re: If Allah exists, why is the ISLAMIC Republic of Iran getting destroyed by INFIDELS?

Politics aside, that's a really big bomb

For frick's sake. How could you two possibly get into another argument over such a stupid OP is this one? When will either one of you figure out that you're not persuading the other to any position whatsoever and therefore any argument you make in a public venue such as this is only for the acceptance of others you hope to persuade to "your side" of such a stupid fricking disagreement?

If either one of you could actually put your full ego's weight into one post in any one thread you two insist on arguing in into perpetuity, this site would fricking crash the moment you hit "submit."

And maybe you, being an idiot atheist, isn't concerned about the ego, but foo definitely should be.

ETA: BTW, you're right on this and foo is wrong. Because he is usually wrong. But it doesn't make you two's relentless bullshite any more interesting or compelling. It's fricking BORING.

quote:

---

No Foo, this is simple. A rabbi/scribe writing words on a goat skin and claiming it is from God is “scripture”. You’re being obtuse, as usual.

---

It doesn't matter what they call it. You've missed the point entirely. The verse is speaking to what was happening in that day, not what may have happened several centuries prior.

You're arguing that the Quran, itself, teaches that the Christians and Jews did not have authentic "Scripture", but were using a corrupted text. I'm explaining to you that you are as bad at reading the Quran as you are at reading the Bible, because the Quran isn't speaking about what the Jews and Christians considered settled Scripture at all, and that was the only thing that matters in this argument.

A rabbi writing on goat skin in Medina in the 600's AD and saying it is the word of God is not the same thing as what you are arguing about the Quran saying that settled Scripture was corrupted.

quote:

---

Ok so you are grasping at straws. The Quran author had access and knowledge to the Jews in Medina. He/they didn’t have knowledge of the Jews in Cordoba or Rome or Babylon. They were writing based on the only Jewish community they knew. Quit being a dumbass.

---

Again you missed the point and are changing the subject, because you can't refute the truth.

You are moving from "what does the text say" to "what did the author know", and you are actually strengthening my argument. My exegesis was pointing out what the text was saying, namely that a group of Jews in Medina were coming up with their own opinions and misleading the ignorant lay people with them. That's what the Quran is criticizing, not the historical Jewish (or Christian) Scriptures. You're trying to pivot rather than address the point at hand.

In addition, your bad interpretation further strengthens my argument even if it were true that it was speaking only of a limited knowledge of a small group of Jews in Medina as representative of all Jewish beliefs about all Jewish Scripture, because it would be factually untrue, as proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls and other manuscripts that existed prior to the writing of the Quran. The claim of corruption is simply not factual, and therefore the Quran would be wrong. It's a moot issue, though, because the text wasn't talking about the historical texts accepted by Jews or Christians, but of Jewish leaders in Medina in the 7th century teaching lies.

quote:

---

I highlighted it for you from your own text.

---

And yet you still haven't shown that it says that the Jewish or Christian Scriptures--believed prior to the 7th century--were corrupted.

What you highlighted emphasizes my point: that the Quran was criticizing the Jewish leaders, not the Scripture. It wasn't saying that the Scriptures were corrupt, but that the teachers in Medina were distorting what they heard and teaching falsely to the people. I went through the entire passage for you.

quote:

---

You’re missing the point that the Quran author in Arabia didn't have access to the Roman Catholic canon. They did have Christian scriptures available to them in Arabia, but it wasn’t the Roman Catholic canon. One that they had was the infancy gospel of Thomas.

---

I'm not missing anything. You are arguing just to argue at this point and have missed the boat.

I provided the Islamic Dilemma argument to show that Islam is a false religion, and you wanted to pick a fight with me to proving my point for me. I'm just trying to show you how silly that is.

It doesn't matter of the author of the Quran was talking about a particular Christian Scripture, because the reality is that nothing was corrupted. You don't win this argument by assuming they only had the infancy gospel, either, because if that's all the author of the Quran knew about, it further proves my point that the author was entirely ignorant of Christianity and couldn't make a blanket statement of the Scriptures being corrupted, because the infancy gospel wasn't even considered Scripture by Christians in the 7th century.

You have to look at the history. Christians had a core canon of Scripture that included teachings about the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, and the resurrection, and those writings existed hundreds of years before the Quran, and they exist today. So whatever the Quran was talking about by the "gospel", it is factually inaccurate for Muslims to say it was corrupted. Either they lose because the texts Christians believed wasn't corrupted, or they lose because the "gospel" wasn't actually something believed by the Christians, and therefore the Quran is wrong and not from God.

quote:

---

You are patently retarded. A potato brain like Joe Biden.

---

I can tell when you're frustrated that you are losing an argument because you bring out the big guns.

quote:

---

The Quran never refers to “The Bible”. It mentions “the Torah” (which is only the 5 books of Moshe) and it mentions “the gospel” which doesn’t refer to any particular document as there were at least 45-50 different gospels and one they definitely used as a source was not contained within Vaticanus or Sinaiticus.

---

You must not understand what you're saying. You clearly don't understand what I'm saying. I'll try again: whatever the Quran means by the "gospel", it is referring to something that it claims existed when the Quran was written. However, there is no historical evidence for any singular "gospel" narrative believed by Christians other than the four gospel accounts that were written hundreds of years prior to the Quran, so there is no historical support for any corruption. In addition, even if the author of the Quran was referring to some other "gospel" writing that wasn't part of the Christian canon, it still falls flat because they claim that Christians, as a whole, believed that "gospel". If it were referring to the infancy gospel or any other non-canonical book, that would be a factual error, and therefore proves that the Quran is not from God.

So no matter how you slice it, the Quran is wrong, and you are still missing the point.

quote:

---

Allah favors the House of Al Saud and its Tribal Cousins around the Persian Gulf, not Persians

---

quote:

---

Allah favors the House of Al Saud and its Tribal Cousins around the Persian Gulf, not Persians

---

And Trump just gifted nuclear capability to the House of Al Saud.