Koran & Hadith in plain english?

[Augustus]

So did you understand what I said about the Madhwaajib in arabic and how that makes a recital (since you mentioned recital). ?

So did you understand the simple question I asked you to answer before asking me to jump through any more of your hoops?

Do you understand?

Yes, I already explained to you why that is not a convincing explanation to a non-Muslim.

Why do you think it should be?

 

[icehorse]

Irrrelevant. And I dont know who you are mate.

It's relevant in so far as you use this tactic to derail debates that aren't going your way.

And I remember you, because I keep a list of novel fallacy or illogical arguments I hear people make and you've contributed a couple of hum-dingers to the list

 

[icehorse]

How we understand it is that if there are words that we are not knowing which is called Thaweel its not going to matter theologically, and we will know the meaning one day

Oh by all means, don't let the facts slow you down

 

[firedragon]

Yes, I already explained to you why that is not a convincing explanation to a non-Muslim.

But you asked a theological question. So you have to approach it methodologically. Basically, put your feet into muslim shoes. If you are unable, then you will of course not understand or agree.

So did you understand the simple question I asked you to answer before asking me to jump through any more of your hoops?

I am not gonna respond to your rhetorical "hoops" and other cross fence type of discussion. If you feel good doing that its your thing.

But again, did you understand the answer about the Madhwaajib and what difference it makes in a recital or not. And I ask, because it was you who brought in recital.

 

[firedragon]

Oh by all means, don't let the facts slow you down

What facts?

So since you are also posing as an expert, what do you understand about Thaweel al masaari that I explained about?

 

[firedragon]

It's relevant in

Nope.

 

[firedragon]

And I remember you

But I dont remember you. If you are keeping lists and are following people to insult them based on your list, maybe that's the definition of trolling.

 

[Augustus]

But you asked a theological question. So you have to approach it methodologically. Basically, put your feet into muslim shoes. If you are unable, then you will of course not understand or agree.

No, I made a point about factual history, not theology. I don't really care whether the issue has theological importance or not because I'm not trying to critique Islam the religion, but just have an interest in history.

If I put myself in a Muslim's shoes I would be basing my beliefs on different axiomatic assumptions which is why the two approaches don't mix. We both start with the unchallenged assumption that the other's approach is fundamentally wrong.

From a historical perspective though:

Imo it is a fair assumption that Muhammad understood who the Sabians were.

The evidence shows that later exegetes did not know.

Therefore we have some knowledge that has been lost (a point which is supported by exegetes not understanding other parts of the Quran, and the growth of hadith/sirah literature that helped explain these passages).

I am not gonna respond to your rhetorical "hoops" and other cross fence type of discussion.

You aren't going to respond to my simple request that you clarify what you think I said, in the context I said it so we can see if you are barking up the wrong tree or not?

And that such a request is a "cross fence rhetorical hoop"

Kind of sums up your approach perfectly.

Well done.

 

[firedragon]

No, I made a point about factual history, not theology.

Yeah. But its a theological point.

Anyway, I see that you wish to address historically. Not methodologically. So do you have an opinion?

You aren't going to respond to my simple request that you clarify what you think I said, in the context I said it so we can see if you are barking up the wrong tree or not?

And that such a request is a "cross fence rhetorical hoop"

Kind of sums up your approach perfectly.

Well done.

Still. You brought in recital. So Still you didnt answer a kindergarten level question. What would a madhwaagib make a difference? You brought in recital.

 

[Augustus]

Yeah. But its a theological point.

Anyway, I see that you wish to address historically. Not methodologically. So do you have an opinion?

What does "historically not methodologically" even mean?

I using a critical historical methodology. My opinion is as stated.

From this perspective, do you think it fair to assume Muhammad knew who the Sabians were given multiple references to them in the Quran?

If so why do you think later Muslims didn't know?

 

[icehorse]

What facts?

So since you are also posing as an expert, what do you understand about Thaweel al masaari that I explained about?

I've never suggested that I'm an expert in theology. But I have a pretty solid foundation in cognitive science and learning theory, and it's useful to look at scripture through those lenses.

 

[icehorse]

But I dont remember you. If you are keeping lists and are following people to insult them based on your list, maybe that's the definition of trolling.

Nah, I don't think so. The study of bad arguments is important. And notice I'm only responding to stuff you're saying

 

[firedragon]

What does "historically not methodologically" even mean?

You missed the comma. Finally. You asked for a clarification. But you missed the simple explanation. Let me cut and paste it. "So you have to approach it methodologically. Basically, put your feet into muslim shoes."

I using a critical historical methodology. My opinion is as stated.

You are not using a historical methodology. You are thinking you do. You wish to.

From this perspective, do you think it fair to assume Muhammad knew who the Sabians were given multiple references to them in the Quran?

If so why do you think later Muslims didn't know?

About Sabians? I explained it. Please go back and read it once more.

Cheers.

 

[firedragon]

Nah, I don't think so. The study of bad arguments is important. And notice I'm only responding to stuff you're saying

Good for you. Keep at it.

 

[firedragon]

I've never suggested that I'm an expert in theology. But I have a pretty solid foundation in cognitive science and learning theory, and it's useful to look at scripture through those lenses.

Good for you. Stay on it.

 

[Augustus]

You missed the comma. Finally. You asked for a clarification. But you missed the simple explanation. Let me cut and paste it. "So you have to approach it methodologically. Basically, put your feet into muslim shoes."

You think it's "methodological" to basically say "God never wanted people to understand and it doesn't matter anyway so don't question it like a good Muslim"?

You are not using a historical methodology. You are thinking you do. You wish to.

Nope.

Saying "God did it so don't question it logically" is not historical.

Saying "role play as a Muslim" is not historical.

About Sabians? I explained it. Please go back and read it once more

So you can't answer beyond saying it's a Divine mystery?

At least you admit it. That will do.

Theological and historical methodologies are incompatible, so if you don't want to defend it historically that's fine.

 

[firedragon]

You think it's "methodological" to basically say "God never wanted people to understand and it doesn't matter anyway so don't question it like a good Muslim"?

Thats not what I was speaking about.

Nope.

Saying "God did it so don't question it logically" is not historical.

Saying "role play as a Muslim" is not historical.

Exactly. It is not.

So you can't answer beyond saying it's a Divine mystery?

Yes. Thats the whole concept of the Quran as I explained. There are some verses that contains Muthasabih verses. You got it. So its not just divine mystery because its an isolated verse, but because the Qur'an already has stated that Muthasaabih verses exists in the Qur'an. You can identify them.

Although, there have been other explanations. For example, the word Sabieen comes from the word Saba, so it means people of other religions. It could also mean those who left the religion.

 

[Augustus]

Yes. Thats the whole concept of the Quran as I explained. There are some verses that contains Muthasabih verses. You got it. So its not just divine mystery because its an isolated verse, but because the Qur'an already has stated that Muthasaabih verses exists in the Qur'an. You can identify them.

As a religious argument it makes sense due to axiomatic assumptions about the Quran and God.

As a critical historical argument based on different axiomatic assumptions that have no role for supernatural agency, its entirely based on circular reasoning.

Although, there have been other explanations. For example, the word Sabieen comes from the word Saba, so it means people of other religions. It could also mean those who left the religion

The fact that people think they should know who this group are yet can't identify them is evidence that some knowledge has been lost, as it is logical to start with the assumption that the identity of the Sabians was known to Muhammad and his broader community.

Even if we assume we were never supposed to know who they were, the fact that people think we should be able to identify them also seems to suggest knowledge was lost.

 

[firedragon]

As a critical historical argument based on different axiomatic assumptions that have no role for supernatural agency, its entirely based on circular reasoning.

Absolutely.

The fact that people think they should know who this group are yet can't identify them is evidence that some knowledge has been lost, as it is logical to start with the assumption that the identity of the Sabians was known to Muhammad and his broader community

Did you not understand what I said? Please read that once more. The meaning of the word, and what it represents.

If you read once more, maybe you will understand that Saba does not mean one particular group. Its a general meaning.

 

[Augustus]

Absolutely.

Which is why it's generally not going to be remotely persuasive to non-Muslims.

Did you not understand what I said? Please read that once more. The meaning of the word, and what it represents.

If you read once more, maybe you will understand that Saba does not mean one particular group. Its a general meaning.

Again who or what exactly it relates to is largely irrelevant. You focus so much on linguistic quibbles that you tend to forget the actual point being made.

The point is that people don't know who or what it relates to and are guessing, hence it is indicative of lost knowledge between the generations.

But you've already accepted you can't make a historical argument against this idea so there is not much room left for discussion.