Atheists: Questions 2, 3 and 4.

[Rhea]

The standing challenge of the Qur'an for about fourteen hundred years is the testimony for the credibility of the prophet Muhammad:

Surah Al-Israa Ruku 10 Surah 17

88 Say: Verily, though mankind and the Jinn should assemble to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof though they were helpers one of another.

M. Pickthall Quran Translation

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130608033430AAebzSw

So the challenge is, that it's not possible for men to write a book like the Koran, even if they are helped by supernatural Djinn? Seriously? That's it?

But that's been met time and time again! What a silly "challenge" to claim. Some of the books "the like of the Koran" are serious, some are fiction, some are satire even. But Many many supernatural works have been put forth, and quite a few of them more coherent and useful than the Koran.

I think JRR Tolkein wrote a much better book than the Koran, and he didn't even have magic Djinn to help him!
And then there's L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith, who wrote books much like the Koran and even got followers just like the Koran.
Confucious wrote a whole lot of useful rules into a book - some of them are out of date and no longer useful (like the Koran, the bible and the Torah) but some are actually still quite wise and useful.

So yeah, this "challenge" is to actual challenges like crayons are to quantum networks.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And yet again, Saeed, you have never yet shown us that we need to have the future vouched for. You have not shown that anyone exists who can vouch for the future. As near as we can tell, various futures are equally likely and that's the way humans live.
Your claims to have discovered a failure in my ideology still have no support.




You're just making shit up and claiming a victory.







Like always.

S:
Not true:

The standing challenge of the Qur'an for about fourteen hundred years is the testimony for the credibility of the prophet Muhammad:

Surah Al-Israa Ruku 10 Surah 17

88 Say: Verily, though mankind and the Jinn should assemble to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof though they were helpers one of another.

M. Pickthall Quran Translation

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130608033430AAebzSw

Saeed H H Alyousuf

You are aware that there are several other holy books, just like the Qu'ran. The bad news is that Buddhism has a good rule set that is much more abbreviated and universal, making it much more superior due to its comprehensiveness despite its brevity.

 

[DrZoidberg]

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130608033430AAebzSw

So the challenge is, that it's not possible for men to write a book like the Koran, even if they are helped by supernatural Djinn? Seriously? That's it?

But that's been met time and time again! What a silly "challenge" to claim. Some of the books "the like of the Koran" are serious, some are fiction, some are satire even. But Many many supernatural works have been put forth, and quite a few of them more coherent and useful than the Koran.

I think JRR Tolkein wrote a much better book than the Koran, and he didn't even have magic Djinn to help him!
And then there's L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith, who wrote books much like the Koran and even got followers just like the Koran.
Confucious wrote a whole lot of useful rules into a book - some of them are out of date and no longer useful (like the Koran, the bible and the Torah) but some are actually still quite wise and useful.

So yeah, this "challenge" is to actual challenges like crayons are to quantum networks.

A huge problem with the Koran is that it's written in verse. Which makes it a good read. But when Mohammed (lets assume the book was actually written by him) searched for words he/she went for meter and poetic expression rather than accuracy. This is not a work suitable for being picked apart by lawmakers or philosophers. It's packed with ambiguities. Hence the need for a Sharia. Ie an interpreting body to explain what the Koran is saying. Which is great if the goal is to get a functioning state based on rule of law, that is flexible enough to adapt to a changing world. Ie, the holy book as an empty symbol on which we can project whatever it is we need. Karen Armstrong, in her History of God makes her best to make this argument.

I personally don't really buy it. It reeks of apologism. I suspect it's much simpler. Mohammed was clearly a guy who was good at thinking on his feet. We have enough historical evidence to say that the man actually lived for real and probably did all the things attributed to him. Considering all the stuff he pulled off... the man must have been some sort of genius. And if he was a genius he of course must have had the insight that the high stakes gambles he was continually making was unlikely to pay off. I don't think he knew where the fuck he was going with this Islam thing. I think he continually looked for openings to exploit and pushed where he could, and retreated where he had to. Compromised whenever it was smart to. Remember, the guy was raised a merchant. He knew how to gamble intelligently and to capitalise on gains. I think he kept it vague on purpose. So he could after the fact, change whatever it was he had said earlier. The switching of direction of worship from Jerusalem to Mecca proves the point ( http://quran.com/2/144 ). I don't think he had a clue how far he could take Islam, or even where he was going. I think he was just as surprised as everybody else of Islam's successes. And as the great leader he, undoubtedly was, he made the best of it.

It's one thing to lead a sect. Any sociopath can do that. But to create a government and system of rule around you, that survives one's death... that takes leadership skills that a mere prophet hearing voices from God in his head will never be able to do. Mohammed must have been able to attract capable lieutenants and been able to delegate powers wisely. Successful people don't live with their head in the skies dreaming. They're quite earthy kind of people. People who get shit done. If all Mohammed was, was a poet with the magical and mysterious power of talking to God... there is no way he would have been more than a passing fad.

 

[Underseer]

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130608033430AAebzSw

So the challenge is, that it's not possible for men to write a book like the Koran, even if they are helped by supernatural Djinn? Seriously? That's it?

But that's been met time and time again! What a silly "challenge" to claim. Some of the books "the like of the Koran" are serious, some are fiction, some are satire even. But Many many supernatural works have been put forth, and quite a few of them more coherent and useful than the Koran.

I think JRR Tolkein wrote a much better book than the Koran, and he didn't even have magic Djinn to help him!
And then there's L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith, who wrote books much like the Koran and even got followers just like the Koran.
Confucious wrote a whole lot of useful rules into a book - some of them are out of date and no longer useful (like the Koran, the bible and the Torah) but some are actually still quite wise and useful.

So yeah, this "challenge" is to actual challenges like crayons are to quantum networks.

Yeah, pretty much any book you can imagine is better than the Bible or the Koran. In fact it would take less time to list the books that are worse.

 

[DBT]

S:
Not true:

The standing challenge of the Qur'an for about fourteen hundred years is the testimony for the credibility of the prophet Muhammad:

Surah Al-Israa Ruku 10 Surah 17

88 Say: Verily, though mankind and the Jinn should assemble to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof though they were helpers one of another.

M. Pickthall Quran Translation

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130608033430AAebzSw

Saeed H H Alyousuf

You are aware that there are several other holy books, just like the Qu'ran. The bad news is that Buddhism has a good rule set that is much more abbreviated and universal, making it much more superior due to its comprehensiveness despite its brevity.

In relation to philosophy and ethics, Buddhism stands a head and shoulders above the rest. Hardly even a comparison...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

S:
Not true:

The standing challenge of the Qur'an for about fourteen hundred years is the testimony for the credibility of the prophet Muhammad:

Surah Al-Israa Ruku 10 Surah 17

88 Say: Verily, though mankind and the Jinn should assemble to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof though they were helpers one of another.

M. Pickthall Quran Translation

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130608033430AAebzSw

Saeed H H Alyousuf

You are aware that there are several other holy books, just like the Qu'ran. The bad news is that Buddhism has a good rule set that is much more abbreviated and universal, making it much more superior due to its comprehensiveness despite its brevity.

In relation to philosophy and ethics, Buddhism stands a head and shoulders above the rest. Hardly even a comparison...

It is the gold standard... how to do it... what the Qu'ran tried to do so inefficiently... and apparently based on the warring between Muslims, very poorly.

 

[Kharakov]

S:
Not true:

The standing challenge of the Qur'an for about fourteen hundred years is the testimony for the credibility of the prophet Muhammad:

Surah Al-Israa Ruku 10 Surah 17

88 Say: Verily, though mankind and the Jinn should assemble to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof though they were helpers one of another.

M. Pickthall Quran Translation

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130608033430AAebzSw

Saeed H H Alyousuf

You are aware that there are several other holy books, just like the Qu'ran. The bad news is that Buddhism has a good rule set that is much more abbreviated and universal, making it much more superior due to its comprehensiveness despite its brevity.

In relation to philosophy and ethics, Buddhism stands a head and shoulders above the rest. Hardly even a comparison...

It is the gold standard... how to do it... what the Qu'ran tried to do so inefficiently... and apparently based on the warring between Muslims, very poorly.

If the Qu'ran has an organized message in 3 dimensions, it is a good argument for design by God (or a higher power). This doesn't mean that the original language is the one with the 3d message- it could be in the English, Latin, Spanish, Portuguese, or phonetic Chinese translation.

I had better elucidate how to find a 3d message-

1. A book that is written in 3d uses equal character spacing.
2. One traces characters through the book
   1. a letter on the front of the page is directly in front of a letter on the back of the page
   2. the following page's letter in the same place being the next letter in the sequence
   3. the letter on the reverse side of this page being the next....
3. if the characters form coherent messages from front to back of the book, you've found a 3d hidden message

So.....

Anyway..

 

[jonJ]

1. if the characters form coherent messages from front to back of the book, you've found a 3d hidden message

In that particular edition. Or rather, that particular printing of that particular edition.

How would it work with e-books?

 

[Kharakov]

1. if the characters form coherent messages from front to back of the book, you've found a 3d hidden message

In that particular edition. Or rather, that particular printing of that particular edition.

How would it work with e-books?

Probably easier- that's what I was imagining anyway, for ease of use. I'm pretty sure people have already done something similar with the "bible code" stuff by selecting every 704th letter, or some such stuff. In fact, it would probably be fairly easy to do with Project Gutenberg texts that are available online.

Set characters per page as something specific (2020):

(character 1, page 1), (character 1, page 2), (character 1, page 3) .... (character 1, last page)
(character 2, page 2), (character 2, page 2), (character 2, page 3) .... (character 2, last page)
.
.
.

Maybe set characters per page so that there would only be a page worth of characters in a single character position through the whole book (so if a page worth of characters=2020, one would make the book have 2020 pages, even though this makes the original format book a bit smaller).


Could use this: http://textmechanic.com/Delimited-Column-Extractor.html

 

[DrZoidberg]

In that particular edition. Or rather, that particular printing of that particular edition.

How would it work with e-books?

Probably easier- that's what I was imagining anyway, for ease of use. I'm pretty sure people have already done something similar with the "bible code" stuff by selecting every 704th letter, or some such stuff. In fact, it would probably be fairly easy to do with Project Gutenberg texts that are available online.

Set characters per page as something specific (2020):

(character 1, page 1), (character 1, page 2), (character 1, page 3) .... (character 1, last page)
(character 2, page 2), (character 2, page 2), (character 2, page 3) .... (character 2, last page)
.
.
.

Maybe set characters per page so that there would only be a page worth of characters in a single character position through the whole book (so if a page worth of characters=2020, one would make the book have 2020 pages, even though this makes the original format book a bit smaller).


Could use this: http://textmechanic.com/Delimited-Column-Extractor.html

This only works if we've got some sort of dependable original. Both the Quran and the Bible have been tampered with considerably since they were first written.

This 1972 find of a huge collection of early Qurans killed any notions of a monolithic work. Early Qurans varied tremendously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sana'a_manuscript

The only reason we have a singular Quran of general use today is because of the Ottoman empire. When the printing press came along, there was for the first time in history a technology available to make sure multiple copies of books were identical. Since they ruled nearly all of the Muslim world they could simply decided on one of the Qurans to be the official version and ordered the rest to be collected and burned (not a heresy since they weren't considered real Qurans). We don't have any original. The earliest surviving copy dates to 710 AD, almost a hundred years after Mohammed died. In the world of books copied by hand, that is close to an eternity. That's enough time to warp any book beyond recognition. So we have no idea how the first Quran looked like. We have an inkling. But Quranic numerology is just fucking dumb-ass. Just as stupid as with the Bible.

There's more here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Quran