Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
al-amiyr

The Qur'aan Cosmological Model

276 posts in this topic

So when the understanding is wrong, the Quran ceases to be a miracle?

This is irrelevant. You are confusing between the miracle in th Quranic statement with the understanding of someone of the miracle. it still even if the understanding is wrong.

How can you say "it does" then you say "until" to favor "a" to "the"? There are many scientists who don't support the BBT explanation. That's enough of a proof that any conclusion based on it is wrong at least to them. Unless you're saying it won't be proven wrong, it's not helping your argument.

You can't say that because you are jumping to the conclusions right after one's says that this is not going to work, you must back up your statement by proofs and evidence otherwise, your statement can not be taken seriously. You said many scientists, so try to enlrage that with the BBT explanation.

So every and any hardworker can claim the prize?

This is irrelevant too, I was pointing out to someone who has the ability and the knowledge of the Quran and science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That alone negates deduction.

maybe or maybe not is for you, so it does negate deduction for your opinion and it will be only your opinion, not mine. I said that to make you close your statement and you did :)

How do you know? Instances please

This is one of the lack of the knowledge of the Quranic statement you have pointed out:

"It may also depend on related verses including those in other places of the Quran. For example, after science found that the earth was not flat, other verses in the Quran were re-interpreted in favor of the new finding".

That's not true what you stated, otherwise you need to back up your statement

Where and how did i show such perplexity? Furthermore, how did/do handle my perplexity because of the language barrier as you said? Should i just take your word for it?

The perplexity you did show in the post (I've read other posts of you too and there is more than this) where you have answered knights of shadow, when you said that "mihaad" is your own selective meaning. You don't know that even if a word in arabic has many meanings, it still hold its own meaning if it is alone, with sentence it can take many forms and many meaning according to the use of the sentence and to the use of the word in the sentence.

"You are, as they are/were, being selective in choosing meanings that reason with your your knowledge/ideas"

P.S : Don't cut my posts into pieces, you are selecting what goes with your replies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it still even if the understanding is wrong.

You say the miracle of the Quran lies in the understanding of people yet it remains a miracle even if the understanding is wrong. Wow. Anyway, let's roll with your latest opinion. It means the Quran being a miracle is irrelevant to the understanding of people. How does the miracle of the Quran -which is a book ... words- show if people keep misunderstanding it hence no understanding at all?

You can't say that because you are jumping to the conclusions right after one's says that this is not going to work

Where did i say this or that isn't going to work?

I was pointing out to someone who has the ability and the knowledge of the Quran and science.

Let me rephrase: "so every hardworker, who has the ability and the knowledge and science, can claim the prize?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say the miracle of the Quran lies in the understanding of people yet it remains a miracle even if the understanding is wrong. Wow. Anyway, let's roll with your latest opinion. It means the Quran being a miracle is irrelevant to the understanding of people. How does the miracle of the Quran -which is a book ... words- show if people keep misunderstanding it hence no understanding at all?

Well, you still don't get my point of view, it's not about understanding or misunderstanding, it's about "Ejtihaad" of someone's understanding. I don't know the right word for "Ejtihaad" the nearest is "studiousness" I suppose.

Where did i say this or that isn't going to work?

I gave you an example of someone's jumping to conclusion like you and saying that is not going to work, you did that too when you said that many scientists disagree with BBT explanation without backing up this statement with any reference or any biased scientists who said otherwise.

Let me rephrase: "so every hardworker, who has the ability and the knowledge and science, can claim the prize?

It's not up to him to claim the prize. He or she who has the ability and the knowledge of Quran and science made efforts and hardworking to understand a phenomena are in two options if he or she is right then he or she gets two rewards "rewards not prize" the word in arabic is "Ajr" and it means something else it's about blessing. the Second option is when he or she is wrong, there will be only one reward.

Edited by TheLionsHunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe or maybe not is for you, so it does negate deduction for your opinion and it will be only your opinion, not mine. I said that to make you close your statement and you did :)

So you made up a reply that was irrelevant to both my question and your argument so that i "close my statement" which "i did". How witty of you. Now, do you have any other examples of science being deducted from the Quran? Also google deduction before you proceed.

This is one of the lack of the knowledge of the Quranic statement you have pointed out:
"It may also depend on related verses including those in other places of the Quran. For example, after science found that the earth was not flat, other verses in the Quran were re-interpreted in favor of the new finding".

That's not true what you stated, otherwise you need to back up your statement

So i don't have the knowledge because i didn't specify the verses not because you asked and i failed. Wow.

39:5 and 79:31 are re-interpreted in favor of the oval shape of the earth (after it was found oval).

The perplexity you did show in the post (I've read other posts of you too and there is more than this)

I'm perplexed because i say: people are selective in choosing the meanings that reason with their knowledge/ideas.

while you, who are not perplexed, think:

that even if a word in arabic has many meanings, it still hold its own meaning if it is alone, with sentence it can take many forms and many meaning according to the use of the sentence and to the use of the word in the sentence.

How is that different than what i said? I'm perplexed here. Moreover, how do you explain a wrong understanding if not, for one, by making wrong selections of meanings?

P.S : Don't cut my posts into pieces, you are selecting what goes with your replies

I select what i need to talk about/understand. How does that harm/bother/offend/annoy you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get this entire thing.

The thread is titled The Koran Cosmological Model.

This would lead one to assume next would be a description of what the Koran says and how this relates to reality.

Instead, we get 3 or 4 words which are in Arabic and some large drawings without any labels and some more Arabic. There is mention of 7 heavens which are not to be found in reality.

Is it possible to explain any cosmological model in 2 sentences, where some words are unclear on top of it? Hardly. I have asked some factual question and have not received any answers.

What is the point of all this? What is the goal?

If someone wants to quote the Koran or read some common knowledge into it, that does not make it a "model". It's a religious book without any scientific ambitions.

If someone wants to find out about cosmology I would suggest going to a physics forum.

If someone wants to find out about the Koran I would suggest going to a religious forum.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you still don't get my point of view, it's not about understanding or misunderstanding, it's about "Ejtihaad" of someone's understanding. I don't know the right word for "Ejtihaad" the nearest is "studiousness" I suppose.

So now the miracle of Quran doesn't lie in the understanding of people. It lies in "Ejtihaad" t. How does this "Ejtihaad" make the Quran a miracle?

I gave you an example of someone's jumping to conclusion like you and saying that is not going to work, you did that too when you said that many scientists disagree with BBT explanation without backing up this statement with any reference or any biased scientists who said otherwise.

So because i say there are many scientists, without specifying who, do not support the BBT explanation it means i say it's not going to work. Wow.

It's not up to him to claim the prize. He or she who has the ability and the knowledge of Quran and science made efforts and hardworking to understand a phenomena are in two options if he or she is right then he or she gets two rewards "rewards not prize" the word in arabic is "Ajr" and it means something else it's about blessing. the Second option is when he or she is wrong, there will be only one reward.

By prize i meant the right to declare one's opinion as the fact/truth/right opinion. In this case: The Quran model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you made up a reply that was irrelevant to both my question and your argument so that i "close my statement" which "i did". How witty of you. Now, do you have any other examples of science being deducted from the Quran? Also google deduction before you proceed.

I have already gave you an example of the inheritance issues and algebra, but you have refused to accept so even if I give you another example, you will replay by google deduction before I proceed. I think you want to tell me that I don't know the meaning of deduction, if so then enlight me and explain I'm all ears.

So i don't have the knowledge because i didn't specify the verses not because you asked and i failed. Wow.

39:5 and 79:31 are re-interpreted in favor of the oval shape of the earth (after it was found oval).

No, you are wrong, it wasn't about specifying verses, it's about the misunderstanding of the words in the Quranic statement and the Quranic statement itself (I was pointing out the dilemma of the word "Mihad" when you are trying to point out that there is another word in another verses says otherwise).

39:5 : can you give me any islamic reference or any thing to see because I don't know where you have found that maybe I can explain to you if there is any.

79:31 : the same thing, any reference !!!

There is no favor in that, many islamic scientists before the discovery of the spherical shape of the earth have said that earth it is Oval and they have interpreted that in their maps and you can check the maps of Al-idrissi a very known scientist of geography who was the first one who made a map of the world in a flat paper and found that the earth has a spherical shape.

I'm perplexed because i say: people are selective in choosing the meanings that reason with their knowledge/ideas.

while you, who are not perplexed, think:

No, you still have no clue of what I mean, I said that the word holds in it the meaning, even if takes another form in the sentence but it still holds its meaning. You got it !!!

How is that different than what i said? I'm perplexed here. Moreover, how do you explain a wrong understanding if not, for one, by making wrong selections of meanings?

It's very different indeed than what you said. we explained wrong if the one who is making "Ejtihaad" gives the word more than what it must take and more that it has to take. it is not about wrong selecting of the meanings, it's about giving the word more than what it can support.

I select what i need to talk about/understand. How does that harm/bother/offend/annoy you?

It does bother me, because in a conversation we should reply to all the post, not takeing "Yes" or "No" without "why it is yes" or "why it is no". it's rude because cutting sentences will serve you to point to a specific places and to guide me to where you want to go to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now the miracle of Quran doesn't lie in the understanding of people. It lies in "Ejtihaad" t. How does this "Ejtihaad" make the Quran a miracle?

So because i say there are many scientists, without specifying who, do not support the BBT explanation it means i say it's not going to work. Wow.

By prize i meant the right to declare one's opinion as the fact/truth/right opinion. In this case: The Quran model.

The miracle does exist and the Ejtihaad is for explaining it or refering to it or studying it or proving it.

I already said that you are like somoene who is jumping to conclusion and saying that it's not going to work. read "You're like" !! I didn't specify you by this but you might be like this in one way or another as I see.

I didn't say that the Quranic model is fact/truth/right even him himself does not say that. he is pointing to a very good point from his understanding to the cosmoslogical model and he has some good knowledge in that field, so his ideas must be taken seriously and you must debate with him by science not by criticizing him because of his religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get this entire thing.

You are correct StopS, you do not understand this Model. You make no attempt to understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct StopS, you do not understand this Model. You make no attempt to understand it.

Well, then answer my questions instead of insulting my personality and character.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have already gave you an example of the inheritance issues and algebra, but you have refused to accept so even if I give you another example, you will replay by google deduction before I proceed. I think you want to tell me that I don't know the meaning of deduction, if so then enlight me and explain I'm all ears.

That was not an example of deduction. Everything you said in favor of your argument (that it was indeed deduction) suggests either he was "motivated" or "inspired" by those verses. I'm asking you now to show me how he deduced Algebra (which is applicable in many areas) from the verses of inheritence (applicable specifically in one area).

(I was pointing out the dilemma of the word "Mihad" when you are trying to point out that there is another word in another verses says otherwise).

I specifically said:

"[the meaning of words depends on the rest of the line] Not exclusively. It may also depend on related verses including those in other places of the Quran. For example, after science found that the earth was not flat, other verses in the Quran were re-interpreted in favor of the new finding."

This mean: after new interpretations in favor of the new finding were established, all related verses are now understood in a way that supports the new interpretation -of the other verses in the Quran that that were re-intepreted in favor of the new finding- the same way they were understood in a way that supported the old common/established belief. I believe it was said that the verses of the Quran explain each other? -If you disagree then we will have to start a new post where i show you how interpreters did that-. How you understood that as "[regarding the word "Mihad"] I [was] trying to point out that there is another word in another verses says otherwise] is a mystery to me.

39:5 : can you give me any islamic reference or any thing to see because I don't know where you have found that maybe I can explain to you if there is any.

79:31 : the same thing, any reference !!!

Are you saying these two verses are not used in favor of saying the Quran stated the earth is oval 14 centuries ago?!

There is no favor in that, many islamic scientists before the discovery of the spherical shape of the earth have said that earth it is Oval and they have interpreted that in their maps and you can check the maps of Al-idrissi a very known scientist of geography who was the first one who made a map of the world in a flat paper and found that the earth has a spherical shape.

You took the bate (sorry was just paying you back).

The earth shape is not oval; it's best described as oblate spheroid, or oblate ellipsoid.

The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to ancient Greek philosophy from around the 6th century BC, but remained a matter of philosophical speculation until the 3rd century BC when Hellenistic astronomy established the spherical shape of the earth as a physical given.
Wikipedia. Spherical as opposed to flat.

It's also wrong that

Al-idrissi...... found that the earth has a spherical shape
as you said.

Islamic astronomy inherited the idea of a spherical earth from the Greek astronomical tradition

No, you still have no clue of what I mean, I said that the word holds in it the meaning, even if takes another form in the sentence but it still holds its meaning. You got it !!!

No. Still perplexed by your argumennt. Care to give examples?

It's very different indeed than what you said. we explained wrong if the one who is making "Ejtihaad" gives the word more than what it must take and more that it has to take. it is not about wrong selecting of the meanings, it's about giving the word more than what it can support.

"gives the word more than what it must take and more that it has to take" may occur when making wrong selections of meanings. Each word in the sentence has several meanings. These meanings of each individual word may be similar or unsimilar to each other. Selecting/choosing one wrong meaning of one word will result in having a wrong understanding of the sentence. "Wrong meaning" isn't the same as baseless meaning which can't be found in the language of the sentence. For example, consider this sentence:

All men are equal.

Language of the sentence: English.

One of the meanings of the word men is: pl of man. One of the meaning of man is:An adult male human. So men is: adult male humans.

One of the meanings of the word equal is:identical.

Select these two meanings from among all the other meanings of "men" and "equal" and you'll have: All adult male humans are identical.

Is this the meaning of the sentence or a meaning of the sentence? To begin with, it's safe to say it's a meaning of the sentence. One meaning among many possible others.

Is it wrong or correct? Nobody can tell. Saying right or wrong depends on many factors like the intention of the sayer (unknown to us), the occasion in which this sentence was said (unknown to us), the other related sentences (unknown to us), the spirit of the whole situation/text (unknown to us).

Could there be more than one wrong meaning? Yes.

Could there be morethan one correct meaning? Yes.

When can we know one meaning is wrong? When one or more of the factors above or other factors, afterbeing known to us, refutes/negates it.

When can we know one meaning is correct? When one or more of the factors above or other factors, afterbeing known to us, supports it.

How do we know which of them is the correct meaning? Only the sayer knows if it is the correct meaning (= it's exactly what he/she says). If he/she can't be reached to tell us, every meaning is equally wrong or correct.

What's the difference between a correct meaning and the correct meaning? A correct meaning is determined by knowing/obtaining one or more of the factors above or other factors. The correct meaning is determined only one factor: the sayer him/herself.

Now, consider the same sentence again:

None of the meanings of men in the English is: tables.

Saying that All men are equal means All tables are equal is baseless.

What's the difference between a wrong meaning and a baseless meaning? A wrong meaning is determined by being refuted/negated by one or more of the factors above or other factors. A baseless meaning is determined by only one factor: it's non-existence in the language of the sentence.

It does bother me, because in a conversation we should reply to all the post, not takeing "Yes" or "No" without "why it is yes" or "why it is no". it's rude because cutting sentences will serve you to point to a specific places and to guide me to where you want to go to.

When you're asked a yes/no question, you're expected to answer with: Yes or No (everything after that is elucidation or elaboration. Meaning; answers to How). "Because" answers are to Why questions. You offer them when you're asked why yes or why no. If you can't answer with yes or no say so and proceed with your answer which is neither yes or no. Quoting isn't only copy/pasting. It's used to serve a more usefful purpose. In this instance, i quote what answer my questions, what i need to investigate/confirm, to which i have a comment, or to respond to what is in the quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The miracle does exist and the Ejtihaad is for explaining it or refering to it or studying it or proving it.

Explanations change. Miracle doesn't.

Refering, studying, and proving requires establishing it is a miracle.

Establishing it's a miracle requires knowing: How and why it's a miracle.

Now: How and why the Quran is a miracle?

I already said that you are like somoene who is jumping to conclusion and saying that it's not going to work. read "You're like" !! I didn't specify you by this but you might be like this in one way or another as I see.

If as you see i'm "like somoene who is jumping to conclusion and saying that it's not going to work", specify how.

If you can't specify how, you probably don't understand.

If you don't understand, ask.

If you don't ask, anything you "see" about me is jumping to conclusions.

Jumping to conclusions is what you see me to be because you don't ask me about what you don't understand.

I didn't say that the Quranic model is fact/truth/right even him himself does not say that. he is pointing to a very good point from his understanding to the cosmoslogical model and he has some good knowledge in that field, so his ideas must be taken seriously and you must debate with him by science not by criticizing him because of his religion.

Using the word "the" instead of "a" in the post's title says:

1. The Quran presents a cosmological model.

2. The poster's presentation is the model presented in the Quran.

This is claiming the prize; i.e. saying this model is the model the sayer (=Allah) says it is, and since the poster believes the model of the Quran is the right model, this is claiming the cosmological model. Now that would be deducing science from the Quran. But first, we must prove the Quran (premises) presents a cosmological model.

Edited by goodconversations
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was not an example of deduction. Everything you said in favor of your argument (that it was indeed deduction) suggests either he was "motivated" or "inspired" by those verses. I'm asking you now to show me how he deduced Algebra (which is applicable in many areas) from the verses of inheritence (applicable specifically in one area).

It was deduction: as I said before it was an Islamic urge to calculate all the people who they have the right of a legal inheritance:

These are the verses:

"Allah commands you regarding your children. For the male a share equivalent to that of two females. " [Quran 4:11]

"If (there are) women (daughters) more than two, then for them two thirds of the inheritance; and if there is only one then it is half." [Quran 4:11]

"And for his parents for each of them there is one-sixth of the inheritance if he has a child, but if he does not have a child and the parents are the heirs then for the mother one-third." [Quran 4:11]

"… but if he has brothers (or sisters) then for the mother one-sixth" [Quran 4:11]

"And for you there is one-half of what your wives leave behind if there is no child, but if they leave a child then for you there is one-fourth of what they leave behind; … " [Quran 4:12]

"And for them one-fourth of what you leave behind if you did not have a child, but if you have a child then for them one-eighth of what you leave behind; …" [Quran 4:12]

"And if a kalala man or woman (one who has neither ascendants nor descendants) is inherited from, and he (or she) has a (uterine) brother or (uterine) sister then for each of them (there is) one-sixth. But if they (uterine brothers and sisters) are more than that then they are sharers in one-third (equally)." [Quran 4:12]

But there was other people that lies under these verses and many have been not sure about their sum of inheritance and there were many problems for other persons from the same blood from different side (the fraternity from mother blood) and there must be someone who can arrange this and calculate the sum for everyone without any abuse.

I specifically said:

"[the meaning of words depends on the rest of the line] Not exclusively. It may also depend on related verses including those in other places of the Quran. For example, after science found that the earth was not flat, other verses in the Quran were re-interpreted in favor of the new finding."

Not entirely correct, it may depend on related words in other verses as an explanation of the word in the discussed verse: for example: the word “Bahrayn=two beaches”: there is a place in a verse that came this word but with a different meaning and the scholars studied the other ways of the word in other verses and they got only one word with two or three meaning that are already in common.

I believe it was said that the verses of the Quran explain each other?

You’re right, and that comes to the conclusion that if Mihad has any relation of any other word in other verses that explain it otherwise??

Are you saying these two verses are not used in favor of saying the Quran stated the earth is oval 14 centuries ago?!

I don’t know, you tell me.

You took the bate (sorry was just paying you back).

The earth shape is not oval; it's best described as oblate spheroid, or oblate ellipsoid.

I think all of these are a common pattern of a sphere “not perfectly spherical, oval, not perfectly oval, it is an oblate ellipsoid) For all practical names, the Earth is a sphere.

The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to ancient Greek philosophy from around the 6th century BC, but remained a matter of philosophical speculation until the 3rd century BC when Hellenistic astronomy established the spherical shape of the earth as a physical given.

Wikipedia. Spherical as opposed to flat.

Yes, I know this information, I was talking about who is the first that makes a map in flat paper and he came to the conclusion that the earth has a spherical shape 5 I suppose this has nothing to do with Greek).

It's also wrong that

Quote

Islamic astronomy inherited the idea of a spherical earth from the Greek astronomical tradition

Everyone claims that The Islamic scientists inherited their ideas from Greek, this is not true, some of them have corrected many misunderstandings in many fields and some of them have found solution for many dilemma in Greek understandings and by the way the only truth is that Greek have inherited their knowledge from the Sommariens and Egyptians civilisations and other civilisation were in the middle east and the Mediterranean.

And if you want a biased book: Go read the book of Sigrid Hunke.

No. Still perplexed by your argumennt. Care to give examples?

I don’t know, I can give you many examples, but you are going to stay perplexed because of the language barrier. I’ve gave you an example in the same post of “bayhrayn=two beaches”

"gives the word more than what it must take and more that it has to take" may occur when making wrong selections of meanings. Each word in the sentence has several meanings. These meanings of each individual word may be similar or unsimilar to each other. Selecting/choosing one wrong meaning of one word will result in having a wrong understanding of the sentence. "Wrong meaning" isn't the same as baseless meaning which can't be found in the language of the sentence. For example, consider this sentence:

All men are equal !!! I didn’t find any relation between this example and what I’m trying to explain. If you did find it fine but Arabic does not work like that.

Here we are speaking about a specific word that can hold meanings in different style in a sentence. This has nothing to do with your example.

What's the difference between a wrong meaning and a baseless meaning? A wrong meaning is determined by being refuted/negated by one or more of the factors above or other factors. A baseless meaning is determined by only one factor: it's non-existence in the language of the sentence.

I didn’t understand your point of view here!!! mine are not wrong neither are baseless .

When you're asked a yes/no question, you're expected to answer with: Yes or No (everything after that is elucidation or elaboration. Meaning; answers to How). "Because" answers are to Why questions. You offer them when you're asked why yes or why no. If you can't answer with yes or no say so and proceed with your answer which is neither yes or no. Quoting isn't only copy/pasting. It's used to serve a more usefful purpose. In this instance, i quote what answer my questions, what i need to investigate/confirm, to which i have a comment, or to respond to what is in the quote.

I stick to my guns and I demand to pick up all the post. Or I’ll not respond to you again.

Edited by TheLionsHunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Explanations change. Miracle doesn't.

Refering, studying, and proving requires establishing it is a miracle.

Establishing it's a miracle requires knowing: How and why it's a miracle.

Now: How and why the Quran is a miracle?

Quran is a miracle itself, for many reasons :

its eloquency, it's unique use of the language, it's perfect meaning, it's different style of reciting. Even the best in the language at that time have remained astonished of the power of the words and their influences from a man from them who wasn't a poet neither a very good orator in arabic contests.

Even the Creator challenges many of them just make 10 verses like the verses in the Quran.

If as you see i'm "like somoene who is jumping to conclusion and saying that it's not going to work", specify how.

If you can't specify how, you probably don't understand.

If you don't understand, ask.

If you don't ask, anything you "see" about me is jumping to conclusions.

Jumping to conclusions is what you see me to be because you don't ask me about what you don't understand.

You know why I said you are jumping to conclusion, because you have spoke about arabic language without any refrence like you were a teacher of classical arabic.

Using the word "the" instead of "a" in the post's title says:

1. The Quran presents a cosmological model.

2. The poster's presentation is the model presented in the Quran.

This is claiming the prize; i.e. saying this model is the model the sayer (=Allah) says it is, and since the poster believes the model of the Quran is the right model, this is claiming the cosmological model. Now that would be deducing science from the Quran. But first, we must prove the Quran (premises) presents a cosmological model.

1. It might present a cosmological model, he is using the letters and numbers to identify this with scientific research.

2. No, You are wrong, the poster's presentation is an explanation of many signs through letters and statement that can lead from someone's perspective to an understanding.

It does not believe that he is right, it does only explain his research and he is doing it well, do you .? I don't think so

Yes, he might get the prize, he is doing a good work. prove otherwise I'm all ears. You need first to understand his concept to reply as I see you don't

Edited by TheLionsHunter
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, TheLionsHunter, this in not productive to me, because generally:

1. You failed to show me what was wrong with my initial comment (the one that got you replying to it).

2. You failed to show me how it was wrong.

3. You're inaccurate with what you actually want to say.

4. You don't call things with their proper names.

5. You're confused about the terms you argue about.

6. You generate new problems/issues and you fail to address them in a way in favor of your argument or that refutes my argument.

7. You project your perceptions on me then ask me to address them.

8. Your way out is the language barrier.

9. You use false information.

10. Your arguments are emotional not rational.

We've reached a point where it has become a vicious circle. A typical end to arguing with Muslims, from my experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, TheLionsHunter, this in not productive to me, because generally:

1. You failed to show me what was wrong with my initial comment (the one that got you replying to it).

2. You failed to show me how it was wrong.

3. You're inaccurate with what you actually want to say.

4. You don't call things with their proper names.

5. You're confused about the terms you argue about.

6. You generate new problems/issues and you fail to address them in a way in favor of your argument or that refutes my argument.

7. You project your perceptions on me then ask me to address them.

8. Your way out is the language barrier.

9. You use false information.

10. Your arguments are emotional not rational.

We've reached a point where it has become a vicious circle. A typical end to arguing with Muslims, from my experience.

Some people lie and they believe their lies, Your 10 headlines are only your way of escaping and they all comments that mean you and only you. And show how your posts were emotional more than what you think and you want just debate for debating not for getting to a conclusion. You want us to be in a vicious circle and I gave you what you want. Your methods are very clear and jump from subject to subject without any references and you failed to argue in my mother language. An advise : You need to study a little bit the religion the language and the history, not just by copying texts from other websites.

The 10 observation are only applied to you because you have failed in being objective, and you tried only to refute the poster's presentation without even reading his concept or even understanding it.

Back to the real Subject, continue al-amiyr and forget any comment out of the subject, I can reply to any comment out of the purpose of the thread.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anSwering StopS verSeS Stop anSwering

I don't get this entire thing.

You are correct StopS, you do not understand this Model. You make no attempt to understand it.

Well, then answer my questions instead of insulting my personality and character.

Please describe the first second, showing the process and the materials used as described in the Koran.

I quote what I wrote on a Madtrix (forum) for Mr StopS - who has become

the chief commander of debate

to combat

The Qur'aan Cosmological Model worldwide.

anSwering StopS verSeS Stop anSwering

I tell you what I will do. I will give you The Qur'aan Cosmological Model Infinite Time Duration Equation just before the first second of our Universe where Einsteins General Theory of Relativity breaks down. See if you can understand it. Not 4 or five sentences but a few letters that can be written in seconds. In your accepted cosmology, how would you define this state?

0

l

l

l

\/

QCMR2=T3R1.png

These are not just dead symbols. They are alive and filled with meaning. They are linked to all other branches of knowledge where they provide further descriptions of the reality. I presented them here at an earlier stage, reluctantly, because of Mr StopS insistence that I do not answer his questions when I have already made clear from the very beginning that I was setting out all the information as I completed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have completed it, can you finally give us a demonstration of this mathematical equation? Or is it still just a bunch of letters strung together?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This mumbo-jumbo or voodoo which is required to explain "just before the first second of our Universe" bwuahahaha

I wish he would explain exactly why he thinks "Einsteins General Theory of Relativity breaks down" without any copy/paste or this Harry Potter invocation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting post!! good work. i tried to do this a while back, all the conventional religious muslims started flaming the thread and it was blocked. average muslims are their own enemies. they are afraid to "think". i will read through this and then post!! lots of informative points!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm supposed to be a Muslim, but I admit I haven't been praying or doing my religious duties.

If you want to come out at me with guns blazing, then so be it.

I haven't felt at peace with myself or the religion when I was practicing it.

This life has been nothing but one big headache for me.

Go ahead and accuse me of whatever, but I know I tried.

I didn't feel like myself with the religion, so there was no point fooling myself.

God should understand.

If not, is there any real love there?

My apologies if this has little relation with the OP.

Just couldn't read this without getting that off my mind.

...

good for you. well that is because there is no "worshipping" of Allah in the Quran, that is the hadith culture, which borrows from other religions. Allah is Conscious Energy. "Namaaz" Which the ignorance masses claim is Salat was actually borrowed from Iran and is a remnant of the Zoroastrian history in the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just find it rather interesting that the purported creator of the universe could not dictate the processes of the universe's creation in explicit detail, but instead mislead Muhammad in saying that the earth had been compacted with the stars and heavens when absolutely nothing existed... not even stars, nor the earth... nothing. It just was just a very compacted space. In fact, Allah should be ashamed of himself for not explaining it properly, as it is very misleading.

Secondly, asunder does not mean to "explode"; it means to "break apart", not necessarily indicating an explosion. Though, like all verses, I suppose you can dissect and analyze any part that you wish, and attach any meaning that you wish to the definitions.

it was explained right, rather not explained he understood it right as the knowledge was passed to his consciousness, his people at the time did as well. it is only 150-200 yrs later we see a corruption of the understanding of the Quran. also it wasnt just Muhammed. Yeshua had this knowledge, Kishna ,etc ,etc ,etc . lol... people, ignorance and degradation of the ideas and here we are. a technologically advanced society yet missing understanding and wisdom of the UNIVERSE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was explained right, rather not explained he understood it right as the knowledge was passed to his consciousness, his people at the time did as well. it is only 150-200 yrs later we see a corruption of the understanding of the Quran. also it wasnt just Muhammed. Yeshua had this knowledge, Kishna ,etc ,etc ,etc . lol... people, ignorance and degradation of the ideas and here we are. a technologically advanced society yet missing understanding and wisdom of the UNIVERSE.

Isn't that a convenient excuse, they had the knowledge but we corrupted it. Ofcourse everything you just said is unsubstantiated nonsense, and what better place to post it than a topic dedicated to ignorance of mathematics.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was explained right, rather not explained he understood it right as the knowledge was passed to his consciousness, his people at the time did as well.

Understood it or accepted it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.