlightenment," a version you most likely made up yourself, like you admit you do.
You can argue all you want about your cult's beliefs. You won't be able to demonstrate a single argument, hence it's all just your delusions.
I understand the definition, you don't.
Despite Q's ridiculous arrogance and bad temper, he does have a point there - you have openly stated (and demonstrated) that you have no acquaintanceship with even the ordinary stories and writings of philosophies other than your own, which appears to be derived from a single book and its specialized commentary within a group of believers in one religion and (from the sound of things) one culture.786 said:
On what grounds do you plan to evaluate and "compare" other philosophies, when you do encounter them some day?
I think you have a problem following things. Michael asked me about something enlightening from the Quran which I did give, another poster mentioned the same thing can be found elsewhere to which I replied that that the fact enlightenment can be found in nature is no surprise to me. THEN we started to get into discussion what enlightenment actually is... Now if you followed this then you will see that I try to give a general meaning to what it is... from here on it had nothing to do with the Quran/God.
You couldn't even follow what was going on, I don't know-- maybe try following up on the definition again.
Perhaps to help you understand what I was saying in a scientific context so that you don't AGAIN misunderstand that I was talking about enlightenment having anything to do with God here:
The discovery of GFP is not enlightening. But the implications of its use in many different assays that help in experiments is enlightening. So it is not simply the fact of GFP's existence but rather what it can mean in a larger context, this "understanding" (from your definition
) is what I was claiming is enlightenment. I think that is why I specifically mentioned an example of "Photosynthesis taking place in a chloroplast" is not enlightening but it seem that have skipped you and so did the whole point of many of my posts.I don't feel like teaching you how to follow a thread and how to read one especially how you understand examples in a post. :bugeye:
Peace be unto you
See your own comment above.
And I have yet to see where 786 has claimed such a perspective by simply saying that one is likely to stick with what one thinks best unless one comes across a better philosophy. Such truisms hardly require one to have exhaustively researched all existing philosophies. I would consider them self evident.
It would be ridiculous only if cults didn't rule the world.
If you did not derive your comment from 786's statement, none.
No, I don't. I do have a problem following your made up terms, though.
As typical as it is for cult members to lie in order to support their delusions, you are no different. You said there were signs of god in nature, but couldn't substantiate that claim even if your life depended on it. That is not enlightening at all since there is no knowledge of those signs, but only your cult based beliefs in them.
Which quite obviously, you still don't have a clue.
For someone whose nose is buried in the Quran and only defines his world based on his own imagination and his cult beliefs, you have absolutely nothing to teach and a shitload to learn.