From: souissi@ec.ecn.purdue.edu (Ridha Souissi)
Subject: Re: Islamic revolution
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 23:38:30 GMT

In article <92226.014101U55870@uicvm.uic.edu> U55870@uicvm.uic.edu (David James Alexander Hanley) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.053433.19983@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>,
>souissi@ec.ecn.purdue.edu (Ridha Souissi) says:
>>
>>
>>Incidently, the people who didn't believe in Mohamed (PBUH) as
>>a prophet of God at his time said that he was insane.
>
>  Gee, evidence that people at the time knew he was insane.  What more
>evidence do you need?  Why do you persist in your delusion?
>

Of course history has shown that he was not so, and those
who made those accusations did so out of jaleousy and enmity.


>> They
>>also said that he was a poet and they asked (like you) why
>>this Qur'an was reveiled on a poor "desert nomad" man? all
>>this is reported in the Qur'an, so it is not new.  Yet there
>>is more than one billion people today following this "insane
>>nomad man" including millions of educated and intellectual people.
>
>  If this line of arguement is of any value at all, you should be a
>christian, as there are more christians than muslims.  Many, many more
>chriatins than muslims have made scientific breakthroughs, therefore
>christians must be more intellectual.  Why do you persist in your
>delusions?
>

I am not using saying that this is an argument to prove the truth
of Islam.  I am just saying that this "desert nomad" has influenced
the world and contributed to humanity tremendously and that even
scientists and itellectuals of the 20th century are embracing Islam.
I am not saying that Muslims are more scientists or intellectuals,
as evry nation and ethnicity has intellctuals and scientists and
has contributed to humanity.

>>The Qur'an does not contradict any proven scientific facts.
>
>  Neither does "The wizard of oz." go worship gelinda now.
>

Also there are scientific facts in the Qur'an that were not known
and were discovered only in the past couple of centuries.
How can these come from a "desert nomad"?

>>I invite you to read and the Qur'an instead of speaking out of ignorance,
>>and then tell me if it could have been "written" by an illiterate
>
>  I read some, enough to see how asinaine it was.
>

Examples?

>  And you admit he was illeterate yourself.  Whah?
>

Sure he was, but he was better than all the intellectuals sitting
in their offices today.

>  Also:  It was not written by whats-his-name as-is today, but was
>modified since to conform to the wishes of those in power.
>

Were you present when they made those modifications? or did  you
see them in the dream?

>>God
>>challenges anyone to write even one chapter similar to
>>the Qur'an.  The challenge is up today.  In 1500 years nobody
>>succeeded, not short of trying though.
>
>  Any you say _I_ make claims from ignorance?  I did read segments of it,
>and found it poorly written, asinaine, and morally abhorrent.  There

When you say poorly written you have to first know (I bet you don't)
that the English translation of the meaning of the Qur'an is just that:
the translation of its meaning.  The Qur'an is the Arabic text
which was reveiled to prophet Mohamed (PBUH) exactly the same word
by word available today in all corners of the world.  
As for the other claims, please elaborate..

>have been many works since that have shared these qualities.  Do you
>really claim to have read all the worls produced in the last 1500
>years?  I doubt it.  I severely doubt you have read the texts of
>another major religion, and am virtually positive that you have not
>done so with an open mind.

>
>  [  I make several observations on the stupidity and barbarism of
>the islamic moral system.  These are not answered.  I wonder why?
>Allah got your tounge? ]
>

I haven't seen those observations.  Could you repeat them?  I hope
they are backed up, otherwise do not waste my time and that of
other readers.

>
>DAVE!!!

Ridha
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,sci.skeptic