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

[Remté]

Sure, but the question by @FearGod pertained to tall buildings 'anywhere in the world'.

Well it depends of how the story goes. The basic line is tall buildings. But some say as high as mountains. I don't know where that comes from, but were there very high buildings at that time?

The prophecy includes that this is a sign of the end being near. That's the main point of it.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Well it depends of how the story goes. The basic line is tall buildings. But some say as high as mountains. I don't know where that comes from, but were there very high buildings at that time?

7th Century?
I mean, I'd say 2 things on that...
1) High as mountains sounds more poetic than practical. So I don't see it as a measurement, but descriptive.

2) Depends what you mean by 'buildings'. I could offer a few examples above and beyond the common enough insulae which were present in both Rome and later Byzantium.

For now, I'd suggest Etemenanki is worth thinking about. It was built in Iraq about 1200 years before the time period you're talking about here. It's just under 300 feet high, dedicated to Marduk. The type of structure (ziqqurratu) translates to rising building. It was enormous...dare I say big as a mountain...with a massive tiered entrance.

Still, there were quite a few similarly sized buidings (pretty much exclusively religious, to some degree) from 7th century and earlier.

The prophecy includes that this is a sign of the end being near. That's the main point of it.

Have you ever studied end times predictions from the Bible, and how these have been tied to different events through history? I'm a history geek, I guess it's not everyone's cup of tea, but the end of the first millennium (1000 AD) was a time when many of these prophecies were fulfilled. Well, except that it wasn't the end of days.

Prophecies are universally ambiguous.

 

[FearGod]

Syria, Palestine and Egypt were all part of Rum, so they were all Rum. That's the way ancient empires worked.

Lots of the Arabs worked for Rum as mercenaries or regular soldiers, and others for the Persians.

Do you think the 7th C Arabs thought Rum was Norway and Britain?

No, I didn't say it was Britain or Norway, but Europe in general.
If people living in the Mediterranean were called Romanians,
then was Jesus a Romanian?

 

[FearGod]

Insulae were probably at least 10 storeys high (some reports are 20, but that seems doubtful to me), and they were common in Ancient Rome, 600 years before the time frame you are talking about.

Would they have been desribed as 'tall'? Sure, why not? Tall is a completely relative measure.

I'm very tall when walking in Papua New Guinea, and not at all tall when walking in Norway.

I don't believe that tall buildings were common in the world before 1500 years ago,
actually the population was extremely small that no need to even think to make floors
buildings of any kind,

When the prophet said that once you see that the buildings in Mecca approached
its mountains then it's a sign that the end is nigh, the tall buildings is a modern thing
that happened all along with how the world has changed in the last 100 years.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't believe that tall buildings were common in the world before 1500 years ago,
actually the population was extremely small that no need to even think to make floors
buildings of any kind,

When the prophet said that once you see that the buildings in Mecca approached
its mountains then it's a sign that the end is nigh, the tall buildings is a modern thing
that happened all along with how the world has changed in the last 100 years.

Why not quote the entire passage?

 

[FearGod]

7th Century?
I mean, I'd say 2 things on that...
1) High as mountains sounds more poetic than practical. So I don't see it as a measurement, but descriptive.

2) Depends what you mean by 'buildings'. I could offer a few examples above and beyond the common enough insulae which were present in both Rome and later Byzantium.

For now, I'd suggest Etemenanki is worth thinking about. It was built in Iraq about 1200 years before the time period you're talking about here. It's just under 300 feet high, dedicated to Marduk. The type of structure (ziqqurratu) translates to rising building. It was enormous...dare I say big as a mountain...with a massive tiered entrance.

Still, there were quite a few similarly sized buidings (pretty much exclusively religious, to some degree) from 7th century and earlier.



Have you ever studied end times predictions from the Bible, and how these have been tied to different events through history? I'm a history geek, I guess it's not everyone's cup of tea, but the end of the first millennium (1000 AD) was a time when many of these prophecies were fulfilled. Well, except that it wasn't the end of days.

Prophecies are universally ambiguous.

I believe it's really dangerous to deceive our own selves when we ignore such
important notes given by a man came to this world 1500 years ago, when he
said that buildings in Mecca will approach its mountains and the camels will
not used for long journeys then you should know that the end is nigh.

All of us will have an end one day and this life I believe is just a sample, the prophet
similar to Jesus they were facing enemies to stop them from spreading the message,
the prophet was known to be honest and truthful, many people believed his message
because they know him as a honest man, even when he was warning them about
how serious it's, he used to remind them that he did never lie during his life and they know
him, the first man that believed him was the richest man in Mecca(Abu Bakr), when he
heard that Muhamad is preaching for a religious message, he said this man is telling
the truth, he was his close friend and he know how honest and truthful he was.

The prophet even before his death, he cared to deliver the message and asked people to deliver it to the others.

 

[FearGod]

Why not quote the entire passage?

When you see Mecca, its mountain with holes (pierced through them), and its buildings reach its mountain tops, then as-Sa’ah (the Hour) has already cast its shadow."

 

[lewisnotmiller]

When you see Mecca, its mountain with holes (pierced through them), and its buildings reach its mountain tops, then as-Sa’ah (the Hour) has already cast its shadow."

So I would assume the building code in Mecca doesn't allow buildings talker than ten storeys.

 

[FearGod]

So I would assume the building code in Mecca doesn't allow buildings talker than ten storeys.

Makkah clock royal tower is 120 floors
List of tallest buildings in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia

 

[Augustus]

No, I didn't say it was Britain or Norway, but Europe in general.

You think a 7th C Arab would have thought of the Romans as 'Europeans'?

They would no more have thought of them as Europeans because in modern times Rome is considered part of Europe, than they would have thought them Turks because modern 'Constantinople' is in Turkey.

Egypt, Syria, 'Turkey', Armenia, etc. were all far more important and enduring parts of the Roman Empire than Western Europe.

Before they conquered them, Romans were appalled at the Gauls, Celts, Britons, etc. seeing as the worst type of uncivilised Barbarians. If you told the emperor that 'actually they are all Europeans like you' he'd probably kill you for the insult.

After they conquered them they turned their elite into Romans, with Roman titles, education etc. This was the Roman way: conquer people turn the elite into Romans, which was a social status, not an ethnicity or nationality.

The process of Romanisation of the Arab tribes is likely one of the reasons the Arabs were able to conquer the region, the same as the process of Romanisation of the Gemanic tribes on the Western frontiers helped cause the fall of the Western parts of the Empire.

If people living in the Mediterranean were called Romanians,
then was Jesus a Romanian?

No, he wasn't of sufficient social rank. King Herod would have been though a Roman citizen though

To be a Roman citizen required:

a) Being in the Roman Empire
b) Being of sufficient social rank

Modern concepts of 'nationality' and 'race' didn't exist.

In most cases, people of low rank couldn't care less whether their overlords were Romans or Persians or Arabs as long as they weren't oppressed too much. They cared about their village and putting food on the table and not being killed or enslaved.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Makkah clock royal tower is 120 floors
List of tallest buildings in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia

So...they think there is a prophecy about end times plus tall buildings, then go ahead and build tall buildings. That seems a somewhat strange choice.

 

[FearGod]

You think a 7th C Arab would have thought of the Romans as 'Europeans'?

They would no more have thought of them as Europeans because in modern times Rome is considered part of Europe, than they would have thought them Turks because modern 'Constantinople' is in Turkey.

Egypt, Syria, 'Turkey', Armenia, etc. were all far more important and enduring parts of the Roman Empire than Western Europe.

Before they conquered them, Romans were appalled at the Gauls, Celts, Britons, etc. seeing as the worst type of uncivilised Barbarians. If you told the emperor that 'actually they are all Europeans like you' he'd probably kill you for the insult.

After they conquered them they turned their elite into Romans, with Roman titles, education etc. This was the Roman way: conquer people turn the elite into Romans, which was a social status, not an ethnicity or nationality.

The process of Romanisation of the Arab tribes is likely one of the reasons the Arabs were able to conquer the region, the same as the process of Romanisation of the Gemanic tribes on the Western frontiers helped cause the fall of the Western parts of the Empire.

Still the origin of the Romanians is Europe similar to saying the origin of Arabs is
the Arab peninsula, can you say the origin of Arabs is Africa.

No, he wasn't of sufficient social rank. King Herod would have been though a Roman citizen though

To be a Roman citizen required:

a) Being in the Roman Empire
b) Being of sufficient social rank

Modern concepts of 'nationality' and 'race' didn't exist.

In most cases, people of low rank couldn't care less whether their overlords were Romans or Persians or Arabs as long as they weren't oppressed too much. They cared about their village and putting food on the table and not being killed or enslaved.

King Herod was an ally to the Romans, but he himself was a Jew.

 

[England my lionheart]

I don't see how anyone can associate the Quran with science or can think it's anything special other than it's it's part of history.

Followers of Islam will talk of it's unequalled beauty in it's prose but if you look even a little bit before Muhammed great poetry was already a thing long before,imru Al qais for example was a 6th century Arabic poet and very highly regarded as it's greatest.

The other thing about it being written in Arabic is this beauty that we're told about disappears in translation,if a book was sent for us all to read and see the beauty in it Arabic was probably not the best choice imo.

The thing I find interesting is Muhammed and "the companions",it seems to even that the companions did ok out of promoting Muhammed,war booty,property,land,slaves etc,I wonder how influential they were like when Muhammed recurved the so called "satanic verses" I wonder if the said woah this one isn't a good idea.

 

[FearGod]

So...they think there is a prophecy about end times plus tall buildings, then go ahead and build tall buildings. That seems a somewhat strange choice.

And they realized it in the last few years and started to make tall buildings, I think
they should have made it 1000 years ago, right.

 

[Augustus]

Still the origin of the Romanians is Europe similar to saying the origin of Arabs is
the Arab peninsula, can you say the origin of Arabs is Africa.

And it is still completely meaningless. Would you say that the most logical way to describe 7th C Arabs was that they were Asians like the Chinese, Japanese and Siberian Eskimos? So if someone saw an Arab and then an Eskimo they would think "they are all Asians and thus share a common bond and cultural identity"? This is what you are arguing for Europeans.

Africa is a specific lump of rock, living on this lump of rock doesn't magically link you to others born on this rock and separate you from people not born on the rock.

Carthage was in "Africa", yet considering that they have more in common with Sub-Saharan Africans than they did with other Mediterraneans is idiotic. The Romans didn't look at Hannibal as being an "African" like the Nubians and Ethiopians. They were Phoenecians. The Roman Emperor Septimus Severus was born in Libya, this didn't make him an "African Emperor" and Hadrian, born in Spain, a "European Emperor". Likewise, Cleopatra wasn't an "African", she was Greek (but not a "European").

You are obsessed with modern geography for ideological reasons, which is why you are always wrong on this issue and blind yourself to something so very obvious: modern geographical terms are meaningless.

King Herod was an ally to the Romans, but he himself was a Jew.

Again, you don't understand this era. Being a Jew didn't prevent you from being a Roman (see for example Paul of New Testament fame).

Julius Caesar bestowed Roman citizenship on Herod's father in 47BC.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

And they realized it in the last few years and started to make tall buildings, I think
they should have made it 1000 years ago, right.

Are you actually suggesting they're now trying to fulfill the prophecy?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Still the origin of the Romanians is Europe similar to saying the origin of Arabs is
the Arab peninsula, can you say the origin of Arabs is Africa.

What the heck does 'Europe' mean in the context of the 7th century?

King Herod was an ally to the Romans, but he himself was a Jew.

Herod? That's 7 centuries earlier than the period you're talking about. Geopolitics from the time of Christ is as relevant to Mohammed's world as the year 1300 is to ours.

In any case, it was entirely possible to be both Roman and Jew, as already mentioned. As indeed one of the key sources of history for Herod was (Josephus).

Further, he was a client King of Rome. 7 centuries later the Byzantine Empire was considerably more Roman than the mess left behind in 'Europe' following the collapse of the Republic.

 

[paarsurrey]

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?

"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"."

Please quote the verse where Quran claims that Makkkah is the center of Earth. Please also quote the verses in the context for correct understanding.

Regards

 

[FearGod]

And it is still completely meaningless. Would you say that the most logical way to describe 7th C Arabs was that they were Asians like the Chinese, Japanese and Siberian Eskimos? So if someone saw an Arab and then an Eskimo they would think "they are all Asians and thus share a common bond and cultural identity"? This is what you are arguing for Europeans.

Africa is a specific lump of rock, living on this lump of rock doesn't magically link you to others born on this rock and separate you from people not born on the rock.

Carthage was in "Africa", yet considering that they have more in common with Sub-Saharan Africans than they did with other Mediterraneans is idiotic. The Romans didn't look at Hannibal as being an "African" like the Nubians and Ethiopians. They were Phoenecians. The Roman Emperor Septimus Severus was born in Libya, this didn't make him an "African Emperor" and Hadrian, born in Spain, a "European Emperor". Likewise, Cleopatra wasn't an "African", she was Greek (but not a "European").

You are obsessed with modern geography for ideological reasons, which is why you are always wrong on this issue and blind yourself to something so very obvious: modern geographical terms are meaningless.




Again, you don't understand this era. Being a Jew didn't prevent you from being a Roman (see for example Paul of New Testament fame).

Julius Caesar bestowed Roman citizenship on Herod's father in 47BC.

Back to your quoted hadith

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) assaying: The Last Hour would not come until the Romans [Rum i.e the Byzantines] would land at al-A'maq or in Dabiq. An army consisting of the best (soldiers) of the people of the earth at that time will come from Medina (to counteract them). When they will arrange themselves in ranks, the Romans would say: Do not stand between us and those (Muslims) who took prisoners from amongst us. Let us fight with them; and the Muslims would say:Nay, by Allah, we would never get aside from you and from our brethren that you may fight them. They will then fight and a third (part) of the army would run away, whom Allah will never forgive. A third (part ofthe army). which would be constituted of excellent martyrs in Allah's eye, would be killed and the third who would never be put to trial would win and they would be conquerors of Constantinople.

It says that the Rums will land in Dabiq,

What it means they'll land in, it means they'll come into land from sea otherwise
from air, you won't land from land to land and even the word in Arabic is
تنزل , which mean they'll be dropped from air into land.

So who do you think those Romans who'll be landed in Dabiq, are they coming
from Turkey, of course not because their lands are in contact with Syria, which
means there's no landing, do you think the Egyptian Romans will land in North
Syria or from Jordan.

As I said to you, you need to think and not just reading the words.
There's no doubt that this army is coming from the west (Al Rum)

 

[FearGod]

Are you actually suggesting they're now trying to fulfill the prophecy?

This is what you thought

You said

So...they think there is a prophecy about end times plus tall buildings, then go ahead and build tall buildings. That seems a somewhat strange choice.

Your reply indicates that they made recently the tall building because of the hadith
except if I misunderstood your reply.