70 jawans killed in biggest Maoists/Naxal attack ever in India

[Kriterion]

You keep rehashing the same thing again and again and again about "THE Hour" ... could you tell me how such a supposedly very simple concept according to you eluded billions over 14 centuries ? Can you logically explain how this is possible ( and please dont get into the Earth = Flat analogy ... translating a simple sentence isnt that profound )

this simple concept is alluding you. so there is no difficulty as to how it should allude millions of uneducated muslims in the middle ages. thats not to mention that merely stating that no one else before came up with some logic is a proof that that logic is faulty is the dumbest thing i've ever heard. thats like saying Newton's theory of gravitation is garbage because millions of people couldn't think of such a simple idea before him. and before you argue that gravity is a complex idea...please realize that the idea of gravity is exceedingly simple. the mathematics describing it may be somewhat complex, but realizing that the moon is simply falling to earth continuously similar to an apple from a tree is a very simple concept. newton discovered it without a single calculation or without performing a single experiment. it was all intuition. and thats precisely my point. the quran requires people to commit to "tafakkur", critical thinking.

To put in other words why did God not know of the situation we are in right now and avoid all the hassle by wording 54:1 clearly ( since we ourselves know there are clearer ways of articulating it ) ? Billions of people over 14 centuries cant all be utter numbskulls to not have the requisite IQ to interpret a simple sentence as it should be(according to you). Iam afraid you have too many dead ends in your theory.

the concept of tafakkur requires an open and unbiased mind. obviously, more intelligent people will grasp certain things quicker, but all people (excluding medical retards) are capable of grasping the Quranic concepts, such as how 54:1 is referring to the future day of judgement...but only if they take care to study things thoroghly. the fact that you yourself have thought semen comes from the testicles, and the fact that you had issues with the quran stating "the sun sets on the western horizon" is proof that, yes, billions of illiterate and uneducated people of the middle ages can indeed misinterpret a simple sentence. a 21st century educated man with access to the google and wikipedia has made that mistake. which just further proves my point of the fallibility of even intelligent people. but i'm sure all this will simply go in through one ear and out the other.

No stones are being thrown. I myself told you that Hinduism has far more preposterous stuff than you can ever imagine. And if God requires multiple messengers it most certainly means that he got it wrong on previous occasions(especially when Islam is at huge variance with Christianity and Judaism on many aspects) . Thats the obvious logical inference. It doesnt need to be spelt out anywhere.

If a student fails a test, it automatically means the teacher taught him "wrong". Is that what you are saying?

this has been answered many times and in fact in this post above. Billions of people all cant be numbskulls who proceed to read that verse in past tense. You show that verse to anyone who hasnt read it and everyone will take it in the past tense. Thats the end of that.

but billions of people can be dumb enough to believe that Jesus turned water into wine, that Muhammad split the moon, that Moses split the red sea, and the earth rests on the head of a giant Snake. even today in 2010, at least half of the world's population of 7 billlion, beleives that another human being is lesser than them based simply on the color of the skin or on the social status of their birth. things which have little to zero basis in science. majority of humanity is not rationale nor are they "intelligent". this is the prime mistake of your assumption.

[Kriterion]

Kriterion, Sorry for the delay in responding. What this means (according to your theory) is that the overwhelming majority of muslims ( keep in mind that this number is in billions covering 14 centuries ) are not capable of grasping quranic concepts since you accepted that most muslims take that verse to mean that the moon was split in two.

you missed the part i bolded... they are capable, but only if they take the quran into consideration about what the quran is saying. this is only fair and in fact, a "duh" move. in fact it is the opposite of rational, to take another author's opinion (tafsir/hadith/whatever) to understand something someone else wrote.

And all this is happeninng because God wrote that verse in a very confusing manner because of the wording. Now you have also agreed that the best option to word that verse would have been to use future tense. This tells me that God isnt aware of the future which is obviously wrong as God is all powerfull and knows everything about future. So that leaves us with only one other possiblity - that the verse did not come from God in the first place and that it was one of many preposterous claims by Mohammad.

only the illiterate who are unable to read or recite the quran for themselves are confused. only those who refuse to engage in tafakkur are confused. only those who blindly follow their scholars - as the Quran condemns the Jews and Christians of doing - are confused. rationale thought is a great thing, because it allows us to see what is really there. why is the past tense used in 54:1? because this verse is unique and important...it mentions the "moon"...which is symbolic in islam? it is also unique because it is the only verse which refers to "the Hour" or the "the day of judgment" in the past tense, despite it being an obviously future prophecy. 54:1 is special because it mentions the Moon, which is symbolic of Islam (e.g flag of Pakistan as just one example). why? because it used to measure time (lunar islamic calendar). this means that when the moon is split or destroyed...time itself is over. the day of judgement has "begun". this is why other verses of prophecy (surah takwir, et al) are written in future tense and ONLY 54:1 is written in the past tense. the verses aren't as emphatic as they talk about other end-times prophecies. one need not offer the explanation, however absurd, that Arabic idioms frequently use the past tense to refer to the future...although technically, this may be correct. Just ask yourself this question. If we substitute "day of judgement" for "the Hour" since they two are by-words in the Quran...does verse 54:1 change in its meaning or "feel"? the answer is no it doesn't: "The Day of Judgement approached and the Moon was split". This does not mean that the Day of Judgement has occured in the lifetime of Muhammad. But rather it is God, who you will agree is Timeless, speaking of an event in which past/present/future only apply to us and never to Him. If I were to ask you "where is God?"...you might answer "nowhere" or "everywhere". And both answers, paradoxically enough, are correct. God is everywhere in that His Power and Divine Decree permeates everything...and yet he is "nowhere" because He Himself is not physically contained in our universe in any particular point in either space or time. So if I were to ask you "when is God?" , what would you say? God is always. Time is inapplicable to him, because with time comes a beginning and end. God has neither a beginning (birth) nor does He have an end (death). at least in the Abrahamic conceptuality of God. This is what the Bible means when it says that God is the "alpha and the omega". Remember that the Quran is claimed to be written by God, not Muhammad. So you must take that into account in your argument. I, however, have been arguing (for arguement's sake of course) that Muhammad wrote the Quran. As such it is logically impossible for him to have authored a statement claiming a miracle which he knew he did not perform, to an audience that knew he did not perform it. Whats more, Muhammad knew that they knew that he didn't do it. So why would he claim it? Unless he was crazy...

[Kriterion]

Not really as this number is in millions (if not billions) spread over 14 centuries which is a big problem . Logically speaking this is improbable since we are talking about a very trivial thing such as reading a small sentence and understanding its meaning. There is simply no way millions will completely miss the point to an extent where they arrive at a opposite meaning to the one intended as per your theory . even otherwise( i.e if we want to entertain the theoretical possibility of millions misreading a simple sentence with 5-6 words for arguments sake ) God should have been aware of this problem (Because as of today there are two readings of that verse out there) and most importantly since the solution is a very simple one ( i.e to write that verse in future tense ) he should have worded that sentence accordingly to pre-empt billions of his followers from completely mis-reading that verse.

even today the literacy rate, which is defined as 15 year olds who can read at an elementary level - in a country like Bangladesh is something like 40%. that means that in 2010, there are some 60 MILLION people who can't read their OWN language. so if even 50% of muslims throughout all times were literate....you have BILLIONS of ppl over 14 centuries who can only go what their village mullah tells them. if you have billions, its not hard to see where millions can come from. Yes, God can write this in future tense. But God can also just hand us a vaccine for HIV too. Ever thought why Bhagwan hasn't done that yet? A teacher who gives his students ALL the answers, won't exactly have the brightest graduates.

If you cannot understand such simple logic Iam afraid there is no point discussing this any further.

So just because I have a personal difficulty grasping general relativity means that Einstein made a mistake or should have worded his theory better. Is that how it goes? And if you don't like this analogy...please explain why its no good, unlike your "don't use the earth is flat" objection. [edit...added in later as I just thought of something new] at any rate, the verb tense used is totally irrelevant, in this particular verse. because as I have shown substituting the phrase "day of judgement" in place of "the Hour" renders the verse totally the same even with the past tense verb "was". Pickthall, also translates verse 54:7 and verse 54:8 - speaking of the Day of Judgment - in the PRESENT TENSE. Shall we now argue that Muslims believe or Muhammad claimed that the Day of Judgement happened back then, since the verb tense is present? I wonder what we're doing here if the Day of Judgement happened some 1400 years ago... If 54:1 is so confusing, why aren't you confused about 54:7 and 54:8, which you have agreed is talking about the Day of Judgement??? What this does prove, however, is that you are selectively confused in an effort to paint some grand "contradiction" within the Quran. now, we also know that all languages have their quirks expressed as idioms and such. thus when Muhammad Asad explains 54:1 as arabic "using past tense to denote future events" I don't think he meant it literally, but rather that such idiomatic phrases exist in arabic, which gets "lost in translation" when its literally translated. This is why some commentators translate it in the past tense and some others in present, and still others in future. but they ALL agree on "the Hour" meaning the day of judgement. surely "all these scholars can't be dumb enough to not see the contradiction between past and future," to borrow your own argument. do you see how silly that refrain sounds now? as if mere numbers are any measure of correctness..."oh don't use the earth is flat analogy..." the second thing is, Asad although fluent in Arabic was actually an ethnic Ukranian. He may have understood literal and standard arabic, but not the vernacular well enough to grasp the intricacies of its idioms.

[Kriterion]

At any rate, you have been unable to answer the fundemental question of why "the Hour" means something different in verse 54:1 as opposed to all the other places where that specific word occurs in the Quran. Instead ur fixating on the past tense and its use in Abrahamic prophecy...even though not a single Christian is confused as to what the Apostle Paul was talking about in the Book of Revelation even though thats written exclusively in the past tense. So, for argument's sake (in order to move it forward) I'm going to say the following: SO what if 54:1 does claim that Muhammad split the Moon? What then?

[Kriterion]

Are you trying to claim that the dozens of scholars whose interpretations I posted in earlier posts are all illiterates ? Are all Arabs who have read 54:1 illiterates too ? This is just simply improbable.

but the scholars aren't "billions"...you said "billions of people can't be wrong".

thats something for you to explain ... since Muslims claim that the Quran has answers to everything and they treat it as a be-all and end-all. But I can also start answering your questions by firing rhetorical questions in return which is just pointless. So if you dont mind .... please explain why God did not forsee the current problem.

a) God forsees everything, so there isn't anything he didn't forsee b) what is the problem with regards to 54:1? if i can understand using the faculty of tafakkur, there is no reason any other person of normal intelligence can not. i am not a genius of epic proportions. the key is willingness to think with an open mind (tafakkur). the quran never states that those who "seek to conceal" (i.e Kuffar) will find the Quran to be of guidance. in fact, the Quran claims the exact opposite! it claims to "confuse those who seek to be confused". BEHOLD, as for those who are bent on denying the truth [6] - it is all one to them whether thou warnest them or dost not warn them: they will not believe. Quran verse 2:6 Notice that Asaad translates the word كَفَرُواْ "kafaru" as "those who are bent on denying"...i.e its not just a person who has a different religious view, its a person who understands that there is no contradiction (or falsehood) yet his own ego and personal agenda will not allow him accept anything else. This is you, Bossbhai. You have not even once attempted to explain the meaning of the term "the Hour"...you have not once attempted to explain why using past tense is NOT idiomatic to Arabic, etc, etc. You haven't even explained why no Christians are "confused" about the Book of Revelation, despite the ENTIRE book being written in PAST TENSE. Further, the Quran has the answer to how so many people, non-muslims (like you) and muslims themselves (jihadists) can misinterpret a book which claims to the "the clear scripture". In this way does He cause many a one to go astray, just as He guides many a one aright: but none does He cause thereby to go astray save the iniquitous, Quran 2:26 And this is the *miracle* of the Quran - not some bogus "moon splitting" - that it answers the questions of the naysayers 1400 years before the fact. What good is a 7th century split moon to me now? I don't see that? It ain't no miracle to me in 2010. And thats IF it happened. If one approaches things with a non-functional mind, even the statement "light travels at a finite speed regardless of the speed of the observer" is something which can cause confusion.

BTW a teacher is required to explain things clearly leaving nothing to the imagination of the students especially so in this case when he(God) has decided that Muhammad is the last messenger he is going to send. Since you have agreed that there is a easier and clearer way to explain 54:1 what it means that the original was not a work of God keeping in mind the other claim that the Quran is a crystal clear and perfect book.

What you are asking for is not an explanation. You are asking God to do all the thinking for you. A teacher who does the students homework is not a good teacher. Furthermore, the idiom is clear in the Arabic language. If you say, "oh I don't know arabic" then learn it. You can't be lazy, refuse to learn, and then complain that teacher made a difficult exam. Of course its going to be difficult if you don't study or put in effort. Life ain't easy my friend. Not to mention, the explanation is there. I showed it it you, using other verses of the Quran. If you are expecting Gabriel himself to come and personally explain, then yes, I will agree. But if you agree that God gave us brains so that we use it to think about His creation then you must agree on this point.

I would like to make it clear that it is not my intention to act like a inflexible dead beat. But the situation is such that no matter how I look at it i only see dead ends.

As long as you try to look with both eyes open and not closed, its a start. But thats not my primary reason. I am essentially "showing off" here. Your argument is weak and mine is strong. I will prove this by conceding, for the sake of this debate, the point about 54:1.

Einstiens theory is about million times more profound than translating a simple piece of text that is no more than 5-6 words long. Secondly you are comparing science to theology. Theology relies a lot on blind belief whereas science requires you to not go by blind beliefs. Thirdly only a small fraction of humanity is capable of understanding Einsteins theories and it doesnt mean anything other than that they dont have the requisite brains to understand it. Whereas tranlating a simple piece of text is just trivial (pls dont ask me to explain why its trivial) and it is simply impossible for millions to have completely missed it by such a wide distance that they now arrive at a completely opposite meaning to the one that was actually intended by God ( as per your claim ). This is why the two anologies make no sense.

1) the profoundness is irrelevant to whether or not something can be understood or not. its a non-sequitor argument. 2) you're talking about understanding what 54:1 is saying as a statement, not inblind belief in it as a religion. 3) an even smaller number of people were literate over the 1400 years and so couldn't not even read 54:1, whereas any literate person can still at least read Einstein's theory. Even in India today there are what, 400 million people who can't read or write at a primary school level? And thats not some sandbox in the middle ages, we're talking about 2010 and one of the next great rising economies.

[Kriterion]

And as I said in post#497 this isnt the only preposterous claim by Muhammad for us to offer the benefit of doubt. He has a history of making preposterous claims. The journey to heaven (and back) via Al-Aqsa on a winged Horse being the most audacious one. There aint no way anyone can prove these things scientifically. This is where belief comes in and it is the cornerstone of all religious ideologies.

So you are saying that its perfectly reasonable for an All-powerful God to communicate with a person (Moses/Jesus/Muhammad/Arjuna), but its not possible for the same Infinite God to a) split the moon or b) take people for a ride on a winged horse?

I have already explained this in post#497 in detail (ditto for everything else that you keep repeating including your favourite phrase - "The Hour") But in short what it means is that the Quran isnt a work of God but something that Muhammad came up with and that he was capable enough to sell it as a work of God to his followers.

So do you think that EVERYONE believed Muhammad, even though not a single person saw the moon split with their own eyes?

[hari504504]

but its not possible for the same Infinite God to a) split the moon or b) take people for a ride on a winged horse?

I can only think of one God who is remotely capable of such feats - Acid pills..

[Kriterion]

But they are included in that number ... so please tell me how all of these scholars are illiterates too. Keep in mind that most of them have dedicated their entire lives on researching the Quran. How is it possible for ALL of them to have completely missed the meaning of a simple sentence ? If such highly educated and trained scholars can err what chances do the average folks have ? Shouldnt God have been aware of this ?

1) never said the scholars were illiterate...that still leaves billions of illiterate lay people. 2) actually NONE of them have missed it...they all agree the Hour means "the day of judgement"...every single one of them. but, i'll admit some of them have contradicted themselves when talking of a supposed miracle. perhaps personal agendas were at play here...

What Iam saying is none of these(including the talking) can be proved scientifically. It then becomes a matter of belief. This is the fundamental requirement of any religion.

Which means none of those things can be disproven either. And thats the point, its easy for me to lie and tell you that I'm wearing green underwear right now, because although there is no proof that I am, you have zero proof that I'm not. But its quite another for me to say that I'm right now splitting the moon, when you can clearly see with your eyes that I am not. You see, Muhammad made up all sorts of claims that you think are prepesterous. I DO accept that Muhammad made a journey on a winged horse, until this can be proven otherwise. I believe it because the Quran says it, and that is by definition what a Muslim believes in. I do not accept (except for when stated for "argument's sake") that Muhammad split the Moon. I do not accept it because the literal Quranic arabic text does not support such an interpretation due to use of the term "the Hour". Like you said, there are only 5-6 words in that statement and BOTH the noun "the Hour" and the past tense verb "was" are of equal importance. I have explained what "the Hour" means...unless you can come up with an alternate explanation, you don't have an argument. The reason for past tense usage is one which signifies both: a) an Arabic idiomatic expression, passed over by non-Arab translators such as Pickthall, Yusuf Ali, Asad, etc, as well as perhaps some Arab ones too...as idioms change from time to place. this may not be the correct explanation, but how you can rule it out with absolute certainty is something I'd like to know. b) regardless of whether 54:1 is an idiom or not, the importance of the Moon in Islamic culture and symbolism is unquestioned. It is the principle measure of Time, something which people even to this day consider to be absolute and Infinite. However, time has a beginning and an end as well...whether you are speaking scientifically or theologically. The end of the Moon, is symbolic of the end of Time itself, i.e The Apocalypse and hence the use of the Apocalyptic term "the Hour".

I have ... I produced works of many scholars and infact you have agreed that the official and widely accepted translation of that verse is as a past event which means that the Hour in that context refers to the time when Muhammad summoned all the Quraysh to witness the event which was to be the sign for all of them to accept Muhammads teachings.

But "the Hour" is a specific noun, hence the "the" in front of it...if there are different contexts for this word there must be multiple "the Hours". How can that be? Yet another reason that your interpretation is weak...Muhammad proving his prophethood should be a monumental time in his religion by his followers. Yet no one makes a big deal about this. No one knows the date of this occurence. No one celebrates it as a holiday. Yet the miracle of Abraham sacrificing his son is celebrated as Eid al Adha. Very curious, wouldn't you say?

And as far as Ego and denial is concerned .... here you are going on and on on a circular debate while you admit that you are one of those tiny exceptions that read 54:1 differently from what the official translation states and what billions of Muslims read it as over 14 centuries . you also agree that the one scholar who agrees with you was wrong and yet all this hasnt stopped you from acknowleding that you were wrong and are now accusing me of being a deadbeat ? I mean it took me weeks (if not months) to just get a straight answer from you on what is the official and widely accepted translation of 54:1 for crying out loud.

Not sure what you mean by a deadbeat...but you yourself have stated that unless certain quetions are answered you won't be interested in talking. Your error-filled logic forced you into such rigid "fixing" of discussions. To prove my inflexibility and the superiority of my viewpoint, I am agreeing to your unfair demands, because the Truth does not need a level playing field. I have also allowed you to control the direction of this discussion...from where men shoot their loads from, to whether Muhammad claimed to split the moon or not.

How many verses in Quran are written in past tense that actually mean future tense ? None AFAIK (correct me if wrong) . And what has the Book of revelation got to do with Quran ? They could have a third tense for all I care. Means nothing w.r.t the current discussion.

Only 54:1 is written in the past tense. And thats the point, if Muhammad simply made a grammatical error we would see numerous such descrepancies in the Quran. Which means 54:1 is unique for the reasons highlighted above regarding the Moon being symbolic of Islam. The Book of Revelation is NOT relevant except for the fact that the ENTIRE text is written in past tense, and yet ALL Christians are agreed it is talking about a Future event (except those who believe its merely metaphorical). You don't seem to have any problems understanding how the Book of Revelation is talking about future events in the past tense, so why do you have trouble with 54:1?

[Kriterion]

They probably saw a illusion or that the few followers who were witness to the event as per Hadith were in with Muhammad. Who knows. But what is absolutely clear is from day one that verse has been treated as an event that happened during Muhammads time.

What illusion do you know of that can make the Moon to appear to split into 2 seperate pieces with one piece going to the other side of a Mountain, as reported by the "hadiths"? I hope you realize that an illusion is not real. You can offer an illusion that you are sawing someone in half, and once a person realizes the trick, its rather humerous. So I ask you, how can someone trick someone else into believing that he or she has split the Moon into 2 completely seperate pieces? If the believers were "in with Muhammad", doesn't that mean the Hadith contains lies and untruths? If it does, and is a historically inaccurate source, how can you use it to prove anything? Its a terrible source in that case?

[Kriterion]

And it also still leaves Billions of literates just like you. Unless you can prove to me that you pocess thinking abilities that have eluded such huge no.of people over 14 centuries ... please dont bring this up again. I will simply not respond if you continue to keep repeating the same again and again as it is nothing but an attempt to argue for the sake of it. I repeat for the last time ... a simple sentence such as 54:1 cannot require this sort of high IQ thinking which would make you(Kriterion) one in a few billion. Any avg joe with average common sense and IQ should and will be able to understand that sentence. We are not dealing in rocket science or brain surgery. This is as simple as it can get. I cannot simplify this further.

regardless, 95% of the worlds' muslims throughout the past 1400 years were illiterate. never said i have superior thinking abilities, although yes, i would put myself in the top 1%. and if you think the average middle ages muslim had equivalent thinking abilities when you yourself have no idea of basic human anatomy, than its best to end this discussion right here. there are actually a lot of people who have the same interpretation of 54:1 as I have. even the scholars say its the Day of Judgement, not some time in Muhammad's life. the scholars have contradicted themselves, proving their fallibility. I have an alternate explanation.

You are now contradicting yourself as you have agreed earlier that the vast majority of Muslim world treats this as a event from Muhammad's time. Once they arrive at that conclusion it implies that your favorite sticking point i.e "The Hour" refers to this event (in this context) which was a significant event and was the judgement day where the Quraysh were shown the signs. If you do not accept this I have nothing else to say and it is quite simply futile to argue with someone who simply not willing to come to terms with facts and evidence which is just overwhelmingly in my favor from all aspects.

OK, but why aren't you confused about 54:7 and 54:8.....which is written in present tense about the Day of Judgement??? In other words you are selectively confused, because 54:7 and 54:8 don't paint a picture of some "prepesterous" claim from Muhammad and cannot be used to further your argument. its true most muslims think its an event in Muhammad's time, but the lack of knowledge about such an amazing thing - i.e unquestionable proof is evidence alone that this viewpoint is a mistake. the majority of muslims also believe that Neil Armstrong heard the call to prayer on the Moon. a) if this is the case, how is that no one cares about Muhammad splitting the moon enough to know when and where it happened exactly, and celebrate it as a holiday? Let me explain this further. Muslims know of exactly when and where Muhammad got his first revelation (Jabal Nur, Ramadan 27 609 AD). Muslims know exactly where Muhammad descended in Jerusalem on the winged horse (Al Aqsa Mosque). Muslims know where Muhammad died. Muslims know the two hills that Hagar ran between 4000 years ago (Safa and Marwa). Yet Muslims don't know when or where their religion was PROVEN to to be the ULTIMATE GOD-GIVEN TRUTH??? In a religion where his followers meticulously committed to memory how many times Muhammad farted after a meal, to not even mention the date and place of this HUGE event is beyond fathomable. Sure the date and time could be incorrect in the hadiths, but to not have one at all is simply unbelievable. therefore, this must not be the event you say it is. not to mention that the Hour never means anything but the day of judgement. sorry for fixating on the NOUN of a sentence, but usually the NOUN of a sentence is pretty important to the meaning of that sentence. b) since so many muslims believe it, according to your logic it must either be true or be part of islamic doctrine. it is neither.

The burden of proof is on you / muslims as you are the ones that claim this book to be authored by God. I have no problems if you tell me that this is just your belief. Just dont try to tell me that it is the ultimate truth and nothing but the truth and worse try to impose it on others and openly tell that all other faiths are fake.

first of all, if i believe something to be true obviously it must be absolutely true. so for you to tell me i can't believe its absolutely true, is to dictate to me my beliefs. do you want to dictate to muslims what they can and cannot believe? now if i believe that there is only 1 god with no children, and obviously i believe its true, because if i believed it was false, i wouldn't believe it, now would i? and someone else says Jesus is God's Son, then I don't have to say his belief is "fake" nor would he have to say my belief is "fake", but we would both achieve that conclusion by logical deduction automatically. In other words, you as a Hindu do not have to say that science is "fake" because scientifically speaking there is nothing holy, sacred, or divine about the Ganges river. It is something which comes automatically because when 2 things contradict each other, and one is accepted as truth, it automatically means the other one is deemed to be false. So if you believe that truth and falsehood are equal to each other you have a point. But otherwise, you (and almost all other humans) are no different, and everyone has a condescending attitude towards those who follow "fake" beliefs. Don't for a minute claim that you are any different. secondly, when have i ever imposed my beliefs on you? in fact, i highly doubt any muslim has ever tried to impose islam on you or even anyone you know personally. your paranoia stems from the admittedly bloody history of post-Muhammad Islam as well as historic revisionism regarding various events.

PS: Will be travelling and wont respond for a few days. I couldnt respond to many other points due to time constraints but I believe I have addresed key points related to the core issue. Laters.

no problem. have a pleasant journey. but you missed the most key point...i hope you will address it when time permits. we got caught up in 54:1 again, and that is the obstacle we must clear, so for argument's sake...i will concede that yes 54:1 says Muhammad split the Moon. i don't believe that he did, but i do believe that he was capable of doing such a thing with an All-might God's permission, because if God couldn't do it, then he's not an Absolute deity anymore. So, what I want to ask you is: What illusion do you know of that can make the Moon to appear to split into 2 seperate pieces with one piece going to the other side of a Mountain, as reported by the "hadiths"? I hope you realize that an illusion is not real. You can offer an illusion that you are sawing someone in half, and once a person realizes the trick, its rather humerous. So I ask you, how can someone trick someone else into believing that he or she has split the Moon into 2 completely seperate pieces? If the believers were "in with Muhammad", doesn't that mean the Hadith contains lies and untruths? If it does, and is a historically inaccurate source, how can you use it to prove anything? Its a terrible source in that case?

[Kriterion]

The same is true for Quran because you cant prove things like Muhammad travelling on winged horse to Al-Aqsa and then to heaven and back. Neither can you you prove that Muhammad was Gods Last messenger nor that he could converse with Angels. Without evidence to backup these claims are just hot air to put it mildly. Like I said .. there aint no religion that doesnt require a healthy dose of Blind Belief.

a fair point. i do not agree with it, obviously because i'm a "believer", but its a fair point in the absence of any other proof. but if the Quran is unreliable (as you are asserting), and the hadith are unreliable (as you are being forced to agree with) then: 1) how can u rely solely on the hadith to tell the truth about anything else? 2) if both the quran and the sunnah are unreliable, how do u even know Muhammad existed and isn't a mythological character like Beowulf? 3) even if Muhammad existed, how can u say for certain that he was a terrorist or a pedophile or even an arab?

As long as you keep it within the 4 walls of your home nobody really gives a flying feck what you believe. Muslims obviously dont subscribe to that because elsewhere in the Quran it classifies the world into 2 groups of believers and non-believers and tells what to do with the non-believers and how to spread your faith and aggresive things like that.

where in the Quran does it do any of these things?

Yes Iam aware of your stand which revolves around 2:256 but the Sunnah provides ample examples to disprove your theory. This is why we need to refer to the Hadith for details on Sunnah (This was the original starting point of our discussion ). Your claim that Quran > Hadith now stands proven as wrong because it has errors and hence is work of man not God just like all the Hadith.

where are the errors? in fact, i see nothing but accuracies. An educated 21st century man such as yourself incorrectly stated that semen originates in the testes, whereas the Quran - presumably written by a 7th century thug - states otherwise.

[Kriterion]

Dont know. There arent many details other than the 2-3 Hadith which only inform us that the moon was split. The Quraysh version of events is sadly missing.

there is no illusion that is humanely possible that can make the Moon to appear to split, when in fact it never has. this is scientifically ridiculous, because if it were the case, there would have to be a scientific explaination, just as David Copperfield's magic tricks have an explanation. Now the follow up question: So you say that Muhammad performed some optical illusion to convince his followers. How do you explain the following: 1) how come none of the "disbelievers" - the Jews, the Christians, the Quraish and other Arabs - how come none of them saw the same optical illusion and converted to Islam right away? or was this only an illusion visable to Muslim eyes? 2) why would Muhammad need to "prove" his Prophethood to his followers? His followers already believed in him. 3) what good is a miracle that can't even be seen or observed by the skeptics (non-muslims)? 4) If Muhammad lacked such basic foresight, than how on earth do expect him to be fit to lead a rag-tag group to such astounding victory?

[Kriterion]

you no doubt believe that Muhammad claimed to have split the moon in verse 54:1. of course its besides the fact that Muhammad never says "i split the moon" only that "the moon was split". what follows is a logical foray into the claim that Muhammad claimed to have split the moon. Did Muhammad Really Claim to Split the Moon in Quran Verse 54:1? Obviously there are only 2 choices, Muhammad either claimed this miracle or he didn't: Muhammad claimed to split the Moon. or Muhammad did not claim to split the Moon. Now the statement that Muhammad claimed to split the moon can be further broken down into the following: Muhammad claimed to the split the Moon, and believed that he actually could and did. or Muhammad claimed to split the Moon, and he knew it was just another "preposterous" claim of divine Prophethood. The statement "Muhammad claimed to split the Moon and actually believed it himself" means that Muhammad was necessarily psychotic, from a medical point of view. Now lets look at these statements individually. ********* Muhammad claimed to split the Moon, and he knew it was just another "preposterous" claim of divine Prophethood. If Muhammad was consciously lying about splitting the Moon, it would be a dangerous slippery slope to travel on. The whole point of this claim is to perform a miracle for the skeptics, since his followers already believe in him. Now, does Muhammad stand to convince any skeptics by claiming to perform a miracle which is physically impossible (i.e the definition of the term "miracle")? No. And his followers already believe everything he says. In other words, Muhammad stands to gain nothing from telling this particular lie, and in fact is guaranteed to lose what little "credibility" he has. Some or even all of his followers may realize he's a hack and join the ranks of the skeptics. So this is a move that no rational person would take as it is piss-poor strategy for a religious quack. Unless of course Muhammad was not rational was a haphazard character, which brings us to the next claim. Muhammad was not a "rational actor". Muhammad, by every single account, was successful in his primary objective, which was to start a new religion and to replace the existing social structure. Whether one agrees with Muhammad's vision is irrelevant. Whatever Muhammad was aiming for worked out eventually, and for the most part before he expired. Such "rags to riches" success stories, achieved against ridiculous odds are NOT proof positive of Muhammad's divine connection. That would be a supreme logical fallacy, for plenty of people have overcome great odds to achieve their stated objectives. However, it is proof positive that Muhammad was a careful thinker, a manipulative planner, a fastidious fellow, and one with abundant persistence. Muhammad was successful on a political level, on a military level, and even on a philosophical level. One need not agree with his politics or his philosophies to gauge that much. The fact that his name stretches from the Atlantic to teh Pacific ocean is example enough. This proves that Muhammad was a rational actor, because why else would anyone claim that Muhammad founded a peaceful religion only until he usurped enough power to be violent? Muhammad claimed to the split the Moon, and believed that he actually could and did. If Muhammad had such delusions, he was obviously psychotic. But was Muhammad a clinical schizophrenic? Although it is impossible to diagnose non-living people because, they're duh, not alive anymore, it is possible to logically examine established elements of their lives. Muhammad could not have been schizophrenic for many reasons. Firstly, schizophrenia has an onset that is when the patient is their teens or early 20s. Muhammad didn't claim visions from God until he was 40 years old. Schizophrenia is chronic and severe. Its not something that affects the patient every now and then. Schizophrenics are unable to hold down even minor jobs like being a gas station attendent because their delusions and hallucinations simply get in the way. This is not to say that schizophrenics are of low intelligence as anyone who seen the movie A Beautiful Mind will know that John Nash was a Nobel laurete and he was also a schizophrenic. Muhammad preached, he organized a community, he built mosques, he led defensive wars, he managed a very large household, etc. If Muhammad was schizophrenic, he could not have done any of those things, and each of them would have fallen apart soon after his symptoms surfaced. Schizophrenics also display what are called positive and negative symptoms. Positive symptoms include things like delusions, hallucinations, thought disorders, and movement disorders. Muhammad had no movement disoders, he had no more thought disorders than does anyone else, and his "delusions/hallucinations" don't last the 6 months necessary to diagnose schizophrenia. Negative symptoms include lack of affect (emotion), lack of pleasure, aphasia (little or no speech). Muhammad didn't have any of these classic symptoms either. Thus Muhammad could not have been schizophrenic. So the next claim: Muhammad suffered from Schizophreniform Disorder or Brief Delusional Disorder. These are basically "baby" schizophrenias. Schizophrenia is something that is chronic and requires at least 6 continuous months of symptoms. Schizophreniform requires 1-6 months, and Brief Delusional Disoder symptoms of about a day or so. Muhammad could not have either of these because none of his "prepestorous" claims lasted for those specified time periods. For example, his claim of splitting the moon took a few minutes, according to the account given in teh hadith - which is only account of such an event. There is no biochemical basis for such an acute possibility. Psychotic behavior is now known to be a function of excess levels of chemicals in the brain. Psychotic people tend to have increased levels of dopamine and serotonin. The bottom line is that there is no known case or instance of a person having such an acute overload of dopamine or serotonin to cause a 5 minute hallucination of having split the moon. ************ So this is what we have in conclusion summarized: Muhammad claimed to split the Moon - false (Muhammad claimed to split the Moon and he believed it) - false [Muhammad was thus schizophrenic] - false [Muhammad had schizophreniform disorder] - false [Muhammad had brief delusional disorder] - false (Muhammad claimed to split the Moon and knowingly lied about it) - false If all the other logical possibilities cannot be true, and we know this for biological and logical fact, then the only other possibility must be true, no matter how unlikely it is. This is the most fundemental teaching of logic. Thus: Muhammad could not have possibly claimed to split the Moon - true

... lets not even worry about the moon splitting thingy (even though a vast majority of Muslims have absolutely no doubt that it did happen ).

i'm glad you've gotten over your obsession with the moon splitting issue. you made me think that was only card you had in your hand. majority of muslims believe that ALL jews are evil, hook-nosed people, doesn't make that true, nor does it mean thats a part of Islamic doctrine.

[Cricket_Guru]

I time to time do visit politics section of icf. and every time i see this thread at the top. today i thought lets just check it out whats the fuss, the attack was year ago. and here people are discussing about islam Jaga Jee Lagaanay Ki Dunya Nahi Hai, Yeh ibrat ki jah hai, tamasha nahi hai. :--D only if i had enough time to take part. maybe when am free....:--D i went over few of your summarised posts. and to be fair. the most recent one and the the staring few quotes. you all people are stuck to your views. and how can someone discuss Islam without believing in hadiths. Muhammad PBUH said this himself. islam is incomplete without sunnah of prophet. this was summaries in his PBUH's last sermon. 6UuCRYfO4e0 i know am talking abit general here, and you people been in much details already. but whats the point of details if the aqeedah(beliefs) are wrong. and whats the point of knowledge too if the beliefs are wrong i.e. doctor zakir naik.

[Cricket_Guru]

Exactly ...but kriterion with whom Iam debating feels that most of the violent stuff that you find in the Sunnah are incorrect and unreliable because they contradict verse 2:256 ( and few other peaceful verses) and since Quran is a work of God it supercedes the Hadith and therefore they are wrong. This is where I went about showing kriterion that there are errors in Quran too. ( This is the high level summary of the discussion so far). But must say it is a surprise to see a padosi not getting upset at the discussion.

Internet would be the last place where i could upset over something.... :two_thumbs_up: on a most basic note. whenever you analyse a verse of quran, dont just assume as to it means what it says. quran took over 20 years to reveal, at different stages, after prophet-hood. if you do read one verse, read the previous one and then then read the next one two. sometime meaning cant be reached without reading the full chapter of quran. like first ever word of God to prophet 'read' now people made many assumptions out of this verse through hadiths and predictions. some say Allah SWT said this because prophet could not read. bla bla. but once you read the full surah. you get the point of what god is trying to get across. I am Muslim and me challenging what Quran says can label and class me as non-Muslim.(this i think again supports your point as to Islam doesn't give freedom to its followers). and me on my way to remembering Holy Book by heart with learning the language. I sometime when learning a specific line get confused and go into that questioning mood only to go further and maybe 3-4 months later reach to a conclusion as to what the fuzz was earlier. I'l be back.............:icflove:

[Kriterion]

The problem is in the highlighted part. And it is because he has already succesfully sold a bunch of other lies to his initial followers in order to gain their support. ( Last messenger of God and being able to converse with Angels being the chief ones ). So he already knows this strategy works. Like I have told you many many times during this debate EVEN in this day and age people fall for these things. That is just human nature. Just look at your own case !! How do you know Muhammad undertook that journey to heaven on a winged horse ? You got absolutely nothing other than blind faith to back your conviction on that regard. So why is it that hard for you to realize that illiterate Arabs from 7th century Arabia in dark-ages could not fall for such claims?

there is a difference in Muhammad saying he is God's Messenger and that he can speak with Angel's - which is neither verifiable, nor unverifiable - and between him claiming to perform a miracle that everyone saw him NOT PERFORM. in other words, you cannot prove that Muhammad was not God's messenger. that is a claim which is unverifiable. its a leap of faith and that is why it is called religious "belief". however, you could prove the claim that Muhammad was a Test cricketer. again someone can believe that if he or she wishes, but that is a claim that can be verified. Muhammad travelling on a winged creature, again that is a claim that cannot be disproven. you either believe it or you don't.

I have already answered the rest of the stuff from your post in previous posts (and quite frankly I dont think you will agree that you are wrong no matter the tons of evidence that I put up ) .. But here is one other angle to look at : If this verse was supposed to be a future ONLY thingy and since you have acknowledged that a vast majority of the Muslim populace takes it as a event that occured during Muhammads time ... when according to you did this complete U-Turn occur ? Do you have anything to show approximately when this change happened ? Keep in mind that this is a very serious thing as you now have a situtation where a verse has been completely mangled to mean the exact opposite and given the sort of wide fanatical following that Islam enjoys this would have been a major event which would have been frowned upon by the ulema and would have caused severe issues as it is a sin to change the meaning of a verse. AFAIK no such thing has occured because since from day one this verse has been interpreted as it is today.

very easy and simple question. it happened as soon as your heroes (Bukhari, Ibn Ishaq, et al) appeared on the scene. geniuses they may have been, but even geniuses can make honest mistakes. There is no REAL evidence that anyone interpretted it as an actual event. All the evidence is something that came 100+ years after the fact. And that makes of rubbish forensics. Plus, logic dictates it couldn't have been for the above reasons in my last post. Of course, you've already displayed a disdain for scientific truths, somewhat akin to Stephen Colbert and his hypersensitivity to moronic things called "facts". misinterpretation of the Quran happens all the time. the only difference is that with the Quran you can, with tafakkur, attain the true meaning. The Quran also apparently allows men to "beat" their wives. EVERY single translator has incorrectly or intentionally mis-translated the word daraba. How do we know? Because in other contexts a diferrent interpretation of the same word has been given. The translators words are only as good as it is if we cross-reference them constantly.

[Kriterion]

Kriterion, Since when did you start valuing shoclastic works ? I thought you had allergy to that no ? Case in point is that thread where I provided many many links to scholarly works from many scholars spread over many centuries which you just simply discarded giving the example of how many scholars felt that the earth was flat for centuries. And this was regarding merely translating and interpreting a simple text no more than 5-6 words from the quran (talk about intellectual capacity !!! ). So before you go pointing fingers look at yourself on where you stand with regards to your take on scholarly work ( and ofcourse intellectual capacity ) elsewhere in a different thread. Unless and untill the said scholarly works are alligning to your viewpoint you just blindly reject them ( using the flat earth analogy ) . For crying out loud you claim that the entire [most of the] Muslim world is wrong in their interpretation of 54:1 and then you come here and ridicule me of not knowing what "study" is and that I lack intellectual capacity.

i don't have any problem with scholastic works so long as they follow reason and logic. religous scholarship is not necessarily "intellectual" scholarship. the two are not mutually inclusive. you have yet to even offer an explanation of how Muhammad could possibly claim to split the moon and not be clinically crazy. or is medical science outside of the pale of "logic" and "reason"? for a person who claims to possess "intellectual capacities" you ignore far too many questions to qualify as anything more than a vitriolic fear-mongerer. you're like the genius student who fails every exam precisely because they never answer any of the questions asked.

I am fully aware that most people ( unlike you which is why I have been debating with you for soo long ) dont have the requisite ethics to even admit that they were wrong on a internet forum.

if i am not mistaken, i don't think you've ever admitted to mistake even on the "cricket talk" forum. this necessarily means that through 14,000+ posts, you've never been wrong. thats a pretty astouding percentage, the limit of which certainly approaches "perfection". so i think that you are as far ahead of that troupe of "most people" as one could possibly be.

As far as reproducing from Google is concerned ... could you tell me how exactly you are producing stuff in that debate we are having on the other thread ? Its not like you have undertaken a trip to Saudi Arabia and conducted your own research and are making posts based on that is it ? These discussions cannot be had without works that are available freely thanks to the wonderfull invention called internet. Attack the content that is put infront of you Instead of attacking the means by which that content is sourced.

not attacking the means by which the content has been obtained. i don't set myself up quite so easily. but i am attacking the fact that you have very little on top of the "googled" material. 99% of your posts/arguments are links with absolutely no independent thought behind them. there is no interpretation, there is little extrapolation except into non-seqiutorial irrelevancies such as "General relativety is so profound you cannot compare it to 54:1", etc, etc, etc. when we get lucky, you actually provide us with an excerpt or a passage, and even then it is hilariously devoid of any tangible arguments. what you do is akin to a school boy bellowing at the top of his lungs "Teacher, my mum says you're mean, therefore you are". ******************************

Not EVERYONE. IIRC No less than 3 of his companions are witness to this event. This has been addressed many times in this thread earlier.

LOL. can you please tell me how its possible for 3 people to witness an event that you and I both agree did NOT occur. yes, these companions must have lied. or whoever transmitted this chronicle must have made it up. or the story must have really been embelished in the 100 years that intervened between the alleged event and the FIRST historical account describing it.

Correct. But if you want others to buy into this belief simply because you think and believe that it is a work of God. I prefer scientific evidence to go with it. Since you now accept that there isnt a way to prove many things stated in the Quran , it therefore cannot be accepted as a word of God by those who are bound by logic and hard evidence (and NOT blind belief ).

really? what about when scientific evidence proves that Muhammad couldn't have claimed to split the moon in verse 54:1 because he would not have been as successful as history claims he's been? my guess is then you'd simply wouldn't even acknowledge that scientific evidence.

If this verse was being interpreted as a future event until Bukhari , Ishaq came on the scene and completely altered the meaning of 54:1 ... this amounts to a act of grave misdeed punishable by death ( or some serious punishement ) and would have been cause for serious uproar given how sensitive Muslims are on these matters. They would have had to face the wrath of Mullahs and fanatic rulers and hence would have been recorded in history. There is no evidence whatsoever that such a thing occured AFAIK and indeed these guys are hailed and revered for their works that documented the Prophetic traditions in excruciating detail(especially Bukhari). So in essence there is nothing to backup your claim.

ROFLMAO....how do you get around with such myopic vision!? The reason Bukhari, Ishaq, et al got away from the wrath of the "mullahs" was BECAUSE THEY WERE THE MULLAHS of their time. duh. gee, i wonder why al-Qaeda hasn't issued a fatwa to denounce Osama bin Laden??? do you see the idiocy of what you called "common sense" just a little while ago? do you see why anyone with an iota of "intellectual capacity" requires a bit more than just "common sense" before they are ready to buy into bigotry against other human beings who they haven't ever met and know absolutely nothing about?

[The Outsider]

Without the intention of getting into these religious arguments, for I believe all religious scriptures are fairy tales, there is one point I would like to make. The 'Hour' or 'Hour of Judgment' or any similar phrases have been used pretty unambiguously to refer to some hypothetical Hour when people at the end of the world are going to line up and face God in all Abrahamic religions. It's not even an Islam specific concept, the old testament, has similar verses written in the past/present tense about the Hour of Judgment. Just saying that a text seems to be written in the past tense regarding the Hour does not at all imply that was the intention of the verse.

[The Outsider]

^ Don't care what the Mullahs might think or propagate. Ask any authority in Comparative Religion and he'll tell you 'Hour' in Abrahamic religions refers only to the Day of Judgment.

[The Outsider]

Don't know any references specific to that verse and can't be bothered to search for something, but you can easily google for how the term, 'The Hour' is used across all Abrahamic religions. For example, here is a a verse from the Bible - "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only." Google 'Last judgment' and you'll find numerous neutral references on how the term is used. There is only one 'The Hour' in all Abrahamic faiths. Here is another verse apparently written in past tense, but obviously referring to the day of judgment : Day of wrath! O day of mourning! See fulfilled the prophets' warning, Heaven and earth in ashes burning!