Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


News From Syria
by zeca
Today at 05:06 PM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
Today at 03:51 PM

New Britain
Today at 03:41 PM

Ashes to beads: South Kor...
Yesterday at 09:44 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
November 30, 2024, 09:01 AM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 30, 2024, 08:53 AM

Gaza assault
by zeca
November 27, 2024, 07:13 PM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 24, 2024, 06:05 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
November 22, 2024, 06:45 AM

Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 19, 2024, 11:36 PM

Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 08:46 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument

 (Read 8957 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     OP - May 01, 2015, 07:15 AM

    Quranic linguistic challenge says that not even one sura can be imitated. (2:23 ) . the smallest sura is al kausar(108) with only TEN words. so i am thinking it is possible to identify the grammatical syntax of this verse and then replace it with other words to see if it can remain coherent and rhyming.

    basically look at the word by word grammatical breakup of the sura al kausur on quran corpus site  :

    hXXp://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=108&verse=1#%28108:1:1%29
    (replace XX with tt)

    first word is "inna" which is a pronoun so we just write a word with a different pronoun e.g. "anta" or "hua" and then move on with the next word. but i cant just randomly throw words it has to make sense and it has to cohere and rhyme . so i need someone with Arabic skills

    had this been in English i may have easily written 10 different verses in that grammatical syntax but i dont know arabic. can someone with knowledge of arabic help  ?  
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #1 - May 01, 2015, 07:30 AM

    Happymurtad has done a number of quranic imitations in Arabic posted here on the forum, they are very good Smiley My daughter was confused and asked what kind of Quran it was that she had never heard when I accidentally put on  "surat al Dhuhr" )

    "The healthiest people I know are those who are the first to label themselves fucked up." - three
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #2 - May 01, 2015, 07:36 AM

    i think it is crazy to take up the challenge. It would be a concession that it even means anything. Whatever you could produce would turn out to have not understood what the challenge is about, and nobody ever will understand what the challenge is about, because the quran doesn't elaborate. It will be added to the list of 'failed challengers' and taken as further proof that the quran is a miracle.

    The quran doesn't say you are supposed to be imitating any particular aspect of grammar, its literary style, or anything else proposed to be inimitable by the apologists.

    Quote
    so i am thinking it is possible to identify the grammatical syntax of this verse and then replace it with other words to see if it can remain coherent and rhyming.


    You would also have to ensure it still contains the 40 rhetorical devices that is being claimed, and whatever else arbitrary ad hoc criteria are devised.  I have even heard apologists suggest that such a thing would merely be copying the quran, and so doesn't count. You are supposed to imitate the quran, but you are not allowed to imitate it.

    I think the quran might fail its own challenge, however it is defined, and until it is defined, the challenge is just a stupid taunt.


  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #3 - May 02, 2015, 06:39 AM

    Hi Arif,
    One of your biggest fanboys here - I absolutely love your work and it's nice to have you post  Smiley I also don't speak Arabic so I'm not of much use. As has already been mentioned, there's no criteria for what constitutes reproduction, so apologists will just move the goalposts at every attempt of a "verse like it". Some argue the miraculous nature of the Qur'an is its eloquence, others say its the scientific and historical miracles, others say its the inimitable structure and others make up the miracles as they go. I don't think that divine revelation logically follows from inimitability anyway. On a similar note, the Qur'an makes a false conditional statement which you may find interesting as a philosopher - http://captaindisguise.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/qurans-error-sura-482-if-quran-had-been.html. Please let me know what you think of the argument. Thanks!
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #4 - May 02, 2015, 08:58 AM

    Quranic linguistic challenge says that not even one sura can be imitated. (2:23 ) . the smallest sura is al kausar(108) with only TEN words. so i am thinking it is possible to identify the grammatical syntax of this verse and then replace it with other words to see if it can remain coherent and rhyming................ but i dont know arabic. can someone with knowledge of arabic help  ?  


    well Arif  even if you are an expert in Arabic, you are bound to fail in convincing these Islamic UNEDUCATED  fools who consider "Quran is a linguistic miracle"  because it says so .   It is not challenge It is an absolute nonsense..

    Anyways let me put those Quran verses that issues the silly challenge
    Quote
    002.023: And if you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed to Our  servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your witnesses besides Allah if you are truthful

    011.013 : Or, do they say: He has forged it. Say: Then bring ten forged chapters like it and call upon whom you can besides Allah, if you are truthful.

    017.088 : Say: If men and jinn should combine together to bring the like of this Quran, they could not bring the like of it, though some of them were aiders of others.


    look at that repetitive rubbish   " and call upon whom you can besides Allah, if you are truthful.

    yes....yes...you call your god and I will call my god and let gods fight and prove whose rhyming  poetry/prose sounds better..  these Islamic intellectual  fools who don't use brain and common sense when it comes to Quran  made that Quran challenge popular on web.

    well let me put some links that may help you in your argument against such nonsense challenge

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQDdV0lZxPw
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imL9PFZXA7A

    http://www.theinimitablequran.com/
    http://www.answering-christianity.com/surah_like_it.htm
    http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/HamzaTzortzis.htm
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=18331.0

    well watch Hassan's videos who is clearly far more proficient in Arabic than that  Indian geek  Zakir Naik or that Greek geek from London..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CHm2xigkBc


    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #5 - May 02, 2015, 09:21 AM

    The way it is described by Hamza is that "all the possible combinations of Arabic words, letters and grammatical rules have been exhausted and yet the Qur’an’s literary form has not been imitated."

    He doesn't realise what a huge claim it is to say every combination has been exhausted. But even if we grant it, it would mean that not even Allah can produce something (else) like the quran. Sure he can produce the quran itself, but we can do that too. Book publishers do it by the million. The argument is that the set of things that could be considered 'like the quran' consists of a single thing - the specific combination and permutation of Arabic letters that constitute the quran, and nothing else.

    The quran is so inimitable that not even Allah can imitate it. We are being challenged to find another member of a set that has already been defined to contain only one thing. We are being challenged to do something that god herself cannot do.
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #6 - May 02, 2015, 12:04 PM

    The way it is described by Hamza is that "all the possible combinations of Arabic words, letters and grammatical rules have been exhausted and yet the Qur’an’s literary form has not been imitated."

    He doesn't realise what a huge claim it is to say every combination has been exhausted..........

    there is no point of wasting time with fools like tortilla ..  It is nonsense to say/to challenge    " can you then produce a chapter like this you see in this book" ..  otherwise it is word of allah/god..  or  or  worse is ,   hell fire to you in this life and after this life way after you became back to dust/carbon or carbon  dioxide along with some other elements..   so let me sing a song

    You can say that to  any book and and to every book ..
    and You can say that  to any song and and to every song.....
    and..and You can say that to any  sound and and to  every sound.,  
    including the one that comes out bathrooms when some one makes sound sitting on a toilet  due to diarrhea
     


    fools talk nonsense.. Quran is a book of its time and without doubt the present book  is compiled by many authors with many authors and at different times.. The funny thing is., it has so many repetitive sentences the same words are repeated  in so-called  surahs it appears that authors of that book have never read it even once to put it n proper format..

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #7 - May 02, 2015, 07:47 PM

    I can't recall a passage in the quran that says bring a chapter like it "linguistly". Last week I was actually chatting to an Iraqi muslim and this came up, his understanding was that a chapter like it was exactly that. We were discussing Surat An-Nūr, particularly the verse which says "And those who seek a contract [for eventual emancipation] from among whom your right hands possess - then make a contract with them if you know there is within them goodness and give them from the wealth of Allah which He has given you."

    The claim he made was that no civilisation before islam had given slaves the right to free themselves and challenged me to show him something pre-islam that's similar to this. I then showed him Roman laws from before islam which proved this wasn't unique to the quran.

    However, if we are to assume that my Iraqi friend is wrong and it is in fact a linguistic challenge, how exactly does one decide that the challenge is won? Do you play an arabic recitation of the quran and then the challenge like it (also in arabic) and ask for a show of hands if people think it's A or B?

    If someone listened to happymurtad's attempt and believed it was from the quran, is that challenge met? Who exactly decides?

    Another point is that this doesn't have to be a challenge solely for the quran. Many things in this world are unique, If I demand a chapter like it from the vedas in the original Sanskrit, and in my eyes whoever attempts is fails, does that mean it's from god?

    Until there can be clear rules about how exactly the challenge can be won with impartial, unbiased judges, it's a nonsense challenge. What believer is ever going to admit to it? The best you can hope for is to get them to listen to one and ask what they think about it. And of course, once you reveal it's not actually from the quran, watch the excuses.

    P.S. Seen a number of your debates. Big fan. Afro

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #8 - May 02, 2015, 07:55 PM

    Quote
    I can't recall a passage in the quran that says bring a chapter like it "linguistically".


    You're right. There isn't one. That's the kind of ret-conning that Dawahgandists get into because they realise that the Qur'anic verses were actually in response to the rising derision of the Qur'an due to it's close resemblance to the works of existing philosophers/orators and wannabe Prophets at the time.

    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #9 - May 02, 2015, 07:59 PM

    I think there's merit to my Iraqi friend's point of view.

    "Islam is really special because it comes from allah and no one else could ever do it cos they're silly humans. Look, here's proof! See this here in the quran? What other civilization gave slaves the right to free themselves like this? Show me something like it before islam!"

    ~shows him~

    "...Fuck."

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #10 - May 02, 2015, 08:02 PM

    The Cyrus cylinder is another great example of providing freedom to an oppressed people. But all that proves is that a particular policy is okay. BTW in Ilam slavery is condoned and only once you become muslims do you earn the right to become free (certain terms and conditions apply).

    Ahsoka> Muhammad.

    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #11 - May 02, 2015, 08:09 PM

    Whichever way you look at it, it's irrelevant. The quran really could be unique in a linguistic sense. It really could be unmatchable, but that doesn't make it correct. Even if I were to accept it's a linguistic miracle, sperm still does not come from between the backbone and ribs, the Earth still did not exist before or at the time of the big bang (ripped apart from heaven), unborn children still do not develop from a clot of blood, Adam and Eve still never existed, evolution is still true, the Earth still did not exist before the sun/stars.

    Arif, if I may, why play on their terms? How is the "linguistic miracle" thing a factor when. even if that's true, the quran is still wrong?

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #12 - May 02, 2015, 08:46 PM

    okay just to remove one confusion i am not THE Arif Ahmad (the bad ass Cambridge philosopher) . i made this id few years ago when i saw his very first online appearance in the debate with Craig . i never thought he would become so famous that it would cause confusion. ill try to try to change it in my profile name . sorry for the confusion,

    and thank you for the responses and links . some of them are new which i am only discovering now.  and you are right even if my method of imitating the syntax is applied it would only be declared as "plagiarism" and not "imitation" because that distinction itself can be subjective. 

    Cornflower can u link me to the attempts from happymurtad ? or can u tell me under which section of the forum can i find it ? the forum topic index seemed very confusing to me

    anyways i am trying an alternate way to test the challenge . i will present a mixture of verses some Quranic and others non-quranic to unsuspecting believers and ask them to see if they can figure out which is which.

    again thank you all for your help and sorry for the confusion.

    [edit: nevermind I found the happymurtad blog]
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #13 - May 02, 2015, 08:46 PM

    I consider the "bring a sura like it" challenge as strongly indicating the human origins of the Quran. It immediately shifts the burden of proof where you're supposed to assume the Quran is true and "fear the fire made for jinns and men" until you can bring something "like it" (whatever that means). Imagine if shakespeare or any other brilliant author expected you to assume their work was divine until you could match it and threatened you if you failed. I couldn't match Shakespeare, so am I just helpless but to accept his work as a divine revelation? Of course not! Being a better writer than you is a complete non-sequitur to being divinely inspired. And the burden of proof is on the person claiming revelation to show it can not be humanly created, not on the other people to show that a "revelation" can be commonplace human speech.

    Plus, if a god is going to contact humans, I think it would want to focus on good communication rather than trivial aesthetics that only apply in a very specific context. The Quran's literary form was catered to impress 7th century arabs as it was written in their dominant form of poetic style (saj). Different poetry styles fall in and out of fashion and languages change and die off, but clear communication never goes out of style and beautiful content (rather than form) remains beautiful no matter what language its translated into. The Quran, translated into English, was probably the most vague, choppy, and inconsistent book I've ever read read.

    There's also no bloody criteria, which allows for optimal goal post shifting. Also, its almost completely esoteric as almost no one knows ancient arabic. If I challenged someone to bring me something like the egyptian book of the dead written in hieroglyphics, only like 1000 people in the world could take me up on the challenge and if they did (they probably all have better things to do), I could always wiggle out. I could then claim that the Egyptian Book of the Dead is divinely inspired with the same criteria the Quran uses.

    If your goal is to change minds, don't bother taking up the challenge. It's for all intents and purposes, unfalsifiable.

    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #14 - May 02, 2015, 09:09 PM

    ill try to try to change it in my profile name . sorry for the confusion,

    Hey mate, you need to PM one of the staff with your request and give them a new name.

    Same question though:

    How is the "linguistic miracle" thing a factor when. even if that's true, the quran is still wrong?


    I wrote a response to a challenge by a member to bring your five strongest arguments against the quran. As far as I'm concerned, until these and others are addressed, the linguistic miracle is, as I said, irrelevant.

    If I were to say "Okay, the quran is a linguistic miracle", the quote below is still as valid as before.

    So I thought I'd expand on the above, because I honestly meant these to be arguments.

    1) The quran:

    The quran claims itself to be the perfect uncorrupted word of god. That's it's biggest flaw. It invites challenge in a way other holy texts don't, and is really to arrogant for it's own good. The level is enough that it doesn't have the flexibility needed to stand the test of time. The fact that it doesn't have this flexibility, and that it needs it in the first place, is an argument against it in my opinion.

    2) Sanity

    There's only so much a human being can reasonably be held accountable for when it comes to spiritual matters. There's a verse in the quran which says allah has not given us two hearts. I personally view this as metaphorical, not literal. We view and believe certain things a certain way. I cannot at the same time believe in the quran while seeing flaws in it.

    3) Reality

    The quran, like all the other holy texts, claims to be the word of god. The way to verify this is testing it, see if it stacks up. Quite frankly it doesn't. Dust devils and jinns, spontaneous human creation, great flood, there's a lot to choose from, but I'll pick a few.

    The story of the arc and the great flood. This would have happened around 4000 years ago. It's quite simply impossible for the number of races, ethnicities and the huge amount of genetic traits to come from one incestuous family in just 4000 years. It cannot happen. Something else that puts a hole in the story is the amount of people who were thriving at this point. God flooded the entire world. Except for the Chinese who were developing at an incredible rate and remained unaffected from a global flood that wiped out every human on the planet. The Japanese were also unaffected. And the Africans. And the Europeans. And the Native Americans. And the Aztecs. And the South Americans. And most of the middle east.  The flood never happened. It's not real.

    The quran teaches that humans were created from clay in a specific creation. If you're to count on the hadiths, then it's just even more ludicrous. We know the first human was not a 90 foot tall clay giant. Even if you don't take the hadiths into account, it also doesn't account for evolution, the proof of which is overwhelming. Nor does it account for the number of people today who have Neanderthal DNA in them from before the Neanderthals went extinct. Everything I know to be proven fact contradicts the claims of the quran. The only logical conclusion I can come to is that it was a story told by ancient societies because they didn't have any answers. Adam never existed. It's not real.

    The sun orbits the Earth...yeah, we've known that's bullshit for a few centuries now.

    It says in the quran that in the embryo/foetus the bones are the first thing to form. "So we made the clot a morsel, so we made the morsel bones, so we clothed the bones (with) meat". This is wrong. The skeleton is actually among the last to be formed. You'd think the all knowing creator of everything would realise this. It's wrong.

    The stars are missiles to be hurled at jinns. Or they hunt demons. I haven't read the quran in a while so I can't remember the exact quote, but you can look it up to see exactly what it says. This is also wrong. The stars are just stars, they do the exact same thing as the star we orbit, the sun.

    Women are defective in intelligence. Coming from a culture where gender mixing is the norm and close relationships aren't looked down upon, I can tell you this isn't true from my own experience. And then there's current trends in school grades, sciences, IQ and employment performance, the fact there are women in MENSA (if you don't know MENSA is like a super genius club, only 2% of the human population globally have a high enough IQ to qualify for membership). Now we live in an age men and women have equal rights, women are on the same level and even starting to out preform men. So I'm going to say this is wrong.

    4) Nonsense

    Do you believe that allah puts a veil over our hearts? If the answer to this is yes, then my reply to that would be that I'm blameless. If the reason I don't see the truth of islam is because allah put a veil over my heart, then it stands to reason I'll be punished (by being sent to hell) for a crime I didn't commit. My reason for saying I'm being punished for a crime I didn't commit is that allah delibertly put a veil over my heart so I would never know him, therefore the fault is allah's, not mine.

    Do you believe nothing happens accept by allah's will? If so then it's the same as above. If nothing happens except by allah's will, then allah made sure I wouldn't believe in him. So again the fault lies with allah, not myself.

    Do you believe islam teaches there's no compulsion in religion? If so does that mean if you don't accept islam as true, then you go to hell? If so, this means that allah has told us something to be taken as truth, and he punishes us for taking him at his word instead of assuming he was lying.

    Do you believe in the virgin birth? If so, can you understand why I might think it's more likely that a teenage girl told a lie rather than a virgin magically conceiving a child, carrying it to term, birthing it, and the child while still an infant speaking?

    Can you also understand why it may be confusing that said infant would only speak once to a few people and refuse to speak again to others, which would cause all doubt in the divinity of allah to be wiped away?

    Here's a situation. Let's say there's something in your house you don't like. It offends you. Let's also say you have the power of a god. Would you A) throw away the thing you didn't like or give it to charity, or B) bring it to life, give it intelligence so it can understand what's happening, enable it to feel pain, and torture it forever and ever and ever? Which is more merciful?

    5) Common sense

    It becomes a common sense issue. Let's say that I'm wrong. Let's say all the things I'm of the opinion are true are wrong. It doesn't change the fact that I find the quran unbelievable. I can't have more knowledge than what's available to me. Let's take evolution. I find it believable. I'm convinced of it. The quran goes against it. I have no reason whatsoever, nothing at all compelling me to believe the quranic story over proven scientific fact.

    Or another, let's take the big bang. I'm convinced by what knowledge I have that before the universe, and after the universe, there was no Earth. This planet did not exist. It took a very long time for our star to be born and for our planet to form. This seems plausible to me. From what I know of physics and cosmology, I can accept this. I have no reason whatsoever to believe that the Earth existed from the start and was ripped apart from heaven.

    Or another. The quran and hadiths suggest a flat Earth. At one point it's spread out like a carpet, at another the Earth is like an ostrich egg (had to pick the bird that buries it's egg and flattens the soil), allah will roll up the Earth like parchment/paper, and on and on it goes. Everything I'm aware of tells me this is wrong. It becomes less and less believable to me. So with all this in mind, common sense tells me that the only truth that lies hidden in the quran is simply the truths of the cultural norms and mindset of that society and time. Historically and psychologically it's interesting, but that's all it is. No more, no less.

    And I have to admit, these aren't even my strongest arguments. I haven't thought about this endlessly, I haven't delved into the theology to throw things at you. The above is just what came to mind as I sit here filling the time on a lazy Sunday evening.


    Whether the quran is a unique work of literature or not, the above still stands and the quran is still wrong

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #15 - May 02, 2015, 10:13 PM

    You're right. There isn't one. That's the kind of ret-conning that Dawahgandists get into because they realise that the Qur'anic verses were actually in response to the rising derision of the Qur'an due to it's close resemblance to the works of existing philosophers/orators and wannabe Prophets at the time.


    Yeah this.  Rarely do the people making this argument stop to ponder why the Qur'an is chock full of railing against people who are calling its surahs fraud, and accusing 'them' of pulling fake surahs from nowhere, which various surahs bitterly complain about.  You don't see that in other 'holy books,' they aren't dealing with an audience calling 'forgery' all the time.  Why not?  Why are these surahs so hellbent on proving they aren't a fraud, as some people were claiming?  Critical thought begins ...
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #16 - May 04, 2015, 04:31 PM

    i never understood this argument that the Quran is inimitable or has a "divine" linguistic miracle, sure some surah are absolutely beautiful and very poetic, but others, specially the long one are rather dull,  unfortunately, Arab writers are afraid to challenge the non sense dogma, and do a critical analysis of Quran style.
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #17 - May 06, 2015, 03:57 PM

    You're right. There isn't one. That's the kind of ret-conning that Dawahgandists get into because they realise that the Qur'anic verses were actually in response to the rising derision of the Qur'an due to it's close resemblance to the works of existing philosophers/orators and wannabe Prophets at the time.


    That makes a lot of sense. So when it says "bring something like it" it really means, "if you think I'm just plagiarizing, prove it by bringing whatever I'm copying from"?

    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #18 - May 06, 2015, 08:49 PM

    I think that interpretation is unlikely because of the other ayah that challenges the other guys to bring forward "ten" more surahs like it.  Actually I think the much bigger point here is why would it even make any sense to bring forward surahs like it?  This doesn't make any sense if a living prophet is uttering the surahs!  Nobody would dream of such a bizarre challenge *unless* you are 'discovering' or promulgating surahs after the prophet's death.

    Also, the fact that the second ayah states "ten surahs" suggests that somebody met the challenge of one, which was felt to be too easy ... so the writer had to up the game to ten.  Here's the revised and substantially more desperate version, which for some reason Muslims don't seem to like as much:

    "Or they say, "He (Prophet Muhammad(P)) forged it (the Qur'an)." Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!" [Qur'an 11:13]

    Clearly many of the believers were calling bullshit on the 'new surahs' .... which again makes zero sense if they were being delivered by a living prophet.  I'm surprised this second verse wasn't accompanied by declarations of hellfire for the munafiqun who had the temerity to suggest that these 'new surahs' weren't legit.
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #19 - May 07, 2015, 01:01 AM

    I don't get why it makes no sense if it's uttered by a living prophet. Is it because you don't think it was organized into suras as it was recited? Because otherwise how is it hard to picture some guy making up poetry and saying that no one can bring forth even a single stanza as good as his?

    But I definitely agree that the discrepancy between the "bring one sura" and the "bring ten sura" challenges seems to strongly imply back peddling rather than the apologetic claim that the criteria was reduced to further show the futility of trying.

    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #20 - May 07, 2015, 02:03 PM

    There are two reasons justperusing.  The first is that the later Qur'anic surahs aren't good poetry at all.  Setting aside Muslim dogma, how can one seriously picture some guy trotting out such bland prosaic text, like the Medinan surahs, and confidently asserting "now, how could anybody replicate this"?  The second is that calling out a 'rap battle' of sorts is just not something that religious figures do in response to a claim of forgery.  What would forgery even mean if Muhammad was sitting right there?  Forgery is not the word!  "Not divinely inspired" or something would be the word, or 'you are just making this up!'  When you talk 'forgery,' you are talking about finding texts, not sitting there and giving oral proclamations.  Neither the claim of forgery, nor the response, makes any sense in that kind of context.  It only makes sense in the context of how forgery *actually worked* in late antiquity -- when people 'find' texts supposedly written by holy figures.
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #21 - May 07, 2015, 03:57 PM

    Ok so what exactly do you see the whole "bring one/ten like it" challenge to mean? Also what layer of the text do you think it's from? Does it go back to something the prophet might have said or something far more likely to have been added closer to the compilation process?

    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #22 - May 07, 2015, 04:20 PM

    I take it to reflect a relatively rudimentary layer of late-Qur'anic polemic, which should be understood alongside the many Qur'anic references to the 'munafiqun' who seem to be a faction of believers who are calling bullshit on the 'new surahs' that are being promulgated.

    When the actual prophet was not around, and somebody contested your 'new surah,' how would you establish its legitimacy?  Two ways, one is by threatening hellfire/political retaliation for the 'hypocrite's' failure to accept the holy text, the second is by saying 'how could I have forged this?  It's too difficult!  It can only be from the prophet!'

    Probably this reflects factional disputes in a relatively illiterate jihadi context, in contrast to the more literate and sophisticated earlier Qur'anic layers.
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #23 - May 07, 2015, 07:01 PM

    There are two reasons justperusing.  The first is that the later Qur'anic surahs aren't good poetry at all.  Setting aside Muslim dogma, how can one seriously picture some guy trotting out such bland prosaic text, like the Medinan surahs, and confidently asserting "now, how could anybody replicate this"?  The second is that calling out a 'rap battle' of sorts is just not something that religious figures do in response to a claim of forgery.  What would forgery even mean if Muhammad was sitting right there?  Forgery is not the word!  "Not divinely inspired" or something would be the word, or 'you are just making this up!'  When you talk 'forgery,' you are talking about finding texts, not sitting there and giving oral proclamations.  Neither the claim of forgery, nor the response, makes any sense in that kind of context.  It only makes sense in the context of how forgery *actually worked* in late antiquity -- when people 'find' texts supposedly written by holy figures.


    Plenty of people produce horrible poetry. Plenty of people make claims as representatives of god. It is not a stretch to combine these two. Often scripture is seen as a higher form of communication thus people find plenty of poetry with little effort. This becomes increasingly common when it is the very believers themselves finding these examples of divine poetry or whatever. Confirmation bias does wonderful things.

    The verses which are seen as rebuttal can easily by directed at those within the believer group rather than actually addressing the one doing the criticizing. The verses are apologetic in nature rather than a dialogue between pro and con positions. This position can either be held by the proponent or a later apologist. We have examples of cults in which the leader represents the divine. They use the same type of apologetic to defend their claims and to shore up the cult members. It is solely an inner dialogue between co-religionists. Look up any apologist website for an example.

    Whether these verses are additions or not I still believe the above is more probable since the basis of the arguments is incoherent due to it's required fallacious reasoning.
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #24 - September 24, 2015, 10:57 AM

    do any of these random characters look familiar to anyone?

    https://libraryofbabel.info/bookmark.cgi?random_characters_1

    Quote
    Jorge Luis Borges’s 1941 tale about a library containing every possible combination of letters – every work that could ever be written – has come to life online.


    http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/may/04/virtual-library-of-babel-makes-borgess-infinite-store-of-books-a-reality-almost
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #25 - September 24, 2015, 04:23 PM

    Oh cool! dance

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Assistance needed regarding the Quranic Linguistic Argument
     Reply #26 - September 24, 2015, 04:51 PM

    The inimitable quran, imitated by brute force of computing power.

  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »