• 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!

Poll: Signs of eloquence of Quran

Quran's eloquence is...

  • Beyond human calculated words, but possibly from misguided higher intelligent beings

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • One human can't do it but it's capable of many humans who have advance knowledge of eloquence

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Perfectly calculated words capable of only God or his exalted chosen ones

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • At a level capable of any human as it's not eloquent at all

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    16

firedragon

Veteran Member
Here is the legend as far as I know it. Please tell me what I am missing;

'We are told that Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter, was one day repeating as she went along, the above verse*. Just then she met the daughter of Imru‘ al-Qais, who cried out, ‘O that’s what your father has taken from one of my father’s poems and calls it something that has come down to him out of Heaven’; and the story is commonly told amongst the Arabs until now.'

* "The hour has come, and shattered is the moon"

Source: Imru‘ al-Qais and a verse of the Holy Quran

In my opinion

Ill tell you what!

Give me the direct source if you could find. Not secondary sources, direct sources.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
A divine origin via analysis must require identification of a specific feature or features that cannot be produced by a human - in which case what are they?

Forget divinity for the moment. Just concentrate on the argument.

You made a claim that one must feel it and that was your criteria. Where did you get that from?

Not an appeal to majority, but the fact that many Arabic speakers don't see its eloquence as clearly Divine.

That is appealing to majority.

For the above reason I find it implausible that Divinity has to be worked out by chin-stroking academics

Can you explain their method behind it? What do they do and what are their so called "criteria"?
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Ill tell you what!

Give me the direct source if you could find. Not secondary sources, direct sources.
The only references I can find online all seem to trace to "The Sources of Islam" by William St Clair Tisdall. You can read it online but you have to dowload and register for an app which is a pain in the bottom.

Unless you know of a better way to get to the direct source?
 
Forget divinity for the moment. Just concentrate on the argument.

You made a claim that one must feel it and that was your criteria. Where did you get that from?



That is appealing to majority.



Can you explain their method behind it? What do they do and what are their so called "criteria"?

Why do your arguments always seem to consist of the endless asking of questions rather than making any actual arguments?

Make your arguments about why it should be considered divine, then I'll answer your questions, deal?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Why do your arguments always seem to consist of the endless asking of questions rather than making any actual arguments?

Make your arguments about why it should be considered divine, then I'll answer your questions, deal?

You made an assertion. So I asked the proper basis behind it. If you don't have a basis all you have to is say you just thought so. I did not claim anywhere in this thread the Qur'an is divine. And I definitely didnt make any assertion like that with you in this thread. So your attempt is at a strawman.

Obviously you don't know what you are talking about so you just made some assertions up and cant substantiate any of them in the real world, so you have to turn around and ask me to prove some other position. That is the burden of proof fallacy. Just admit that you were making things up on the go based on your feelings.

Just for your information, the so called "Eloquence" is not just "sounds nice" or some simplistic thing like that. It has much more to it. You have to honestly at least try to explore what it is prior to making commentary you don't understand anything about.
 
You made an assertion. So I asked the proper basis behind it. If you don't have a basis all you have to is say you just thought so. I did not claim anywhere in this thread the Qur'an is divine. And I definitely didnt make any assertion like that with you in this thread. So your attempt is at a strawman.

Is your position that we can not say the Quran is Divine based on its eloquence, or that we can?

Obviously you don't know what you are talking about so you just made some assertions up and cant substantiate any of them in the real world, so you have to turn around and ask me to prove some other position. That is the burden of proof fallacy. Just admit that you were making things up on the go based on your feelings.

Just for your information, the so called "Eloquence" is not just "sounds nice" or some simplistic thing like that. It has much more to it. You have to honestly at least try to explore what it is prior to making commentary you don't understand anything about.

Again, feel free to make any actual argument in support of your position. Just saying "you are wrong and you are ignorant" is not an argument.

If you feel I've missed something or got something wrong, just point it out. It would take less effort and be far more interesting than your tediously self-aggrandising schtick that does anything but make an actual argument.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Is your position that we can not say the Quran is Divine based on its eloquence, or that we can?

That's irrelevant to the claim you made. I do not make this claim.

Again, feel free to make any actual argument in support of your position.

"My position" is that you made a false assertion with no knowledge of anything in this subject so you are trying to turn it around to others dishonestly. So now you are trying to change "My position".

The evidence for that position is in this thread where it is evident you made claims made out of thin air but when asked how, a small query on your subject matter knowledge you are doing the burden of proof fallacy. Keep repeating it, so even you cant trace your fallacy. ;)

Cheers.
 
That's irrelevant to the claim you made. I do not make this claim.

But, in general, you do indeed believe the Quran's eloquence marks it as divine? Correct?

"My position" is that you made a false assertion with no knowledge of anything in this subject so you are trying to turn it around to others dishonestly. So now you are trying to change "My position".

The evidence for that position is in this thread where it is evident you made claims made out of thin air but when asked how, a small query on your subject matter knowledge you are doing the burden of proof fallacy. Keep repeating it, so even you cant trace your fallacy. ;)

:rolleyes:

Good grief, if you even spent 1/10th of the time reading carefully, thinking and engaging in good faith discussion as you do blowing your own trumpet, you might be less likely to miss the point quite so consistently.

Of course those were my own thoughts. There are no objective standards to identify whether a text is divine in origin. There are no experts. There is no go to textbook. Everyone is ultimately making claims out of thin air as they are all based on their own personal criteria.

As such, one person can make their subjective argument, and another can make theirs. People can decide which one they want to believe. Is this really that hard for you to understand?

What I said, divinity must be:

a) felt intuitively
b) identified based on a specific characteristic or characteristics that humans are not capable of producing - in which case what are they?
c) identified based on characteristics that humans are capable of producing but not to that standard, or in that number or combination. In which case there would have to be some "divine" threshold.

Seeing as I've never seen any evidence for B, and don't think C could make divinity more probable than human eloquence, I think a genuinely divine text should be pretty self-evident to anyone who can understand it. Before you start getting excited again, yes, this is a subjective opinion. Just like your one is and everyone else's.

Feel free to critique any of these points, identify which ones I have missed out or state your opinion on the topic. It's called discussion. Or you could just make another post saying nothing in an overweeningly pompous manner. Choice is yours ;)
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Daniel. There are no original or primary sources for this.
Looks like it was just a claim made by Tisdall. I suppose I should have applied Hitchens razor to the claim, but it took me a while to find a copy of his book so that I could see that he doesn't cite a source for it.

In my opinion.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
But, in general, you do indeed believe the Quran's eloquence marks it as divine? Correct?

Irrelevant.

a) felt intuitively
b) identified based on a specific characteristic or characteristics that humans are not capable of producing - in which case what are they?
c) identified based on characteristics that humans are capable of producing but not to that standard, or in that number or combination. In which case there would have to be some "divine" threshold.

Based on what did you make these criteria?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
You must be fun at parties...

It's a simple question.

Parties are also irrelevant you see?

Read the previous post (more carefully this time).

So based on what did you develop your theories? Did you just make them up based on your feelings? Are they are strawman attempt?

Or is it that you just have no knowledge on the topic to make some objective argument against it with some decent analysis?
 
Top