Meteors chase things?
-
Well, according to Ibn Kathir and the hadiths, it is the angels that throw these things, not the angels themselves. Boy, you're really trying anything that you can possibly imagine.
Again, there is no priesthood in Islam. They definitely can refer to the angels.
-
I never even raised the point of active or passive. You did. I'm just answering it.
This is exactly why the Quran has no errors in it. Because it's followers are so dogmatically brainwashed, that no matter what is shown to them, they simply are not capable of accepting it. vBut it's funny that when Muslims look at other religious scriptures, suddenly they have a decent ability for objective thought and analysis. Isn't that interesting? Why yes it is.
Please link it and show me it's electrical charge.
jinn means to conceal or to hide which refers to their ability to make themselves invisible if they so desire. The word has absolutely nothing to do with smokeless flame, although I accept the smokeless flame description because it's just as pointless to argue about as an invisible being. But my point is, where did you get the electrical charge notion about the jinn and meteorites. You still haven't told me that yet.
Well, OK, so a little change in direction here, eh? If one angle doesn't work, try another. In fact, keep trying any angle you can think of, as the truth doesn't really matter, answering the question with anything you can think of to make it go away is what matters. So if NOW, the story is that it doeswn't refer to meteroites, then what else can we see in the sky that is a bright flame and appears to fly across the sky as if it is pursuing something or chasing something? I'm open to suggests (if they're good)
Why don't you just post the scientific article? No need for hints or clues as you are wasting time.
Actually, while you're rolling on the floor, you may want to realize that most shooting stars are made up of particles as small as a pebble or even smaller. So what's so funny? Go do the research before you laugh.
Actually, you stated
That's not what my silly POV is, that's what the word pursue or follow means. Nice try.
Which automatically raises the issue of activeness or passiveness. Here, you are stating that follow or pursue denotes activeness. "Pursue" denotes activeness, "follow" doesn't.
This is exactly why the Quran has no errors in it. Because it's followers are so dogmatically brainwashed, that no matter what is shown to them, they simply are not capable of accepting it. vBut it's funny that when Muslims look at other religious scriptures, suddenly they have a decent ability for objective thought and analysis. Isn't that interesting? Why yes it is.
Too bad I'm not "Muslims" or "it's followers are so dogmatically brain...". I don't look at any other book except the Quran, at least for now. As for "objective thought and analysis", you must be a "Muslim" because that is lacking significantly on your part. That one sentence doesn't allow you to cop out of answering the simple questions asked earlier.
Please link it and show me it's electrical charge.
LOL. http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_(physics)
jinn means to conceal or to hide which refers to their ability to make themselves invisible if they so desire. The word has absolutely nothing to do with smokeless flame, although I accept the smokeless flame description because it's just as pointless to argue about as an invisible being. But my point is, where did you get the electrical charge notion about the jinn and meteorites. You still haven't told me that yet.
As I said, it is a simple possibility and nothing more, within the scope of this thread. As for your definition of jinn, can you give a tangible entity or is it just conceptual?
Well, OK, so a little change in direction here, eh? If one angle doesn't work, try another. In fact, keep trying any angle you can think of, as the truth doesn't really matter, answering the question with anything you can think of to make it go away is what matters. So if NOW, the story is that it doeswn't refer to meteroites, then what else can we see in the sky that is a bright flame and appears to fly across the sky as if it is pursuing something or chasing something? I'm open to suggests (if they're good)
We are not talking about the "sky", we are talking about "samawat". Pay attention. As I said, it can refer to plasma, which is very common in the lower "samawat" decked with planets - http//plasmascience.net/tpu/plasma_space.html.
Regardless, the original Arabic DOES NOT REFER SPECIFICALLY TO METEORS, period. This is something you cannot deny, and something you skirted around.
Why don't you just post the scientific article? No need for hints or clues as you are wasting time.
It is forbidden that you think rotfl. Regardless, see above.
Actually, while you're rolling on the floor, you may want to realize that most shooting stars are made up of particles as small as a pebble or even smaller. So what's so funny? Go do the research before you laugh.
I was laughing at your laughable definition of "meteorite". Even then, as the Arabic of the verse goes, this is an unrelated diversion.
Well, according to Ibn Kathir and the hadiths, it is the angels that throw these things, not the angels themselves. Boy, you're really trying anything that you can possibly imagine.
rotfl
-
Again, there is no priesthood in Islam. They definitely can refer to the angels.
Right on the first, wrong on the second. Keep looking.
-
Right on the first, wrong on the second. Keep looking.
I will, thanks for the advice.
-
Actually, you stated
Which automatically raises the issue of activeness or passiveness. Here, you are stating that follow or pursue denotes activeness. "Pursue" denotes activeness, "follow" doesn't.
Follow denotes activeness as well. Would you like me to show you where Ibn Kathir says that Angels throw these things? Would that help clear it up for you? Isn't that a more respected interpretor for the meanings of the Quran than you are?
Too bad I'm not "Muslims" or "it's followers are so dogmatically brain...". I don't look at any other book except the Quran, at least for now.
Which is a sign of subjective, self fulfilling brainwashing
As for "objective thought and analysis", you must be a "Muslim" because that is lacking significantly on your part. That one sentence doesn't allow you to cop out of answering the simple questions asked earlier.
Which exact question did I miss? Be specific.
LOL. http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_(physics)
Well, it says that plasmas can be lightning and a bunch of other stuff. So I'm not so sure how much this qualifies as smokeless flame. Anyway, so the jinn are made of plasma? So how does a flame chase away or hurt or burn plasma? Boy, you're really digging yourself deep.
As I said, it is a simple possibility and nothing more, within the scope of this thread. As for your definition of jinn, can you give a tangible entity or is it just conceptual?
Either way, the jinn has nothing to do with na clear error about meterorites. THAT's the issue, not the jinn. But you keep wanting to make it about the jinn as a diversion.
We are not talking about the "sky", we are talking about "samawat".
I've already had Muslims correct me by saying that samawat does not refer to the lowest heaven, but rather to the sky. so you disagree with them.
Pay attention. As I said, it can refer to plasma, which is very common in the lower "samawat" decked with planets - http//plasmascience.net/tpu/plasma_space.html.
Oh, so the jinn are plasma in the lower samawat? So what are they when they are hanging out in graveyards and garbage dumps eating bones? This is really getting very far out. My how your imagination is working overtime to solve this problem.
Regardless, the original Arabic DOES NOT REFER SPECIFICALLY TO METEORS, period. This is something you cannot deny, and something you skirted around.
Then what is in the sky, that is bright to see, that appears to chase things or fly across the sky? I'm open to any good alternatives, as long as it doesn't have holes in it. interpreting those verses as speaking as meteorites has no holes in it.
I was laughing at your laughable definition of "meteorite". Even then, as the Arabic of the verse goes, this is an unrelated diversion.
No no no. I was laughing at your incorrect notion of comets. Don't try to hide it, it won't work. My definition of meteorites is perfectly accurate and i can substantiate it any time you please. Here.
http//starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question12.html
What's the problem?
-
My understanding now of those verses is that meteorites keep jinns around the earth.
-
Follow denotes activeness as well. Would you like me to show you where Ibn Kathir says that Angels throw these things? Would that help clear it up for you? Isn't that a more respected interpretor for the meanings of the Quran than you are?
Which is a sign of subjective, self fulfilling brainwashing
Which exact question did I miss? Be specific.
Either way, the jinn has nothing to do with na clear error about meterorites. THAT's the issue, not the jinn. But you keep wanting to make it about the jinn as a diversion.
I've already had Muslims correct me by saying that samawat does not refer to the lowest heaven, but rather to the sky. so you disagree with them.
Oh, so the jinn are plasma in the lower samawat? So what are they when they are hanging out in graveyards and garbage dumps eating bones? This is really getting very far out. My how your imagination is working overtime to solve this problem.
Then what is in the sky, that is bright to see, that appears to chase things or fly across the sky? I'm open to any good alternatives, as long as it doesn't have holes in it. interpreting those verses as speaking as meteorites has no holes in it.
No no no. I was laughing at your incorrect notion of comets. Don't try to hide it, it won't work. My definition of meteorites is perfectly accurate and i can substantiate it any time you please. Here.
http//starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question12.html
What's the problem?
Follow does not denote activeness. For instance, I follow the laws of physics. This is passive. We follow the laws of physics, willingly or unwillingly.
As for Ibn Kathir, LOL. rotfl
Appeal to authority, in any case.
Which is a sign of subjective, self fulfilling brainwashing
Not at all. Unlike you, I am at peace with Christians and Jews and whoever else (aside from, maybe, Scientology) and I genuinely don't care for their books when I have this book I believe to be the word of God stating it encompasses, explains and supersedes those books. As the Quran says, to them their religion, to me, mine. The only things I care for are my self-study of the Quran and concepts of God, these two being heavily intertwined.
Which exact question did I miss? Be specific.
Mostly a reference to the other thread where you failed to bring a reference for "angels". In this thread, you failed to bring a tangible definition of "jinn" and conceded to the obvious intangible/conceptual meaning.
Well, it says that plasmas can be lightning and a bunch of other stuff. So I'm not so sure how much this qualifies as smokeless flame. Anyway, so the jinn are made of plasma? So how does a flame chase away or hurt or burn plasma? Boy, you're really digging yourself deep.
You are digging yourself ever so slightly deeper than my hole
Very simply, if the "jinn" (notice the quotation marks) has one uniform electrical charge, as demonstrated by beloved Roy C. Sullivan, 7 times in his life, and if the fire in space has an opposing charge, the flame will "chase" or "hurt" or whatever else. How does a solid chase away or hurt or burn another solid? Or a gas to a gas? Or a liquid to a liquid? Use your sense.
I've already had Muslims correct me by saying that samawat does not refer to the lowest heaven, but rather to the sky. so you disagree with them.
Thank you for pointing that out. As for "lowest heaven" or "sky", I don't care what it means in English's restricted meanings, as far as I'm concerned, we are dealing with the "lowest samawat".
So what are they when they are hanging out in graveyards and garbage dumps eating bones? This is really getting very far out. My how your imagination is working overtime to solve this problem.
You have slight issues that can be better solved with a psychiatrist than on Free-Minds.
Then what is in the sky, that is bright to see, that appears to chase things or fly across the sky? I'm open to any good alternatives, as long as it doesn't have holes in it. interpreting those verses as speaking as meteorites has no holes in it.
Correction, the lowest samawat which is decked with planets, that is distinct, and that follows the unseen.
No no no. I was laughing at your incorrect notion of comets. Don't try to hide it, it won't work. My definition of meteorites is perfectly accurate and i can substantiate it any time you please. Here.
We are not talking about comets, but meteors. I already stated comets are made from dust and gas.
Here's one definition
A small body drifting through space. If a meteoroid is pulled into a planet's or moons gravitational field, it is called a meteor. if the meteor survives a trip through the atmosphere and lands, it is called a meteorite. If meteorites are not burned up in the process of entering an atmosphere (or if there is no atmosphere), they may strike the surface and if large enough create a craters.
Another here, http//www.space.com/spacewatch/meteor_forecast.html that states it can be smaller than an asteroid and larger than a few atoms.
As far as I'm concerned, the Arabic wording, which you conveniently sidestep each time it is mentioned, is nowhere restricted to mean "meteor" and that definition is extracted from your erroneous understanding as seen above.
-
My understanding now of those verses is that meteorites keep jinns around the earth.
Oh, NOW you have a NEW understanding of the verses. Sure, try anything. Anything that you can pull out of your pocket. Who knows, if you keep arbitrarily trying different things, one of them just might work, eh?
Actually, they don't keep them around the earth, they chase only the jinn who by stealth manage to actually grab a hearing from heaven, and not the ones who don't make it to the lowest heaven or don't grab a hearing. So this doesn't work as well. But, I know you probably have about at least 10 more angles you'll try. Doesn't it bother you to have to keep on inventing stories to cover for this?.
-
Actually, they don't keep them around the earth, they chase only the jinn who by stealth manage to actually grab a hearing from heaven, and not the ones who don't make it to the lowest heaven or don't grab a hearing.
They do not have to go near heaven to grab a hearing.
-
What? Oh yeah, they go to the sky, right? Either way, doesn't change the point. Meteorites only chase the ones who manage to snatch a hearing, and that was my point about your error.
No, they do not go to the sky. They try to get to the sky but the presence of meteorites prevents them.
-
What? Oh yeah, they go to the sky, right? Either way, doesn't change the point. Meteorites only chase the ones who manage to snatch a hearing, and that was my point about your error.
Ah... Have you thought that the process of stealing a hearing could involve the entity in question being ionised and hence, causing the two to attract? Remember, the "meteor" which can be a normal flame, if you wish, does not have to change its charge, a change in charge on the "jinn" can also cause them to attract.
So, if that is the case, it simply tends more towards my understanding, which may or may not be correct.
-
Ah... Have you thought that the process of stealing a hearing could involve the entity in question being ionised and hence, causing the two to attract?Remember, the "meteor" which can be a normal flame, if you wish, does not have to change its charge, a change in charge on the "jinn" can also cause them to attract.
Didn't I already ask you if plasma eats bones and hangs around in graveyards? Didn't I already ask you how a flame can hurt plasma? This is getting as crazy as your imagination wants to make it.
So, if that is the case, it simply tends more towards my understanding, which may or may not be correct.
;D It's amazing how far the human mind will go if it thinks it's treasured notions are being threatened.
-
It's amazing how far the human mind will go if it thinks it's treasured notions are being threatened.
You are not threatening here really because you are debating the undebateable (Invisible jinns). We want to reason with your awkward thinking.
-
Didn't I already ask you if plasma eats bones and hangs around in graveyards? Didn't I already ask you how a flame can hurt plasma? This is getting as crazy as your imagination wants to make it.
;D It's amazing how far the human mind will go if it thinks it's treasured notions are being threatened.
How does a solid hurt a solid, a liquid with a liquid, gas with a gas? Chemical reaction...
It's amazing how far the human mind will go if it thinks it's treasured notions are being threatened.
Correct, you even attempted to restrict the meaning of "tautology" to fit in with your preconceptions. Funny, eh? And still, not a single Arabic reference from you, which would have put the supposed discrepancy in Quran to rest...
-
How does a solid hurt a solid, a liquid with a liquid, gas with a gas? Chemical reaction...
What is the chemical reaction between plasma and fire? Does one destroy the other?
Correct, you even attempted to restrict the meaning of "tautology" to fit in with your preconceptions.
Didn't I quote from what YOU linked? Why yes I did.
Funny, eh? And still, not a single Arabic reference from you, which would have put the supposed discrepancy in Quran to rest...
How about some Arabic and some Ibn Kathir? Would that do? By now, you can tell that I know where to find this, but I'm not going to bother if you are merely in stonewall mode, because you would merely find yet another excuse to not accept it. And again, plasma eats bones? Come on.
-
What is the chemical reaction between plasma and fire?
What is the chemical reaction between solid and nickel?
Didn't I quote from what YOU linked? Why yes I did.
Your point? You chose the most restrictive definition, when the broadest definition applied.
How about some Arabic and some Ibn Kathir? Would that do? By now, you can tell that I know where to find this, but I'm not going to bother if you are merely in stonewall mode, because you would merely find yet another excuse to not accept it. And again, plasma eats bones? Come on.
I have no idea about "plasma eats bones" and I don't care about Ibn Kathir, I just want to see Arabic references for "angels".
-
What is the chemical reaction between solid and nickel?
I don't know and i don't care. Why don't you simply answer the question? What is the chemical reaction between plasma and flame?
I have no idea about "plasma eats bones" and I don't care about Ibn Kathir, I just want to see Arabic references for "angels".
You didn't ask for that. Maybe you asked for that in another thread?
-
I don't know and i don't care. Why don't you simply answer the question? What is the chemical reaction between plasma and flame?
You didn't ask for that. Maybe you asked for that in another thread?
What is the chemical reaction between plasma and flame?
I don't know and i don't care. A fire, is a form of plasma, which is why I asked you those. Again, chemical reactions. Depends on the smokeless fire and the space plasma.
You didn't ask for that. Maybe you asked for that in another thread?
Yes. The Quran cannot be taken piece by piece, because themes recur in it. One theme is "angels", but I wish to know where "angels" are supposedly mentioned in the Quran.