Qur'an 2:256 and the sophistry it inspires.

[KWED]

Why can’t I ask you “what evidence(s) do you have for the non-existence of God?” when you are the one who came here insisting that God does not exist?? Isn’t that why you ‘attack’ the Muslims here because of their faith in God??

If you are now admitting that you don’t have any evidence nor have you any rational argument for the non-existence of God, and indirectly admitting there is a God, then, I won’t ask you that question again.

I have given you evidence for the non-existence of the god of the Quran.
But I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence for the non-existence of the FSM. If you wan't to give up and admit that you don't have any such evidence - feel free.
And if you don't have any such evidence, how can you claim that he definitely doesn't exist?

 

[JerryMyers]

I have given you evidence for the non-existence of the god of the Quran.
But I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence for the non-existence of the FSM. If you wan't to give up and admit that you don't have any such evidence - feel free.
And if you don't have any such evidence, how can you claim that he definitely doesn't exist?

What evidence have you shown???
You keep insisting you have “given evidence for the non-existence of the god of the Quran” and yet you find it so difficult to show it!!! Why??? Because your ‘evidence’ is a joke and will only further expose your inability to understand what you read???

 

[KWED]

What evidence have you shown???
You keep insisting you have “given evidence for the non-existence of the god of the Quran” and yet you find it so difficult to show it!!! Why??? Because your ‘evidence’ is a joke and will only further expose your inability to understand what you read???

We both know that I have explained, in detail, clear proof that the Quran contains errors. We can tell you know this because you haven't attempted to present a counter argument. You just keep denying that I have presented any evidence.

If the Quran contains any error, then it was not authored by god - by its own standards!
If the Quran was not revealed by a god, then the god it claims to have been released by does not exist.
QED.

 

[BrightShadow]

I asked you for evidence that the FSM does not exist.
You cannot provide any. Therefore you must accept that its existence is

It is not the same comparing a said God (creator, deity) to a figment of your imagination or a creature of your imagination.
It is not the same to compare a God of a particular religion to Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) especially if you don't believe in this Monster to be your god.
If you are comparing two entities that are unknowable to you (one a Supreme being illustrated as a creator by billions of people via their doctrines and another cartoon character portrayal of a Monster from a children's book) - then you still have to consider whatever supporting documents, records are available to you in both cases. In one case you have supporting documents (doctrines, religious scriptures and word of mouth of over billion people) and the other case you have a cartoon book that clearly claims to be fantasy written for children. Which one would you consider has better weight?
After checking the documents - any sane and rational skeptic should come to the conclusion that they are not comparable.
Regardless of any convincing evidence is found or not - the skeptic should still give benefit of the doubt to the position of "God" - because billions of adult people are standing by that example while only a few children with the (FSM).
Do you still think it is the same?
"Word of mouth" is a powerful tool. It can get distorted over time and how far it travels but it usually have a basis. In a religion such as Judaism, Christianity or Islam - not just word of mouth but also documents traveled through time through children and grandchildren of people who were actually witnessed Moses, Jesus and Mohammad and heard from them about God. Their testimonies such as Bible, Quran made it through the generations. There are also other supporting historical documents and claims out there that would give more weight to their claims. What supporting evidence do you have regarding the existence of your Flying Spaghetti Monster? Apart from some possible recent cartoon books - no one really talked about FSM over the last centuries. I would dismiss it with prejudice (meaning it is over and done with!) but I cannot dismiss the claim of billions of people. I must consider the possibility of their claim!

 

[KWED]

It is not the same comparing a said God (creator, deity) to a figment of your imagination or a creature of your imagination.

Oh dear. The point of this has completely gone over your head.

Why do you claim your god is real but the FSM is imaginary? Why can't it be the other way around? Or perhaps, they are both imaginary.
What you did is called "question begging". It is a fallacious argument where you assume the conclusion in your first premise.

It is not the same to compare a God of a particular religion to Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) especially if you don't believe in this Monster to be your god.

Of course it is "fair". The FSM is the god of the Pastafarian religion. How dare you disrespect it like that!

If you are comparing two entities that are unknowable to you (one a Supreme being illustrated as a creator by billions of people via their doctrines

Ah, so the most popular god is the real one.

then you still have to consider whatever supporting documents, records are available to you in both cases. In one case you have supporting documents (doctrines, religious scriptures and word of mouth of over billion people) and the other case you have a cartoon book that clearly claims to be fantasy written for children. Which one would you consider has better weight?

In both cases, there is only hearsay and claims. There is no actual evidence for either. You seem to be saying that if enough people believe in an idea, it is probably true. I'm sure you can see the fatal flaw there.

After checking the documents - any sane and rational skeptic should come to the conclusion that they are not comparable.

"Comparable" in what way?
Your argument here would apply to Christianity vs the Roman Pantheon in the 1st/2nd centuries. Also to Islam vs Arab Paganism in the 7th century.
By your argument, we can dismiss Christianity and Islam in favour of Roman and Arab Paganism.
Is that really what you are trying to say?

To the rational sceptic, extraordinary claims with no supporting evidence can be dismissed, regardless of how many people have been raised from infancy to believe them. Childhood indoctrination into an ideology is not a sign of its truth.

Regardless of any convincing evidence is found or not - the skeptic should still give benefit of the doubt to the position of "God" - because billions of adult people are standing by that example while only a few children with the (FSM).

Why do you keep referring to the FSM as something from a children's book? It is a god of a religion. A religion followed by millions, if not fewer. Less of the blasphemy please!
Flying Spaghetti Monster - Wikipedia

"Word of mouth" is a powerful tool.

It can get distorted over time and how far it travels but it usually have a basis. In a religion such as Judaism, Christianity or Islam - not just word of mouth but also documents traveled through time through children and grandchildren of people who were actually witnessed Moses, Jesus and Mohammad and heard from them about God. Their testimonies such as Bible, Quran made it through the generations.

You seem to have ben misinformed. There are no first-hand, eye-witness accounts of Moses or even Jesus. Some historians also question whether the Muhammad of the Quran was an actual, historical figure.

There are also other supporting historical documents and claims out there that would give more weight to their claims. What supporting evidence do you have regarding the existence of your Flying Spaghetti Monster? Apart from some possible recent cartoon books - no one really talked about FSM over the last centuries. I would dismiss it with prejudice (meaning it is over and done with!) but I cannot dismiss the claim of billions of people. I must consider the possibility of their claim!

Just to reiterate, you have missed the point of this argument.
@JerryMyers claimed that if I cannot disprove the existence of the god of the Quran, then that is evidence that said god exists.
Therefore, if he cannot disprove the existence of the FSM, then that is evidence for the existence of the FSM.
QED.

Your fallacious argument ad populum has no bearing on that.

 

[BrightShadow]

Oh dear. The point of this has completely gone over your head.

Why do you claim your god is real but the FSM is imaginary? Why can't it be the other way around? Or perhaps, they are both imaginary.
What you did is called "question begging". It is a fallacious argument where you assume the conclusion in your first premise.

Of course it is "fair". The FSM is the god of the Pastafarian religion. How dare you disrespect it like that!

Ah, so the most popular god is the real one.

In both cases, there is only hearsay and claims. There is no actual evidence for either. You seem to be saying that if enough people believe in an idea, it is probably true. I'm sure you can see the fatal flaw there.

"Comparable" in what way?
Your argument here would apply to Christianity vs the Roman Pantheon in the 1st/2nd centuries. Also to Islam vs Arab Paganism in the 7th century.
By your argument, we can dismiss Christianity and Islam in favour of Roman and Arab Paganism.
Is that really what you are trying to say?

To the rational sceptic, extraordinary claims with no supporting evidence can be dismissed, regardless of how many people have been raised from infancy to believe them. Childhood indoctrination into an ideology is not a sign of its truth.

Why do you keep referring to the FSM as something from a children's book? It is a god of a religion. A religion followed by millions, if not fewer. Less of the blasphemy please!
Flying Spaghetti Monster - Wikipedia

You seem to have ben misinformed. There are no first-hand, eye-witness accounts of Moses or even Jesus. Some historians also question whether the Muhammad of the Quran was an actual, historical figure.

Just to reiterate, you have missed the point of this argument.
@JerryMyers claimed that if I cannot disprove the existence of the god of the Quran, then that is evidence that said god exists.
Therefore, if he cannot disprove the existence of the FSM, then that is evidence for the existence of the FSM.
QED.

Your fallacious argument ad populum has no bearing on that.

I would like to see you defend the God in question in this thread the same way you defended Flying Spaghetti Monster.
I thought FSM was a figment of your imagination. Anyhow, from the wiki you can see the motivation behind creating this concept by the 24 years old student who created it. That should be enough to dismiss this. NO!?

Are you a devoted follower of FSM?
Why would you compare that with God of Islam? You really don't see a difference?

You can name any God whatever way you like as long as you don't claim to come up with it yourself for a deceptive purpose or to just make your case. You have to show with convincing argument that it has some spiritual component to it and you have to be somewhat rational about your details.

 

[KWED]

I would like to see you defend the God in question in this thread the same way you defended Flying Spaghetti Monster.
I thought FSM was a figment of your imagination. Anyhow, from the wiki you can see the motivation behind creating this concept by the 24 years old student who created it. That should be enough to dismiss this. NO!?

Still not getting it, I see.
No one is seriously claiming that the FSM is real. It is an analogy, a thought experiment, a demonstration to show the flaws in apologists' arguments.

Remember that @JerryMyers claimed that the lack of evidence for the non-existence of a thing is proof that it does exist. There is no evidence that the FSM does not exist. The whole invention myth might have been planned by Him as a Test.

Are you a devoted follower of FSM?
Why would you compare that with God of Islam? You really don't see a difference?

The principle is no different.
Remember that initially, Islam was exactly the same as Pastafarianism. It was just one person, who most people assumed was deluded or dishonest, making claims about some new god. Did you know that Islam had no more than a hundred or so followers for the first decade.

You can name any God whatever way you like as long as you don't claim to come up with it yourself for a deceptive purpose or to just make your case. You have to show with convincing argument that it has some spiritual component to it and you have to be somewhat rational about your details.

It is a real religion. It is a recognised church. It has weddings, scripture. The colander has been recognised as religious headwear in some countries.
It may have started as satire, but it is now the real thing. The same may apply to other, older religions. Have you seen The Life of Brian?

 

[BrightShadow]

You said the following....

There are no first-hand, eye-witness accounts of Moses or even Jesus. Some historians also question whether the Muhammad of the Quran was an actual, historical figure.

Remember that initially, Islam was exactly the same as Pastafarianism. It was just one person, who most people assumed was deluded or dishonest, making claims about some new god. Did you know that Islam had no more than a hundred or so followers for the first decade.

In the first quote - you wrote some historians question whether Muhammad of the Quran was an actual, historical figure.
Then in the next quote you claimed Mohammad (who according to your earlier post didn't even exist - was suddenly real but dishonest and deluded and you also claimed there was only a hundred or so followers for the first decade! Where are you coming up with all this?
Don't you see a discrepancy here? First you deny he was real and then you make all sorts of prejudice opinion about him!
You say - whatever floats your goat (it is not even a boat!).

 

[KWED]

In the first quote - you wrote some historians question whether Muhammad of the Quran was an actual, historical figure.
Then in the next quote you claimed Mohammad (who according to your earlier post didn't even exist -

Gosh, I can see I am going to have to start with the basics here.
"Some historians believe" does not mean "Is a claimed fact that I subscribe to".
I do not know if the historical hypothesis of Muhammad being a kind of composite character is true or not. The point is that we don't know anything for certain.
For example, there is no archaeological or textual evidence (outside the Quran) that Mecca even existed at the time - which is odd considering its supposed significance in the region as a centre of pilgrimage.

was suddenly real but dishonest and deluded

That is not my claim, that is what the people of Mecca thought in the context of the Quranic narrative (which may or may not be historically accurate - there are no independent, corroborative records). There are several instances in the Quran and sunnah where the Quraysh accuse Muhammad of delusion or deception.
If you are going to engage in debate about Islam, I suggest that you first read the Quran. It will help avoid these misunderstandings.

and you also claimed there was only a hundred or so followers for the first decade! Where are you coming up with all this?

Bukhari states that there were 60 emigrants amongst the army at the Battle of Badr. Assuming every able-bodied adult male went out to defend Islam, and assuming a majority of men because of the common pagan practice of killing female children (according to apologists), around 100 emigrants seems accurate. However, I am happy to consider your argument for a different number.
Also, Muhammad carried out a census 5 years after Hijra and there were between 500-700 Muslims according to Bukhari. If there were more than 100 or so original emigrants, that figure seems strangely low.
Although we have to bear in mind that it is impossible to corroborate any of this historically. I am speaking from an Islamic perspective, that assumes these records are accurate.

Don't you see a discrepancy here? First you deny he was real and then you make all sorts of prejudice opinion about him!

Ok, lets go through it again.
1. Some historians suggest there may not have been an actual historical character that corresponds to the Muhammad of the Quran. I did not claim to agree with them. I was simply pointing out the lack of certainty over the early days of Islam.
2. The "prejudice opinion" comes from original islamic sources.
3. One can argue from a position of assuming dubious claims to be true in order to refute them. For example "If what you say is true, that would mean (highlight inconsistency in the other's argument)"
Hope this helped.

 

[JerryMyers]

We both know that I have explained, in detail, clear proof that the Quran contains errors. We can tell you know this because you haven't attempted to present a counter argument. You just keep denying that I have presented any evidence.

If the Quran contains any error, then it was not authored by god - by its own standards!
If the Quran was not revealed by a god, then the god it claims to have been released by does not exist.
QED.

OK, what are the 'errors' in the Quran, but give me real evidence of those errors, not just copy and paste from some anti-Islam sites.

 

[KWED]

OK, what are the 'errors' in the Quran, but give me real evidence of those errors,

Once again, 41:9-12 clearly describes god creating the earth before the visible stars. Which is categorically wrong.
Your only response was some vague handwaving about translations. You have not presented any cogent counter-argument. The only reasonable conclusion is that you do not have one.

not just copy and paste from some anti-Islam sites.

I read that passage in the Quran and could see it was clearly wrong as I read it. Even to those without specialist scientific knowledge, it is obviously wrong.
But even if I had read it on IslamIs Nonsense.com or wherever, if it is true, it is true. You are merely committing the genetic fallacy.

 

[JerryMyers]

Once again, 41:9-12 clearly describes god creating the earth before the visible stars. Which is categorically wrong.
Your only response was some vague handwaving about translations. You have not presented any cogent counter-argument. The only reasonable conclusion is that you do not have one.
I read that passage in the Quran and could see it was clearly wrong as I read it. Even to those without specialist scientific knowledge, it is obviously wrong.

NOPE. Once again you are demonstrating your inability to understand context and what you read. Quran 41:9-12 IS NOT describing God creating the earth before the visible stars. What is clear here is your ignorance and inability to understand what is written.

I have already explained Quran 41:9-12 in the other thread, so go there, read to understand, and respond in that thread. Why you should post your ignorance on the same subject in 2 different threads, I could not understand – the only reasonable conclusion is that you could not present any cogent counter-argument, so the only thing you can do is to present your ignorance here and there again and again and again.

But even if I had read it on IslamIs Nonsense.com or wherever, if it is true, it is true. You are merely committing the genetic fallacy.

Yes, no doubt about that - you ARE presenting nonsense based on your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally, and that’s NOT even a question of ‘IF’ - IT IS THE TRUTH!

 

[KWED]

NOPE. Once again you are demonstrating your inability to understand context and what you read. Quran 41:9-12 IS NOT describing God creating the earth before the visible stars. What is clear here is your ignorance and inability to understand what is written.

I have already explained Quran 41:9-12 in the other thread, so go there, read to understand, and respond in that thread. Why you should post your ignorance on the same subject in 2 different threads, I could not understand – the only reasonable conclusion is that you could not present any cogent counter-argument, so the only thing you can do is to present your ignorance here and there again and again and again.


Yes, no doubt about that - you ARE presenting nonsense based on your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally, and that’s NOT even a question of ‘IF’ - IT IS THE TRUTH!

Your "explanation" was that not every translator used "then" in verse 41:12.
1. But some translators do use "then".
2. 41:11 also uses "then", according to most translators.
3. There is a clear linear timescale. The earth is crated, complete with mountains, plants, animals, etc. Then it is separated from the heavens (which are just "smoke", so no stars). Then god hangs the stars in the nearest heaven.

The Quran clearly describes god creating the earth, as we know it now, before the "heavens" existed as we know it . Nothing you have said suggests otherwise.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is not the same comparing a said God (creator, deity) to a figment of your imagination or a creature of your imagination.
It is not the same to compare a God of a particular religion to Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) especially if you don't believe in this Monster to be your god.
If you are comparing two entities that are unknowable to you (one a Supreme being illustrated as a creator by billions of people via their doctrines and another cartoon character portrayal of a Monster from a children's book) - then you still have to consider whatever supporting documents, records are available to you in both cases. In one case you have supporting documents (doctrines, religious scriptures and word of mouth of over billion people) and the other case you have a cartoon book that clearly claims to be fantasy written for children. Which one would you consider has better weight?
After checking the documents - any sane and rational skeptic should come to the conclusion that they are not comparable.
Regardless of any convincing evidence is found or not - the skeptic should still give benefit of the doubt to the position of "God" - because billions of adult people are standing by that example while only a few children with the (FSM).
Do you still think it is the same?
"Word of mouth" is a powerful tool. It can get distorted over time and how far it travels but it usually have a basis. In a religion such as Judaism, Christianity or Islam - not just word of mouth but also documents traveled through time through children and grandchildren of people who were actually witnessed Moses, Jesus and Mohammad and heard from them about God. Their testimonies such as Bible, Quran made it through the generations. There are also other supporting historical documents and claims out there that would give more weight to their claims. What supporting evidence do you have regarding the existence of your Flying Spaghetti Monster? Apart from some possible recent cartoon books - no one really talked about FSM over the last centuries. I would dismiss it with prejudice (meaning it is over and done with!) but I cannot dismiss the claim of billions of people. I must consider the possibility of their claim!

Sorry but that is an ad populum fallacy. The number of believers is not evidence for a belief.

And the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Ramen) is not from a child's comic book or from any comic book.

 

[BrightShadow]

Sorry but that is an ad populum fallacy. The number of believers is not evidence for a belief.

And the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Ramen) is not from a child's comic book or from any comic book.

I already indicated that I wasn't aware about the concept of FSM or its origin. Even after reading about it - it is clear to me that this concept did not began the way any of the known major religions began. A 24 year invented FSM concept in opposition to the teaching of intelligent design in public schools.
There is absolutely no reason to compare the two because one was created by a 24 year old for a specific reason and the followers of other major religions claim their concepts were transpired by devout religious righteous personalities who claimed their teachings were inspired by a supreme entity who created the universe. There is no comparison!
Anyone comparing the two concepts to make any point - is not only fooling themselves - they are also trying to fool the world!
If I am looking to make an authentic dish and billions of people tells me they have the right recipe then I will check their recipe . However if a comical person admits - he just wrote a false recipe (with imaginary ingredients) then why should I even bother to look?
By the way, I didn't say - many people adhering to a belief system makes it true. I didn't say - great numbers of followers are evidence of truth. I said when many people believe something - you cannot dismiss it without checking. But the example of Flying Spaghetti Monster can be dismissed with prejudice. No need to even consult that concept ever again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I already indicated that I wasn't aware about the concept of FSM or its origin. Even after reading about it - it is clear to me that this concept did not began the way any of the known major religions began. A 24 year invented FSM concept in opposition to the teaching of intelligent design in public schools.
There is absolutely no reason to compare the two because one was created by a 24 year old for a specific reason and the followers of other major religions claim their concepts were transpired by devout religious righteous personalities who claimed their teachings were inspired by a supreme entity who created the universe. There is no comparison!
Anyone comparing the two concepts to make any point - is not only fooling themselves - they are also trying to fool the world!
If I am looking to make an authentic dish and billions of people tells me they have the right recipe then I will check their recipe . However if a comical person admits - he just wrote a false recipe (with imaginary ingredients) then why should I even bother to look?
By the way, I didn't say - many people adhering to a belief system makes it true. I didn't say - great numbers of followers are evidence of truth. I said when many people believe something - you cannot dismiss it without checking. But the example of Flying Spaghetti Monster can be dismissed with prejudice. No need to even consult that concept ever again.

What difference does it make when a religion was invented? That is not an argument for or against a religion either. They were all invented at some time.

And it appears that you are claiming that Pastafarianism is superior religion since unlike others it was invented for a good reason. I do not think that you are helping yourself in your arguments here.

Lastly a great number of believers is not evidence for "truth". If so the larger number of believers that are Christians is evidence against Islam. Do you believe that?

 

[BrightShadow]

What difference does it make when a religion was invented? That is not an argument for or against a religion either. They were all invented at some time.

I know most people get introduced to a religion at a very early age. Many get indoctrinated through their parents because they feel it is the correct path. However remaining uncritical about the belief system one inherited and continue believing it (even after growing up) without questioning its validity - is a personal choice. As we grow older and begin to understand things - we need to question things and thus it is our job to find the concepts that makes sense.
When a religion debuts through an initial claim that it is God inspired and its followers through generations continue to testify to its merit -then it is our obligation to check it out. Word of mouth is a powerful tool! However, I am not entertaining something that came out of someone's figment of imagination - especially when its founder (initiator, designer) does not even deny the notion that he made it up.
It is amazing that some folks (knowing FSM is made up) - still compare it with a proper religion that evolved and spread through traditional process. It disingenuous!
Of course a skeptic may ask - why one religion makes better sense than another but to compare one religion that claims to be God inspired - with a obvious fabrication is not discussion worthy in my opinion.

And it appears that you are claiming that Pastafarianism is superior religion since unlike others it was invented for a good reason. I do not think that you are helping yourself in your arguments here.

It is funny that you feel you get to decide what a "good reason" is! Who gave you the power of final verdict regarding anything?
I am pretty sure - what you feel a "good reason" - is actually the opposite. Most people might think - introducing an alternate theory (intelligent design) to evolution may be beneficial to kids because Darwin's theory is after all - just a theory! The reality could easily be a mixture of both the theories! Just because there are some evidence to support Darwin's evolution theory - does not nullify that something else or something more could have simultaneously occur by an intelligent designer.

Lastly a great number of believers is not evidence for "truth". If so the larger number of believers that are Christians is evidence against Islam. Do you believe that?

You keep trying to falsely imply that I indicated that great number of believers means it is evidence of truth. I never said that! Is taking that kind of angle your best tool? Does it help you make your point? I clearly pointed out in my last post that number of believers only makes a religion stand out. Of course it doesn't authenticate it!

By the way - while Majority of Christians may not acknowledge it - but I think majority of Muslim would say Islam is a continuation of the teachings of Jesus. Most Muslim will say - Muhammad only eliminated corruptions that sneaked into Jesus' teachings. For example -Muslims don't believe in the divinity of Jesus!

N.B. I don't belong to any organized religion. I believe God sent message to many parts of the world in different era but I also believe information got either lost or corrupted via many methods and due to many reasons. So, I think what is out there in any one religion - does not represent the entire truth! IMO the truth is scattered among multiple religions!

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know most people get introduced to a religion at a very early age. Many get indoctrinated through their parents because they feel it is the correct path. However remaining uncritical about the belief system one inherited and continue believing it (even after growing up) without questioning its validity - is a personal choice. As we grow older and begin to understand things - we need to question things and thus it is our job to find the concepts that makes sense.
When a religion debuts through an initial claim that it is God inspired and its followers through generations continue to testify to its merit -then it is our obligation to check it out. Word of mouth is a powerful tool! However, I am not entertaining something that came out of someone's figment of imagination - especially when its founder (initiator, designer) does not even deny the notion that he made it up.
It is amazing that some folks (knowing FSM is made up) - still compare it with a proper religion that evolved and spread through traditional process. It disingenuous!
Of course a skeptic may ask - why one religion makes better sense than another but to compare one religion that claims to be God inspired - with a obvious fabrication is not discussion worthy in my opinion.




It is funny that you feel you get to decide what a "good reason" is! Who gave you the power of final verdict regarding anything?
I am pretty sure - what you feel a "good reason" - is actually the opposite. Most people might think - introducing an alternate theory (intelligent design) to evolution may be beneficial to kids because Darwin's theory is after all - just a theory! The reality could easily be a mixture of both the theories! Just because there are some evidence to support Darwin's evolution theory - does not nullify that something else or something more could have simultaneously occur by an intelligent designer.




You keep trying to falsely imply that I indicated that great number of believers means it is evidence of truth. I never said that! Is taking that kind of angle your best tool? Does it help you make your point? I clearly pointed out in my last post that number of believers only makes a religion stand out. Of course it doesn't authenticate it!

By the way - while Majority of Christians may not acknowledge it - but I think majority of Muslim would say Islam is a continuation of the teachings of Jesus. Most Muslim will say - Muhammad only eliminated corruptions that sneaked into Jesus' teachings. For example -Muslims don't believe in the divinity of Jesus!

N.B. I don't belong to any organized religion. I believe God sent message to many parts of the world in different era but I also believe information got either lost or corrupted via many methods and due to many reasons. So, I think what is out there in any one religion - does not represent the entire truth! IMO the truth is scattered among multiple religions!

Your desperation is showing.

 

[JerryMyers]

Your "explanation" was that not every translator used "then" in verse 41:12.
1. But some translators do use "then".
2. 41:11 also uses "then", according to most translators.
3. There is a clear linear timescale. The earth is crated, complete with mountains, plants, animals, etc. Then it is separated from the heavens (which are just "smoke", so no stars). Then god hangs the stars in the nearest heaven.

The Quran clearly describes god creating the earth, as we know it now, before the "heavens" existed as we know it . Nothing you have said suggests otherwise.

You keep showing me that you are such a simpleton who really cannot understand what you read nor can you understand the context. When you don’t understand context, then your ‘explanation’ is nothing but nonsense and you keep making a fool of yourself.

In context, Quran 41:9-12 is NOT describing the creation of earth and heaven, BUT it is describing the GREATNESS of God. Likewise, a boxing legion might refer to his past achievements if another boxer doubts his ability in the ring. He might say something like “Why do still doubt my ability when I have knocked you out in 5 seconds of the first round?”. Then he turned to his famous match where he defeated the then-undefeated champion in 3 rounds. Was the boxing legend describing how he defeated the other boxer and the then-undefeated champion?? NO, he was highlighting his GREATNESS! Only those who cannot understand the context and are incapable to think logically and rationally will say he’s describing how he defeated his opponents.
So, really, try to show some intelligence and stop making a fool of yourself!

 

[KWED]

You keep showing me that you are such a simpleton who really cannot understand what you read nor can you understand the context. When you don’t understand context, then your ‘explanation’ is nothing but nonsense and you keep making a fool of yourself.

Ah, so it isn't a "translation" problem any more, it's "context" now is it?
This should be good.

In context, Quran 41:9-12 is NOT describing the creation of earth and heaven, BUT it is describing the GREATNESS of God.

If it is describing the greatness of god, it is doing it by describing how he created the earth and stuff. And that description is wrong.

Likewise, a boxing legion might refer to his past achievements if another boxer doubts his ability in the ring. He might say something like “Why do still doubt my ability when I have knocked you out in 5 seconds of the first round?”. Then he turned to his famous match where he defeated the then-undefeated champion in 3 rounds. Was the boxing legend describing how he defeated the other boxer and the then-undefeated champion?? NO, he was highlighting his GREATNESS! Only those who cannot understand the context and are incapable to think logically and rationally will say he’s describing how he defeated his opponents.
So, really, try to show some intelligence and stop making a fool of yourself!

If the boxer said, "I became amateur champion, then I became Olympic champion, then I turned pro and became world champion" - yes, he is describing what happened in his boxing career. Just like Allah is describing what happened when he created everything.
Baffled as to why you think your argument is in any way coherent? (Actually, not baffled at all. You have no idea how rational argument works)