The Golden Calf

[TashaN]

To borrow your own words - "Not really".

I don't deny the early Muslim contributions to science and mathematics. I truly admired their works. And it all come from their own inquiring mind, and from their hard work and discoveries.

Claiming that Islam is responsible for science, is to belittle those brilliant and intelligent men's efforts and achievements.

Take for instance, Michelangelo. Although he received many commissions from the Church, the artistic works are his own painting, sculptures or architecture, it is not achievements of the Church or Christianity or the Bible, even he found plenty inspirations from biblical stories. They may own his work of arts, but the works themselves come from his genius and from his hands.

Do not belittle your own history, the history of those scientists who have done the works in Islam's golden age.

Do you understand, tashaN?

I do understand and you do have a point. I just meant that many of them were inspired by their faith because many of them expressed that as part of their work like Al-Ghazali for instance with Philosophy.

 

[outhouse]

i don't even remember what we supposed to discuss about. .

How islam perverted the history that was a mistake to begin with.

proving your books were not divinely inspired, as they copied mistakes made by the bible.

The golden calf history was perverted by islam to meet their personal religious needs.

It historically never happened as decribed, yet your books contain the same mythology.

 

[TashaN]

How islam perverted the history that was a mistake to begin with.

proving your books were not divinely inspired, as they copied mistakes made by the bible.

The golden calf history was perverted by islam to meet their personal religious needs.

It historically never happened as decribed, yet your books contain the same mythology.

While i do understand how easy and tempting it is to claim that the Quran copied previous scriptures but that's not true. There are many ways to deal with this.

One way is to assume there is God--for the sake of the argument--and we just have to examine whether the claim that the Quran copied its content is correct or false. If it was false then you will have to accept it's authentic, and thus, the golden calf story is correct.

What do you think?

 

[outhouse]

What do you think?

I believe you keep making unsubstantiated claims.


If we assume there was a god, why did he tell your people factual historical errors to write down?

Do you really think a spirit whispered all the book to one man, and that this man made no errors, or had no influence at all, from a religion that was spread all over the world at that time?

Did he live in a cave with no outside influence?

I mean it was becoming common knowledge, everyone knew about christianity.

 

[Ingledsva]

I accept any answer whether i like it or not. What i don't accept is disrespectful and uncivilized dialogue.

Which it wasn't!



*

 

[TashaN]

I believe you keep making unsubstantiated claims.

If we assume there was a god, why did he tell your people factual historical errors to write down?

That's a mere assumption. You are assuming the Quran is just a copy, which is not.

Do you really think a spirit whispered all the book to one man, and that this man made no errors, or had no influence at all, from a religion that was spread all over the world at that time?

Yes.

Did he live in a cave with no outside influence?

Yeah, occasionally.

I mean it was becoming common knowledge, everyone knew about christianity.

Please remember, you are judging that era with your 21st century mentality which is not fair. You have to know how was it like for people at that time. That's called history. You are oversimplifying it honestly.

 

[TashaN]

Which it wasn't!



*

So what now?

Do you want to have a fruitful discussion or you want to simply insult and smear Islam and Muslims? which one is it?

 

[outhouse]

That's a mere assumption. You are assuming the Quran is just a copy, which is not.



.

Plagiarized is the correct fact here.


No amount of education or knowledge or reason will change your mind, so why debate history???


Biblical and Quranic narratives - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From a modern scholarly perspective, similarities between Biblical and Quranic accounts of the same person or event are evidence for the influence of pre-existing traditions on the composition of the Qur'an.[2] From a traditionalist Muslim perspective, such a discussion makes no sense

 

[Ingledsva]

So what now?

Do you want to have a fruitful discussion or you want to simply insult and smear Islam and Muslims? which one is it?

I have not smeared you, or Islam.

That is ridiculous!

This is a debate site, - you should be expecting challenges to what you say, and material pointing to different conclusions.


*

 

[paarsurrey]

Originally Posted by TashaN
That's a mere assumption. You are assuming the Quran is just a copy, which is not

Plagiarized is the correct fact here.


No amount of education or knowledge or reason will change your mind, so why debate history???


Biblical and Quranic narratives - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From a modern scholarly perspective, similarities between Biblical and Quranic accounts of the same person or event are evidence for the influence of pre-existing traditions on the composition of the Qur'an.[2] From a traditionalist Muslim perspective, such a discussion makes no sense

This is just either Islamophobia or a bias against Islam/Quran/Muhammad.

There are many similarities in Hammurabi's Law and the Torah.

There one never would says that Torah is copied from or plagiarized from Hammurabi's Law.

Does history says nothing about it?

Regards

 

[outhouse]

This is just either Islamophobia or a bias against Islam/Quran/Muhammad.

There is also willful ignorance and bias for islam/muhammad

 

[Ingledsva]

This is just either Islamophobia or a bias against Islam/Quran/Muhammad.

There are many similarities in Hammurabi's Law and the Torah.

There one never would says that Torah is copied from or plagiarized from Hammurabi's Law.

Does history says nothing about it?

Regards

Actually we have had debates on this very subject, of older laws, including Hammurabi's, linking to Torah. Very lively debates, I might add.



*

 

[paarsurrey]

Actually we have had debates on this very subject, of older laws, including Hammurabi's, linking to Torah. Very lively debates, I might add.

*

I don't believe that at all.

They did not copy from one another; since the original source of all of them was the same G-d; having different names in their languages; hence the similarities.

The differences arose when the narrators/scribes/clergy played with the original message and corrupted it.

Like they have done with the Torah.

Regards

 

[Ingledsva]

I don't believe that at all.

They did not copy from one another;


ING - We know that ALL cultures take from other cultures. Sometimes as is, and sometimes built upon, or altered.


since the original source of all of them was the same G-d; having different names in their languages; hence the similarities.


ING - That is just your opinion.


The differences arose when the narrators/scribes/clergy played with the original message and corrupted it.

Like they have done with the Torah.

Regards

Indeed most ancient texts have been messed with, or mistranslated, have additions, or deletions, etc.




*

 

[TashaN]

Plagiarized is the correct fact here.

This fact is based on what exactly? do you have certain sources to back your claim or this is just your opinion?

No amount of education or knowledge or reason will change your mind, so why debate history???

And that's because i disagree with your assertion?

Biblical and Quranic narratives - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From a modern scholarly perspective, similarities between Biblical and Quranic accounts of the same person or event are evidence for the influence of pre-existing traditions on the composition of the Qur'an.[2] From a traditionalist Muslim perspective, such a discussion makes no sense

I went a head and clicked on the source for that passage on Wikipedia and it led me to the website below:

The Orientalists, The Bible & The Qur'an: A Brief Review Of The Bible Borrowing Theories

So this is your source? Did you even read what was written or your opinion was based solely on the passage cited by Wikipedia?

 

[outhouse]

This fact is based on what exactly?

It is either

#1 plagiarized mythology

OR

#2 directly god inspired.


All evidence points to #1

NO evidence points to #2


Do you believe in a global flood???

Flat earth to?

 

[TashaN]

I have not smeared you, or Islam.

That is ridiculous!

This is a debate site, - you should be expecting challenges to what you say, and material pointing to different conclusions.


*

I have been long enough here to know it's a debate site. I understand that well and i respect any opponent in any debate in regardless of whether we agree or disagree. I have an issue with trolls and those who have absolutely no intention of providing any substantial evidence to back up their claims. For instance, if someone kept repeating himself/herself about something without willing to exchange evidence, then it is pointless to debate and any reader can easily see that.

Through the posts i have seen which was directed at me, you merely kept insisting it's a pagan faith and you weren't willing to accept questioning your stance which is really frustrating. You must be willing to listen to the other side of the argument. if you just want to advocate something without the slightest desire to discuss it then no one will care to listen to what you say.

If you need to engage in a debate then you have to know how debates are conducted. What you did was simply declaring yourself to be a winner by saying "Good try" without even validating or replying directly to what i said nor what i asked you in my post #124.

 

[TashaN]

It is either

#1 plagiarized mythology

OR

#2 directly god inspired.


All evidence points to #1

NO evidence points to #2


Do you believe in a global flood???

Flat earth to?

What kind of evidence is sufficient for you to accept it's from God?

Regarding your question about the flood, i'm not sure whether it was global flood or just in a certain area and all what was mentioned in the Quran as far as i know was that there was a flood. When it comes to flat earth, i don't understand what you mean. I'm aware Christianity did believe so but the Quran didn't mention earth was flat. this clearly shows that all your claims are based on what you know of the bible but not what you know of the Quran.

We have two choices, we can either focus first on how related the Quran is to the bible, or we can straight go to the Quran and examine it for any historical or scientific fallacies.

So what do you think?

 

[outhouse]

So what do you think?

It is either

#1 plagiarized mythology

OR

#2 directly god inspired.


All evidence points to #1

NO evidence points to #2


Do you believe in a global flood???

Your books state a global flood, you dont believe the words of god, or do muslims pick and choose how much god really inspired?

 

[outhouse]

here you go

Noah in Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thereupon, God decreed that a terrible flood would cover the whole earth and He ordered Noah to build an Ark which would save him and the believers from this dreadful calamity.


So you either believe god wrote this, or you cherry pick what you will believe.