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

[firedragon]

We can also discuss why fairies might like to fornicate under mushroom tops without first having any idea that fairies exist at all. Wouldn't that be productive?

I dont know. You brought that up. So its your matter.

Yes, because as I have stated, this is square one. You want to talk about the attributes or activities of God? First you must prove His existence - without it you may as well be throwing around conjectures on fantasy.

Yeah. So start a new thread.

Says you. Like I care at all.

I didnt say you care. I said you dont care. But still the type of reaction you have is kind of fanatical.

I am assuming the non-existence of unicorns

Very good. Good for you. But that's not relevant.

Where did I claim that no gods exist?

Excellent. Now you just showed that you tribalistically jumped to answer for someone else.

The existence of God is not relevant to this thread. So if one could ask questions not pertaining to the topic, the other could too. There is no premise related to it.

 

[firedragon]

You still haven't told me what it is about the OP I am missing or misunderstanding.

You dont even know what the OP is about. Maybe you should clarify form the author before jumping to dismiss what you have not even clarified.

 

[F1fan]

Why assume otherwise in the first place?

Young children adopt the idea that Santa Claus exists and they don't question it. They go along with the social learning that this idea is real and true, until they are informed it's just an imaginary cultural character. the many gods in various cultures aren't known to exist either, but those cultures pressure members to adopt the ideas and to reject any questions about this social influence.

The objective thinker who takes their intellectual authority seriously knows they can question any idea a society pressures its members to adopt and assess whether they are true or part of the underlying identity of whatever tribe they are part of. No one is obligated or forced to believe anything that is not rational or reasonable.

So, we hear about gods, and many just go along with the pressure to adopt and believe, but a growing number are questioning this. So we ask: why assume your God exists?

 

[F1fan]

So again, you are just dismissing it without understanding it. Thats a logical fallacy called genetic fallacy. It stems because of bias.

Understand what, the assumptions that are not factual? The OP makes loads of unwarranted and unrealistic assumptions that aims to justify a preferred conclusion. It makes no effort to make coherent and factual points that a rational and objective mind can comprehend.

 

[firedragon]

So, we hear about gods, and many just go along with the pressure to adopt and believe, but a growing number are questioning this. So we ask: why assume your God exists?

So why?

 

[firedragon]

Understand what, .

what should be understood.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I dont know. You brought that up. So its your matter.

HAHAHAHA! EXACTLY!!!!! Holy crap. Now please direct this same exact idea at the OP please. If you're the one bringing something to the table for discussion, then you're the one who needs to provide the evidence. So, if someone claims that "God exists", or even infers or assumes that God exists in order to make another point (like the idea that the Quran was divinely inspired by God) then it is on THEM to bring the evidence forward that links this up. And yet YOU keep saying that I need to provide you evidence that "God doesn't exist." Of course I don't need to do that. I am not the one here making claims about God.

The existence of God is not relevant to this thread. So if one could ask questions not pertaining to the topic, the other could too. There is no premise related to it.

The existence of God is relevant in any discussion within which it is assumed that God exists and one is attempting persuade others on a point they are making. If you are just "preaching to the choir", then of course no one is going to ask you to take it back to square one, because everyone in the discussion has likely already affirmed their biases in this regard. But you should be prepared at all times in general discussion with people who don't necessarily hold your beliefs for the question to be raised as to whether the basis for your belief is warranted - i.e. that God exists in the first place.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

You dont even know what the OP is about. Maybe you should clarify form the author before jumping to dismiss what you have not even clarified.

Please answer my question. The above is not an answer with any sort of explanatory power.

By the way - did you clarify with the author before stating that I am completely off track? Are you sure YOUR interpretation is the correct one? And if it is, then you should be fully equipped to tell me what is wrong with my interpretation. Currently the only evidence I have seen is that you are dodging this question entirely.

 

[Link]

We've had threads discussing the existence of God. This thread is not about whether God exists nor about whether he has sent Prophets, but particularly looking at a claim and if it's rational. Rational, not as in if it's true, but if it's rationally coherent and possible to claim writing as miracle by challenging others to bring the like of it in which all humans and Jinn fail too. It's not even about whether it has happened or not, nor about the content of the miracle (Quran), but just that claim.

I don't know why people have to mix all topics into one thread all the time.

 

[Link]

An example of something on topic:

Shakespeare - his writing is amazing, most people can't bring the likes of it, does it mean it's divine?

reply: there are "fake" works attributed to Shakespeare and it takes experts to know what is fake and what is not (and it's not just through content) so it's not really that others can't bring like of it.

Off topic would be prove God exists, sorry, this not the topic.

 

[dybmh]

I agree I am not an expert. I only know that Mohammed married a 9 years old, which would qualify him as a pedophile, BPUH.

Or am I wrong?

Ciao

- viole

I'm surprised that a Gnostic would have such a low benchmark for knowledge. You certainly don't know she was 9 years old. This is a rumor; nothing more. A modicum of research would demonstrate that.

 

[firedragon]

HAHAHAHA! EXACTLY!!!!! Holy crap. Now please direct this same exact idea at the OP please. If you're the one bringing something to the table for discussion, then you're the one who needs to provide the evidence. So, if someone claims that "God exists", or even infers or assumes that God exists in order to make another point (like the idea that the Quran was divinely inspired by God) then it is on THEM to bring the evidence forward that links this up. And yet YOU keep saying that I need to provide you evidence that "God doesn't exist." Of course I don't need to do that. I am not the one here making claims about God.

The existence of God is relevant in any discussion within which it is assumed that God exists and one is attempting persuade others on a point they are making. If you are just "preaching to the choir", then of course no one is going to ask you to take it back to square one, because everyone in the discussion has likely already affirmed their biases in this regard. But you should be prepared at all times in general discussion with people who don't necessarily hold your beliefs for the question to be raised as to whether the basis for your belief is warranted - i.e. that God exists in the first place.

So what are your proofs that God doesnt exist? Of course I do not expect you to know relevance since you seem to have this dire need for this particular subject. I hear the same evangelistic urgency from some other atheists so its fine. I already told you. Down with relevance. Once you pop, you cannot stop.

So go ahead and prove that God doesnt exist since that's what you are proposing here.

 

[firedragon]

Please answer my question. The above is not an answer with any sort of explanatory power.

By the way - did you clarify with the author before stating that I am completely off track? Are you sure YOUR interpretation is the correct one? And if it is, then you should be fully equipped to tell me what is wrong with my interpretation. Currently the only evidence I have seen is that you are dodging this question entirely.

I dont need to clarify anything from anyone. Because I didnt dismiss or adopt anything. It is you who did that.

So of course, as expected, a desperate attempt at a tu quoque.

And of course your need for ad hominem. Its alright. Try once more. It doesn't really affect much anymore because this is casual and usual. If you read through this thread, you would notice it.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

We've had threads discussing the existence of God. This thread is not about whether God exists nor about whether he has sent Prophets, but particularly looking at a claim and if it's rational. Rational, not as in if it's true, but if it's rationally coherent and possible to claim writing as miracle by challenging others to bring the like of it in which all humans and Jinn fail too. It's not even about whether it has happened or not, nor about the content of the miracle (Quran), but just that claim.

I don't know why people have to mix all topics into one thread all the time.

Alright then... it is not rational. I repeat: NOT rational.

As in, it is not rational to claim that the Quran has some divine source based on the idea that no one else is up to the challenge of writing it with a matched eloquence.

And in defense of my position (that it is, in no way, rational or "fair" to make this expectation, and when it can't be met, use it to fortify your positions on God), I would posit exactly what I have already - which is that there are a great many things that appear on our world that cannot be reproduced by anyone. Another simple example that is actually used by theists quite often (and in fact, has been used on me just recently) is the idea of telling someone to "create a blade of grass" - and when they can't, the theist claims that it is therefore "obvious" that God must have had a hand in creating the blade of grass, because no human being can create one. That is completely irrational, proves nothing, actually says nothing, and is downright preposterous.

And this gets us right back to the idea of whether or not God exists in the first place for claims like this - because I could easily (SO SO EASILY) make an equivalent claim of any kind and state the same sort of nonsense, and there would literally be no difference to the "challenge" I put forth to you. No difference. For example: Unicorns are the only ones that can affect the universe around us while simultaneously being undetectable. Their horns were used to dig the Grand Canyon in all its splendor. I think it a fair challenge that if a human being cannot reproduce something of the same grandeur and splendor as the Grand Canyon, then they must admit that these unicorns had a hand in its creation.

Now: MAKE ME A GRAND CANYON! DO IT!! DO IT NOW!!!!!!

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

So what are your proofs that God doesnt exist?

I have no proofs. I maintain a stark lack of evidence - therefore I do not believe in it. The same as if you told me you were going to sell me a bridge that you owned. I don't believe that you own that bridge, but do I know for certain? No. You may very well own that bridge - BUT I AM NOT JUST GOING TO TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT. In order to make sure that I can actually become the owner of the bridge, I am going to need to see evidence that you own the deed. Do you understand?

So go ahead and prove that God doesn't exist since that's what you are proposing here.

For goodness sake. How many times do I need to say this - I am not proposing that God doesn't exist. I am just not willing to assume that He does. He may very well exist. How would I know? But I am NOT just going to take your word for it. Especially considering your track record for what I consider intellectually irresponsible behavior.

 

[Muffled]

It is not my idea of a miracle.

 

[Muffled]

What if someone said to you: bring forth descriptive mathematical physics equations either as compelling or more compelling than Albert Einstein's, otherwise you simply prove yourself not as mathematically gifted.

Wouldn't you simply admit you weren't as mathematically gifted?

Also related to this - if you can't produce mathematical physics equations on par with Einstein, does this serve as proof of God's existence, do you think? Would it be that God had to have revealed those equations to Einstein if there are no others up to the challenge?

Point being - substituting the "eloquence" of the Quran as executed by its authors DOES NOT suddenly serve as a proof of God's having had to have been involved in its crafting.

I believe I would prefer for God to be a little more clear about some things but then it is the mystical that thrills the soul.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

So what are your proofs that God doesnt exist? Of course I do not expect you to know relevance since you seem to have this dire need for this particular subject. I hear the same evangelistic urgency from some other atheists so its fine. I already told you. Down with relevance. Once you pop, you cannot stop.

So go ahead and prove that God doesnt exist since that's what you are proposing here.

Also... I can't believe you replied this to me after I just got done giving you evidence (and AGREEING WITH YOU!) that the one making the claim about something existing is the one who needs to provide the evidence and bring details to the table. Not the one who doesn't believe the person who is making the claims. You even understood this yourself when you told me that I was the one who needed to bring more to the table for the idea of fairies fornicating under mushroom caps. But as soon as "God" is the target, your understanding of the point seems to fly right out of the window.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I believe I would prefer for God to be a little more clear about some things but then it is the mystical that thrills the soul.

Says you. It doesn't thrill me at all. At most it makes my eyes roll about in my head. AT MOST.

 

[Muffled]

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.

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