Is the Qu'ran self-evidently true?

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Sat May 03, 2008 10:29 am

paarsurrey wrote:Quran is self-evident, yes very truly.

Is the Qu'ran self-evidently true?

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:27 pm

post 174 comes 1st, you have to answer it 1st to continue for other question and answers, please follow the debate

For the love of god, you can't have a conversation in english if you can't understand basic sentences.

Yes you posted in post 174 it was answered in post 175, 176 and 177 you have yet to comment on those answers.

TrueReligion · Post by **TrueReligion** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 3:54 am

Wyvern wrote:
post 174 comes 1st, you have to answer it 1st to continue for other question and answers, please follow the debate
For the love of god, you can't have a conversation in english if you can't understand basic sentences.

Yes you posted in post 174 it was answered in post 175, 176 and 177 you have yet to comment on those answers.

Concentrate on post rather thn on my english, its not a problem for any1 beside you.
I answer already, other answers I wil give after you answer my question.

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 4:21 am

Concentrate on post rather thn on my english, its not a problem for any1 beside you.
I answer already, other answers I wil give after you answer my question.

Which topical question is this? Please refer to posts 175-177 for refutations of your argument. Please stay on topic.

Post by **otseng** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 5:07 am

Wyvern wrote: For the love of god, you can't have a conversation in english if you can't understand basic sentences.

Yes you posted in post 174 it was answered in post 175, 176 and 177 you have yet to comment on those answers.

Moderator comment:

The first sentence would be considered a comment of a personal nature. You can leave out that sentence and just post the second sentence to make your point.

TrueReligion · Post by **TrueReligion** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:12 am

Wyvern wrote:
Concentrate on post rather thn on my english, its not a problem for any1 beside you.
I answer already, other answers I wil give after you answer my question.
Which topical question is this? Please refer to posts 175-177 for refutations of your argument. Please stay on topic.

Wyvern I said I will only answer further if you answer my question as we discussed.
We agreed that Once I give answer to existence of God, you will provide me your answer that if you believe in God or no.
Unless you will answer me, I wont give further comments or any response here

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:39 pm

TrueReligion wrote:
Wyvern wrote:
Concentrate on post rather thn on my english, its not a problem for any1 beside you.
I answer already, other answers I wil give after you answer my question.
Which topical question is this? Please refer to posts 175-177 for refutations of your argument. Please stay on topic.
Wyvern I said I will only answer further if you answer my question as we discussed.
We agreed that Once I give answer to existence of God, you will provide me your answer that if you believe in God or no.
Unless you will answer me, I wont give further comments or any response here

Show me where I agreed to that. I agreed to answer yourt question after you provided a medical website that stated that an embryo is like a leech. Alternately you can stay on topic and comment on the refutations to your proof of god.

TrueReligion · Post by **TrueReligion** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:50 am

Wyvern wrote:
TrueReligion wrote:
Wyvern wrote:
Concentrate on post rather thn on my english, its not a problem for any1 beside you.
I answer already, other answers I wil give after you answer my question.
Which topical question is this? Please refer to posts 175-177 for refutations of your argument. Please stay on topic.
Wyvern I said I will only answer further if you answer my question as we discussed.
We agreed that Once I give answer to existence of God, you will provide me your answer that if you believe in God or no.
Unless you will answer me, I wont give further comments or any response here
Show me where I agreed to that. I agreed to answer yourt question after you provided a medical website that stated that an embryo is like a leech. Alternately you can stay on topic and comment on the refutations to your proof of god.

Now who is changing topic here? we are discussing existence of God here, from where did embryo and leech came in this topic?
If you dont want to answer, just tell that you can;t and I wont ask further from you as a respect of debate.

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:30 am

Now who is changing topic here? we are discussing existence of God here, from where did embryo and leech came in this topic?
If you dont want to answer, just tell that you can;t and I wont ask further from you as a respect of debate.

If you want to stay on topic as you say you do then comment on the refutations of your proof of god that was given on posts 175-177.

On the other hand if you want to know what my thoughts on god are then you need to provide a medical website that states that an embryo is like a leech.

These are your choices demonstrate that your calls for staying on topic isn't just empty words or go off topic and provide the link that is asked for.

TrueReligion · Post by **TrueReligion** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 12:37 pm

Wyvern wrote:
Now who is changing topic here? we are discussing existence of God here, from where did embryo and leech came in this topic?
If you dont want to answer, just tell that you can;t and I wont ask further from you as a respect of debate.
If you want to stay on topic as you say you do then comment on the refutations of your proof of god that was given on posts 175-177.

On the other hand if you want to know what my thoughts on god are then you need to provide a medical website that states that an embryo is like a leech.

These are your choices demonstrate that your calls for staying on topic isn't just empty words or go off topic and provide the link that is asked for.

Why Ive to accept your changed views? I already gave answer to proof of God, we will discuss for that proof only if you answer me that you believe in God or no.

I never said that we wont discuss, you ask question, I gave answer, now you answer my question, after which I will answer your question.
Its simple and fair rule of debate wyvern, be coperative please

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 1:34 pm

Why Ive to accept your changed views? I already gave answer to proof of God, we will discuss for that proof only if you answer me that you believe in God or no.

I never said that we wont discuss, you ask question, I gave answer, now you answer my question, after which I will answer your question.
Its simple and fair rule of debate wyvern, be coperative please

I have already told you my conditions, if you want an answer to something that is off topic you must answer my off topic.

If you want to stay on topic please refer to posts 175-177 for refutations to your argument for the existancve of god.

If you wish to do neither then this conversation is over.