Contradictions and inconsistencies in the quran?
-
What the heck are Ahmed and Mquran trying to achieve here? O I get it. The ?master-student? vendetta that teaches their own selves ?people who tell OUTRIGHT LIES about al-quraan yet claim to believe in Al-quraan's divine origin.? This crucial statement is going to haunt them forever and thank GOD for exposing it from them.
Danish, you're some kind of a desperado, aren't you? You need to resort to lies about me in order to feel big. When did I say the challenge is to 'another god' ? AB has his view which I disagree to. Why don't you address MY responses? Because you know, they will end up exposing the hollowness of your points. Why don't you call upon the 'essence of nature' (sic) to help you out there, pal? I really feel bad for those who have the misfortune of knowing you in real life.
A 'sura' is a coherent discourse about something. In this case, 2/21-22 has shown what that is, the existence of the human being in the world. His needs and what he needs to do to fulfil them. Of course, when we read in the unscientific way that you do, all we can come up with this is the typical Muhammadan tale of poetry comparison. It's just so pathetic when you think about it.
-
I believe Danish Enquirer and Agentxxx if keep posting against Qur'an deserve no reply. Ahmad Baghat has spend so much of his time explaining in detail the contradictions posted by Agentxxx and he still side with the people who post nonesence against Qur'an. People who believe Qur'an is the not from God will keep disrupting the discussion for the satisfaction of their ego.
-
Leyla is only here to support her majnu at ANY COST. I remember the cat and mouse play some time ago.
That's just wrong and unjustified. -
What the heck are Ahmed and Mquran trying to achieve here? O I get it. The ?master-student? vendetta that teaches their own selves ?people who tell OUTRIGHT LIES about al-quraan yet claim to believe in Al-quraan's divine origin.? This crucial statement is going to haunt them forever and thank GOD for exposing it from them.
Danish, you're some kind of a desperado, aren't you? You need to resort to lies about me in order to feel big. When did I say the challenge is to 'another god' ? AB has his view which I disagree to. Why don't you address MY responses? Because you know, they will end up exposing the hollowness of your points. Why don't you call upon the 'essence of nature' (sic) to help you out there, pal? I really feel bad for those who have the misfortune of knowing you in real life.
A 'sura' is a coherent discourse about something. In this case, 2/21-22 has shown what that is, the existence of the human being in the world. His needs and what he needs to do to fulfil them. Of course, when we read in the unscientific way that you do, all we can come up with this is the typical Muhammadan tale of poetry comparison. It's just so pathetic when you think about it.
Go back and re-read my reply numbers 406, 407 and adhere and reply specially to what 412 is called for. As mentioned earlier, I am not going to remind and spoon feed you repetitiously and certainly I'm not going to respond to you unless 412 is met dilligently. Else keep grunting.
-
Danish, here is my response to your counter-response, after which there has been ZERO response from you. Full quota of rants and raves though. I tell you what, why don't you get a moderator to moderate a debate. Get the moderator to see who actually responds and who's a cowardly loser who refuses to submit his views to scrunity. What do you say to that?
Let me spell it out for you, ok
-
Danish says that 22/51 is a contradiction because as soon as a person tries to produce a sura like it, he will fit into the 22/51 criteria and thus be sentenced to hell.
-
My response to Danish is, please sir, learn to read. 22/51 doesn't talk about producing suras. It talks about striving against the signs of Allah. It describes this act in opposition to the aforementioned 22/50. Danish took it OUT OF CONTEXT in his poor, unscientific attempt to read al-quraan.
-
-
Danish, here is my response to your counter-response, after which there has been ZERO response from you. Full quota of rants and raves though. I tell you what, why don't you get a moderator to moderate a debate. Get the moderator to see who actually responds and who's a cowardly loser who refuses to submit his views to scrunity. What do you say to that?
Let me spell it out for you, ok
-
Danish says that 22/51 is a contradiction because as soon as a person tries to produce a sura like it, he will fit into the 22/51 criteria and thus be sentenced to hell.
-
My response to Danish is, please sir, learn to read. 22/51 doesn't talk about producing suras. It talks about striving against the signs of Allah. It describes this act in opposition to the aforementioned 22/50. Danish took it OUT OF CONTEXT in his poor, unscientific attempt to read al-quraan.
Did you even care to read my last post to you and re-read my reply #412 or do you need eyeglasses or better yet resurrect Aristotle to improve your comprehension level. Your above responses are just WINKS at best, nothing else. Get it? ???
-
-
Did you even care to read my last post to you and re-read my reply #412 or do you need eyeglasses or better yet resurrect Aristotle to improve your comprehension level. Your above responses are just WINKS at best, nothing else. Get it?
I have read them because unlike you, I want to discuss. Sadly, reply 412 doesn't acknowledge the INVALIDITY of your first critique. If you were sincere, you would first admit that your first critique is wrong and wasn't based upon anything but faulty translations. Secondly, you'd also admit that your total lack of Arabic wouldn't be helpful for the 'suralikeit' website.
When are we going to discuss 'essence of nature' ? I have a good laugh everytime I type it. You're good at coining terms but just display hot air when it comes to backing up, huh?
-
Did you even care to read my last post to you and re-read my reply #412 or do you need eyeglasses or better yet resurrect Aristotle to improve your comprehension level. Your above responses are just WINKS at best, nothing else. Get it?
I have read them because unlike you, I want to discuss. Sadly, reply 412 doesn't acknowledge the INVALIDITY of your first critique. If you were sincere, you would first admit that your first critique is wrong and wasn't based upon anything but faulty translations. Secondly, you'd also admit that your total lack of Arabic wouldn't be helpful for the 'suralikeit' website.
When are we going to discuss 'essence of nature' ? I have a good laugh everytime I type it. You're good at coining terms but just display hot air when it comes to backing up, huh?
LOOK WHO'S TALKING!
-
I believe Danish Enquirer and Agentxxx if keep posting against Qur'an deserve no reply. Ahmad Baghat has spend so much of his time explaining in detail the contradictions posted by Agentxxx and he still side with the people who post nonesence against Qur'an. People who believe Qur'an is the not from God will keep disrupting the discussion for the satisfaction of their ego.
Salam,
I don't think these are against the Quran. Though we have the right to critically evaluate the book whether it is from Allah. I believe it is from God because there are no contradictions in it. However, the understanding of the people of the past slighted clouded the meaning of it, especially when it come to translations. I think we need to reinterpret the Quran always, to the situation/circumstances that we are in.
Peace
-
I believe Danish Enquirer and Agentxxx if keep posting against Qur'an deserve no reply.
wtf?!
Ahmad Baghat has spend so much of his time explaining in detail the contradictions posted by Agentxxx and he still side with the people who post nonesence against Qur'an.
That may be how you see it. What i observe is that the "explanation" is mainly ad hoc posting of verses, and when people protest and tell why they disagree, the argumentation provided loops. Or turns into nothing but nitpicking, wich is why i personally chose to step down. It would seem that nothing good comes out of it, other than make come to the point of nonsensical ad hominem posts.
People who believe Qur'an is the not from God will keep disrupting the discussion for the satisfaction of their ego.
you just pulled that one our of your butt didnt you? I dont think people are saying that the book is not divinely inspired as many other great works. But i object to the notion that it should be the word of God 11. Tell me this, why is it that everything has to be coded in a way so you have to spend anormous amounts of time deciphering it, when it ALL comes down to some very simple ethical rules, that people who are aware figure out book or no book anyway.
dont kill, dont steal, dont waste you time on imaginary things, walk in peace etc. How come it always has to be made as cryptical as possible and wrapped into things that makes absolutely no sense, that makes sure to devide people into groups with each their pet truth, so sure of themself and their truth that other people dont deserve an answer to questions e.g.
Why is it that speaking outloud against a view on the Quran is so bad? I have seen nobody argue against the Quran as a message, but that is how it is taken for some reason. Why is it an attack?
peace
Whipping of porn actors? why? what is reasonable about whipping anyone?
-
-
I believe Danish Enquirer and Agentxxx if keep posting against Qur'an deserve no reply.
wtf?!
Ahmad Baghat has spend so much of his time explaining in detail the contradictions posted by Agentxxx and he still side with the people who post nonesence against Qur'an.
That may be how you see it. What i observe is that the "explanation" is mainly ad hoc posting of verses, and when people protest and tell why they disagree, the argumentation provided loops. Or turns into nothing but nitpicking, wich is why i personally chose to step down. It would seem that nothing good comes out of it, other than make come to the point of nonsensical ad hominem posts.
People who believe Qur'an is the not from God will keep disrupting the discussion for the satisfaction of their ego.
you just pulled that one our of your butt didnt you? I dont think people are saying that the book is not divinely inspired as many other great works. But i object to the notion that it should be the word of God 11. Tell me this, why is it that everything has to be coded in a way so you have to spend anormous amounts of time deciphering it, when it ALL comes down to some very simple ethical rules, that people who are aware figure out book or no book anyway.
dont kill, dont steal, dont waste you time on imaginary things, walk in peace etc. How come it always has to be made as cryptical as possible and wrapped into things that makes absolutely no sense, that makes sure to devide people into groups with each their pet truth, so sure of themself and their truth that other people dont deserve an answer to questions e.g.
Why is it that speaking outloud against a view on the Quran is so bad? I have seen nobody argue against the Quran as a message, but that is how it is taken for some reason. Why is it an attack?
peace
Whipping of porn actors? why? what is reasonable about whipping anyone?
;D
-
Magi
You certainly did not understand what I am saying. It will be of no use to respond to your post.
this is so arrogant i can hardly belive it. You are telling me that i dont understand what youre are saying, but upfront decide that im not worth clarifying for. Is this a reoccuring theme that you have found somewhere in the Quran?.
peace
-
;D man you were better person with Noah name. You got it wrong again.
and you are again telling me that im wrong without clarifying. So i take it that arrogance is a trait of people who really understand the Quran, right?
Its funny how people who really understand the Quran, forget the most simple instructions in all their understanding of the Quran. what happened to "when greeted with a greeting, greet better or atleast equally". Is that only for people who are in the right team?
-
Hi Magi
Sorry did not greet you properly. How are you doing my friend? )
Peace
dont worry about it, you proved a point of mine well by not doing it in the context ). Dont worry. Now could you please humble yourself, to tell me why you think im so wrong?
-
Magi/Noah this is so arrogant i can hardly belive it. You are telling me that i dont understand what youre are saying, but upfront decide that im not worth clarifying for. Is this a reoccuring theme that you have found somewhere in the Quran?.
I don't think this is what KGB meant. However, if he did, I do understand his frustration. This forum thanks to a great level of freedom afforded has attracted the wayward stragglers of the net. People who have nothing better to do than to heckle, to troll and to generally belittle the beliefs of others. You might not be one of them, but you do have a similar worldview to them which rejects authority. I thus wonder why you're here for al-quraan proposes authority of the messenger to the believers.
I think that at the end of the day, its ridiculous to waste time when the other party has nothing better than 'look who's talking' as his counter-response. I'm here to deepen my knowledge of al-quraan. I have much to learn and if others want some information I have, they're welcome to it as well. What I'm not here for is the type of off-handed treatment al-quraan has recieved at the hands of some people here, even those claiming acceptance.
I understand KGB's frustrations. Some of us here are here to learn, not to waste our time with people unwilling to learn.