What Soora 2:23 really says to SFE Talk?

Read soora 2:23 again my dear learned friend .
YUSUFALI: And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true.

Finished? Good. Now answer the following.
1. Is there any mention of a competition in soora 2:23?
Yes there is.

2. Is there mention of the need for judges?
Yep, no mention, thast why thsi challenge is unintelligible.

3. Is there mention of a need for a criteria, other then the already stated invitation of producing a chapter of the likeness of any chapter of your choice?
No objective criteria, no valid challenge.

4. Isn't there mention of the "rules of the examination" in the soora itself ? Be honest.
No there isn't, thats why sura 2:23 in unintelligible, it is neither a valid nor sincere challenge.

5. Is soora 2:23 really a challenge? Hasn't it started off with "when in doubt' ?
Why is the 'then produce a sura like it' there for?

6. Does the call to resolve when in doubt constitute a full fledge challenge? If so please characterise the framework of your assumption.
Its is a challenge but not a valid nor sincere one. Its so kiasu that it even declare in 2:24 before the challenge started that it has won. Thats how silly it is.


7. Does the sentencing of "when in doubt" constitute a challenge or more so an invitation to investigate one's doubt over a certain misunderstood subject ?
It is challenging doubters isn't it.

Soora 2:23 is more like RPG gaming where as you try more to decipher the soora, the more you will learn and understand the beauty and truth of the Quran. That is why most Christian scholars shy away from the 2:23 for fear that more indepth study of the 2:23 would only lead to Quranic appreaciation thus defeating the primary goal of abominating the Al-Quran.

The more I decipher it, the more I realise that its nothing but nonsence and the more we expose Quran as a work of a carnal man. Thats the beauty of it.

peace

Fuzzman

This is soora 2:23 brought to the top to be used as reference for the exchanges with SFE Talk.
YUSUFALI: And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true.

1. Is there any mention of a competition in soora 2:23?
Yes there is.
Fuzzman replies:-
Show us specifically where in soora 2:23 is mentioned to be a competition?

2. Is there mention of the need for judges?
Yep, no mention, thast why thsi challenge is unintelligible.
Fuzzman: Therefore we are in total agreement that there is no mention of judges in soora 2:23 thus bringing us to the reality that without judges there cannot be a competition. The question of a competition is eliminated here.

3. Is there mention of a need for a criteria, other then the already stated invitation of producing a chapter of the likeness of any chapter of your choice?
No objective criteria, no valid challenge.
Fuzzman: Therefore again you agree that there is no objective criteria. With no criteria will eliminate your perception of the 2:23 of being a competition. Without a criteria  and the need for a judge, 2:23 can never be taken to be a competition thus proving Fuzzman's point of the 2:23 to be a open invition to a DIY religious discovery where a disbeliever is given the opportunity to correct one's misconceptions of the Quran by chapter recreation.

4. Isn't there mention of the "rules of the examination" in the soora itself ? Be honest.
No there isn't, thats why sura 2:23 in unintelligible, it is neither a valid nor sincere challenge.
Fuzzman: My question is landscaped on your want of a competition and challenge all rolled into one. So Fuzzman has subtlely used " rules of the examination" as persuasion to  remodel a concept that is familiar to you. Now, honestly isn't the "And if ye are in doubt" and  "then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah" of the embodiment of soora 2:23 a form of "rules" or clearly seen as guidelines to overcome one's doubts?

5. Is soora 2:23 really a challenge? Hasn't it started off with "when in doubt' ?
Why is the 'then produce a sura like it' there for?
Fuzzman: "Then produce a soora like it" is to answer one's "when in doubt"over the validity of Quran. Can we construe that to be an element of challenge in that?

6. Does the call to resolve when in doubt constitute a full fledge challenge? If so please characterise the framework of your assumption.
Its is a challenge but not a valid nor sincere one. Its so kiasu that it even declare in 2:24 before the challenge started that it has won. Thats how silly it is.
Fuzzman: Your answer does not address my question put forth to you. 2:23 is a invitation to discovery and 2:24 is revelation. Tha's how Fuzzman that's it to be. Others can give their views if they disagree.
SHAKIR: But if you do (it) not and never shall you do (it), then be on your guard against the fire of which men and stones are the fuel; it is prepared for the unbelievers.
Read 2:24 and you will fairly see that whoever says that the Quran can be created by Man and fail it, will suffer a fate not from Allah but from the faithful of Islam. Here is never mentioned that Allah is the one who will punish. Allah only atates that blasphemers will be answerable to the faithful. That is all.

7. Does the sentencing of "when in doubt" constitute a challenge or more so an invitation to investigate one's doubt over a certain misunderstood subject ?
It is challenging doubters isn't it.
Fuzzman: This is your own misconception of the 2:23 because in reality "when in doubt "doesn't constitute a challenge at all.

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 21-9-2003 at 11:02 AM ]

If sura 2:23 is not a challenge, why then do Muslims like Criteria and You challenge non Muslism to produce a sura like it? Hahahahahahaha............

But too bad, sura 2:23 does not specify any objective criteria nor who gets to be judge. Its an unintelligible which no Muslism has ever made sense of. And the world continues laughing at how silly the Quran and Muslism can be. Hahahahahahahahaha...................

cheers

Fuzzman

SFE Talk wrote:
If sura 2:23 is not a challenge, why then do Muslims like Criteria and You challenge non Muslism to produce a sura like it? Hahahahahahaha............
Fuzzman replies:-
You must be hallucinating. There you go again with your infamous "Hahaha" trademark when you cannot make gains on issues. Does a forwarded challenge from Moslems make the 2:23 a challenge?  Any Moslem can "challenge" any Christian to take on the 2:23 but the 2:23 remains only an invitation; nothing more. It only becomes a challenge when disbelievers feel intimidated by the inability to size up to the invitation context of 2:23. Soora 2:23 has got to be the most subtlest and gentlest soora that Fuzzman has ever come across because there is no element of harassment, no element of intimidation, no element of entrapment as you so desire to project as with the opening of the soora itself bears evidence that there is no element of persecution nor malice but only the all consuming sense of invitation that truly prevails. It is people like you that want and need to paint a more cynical and negative picture of the 2:23 in the endeavor to cloak your inabilities of proving the 2:23 wrong. Therefore you think that by making sweeping statements and comments of the 2:23 will eventually hush up away efforts on the part of Moslems of ever pursuing where you fail. With Fuzzman there never will be any let up as you can see to the diligency applied in this thread with you. Getting your infamous "Hahaha" bears testimony to the fact. Once again the onus is on Christians to pursue the 2:23 if and only when in doubt of The Quran's validity as a final revelation from Allah who is by the way the God of Abraham and the God of Moses too.

SFE Talk wrote:-
But too bad, sura 2:23 does not specify any objective criteria nor who gets to be judge. Its an unintelligible which no Muslism has ever made sense of. And the world continues laughing at how silly the Quran and Muslism can be. Hahahahahahahahaha...................
Fuzzman replies:-
Once again soora 2:23 was never meant to be a challenge but an invitation. That would account for your agreement on the 2:23 for not having the "objective criteria" or "judges". If the world was truly "laughing" at the Quran and Moslems over the soora 2:23 issue, I haven't heard anything about it. The only laughing that has emerged thus far only came from you no this forum and no where else. Why don't you make peace with yourself by swallowing the fact that for over a thousand  and four scores of years that have already gone by, there has been no Christian scholars able to take up the 2:23 invitation to religious discovery because the fact lies in the truth that any Christians who do take on the  2:23 invitation will only end up as Moslems professing the superb Al-Quran.

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 22-9-2003 at 01:05 AM ]

If sura 2:23 is not a challenge, why then do Muslims like Criteria and You challenge non Muslims to produce a sura like it? Hahahahahahaha............

cheers

Fuzzman

Originally posted by SFE talk at 2003-9-22 01:03 AM:
If sura 2:23 is not a challenge, why then do Muslims like Criteria and You challenge non Muslims to produce a sura like it? Hahahahahahaha......

Nope. Don't know about T_C , but as for Fuzzman, Fuzzman doesn't challenge you to do up the 2:23 but instead invite you to do up the 2:23 ONLY WHEN YOU ARE IN DOUBT. Are you in doubt SFE Talk?

Fuzzman

When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power.
-- 1 Corinthians 2:1-5

When Paul said the above he was unlearned and admitedly had no eloquence for his words to reflect the greatness of the Bible as Paul created the Bible and the alledged meetings with Jesus which strangely until today bears no revelation or signages from God or Jesus that what Paul speaketh was inspired by God HIMSELF or that Paul was the CHOSEN ONE or even the Comforter mentioned by Jesus.

However God did sent out a final message to prove to us all that Paul was not sent by HIM by HIM sending us another unlettered prophet who brought the final revelation that is filled with such eloquence never to be found in the Holy Bible. Eloquence that no human mind can fathom or create unless penned only from the  might of GOD HIMSELF. That was why God chose a unlettered prophet to prove that the words of eloquence were HIS alone and not the creation of a mere human.

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 22-9-2003 at 01:25 AM ]

No sir, I have no doubt at all that the Quran is not the word of God but the writings of conmen.

Hmmm............. Criteria seems to have contradicted what you said. Even you yourself have contradicted what you said.

cheers & peace

Fuzzman

SFE Talk wrote:-
No sir, I have no doubt at all that the Quran is not the word of God but the writings of conmen.
Fuzzman replies:-
Just as Paul has admitted to not having any quality of eloquence in him, so too are you the same. Eloquence plays a very important role in any religious text for it is the literary median that divides the work of man and the work of God. With the Bible by Paul not having eloquence only proves that it stands inferior to the Quran which is filled with eloquence, proving Quran to be purely from a holy source. Therefore you should be more concerned on the authority and authenticity of the Bible after having read 1 Cor 2: 1-5 instead of turning a blind eye to that fact and remain obssessed with the Quran which is far more superior over the Bible.

Talking about the work of conmen again ? For instance we know that the New Testament is a compilation of the work of conmen because they take God to not know that the Earth is a rounded object? Imagine that? God doesn't know his own creation? Laughable blasphemy is what this maddening statement is. By stubborn diligence in defending the "four corners of the Earth" entry in the Bible only pays to show that this belief was the belief of Bible scribes that lived through the era that believes the Earth to be flat. And this Middle Age belief is brought into the Bble to be falsely reflected as that of the word of God. So much for works of conmen although Fuzzman can rattle on and on with more facts being brought forth.

SFE Talk wrote:-
Hmmm............. Criteria seems to have contradicted what you said. Even you yourself have contradicted what you said.
Fuzzman replies:-
Like I said what TC wrote should be refered to TC and not to me. As for me, please show where I've contradicted what I've said? All Fuzzman knows is that from the very start of this thread, you've done nothing but contradicted yourself on many counts.

Looks like you're still in doubt over the 2:23. Wanna try creating a chapter with the help of your helpers and witnesses and let them see how you've faired?

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 23-9-2003 at 12:01 AM ]

So where are the objective criteria for the cahlelnge and who gets to be judge? Cannot make sura 2:23 intelligible? Hahahahahahaha.....................

cheers

Fuzzman

Originally posted by SFE talk at 2003-9-23 07:49 AM:
So where are the objective criteria for the cahlelnge and who gets to be judge? Cannot make sura 2:23 intelligible? Hahahahahahaha.....................

cheers

Soora 2:23 is not only intelligible but very clear in its message to all disbelievers. It's message clarity has withstood the test of time to this day with only hecklers like you trying maximum chance in trying to make the 2:23 obselete.

The 2:23 is what it is. An invitation to create a "viable alternative" to the Quran based on any chapter within when in doubt. "When in doubt" cannot be constituted to be a challenge because there is no time frame mentioned. To be a competition or a challenge, there has to be a time frame put into motion. There is need for a judge too. But there is none of such made a requirement in 2:23 ! So we have it in that the 2:23 was never meant to be a challenge nor a competition. Soora 2:23 is really a DIY invitation meant to allow educative discovery into deciding the validity and truth of the Quran, where disbelievers are invited to put to the test their religious faith, by using that strength as a pivotal guiding force, to create that one single chapter of any parts of the Quran, to send a very strong statement that the Holy Bible transcends Al-Quran.

Seeing that you have only resorted to your same monotonous uniformed one-liners topped with generous amounts of your infamous "Hahahaha's", Fuzzman takes that to mean that you don't have much in your defence arsenal to play around with as you very well know that "when in doubt" doesn't really put up much of a case for being warranted as a full-fledged challenge that you so wish it to be.

Stil in doubt over this issue? Hahahaha.

ARI FUZZMAN

Originally posted by SFE talk at 2003-9-23 07:49 AM:
So where are the objective criteria for the cahlelnge and who gets to be judge? Cannot make sura 2:23 intelligible? Hahahahahahaha.....................

cheers

I have noticed two things about you deb:

A)  You will never accept anything as "objective"?  

B)  You do not have the religious education to evaluate religious objectivity.  You have not taken the basic religous course in anything.  How is it you can judge what is "objective"?

You have never presented any objective criteria yet.
You thought yu did but yu can't even justify them to me when yu are challenged.

Originally posted by SFE talk at 2003-9-23 11:12 AM:
You have never presented any objective criteria yet.
You thought yu did but yu can't even justify them to me when yu are challenged.

What do you mean "justify"?  How about this.  You admittedly no NOTHING ABOUT RELIGION FROM AN INSTRUCTER ON EITHER RELIGION.  So to make things easier for yourself, how about you posting a CHRISTIAN SCHOLAR'S response to the qur'an's challenge?  You are speaking about issues in which you have zero knowledge.  No one in this forum has agreed with you, and NO CHRISTIAN SCHOLAR HAS EITHER.

What non muslims say about the quran


Gibb, a certain Christian scholar, says: "Even if we attempt to reorder the words of the Quran, we will not be able to put them in a new and meaningful order; we must replace them exactly where they were before."


Laura Vaccia Vaglieri, professor at the University of Naples, has the following to say: "The heavenly book of Islam is miraculous and inimitable. Its style is totally unprecedented in Arabic literature, and its peculiar impact on the spirit of the human being derives from its special and superior characteristics. How is it possible that such a book should be the work of Muhammad, an Arab who had never studied?  

"We find in this book a treasury of knowledge beyond the capacity of the greatest philosophers and statesmen, and for this reason it is also impossible to regard the Quran as the work of an educated person."

Smith writes in his book, Muhammad and Islam: "I boldly assert that one day the loftiest of human philosophers and the most veracious principles of Christianity will confess and bear witness that the Quran is the Word of God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God. An unlettered and unlearned Prophet was chosen by God to bring the Quran to mankind, a book that has in the course of history produced thousands of other books and treatises, brought libraries into being and filled them with books, and placed before mankind laws and philosophies and educational, intellectual and ideological systems.

"He arose in an environment where there was no trace of learning and civilization. In the whole of Medina, there were only eleven people who knew how to read and write, and in all the branches of the Quraysh, in Mecca and its environs, not more than seventeen people were literate.

"The teachings of the Quran, which mentions knowledge and the pen in its opening verses, brought about a tremendous transformation. Islam proclaimed study to be a religious duty, and made the black ink of the scribe and the scholar to be superior to the red blood of the martyr.

"Thanks to the teachings of the Quran and its emphasis on the cultivation of knowledge, countless scholars made their appearance and wrote innumerable books. Different scientific disciplines were derived from the Quran and spread across the world by Muslim thinkers. The world was illumined with the light of the Quran and the culture of Islam."


The author of Muhammad, the Prophet Who Must Be Examined Anew, writes as follows: "Although he was unlettered, the very first verses that were revealed to him contain mention of the pen and of knowledge, of learning and teaching. There is no other religion that places such emphasis, in its very origin, on knowledge and learning.

"If Muhammad had been a scholar, the revelation of the Quran in the cave of Hira would not have been surprising, for a scholar knows well the value of learning. But he was unlettered and had never studied with any teacher. I congratulate the Muslims that the acquisition of knowledge was so highly valued at the very inception of their religion."



You seem to be the only one ignorant enough to deny the criteria of the challenge.  If not show us what the CHRISTIAN SCHOLARS SAY!!

[ Last edited by The_Criteria on 24-9-2003 at 03:24 AM ]

What do you mean "justify"?  How about this.  You admittedly no NOTHING ABOUT RELIGION FROM AN INSTRUCTER ON EITHER RELIGION.

You are a liar. I never said that.

I have also not heard of any of your alledge Christian schorlars, I think they don't exist.
And none of the quotes say anything about objective criteria of sura 2:23 challenge. You issued it as a challenge but Fuzzman said it is not a challenge, even you Muslims cannot make sense of it and agree on what its all about. so how can you expect non Muslims to take it seriously? So I suggest that you have a long chat with Fuzzman and agree on how to deal with this question of sura 2:23 together before you write further.

peace

Fuzzman

You issued it as a challenge but Fuzzman said it is not a challenge, even you Muslims cannot make sense of it and agree on what its all about. so how can you expect non Muslims to take it seriously? So I suggest that you have a long chat with Fuzzman and agree on how to deal with this question of sura 2:23 together before you write further.

You are in serious doubt with anything associated with the 2:23! That's laughable but acceptable on my terms anyways. The 2:23 other than being an invitation to "explore" when you are in serious doubt of its truth can be taken to be ANYTHING that any unbelievers take it to be. That's right buddyboy. You see when a person is in SERIOUS DOUBT, the mind will wonder in denial, just looking for a "smoking gun" that would justify their cause in saying that the 2:23 is unintelligible. If you take it to be a challenge, then by all means it will be so according to what your religious inclination makes of it; but in reality it is not. You however need to understand that this want to make the 2:23 a "challenge bid" will arise to only surrogate your ability in a primarial "private limited capacity" where you are invited to overcome your doubt of the Quran by creating another of similiar fashion in prose, eloquence, gematrical value  sequencing and originality without defacing, altering and disturbing the mathematical balance of certain quranic expressions.

What T_C has expressed had been what Fuzzman had written in the same subject of the 2:23 approximately two years ago [you must still remember that thread] when Fuzzman first started the 2:23 issue. Earlier in this thread I had again mentioned that if that thread was allowed to exist, this would have been the continuation. As far as Fuzzman is concerned what we Moslems speak of normally will tally iin closure. So what writes T_C from his perspective will corelate with mine in finality because anything Quranic will have the same singular answer always; unlike the study of the Holy Bible that ends in multitudes.

I see your grievious "doubt" has got the better of you in that even small matters take up your attention when you should be concentrating on resolving the many doubts that have blinded your path here.

Still in doubt again? Do the 2:23 my friend!

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 25-9-2003 at 10:17 AM ]

Fuzzman

Why so quiet now SFE Talk? Lost for words or has "doubt" gotten the better of you? Either way says that you can't really make head of this really simple situation.
Another thing that was left out earlier is the fact that to create a chapter on a chapter from Quran would never serve meaning unless there is a forward or past chapter to provide fluidity for the 2:23 tasker, for any chapter that he/she has chosen for the  acid test here that is more aptly named the "doubt-test". To make this chapter workable would eventually lead to the required creation of more forward and past chapters to provide a "smooth narrative" which Fuzzman reckons is one really difficult feat for the 2:23 tasker. And by the time the 2:23 tasker does make any inroads into this difficult mental feat, he'd probably would have ended up studying the Al-Quran word for word, verse over verse, chapter by chapter. And by then the 2:23 tasker would have been overwhelmed by the beauty of Quran as is revealed along the study marathon, and would probably embrace Islam for the newfound love for Quran and Allah. It would be polemic suicide for the Church state if word got out on this revertion happening. That could be one of the causes that the Church does not encourage tasking the 2:23 to put to test the reality of its message.

ARI FUZZMAN

Fuzzman

Hahahaha Fuzzman roughly guesses SFE Talk is no more in "serious doubt" over the 2:23 as SFE Talk has chosen the most logical path out of this quagmire by doing the only smartest thing that most Christian scholars would do; taking the fastest exit out of this thread.

Cheers SFE Talk. I know you tried really hard but your efforts were all in vain. Try harder next time.... that's if you can't overcome your doubt over the true meaning of the 2:23.

ARI FUZZMAN

Originally posted by SFE talk at 2003-9-24 08:15 AM:
You are a liar. I never said that.

I have also not heard of any of your alledge Christian schorlars, I think they don't exist.
And none of the quotes say anything about objective cri ...

You seem to be the only one ignorant enough to deny the criteria of the challenge.  If not show us what the CHRISTIAN SCHOLARS SAY!!

You never answered this.  And I am not lying about you admittedly being relgiously uneducated.  If I am lying, please mention the religious schooling you have had and that will put an end to this.  

Deb, you said that the quotes above do not mention the "challenge".  I beg to differ.  The challenge is to produce a book with the divine nature of the Qur'an.  The quotes show 1) conclusions to an attempt at the challenge **as the first and second quote show and 2) the miraculous nature of the Qur'an in general.  


Gibb, a certain Christian scholar, says: "Even if we attempt to reorder the words of the Quran, we will not be able to put them in a new and meaningful order; we must replace them exactly where they were before."

~~~~Gibb had attempted to use the same words found in the Qur'an to imitate it.  His conclusion is posted above.~~~~


Laura Vaccia Vaglieri, professor at the University of Naples, has the following to say: "The heavenly book of Islam is miraculous and inimitable. Its style is totally unprecedented in Arabic literature, and its peculiar impact on the spirit of the human being derives from its special and superior characteristics. How is it possible that such a book should be the work of Muhammad, an Arab who had never studied?  

~~~~Laura Vaccia Vaglieri mentions that the Qur'an is "inimitable", meaning it CAN'T BE IMITATAED.  This quote has EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE CHALLENGE.  IT IS THE CHALLENGE....~~~~

"We find in this book a treasury of knowledge beyond the capacity of the greatest philosophers and statesmen, and for this reason it is also impossible to regard the Quran as the work of an educated person."

~~~~Laura Vaccia Vaglieri ALSO SAYS about the Qur'an the above statement.  Again, it is stated that the knowledge in the Qur'an is "beyond the capacity of the greatest philosophers and statesmen" and goes on to say "it is also impossible to regard the Quran as the work of an educated person"~~~~


Smith writes in his book, Muhammad and Islam: "I boldly assert that one day the loftiest of human philosophers and the most veracious principles of Christianity will confess and bear witness that the Quran is the Word of God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God. An unlettered and unlearned Prophet was chosen by God to bring the Quran to mankind, a book that has in the course of history produced thousands of other books and treatises, brought libraries into being and filled them with books, and placed before mankind laws and philosophies and educational, intellectual and ideological systems.

~~~~"I boldly assert that one day the loftiest of human philosophers and the most veracious principles of Christianity will confess and bear witness that the Quran is the Word of God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God" as Smith says is complemented by this statement "An unlettered and unlearned Prophet was chosen by God to bring the Quran to mankind".  The Godly nature of the Qur'an is mentioned.  How is it that this quote has nothing to do with the divine nature of the Qur'an?  That is the challenge.  Bring a book that can be attritbuted to God.~~~~

"He arose in an environment where there was no trace of learning and civilization. In the whole of Medina, there were only eleven people who knew how to read and write, and in all the branches of the Quraysh, in Mecca and its environs, not more than seventeen people were literate."

~~~~Smith goes on to say the above statement about the prophet (pbuh) to debunk the idea that the Qur'an was written by him~~~~

"The teachings of the Quran, which mentions knowledge and the pen in its opening verses, brought about a tremendous transformation. Islam proclaimed study to be a religious duty, and made the black ink of the scribe and the scholar to be superior to the red blood of the martyr."

~~~~This statement by Smith reflects the teachings of the Qur'an and what they brought to humankind.  If someone was to make a book like the Qur'an, that book too, would have to do the same thing.~~~~

"Thanks to the teachings of the Quran and its emphasis on the cultivation of knowledge, countless scholars made their appearance and wrote innumerable books. Different scientific disciplines were derived from the Quran and spread across the world by Muslim thinkers. The world was illumined with the light of the Quran and the culture of Islam."

~~~~Read the above comment~~~~


The author of Muhammad, the Prophet Who Must Be Examined Anew, writes as follows: "Although he was unlettered, the very first verses that were revealed to him contain mention of the pen and of knowledge, of learning and teaching. There is no other religion that places such emphasis, in its very origin, on knowledge and learning.

~~~~The above verse shows a miraculous attribute of the Qur'an.  It's emphasis on gaining and spreading knowledge.  NO OTHER RELIGION DOES SO.~~~~

"If Muhammad had been a scholar, the revelation of the Quran in the cave of Hira would not have been surprising, for a scholar knows well the value of learning. But he was unlettered and had never studied with any teacher. I congratulate the Muslims that the acquisition of knowledge was so highly valued at the very inception of their religion."

~~~~Again, this quote shows that Muhammad (pbuh) did not write the Qur'an.  ~~~~

So my friend, these quotes have EVERYTHING to do with the challenge that you STILL HAVE NOT MET.  :stp:

[ Last edited by The_Criteria on 30-9-2003 at 02:38 AM ]