RE: Do you know WikiIslam ?
April 18, 2022 at 3:59 pm
(This post was last modified: April 18, 2022 at 4:08 pm by R00tKiT.)
(April 18, 2022 at 2:51 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: You have independent reasons to believe magic book is gods word, magic book says an event happened, therefore it happened is a non sequitur, you realize?
No, I don't realize that. Someone who believes that the Qur'an is truly God's words, verbatim, is justified in believing that all events recounted in the Qur'an really happened, in so far as his initial premise is justified. This argument is definitely valid in structure, its soundness, however, is controversial, because not all people accept that the Qur'an is divine.
That's why a Muslim believes angels exist, that's why they believe an afterlife with very specific descriptions exists, it's essentially because scripture contains these doctrines.
(April 18, 2022 at 2:51 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: You might need to lay out those silent premises, and where you heard they were certified.....but that would bring us right back round to that chain of narration, wouldn't it? To a game of telephone called a science.
I don't think I hid any premises, a Muslim's independent reasons for believing that the Qur'an is divine can be summarized as follows: the content of the Qur'an can't possibly be the product of Muhammad PBUH(*), it's precisely to avoid this fact that you have revisionist scholars who reject even the clearest facts about the surrounding milieus in Early islamic times. Some say the location of early Islam is not mecca, but somewhere else like Petra in Jordan.. some say the Qur'an is posthumous writing.. some say Islam rised in a milieu where christian texts were well-known, etc. All kinds of wild ideas are suggested to explain how the content in the Qur'an could possibly appear in the middle of pagans in the desert.
I don't think the reliability of narrators matters at this point, as people dispute the divinity of the Qur'an/the prophethood of Muhammad even if they grant their historicity.
(April 18, 2022 at 2:51 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: As to the rest you're a loon. Some people assess magic books for what they tell us about mere reality, and about the people who believed them, and about how that effected their societies. Makes plenty of sense to do.
If these people don't believe in God, I don't think it makes sense to discuss any religious text. All religious claims are false by default if one doesn't think belief in God is justified. As for the effect on people or society, this is a non-sequitur, because true facts can have a bad effect.. say, our knowledge of the atom made nuclear weapons possible.. for the lack of a better example.
(*) I really need to point this out, it's tempting to say that this is an argument from ignorance/incredulity. But this kind of arguments is not always fallacious. In fact, all inductive arguments are more or less arguments from ignorance: the conclusion is more general than the premises.
