Joseph wrote:fdjohan wrote:Until this point. Apple Pie GIVES NOTHING about proving his own words and his accusation about DICTATION THEORY on the HISTORICAL RECORD side. Talking about historical record is not talking about OPPINION.
His argument has been detailed and reference material noted. Instead of trying to kill the messenger make your counter-argument on why borrowing is improbable.
This way readers may see which argument is sound and form knowledgeable opinion. All you are doing is appealing to authority of historical record. You have not yet established any so-called historical record as reliable witness.
First, remember that I gave Apple Pie a big chance to prove about what he said. For example,
" earliest fragmented COPIES of the Koran only surfaced 100 years after his supposed life and times".
Do you find something wrong with that? This thread is provided to talk more focus about it.
Then I gave you all my arguments that Apple Pie was wrong. If you want to argue me, please do so. But if you come to the word "BIASED" , then let us talk about the rule of "BIASED" or "UN-BIASED".
That word he said about
100 years is coming from him as a support for his a so called "DICTATED".
So since until now at this second he comes with nothing, that "DICTATED THEORY" he made is BASELESS. It will turn to a wishful thinking.
I think this is rational thinking.
Second. IF you can prove your claim by the HISTORICAL EVIDENCES, it will come more strong and solid. You can't come by claiming this and that but when we ask more you'll say "WHO CARES!!".
The teaching of CHRISTIANITY coming from historical process. Your Bible in your hannd formed through the historical process. That's the fact.
Then how come you make too much complain when we ask your arguments in the eye of historical facts? Don't you think Al-Qur'an formed without historical process?
Apple pie is playing on his side with his "DICTATE THEORY", where he accused Al-Qur'an was dictated by NT just because he found many similar words inside the two Holy books. But all of this accusation will turn to a WISHFUL THINKING if you can't backed-it up by the history of how that DICTATION happenned. Who did it? When? so many questions from Muslims you have to answer.
So? You are playing on your side,
Which are from argument in this thread from my side?
There are 2 muslims site, but only telling story about how Uthman(ra) faced his death. This information you can find it everywhere.
Which part that you accuse me as "playing on your side" in this thread?
the playing field is level. His analysis has found a pattern where many similar words have formed very familiar message. He is making a case for Quran borrowings. It is wishful thinking to believe how, who and when is needed as supporting evidence.
Who says simillar words are the prove of everything? That claim that thing if we Muslims worship what your worship.
Come to logical thinking. How come
a man who learned and read your NT, picked the verses, and put it in Al-Qur'an, and turned out to reject the NT's teachings? Apple Pie doesn't event show who's that
man was. Who was the man who put the NT text to Al-Qur'an? Can Apple Pie show us?
Everything need proves. We are not kids.
On top of that, We challenge Apple Pie to talk about the HISTORICAL FACTS about the DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY.
You can challenge him all you like, but his case is not beholden to your criterion.
I asked him to talk more about his arguments. WHat backed up his claims.
But this thread is to talk about the historical facts. If Apple Pie fail to explain this part, then everybody will see the weakness of his claims.
Apple Pie uses E.W. Lane as his reference. This is a bad start.
Islamic sites recommended Lane's Lexicon
Please look back. this thread is not talking about lexicon. And as the start, Lane was not talkng about what this thread talking about.
Apple Pie's argument is using CHRISTIAN's SIDE point of view.
Again, so, you take the Muslim side, the playing field is level
Which part is Muslims site in this thread?
You'd better understand that this thread is talking about HISTORICAL RECORD
Apple Pie is treating the Quran as historical record.
Hmm... I see
. By saying "WHO CARES!!" when we ask about it?
Which part? by picking Greek texts and push as hard as he can to match them with verses in Al-Qur'an? That's not historical record.
Can you imagine how a "misterious man" picked 13 verses of the Revelations and squeezed them into ONE VERSE for Al-Qur'an?
How come a smart guy like you hava a same idea about this.
There is no reason he must accept simply repeated dogmatic assertion of its divine origins.
We are not talking about dogmatic my dear Christian friend. We are talking about the historical facts.
We Muslims challenge Apple Pie to talk about "ORIGINALITY" of the Al-Qur'an and Bible in this forum and this discission must go to the borrowing theory historical facts.
I have no idea what you are trying to say.
Who cares !!
...just kidding.
On top of that, We challenge Apple Pie to talk about the HISTORICAL FACTS about the DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY.
Suppose you talk about them? Set aside the demands and present your counter-argument to forum readers.
joseph