The 'in The Light Of Quran' Debate

[Poonis]

Regarding the Scotter Vs Omniscient On The Divinity And Validity Of Islam debate, I have two questions:

 

1. What does "in the Light of the Quran" mean?

2. How is this any different than arguing, for example, the Divinity and Validity of Peter Pan in light of the book titled Peter Pan and Wendy by J. M. Barrie (1860–1937)?

 

Reading the Quran debate, I can't get past this part. I guess I need something more than someone just saying such-and-such is true because I read it somewhere.

[The_Omniscient]

Dear Poonis;

 

I dont know tht whether you asked this for just to argue or you really wanted to know the logic/reason. Irrespective of your intention, I assume that you asked this seriously and for the sake of knowledge. I dont claim tht only I can provide knowledge, but its a mutual sharing a give n take.

 

Well, as regards Quran or any other debate of such kind i.e. about or in the "light of a holy-book" means that the issues/questions would be scrutinised in the light of the teachings of the holy book. If the holy book could not survive the rational questions then the divinity of such book would be assumed "artificial". but contrary to this, if a book would survive the rational arguments then the divinity of such book would stand as a reality.

 

Hope this would have cleared a little, at least. Any more questions are more then welcome.

 

Regards

A well wisher

[Poonis]

Dear Poonis;

Well, as regards Quran or any other debate of such kind i.e. about or in the "light of a holy-book" means that the issues/questions would be scrutinised in the light of the teachings of the holy book. If the holy book could not survive the rational questions then the divinity of such book would be assumed "artificial". but contrary to this, if a book would survive the rational arguments then the divinity of such book would stand as a reality.

 

Yes, I would like to know. Regarding the above text in bold,

 

1. Definitions: in the above paragraph (and for the sake of the entire length of this topic), do the words 'holy' and 'divinity' share the same definition or or different? If different, please provide separate definitions for both.

2. What is the difference between a holy book and a regular book?

3. What necessitates this difference?

4. You note that survival is necessary for a holy book not to be assumed artificial. What constitutes the survival of a holy book from being deemed artificial?

5. Is it rational argument between humans alone that determines the divinity of a book?

 

Please relate your answers as I have numbered my questions so that I can follow more easily and clearly. Thanks

[The_Omniscient]

Dear Poonis;

 

I am trying my level best to answer your questions as clear as possible but keeping in mind tht Eng is not my 1st language therefore if you find anything not clearly understandable then kindly ask for ellaboration rather then argumenting;

 

Now, your answers as per serialization;

 

1. The Definitions:

 

a. Holy Book: A book which is considered by its holders/believers to be revealed from a non-human entity most probably a god.

 

b. Divinity / Divine Book: A book which is not only considered but could prove itself through rational arguments and logic that it is actually revealed by a non-human entity i.e.The God.

 

Explanation: Difference between a holy book and a divine book is this that the holy book is believed to be revealed and a divine book is actually revealed. To find whether a book is either holy or divine or a belnd it should go through a falsification test. (falsification test means that it should be scrutinised in the light of logic and rationality according to a set standard).

 

2. The difference between a holy & regular book is simply of a belief only. But in the terms of a difference between a divine and regular book; it is entirely different. A divine book is the knowledge of God, the Omniscient. However, a regular book is the knowledge of a human.

 

3. The perfection of Knowledge and authenticity.

 

4. Kindly rephrase your question for more clearity.

 

5. A divine book is aimed for humans only. Therefore logically, the arguments should be between humans only.

 

Thanks

 

Regards

A well wisher

[Poonis]

4. Kindly rephrase your question for more clearity.

You had written,

"but contrary to this, if a book would survive the rational arguments then the divinity of such book would stand as a reality"

to which I had written,

4. You note that survival is necessary for a holy book not to be assumed artificial. What constitutes the survival of a holy book from being deemed artificial?

To rephrase the question, by what specific methods does the divinity of a holy book survive rational arguments?