The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Feminists Vs Islam (women are disrespected in islam?)

Scroll to see replies

Original post by fire_and_ice
It would have helped if someone told me earlier...

Thanks, though. I give up, anyway. Don't want to lose any more brain cells trying to explain the significance of the 'translation argument' (as he/she/the moron puts it).




LOL. You're the moron if you think that reading a set of letters that forms a word in English isn't the same as reading a set of letters which form a word in Arabic.
Original post by SAhm95
u made a thread about it on your main account, everyone knows.




Right.

I made a thread in 2015, stating that i failed foundation year, when I just received 2 offers to study computer science from King's college and Southampton 2 weeks ago?



This is the desperation muslims are reaching to when their religion gets scrutinised.
Original post by fire_and_ice
It would have helped if someone told me earlier...

Thanks, though. I give up, anyway. Don't want to lose any more brain cells trying to explain the significance of the 'translation argument' (as he/she/the moron puts it).


he has over 15 accounts. Last time he claimed that he read the quran and he knows every single hadith. What a clown lmfao
Original post by SuperStar#7
What are you Dumb or Blind?


I just said that the writer of the Gospel of John is UNKNOWN. Moron.

:facepalm2::facepalm2::facepalm2:

I never said that it was John the apostle that wrote the book, all i said was that the general consensus towards the book of John is that it is infact written at the time of Christ. You ignorant dummy

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/gopel-of-john-commentary-who-wrote-the-gospel-of-john-and-how-historical-is-it/


Provide proof of where these actual scholars date it to be from 90-110 AD.

I'm waiting you embarrassment.


Then on what basis is it reliable?? If I write that I saw a dragon, it's all true? What the hell lol...

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=eYmxAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA18&dq=%22final+form%22%22some+time+between+90+and+110+ce%22&hl=en&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22final%20form%22%22some%20time%20between%2090%20and%20110%20ce%22&f=false

A much more reliable source. And as I said, much of what you read today is not the original version - as all books were, they were edited and written again and again.

Turns out I'm not embarrassed. Not sure about you though :smile:
Original post by SuperStar#7
LOL. You're the moron if you think that reading a set of letters that forms a word in English isn't the same as reading a set of letters which form a word in Arabic.


You're monolingual, your little brain won't understand.
Original post by SuperStar#7
Have you run out of points now?


Can't be bothered having to constantly dumb things down in a way that you'll maybe consider my point of view.
Original post by *Stefan*
Then on what basis is it reliable?? If I write that I saw a dragon, it's all true? What the hell lol...

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=eYmxAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA18&dq=%22final+form%22%22some+time+between+90+and+110+ce%22&hl=en&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22final%20form%22%22some%20time%20between%2090%20and%20110%20ce%22&f=false

A much more reliable source. And as I said, much of what you read today is not the original version - as all books were, they were edited and written again and again.

Turns out I'm not embarrassed. Not sure about you though :smile:




So Andrew Lincoln is this Scholar you are going on about?


A scholar no one has ever even heard about is the guy you're basing this argument on?



HAHAHAH. Okay mate. You certainly haven't embarrassed yourself at all here.

Spoiler

Original post by fire_and_ice
Can't be bothered having to constantly dumb things down in a way that you'll maybe consider my point of view.




You have no argument, nor any knowledge of your own book.


Can't even differentiate between the style of writing of hadiths and the Qur'an.


No credible scholar takes the translation argument seriously. It's a defense mechanism when Muslims don't have any thing to say.
Original post by SuperStar#7
I understand English and French.

You think that a book is meant for mankind, yet it must only be read in one language, and i'm the one with a little brain.


Hahahahah.



Okay bro.


LOOOOOOL you joker. I swear you said you "read and understand the Qur'aan" or something like that? And now you're telling me that you understand that every single translation from French to English is absolute and correct?
Original post by SuperStar#7
So Andrew Lincoln is this Scholar you are going on about?


A scholar no one has ever even heard about is the guy you're basing this argument on?



HAHAHAH. Okay mate. You certainly haven't embarrassed yourself at all here.

Spoiler



Right. Because "most theological scholars" is a more reliable source. LOOOL. Perhaps link a specific author, and we'll see.

Lincoln was a professor moron, who has even received a honorary book.

Can't believe I'm arguing with someone who has a nut for a brain.
Original post by SuperStar#7
You have no argument, nor any knowledge of your own book.


Can't even differentiate between the style of writing of hadiths and the Qur'an.


No credible scholar takes the translation argument seriously. It's a defense mechanism when Muslims don't have any thing to say.


Okay, cool.
Original post by fire_and_ice
LOOOOOOL you joker. I swear you said you "read and understand the Qur'aan" or something like that? And now you're telling me that you understand that every single translation from French to English is absolute and correct?




That case doesn't apply to The Qu'ran because the Qur'an has been perfectly translated from Arabic to English.


It's only the violent and intolerant verses of the Qur'an that supposedly need Historical context, Quranic translations, Scholarly research, In-depth analysis, Titration and Graphical illustrations for.
Original post by *Stefan*
Right. Because "most theological scholars" is a more reliable source. LOOOL. Perhaps link a specific author, and we'll see.

Lincoln was a professor moron, who has even received a honorary book.

Can't believe I'm arguing with someone who has a nut for a brain.




OOOOOH, He's a professor.



WOOOOOOOOOOOOW.

Such an achievement.


You retard, Zakir Naik and Reza Azlan are also professors, I guess we should also take their arguments seriously because their "professors" right?
Original post by SuperStar#7
That case doesn't apply to The Qu'ran because the Qur'an has been perfectly translated from Arabic to English.


It's only the violent and intolerant verses of the Qur'an that supposedly need Historical context, Quranic translations, Scholarly research, In-depth analysis, Titration and Graphical illustrations for.


"violent and intolerant" lmfao. That's how I know you haven't read more than a few words of the Qur'aan.

"Perfectly translated"? Where the hell did you get that from?

Don't respond, can't be bothered with your crap.
Original post by SuperStar#7
x


Uhh, a question Zinnan:
Every time you get banned will you change the number after the #, if that is the case is this dupe no.7?!
Original post by SuperStar#7
OOOOOH, He's a professor.



WOOOOOOOOOOOOW.

Such an achievement.


You retard, Zakir Naik and Reza Azlan are also professors, I guess we should also take their arguments seriously because their "professors" right?


That is completely irrelevant. I gave you an author who IS known among religious scholars, and you gave me "most scholars say". So for you to make fun of my source is a bit rich.

But that aside, why shouldn't we? Because they disagree with your faith? LOOOL.
Original post by Al-farhan
Uhh, a question Zinnan:
Every time you get banned will you change the number after the #, if that is the case is this dupe no.7?!


Do you know who he is?

Sounds like an extremist Christian...
Original post by fire_and_ice
"violent and intolerant" lmfao. That's how I know you haven't read more than a few words of the Qur'aan.

"Perfectly translated"? Where the hell did you get that from?

Don't respond, can't be bothered with your crap.




So are you now saying that there aren't violent and intolerant verses in The Qur'an?

LOL. You are probably 12 or something and know absolutely nothing about it then.


I got the perfect translation from this Doctor.

He wrote a book earlier about Arabic dialects

http://www.quran-islam.org/main_topics/quran_in_english_(P1223).html
Original post by SuperStar#7
Muslims believe that Allah replaced Jesus with some imposter who looks exactly like him, and Jesus ascended into heaven and will return and denounce false religions.That's what I meant by he wasn't crucified and never resurrected, because Jesus in the Qur'an never died.

What I meant was, if there is evidence that Jesus was crucified, then that can still comply with the Islamic teaching right? Because instead of Jesus, the imposter was crucified. There's no historical evidence proving whether the one crucified was an impostor or Jesus himself.

Original post by SuperStar#7


So this might give evidence of the crucifiction and reserrection (or ascendence in the Qur'an), but what about the historical evidence where you say Jesus claimed to be the son of God, or where he wanted to be worshipped?
Original post by *Stefan*
Do you know who he is?

Sounds like an extremist Christian...

He is been banned several times.
I have no issues with him believing whatever he wants to believe, but it is just when you engage with him, it goes off the rails real quick and discussion turns sour quicker than i have ever seen it with anyone before.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you