@ Sobeiski
You have this tendency of restating the same things I already addressed. For example you said:
Well you keep a pretty damning thing in that corner, that the guide to all mankind fails miserably (100%) to explain how nature works. Is that a wise thing to do? If you would find out your financial adviser is an embezzler, would you keep that in the corner too?
when I have already explained to you that putting it in this context doesn’t change my position.
Mars is rock just like Earth, so it would have sounded in the same limited way. What is your point then?
If you didn’t get it the first time, then there’s no point of repeating it.
Actually I never use these terms, because the need for using them never arises. Nowadays I use the clock system if I want to refer to a point in time - and I'm not being sarcastic here. If I'd really want to refer to those events/periods, I could say "dawn" and "dusk", but yes, I could use "sunrise" and "sunset" just as well. Mainly because I don't have the mission of writing a guide to all mankind, a guide that wants to impress unto the reader that it is not the work of a limited being.
Ok, I’m going to explain this to you once and only once: yes, God is unlimited, but that doesn’t necessarily mean He shouldn’t speak our language. In fact, there’s no point of speaking to us in
His language, because its beyond us anyway.
You believe that? Based on what? Lack of faith in Mo's belief capabilities? Lack of persuasion capabilities on Mo's part toward fellow Arabs? Is it more easy to believe the sun sets in a pool of murky water? If you like to speculate in this way, I could also speculate that IF they wouldn't have believed that, "Allah" could have performed miracles before them, and tell them to believe it. Or "Allah" could have destroyed them for their disbelief and throw them into hell (like he threatens all over the place in the Quran to do), then he would have approached other primitive people more open to suggestions. Why didn't you choose to believe these alternatives? Because you'd like Islam to be true?
Sorry, Sobeiski, but I have to say that 1- your style is patronizing 2- it is especially annoying given that you don’t seem like the bright guy you fancy yourself to be, at all!
Now, you chose to neglect the fact that explaining nature to man was not the goal of that book, and that adding more obstacles to delivering a message (that has nothing to do with science) isn’t exactly helpful. Yes, you can speculate all sorts of things, including God actually creating us with an inability to stray, and thus there’s really no point of any of that.
The Meccans could or could not have believed in (supernatural) miracles, to force them to believe in a natural phenomena that 100% goes against their own daily observations. A relevant miracle would be if God took the Meccans to outer space, and shown them the Earth from the moon, for example. Yeah, that could have worked, I guess. (of course, such a miracle would have to be perpetually repeated for everyone, beyond Mecca, until modern times where everyone accepts earth's spinning as an established scientifc fact OR the Quran simply didn't have to mention an irrelevant fact with all such potential trouble). Best yet, God could have shown Himself to Meccans and to all humanity for all time.
Oh, btw, the sun setting in murky water point is entirely irrelevant (after all, isn’t this “supposedly” what the author of the Quran believed, being from that age?)
As for the "without the guarantee of impressing anyone from the future" part, maybe you're not familiar with people converting to Islam because of the "scientific miracles", and people falling from Islam because of their falseness. They *do* have the guarantee of impressing people from future.
Really? The Bible says the earth is a ball hanging on nothing (and this is a REAL scientific miracle in the Bible). Why don’t you believe in the Bible? Because there’s no
guarantees that even this would make anyone believe this was revealed by God. (in case you don’t know already, I don’t believe there are any scientific miracles in the Quran – these are all lies).
Well first, the verse I presented says nothing about it being something to thank God for.
Second, it *does* mean the earth cannot be a globe, since a "bed" is never a globe. The only reason you're saying it "doesn’t necessarily mean the earth cannot be a globe" is that the alternative is not palatable to you. The context shows clearly "Allah" speaks from a cosmic perspective here about his creation, the creation of a whole planet, not the creation of a path. The thing that betrays the author is not an out-of-this-world being is that this author has the limited perspective a primitive man on earth would have.
I already told you elsewhere that preaching to people from another religion is a bad idea and here you are still preaching to me. Do you know how many verses talking about the flatness of the earth are there? Many of them mention this flatness as if it is something to thank God for. Here’s one example:
20:53
Who has made earth for you like a bed (spread out); and has opened roads (ways and paths etc.) for you therein; and has sent down water (rain) from the sky. And We have brought forth with it various kinds of vegetation.
Hmmm? Why would I want to count the “flatness” of the earth, as a
blessing? What would the earth be if not flat? Hilly all over? Possibly.
And no, *bed* doesn’t necessarily mean anything beyond a description of the flatness of the earth. Besides, the Arabic word (Mahd = bed) is really derived from the word “flat” (a bed is flat or even and that’s why bed is called Mahd in Arabic).
That's a shame. Let's go through just one more. Quoting from isLame's (I think) list, here's the 1st one:
Quran 41:9-12 teaches that it took God 8 days to complete his creation, while Quran 7:54, 10:03 and 11:07 say it took 6 days.
Here you are again, acting as if you didn’t understand what I told you in a previous post. I do NOT care to do this with you (or anyone else). I’m not going to go through the endless list of supposed errors in the Quran. You think there are many errors, fine, but I’m not going to discuss them with you.
Why is that the worst, I say it's the best. There is empiric evidence for it, so what's the problem. JWs have a favorite (but valid) question for doubters, that works here too: would you drink a glass of water knowing 1% of it is poison? Hey, 99% is clear water, right?
*rolling eyes* I know a Christian who believes the Bible is heavily corrupted but he still believes the Bible is originally revealed by God. He follows his heart on what bits of the Bible to believe and what to reject. And that poisoned water example is irrelevant.
Then you were playing with me previously. I asked you "So you agree that you are rejecting reality, that the Quran contains indeed contradictions?" and you replied "No, I agree to the *possibility* of contradictions but that doesn't necessarily mean that there are contradictions."
So do you admit now that you are rejecting reality, something you complained about when it comes to the Shia?
I won’t perpetually re-explain myself to you.
So you believe you owe your "soul" to "Allah" because he created your soul, and you believe he created your soul because you start with a premise? Why don't you start with hard facts? Why do you prefer to start with *this* premise? And how do you know this premise is correct, what are your hard facts and proofs?
Ok, I didn’t explain this to you before. But to me, a God who is not the creator of absolutely everything and in control of absolutely everything and is absolutely limitless is not a God. So anything other than starting with that premise means that God doesn’t exist (at least not to me) and thus we don’t have to discuss why I owe my soul to an entity, that to me, doesn’t exist. Capiche?
Any comments from debunker on this previous piece about the soul?
No, and in fact I don’t care to discuss anything related to religion with you again. (you can always pat yourself on the back and assume that this means that you got to me and I’m now scared shitless of your de-conversion tactics, but the reality is I just find that talking to you is a bit too tedious).
Regards.
Topic: Hi from on the fence muslim