Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.

12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
- mighty_cats
- Pub Regular
- offline
Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
OP - July 11, 2011, 12:57 PM

As I haven't yet opened the official website or blog, I will post my article here for the time being.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I am sure most of you are already aware, I am the creator and owner of the 'Quran miracles debunked' youtube channel. http://www.youtube.com/user/TheIslammiracle
The site consists of a 50 part series, with a separate 30 part sub-series, all devoted to responding to claims made by muslims to either support the Quran or Islam itself.

So far we've managed to get around 50% of the way through and currently have 100,000 video views; So its time that we analyse the muslim responses that we've received so far:

The number of muslims who comment.

Despite the channel being over a year old and having 6-digit views spanning over 40 videos, one cannot be surprised at the sheer lack of comments / responses from muslims.
It seems rating down the video is easy enough (far be it incredibly futile in comparison to its up-ratings), but even receiving a single comment per video from a muslim is often a miracle in itself.
Research demonstrates that the videos appear under a large number of searches terms connected with Islam, muslims and the videos which propose the claims I am responding to, so there can be no argument that 'muslims don't come across them'.
For a person who is supposedly entirely wrong about the subjects at hand, I don't seem to receive evidence of this.
However, to give credit where it is due, I do receive some comments which fit into the following categories...

'You're Wrong and Islam is right'.

As expected, the mast majority of comments are composed of this.
All that can be said here (as I don't wish to waste valuable energy on such people) is that none of such people provide any evidence that they have even watched the video, nor do they provide evidence to support their position even where asked.

'These claims are false'.

To most people on the forum Islam=Dishonesty and nothing is more evident of this reality than what is found in the comments of this nature.
In an incredibly perplexing thought process, it is presumed that the claim I am responding to is false and that I have also made it up myself
(Essentially concluding that I make up a claim, debunk myself and make a video about it)
Ofcourse this isn't the dishonest part of the comment(s), but rather the variation of it..

Where as such people listed above quickly shut their mouths as soon as I ask them to paste the key words of the video into google or youtube etc etc, some commenters instead decide to agree with me that:
1) There are no miracles in the Quran of this nature.
2) The claims are wrong anyway.
So where does the dishonesty come into it?

The dishonesty shows up when I then direct them to a video listed in the side bar from a muslim who makes the claim that I am responding to. My position on the matter is always indicated clearly which goes like this:
'You agree with me that the claim is false, here is the video that I am responding to; *gives link*. It is made by a muslim, so please go onto it and make this point clear to him in a comment. Thankyou.'

I have done this a total of 15-20 times now. Care you guess how many have done so? Zero.
Never once has a muslim completed this request, nor have I ever seen a muslim respond to another in this manner on any video proposing the claims (and I check all of them), even when a conversation has arisen and the request has been made several more times, the topic is immediately changed or outright ignored. I even once received a direct refusal.
It seems that with muslims the ends justifies the means. It's ok for muslims to lie -- just as long as its for the greater good (to encourage more people to follow Islam); This guarantees that such claims will be forever uploaded/claimed and posted without challenge , yet any response on my part immediately renders myself to be the bad guy who is either somehow lying or just some person with a position that won't be supported by some, even when they know I am correct.

Edit/
I have decided to leave my responses to muslims comments about muhammads illiteracy for a future video instead.

You would like to think that there would be more to write than this, but sadly there isn't.
The above comments make up around 95% of all comments from muslims and it's becoming quite clear that this trend is going to continue.
My only response to muslims at this stage is: 'I'm intellectually kicking your ass and there is clearly nothing you can do about it..and I'm coming for you next'.

Rarrrr!

End.
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #1 - July 11, 2011, 02:35 PM

Hi,

I've read quite a bit on this subject. Can you link us to several of the strongest refutation videos you have dealing strictly with The Quran?

Thanks.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- mighty_cats
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #2 - July 11, 2011, 02:45 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clDh9u2P-Iw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbX1lxcix_Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjaLw4_ZCXw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT74OOMmnGI
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #3 - July 13, 2011, 04:13 PM

Thanks mc.

I watched the first one. Here are my notes:

At 34s
Quote the wrong verse, 5:54?

You say "sun" is mentioned separately to "stars" but this may simply be because the audience does not refer to them using the same words.

At 1:20s
how come u dont mention the verse number?

At 1:30s
your alleged flaw is why does it not mention everything, or why only some things in this one verse. Who says it has to mention every related thing in one verse? what kind of objection is that? the question should be does it state anything factually wrong not that its writing style is not like a scientific reference list.

Same at 1:59s

You seem to imply an association by proximity when Quran discussing day and night, sun and moon, means it does not understand how they work because day and night is related to sun and earth orbit, but this is not a factually incorrect objection. The fact remains that the common association for the day is the sun and for the night it is the moon, hence perhaps they are mentioned together.

At 2:28
you say Quran does not detail trajectory of the sun or galaxy but it states the sun is coursing/swimming in an orbit, or revolving, so actually it does imply it, or at least that it rotates. You interpret this as it implies it is saying sun revolves around the earth, and that is one interpretation but not the only one.

You say it does not say anything contrary to your view above, but fail to mention these verses:
coil/wrap of day/night - 39:5
sun - burning lamp 78:13, 71:16 (as opposed to moon being a light)

___

Let me know your thoughts.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- mighty_cats
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #4 - July 13, 2011, 04:54 PM

Ok.

Near the end of your message you argue that the verse(s) can be interpreted in different ways, but what you mention earlier in the comment is exactly what negates the idea.
The qurans detailings of space is in all cases synonymous with the factually incorrect beliefs at the time and provides nothing superior to conclude it knows anything more than anyone else.

You say that 'but this may simply be because the audience does not refer to them using the same words', but you ignore the fact that the almighty god at no point feels the need to explain simple facts that would allow the 'interpretation' idea to even be possible..

Its quite simple, you cant have a book which fits with the old model --that the stars are merely light and the sun is something different, no mentioning of any galaxy or beyond-visible fact of the sort and no indication of anything more advanced, and then turn around at the last moment and say 'this verse says xyz, therefore we should based this on the notion that the Quran may be telling us advanced and accurate intergalactic knowledge that no one ever knew', Whats the foundation for that assumption?
The Quran is not hinting at such knowledge prior or after the verses and its the lack of this which dismisses the idea that it may be telling us something that can be interpreted to mean something godly. Its unfounded and too weak to be humored.

Next of all:
'You seem to imply an association by proximity when Quran discussing day and night, sun and moon, means it does not understand how they work because day and night is related to sun and earth orbit, but this is not a factually incorrect objection. The fact remains that the common association for the day is the sun and for the night it is the moon, hence perhaps they are mentioned together.'

As with the old view of how the universe worked, the sun and moon traveled around the earth and therefore such movements were in a direct relation to the earths light levels.
Now, the verses 'interpreted' perspective is claiming that the sun travels through the galaxy. This path ofcourse has nothing to do with the moons orbit around earth or the effects on the earth itself, especially its day and night transition...So here is where it gets interesting, if the sun really is traveling on some multi-trillion mile orbit, then why does it feel the need to follow up every such statement with the detailings of the moons orbit and how the sun creates a day-night transition straight after?
If it was simply a case of 'the sun has an orbit...end', then you have some form of an argument (albeit incredibly weak), but to follow up and compact every such verse/idea immediately with 2 other orbital events which specifically connect to and effect the Earth directly in all cases makes this interpretation ideal entirely unsubstantiated once again.

'You say it does not say anything contrary to your view above, but fail to mention these verses:
coil/wrap of day/night - 39:5
sun - burning lamp 78:13, 71:16 (as opposed to moon being a light)'

What does any of that have to do with this claim?
The transition of day-to-night is clearly listed in the verses used, I even made a point of this in this message.
It has also been known for 100's of years prior to the Quran that the moon was a dim reflected light.
So you have one verses as an argument that I already use myself and another verse which has nothing to do with trajectory and orbits.
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #5 - July 14, 2011, 11:15 PM

Note how in your reply above you do not state one factually incorrect statement in Quran.

You seem to object to its writing style, i.e. its now how you would write it. And you seem to take a certain interpretation and say: look, it seems to be implying something wrong here.

And my verse references at the end were appropriate.

AFAIK the sun does travel in an orbit around the milky way.

I do hope the other videos you linked to are not like the first one.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- mighty_cats
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #6 - July 14, 2011, 11:53 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 14, 2011, 11:15 PM
You seem to object to its writing style, i.e. its now how you would write it.

LOL, its not how anyone would write it if they had any understanding of the reality of the situation.
just amazing as to how the suns orbit is always immediately followed with the moons orbit and the day-night transition in all cases...Let's see how comparable your argument is in-line with the verses themselves..

and for the record, even though this is supposedly just how 'I personally interpret' the verses', I find it odd how not a single tafsir or translation or foot note feels the need to explain anything alternate to what I say.
Once again we are in the same position as always.. The quran says nothing to differentiate with what people believed (wrong)> science says something in the modern era > the vague quranic verse is re-shaped to fit accordingly and is now 'true'.
(ofcourse this would also conclude that for 1350 years, what people thought about the verse was wrong, good work god).

If any interpretation is out of the ordinary, its yours.
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #7 - July 16, 2011, 09:36 PM

Dear mc,

Thanks for the graphic

My point was simply that there was no factually incorrect statement proven in your video. What you did prove however was that your chosen interpretation seems to be wrong.

I also watched your second video. Once again, you showed no factually incorrect statement from the Quran! You tried to discredit what Muslims say about these foods, and bring up non-points such as "why doesn't it tell us how food nourishes us" or "how illness works".
And then you quote a hadith at the end, a highly controversial source, that is not the Quran.

Please recall, I asked you for your "strongest refutation videos", and in two so far, you showed no factually incorrect statements from the Quran.

Seriously, dude, whats up with that?

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #8 - July 16, 2011, 09:58 PM

Whoman, you are an ex-muslim right?

Also, you're completely missing his point...
- mighty_cats
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #9 - July 16, 2011, 10:00 PM

Red is a colour.
Teeth grow in your mouth.
Grass and weeds can grown by adding water to soil.
There are around 24 hours in a day.
We see the moon at night.
Animals have four legs.

There are no factually incorrect statements in my message.
I think because of this we can put such knowledge down to miraculous insight.

Responses:
'Everyone knows these things, there is no evidence of divine knowledge at all, miraculous claims require miraculous evidence...however, you aren't quite correct --Not all animals have 4 legs and we don't always see the moon at night, sometimes during the day..'

Refutation:
'But there are no mistakes here, this is why its miraculous.
Most animals have 4 legs (the statement didn't say ALL animals) so technically its correct, its your interpretation thats at fault, and yes we don't see the moon every night, but the statement just says 'night', that doesn't mean we don't see it during the day as well'.

Whoman, I'm sure you can agree that I am infact in connection with a divine creator and that my information is perfect.
Also, feel free to explain the adam and eve story to me in a biologically accurate manner.
It would be nice to see how the reality of human development and existence can be correlated with a formed male being created out of dirt.
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #10 - July 17, 2011, 12:04 PM

mc,
You do realise you just gave me a logical fallacy dont you?

Quote
There are no factually incorrect statements in my message.
I think because of this we can put such knowledge down to miraculous insight.

Nowhere did I claim that no factually incorrect statements means miraculous insight.

This is your own strawman argument. A logical fallacy.

You are the one who has apparently made videos refuting or debunking the Quran, and I simply asked you for your strongest refutations, and the first two "strongest" videos did not show any factually incorrect statements or contradictions! If you think that is good, then good for you. I dont.

If it makes you feel any better, I have read articles that better pointed out problems in Quran info.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #11 - July 17, 2011, 12:05 PM

^ for example?
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #12 - July 17, 2011, 12:06 PM

prince, I am an ex-Muslim, yes.

See my signature links.

If I have missed the point, feel free to explain it to me.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #13 - July 17, 2011, 12:11 PM

I'm slightly confused, what significance does the qur'an have for you?

Also, the point, as I see it, is that you can justify pretty much any crap with a certain amount of wordplay. The original interpretations, from people who don't have knowledge of the world like we do now, are contradictory. You can try your hardest to re-interpret based on new facts now, but then you can do the same with any book. I'm just wondering why you do it with the qur'an when you're an ex-muslim.
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #14 - July 17, 2011, 12:17 PM

prince, the problems that I thought were better, were mainly theological (e.g. infinite hell for finite wrongdoing), but some were to do with embryology, e.g. the sequence of formation, flesh/bones etc (23:14). None were "smoking gun" so to speak, but were better than those two videos.

Traditional Hadith contain a load of nonsense, and many articles etc focus on that aspect. It is very rare to get a well articulated and solid refutations against Quran. At least from my experience.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #15 - July 17, 2011, 12:22 PM

prince,
See my intro post. I am a deist, however, in terms of what system makes most sense to me, it is Quran based islam. For example, if you check the link in my signature you will know this type of view was dominant and common etc.

Thanks for explaining the point BUT refuting interpretations, no matter how prominent or how widespread they are is an "appeal to authority/popularity" fallacy, and I try to stay away from logical fallacies if I can help it.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #16 - July 17, 2011, 12:23 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 17, 2011, 12:17 PM
prince, the problems that I thought were better, were mainly theological (e.g. infinite hell for finite wrongdoing), but some were to do with embryology, e.g. the sequence of formation, flesh/bones etc (23:14). None were "smoking gun" so to speak, but were better than those two videos.

Traditional Hadith contain a load of nonsense, and many articles etc focus on that aspect. It is very rare to get a well articulated and solid refutations against Quran. At least from my experience.

Well of course not. Words in-and-of themselves don't have meaning. Meaning is what happens between a speaker and a listener, or a reader and a writer. The words uttered only have the meaning that is agreed upon between the speakers. If a Muslim doesn't want to accept a contradiction in the qur'an he simply rejects your definition/interpretation of a word/phrase. There is no great skill in rationalising fairy-tales. But let's be reasonable here, do you really not see that certain verses/parts of the qur'an, from the point of view of the writer, are contradictory/wrong?
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #17 - July 17, 2011, 12:24 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 17, 2011, 12:22 PM
prince,
See my intro post. I am a deist, however, in terms of what system makes most sense to me, it is Quran based islam. For example, if you check the link in my signature you will know this type of view was dominant and common etc.

So you don't believe the qur'an is divine?
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #18 - July 17, 2011, 12:29 PM

Quote
If a Muslim doesn't want to accept a contradiction in the qur'an he simply rejects your definition/interpretation of a word/phrase.

No, because there is only a finite way one can interpret something. If it becomes too nonsensical, then you have a solid point against etc.

Quote
So you don't believe the qur'an is divine?

Not sure. Still researching.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #19 - July 17, 2011, 12:52 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 17, 2011, 12:29 PM
No, because there is only a finite way one can interpret something.

What does that matter.

Quote
Not sure. Still researching.

What makes you think it might be divine?
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #20 - July 17, 2011, 12:58 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 17, 2011, 12:22 PM
prince,
Thanks for explaining the point BUT refuting interpretations, no matter how prominent or how widespread they are is an "appeal to authority/popularity" fallacy, and I try to stay away from logical fallacies if I can help it.

Not really, it's only a fallacy if you state it's authority/popularity makes that particular interpretation true. The point isn't that those interpretations are correct, it's simply demonstrating how without modern knowledge the qur'an can have contradictory/inaccurate meaning. Like I said - there is no great skill in rationalising fairy-tales. But let's be reasonable here, do you really not see that certain verses/parts of the qur'an, from the point of view of the writer, are contradictory/wrong?

Your answer?

Also, what do you mean by - "in terms of what system makes most sense to me, it is Quran based islam."
- cosmicdancer
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #21 - July 17, 2011, 06:16 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 14, 2011, 11:15 PM
the sun does travel in an orbit around the milky way.

I'm curious.

So you reject the claim that the Qur'an is factually incorrect and is not talking about the sun orbiting the Earth, but is actually talking about the Sun's orbit around the Milky Way? (which takes 250 million years)

Do you not find it odd that Allah would make repeated references to night and day and the sun's orbit around the Milky Way in the same breath when this would not only mean nothing to the people at the time, but would easily be understood as confirming their (mistaken) geocentric view that the suns orbit around the earth is responsible for night and day? And that's in fact exactly what they all thought the Qur'an was saying! (As Allah knew they would.)

Why would Allah want to entrench their misconceptions by wording it in a way that would fit perfectly with their geocentric view? (and why make a reference to the 250 Million year journey of the sun around the Milky Way? How would that mean anything the people hearing it other than confirming their geocentric view?)

If Allah wanted to avoid entrenching their misconceptions he could easily have...

1. Not made reference to the suns orbit in connection with night and day.

2. Said explicitly that night and day is caused by the Earth's rotation on it's axis as it goes around the sun.

For almost 1000 years after the Qur'an, the great Muslim astronomers (and they were truly great) studied the movements of the sun and planets and made many very accurate observations. They challenged Greek science and found faults in the work of Ptolemy and came up with very sophisticated calculations to correct his work and account for the variations in the movements of the sun and planets.

What they were never able to do, however, was to challenge the basic assumption of a geocentric universe. It wasn't until Copernicus - using data from Arab astronomers - that the geocentric view of the universe was finally shown to be wrong.

Does it not seem odd to you that God would - repeatedly - make this puzzling reference to the orbit of the sun around the Milky Way, so far ahead of human development and ability to appreciate it, while knowing that not only would no-one recognise it - but it would actually mislead and hold Muslim scientists back from the discovery of the truth - simply so that a handful of Muslims in the 21st century could say "This is what the Qur'an really means" - after non-Muslim scientists discovered it first of course?
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #22 - July 17, 2011, 06:27 PM

Quote from: Prince Spinoza on July 17, 2011, 12:52 PM
What makes you think it might be divine?

I have read and studied it.

Quote
do you really not see that certain verses/parts of the qur'an, from the point of view of the writer, are contradictory/wrong?

Not really.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #23 - July 17, 2011, 06:39 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 17, 2011, 06:27 PM
I have read and studied it.

Yes but what about it?
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #24 - July 17, 2011, 06:40 PM

Hassan - it's futile. Summum bukmun 'umyun fahum la yarji'oon.
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #25 - July 17, 2011, 06:46 PM

Hassan,

It may seem odd to the lay reader, and one could interpret that as "misleading" as you put it, but that does not make it incorrect.
Further, since you seem to be from Egypt and likely know Arabic, you will know for example in 21:33 the plural verb is used for "floating/revolving/swimming/coursing". The Arabic plural is for more than two.

All I know is it has left the interpretation open. If someone takes it to mean X, and others take it to mean Y, that dont make the text factually wrong.

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #26 - July 17, 2011, 06:51 PM

... because, like I said, words themselves don't have meaning. All there is, is interpretations. That's not a reflection of the qur'an, that's just how language works. If you don't think MC's/Hassan's interpretations are reasonable, then there's not much anyone can do. Why you'd want to try so hard to rationalise the qur'an, I have no idea... so how about you tell us what makes you think the qur'an might be divine...
- cosmicdancer
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #27 - July 17, 2011, 07:49 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 17, 2011, 06:46 PM
in 21:33 the plural verb is used for "floating/revolving/swimming/coursing". The Arabic plural is for more than two.

I'd be interested to hear what you think that signifies?
- WhoMan
- Member
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #28 - July 17, 2011, 08:00 PM

prince,
I dont feel I'm trying hard at all. In regard to Quran, its a combo of things, e.g. its philosophy, principles, solutions, logic, practicality, aims, style of prose, content, its seeming transformational power etc.

Hassan,
I'm not sure what it signifies, there is variance of opinion, what do you think it signifies?
As I said, all I know is, it is open and does not allow one interpretation only in this case. Thus, to argue along the lines of "most people think the book meant X, but X is wrong, that means the book is wrong" is a logical fallacy. I'm not interested in that kind of "refutation".

What am I? Deist / Quranist <--- Click links to Find Out More
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Miracles of the Quran channel: A half-way analysis.
Reply #29 - July 17, 2011, 08:03 PM

Quote from: WhoMan on July 17, 2011, 08:00 PM
prince,
I dont feel I'm trying hard at all. In regard to Quran, its a combo of things, e.g. its philosophy, principles, solutions, logic, practicality, aims, style of prose, content, its seeming transformational power etc.

Please do elaborate.
12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »