Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Travis
Worship Creator, not creation..Christanity, Judaisam and all the religions worship creation itself. but islam is the only religion who worship Creator
If superiority in the universe is defined by servanthood and mastership, then by looking at the kingdom of God, man will find that he is the master of every thing else in the universe. All genera serve him: the genus right beneath him, which is the animals, and the genus beneath the animals, which is the plants, and what is beneath the plants, which is the inanimate beings. Those genera are classified with great wisdom, such that the inferior genus would serve all genera superior to it.
For example, the inanimate beings that we see around us, such as the sun, the moon, the mountains, the elements of the earth and the water, they all serve the genera above them. They serve the plants and provide it with food and all the elements required for its growth. They also serve animals providing it with the essential elements for its survival and continuance. The inanimate beings also serve man, providing him with all the necessary elements of life.
If we ascend one level to the plants, we do not find it serving its inferior genus, which is the inanimate beings, but serving the superior genera to it which are the animals and the human beings. If we ascend one more time to the animals, we still will not find it serving its inferiors, but again serving its superior genus, which is the human being. Then the circle of servanthood stops, and we do not find any other genera that man would serve. So the servanthood in the whole universe has stopped at the level of man and now man should look for his mission in this world.
The inanimate beings have a mission to do in serving the plants, animals and human beings, and the plants have a mission to do in serving the animals and the humans. Also the animals have a mission to do for the humans. And then servanthood stops. So man, what is your mission as a human being? And who are you serving in this world? You have been deceived by your innovation of a lot of the secrets of the universe. And as a rational being with the ability to reason you ought to have understood your mission first, before you try to figure out the mission of others serving you.
This is the first task for the mind: man has to look for his mission in life. If he does not search for it, then he must consider himself lower than the inanimate beings, less significant than the plants, and more trivial than the animals. But how would the master be less important than the servant? Therefore, man as a master ought to have a mission appropriate to his mastership over the rest of the genera.
This is one stance that man ought to stand. There is yet another stance: You as a human being served by all other genera, when did those genera serve you?
Did they serve you after you possessed a mind, and after you have used that mind to control them and make them serve you?
Or did those genera serve you before you obtained your mind and before you had the ability to reason?
Did they serve you because they are under your control following your commands?
Did you command the sun to shine, the moon to rise, the air to move and the sky to rain? Definitely, you did not have power over any of this!
You were not supposed to accept your existence in life in such a passive attitude, where you only benefit from others. Your duty is to look for your own mission in this world so that you would not be less significant than those beneath you.
Everything else serves you, and who do you serve? You ought to examine that and give it some thought. Suppose that you were alone at home with no one else around you and then you woke up and found a table with a variety of food set for your breakfast. Is it not common sense to use your own mind and try to find out who set up the table for you?
In this world, you are just like that person who found things at his service, without having power over them and without even knowing about them. It is your duty as a human being to search for whoever created those things and made them subservient to you, without you having any power over them and even before you got your own mind. Allah bestows mercy on people to lead them out of their negligence by sending them messengers to solve those mysteries: Who provided you with those things that you have no power over them? And who has made them subservient to you before even you can have any power to control them? The messengers came to solve this mystery for us. So when God sent His messenger, you ought to have listened carefully to them so that you can get the puzzle sorted out. By that you would regain your value in this world, instead of being a negligible person without a function or a determined mission. You should have listened to the messenger and obeyed him better than deafening your ears and turning away from him. This is another absolute foolishness.
The first irrational act from you is ignoring your mission. And the second one is that you turned away from those who came to solve the mystery for you. However, Allah is merciful and He continued to send his messengers to remind us because he is the All Merciful God. He knows the negligence of the human being. He sent the messengers so that no one could claim that he did not know. But did Allah (SWT) send the messengers to establish those matters of servanthood and mastership? Of course not, those rules have always been there, He (SWT) sent the messengers to remind the people. So normally the concept of mans mission in life should be well known, and at a point in time man forgets his role and then Allah (SWT) would send His messenger as a mere reminder to the people
They're obviously not the same BOOK/collection of books but they are considered in the same category of religious texts. They're the same KIND of book. Meaning, both of them are books that religions are based upon. Same religion or views or content, no.
Maryam:
"Can an omnipotent being create a stone that is so heavy the being cannot lift it?
If he cannot create it, then isn't that a flaw in his omnipotence?
If he can create it, but cannot lift it, then isn't that a flaw in his omnipotence?
The answer is very simple: "Yes he can create it; and no it's not a flaw that he cannot lift it.".
The problem is choice again."
wrong, read again what i said:
If god can do everything,
Can god create a stone that he cannot lift?
Omnipotence deals with power,
But christians claim that god can do everything, not just omnipotence.
so
"If god can do everything, Can god create a stone that he cannot lift?"
does not equal this:
"Can an omnipotent being create a stone that is so heavy the being cannot lift it?"
Apart from that, there is an other flaw in your argument, a major one at that:
"The problem is choice again"
This just shows how much you did not understand the question.
I did not say:
Can god create a stone that he WILL NOT lift?
I said:
Can god create a stone that he CANNOT lift?
There is a huge difference.
One implies that he chooses not to be able to lift it.
The other is saying that god does not have the ability to do something.
Meaning, he cannot do everything like Christians say in every mass, everyday.
An other major flaw is your understanding of the basic English:
Everything means everything, no exception.
And yes, it means that he can make water not wet, fire not hot, etc...
EVERYTHING means EVERYTHING
If that wasn't the case , you been admitting that whoever says that god can do everything is outright lying or at least manipulating the truth.
That includes the entire Theistic community.
We atheists already know that they are hypocrite in nature and most of them are lairs, so it comes at no surprise.
Jeff
It's simple if God can make water not wet, fire not hot, etc then what would be the purpose of making that. ??
"The problem is choice again" Human beings have bestowed with Intelligence so that we make a diffrence between right and wrong.
Is that even an answer maryam?
"If god can do everything,
Can god create a stone that he cannot lift?"
Can he lift everything?
Yes or No?
Can he create everything?
Yes or No?
If both are yes, there is no choice in the matter, there is a contradiction when creating a rock he cannot lift.
If both or any are No, then Theists are lying.
Plain and simple
There is no choice anywhere.
If you insist about choice then you are just admitting to me that you have given up reason for gullibility.
Which means you are ready to believe anything everybody tells you even if it does not make sens.
You must make it make sens somehow.
An other point here is that we are rational people.
Thus we give credence to logic over human claims.
Theism is constantly trying to do the opposite, to give credence to human claims rather then logic.
The idea that God can do everything is needed to justify most of the illogical things happening around us.
It is used as a general purpose Theistic LAW.
Sane people know that 1+1 is not -5,
If god can do everything he can make 1+1= -5 because he can do everything.
Now the vast possibility 99.99999999999999999999999% is that logic is universal and thus god cannot do everything.
Meaning that the possibility of the human claim that god can do everything is less then 0.0000000000000000000000001%
Why the possibility of a human to lie is 99.99999999999999999999999%
Now you are insisting that humans are not lying when they are claiming that god can do everything.
Sane people consider this insistence as insanity or stupidity.
This is my honest opinion which I think is shared by most if not all sane people.
Jeff,
Concept of omnipotence is a bit different in Islam. It is not not like, ''God can do anything''. It is like, ''God can do anything Godly''. And what can he do is what he does and what he plans to do. The question is supposed to be within this clause and the question asked doesn't fit here.
So, Can god create a stone which he can't lift is inconsistent because God doesn't do such things.
God in Islam is called omnipotent on the basis that he does what he wants to do.
So does he want to create a stone that he can't lift?
No. So the question about him being able to create it doesn't exist. The omnipotence in Islam doesn't mean God can do anything, it is God can do anything logical.
If God can do anything, can He make it impossible for himself to do something?
The question is illogical and self-contradictory because the argument contradicts the premise.
He can do anything that is consistent with His nature, anything that is absolute.
Can God make 1=2? Well if 1=2, then it wouldn't be 1!
So the idea is self-contradictory, not God.
The question also reminds me of the idea of what happens when an immovable rock meets an unstoppable force?
The two things cannot exist in the same universe. Likewise, if God exists then all things which contradict His attributes are imaginary, non-existant and impossible.
They are forever bound to the realm of imagination and cannot be brought into existence.
God will not lift something created by Himself but rather he will make it lift by someone like you ( another created objected )
God is something beyond imagination , so it is impossible to make an assumptions or apply our understanding on God.
This type of argument occurs when the sentences work grammatically but have no intelligible meaning, since the meaning conveyed by the sentences is self-contradictory.
It is an old philosopher’s trick. The argument looks sensible on the surface, but contains a logical fallacy.
When we talk about lifting a stone, we are merely referring to moving it form one point in space to another. Of course, we cannot doubt that Allah has the power to cause a stone to be in any point in space that He wishes.
We need to understand what the argument is really saying. When someone proposes that “He cannot lift it”, he is essentially proposing that He is incapable of something – in this case of having the stone move to a different point in space. The argument is really only proposing His being capable of being incapable!
Therefore, by removing the words “stone” and “lift” from the argument, we get to the essence of the argument, which we can express as follows:
Muslims say that Allah is capable of all things.
Therefore, is Allah capable of being incapable?
If he is capable of being incapable, then he is incapable of something.
If he is incapable of being incapable, then he is incapable of something.
You see, once we remove the words “lifting a stone” form the argument and get down to its bare bones, it becomes clear to us just what a silly, nonsensical argument it really is
Well at least you try to answer better now.
So you are practically admitting that god cannot do everything right?
because "Islam doesn't mean God can do anything, it is God can do anything logical."
So remember to correct your theistic friends that god cannot do everything but he is limited by logic too.
If your head is still on your shoulder after that, you would have proven to me to me that Islam is making progress lol
Now to your "silly, nonsensical argument".
One mistake in your second, just for info:
"If he is incapable of being incapable, then he is incapable of something."
you mean :
If he is incapable of being incapablecapable(of lifting the rock), then he is incapable of something.
Does the argument make sens now?
"Muslims say that Allah is capable of all things."
Muslims do say this and it is quite a fact that they say it, do i need to quote?
Do you accept the fact that they are wrong or lying here or do we have to go to the "silly, nonsensical argument" again?
They are the ones making that claim not us. We are just pointing it out.
Though I agree at the "bare bones" it is PART of what they are implying is out of stupidity or ignorance.
The problem is that theist LIKE this kind of stupidity and ignorance and promote it accordingly.
I have seen no effort what so ever from theist to correct this HUGE exaggeration or LIE about their own god.
That is why Theism is evil in nature, it promotes dishonesty.
Jeff, don’t take my answers in a wrong way.. I can answer you but the problem here is MY ENGLISH IS NOT THE BEST. Anyhow I will clarify you in the best way I can…!!!!
Let’s come to the point .
As I said in my previous reply
"Islam doesn't mean God can do anything, it is God can do anything logical."
What I mean here is that God is not limited by logic, God can do certainly everything.. here the logic is for us. Logic is for human beings , because we human beings cannot understand illogical things.
“Can God make 1=2? Well if 1=2, then it wouldn't be 1!
So the idea is self-contradictory, not God.
I would like to clarify again what the concept of 'omnipotence', as used with reference to God, implies. To fully understand the implication of the 'omnipotence' of God, we should keep in mind that God is not ONLY 'omnipotent'.
God's omnipotence is subject to His mercy, wisdom, omniscience and His other attributes. Therefore, it would not be very accurate to say that 'God can do everything/anything'.
A more accurate statement would be 'God can do everything/anything that His wisdom/mercy/omniscience/etc. require Him to do'.
Hence, even though God is 'omnipotent', yet He CANNOT do anything, which is contrary to His other attributes.
Thus, one may ask: "If God is 'omnipotent', can He create another one like Himself?"
Or
"if God is 'omnipotent' can He commit suicide?"
Or
"If God is 'omnipotent', can he throw the pious in Hell and place the evil in heaven?"
All these questions are, in fact, based on a 'Playing Tom' view of an omnipotent God.
God is absolutely clear of all wrong and, therefore, even though He is 'omnipotent', yet He CANNOT do anything, which is against His wisdom, justice, knowledge etc.
It should, therefore, remain clear that God's omnipotence is conditional upon His other attributes.
The fact that God is 'omnipotent' implies that, if His wisdom so requires, there is no limit on the largeness of a stone that He can make. It also implies that, if His wisdom so requires, there is no limit on His capacity of lifting stones.
Both the capacities - that of creation as well as that of lifting - are unlimited; neither of the two knows any limits.
Now, when someone asks whether God can make a stone, which He Himself cannot lift, the question can actually be rephrased as:
'Can God limit His power of creation?' or 'Can God limit His power of lifting stones?
In other words, the question, in fact, is similar to 'Can God create something (a stone), upon which He loses control?' or that 'Can God create another God.
I hope you use your logic here. Don’t accept things which are pleasing to you. Look for Truth..!!!
Apart that you did not answer most of my reply especially regarding theist dishonesty.
I will correct some of your mistakes here:
"What I mean here is that God is not limited by logic, God can do certainly everything.. here the logic is for us. Logic is for human beings , because we human beings cannot understand illogical things."
You are assuming that an illogical god exists here.
Which is stupid to say the least.
Then you are implying that logic is for humans only and is not universal.
Then you are claiming that we cannot understand illogical things as if illogical things even exist.
What we do not think are logical today is just because we haven't understood them yet not because they are illogical. History proved that.
You are making a ton of unsupported claims here that not only show a huge level of stupidity but makes me want to quit debating you since i am wasting my time.
"God is absolutely clear of all wrong" How do you know that? Ahh yes a book told you.
"What I mean here is that God is not limited by logic, God can do certainly everything."
"He is 'omnipotent', yet He CANNOT do anything, which is against His wisdom, justice, knowledge etc."
You are illogical here, who told you that his "wisdom, justice, knowledge" limits god's ability to do anything?
Ahh yes you invented it.
If someone claims that god can do everything like you just did, it means EVERYTHING, no exceptions.
Neither logic, wisdom, justice or knowledge can make an exception to the rule.
EVERYTHING means EVERYTHING.
This is the reason why either theists are wrong when claiming that god can do EVERYTHING or they are they are claiming that god defies logic which is universal.
Thus making a theistic god less then 0.00000000000000000000001 % chance to exist.
Making all theist either insane or stupid to believe in such an absurdity.
The Quran and Old Testament came from the same religion. They are just different version of the account. They both come from Judea. Some books in the KJV are not in the Quran and vice versa. A few names change as well. The Muslims believe Jesus existed, just was not the Messiah. They believe he was just another profit and Mohammed is the Messiah. Of course you know the Christians side of the story.( Although I encourage you to research the Council of Nicea), and last but not least, the Jews believe the Messiah has not been born yet since no biblical figure has upheld to the Mosaic prophecies. They say Jesus is not the Messiah bc of their teachings,and I think the KJV old testament says the same, that the Messiah must uphold all the Mosaic prophecies to prove to them he is in fact him. It also said he had to live up to all of them not even one could be missed. There are just some that are impossible for Jesus to uphold, example, he can never be the descendent of King David because he is a demi god. So that's how they are all connected, they came from Judaism then split into their own factions after fighting about who the Messiah was among other things.
-The Messianic Prophecies we invented by Jewish priests after the babilonean Exile to give hope to the people
-Christianity was invented by the Romans by abusing some of the Messianic Prophecies to establish the new imperial family as divine and to counter the rebellion that the Jews were plotting against rome, since their usual militaristic approach did not work.
- Islam was invent by the leaders of the power vacuum left by the weakened Persian and byzantine empire to unite the middle east. They just copied Christianity but instead of making Jesus portraying the roman emperor(Titus) as his second coming they portray Mohamed instead.
It is just a way to control empires, since different religions in the same empire does not create unity but division.
Religion only purpose is to control the people, if there is no control then it is useless.
Conclusion:
Christianity and Islam is like Religion version 2.0 and that is why they were so successful, because world Leaders used them for their practicality.
Concerning the point of copying from the Holy Book, A Christian scholar , now a Muslim, says in his book "I recognized that there were two possibilities:
(1) The Prophet Muhammad did steal his material or
(2) The revelation he received was from the same god who sent Moses, Jesus and the earlier prophets, as the Prophet Muhammad himself claimed. If it were the latter, it would explain why there would be much overlap in the teachings and message. The same God sent the earlier prophets and is simply recounting their stories again in the new revelation.
However, I immediately started to notice some glaring differences between the Quran and the Bible, even with respect to the teachings about God. If the Prophet Muhammad was “editing” what he was hearing from the Bible—and by the way, at that time, there was no Bible available in Arabic—then he was doing an excellent job.
I found that the strange teachings about God that one finds throughout the Bible are completely and unequivocally missing from the Quran. For the sake of brevity, only a few examples illustrating this point shall be given.
The New International Version of Genesis 3:8-11, reads,“Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden.
(9) But the LORD God called to the man, “Where are you?”
(10) He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.”
11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”
Here, God is pictured as walking in the garden in the cool of the day. What is even more astonishing is that Adam and Eve were able to hide from God and he had to ask, “Where are you?” If a human is able to hide from Him in the garden, how is it that this Lord is going to have knowledge of the sins that people commit?
It would be difficult for any human to gender in his heart the kind of love and fear of God that he should have when he believes that his God is so faulty and weak that an event like this could occur to him.
In Genesis 32:24-28, there is the story and literal description of Jacob wrestling with and defeating God. In verse 28, it says,
“You [Jacob] have wrestled with God and with men, and you have won.” In other words, the creator of the universe whom mankind is expected to worship and submit to was defeated by a mere mortal in a wrestling match.
The Old Testament even pictures God as one who intended to do evil but then repented. Exodus32:14states:
“And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people” (KingJames Version).
It would not be surprising for anyone to turn away from God and not consider Him worthy of worship if He himself has to repent from His own evil.
The Old and New Testaments distort the image of the prophets and defame them. Some prophets got drunk! Some showed their nakedness to others! Some pretend foolishness! And some fornicate and commit adultery!
In the Qur'an, these distortions are non-existent. The reader to the Qur'an will find continuous glorification to the prophets of God because they are the `God-Elects' and they are the most righteous of all men.
The story of creation and human history in the Old Testament contradicts the most basic science findings.
In the Qur'an, there are many verses of a scientific nature that discuss the creation, the development of the embryo, the origin of fresh underground water, and other physical and scientific phenomena that were discovered hundreds of years after the revelation of the Qur'an. None of these verses contradict any of the proven scientific facts.
Now, if the Qur'an had a Jewish-Christian' origin, one would expect to find in the Qur'an the same errors and distortions that are in the Old and New Testaments.
The question that must be asked here:
How could Muhammad correct the distortions in the Old and New Testaments?
Another more question is that "How can you interpret the existence of some stories which were not mentioned in the widely-known bibles but only found in some codices that were found recently , these were not known tot he contemporary Christians of prophet Mohammed ,moreover they were in languages that were at that time defunct . Did Muhammed read the Pseudepigrapha which was not known to his contemporary Christians.
Did Muhammed read the Red Sea scroll , which remained hidden in one of the caves of the Dead sea and only were found in the 1948 ?
Did Mohammed read the codices of Naga Hamadi in Egypt and that were only found a few years ago?
Did Muhammed read the Bible of Judas which was found recently in Egypt and only translated into English a few years ago in US .
This bible in conformity with the Holy Quran concerning the story of Crucifixion , it states thati t was not Jesus who was crucified and some one else was.
Did Mohammed know all of these languages that these codices were written in?
These books were written on leather , so huge and so easily to be notices by his enemies who were searching for any proof against his prophethood.
The similarity between the Holy Quran and the Holy Book doesn't mean that the Holy Quran borrows from them , it means that both came from the same source.
Does Similarities imply borrowing ?
Let's start with an example. Prophet Noah(P)was given certain commandments. So was Prophet Moses(P)after him. If we were to see
that the followers of Prophet Noah (P)accusing of the followers of Prophet Moses(P), how do we expect the followers of Prophet
Moses(P) to respond? We might hear a response like this
The Law has come from the same source (from the one and only God),Of course we would expect similar teachings and not such as
God is a twin or has a daughter from eternity etc.
Any differences from absolute similarities would mean correction of the message that got corrupted .
Any other differences would mean additional Law with the newer revelation.
The new revelation from the same source comes with its own proof and evidences, otherwise anyone can attempt to invent 'revelation' (while not coming from that same source - God) and mislead many thereby.
If there were no proofs or evidences then how can someone verify its truthfulness and authenticity, believe in it and accept it ?
We will thus see that the emphasis shifts to verifying the inherent proofs or evidences of the fresh revelation when older (or traces of the older) revelation still exists.
Therefore, similarity between two revelations can even imply that the later revelation is from God.
No one is interested in your copy/paste apologetics, for any religion. You didn't even fix the typos!
Whatever it may be it's my right to provide the authentic sources...I fix it almost...!!!
If you look at the top of the page, this is a debate section. Maybe I'm crazy but copying and pasted pages and pages of material from another site does not seem like debate, no matter the content. What it does seem like is spam....
Yea i know it's a debate section. But i took only the authenticated sources so that it may be clear to the people who are claiming false about something which they actually don't know about it.
I think you don't know the meaning of spam... IT'S NOT SPAM..
What if the same matter i write IT instead of copying and pasting..
I Thought that answer would help to clarify the false claim..
Jeff
Have you heard of books? I suggest you go out and read some - quick. If you're low on funds then you should have a local library somewhere.
“In the Qur'an, these distortions are non-existent. The reader to the Qur'an will find continuous glorification to the prophets of God because they are the `God-Elects' and they are the most righteous of all men.”
Anyone, given a cursory objective look at the text can tell that it was written that way; to make it seem that way; so people would only see what they wanted them to see; know only what they wanted them to know. Aside from the obvious fact that the text was written and inspired by men – and men alone, there is nothing said or written in the Qur’an that couldn’t have been written by the men of that time period. If I was going to write a religious book, and I wanted to make it seem as authentic and ‘God-inspired’ as possible, of course I would make all my ‘prophets’ completely righteous. Of course I would make every attempt to make it as ‘accurate’ (or make it seem that way) as possible.
Referring to a holy book as a point of authority or as a justification of one’s beliefs makes people look ignorant. As mentioned earlier in this thread, for someone who already believes in his/her religion, looking at their holy books objectively is next to impossible or at the very least extremely difficult.
Greys,
What about the scientific Verses of Quran which exactly states about Human embryology, oceanology, cosmology, Dermatology, animal life kingdom and many more ??
A brief explanation of Oceanology
“He is the one who has set free the two kinds of water, one sweet and palatable, and the other salty bitter. And he has made between them a forbidding partition.” (Qur’an, 25:53)
This info has been discovered only recently, using advanced equipment to measure temperature, salinity, density etc.
The human eye cannot see the difference between the two seas that meet, rather the two seas appear to us one homogenous sea.
We cannot see division of water into the three kinds (fresh water, salt water, and the partition (zone separation)
If this was not revealed from God, How could Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) have known it when he never came near the sea in his life?
Mecca is just east of the Red Sea...a saltwater sea. And you know absolutely that this person never went there or talked to anyone who did?
Cyber LN
The verse mentions about Mediterranean sea water [warm, saline] and Atlantic ocean....!!!
Aw .... disappointed..... and you had been doing so well....
Delusional but sincere.... and now you come up with an outright lie .... and you do know the Quran ...so you know its a lie.
"25:53 And He it is Who hath given independence to the two seas (though they meet); one palatable, sweet, and the other saltish, bitter; and hath set a bar and a forbidding ban between them."
This you claim to be a reference to the Atlantic meeting the Mediterranean..... sorry ... both seas are salt... neither is "palatable and sweet" and there is no "bar" between them. (true the straits of Gibraltar narrow but there is no bar.)
Watchman
Oh really…..!!! But sorry you’re wrong here…
No, its not a lie . Islam is truth
"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong." [Quran 2:256]
Mediterranean Sea water is warm, saline, and less dense, compared to Atlantic Ocean water.
When Mediterranean Sea water enters the Atlantic over the Gibraltar still, it moves several hundred kilometers into the Atlantic at a depth about 1000 meters with its own warm, saline, and less dense characteristics. (Principles of oceanography)
Although there are large waves, strong currents, and tides in these seas, they do not mix or transgress.
Go through this link http://www.answering-christianity.com/oceanology.htm
Maryam ..
I made no claim about Islam ... The lie I called you out on was your reference to ,
“He is the one who has set free the two kinds of water, one sweet and palatable, and the other salty bitter. And he has made between them a forbidding partition.” (Qur’an, 25:53)
And the claim that it refers to the Atlantic and the Mediterranean ...
I can assure you that both seas are saline ...not one of them is "one sweet and palatable, and the other salty bitter"
Plus if your misdirection was correct ...then how can the waters mingle ? There is a bar ...is there not ???
In the correct verse (which I note you chose to "edit") .... "25:53 And He it is Who hath given independence to the two seas (though they meet); one palatable, sweet, and the other saltish, bitter; and hath set a bar and a forbidding ban between them.
You see ... In English we have words for most things and the word for propagating an untruth is ...lying ... sorry if you find that offensive ...
maryam-"The human eye cannot see the difference between the two seas that meet, rather the two seas appear to us one homogenous sea.
We cannot see division of water into the three kinds (fresh water, salt water, and the partition (zone separation)"
LOL, you are implying people in the past couldn't tell the difference between salt water and fresh water. People in the past had taste buds.
Have you ponder what i actually said.
Although people in the past had taste-buds but they cannot see the difference between the two seas that meet..
As usual the devil is in the details. The Koran says the division between salt water and fresh water is a "a partition that is forbidden to be passed". However this is not actually true: salt concentration are homogenized across these regions at a slow rate. So what the Koran says is forbidden, actually happens.
The verse says nothing about the waters never mixing. It says that they remain separate.
The freshwater layer does not get "overtaken" by the saltwater and the saltwater does not get diluted by the freshwater because the middle layer acts as a boundary.
Brackish water at the meeting of a river and the ocean can also be seen as a "barrier" in that sense.
The Qur’an mentions the partition when speaking about the divider between fresh and salt water, but did not mention it when speaking about the divider between the two seas
Modern science has discovered that in estuaries, where fresh and salt water meet, the situation is somewhat different from what is found in places where two seas meet.
It has been discovered that what distinguishes fresh water from salt water in estuaries is a “ pycnocline zone with a marked density discontinuity separating the two layers ( oceanography, Gross, p. 242)
Maryam ...
Please ....
"The verse says nothing about the waters never mixing. It says that they remain separate." .....
So ...let me get this straight .....
the verse says nothing about waters never mixing. It says they remain separate ....
and so never mix
remaining separate ????
Nope ... you got me there ...
"The Qur’an mentions the partition when speaking about the divider between fresh and salt water, but did not mention it when speaking about the divider between the two seas"
Nope.... that's merely your interpretation ....
Oh wait ... let me guess ... its different in the original Arabic?
Pages