Refuting Islam

[CTZonEdit]

CTZonEdit
Site Admin
Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 10:16 am Post subject: Refuting Islam

[4-7-2005] Admin note: Since the creation of this thread the original links have been changed due to a domain name change of the site the new links are here

[2-3-2006] Admin note note: Again the website changed names so I have updated the links.



http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/703-christ-judo-christianity.html



Anyone who is interested in seeing an ongoing debate on an Islamic forum should take a look at the following. Different than alot of the Islamic forums you will find in the respect that there are not as many personal attacks from members on the forums twords Christians. For the most part it is civil but heated debate. Notice I said not as many because as soon as I brought up the evidence of the "satanic verses" then I started to receive personal insults in my private messages, and my "reputation" meter on the forum went from a level of 10 to -1.

The link to the site is http://www.islamicboard.com

[CoreIssue]

And now is -11. http://www.christiantalkzone.net/archive/images/smiles/biggrin.gif

That is one mod that will never be added or activated on this site.

[CoreIssue]

Here is the problem: the Qu'ran is in Arabic, and we are not given the privilege of even challenging its word usage, and this is vital, because when you take words or changes in the Qu'ran which they (they being Kadafi, Amir, Dhahabi or any other Islamic Apologist or scholar) will tell you have never been made, (although some great scholars like Ali Dashdee(sp?) from Iran challenged that assumption) the fact of the matter is unless we know the language, we cannot perceive the miracle. Which basically means there are millions of people, muslims and non-muslims in the world to whom the language in which the Islamic scriptures are written will ever remain completely foreign and the miracle therefore becomes purely one affirmed by those who know the language. It can never be tested in your experience, because the English translation or any other translations are not accurate except the original as given in the original language. How does one deal with a miracle that is not recognizeable by the masses in society. That presents a 1st problem. There is a 2nd problem that presents itself: They abolish our authority which is the Bible scriptures, without an original of their own with which to condemn ours. So we are told by the scholars representing that view (Islam) that the Bible we have is not the original Bible given, that it is a corrupt Bible, that there are many contradictions in it and it is not an accurate reflection of Jesus Christ. For example, they espouse that Jesus never really died on the cross, and therefore the ressurrection was purely a fabrication of later collectors of the idea. Now let me ask you this, "How does one ever know something to be truthful, if there is not a unit by which to measure it. There is no point of reference. If we were presented with an original that clearly debunks what we do have, then the dialogue can begin. But, if we are told what we have is error prone and wrong on the basis of something they have never shown to us, how does one begin to dialogue? Do you see the problem? It is like talking about the moon being so far away from here, but saying: we have no way to measure it, but take my word for it, thats how far it is. They have destroyed our original authority and told us we have no authority now. Therefore the Bible has been taken away from the Christian, and the Christian has got nothing left to defend, because he does not have the original bible. How does one begin a dialogue with that? 3rdly and very importantly, as you know the Qu'ran was written about six centiries after Jesus Christ. Now their problem was that what has happened is: that the original absolute which was given has been lost and their belief (Islam) is in a sovereign God, a very sovereign God, but the original revelation has been given in what they call the Injil(sp?) (their gospel) has been lost. Now 600 yrs later comes the latest and the greatest and the final revelation. Which means B succeeds A 600 yrs later and B overrules A because A is lost. And what we (Christians) believe is now false because B has to overrule A.

Question: If that is the way an absolute can be overruled, what is to keep C from coming in 6 centuries from now and overruling B? And after all isn't that what Joseph Smith (Mormon Prophet) really did in the founding of mormonism? That is precisely what Joseph Smith did, he said all of the religions of the world (coming centuries after Islam for example) "All of the revelations have become CORRUPT. Now he (Joseph Smith) has come out with the latest and greatest. So absolutes keep overruling absolutes without any point of reference for the previous absolute. It is philosophically unarguable, you cannot talk about it, because there is no more possibility of discussing absolutes. That is the 3rd problem, and problem number 4 is a sad one, but it is true, many scholars of that school of thought, reserve the right to impune & debunk truths that we hold about our Lord, but you cannot do the same with the names that are precious to them. Do you follow? We can be told in the Qu'ran that Jesus never died, which is what they (Islamists) have said, and these people look at us and say that this is a blasphemy and that Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God, which is completely wrong. He (Jesus Christ) does claim to be the Son of God.

How does one dialogue with 2 people talking, while A deserves the right to impune what B is defending, but B is not given the same privilege to closely scrutinize what A is defending. These points of tension make meaningful dialogue very very difficult with all respect for the scholarship. And I believe it is a hatpin in the heart of their belief system because it philosophically does not really cohere in its fundamental assumptions, in other words the Islamic belief system self destructs in its philosophical assumptions.


Excerpt from "Uniqueness of Christ in the Religions of the World" by Ravi
Zacharias

My wording in parenthesis.
_________________
Someday I hope with you to stand
Before the throne, at God's right hand,
And say to you at journey's end,
"Praise God, you've been to me a friend."

[CoreIssue]

Yep. Hard to discuss with someone the merits of something when someone uses that something as proof it is true.

Can we say circular logic?

Sadly they have their arguments down by rote. Does not matter many are decades or more out of date in the light of new facts and finds.

Denying with straight faces Christ did not die on the cross, Nero did not persecute Christians and more makes it so one can only try to get info out there to keep others from falling prey to this thinking.

[CoreIssue]

Discuss??? Kadif wasn't discussing anything, throughout the thread, he basically gave unsubstantiated reasoning according to his belief and then made derrogatory remarks to belittle anyone who opposed his reasoning.
_________________
Someday I hope with you to stand
Before the throne, at God's right hand,
And say to you at journey's end,
"Praise God, you've been to me a friend."

[CoreIssue]

avlotts wrote:Discuss??? Kadif wasn't discussing anything, throughout the thread, he basically gave unsubstantiated reasoning according to his belief and then made derrogatory remarks to belittle anyone who opposed his reasoning.

Agree.

But in doing so he further reveals the depths of his problems and indoctrination to others who have not closed their eyes.

I greatly doubt more than that can be hoped for.

[CoreIssue]

Yes thats about as far as he can go, and now wants to step away from all the arguments because we are just spoutin' propaganda. http://www.christiantalkzone.net/archive/images/smiles/rolleyes.gif

When what is clear (which is hard to see in his posts and his style) is that he loves to go off topic and rant on irrelevant issues as if they are true. As you will find with most every Muslim apologist.

[CoreIssue]

Agreed. Kadif must go off topic and rant about something because he cannot give a direct answer to a direct question.

[CoreIssue]

Yep.

And I learned a long time ago for such take a good single simple topic and stay on it alone to the exemption of all else.

Amazing how a whole religion can crumble on one simple issue. http://www.christiantalkzone.net/archive/images/smiles/biggrin.gif

After all. If it is false and undependable on one point how can you trust any of it when speaking for God?

[CoreIssue]

Which is my point on the satanic verses.

Kadafi admitted that the Hadiths could not be trusted.That they were tainted. Bye Bye to the unchanging Quran claims. If the hadiths cannot be trust then neither can the Quran. They go hand in hand.

They are to obey the hadith as well as the Quran, yes? YES.

And where did Allah ever say that his hadiths were to be scrutinized by men and deemed unacceptable? There is no process by which Allah revealed to Muhammad or any other muslim to determine the validity of a hadith.

Therefore it seems to me that these scholars have taken it upon themselves to determine what is valid, corrupting the entire Quran in the process.

There is no way at this point to ever know just what Allah revealed except to believe what was recorded. Not to allow men to decide what was true, or false. But let the record speak as to what is true and that record is the documented history of Muhammad, the biographical texts of his life and the Quran. An when you inspect these records you see how destructive Muhammad was and the lengths that he went to spread his revelations.

[CoreIssue]

Just like the Mormons with Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.

Oooops! That proved wrong so say it was never actually approved by the leadership.

[CoreIssue]

Apparantly, CoreIssue is seeing things that are infact not there. Could you please point out where I explicitly insulted you?

The reason why the topic was closed is 'cause your side didn't answer the points but continued re-iterating the same refuted allegations.

Bear also in mind that CoreIssue has insulted Islam on numerious occasions by calling Allah (God) a "pagan God" (God Forbid) without providing any evidence, he also insulted the tenents of Islam but no Muslim user has dared to make degratory comments about Christianity and its adherents. Consider yourself lucky that I didn't even ban you straight away.

Insulting instead of responding to the argument is the characteristic of the ignorant.

The questions still stands and you're free to answer them at

[CoreIssue]

Quote:Apparantly, CoreIssue is seeing things that are infact not there. Could you please point out where I explicitly insulted you?

I will let the other membership tell you.

Quote:The reason why the topic was closed is 'cause your side didn't answer the points but continued re-iterating the same refuted allegations.

I will let the other members evaluate that.

Quote:Bear also in mind that CoreIssue has insulted Islam on numerious occasions by calling Allah (God) a "pagan God" (God Forbid) without providing any evidence, he also insulted the tenents of Islam but no Muslim user has dared to make degratory comments about Christianity and its adherents. Consider yourself lucky that I didn't even ban you straight away.

http://www.christiantalkzone.net/archive/images/smiles/laughing6.gif Let the other members see if you did not insult Christians and Christianity.

And consider yourself lucky we do not operate under the same double standards you do or you would have been banned the second you registered. http://www.christiantalkzone.net/archive/images/smiles/wink.gif

Quote:Insulting instead of responding to the argument is the characteristic of the ignorant.

I will let the members determine if you just insulted CTZ and me.

Quote:The questions still stands and you're free to answer them at

http://www.load-islam.com/forums/showthread.php?t=703 (http://www.load-islam.com/forums/showthread.php?t=703)

http://www.christiantalkzone.net/archive/images/smiles/laughing6.gif No one is answering them at that link. It is a locked topic.

Note avlotts has already commented on your tactics. http://www.christiantalkzone.net/archive/images/smiles/yessmiley.gif

Later.

[CoreIssue]

kadafi wrote:Apparantly, CoreIssue is seeing things that are infact not there. Could you please point out where I explicitly insulted you?

Well wouldnt do any good for me to point it out. Will have to let the others here do that. But you were belittling me and making arrogant remarks from the beginning.

As I have seen in a majority of Islamic discussions.

Quote:The reason why the topic was closed is 'cause your side didn't answer the points but continued re-iterating the same refuted allegations.

Which had nothing to do with the questions we asked. And why we kept asking until you answered properly or with something legitimate.

Instead you squirmed and went off topic, got more insulting and then closed the topic altogether.

Quote:Bear also in mind that CoreIssue has insulted Islam on numerious occasions by calling Allah (God) a "pagan God" (God Forbid) without providing any evidence, he also insulted the tenents of Islam but no Muslim user has dared to make degratory comments about Christianity and its adherents. Consider yourself lucky that I didn't even ban you straight away.

Numerous occasions. Try none. You claimed the pagans originated the cross, therefore making them Christians.

If that is the case then the pagans that were worshipping the moon god Allah are Islamics.

You have to be blind not to see the comparison, kadafi. Own up to something for one in a discussion.

Quote:Insulting instead of responding to the argument is the characteristic of the ignorant.

And misrepresentin' facts, deliberatly changin' evidence to suite your argument, is the characteristic of what exactly?

[CoreIssue]

Now that I have the time, I would post my response on the thread in the Islamic forum, but its locked! http://www.christiantalkzone.net/archive/images/smiles/crazy.gif

In short, Kadafi's response to my post was no real response at all.

He dodged the stated problems with the sources of the Qur'an and Muhammad's biographies by simply offering unproven commentary while simply demanding that I offer evidence. In addition, he picks and chooses which Arab or Muslim "scholars" to accept and reject as it suits his needs.

Myth #1: The Qur‘an is Preserved and Unchanged Revelation from Allah (http://www.studytoanswer.net/myths_ch1.html#ch1)

Essay (Again): Muhammad and the Qur’an: What are the Sources? (http://www.standing4christ.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16)

In addition, he even goes on to deny well known historical facts such as Nero's persecution of Christians for the sake of maintaining his faith in Islam and the Qur'an. But, for instance, Cornelius Tacitus records that Nero blamed Christians for the Fire of Rome in 64 CE in response to rumors that he started the fire and played his fiddle while it burned (see Annales XV, 41-44).

PBS on "Nero's persecution of Christians" (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/heritage/episode3/documents/documents_9.html)

Note: I was in error when I said the rumor likely referred to the resurrection of Christ in Annales 15:44. It actually refers to the rumor that Nero started the fire.

Kadafi's only response to this is to reject historians like Tacitus as legitimate evidence because they do not cite hard sources for their work, then substitute his own unsubstantiated commentary. However, this is absurd because most ancient historians got their information from oral accounts and personal observations. Further, under the criteria he uses to reject Tacitus, the work of ancient Islamic "historians" and "scholars," which rely exclusively on orally transmitted information, is to be rejected as untrustworthy as well.

kadafi wrote:Bear also in mind that CoreIssue has insulted Islam on numerious occasions by calling Allah (God) a "pagan God" (God Forbid) without providing any evidence,[...]

Just like I tell the atheists who refer to TalkOrigins.org for all their answers, I recommend you research the issue yourself instead of simply appealing to IslamicAwareness.org to do your thinking for you.

Quote:Allah (allah, al-ilah, the god) was the principal, though not the only, deity of Makkah. The name is an ancient one. It occurs in two South Arabic inscriptions, one a Minaean found at al-'Ula and the other a Sabaean, but abounds in the form HLH in the Lihyanite inscriptions of the fifth century- B.C. Lihyan, which evidently got the god from Syria, was the first Centre of the worship of this deity in Arabia. The name occurs as Hallah in the Safa inscriptions five centuries before Islam and also in a pre-Islamic Christian Arabic inscription found in umm-al-Jimal, Syria, and ascribed to the sixth century . The name of Muhammad's father was 'Abd-Allah ('Abdullah, the slave or worshipper of Allah). The esteem in which Allah was held by thepre-Islamic Makkans as the creator and supreme provider and the one to be invoked in time of special peril may be inferred from such koranic passages as 31 : 24, 31; 6 : 137, 109; to : 23. Evidently he was the tribal deity of the Quraysh. (History Of The Arabs, Philip K. Hitti, 1937, p 96-101)
Source (http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-allah-pre-islamic-origin.htm)

kadafi wrote:The reason why the topic was closed is 'cause your side didn't answer the points[...]

Unproven commentary does not need answering because it proves nothing. We have cited sources and evidence while you have offered nothing but unproven pro-Muslim commentary. And the locking of that thread on your forums is positive proof that your position was defeated.

CoreIssue wrote:More hard evidence.

Here are 1st century Christian burial inscriptions from around Jerusalem. Captions included.

http://www.leaderu.com/images/art2b.jpg (http://www.leaderu.com/images/art2b.jpg)

</SPAN>Quote:A "head stone", found near the entrance to the first century catacomb, is inscribed with the sign of the cross.

http://www.leaderu.com/images/art2d.jpg (http://www.leaderu.com/images/art2d.jpg)

Quote:An inscription, found on a first century coffin bearing the sign of the cross, reads: "Shimon Bar Yonah" = "Simon [Peter] son of Jonah".

http://www.leaderu.com/images/art2e.jpg (http://www.leaderu.com/images/art2e.jpg)

Quote:One of the first-century coffins found on the Mt. of Olives contains a commemorative dedication to: "Yeshua" = "Jesus".

http://www.leaderu.com/images/art2f.jpg (http://www.leaderu.com/images/art2f.jpg)

For instance, how do you know that the crosses on Christian ossuaries are pagan in nature? Just because certain ancient cross symbols are pagan in origin does not mean that all crosses are pagan in nature. This is non-sequitur reasoning.

Kadafi is a wonderful example of anti-intellectualism trying to masquerade as intellectualism. The only hope for kadafi is to reflect on and question the intellectual honesty of his methods of debate instead of scratching around in his personal mental box.
_________________
1 Peter 3:15 [NIV]
Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.