There are many misconceptions that exist within the field of Islam one being the topic of women. Unfortunately due to ignorance and lack of knowledge of some people and the ever growing propaganda and Islamaphobia that exist today, including the ever growing media agenda’s that govern the way people think and act, women are deemed as being unequal to men in Islam.
We are all aware that women and men are not alike so I don’t understand when someone makes the statement that Islam should practice equality, what do you mean by equality??? This word – equality – which many thinkers in both the east and the west advocate in various fields of life is a word which is based on deviation and a lack of understanding, especially when it is attributed to the religion to Islam. One of the things that people misunderstand is when they say that “Islam is the religion of equality�. What they should say is that Islam is the religion of justice.
Here we should note that there are some people who speak of equality instead of justice, and this is a mistake. We should not say equality, because equality implies no differentiation between the two. Because of this unjust call for equality, people start to ask, what is the difference between male and female?’ So they made males and females the same. We are all aware that the Male is not like the female.
God says in the Quran:
“And the male is not like the female�[Quran Aal ‘Imraan 3:36] The male is different from the female in many ways, in his strength, in his body, in his toughness and roughness, whereas women are soft and gentle. Women are like men in some aspects and they differ from them in others. Most of the rulings of Islam apply to men and women equally.
In cases where a distinction is made between the sexes, the Muslim regards that as a mercy from God and a sign of His knowledge of His creation, but the arrogant people see it as oppression and injustice, so he stubbornly insists on claiming that men and women are the same. So let him tell us how a man can carry a foetus and breastfeed it? He stubbornly ignores the weakness of women and how they bleed during their monthly period, and he stubbornly refuses to accept reality.
But the Muslim is still at peace with his faith, surrendering to the command of God. “Should not He who has created know? And He is the Most Kind and Courteous (to His slaves), All Aware (of everything)� [Quran al-Mulk 67:14 ]
Misconceptions about Islam:
Moderator: Moderators
Post #751
This truly is frustrating. I cannot tell if you are just being naive or deliberately being obtuse.HaLi8993 wrote: @ Herictic
QUOTE: "This is exactly what I am refering to. I already gave this encyclopedia defintion of pycncoline:http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/pycnoclines
The word "barrier" appears no where in the definition, yet it refers to pycnocline.Â
Your entire argument is that since Pliny or Aristotle does not use the word "barrier" then it cannot be refering to pycnocline, when in fact they give a perfect description of the occurence.
This is blatantly dishonest.
ANSWER: A definition is not a description on how something works, I have given you evidence that it is referring to a barrier lol.
Yes, there is a barrier per se. It involves the two waters mixing and the sediments, salinity, gravity, temperature. My point, which you missed AGAIN, is that the definition DESCRIBES what is transpiring.
Here is the definition which apparently you didn't want to address.
A change in density of ocean or lake water or rock with displacement in some direction, especially a rapid change in density with vertical displacement.
(oceanography)
A region in the ocean where water density increases relatively rapidly with depth.
This is EXACTLY DESCRIBES every single site you and I have given on pycnocline.
Notice the Quran mentions NOTHING regarding any site you have
given or I have given.
All the Quran states is that there is a barrier that cannot be transgressed. I've already given you the sites which show the pycnocline IS the mixing of the waters, which separates the two bodies of water which STILL allows items from the fresh water and salt water to mix.
Shocking you keep ignoring this.
At its basic core, without getting into scientific explanations, pycnocline is the separation of salt water and fresh water due to salinity, sediments, gravity and temperature. This "barrier" containing the above, allows the salt water to stay separate from the fresh water. They do mix slowly and eventually, but we will ignore that for the time being.
To suggest the word "barrier" is needed to explain this is absurd. To suggest Pliny and Aristotle were not referring to the concept of pycnocline is just dishonest. I hate using that word, you seem very intelligent, but I shake my head at how this debate is going. You just deny anything, no matter how much evidence, that contradicts the Quran.
"This is rendered more remarkable by springs of fresh water bubbling out as if from pipes on the sea shore. In fact, the nature of water also is not deficient in marvels. Patches of fresh water float on the surface of the sea, being doubtless lighter. Consequently, also sea water being of a heavier nature, gives more support to objects floating upon it. But some fresh waters too float on the surface of others; cases are the river carried on the surface of Lake Fucino, the Adde on the lake of Como, the Ticino on Maggiore, the Mincio on Garda, the Ollio on Lago d'Iseo, the Rhone on the Lake of Geneva (the last North of the Alps, but all the rest in Italy), after a passing visit that covers many miles, carrying out their own waters only, and no larger quantity than they introduced. This has also been stated in the case of the river Orontes in Syria and many others."
Pliny mentions how the fresh water is lighter (which it is)and floats separate from the salt water. Hmmmm.........well, at its basic core that pycoline.
"We find it maintained that rivers not only flow into the sea but originate from it, the salt water becoming sweet by filtration. But this view involves another difficulty. If this body is the source of all water, why is it salt and not sweet? Now the sun, moving as it does, sets up processes of change and becoming and decay, and by its agency, the finest and sweetest water is every day carried up and is dissolved into vapour and rises to the upper region , where it is condensed again by the cold and so returns to the earth.
The drinkable, sweet water then, is light and all of it is drawn up: the salt water is heavy and remains behind, but not in its proper place. The place which we see the sea filling is not its place but that of water. It seems to belong to the sea because the weight of the salt water makes it remain there, while the sweet, drinkable water which is light is carried up."
Again, Aristotle describes how there is a separation of the waters. The word barrier is not used, but the talk of the separation is.
Both mention the separation! They even mention the density difference!wrote:It must be a barrier, separation, boundary of some sort that deals with the different densities of the two different waters. Otherwise how would we know it is referring to a pycnocline?
ANSWER: No, you are wrong lol, the original interpretations were land and an invisible barrier the later being the narration of Al-Qurtubi and Imam As-Suyooti.
It is only recently that researchers are proving what the Quran says. These interpretations existed between 1200's and the 1500's the first interpretation by Ibn Kathir and the second was narrated by al-Qurtubi from Ibn Abbaas, and as-Suyooti attributed it to a report from Abd ibn Humayyid from Qataadah. It can be found in See ad-Durr al-Manthoor. Again you don't want to accept it, I am not the one making these interpretations up the second interpretation (invisible barrier) found in the above mentioned commentary was written in the 1500's. [/quote]
Show me the original translations and that they state its an invisible barrier.
YOU gave me scientific sites that explain pycnocline. Those sites were referring to the seas.wrote:ANSWER: Yes, this is what it's referring too, where did I ever say they were both seas?? I will explain this to you provided you answer my question first.
Here, from another science site: http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/W ... nsity.htmlwrote:QUOTE: "Thats because you're not understanding the sites you are reading. Pycocline IS the barrier. Its not invisible. It the MIXING of the waters above and the waters below. http://oceanmotion.org/html/background/ ... cture.htmÂ
And there is mixing! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PycnoclineÂ
ANSWER: If Pycocline is the barrier then why are you saying Pliny or Aristotle don't need to mention this?
Notice the word "barrier" is NEVER used. Notice how it is closer to what Aristotle and Pliny stated than the Quran.
You haven't done any homework.wrote:ANSWER: I won't answer any of your questions until you answer one  question of mine, it's not much to ask for, come on lol.
Your right your not TRYING to be impolite at all lol, must come naturally (just kidding)
Homework?? I have done plenty of that!
Seriously I only have one question.
I have shown you the the word "barrier" is not needed to describe pycocline a few times.
I have shown you science sites that state the waters do mix.
I have shown you repeatedly that the Quran only states there is a barrier between fresh and salt water, nothing more.
I have shown you that Aristotle and Pliny already described pycocline a 1000 years prior five times.
I have shown you that land is a better explanation.
I have shown you the very sites you use show two seas and pycocline when in fact, this would contradict the Quran.
I have shown you..oh hell, I've shown you a ton.
But yes, you can ask a question.
Post #752
@ Herictic
QUOTE: "This truly is frustrating. I cannot tell if you are just being naive or deliberately being obtuse.Â
Yes, there is a barrier per se. It involves the two waters mixing and the sediments, salinity, gravity, temperature. My point, which you missed AGAIN, is that the definition DESCRIBES what is transpiring.Â
Here is the definition which apparently you didn't want to address.Â
A change in density of ocean or lake water or rock with displacement in some direction, especially a rapid change in density with vertical displacement.Â
(oceanography)Â
A region in the ocean where water density increases relatively rapidly with depth.Â
This is EXACTLY DESCRIBES every single site you and I have given on pycnocline.Â
Notice the Quran mentions NOTHING regarding any site you haveÂ
given or I have given.Â
All the Quran states is that there is a barrier that cannot be transgressed. I've already given you the sites which show the pycnocline IS the mixing of the waters, which separates the two bodies of water which STILL allows items from the fresh water and salt water to mix.Â
Shocking you keep ignoring this"
ANSWER: So now there is a barrier?? The point doesn't need to go into detail regarding sediments, salinity, gravity and temperature. The fact that it tells us that the two seas meet and do not transgress already tells us this, because how is it possible that the two seas can meet and  mix but at the same time not transgress?? At a time where people had no knowledge of sediments, salinity, gravity and temperature this was revealed.
Yes and this word describes what happens when water meet but do not transgress in properties, something that was not known at the time.
I think you are misunderstanding the verse, the waters mix at a slow rate but the properties of each water do not transgress, hence there is an invisible barrier preventing and maintaing each waters unique properties.
QUOTE: "At its basic core, without getting into scientific explanations, pycnocline is the separation of salt water and fresh water due to salinity, sediments, gravity and temperature. This "barrier" containing the above, allows the salt water to stay separate from the fresh water. They do mix slowly and eventually, but we will ignore that for the time being.Â
To suggest the word "barrier" is needed to explain this is absurd. To suggest Pliny and Aristotle were not referring to the concept of pycnocline is just dishonest. I hate using that word, you seem very intelligent, but I shake my head at how this debate is going. You just deny anything, no matter how much evidence, that contradicts the Quran.Â
"This is rendered more remarkable by springs of fresh water bubbling out as if from pipes on the sea shore. In fact, the nature of water also is not deficient in marvels. Patches of fresh water float on the surface of the sea, being doubtless lighter. Consequently, also sea water being of a heavier nature, gives more support to objects floating upon it. But some fresh waters too float on the surface of others; cases are the river carried on the surface of Lake Fucino, the Adde on the lake of Como, the Ticino on Maggiore, the Mincio on Garda, the Ollio on Lago d'Iseo, the Rhone on the Lake of Geneva (the last North of the Alps, but all the rest in Italy), after a passing visit that covers many miles, carrying out their own waters only, and no larger quantity than they introduced. This has also been stated in the case of the river Orontes in Syria and many others."Â
ANSWER: Well I'm glad you are using the word barrier now, yes this is what a pycnocline is the separation  of waters due to there distinct properties. Are you contradicting yourself or is it just me? Now they don't mix?? Lol
Why is it absurd?, that's what a pycnocline does, As I have said I don't deny evidence, how can we reconcile this difference the only way I can think of is by you siting the evidence you have of Pliny and Aristotle and let us compare it to the description of  pycnocline is this not a logical idea??
It is referring to rivers, but this wouldn't explain how they meet and do not transgress, not transgressing due to their properties, especially not 1400 years ago.
QUOTE: "Pliny mentions how the fresh water is lighter (which it is)and floats separate from the salt water. Hmmmm.........well, at its basic core that pycoline.Â
"We find it maintained that rivers not only flow into the sea but originate from it, the salt water becoming sweet by filtration. But this view involves another difficulty. If this body is the source of all water, why is it salt and not sweet? Now the sun, moving as it does, sets up processes of change and becoming and decay, and by its agency, the finest and sweetest water is every day carried up and is dissolved into vapour and rises to the upper region , where it is condensed again by the cold and so returns to the earth.Â
The drinkable, sweet water then, is light and all of it is drawn up: the salt water is heavy and remains behind, but not in its proper place. The place which we see the sea filling is not its place but that of water. It seems to belong to the sea because the weight of the salt water makes it remain there, while the sweet, drinkable water which is light is carried up."Â
Again, Aristotle describes how there is a separation of the waters. The word barrier is not used, but the talk of the separation is"
ANSWER: Yes, I could tell you that also lol, all I would need to do is go to a river pick up some water in a jug and go to the beach and do the same lol.Â
This separation is visual to the naked eye, and seems to me it is talking about the separation of water vertically considering the freshwater is lighter and carried up but we are talking horizontally and how they meet mix but do not transgress in properties.
QUOTE: "Both mention the separation! They even mention the density difference! "
ANSWER: They are not talking about the same thing, can you please post the link please.
QUOTE: "Show me the original translations and that they state its an invisible barrier"
ANSWER: From my knowledge and a quick Internet search they do not have a soft copy version of ad-Durr al-Manthoor. You can order it online if you like lol.
QUOTE: "YOU gave me scientific sites that explain pycnocline. Those sites were referring to the seas"
ANSWER: Yes, thats what we are discussing
QUOTE: "Here, from another science site: http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/W ... sity.htmlÂ
Notice the word "barrier" is NEVER used. Notice how it is closer to what Aristotle and Pliny stated than the Quran"
ANSWER: Are you going to paste what Aristotle and Pliny stated any time soon lol
If this is the site your going to use to prove what a pycocline is, then according to this site that says:
"The density of ocean water is rarely measured directly. If you wanted to measure the density of ocean water, you would have to collect a sample of sea water and bring it back to the laboratory to be measured. Density is usually calculated using an equation. You just need to measure the salinity, temperature and pressure to be able to find density. These measurements are often made with a CTD instrument, where the instrument is placed in the ocean water from a ship or a platform"Â
How would this have been known 1400 years ago??
QUOTE: "You haven't done any homework.Â
I have shown you the the word "barrier" is not needed to describe pycocline a few times.Â
I have shown you science sites that state the waters do mix.Â
I have shown you repeatedly that the Quran only states there is a barrier between fresh and salt water, nothing more.Â
I have shown you that Aristotle and Pliny already described pycocline a 1000 years prior five times.Â
I have shown you that land is a better explanation.Â
I have shown you the very sites you use show two seas and pycocline when in fact, this would contradict the Quran.Â
I have shown you..oh hell, I've shown you a ton
But yes, you can ask a question"
ANSWER: 1) Â Pycocline is the barrier lol.
2) Now your back to saying they mix?? Which is it they mix or don't mix??, yes they do mix but there properties do not transgress.
3) I have told you that we don't just follow the Quran and interpret it according to our own whims and desires.
4) I have asked you to paste what Aristotle and Pliny have said, you haven't done so yet, so so far we only have your opinion, I want to see this from their books.
5) I have explained to you that you cannot choose what definition you prefer to support your claims and avoid what the other interpretation is.
6) Your contradicting yourself again first you say that it would make better sense if it was a river and sea which is what the books of tafsir confirm and now you are saying that they are two seas
As for my question, are you going to accept the documented meanings of the verses Islam believes in??. The famous commentaries of the Qur'an or simply deny it??Â
QUOTE: "This truly is frustrating. I cannot tell if you are just being naive or deliberately being obtuse.Â
Yes, there is a barrier per se. It involves the two waters mixing and the sediments, salinity, gravity, temperature. My point, which you missed AGAIN, is that the definition DESCRIBES what is transpiring.Â
Here is the definition which apparently you didn't want to address.Â
A change in density of ocean or lake water or rock with displacement in some direction, especially a rapid change in density with vertical displacement.Â
(oceanography)Â
A region in the ocean where water density increases relatively rapidly with depth.Â
This is EXACTLY DESCRIBES every single site you and I have given on pycnocline.Â
Notice the Quran mentions NOTHING regarding any site you haveÂ
given or I have given.Â
All the Quran states is that there is a barrier that cannot be transgressed. I've already given you the sites which show the pycnocline IS the mixing of the waters, which separates the two bodies of water which STILL allows items from the fresh water and salt water to mix.Â
Shocking you keep ignoring this"
ANSWER: So now there is a barrier?? The point doesn't need to go into detail regarding sediments, salinity, gravity and temperature. The fact that it tells us that the two seas meet and do not transgress already tells us this, because how is it possible that the two seas can meet and  mix but at the same time not transgress?? At a time where people had no knowledge of sediments, salinity, gravity and temperature this was revealed.
Yes and this word describes what happens when water meet but do not transgress in properties, something that was not known at the time.
I think you are misunderstanding the verse, the waters mix at a slow rate but the properties of each water do not transgress, hence there is an invisible barrier preventing and maintaing each waters unique properties.
QUOTE: "At its basic core, without getting into scientific explanations, pycnocline is the separation of salt water and fresh water due to salinity, sediments, gravity and temperature. This "barrier" containing the above, allows the salt water to stay separate from the fresh water. They do mix slowly and eventually, but we will ignore that for the time being.Â
To suggest the word "barrier" is needed to explain this is absurd. To suggest Pliny and Aristotle were not referring to the concept of pycnocline is just dishonest. I hate using that word, you seem very intelligent, but I shake my head at how this debate is going. You just deny anything, no matter how much evidence, that contradicts the Quran.Â
"This is rendered more remarkable by springs of fresh water bubbling out as if from pipes on the sea shore. In fact, the nature of water also is not deficient in marvels. Patches of fresh water float on the surface of the sea, being doubtless lighter. Consequently, also sea water being of a heavier nature, gives more support to objects floating upon it. But some fresh waters too float on the surface of others; cases are the river carried on the surface of Lake Fucino, the Adde on the lake of Como, the Ticino on Maggiore, the Mincio on Garda, the Ollio on Lago d'Iseo, the Rhone on the Lake of Geneva (the last North of the Alps, but all the rest in Italy), after a passing visit that covers many miles, carrying out their own waters only, and no larger quantity than they introduced. This has also been stated in the case of the river Orontes in Syria and many others."Â
ANSWER: Well I'm glad you are using the word barrier now, yes this is what a pycnocline is the separation  of waters due to there distinct properties. Are you contradicting yourself or is it just me? Now they don't mix?? Lol
Why is it absurd?, that's what a pycnocline does, As I have said I don't deny evidence, how can we reconcile this difference the only way I can think of is by you siting the evidence you have of Pliny and Aristotle and let us compare it to the description of  pycnocline is this not a logical idea??
It is referring to rivers, but this wouldn't explain how they meet and do not transgress, not transgressing due to their properties, especially not 1400 years ago.
QUOTE: "Pliny mentions how the fresh water is lighter (which it is)and floats separate from the salt water. Hmmmm.........well, at its basic core that pycoline.Â
"We find it maintained that rivers not only flow into the sea but originate from it, the salt water becoming sweet by filtration. But this view involves another difficulty. If this body is the source of all water, why is it salt and not sweet? Now the sun, moving as it does, sets up processes of change and becoming and decay, and by its agency, the finest and sweetest water is every day carried up and is dissolved into vapour and rises to the upper region , where it is condensed again by the cold and so returns to the earth.Â
The drinkable, sweet water then, is light and all of it is drawn up: the salt water is heavy and remains behind, but not in its proper place. The place which we see the sea filling is not its place but that of water. It seems to belong to the sea because the weight of the salt water makes it remain there, while the sweet, drinkable water which is light is carried up."Â
Again, Aristotle describes how there is a separation of the waters. The word barrier is not used, but the talk of the separation is"
ANSWER: Yes, I could tell you that also lol, all I would need to do is go to a river pick up some water in a jug and go to the beach and do the same lol.Â
This separation is visual to the naked eye, and seems to me it is talking about the separation of water vertically considering the freshwater is lighter and carried up but we are talking horizontally and how they meet mix but do not transgress in properties.
QUOTE: "Both mention the separation! They even mention the density difference! "
ANSWER: They are not talking about the same thing, can you please post the link please.
QUOTE: "Show me the original translations and that they state its an invisible barrier"
ANSWER: From my knowledge and a quick Internet search they do not have a soft copy version of ad-Durr al-Manthoor. You can order it online if you like lol.
QUOTE: "YOU gave me scientific sites that explain pycnocline. Those sites were referring to the seas"
ANSWER: Yes, thats what we are discussing
QUOTE: "Here, from another science site: http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/W ... sity.htmlÂ
Notice the word "barrier" is NEVER used. Notice how it is closer to what Aristotle and Pliny stated than the Quran"
ANSWER: Are you going to paste what Aristotle and Pliny stated any time soon lol
If this is the site your going to use to prove what a pycocline is, then according to this site that says:
"The density of ocean water is rarely measured directly. If you wanted to measure the density of ocean water, you would have to collect a sample of sea water and bring it back to the laboratory to be measured. Density is usually calculated using an equation. You just need to measure the salinity, temperature and pressure to be able to find density. These measurements are often made with a CTD instrument, where the instrument is placed in the ocean water from a ship or a platform"Â
How would this have been known 1400 years ago??
QUOTE: "You haven't done any homework.Â
I have shown you the the word "barrier" is not needed to describe pycocline a few times.Â
I have shown you science sites that state the waters do mix.Â
I have shown you repeatedly that the Quran only states there is a barrier between fresh and salt water, nothing more.Â
I have shown you that Aristotle and Pliny already described pycocline a 1000 years prior five times.Â
I have shown you that land is a better explanation.Â
I have shown you the very sites you use show two seas and pycocline when in fact, this would contradict the Quran.Â
I have shown you..oh hell, I've shown you a ton
But yes, you can ask a question"
ANSWER: 1) Â Pycocline is the barrier lol.
2) Now your back to saying they mix?? Which is it they mix or don't mix??, yes they do mix but there properties do not transgress.
3) I have told you that we don't just follow the Quran and interpret it according to our own whims and desires.
4) I have asked you to paste what Aristotle and Pliny have said, you haven't done so yet, so so far we only have your opinion, I want to see this from their books.
5) I have explained to you that you cannot choose what definition you prefer to support your claims and avoid what the other interpretation is.
6) Your contradicting yourself again first you say that it would make better sense if it was a river and sea which is what the books of tafsir confirm and now you are saying that they are two seas
As for my question, are you going to accept the documented meanings of the verses Islam believes in??. The famous commentaries of the Qur'an or simply deny it??Â
Post #753
@ A Troubled Man
QUOTE: "Unfortunately, that doesn't explain why there are varying denominations of Islam and why Muslims fight and kill each other over their interpretations. And, if the Quran requires several books written by other men in order to zero in on a particular interpretation, then it is pretty much useless"
ANSWER: Fight and kill each other over interpretations??? that's a first I've heard that one, yes this is why you cannot even answer my questions and resort to posting a link to do it for you. Lol
QUOTE: "One book, "The Origin of Species" - try reading it sometime. Of course, some time ago, I provided YOU with a link to help understanding evolution, which you obviously just ignored.Â
Here is a link to the book...Â
http://www.literature.org/authors/darwi ... f-species/"
ANSWER: That hasn't answered my question to you (not the link), even if I were to read it, it still wouldn't answer my questions. Cause it doesn't have the answers.
QUOTE: "Unfortunately, that doesn't explain why there are varying denominations of Islam and why Muslims fight and kill each other over their interpretations. And, if the Quran requires several books written by other men in order to zero in on a particular interpretation, then it is pretty much useless"
ANSWER: Fight and kill each other over interpretations??? that's a first I've heard that one, yes this is why you cannot even answer my questions and resort to posting a link to do it for you. Lol
QUOTE: "One book, "The Origin of Species" - try reading it sometime. Of course, some time ago, I provided YOU with a link to help understanding evolution, which you obviously just ignored.Â
Here is a link to the book...Â
http://www.literature.org/authors/darwi ... f-species/"
ANSWER: That hasn't answered my question to you (not the link), even if I were to read it, it still wouldn't answer my questions. Cause it doesn't have the answers.
Post #754
Again, I cannot tell if you are just having fun with me or you really are this dense. You keep repeating the same points over and over even after I have shown you otherwise. This is why religion is so scary. You have your mind made up, regardless of the facts.HaLi8993 wrote: @ Herictic
QUOTE: "This truly is frustrating. I cannot tell if you are just being naive or deliberately being obtuse.Â
Yes, there is a barrier per se. It involves the two waters mixing and the sediments, salinity, gravity, temperature. My point, which you missed AGAIN, is that the definition DESCRIBES what is transpiring.Â
Here is the definition which apparently you didn't want to address.Â
A change in density of ocean or lake water or rock with displacement in some direction, especially a rapid change in density with vertical displacement.Â
(oceanography)Â
A region in the ocean where water density increases relatively rapidly with depth.Â
This is EXACTLY DESCRIBES every single site you and I have given on pycnocline.Â
Notice the Quran mentions NOTHING regarding any site you haveÂ
given or I have given.Â
All the Quran states is that there is a barrier that cannot be transgressed. I've already given you the sites which show the pycnocline IS the mixing of the waters, which separates the two bodies of water which STILL allows items from the fresh water and salt water to mix.Â
Shocking you keep ignoring this"
ANSWER: So now there is a barrier?? The point doesn't need to go into detail regarding sediments, salinity, gravity and temperature. The fact that it tells us that the two seas meet and do not transgress already tells us this, because how is it possible that the two seas can meet and  mix but at the same time not transgress?? At a time where people had no knowledge of sediments, salinity, gravity and temperature this was revealed.
YES! There is a barrier! The barrier IS the two waters mixing!!! No, its NOT two seas we are talking about bc the Quran mentions FRESH water and SALT water. No sea has fresh water.
So either the Quran is wrong or the author is not refering to two seas. Pick one and stick with it.
Plus, I have already given you science sites at least twice that I can remember that state the salt and fresh water do go through the "barrier"!
You then go on to claim that that Quran is amazing bc no one could possibly have known of salinity, gravity, sediments and temperature when the Quran mentions NONE of these regarding the waters.
In fact, the Quran doesnt even mention the waters touching at all!
On top of this, Aristotle and Pliny mention the salinity! So again, you're ignoring any type of evidence I give.
The verse states nothing of the above. You are adding to scripture once again. On top of that, they do transgress! I find it amazing that you are now changing the meaning of the word "transgress". First your entire argument was that the waters to NOT mix. I pointed out numerous times they do. Now you're admitting they do mix. Plus, its NOT invisible. You can see the waters! On top of that, the Quran doesnt even mention anything invisible. Even better, w a lil digging, I found this:wrote:I think you are misunderstanding the verse, the waters mix at a slow rate but the properties of each water do not transgress, hence there is an invisible barrier preventing and maintaing each waters unique properties.
Jeremiah 5:22 "I made the sand a boundary for the sea, an everlasting BARRIER it cannot cross."
Gee, sounds nearly exact to the Quran...and its refering to a land mass as I stated.
No, trust me its you. You used the word barrier to imply that the salt water does not come in contact with the fresh. This is absolutely untrue. There isnt any barrier. The "barrier" that seperated the two, IS the waters mixing. On top of that, the fresh and salt DO pass through the barrier. You are wrong on every account.wrote:ANSWER: Well I'm glad you are using the word barrier now, yes this is what a pycnocline is the separation  of waters due to there distinct properties. Are you contradicting yourself or is it just me? Now they don't mix?? Lol
This is absurd. I gave you the quotes AGAIN, at least five times so far maybe more. You pasted the quotes each time, then ask for them again. You're not even reading what Im giving you. In fact, you quoted them in your last response and STILL asked me for it. What is wrong with you?wrote:Why is it absurd?, that's what a pycnocline does, As I have said I don't deny evidence, how can we reconcile this difference the only way I can think of is by you siting the evidence you have of Pliny and Aristotle and let us compare it to the description of  pycnocline is this not a logical idea??
Again, you failed to read anything I wrote. I said the Quran is refering to a land mass, such as land seperating a lake from the sea. I brought up Pliny and Aristotle to show you they were aware of the seperation.wrote:It is referring to rivers, but this wouldn't explain how they meet and do not transgress, not transgressing due to their properties, especially not 1400 years ago.
Yes it is visible. The Quran mentions NOTHING about horizontally. Again, you are adding to scripture to make it say what you want to say. I hope others are reading this debate. Its remarkable how the fundamnalist ignores the evidence and changes what scripture states to conform to their beliefs.wrote:QUOTE: "Pliny mentions how the fresh water is lighter (which it is)and floats separate from the salt water. Hmmmm.........well, at its basic core that pycoline.Â
"We find it maintained that rivers not only flow into the sea but originate from it, the salt water becoming sweet by filtration. But this view involves another difficulty. If this body is the source of all water, why is it salt and not sweet? Now the sun, moving as it does, sets up processes of change and becoming and decay, and by its agency, the finest and sweetest water is every day carried up and is dissolved into vapour and rises to the upper region , where it is condensed again by the cold and so returns to the earth.Â
The drinkable, sweet water then, is light and all of it is drawn up: the salt water is heavy and remains behind, but not in its proper place. The place which we see the sea filling is not its place but that of water. It seems to belong to the sea because the weight of the salt water makes it remain there, while the sweet, drinkable water which is light is carried up."Â
Again, Aristotle describes how there is a separation of the waters. The word barrier is not used, but the talk of the separation is"
ANSWER: Yes, I could tell you that also lol, all I would need to do is go to a river pick up some water in a jug and go to the beach and do the same lol.Â
This separation is visual to the naked eye, and seems to me it is talking about the separation of water vertically considering the freshwater is lighter and carried up but we are talking horizontally and how they meet mix but do not transgress in properties.
The Quran only mentions a barrier that cannot be crossed. Thats it. Show me anywhere in the Quran it mentions a horizontal barrier. Give me the verse. You cant, it does not exist.
You just responded to the quotes above, then you forget its there to reference???wrote:QUOTE: "Both mention the separation! They even mention the density difference! "
ANSWER: They are not talking about the same thing, can you please post the link please.
I know they're not talking about the same thing. The Quran is talking about a land mass. You keep forgetting the Quran cannot be refering to two seas, bc no sea is fresh water. Therefore it can only refer to a river or a lake. So IF the Quran is talking about a lake, its a land mass. If the Quran is talking about a river, then it backs up what Pliny and Aristotle stated.
There isnt anything in the Quran that mentions two oceans meeting. Nothing.
I already found it. It does not mention invisible. If you would like to prove me wrong, do so. But we are going by what the Quran states, no what other authors later added to it. Even if you wish it mentions invisible, its not. It can be seen by the naked eye. The barrier is the waters mixing.wrote:QUOTE: "Show me the original translations and that they state its an invisible barrier"
ANSWER: From my knowledge and a quick Internet search they do not have a soft copy version of ad-Durr al-Manthoor. You can order it online if you like lol.
You can perform this in your own home with salt, different temperatures and water.
The waters will seperate, but they are still touching and mixing. You can see it. Its not invisible.
As already explained, no we are not. If the Quran is refering to seas, its wrong. No sea has fresh water. Is this the angle you wish, that the author was refering to a sea with fresh water?wrote:QUOTE: "YOU gave me scientific sites that explain pycnocline. Those sites were referring to the seas"
ANSWER: Yes, thats what we are discussing
This is pointless.wrote:QUOTE: "Here, from another science site: http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/W ... sity.htmlÂ
Notice the word "barrier" is NEVER used. Notice how it is closer to what Aristotle and Pliny stated than the Quran"
ANSWER: Are you going to paste what Aristotle and Pliny stated any time soon lol
I deleted the rest except for this, you said:
4) I have asked you to paste what Aristotle and Pliny have said, you haven't done so yet, so so far we only have your opinion, I want to see this from their books.
Me again: They're quoted in this very post. You even responded to it earlier. I gave you the exact quotes and where they are taken from quite a few times. Easily found on the internet.
I tried again, but it really is pointless. You ignore everything that contradicts your beliefs. You're so brainwashed by your religion you cannot even see that I gave you the quotes and from where they are located from. At least five times. You even responded to the quotes, then in the same post asked for them again! Twice!
I gave science sites that show its not invisible, the barrier is the mixing of the waters, that the waters do go through the barriers...and you still ignore it.
I showed you the Quran would be wrong if it was refering to two seas, since seas are not fresh water and then you still give sites that refer to oceans.
Im done.
-
A Troubled Man
- Guru
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:24 am
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #755
Either that is more dishonesty on your part or you have no idea what is occurring in the world around you. Shiite and Sunni have been fighting and killing each other for some time. Funny how so much of the world knows this but you don't.HaLi8993 wrote: ANSWER: Fight and kill each other over interpretations??? that's a first I've heard that one
More dishonesty on your part. You refuse to read the book that will help you to understand evolution. I suspect you are probably afraid of understanding it because you don't want to know the truth because you feel it conflicts with your religious beliefs.Here is a link to the book...Â
http://www.literature.org/authors/darwi ... f-species/"
ANSWER: That hasn't answered my question to you (not the link), even if I were to read it, it still wouldn't answer my questions. Cause it doesn't have the answers.
I'm done too.
Post #756
@ Herictic
QUOTE: "Again, I cannot tell if you are just having fun with me or you really are this dense. You keep repeating the same points over and over even after I have shown you otherwise. This is why religion is so scary. You have your mind made up, regardless of the facts.Â
YES! There is a barrier! The barrier IS the two waters mixing!!! No, its NOT two seas we are talking about bc the Quran mentions FRESH water and SALT water. No sea has fresh water.
So either the Quran is wrong or the author is not refering to two seas. Pick one and stick with it.Â
Plus, I have already given you science sites at least twice that I can remember that state the salt and fresh water do go through the "barrier"!Â
You then go on to claim that that Quran is amazing bc no one could possibly have known of salinity, gravity, sediments and temperature when the Quran mentions NONE of these regarding the waters.Â
In fact, the Quran doesnt even mention the waters touching at all!Â
On top of this, Aristotle and Pliny mention the salinity! So again, you're ignoring any type of evidence I give"
ANSWER: Yes, I could say the same thing about you, I'm loosing track how many times you have asked me the same questions after I have shown you otherwise, religion is the fact.
Hold on what do you mean by mixing?? The Quran is not wrong, the books of tafsir as well as the Quran make it very clear the meaning of  "the  two seas" it is the two kinds of water. As we can see in the translation of the Quran below:
QURAN: 25:53
Muhsin Khan
"And it is He Who has let free the two seas (kinds of water), one palatable and sweet, and the other salt and bitter, and He has set a barrier and a complete partition between them"
Look I don't think you are understanding this at all, or maybe it is my fault that I cannot explain such detailed work effectively in a short summary, Â here are some sites to help you understand this concept:
http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewArticle.do?id=2486
http://disc.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/education ... ater.shtml
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estuary
As I mentioned it doesn't need to mention the salinity, gravity, sediments and temperature or the waters touching why do you think it would need too?
Aristotle and Pliny most likely mentioned salinity because they were studying water, not what causes a barrier between the two types of water.
QUOTE: "The verse states nothing of the above. You are adding to scripture once again. On top of that, they do transgress! I find it amazing that you are now changing the meaning of the word "transgress". First your entire argument was that the waters to NOT mix. I pointed out numerous times they do. Now you're admitting they do mix. Plus, its NOT invisible. You can see the waters! On top of that, the Quran doesnt even mention anything invisible. Even better, w a lil digging, I found this:Â
Jeremiah 5:22 "I made the sand a boundary for the sea, an everlasting BARRIER it cannot cross."Â
Gee, sounds nearly exact to the Quran...and its refering to a land mass as I stated."
ANSWER: How do the properties transgress? When I say they do not mix it's in reference to the properties of each water. When I say they mix the waters meet. We are talking about the barrier not the waters, the commentary of the Quran make it evident that one of the opinions was an invisible barrier, I'm turning into a parrot, lol.Â
So how does this verse of the bible relate to what we are discussing, are we discussing sand?? I would really like to see the commentary of this verse of the bible and your thoughts on this.
QUOTE: "No, trust me its you. You used the word barrier to imply that the salt water does not come in contact with the fresh. This is absolutely untrue. There isnt any barrier. The "barrier" that seperated the two, IS the waters mixing. On top of that, the fresh and salt DO pass through the barrier. You are wrong on every account"
ANSWER: If there is no barrier as you claim then what prevents them from becoming one water?? Â
QUOTE: "This is absurd. I gave you the quotes AGAIN, at least five times so far maybe more. You pasted the quotes each time, then ask for them again. You're not even reading what Im giving you. In fact, you quoted them in your last response and STILL asked me for it. What is wrong with you?"
ANSWER: Yes, I am asking for new material if any, you may have of Pliny or Aristotle, because we have seen that what you have posted firstly has no references, secondly has nothing to do with what we are discussing, I don't see it relating to the description of pycnocline.
QUOTE: "Again, you failed to read anything I wrote. I said the Quran is refering to a land mass, such as land seperating a lake from the sea. I brought up Pliny and Aristotle to show you they were aware of the seperation."
ANSWER: You are still persisting in ignoring the other interpretation of the verse, why is this?? We can say everyone is aware of water seperation however the description of this water seperation doesn't say much about the topic itself. Unless you can explain to me how it does, all you insist on saying is that they knew of seperation, that's all fine and well but I could have told you that. LolÂ
QUOTE: "Yes it is visible. The Quran mentions NOTHING about horizontally. Again, you are adding to scripture to make it say what you want to say. I hope others are reading this debate. Its remarkable how the fundamnalist ignores the evidence and changes what scripture states to conform to their beliefs.Â
The Quran only mentions a barrier that cannot be crossed. Thats it. Show me anywhere in the Quran it mentions a horizontal barrier. Give me the verse. You cant, it does not exist"
ANSWER: Your putting words into my mouth, in some cases yes it is land, but we are focussing on the other meaning right now, did I say the Quran mentions it is horizontally, I was giving you an example how what you posted of Pliny and Aristotle  have no relevance.Â
QUOTE: "You just responded to the quotes above, then you forget its there to reference???Â
I know they're not talking about the same thing. The Quran is talking about a land mass. You keep forgetting the Quran cannot be refering to two seas, bc no sea is fresh water. Therefore it can only refer to a river or a lake. So IF the Quran is talking about a lake, its a land mass. If the Quran is talking about a river, then it backs up what Pliny and Aristotle stated.Â
There isnt anything in the Quran that mentions two oceans meeting. Nothing"
ANSWER: I wanted the link in which you are getting these references from, it's called referencing.
Your stubborn nature to accept what we are discussing won't get you anywhere in this debate considering that for all of the debate I am not referring to the barrier as a land mass, you keep ignoring my explanation the Quran isn't referring to two seas.Â
As mentioned on countless occasions again the commentary makes it very clear it is referring to  rivers and lakes.
Not at all because I river flows into the sea it's called the river mouth.
QUOTE: "I already found it. It does not mention invisible. If you would like to prove me wrong, do so. But we are going by what the Quran states, no what other authors later added to it. Even if you wish it mentions invisible, its not. It can be seen by the naked eye. The barrier is the waters mixing.Â
You can perform this in your own home with salt, different temperatures and water.Â
The waters will seperate, but they are still touching and mixing. You can see it. Its not invisible"
ANSWER: You have found what exactly?? As I said if you are going to deny the commentary of the Quran then we have nothing, the study of water is not the same as the as the study of rivers and seas especially considering the extremities involved such as the water moving backwards and forwards and the turbulence involved. This requires instruments that are only being used today.
QUOTE: "As already explained, no we are not. If the Quran is refering to seas, its wrong. No sea has fresh water. Is this the angle you wish, that the author was refering to a sea with fresh water?"
ANSWER: Well it's not referring to seas it's referring to rivers and seas so I guess it's not wrong, yes we know that no sea has fresh water thanks for pointing that out but who said anything about a sea with freshwater?? You are wrong this is not what the verse is saying at all as proven in the above translation of the verse.
QUOTE: "This is pointless.Â
I deleted the rest except for this, you said:Â
4) I have asked you to paste what Aristotle and Pliny have said, you haven't done so yet, so so far we only have your opinion, I want to see this from their books.Â
Me again: They're quoted in this very post. You even responded to it earlier. I gave you the exact quotes and where they are taken from quite a few times. Easily found on the internet.Â
I tried again, but it really is pointless. You ignore everything that contradicts your beliefs. You're so brainwashed by your religion you cannot even see that I gave you the quotes and from where they are located from. At least five times. You even responded to the quotes, then in the same post asked for them again! Twice!Â
I gave science sites that show its not invisible, the barrier is the mixing of the waters, that the waters do go through the barriers...and you still ignore it.Â
I showed you the Quran would be wrong if it was refering to two seas, since seas are not fresh water and then you still give sites that refer to oceans.Â
I'm done"
ANSWER: This is the thing you quote something form Pliny and Aristotle with no references then you make a comparison between the Quran and what they have said, my response was that it doesn't relate to what we are discussing, your response is that it does, but when asked show me what you believe is the same and give me an explanation in terms of the similarities there is no response apart from what you have copied and pasted from I don't know what site, We need to concentrate on the entire context and picture, what were Pliny and Aristotle talking about?? where is the book or link?, it is easy to copy and paste something and say here you go this proves that so and so it talking about a particular thing. This is however very diceptive. There is absolutely no way I'm going to simply agree that Pliny and Aristotle knew anything about what we are discussing unless I see solid evidence. Your evidence is just the study of water, we are discussing the mechanisms involved in the rivers and seas that act as a barrier to prevent the two waters from transgressing the properties of one water with the other, in my opinion these are two separate things. The other problem is you want to ignore the commentary of the Quran as well as the interpretations and meanings of the verses lol.
I ignore everything that contradicts God, you never provided references since we started the Dante again  lol, I never asked for the same quote, I asked for what Pliny and Aristotle said in regards to what we are discussing, meaning what else do you have of their work??
If the barrier is the mixing of the waters isn't this invisible?? if they cross through the barrier does it mean that they become the same in properties??Â
The Quran is not referring to two seas this is a misconception on your part, you know what I find really interesting that I have only asked you one question which was:
are you going to accept the documented meanings of the verses Islam believes in??. The famous commentaries of the Qur'an or simply deny it?? Â Â
And you failed to answer it, and then you accuse me of injustice lol. As for your questions I'm not going to run away they are posted below,Â
Thanks, for your time and effort involved in our discussion. I really enjoyed it
QUOTE: "Again, I cannot tell if you are just having fun with me or you really are this dense. You keep repeating the same points over and over even after I have shown you otherwise. This is why religion is so scary. You have your mind made up, regardless of the facts.Â
YES! There is a barrier! The barrier IS the two waters mixing!!! No, its NOT two seas we are talking about bc the Quran mentions FRESH water and SALT water. No sea has fresh water.
So either the Quran is wrong or the author is not refering to two seas. Pick one and stick with it.Â
Plus, I have already given you science sites at least twice that I can remember that state the salt and fresh water do go through the "barrier"!Â
You then go on to claim that that Quran is amazing bc no one could possibly have known of salinity, gravity, sediments and temperature when the Quran mentions NONE of these regarding the waters.Â
In fact, the Quran doesnt even mention the waters touching at all!Â
On top of this, Aristotle and Pliny mention the salinity! So again, you're ignoring any type of evidence I give"
ANSWER: Yes, I could say the same thing about you, I'm loosing track how many times you have asked me the same questions after I have shown you otherwise, religion is the fact.
Hold on what do you mean by mixing?? The Quran is not wrong, the books of tafsir as well as the Quran make it very clear the meaning of  "the  two seas" it is the two kinds of water. As we can see in the translation of the Quran below:
QURAN: 25:53
Muhsin Khan
"And it is He Who has let free the two seas (kinds of water), one palatable and sweet, and the other salt and bitter, and He has set a barrier and a complete partition between them"
Look I don't think you are understanding this at all, or maybe it is my fault that I cannot explain such detailed work effectively in a short summary, Â here are some sites to help you understand this concept:
http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewArticle.do?id=2486
http://disc.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/education ... ater.shtml
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estuary
As I mentioned it doesn't need to mention the salinity, gravity, sediments and temperature or the waters touching why do you think it would need too?
Aristotle and Pliny most likely mentioned salinity because they were studying water, not what causes a barrier between the two types of water.
QUOTE: "The verse states nothing of the above. You are adding to scripture once again. On top of that, they do transgress! I find it amazing that you are now changing the meaning of the word "transgress". First your entire argument was that the waters to NOT mix. I pointed out numerous times they do. Now you're admitting they do mix. Plus, its NOT invisible. You can see the waters! On top of that, the Quran doesnt even mention anything invisible. Even better, w a lil digging, I found this:Â
Jeremiah 5:22 "I made the sand a boundary for the sea, an everlasting BARRIER it cannot cross."Â
Gee, sounds nearly exact to the Quran...and its refering to a land mass as I stated."
ANSWER: How do the properties transgress? When I say they do not mix it's in reference to the properties of each water. When I say they mix the waters meet. We are talking about the barrier not the waters, the commentary of the Quran make it evident that one of the opinions was an invisible barrier, I'm turning into a parrot, lol.Â
So how does this verse of the bible relate to what we are discussing, are we discussing sand?? I would really like to see the commentary of this verse of the bible and your thoughts on this.
QUOTE: "No, trust me its you. You used the word barrier to imply that the salt water does not come in contact with the fresh. This is absolutely untrue. There isnt any barrier. The "barrier" that seperated the two, IS the waters mixing. On top of that, the fresh and salt DO pass through the barrier. You are wrong on every account"
ANSWER: If there is no barrier as you claim then what prevents them from becoming one water?? Â
QUOTE: "This is absurd. I gave you the quotes AGAIN, at least five times so far maybe more. You pasted the quotes each time, then ask for them again. You're not even reading what Im giving you. In fact, you quoted them in your last response and STILL asked me for it. What is wrong with you?"
ANSWER: Yes, I am asking for new material if any, you may have of Pliny or Aristotle, because we have seen that what you have posted firstly has no references, secondly has nothing to do with what we are discussing, I don't see it relating to the description of pycnocline.
QUOTE: "Again, you failed to read anything I wrote. I said the Quran is refering to a land mass, such as land seperating a lake from the sea. I brought up Pliny and Aristotle to show you they were aware of the seperation."
ANSWER: You are still persisting in ignoring the other interpretation of the verse, why is this?? We can say everyone is aware of water seperation however the description of this water seperation doesn't say much about the topic itself. Unless you can explain to me how it does, all you insist on saying is that they knew of seperation, that's all fine and well but I could have told you that. LolÂ
QUOTE: "Yes it is visible. The Quran mentions NOTHING about horizontally. Again, you are adding to scripture to make it say what you want to say. I hope others are reading this debate. Its remarkable how the fundamnalist ignores the evidence and changes what scripture states to conform to their beliefs.Â
The Quran only mentions a barrier that cannot be crossed. Thats it. Show me anywhere in the Quran it mentions a horizontal barrier. Give me the verse. You cant, it does not exist"
ANSWER: Your putting words into my mouth, in some cases yes it is land, but we are focussing on the other meaning right now, did I say the Quran mentions it is horizontally, I was giving you an example how what you posted of Pliny and Aristotle  have no relevance.Â
QUOTE: "You just responded to the quotes above, then you forget its there to reference???Â
I know they're not talking about the same thing. The Quran is talking about a land mass. You keep forgetting the Quran cannot be refering to two seas, bc no sea is fresh water. Therefore it can only refer to a river or a lake. So IF the Quran is talking about a lake, its a land mass. If the Quran is talking about a river, then it backs up what Pliny and Aristotle stated.Â
There isnt anything in the Quran that mentions two oceans meeting. Nothing"
ANSWER: I wanted the link in which you are getting these references from, it's called referencing.
Your stubborn nature to accept what we are discussing won't get you anywhere in this debate considering that for all of the debate I am not referring to the barrier as a land mass, you keep ignoring my explanation the Quran isn't referring to two seas.Â
As mentioned on countless occasions again the commentary makes it very clear it is referring to  rivers and lakes.
Not at all because I river flows into the sea it's called the river mouth.
QUOTE: "I already found it. It does not mention invisible. If you would like to prove me wrong, do so. But we are going by what the Quran states, no what other authors later added to it. Even if you wish it mentions invisible, its not. It can be seen by the naked eye. The barrier is the waters mixing.Â
You can perform this in your own home with salt, different temperatures and water.Â
The waters will seperate, but they are still touching and mixing. You can see it. Its not invisible"
ANSWER: You have found what exactly?? As I said if you are going to deny the commentary of the Quran then we have nothing, the study of water is not the same as the as the study of rivers and seas especially considering the extremities involved such as the water moving backwards and forwards and the turbulence involved. This requires instruments that are only being used today.
QUOTE: "As already explained, no we are not. If the Quran is refering to seas, its wrong. No sea has fresh water. Is this the angle you wish, that the author was refering to a sea with fresh water?"
ANSWER: Well it's not referring to seas it's referring to rivers and seas so I guess it's not wrong, yes we know that no sea has fresh water thanks for pointing that out but who said anything about a sea with freshwater?? You are wrong this is not what the verse is saying at all as proven in the above translation of the verse.
QUOTE: "This is pointless.Â
I deleted the rest except for this, you said:Â
4) I have asked you to paste what Aristotle and Pliny have said, you haven't done so yet, so so far we only have your opinion, I want to see this from their books.Â
Me again: They're quoted in this very post. You even responded to it earlier. I gave you the exact quotes and where they are taken from quite a few times. Easily found on the internet.Â
I tried again, but it really is pointless. You ignore everything that contradicts your beliefs. You're so brainwashed by your religion you cannot even see that I gave you the quotes and from where they are located from. At least five times. You even responded to the quotes, then in the same post asked for them again! Twice!Â
I gave science sites that show its not invisible, the barrier is the mixing of the waters, that the waters do go through the barriers...and you still ignore it.Â
I showed you the Quran would be wrong if it was refering to two seas, since seas are not fresh water and then you still give sites that refer to oceans.Â
I'm done"
ANSWER: This is the thing you quote something form Pliny and Aristotle with no references then you make a comparison between the Quran and what they have said, my response was that it doesn't relate to what we are discussing, your response is that it does, but when asked show me what you believe is the same and give me an explanation in terms of the similarities there is no response apart from what you have copied and pasted from I don't know what site, We need to concentrate on the entire context and picture, what were Pliny and Aristotle talking about?? where is the book or link?, it is easy to copy and paste something and say here you go this proves that so and so it talking about a particular thing. This is however very diceptive. There is absolutely no way I'm going to simply agree that Pliny and Aristotle knew anything about what we are discussing unless I see solid evidence. Your evidence is just the study of water, we are discussing the mechanisms involved in the rivers and seas that act as a barrier to prevent the two waters from transgressing the properties of one water with the other, in my opinion these are two separate things. The other problem is you want to ignore the commentary of the Quran as well as the interpretations and meanings of the verses lol.
I ignore everything that contradicts God, you never provided references since we started the Dante again  lol, I never asked for the same quote, I asked for what Pliny and Aristotle said in regards to what we are discussing, meaning what else do you have of their work??
If the barrier is the mixing of the waters isn't this invisible?? if they cross through the barrier does it mean that they become the same in properties??Â
The Quran is not referring to two seas this is a misconception on your part, you know what I find really interesting that I have only asked you one question which was:
are you going to accept the documented meanings of the verses Islam believes in??. The famous commentaries of the Qur'an or simply deny it?? Â Â
And you failed to answer it, and then you accuse me of injustice lol. As for your questions I'm not going to run away they are posted below,Â
Thanks, for your time and effort involved in our discussion. I really enjoyed it
Post #757
@ Herictic
Question 1: Show me using the Quran the author is NOT refering to a land mass.Â
ANSWER: I would just like to point out that the Quran has no author, it is the words of God it wasn't written by man, it was revealed to the seal of the Prophets, the final Messenger that came for all of mankind Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Who said it's not referring to land mass??, There is no reason not to adopt both opinions (land and a non visual barrier) in interpreting this verse, because each is correct and there is no contradiction between them. The barrier may indeed be dry land that separates rivers and seas, and it may be a virtual barrier (resulting from differences in density) which oceanographers speak of today. This is a different understanding, but there is no contradiction between the two.
What we have seen according to most of the authors of books of Tafsir (Quranic commentary) is that what is meant by the two seas here is the two well known types of water that are found on earth,
one being rivers of fresh water and two being the seas of salty water.
The evidence for this interpretation is the verse in which Allah says, describing the two seas (interpretation of the meaning):
 “one palatable and sweet, and the other salt and bitter� (al-Furqaan 25:53)
With regard to the barrier between the two seas that is mentioned in these verses, there are two scholarly views concerning it:Â
Firstly that what is meant by the barrier between the two seas (i.e., between rivers and seas) is the vast lands that separate the rivers from the seas, so that there is no mixing of their waters, rather each of them has its own course and destination that is separate from that of the other. “a barrier� - the dry land
“a complete partition� - an obstacle that prevents one of them reaching the other.
The second interpretation is that between the two “seasâ€�, the fresh and the salty, there is a barrier that is not visible to human eyes. Allah created it by His decree and it prevents mixing of the fresh water with the salty water even though the two waters meet at the mouths of rivers.Â
Therefore I cannot show you evidence that it is not referring to land mass because we accept this interpretation also.
Question 2: Show me using a science site that its IMPOSSIBLE for the two waters to eventually mix with the action of pycnoclineÂ
ANSWER: I think there is a misunderstanding here, or maybe I just haven't explained myself properly in the past.
Despite there being the  presence of a barrier, these waters that are opposite one another mix very slowly however one sea passes upon the other through carrying over its own properties to it, hence why the barrier zone is a region for changing the water crossing from one sea to the other so that it gradually acquires the properties of the sea that it is going to enter and loosing the properties of the sea it has come from.
Â
This is the reason neither of the two seas transgress by carrying its own properties to the other, although they mix during the process of meeting. Hence the reason God says:Â
"He has let free the two seas meeting together. Between them is a barrier which they do not transgress."
Question 3: Show me a sea that contains fresh water.Â
ANSWER: This is where the other problem lies, when one reads this verse they will think that it is referring to two seas that are salty, this is not the case, when one refers back to the meaning of the verse it is quite clear what is meant by the verse:
"And it is He Who has let free the two seas, this is palatable and sweet, and that is salty and bitter" is He has created the two kinds of water, sweet and salty. The sweet water is like that in rivers, springs and wells, which is fresh, sweet, palatable water. This was the view of Ibn Jurayj and of Ibn Jarir, and this is the meaning without a doubt, for nowhere in creation is there a sea which is fresh and sweet. Allah has told us about reality so that His servants may realize His blessings to them and give thanks to Him. The sweet water is that which flows amidst people. Allah has portioned it out among His creatures according to their needs; rivers and springs in every land, according to what they need for themselves and their lands"
"And what is meant by "and that is salty and bitter" is salty, bitter and not easy to swallow. This is like the seas that are known in the east and the west, the Atlantic Ocean and the Straits that lead to it, the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea, the Persian Gulf, the China Sea, the Indian Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea and so on, all the seas that are stable and do not flow, but they swell and surge in the winter and when the winds are strong, and they have tides that ebb and flow. At the beginning of each month the tides ebb and flood, and when the month starts to wane they retreat until they go back to where they started. When the crescent of the following month appears, the tide begins to ebb again until the fourteenth of the month, then it decreases. Allah, may He be glorified, the One Whose power is absolute, has set these laws in motion, so all of these seas are stationary, and He has made their water salty lest the air turn putrid because of them and the whole earth turn rotten as a result, and lest the earth spoil because of the animals dying on it. Because its water is salty, its air is healthy and its dead are good (to eat), hence when the Messenger of Allah was asked whether sea water can be used for Wadu (ablution), he said:
Its water is pure"
These is the commentary by Ibn Kathir, therefore without a doubt the commentary makes it clear what it is referring too. The freshwater being "rivers, springs and wells, which is fresh, sweet, palatable water.
The Nile river is one example which meets with the Mediterranean Sea. Therefore without looking at the meaning of the verse, this can easily be misunderstood the verse makes it very clear that is is not suggesting that both seas are salty.
Question 4: If its refering to pycnocline, why it is a miracle when it can be seen by ones own eyes up close?Â
ANSWER: These things can only have been known through sophisticated equipment, furthermore the Prophet (peace be upon him) lived in a desert environment and never traveled by sea.
Man would have needed ships and equipment in order to analyze the water movement and masses in those regions where they meet.
We need to consider the situation at the time did the Prophet (peace be upon him) have equipment in order to analyze the water and the ability to trace the movement of various water masses? Did he carry out comprehensive processes of those we see today although he never sailed the sea??
Did the Prophet (peace be upon him) have theÂ
required instruments that researchers use today to figure out and analyze samples of water?
Question 5: I have given you FOUR times the quotes by Pliny and Aristotle(please go back and look them up), which predate the Quran by 1000 years, both giving in detail the effects of pycnocline, how the waters are seperate, fresh and salty. Why isnt it a miracle that they IN DETAIL describe the effect of pycnocline but the Quran is considered a miracle when very little detail is given?Â
ANSWER: Lol, your going to have to give it to me a fifth or maybe even a sixth time and explain to me  the similarities, cause I don't recall any mention of of the word pycnocline in those posts or anything remotely connected to this, but I could be wrong if you prove this to me.Â
Question 6: Name me the two seas, one containing fresh water and the other containing salt water that touch. Name me any two seas that fit this criteria.Â
ANSWER: As mentioned above one is referring to rivers, springs and wells such places that have fresh water the other is the sea that consists of salty water. One example is the Nile River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Question 1: Show me using the Quran the author is NOT refering to a land mass.Â
ANSWER: I would just like to point out that the Quran has no author, it is the words of God it wasn't written by man, it was revealed to the seal of the Prophets, the final Messenger that came for all of mankind Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Who said it's not referring to land mass??, There is no reason not to adopt both opinions (land and a non visual barrier) in interpreting this verse, because each is correct and there is no contradiction between them. The barrier may indeed be dry land that separates rivers and seas, and it may be a virtual barrier (resulting from differences in density) which oceanographers speak of today. This is a different understanding, but there is no contradiction between the two.
What we have seen according to most of the authors of books of Tafsir (Quranic commentary) is that what is meant by the two seas here is the two well known types of water that are found on earth,
one being rivers of fresh water and two being the seas of salty water.
The evidence for this interpretation is the verse in which Allah says, describing the two seas (interpretation of the meaning):
 “one palatable and sweet, and the other salt and bitter� (al-Furqaan 25:53)
With regard to the barrier between the two seas that is mentioned in these verses, there are two scholarly views concerning it:Â
Firstly that what is meant by the barrier between the two seas (i.e., between rivers and seas) is the vast lands that separate the rivers from the seas, so that there is no mixing of their waters, rather each of them has its own course and destination that is separate from that of the other. “a barrier� - the dry land
“a complete partition� - an obstacle that prevents one of them reaching the other.
The second interpretation is that between the two “seasâ€�, the fresh and the salty, there is a barrier that is not visible to human eyes. Allah created it by His decree and it prevents mixing of the fresh water with the salty water even though the two waters meet at the mouths of rivers.Â
Therefore I cannot show you evidence that it is not referring to land mass because we accept this interpretation also.
Question 2: Show me using a science site that its IMPOSSIBLE for the two waters to eventually mix with the action of pycnoclineÂ
ANSWER: I think there is a misunderstanding here, or maybe I just haven't explained myself properly in the past.
Despite there being the  presence of a barrier, these waters that are opposite one another mix very slowly however one sea passes upon the other through carrying over its own properties to it, hence why the barrier zone is a region for changing the water crossing from one sea to the other so that it gradually acquires the properties of the sea that it is going to enter and loosing the properties of the sea it has come from.
Â
This is the reason neither of the two seas transgress by carrying its own properties to the other, although they mix during the process of meeting. Hence the reason God says:Â
"He has let free the two seas meeting together. Between them is a barrier which they do not transgress."
Question 3: Show me a sea that contains fresh water.Â
ANSWER: This is where the other problem lies, when one reads this verse they will think that it is referring to two seas that are salty, this is not the case, when one refers back to the meaning of the verse it is quite clear what is meant by the verse:
"And it is He Who has let free the two seas, this is palatable and sweet, and that is salty and bitter" is He has created the two kinds of water, sweet and salty. The sweet water is like that in rivers, springs and wells, which is fresh, sweet, palatable water. This was the view of Ibn Jurayj and of Ibn Jarir, and this is the meaning without a doubt, for nowhere in creation is there a sea which is fresh and sweet. Allah has told us about reality so that His servants may realize His blessings to them and give thanks to Him. The sweet water is that which flows amidst people. Allah has portioned it out among His creatures according to their needs; rivers and springs in every land, according to what they need for themselves and their lands"
"And what is meant by "and that is salty and bitter" is salty, bitter and not easy to swallow. This is like the seas that are known in the east and the west, the Atlantic Ocean and the Straits that lead to it, the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea, the Persian Gulf, the China Sea, the Indian Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea and so on, all the seas that are stable and do not flow, but they swell and surge in the winter and when the winds are strong, and they have tides that ebb and flow. At the beginning of each month the tides ebb and flood, and when the month starts to wane they retreat until they go back to where they started. When the crescent of the following month appears, the tide begins to ebb again until the fourteenth of the month, then it decreases. Allah, may He be glorified, the One Whose power is absolute, has set these laws in motion, so all of these seas are stationary, and He has made their water salty lest the air turn putrid because of them and the whole earth turn rotten as a result, and lest the earth spoil because of the animals dying on it. Because its water is salty, its air is healthy and its dead are good (to eat), hence when the Messenger of Allah was asked whether sea water can be used for Wadu (ablution), he said:
Its water is pure"
These is the commentary by Ibn Kathir, therefore without a doubt the commentary makes it clear what it is referring too. The freshwater being "rivers, springs and wells, which is fresh, sweet, palatable water.
The Nile river is one example which meets with the Mediterranean Sea. Therefore without looking at the meaning of the verse, this can easily be misunderstood the verse makes it very clear that is is not suggesting that both seas are salty.
Question 4: If its refering to pycnocline, why it is a miracle when it can be seen by ones own eyes up close?Â
ANSWER: These things can only have been known through sophisticated equipment, furthermore the Prophet (peace be upon him) lived in a desert environment and never traveled by sea.
Man would have needed ships and equipment in order to analyze the water movement and masses in those regions where they meet.
We need to consider the situation at the time did the Prophet (peace be upon him) have equipment in order to analyze the water and the ability to trace the movement of various water masses? Did he carry out comprehensive processes of those we see today although he never sailed the sea??
Did the Prophet (peace be upon him) have theÂ
required instruments that researchers use today to figure out and analyze samples of water?
Question 5: I have given you FOUR times the quotes by Pliny and Aristotle(please go back and look them up), which predate the Quran by 1000 years, both giving in detail the effects of pycnocline, how the waters are seperate, fresh and salty. Why isnt it a miracle that they IN DETAIL describe the effect of pycnocline but the Quran is considered a miracle when very little detail is given?Â
ANSWER: Lol, your going to have to give it to me a fifth or maybe even a sixth time and explain to me  the similarities, cause I don't recall any mention of of the word pycnocline in those posts or anything remotely connected to this, but I could be wrong if you prove this to me.Â
Question 6: Name me the two seas, one containing fresh water and the other containing salt water that touch. Name me any two seas that fit this criteria.Â
ANSWER: As mentioned above one is referring to rivers, springs and wells such places that have fresh water the other is the sea that consists of salty water. One example is the Nile River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Post #758
@ A Troubled Man
QUOTE: "Either that is more dishonesty on your part or you have no idea what is occurring in the world around you. Shiite and Sunni have been fighting and killing each other for some time. Funny how so much of the world knows this but you don't"
ANSWER: Over interpretations?? Really??Â
QUOTE: "More dishonesty on your part. You refuse to read the book that will help you to understand evolution. I suspect you are probably afraid of understanding it because you don't want to know the truth because you feel it conflicts with your religious beliefs.Â
I'm done too"
ANSWER: Help me to understand that we evolve into new life forms? Of course it conflicts with my religious beliefs lol, especially due to the fact that God makes it clear of the falseness of such a theory and how this view is not correct, the evidence for that is that God has described in the Quran the stages of the creation of Adam. Â
In my opinion people want to believe in he theory of Evolution in order to justify there own beliefs, that they don't want to believe in God, hence having an easy life without any rules, boundaries regulations and responsibilities, no worship, no morals, no respect just a hedonistic mindset, the truth of the matter is people don't want to exsert the least bit of effort in seeking the truth but rather choosing to believe what they want in order to suite their own whims and desires, unfortunately such people will be lost till the day of Resurrection when each person will be accountable for each and every word and deed committed. This isn't a light issue your life here on earth will determine either eternal hellfire or eternal Paradise the answers to our existence is very clear and this is found in no other than the religion God has chosen for all of mankind.Â
QUOTE: "Either that is more dishonesty on your part or you have no idea what is occurring in the world around you. Shiite and Sunni have been fighting and killing each other for some time. Funny how so much of the world knows this but you don't"
ANSWER: Over interpretations?? Really??Â
QUOTE: "More dishonesty on your part. You refuse to read the book that will help you to understand evolution. I suspect you are probably afraid of understanding it because you don't want to know the truth because you feel it conflicts with your religious beliefs.Â
I'm done too"
ANSWER: Help me to understand that we evolve into new life forms? Of course it conflicts with my religious beliefs lol, especially due to the fact that God makes it clear of the falseness of such a theory and how this view is not correct, the evidence for that is that God has described in the Quran the stages of the creation of Adam. Â
In my opinion people want to believe in he theory of Evolution in order to justify there own beliefs, that they don't want to believe in God, hence having an easy life without any rules, boundaries regulations and responsibilities, no worship, no morals, no respect just a hedonistic mindset, the truth of the matter is people don't want to exsert the least bit of effort in seeking the truth but rather choosing to believe what they want in order to suite their own whims and desires, unfortunately such people will be lost till the day of Resurrection when each person will be accountable for each and every word and deed committed. This isn't a light issue your life here on earth will determine either eternal hellfire or eternal Paradise the answers to our existence is very clear and this is found in no other than the religion God has chosen for all of mankind.Â
-
Burninglight
- Guru
- Posts: 1202
- Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:40 am
Islam, a misconception of God.
Post #759As I had mentioned before, and no one commented on it. There are many Muslims that have misconceptions of Islam. One doesn't have to be a non Muslim to have misconceptions of Islam. IMO, Islam is a misconception of the one and only True God and Jesus Christ!
Post #760
@ Burninglight
QUOTE: "As I had mentioned before, and no one commented on it. There are many Muslims that have misconceptions of Islam. One doesn't have to be a non Muslim to have misconceptions of Islam. IMO, Islam is a misconception of the one and only True God and Jesus Christ!"
ANSWER: Which Muslims would this be?? I'm glad you have admitted that non-Muslims have misconceptions about Islam lol, What Misconceptions do Muslims have about God? or of Jesus (peace up upon him)??
QUOTE: "As I had mentioned before, and no one commented on it. There are many Muslims that have misconceptions of Islam. One doesn't have to be a non Muslim to have misconceptions of Islam. IMO, Islam is a misconception of the one and only True God and Jesus Christ!"
ANSWER: Which Muslims would this be?? I'm glad you have admitted that non-Muslims have misconceptions about Islam lol, What Misconceptions do Muslims have about God? or of Jesus (peace up upon him)??
