|
Linguistic Structure of the Quran Part
V
Hamza
Tzortzis vs. Ali Sina
2006/03/31
<< go to part I
|
Now let me deal with
some of your points before detailing with the linguistic
inimitability of the Quranic discourse.
You said:
“I said you have no idea what you’re talking about”
I must correct you as
it was you who claimed that the linguistic structures are
“gobbledygook”. The rest of the email will show you that these
are in fact linguistic structures. So it is you who has no idea.
On the grammar issue
you said:
“I read the link it
contains no valid argument”
Well that must be just
your opinion then, I will leave the reader to decide. It is a slap
in the face of any intellectual when people say there are
grammatical mistakes in the Quran. I suggest your readership to read
the link. Case is closed.
You posted the
following sites:
www.islam-exposed.org
http://suralikeit.com/
I have already dealt
with these. They are just simple rhymed prose examples of Arabic
that contain no complex linguistic features, they fail to have as
many rhetorical devices as the Quran, they are not linguistically
sensitive which means any word can be replaced and the meaning will
not be altered, they have no complex cohesive structures, they do
not employ consonance as the Quran does etc etc the list can go on.
As I said any Arabic nursery rhyme can be a challenge to the Quran
if you do not scratch the surface and start to think. Ali! I thought
you were a “free thinker”. If you still believe that these so
called challenges are valid, then prove to me they have complex
linguistic structures (examples below). Just simply posting two
sites up does not prove anything. You have to give me an analysis.
Stop standing on the shoulders of “giants”! Use your mind.
|
First
of all you have not yet explained to us what does “rhetoric device”,
“complex cohesive structure” or “employing consonance” mean and in
what ways the Quran is superior in that sense. As long as you don't become
specific you are not proving anything.
|
You spoke about your
debating technique. Thanks for your “secret”.
Ali. Why have you
refused to deal with the Prose and Poetry argument, your story about
the Iranian Mr Hossein is out of context and you are playing with
your own ignorance and maybe the ignorance of your readership.
|
You failed to understand my point. Hossein, the
village idiot, was a crazy man who like Muhammad he liked to end his
sentences in rhyme. No one thought because of that he is a prophet. By the
same token, Muhammad cannot be called a prophet just because he liked to
end his sentences in rhymes. He was most likely suffering from Temporal
Lobe Epilepsy. There are other
symptoms to corroborate this claim. You have a good knowledge of
English but you seem to switch off when it comes to things you do not want
to understand. Otherwise what I wrote was very clear and I believe well
understood by everyone.
|
Your statement:
“This is like saying
all people walk on two legs and if a person walks on four legs he
must be performing a miracle. How much stupidity is enough Mr Hamza”
Ok. Now you are
exposing yourself. Your analogy does not apply, you are showing you
know nothing about language and the Quranic challenge.
|
You already said this many times, but failed to prove
your claim.
|
People do not have four legs. But we do
have the grammatical rules, the 28 letters and the blueprint of the
challenge - which is the Quran itself. What does this suggest Mr
Sina? It means that although we have the tools (unlike your
ridiculous 4 legged example) we still cannot imitate it (which will
be elaborated below). Your analogy is your way of brushing pass the
subject. Good try, but it doesn’t work with me. |
You repeat the same thing as if by repeating
something false it will become true by magic. You have not yet established
that the Quran is inimitable. The example of walking on four legs (using
the two arms as legs like quadruped animals) is feasible but it is not a
miracle. In the same way writing a book as stupid as the Quran containing
this many logical, grammatical, scientific, historic, and mathematical
errors is possible but not a miracle. The Quran is an asinine book my
friend, it is not a miracle. Don’t repeat the same thing ad nauseam.
Prove it if you can. If you
can’t admit that it is not a miracle step aside and let me start showing
how stupid is this book.
|
So I say again – why
cant you deal with the poetry prose argument? Prove to me that it
fits into one of the known styles.
|
How many times I should tell you that the Quran does
not fit into any known style and therefore it is a stupid book. How many
times I should tell you that breaking the rules of language is not a
miracle but the sign of illiteracy? You have failed to prove that the
Quran is a miracle and all you tell us is that because it is odd, it
should be from God. That is nonsense. Hossein divooneh’s rhymes did not
make him a prophet, Terence’s rhymes do not make him a prophet, why
should Muhammad’s rhymes make him a prophet? Those rhymes show this man
was illiterate and ignorant.
|
I have given you
examples and a whole article with an analysis. But you just reply
with swiping statements. Please do not bore me and try and deal with
the arguments I give you.
|
You have not given us anything so far. You simply
have made some baseless statements without even attempting to prove them.
I can’t even refute you because you have given no proof to be refuted.
|
Also, your Terrence example just proves my
point. He produces a text that fits into a known style. So this
argument just supports my argument. The Quran is not like any known
style – please see the previous threads. |
You are wrong. Terrence’s style is all his. As I
said Khomeini also had his own style of speech, unique to him but grammatically
it was very wrong. Muhammad’s style is unique but it reveals his
ignorance. Now, if you want inimitable style you should read Shakespeare,
Dante, or Ferdowsi. These geniuses wrote in unique styles that set new
standards in language. Muhammad, like Khomeini, only revealed that he is
an illiterate and ignorant man.
|
Before I post the linguistic features I
want you to understand something. The normal layman Muslim accepts
Islam on the basis that no one has been able to imitate the Quran
although we have the finite 28 letters, grammatical rules and the
blueprint of the challenge! When the best of Arab poets,
rhetoricians, linguists etc., of a linguistically homogenous
community of the time failed, the layman Muslim wonders how a
bilingual/bicultural individual can succeed in reproducing an
equivalent “Quran”. The task is so frustrating. My list will
exhibit this fact.
|
The normal layman Muslim is an ignorant brainwashed
zombie. He is not the standard for us. The normal layman Muslim riots;
burns the churches and embassies and kills innocent people. The normal
layman Muslim demands that those who convert to another religion from
Islam be put to death. The normal layman Muslim is a savage. He is brain
dead. His opinion about Islam and the Quran is as much valid as the
opinion of any cult member about his cult. 900 followers of Jim Jones
drank cyanide laced Cool Aid voluntarily and gave up their lives. Should
we give any validity to the opinions of these fools about Jim Jones and
his cult? The opinion of Muslims about Muhammad is as valid as the opinion
of those wretched people about their cult leader. How can such zombies
decide whether the Quran is inimitable or not? They have no rational
capacity.
If they had they would leave Islam.
< back
next >
|
