Contarini
I wrote, “It should be obvious who the god of islam is.”
You replied, “It seems obvious to me that the Qur’an is a very human document. And it seems obvious to me that it’s a shoddy tactic to accept just in order to portray Islam as demonic.”
I am not portraying “Islam as demonic”, I am saying that the god of islam is a godwannabe and that the god of islam is satan.
That was what I meant. I can see why you would want to make the distinction, although I find it hard to see much difference. I apologize for stating your position inaccurately.
My objection stands, though: what is your reason for not considering the Qur’an to be a human document? Why speak of “the god of Islam” as somehow the author of the Qur’an in the first place?
Seems obvious to me that the deceiver is behind this and various other claims in the quran.
I think that we should be careful with language about Satan being “behind” things. It threatens to take away human agency. This is not to deny that Satan is involved in religious error. It’s just that we should not reduce the human actors to the status of puppets. However Satan may exploit human weaknesses, human behavior should be described in human terms. Certainly whenever we find religious people (even those of unimpeachable orthodoxy) doing evil in God’s name, we are dealing with demonic powers.
As far as “a particularly un-provable Islamic claim (that the Qur’an is of non-human origin)”, seems to me that the claims in the bible can only be “proven” by God, if they weren’t than there would be no place for faith.
And my point is that it seems odd that you would place a kind of “negative” faith in the Qur’an, by accepting that a “god of Islam” is at work rather than simply seeing it as a human document (no doubt used by God insofar as it contains truth, and used by Satan insofar as that truth is highly imperfect and sinful people use it to justify their evil actions).
A thing about a lie or a deception, it is easier to see thru a 100% lie than a lie that is 99% true and 1% false, both are lies.
I don’t think there is such a thing as a 100% lie. It is also, however, pretty hard to find something that is 100% truth. Only God’s Word is that, and even that only comes to us filtered through our flawed human perceptions.
So I don’t think it’s true that anything imperfect should be thrown out as a lie. Rather, we should sort through everything human to find the truth, and accept that, rejecting the flaws and errors insofar as we perceive them.
But back to the main point: why not simply speak of the Qur’an as a human document produced by human agency? Why place faith in the claim that it is of nonhuman origin, and then ascribe it to a malevolent nonhuman source?
Edwin