The supernatural

[JoeMorgue]

The whole "I'm pretentiously and aggressively wrong but I'm super surface level nice in a way that is just one hair on the side of smug and condescending" thing is an old trick, played by many a woo slinger and navel gazer.

Having figured out long ago that it's not hard to reach a level of intention wrong that is rude and uncivil no matter how pleasantly you word it solve that little conundrum for myself a long time ago.

You can put as much sugar on "2+2=5" as you want, if you keep arguing it past the point of reasonableness, it's rude and surface level smug politeness does not give you the moral high ground.

 

[Scorpion]

Hi
Continue my reply to message 2885. Please read if you wish.
- The only divine book that has not been distorted is the "Qur'an".
This is the claim of the narrator of the Qur'an. God Himself has said in the Qur'an: "No one can distort the Qur'an." We have only been able to find one reason for this claim of God! This is because: "If we remove even one letter from the words of the Qur'an, the meaning of the sentence will change. And the composition of the sentence and its message will be damaged. Because all the letters in the words of the Qur'an are arranged very precisely. Of course, the original Arabic text of the Qur'an.
What has astonished and confused us. This is because we make mistakes in our translations and interpretations. Because these translations and interpretations are just our perception. Everyone has their own translation and interpretation. Especially since the translations and interpretations are all from ancient times. And it is clear that ancient translations are of little use to us in the twentieth century. And many of us humans do not accept and reject it. And we are right. Translations and interpretations should be changed regularly according to the present time. And translations should be written with modern science.
- Other reasons for the revelation of the Qur'an by God other than valid historical documents are the following:
1- There is no possibility of any distortion in the Quran. Even if one word is removed or moved from the Qur'an, the meaning of the Qur'anic sentence will be mistaken. The arrangement of all the letters - words and sentences of the Quran is extremely accurate. Therefore, no one has been able to say such a thing in the seventh century. On the other hand, among all the holy books of religions, only the Qur'an has such a feature. Which can not be distorted. And this is a sign that the Qur'an is a revelation from God. (15/9 - 41/41&42)
2- He calls for verses from the Quran. Not to declare war, but to say: If all human beings gather, they will not be able to recite the Qur'an. He says: If all human beings gather, they will not be able to recite ten surahs like the Qur'an. He says: If all human beings gather, they will not be able to recite even one surah like the Qur'an. And this is a sign that the Qur'an is a revelation from God. (11/13 & 14 – 2/ 23 & 24 - 10 / 38 – 52/33 & 34)
3- The illiteracy of the Prophet of Islam is a proof that the Qur'an is not from him. In addition, the completeness of the Qur'an is such that no one can recite this comprehensive and complete book. And only a higher power than man, who dominates all the sciences of the world, can say this. On the other hand, as in the seventh century, no one could recite the Qur'an. And only God says it. Until now, no one has been able to say a word like the Qur'an. It is completely unique. Therefore, it is a sign that the Qur'an is a revelation from God. (7/157 & 158 (
Because God has told them that in the future I will recite the Qur'an to the last prophet, Muhammad. In fact, this prediction was inspired by God to the previous prophets. And has been announced to the people. And the relevant verses are even in the Qur'an and the Bible itself. (61/6 - 6/114 - Gospel of John 14:15 - 6:14 - 7:40 - 1:19 - Gospel of Matthew 5:17)
5- In verse 82 of Sura 4, the complete harmony and non-difference in words and sentences and the meaning of the verses are explicitly stated as evidence of the revelation of the Qur'an by God. Because no objection can be made to this word. Until now, man has not been able to write such a book without any problems. Therefore, it is a sign that the Qur'an is a revelation from God.
6- There is a possibility of revelation to man from God. And not rejected. All divine prophets throughout history have received the same message from God. Authentic historical texts in this regard have proved the truth of this issue. The Qur'an was the last divine revelation to Muhammad. (See the unique historical Qur'anic inscription of the seventh century at the University of Birmingham, England. Verses 1 and 2 of Sura 50 of the Qur'an also say the same thing).
Thanks

Firstly there were four editions of the Quran but they were edited into one by Khalif Uthman. also the original writings had no vowels so the later addition of vowels may have changed the meaning of the text.

As for the statement that John 14.15 which refers to another comforter being sent. If you had bothered to read a few more verses to John 14.26 you will see that the comforter is the holy Ghost. NOT MUHAMMMAD.

I may look at the other bible passages you have mentioned, but I expect they will all have nothing to do with Muhammad.

 

[Chanakya]

The whole "I'm pretentiously and aggressively wrong but I'm super surface level nice in a way that is just one hair on the side of smug and condescending" thing is an old trick, played by many a woo slinger and navel gazer.

Clearly.

Having figured out long ago that it's not hard to reach a level of intention wrong that is rude and uncivil no matter how pleasantly you word it solve that little conundrum for myself a long time ago.

You can put as much sugar on "2+2=5" as you want, if you keep arguing it past the point of reasonableness, it's rude and surface level smug politeness does not give you the moral high ground.

Beginning to agree with you.

I'd still refrain from generalizing before the fact. I'd still extend the benefit of the doubt to start with. But that apart, I guess I agree with what you're saying.


eta: That is, being wrong and being rude are two separate things. But arguably keeping on telling others that you believe they're "infidels" destined for hell is outright rude, no matter the outward form in which this vile creed is discussed. And in any case this insufferably smug and snidely passive-aggressive BS we're seeing here is now entirely transparent.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Firstly there were four editions of the Quran but they were edited into one by Khalif Uthman. also the original writings had no vowels so the later addition of vowels may have changed the meaning of the text.

Further to this, the dots above and below the letters were also missing in some cases. This necessitates guessing what the letter is, and thus what the word is.
For example, one dot below is 'b'; one dot above is 'n', and two dots above is 't'. Without those dots, it could be any of those.

 

[heydarian saeed]

God was clearly wrong, then, because you have been distorting it for all you are worth in your attempts to make it fit your claims about science.

Hello
Please explain my distortion of the Quran. What distortion have I brought in the Quran? "Modern science is stated in the Qur'an. Exactly and there is no doubt about it."

 

[MRC_Hans]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafiz_(Quran)

Yeah, thought as much. Millions of people can recite it by heart.

Heydarian saeed, at least have your own facts straight, OK?

Hans

 

[heydarian saeed]

heydarian just wants to sit sipping coffee and eating muffins, and have a long discussion that may be utterly nonsensical, not to mention downright vile in as much as what it really speaks to, but that involves his telling us, in every other post, how much he loves us.

I wonder, would it be fine --- as far as heydarian is concerned, and also as far as our mods are concerned --- to sit in this cafe, and sip from this brew, and smilingly tell him how, simply by shifting base from his superstitions to another superstition, it is he and his family that are on their way to hell? To keep smiling at him, and telling him how much we love him, as we categorically tell him that he as well as his family are more vile than murderers, and graphically describe to him how he and his blasphemous family will be tortured in hell for their evil sinful blasphemous reprehensible ways? Maybe that is a language he will understand, even as everything else goes whizzing right above his head. After all that would be the language of love, and we'd keep assuring him, every few posts, how much we love him.

Dear friend, please bitter coffee ...
Your stress is a little worrying. It may not matter to you. But it's important to your friends.
My opinion of you is that you are good. But you are not our taste.
Wishing you health and success.
heydarian

 

[Pixel42]

Hello
Please explain my distortion of the Quran. What distortion have I brought in the Quran?

This distortion:

"Modern science is stated in the Qur'an. Exactly and there is no doubt about it."

This is simply not true, heydarian. I know you have managed to convince yourself it is true, but that's only because you are so determined to believe it you will misinterpret, misunderstand and twist the words of the Qu'ran however much you need to in order to justify that belief to yourself. But you will never convince anyone who isn't just as fanatically determined to believe it as you are. Because it just isn't true.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Yes, you start by assuming the existence of God, and then look for arguments (no matter how illogical and factually inaccurate) which allow you to maintain that assumption whilst waving away any and all objections to it. That is the most fundamental of the mistakes you are making.



No it isn't.

My approach is to start by looking at the evidence - the mountain of knowledge and understanding which has been painstakingly accumulated by generations of humanity's finest minds - and arriving at the most logical assumptions about the origin and nature of the universe which are consistent with it. Those assumptions do not include the assumption that God exists, because that assumption is unnecessary, illogical, and inconsistent with the evidence.

Hello dear pixel
God is not presumed. God exists. He does not need proof. We seek reason to prove God for our own confidence. I personally do not accept this approach. Because God has been proven to me. It is quite clear. There is no ambiguity in the existence of God. Of course I give you the right. Because God must be proven to you. Good. Our discussions in this group are also to achieve this goal. To be sure. Although this may never happen. And let no one accept the existence of God. No matter. The important thing is that we have to say whatever ambiguity we have. And seek to clarify the ambiguity.
Your approach is quite logical and good. congratulations. But ... the existence of God is not one of the hypothesis. That is why you do not see God with evidence and in the laboratory. I have said many times before that God is the ultimate cause in the Ali hierarchy. And it is a necessity. For the existence of the universe and everything in it. Of course, experimental science is not the way to prove this.
See dear pixel is the way to prove God with philosophy and logic. And the field of philosophy is different from the experimental sciences. And they are not one. The way of proof is in abstract philosophy. Its main tool is the mind and thinking. It is logic and reasoning. While the way of proof in experimental science is experiment with matter.
Thanks

 

[IanS]

Hello
Please explain my distortion of the Quran. What distortion have I brought in the Quran? "Modern science is stated in the Qur'an. Exactly and there is no doubt about it."

I must have explained here at least 50 times now how we know that modern science is most definitely NOT stated in the Quran ... because if it were there, then every science paper since the 1970's would have been filled with evidence of that & filled with studies of what the Quran said ... but as you very well know, out of perhaps (rough guess) 250,000 such research papers published since the 1970s', not a single one has ever found any evidence whatsoever of any modern science being mentioned anywhere in the Quran ...

... that is a "Proof" as much as you could ever have for anything as "proof" in this universe, that your claim is 100% untrue.

But just re. you distorting the Quran - your entire argument here over every single one of your hundreds of posts has been to claim that you have "interpreted" the words of the Quran ... that means you have changed the original words! ...

... you are claiming that we should not take the actual words of the Quran at the "face value" of what the words actually say, but instead you are claiming to have permission to change those words to say that they actually mean descriptions of the Big Bang, Evolution, Quantum Theory, Neutron Stars, Black holes etc etc ... but none of those things are mentioned in any original words of the Quran!... none of them! ... not a single word of any of that science ... what you are claiming is that you can change the words to say "neutron star", "black holes", "evolution" etc., ... but those are YOUR own words, they are not in the Quran at all.

You also told me in the last reply that you made to me, that we must not use science to show why your claims about science are wrong .... you actually tried to insist that we must use what you call "philosophy" and not science ... you want to ban science from the discussion, even though all your posts here are making claims about science in the Quran ... your whole claim of belief here has been about science, but you want to ban us from using that same science to show why science very clearly shows that you are wrong ... what an enormous arrogant cheek you have! ...

... well sir, you are not the judge here for what any of us can or cannot explain to you ... you have no ability, no qualifications, and no authority to rule out our usue (or anyone's use) of science to show so clearly why your religious beliefs are wrong ...

... modern science has shown far FAR beyond any credible honest doubt why religious beliefs such as yours are no longer credible in an educated 21st century.

And the only way, I'll repeat that "THE ONLY WAY", for you to argue against that is to produce a wide range of modern science papers that claim to have discovered evidence of God, and/or evidence that the Quran described modern science in the 7th century ... and so far you have been a complete 100% failure to provide anything even remotely like that at all.

 

[heydarian saeed]

This distortion:



This is simply not true, heydarian. I know you have managed to convince yourself it is true, but that's only because you are so determined to believe it you will misinterpret, misunderstand and twist the words of the Qu'ran however much you need to in order to justify that belief to yourself. But you will never convince anyone who isn't just as fanatically determined to believe it as you are. Because it just isn't true.

Please tell me:
How is a star destroyed?
And where does the star fall at this time?
Thanks

 

[heydarian saeed]

Firstly there were four editions of the Quran but they were edited into one by Khalif Uthman. also the original writings had no vowels so the later addition of vowels may have changed the meaning of the text.

As for the statement that John 14.15 which refers to another comforter being sent. If you had bothered to read a few more verses to John 14.26 you will see that the comforter is the holy Ghost. NOT MUHAMMMAD.

I may look at the other bible passages you have mentioned, but I expect they will all have nothing to do with Muhammad.

Hello
We miss you. Come soon.
- Regarding the collection of different versions of the Qur'an by the fourth caliph, I have mentioned this in previous messages in the article on scientific research at the University of Birmingham, England. Apparently you have not read. No problem, go read my previous messages.
- The recitation of the words of the Qur'an has been done by non-Arabs due to the recitation of Asna. Like me, my language is Persian. If the Qur'an is not a voice, I can not read it easily. Otherwise, it has no effect on the meaning of the Qur'an. The bottom line is that translations of the Qur'an are not up to date. And according to medieval science. And this is an important problem in translating the Qur'an.
- Exactly we have read the previous and next verses in the Gospel of John and Matthew. None of them interpret the translation to mean the Holy Spirit. Rather, the next prophet is Muhammad.
- Your knowledge of the meaning and interpretation of the Bible is limited. As you do not basically understand the meaning and interpretation of the Qur'an. And all your talk in this regard is either vague. Or because of instinct hostility. no problem. We're. And we answer.
Thank you

 

[Pixel42]

God is not presumed. God exists. He does not need proof. We seek reason to prove God for our own confidence. I personally do not accept this approach. Because God has been proven to me. It is quite clear. There is no ambiguity in the existence of God.

No, you can't just assume that something that seems obvious to you must be true. Many things that seemed obvious turned out not to be true. The earth is not flat, the sun does not go round the earth, and the first cause argument for the existence of God was refuted many years ago.

You are the one making a positive claim, so the burden of proof is on you. You have been unable to support your claim with either evidence or logical argument.

Please tell me:
How is a star destroyed?
And where does the star fall at this time?
Thanks

The answers to your questions can be found in astronomy text books. They cannot be found in the Qu'ran.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Please tell me:
How is a star destroyed?
And where does the star fall at this time?
Thanks

The end of stars is pretty well known. There are different outcomes depending on the size of the star. There is a simple account for non-scientists here:

https://science.howstuffworks.com/star6.htm

Hans

 

[Chanakya]

Dear friend, please bitter coffee ...
Your stress is a little worrying. It may not matter to you. But it's important to your friends.
My opinion of you is that you are good. But you are not our taste.
Wishing you health and success.
heydarian

*checks impulse to respond in kind, with some similar passive-aggressive incivility*

Your barely veiled insults are noted, heydarian. Just as you've now, since quite a while, given up even the barest pretense of sincere engagement and intellectual integrity, so you now renounce even the barest pretense of the "love" and goodwill as well as scrupulously observed civility that you've been proclaiming all of this while. Hah, so now we finally see your true colors, eh, "friend"?

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Please tell me:
How is a star destroyed?
And where does the star fall at this time?
Thanks

Quran 67:5.
The 'lower heavens' (whatever they may be) are 'adorned with stars like lamps', which will be used as missiles for stoning eavesdropping demons.

It is not clear from this text whether the stars are destroyed once they hit an eavesdropping demon. I assume that star falls somewhere near the demon's feet, but again, the Qur'an doesn't actually say. I guess then heydarian, that you don't know the answer. Strange, because the Qur'an is all sciency and stuff.

Of course, you could actually consult real science, as IanS, Pixel42 and others have repeatedly advised you to do, but that would mean abandoning the eavesdropping demons.
Your choice.

 

[IanS]

Quran 67:5.
The 'lower heavens' (whatever they may be) are 'adorned with stars like lamps', which will be used as missiles for stoning eavesdropping demons.

It is not clear from this text whether the stars are destroyed once they hit an eavesdropping demon. I assume that star falls somewhere near the demon's feet, but again, the Qur'an doesn't actually say. I guess then heydarian, that you don't know the answer. Strange, because the Qur'an is all sciency and stuff.

Of course, you could actually consult real science, as IanS, Pixel42 and others have repeatedly advised you to do, but that would mean abandoning the eavesdropping demons.
Your choice.

Just 2:cents worth, but - I was even a bit suspicious of the word “stars” appearing in such translations, so I did the most minimal Google search and the very first link that pops up gives 7 different translations of that verse 67:5 only one of which has the word “stars” … most translations just say “lamps” e.g. as the translation below –

https://myislam.org/surah-al-mulk/ayat-5/#:~:text=(67:5) We have,chastisement of the Blazing Fire.


“ (67:5) We have adorned the lower heaven[9]*with lamps,[10]*and have made them a means to drive away the satans.[11]*We have prepared for them the chastisement of the Blazing Fire. “


That suggests to me that the actual text of early copies of the Quran probably did not think of the night sky as containing “stars” in the sense of any belief that these were distant Suns or Planets or anything like that, but instead that they simply believed these were “lamps” of burning fire which God had placed in the night sky for the purpose of hurling at demons … presumably that idea came from the fact that of course people in the 7th century could see “shooting stars” i.e. meteors i.e. small bits of rocky debris that enters into the Earths atmosphere.

But apart from that, where heydarain is now asking incredulously or somewhat sarcastically “where do stars fall?” … as everyone else here knows (apart from heydarian apparently), the stars do not “fall” anywhere. Meteorites fall towards the Earth because of gravity, and if they are large enough not to burn away completely by friction in the Earths atmosphere then they may hit the surface of the Earth as small rocks or particles of dust.

And as the rest of us know, large pieces of space debris such as asteroids or comets occasionally hit the surface of the Earth causing more widespread damage or even large craters, inc. the object that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago … but none of those things are “stars” that “fall” anywhere.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Just 2:cents worth, but - I was even a bit suspicious of the word “stars” appearing in such translations, so I did the most minimal Google search and the very first link that pops up gives 7 different translations of that verse 67:5 only one of which has the word “stars” … most translations just say “lamps” e.g. as the translation below –

https://myislam.org/surah-al-mulk/ayat-5/#:~:text=(67:5) We have,chastisement of the Blazing Fire.


“ (67:5) We have adorned the lower heaven[9]*with lamps,[10]*and have made them a means to drive away the satans.[11]*We have prepared for them the chastisement of the Blazing Fire. “


That suggests to me that the actual text of early copies of the Quran probably did not think of the night sky as containing “stars” in the sense of any belief that these were distant Suns or Planets or anything like that, but instead that they simply believed these were “lamps” of burning fire which God had placed in the night sky for the purpose of hurling at demons … presumably that idea came from the fact that of course people in the 7th century could see “shooting stars” i.e. meteors i.e. small bits of rocky debris that enters into the Earths atmosphere.

But apart from that, where heydarain is now asking incredulously or somewhat sarcastically “where do stars fall?” … as everyone else here knows (apart from heydarian apparently), the stars do not “fall” anywhere. Meteorites fall towards the Earth because of gravity, and if they are large enough not to burn away completely by friction in the Earths atmosphere then they may hit the surface of the Earth as small rocks or particles of dust.

And as the rest of us know, large pieces of space debris such as asteroids or comets occasionally hit the surface of the Earth causing more widespread damage or even large craters, inc. the object that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago … but none of those things are “stars” that “fall” anywhere.

Sure, but that's kind of the point, isn't it? Even taking the few translations that use the word 'star', as opposed to 'lamp' or even, as I saw in one, 'lit object', it still shows a level of scientific ignorance typical of that time, and especially among those more willing to see the world in religious, rather than scientific, terms.
heydarian's insistence that the Qur'an is scientific is disproved most convincingly, but the Quran itself.
I'm assuming there will come another long piece of copypasta, in which we will be told in excruciating detail how it really doesn't say that, but something else, all of which we will have heard before, overlaid with cloying and insincere protestations of love and affection for all of us evil unbelievers, none of which we wish to hear again.

 

[IanS]

Sure, but that's kind of the point, isn't it? Even taking the few translations that use the word 'star', as opposed to 'lamp' or even, as I saw in one, 'lit object', it still shows a level of scientific ignorance typical of that time, and especially among those more willing to see the world in religious, rather than scientific, terms.
heydarian's insistence that the Qur'an is scientific is disproved most convincingly, but the Quran itself.
I'm assuming there will come another long piece of copypasta, in which we will be told in excruciating detail how it really doesn't say that, but something else, all of which we will have heard before, overlaid with cloying and insincere protestations of love and affection for all of us evil unbelievers, none of which we wish to hear again.

Well for me the thing that stood out, was that if the true translation is that it actually says "lamps", and where in the various translations they make clear that these "lamps" are burning with flames ... then those verses are expressing the belief that what we now recognise as very distant stars in the night sky, were believed by the authors of the Quran to be burning lamps! ... and that would be the very opposite of any miraculous 7th century scientific revelation about what space and the universe is truly like. IOW the verses would show a rather obvious mistaken ignorance of things seen in the skies/heavens.

But otherwise - Oh, yeah, of course if heydarian says anything at all about that, then it will doubtless be the same obvious fanatical claims that he's repeated so many times here already about how it's all a precise description of Neutron Stars or Supernova or something.

 

[Mojo]

Hello
Please explain my distortion of the Quran. What distortion have I brought in the Quran? "Modern science is stated in the Qur'an. Exactly and there is no doubt about it."

Your distortion of the Quran is explained by this post from IanS:

Well for me the thing that stood out, was that if the true translation is that it actually says "lamps", and where in the various translations they make clear that these "lamps" are burning with flames ... then those verses are expressing the belief that what we now recognise as very distant stars in the night sky, were believed by the authors of the Quran to be burning lamps! ... and that would be the very opposite of any miraculous 7th century scientific revelation about what space and the universe is truly like. IOW the verses would show a rather obvious mistaken ignorance of things seen in the skies/heavens.

But otherwise - Oh, yeah, of course if heydarian says anything at all about that, then it will doubtless be the same obvious fanatical claims that he's repeated so many times here already about how it's all a precise description of Neutron Stars or Supernova or something.

Because the Quran was written with a 7th-century understanding of the universe, you have to distort it to make it fit more recent scientific discoveries.