Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxeas
that's not a definition. that's an anecdotal attempt at an appeal to absurdity and emotion rather than the topic
|
The issue was this: Was the Quran divinely inspired or not. It is claimed it is not due to the actions of those who claim to practice Islam. It amuses me greatly, as you well know, to apply that same logic to christianity however there is no doubt from my side that the outlined laws in the bible handed to Moses WERE in fact divinely inspired.
The Quran, laws of the Quran, teachings of the Quran, description of how to conduct oneself in the Quran, all parallel the bible up to and through the time of Jesus.
After the gospels (which you know are believed to be partially suspect anyway due to their numerous inconsistancies which I recall you say are because different writers remember the event in a different light, which is understandable HOWEVER the inconsistancies themselves denote that they are not, in fact, divinely inspired) the two sets of beliefs diverge.
The issues that you as christians have with Islam and Islamic law are in fact issues that are peppered through your own bible and are similar to BUT less stringent.
It is my observation that if you have a problem with one, you must by default have a problem with the other which means that you have issues with divinely inspired laws. That is the fundamental difference between you and I.
Conclusion: If you say one is not divinely inspired then the other cannot be either. That leaves you with nothing inspired, the transition inconsistant, and the rest of it completely in conflict with the first and simply leaves us with a code that is at a minimum 2,400 years old and is the oldest living set of laws practiced by humanity on record.