|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ummm, Greece? More nonsense UK.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Campbell/s4c2b.html
Quote: |
in one and the same paragraph.
Hippocrates said in the third chapter of Kitab al-ajinna: "... The semen is contained in a membrane, and it grows because of the blood of its mother which descends to the womb[47] ... Some membranes are formed at the beginning, others after the second month, and others in the third month ..." That is why God says, "He creates you in the wombs of your mothers, by one formation after another in three darknesses" (Qur'an 39:6). Since each of these membranes has its own darkness, when God mentioned the stages of creation and transformation from one state to another, He also mentioned the darknesses of the membranes. Most commentators explain: 'it is the darkness of the belly, and the darkness of the womb, and the darkness of the placenta' ...
In a second example we read,
Hippocrates said, "The mouth opens up spontaneously, and the nose and ears are formed from the flesh. The ears are opened, and the eyes, which are filled with a clear liquid." The Prophet used to say, 'I worship Him Who made my face and formed it, and opened my hearing and eyesight' etc. etc."[48]
He could do this because, as we have seen, the educated people of Muhammad's time were familiar with Greek medicine.
However, what is important for us sitting here today to realize is that there is no place where the Qur'an corrected Greek medicine. There is no place where Ibn Qayyim was shouting "Hay you guys. You've got this all wrong. The correct meaning of �alaqa is "that which clings" or "leech-like substance." On the contrary, Ibn Qayyim was demonstrating the agreement between the Qur'an and Greek medicine--their agreement in error. |
This is more of MM2's thing. I don't really have the patience to snap whatever strings you are holding onto as justification for your beliefs. But I'll try.
Two down. Keep em' comin. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
fromtheuk
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Muhammad was illiterate. When did the arabs of that time have access to greek literature and when is it documented in the time of Muhammad that he studied it?!!!
Also, why did he manage to 'plagiarise' only correct statements and omit all false statements from sources he is alleged to have copied from?!!!
So, quoting many sources, which admitly are correct on many issues does not disprove the Qur'an, it shows the only possible source for the Qur'an could be from a higher source than man.
You haven't answered either of my points, you have attempted to explain them away with really mediocre reasoning, which was utterly disproved in my last post.
When you copy something you end up copying what's true and false. Right? If Muhammad had copied others, the mistakes would have been copied too. As those mistakes are not in the Qur'an, you cannot explain how or why they were omitted.
The answer is obvious, mistakes aren't in the Qur'an, because it is from God. I'm off to bed now, but read this and try and explain it:
A MATHEMATICAL APPROACH
All of the examples so far given concerning the various angles from which one can approach the Qur'an have undoubtedly been subjective in nature; however, there does exist another angle, among others, which is objective and whose basis is mathematical.
It is surprising how authentic the Qur'an becomes when one assembles what might be referred to as a list of good guesses. Mathematically, it can be explained using guessing and prediction examples. For instance, if a person has two choices (i.e., one is right, and one is wrong), and he closes his eyes and makes a choice, then half of the time (i.e., one time out of two) he will be right. Basically, he has a one in two chance, for he could pick the wrong choice, or he could pick the right choice.
Now if the same person has two situations like that (i.e., he could be right or wrong about situation number one, and he could be right or wrong about situation number two), and he closes his eyes and guesses, then he will only be right one-fourth of the time (i.e., one time out of four). He now has a one in four chance because now there are three ways for him to be wrong and only one way for him to be right. In simple terms, he could make the wrong choice in situation number one and then make the wrong choice in situation number two; or he could make the wrong choice in situation number one and then make the right choice in situation number two; or he could make the right choice in situation number one and then make the wrong choice in situation number two; or he could make the right choice in situation number one and then make the right choice in situation number two.
Of course, the (only instance in which he could be totally right is the last scenario where he could guess correctly in both situations. The odds of his guessing completely correctly have become greater because the number of situations for him to guess in have increased; and the mathematical equation representing such a scenario is � x � (i.e., one time out of two for the first situation multiplied by one time out of two for the second situation).
Continuing on with the example, if the same person now has three situations in which to make blind guesses, then he will only be right one-eighth of the time (i.e., one time out of eight or � x � x � ). Again, the odds of choosing the correct choice in all three situations have decreased his chances of being completely correct to only one time in eight. It must be understood that as the number of situations increase, the chances of being right decrease, for the two phenomena are inversely proportional.
Now applying this example to the situations in the Qur'an, if one draws up a list of all of the subjects about which the Qur'an has made correct statements, it becomes very clear that it is highly unlikely that they were all just correct blind guesses. Indeed, the subjects discussed in the Qur'an are numerous [some of them are listed in the Qur'an and Scientific Knowledge], and thus the odds of someone just making lucky guesses about all of them become practically nil. If there are a million ways for the Qur'an to be wrong, yet each time it is right, then it is unlikely that someone was guessing.
The following three examples of subjects about which the Qur'an has made correct statements collectively illustrate how the Qur'an continues to beat the odds.
THE FEMALE BEE
In the 16th chapter (Surah an-Nahl 16:68-69) the Qur'an mentions that the female bee leaves its home to gather food. Now, a person might guess on that, saying, "The bee that you see flying around - it could be male, or it could be female. I think I will guess female." Certainly, he has a one in two chance of being right. So it happens that the Qur'an is right. But it also happens that that was not what most people believed at the time when the Qur'an was revealed. Can you tell the difference between a male and a female bee? Well, it takes a specialist to do that, but it has been discovered that the male bee never leaves his home to gather food.
However, in Shakespeare's play, Henry the Fourth, some of the characters discuss bees and mention that the bees are soldiers and have a king. That is what people thought in Shakespeare's time - that the bees that one sees flying around are male bees and that they go home and answer to a king. However, that is not true at all. The fact is that they are females, and they answer to a queen. Yet it took modern scientific investigations in the last 300 years to discover that this is the case.
So, back to the list of good guesses, concerning the topic of bees, the Qur'an had a 50/50 chance of being right, and the odds were one in two.
THE SUN
In addition to the subject of bees, the Qur'an also discusses the sun and the manner in which it travels through space. Again, a person can guess on that subject. When the sun moves through space, there are two options: it can travel just as a stone would travel if one threw it, or it can move of its own accord. The Qur'an states the latter - that it moves as a result of its own motion (Surah al-Anbiya 21:33). To do such, the Qur'an uses a form of the word sabaha to describe the sun's movement through space. In order to properly provide the reader with a comprehensive understanding of the implications of this Arabic verb, the following example is given.
If a man is in water and the verb sabaha is applied in reference to his movement, it can be understood that he is swimming, moving of his own accord and not as a result of a direct force applied to him. Thus when this verb is used in reference to the sun's movement through space, it in no way implies that the sun is flying uncontrollably through space as a result of being hurled or the like. It simply means that the sun is turning and rotating as it travels. Now, this is what the Qur'an affirms, but was it an easy thing to discover? Can any common man tell that the sun is turning? Only in modern times was the equipment made available to project the image of the sun onto a tabletop so that one could look at it without being blinded. And through this process it was discovered that not only are there spots on the sun but that these spots move once every 25 days. This movement is referred to as the rotation of the sun around its axis and conclusively proves that, as the Qur'an stated 1400 years ago, the sun does, indeed, turn as it travels through space.
And returning once again to the subject of good guesses, the odds of guessing correctly about both subjects - the sex of bees and the movement of the sun - are one in four!
TIME ZONES
Seeing as back fourteen centuries ago people probably did not understand much about time zones, the Qur'an's statements about this subject are considerably surprising. The concept that one family is having breakfast as the sun comes up while another family is enjoying the brisk night air is truly something to be marveled at, even in modern time. Indeed, fourteen centuries ago, a man could not travel more than thirty miles in one day, and thus it took him literally months to travel from India to Morocco, for example. And probably, when he was having supper in Morocco, he thought to himself, "Back home in India they are having supper right now." This is because he did not realize that, in the process of traveling, he moved across a time zone. Yet, because it is the words of Allah, the All-Knowing, the Qur'an recognizes and acknowledges such a phenomenon.
In an interesting verse it states that when history comes to an end and the Day of Judgement arrives, it will all occur in an instant; and this very instant will catch some people in the daytime and some people at night. This clearly illustrates Allah's divine wisdom and His previous knowledge of the existence of time zones, even though such a discovery was non-existent back fourteen centuries ago. Certainly, this phenomenon is not something which is obvious to one's eyes or a result of one's experience, and this fact, in itself, suffices as proof of the Qur'an's authenticity. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
shaunew

Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
holy crap I just wanted to talk about the useless decisions about the Korean government. But I guess some al quede found the site and is trying to recruit some whittles. When I was in Afghanistan we ran into some crazy Muslims, they believed our bullet's could not harm them, because Mohammad protected them. Well when the first few that ran at us and there was nothing left of them but a bloody mess. The rest of the insurgents ran for cover and it turned into a fire fight. But they shoot for shat. Ended up a complete slaughter. Uk said about western soldiers going home in body bags. Yes but for 1 solider in Afghan that goes home that way their are 300 Taliban rotting away in the mountains. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dome Vans Guest
|
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
fromtheUK is right.
The koreans realised the futility of this illegal war and wanted out. The bribes from the Yanks, which I'm sure would have been better spent on the American people, was wasted on this ridiculous 'dick waving' war. These perks were outweighed by the value of thier own people.
The Koreans obviously place a higher value on their citizens' lives than the American Cannon Fodder that is being sent out for certain death with NO victory on the horizon. For a democracy the 'voice of the people' doesn't seem to reflect what the neo-con government is doing. And I don't want to hear about national security. 'The futility of War' There are no winners! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004 Location: All over the map
|
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
fromtheuk wrote: |
I don't think it is ok to be violent and kill. |
Really went out on a limb with this one, huh? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005 Location: Next to a River
|
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
Christian crusades |
Interesting wordage. It was a catholic crusade, not a christian crusade. Christ preached "do to others as you want them to do to you". He also said that not everyone who called him Lord, would enter the kingdom of heaven".
So, its not quite true to call it a christian crusade. Though if you wish to call it a christian crusade and tar all christians throughout history with that crime (war) then you must also accuse all muslims as being one and the same with Al Quada and blame them a 1000 years later as being the same.
Or, you are nothing more than hypocrites and you have given up the right to have anyone take you seriously. Therefore, choose what you feel carefully. I don't care either way. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004 Location: All over the map
|
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dome Vans wrote: |
fromtheUK is right.
The koreans realised the futility of this illegal war and wanted out. The bribes from the Yanks, which I'm sure would have been better spent on the American people, was wasted on this ridiculous '*beep* waving' war. These perks were outweighed by the value of thier own people.
The Koreans obviously place a higher value on their citizens' lives than the American Cannon Fodder that is being sent out for certain death with NO victory on the horizon. For a democracy the 'voice of the people' doesn't seem to reflect what the neo-con government is doing. And I don't want to hear about national security. 'The futility of War' There are no winners! |
No, they have given unwarranted credence, and money, to a gang of backwards-thinking thugs who are trying to usurp the power of a fledgling government that promises to allow more future rights to the citizens of that country. This is something that this bunch of murderous sh!theads will never do.
Whose side are you on? Hate the US if you want, but I personally think girls should be allowed to go to school. Even better, they should be allowed to go to school without wearing a tent.
You need to step back and take another look. Leave your USA hate at the door. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fromtheuk wrote: |
Muhammad was illiterate. When did the arabs of that time have access to greek literature and when is it documented in the time of Muhammad that he studied it?!!!
|
The quote said it was common knowledge. Like, how I've heard of cities that I've never read about or that I heard of cities before I read of them.
I'm sorry, but this little big of apologetics is not valid either.
#3? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dome Vans Guest
|
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
General backed over US attack
Politicians and military figures have thrown their weight behind General Sir Mike Jackson after he launched a scathing attack on the US for mishandling the aftermath of the Iraq war.
Sir Mike, head of the army during the 2003 invasion, lambasted Washington's post-war policy as "intellectually bankrupt".
In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, he also singled out ex-US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld for criticism, describing his claim that US forces "don't do nation-building" as "nonsensical".
Sir Mike brands the US's approach to fighting global terrorism as "inadequate" - insisting it relies too much on military power over diplomacy and nation-building.
He lays the blame for the chaos engulfing Iraq firmly at the door of Mr Rumsfeld, saying he was "one of the most responsible for the current situation".
The Ministry of Defence insisted that Sir Mike, who is retired, was now a "private individual" and entitled to air his views.
Liberal Democrat leader Menzies Campbell said: "What General Jackson has said is absolutely correct. It goes to the very heart of the lack of real planning for post-war Iraq."
Former Tory defence secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind also backed Sir Mike's intervention. He told the BBC: "I think one of the most fundamental criticisms is not just that Rumsfeld was incompetent - which he was - but it was actually his boss, George Bush, who actually made the extraordinary decision to put the Pentagon and Rumsfeld in control of political nation-building after the actual war ended."
Major General Patrick Cordingley, who commanded the Desert Rats during the 1991 Gulf War, said Sir Mike's analysis was "absolutely spot on".
"The frustration, of course, is that one wonders why he and others could not persuade the Government to listen to him so that we wouldn't be in the mess that we are in now." |
http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp-documentid=6015101
Quote: |
but I personally think girls should be allowed to go to school. Even better, they should be allowed to go to school without wearing a tent. |
Agreed. But I don't think we can judge other cultures and their traditions as though we are superior to them. As barbaric as we think it is about the women who are stoned to death for adultery in the modern day is really none of our business. They know their laws and the punishment for it. We don't have the right to feel as though we should change this. In the same way that they probably think the west's obssession with pornography is not right. America spends more on pornography in one year than the total GNP of Sub saharan Africa.
As I mentioned before you can't label Koreans woosies because they got their citizens back. Their culture places a price on their citizens lives. America does not. The futility of this war is beyond throwing people's away for no reason, anybody who thinks otherwise, needs to stop injecting themselves with testosterone, and use their brains. If anything the 'terrorists' are isolating America by removing their Allies. This happens in politics to weaken ones position. Blair went because all his 'allies' had gone. And thankfully now he's gone and we really don't hear much about him anymore. Suits me that. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bangnangja
Joined: 13 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dome Vans wrote: |
you can't label Koreans woosies because they got their citizens back. Their culture places a price on their citizens lives.
America does not. |
And that's why South Korea exists in the first place.
Yes, they are not woosies, they are selfish racist traitors.
You think they give a shit about all the people who will be killed with the ransom money they obviousely paid? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dome Vans Guest
|
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
they are selfish racist traitors. |
Haha this is good. I think they were well out of their depth when trying to stand 'shoulder to shoulder' with America. Countries can only match America's 'selfish' aggressive foreign policies for so long. That is until they realise that nothing is being achieved, if anything the situation is getting worse.
Quote: |
the US's approach to fighting global terrorism as "inadequate" - insisting it relies too much on military power over diplomacy and nation-building. |
Quote: |
Washington's post-war policy as "intellectually bankrupt". |
If the US had concentrated on finishing the job in Afghanistan then maybe they may have achieved a partial victory, but as it was they invaded Iraq before the job was done, creating 2 quagmires. This is why it is intellectually bankrupt.
Quote: |
all the people who will be killed with the ransom money they obviousely paid? |
I really don't think that Al Qaeda has a problem with funding. This money is insignificant to money they probably already have.
Quote: |
Hersh: U.S. Funds Being Secretly Funneled To Violent Al Qaeda-Linked Groups
New Yorker columnist Sy Hersh says the �single most explosive� element of his latest article involves an effort by the Bush administration to stem the growth of Shiite influence in the Middle East (specifically the Iranian government and Hezbollah in Lebanon) by funding violent Sunni groups.
Hersh says the U.S. has been �pumping money, a great deal of money, without congressional authority, without any congressional oversight� for covert operations in the Middle East where it wants to �stop the Shiite spread or the Shiite influence.� Hersh says these funds have ended up in the hands of �three Sunni jihadist groups� who are �connected to al Qaeda� but �want to take on Hezbollah.�
Hersh summed up his scoop in stark terms: �We are simply in a situation where this president is really taking his notion of executive privilege to the absolute limit here, running covert operations, using money that was not authorized by Congress, supporting groups indirectly that are involved with the same people that did 9/11.� |
Looks as though the US seems to be funding terrorism as well. BUt it's state sponsored terrorism, so that's ok? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Dom Vans why don't you tell us how Saddam didn't gas the Kurds? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dome Vans Guest
|
Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
Putin said Saddam's Iraq planned attacks |
Sure Joo, check out this thread, everything is explained here. Maybe you might like to contribute to it, if you have anything worthwhile to say.
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/GaseousLies.htm
http://www.quixote-quest.org/resources/national_international/IraqGasKurds_OilH2O_013103.html
Quote: |
Pelletiere is retired at age 70 and living in central Pennsylvania. He is a Ph.D. in political science and was the chief of the CIA Iraq desk at Langley in the 1980s. He left the CIA in 1987 to become a lecturer at the Army War College in Carlisle, Pa., and was sent in 1988 to investigate Halabja. He based his conclusions that the "several hundred Kurds" who died at Halabja must have been killed by Iranians, because the deaths were caused by cyanide gas, which Iraq had not used in the war against Iran (they used mustard gas), and which, says Pelletiere, they had no ability to produce |
.
This guys pretty qualified to be over looked and his report, that he co-wrote, to be rubbished.
Quote: |
Soon after the attack, the United States approved the export to Iraq of virus cultures and a billion-dollar contract to design and build a petrochemical plant the Iraqis planned to use to produce mustard gas.
Saddam Hussein has appeared so far without a lawyer to defend him. A Jordanian firm is reported to be speaking up for him. But the real defense for him could be waiting for him in Washington and London |
He was executed pretty quickly. Sure he would have had plenty to say IF he'd been properly represented, would have blown apart the American Hierarchy. Still, you can't talk when you're dead, easy for the US there.
Anyho, back to the thread. Big mess, South Korea did right thing. US cannon fodder, no respect for life, aggressive, intellectually bankrupt foreign policy. Indefensible. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
seoulunitarian

Joined: 06 Jul 2004
|
Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 1:07 am Post subject: re: |
|
|
fromtheuk wrote: |
Scotticus - read your last post. Are you always condescending/patronizing?
Afghanistan is a Muslim country, so if you invaded it, you're mad to assume you won't be attacked there. To assume you have the right to invade and not face retaliation is absurd.
Your countries have killed/oppressed/maimed many more Muslims than the Taliban ever did, it's a pity an ignorant fool like you believes its own media all the time.
The Taliban became 'bad' only after they declined to have gas deals with the US.
Ending a post with a petty put-down is not a sign of true intellect. If somebody disagrees with your views it is not a sign of ignorance, it simply means they disagree with you.
And if you can only respond to a different viewpoint by insulting that person or by being dismissive of them, you have demonstrated a very poor approach to open debate. In fact, you've proved my point, you lack common sense, any real knowledge of any issue and most importantly you are unable to understand why you face such hostility around the world. |
I am not reading ahead before posting this, so forgive me if this has already been said or alluded to:
The Taliban became "bad" when they began cutting off the heads of women who left home without their husband's/brother's/father's permission.
Peace |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
seoulunitarian

Joined: 06 Jul 2004
|
Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 1:35 am Post subject: re: |
|
|
fromtheuk wrote: |
BJWD - Atheism is the biggest fairly tale, and all you can do as stuck-up, unclean, bitter losers is spend your useless lives trying to disprove a Deity who you claim doesn't exist anyway.
I think your comment about Muslims not questioning things sounds like something Hitchens would say, that's what we mean when we say you don't get it.
Hitchens critique of Islam, is as mediocre as the rest....oh Islam is a copy of previous scriptures.....Hitchens is self-evidently, a bad liar.
We follow Islam because we are convinced by it and not because of need.
I'd like you to know when we Muslims see people like you walking down the street, without any facial hair, we have to open our eyes wide to check if you are male or female. You may as well wear a skirt BJWD, if you have no facial hair I'd probably think you were a woman anyway.
As regards behaving absurdly, most of mankind believe in a Deity, so the fairy tale of atheism is believed by only you and a handful of other gullible, wannabe-rebels, who are more like sheep than any Muslim I've ever met.
You're the kind who look like they have died and gone to heaven when they hear one of those pathetic Dawkins interviews, where he looks slick, talks nicely, but has no coherent argument for his silly beliefs, but still has the audacity to question God's existence.
Yes....BJWD....the world came into being all by itself......so did Burger King......nobody made it.........it just came into being all by itself. |
(1) What brand of Psychology did you study?
(2) Did you learn anything?
Peace |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|