Author [EN] [PL] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: PLEASE READ FIRST

Offline Joseph Islam

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1858
    • View Profile
    • The Quran and its Message
« on: November 12, 2011, 12:52:37 AM »
Dear Readers.

Peace to you all,

You will note some of my responses on the salaat forum dealing with the subjects in quite curt, direct form. This approach has been adopted as the most appropriate after much deliberation given some of the negative experiences on other forums which advance similar arguments. The theological crux of the arguments presented on these forums seems to either be derived or developed (at times inconsistently) from the thoughts of Ghulam Parvez's work.

In other forums, which advance similar theological ideologies, I have found them to curtail and often abuse any constructive academic challenge to their theological arguments, no matter how well advanced. Such posts are often simply denied.

My contentions are with the crux of the arguments put forward by some members. In the main my academic contentions are:

(1) Often use of poor translations of the Quranic Arabic which are replete with 'interpolations' and mistranslations on which the theological arguments are based.
(2) Faulty premise of argumentation. When challenged, the central contention is not refuted, rather skirted.
(3) Fantastic claims of knowledge of classical Quraishi Quranic Arabic for example such as those sought from modern era Bedouin Arabs in the desert. These claims tacitly attempt to provide credence to the often poor English renditions of the Arabic that are advanced.
(4) Inconsistent use of classical Arabic lexicons to derive renditions to prove a particular theological bias.
(5) Faulty argumentation based on an appeal to authorities (most of similar theological ilk), ad hominem, circular reasoning,  false cause, fallacy of exhaustive hypothesis, complex questioning (tying), doggedness, argumentation by half truths, selective observation, selective reasoning, generalisation and argumentation which is inconsistent and non-sequitur.

These weaknesses in argumentation I feel has left some who rely on this approach to conclude that performing prayers is not a requirement, that fasting has nothing to do with abstaining from eating and drinking, to dismiss Quranic confirmations of Biblical portents and at times, question the need to seek help from God (dua). More than the conclusions and as an academic, I find the approach and reasoning to not only be severely flawed for some of the reasons highlighted above, but to remain consistently disproved by the Quran itself.

Please feel free to contact me for more information.

'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act' 
George Orwell