Contradictions and inconsistencies in the quran?
-
enquirer wrote
peace thegod. Show me one verified example of creation from nothing in the whole history of existence?... We are all eternal my friend...Travelling from one manifestation to the next.that's what i say unto those who deny the existence of god to create something out of nothing and then put forth the claim of the absence of a supernatural entity!
so u are perhaps alluding to pantheism? that all of us are manifestations of god? each of us is god? wowww...that would have been cool!
enquirer wrote
God=reality,idol=illusion or misinterpreted reality.who created the universe? an enitity called god? or is it a self generated reality?
peace -)
-
peace Zenje. Ah,so i proved my point,you do make arbitrary divisions and harmful interpretations from your own ego,(on the basis of an internet dialogue)...Not from god. D or is it?
If only half the energy was spent on serving god and being tolerant and open-minded,the world might be a much better place. I notice when you guys run out of ideas you throw out your quranic misinterpretations. D -
peace thegod. Yes it is cool,us being gods. D
Everthing is a self generated,though interdependent reality. -
damn i should have deleted that line and gone with the edit alone. you are offtracking the issue at hand now.
Oh that's right I am. You brought it in remember? I'm sorry I didn't keep refreshing to keep checking on your 'edits'.
If you grandad burn his hand on a hot stove, you dad does and you mom does, you have reasonable confirmation that stoves are hot. THis history is not pr. default, wrong.
However, Here it is again (source;http//philosophy.hku.hk/think/logic/basic.php)
source explanation i chose this source because it is easy to find around. The information however, is 1st grade knowledge for pholosophers, scientist and mathmaticians alike.Thank you for the logic lesson. I don't think I am the one needing it btw. What history are we debating using logic? Observable facts that do not change with our concept of time or whether your grandaddy actually did burn his hand on the stove? I trust you see the difference?
we are still talking about basic human logic as defined by expereince through history.
Your human logic as defined by history is inaccurate. Logic does not rely on history and hearsay.
it is rethorical, because all you can do is give me YOUR concept. I can ask the 19'er, the submitters, the sunnis and get totally different concepts, all claiming it is from the same book, and that it is what God tells them to.
A person sees what they see, no matter what is actually written in the book. That is not a problem with the book, I trust you can see the difference?
i have actually succeeded in several places. It is obviously NOT clear. So when it tells us to belive in something on faith, in contradicts itself when it makes clear that we should not accept things we cannot confirm. Or perhaps, this doesnt go for the book itself ?Personally i think that it does, and it pose the greatest challenge to us. To let go of our sucker, and live according to the message, wich is beutyful.
Oh you have? That's news. Confirmation is of different types. Not everyone will recieve confirmation the same way. What is 'our sucker'?
im sorry, please correct me. where is this first copy to be found?
Deal with what you have. The quran is here and now.
so whatever our understanding of the book is, it is the right one, at any given time, even if it contradicts other peoples understanding?
It is a learning process. We keep going until we find something that works for us with reason and logic. If something contradicts my understanding, I will try to see why with an open mind and research it. If I find a flaw in it, awesome, if not I will accept the other understanding. I have done that many times in the past few years.
aber ja, das ist wunderbar. das buch ist f?r alle menschen. But either for all to understand, or all to make their own understanding of, and if that is the case. what im doing is fully in line with the book itself.
Good for you.
-
enquirer wrote
peace thegod. I was adressing a comment zenje made,or should i open a seperate thread to answer him? Can you not see that topics are sometimes quite diverse and need a broad range of explanations. What does your last post have to do with the fallacy of the quran? LoLur comment made a general observation with nothing to lend credibility to it, or did it? " Some people try to be open-minded and promote reality..."...who are these people? u amongst them? which 'reality'? god? so what makes u think 'that' is a good deed? what is ur source for calling any deed 'good' and any intepretation 'harmful'? what are the standards by which u judge? why do u condemn quran simply because ur logical self (distinct from god) is not agreeable to it? the quran gives each of us the liberty to practise r belief without infringing on others' rights, then why do u insist on calling quran corrupt without any justification? -)
peace thegod. Yes it is cool,us being gods.
Everthing is a self generated,though interdependent reality.that's simply ur opinion, right? cool! or can u lend some credence to it?
peace -)
-
Peace thegod. I am not condemning the quran,i am stating that its is not perfect or absolute.(hence the inconsistencies and contradictions.) Of course there is some wisdom in it.
Anybody is free to practise their beliefs as long as they dont infringe on others rights...this is very true,...dont you think calling peaceful people kafirs or dividing humanity into arbitrary groups,or chopping off hands etc... to be infringing on civil liberties?
Yes,and my opinions are just that...my verified opinions...your job is to verify your own realities,not follow me. -
Thank you for the logic lesson. I don't think I am the one needing it btw. What history are we debating using logic?
You started out in the thread by saying, no phonebook logic, this is what spawned a debate on human logic in generel. Maybe i am wrong, but i assumed you where reffering to the logic analysis of "if it had been from other than God....". By default human logic alone, as demonstrated, this statement is true, given that its logical equivalence is true aswell. If the logical equlence is to have the same truth value, a phonebook is indeed from God. Any speculation as to what books God might mean with this, is pure speculation on behalf of the reader.
Your human logic as defined by history is inaccurate. Logic does not rely on history and hearsay.
i havent said that it is, on the contrary, you chose to misunderstand a statement i made,wich i 2 times now has clarified, and take it to walk out on a tangent.
A person sees what they see, no matter what is actually written in the book. That is not a problem with the book, I trust you can see the difference?
given that it is supposedly the key to our salvation that IS a problem. Unless ofcourse the salvation lies in us reading it nomatter what we read in it. there is no facit to the book, thus it is unusable as anything but ethical guidelines as nobody will know the right answer untill the examn is over. In other words. We are given the examn and then we will get educated (in hell or heavenb) wich on its own makes very little sense.
Oh you have? That's news. Confirmation is of different types. Not everyone will recieve confirmation the same way. What is 'our sucker'?
a book from wich we always can find "bullets of truth" to shoot at people who disagrees with us. And i have your own words for that the book means anything we want it to, thus the "bullets of truth" is anything we want them to be in any given context we want it to be. Not excactly clear speak is it?
Deal with what you have. The quran is here and now.
But it tells me it hasnt been corrupted, and the only evidence i have of it, is the book claiming it is so. So without a first copy, i cannot verify that there is no corruption to it. Thus the statement is pr.default, false. As the book altso makes clear that we shoudnt take anything for face value, but confrim things ourself. How can i confirm this, with the Quran here and now, when i know for a fact that changes HAS been made to it, like insertion of grammer marks.
It is a learning process. We keep going until we find something that works for us with reason and logic. If something contradicts my understanding, I will try to see why with an open mind and research it. If I find a flaw in it, awesome, if not I will accept the other understanding. I have done that many times in the past few years.
THis is no different from what the xtians claim to be doing with their book.
This learning process is avaible to anyone, altso people without a book end up believing in God, and doing good deeds. And i still claim that to do this, often you have to bend corners of logic, wich is against the book itself. -
peace savage carrot. I told you its hard to stick to the specific topic sometimes...What was this thread about again?...Dont worry,i dont mind at all...its very interesting. Can you say 'double standards'.
-
enquirer wrote
Peace thegod. I am not condemning the quran,i am stating that its is not perfect or absolute.(hence the inconsistencies and contradictions.) Of course there is some wisdom in it.yet again u sail into ur sea of assumptions...just what tells u quran has wisdom or contradictions? u state these things as if u have a word from god regarding this...but in essence u are only reflecting ur opinion! -)
enquirer wrote
Anybody is free to practise their beliefs as long as they dont infringe on others rights...this is very true,...dont you think calling peaceful people kafirs or dividing humanity into arbitrary groups,or chopping off hands etc... to be infringing on civil liberties?chopping off hands? quran tells to chop off hands of those who do not believe in one god? would u back that up with the verse which states that!
enquirer wrote
Yes,and my opinions are just that...my verified opinions...your job is to verify your own realities,not follow me.not verified by an agreed to standard....verified only according to ur (self-confessed) limited capabilities! again, u want others to validate their beliefs and take ur opinions as verified facts? does that tell anything about ur logical self....ur god...which guides ur understanding? cool! D
peace -)
-
peace thegod. Now you are misquoting and misunderstanding me. Forget the definitions and linguistics my friend. I say these are my verified opinions...,you verify your own realities...im not asking you to believe in my opinions. I stated chopping off hands(for theft,obviously.) is the opinion of some who follow the quran,i did not state they believe in chopping off hands for not believing in one god...Whose making assumptions now?
And finally whatever you say...isnt that also really only your opinions/interpretations of what you think is gods words? D -
enquirer wrote
peace thegod. Now you are misquoting and misunderstanding me. Forget the definitions and linguistics my friend. I say these are my verified opinions...,you verify your own realities...im not asking you to believe in my opinions.if that be the case it would be pretty cool, but u are abusing my opinion by claiming quran is corrupted without a valid reason! u believe in endless regeneration without providing evidence, would then u like to be reminded every now and then that u are following conjecture? why then do u propose every now and then that quran is corrupted? -)
enquirer wrote
I stated chopping off hands(for theft,obviously.) is the opinion of some who follow the quran,i did not state they believe in chopping off hands for not believing in one god...Whose making assumptions now?u talked about quran infringing the civil liberties by commanding to chop off hands...did u mention it was for theft? then when v were contesting my claim that quran does not infringe on anybody's right based on their belief...what else would be the assumption to be drawn? that said...that verse is under scrutiny...and that is of the verses on which i have reserved my judgement...not on the text but the interpretation thereof! still...there has to be some punishment for theft...or do u recognize thieving as a civil right?
enquirer wrote
And finally whatever you say...isnt that also really only your opinions/interpretations of what you think is gods words?yes, but have i ventured forth to say u are guided by nothing save ur imperfect wisdom? nor do i go far as to ask u to prove ur beliefs...simply to substantiate ur charges against quran....set common standards so that ur grievances against the text can be looked into and its veracity established or otherwise! i am definitely interested in seeing criticism of quran based on something definitive...but if all someone plans to do is claim i guess its a matter of prerogative! -)
peace -)
-
Peace thegod. I am bringing things to your attention for you to verify,not asking you to believe me. I have posted a few verses and will post some more as well. Even to show 1 contradiction is enough my friend. I am not stating the quran is corrupt,i am stating it is not perfect and that it is only as good as the interpreter...
Why make assumptions about me...Of course i believe in some sort of deterrent/rehabilitaion for theft.(just not cutting of the hand in todays society. .) I dont know why you are getting so emotional,if your that convinced about the quran you should be able to disprove me easily?
Do i need an objective common standard to say i like chocolate? Can you prove i dont like chocolate if i say i do? Verify for yourself my friend. I know the example of chocolate is a bit weird,but i am trying to get a point across.
one of the valid reasons(of many.) i have for saying the quran is incomplete in itself ,is that it says its a clear book or a criterion,yet most on this forum disagree or cannot understand its meanings. -
Peace all. Ok,some translations state that only god can know what is in the wombs...(end of surah 31.) What about the new pictures we have on an ultrasound of babies in the womb? Can you see an inconsistency with the literal interpretations?
-
peace savage carrot. I told you its hard to stick to the specific topic sometimes...What was this thread about again?...Dont worry,i dont mind at all...its very interesting. Can you say 'double standards'.
What a load of crock. I asked people to stick to the topic and obviously some had a problem with me saying it...since most of your threads go down this way and you don't have a problem in not sticking to the topic, I kept answering Magi's posts. Can you say bull?
-
peace all. What about the quran saying that allah doesnt change his ways or laws,(or sunnat.) and then jesus being born without a father,a stick turning into a snake,the splitting of the sea into two firm mountains,jesus speaking as a baby,fire not burning abraham etc...
All creatures are supposed to do sujood to allah alone,and yet allah asked the angels to do sujood to adam?
Allah never commanding indecency,but then abraham being asked to sacrifice an innocent son? If you take these literally you make the book contradictory and inconsistent... Please explain these verses... -
peace savage carrot. If only you defended the truth as well as you try to defend yourself and your opinions of your book...
-
enquirer wrote
Peace thegod. I am bringing things to your attention for you to verify,not asking you to believe me. I have posted a few verses and will post some more as well. Even to show 1 contradiction is enough my friend. I am not stating the quran is corrupt,i am stating it is not perfect and that it is only as good as the interpreter...i believe somebody did address the verses which u posted...if u are not satisfied with the response u are free to air ur views...but just posting a few verses does not in any way strengthen ur claims! i wonder if u can understand and appreciate that point! -)
enquirer wrote
Why make assumptions about me...Of course i believe in some sort of deterrent/rehabilitaion for theft.(just not cutting of the hand in todays society. .) I dont know why you are getting so emotional,if your that convinced about the quran you should be able to disprove me easily?assumptions about u? like? could u shed some more light on the deterrent/rehabilitation part as guided by ur god? D
talking about assumptions.....is driving home the fact that u are slandering the quran being emotional? remind me not to take my logical self for god! D
as for 'disproving' it also requires biting the bullet...but humans have a tendency to desire outthinking god! again...i do not wish to even attempt at disproving u unless u bring forth some proof for ur claims!
enquirer wrote
Do i need an objective common standard to say i like chocolate? Can you prove i dont like chocolate if i say i do? Verify for yourself my friend. I know the example of chocolate is a bit weird,but i am trying to get a point across.yes...thats wierd alright...should i verify for myself that u like chocolates or not? i can verify according to my standards whether or not a certain opinion u carry about the choc is valid...but i cannot verify for myself whether or not u like the choc...n why should i? -S wonder if i was able to get the point u tried to put across! D
-
You started out in the thread by saying, no phonebook logic, this is what spawned a debate on human logic in generel. Maybe i am wrong, but i assumed you where reffering to the logic analysis of "if it had been from other than God....". By default human logic alone, as demonstrated, this statement is true, given that its logical equivalence is true aswell. If the logical equlence is to have the same truth value, a phonebook is indeed from God. Any speculation as to what books God might mean with this, is pure speculation on behalf of the reader.
lol Books claiming to be from God. Logic starts with a premise. They would have found in IT much discrepancy. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what IT means. It is just comprehension if you read the verse NOT speculation.
havent said that it is, on the contrary, you chose to misunderstand a statement i made,wich i 2 times now has clarified, and take it to walk out on a tangent.
You said it is 'off topic' not clarified it imo. If you don't want to talk about some of your statements claiming they are not the point you are trying to make, that's okay.
given that it is supposedly the key to our salvation that IS a problem. Unless ofcourse the salvation lies in us reading it nomatter what we read in it. there is no facit to the book, thus it is unusable as anything but ethical guidelines as nobody will know the right answer untill the examn is over. In other words. We are given the examn and then we will get educated (in hell or heavenb) wich on its own makes very little sense.
The book is the key to salvation? Where do you get this from? What about blind and deaf people? The book is a guide or a shortcut.
a book from wich we always can find "bullets of truth" to shoot at people who disagrees with us. And i have your own words for that the book means anything we want it to, thus the "bullets of truth" is anything we want them to be in any given context we want it to be. Not excactly clear speak is it?
This you can do with any book or movie. Is that fault of the text or yourself?
But it tells me it hasnt been corrupted, and the only evidence i have of it, is the book claiming it is so. So without a first copy, i cannot verify that there is no corruption to it. Thus the statement is pr.default, false. As the book altso makes clear that we shoudnt take anything for face value, but confrim things ourself. How can i confirm this, with the Quran here and now, when i know for a fact that changes HAS been made to it, like insertion of grammer marks.
Logic starts with a premise. It says it's from God. It says if it was from other than God there would be much discrepancy in it. There is your clue. No first copies needed. It gives you the chance to do so. Do the grammar marks create a discrepancy? Can it be solved without creating a discrepancy anywhere else? Prove it false or discrepancy ridden.
THis is no different from what the xtians claim to be doing with their book.
This learning process is avaible to anyone, altso people without a book end up believing in God, and doing good deeds. And i still claim that to do this, often you have to bend corners of logic, wich is against the book itself.So what if the 'xtians' claim this that or whatnot? What do I care? Then you say it is available to everyone. Yes it is. What I don't understand is the last statement. People without a book end up believing in God and doing good deeds are 'bending corners of logic'?
-
i guess most of that which i have posted has already been posted on some site or the other and also been addressed, but still just to tackle the first of this bunch....
enquirer wrote
Peace all. Ok,some translations state that only god can know what is in the wombs...(end of surah 31.) What about the new pictures we have on an ultrasound of babies in the womb? Can you see an inconsistency with the literal interpretations?31 34 With God is the knowledge regarding the Hour. And He sends down the rain, and He knows what is inside the wombs. No soul knows what it may gain tomorrow, nor does any soul know in which land it will die. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.
where does it say only god knows what is in the wombs? that said it could also mean other things! -)