Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MysticKnight

The Quran Challenge "bring A Surah Like It"

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Ok, I guess there is no point of repeating the same point. Your own reasoning and various factors is up to you, but if you realize it, it's not a cause in itself preventing God, it's a factor to a bunch of factors that gave to the reason that prevented God from sending miracles.

It's not the only thing that prevented him from sending signs if all what you say is true. Therefore I don't feel the need to argue for your reasons which I don't find convincing.

Miracles if they are proof, then hearing some people tell you it can be magic, would not make the proof go away. It would still be as evidence.

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically arguing why it's a factor to a bunch of factors that lead to a reason of being ineffective, is not showing how the verse can possible be true. It's ignoring what language states to avoid the obvious absurdity of the statement.

This is if we accept all that bunch of factors to being ineffective as true, and if we take it being ineffective as a reason, but in language, you really would have state that as the reason, because if it didn't become ineffective, and ancients rejected, that would not have prevented God...so what really is being argued as the reason that prevented God is that it's ineffective.

Basically ignoring language and making up a new rule for it, to avoid the absurdity of the statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following statement is implied by the phrase:

God would have sent signs with Mohammad if and only if ancients accepted them.

I want to break up the implications of this phrase...and what happens when we consider the reason universally.

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MysticNight - you're very intelligent - but, with all due respect, you're also an example of someone being "deaf, blind and dumb". Allow me to elaborate ... You find infintisemal incoherences or so called "absurdities" due to your lack of in depth scrutiny when it comes to understanding period of revelation, historical background, psychological aspects of mankind etc.

You were born in the Shia faith, so you obviously know about the tragedy of Kerbala, you know there is proof that the sky rained blood on this day, you know about the message of Imam al Hussein Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã, and the fact that He took His own beloved family with Him to the battlefield which only proves the sincerity of Imam al Hussein (a) and that he really did sacrifice his life in order to (I quote from Imam al Hussein (a)) "reform the religion of my grandfather" which had been corrupted to the core. You are also aware of the lives of the Imams Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã, how they lived their lives and what wisdom and knowledge they spread, the morality and justice they all preached and you're aware of their asceticism. You're also aware that the Imams (as) used the Quran and interpreted it, since they are the Ahlul Bayt, the ones whom the Quran tells you to "ask if you do not know". You will find many absurdities in the Quran if you leave aside Ahlul Bayt. Ahlul Bayt and Quran go hand in hand, don't forget that.

You are also fully aware that the Quran contains at least some miracles, such as prophecizing things before they even happen and talking of how celestial objects move "as if they are swimming" which was not even known back then, the incident of Mubahila etc

And now ... after knowing ALL this .... Instead of considering the proof of what you already know and contemplating on this, instead you choose to reject islam amd renounce the faith ALL TOGETHER. This is ignorance. Which is clearly why the Quran had to emphasise "deaf, blind, dumb" because they won't incline to belief even a little bit, even if they know 'some' things are definitely true. Yes, there are questions that you may not have found and answer for but that doesn't mean that you reject the whole faith altogether when you know that there are wisdoms and knowledge in this faith that cannot be discredited. After 'acknowledging' all of this, you, as an intelligent person, should be 'sitting on the fence', not outrightly rejecting. THIS is a form of irrationality!

Hence why the Quran repeatedly echoes 'arrogant, ignorant people who have a disease in their heart' for all times, in order to awaken

Mankind so they don't forget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'll step out of this thread. I will address the verse about not sending miracles with a new thread that will make use of logical symbols and well known logical formation, to analyze the phrase and take every implied statement out of it. Then I will show you the problem with it, and how we reach a contradiction in the statement itself. I will also show how you can't add and give another reason then the given, because it's a different statement, and you can't argue it makes ineffective and how reach absurdity and contradiction in the same way.

I will make a new thread so we can start fresh.

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'll step out of this thread. I will address the verse about not sending miracles with a new thread that will make use of logical symbols and well known logical formation, to analyze the phrase and take every implied statement out of it. Then I will show you the problem with it, and how we reach a contradiction in the statement itself. I will also show how you can't add and give another reason then the given, because it's a different statement, and you can't argue it makes ineffective and how reach absurdity and contradiction in the same way.

I will make a new thread so we can start fresh.

I wish you wouldn't bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know it's like you're not bothering to grasp the content of my posts and merely skimming through them. I understand what you're trying to say, that i'm simply adding more reasons as to the supposedly 'only' reason in the Quran. You think most of my arguments originate from me? 90% originate from the Quran. I keep on telling you that the Quran rejected bringing the same physical manifestation past prophets did, NOT that Muhammad wouldn't be given a miracle at all. But you just keep on repeating the same assertion that the Quran disavowed Muhammad of bringing any miracles. This argument will be settled once and for all if I bring all the verses where my arguments are rooted and the one which you have endless trouble fathoming...

"And they say: 'Why is not a sign sent down unto him from his Lord?' Say: 'Verily God is able to send down a sign, but most of them know not'" (6:37) They ask this question, relating to their present state. Yet they still believe in a supreme Lord yet assign many of his attributes and powers to endless gods carved from stone and wood so nothing would be more suitable for them to eventually question themselves whether God is even personal at all and can intervene in the universe. They're not that different from the present day kabbalists and devotees of Einstein (and perhaps Stephen Hawking) who all believe in an impersonal deity except that most (if not all) the forces of nature were attributed to specific idols back than.

"And they swear by God with the strongest of their oaths that if came unto them a sign, they would most certainly believe in it; Say: 'Verily the signs are with God, but what should make ye know that when it cometh, they will not believe'. And We will turn their hearts and their visions, even as they did not believe in it the first time; and We will leave them in their contumacy, wandering blindly on" (6:109-10) The Quran clearly outlines that they were obstinate the first time against the message, despite all its logical arguments and call for righteousness. Thus their hearts were sealed so there's no point in bringing a miracles for these blind bigots at all. As the Quran says, even if they were given every sign they wouldn't believe.The prophet's main mission was a warner for people in general and he had already brought an inimitable, literary miracle that was resplendant with exhortations and arguments...the Quran itself! It wasn't a physical manifestation, but an open challenge that was never met:

"Nay! It (Quran) is the clear signs in the chests of those who have been granted the knowledge; and dispute not against Our signs except the unjust. And say they: 'Why have not been sent down upon him the signs from the Lord?' Say: The signs are with God, and I am only a plain warner." (29:49-50) This verse and the one previously mentioned confirm what I said that all miracles are attributed to and performed by God, Muhammad humbly tells them "am I aught save a man, a messenger?" (17:93). His main duty is to convey the message, and indeed he had a miracle that wasn't a temporary manifestation but is set in stone and can be accessed by everyone and can be copied and printed across the globe for future generations to ponder upon, the everlasting miracle the Quran itself. It wasn't a temporary physical manifestation like previous miracles. As for when God does or does not allow miraculous powers to be given to his prophets, well that's God's wisdom in guiding men. Indeed if there was no sign that his message was divine and he merely produced arguments, his preaching would have fallen on deaf ears. But he had this everlasting miracle that was always with him from the beginning of his mission to the end of his prophetic career, and to think it was intertwined in the message itself that was filled with reasoning and exhortation and wasn't a seperate scripture he gave simply to 'woe' the people! It can't ever be dismissed as an illusion, and interestingly enough in the very early days of the Quran its versatile content prompted a certain disbeliever to label it as 'naught but clear sorcery'.

Later on in the same chapter, the signs Muhammad did bring are shown to have the rebuttal of the irregularity of the miracle with the previous physical phenomenons manifested by previous religious figures:

"And when cometh unto them a sign, they say: 'Never will we believe until We are given the like of what was given unto the apostles of God'..." (6:124) This clearly proves they wanted an exact replica of the previous physical manifestations wrought by earlier prophets. It's clearly inferred in the very verse which you have so much trouble with: "And nothing hinders Us that We should send signs save that belied them, the ancients;.." (17:60). So you bring the hypothetical situation of those indoctrinated by their tradition that past miracles were sorcery coming with those who aren't indoctrinated. You symbolize this in a formula and say why can't Muhammad simply bring the same miracle earlier prophets brought as those who aren't indoctrinated would believe in it regardless. Well wouldn't that be unjust? The open-minded idolaters may have believed but then the whole band of Jews and idolaters who reproduced their arguments would be ready to dismiss it as sorcery. Haughtiness arises in their hearts subsequently and hence their hearts would be sealed and they'd be forever left astray. Does not a physical manifestation that appeals to both sides of the coin become more appropriate? Wouldn't the former be completely against the wisdom, justice and mercy of God? They would all be doomed to hell, how unfair can the All-Wise, All-Merciful Lord get. The 'belied them the ancients' argument is obviously against those who wanted Muhammad to bring exactly the same miracles previous messengers had. So the Quran says this is the 'sole' reason the same miracles wouldn't be granted to them.

Where are the 'red herrings'? It can be clearly deduced through careful reflection that there is neither absurdity nor red herrings in the Quran's argument at all. The Quran provides perfectly logical answers perfectly suited to the addressee and the context.

Oh and one more thing: Read my whole post carefully and in an unbiased manner .

EDIT: And just so you know the Quran being an everlasting miracle would suffice for his message to succeed, that is true. We the 21st century generation, like all other generations succeeding the prophet's were blessed with this miracle that's always there. His first followers were indeed the most faithful to the very end (i.e. Ali, Khadijah, Zayd, Abdullah ibn Mas'ud etc. notice they're all the prestigious companions of the Prophet)

Edited by La'nat Ma Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can be succinctly compared to the case of prophecies. We know fully well that the Quran says that only God knows the unseen. Yet in other places it affirms that but adds specimens of this exclusive knowledge is granted to whichever messenger he pleases. Indeed the prophet, like previous prophets as the Quran shows in Surat Al-A'raf, denied any knowledge of the unseen in general. Muhammad told them if that had been the case indeed much harm wouldn't have reached him. But specific events with consequences were told to the prophets and Surat Al-Tahrim demonstrates that God gave Muhammad the knowledge of the unseen when he disclosed to his wife his knowledge of her unfaithfulness in keeping his secrets. He replies that it was God who informed him.

It's very much the same case with miracles, except one or two other factors had to be considered.

Oh yeah and other clear examples about being granted knowledge of the unseen by God is shown in the prophecies of the Romans being defeated in 7-10 years and Muhammad performing the pilgrimage to the Ka'ba, and a couple of other explicit prophecies mentioned in the Quran. They're perfect examples of God imparting specimens of his knowledge of the unseen to Muhammad.

Edited by La'nat Ma Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/09/2011 at 4:20 PM, MysticKnight said:

I'm telling you the inherent problem, if Suratal Abu Lahab was not in the Quran, and someone wrote it to be bring the Quran challenge, people will say "what is this, this is nothing like Quran, it's junk'.

However when you read in Quran, you assume it must be great, have this big hidden wisdom behind it, that even you can't understand it's greatness or see why God would write it, it is awesome.

Basically you can't see how bad a Surah is, how much rambling it's doing with no flow structure, with no seeming purpose behind it's switch of topics to other topics, telling us randomly of something of Musa people, then something else, then a law, then this, then some bashing of unbelievers, etc..

If someone wrote one of Surahs in Quran but weren't part of Quran, everyone would be able to see the flaw and the none-eloquence.

If Suratal Kaffiroon was not in Quran, and someone wrote it, everyone would say "you call that great, what kind of literature is this, it's nothing like Quran".

Quran doesn't even have one style to immitate. It's all different because there is no universal structure to it.

If someone tries writting a Surah like Quran, he will see there is no universal style to copy, and that it's surahs to copy are not great quality, that if he makes something similar to one of it's surahs, people will be able to see why it's not great because they know already it's human made.

Instead of seeing big hidden unknown wisdom by random changing of topics, hitting there and there with no different facts with no relationship with each other, he will see "what the heck is this, it's just pointless rambling, disconnect mumbo jumbo". If a stories of the past are narrated, they see it as nothing but made up stories which won't seem great.

It looses the "wow" "great" factor, when you don't assume it's from God. When you assume it's from God, you assume it's great because you feel it's God talking.

If I write in English:

In the name of God, The Loving, the Caring

I seek help in the Lord of the universe

Against the bias of myself

Against the falsehood amongst men

And against the evil suggestions of my mind

You will see say this doesn't resemble Suratal Falaq and Suratal Nas... Well it's not the same.

Ofcourse the writting is not that great, but so isn't suratal nass or suratal falaq, but since it's not great, you will say "it comes no where close to the greatness of Quran" and Suratal Falaq and Suratal Nas are a whole different level.

Basically it's the flaw. The writting won't feel on par with Quran, because you have a belief all of Quran is so amazing due to believing it's from God.

But when you see a human makes a writting, it won't feel so great and you can see how not great it is, because it is just a human writting it and you know it, and it feels like that.

That's the problem.If Suratal Falaq was not part of Quran, people will not feel it's great, and will see how silly to put the "from those whom blow knots" out of all the stuff we could have sought refuge from, we seek refuge from people blowing on knots!

I'm sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about. 

Watch Linguistic Miracles in the Quran by Nouman Ali Khan 

In order to challenge the Challenge 

You need to be able to not WRITE ANYTHING 

Nor CAN YOU RETRACT YOUR WORDS ONCE YOU said them 

ITS ALL ORALLY 

You need to be USING THE LANGUAGE OF THE QURAN 

Let's see how you would pull that out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2011 at 11:40 PM, MysticKnight said:

Basically no one should be Muslim by that standard unless you know Arabic really well, because you basically following a religion with no proof.

This is how I feel sometimes. I'm following something that I half understand, and will never be able to understand no matter how much Arabic I learn. But I just think the main reason why I believe in Islam so much is because science validates everything. Like how in Islam it says to wash a bowl that a dog licked 7 or 9 times (can't remember) and science recently proved that a dog's germs need 7-9 washes to be completely eliminated. There is so much validity in the religion that it's hard to not believe in it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AgnosticPrince said:

The challenge in itself is a fallacy. Why would an infallible god use a fallacy to prove its authenticity? And why would the challenge suggest to create a fallacy as well? What's the hustle here?

It's not a fallacy as the Quraysh were the one's who issued the challenge, the verse is a response to them. Notice that this is a response argument. If people claim the Prophet made up the verses then let them compare the level of int

This is not a burden of proof fallacy as the Prophet has put forward the verses of the Quran as his proof.

The burden of proof fallacy also involves try to get someone to prove something which is impossible to test, this challenge is however, testable.

Edited by Enlightened Follower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/04/2017 at 11:01 PM, AgnosticPrince said:

The challenge in itself is a fallacy. Why would an infallible god use a fallacy to prove its authenticity? And why would the challenge suggest to create a fallacy as well? What's the hustle here?

How could that be a fallacy? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/04/2017 at 0:22 AM, j.angel said:

This is how I feel sometimes. I'm following something that I half understand, and will never be able to understand no matter how much Arabic I learn. But I just think the main reason why I believe in Islam so much is because science validates everything. Like how in Islam it says to wash a bowl that a dog licked 7 or 9 times (can't remember) and science recently proved that a dog's germs need 7-9 washes to be completely eliminated. There is so much validity in the religion that it's hard to not believe in it. 

Are you Arab? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×