Comments on: Surah al-Anbiyaa:30 and the Missionary Felix Culpa http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/ The purpose of this website is to facilitate Muslim responses to the various mendacious polemics and distortions of Islam by the Christian missionaries and their anti-Islamic allies that are being spread over the Internet. Fri, 29 Aug 2008 01:04:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Patrick Maxwell http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-6766 Patrick Maxwell Sun, 10 Dec 2006 07:59:34 +0000 http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-6766 A good read...compelling and rich. A good read…compelling and rich.

]]> By: rainman http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-6109 rainman Fri, 01 Dec 2006 15:02:00 +0000 http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-6109 Thrashing christian apologists is inerrancy forums job http://lists.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?mid=812516098&sort=d&start=42443 Thrashing christian apologists is inerrancy forums job

http://lists.topica.com/lists/.....tart=42443

]]> By: Startucuus http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-3774 Startucuus Thu, 26 Oct 2006 07:51:28 +0000 http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-3774 Denis, I am amazed at your presence at a lot of places on the web I've visited. Nice to hear from you. Man, you have a good head on your shoulders. Your unique way of thinking, your un-accidental sense of logic, your acute sense of finding where the action is.... How can such a Package be a coincidence or an accident of nature? Apologies but my intention was not to praise or anything other than that which I have concluded above. Denis, I am amazed at your presence at a lot of places on the web I’ve visited. Nice to hear from you. Man, you have a good head on your shoulders. Your unique way of thinking, your un-accidental sense of logic, your acute sense of finding where the action is…. How can such a Package be a coincidence or an accident of nature?

Apologies but my intention was not to praise or anything other than that which I have concluded above.

]]> By: Denis Giron http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-2772 Denis Giron Thu, 28 Sep 2006 03:43:42 +0000 http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-2772 Greetings I am glad to see that Bismika Allaahuma is picking up Servidor's wonderfully-written pieces. I just want to comment on one small portion... I looked at Vargo's article, and he does not make any explicit charge of plagiarism, thus the last paragraph comes off as a bit of a straw man. Furthermore, has it been demonstrated that ratq necessarily means "mixed/blended" (as to be distinguished from "intertwined"?), and if so, mixed/blended in what sense? It seems to me that the only thing we can be certain about is that the text is stating that at one point the heavens and the earth were together, and then they were separated. That idea, as Vargo pointed out, is not exactly a new idea, nor does it seem to be one which conveys tremendous scientific import. It is a bit unfortunate for a believer in a religious text to demand that others show him alleged errors in the text (how does one do that to a sufficient degree?). It would be better to focus on the question of whether the essential idea (that which we can boil the text down to with certainty) is new, or containing anything more detailed than what has appeared in previous creation stories. Greetings

I am glad to see that Bismika Allaahuma is picking up Servidor’s wonderfully-written pieces. I just want to comment on one small portion…

I looked at Vargo’s article, and he does not make any explicit charge of plagiarism, thus the last paragraph comes off as a bit of a straw man.

Furthermore, has it been demonstrated that ratq necessarily means “mixed/blended” (as to be distinguished from “intertwined”?), and if so, mixed/blended in what sense? It seems to me that the only thing we can be certain about is that the text is stating that at one point the heavens and the earth were together, and then they were separated. That idea, as Vargo pointed out, is not exactly a new idea, nor does it seem to be one which conveys tremendous scientific import.

It is a bit unfortunate for a believer in a religious text to demand that others show him alleged errors in the text (how does one do that to a sufficient degree?). It would be better to focus on the question of whether the essential idea (that which we can boil the text down to with certainty) is new, or containing anything more detailed than what has appeared in previous creation stories.

]]> By: Salman Abu Hamza http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-2747 Salman Abu Hamza Wed, 27 Sep 2006 09:36:25 +0000 http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/surah-al-anbiyaa30-and-the-missionary-felix-culpa/#comment-2747 Allahu AKbar Good article. Laa ilaha ilallah muhammadu rassolullah Allahu AKbar
Good article.
Laa ilaha ilallah muhammadu rassolullah

]]>