How convincing is the Qur'an anyway? In which respects?

[Augustus]

If you say so. there are scholars in America who are scientist who have explained it as well, but considering you are the supposed expert I thought you knew that. A one called Seyyed Hossein Nasr is one who explained the scientific aspect of the Qur'an he is an esteemed George Washington University professor.

What precisely do you believe it says about 'embryology' that would merit being considered 'remarkable' in the 7th C?

Even if we assume it is trying to be 'scientific' which is highly debatable, it says nothing that was unknown to the Greeks (Galen, etc.) centuries before that.

 

[Shad]

I wish that was relevant. I really do.

It is relevant as the source is Muslims themselves instead of anti-Muslims.

 

[Shad]

Neither were those in the Crusades.

You were talking about modern ME problem which is far more relevant to the Ottoman's than the Crusades. More so the Crusaders were in response to repeated wars against Christians by other Muslim dynasties; Umayyad in the West, Abbasid in the East follow the former's fall from power. Again none were innocent bystanders being attacked for no reason. Heck see the Treaty of Tripoli.

Your grasp of history is horrible.

 

[Prestor John]

There is a thread by @Debater Slayer elsewhere discussing the literary merits of the Qur'an.

However, there is a surprisingly predictable recurrence of claims about the excellence of the Qur'an in other respects.

It is surprising because, to the best of my knowledge, they consistently turn out to be questionable at best, despite the passion and insistence of so many.

Perhaps the best example of how bizarre those claims are is the anecdote of how the Qur'an predicts, apparently accurately by the perception of some, that Makkah is somehow "the center of Earth".

There is also the anecdote told in the Qur'an itself tells about how hard it presumably is to create a text of comparable merit. Needless to say, that is ultimately pure self-promotion with nothing substantial to show for it.

Challenge of the Quran - Wikipedia

Far as religious doctrine go, I must say that the Qur'an is if anything deplorable. Its doctrine is both derivative, self-limiting and seriously misguided, to the point that to this day it insists on the repudiation of LGBT and the defense of "proper" ways for husbands to physically hit their wives.

Then there is the sheer inability of the Qur'an to even acknowledge properly the nature and existence of either atheism or non-Abrahamic religion. Or the necessity of freedom of belief.

All in all, a pretty limited and dismaying text, raised by the sincere if misguided effort of so very many to a role that it can't ever possibly sustain.

Yet the claims that the Qur'an is of "remarkable accuracy" or admirable in other ways persist.

Do we have any true indication that such is or could conceivably be the case?

Not very, to me.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Except the translations I use are from believing and practicing Muslims.

I have not seen them here in this newly created thread.....

You are making a lot of assertions but have yet to demonstrate anything. More so I can take your own argument and apply it to moderate translations and miracle claims, you cited scholar, etc, etc.

I have yet to make an argument here except the opinion I initially laid down.

I honestly think, the only reason the divinity of Quran is not recognized, is because of misunderstandings in interpretations.

The first, and the most important thing to know about Quran is the method of interpretation.
And the only way, not to misinterpret is to know and understand verse 3:7 well, before even trying to interpret any other verse of the Quran.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Not very, to me.

Of course as if you read and understood it. Funny how Jews have more in common theologically with Muslims than you Christians.

 

[loverofhumanity]

There is a thread by @Debater Slayer elsewhere discussing the literary merits of the Qur'an.

However, there is a surprisingly predictable recurrence of claims about the excellence of the Qur'an in other respects.

It is surprising because, to the best of my knowledge, they consistently turn out to be questionable at best, despite the passion and insistence of so many.

Perhaps the best example of how bizarre those claims are is the anecdote of how the Qur'an predicts, apparently accurately by the perception of some, that Makkah is somehow "the center of Earth".

There is also the anecdote told in the Qur'an itself tells about how hard it presumably is to create a text of comparable merit. Needless to say, that is ultimately pure self-promotion with nothing substantial to show for it.

Challenge of the Quran - Wikipedia

Far as religious doctrine go, I must say that the Qur'an is if anything deplorable. Its doctrine is both derivative, self-limiting and seriously misguided, to the point that to this day it insists on the repudiation of LGBT and the defense of "proper" ways for husbands to physically hit their wives.

Then there is the sheer inability of the Qur'an to even acknowledge properly the nature and existence of either atheism or non-Abrahamic religion. Or the necessity of freedom of belief.

All in all, a pretty limited and dismaying text, raised by the sincere if misguided effort of so very many to a role that it can't ever possibly sustain.

Yet the claims that the Qur'an is of "remarkable accuracy" or admirable in other ways persist.

Do we have any true indication that such is or could conceivably be the case?

The Quran contains many truths. It is impossible for me to adequately cover them in an entire book let alone a post. Empty words perhaps for you but not 1.7 billion adherents.

For many, the Quran represents the first documented fight for religious freedom. Which is what the Quran was all about. The right to believe in one God was suppressed by the Meccans and Muslims became outcasts, were tortured, killed and exiled for believing in one God which was not in harmony with Mecca’s 360 profit making idols. So the struggle from the very beginning was for freedom of belief. Muslims were persecuted for 13 years and their homes and businesses seized or destroyed before they fled to Mecca

So firstly I am convinced that the world of today has the Quran to thank for the basic human right of freedom of religion. An achievement which has benefited all humanity. It was the Quran which promoted this right to all humanity. Although some Muslim countries do not observe it, it spread through the entire world to become a cornerstone of all democracies.

Next nationhood. Before Muhammad appeared there were no nations or nation building or constitutions as He made. Within a short time He had united the warring tribes of Arabia and formed the ummah or community which eventually led to nationhood before even the nations of the west had even appeared and also established things like the Constitution of Medina which for the first time in human history granted official rights to other religions as citizens. These things and many other concepts from the Quran were later borrowed, copied and modified by other countries,

https://www.minhajpublications.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/The_Constitution_of_Madina_Ebook.pdf

It appears there are different English translations of the Quran mainly by men which support the view that the Quran promotes beating women which I do not believe to be the case in Sura 4:34. Arabic words have many meanings and the word to beat or hit is always used with a number such as 10 or 100 times which it gives no instructions for in this verse. In this case I believe the wrong word has been used and another meaning of the same Arabic word to ‘hit’ is also ‘to separate’ which I believe is the correct translation and what was intended. See link below

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.885.8423&rep=rep1&type=pdf

I believe it needs to be pointed out also the many contributions Islam has made to civilisation.

https://bahai-library.com/cobb_islamic_contributions_civilization

By Mecca being the Centre of the earth it simply means Qiblih or the place to turn to when praying. This changes with each Prophet to test the sincerity of those who claim to believe.

The Quran issues a challenge to ‘produce its like’ which I believe is fair but it entails being able to write a book which billions of people will try and live their lives by even thousands of years after you die and it’s written. I think this accomplishment by the Quran of itself proves its Divinity as there is no one in earth capable of such a feat. Critics should, if they think it was just a book written by a man take up this challenge.

 

[LuisDantas]

A lot of Muslims can read it - though perhaps not fluently.

True enough.

Unfortunately, that ends up meaning a lot less than one would hope.

 

[Salvador]

The Koran tells a story about a supreme being "Allah" who uses stars or shooting stars as missiles to chase away supernatural beings "the Jinn". (Koran 15:16-18. 37:6-10, 67:5 and 72:8-9) High-velocity stars move through space in a predictable path and at about the same rate of speed as do man-made space probes. However, supernatural beings such as "the Jinn" ought to easily be able to outrun or out maneuver either natural objects such as stars or man-made objects such as space probes. Hence, here the Koran is demonstrably false, because natural objects such as stars couldn't effectively be used as missiles to chase away supernatural beings such as "the Jinn. Also if Jinn were supernatural, they wouldn't be affected by any natural object as how described in the Koran.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Except that no one has ever done it.

Any text that doesn't prioritize text length instead of content.

It isn't an encyclopedia.

You would think God's Word would include everything there is to know.

The Quran talks about freedom a lot. It says God created people with a free will.

And gets offended when it's used.

Christianity seems quite pleased to tear at Islam, and that is sad.

Only mostly because it's horrendously hypocritical. Every scripture should be available for critique.

Yes, there are some amazing scientific revelations in the Quran.

Like what?

Even the embryo thing isn't a miracle. The fact that the ancients had to ban autopsies/anatomical research means it was being done, which means anyone willing to cut up a human being would find what goes on inside.

For many, the Quran represents the first documented fight for religious freedom. Which is what the Quran was all about. The right to believe in one God was suppressed by the Meccans and Muslims became outcasts, were tortured, killed and exiled for believing in one God which was not in harmony with Mecca’s 360 profit making idols. So the struggle from the very beginning was for freedom of belief. Muslims were persecuted for 13 years and their homes and businesses seized or destroyed before they fled to Mecca

That's support for their religious freedom, not everyone else's.

Before Muhammad appeared there were no nations or nation building or constitutions as He made. Within a short time He had united the warring tribes of Arabia and formed the ummah or community which eventually led to nationhood before even the nations of the west had even appeared and also established things like the Constitution of Medina which for the first time in human history granted official rights to other religions as citizens.

LOL. How do you think empires such as the Greeks or Romans or Chinese or Mongols or whatever came to be?

King Cyrus in the bible is praised for letting Jews be Jews after the Exile. That's before Muhammad, not after.

I believe it needs to be pointed out also the many contributions Islam has made to civilisation.

While I value Muslim contributions to math and science, they still wouldn't have done any of that without caring about the preservation of the math and science done by, say, Greeks.

The Quran issues a challenge to ‘produce its like’ which I believe is fair but it entails being able to write a book which billions of people will try and live their lives by even thousands of years after you die and it’s written.

Christians have a similar challenge and both ignore the fact there are still people who believe in stories that far predate both.

Critics should, if they think it was just a book written by a man take up this challenge.

Neither the bible nor the qu'ran were followed by "billions" of people shortly after being written, so it's not a fair challenge. Give it a thousand years and Game of Thrones might be as popular. Who knows?

 

[Remté]

You would think God's Word would include everything there is to know.

Why?

And gets offended when it's used.

It is impossible to offend it.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I think the revelation of the Quran by an illiterate man is indeed with aid of spiritual sources above him.

It is also in some ways a product of its culture and time and judgment by liberal 21st Century western society is taking things out of the context of the times preceding this revelation.

At the risk of starting a debate I'm not sure I'm interested in, why the assumption that Muhammad was illiterate?

 

[Remté]

At the risk of starting a debate I'm not sure I'm interested in, why the assumption that Muhammad was illiterate?

Every source says so.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The Quran issues a challenge to ‘produce its like’ which I believe is fair but it entails being able to write a book which billions of people will try and live their lives by even thousands of years after you die and it’s written. I think this accomplishment by the Quran of itself proves its Divinity as there is no one in earth capable of such a feat. Critics should, if they think it was just a book written by a man take up this challenge.

Like the Bible? I mean, personally, I don't see the divine in either the Bible nor the Quran, but those who use it's impact as an indication of divinity must surely see both as divine, then?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Every source says so.

Every source? That's a bold claim.

 

[Remté]

Every source? That's a bold claim.

So be it. Do tell if you know of one that contradicts it. ....if there is it is probably propaganda against Islam about how cleverly the whole Quran war forged out of what not.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

So be it. Do tell if you know of one that contradicts it. ....if there is it is probably propaganda against Islam about how cleverly the whole Quran war forged out of what not.

Wait, you're judging the source before I even mention one? And accusing me of bias. Wow.

 

[George-ananda]

At the risk of starting a debate I'm not sure I'm interested in, why the assumption that Muhammad was illiterate?

Almost historical certainly.

If you are not aware Muhammad did not write the Quran. He ‘recited’ it and scribes ‘wrote’ it.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Almost historical certainly.

If you are not aware Muhammad did not write the Quran. He ‘recited’ it and scribes ‘wrote’ it.

I'm certainly aware of the claims made around the Quran's origins.
What do you mean by 'almost historical' and why do you profess that?

 

[George-ananda]

I'm certainly aware of the claims made around the Quran's origins.
What do you mean by 'almost historical' and why do you profess that?

I take the mainstream historical understanding as I wasn’t there. Much like George Washington, Napoleon, etc..

Apparently he could not write his own name.