The Vortex beckons,how many contradictions and errors are in the Qur'an

[Fatihah]

But the problem is that you don't deliver that message very well. THAT is why these discussions go on and on and on.... If you were better at this, we would all be in awe of your brilliant answers.

Response: Not when you choose to live in denial. Even at gun point, I can't convince such a person. So the lack of awe by some is due to their own doing, not mine.

 

[YmirGF]

Response: Not when you choose to live in denial. Even at gun point, I can't convince such a person. So the lack of awe by some is due to their own doing, not mine.

*sigh*

 

[Bismillah]

abibi argued devils are not referred to parents as devils are singular.
i proved to them devils are plural and abibi and eselam accepted that.
So it is proved that devils refers to parents.
Again abibi is asking me for the verses explaining that
but it is their turn to prove devils are not parents by showing verses.

Wrong, I have never argued Devils are not parents because Devils are singular. The statement you are referring to was tacked on in the end and I believe you are purposely ignoring my main point. That there is no reason to suspect that Parents are devils. Why do you deny that Parents are misguided by the devil, not ever non-believer is the devil reincarnate, something you think would be glaringly obvious.

You have proven that the Hadith is grammatically correct in accordance with the Qur'an. Congratulations.

Hold on a second. It is proved that devils are parents just because we know that there are multiple devils? Are you honestly trying to defend this statement, if you are you are wasting my time.

What in the world would lead you to assume that parents are Devils. Iblis supplies lies and doubt among people. It is only natural that those who doubt Allah then have fallen prey to the Devil's slander. It does not in any way show that they are the devil. It is you who has to explain how you ascertain that all parents are Devils and where this is supported in the Qur'an

What accepted translation? There are many "accepted" English translations, my friend. When I am investigating a point in the Qur'an, I normally utilize 16 translations simultaneously, that also provides the transliterations of the original Arabic. Utlizing so many translations gives a far clearer view of what is really being talked about in the text and I am not at the mercy of any individual translator's agenda.

To be perfectly honest, it is child's play to take any given translation and use it as your proof text, as a gold standard, if you will. The reality is that most of the passages of the Qur'an have been translated in numerous ways over the years, so one cannot point to a single translation and say it is the "accepted translation".


As to the windy Muslim replies, the sad fact is that most replies rely on circular reasoning and so are very difficult to critique. When pressed Muslims, if they are feeling generous, may admit it is all a matter of faith, whereas others may claim the reader is simply in denial for not accepting the answers that are given.

Likewise, I began this thread with a very clear contradiction between the Qur'an and widely accepted events in the life of your prophet. I do understand that the ahadith are not on the same level as the Qur'an, however, it does occupy the 2nd place in Muslim thinking. The thing is, non-Muslims point out errors and contradictions, which Muslims then trip over themselves to explain, at length, why those contradictions are not actually contradictory. These answers seldom impress the non-Muslim greatly, unless of course, said non-Muslim knows very little about Islam to begin with.

At the end of the discussion, when both parties are exhausted from playing mental and verbal gymnastics, we simply choose to disagree. Sadly though, a draw is not exactly what I would expect in such conversations. In theory, Muslims have the word of God on their side, so the debates should ALWAYS land in the Muslim's favor. But the reality is, that all we ever get are stalemates, followed by ad hominem barrages.

Doesn't that fact, alone, make you question the validity of your arguments? In my view, if Muslim positions actually had merit these discussions would be over very, very quickly and we would all sit back and wonder what just hit us. Instead, we are left blinking at what we are reading, trying to find the sense in it.

Well the reason you find so much discord is that you are looking for translations online. I find that many websites alter or mistranslate the Qur'an far more frequently online to prove a point. Simply, because those looking are using that site as a reference and have no means to know that the translation is indeed invalid. For example, my copy of the Interpretation of the Meaning of the Noble Qur'an by Dr. Khan and Dr. Taqui-ud-Din Al-Hillan provide reliable translations.

But, if you take the translations of credible sources, I find that the verse's statement is unchanged. A translation can be accepted as "the translation" if it successfully transcribes the idea and meaning of the verse from Arabic to English no?

No offense to any previous posters, but all the supposed contradictions in the Qur'an that I looked at I found in the top 3 Islamaphobic sites with the exact same faulty translations. Each of them employing faulty translations.

In regards to Circular logic, I think that the majority of the time the problem lies in not taking the verse into context. From those above and below it. For example, the "contradiciton"of Earth is stated to have been made in 6 and 8 days, proved to be wrong simply because the second time frame was taking into account not just the creation of the Earth, but of the Universe. The "contradictions" I have answered so far in this thread, have not included the belief that the Qur'an is faultless and thus this verse if faultless. I have tried to provide a clear interpretation and a scientific explanation of the verse, from a Muslim perspective.

I think I am beginning to agree with your "root assumptions" theory. While I see the Qur'an as faultless, Atheists are not satisfied by the "broadly worded" verses of the Qur'an. However, think what affect it would have if the Qur'an used today's standard scientific lexicon. Stating that matter was made of atoms further divided by quarks etc. etc. would have not been applicable or decipherable at the time of revelation. Instead Allah, through his wisdom, dictated the Qur'an in terms that were correct thousands of years back and are still correct now. Even if the Qur'an speaks broadly, surely there is one claim that is dead wrong? Not just open to interpretation or however you may look at it, but dead wrong? Since there is no such thing then I reason that the Qur'an is correct.

The fact that I can use the Qur'an Allah's commandments does not necessarily help in me convincing someone that they are true. That person has the ability to accept or deny the claim. Just because the Qur'an is faultless doesn't make my argument faultless as well. The reason these discussions end in stalemates is because of the perspectives each side takes. Then should these discussion continue? Are they of value? I think what is more important is trying to understand how you can change someone's perspective, their outlook on the discussion. But, I don't think that is possible through such terse and broken up dialogue that is found on these forums.

 

[Gharib]

Response: Not when you choose to live in denial. Even at gun point, I can't convince such a person. So the lack of awe by some is due to their own doing, not mine.

exactly. and still everyone blames the muslims.

 

[Gharib]

abibi argued devils are not be referred to parents as devils are singular.
i proved to them devils are plural and abibi and eselam accepted that.

i'm the one that told you devils are plural. they live like humans, ie populate.

So it is proved that devils refers to parents.

where did you prove this? i'm the one who said there are more than one devil and the verse reffers to them.

Again abibi is asking me for the verses explaining that

he is right in doing so. you just make false claims without even posting any proof.

but it is their turn to prove devils are not parents by showing verses.

since when is the quran considered proof by non muslims? can i post a verse that says Allah is the only god, muhamed is the last prophet and islam is the right religion?

 

[nameless]

i'm the one that told you devils are plural. they live like humans, ie populate.

eselam dont say false, im the one who proved that, and you and abibi were forced to accept.

yours is just statement, even your scripture tells it is devils and not devil, so it is plural, thus devils are referred to parents. or explain why plural is used.

since when is the quran considered proof by non muslims? can i post a verse that says Allah is the only god, muhamed is the last prophet and islam is the right religion?

its contradiction now being proved.

 

[Gharib]

eselam dont say false, check

yeah i explained that devils is referred to devils. there is more than one devil so it reffers to them not someones parents.

 

[nameless]

Wrong, I have never argued Devils are not parents because Devils are singular.

see post 504, explain for what reason you introduced singularity.

 

[Gharib]

eselam dont say false, im the one who proved that, and you and abibi were forced to accept.

forced? are you sure?

you said:

yours is just statement, even your scripture tells it is devils and not devil, so it is plural, thus devils are referred to parents. or explain why plural is used.

and i told you that if it is referring to Iblis (the devil) it is singular, however if it is plural it referrs to more than one devil (including or excluding iblis) and not parents. because devils also are like humans, there are many of them.

now that i have explained why it is in plural and to whom it referrs. you are free to think that it still referrs to parents.

its contradiction now being proved.

what contradiction, if you really think that just by statting something that isn't there will make a difference then, you are wrong.

 

[Gharib]

see post 504, explain for what reason you introduced singularity.

he introduced it because the quran ussualy says devil rather than devils. and when it is devil (singular) it referrs to iblis, the sheytan, exclusive of the other devils.

 

[Gharib]

nameless, now that we've settled what 'devils' referrs to. lets continue with you answering post 514 and 518.

 

[England my lionheart]

Or maybe it has to do with muslims being tired explaining the same thing over and over, and even if they did it still won't be satisfactory for you.

Perhaps its because if a single error or contradiction is accepted then for a Muslim it all falls down,however i don't see a problem with it because its all about faith and not facts.

I mean some people see this verse as contradicting, saying stuff like its the DNA inheritance that shapes us.

What else shapes us,DNA does go a long way to shape us,there is also your Family and Education and the society in which you live,peer pressure etc,

"He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He pleases. There is no god but He, the Exalted in Might, the Wise. [2:6]"

This makes no sense,why would an all powerful God create for example a disabled person who after reaching adulthood would probably be understandably bitter towards said God and end up in Hellfire,there is no logic to it,or create a Homosexual which is bound for Hellfire before he is even born.

 

[Gharib]

This makes no sense,why would an all powerful God create for example a disabled person who after reaching adulthood would probably be understandably bitter towards said God and end up in Hellfire,there is no logic to it,or create a Homosexual which is bound for Hellfire before he is even born.

it doens't make sense because it isn't true.
you are wrong with both of those examples. Allah does not create someone destined to hell. you make that choice. no one is created homosexual, they choose to be so.

 

[England my lionheart]

Not according to your Qur'an Eselam "He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He pleases. There is no god but He, the Exalted in Might, the Wise. [2:6]" i ask you,why would he create Siamese Twins for example ,"He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He pleases" or a Downes Syndrome Baby.

 

[England my lionheart]

As for Homosexuals do you really think that someone wakes up one day and thinks "mmm i think i will come out as Gay today" well you may do but you would be wrong,for many Gay people there can be a big inner struggle to come to terms with it ,added to that Family and societies attitude to Homosexuality would not make an attractive choice if thats what it was.
I lost a good freind who drank himself to death as he could'nt handle the inner struggle,he was a Catholic which was an added issue,he was Gay but could'nt admit it some people just are its as simpla as that.

 

[Fatihah]

Not according to your Qur'an Eselam "He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He pleases. There is no god but He, the Exalted in Might, the Wise. [2:6]" i ask you,why would he create Siamese Twins for example ,"He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He pleases" or a Downes Syndrome Baby.

Response: The verse answers the question for you. "He does what he pleases". The purpose of life is to overcome the obstacles presented to you. The qur'an also says that every prophet has an enemy. That's right. The ones that Allah favors over all of mankind, they themselves are given enemies! Why? Because that's part of the purpose of life. Those who overcome these obstacles and still praise Allah, are rewarded in the Hereafter.

 

[Fatihah]

As for Homosexuals do you really think that someone wakes up one day and thinks "mmm i think i will come out as Gay today" well you may do but you would be wrong,for many Gay people there can be a big inner struggle to come to terms with it ,added to that Family and societies attitude to Homosexuality would not make an attractive choice if thats what it was.
I lost a good freind who drank himself to death as he could'nt handle the inner struggle,he was a Catholic which was an added issue,he was Gay but could'nt admit it some people just are its as simpla as that.

Response: I don't suggest that they suddenly wake up as homosexuals.

 

[YmirGF]

Why do you deny that Parents are misguided by the devil, not ever non-believer is the devil reincarnate, something you think would be glaringly obvious.

Well, I don't believe in demons or a "devil" anyways, so it is a meaningless concept, as given. Amusingly it does remind me of the time a Muslim here on RF said that I was Satan. No, not influenced by Satan, but Satan himself. I took it as quite a compliment actually.

Well the reason you find so much discord is that you are looking for translations online. I find that many websites alter or mistranslate the Qur'an far more frequently online to prove a point. Simply, because those looking are using that site as a reference and have no means to know that the translation is indeed invalid. For example, my copy of the Interpretation of the Meaning of the Noble Qur'an by Dr. Khan and Dr. Taqui-ud-Din Al-Hillan provide reliable translations.

Actually, the site I use is an authentic Muslim site. Dah Linkypoo for Islamawakened. Nice try though.
This is a direct quote from Islamawakened.com in regards to the translation of Din/Hillan.

I strongly recommend that you use an alternate translation of the meaning; the Hilali & Khan work is the least appropriate for dawah work; it comes across to non-Muslims as extremely bigoted.
The peace that is Islam is not to be found in it. To verify this compare it with others, here... Compared Translations of the meaning of the Quran - Sura 1
Scroll down to 1:7 and imagine you are trying to use that translation to bring Islam to a Christian or Jew.
Saheeh International has made some efforts to correct these problems while retaining the efforts of (otherwise) strong scholars..

Evidently, some Muslims don't agree with your position on this matter.

But, if you take the translations of credible sources, I find that the verse's statement is unchanged. A translation can be accepted as "the translation" if it successfully transcribes the idea and meaning of the verse from Arabic to English no?

And deftly ignores the fact that many Arabic words have multiple meanings which leaves up with the agenda of one particular translator.

No offense to any previous posters, but all the supposed contradictions in the Qur'an that I looked at I found in the top 3 Islamaphobic sites with the exact same faulty translations. Each of them employing faulty translations.

But that problem does not arise when one is looking at multiple translations. Just out of curiosity, which are the top three sites. I'll let you know if I ever bother reading them.

In regards to Circular logic, I think that the majority of the time the problem lies in not taking the verse into context. From those above and below it. For example, the "contradiciton"of Earth is stated to have been made in 6 and 8 days, proved to be wrong simply because the second time frame was taking into account not just the creation of the Earth, but of the Universe. The "contradictions" I have answered so far in this thread, have not included the belief that the Qur'an is faultless and thus this verse if faultless. I have tried to provide a clear interpretation and a scientific explanation of the verse, from a Muslim perspective.

I don't recall being particularly impressed with your account. Perhaps I'll go back and read it again. Regarding you claim not to rely on the "faultless" argument, it is an assumed given. You don't need to say it. We already know that is what you believe.

I think I am beginning to agree with your "root assumptions" theory.

Why, thank you. To be fair, it isn't my idea, but it is an idea I have worked with for over three decades

While I see the Qur'an as faultless, Atheists are not satisfied by the "broadly worded" verses of the Qur'an. However, think what affect it would have if the Qur'an used today's standard scientific lexicon.

But... it doesn't. Remember, unchanged... protected... yadda, yadda, yadda.

Stating that matter was made of atoms further divided by quarks etc. etc. would have not been applicable or decipherable at the time of revelation. Instead Allah, through his wisdom, dictated the Qur'an in terms that were correct thousands of years back and are still correct now. Even if the Qur'an speaks broadly, surely there is one claim that is dead wrong? Not just open to interpretation or however you may look at it, but dead wrong? Since there is no such thing then I reason that the Qur'an is correct.

But that leaves far too much room for silliness to enter the picture. It is somewhat mind-numbing that a single 6 word, vaguely written phrase is used to support the idea of the Big Bang, for example, or that mountains act as pegs to stabilize the "shaking" earth.

The fact that I can use the Qur'an Allah's commandments does not necessarily help in me convincing someone that they are true. That person has the ability to accept or deny the claim. Just because the Qur'an is faultless doesn't make my argument faultless as well. The reason these discussions end in stalemates is because of the perspectives each side takes.

That and Muslims reliance on a faulty understanding of scientific issues or what is popularly described as "junk science". So, we have one camp using a faulty understanding of science and another camp using the "wrong" translations. Sounds like a recipe for disaster as far as I can tell. Do you at least appreciate how Muslims set themselves up to be knocked right back down?

Then should these discussion continue? Are they of value?

I think there is tremendous value in these discussions for those who know very little about Islam. It serves to underscore the mindset often held by Muslims and the borderline fanaticism that makes them believe that their thinking is valid. My advice is that Muslims should try a different tactic unless they just wish to swell their ranks with fools, as it is only the foolish that are taken in by the paper-thin circular reasoning.

I think what is more important is trying to understand how you can change someone's perspective, their outlook on the discussion. But, I don't think that is possible through such terse and broken up dialogue that is found on these forums.

I do agree with this. It is very difficult to have a straight forward discussion when everyone is jumping in from different directions. I tried having a one on one discussion with a Muslim a few weeks back, but it appears that he has lost interest in presenting his arguments. LINK

 

[England my lionheart]

Response: The verse answers the question for you. "He does what he pleases". The purpose of life is to overcome the obstacles presented to you. The qur'an also says that every prophet has an enemy. That's right. The ones that Allah favors over all of mankind, they themselves are given enemies! Why? Because that's part of the purpose of life. Those who overcome these obstacles and still praise Allah, are rewarded in the Hereafter.

Sorry i do not buy that,lets go one step further,a Person who was born mentally retarded does he face the same test,just how can he negotiate these obstacles.

 

[England my lionheart]

Response: I don't suggest that they suddenly wake up as homosexuals.

Why would someone choose their sexuality,what would be the motivation to do that IYO