|
Attention: Year 2009 is here
Wishing a very Happy New Year to all members of FFI. Our new and improved site is ready. To visit main site, click at faithfreedom.org and to visit our new forum, click at forum09.faithfreedom.org and register again. Do not worry about your old forum posts and PM, everything is saved here till 31st December, 2008 for future references.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sbwus
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 1061
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:18 pm Post subject: A reality check for a Hindu [maha_swami] |
 |
|
| maha_swami wrote: |
Islam has incredible power, it can turn an intelligent, sane person to a violent dummy. |
Coming from a Hindu, the above statement in form of his/her(?) signature, is beyond absurdity. The irony of this polytheist Hindu's posts in this forum is that he questions, mocks and attacks a pure monotheiets faith, i.e. Islaam.Let us give him a reality check in the light of his signature, showing it is Hinduism with incredible power to turn its followers into braind-dead morons.
The status of women in Hinduism has never been high, it has always been rather lowest of the worst. In Hindu scripture[s] the birth of a girl/daughter is mentioned with disgust than Bible, which is also not women friendly.
In the Sok Sap Tati we read,
"Characteristics of women are fraudulence, deceiving taking oaths, to overreact, lies, appologies, artificial smiles, pretending sadness and pain, pretending happiness, carelessness and lack of sympathy, asking stupid questions and unability to distinguish between virtue and vice."
In the Neeti Ashok the following advise is given.
"Women are inconsistant as the wave of the sea. Their love and friendship are as impermanent as their threats, comparable to the sun disappearing below the horizen. They like to be with such men who owns lots of money, then they literally start to suck him empty, in the end they let him fall."
[color=blue]Prostituion in the name of religion is very popular among Hindus and/or in India. Hinduism is the most pornographic religion of all. In the Hindu temples and/or Pagodas there are hundred of girls to fulfill the sexual desires of Hindu priests and visitors. The priests have made people to believe that whoever presented his daughter to the 33 millions HIndu gods, would go to heaven.
How Hindu perceived their women has been stated in the "Encyclpedia of Religion and Ethics, as we read:
"Women can never be free, they can never get a share in inheritance, after their husband's death she is supposed to spend her life serving her oldest son."
Mind you that "Sati" (to burn the widow alive) is a part and parcel of Hindu religion, which is still being practiced by Hindus.
I can go on and on, but me me conclude by saying:
Hindu worship 33 (thrity million gods) which includes kissing asses of:
Rats
Monkeys
Elephants
Snakes
Cows (Cow's urine is a source of purificatrion)
Thuosands of idols literally.
This only proves that Hindus are not intelligent genetically. if they are, than it only proves that Hindism has the power to turn an intelligent person into a brain-dead dummy.
maha_swami, admit it because you can't weasel out deny both. You have a choice to pick one of the above or both. I say both!!!!
maha_swami, has also proved that Hindu icons like Gandhi and Nehro were stupid, hey thanks guy.
Let me also quote what Hindu icons have to say:
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (India's Prime Minsiter 1947-64) in ‘The Discovery of India,’ 1946, p. 218, 225.
“The coming of Islam and of a considerable number of people from outside with different ways of living and thought affected these beliefs and structure. A foreign conquest, with all its evils, has one advantage: it widens the mental horizon of the people and compels them to look out of their shells. They realize that the world is a much bigger and a more variegated place than they had imagined. So the Afghan conquest had affected India and many changes had taken place. Even more so the Moghals, who were far more cultured and advanced in the ways of living than the Afghans, brought changes to India. In particular, they introduced the refinements for which Iran was famous.”
Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya, Presidential Address to the Fifty-fifth Session of the Indian Congress, Jaipur, 1948.
“(The Muslims had) enriched our culture, strengthened our administration, and brought near distant parts of the country... It (the Muslim Period) touched deeply the social life and the literature of the land.”
N.S. Mehta, in 'Islam and the Indian Civilization,' reproduced in 'Hindustan ke Ahd-i-Wusta ki ek Jhalak,' by S.A. Rahman.
“Islam had brought to India a luminous torch which rescued humanity from darkness at a time when old civilizations were on the decline and lofty moral ideals had got reduced to empty intellectual concepts. As in other lands, so in India too, the conquests of Islam were more widespread in the world of thought than in the world of politics. Today, also, the Islamic World is a spiritual brotherhood which is held together by community of faith in the Oneness of God and human equality. Unfortunately, the history of Islam in this country remained tied up for centuries with that of government with the result that a veil was cast over its true spirit, and its fruits and blessings were hidden from the popular eye.”
Gandhi said:
http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/quote1.html#gandhi
Soooooooooo, maha_swami, do you really think that your BS can take precedent over these Indian/Hindu icons? Get a life!
P. S. Quotations of Hindu incons taken from the website
http://www.cyberistan.org/
sbwus
ISLAM IS THE ONLY SOLUTION
http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/
_________________
"An uninformed person cannot conceptualize the essence of knowledge nor its sublimity. One who fails to conceptualize something, its significance will never become rooted in the heart." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MrHappy
Joined: 16 Feb 2004
Posts: 1384
Location: R.I.P George Best
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:26 pm Post subject: Re: Zulqarnain and place of Sunrise and Sunset! |
|
|
| sbwus wrote: |
| Before we talk about Zulqarnain, we must explore that why the Glorious Qur’aan took up this subject? |
Must we ?
This is a fairly typical muslim strategy. Put forward a question to a muslim and the respone is almost always "Before we do that, let me cut and paste a huge article interspersed with quotes from the "glorious quran" that have absolutely no relevance to the actual question you asked you dumb kaffir."
_________________
If you see a sacred cow, kick it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
justakaffir
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 324
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So is that why pakistan, a former Hindu land, where polyetheism was practised, is now the best country to live in? Wow!!
_________________
Someone set up us the bomb! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sbwus
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 1061
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 8:06 pm Post subject: Re: Zulqarnain and place of Sunrise and Sunset! |
|
|
| MrHappy wrote: |
Has U.S. threatened to vaporize Mecca?
Intelligence expert says nuke option is reason bin Laden has been quiet.
|
Put down the crack pipe and call for help.. What a load of crap and a fancy of American Abraha. 
YOU DUMBASS *CROSSTIANS* CAN'T EVEN GET CLOSE TO MAKKAH, LET ALONE NUKING IT.
What a Christian BRAIN-FART!
_________________
"An uninformed person cannot conceptualize the essence of knowledge nor its sublimity. One who fails to conceptualize something, its significance will never become rooted in the heart."
Last edited by sbwus on Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:17 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrHappy
Joined: 16 Feb 2004
Posts: 1384
Location: R.I.P George Best
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 8:14 pm Post subject: Re: Zulqarnain and place of Sunrise and Sunset! |
|
|
| sbwus wrote: |
| NOT MrHappy wrote: |
Has U.S. threatened to vaporize Mecca?
Intelligence expert says nuke option is reason bin Laden has been quiet
Dr. Jack Wheeler |
Put down the crack pipe and call for help.. What a load of crap and a fancy of American Abraha.
YOU DUMBASS *CROSSTIANS* CAN'T EVEN GET CLOSE TO MAKKAH, LET ALONE NUKING IT.
What a Christian BRAIN-FART! |
You have quoted the wrong person. Update your post please.
_________________
If you see a sacred cow, kick it.
Last edited by MrHappy on Tue Jan 25, 2005 8:15 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yeezevee
Joined: 17 Feb 2004
Posts: 17109
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well forummers, one of the good friend at No 19.org says this, I am not sure how many worship Ali Sina and How many of you are going to make Money?
http://19.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&goto=18626&rid=0&S=7b4435f8ce380818e7426f852979b532#msg_18626
| Quote: |
Salaam,
Continuing the debate may cause more harm than good. Such a provocative person he is likely to go into print and if his posts are anything to go by, he is going to engage in character assasination. Luckily his crowd of humanist bigots who are hypocrites to their own golden rule worship him., I They do not question the assertions being made and readily accept it as a fact. In turn he worships his own ego and he has made it clear his intentions are beyond building an understanding but to capitalise on the exchange. It was apparent before the debate started that his sole motivations were money and probably to serve his preconceived notions. |
I wonder our dear Sbwus could share the secret and tell us How much MONEY he got from writing in to FFI..Any way, Indeed Our good freind Edip should become an Imam of Arizone desert to start with .. the man has that POLITICAl instinct. but America is NOT Turkey..
with best wishes
yeezevee
Last edited by yeezevee on Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:22 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PeaceOnEarth
Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 1564
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yeezevee wrote: |
I wonder our dear Sbwus could share the secret and tell us How much MONEY he got from writing in to FFI..Any way, Indeed Our good freind Edip should become an Imam of Arizone desert to start with .. the man has that POLITICAl instinct. but America is NOT Turkey..
|
I personally wrote a check for $19.95 + S/H to sbwus for abusing me on multiple threads on the same day.
_________________
"The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye. The more light you shine on it, the more it will contract." - Oliver Wendell Holmes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shake Down
Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 489
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
yeezevee,
Did you vote in the poll on Edip's fourm on if the debate should continue?
I did my civic duty and voted YES.
_________________
If you obeyed most of those on earth, they would misguide you from God's Way. They follow nothing but conjecture. They are only guessing. (Surat al-An'am: 116)
It will all be OK in the end. If it's not OK, then it must not be the end. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yeezevee
Joined: 17 Feb 2004
Posts: 17109
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
yeezevee,
Did you vote in the poll on Edip's fourm on if the debate should continue?
I did my civic duty and voted YES. |
dear Shake Down.. I use different computers for different forums.. Looking for No 19.. computer to get in to 19ers hearts
MY VOTE IS "YES".. Edip with all his debating abilities.. he can not quit.. He must continue for the sake of his good health..I hope he will., Vote for me on my behalf as "YES"
with best
yeezevee
Last edited by yeezevee on Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:22 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Righteous
Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Posts: 3728
Location: Through the looking glass.
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:54 am Post subject: Re: Zulqarnain and place of Sunrise and Sunset! |
|
|
| sbwus wrote: |
Surah Al-Kahf 86
حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ الشَّمْسِ وَجَدَهَا تَغْرُبُ فِي عَيْنٍ حَمِئَةٍ وَوَجَدَ عِنْدَهَا قَوْمًا قُلْنَا يَا ذَا الْقَرْنَيْنِ إِمَّا أَنْ تُعَذِّبَ وَإِمَّا أَنْ تَتَّخِذَ فِيهِمْ حُسْنًا
Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people. We (Allâh) said (by inspiration): "O Dhul-Qarnain! Either you punish them, or treat them with kindness."
حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ الشَّمْسِ
{H.ATTAA 'IDHAA BALAGHA MAGHRIB ASH- SHAMS}
Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun,
...
To further simplify the Ayaah آيه 18:86, following must be understood:
Until when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he perceived it setting in a miry spring, and he found beside it a nation. We said: Zulqarnain! either chastise them or take in respect of them the way of kindness.
Sun = i.e. western point where the expedition terminated. MAGHRIB مغرب and Al- MAGHRIB المغرب both signify West.
Setting = Arabic word WAJAD وجد has two distinct meanings: one, he found it, lighted on it, attained it, having an objectivity, a correspondence with fact; the other is, he perceived it, became sensible of it, having only a subjective import. Here it is used in the latter sense, and the phrase means, ‘it appeared to him that the sun was setting.’
|
Liar. The word WAJAD was not used in 18:86 in association with the place where the sun set. The actual phrase used in the Quran is: {H.ATTAA 'IDHAA BALAGHA MAGHRIB ASH- SHAMS}.
The word WAJAD is used twice in the verse: once in association with the "black murky pond" (as it setting in a murky pond) and the second time about the people living there. EVEN WITHOUT KNOWING ARABIC, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS NO WAJAD ASSOCIATED WITH THE PLACE OF THE SETTING SUN. You are wrong. So much for your knowledge of Arabic ! Hah
THE WORDS MAGHRIB AND WAJAD WERE NEVER USED TOGETHER IN 18:86. THE WORD MAGHRIB IS ONLY USED ONCE AND IN THE PHRASE "H.ATTAA 'IDHAA BALAGHA MAGHRIB ASH- SHAMS". Go spread your lies elsewhere.
Rgds
R
_________________
"The harsh truth is that science and Islam parted ways many centuries ago." - Pervez Hoodbhoy, Professor of Nuclear and High-Energy Physics at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.
Last edited by Righteous on Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:55 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ali Sina
Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 4607
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am not a member of that forum so I can’t vote. But I think the debate should go on. As originally both Edip and I stated, the debate is not to convince each other. I never had the illusion to convince a Muslim in a debate. However these debates will help others to see the light. The person I debate with often is hindered by his ego. Other Muslims read and they can see the truth. It is for them that we must continue.
We have touched a few important points so far and there are more things to talk about. We have talked about the fact that:
• Without its history, Islam cannot be established.
• Without the context the verses of the Quran are incomprehensible
• The fact that some of the hadith are forged does not invalidate all of them. Even the submitters admit that at least two of the verses of the Quran are forged. Does this invalidate the entire Quran? Then why this double standard with hadith?
• To prove Quran is not divine there is no need to rely on any hadith.
• The Quran is a violent book, a manual for terrorism.
• The Quran is a book of contradictions. Only the knowledge of the science of nasekh wal mansook can solve the problem of contradictions and that can be determined by knowing the context of “revelations”.
These topics we discussed in the debate. Edip Yukel gave no response to any of them. He contented himself to make my psychoanalysis and issue a threat and a prophecy. But he failed to address the above points. There are more points to discuss so we can complete our debate.
• Does the Quran contain any scientific evidence?
• Is the alleged numerical miracle of the Quran a fact or a scam?
I think after discussing these two points we can say the debate is complete.
We already agreed that either one of us is entitled to publish the book. I would like to do that. I think the book is going to clarify many points to Muslims and non-Muslims who can’t have access to the Internet. I will also provide the book online for free access.
At this moment if one side withdraws it sends a message to the readers. It is inevitably interpreted as admission of defeat and it will negatively reflect on the image of the withdrawing party. I earnestly invite Edip to come back to the table and resume the debate. The best part is ahead of us. We can now talk about the scientific evidence of the Quran and then move to its numerical magic. This should be easier for Edip. I suppose this is his specialty. So if there is any truth to such claims this will certainly reverse the things to his favor and he will be able to either win the debate or restore his credibility.
It is regrettable that most of these who have voted in the 19ers forum have said it is a waste of time to continue this debate. Waste of time for whom? If the idea was to educate the public this debate is doing its job. If the majority of the submitters think this debate has been a waste of time, it means they realize they are losing the debate. May be this is the best investment of their time. Maybe they should rethink their indefensible approach and abandon following a psychopath. It is a shame to be a Muslim. It is a shame to follow a murderous man like Muhammad. You are Satan worshippers. If there is a hell and heaven you are all denizens of hell. You have already realized Islam has no defense. So far you debated with other Muslims and by denying the hadith and hiding the evidence you thought you are winning. Now that you are facing the real challenge you retreat and say it is not worth it. If you had any regards for truth you would want to continue this debate to come to the bottom of it. If you really cared for truth you would leave Islam.
How can you people not be ashamed of yourself when you are so afraid to face the truth and instead prefer to run and hide? I saw only two people who voted to continue the debate. I salute these two. They are honest. They are truth seekers. Those of you who voted to end the debate are not honest. You are hypocrites. You have realized Islam is false and instead of leaving it, you are trying to close your eyes and avoid seeing the truth. This is hypocrisy.
Why anyone would want to cling to a falsehood so desperately? What kick you get by remaining in this cesspool of lies and deception? You already saw Islam is false. The very fact that you don’t want to continue this debate proves it. Why you cling to something you know is false? There is no heaven for you. There are no virgins waiting for you. Wake up from your wet dream. End this madness and stupidity. The world is at the threshold of destruction. Millions are to be perished in nuclear disasters and you look like someone with a big erection dreaming of making love to a houri and pull the pillow over your head when you hear the voice of the caller telling you the day has dawned. Just two of you had the guts to say let us continue and find out the truth. Those of you, who voted no, are liars and hypocrites. But you lie to no one except to yourselves.
_________________
Don't be a follower, but a prophet unto your own.
Last edited by Ali Sina on Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:11 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PeaceOnEarth
Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 1564
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ali Sina wrote: |
| But I think the debate should go on. |
Ali,
How about restricting the debate to Quran with no references of whatever allowed to Hadith?
Edip,
How about you drop the assumptions that Quran has to be internally consistent, and that Quran has a devine origin?
Finally, to both Ali & Edip,
Even without Hadith, this debate is bound to run into trouble because there is no agreed third-party translation that the debators picked. I will take a bet right now that this debate will get stalled on what the right translation for a verse is.
How can such a deadlock be broken? Can references to Hadith, Sunnah, Tafsir, History etc., be used?
Just went through this topic here:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=111409#111409
_________________
"The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye. The more light you shine on it, the more it will contract." - Oliver Wendell Holmes
Last edited by PeaceOnEarth on Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:21 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sbwus
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 1061
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:24 am Post subject: Re: Zulqarnain and place of Sunrise and Sunset! |
|
|
| Righteous wrote: |
| sbwus wrote: |
Surah Al-Kahf 86
حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ الشَّمْسِ وَجَدَهَا تَغْرُبُ فِي عَيْنٍ حَمِئَةٍ وَوَجَدَ عِنْدَهَا قَوْمًا قُلْنَا يَا ذَا الْقَرْنَيْنِ إِمَّا أَنْ تُعَذِّبَ وَإِمَّا أَنْ تَتَّخِذَ فِيهِمْ حُسْنًا
Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people. We (Allâh) said (by inspiration): "O Dhul-Qarnain! Either you punish them, or treat them with kindness."
حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ الشَّمْسِ
{H.ATTAA 'IDHAA BALAGHA MAGHRIB ASH- SHAMS}
Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun,
...
To further simplify the Ayaah آيه 18:86, following must be understood:
Until when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he perceived it setting in a miry spring, and he found beside it a nation. We said: Zulqarnain! either chastise them or take in respect of them the way of kindness.
Sun = i.e. western point where the expedition terminated. MAGHRIB مغرب and Al- MAGHRIB المغرب both signify West.
Setting = Arabic word WAJAD وجد has two distinct meanings: one, he found it, lighted on it, attained it, having an objectivity, a correspondence with fact; the other is, he perceived it, became sensible of it, having only a subjective import. Here it is used in the latter sense, and the phrase means, ‘it appeared to him that the sun was setting.’
|
Liar. The word WAJAD was not used in 18:86 in association with the place where the sun set. The actual phrase used in the Quran is: {H.ATTAA 'IDHAA BALAGHA MAGHRIB ASH- SHAMS}.
The word WAJAD is used twice in the verse: once in association with the "black murky pond" (as it setting in a murky pond) and the second time about the people living there. EVEN WITHOUT KNOWING ARABIC, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS NO WAJAD ASSOCIATED WITH THE PLACE OF THE SETTING SUN. You are wrong. So much for your knowledge of Arabic ! Hah
THE WORDS MAGHRIB AND WAJAD WERE NEVER USED TOGETHER IN 18:86. THE WORD MAGHRIB IS ONLY USED ONCE AND IN THE PHRASE "H.ATTAA 'IDHAA BALAGHA MAGHRIB ASH- SHAMS". Go spread your lies elsewhere.
Rgds
R |
So now being desperate you would resort with rumors and personal attacks, not to mention putting words in my mouth that I never claimed, by lifting my quote off the context. I posted the following that you have distorted, after all you are a Christian and can't resist distorting.
حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ الشَّمْسِ
{H.ATTAA 'IDHAA BALAGHA MAGHRIB ASH- SHAMS}
Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun,
Means, he followed a route until he reached the furtherest point that could be reached in the direction of the sun’s setting, which is the west of the earth. As for the idea of his reaching the place in the sky where sun sets, this is something impossible, and the tales told by storytellers that he traveled so far to the west that the sun set behind him are not true at all. Most of those stories come from the myths of the people of the Book and the fabrications and lies of their heretics.
وَجَدَهَا تَغْرُبُ فِي عَيْنٍ حَمِئَةٍ
{WAJADA -HAA TAGHRUB FE cAYN H.AMI'AH}
he found it setting in a spring of Hami’ah
Meaning, he saw the sun as if it were setting in the ocean. This is something which everyone who goes to the coast/beach can see: it looks as if the sun is setting into sea but in fact it never leaves it path in which it is fixed. Hami’ah is, according to one of the two views, derived from the word Hama’ah, which means, “mud.” This is like Ayah [verse 15:28]:
From the day one I have posted two links of my two articles that coward like you @ FFI and your ilk avoided to exmaine and comment. They are again,
Zulqarnain and place of Sunrise and Sunset!
http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/sunset.htm
What you should know about Gog and Magog & Zul-Qarnain?
Is it about the sun setting in murky water or it is sheer false attack on Islaam?
http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/gmz.htm
So for no one has shown the guts and knowledge to refute me, and how they can? it is irrefutbale.
Therefore, from day one my position has not changed. But you sure have proved that you are really a Dyslexic.
Don't forget that your opinion mean nothing outside FFI and/or your desktop.
sbwus
ISLAM IS THE ONLY SOLUTION
http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/
_________________
"An uninformed person cannot conceptualize the essence of knowledge nor its sublimity. One who fails to conceptualize something, its significance will never become rooted in the heart." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Righteous
Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Posts: 3728
Location: Through the looking glass.
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:42 am Post subject: Re: Zulqarnain and place of Sunrise and Sunset! |
|
|
| sbwus wrote: |
| So now being desperate you would resort with rumors and personal attacks, not to mention putting words in my mouth that I never claimed, by lifting my quote off the context. I posted the following that you have distorted, after all you are a Christian and can't resist distorting. |
No putting words in your mouth and no lifting out of context. Here is where you claimed that wajad was incorrectly translated to "reached" and hence "reaching the setting place of the sun" was incorrectly translated by YusufAli et al.
http://faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6666&start=58
| sbwus wrote: |
| Righteous wrote: |
And then one need to read 18:86 that is stating the perception of Dhul-Qarnain, and not asserting that sunsets in murky water.
You have missed the point that martini and I have made. The Quran specifically stated that Dhul-Qarnain "reached" the point of the setting sun (after travelling abit). He didn't "see" the setting sun. The choice of words "reached" instead of "see" is the key of what we are saying.
|
Different translators of Qur'aan in English have used different choice of words to translate the Arabic word WAJAD وجد , therefore, you cannot take the word of man (translator that you pick) to question and/or attack Qur'aan. You are obligated to use the word of Allaah, the original Qur'aan (since translations are not Qur'aan) and show us Muslims how and where is a mistake and/or inconsistacy? What one should know about the word WAJAD وجد , is that it has two distinct meanings: one, he found it, lighted on it, attained it, having an objectivity, a correspondence with fact; the other is, he perceived it, became sensible of it, having only a subjective import. Here it is used in the latter sense, and the phrase means, ‘it appeared to him that the sun was setting.’ Translation has its limitations and a translation cannot define each and every word in his/her transaltion of the meaning. |
and what about this, where you clearly asked for refutation of your word "Wajad" with respect to reach.
| sbwus wrote: |
| Righteous wrote: |
| My point is in support to Martini - that he "reached" a point after travelling. The point about travelling is to reinforce the fact of "reaching" for a point - ie you reach your destination after travelling. |
Then you will have to prove that the word used in the Qur'aan i.e WAJAD وجد exactly and explicitly the way you are claiming and my explanation/exegesis above is wrong with how and why?
|
| sbwus wrote: |
حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ الشَّمْسِ
{H.ATTAA 'IDHAA BALAGHA MAGHRIB ASH- SHAMS}
Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun,
Means, he followed a route until he reached the furtherest point that could be reached in the direction of the sun’s setting, which is the west of the earth. |
This is NOT what the verse said. Even you have used the words "reached the setting place" instead of "reached the furtherest point that could be reached in the direction ..."
| sbwus wrote: |
| From the day one I have posted two links of my two articles that coward like you @ FFI and your ilk avoided to exmaine and comment. |
We have. What have I been doing but debunking your analysis using the WAJAD word with respect to "reach".
| sbwus wrote: |
| So for no one has shown the guts and knowledge to refute me, and how they can? it is irrefutbale. |
It is refutable. I am doing just that now. By the way, your words are exact copy-and-paste from your link in islam-is-the-stupid-solution.com.
| sbwus wrote: |
| Therefore, from day one my position has not changed. [color=red]But you sure have proved that you are really a Dyslexic. |
And you have just shown you are stupid. You are dyslexic if you can't even understand the written words "reached the setting place of the sun."
| sbwus wrote: |
| Don't forget that your opinion mean nothing outside FFI and/or your desktop. |
And yours mean even less.
_________________
"The harsh truth is that science and Islam parted ways many centuries ago." - Pervez Hoodbhoy, Professor of Nuclear and High-Energy Physics at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.
Last edited by Righteous on Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:42 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ali Sina
Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 4607
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| How about restricting the debate to Quran with no references of whatever allowed to Hadith? |
That is what I did. I never used any hadith as proof. However when a hadith is backed by the Quran, there is no reason not to mention it. For example I quoted a verse saying Muhammad raided people without warning. Only after that I quoted a hadith that said the same thing. This is to prove that not all hadiths are false. Edip at no time was asked to respond for any hadith. He had to respond for the Quran only.
Also you have to realize that I do not agree with Edip’s forgone conclusion that all hadiths are false and should be rejected. Part of my argument with him is to prove that such assumption is false. The Submitters base their entire belief on this false premise. It is important to shatter that myth. I have and will use every opportunity to defy and discredit such assumption. However, although this is part of my rebuttal of the 19eres, at no time I relied on any hadith to disprove the Quran. I challenge Edip to show me one case where I have used a hadith to disprove the Quran or discredit Muhammad. If a hadith is not backed by the Quran, it will not be mentioned.
My rebuttal of the Submitters is twofold. On one hand to disprove the Quran and that is done with no reliance on any hadith and the other is to demonstrate that the premise that Islam can exist without hadith is a fallacy.
One simple question that the Submitters have to answer is why all the hadiths should be rejected? I am not talking about accepting them as divine sources of guidance as the Sunnis do. But they have historic value. The hadith is the basis of the history of Islam. Why should we reject all the hadith? Is it because some of them are forged? In that case why should we accept the Quran. Don’t the Submitters say two of the verses of the Quran are forged? Isn’t it double standard to accept the Quran and reject the hadith?
Are we to reject all the hadiths because some of them are stupid and illogical? Then the same thing applies to the Quran. I can show hundreds of Quranic verses that are stupid and illogical.
The Submitters must give us a good reason to throw the hadith out. If we can reject the Quran using the same reason then such reason is invalid.
Notice that this is not to make a straw man as Denis Girron inanely suggested. At no time I have or will hold any Submitter responsible for any hadith. They are only required to a) answer for what is in the Quran and b) prove that Islam without the hadith can stand alone. These two are separate fronts of attack on the Submitters.
| Quote: |
Even without Hadith, this debate is bound to run into trouble because there is no agreed third-party translation that the debators picked. I will take a bet right now that this debate will get stalled on what the right translation for a verse is.
How can such a deadlock be broken? Can references to Hadith, Sunnah, Tafsir, History etc., be used? |
I am not very much concerned about the translations. Both Edip and I read more or less Arabic and to a certain degree can see which translation is more accurate and to the point. There are also Arab speaking members in this forum that can help.
My concern is about the moderation. I think that would be something helpful. As we saw Edip went completely off tangent after the thirds round and did not discuss any of the points that I raised. A moderator could suggest that we remove the irrelevant parts from our messages and stick to the point.
I think it would be a good idea to have two moderators to review our postings and reject the parts that are not relevant to the debate. For example, I don’t think my psychoanalysis, the comments my enemies made about me in alexa.com, Edip’s threat of lawsuit, his prophecy about what is going to happen to me on 19 of February and basically everything he wrote after the round III have anything to do with the debate. The moderators should read our messages and disallow the parts that are not relevant. All the ad hominem that constituted most of Edip’s postings, all the cut and pastes from his book, could be eliminated. The poster should be asked to remove those parts and answer the questions.
I suggest two moderators – one from Submitters and the other from our side. I propose Shake Down as the moderator from my opponents’ side. Edip can choose someone from our side. If he agrees with you I think you and Shake Down could act as moderators. We will first post our messages in the forum. You read them and choose only the parts that are relevant and that part will go into our debate.
This is of course a suggestion. But I will continue this debate even if Edip does not like the idea.
_________________
Don't be a follower, but a prophet unto your own.
Last edited by Ali Sina on Mon Jun 23, 2008 4:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
