How to test the truth of a religion

  • Thread starter Thread starter hamba2han
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Qur’an is indeed the literal Word of God.

Are you saying that God is not allowed to talk metaphorically to His creations?

Like I said, the Qur’an is not a science textbook.

In fact, it uses the most beautiful Arabic language ever seen in history.
According to Webster’s New World Dictionary Third College Edition, literal is not figurative or symbolic. Yet you claim the Quran uses metaphoric language.

You further protest that the Quran is not a science textbook; and we all agree, however as it uses metaphoric language it is also not literal.

You further go on to say that it is a fact that the Arabic of the Quran is the most beautiful language in history. Beauty is based on personal preference and tastes and is not necessarily based on any fact so your “fact” is not a fact at all, but an opinion.

You claim the Quran is literal, but uses metaphoric language. That is an oxymoron. Something can not be literal and figurative. As the Quran is obviously figurative in places logic dictates the Quran is not literal.

Now if you want to use literal in the sense that it is exactly what God said we can go that route, but we would have to bring up “God’s” obvious errors and contradictions… you know the ones that do not exist… if you are a Muslim and believe it all anyway.
 
There is one reason alone why I would never be Islam:

In Islam, no one died for me. No one loved me enough, in Islam, to give me the gift of eternal life. So converting would only take everything from me, and leave my life empty.

Also, Islam came into being after Christianity. Most of it is based from Christianity. So, to me, there’s no way such a new religion could hold the truth.
 
Oh, have a bit of patience, I haven’t even started yet on the subject of the jinn – Wait till I get into the deal on UFOs and extraterrestrials, Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster to name a few.🙂

But I think that will have to wait till I first delve into the uniqueness of the Qur’an in terms of it’s language, God-willing, when I come back later.
My last response to you on this thread.

Like most Mulsim aplogists you rarely answer the direct question, but deflect to a new topic in order to obfuscate the issue at hand. You orginally stated the Koran is without error or contradiction as a proof to validate it; a proof declared withing the Qur’an itself, and time and again myself and others have pointed to the most obvious contradictions, falsehoods and outright lies withing the Quran, but you deflect these proofs wiht lame analogies and further deflection.

An upright person (Muslim or otherwise) who has sincerity and honor within their own character, would at a minimum acknowledge the simple errors of the “revelations” of an ancient pagan 7th century moon god, to an illiterate messenger that promotes war, not peace; death not life; and ignorance not knowledge.

Going into the greater detail of the Qoran’s more subtle errors would be a complete waste of effort when you gloss over the simple errors.

I’ll answer your
uniqueness of the Qur’an in terms of it’s language
now and then end.

Taking nothing away from, or dispraging those who can speak/read/write classical Arabic; to limit the “true understanding of gods word” because it was the language in which it was revealed to “only a warner” 1400 years ago is silly. You yourself limit the power of God by claiming only in that language will a true understanding be gained. The true God would (and did) make His word available to the very simple so they could easily understnd what He was saying to us.

I think it was no accident that the actual Word was given when and how it was through Christ. Greek culture was what did this when after Christ’s ministry was completed to the his own Chosen People in Aramaic and/or Hebrew; the Hellenistic culture of the Gentiles which was the inrode to the most powerful nation-state of the day: Rome. Not only did the Word spread so successfully in a complete opposite way as Islam. Not by war and fear, but by the Love of Jesus and the power of the Holy Spirit. From criminally persecuted to Emperor- it took about 300 years to overcome by love and truth the very power that crucified our Lord. “Our” to include you, though you deny Him the honor he rightly deserves.

From Aramaic, to Greek, to Latin, to German… How can you not see the logic in the simple truth? It does not matter what language the Word is spoken becasue it transends our human limitations. Even the most simple, if sincere nd honost, can KNOW what was reserved for only the most learned, and what Islam denies; by what ever answer you will regeritate in defense of why only in the original language of 7th century Arabia can the true understanding be achieved. Bunk.

I will use your own holy words to explain why I will no longer debate with a dishonest, insincere person such as yourself.
But those who disbelieve and belie Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) such are the dwellers of the Fire, they shall abide therein forever.
( سورة البقرة , Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #39)
Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allah and cursed by the cursers.
( سورة البقرة , Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #159)
This is the One you should be listening to.

Beware of false prophets who come to you disguised as sheep but underneath are ravenous wolves. You will be able to tell them by their fruits…I repeat, you will be able to tell them by their fruits. (Jn 7:15-20)

A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." John 13:34-35

Whose disciple are you: the wolf of the Lamb?
 
This is how I would summarize Hamba’s argument so far…

Hamba2han: This is how you test the truth of a religion - If it has no discrepancies within itself, then it MUST be true.

(counter): I am a prophet from God, though, and MY new religion X is the true religion. It’s only teaching is “There is no God but God and Exoflare is his prophet”.

Hamba: Your religion is false.

(counter): Use your own test against my religion. Can you find any discrepancies therein?

Hamba: No, I can’t. But I’m going to go ahead and contradict what I said to start out with, and claim that THIS TEST IS NOT SUFFICIENT. Let me make up some other “tests” at the top of my head to try and prove you wrong.
Absolutely beautiful…!! 🙂

Internal consistency is indicative of nothing more than internal consistency. It is not indicative of truth.

Moslems are extremely fond of logic. The problem is that they are fond of any and every logic that makes their immediate point, and no one logic is required to have any relationship with any other logic.

To them, a “logic” is a temporary structure to make an emergent point, not a system to be used to understand truth and reality.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.
 
According to Webster’s New World Dictionary Third College Edition, literal is not figurative or symbolic.
An argument that relies on Webster’s is in trouble from the start!
You claim the Quran is literal, but uses metaphoric language. That is an oxymoron. Something can not be literal and figurative. As the Quran is obviously figurative in places logic dictates the Quran is not literal.

Now if you want to use literal in the sense that it is exactly what God said we can go that route,
That is what he said–it is the “literal word of God.” It is strained and unfair to take this as if he meant “it is literal in every respect.” Never mind that there is no such thing as a book that is literal in every respect. You’re creating a highly artificial straw man here.

hamba’s arguments are very bad, but some of the arguments being launched against him are not much better.

Edwin
 
Absolutely beautiful…!! 🙂

Internal consistency is indicative of nothing more than internal consistency. It is not indicative of truth.

Moslems are extremely fond of logic. The problem is that they are fond of any and every logic that makes their immediate point, and no one logic is required to have any relationship with any other logic.

To them, a “logic” is a temporary structure to make an emergent point, not a system to be used to understand truth and reality.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.
Thanks, and yes you’re right about Muslim “logic”! 😃
 
The Qur’an is miraculous not just from a scientific perspective but at the time of it’s revelation, the most convincing proof of all to the society that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) lived in was that it’s astounding, inimitable style from a literary perspective means that the Qur’an could not possibly have been authored by him or any other human being.

The Qur’an in many places challenges the people to produce a surah like it and the verses dealing with the challenge are given below (Hilali and Muhsin Khan’s Translation):
Code:
**Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another."** [Qur'an 17:88]

**And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful.** [Qur'an 2:23]

**And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it *, and a full explanation of the Book (i.e. laws and orders, etc, decreed for mankind) - wherein there is no doubt from the the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns,and all that exists).

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it?" Say: "Bring then a surah (chapter) like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides Allah, if you are truthful!"* [Qur'an 10:37-38]

**Or they say, "He (Prophet Muhammad(P)) forged it (the Qur'an)." Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!" **[Qur'an 11:13]

**Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it (this Qur'an)?" Nay! They believe not! Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Qur'an) if they are truthful.** [Qur'an 52:33-34]
Needless to say, this challenge of the Qur’an has never been met and I do not expect that anyone here would wish to try this challenge because the surah (chapter) that you need to produce must of course be in Arabic i.e. the language of the Qur’an.

Nevertheless, the fact that not even a single one of the very many masters of poetry and prose in all of the land of ancient Arabia at the time and ever since could succeed in meeting this literary challenge certainly proves that the Qur’an is indeed inimitable.

For those who wish to learn more about this miraculous, inimitable style of the Qur’an, then perhaps you can start by reading this short article.**
 
hamaba, I issue you a challenge. Write for me something that surpasses or equals the gospels. Just a single verse will do. If you can I will become muslim. BUT I get to judge whether you have met the standard. AND if you lose you must become Catholic.

Sound fair? It’s your challenge reversed, so don’t say no.

The muslim challenge is designed to be a false one. No muslim will admit that your poetry is better then the quran. If they did they could end up killed by other muslims. So they get to be the judge and have already decided. Not only that, but Muhammed had poets killed who made fun of his quranic style. So there is precedent for this “challenge.” You win no matter what and if you really in fact lose you kill the other guy. This is a purely subjective test that proves nothing and means nothing. It does prove the point about muslim misuse of logic though, I will give you that.
 
hamaba, I issue you a challenge. Write for me something that surpasses or equals the gospels. Just a single verse will do. If you can I will become muslim. BUT I get to judge whether you have met the standard. AND if you lose you must become Catholic.

Sound fair? It’s your challenge reversed, so don’t say no.

The muslim challenge is designed to be a false one. No muslim will admit that your poetry is better then the quran. If they did they could end up killed by other muslims. So they get to be the judge and have already decided. Not only that, but Muhammed had poets killed who made fun of his quranic style. So there is precedent for this “challenge.” You win no matter what and if you really in fact lose you kill the other guy. This is a purely subjective test that proves nothing and means nothing. It does prove the point about muslim misuse of logic though, I will give you that.
Well said! 👍
 
The Qur’an is miraculous not just from a scientific perspective but at the time of it’s revelation, the most convincing proof of all to the society that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) lived in was that it’s astounding, inimitable style from a literary perspective means that the Qur’an could not possibly have been authored by him or any other human being.

The Qur’an in many places challenges the people to produce a surah like it and the verses dealing with the challenge are given below (Hilali and Muhsin Khan’s Translation):
Code:
**Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another."** [Qur'an 17:88]

**And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful.** [Qur'an 2:23]

**And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it *, and a full explanation of the Book (i.e. laws and orders, etc, decreed for mankind) - wherein there is no doubt from the the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns,and all that exists).

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it?" Say: "Bring then a surah (chapter) like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides Allah, if you are truthful!"*** [Qur'an 10:37-38]

**Or they say, "He (Prophet Muhammad(P)) forged it (the Qur'an)." Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!" **[Qur'an 11:13]

**Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it (this Qur'an)?" Nay! They believe not! Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Qur'an) if they are truthful.** [Qur'an 52:33-34]
Needless to say, this challenge of the Qur’an has never been met and I do not expect that anyone here would wish to try this challenge because the surah (chapter) that you need to produce must of course be in Arabic i.e. the language of the Qur’an.

Nevertheless, the fact that not even a single one of the very many masters of poetry and prose in all of the land of ancient Arabia at the time and ever since could succeed in meeting this literary challenge certainly proves that the Qur’an is indeed inimitable.

For those who wish to learn more about this miraculous, inimitable style of the Qur’an, then perhaps you can start by reading this short article.

I do not doubt the beauty and brilliance of the Qur’an, if it brings you peace and enlightenment, then that is a good thing.

But I don’t understand Arabic, sorry. If I need a translator or a PhD in theology to understand scripture, I’m not interested.

The fact that you pose a test make me suspicious, another loaded question on this site. I consider myself educated and worldly, but I dislike confusion. So tell me something I will understand, and I will listen.

That’s my test.
 
The Qur’an is miraculous not just from a scientific perspective but at the time of it’s revelation, the most convincing proof of all to the society that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) lived in was that it’s astounding, inimitable style from a literary perspective means that the Qur’an could not possibly have been authored by him or any other human being.
You said it wasn’t scientific.
The Qur’an in many places challenges the people to produce a surah like it and the verses dealing with the challenge are given below (Hilali and Muhsin Khan’s Translation):
This challenge has already been shown to be circular. You’re about to prove it…
Needless to say, this challenge of the Qur’an has never been met and I do not expect that anyone here would wish to try this challenge because the surah (chapter) that you need to produce must of course be in Arabic i.e. the language of the Qur’an.
That’s the problem there. You don’t expect it to be met because you’ve already accepted that none can’t be like it, because the Koran says so. Based on circular reasoning you’ve already discounted any contender because the Koran says so, because it does.
Nevertheless, the fact that not even a single one of the very many masters of poetry and prose in all of the land of ancient Arabia at the time and ever since could succeed in meeting this literary challenge certainly proves that the Qur’an is indeed inimitable.
Please provide me the ‘scale’ by which you measure poeticness.
 
Please provide me the ‘scale’ by which you measure poeticness.
The following is an excerpt from an article:

The Arabic language and Arab speech are divided into two branches. One of them is rhymed poetry. It is a speech with metre and rhyme, which means every line of it ends upon a definite letter, which is called the ‘rhyme’. This rhymed poetry is again divided into metres or what is called as al-Bihar, literally meaning ‘The Seas’. This is so called because of the way the poetry moves according to the rhythmic patterns. There are sixteen al-Bihar viz; at-Tawil, al-Bassit, al-Wafir, al-Kamil, ar-Rajs, al-Khafif, al-Hazaj, al-Muttakarib, al-Munsarih, al-Muktatab, al-Muktadarak, al-Madid, al-Mujtath, al-Ramel, al-Khabab and as-Saria’. Each one rhymes differently.

The other branch of Arabic speech is prose, that is non-metrical speech. The prose may be a rhymed prose. Rhymed prose consists of cola ending on the same rhyme throughout, or of sentences rhymed in pairs. This is called “rhymed prose” or sajc. Prose may also be straight prose (mursal). In straight prose, the speech goes on and is not divided in cola, but is continued straight through without any divisions, either of rhyme or of anything else. Prose is employed in sermons and prayers and in speeches intended to encourage or frighten the masses.

So, the challenge is to produce in Arabic, three lines, that do not fall into one of these sixteen al-Bihar, that is not rhyming prose, nor like the speech of soothsayers, and not normal speech, that it should contain at least a comprehensible meaning and rhetoric, i.e. not gobbledygook.

It is interesting to note that all of the known pre-Islam and post-Islamic poetry falls in the above sixteen metres or al-Bihar. Indeed the pagans of Mecca repeatedly accuse Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of being a forger, a soothsayer etc. The Arabs who were at the pinnacle of their poetry and prose during the time of revelation of the Qur’an could not even produce the smallest surah of its like. The Qur’an’s form did not fit into any of the above mentioned categories. It was this that made the Qur’an inimitable, and left the pagan Arabs at a loss as to how they might combat it.

And as the Qur’an itself says:
**And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true. But if ye cannot- and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones,- which is prepared for those who reject Faith.** (Qur'an 2:23-24)
 
You have not responded to anything we have said regarding your “challenge.”
 
The “Sura like this” test is also clearly a load of baloney. Since Muslims claim the only people qualified to judge if an alternatively authored Sura equals something dictated by an illiterate Arab, then clearly the test is meaningless. Many people have written Suras that objectively are the equal or superior to some of the shorter more garbled Suras. Also the test is repeated to say 10 Suras like this - a sign of insecurity and indecision? But no, Allah never changes his mind (despite being the best of all deceivers).
 
The following is an excerpt from an article:

The Arabic language and Arab speech are divided into two branches. One of them is rhymed poetry. It is a speech with metre and rhyme, which means every line of it ends upon a definite letter, which is called the ‘rhyme’. This rhymed poetry is again divided into metres or what is called as al-Bihar, literally meaning ‘The Seas’. This is so called because of the way the poetry moves according to the rhythmic patterns. There are sixteen al-Bihar viz; at-Tawil, al-Bassit, al-Wafir, al-Kamil, ar-Rajs, al-Khafif, al-Hazaj, al-Muttakarib, al-Munsarih, al-Muktatab, al-Muktadarak, al-Madid, al-Mujtath, al-Ramel, al-Khabab and as-Saria’. Each one rhymes differently.

The other branch of Arabic speech is prose, that is non-metrical speech. The prose may be a rhymed prose. Rhymed prose consists of cola ending on the same rhyme throughout, or of sentences rhymed in pairs. This is called “rhymed prose” or sajc. Prose may also be straight prose (mursal). In straight prose, the speech goes on and is not divided in cola, but is continued straight through without any divisions, either of rhyme or of anything else. Prose is employed in sermons and prayers and in speeches intended to encourage or frighten the masses.

So, the challenge is to produce in Arabic, three lines, that do not fall into one of these sixteen al-Bihar, that is not rhyming prose, nor like the speech of soothsayers, and not normal speech, that it should contain at least a comprehensible meaning and rhetoric, i.e. not gobbledygook.

It is interesting to note that all of the known pre-Islam and post-Islamic poetry falls in the above sixteen metres or al-Bihar. Indeed the pagans of Mecca repeatedly accuse Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of being a forger, a soothsayer etc. The Arabs who were at the pinnacle of their poetry and prose during the time of revelation of the Qur’an could not even produce the smallest surah of its like. The Qur’an’s form did not fit into any of the above mentioned categories. It was this that made the Qur’an inimitable, and left the pagan Arabs at a loss as to how they might combat it.

And as the Qur’an itself says:
Code:
**And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true. But if ye cannot- and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones,- which is prepared for those who reject Faith.** (Qur'an 2:23-24)
Well, considering that poetry (up until modern times when we have freeverse poetry) has been metric, wasn’t the purpose of metric poetry to follow a particular metre? This doesn’t mean that someone following a metre can’t invent his own metre, he just wants to follow an accepted poetic metre. For example, I’ve been reading Ovid lately (in the original Latin). He wrote most of his poetic works in elegiac verse (dactylic hexameter alternating with dactylic pentameter) and in his first such poem he pokes fun at the metre in which he is writing, saying that he would have preferred to write epic poetry in straight hexameter, but since Cupid has decided to make him fall in love, he has to write in elegiac verse, because that was the metre reserved for love poetry in the Roman world - only epic was written in hexameter. This doesn’t mean that he was incapable of writing in hexameter (he later did so in his Metamorphoses), but he just stuck with tradition.

But anyway, that’s beside the point.

The fact is that no Muslim poet would have challenged the Qu’ran (why bother since they believe it anyway), and anyone else who tried would have failed the test in the eyes of Muslims anyway.

And by the way, does anyone else find this test of the Qu’ran’s authenticity a bit illogical? Did God reveal his Word to people to tell us the truth about Himself and the world, or to win a poetry contest? How does the fact that it sounds nice prove that what it states is true?
 
A unique feature of the Qur’an is that of numerical symmetry. This can be taken as an interesting feature of coherence due to the fact that the Qur’anic text was revealed over a 23 year period. Furthermore this feature sheds more light to the question of authorship.

Below is the repetition of some Qur’anic words that appear in the Qur’an in exactly the same number:
Code:
  The words “this world” and “the Hereafter” occur 115 times each.

  The words “the Angels” and “the Devils” occur 88 times each.

  The words “death” (its derivations) and “life” occur 143 times each.

  The words “summer/heat” and “winter/cold” occur 5 times each.

  The words “evil deeds” (its derivations) and “good deeds” (its derivations) occur 167 times each.

  The words “people” and “prophets” occur 241 times each.

  The words “disbelief” and “faith” occur 17 times each.

  The word “month” occurs 12 times each, i.e. the same number as the months of the year.
Is it humanly possible for an illiterate man to produce such a numerically symmetrical text when the revelation was revealed over a period of 23 years concerning issues and realities that were specific to that period?

We should always remember that miracles can only come from the Creator.
 
A unique feature of the Qur’an is that of numerical symmetry. This can be taken as an interesting feature of coherence due to the fact that the Qur’anic text was revealed over a 23 year period. Furthermore this feature sheds more light to the question of authorship.

Below is the repetition of some Qur’anic words that appear in the Qur’an in exactly the same number:
Code:
  The words “this world” and “the Hereafter” occur 115 times each.

  The words “the Angels” and “the Devils” occur 88 times each.

  The words “death” (its derivations) and “life” occur 143 times each.

  The words “summer/heat” and “winter/cold” occur 5 times each.

  The words “evil deeds” (its derivations) and “good deeds” (its derivations) occur 167 times each.

  The words “people” and “prophets” occur 241 times each.

  The words “disbelief” and “faith” occur 17 times each.

  The word “month” occurs 12 times each, i.e. the same number as the months of the year.
Is it humanly possible for an illiterate man to produce such a numerically symmetrical text when the revelation was revealed over a period of 23 years concerning issues and realities that were specific to that period?

We should always remember that miracles can only come from the Creator.
You’re just like the energizer bunny, aren’t you? How much longer will you keep going like this until you finally answer what the other posters have said? Why did you start a thread instead of a blog?
 
How much longer will you keep going like this until you finally answer what the other posters have said?
If they had just taken the trouble to read the links which I had posted, they would have found the answers to virtually all of their questions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top