• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

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

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
So tell me. Why assume God doesnt exist? Provide logical reasoning. Not just "no proof", because I can say "no proof" to you.

And you'ld be shifting the burden of proof if you do so.

So please explain your logical explanation of why you should assume.

There is no evidence to warrant / justify belief of the positive claim.

Go ahead. Shift the burden of proof.
Won't change the facts.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And you'ld be shifting the burden of proof if you do so.



There is no evidence to warrant / justify belief of the positive claim.

Go ahead. Shift the burden of proof.
Won't change the facts.

It's not shift, it's saying, I produced clear signs and proofs. If people want to doubt them, then they should be able to counter claim it and bring speech like it. Simple counter to counter-claim response.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Nope. I didnt defend anything. Strawman.
I see, so you were just asking questions to get me to think on my position, is that it? Well... I feel that I effectively answered or addressed all your questions. I have effectively answered to all your points (even if you don't agree). However, note that you did NOT even attempt to answer all of my questions. Remember my question to you asking you to point out what it was I was missing from the OP that you very starkly indicated was the case:
firedragon said:
So again, you are just dismissing it without understanding it. Thats a logical fallacy called genetic fallacy. It stems because of bias.
In this quote, it is obvious that you feel I did not understand the OP when I first responded. What about it did I miss? Deleted by moderator
 
Last edited by a moderator:

firedragon

Veteran Member
In this quote, it is obvious that you feel I did not understand the OP when I first responded.

You have not understood the thesis the OP is proposing because you have not asked for it, nor looked at it.

I honestly think there is something preventing you from answering. Something psychological perhaps?

See, cheap characters generally like to call others "mad" and "psychological". Its just your character. And you will keep demonstrating it.

Keep going.
 

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
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.

I believe it's legitimate challenge, bring something like it or akin to it.
Of course it's not a legitimate challenge. Eloquence and the beauty of form are subjective.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
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.

Don't link me to a thread where I'm supposed to go hunt for the answer the my question which may or may not exist in the thread. That is very disrespectful. And incredibly lazy.


As I said before: your question of if the challenge is fair, CAN NOT BE ANSWERED until you list the objective criteria by which this is to be measured. It is the criteria that will determine if it is "fair" or not.

So you should list those criteria here.
In fact, this is so crucial to your OP question that these criteria should have been listed in the OP right from the start.


So please, list the objective criteria.
Or alternatively, admit that these criteria don't exist.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Eloquence has levels. To see the level of Quran, you have to begin to scratch at it and then see if it's beyond human capability or at least see if anything comes close to it.

So far I explained a bit of some aspects of verse 2:255 and the first chapter (Al-Fatiha).

We have to begin somewhere, and so that's what that thread is doing, it's looking at the eloquence signs in Quran.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Of course it's not a legitimate challenge. Eloquence and the beauty of form are subjective.

I don't believe it's total subjective, but rather some people are better at detecting it then others, really is what it is.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
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.

I don't need two birds. I need just the one bird that is absolutely essential to be able to even begin formulating an answer to your question in the OP.

If you can't list any objective criteria, because they don't exist, then just say so.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I don't need two birds. I need just the one bird that is absolutely essential to be able to even begin formulating an answer to your question in the OP.

If you can't list any objective criteria, because they don't exist, then just say so.

You can take a class on eloquence. Let me know what you think if there is objective criteria or not after that class.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
It claims it has signs of it being from God

Claims require evidence.

. 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.

Can't be done unless objective criteria are established. Otherwise, you are just arguing from subjective opinion. And in that case, clearly Eric Clapton is god.

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.

What are the criteria that establish "speech" as being from a god as opposed to from humans?
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Take shakespeare for example, there are many "fake" works attributed to him and it takes experts to sort that, not that people can't write in his style.

For this thread, it does not matter who wrote the plays we attribute to Shakespeare. All that matters is that they are amazing. In my book Shakespeare, Rumi, and many others are truly amazing, and the Quran is pretty mediocre.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The level of eloquence being observed, would help facilitate understanding. That's what that thread is about. And I'm trying to make a cumulative case. We have to start with just scratching the surface approach.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
For this thread, it does not matter who wrote the plays we attribute to Shakespeare. All that matters is that they are amazing. In my book Shakespeare, Rumi, and many others are truly amazing, and the Quran is pretty mediocre.

I think this speaks volumes about Quran. Family of Mohammad - most people don't see them in Quran despite clearly in there. Eloquence in Quran far more superior to Rumi works even per Rumi himself, but people are crazy about Rumi and not Quran eloquence. Some hidden enemies and force at work it seems. They don't want us to understand the Quran nor see the family of Mohammad (s) clearly in there.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
It's not shift, it's saying, I produced clear signs and proofs

Which is a claim. A claim in need of evidence.
Lacking such evidence, it can be dismissed at face value.
Because what is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

If people want to doubt them, then they should be able to counter claim it and bring speech like it.
By what criteria would that speech be measured?

Simple counter to counter-claim response.

Yes, if we are going to allow arguing devoid of any evidence, then you indeed and up in a pissing contest that goes like this:

"na-huh!"
"ya-huh!"
"not so!"
"is so!"
"no!"
"yes!"
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
We have a sense that detects eloquence. It's not totally subjective nor totally objective, it's a middle ground, but God can show through that to all humans, signs of eloquence with whatever taste they have in them for it.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
You have not understood the thesis the OP is proposing because you have not asked for it, nor looked at it.

Please. Do you honestly think that this is the first time we hear of this "challenge"?
I can't speak for others off course, but I would be extremely surprised if @A Vestigial Mote hasn't heard about this a gazillion times before.

Anyone who's just a little familiar with islamic apologetics, knows about this "challenge".
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Eloquence has levels. To see the level of Quran, you have to begin to scratch at it and then see if it's beyond human capability

What are the objective criteria by which this is established?

We have to begin somewhere, and so that's what that thread is doing, it's looking at the eloquence signs in Quran.

By what objective criteria is "eloquence" measured?
So far, it sounds like it is just about subjective opinion.

Which would make Eric Clapton a God.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
I don't believe it's total subjective, but rather some people are better at detecting it then others, really is what it is.


Translation: the quran is divine and if you don't agree, then you are just wrong.


So with that in mind: clearly Eric Clapton is god. And if you don't agree, then that's just because you can't detect what divine music sounds like.



:rolleyes:
 
Top