Those aren't arguments. They're just statements, unverified by the first shred of evidence.
Objection to some astronomers.
- Thread starter Torch light
- Start date
Another argument of the Quran:
The deniers of the Hereafter:
Quran 36: 78-79, which mean:
78. And he tells Us an example [of the decayed bones] and forgets about his own creation [that he was created from seminal fluid]; he says: "Who can revive the bones when they are decayed!?"
79. Say [Mohammed, answering him]: "He revives them, That Who created them at the beginning [from seminal fluid]; He is All-Knowing about everything in the creation."
http://quran-ayat.com/pret/36.htm#a36_78
The deniers of the Hereafter:
Quran 36: 78-79, which mean:
78. And he tells Us an example [of the decayed bones] and forgets about his own creation [that he was created from seminal fluid]; he says: "Who can revive the bones when they are decayed!?"
79. Say [Mohammed, answering him]: "He revives them, That Who created them at the beginning [from seminal fluid]; He is All-Knowing about everything in the creation."
http://quran-ayat.com/pret/36.htm#a36_78
Last edited:
And so on the Quran is full of arguments in answering of the objections of the disbelievers and idolaters.
Therefore, when someone here argues with me about some point, I bring up the proper argument of the Quran and in this way I overcome the falsehood of the disbeliever, while if I give the argument in my own words, it is not certain that I will be victorious in the disputing and arguing.
Quran 25: 33, which means:
(And they bring you [O Mohammed] no argument g but We bring you the true [answer h as against it], and a better explanation [and exposure of the meaning.])
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
g With which they dispute against you so as to falsify your message and to contradict you.
h Which disproves and refutes their arguments.
quran-ayat.com/pret/25.htm#a25_33
Therefore, when someone here argues with me about some point, I bring up the proper argument of the Quran and in this way I overcome the falsehood of the disbeliever, while if I give the argument in my own words, it is not certain that I will be victorious in the disputing and arguing.
Quran 25: 33, which means:
(And they bring you [O Mohammed] no argument g but We bring you the true [answer h as against it], and a better explanation [and exposure of the meaning.])
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
g With which they dispute against you so as to falsify your message and to contradict you.
h Which disproves and refutes their arguments.
quran-ayat.com/pret/25.htm#a25_33
So if the disbeliever keeps arguing, it is only his insisting on his falsehood to which he might insist and keep insisting until tomorrow.
No, the Quran is full of unsubstantiated claims, not arguments, you simply assume the truth of them because they're in the book. I haven't noticed you've had much success in overcoming the "falsehood of the disbeliever" either, despite citing the Quran at every opportunity. You've been victorious exactly zero times here.
Pretty consistent with his co-religionists, who get their asses kicked by. . . pretty much everybody. The Mongols. The Ottomans. Western Europe. The U.S. Israel. And so forth.
Forgot one, by the way. . .
Other Muzzies. Both in the Iraq-Iran War sense, and in the sense that all the people Bashar Assad's barrel-bombing and gassing are Muslims.
Yes, there's a lot of sectarian violence in Islam, mainly between the Sunni and Shia sects (Torch light's rejection of the 12th Imam almost certainly makes him one of the former), and if it weren't for the dangers they present to the rest of world we could pay no attention and just let them shoot it out among themselves. Islam's about the same age Christianity was when Catholics and Protestants were slaughtering each other in assorted religious wars, but with modern weapons, so they're far more dangerous and destructive. Maybe they'll grow up some day. Islam needs an Enlightenment and an Age of Reason, but that might be hopelessly optimistic. One major consequence of those was the recognition that you can't give religious authorities secular power, but no separation of church and state is possible in Islam, the church IS the state. The scientific revolution also did a pretty good job of forcing the Christian churches to retreat on some of their silly claims about the nature of reality, but Torch light seems pretty much impenetrable on that topic too, and Islam more generally may be as well if he's at all typical.
Meh, Christians do a pretty fair job of slaughtering each other to this very day, as Ukraine demonstrates. They just generally don't do it over theological disagreements any more. Just for money and power. And one must always wonder, with Christianity and with Islam, to what extent their past and current theological disagreements are simply masks for good old money-and-power plays.
These are the persisting claims of disbelievers and atheists on which they always insist, and they will certainly lose in the Hereafter, whether they deny it or not.
So, one would have to be a believer, and not question things due to their beliefs, about their beliefs, in order for the claims in the Quran to be substantiated? Otherwise they will lose out in the Hereafter lottery?
Is that an accurate translation of what you’re trying to state without copy and pasting somebody else’s words?
This is your opinion with which you are delighted and satisfied.
Wars and violence at the start were initiated by disbelievers against the people devoted to God alone.
Such disbelievers were and are either atheists or religious sects following the idolatry: whether they belong to Jews, Christians or even Muslims.
Originally I was one of the Shia, but now I follow the original Islam, and the Quran while being devoted to God alone with no associate or patron whether imam, sheikh, or saint. I do not follow the different sects of Muslims other than only following the original Islam and the Quran and pure monotheism.
Monotheism Is the Way of Success
To question is a thing and to deny and insist on denial is the lottery of disbelievers and atheists claiming no evidence and insisting on their denial whatever evidence is given to them.
So you, and especially you, will never believe [unless God might guide you] whatever evidence is given to you, like the ancients who denied their messengers exactly
The evidence is there and they keep claiming no evidence.. this is their rigid thinking unmovable like the drunken.
It is the same whether one warns them or does not warn them, they will never believe, because God does not guide them because they are wrongdoers [and they keep to their wrongdoing and do not repent], and God does not guide the wrongdoers, but misguides him.
Quran 2: 6-7, which mean:
(6. Surely, those who deny [you, Mohammed, and the Quran]; it is alike to them – whether you warn them or do not warn them– they will not believe. a
7. God has set a seal [of "Rayn" which is the rust] upon their hearts and [deafness] on their hearing, and on their sights is a veil [lest they might convert] b, and there awaits them a grievous chastisement.)
........................................................................................................................................................................................
a Because they are wrong-doers: they wrong people, and God does not guide the wrong-doer but misguides him.
The indication of this is His saying – be glorified – in the Quran 14: 27 which means: (God misguides the wrong-doer, and God does what He pleases.)
b because they are wrong-doers, and God does not guide the wrong-doer.
http://quran-ayat.com/pret/2.htm#a2_6
I asked you a question. I assume English isn’t your first language, & you’re just copy & pasting someone else’s words for the most part…so I wanted clarification as to what you thought what you where copy and pasting of other peoples words actually meant.
I’m curious about your words, but much much less so about the copy&paste of somebody else’s interpretation of somebody else’s book that was written long ago.
You’re here, & Ali-Bin-Whatever isn’t. What do “YOU” think, as opposed to whatever this other person who interprets another person’s interpretation of your holy book think?
You haven't given any evidence, all you've got is the argument from authority fallacy, and as the person making the claims the burden of proof is on you, it's not up to others to prove you wrong. Doubt is the default position in the absence of evidence. In the meantime, what is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Like the money and power that accrues to a successful religion? Yes, money and power will always be in the mix somewhere, regardless of whatever else people might claim motivates them.
No, you follow the interpretation of this Al-Hilly.
So now you're lying that you follow the Quran and that you're devoted to "God alone with no associate or patron".
Shame.