Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Get in the Ring → Ringside seats → BMZ and Skynightblaze

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

Gaza assault
January 26, 2025, 10:05 AM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
January 26, 2025, 08:55 AM
Lights on the way
by akay
January 25, 2025, 03:08 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
January 23, 2025, 06:32 AM
New Britain
January 21, 2025, 11:54 PM
AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
January 20, 2025, 05:08 PM
Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
December 29, 2024, 12:03 PM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
December 29, 2024, 11:55 AM
News From Syria
by zeca
December 28, 2024, 12:29 AM
Mo Salah
December 26, 2024, 05:30 AM
What music are you listen...
by zeca
December 25, 2024, 10:58 AM
What's happened to the fo...
December 25, 2024, 02:29 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: BMZ and Skynightblaze

 (Read 78522 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 7 8 9« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #240 - April 06, 2009, 05:57 PM
    Also, conclusive remarks:

    1) Arsh is literal was proved from 39:75(Bmz agreed)

    2) Kursi is literal was proved from 38:34(Bmz agreed)

    3) Both khursi and Arsh were used to denote same object i.e throne in the above verses so kursi and arsh are synonyms and thereby proving arsh as literal proves kursi as literal. Arsh was accepted as literal in 39:75

    "I am ready to make my confession. I ask for no forgiveness father, for I have not sinned. I have only done what I needed to do to survive. I did not ask for the life that I was given, but it was given nonetheless-and with it, I did my best"
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #241 - April 06, 2009, 06:02 PM
    Having read through the thread again, I have to concur with FF"s summary and give the point to SNB. 
    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #242 - April 06, 2009, 06:17 PM
    Quote from: IsLame on April 06, 2009, 05:01 PM
    SB has concluded the first question, and my vote goes to BMZ. 

    IMO SB did not prove this to be a Quranic contradiction.


    But as I pointed out a few days back, it was not supposed to be a contradiction at all; it was supposed to be an error. Skynightblaze's contention was that the size of throne of Allah is so big that it would be impossible for humans to see the angels moving around the said throne.

    BMZ has been claiming that the word kursi in that particular verse must be taken allegorically without providing any credible reason. Ahmed and Emerald, two of the known native Arabic speakers agreed with SNB's stand that Kursi is to be taken literally. The only person agreeing with BMZ was a new entrant called Mr X (LOL) who claimed to be from Saudi Arabia. I don't think his credibility can be taken as at par with that of Ahmed or Emerald as far as the knowledge of Arabic is concerned. Moreover, SNB has conclusively proven that "Kursi" is literally chair as per the Arabic dictionaries too.

    To conclude, I would say that,

    1. BMZ has not been able to provide a single credible reason for Kursi being allegorical in the verse in contention apart from his personal opinion which has little value of course.

    2. He has been seen by all to be contradicting himself.

    3. His Arabic knowledge has become suspect because of the fact that he failed to write a simple sentence of three-four words in Arabic correctly in his first attempt.

    4. The opinions of known native Arabic speakers go against BMZ even though we all know that Ahmed is sympathetic to BMZ. Ahmed did try to provide an escape route to BMZ by arguing that Allah's throne can be as big as Allah wants, but unfortunately his help was late in coming and by then BMZ had already committed himself in favor of "allegorical" argument.

    I am prepared to enter into a debate with anyone disagreeing with any of the four points I have concluded.

    Rest is up to you friends.
    Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
    Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #243 - April 06, 2009, 06:28 PM
    Quote from: Submissive Bob on April 06, 2009, 05:48 PM
    On a side note, I would like to thank professor Ahmed for his lecture on how the Quran is not clear.

    I can't wait to throw some of that in the face of the next Muslim who says it is.

    BdanceB

     Cheesy
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #244 - April 07, 2009, 02:20 AM
    Quote from: Submissive Bob on April 06, 2009, 05:48 PM
    On a side note, I would like to thank professor Ahmed for his lecture on how the Quran is not clear.

    I can't wait to throw some of that in the face of the next Muslim who says it is.

    BdanceB



    Look pal

    your scarcastic crap won't really benefit you

    read my comment again you stubborn ignorant and read for yourself that I stated that the Quran is clear for the true believers who do not shirk anything with Allah

    The Quran was clear and easy for me sicne I was 14 years old, mister sarcasim

    Now, I do not claim that I understand 100% of the Quran, however I do understand over 90% witout the help of anything and that should be enough to be classified as clear to me

    now, instead of acting like a jerk by insisting on your saracstic crap, why don't you go and educate yourself a bit

    let me give an example:

    a car means a car

    a boat means a boat

    a pen means a pen

    a throne means a throne

    a chair means a chair

    etc etc

    and that should apply to all languages btw, however it seems you talk a language out of this world, and in that case, don't talk to me or about me, try to talk to the likes of you or about you

    your are dismissed
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #245 - April 07, 2009, 02:56 AM
    Quote from: AhmedBahgat
    let me give an example:

    a car means a car

    a boat means a boat

    a pen means a pen

    a throne means a throne

    a chair means a chair

    etc etc


    Tell that to BMZ who thinks Kursi means "dominion", "power", "knowledge" and what not. Cheesy
    Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
    Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #246 - April 07, 2009, 03:05 AM
    Quote from: BMZ
    Please leave aside your Shenanigans FFI-Style and answer the following question, which I had asked:

    Before I do that, can I have your acknowledgement and confirmation that Arsh means only Kursi or throne?

    If you think and believe that is correct, just write a simple acknowledgement, saying, "Hello, BMZ. I write to confirm that Arsh in Arabic only means a throne or a chair." This confirmation is imperative. I can then take you through the next but short phase.

    Once you write down your answer, I will write down a conclusive summary and you can then either choose to carry on or concede.


    Oh..BMZ. You keep tripping up very badly. Do you even read your opponents' arguments? It cannot be a comprehension problem, hence it can only be an utter unwillingness to understand and acknowledge the valid arguments.

    Quote from: skynightblaze
    Here is what BMz has failed to understand time and again. Someone please take the impossible task of making him understand. The debate is not about what arabic can provide. The main point is whether quran used ARsh and khursi as literal or metaphor. The point is kursi and arsh are both literally used by quran ( Refer points  3 & 4 & 5 of the summary of the debate below)

    Now the question is  are we again required to look whether ArsH in arabic can mean something other than Throne when we have evidence that quran used it literally?

     Even if arabic allows it to be interpreted as metaphorically it doesnt matter because it has already been established that quran used it literally.What matters is how quran used it and not how it can be used in arabic The case is over and we need not go to arabic again.

    Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
    Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #247 - April 07, 2009, 07:43 AM
    Quote from: AhmedBahgat on April 04, 2009, 07:27 AM
    Now, I am a literal type of guy, and when I read about the throne of Allah in the Quran, it quickly means for me that Allah has a physicla throne, nothing more and nothing less, now anything more may lead to such metaphorical understandngs which I believe has no merit

    Quote from: AhmedBahgat on April 07, 2009, 02:20 AM

    now, instead of acting like a jerk by insisting on your saracstic crap, why don't you go and educate yourself a bit

    let me give an example:

    a car means a car

    a boat means a boat

    a pen means a pen

    a throne means a throne

    a chair means a chair

    Quote from: AhmedBahgat on April 05, 2009, 11:26 AM
    Well, but the seal on the heart and eyes and the ears, MUST be taken metaphorically, a child should now that.




     Cheesy
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #248 - April 07, 2009, 07:46 AM
    Classic foot in mouth disease there. Cheesy
    Attached image is missing * SEAL-INSIDEMAIN-V02.JPG (15.89 KB, 325x289 - viewed 1038 times.) Attached image is missing * heart-front-view-picture.jpg (17.94 KB, 400x320 - viewed 1073 times.)
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #249 - April 07, 2009, 09:42 AM
    Wow, lets have a look at the latest installment:

    Quote from: skynightblaze
    Quote from: BMZ
    Before I do that, can I have your acknowledgement and confirmation that Arsh means only Kursi or throne?

    If you think and believe that is correct, just write a simple acknowledgement, saying, "Hello, BMZ. I write to confirm that Arsh in Arabic only means a throne or a chair." This confirmation is imperative. I can then take you through the next but short phase.

    Here is what BMz has failed to understand time and again. Someone please take the impossible task of making him understand. The debate is not about what arabic can provide. The main point is whether quran used ARsh and khursi as literal or metaphor. The point is kursi and arsh are both literally used by quran ( Refer points  3 & 4 & 5 of the summary of the debate below)

    ...

    Even if arabic allows it to be interpreted as metaphorically it doesnt matter because it has already been established that quran used it literally.What matters is how quran used it and not how it can be used in arabic The case is over and we need not go to arabic again.


    BMZ's reply:

    Quote from: BMZ
    Please leave aside your Shenanigans FFI-Style and answer the following question, which I had asked:


    "Before I do that, can I have your acknowledgement and confirmation that Arsh means only Kursi or throne?

    If you think and believe that is correct, just write a simple acknowledgement, saying, "Hello, BMZ. I write to confirm that Arsh in Arabic only means a throne or a chair." This confirmation is imperative. I can then take you through the next but short phase."


    Circles, it's running in circles...
    "It may happen that the enemies of Islam may consider it expedient not to take any action against Islam, if Islam leaves them alone in their geographical boundaries... But Islam cannot agree to this unless they submit to its authority by paying Jizyah"

    -Sayyid Qutb, Milestones
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #250 - April 07, 2009, 02:28 PM
    Professer Ahmed,

    Quote
    I stated that the Quran is clear for the true believers who do not shirk anything with Allah


    This reminds me of the Emperor's New Clothes. So anyone who does not understand must not be pure of hear?. No wonder all the Muslims claim it is so easy to understand.

    Quote
    The Quran was clear and easy for me sicne I was 14 years old, mister sarcasim


    Maybe you should re-read it when you turn 15.

    You?ve tried reading with an open heart. Why not try reading now with an open mind.

    One doesn?t have to read past the first couple pages to grasp the author?s love of metaphors. Veils are not veils, seals are not seals, fires are not fires and clouds are not clouds.

    Does this look like the work of an author trying to be straight-forward and obvious? Of course not. This is creative writing. This is poetry written by poets.

    At least you have the common sense not to accept the hadith collection. It is said that Bukhari had to sort thru 300,000 hadiths? He only determined 2,602 to be authentic, but even those are questionable aren?t they?

    300,000 is a very big number. What does that tell us? It tells us that in the years preceding the death of Mohammed that lots of Arabs loved to make up bullshit and call it devine.

    This is the same community that provided Abu Bakr with the leaves of trees, pieces of wood, parchment or leather, flat stones, and shoulder blades that were to complie into the Quran?

    A competant prophet would have preserved the notes he dictated to the scribes himself wouldn?t he?

    Maybe this makes sense to you because you have an open heart. I however am cursed with an open mind.

    BB
    My style is impetuous, my defense is impregnable and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to eat your children. Praise be to Allah." -- Mike Tyson
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #251 - April 07, 2009, 02:32 PM
    Quote from: Submissive Bob on April 07, 2009, 02:28 PM
    Professer Ahmed,

    Quote
    I stated that the Quran is clear for the true believers who do not shirk anything with Allah


    This reminds me of the Emperor's New Clothes. So anyone who does not understand must not be pure of hear?. No wonder all the Muslims claim it is so easy to understand.

    Quote
    The Quran was clear and easy for me sicne I was 14 years old, mister sarcasim


    Maybe you should re-read it when you turn 15.

    You?ve tried reading with an open heart. Why not try reading now with an open mind.

    One doesn?t have to read past the first couple pages to grasp the author?s love of metaphors. Veils are not veils, seals are not seals, fires are not fires and clouds are not clouds.

    Does this look like the work of an author trying to be straight-forward and obvious? Of course not. This is creative writing. This is poetry written by poets.

    At least you have the common sense not to accept the hadith collection. It is said that Bukhari had to sort thru 300,000 hadiths? He only determined 2,602 to be authentic, but even those are questionable aren?t they?

    300,000 is a very big number. What does that tell us? It tells us that in the years preceding the death of Mohammed that lots of Arabs loved to make up bullshit and call it devine.

    This is the same community that provided Abu Bakr with the leaves of trees, pieces of wood, parchment or leather, flat stones, and shoulder blades that were to complie into the Quran?

    A competant prophet would have preserved the notes he dictated to the scribes himself wouldn?t he?

    Maybe this makes sense to you because you have an open heart. I however am cursed with an open mind.

    B(Clicky for piccy!)B


    multiply the 300000 by 2 and that should be what Bukhari claimed to be alleged as hadith
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #252 - April 07, 2009, 08:16 PM
    Quote from: AhmedBahgat on April 05, 2009, 08:33 PM
    here is a comment I just added on FFI:

    Quote
    Exactly. And I don't see why would any Muslim argue with that?!!!!! Are there indeed Muslims who argue with this?!!!



    There are indeed Muslims who argue with that, I am not one of them though, the Throne and the Chair are literal as far as my understaniding to the Quran and its language

    The Bottom line is this, which I believe is simple enough, yet cannot be comprehended by those kafirs and their fellow Muslims, here it is simply:

    If everything around us including us is made bigger 1000 times, then no one should feel any changes, this is because if I am 5.8 tall, then after being magnified 1000 times, i will still be 5.8 tall, this is because the measuring length of foot has been magnified 1000 times as well

    Same with my weight, I will be exactly the same after getting bigger 1000 times

    And of course it works the other way around, i.e. if I have been made 1000 times smaller as well as everything around me in the heavens and the earth, i won't feel any change

    Such delusion, is indeed real, it is called Relativity, i.e. we really do not know what our real size is in comparison with a datum that is out of this world,

    Now, imagine a basketballer holding his basket ball between his two hands, then think of it as Allah is doing the exact same to the heavens and the earth, i.e. the heavens and the earth (as a ball)  is held between Allah hands, this means that Allah is way too big compared with the size of the heavens and the earth (from His perspective of course),

    With that in mind, then all the following statments will make great literal sense:

    1) Allah is AKBAR, i.e. Allah is bigger than anything
    2) His chair is big enough to encompass the heavens and the earth
    3) Allah is MOHIT (surrounding) everything
    4) Allah is always with us whereever we are

    And many more

    I indeed believe in such valid possibility that is even approved by the theory of relativity

    Salam

    Actually, Allah would not be bigger than "the set/collection of everything that exists" because that would include Allah itself and the World

    and:
    Allah > Allah + World
    would imply:
    World < 0

    And we know the World has definitely size > 0 regardless of how you measure it.

    Pantheism is more coherent than Monotheism about this.
    (i.e. those who consider God = All that exists, do not fall into any contradiction about God being the greatest entity)
    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #253 - April 07, 2009, 08:19 PM
    Now, a tricky Monotheist could say:

    But, hey, if Allah is infinite then Allah is greater than everything.

    But, no, even if Allah were infinite Allah still could not be STRICTLY greater than Allah+World
    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #254 - April 07, 2009, 08:30 PM
    What a fool

    so why the following equation then:

    Allah > Allah + World

    ?

    it should be as follow, mister year 12:

    Allah >  World


    Please dismiss yourself
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #255 - April 07, 2009, 08:34 PM
    Quote from: AhmedBahgat on April 07, 2009, 08:30 PM
    What a fool

    so why the following equation then:

    Allah > Allah + World

    ?

    it should be as follow, mister year 12:

    Allah >  World


    Please dismiss yourself

    Because "all that exists" is not just the World, if you consider that Allah must exist as well.

    It's this special thing called logic :S
    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #256 - April 07, 2009, 08:36 PM
    Quote from: Tlaloc on April 07, 2009, 08:34 PM
    Quote from: AhmedBahgat on April 07, 2009, 08:30 PM
    What a fool

    so why the following equation then:

    Allah > Allah + World

    ?

    it should be as follow, mister year 12:

    Allah >  World


    Please dismiss yourself

    Because "all that exists" is not just the World, if you consider that Allah must exist as well.

    It's this special thing called logic :S


    LOL

    Yeh, He exists, but unfortunately for you, He is not part of the world that He created
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #257 - April 07, 2009, 08:37 PM
    Quote from: Cheetah on April 06, 2009, 06:02 PM
    Having read through the thread again, I have to concur with FF"s summary and give the point to SNB. 

    ==========

    Yes Cheetah, BMZ doesn't deserve it IMO,

    +1 ===> SNB.
    "I'm Agnostic about God."

    Richard Dawkins
    ==
    "If there is a God, it has to be a man; no woman could or would ever fuck things up like this."
     George Carlin == "...The so-called moderates are actually the public relations arm of Al-Qaeda and the Islamic Republic of Iran."  Maryam Namazie
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #258 - April 07, 2009, 08:38 PM
    I will try to make it a bit more simpler, in case you got confused.

    "All that exists" is the set or collection of any thing that exists.
    So, if you answer yes to the question "Does X exist?" then X is part of "All that exists".

    Does the World exist? Yes? Then it's included in "all that exists"
    Does Allah exist? Yes? Then it's included in "all that exists"
    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #259 - April 07, 2009, 08:39 PM
    Quote from: AhmedBahgat on April 07, 2009, 08:36 PM
    LOL

    Yeh, He exists, but unfortunately for you, He is not part of the world that He created

    Unfortunately for you, I never claimed such a thing
    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #260 - April 07, 2009, 08:47 PM
    I will try to make it another step easier by using your basketball metaphor.

    If Allah is the basketball player and the World is the ball, and nothing else exists...
    Then the whole existence itself is made of player+ball, and the player cannot be greater than existence itself because the player is included IN existence itself, since it exists.

    And that does NOT involve the player being part of the ball.

    Got it now? Year 12? Dismissed?
    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #261 - April 07, 2009, 09:25 PM
    Sorry, I've got to have a go...

    Ahmed...





























    ..dismiss yourself
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #262 - April 08, 2009, 03:52 PM
    He actually dismissed himself :(
    I was hoping for more enlightening replies :S lol
    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #263 - April 08, 2009, 04:12 PM
    Quote from: Tlaloc on April 08, 2009, 03:52 PM
    He actually dismissed himself

     Cheesy
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #264 - April 09, 2009, 07:22 AM
    I've locked the existing debate thread and opened a new debate thread and comments thread for "Contradictions in the Qur'an" at BMZ's request. This thread can keep going if anyone wants to comment on the locked debate thread.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: BMZ and Skynightblaze
     Reply #265 - April 17, 2009, 10:23 PM
    Quote from: AhmedBahgat on March 31, 2009, 06:34 AM

    Haha, I will always be there to support anny Muslim who is debating with kafirs concerning the Quran

    Keep it itchy, goon


    And you think that's support?  Cheesy  I don't remember anybody telling me this was an embarrassment contest. With supporters like you, who needs opponents? Tongue
  • Previous page 1 ... 7 8 9« Previous thread | Next thread »