The Quran as a miracle - is it a legitimate challenge?

[Link]

Would the writings of the Bahá’u’lláh qualify?

I've read them, and I don't think so, same with the Maitriya. That's why I believe they emphasize on spiritual element of them rather then eloquence. For example, the Bab would emphasize on his words being signs to the heart of sincere believers, but Quran, challenges disbelievers and believers alike to think of it's content as a miracle in itself and that they can try to bring the like of it.

To say "spiritual signs" - that's subjective, and that is a flaw of Bab and Baha'allah, they emphasized too much flowery spirituality being the basis of their miracle, but that is too subjective.

 

[firedragon]

that the one making the claim about something existing is the one who needs to provide the evidence

I didnt make any claim. You see?

 

[Link]

Damn it Sheikh Google is not helping me find that quote!!

 

[Link]

I deleted the post since I couldn't find the quote I read a long time ago on the internet.

 

[firedragon]

Would the writings of the Bahá’u’lláh qualify?

A question like this should be asked with specific reference.

Which particular writing of Bahaullah?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I didnt make any claim. You see?

I wish I could affect an audible sigh on these forums, because it would just be so appropriate right now.

You have been railing on against me, in defense of the OP, within which THE FIRST FEW SENTENCES ARE THESE:

God can speak in a way humans cannot. He can put signs in his speech that would indicate it's from him and beyond capability of humans. I think this is rational, as we see there is ranks to eloquence, and not everyone is capable of the same eloquence.

Why are you defending this, asking me to provide evidence for God's non-existence, when I have been saying all along that I simply do not support working from the assumption of God's existence which is EXACTLY what the OP does in its first three sentences?

This is just ridiculous. Why does anyone have to put up with shenanigans like these, I ask you?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

God can speak in a way humans cannot. He can put signs in his speech that would indicate it's from him and beyond capability of humans. I think this is rational, as we see there is ranks to eloquence, and not everyone is capable of the same eloquence.

What is the objective criteria by which this is to be measured?

Therefore if God speaks in a way beyond all humans and challenges all humans and Jinn, to bring something like it if they don't believe it's revealed by God, I believe this is a legitimate challenge.

Only if there are objective criteria by which it can be measured.

I also believe some of the sermons and prayers and visitations taught by Ahlulbayt (a) are beyond normal humans, but still, I can see Quran is MUCH higher in eloquence, form, and speech.

Based on what objective criteria?

So people can't even replicate some of the works of Ahlulbayt (a) and bring something similar to it, let alone the Quran which is signs from God in form of speech.

I believe it's legitimate challenge, bring something like it or akin to it. Another challenge it poses which is fair, you claim it's not guidance from God, then bring something more guiding than it.

Both challenges are fair from my perspective.

Only if there are objective criteria according to which this is to be measured.

Because otherwise, OBVIOUSLY Eric Clapton is God.
If you disagree, I challenge you to compose a piece of music that is as "eloquent" or even more then his compositions.

Just like you, I have decided in advance that this can't be done.

 

[firedragon]

I wish I could affect an audible sigh on these forums, because it would just be so appropriate right now.

Many do.

You have been railing on against me, in defense of the OP, within which THE FIRST FEW SENTENCES ARE THESE:

Nope. I didnt defend anything. Strawman.

Why are you defending this, asking me to provide evidence for God's non-existence,

You responded by need to someone else's post. I didnt ask you to. So, maybe you question yourself.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Math has specific people, and so you are appealing to a minority already. Eloquence - is something everyone can work on, but I do get what you mean. The thing is it didn't say you as an individual have to bring it, but if you can get anyone to bring something like it, and combined effort is allowed.

If humans and Jinn can't combine together to bring something like it, I would say that's a major sign it's from God. Perhaps, not a certainty, but huge indication that it should be studied and taken seriously.

The real signs of certainty are revealed to the heart which is a personal experience with Quran. But the fact no one - and you can get help from others and even combine efforts per Quran with others, has been able bring something like it so far. That's saying a lot.

"eloquence" is a subjective quality.
What is eloquent to you, may not be eloquent to me.

Here's my evidence: I think the quran reads like primitive garbage. That's just my opinion. Any toilet paper humor is just as eloquent imo. Shakespeare is imo FAR MORE eloquent then anything ever written by anyone, ever. Now what?

I guess this means that Shakespeare is God and Allah is an imposter?
It must be....



(this is the type of reply you will get, unless you come up with objective criteria)

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Let's open a thread about contradictions in Quran. But going to your first sentence, since you find no book, is God capable of making a book a miracle or incapable? And if the former, why hasn't he done so?

God by definition can do anything at all.
It's why it is the ultimate cop-out for any question that would otherwise stump an intellectually honest person.

You can always fall back on "god dun it" - which he can by definition, since god is defined as "the entity that can do anything".

Which renders the entire thing meaningless, btw.

Can he make Jennifer Anniston materialize in my bedroom? I guess he can. Why hasn't he done so?

I bet suddenly the "why hasn't he done so" doesn't count to the same point you were trying to make, because it happens to not support your a priori assumed conclusion and you hold double standards.

 

[Link]

"eloquence" is a subjective quality.
What is eloquent to you, may not be eloquent to me.

Here's my evidence: I think the quran reads like primitive garbage. That's just my opinion. Any toilet paper humor is just as eloquent imo. Shakespeare is imo FAR MORE eloquent then anything ever written by anyone, ever. Now what?

I guess this means that Shakespeare is God and Allah is an imposter?
It must be....



(this is the type of reply you will get, unless you come up with objective criteria)

We are look at the signs of eloquence in Quran in this thread: Signs of eloquence in Quran | Religious Forums

Let me know if I'm being objective so far in pointing to some eloquence or if it's subjective.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Prophet Mohammad, Fatima and the Twelve Successors:

Twelve. How unsurprising.

12 constellations
12 apostles
12 successors.
12 hours
12 months
12 olympians
12 cities (dodecapolis)
12 lictors, carrying fasces of 12 rods
12 names of Surya
12 names of the monkey god
12 sons of Odin
12 princes subdued by King Arthur
12 battles one by King Arthur
..........


"12" is a number that comes up in pretty much all legends, myths etc

Take a hint.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But this thread is not about that. It's about given he does exist and does send Anbiya, is the Quran challenge legitimate?

The answer is "no", unless objective criteria are established.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I will make a thread separate from this about high eloquence examples in Quran. Because the question of this thread, is if the Quran challenge in itself is a fair one and then we can look a thread discussing particular high eloquence signs in Quran.

No.

This is absolutely the topic of the thread.
You ask if it is "fair". How "fair" it is, depends 100% on the criteria.

So no, you can't ask this question while refusing to share the criteria.
Examples won't do btw. You need to establish the criteria FIRST.

Otherwise, there is nothing to measure by.

 

[Link]

No.

This is absolutely the topic of the thread.
You ask if it is "fair". How "fair" it is, depends 100% on the criteria.

So no, you can't ask this question while refusing to share the criteria.
Examples won't do btw. You need to establish the criteria FIRST.

Otherwise, there is nothing to measure by.

The actual examples of eloquence would be two birds in one stone. We can talk about eloquence and criteria general, then you would ask, okay apply examples in Quran. But so far, I'm looking at examples of Quran and analyzing them, and trying to build a cumulative case.

You can let me know in that thread if the analysis so far is objective or not.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The ones who claim Quran is false or in serious doubt about it should in my view, Instead of just claiming it's false, let them prove it false.

Classic case of shifting the burden of proof.
You are the one who makes the claim that the quran is "special" and "true". Upto you to support those claims.

Failing to do so, gives me the right to dismiss your claim at face value.
Because what is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

The quran is not "true until shown false".
Nothing is.

 

[Link]

Classic case of shifting the burden of proof.
You are the one who makes the claim that the quran is "special" and "true". Upto you to support those claims.

Failing to do so, gives me the right to dismiss your claim at face value.
Because what is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

The quran is not "true until shown false".
Nothing is.

It claims it has signs of it being from God. I would say, it claims it proven it. If you want to say, it has not proven it, you should be able to replicate what it claims to be signs from God and bring speech like it.

No one is saying to take the claim blindly. But if you study it, and say, well there are no signs as it claims, I believe that's a fair challenge to you.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well gee whiz given you can assume any number of premises are true you can assume your conclusion is true, too.

If you assume a God exists, well sure, why not miracles, or a sent prophet, or a devine book. If you want speculative debate you need to clarify the ground rules for it.

I assume undetectable pink fairies exist and that they find it entertaining to make people believe they are gods.

So clearly, the quran is false and just part of this entertainment scheme of the undetectable pink fairies.

Checkmate, muslims!

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why assume otherwise in the first place?

For the same reason that you assume there are no undetectable dragons following you around.

 

[Link]

I assume undetectable pink fairies exist and that they find it entertaining to make people believe they are gods.

There are undetectable pink/blue and all sorts of fairies that exist and they do find it entertaining to make people believe they are gods, but all this off-topic.