The Qur'aan Cosmological Model: A delineation of the Origin, Evolution and End of the Universe

[sojourner]

Nobody is doing any building at this point.
We are being shown architectural drafts of something we can accept or reject.
I am not being mesmerized. I am simply giving him space to present his views.
I admit I am looking at this more along the lines of a geneopolitical creation than a cosmic one.
But, I do truly believe once the geneopolitical understanding is grasped that meaningful truths about our cosmos will become accessible as well. As above, so below.
I'm not going to wield my knowledge of math and physics until after I understand him.

Those drafts are unacceptable, without even looking at results. One doesn't need to see the full scale model of a ship to be built out of boulders, to know that it's going to be an epic fail.

 

[sojourner]

That's a gross misrepresentation of what I advocated.
Nobody should ever put aside healthy skepticism.
Is all that is asked is that they be understood as intended, and in full, before any final judgments are made.
I am responding to the snarkiness of 1Robin who was being quite rude.
You too are being quite rude to grossly misrepresent what I have advocated.

This isn't the Emily Post Day Care Center for being Nice, it's a debate forum.



Just in case you were unaware.

 

[kylixguru]

Those drafts are unacceptable, without even looking at results. One doesn't need to see the full scale model of a ship to be built out of boulders, to know that it's going to be an epic fail.

I don't recall talk about a ship being built out of boulders.
Perhaps you are confusing some other thread with this one?

 

[kylixguru]

This isn't the Emily Post Day Care Center for being Nice, it's a debate forum.

Just in case you were unaware.

Nor is this a contest about who can be the most unbelieving, presumptuous and inhospitable.

 

[1robin]

In one thread i asked you about the trinity,then you said it is easy,water can be liquid,gas,solid and it is still water.

So do you think that symbol is a strong foundation to understand trinity and then christianity

No I do not think that is a reasonable foundation for believing in the trinity. What I posted was a knee jerk attempt to describe something not prove it. I do not usually defend the trinity as I do not find it all that meaningfull but I am aware of how it is described. It is "as the Catholics say" a mystery and has no good explenation but that is one that others have thought helpfull. In short it was a quick explenation not a proof of anything. I think the case dissproving it is as strong as the one proving it but I do not find it matters enough to hash out. I lean in the direction of the trinity but that is faith based only. My simple explenation was not suffecient to fully understand the trinity or Christianity. It was not meant to be.

 

[1robin]

Don't worry guys, The world will not end (my banana told me so...) by allowing Al-Amyr the graciousness to finish his presentation, of which he began by asking us to be patient and at a certain point he will address our questions. When you join a book club, you must finish the book to discuss and debate it, this is all he is asking us to do. He has been very patient in each of his threads by allowing us to go way of course and bringing us back in line. It is his thread after all, I think we need to let the man make his presentation.

Signed Pollyanna...

Someone once gave me a movie called the Agora. He recommended that movie very highly and praised its historical accuracy and attention to detail over and over. He said it was very long but it was worth the time. I did not respect the guy or his opinions but I finally agreed to watch it out of civility. The very first title screen said 323BC Christian Alexandria. Now I hope like me you can see the glaring error with that (the first screen of the movie). I almost turned it off at that point; instead I sat through about 4 hours of the most excruciating nonsense you can imagine. I think I even saw some Muslims running around in there 800 years before Muhammad. I was being nice. Since then and since I do not have near as much time, I make efforts to see if an expenditure of time is appropriate. I had concluded from the first mathematical train wreck that it was not but as it had such flowery rhetoric I gave another chance or two. I personally will not sit through hours of discourse when the premise has major flaws. I have also seen a pattern of people who use volume to make up for quality. They refuse any specific scrutiny and just keep going and after you have invested days or hours you realise you have wasted all of them on garbage. I tend to identify or determine that early on these days. You and anyone else may do as you wish. I would not as a debater or a teacher ever expect anyone to sit patiently by and listen to theories built on sand and not first take the time to establish why it is rock and not sand they are built on. It certainly does not happen in professional debates. Shalom

 

[Lady B]

Someone once gave me a movie called the Agora. He recommended that movie very highly and praised its historical accuracy and attention to detail over and over. He said it was very long but it was worth the time. I did not respect the guy or his opinions but I finally agreed to watch it out of civility. The very first title screen said 323BC Christian Alexandria. Now I hope like me you can see the glaring error with that (the first screen of the movie). I almost turned it off at that point; instead I sat through about 4 hours of the most excruciating nonsense you can imagine. I think I even saw some Muslims running around in there 800 years before Muhammad. I was being nice. Since then and since I do not have near as much time, I make efforts to see if an expenditure of time is appropriate. I had concluded from the first mathematical train wreck that it was not but as it had such flowery rhetoric I gave another chance or two. I personally will not sit through hours of discourse when the premise has major flaws. I have also seen a pattern of people who use volume to make up for quality. They refuse any specific scrutiny and just keep going and after you have invested days or hours you realise you have wasted all of them on garbage. I tend to identify or determine that early on these days. You and anyone else may do as you wish. I would not as a debater or a teacher ever expect anyone to sit patiently by and listen to theories built on sand and not first take the time to establish why it is rock and not sand they are built on. It certainly does not happen in professional debates. Shalom

I understand what you are saying, however as you have revealed you approached the video with presuppositions and while they were correct, you finished the video in order to have an understanding of what the video pertained in its entirety, so that you could discuss or debate it in a well informed manner. This is what we are all waiting on here, just because we are intent on listening till the end does not mean we don't have problems as we go. We are willing to let him finish his presentation as he is working very hard to bring this to a forum setting and surely we can appreciate that right? As for me this is a completely new and foreign concept, I would like to be well informed and I find the constant disputes are upsetting the focus and learning process.

All members are free to close out any thread in which they disagree, or turn off a video when they see inaccurate statements. But if they are curious and choose to stay and be informed completely of a new or even opposing view, it is indeed better for him, do you not agree?

Also I would like to add, there is an absence of respect in some of the baiting posts here,This is not helping any opposing side, and many times it hurts and draws negative attitudes towards the religion who's representative is being combative, so we must take some care here don't you agree?

 

[sojourner]

I don't recall talk about a ship being built out of boulders.
Perhaps you are confusing some other thread with this one?

Don't be obtuse.

 

[sojourner]

Nor is this a contest about who can be the most unbelieving, presumptuous and inhospitable.

Nor is it a contest to see who can be the most gullible, naive and sanctimonious.

 

[kylixguru]

Nor is it a contest to see who can be the most gullible, naive and sanctimonious.

Which should not be confused for being believing, polite and dedicated to principle.

 

[al-amiyr]

This isn't the Emily Post Day Care Center for being Nice, it's a debate forum.



Just in case you were unaware.

Why are you not showing respect for the thread. Do you want the moderators to close the thread so that I do not complete what I still have to say. Please cease this nonsense and show some self respect. If you tackle what I have said then that is 100% fine with me. In that way it will be a good contribution. But you and your main accomplice just seem to have one strategy in mind and that is to throw bad seed among the good seed. But these seed will be weeded out. Mark my words.

 

[FearGod]

Why are you not showing respect for the thread. Do you want the moderators to close the thread so that I do not complete what I still have to say. Please cease this nonsense and show some self respect. If you tackle what I have said then that is 100% fine with me. In that way it will be a good contribution. But you and your main accomplice just seem to have one strategy in mind and that is to throw bad seed among the good seed. But these seed will be weeded out. Mark my words.

i was just thinking the same that some are trying to inflame the thread to push mods to close it at one point before revealing the truth.

i don't know if you can make a special group for whom are interested on the title to avoid disturbances from others.

 

[1robin]

Why are you not showing respect for the thread. Do you want the moderators to close the thread so that I do not complete what I still have to say. Please cease this nonsense and show some self respect. If you tackle what I have said then that is 100% fine with me. In that way it will be a good contribution. But you and your main accomplice just seem to have one strategy in mind and that is to throw bad seed among the good seed. But these seed will be weeded out. Mark my words.

As with any teacher, long time students learn over time to establish who to respect and not respect early on so we know who to drop or ignore and who we can justify investing time with. Some of the methods to determine this are (keep in mind this is an academic comparison):
1. If that teacher will not stop rattling off stuff long enough to clarify early foundational points but instead just keeps piling more stuff on a bad foundation.
2. If that teacher is so arrogant that he displays a resistance to stop showing off his flowery theories long enough to explain core issues.
3. If that teacher seems to be over his head and only regurgitates theories others have produced and therefore resists questions because they would reveal his incompetence.
4. If that (usually a theological or philosophical) teacher is presenting an incorrect theory based on bad foundations and avoids any questions concerning the flaws in the foundation because he is more interested in his conclusion than the principles it is based on.
5. If that teacher uses technical language he supposes is over his student’s heads to cover the fact that his theory is flawed.
I do not know you and can't say with certainty that you fit in any or all of these categories, but I will say that I have a college degree in math plus enough hours for a masters, Lion hart has always made intelligent comments, and Sojourner is a graduate theological student and we seem to agree that you display the signs that I look for to establish that you are a teacher that fits somewhere in there. I will suspend my judgment and ask one last time again.
Why is there a point slope equation for a line used in your proof for God? Why was your initial explanation for it so full of errors and misunderstandings concerning math and physics? Why does T=0 occur when matter is still present and in motion? Matter is duration and that is why God created time and matter at the same point. If one exists both do. Finally why is there a reversal in time when thermodynamics (times arrow) shows otherwise?

I would never ask any one to respect or give up the time to follow a grammatical dissertation I presented if I misspelled words early on and refused to correct them or promised to and never did.

I do not ask these questions to condemn you. I ask this in order to justify the time it would take to follow your completed theory. Combine your answers or non-answers to these questions with the same conclusions drawn by other competent debaters and it was easy to conclude the time was not justified. I will suspend that one last time pending actual answers. I would normally have bailed out long ago but your theory was intriguing enough to justify asking questions to attempt to clarify mistakes in it's foundation. Fair enough?

 

[1robin]

i was just thinking the same that some are trying to inflame the thread to push mods to close it at one point before revealing the truth.

Whatever makes you feel better and enables you to maintain a preferred illusion that competent people have refuted. I do not even watch people who I agree with unless it is in a debate setting where they can be challenged any more.

i don't know if you can make a special group for whom are interested on the title to avoid disturbances from others.

It is called a mosque or Church. A debate thread is no place for rhetoric that can't be defended with the exception of more rhetoric. Maybe try a non-debate thread (discussion forum). They are for people who do not wish their theories challenged. Appealing to sympathy because competent people show a pet theory is truly a house of cards built on nothing is the tactic of the easily mesmerized and people who want their ears tickled.

 

[kylixguru]

I do not know you and can't say with certainty that you fit in any or all of these categories

Ok, then how about you quietly sit down and keep a respectful tone in the classroom or excuse yourself?

 

[1robin]

Ok, then how about you quietly sit down and keep a respectful tone in the classroom or excuse yourself?

I have been on the verge of that for a few days. If you will quit defending the indefencable and please just let the people who I actually addressed answer for themselves that matter may be concluded very soon.

 

[sojourner]

Which should not be confused for being believing, polite and dedicated to principle.

Oh, I'm by no means confusing belief, politeness and principle with gullibility, naivete and sanctimoniousness. Neither should you.

 

[sojourner]

Why are you not showing respect for the thread. Do you want the moderators to close the thread so that I do not complete what I still have to say. Please cease this nonsense and show some self respect. If you tackle what I have said then that is 100% fine with me. In that way it will be a good contribution. But you and your main accomplice just seem to have one strategy in mind and that is to throw bad seed among the good seed. But these seed will be weeded out. Mark my words.

"Respect for the thread" means that one follows the forum rules. Thus far, I've seen no reprimands for rules infraction.

A debate thread is not a free forum for one person to "say all (s)he has to say." It's a forum for an idea to be presented and opened for rebuttal. Thus far, it appears as though some don't want others to play here who want to rebut.

Thus far your arguments haven't given me any reason to "mark [your] words."

 

[sojourner]

i was just thinking the same that some are trying to inflame the thread to push mods to close it at one point before revealing the truth.

i don't know if you can make a special group for whom are interested on the title to avoid disturbances from others.

It's not the truth I'm afraid of. But then, IMO, nothing truthful has yet been presented in either the OP or what has followed. There has been unfounded conjecture, to be sure.

Again, this is a public forum, and dissenting ideas are welcome. Perhaps the OP should have opened a discussion in a more appropriate area, such as a religious DIR and labeled it "for Muslims" only, or some such. But here, I'm as welcome to debate as the next person.

 

[sojourner]

Ok, then how about you quietly sit down and keep a respectful tone in the classroom or excuse yourself?

Hmmm...

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I was under the impression that this kind of suggestion is one best left to the work of moderators, not members-at-large.


But I could be wrong.