Meteors chase things?
-
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.
-
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.
Okay, so you bring up chemical reactions without even having any idea what the reactions are between the two. You're just fishing.
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.
Again, aren't you asking for this on another thread? If not, then what the heck do you mean? Angels are all over the quran.
-
Okay, so you bring up chemical reactions without even having any idea what the reactions are between the two. You're just fishing.
Again, aren't you asking for this on another thread? If not, then what the heck do you mean? Angels are all over the quran.
Of course I'm fishing. The purpose is to show there can be a mundane, rational explanation. As for the reactions, I already asked, you are trying to compare chemical reactions between states of matter. If we take the Quran's word, then all living things are made of/from water, so the smokeless fire of jinn must also be derived from that.
Angels are all over the quran.
Evidence please. What is an "angel"? For all intents and purposes, I don't know what an "angel" is. Enlighten me.
-
Of course I'm fishing. The purpose is to show there can be a mundane, rational explanation.
One doesn't "fish" or basically just try anything that they can if one is searching for the truth.
As for the reactions, I already asked, you are trying to compare chemical reactions between states of matter.
Well to be specific, I asked how smokeless flame can be hurt by flame. I asked the question that way because some people put the jinn in another dimension, thereby making them non physical entities altogether. But according to what I've read, the jinn are indeed physical entities that are merely invisible when they wish to be or can be visible and change their shapes
If we take the Quran's word, then all living things are made of/from water, so the smokeless fire of jinn must also be derived from that.
On earth or in the sky?
Evidence please. What is an "angel"? For all intents and purposes, I don't know what an "angel" is. Enlighten me.
Well, they are mentioned in the Quran 85 times, and apparently, Gabriel was an angel. But I'm guessing that you must know the Quran better than me.
-
One doesn't "fish" or basically just try anything that they can if one is searching for the truth.
Well to be specific, I asked how smokeless flame can be hurt by flame. I asked the question that way because some people put the jinn in another dimension, thereby making them non physical entities altogether. But according to what I've read, the jinn are indeed physical entities that are merely invisible when they wish to be or can be visible and change their shapes
On earth or in the sky?
Well, they are mentioned in the Quran 85 times, and apparently, Gabriel was an angel. But I'm guessing that you must know the Quran better than me.
The "fishing" is to test if it is plausible. And it is. There is a rational explanation for everything, and this is the assumption I am testing the Quran on when "fishing". In 3680, does it mean fire literally blew out from the green tree or does it mean the components of fire (oxygen, carbon and friction) originated from the specifically GREEN tree? What gives a tree or any plant its green colour, and what is its relationship with fire?
Well to be specific, I asked how smokeless flame can be hurt by flame. I asked the question that way because some people put the jinn in another dimension, thereby making them non physical entities altogether. But according to what I've read, the jinn are indeed physical entities that are merely invisible when they wish to be or can be visible and change their shapes
If "jinn" are deterministic machines like us, then by disrupting their chemical balance or structure. In the same way that prolonged contact with potassium will hurt, by reacting with our skin, or gas by burning, or by a 2 ton block by crushing, such can plasma interact. If "jinn" are pursued actively or passively by objects in the lower samawat, then that could be rationally explained by them becoming charged in some way, or having a net change in some kind of energy content that interacts with the plasma. I said electric charge because of the nature of plasma as ionised gas, and the nature of jinn as smokeless fire, living in relation to water (though whether the Quran states "jinn" are alive, I have to recheck). The Quran should be used to show the described nature of "jinn", and not any external source, if we are to challenge the Quran. So far, verses in the Quran show "jinn" are alive entities who are hidden away.
Now, on the nature, "iblees" in 3873-76 is shown to not be a "malaika", because all the "malaika" did their "sujood" towards "adam", but there is a comparison - in the words of this "iblees", humans are created from clay (see clayparticles theory) and he was created from fire, and iblees was of the jinn (1850). If these have the same nature, then it can be said that "jinn" are living beings, consisting of water in some form, in the same way as humans - we may originate from clay, but we are not made from clay.
Another thing, when you consider that all living beings are made of water (2445), another plausible explanation has to do with radio waves attacking the "jinn", or some form of EM radiation (See John Kanzius, for instance). There is a rational explanation for everything the Quran gave so far to my understanding in regards to "jinn".
On earth or in the sky?
Just says every living creature.
Well, they are mentioned in the Quran 85 times, and apparently, Gabriel was an angel. But I'm guessing that you must know the Quran better than me.
Quite complex.
-
The "fishing" is to test if it is plausible. And it is.
It is? Have you been reading any of my responses?
There is a rational explanation for everything, and this is the assumption I am testing the Quran on when "fishing".
OK, whatever.
In 3680, does it mean fire literally blew out from the green tree or does it mean the components of fire (oxygen, carbon and friction) originated from the specifically GREEN tree? What gives a tree or any plant its green colour, and what is its relationship with fire?
Chloroform? Or maybe even it's pigment? Why don't you just say it? I'm not responding to a time wasting little game. Why do you do this? you're not being clever in the least, so stop trying so hard and just say it in plain, simple terms.If "jinn" are deterministic machines like us,
Now us and the jinn are deterministic machines? My God, you are all over the map. I'm losing patience with the conversation.
then by disrupting their chemical balance or structure. In the same way that prolonged contact with potassium will hurt, by reacting with our skin, or gas by burning, or by a 2 ton block by crushing, such can plasma interact. If "jinn" are pursued actively or passively by objects in the lower samawat, then that could be rationally explained by them becoming charged in some way, or having a net change in some kind of energy content that interacts with the plasma. I said electric charge because of the nature of plasma as ionised gas, and the nature of jinn as smokeless fire, living in relation to water (though whether the Quran states "jinn" are alive, I have to recheck). The Quran should be used to show the described nature of "jinn", and not any external source, if we are to challenge the Quran. So far, verses in the Quran show "jinn" are alive entities who are hidden away.
This conversation is simply going into outer space. Go right a science fiction novel. By the way, as far as the Jinn being alive, go read sura 72 Al-Jinn, okay? What's you're point?
Now, on the nature, "iblees" in 3873-76 is shown to not be a "malaika", because all the "malaika" did their "sujood" towards "adam", but there is a comparison - in the words of this "iblees", humans are created from clay (see clayparticles theory) and he was created from fire, and iblees was of the jinn (1850). If these have the same nature, then it can be said that "jinn" are living beings, consisting of water in some form, in the same way as humans - we may originate from clay, but we are not made from clay.
So what? What's your point?
Another thing, when you consider that all living beings are made of water (2445), another plausible explanation has to do with radio waves attacking the "jinn", or some form of EM radiation (See John Kanzius, for instance).
Are radio waves bright for us to see as per 1518? What are you on?
There is a rational explanation for everything the Quran gave so far to my understanding in regards to "jinn".
Just says every living creature.
Quite complex.
OMG WTF
-
Check out a mirror sometime
I'm not inventing anything. I'm going with the most obvious, simplest interpretation. And my interpretation works across the board for all verses. There's only one problem with my interpretation, and that is that it puts the Quran at odds with science. But science should be totally irrelevant when interpreting the Quran. One should not "fudge" the Quran to make it work with science. That is inaccurate, and some might even go as far as calling it dishonest.
-
I'm not inventing anything. I'm going with the most obvious, simplest interpretation. And my interpretation works across the board for all verses. There's only one problem with my interpretation, and that is that it puts the Quran at odds with science. But science should be totally irrelevant when interpreting the Quran. One should not "fudge" the Quran to make it work with science. That is inaccurate, and some might even go as far as calling it dishonest.
But who told you that science is 100 % correct
-
But who told you that science is 100 % correct
You've missed the point if you asked a question like that. The point is that Muslims fudge and reinterpret the Quran to make it fit science. It has absolutely nothing to do with wheter science is correct or not.
-
No, they do not go to the sky. They try to get to the sky but the presence of meteorites prevents them.
-
Your point?
The meaning of the verse is that jinn try to get to the sky to snatch a hearing, but the presence of meteorites prevents them from hearing too much.
-
The meaning of the verse is that jinn try to get to the sky to snatch a hearing, but the presence of meteorites prevents them from hearing too much.
Actually, here are the verses
1516 It is We Who have set out the zodiacal signs in the heavens, and made them fair-seeming to (all) beholders;
1517 And (moreover) We have guarded them from every cursed devil
1518 But any that gains a hearing by stealth, is pursued by a flaming fire, bright (to see).
So here, it would seem that the heavens are guarded, but that occasionally, through stealth, one or a few might snatch a hearing, at which point a flame chases them if they do. So what you said isn't entirely accurate.
376 We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars,-
377 (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits,
So far, it seems like the stars guard
37 8 (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side,
379 Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual penalty
3710 Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.
There it is. 3710 says the same thing as 1518. Only the ones who gain a hearing by steal are pursued by a bright flame
-
The word
is wrongly translated as to follow. It means to "guard it of".