Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. The Story of Solomon in Qur'an

The Story of Solomon in Qur'an

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
17 Posts 7 Posters 159 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C Offline
    C Offline
    cosmicdancer
    wrote on last edited by
    #6

    Ok, here is my answer.

    Thanks for posting a textbook example of argumentum ad ignorantiam. In particular see the underline below.

    Argument from ignorance

    The two most common forms of the argument from ignorance, both fallacious, can be reduced to the following form
    -Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen (often opposite) hypothesis is therefore considered likely or proven.
    -Something is currently unexplained, or insufficiently understood or explained, so it is not (or must not be) considered true, and the opposite position is considered likely.

    http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

    And the relevant verse
    A wonderful rebuttal that is as relevant today as it was hundreds of years ago.

    In other words you have no answer.

    Sorry but it is the Qur'an that makes the claim and so the onus is on you to show me the evidence for these claims - otherwise there is no reason to accept them as historical fact - but rather are just myths and legends with no historical basis.

    The total lack of evidence, is not just astonishing - but totally exposes the claims the Qur'an makes. The Qur'an claims that there was a great king called Solomon who had a mighty kingdom "the like of which will never be seen after him". He gained the submission of at least one other Kingdom in Yemen. He had huge - and magical - armies containing men, jinn animals etc... He spent his time building and reviewing his troops and marching - and cannot possibly not have come into conflict with his neighbours Egypt and the Babylonians (we know this area was constantly at war) - yet leave not a single trace!

    Nothing!

    Nor even a single documented mention of it in any of the writings of the time or records of neighbouring kingdoms!

    Surely they would have been amazed by this magical army of Jinn and animals - the wind taking Solomon to where he wants! Talking to ants and birds! Making thrones appear in a blink of an eye all the way from Yemen.

    The only mention of it is... ah yes - the Bible and Qur'an. Hmmm.....

    We have a huge amount of archaeological evidence from the Egyptians and the Babylonians and all the other kingdoms big and small and city states and we have pottery and bricks and jewelry etc... from the period. And the Israeli archeologists have been working night and day to find one scrap of evidence (that many Jews believe will help support their claim to the land).

    But they found nothing!

    You can avoid this question by claiming Argument from ignorance - if you like.

    But you lack of a proper answer is deafening!

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • I Offline
      I Offline
      IronSky
      wrote on last edited by
      #7

      Peace to all,

      What you talking about, they have alot of archeological evidence of Solomons KIngdom, http//astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2010/02/archaeologists-discover-part-of.html

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • C Offline
        C Offline
        cosmicdancer
        wrote on last edited by
        #8

        Peace to all,

        What you talking about, they have alot of archeological evidence of Solomons KIngdom, http//astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2010/02/archaeologists-discover-part-of.html

        "Nothing indisputably of Solomon's reign has been found."
        http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon

        Yet we have clear and unequivocal evidence from other - lesser - civilisations!

        The fact that "Nothing indisputably of Solomon's reign has been found" - when it was a kingdom of such magnitude is at the very least - extremely suspicious - no?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • A Offline
          A Offline
          afridi220
          wrote on last edited by
          #9

          OK, here's a question for you - which I asked above.

          How come there is no trace of Solomon's Kingdom - the like of which will never be granted to anyone after him - and which contained a "lofty palace" and many other buildings and statues and stuff that the Jinn built for him etc...?

          Even though we have archeological evidence of all the "lesser" kingdoms and cultures and peoples of that region of that time?

          How can that be?

          like of which will never be granted to anyone after him ( thet is hidden from you) )

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • Y Offline
            Y Offline
            you_gunna_eat_that
            wrote on last edited by
            #10

            Peace,
            You go from saying there is a total lack of evidence to saying the evidence found is not indisputable. Either way, aalmakto is right; the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. To suffice your evidentialism though, you should check out the work of the historians who believe there is enough evidence to grant that such a kingdom existed. I personally am not concerned either way.
            Peace

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • M Offline
              M Offline
              Mazhar
              wrote on last edited by
              #11

              The total lack of evidence, is not just astonishing - but totally exposes the claims the Qur'an makes. The Qur'an claims that there was a great king called Solomon who had a mighty kingdom "the like of which will never be seen after him"

              http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/038.%20Suad/38.35a.gif
              and You grant me such a rule of kingdom that it may not be possible for a single one after me to acquire it for himself

              http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/038.%20Suad/38.36.gif
              In response We subjected for him the particular breeze
              http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/038.%20Suad/38.36a.gif
              it moved/blew under his command
              http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/038.%20Suad/38.36b.gif
              gently from the direction/place wherever he had found it.

              This is the peculiar feature of his Rule which shall never be acquired by any Ruler in the world. If any country gets control over this particular breeze, the rest of the lands of the world will have no or little grain/grasses crops, since they will keep it directing towards their own lands all the time.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • C Offline
                C Offline
                cosmicdancer
                wrote on last edited by
                #12

                like of which will never be granted to anyone after him ( thet is hidden from you)

                So you are saying it has been hidden away?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • C Offline
                  C Offline
                  cosmicdancer
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #13

                  Peace,
                  You go from saying there is a total lack of evidence to saying the evidence found is not indisputable. Either way, aalmakto is right; the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. To suffice your evidentialism though, you should check out the work of the historians who believe there is enough evidence to grant that such a kingdom existed. I personally am not concerned either way.
                  Peace

                  You are the one who should check out the evidence

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • C Offline
                    C Offline
                    cosmicdancer
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #14

                    http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/038.%20Suad/38.35a.gif
                    and You grant me such a rule of kingdom that it may not be possible for a single one after me to acquire it for himself

                    http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/038.%20Suad/38.36.gif
                    In response We subjected for him the particular breeze
                    http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/038.%20Suad/38.36a.gif
                    it moved/blew under his command
                    http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/038.%20Suad/38.36b.gif
                    gently from the direction/place wherever he had found it.

                    This is the peculiar feature of his Rule which shall never be acquired by any Ruler in the world. If any country gets control over this particular breeze, the rest of the lands of the world will have no or little grain/grasses crops, since they will keep it directing towards their own lands all the time.

                    Not sure what point you are making here.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • A Offline
                      A Offline
                      AlFajr
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #15

                      You are the one who should check out the evidence

                      Why? the evidence doesn't prove or disprove anything.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • M Offline
                        M Offline
                        Mazhar
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #16

                        Not sure what point you are making here.

                        I suggested that instead of making a tune and start dancing presuming it from Qur'aan first read what the Qur'aan said.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • C Offline
                          C Offline
                          cosmicdancer
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #17

                          I suggested that instead of making a tune and start dancing presuming it from Qur'aan first read what the Qur'aan said.

                          Wow, I never thought of that - thanks!

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Users