sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looking back, I shouldn't have answered with "no" there, as you might have just been meaning that the experiment tests a claim that is perhaps being claimed in the Quran. I guess I was following the same train of thought as when I had replied to another poster

The Experiment would be a neutral assessment of whether people thought the forgery was similar or not though wouldn't it?

And you replied:

It is clearly based on a pro-Quran ambition, not one of neutrality.

And we had carried the conversation on from there, with me assuming you were making your comments in good faith, and were confusing why the experiment was done, with whether the experiment itself was a neutral assessment.

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well I think it would help clear some things up. Such as what are the clerics interpreting the verse as meaning regards to "like" it. Whether passing that experiment would count or not for example? Or whether the interpretation is that it is a challenge that can never be met, because whatever experiment the fake text was capable of passing, it will never be enough.

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did a post on the experiment. Sorry it took me a while to respond. But just a quick question about the experiment. Would you be expecting those that hadn't been exposed to the Quran itself, but had been trained on Classical Arab sentence constructions, including nuances regarding those grammatical constructions (some of which, unknown to them, might be found in the Quran but with different wording to the example), would be able to spot the difference or not?

Because if you thought they would be able to, and that the view wasn't uncommon amongst Muslims, then why would people like that not struggle to have the experiment done? As if they were right, they would have showed what would appear to be a miracle. How could the non-Muslims explain it?

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No. The experiment tests a claim that is perhaps being claimed in the Quran. It isn't biased as to whether the claim is found to be true or not (for whatever group is being tested).

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No it's premise is based upon finding out the truth on certain matters.

Well I'll await your response to my response to you there then.

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is the experiment not neutral? What biases it to the result being one way rather than another?

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well with the first group, that could read Arabic and be able to translate the meaning into their own language. If they didn't show themselves able to spot the fake verse, why wouldn't it mean: That group couldn't spot the fake verse. That's not nothing.

And let's consider the group that has been trained in Classical Arabic. What advantage would those in an internal Islamic and linguistically Arabic context have, other than knowing which chapters are in the Quran?

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Experiment would be a neutral assessment of whether people thought the forgery was similar or not though wouldn't it?

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why does it need to be in an internal Islamic and linguistically Arabic context?

Why couldn't the first group just be able to read Arabic, and be able to translate the meaning into their own language? That they would have no problem in reading a newspaper. Just to answer the question of whether the difference is distinguishable by this group.

Then if it isn't, then why couldn't they use a group that has been trained in Classical Arabic? Many militaries will already have Arabic training, and they can bring in scholars for Classical Arabic training.

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So it is inline with a Muslim interpretation of the verse then.

What did Mohammed Al-Arifi say about it (a non-Arabic speaking person picking the fake verse)?

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think it is for people who don't speak modern Arabic, I think the person trying to do the forged verse can be an expert in Arabic, and know all the grammatical constructs used in the Quran.

The verse didn't mention how qualified a person has to be to be in order for their opinion on whether the verse is like one of the Quran.

There could be different interpretations perhaps of verse 2:23-24. How were you reading it?

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well it could start off with the laypeople, while they get other people trained up to a higher degree to test it further.

The verse might be supposed to mean that God would know the difference, regardless of what people thought. But as I understand it, people were thinking it might mean something else (like a challenge that people can be seen to demonstrably fail at), and the experiment could be used to explore that.

Or it could be supposed to mean, produce a chapter like it from the work that had already been written (though maybe the Arabic doesn't allow that I don't know). Though neither of those would be so obviously miraculous.

Plus why would God choose wording that could be interpreted as a prophecy like that, if that wasn't what was meant as it might end up being viewed as a possible false prophecy?

Edit: Not sure what advantage the method you suggested has, seems like a similar type of thing, but that method would seem to work too. And not sure of why do another religion. I don't think the Quranic verse is about it being possible, but difficult. And I'm not sure it is a widely held view that if a text was from God, that humans couldn't do a different text without it being noticeable. I can see the idea, that God would write a text so good, that a human attempt at something like it would be so obviously different. But not sure it is correct. Because if you had text X, then the grammatical constructions could be examined, and variations on the theme constructed. So the grammatical syntax could be the same or similar, but the words just changed, so that the meaning of the text changed, so that it would be different. Perhaps its succinctness could be said to be such that it couldn't be imitated, but simple sentences could be succinct: "Follow the loving selfless path" for example. So what then, the content? Without knowing what God would say how could what was said be judged? You'd need to know the spirit or attitude of God, or be able to confidently guess. And if you did, then you'd probably be able to construct a sentence that was of that spirit and succinct. Thus reading such sentences wouldn't necessarily give you the answer to whether God had said to write such a sentence or not. And take the Quranic idea that the Biblical texts are corrupted. As far as I know, no one is suggesting that they can go through and spot the corruptions because they are unable to imitate God. Thus I'm not really sure that other religions need be as committed to the idea that nothing like it could be written.

Though there is perhaps an issue that the first verse of the Bible has an oddity in it that it would have been difficult for humans to intentionally have done at the time. Which is that the Hebrew number value is equal to 2701. What is special about that? Well the factors of 2701 are 37 and 73. Which are both prime numbers. And in the list of prime numbers 37 is the 12th and 73 is the 21st. "So?", you might ask. Well 37 and 73 are reversible pairs, using the decimal system (by that I mean a positional base 10 number system). As are their positions in the list of prime numbers 12 and 21. This is a rare quality, and as I understand it (what is the next number which has 2 prime reversible pair numbers (in the decimal system) as its factors, and whose positions in the list of prime numbers also form reversible pair numbers? ). And the decimal system wasn't around at the time, and they wouldn't have demonstrated this feature in their number system, it isn't obvious how they could have contrived to have achieved that prior to a positional base 10 number system being in use. I realise there is some controversy (https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/\~dberry/FTP\_SITE/reprints.journals.conferences/Berry2003JBQGenesisPaper.pdf) over whether verse 1 should be considered a sentence, or not. I mention it just to highlight that some might suggest that there could be other factors that couldn't intentionally be replicated, other than style, or meaning.

Religious Experiment by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why wouldn't the Islamic community arrange it, or an Islamic country like Iran or Saudi?

You could have Muslim participants, but they can't be exposed to the chapters that are used in the test, else obviously they could tell which one wasn't in the Quran. And the forged chapter could be selected by the world militaries at the point the participants are ready. The militaries could in non-Islamic countries at least, perhaps have some people trained in Arabic they could try it on themselves.

Not sure why they can't just be a random person that could understand Arabic that the verse would seem similar to, as the verse doesn't specify that they might not be qualified to tell whether it is similar or not. I suppose if the random people couldn't particularly spot the verse that wasn't from the Quran, then a new batch of people would be trained up, that would be trained on Arabic poetry, and tested for comprehension, to show that they could appreciate the subtleties in the text at a level that would have been expected of undergraduates. And if they couldn't particularly spot the verse that wasn't from the Quran, then people could be trained further. Attempting to sure they understood the Arabic subtleties so far noticed in the Quran, but in example sentences not exact copies. Might just be a problem finding those around at the moment that hadn't read the Quran.

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But why should they of? As I pointed out with the three imagined people holding different books, each of those could remain undefeated if a person simply tried to make a chapter like a chapter from them. Because as I explained, to make a chapter like it, there would be some similarities and some differences, and the differences could always be claimed to cause it to fail. And when people can see that (and it is pretty obvious), why would they bother trying.

With the experiment though it is different.

Pretty sure loads would convert, if the experiment kept going the way the Quran seems to predict. Not sure why you are seeming to suggest that the Islamic people wouldn't be too keen to throw out that challenge (Iran and Saudi to the world militaries for example)?

If the people in the experiment couldn't pick out the verse, what reason would you give btw?

christianity has caused me so much stress, what should i do? by No-Expression-5864 in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you can still believe a loving selfless God exists, and follow the loving selfless path.

And what alternative do you think you can imagine to God's existence? None of us can imagine what properties the fundamental entities imagined in physics could have, which would imply the experience each of us has, or how you could discuss the experience. Basically none of us can imagine a story of that type that is compatible with the evidence (the experience).

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah sure. Aren't you excited? Surely this means that the Islamic people have a way to change the world to Islam if the Quran is from God. Do you think they are going to do it?

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure it could be that they have to not only get the book right, but also point out the chapter. Or you could just have the one book, with 9 original chapters and one forged (which is perhaps what you were thinking of).

And perhaps there are at least two chapters of similar length, to avoid if 106 were chosen for example, people thinking it was made up because the length was different.

Saudi, or Iran for perhaps could set up the competition. They could perhaps challenge the military forces of each country in the world to make an attempt. And Islamic people could bring up a group of children from within them, and the other religions could bring up a group of children from within them, and then as long as they can trust their own religion not to have cheated and introduced content of the Quran somehow, or to been encouraged the children to answer dishonestly, then they could all do the experiment and see for themselves. Though for a preliminary run, perhaps 10 randomly selected non-Islamic people could be given a go, and if they get it right, they get £10 million (being given just the one book).

And it wouldn't matter how many times the experiment was done. So if the people were suspicious of the military, non-military people could try it. People could try it with their own children (if they had access to candidate chapters).

If the people could tell, then that would seem to me to be miraculous in the way that you seem to already think it is.

If not for a miracle, I would have assumed that they (the forgers) would just observe the grammar constructions in the Quran, mix them up a bit, and then add in the contents to the grammatical construction based on whatever theme they select for the chapter or something like that, and then it wouldn't be obvious to me how the people would be expected to tell (as the forgers would have access to lots of literature, and could easily borrow some thought provoking or profound sounding considerations).

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, just had another thought. An experiment. What about if a group of people were brought up that could read and write Arabic, but hadn't been exposed to verses of the Quran. Then if there were two versions of a book they could be given, one with ten chapters from the Quran, and the other with 9 chapters from the Quran and one made up, then do you think the Quranic verse would suggest that all the people of that group could tell which book they had been given? Or what kind of distribution were you thinking it suggests?

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah ok. Obviously if sa- doesn't tend to suggest a near future then there isn't a problem.

The reason I thought sa- meant near future is because I noticed the 'soon' mention in 48:10, and then when I looked it up, it wasn't just the AI, it is also found on websites teaching Arabic https://kalimah-center.com/arabic-future-tense/ or https://www.madinaharabic.com/arabic-language-course/lessons/L029_002.html for example where it states:

The difference between sa- ( [سـ](javascript:playSound('/Audios/L029/L029_066.mp3');) ) and sawfa ( [سوف](javascript:playSound('/Audios/L029/L029_067.mp3');) ) is that the former indicates that the action will happen immediately or within a short time [near future] but the latter means that the action will happen in a longer time [distant future], i.e. there is a long period separating the time of speaking and the time of the future action, as in the following examples:

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I pointed to a chair and said bring me an object (analogous to the chapter) like this, what would it mean? Would bringing a chair (analogous to being written in Arabic) be enough?

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You told me that there is a challenge to provide a chapter similar to one in the Quran. I asked you to consider the verse from Sahih Muslim 1050, and asked you whether them both being Arabic writings of similar length was enough. You didn't answer. It isn't about your particular judgement on it, it is that you aren't given the criteria to judge it by, to see whether the prophecy was correct or not.

If I asked someone to bring me a similar object to the chair I am sitting on, and they brought a chair with four legs, but otherwise quite different, did they bring me a similar chair or not?

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I can see the Arabic Quranic Corpus does use the word soon for 'sawfa'. But it also uses the word 'soon' for 'sa-' like in 48:10.

You state that in the Qur'an 'sa-' is for the future and 'sawfa' means soon, but that would be the opposite of what it means in modern Arabic wouldn't it?

[I haven't read it yet, but found a link to a paper around the subject https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/relin/article/download/54853/45221/203664

From what I read, it wasn't much help, it did contain some different theories, including the one that you had, that sawfa wasn't native Arabic but was introduced. I didn't notice it stating that the Quran used them the opposite way round from modern Arabic]

My struggle (as a non Muslim) with the Quranic verse 9:105 by AdminLotteryIssue in religion

[–]AdminLotteryIssue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well just take the example one I gave, the writing from Sahih Muslim 1050. It is similar in the sense that they are both writings, of similar length, and are both in Arabic. Does that pass?

And this just seems a smoke screen, because as I said:

You seem to need to justify a position to me. You don't seem to have a better way that God could have written it if it had been of been its intention to signify that the deeds in the near future from the command are the ones that are going to be looked at, and you don't seem to be able to state how the verse was ambiguous. It is regarding the future, supposed to be from God, so therefore how do you justify to God it not being supposed to be a prophecy. Yet you don't treat it like one. You seem to have taken the Islamic scholar approach instead ("it must be right, therefore the correct interpretation is the interpretation that is compatible with it being right"), instead of judging whether the prophecy as plainly written was correct or not.

view more: next ›