Contradictions and inconsistencies in the quran?
-
I agree that there are some who are rude in here. I know you are mostly referring to mquran and AhmedBagat here. I totally agree that some in here use methods that arent altogether effective and have tones that should be eschewed. For that, and for them, I apologize. Personally though, I do not think mquran is rude at all. I find him to be simply direct and a no-nonsense intellectual. I can relate to his frustration with those who, like I said above, like to play by different rules. Note I am not saying I don't accept different views or don't like discussing different views; far from it. What I don't like is someone who simply plays by different rules. We can have different understandings/beliefs/philosophies but we must approach a debate in an objective and logical way. Claim-Response-Counterresponse, etc. After all, this is why we are here.
I found the above statement is nothing but crap to be honest
so what you are saying that you agree with this enemy of Islam that me and Mquran are rudes then you come and say thet you son't think that Mquran is rude, oh yeh Ahmed is,
look bro i warn you to talk ill about me again, because simply if you do again you have to carry the consequnces of your BS
Salam
Peace Ahmed. The above is exactly what I'm talking about. I have expressed my opinion and I am entitled to that. I value you as a member of this forum. You do have a lot of knowledge of the Qur'an and Arabic and I appreciate that. To be honest though, I think you tend to be abrasive and you engage in debating methods that leave a lot to be desired (this is my opinion). If I talk ill about you again, I "have to carry the consequences of my BS?" What kind of thinly veiled threat is that? Is this how the Qur'an tells us to act?
Sorry, I don't see the world in black and white like you do Ahmed. There are shades of grey. Just because I think you are rude doesn't mean I side with "an enemy of Islam." I am entitled to question enquirer's tone/methods as well as yours. Unlike you, I don't see everyone through the lens of believer/disbeliever. I look at the message and not the messenger.
Finally, even if you have such a huge problem with what I have said, are you really supposed to react that harshly/negatively? resort to threats?
4134 "Not equal are the good and the bad response. You shall resort to the one which is better. Thus, the one who used to be your enemy, may become your best friend."
Peace.
-
Peace Ahmed. The above is exactly what I'm talking about. I have expressed my opinion and I am entitled to that.
Hi and what i said above is exactly what I'm talking about and I'm entitled to defend myself against the pepetrators
I value you as a member of this forum.
accompanied with rudenss?, well thanks but you can keep your opinion about me to yourself
You do have a lot of knowledge of the Qur'an and Arabic and I appreciate that.
oh thanks but again if accompanied by rudness, i don't want this appreciation, i prefer that you ignore me better
To be honest though, I think you tend to be abrasive and you engage in debating methods that leave a lot to be desired (this is my opinion).
as i said many times, i'm here to debate, not to make friends, and sure i'm one hell of a debater, i'm not here to preach the Quran
If I talk ill about you again, I "have to carry the consequences of my BS?" What kind of thinly veiled threat is that? Is this how the Qur'an tells us to act?
Yeh I expected the weak will come and say are you threatening me?, lol this is funny indeed
my battle with the perpetrators will be the free mind battle field i. bloody e., it is not like I will strap a bomb on me and kill the both of us, but what i meant with the consequnces that I will hunt for your fallacies in here and expose it, something i'm not intersted to do really, it is up to you at the end of the day
Sorry, I don't see the world in black and white like you do Ahmed.
wrong guess
i see the world red and yellow not black and white
There are shades of grey.
I didn't see grey in the red and yellow but I saw orange
Just because I think you are rude doesn't mean I side with "an enemy of Islam."
fine and I'm sure that you are full of crap and non sense
I am entitled to question enquirer's tone/methods as well as yours.
but if you insult me then you have to carry the consequences
Unlike you, I don't see everyone through the lens of believer/disbeliever. I look at the message and not the messenger.
LOL, that was funny, thanks for the laugh especially the last bit about the message and messenger, it sounded very funny )
Finally, even if you have such a huge problem with what I have said, are you really supposed to react that harshly/negatively? resort to threats?
LOL, far out bro, are you on drugs or somethin?
it is like you are asking to insult others then asking them to defend themselves the way you want it, haha it seems you are high now
4134 "Not equal are the good and the bad response. You shall resort to the one which is better. Thus, the one who used to be your enemy, may become your best friend."
Peace.
why not implementing this verse yourself instead of calling me rude?
are you a clear cut hypocrite, or just hypocrite?
-
Peace Ahmed
Hopefully this bad blood between us settles and we can one day discuss things in a more fruitful manner. God knows best. Peace.
-
Peace darbari. Those are not contradictions?...ok.....if you want
to explain why these are not contradictions,im happy to listen to your account....I have now explained in detail in my posts why i dont agree with them,as they are inconsistent in the 'modern age' to always take literally,and they dont agree with my morality when taken literally...
And remind me of your explanations that you want me to address,please?This one http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=5550.msg82615#msg82615 ? the only one that I had explained .
-
Peace Ahmed
Hopefully this bad blood between us settles and we can one day discuss things in a more fruitful manner. God knows best. Peace.
Inshaallah
Thank you
-
Enquirer peace mquran. Ok,yes i find hand-chopping harmful in todays society,when jails, rehabilitation,social study etc.. is possible and available.(not that it was totally un-available in the past,necessarily.)
I see. So your criteria for the 'harmfulness' of hand-chopping is relative to what is being done TODAY. Can you please tell me, what is your criteria for your choosing 'jails, rehab, social study' etc ? Can you define a standard by which we can tell which response is most effective?
Yes,i do recognise the 'possibility' of quran being the word of god,i have clarified many times that if interpreted properly,it can be a great source/help in guidance...
Good. That's very open-minded of you
If it is to be regarded as guidance for 'all times',then the interpretations definately have to be updated and cater for the modern context.(with the literalism and previous translations,sometimes sorely lacking,and impractical,inhumane.)
Can you give me an example of this of how
- certain interpretations have worked in the past
- vis-a-vis (1) above, how this update can be made to take place.
Please give an example of 'lacking, impractical and humane' and name the criteria by which you have given your example.
I also dont believe its necessary for our salvation,as the universal laws are available elsewhere..(i know you havent claimed its necessary for salvation,im just clarifying a point.).
Universal laws , by which I understand as the eternal truths governing the being of humankind can be found through empirical observation as well as rational deduction. The problem I'm asserting to yourself and Danish are the limitations of such an epistemology (the parameters by which we accept something as 'information'.
I shall give you an example. During the Hobbesian period of political thought, it was thought that the White Man was superior to the Afro-man. The reason for this is that by observation, the White Man had colonised and enslaved the Black-man. No less than certain American presidents thought that the Afroman was only 3/5'ths human.
Consider this example above to be a hypothetical one for now (to avoid pedantic and distracting conversations about it). What can we deduce from the above
-
The formulation of natural universal law is limited by mankind's capacity to observe, namely the space-time limitation.
-
Mankind has always a tendency to be biased in his observation.
The afro-man could easily say, this is the universal law that the chosen ones of God have to suffer before achieving heavenly bliss. How are we to contradict him?
peace all ps;yes,its good to talk. pps; ive just read your last post...i can appreciate and tone down my tone when adressing peoples sensitive beliefs..you are right...i suggest you can do the same...
Suggestion accepted. I also suggest you concentrate on substantiation. Sorry if you take this offensively but it has to be said Sir, you have exhibited a lack of grounding in Quranic concepts. I say this without any malice. This in itself is not a bad thing. We can always learn when we don't know. It's when we think we know but we really don't, that's where the problems occur.
I am a human being like yourself. I have to consider my existential reality as a human being just like yourself when I adopt an ideology. I chose al-quraan not because it was my starting position (I am from a 'muslim' background) but because its concepts give the potential for me to elevate myself as a human being. If you believe this, then we have a basis for a productive discussion.
-
Elena I think that is impossible. How to reject what has been found true?
Do you mean 'ignore'?I don't mean 'ignore', no. I mean 'rejections' in the sense of 'concealment' (literally kufr). You recognise something is al-haqq (truth in the ultimate level) but choose to conceal it from your life.
-
Hello All
Let?s look at this alleged contradiction ?From memory? regarding Ad people and their prophet Hud
"Truly I fear for you the Penalty of a Great Day."
(135)
6- And the 'Ad, they were destroyed by a furious Wind, exceedingly violent;
7- He made it rage against them seven nights and eight days in succession so that thou couldst see the (whole) people lying prostrate in its (path), as they had been roots of hollow palm-trees tumbled down!
(6)
(7)Due to the fact that it was left for the Muslims on this web site to work out how it is a contradiction, I have to be fair, I have to try to work it out as if I?m smart then as if I?m dumb, now let me see how it is a contradiction under both possibilities
Possibility # 1 I?m smart
Hmmmmmm?..
?.
?.Well I see no contradiction whatsoever
Possibility # 2 I?m dumb
YES, THERE IS A CLEAR CUT CONTRADITION
26135 tells us that the punishment is one day
697 tells us that the punishment lasted 8 days and 7 nights
Ahmed says to himself
Excuse mister Dumb, I need to ask you the following question first
Why you are comparing Eggs with Potatoes?,
Allah is telling us in 26135 how prophet Hud warned his people, Prophet Hud told them , i.e. ? Truly I fear for you the Penalty of a Great Day.?, this can never mean how long that punishment will last, all he told them that he fears for them the Penalty of a Great Day, he never said how long the punishment is and surely the statement is open for any period that this punishment mentioned will last, as well the statement is open to highly consider that Hud was warning them about the Judgment Day, in fact the Judgment Day was called exactly as such ?Yawm Azeem? in the Quran, here is an example
Say "I would, if I disobeyed my Lord, indeed have fear of the penalty of a Great Day. "
(15)
-> See, the J D was called the same by Mohammad, in fact at least 4 times the J D was called as such, therefore we can?t take it conclusively as a day in their life back then, Yawm Azeem can easily mean the J D and still has nothing to do with how long the punishment of that day will last.
In 697, Allah is talking about totally something else, He is telling us how long that punishment lasted on them back then ?seven nights and eight days in succession?
Totally something else, it is like when you book a trip on any day for two weeks long holiday, i. dumb e. it will last 14 days and 13 nights depending on when you will check out, so can you compare the day when your trip starts with how long it will last?, I think you can if you are dumb, because in this case you are comparing Eggs with Potatoes and you are right they both are round and we have the word day in 26135 & 697
Slam dunk
Salam
-
Peace darbari,ab,cavemandoctor and mquran.
Mquran and ab,i will cease 'debating' with you two for my peace,your peace,and the forums peace. I dont feel much is being achieved in the way of 'peace'in our 'dialogues'... I will reply to points i disagree with from you two,but i will not enter into a dialogue...Take it easy.
darbari; i read the link you posted,to be honest you did not clarify to my satisfaction how those literal occurences (eg sticks into snakes,virgin births etc...)
can be verified....If you believe god does these 'miracles' now and then,thats fine...thats your opinion...I just wonder why these 'miracles do not seem to happen anymore?Cavemandoctor; I have tried to answer your first post,i dont feel we have to really 'debate' all the 'subjective' details any more,youre entitled to your opinion,as am i...Im sure we can discuss in future under better and more 'peaceful' circumstances,and without bad feelings...
Peace all. -
darbari; i read the link you posted,to be honest you did not clarify to my satisfaction how those literal occurences (eg sticks into snakes,virgin births etc...)
can be verified....If you believe god does these 'miracles' now and then,thats fine...thats your opinion...I just wonder why these 'miracles do not seem to happen anymore?what i showed u is that the verses are not in contradiction with EACH OTHER . so your claim ABOUT THOSE VERSES has been disproved . do u agree ?
-
Peace darbari...Ok to clarify,the verses seem inconsistent with reality because 'miracles' are unverifiable/unwitnessed by us,and do not occur in our current times... The interpretation of verses that you stated in your post is fine for you..im not disputing that... And yes im not saying every verse you posted is always contradictory with another,nor am i saying that all of the quran is always contradictory. I was not referring to your specific interpretation of 'sunnah' of allah being contradictory,i was referring to a specific intepretation from a 'quran only' scholar.(parveez type.)....My main point has been that some verses when taken literally are inconsistent with other verses.(and reality,common sense,and science.)
If we are to have a decent,peaceful,beneficial dialogue please dont treat this as a ; 'my interpretation is 'correct' type exercise',or as an insulting attack on your beliefs,....i myself can make verses stop contradicting if i interpret them 'symbolically' or use a different translation/linguistic analysis of the arabic words...My point has always been you have to re-interpret and symbolise some verses for todays age otherwise they are contradictory...Hope that clarifies my viewpoint...
peace all. -
peace.
Peace darbari...Ok to clarify,the verses seem inconsistent with reality because 'miracles' are unverifiable/unwitnessed by us,and do not occur in our current times... The interpretation of verses that you stated in your post is fine for you..im not disputing that... And yes im not saying every verse you posted is always contradictory with another,nor am i saying that all of the quran is always contradictory.
So u now agree that those verses do not contradict EACH OTHER ? please be more straightforward .
I was not referring to your specific interpretation of 'sunnah' of allah being contradictory,i was referring to a specific intepretation from a 'quran only' scholar.(parveez type.)....
you never mentioned Pervez before ?! is his interpretation correct ? can u tell us please ?
-
Peace darbari. If you re-read my previous post it contains the answers to your current post...The interpretation from the 'parveez' methodology (also some on this forum share this same understanding too.) was that the phrase 'allahs sunnat' referred to allahs laws never changing,and so this meant that all the virgin births,fire not burning abraham,sticks into snakes,sea parting with a staff,man in belly of whale etc... verses were taken 'metaphorically by this 'methodology' to prevent inconsistencies in understanding the text.
If you want to have a dialogue,then please address some of my questions i have given you in my most recent posts (about why these 'miracles' ,if literal, do not occur today,and can not be proven by science or verified etc..)...I was 'criticised' by many for not answering questions...So i am trying answer your questions...If the courtesy of answering is not re-paid,then i fell there is little point in having a dialogue?...I think thats fair?...
Peace all. -
Mquran and ab,i will cease 'debating' with you two for my peace,your peace,and the forums peace. I dont feel much is being achieved in the way of 'peace'in our 'dialogues'... I will reply to points i disagree with from you two,but i will not enter into a dialogue...Take it easy.
Hehe, I thought as much. Lote-tree, is this the limit of your capacities? You come here with that arrogant 'im too good for this book' demeanor of yours and field questions and when they are answered, you run away. Is this the 'being good' philosophy you were talking about, Lote-tree?
Cease debating? How can you cease what you never began?
Let me remind you of your claims
-
You claimed al-quraan is JUST self-referential. No proof.
-
You claimed al-quraan prescribes 80 lashes punishement for accusation. No proof.
-
You claimed to have read 'nearly' all of the posts of Shabbir, Parwez etc yet you don't even know of a topic which was PERENNIAL in Bazm forum for a long time. I didnt go for the hard questions pal, you trip at the easiest hurdle.
Face facts, you didn't do your research and now when your views are on the verge of being ripped open, you RUN again. There's no other word for it but shameful. Honestly, I expected better from one who has escaped the clutches of religion.
-
-
Peace,
Enquirer, why do you keep claiming you knwo the Quran, and keep making these dumb mistakes
virgin births,fire not burning abraham,sticks into snakes,sea parting with a staff,man in belly of whale etc
Nowhere it is mentioned in the Quran about strike the sea with your stick, nowhere does it mention Jonah ending up in a belly and so on. These are mostly not metaphorical or literal discussions, but what it realy says in Arabic. And the things like the virgin births and so on, we read with distorted glasses left over from the past, and approach it as it was a virgin birth, while the Quran doesn't say anything about it, only that mary was a chaste women, and if you look at how fire is used in the Quran, you can see automaticaly that is used metaphoricaly in almost every verse mentioned, so in this way it is not the discussion how we look at it, but at how the Quran looks at it. And the Arabic and the order of the verses shows those things are not said in the Quran. So this is not metaphorical issue, but a language one...
Peace
-
Enquirer, why do you keep claiming you knwo the Quran, and keep making these dumb mistakes
Arnold, don't expect anything else. This person who screams about God in his heart must be acting on his 'gods' command. His god tells him, lead people on, WASTE THEIR TIME and when they have pandered to your request, let them down. It's like Bush's God but somewhat less malevolent.
If he's still responding to you, Arnold, ask him where al-quraan enjoins interpretation by JUST self-reference. The man rants about 'literal' and 'metaphor' and doesn't even know what al-quraan says about it.
-
.If you want to have a dialogue,then please address some of my questions i have given you in my most recent posts (about why these 'miracles' ,if literal, do not occur today,and can not be proven by science or verified etc..)...I was 'criticised' by many for not answering questions...So i am trying answer your questions...If the courtesy of answering is not re-paid,then i fell there is little point in having a dialogue?...I think thats fair?...
Did the God in your heart tell you to lie, Enquirer? Did you answer to my FIRST response regarding 4/78-79?
-
Peace arnoldayasin. If you wish,you can read my previous posts in this thread...,you will see what my position is,and the points i have made...To be honest i think you are misunderstanding me,and looking at my previous posts might rectify this...
As i have said before the quran properly interpreted can be a great,beneficial book...If you feel that the way you interpret the quran,means that there are no inconsistencies in it,then thats fine by me...as long as you benefit in practical behaviour from the book....
I was looking for other posters also to answer these 'literal' verses,and how they interpret them... if people are too 'sensitive',or feel 'attacked' then i will probably not respond,as i dont feel there is any benefit in such dialogues.
Peace all. -
Salam ahmed bahgat,
- I believe?..blah blah
- I think ??.blah blah
- It seems ?.. blah blah
- Most likely ?.. blah blah
- Possibly ?.. blah blah
- Probably ?. blah blah
What we need is one word bro
Certainly it is ?. Blah blah,
I found the above statement is nothing but crap to be honest
look bro i warn you to talk ill about me again, because simply if you do again you have to carry the consequnces of your BS
My intention is obvious and clear, I don?t need to explain it further, I have almost 2000 posts and in many of these posts I explained my stand clearly
most of your posts are nothing but blah blah blah, full of crab and bs ;D
ps carry own with your blah blah blah .
-
Peace arnoldayasin. If you wish,you can read my previous posts in this thread...,you will see what my position is,and the points i have made...To be honest i think you are misunderstanding me,and looking at my previous posts might rectify this...
Enquirer style
I claim contradiction.
People explain.
I go blank.As i have said before the quran properly interpreted can be a great,beneficial book...If you feel that the way you interpret the quran,means that there are no inconsistencies in it,then thats fine by me...as long as you benefit in practical behaviour from the book....
Define 'properly interpreted'. Is it 'interpreted to suit the delusions of the great Enquirer guy'. 'Interpreted' here means 'convoluted', really. The strange thing is, Enquirer cannot even tell us what he means by 'bad, good, old, outdated' etc. What he can do is wax lyrical and tell us how above all that he is.
I was looking for other posters also to answer these 'literal' verses,and how they interpret them... if people are too 'sensitive',or feel 'attacked' then i will probably not respond,as i dont feel there is any benefit in such dialogues.
Counter-respond to the first one, then answer my questions and I'll be happy to deal with the issue with you.