Poll: Signs of eloquence of Quran

[Link]

So we’ve gone from the “eloquence of the Quran” to the family of Muhammed,im sorry I don’t see any sound arguments that prove anything.

If you don't see sound arguments proving God, his Oneness, the signs of God in the outward and inward, in the creation outwardly and in the spiritual realm of the soul, the wisdom of connecting from lowest to highest through a divine book (Nubuwa) and showing all levels of knowledge to the Nabi and him being a Messenger conveying the truth of it in the Sunnah, then of course, you can't appreciate the exalted nature of Quran.

And if you don't see the wisdom of Ulil-Amr in Surah Nisa and, you don't understand the social model of Islam, and Imamate and Islamic society, then sure, it's not proven to you.

But these arguments for Islam in the Quran, they are before the Quran, and all it takes is reasoning.

One can listen to Quran and Ahlulbayt (a) and be guided to these proofs, or one can reason and philosophize sincerely, and will reach these proofs as well.

If a person would ask "Why aren't Angels" coming down to earth instead of humans, the Quran has a whole philosophy of why humans and why the Prophets and chosen ones, been chosen and exalted above the Angels in this regard.

And the issue is delegation. Delegated to Angels, they either have to come outwardly in non-Angelic form, and confuse us, or if they are witnessed in Angelic form, not everyone is ready for that reality.

And humans delegate leadership to the likes of Trump and mischief makes in the earth, but won't give a chance to those God proves their authority and who have a divine book calling to them. This arrogance and oppression towards their followers, has always resulted in destruction of arrogant people "So wait, we too are of those who await".

 

[England my lionheart]

That's great. So why do you believe some of them crept into the Qur'an? Which specific verses, and why do they have to be this way? What features of the so called "Eloquence" do both books have?

Thanks.

Because I’m more interested in the history of The Middle East and Islam like the “One thousand and one nights” folktales and how poetry and storytelling in the oral tradition before Islam I came accross al Qais and his story,.

 

[firedragon]

Sure, but is the "historical" reports about it and the "snip" of those four lines from Quran, before Quran?

According to some Christian, Anti Islamic polemicists who made careers out of it. One guy was arrested trying to burn his documents knowing he will get arrested for money laundering if the authorities got hold of his documents. He tried to burn them in the basement of the building he was living at. He was arrested for financial crimes. His name is Anish Shorrosh. Then you get Robert Morey. They you get Fadi. Then you get Masood. Then you get Tishdall.

I have read all of their material. Their scholarship is as poor as stone. Do you know the basis of the story? The daughter of Al Kindi lived during the prophet Muhammed's time, and she told his daughter that when the Qur'an was recited, she recognised a verse or two from her fathers poetry. This is at least in the year 610 and definitely later if that ever happened, and Al Kindi died 90 years earlier. The daughter would have to be a 120 years old, and is associating the prophets daughter by the way, not the prophets father or grandfather. Later, pretenders like Anish Shorrosh came and changed that story to "granddaughter" just like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. Swish. Changed the story. And the audience swallows it. Because it's "Nice to hear".

The story is absolutely bogus.

 

[firedragon]

Because I’m more interested in the history of The Middle East and Islam like the “One thousand and one nights” folktales and how poetry and storytelling in the oral tradition before Islam I came accross al Qais and his story,.

It's not Al Qais. It's ImrulQais. Better known as Al Kindhi.

I appreciate the interest in any of these things. Even if you are interested in English poetry and prose itself that's great.

Yet I request you to not to make such profound statements about these literature.

Cheers.

 

[England my lionheart]

It's not Al Qais. It's ImrulQais. Better known as Al Kindhi.

I appreciate the interest in any of these things. Even if you are interested in English poetry and prose itself that's great.

Yet I request you to not to make such profound statements about these literature.

Cheers.

Why,is it too close to comfort?.

 

[firedragon]

Why,is it too close to comfort?.

No. Because they are made out of absolute ignorance.

 

[England my lionheart]

No. Because they are made out of absolute ignorance.

So anything other than what you believe is “absolute ignorance”,actually your not unique when it comes to Abrahmic faiths but your welcome to what you believe,if it’s infallible and strong it can withstand anything or maybe not.

 

[firedragon]

So anything other than what you believe is

No. Only what you said.

 

[England my lionheart]

If you don't see sound arguments proving God, his Oneness, the signs of God in the outward and inward, in the creation outwardly and in the spiritual realm of the soul, the wisdom of connecting from lowest to highest through a divine book (Nubuwa) and showing all levels of knowledge to the Nabi and him being a Messenger conveying the truth of it in the Sunnah, then of course, you can't appreciate the exalted nature of Quran.

And if you don't see the wisdom of Ulil-Amr in Surah Nisa and, you don't understand the social model of Islam, and Imamate and Islamic society, then sure, it's not proven to you.

But these arguments for Islam in the Quran, they are before the Quran, and all it takes is reasoning.

One can listen to Quran and Ahlulbayt (a) and be guided to these proofs, or one can reason and philosophize sincerely, and will reach these proofs as well.

If a person would ask "Why aren't Angels" coming down to earth instead of humans, the Quran has a whole philosophy of why humans and why the Prophets and chosen ones, been chosen and exalted above the Angels in this regard.

And the issue is delegation. Delegated to Angels, they either have to come outwardly in non-Angelic form, and confuse us, or if they are witnessed in Angelic form, not everyone is ready for that reality.

And humans delegate leadership to the likes of Trump and mischief makes in the earth, but won't give a chance to those God proves their authority and who have a divine book calling to them. This arrogance and oppression towards their followers, has always resulted in destruction of arrogant people "So wait, we too are of those who await".

In my opinion you cannot say the Quran is the true word of a god because it says so in the Quran,it like the Bible was authored a long time ago with a different worldview.

 

[Link]

In my opinion you cannot say the Quran is the true word of a god because it says so in the Quran

I agree.

 

[danieldemol]

... Do you know the basis of the story? The daughter of Al Kindi lived during the prophet Muhammed's time, and she told his daughter that when the Qur'an was recited, she recognised a verse or two from her fathers poetry. This is at least in the year 610 and definitely later if that ever happened, and Al Kindi died 90 years earlier. The daughter would have to be a 120 years old, and is associating the prophets daughter by the way, not the prophets father or grandfather.

I have Covid at the moment, so if i get anything wrong be patient.

According to Wikipedia;
'Died 544 (aged 42–43)
Ankara'

Source: Imru' al-Qais - Wikipedia

So 610 - 544 = 66.
I assume you are adding the daughters age to 66 years old to arrive at 120, but if he gave birth to her when he was born (which is impossible of course) she would be 66 + 42 to 43 which gives an age of 108 to 109 which is a radical overestimation of her age for the obvious reason mentioned.

Can you explain how you arrived at the age of the daughter as 120?

How did you arrive at her birthdate?

In my opinion.

 

[firedragon]

I have Covid at the moment, so if i get anything wrong be patient.

I am so sorry. I hope you recover soon. I have never got Covid but my whole family got. Now it's not too harsh on people, so I hope it will be mild on you.

I have Covid at the moment, so if i get anything wrong be patient.

According to Wikipedia;
'Died 544 (aged 42–43)
Ankara'

Source: Imru' al-Qais - Wikipedia

So 610 - 544 = 66.
I assume you are adding the daughters age to 66 years old to arrive at 120, but if he gave birth to her when he was born (which is impossible of course) she would be 66 + 42 to 43 which gives an age of 108 to 109 which is a radical overestimation of her age for the obvious reason mentioned.

Can you explain how you arrived at the age of the daughter as 120?

How did you arrive at her birthdate?

In my opinion.

Was just making a top of mind calculation. If she was born somewhere in 520 lets say, and she heard the Qur'an in around 630 attributed to the daughter it's at least 110 years. Try to bring some valid points that are important and take the whole argument. Take every point I said in the post you are trying to clutch on to for some argument. Every point.

Get well soon.

 

[danieldemol]

I am so sorry. I hope you recover soon. I have never got Covid but my whole family got. Now it's not too harsh on people, so I hope it will be mild on you.



Was just making a top of mind calculation. If she was born somewhere in 520 lets say, and she heard the Qur'an in around 630 attributed to the daughter it's at least 110 years. Try to bring some valid points that are important and take the whole argument. Take every point I said in the post you are trying to clutch on to for some argument. Every point.

Get well soon.

Ok thanks, how did you get the year of 630 as the time she heard the Quran?

 

[firedragon]

Ok thanks, how did you get the year of 630 as the time she heard the Quran?

The Qur'an has already fully been revealed.

 

[Augustus]

Correction, without any irrelevant study.

Otherwise if eloquence = divinity it is on you to demonstrate how so without making additional assumptions

Also explain the fact that tens of millions of people who do speak Arabic have been exposed to the Quran and not reached the conclusion that it is so extremely eloquent that it must be Divine in origin. That is certainly evidence against the idea that is accessible to even non-Arabic speakers.

It took 400 years or so for Muslims to become the majority in the Middle East, which means a very low rate of conversions, and there are many non-Muslims today. These people obviously didn't agree.

Given, by definition, a miraculous origin must be deemed by far the least likely hypothesis for any text, it carries an exceptional burden of proof.

It is also hard to make a case that any Divine origin can be deduced from textual and stylistic analysis as this would require some form of the argument that "X number of rhetorical techniques + Y number of grammatical shifts + ... = Divine" whereas a human could only manage "(X - n) number of rhetorical techniques + (Y - n) number of grammatical shifts + ... "

A Divine origin must therefore be something that is intuitively felt, a fundamental difference with anything of human origin.

But how to explain those that didn't feel this?

 

[danieldemol]

The Qur'an has already fully been revealed.

Why do you think the entire Quran was fully revealed at that time, aren't we only discussing surah 54 v1-2?

In my opinion

 

[firedragon]

Why do you think the entire Quran was fully revealed at that time, aren't we only discussing surah 54 v1-2?

In my opinion

No. It's the story.

I don't know why you are arguing this side point. some guy who had no clue about any of this brought in some nonsensical point made moot by scholars worth any salt, and you hooked on to it for what reason I really can't understand. The story is not authentic. Pretending it's authentic, the legend is that someone was reciting the Qur'an by memory in Al Amr, which means in chronological order as instructed. If that is the case mate, he had to have recited chapters 9 and 5. If I am to pretend this story is true, the Quran is full revealed. Unless you think only Surathunnasr was not recited. Which is one chapter.

 

[firedragon]

A Divine origin must therefore be something that is intuitively felt, a fundamental difference with anything of human origin.

Where did you get that from? Which part of the study of this subject says that? Can you explain?

Your whole post was about appealing to majority right? How is that a good argument? Is it based on your decision that anyone who knows arabic must "feel it"? Is that all this whole topic is about?

 

[danieldemol]

No. It's the story.

I don't know why you are arguing this side point. some guy who had no clue about any of this brought in some nonsensical point made moot by scholars worth any salt, and you hooked on to it for what reason I really can't understand. The story is not authentic. Pretending it's authentic, the legend is that someone was reciting the Qur'an by memory in Al Amr, which means in chronological order as instructed. If that is the case mate, he had to have recited chapters 9 and 5. If I am to pretend this story is true, the Quran is full revealed. Unless you think only Surathunnasr was not recited. Which is one chapter.

Here is the legend as far as I know it. Please tell me what I am missing;

'We are told that Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter, was one day repeating as she went along, the above verse*. Just then she met the daughter of Imru‘ al-Qais, who cried out, ‘O that’s what your father has taken from one of my father’s poems and calls it something that has come down to him out of Heaven’; and the story is commonly told amongst the Arabs until now.'

* "The hour has come, and shattered is the moon"

Source: Imru‘ al-Qais and a verse of the Holy Quran

In my opinion

 

[Augustus]

Where did you get that from? Which part of the study of this subject says that? Can you explain?

Given, by definition, a miraculous origin must be deemed by far the least likely hypothesis for any text, it carries an exceptional burden of proof.

It is also hard to make a case that any Divine origin can be deduced from textual and stylistic analysis as this would require some form of the argument that "X number of rhetorical techniques + Y number of grammatical shifts + ... = Divine" whereas a human could only manage "(X - n) number of rhetorical techniques + (Y - n) number of grammatical shifts + ... "

A divine origin via analysis must require identification of a specific feature or features that cannot be produced by a human - in which case what are they?

Or, it is about features that can be produced by humans but not in that number, combination or to that standard - which relies on there being a rough threshold at some point = divine (see above).

Your whole post was about appealing to majority right? How is that a good argument? Is it based on your decision that anyone who knows arabic must "feel it"?

Not an appeal to majority, but the fact that many Arabic speakers don't see its eloquence as clearly Divine.

For the above reason I find it implausible that Divinity has to be worked out by chin-stroking academics based on what amounts to fairly arbitrary characteristics, and that these characteristics can be used as a metric for differentiating the Divine from the merely eloquent. This is especially true given a miraculous origin is, by definition, the most implausible origin for any text.

If you feel it is not a good argument, feel free to make a case for whatever you believe. Why should anyone believe its eloquence is demonstrably miraculous?