U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-21-2016, 09:29 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,583,450 times
Reputation: 461

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Khalif View Post
In religion, I don't need "proof" as the scientists need proof. In religion, I certainly use "reason". I have even explained to you the reason I believe Allah exists. That was only one of the reasons. If I don't use the same reason you use to reject Allah, it does not mean that I do not use reason. Your reason is not the only usable reason.
As I mentioned, theism is based on faith, i.e. without proof nor reason [justifiable]. I have no issue with theism if it is kept private and personal, and I believe theism is a critical necessity for the majority of people at present [not the future].


I can agree theism rely on some sort of 'reason' but that is crude and barbaric "reason". Obviously the most barbaric killer can "reason" within himself he has the right to kill others.
As for theism, Kant termed such 'reason' as 'Pure Reason' and he wrote the very famous philosophical book entitled 'The Critique of Pure Reason' [Woodrow is familiar with it]. In it Kant proved God is an illusion and it is impossible to proof the existence of God as real. Note I spend nearly 3 years studying the philosophies of Kant on a full time basis.


As I had stated there is no issue with faith [belief without reason nor proof] if kept private and personal but when it is brought into the public sphere, i.e. in discussion with others [as we are doing it now] or imposing one's belief on others, then the theists must justify their theistic basis with proofs and justifications.


Therefore in this forum [a public discussion] you need to provide empirical proofs and philosophical & reasonable justifications for the existence of your God.


Quote:
You read the Qur'an but your objective in reading the Qur'an is completely wrong. You do not ponder over what is said and do not comprehend what is said because your starting point, "Allah does not exists", stops you understanding the Qur'an. In other words, you have rejected the Qur'an before even reading it and closed your mind to it from the outset.
I told you I am reading the Quran objectively and Muslims read the Quran emotionally and subjectively.
Obviously the objective approach is more credible than the subjective approach.
Will you accept someone who accused you of murder in a court based on the accuser's subjective views or you expect him to provide objective evidences and arguments??

Btw, I read the Quran with the assumption that Allah exists to convey his message to Muhammad via Gabriel.
It is only when the discussion goes beyond [meta-] the above point that I bring in other points, i.e. God do not exists and Muhammad or a group of people are the authors of the Quran

Quote:
Not on my faith based knowlede but based on what you write here. It is what you write here that gives me reason to believe that you do not "understand" Islam.
It is only your opinion and I don't have much respect for your opinions on the Quran which is based on strong emotions, biasness and subjectivity.


Quote:
If you start with an English dictionary, you can learn only English. If you start with the Qur'an, the covenant in Islam will become clear to you only then. Just the first few verses of the first Surah in the Qur'an would be enough. In fact, just one verse, "Thee we serve and Thee we beseech for help" should be enough for the seeker of truth about the covenant. Shahadah defines "Thee" in this verse but says nothing about actual main term of the covenant, "serving Allah".
In the case of an agreement [contract, covenant], the meaning is generic via any language.



Quote:
I hope you are now beginning to understand something about Islam (serving Allah, obeying Allah, worshipping as Allah). Islam itself is covenant rather than Muhammadanism. Do you understand the difference between the two?
I don't think you really understand what is a 'covenant'?
A covenant is merely an agreement but with religious and theological subject matters.


Quote:
You haven't noted that the Qur'an mentions our religion to be the same religion as the religion of Abraham 4:125, 2:132, 2:133, 2:135, 2:136, 3:67, 16:120, 16:123, 22:78, 33:7). It is the same covenant for ALL believers. The term for the believers is only ONE; obey God/Allah. Obeying God is Islam.
Note I understand the water I drink is the same H20 it was 5 billion years ago.
The difference is the ways water is used and drank by humans.
This analogy is the same for the point that the religion of Abraham is the same as the Islam today. After all there is only one Allah.

Quote:
It is this kind of ignorance about the believers and the Qur'an that reveals to me that you do not understand either the Qur'an or Islam. Read and understand 2:136. This verse knocks the stuffing out of your above view in ignorance.
Continuum, I thought you were an educated and intelligent man. Why do you then come up with such statements full of ignorance about Islam and the Qur'an?
What is the issue with understanding 2:136 as the analogy I have used with 'water'.
The additional point is the Jews and Christians had corrupted the original texts sent by Allah [i.e. polluted the water]


You will note I am intelligent enough to use the water analogy to explain 2:136 and provide additional points to 2:136.

Quote:
You are coming back from error that the Shahada is the covenant. You have come back only half way. You need to come back all the way. Shahada recognizes only the other party, and not the terms of the covenant. Therefore, it is not the covenant but only the recognition of the other Party that one is going to enter covenant with.
You have been blinded to read what I wrote;


I did not say the Shahada is the covenant per se. I stated;
Continuum wrote: Note I mentioned the Sahada [and its essential element] is merely an initial pledge of agreement to enter into the covenant with Allah
Surely you can understand what :"is merely an initial pledge" meant. Read the whole sentence again.

Quote:
You miss the whole point here in your eagerness. 1. has nothing to do with terms of the covenant, therefore, the covenant. It is only about the parties. 2. is the terms of the covenant and, therefore, the covenant. 3. is Islam (execution of the covenant by the believers, one party in the agreement/covenant).
It is your eagerness that blinded you from seeing this simple example of what is an agreement/contract. An agreement with God is a covenant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-27-2016, 05:55 PM
 
3,166 posts, read 1,037,948 times
Reputation: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
Per the dictionary, addition to the texts is also in a sense a 'deviation'.


Zaid did not deviate from Allah's command in the Quran.


My argument is the Quran was authored by Muhammad himself and he created Chapter-33 [Medina] for his personal interests.
Your argument is crap. After saying that the Qur'an was authored by Muhammad, you then go on to say that he created Chapter 33. Any idiot will understand that if he authored the Qur'an then he authored all chapters. You have no proof that Muhammad authored the Qur'an.

Quote:
There is no where that Muhammad ordered Zaid not to divorce his wife in the Quran.
You must have been looking for the words divorce and Zaid together in your Qur'an search and did not find it. It is just like you looking for explanation of "spirit" (ruh) in the Qur'an but not finding it because someone had translated the same as "soul".

Quote:
If that is from other sources, the reliability of it is questionable.
This Chapter 33 is what others called a Just-in-Time revelation.
Why do you believe "others" but not "other sources"? I can now see where you are coming from!

Muhammad did say to Zaid to keep his wife. ZAID did not keep his wife but divorced her. Keep your wife means don't divorce her. I am sure you are not so thick that you can't understand it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2016, 11:36 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,583,450 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khalif View Post
Your argument is crap. After saying that the Qur'an was authored by Muhammad, you then go on to say that he created Chapter 33. Any idiot will understand that if he authored the Qur'an then he authored all chapters. You have no proof that Muhammad authored the Qur'an.
First it is impossible for a God to exist as real.
Thus the Quran cannot be authored by a God.
Therefore the Quran must be authored by persons or group of persons.


It is claimed that the Quran [all chapters] was recited by Muhammad.
Since there is no God, the Quran must be authored by Muhammad.


I do not have direct proof Muhammad authored the Quran.
But this can be inferred by secondary sources, e.g. from the historical life of Muhammad, the Ahadith and reconciling with the events in the Quran on a chronological order.
I understand what is written of Muhammad may not be totally reliable but they can be referred to for whatever they are worth.


The point is the major events in the Quran do coincide with the historical details of Muhammad and the psychological behavior of a person with the personality of Muhammad, e.g. a cult or religious leader, a war general, warlord, imperialistic person, etc.
The other relations of Muhammad's event to the Quran are;
1. Marrying his adopted son's wife
2. Reprimanding his wives, re sex with the Coptic slave
3. Reprimanding other when Aishah 'lost' her way
4. The Satanic verses
5. Others.




Quote:
You must have been looking for the words divorce and Zaid together in your Qur'an search and did not find it. It is just like you looking for explanation of "spirit" (ruh) in the Qur'an but not finding it because someone had translated the same as "soul".

Why do you believe "others" but not "other sources"? I can now see where you are coming from!

Muhammad did say to Zaid to keep his wife. ZAID did not keep his wife but divorced her. Keep your wife means don't divorce her. I am sure you are not so thick that you can't understand it.
There is nothing in the Quran where Muhammad said to Zaid to keep his wife.
It is likely Muhammad was very good in controlling his followers, i.e. subliminally coerced his closest companion to give up his six years old daughter to be married to Muhammad, then influencing his adopted son to give up his wife to the father. This is weird. There is no need for such a rule and permission to be included in any religious text as this is basically and fundamentally very immoral from the standard of universal human values.




Such complete controls by religious leaders over their followers has been happening in the past till the present. Note Reverend Jim Jones, Shree Ranesh, Koresh, etc.
Studying the various circumstance surrounding Muhammad, e.g. marrying many wives after Khatijah point to his high sex drive. The matured religious founders of the past and present do not marry many wives and most do not marry at all [Dalai Lama, Pope, etc.] which indicate they have control over their sexual drives [and other nafs] and not fall into lusts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 06:57 AM
 
3,166 posts, read 1,037,948 times
Reputation: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
First it is impossible for a God to exist as real.
Thus the Quran cannot be authored by a God.
Therefore the Quran must be authored by persons or group of persons.
You cannot act as prosecuter, judge and jury at the same time. I can counter your remark here with:
It is possible for God to exist as real and impossible for any human to create the Qur'an. Even ten chapters like the chapters of the Qur'an can't be created by humans. Can you meet the challenge in 11:13? Try it! You will utterly fail.

Therefore the Qur'an must be from God.


Quote:
It is claimed that the Quran [all chapters] was recited by Muhammad.
Since there is no God, the Quran must be authored by Muhammad.
Since nobody else could produce even ten chapters like the Qur'an, it must be from God.

Quote:
I do not have direct proof Muhammad authored the Quran.
But this can be inferred by secondary sources, e.g. from the historical life of Muhammad, the Ahadith and reconciling with the events in the Quran on a chronological order.
I understand what is written of Muhammad may not be totally reliable but they can be referred to for whatever they are worth.
I too have plenty of indirect proof that Muhammad did not create the Qur'an but only delivered it as God's messenger.


Quote:
The point is the major events in the Quran do coincide with the historical details of Muhammad and the psychological behavior of a person with the personality of Muhammad, e.g. a cult or religious leader, a war general, warlord, imperialistic person, etc.
The other relations of Muhammad's event to the Quran are;
1. Marrying his adopted son's wife
2. Reprimanding his wives, re sex with the Coptic slave
3. Reprimanding other when Aishah 'lost' her way
4. The Satanic verses
5. Others.
None of these events are direct or even indirect proof of Muhammad authoring the Qur'an. The best people to decide about Muhammad and these matters were the people with him for 23 years. People 14 centuries later haven't a clue how to decide about Muhammad.

Quote:
There is nothing in the Quran where Muhammad said to Zaid to keep his wife.
Don't lie! It is in the Qur'an 33:37.

Quote:
It is likely Muhammad was very good in controlling his followers, i.e. subliminally coerced his closest companion to give up his six years old daughter to be married to Muhammad, then influencing his adopted son to give up his wife to the father. This is weird. There is no need for such a rule and permission to be included in any religious text as this is basically and fundamentally very immoral from the standard of universal human values.
Most of it is just imagination of Islam haters 14 centuries after the "likely" events. I have discussed all these "likely" events for years and hundreds of times with people here on the 'net'. The only true event out of the above you mentioned was his marriage with the ex wife of his "adopted" son Zaid. An adopted son is never your biological son. The adopted son can't even take his foster parent's name in Islam. He always remains the son of his biological father and always keeps his real father's name. So it is stupid to complain about marrying a divorced wife of adopted son. In Islam, there is no likelihood of marrying your sister but outside Islam it is a real possibilty that you may marry your real sister, if she had been adopted and taken her foster parent's name and you meet her years later in a club not even knowing that she is your real sister.

Quote:
Such complete controls by religious leaders over their followers has been happening in the past till the present. Note Reverend Jim Jones, Shree Ranesh, Koresh, etc.
Studying the various circumstance surrounding Muhammad, e.g. marrying many wives after Khatijah point to his high sex drive.
High sex drive? Even though he had no other woman until he got married to Khadijah at 25 or during the marriage with Khadijah until he was 53 years old? Most of them were old and well past their menopausal time. Only Aisha was a virgin. Her age was never 6 or even 9 but quite likely 16 or 19. Her age in hadith books is wrong as she was already born when Her father became a Muslim. There is nothing about her age in the Quran.
.
Quote:
The matured religious founders of the past and present do not marry many wives and most do not marry at all [Dalai Lama, Pope, etc.] which indicate they have control over their sexual drives [and other nafs] and not fall into lusts.
They must be impotent. God never commanded them not to marry a woman.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,583,450 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khalif View Post
You cannot act as prosecuter, judge and jury at the same time. I can counter your remark here with:
It is possible for God to exist as real and impossible for any human to create the Qur'an. .

Therefore the Qur'an must be from God.
1. The dominating argument is, it is the onus of the positive claimant to provide proof, i.e. that God exists as real.
If some one accused you of murder, don't you and any one would want proof of that?
So far, throughout the history of mankind and now with 6+ billion humans no one has been able to proof the existence of God at all.

2. My 100% confidence that it is impossible for God to exists is an additional reinforcement to point 1 above.
I admit I have merely provided convincing clues [at least] but have not laid out the full justification because it is very complex.
Thus if I do not expect you to agree with me at this stage, but I am making an assertion of this possibility from my point of view.


3. In addition I have justified with various explanations and arguments why the majority of humans are heavily inclined to believe in a God [despite God being illusory] for a very strong psychological reason.


Quote:
Even ten chapters like the chapters of the Qur'an can't be created by humans. Can you meet the challenge in 11:13? Try it! You will utterly fail.
Since nobody else could produce even ten chapters like the Qur'an, it must be from God.
This is the worst kind of proof to justify God exists.
Such an immatured argument has been trounced by many and you can check the arguments in the internet and other books.

Quote:
I too have plenty of indirect proof that Muhammad did not create the Qur'an but only delivered it as God's messenger.
If you are rational on this you should first list down all the possibilities of the Quran could came about to its present state, via God, Muhammad, group of men, etc.


The point here is the Quran was recited by Muhammad.
This itself give at least a 50% possibility it was authored by Muhammad.
The various circumstances point to Muhammad or a group of men was the author.


Quote:
None of these events are direct or even indirect proof of Muhammad authoring the Qur'an. The best people to decide about Muhammad and these matters were the people with him for 23 years. People 14 centuries later haven't a clue how to decide about Muhammad.
It is a very common thing where various humans throughout history and at present claimed God spoke to them.
In the present situation if any one human were to claim God spoke to them, they will be referred to a psychiatrist to assess their degree of mental illness. This is fact.


Here is one example amongst the many tens or even hundreds of thousand examples of various degrees; [note I have done very extensive research on this subject]



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIiIsDIkDtg


The point is during the 7th centuries and even 75 years ago it was difficult for the majority to understand the real thing that is happening in the brain of these people.


Even now in India and elsewhere, people who suffer from sizchophrenia and other mental illness are highly regarded as holy person and revered.
In other cultures, there is a sense of reverence for the schizophrenic. They can be considered prophets, healers, holy men, shamans, and god-intoxicated.
The History of Schizophrenia | Schiz Life
Quote:
Don't lie! It is in the Qur'an 33:37.
Re 33:37 in the perspective of reality, I interpret it as Muhammad scheming the situation to get what he wanted, i.e. his adopted son. He pretended it is not him but God command that sanction of the father marrying his adopted son's wife. By any human standard this is immoral.

Quote:
Most of it is just imagination of Islam haters 14 centuries after the "likely" events. I have discussed all these "likely" events for years and hundreds of times with people here on the 'net'. The only true event out of the above you mentioned was his marriage with the ex wife of his "adopted" son Zaid. An adopted son is never your biological son. The adopted son can't even take his foster parent's name in Islam. He always remains the son of his biological father and always keeps his real father's name. So it is stupid to complain about marrying a divorced wife of adopted son. In Islam, there is no likelihood of marrying your sister but outside Islam it is a real possibilty that you may marry your real sister, if she had been adopted and taken her foster parent's name and you meet her years later in a club not even knowing that she is your real sister.
1. In general an adopted son is treated like one's real son because of the emotional bonding.
Why people adopt sons or daughters is because of their very strong maternal or paternal instincts to have children and they will automatically treat their sons/daughters as their real children with strong emotions of bonding. It is not only to human child, some transfer their maternal/paternal instincts to even their pets.


2. The exception is very people adopt sons or daughters as objects and not as human beings for their selfish interests.
Perhaps this is what happened in Muhammad's case.


The point is because of 1, i.e. the emotional bonding which is natural, such a principle [father can marry adopted son's wife] should not have been included in a supposedly immutable holy book [assumed of high moral] from a God. Incidentally why there is no provision for mother to marry adopted daughter's husband. This omission infer this principle was solely for Muhammad's [man] interests.



Quote:
High sex drive? Even though he had no other woman until he got married to Khadijah at 25 or during the marriage with Khadijah until he was 53 years old? Most of them were old and well past their menopausal time. Only Aisha was a virgin. Her age was never 6 or even 9 but quite likely 16 or 19. Her age in hadith books is wrong as she was already born when Her father became a Muslim. There is nothing about her age in the Quran.
Muhammad was nothing before he married Khadijah, thus depended on Khadijah emotionally, psychologically and financially. If he had dared to marry another, he would be kicked out of Khadijah's house and life, and losing the benefits of her social influence and wealth.

Quote:
They must be impotent. God never commanded them not to marry a woman.
That is where you do not understand human nature that is progressive.
As I had said, in the position they hold as spiritual masters they are so spiritually developed they are able to control their sensual lusts [of the nafs].

Note sexual lusts manifest from the beastly levels of the mind [lower brain] whereas the very spiritual minded are highly developed in the human levels of the mind [prefrontal cortex].
Most of the Eastern religions has various spiritual techniques to develop the spiritual aspects of their brain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2016, 08:15 AM
 
3,166 posts, read 1,037,948 times
Reputation: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum;431844 81
1. The dominating argument is, it is the onus of the positive claimant to provide proof, i.e. that God exists as real.
Positive claimant has provided proof, the Qur'an. It cannot be produced by human beings. Now the onus is on you to prove my claim to be false by you producing just ten chapters like the Qur'an, claim it to be from God, and see how far you get with it.

When talking about faith, that is the only proof that works. In faith, you can't pull out the proof out of your pocket as if God is a factory product.

Quote:
If some one accused you of murder, don't you and any one would want proof of that?
Then why don't you produce proof that Muhammad created the Qur'an because here is the proof that God does not exist.

Quote:
So far, throughout the history of mankind and now with 6+ billion humans no one has been able to proof the existence of God at all.
Nor has anyone produced proof otherwise.

Quote:
2. My 100% confidence that it is impossible for God to exists is an additional reinforcement to point 1 above.
I admit I have merely provided convincing clues [at least] but have not laid out the full justification because it is very complex.
Thus if I do not expect you to agree with me at this stage, but I am making an assertion of this possibility from my point of view.
That is not proof but mere assumed clues, assumed part justificaton and mere assertion of possibily. Right?


Quote:
3. In addition I have justified with various explanations and arguments why the majority of humans are heavily inclined to believe in a God [despite God being illusory] for a very strong psychological reason.
The latter is my argument too. The majority of humans do not believe in God because of very strong psychological reason along with lack of belief.


Quote:
This is the worst kind of proof to justify God exists.
Such an immatured argument has been trounced by many and you can check the arguments in the internet and other books.

If you are rational on this you should first list down all the possibilities of the Quran could came about to its present state, via God, Muhammad, group of men, etc.
I need to do no such thing on Islam discussion board. I am not on any atheism board that I have to justify existence of God with proof.

Quote:
The point here is the Quran was recited by Muhammad.
This itself give at least a 50% possibility it was authored by Muhammad.
The various circumstances point to Muhammad or a group of men was the author.
All messengers recite the message. The people with him knew him best to tell whether he was the author or he was only a messenger. They believed him to be the messenger. They had 23 years to test him. You have nothing but the words of other men who came centuries later and knew nothing about Muhammad.


Quote:
It is a very common thing where various humans throughout history and at present claimed God spoke to them.
In the present situation if any one human were to claim God spoke to them, they will be referred to a psychiatrist to assess their degree of mental illness. This is fact.
That's why I don't claim so. God hasn't spoken to me direct but through Muhammad as in the Qur'an. Because they haven't sent me to a psychiatrist to assess me, they must all be thinking that God has spoken to me through Muhammad and the Qur'an. Yes?

Quote:
1. In general an adopted son is treated like one's real son because of the emotional bonding.
Why people adopt sons or daughters is because of their very strong maternal or paternal instincts to have children and they will automatically treat their sons/daughters as their real children with strong emotions of bonding. It is not only to human child, some transfer their maternal/paternal instincts to even their pets.

2. The exception is very people adopt sons or daughters as objects and not as human beings for their selfish interests.
Perhaps this is what happened in Muhammad's case.
There is no cure for suspicians.

Quote:
The point is because of 1, i.e. the emotional bonding which is natural, such a principle [father can marry adopted son's wife] should not have been included in a supposedly immutable holy book [assumed of high moral] from a God.
I see no problem unless the son is biological son. Biological son is the only real son. The adopted is adopted even on paper.

Quote:
Incidentally why there is no provision for mother to marry adopted daughter's husband. This omission infer this principle was solely for Muhammad's [man] interests.
You are talking in ignorance of the situation at the time and just nit picking about yhe imagined omission. Let me get you out of ignorance about the situation and show you that there is no omission. First, Muhammad had actually asked for Zainab's hand in marriage to his adopted son. Muhammad could easily have married Zainab if he wanted to before he got her married to Zaid. Second, Zainab was not happy marrying a black man who was once a slave. She hated this marriage. Muhammad, in his love for his adopted son, had made a mistake in arranging the marriage. In that culture, slaves or ex slaves who were also black were looked upon as low class and the Quraish family as the royal family. Once Zainab from the royal family had married a black ex slave, and then divorced, nobody was going to marry Zainb again. Muhammad had to rectify his mistake in arranging this marriage and also establish that there was nothing wrong in marrying ex wife of a black man, wife of an ex slave, and wife of an adopted son.
As for omission, many Islamic laws are derived from inference. Therefore, the mother is also allowed to marry her adopted daughter's divorced husband. This is not allowed only in three cases, (a) the mother is already married, (b) the mother had ever been breast-feeding the adopted daughter in the past and (c) her adopted daughter's ex husband is not mother's close blood relative that the marriage would have been impossible under the normal Islamic law anyway.

Quote:
Muhammad was nothing before he married Khadijah, thus depended on Khadijah emotionally, psychologically and financially. If he had dared to marry another, he would be kicked out of Khadijah's house and life, and losing the benefits of her social influence and wealth.
Utter nonsense!
You had accused Muhammad for his sex drive. His sex drive wasn't dead before his marriage to Khadijah nor during the marriage. That's at least 35 years. Now you are accusing him for something else. The list is gettng longer and longer. Yet you know nothing about him except what you read in anti-Muhammad books and sites. Had he been interested in wealth he would have kept Khadijah's wealth and not lose it in his imposed mission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2016, 10:40 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,583,450 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khalif View Post
Positive claimant has provided proof, the Qur'an. It cannot be produced by human beings. Now the onus is on you to prove my claim to be false by you producing just ten chapters like the Qur'an, claim it to be from God, and see how far you get with it.

When talking about faith, that is the only proof that works. In faith, you can't pull out the proof out of your pocket as if God is a factory product.
The Quran Challenge is a very childish challenge.
I could issue such a challenge if I am spiritually childish, i.e.
Produce a Sutra like the famous Diamond Sutra;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Sutra
If you cannot then God does not exist.


The Quran is a ridiculous challenge for the following reason;
1. Any one can issue a similar challenge to produce any human work, then if cannot, claim God do not exists.
2. Any of the chapters in the Quran can be easily reproduced to every detail, but who is to judge as Allah [since does not exist] will NEVER turn up to judge.

Quote:
Then why don't you produce proof that Muhammad created the Qur'an because here is the proof that God does not exist.
Proving Muhammad created the Quran is not proof God does not exist.
Again this is a ridiculous argument.

Quote:
Nor has anyone produced proof otherwise.
As I said the primary proof is on the positive claimant.

Quote:
That is not proof but mere assumed clues, assumed part justificaton and mere assertion of possibily. Right?
It is not a confirmed proof, but an announcement of a possibility based on justifications.


Quote:
The latter is my argument too. The majority of humans do not believe in God because of very strong psychological reason along with lack of belief.
I have no problem with that as theists are not making any positive assertions.
The critical issue here is SOME Muslims justified their killing of non-Muslims and other Muslims because they believe their real God give them sanction to do so in the Quran.
This is why a positive proof is essential for them to justify their evil deeds.

Quote:
I need to do no such thing on Islam discussion board. I am not on any atheism board that I have to justify existence of God with proof.
The default of critical thinking is one must provide proofs for any positive assertion, i.e. God exists in this case.

Quote:
All messengers recite the message. The people with him knew him best to tell whether he was the author or he was only a messenger. They believed him to be the messenger. They had 23 years to test him. You have nothing but the words of other men who came centuries later and knew nothing about Muhammad.
Within history humans has believed in all sort of false tales from people who claim to be an agent of God. These are fact.
What I have is the understanding of human nature.
There are tens of thousands of cases in human history who claimed God has spoken to them, but research in psychology has demonstrated it is only a psychological issue which can be treated.


Quote:
That's why I don't claim so. God hasn't spoken to me direct but through Muhammad as in the Qur'an. Because they haven't sent me to a psychiatrist to assess me, they must all be thinking that God has spoken to me through Muhammad and the Qur'an. Yes?
It has nothing to do with you.
What was experienced by Muhammad is experienced by many thousands of human throughout history and the present. Psychiatrists have found out this is a mental issue which can be cured.
Therefore it is very possible what Muhammad experienced is likely to the same issue and not because God actually sent him messages.



Quote:
I see no problem unless the son is biological son. Biological son is the only real son. The adopted is adopted even on paper.
Generally it is immoral to marry the wife of one's adopted son due to the bonding factor.

Quote:
You are talking in ignorance of the situation at the time and just nit picking about yhe imagined omission. Let me get you out of ignorance about the situation and show you that there is no omission. First, Muhammad had actually asked for Zainab's hand in marriage to his adopted son. Muhammad could easily have married Zainab if he wanted to before he got her married to Zaid. Second, Zainab was not happy marrying a black man who was once a slave. She hated this marriage. Muhammad, in his love for his adopted son, had made a mistake in arranging the marriage. In that culture, slaves or ex slaves who were also black were looked upon as low class and the Quraish family as the royal family. Once Zainab from the royal family had married a black ex slave, and then divorced, nobody was going to marry Zainb again. Muhammad had to rectify his mistake in arranging this marriage and also establish that there was nothing wrong in marrying ex wife of a black man, wife of an ex slave, and wife of an adopted son.
As for omission, many Islamic laws are derived from inference. Therefore, the mother is also allowed to marry her adopted daughter's divorced husband. This is not allowed only in three cases, (a) the mother is already married, (b) the mother had ever been breast-feeding the adopted daughter in the past and (c) her adopted daughter's ex husband is not mother's close blood relative that the marriage would have been impossible under the normal Islamic law anyway.
Where did you get the story of Zainab's and Zeyd's background. They are not told in the Quran, therefore the reliability is highly questionable. Note there are other stories [in the Sira] of why Muhammad went for Zainab.


The point is if your story is valid, then Muslims can only marry their adopted son's wife, if the adopted son is black [racism implied here] and other same circumstance as in Zeyd and Zainab's case.


What is critical in Zainab's case is the principles and generic rule one can extract from the verses related to Zainab and Zeyd.
The general rule is basically, a Muslim is allowed to marry his adopted son's divorced wife.


Such a general rule which is expected to be eternal for mankind is fundamentally immoral.


Quote:
Utter nonsense!
You had accused Muhammad for his sex drive. His sex drive wasn't dead before his marriage to Khadijah nor during the marriage. That's at least 35 years. Now you are accusing him for something else. The list is gettng longer and longer. Yet you know nothing about him except what you read in anti-Muhammad books and sites. Had he been interested in wealth he would have kept Khadijah's wealth and not lose it in his imposed mission.
I don't have the exact evidence to conclude on Muhammad's sex drive.
Generally when a man has many wives, one can infer with high probability it is due to the man's high sex drive. This is a very simple rational inference any one with common knowledge can infer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2016, 02:28 AM
 
3,166 posts, read 1,037,948 times
Reputation: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
The Quran Challenge is a very childish challenge.
I could issue such a challenge if I am spiritually childish, i.e.
Produce a Sutra like the famous Diamond Sutra;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Sutra
If you cannot then God does not exist.
If you cannot produce 10 chapters like the Qur'an's chapters, claim them to be from Allah, you will fail in making people believe them to be from Allah because these won't be from Allah but from yourself. People would know them to be rom you and not from Allah even if you had high sex drive.

Quote:
The Quran is a ridiculous challenge for the following reason;
1. Any one can issue a similar challenge to produce any human work, then if cannot, claim God do not exists.
2. Any of the chapters in the Quran can be easily reproduced to every detail, but who is to judge as Allah [since does not exist] will NEVER turn up to judge.

Proving Muhammad created the Quran is not proof God does not exist.
Again this is a ridiculous argument.

As I said the primary proof is on the positive claimant.

It is not a confirmed proof, but an announcement of a possibility based on justifications.
That means you cannot take even a childish challenge.


Quote:
I have no problem with that as theists are not making any positive assertions.
The critical issue here is SOME Muslims justified their killing of non-Muslims and other Muslims because they believe their real God give them sanction to do so in the Quran.
This is why a positive proof is essential for them to justify their evil deeds.
That is a different subject. There is nothing in the Qur'an that requires me to kill non-muslims as a blanket statement. The Qur'an requires me to live in peace with non-muslims if they want to live in peace with me.

Quote:
The default of critical thinking is one must provide proofs for any positive assertion, i.e. God exists in this case.
it works both ways then. The negative assertion does not override the positive assertion.

Quote:
Within history humans has believed in all sort of false tales from people who claim to be an agent of God. These are fact.
What I have is the understanding of human nature.
There are tens of thousands of cases in human history who claimed God has spoken to them, but research in psychology has demonstrated it is only a psychological issue which can be treated.
He negative assertion would also be treated unless they too have proof.

Quote:
Generally it is immoral to marry the wife of one's adopted son due to the bonding factor.
Generally it is immoral only in case of real biological son. The bonding in that case is through blood which is much stronger.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2016, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,583,450 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khalif View Post
If you cannot produce 10 chapters like the Qur'an's chapters, claim them to be from Allah, you will fail in making people believe them to be from Allah because these won't be from Allah but from yourself. People would know them to be rom you and not from Allah even if you had high sex drive.
Such a challenge display a lack of intelligence, i.e. stupid and childish.
The primary intelligent thing to do is first to prove a God or Allah exists.
You cannot do that primary thing and you have to resort to such childish games.

Quote:
That means you cannot take even a childish challenge.
Why should I take the challenge when I know it is childish. This is obvious.


Quote:
That is a different subject. There is nothing in the Qur'an that requires me to kill non-muslims as a blanket statement. The Qur'an requires me to live in peace with non-muslims if they want to live in peace with me.
That is merely from your very emotional and bias point of view.
The fact is the Quran contain two truths, i.e. both good and evil elements.
You may focus on the good elements but there is nothing you can do to stop the 20% of naturally born evil prone Muslims to be influenced and inspired by the other truths of the evil laden verses.


Quote:
it works both ways then. The negative assertion does not override the positive assertion.
As I had stated the DEFAULT positive is the one who made the positive assertion must prove his claims especially on an issue that has serious implications for humanity.
There is actually no need for any negative assertion.
If there is any negative assertion, that is an additional reinforcement and this must be supported by proofs and justifications.

Quote:
He negative assertion would also be treated unless they too have proof.
Both positive and negative assertions must be supported by proofs and justifications.
However the onus of proof is always primary on the one who made the positive assertions, especially in this case, i.e. God exists.


In the case of the psychiatrists and psychologists they have proofs those [their patients] who claimed to be agents, messengers and represent God are suffering some kind of mental illness. When treated properly with medicines and psychotherapy most are cured and understand they are not agents of God.
Here is one example which I post regularly.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIiIsDIkDtg


Suggest you do extensive research [I have done so] on this topic on people who think God spoke to them.



Quote:
Generally it is immoral only in case of real biological son. The bonding in that case is through blood which is much stronger.
It is obvious if it is a biological son.
However most people exercise a stronger emotional bonding for their adopted son given the amount of time, effort and money they spend to get an adopted son/daughter.
In either case it is immoral for a father to marry the divorced wife of his adopted son.
In Muhammad's case, it is not even the case that Zeyd had serious quarrels and issues with his wife and the divorced some time long time ago. From the stories [credibility ???] surrounding this issue, there is some intention on Muhammad's part to marry Zeyd's wife.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2016, 09:48 PM
 
1,601 posts, read 751,510 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
In the case of the psychiatrists and psychologists they have proofs those [their patients] who claimed to be agents, messengers and represent God are suffering some kind of mental illness. When treated properly with medicines and psychotherapy most are cured and understand they are not agents of God.
Here is one example which I post regularly.


I don't think I suggested this book to you, but I know you'd be interested.

http://www.amazon.com/Seized-Eve-LaPlante/dp/0595094317

Last edited by juju33312; 03-01-2016 at 09:49 PM.. Reason: remove video
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top