The Supernatural Part II

[Leumas]

<snip>

Look man... when you can scientifically explain why the demon called Allah (a.k.a. YHWH) did the licentious job of blowing into the فرج of a married human girl whom he called his girlfriend and how scientifically he made this poor violated girl have an ill begotten son and why scientifically this lascivious Allah (a.k.a. YHWH) was such a cad and a deadbeat daddy so as to deny that the ill begotten son is his... then come back and talk about other claptrap you think is scientific in the 1400 years ago desert brigand's book of turpitude and flimflam.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Advise me on what exactly.... how to do the job of blowing in a little married girl's فرج like the lasciviously turpitudinous demon called Allah (a.k.a. YHWH) did?? I know that doing this licentious act does not make girls pregnant but evidently the 1400 years ago desert brigand charlatan who fabricated the Islamic cultic branch of the sub-cult of Zoroastrianism called Judaism, had no idea.





I am not denying the truth... I know that the Quran is a fetid mephitic pile of claptrap.... you are the one denying facts.




Wait for what?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_5128262cde11bbe88b.jpg[/qimg]​

Hello
We are waiting for you to come out of Faraj. Don't get too caught up in this. We hope you will be born soon... !!
Merry Christmas to all of you. We are very happy. Eid is beautiful. We hope you are always happy and healthy.
Kisses for everyone
May God protect everyone.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Look man... when you can scientifically explain why the demon called Allah (a.k.a. YHWH) did the licentious job of blowing into the فرج of a married human girl whom he called his girlfriend and how scientifically he made this poor violated girl have an ill begotten son and why scientifically this lascivious Allah (a.k.a. YHWH) was such a cad and a deadbeat daddy so as to deny that the ill begotten son is his... then come back and talk about other claptrap you think is scientific in the 1400 years ago desert brigand's book of turpitude and flimflam.

See, dear philosopher
Your words have no scientific-historical-geographical references. And it is not true at all. You better read at least the complete history of the land of Mary and Jesus. To understand what happened in their time. I do not advise you to go to the church and the Christian priest. Because you do not believe in them. At least read the date.I am sorry that you are saying illogical and ugly things. We hate this kind of words.
It does not suit your personality.

 

[Leumas]

Hello
We are waiting for you to come out of Faraj. Don't get too caught up in this. We hope you will be born soon... !!
Merry Christmas to all of you. We are very happy. Eid is beautiful. We hope you are always happy and healthy.
Kisses for everyone
May God protect everyone.

You have your Arabic vocabulary all muddled up... Faraj (فَرَج) ( = relief) and Farj (فَرْج) ( = vulva) are not the same word.... unless you meant it as a play on words ... if you did it is not a good one at all, since it fails in translation as well as transliteration.

ِAlthough... it is not your fault... because the Quran is written in a flawed and incomplete ABJAD and thus two entirely different words can be mistake with each other unless one uses the much later amendment of the diacritics (حركات)... which is yet another proof that the Quran is nothing but a human artifice and flimflam by a wily clever charlatan and brigand with a penchant for beautiful beguiling words... like all the cunning mountebanks before and after him in the annals of human perfidy and gullibility.

But at least the Quran is a little (just a bit) less ludicrous than the bible on this account, in that at least it is using the language of the people it is meant for instead of the language of the people they execrated and wanted to extirpate and is using the language's own abjad instead of one anachronistically borrowed from yet another people they loathed.

 

[steenkh]

Hello
Our explanations are very clear to answer your questions and doubts. No further explanation is needed.
We hope you understand this clear article well.
Accepting the truth is not mandatory. But you cannot deny the truth in any way. Please understand. Your efforts are in vain.

So … you have no answers, and try to dismiss the questions.

Well, what a surprise.

 

[Pixel42]

These are the simplest philosophical reasons for the existence of God. God has reality and truth, but he is not of the reality of the universe. This is easy to understand.
Please get to know a little more about philosophical concepts.
Philosophical concepts are all abstract. And it is understandable with logic.
Thank you

"The earth is flat" is easy to understand. "The sun goes round the earth" is easy to understand and seems obviously true - you can see it doing it after all. But neither statement is actually true.

Your "logic" is simplistic and fundamentally flawed. Your beliefs are incorrect. You do not have the necessary knowledge and understanding to correct them, and refuse to educate yourself. You are not the instructor here, and us the ignorant students. You are the ignorant - wilfully ignorant - student.

 

[Leumas]

See, dear philosopher
Your words have no scientific-historical-geographical references. And it is not true at all. You better read at least the complete history of the land of Mary and Jesus. To understand what happened in their time. I do not advise you to go to the church and the Christian priest. Because you do not believe in them. At least read the date.I am sorry that you are saying illogical and ugly things. We hate this kind of words.
It does not suit your personality.

Hey man... they are not my words... they are the words written in the Quran... Surah #66 Ayah 12... and also Surah #21 Ayah 91.... and as far as the girlfriend part... read Q5:75....

Here have a look

As you can clearly see.... it is your Quran that says that... not I... get that???

Your words have no scientific-historical-geographical references. And it is not true at all.

As I said they are not my words... they are the words of a mountebank desert brigand from 1400 years ago claiming they are the words of his Allah.

Nevertheless... as far as historical and geographical claptrap... the desert charlatan got those from Christianity... are you familiar with that religion from which the desert flimflammer plagiarized parts of the nice poetry he fabricated???

As far as not true at all.... BINGO!!! you got it... by Zeus you got it... finally!!!

You better read at least the complete history of the land of Mary and Jesus. To understand what happened in their time.

Yes that is called the New Tall tales... but ... it is not history... it is fairy tales just like the Quran which plagiarized them.... and the desert caravan robber did in fact get his plagiarization quite accurately... I suggest you read Matthew 1 and Luke 1 to see where he got his stuff from.... as well as many of the other proto-Christian "gospels" which are not even in the New Tall tales canon.

I do not advise you to go to the church and the Christian priest. Because you do not believe in them. At least read the date.I am sorry that you are saying illogical and ugly things. We hate this kind of words.

I am not the one who is saying those words... it is your 1400 years ago desert cult leader... but at least you now can see how it is all nothing but arrant perfidy and claptrap.... well done!!!

At least read the date.

What date? Of what event? And where is it written so that I can read it??


In any case.... you STILL HAVE NOT scientifically explained why the demon called Allah (a.k.a. YHWH) did the licentious job of blowing into the فرج of a married human girl whom he called his girlfriend, nor have you even begun to show how scientifically he made this poor violated girl have an ill begotten son and why scientifically this lascivious Allah (a.k.a. YHWH) was such a cad and a deadbeat daddy so as to deny that the ill begotten son is his.

So until you have done so... you cannot carry on talking about other claptrap you think is scientific in the 1400 years ago desert brigand's book of turpitude and flimflam.

 

[JayUtah]

Our explanations are very clear to answer your questions and doubts. No further explanation is needed.

No.

I pointed out how your interpretation of the Qur'an is wrong. You've never answered a single one of my rebuttals. It's extremely rude. I've done the courtesy of reading and addressing your posts. All you can ever do is insist that your "explanations" are clear, and that this somehow excuses you from listening to what anyone else says.

I've shown just what a lousy scholar you are, whether the subject is science, philosophy, or the Qur'an. I've read your books, but you won't read mine. Try harder.

 

[JayUtah]

Our translation and commentary for the similar verses of the Qur'an is up-to-date.

Exactly whose translation and commentary? You do understand that I can read Arabic, and when I say there's nothing there about black holes, white holes, or other modern concepts, it's because there really isn't anything like that there. Simply insisting that you're the only one who can properly read and interpret the Qur'an is arrogant and rude.

 

[JayUtah]

Our philosophy is the authenticity of existence. Therefore, our logic is completely consistent with reality in the universe. We fully accept the fact. God has reality and truth.

No.

Your "philosophy" is simply to assume your desired conclusion as an axiom. That is not a convincing line of reasoning.

Please get to know a little more about philosophical concepts.

Arrogant and rude. You are as ignorant about philosophy as you are about science. I explained how your philosophical line of reasoning was simply circular. You claimed you had answered that post, but when I asked you twice to point out where those answers are, you ignored me. Not only are you arrogant and rude, you seem to lie habitually.

Allah does not strive with a liar, says the Qur'an.

 

[IanS]

Hello
These translations and interpretations are old. We have read all of these. Of course, it is completely true about the strong and main verses of the Qur'an. But they have not translated the translation of the similar verses of the Qur'an. And therefore it should be translated up to date. Our translation and commentary for the similar verses of the Qur'an is up-to-date. And this is the truth of the translation of these verses.
I have told you this several times. But you are repeating your old words to us again. Please rest.
Listen to the up-to-date translation of similar verses of the Qur'an from us. please

What you are calling "up to date translations" are the translations claimed by I'jaz believers such as yourself who are religious fanatics in Islam, who have used the fact that many words in ancient Arabic can have slightly different meanings (which is a fault of the language, incidentally) ... so that what they have done and what you have done when you copy them, is to take a more obscure meaning that was not previously believed to be what was actually meant in the Quran, where you think that the more obscure and far less likely meaning sounds just a tiny bit more like it might possibly be more scientific...

... though in all of the examples of verses that you have given, and in all of the examples from all the I'jaz preachers on the internet, the translations are still not remotely scientific at all !! ...

... if the Quran came from God then he could have easily made the science clear, but instead of that your translations are so obscure and so vague that only committed Muslims believe that the words are describing modern-day science ... you need to have, as you yourself have, the massively biased and hugely naive "eye of faith" to think that you really can see or can detect such science in those verses.

OK, lets try this, you have in the past given several of your translated verses before, but we need to concentrate on what those verses actually say and what your translated words actually are & why they are valid or not valid ...

.... So - please pick any 3 verses that you like, with your preferred translations, and lets all examine those so that we can explain more clearly to you why the verses do NOT contain any valid modern science revealed from the 7th century ...


Just post 3 such verses please.

 

[Skeptic General]

No.

I pointed out how your interpretation of the Qur'an is wrong. You've never answered a single one of my rebuttals. It's extremely rude. I've done the courtesy of reading and addressing your posts. All you can ever do is insist that your "explanations" are clear, and that this somehow excuses you from listening to what anyone else says.

I've shown just what a lousy scholar you are, whether the subject is science, philosophy, or the Qur'an. I've read your books, but you won't read mine. Try harder.

I've been amazed with your patient courtesy. And appalled by his rudeness.
He's avoiding my posts too, mainly because he realized that I'm knowledgeable about Quran. I even told him repeatedly who his master is in regards to "scientific verses" in Quran. He's a rude coward.

 

[Leumas]

See, dear philosopher....

Look man... if you were to prove every single claim about the pseudo-science you are stating is in the 1400 years old desert book of flimflam... you will not... but let's say you do by some demonic conjuring.... you still have to explain why Allah saw it fit or necessary to do the job of blowing into الفرج of his girlfriend Mary to make her pregnant with Jesus and how that was by any means moral or rational let alone scientific!

Even if you were to do the impossible you would still need to expound on why Allah saw it fit and proper to do this licentious turpitudinous travesty!

If it is true that Allah did what he claims to have done in Q66:12... then whether he exists or not and is indeed capable of anything or not... he is for sure nothing more than a DEMON.

If it is not true... then either he is a DEMON or the 1400 years ago wily poetic desert brigand was a perfidious charlatan.

You choose!!!





.

 

[JayUtah]

I've been amazed with your patient courtesy. And appalled by his rudeness.

Thanks, you're very kind. The other contributors have born the brunt of his rudeness, so if I seem especially patient it's only because I've only watched this thread from afar until now.

 

[Little 10 Toes]

Summarized/quoted from a different topic/thread, but still important enough to copy/paste here.

heydarian saeed, please explain why we have earthquakes when the Quran said that we should not have them.

From the Quran: "31:10 He created the heavens without pillars or supports; you see them. And He placed on the earth weights and supports so that it would not shake you and make you stagger, and He spread therein all kinds of animals. And We sent down water from the sky, and there We caused every kind of generous and fruitful pair to flourish."

However we still have earthquakes. I have lived through at least 3 earthquakes.

Based off of what the Quran says and what happens in the world, which of the following options are correct:
1) Allah is a liar because weights were put down and there are earthquakes
2) Allah is a liar because weights were not put down and there are earthquakes
3)Mohammad, who "wrote" the Quran, put down the wrong thing and the Quran has a mistake
4)Allah is powerless against earthquakes and therefore not "capable of everything" even though he created the earth and the Quran said he is all-powerful. (This then means that one of the first three items is correct).


Quran 65.12 "Allah is the one who created seven Heavens and from Earth like them (of corresponding type); [Allah's] command descends among them so that you may know that Allah is capable of anything and that Allah knows everything."

 

[JayUtah]

...many words in ancient Arabic can have slightly different meanings (which is a fault of the language, incidentally)

This seems unfair. Every language I've studied -- ancient and modern -- struggles with nuances of meaning that shift over time. I don't know if you intended to call out Arabic specifically on this point. Consider the English word "image," for example. Or a similar word in Greek, είδωλο. Or a similar word in Hebrew: צֵל. In ancient Hebrew, the word ֶצלם (missing a vowel point or two) is related, and is the word translated in Gen. 1:27 to mean the "image" of God in which humans were created. But it can also mean "shadow." The verb from the Hebrew root means "to cast a shadow." Makes for great fun talking about what God looks like. All these related words have related, but not identical, meanings. Arabic is no different.

... so that what they have done and what you have done when you copy them, is to take a more obscure meaning that was not previously believed to be what was actually meant in the Quran, where you think that the more obscure and far less likely meaning sounds just a tiny bit more like it might possibly be more scientific...

Yes, I agree with you from here on out.

 

[IanS]

Whilst we are waiting to see if Heydarian answers any of the questions that people have put to him, below is a link to a YouTube film from a Muslim guy known Apostate Prophet (he's actually well known from appearances on Atheist Experience - he's an ex believer and now atheist) … here he de-bunks 60 of the most common claims made by the millions of fanatical I'jaz preachers such as Heydarian -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yMD99gyr14

Of course atheists with any modicum of scientific education may well say that they do not need to see this sort of specific refutation of verses claimed to describe modern science in the Quran, because of course they/we might think the claims are obvious nonsense anyway … and we can all guess that Heydarian & his I'Jaz friends will just deny everything anyway, and just claim that the vital key words of each verse have a new interpretation which they claim makes the verses authoritatively scientific from God/Allah … but, all that aside, I think this is well worth watching (and maybe even take notes … and check it all if you think that's necessary, or even possible).

 

[Leumas]

...
Of course atheists with any modicum of scientific education may well say that they do not need to see this sort of specific refutation of verses claimed to describe modern science in the Quran, because of course they/we might think the claims are obvious nonsense anyway … and we can all guess that Heydarian & his I'Jaz friends will just deny everything anyway, and just claim that the vital key words of each verse have a new interpretation which they claim makes the verses authoritatively scientific from God/Allah … but, all that aside, I think this is well worth watching (and maybe even take notes … and check it all if you think that's necessary, or even possible).

Atheists, and deists, and theists and sane moral people... whether they know science or not... can appreciate that a book that claims

the creator of the universe said that he saw that his married human girlfriend has guarded her vulva and thus he did the job of blowing in it so that she can get pregnant​

is either

• a book written by a charlatan...

or

• a book written by an insane demented ignoramus...

or

• a book written by a DEMONIC deceiver who deceived the poor dupe who repeated its words

QED!!!

 

[Chanakya]

Atheists, and deists, and theists and sane moral people... whether they know science or not... can appreciate that a book that claims

the creator of the universe said that he saw that his married human girlfriend has guarded her vulva and thus he did the job of blowing in it so that she can get pregnant​

is either

• a book written by a charlatan...

or

• a book written by an insane demented ignoramus...

or

• a book written by a DEMONIC deceiver who deceived the poor dupe who repeated its words

QED!!!

There's a fourth option, actually. Maybe it's supposed to be porn? Let's not forget Mo was something of a Humbert Humbert, except his tastes went even younger.

 

[Chanakya]

Whilst we are waiting to see if Heydarian answers any of the questions that people have put to him, below is a link to a YouTube film from a Muslim guy known Apostate Prophet (he's actually well known from appearances on Atheist Experience - he's an ex believer and now atheist) … here he de-bunks 60 of the most common claims made by the millions of fanatical I'jaz preachers such as Heydarian -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yMD99gyr14

Of course atheists with any modicum of scientific education may well say that they do not need to see this sort of specific refutation of verses claimed to describe modern science in the Quran, because of course they/we might think the claims are obvious nonsense anyway … and we can all guess that Heydarian & his I'Jaz friends will just deny everything anyway, and just claim that the vital key words of each verse have a new interpretation which they claim makes the verses authoritatively scientific from God/Allah … but, all that aside, I think this is well worth watching (and maybe even take notes … and check it all if you think that's necessary, or even possible).

Haven't watched this yet, but I've bookmarked the link, and I do intend to at least sample a bit of it later on.

As far as debunking these asinine claims by actually going back to the verses and all (rather than the hard-core science stuff per se) --- not really called for, as you say, much like there's no call for actually debunking claims that Santa drops down chimneys (where's the soot on his red suit, then, huh, huh, HUNH?) --- one thing that stood out in this thread as far as that sort of thing specifically, was, I'd say, Scorpion's very able refutation of heydarian's claim that when the Quran speaks of the Sun going around, it means going around the center of the galaxy. I loved how he showed, beyond any question of the slightest doubt, that the Quran did mean exactly that the Sun goes around Earth. (Again, that's like showing by quoting chapter and verse that Santa does not favor chimneys, but still.)