Violence towards wives and children in Islam

138 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sky Pilot's picture


Do you know when the Koran got numbered chapters and verses? The original one didn't have numbered chapters and verses.

Al-Fatihah's picture
@Diotrephes Whether the Qur

@Diotrephes Whether the Qur'an has numbered chapters and verses was never important, making it a matter of preference. So there are some Qur'ans with numbered chapters and verses and some are not. There are some made to read left to right, while others are right to left, etc.. It is a matter of preference.

LogicFTW's picture
@Al-Fatihah's long response

@Al-Fatihah's long response to my post.

So, since you did not really answer my questions specifically, I assume that your answer is: "because my god is real," and that answers any questions I can have about your faith. That once I accept that your god is real, in logical fallacies, reasoning holes, contradictions and out right lies perpetrated by anyone in your religion or books do not matter.

I can only assume this because you wrote, (or copy/pasted,) a long post attempting to prove god exist, that god is Allah, and that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah.

I unfortunately do not have time right now to respond to each point, (perhaps I will later.)

"A repeating pattern can only originate from choice" I am still fairly new to these boards and have not heard this particular "proof" before.

I assume you are saying a checkerboard pattern is repeating, until a person stops drawing the repeating pattern. Well yeah obviously someone in normal circumstances must choose to draw or not, (pattern that repeats a few times or not.) I am well aware of the fact that chemical processes go off in my brain that allows me to decide if I want to do something or not and to continue doing something or not.

If someone put a bunch of electrodes on my arms and precisely mapped my electrical/chemical nervous system for my hand to great detail, they could strap me into a chair run the electrodes and have me draw a checkerboard pattern endlessly (with the aid of a computer,) whether I choose to or not. (Also the mad scientist surprised me, kidnapped me, and drugged me so I did not have choice to be part of this experiment."

If I was fully paralyzed I could not "choose" to draw the checkerboard pattern, I would be forced, (not choose,) to not draw the pattern. And again someone could attach electrodes that fire my muscles to then force my hand to draw a checkerboard pattern even though I my self could not choose to or choose not to.

What does drawing a repeating pattern have to do with anything? Why not just say: "you choose to draw or not?" Where, why how, do we make this leap to repeating pattern? To control the flow of the argument/thought process in the direction you want to take it?

I guess you are saying, everything is created by choice, (repeating pattern or not,) and in order for everything to be created by choice, that means some sort of "god" must of created it because if some intelligent being did not create it, it was not "by choice"

The IPhone in the sand thing reminds me a lot of the common "watchmaker's" argument theist like to use. Which has been countered thoroughly by others far better at explaining and wording then I ever will be. If you want a link to this I will be happy to provide one.

I could keep going, but every step of your argument relies on the last, and on the very first step (the test of choice/non choice) already fell apart to me. Not proving anything and certainly not able to be built upon.

Al-Fatihah's picture


You couldn't show a repeating pattern originating from non-choice, thus failing to disprove that such order only originates from choice. Proving God exist.

You couldn't show any error, indecency or unrighteous guidance in the Qur'an, thus supporting the fact the Qur'an and its author is truthful and reliable.

You failed to answer the Qur'an challenge as mentioned in part 3, thus supporting the fact that the Qur'an is of divine origin.

Therefore, the fact remains that since the Qur'an is true and of divine origin and God does exist and originated the universe and life itself, then the Qur'an is reliable in it's claim that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah and Allah is the originator of creation, including the universe and life itself since it is confirmed that the Qur'an speaks the truth.

LogicFTW's picture
So, I have to prove a

So, I have to prove a situation of a repeating pattern originating from non-choice, to prove that a god does not exist? I have to play by your rules and definitions to disprove an idea?

You never respond to questions or points I make, and keep switching it to having me or others try and challenge your "word" arguments. I started with the questions, and then instead of answering them you respond with your own assertions and challenges. If you are so sure of your god and Qur'an why cant you simply answer them? Instead of trying to make me and others jump through a hoop, which looks like to me you are avoiding the questions that make you uncomfortable or that you can not easily answer because it shows the cracks in god (any god, not just yours.)

I already worked to respond to first challenge. I already endeavored to answer to your post even though you did not answer mine. I pointed out it is possible to have someone draw a checkerboard pattern when it was not their choice. You did not even respond to that. I said I would get to the other parts of it when I got time, I suppose this constitutes as proof you are right if you do not get timely response to all your points, even though each of your points builds on the next. And I pointed out your first argument is very flawed. And you did not even defend it, you simply stated I did not prove a non choice repeating pattern by your strange definition setup that has no bearing on the actual argument.

I am starting to feel I am wasting my time with you, even if I respond to your postings, any thoughtful challenges I have to any part of your faith: you ignore, I may as well be talking to a wall. You are not here to learn anything, or even argue. You do not even realize the insanity of your argument of "drawing a checkerboard pattern by choice" is a ridiculous argument for proving the existence of any god when I pointed it out to you.

Harry33Truman's picture
I know you- you used the same

I know you- you used the same speech patterns and arguments as another I have come in contact with:

People have been kicking this guys ass up and down the DDO forms ever since he joined

Sky Pilot's picture


It's important because isn't the Koran supposed to never be changed? If that's true then someone changed it and no one cares. So how can anyone know that what's in it is accurate?

CyberLN's picture
Al-F, I see that some of the

Al-F, I see that some of the arguments you've used in this latest post were verbatim those used in a debate on a different forum a few years ago; a forum from which you were banned btw. Isn't that interesting?

Al-Fatihah's picture
@CyberLN I use the same

@CyberLN I use the same arguments everywhere because they are irrefutable. Yet instead of addressing the post, I noticed you admitting to seeing it on a different forum, which is only possible if one is stalking someone. Isn't that interesting?

CyberLN's picture
It's my job as the forum mod

It's my job as the forum mod here to confirm people are posting legitimately. I suppose, however, there's nothing to stop you from making assumptions about my behavior without real evidence.

Al-Fatihah's picture


Nor is anything stopping you from highlighting things regarding posts of mine on a different forum without merit.

pijokela's picture
Since proof 1 didn't in my

Since proof 1 didn't in my opinion make any sense, I instead have a question about proof 2:

Why does the Quran say that the Sun sets in a muddy pond? Please do not answer with some vague linguistic acrobatics.

Al-Fatihah's picture


It doesn't. It says he saw the sun set in murky water, thus referring to what he saw. Not what actually took place.

Sky Pilot's picture


It seems that the guy was heading West.

Al-Fatihah's picture


Calling eye for an eye unjust means by your logic, it would be okay to break someone's jaw if they take a cookie from you since equal justice is unjust.

Another example of the indecent and immoral mindset of atheism.

pijokela's picture
I have no idea of where you

I have no idea of where you got the example you attribute to me here. I have argued for more lenient punishment, but here you accuse me of being too harsh with an example you invented yourself.

The thing is that as you are the victim of some wrong doing, you are generally not in any position to objectively decide what is the proper punishment of restitution for the crime. You are filled with anger and you do not want justice, you want revenge. Therefore it is better to have separate court system instead of people exacting vigilante justice on each other.

Your answer to my question on the infallibility of the Quran really shows the way you think. I bet you also think the embryonic development description in Quran is correct - even though it clearly is not. I do not wish to continue this discussion anymore. For a discussion we need to agree on some basic concepts, like what makes something correct or true. Good luck and have fun!

Al-Fatihah's picture


It was your own words that stated eye for an eye unjust is not true justice. That means by your logic, it would be okay to break someone's jaw if they take a cookie from you since equal justice is unjust.

So nothing is being attributed to you but rather, what is taking place is the exposure of the indecent and immoral mindset of atheism.

Al-Fatihah's picture


Your questions were answered. I clearly stated to you that you asked too many questions at once so it would be better for you to ask one at a time but you refuse to do so. So even if your questions or points were not addressed or answered, that is your fault.

I addressed your answer to the checkerboard challenge by highlighting the fact that you, yourself, did not create a checkerboard pattern by non-choice. Therefore, your response that it is possible to do so is clearly invalid, when you yourself have not done so and firsthand evidence is the best evidence. So since you failed firsthand to do it, you have no logical basis to claim it is possible.

The same applies to every challenge. YOU yourself did not answer them firsthand, thus failing to refute the fact that the Qur'an is the true word of Allah, who is the true God and originator of all creation including the universe and life itself.

LogicFTW's picture
Step 1. A mad scientist

Step 1. A mad scientist unbeknownst to me drops a drug that temporarily paralyzes me.
Step 2. He attaches electrodes to my arm, and then proceeds to map my hand muscles based on electrical signals using a computer.
Step 3. after my muscles in my hand have been mapped, he puts a piece of paper under my hand, a pen in my hand and instructs the computer to make my hand draw the checkerboard pattern. We have a repeating pattern drawn by me but I had no choice in the matter.

Is the above ridiculous? Of course, but so is the idea of the "self test" to prove their is always a choice behind repeating patterns.

Can you think of a number that is greater than 2 that is not the sum of three primes? You cant? That is proof that no repeating patterns in numbers that can only be divided by one and it self. Which means there can be no singularity and due to the inverse of negativity hyper inclusion principle, this proves their must be at least two gods or no gods, god cannot be singular. Since you cannot prove this conundrum. then their is no singular god like the one in the Qur'an or their are no gods at all.

The above is a bunch of made up bullshit I just made up based on an old math problem that has never been conclusively proven or disproven. And it has just as much merit, (or more specifically: lack of merit,) as your little test that prove a god. Just because we can play word games and mess around with definitions does not mean we prove or disprove anything.

Al-Fatihah's picture


In other words, you have absolutely no evidence of a repeating pattern from non-choice, while we do have firsthand evidence that it can only come from choice (your own failure to draw a simple checkerboard pattern except by choice), thus we can logically deduce that a repeating pattern can only originate from choice.

As such, that means the patterns in the universe and life itself also originated from choice. Proving God exist.

LogicFTW's picture
You put @logicftw, but you do

You put @logicftw, but you do not respond to any of the points I make and you just repeat yourself. That is how you argue? That is how you were convinced your god is real? Have a few statements repeated over and over, and ignore all challenge to the idea?

Understanding you and your take on beliefs do make a bit more sense to me now..

watchman's picture
"thus we can logically deduce

"thus we can logically deduce that a repeating pattern can only originate from choice."...

Ooh ooh ...look.....

You know that looks very much like a repeating pattern that couldn't possibly have been created by choice.....

made by a volcano but not by choice ....

and then again.....

"the Qur'an is the true word of Allah".....

Now which Quran would that be ? ..... if I may ask.

Al-Fatihah's picture


And your proof that it occured without choice is because you "did not see a choice made". Yet if you found an IPhone in the sand or on the street, and we ask was this IPhone created by choice or without choice, you would say it was created by choice, despite the fact you "did not see a choice made". A blatant contradiction. Showing once again that non-choice is false since it is based on a contradiction, leaving choice as the option and proving God exist.

watchman's picture
"And your proof that it

"And your proof that it occured without choice is because you "did not see a choice made".

No. .no. . not at all .... My "proof" is in Volcanology ..... (its a science ...... you might try looking it up)

and do you know what...... volcanoes are not sentient beings...they are incapable of making choices.

and yet it appears they produce these regular ,repeating patterns quite a lot of the time......

looks like it might actually be a NATURAL PHENOMENUM ....

It is you who has no proof for your position .... desperately clinging to the failing hope that your myths can be sustained by disingenuous fabrications.

And speaking of fabrications .... you failed to answer my question regarding which Quran you are referring to.

So..? which is it?

Al-Fatihah's picture


Your points were addressed and refuted. Constantly repeating that they were not does not change the reality that they were addressed and refuted. However, how you argue is to address the refutation. Not repeat the same argument that was just addressed and refuted, as you do, hoping that my argument will change.

LogicFTW's picture
Okay, I am going to make this

Okay, I am going to make this real clear, for anyone reading along because I already understand it is nigh hopeless for Al-Fatihah to admit, (to him self,) that it is him avoiding questions, not my self.

1st: I ask a 5 general questions to Al-Fatihah about god/religion in general post 108 in this thread

2nd: Al-Fatihah responded on post 113. He responded he was not concerned with question 1, then he started talking about what he thinks is the purpose of life, (test of good and evil.) And that we were all born by agreeing, with no memory to a "deal" to earn paradise via test in this world. That the test is we must worship Allah alone. Which directly ignored my question in my initial posting to him about people geographically/politically/age being unable to ever know of Allah.

He then tries to build a case of proof that god exists using a strange double negative test using word games. That also does not even show the connection between "choice" and repeating patterns. A confusing word game that may work on people that do not challenge test makers trying to prove their preconceived conclusions. The rest of his conclusions, god is Allah, (because the qur'an says so and it is perfect,) And that the qur'an is the true word of Allah because it is impossible to produce something in Arabic that is more inspiring to people then the Qur'an. Which of course is all subjective. Christianity has more followers then Islam at the moment and for over 1000 years? Does that mean the bible is more inspiring then the Qur'an? How do you measure it? it is all very subjective, no testable evidence, and lots of circular reasoning.

3rd: I point out he did not answer any questions, but graciously conceded that to him all the answers, (for him) lies in believing in his god as I know that is how many theist operate. I let him know that I can not respond to all points at the moment due to time constraints, but proceeded to talk about the first one, explaining the rest of his arguments build upon the first one.
I point out a situation where his free choice to "draw" test can be met, but he simply responds. I also point out the flaws in the "test" in general that its a word game, and proves nothing.

4th: He states "You couldn't show a repeating pattern originating from non-choice, thus failing to disprove that such order only originates from choice. Proving God exist."

Which does not address any of the points I made, just that I did not answer his hypothesis to his liking. Then he also explains I did not answer his other points, even though I stated at the time I do not have the time to address them yet. Then ofcourse he claims victory and that he is right and I am wrong.

5th: I point out again that he is not responding to my points, and I explained the flaw in attempting debate with someone that does not debate, just states he is correct all the time. Without addressing any refutation or points made.

6th: He then states my questions were answered. Where? I took the time to read his postings in full and did not find answers to my questions anywhere, only in me conceding back in my first response that, the answers to him are: my god and holy book are real and that is supposed to answer all questions. He repeats that I did not answer his checkerboard challenge when I highlighted a scenario where the challenge was met. He never addresses this in any way.

7th: I am already playing the game of answering his questions when I was the one that started with questions. I am already attempting to play in his court with his rules. I repeat the situation that meets his challenge. I give him an example that challenges like his to prove a point is ridiculous as well.

8th: not unsurprisingly, he says "in other words" (admitting he is changing my words,) that I have no evidence of repeating pattern from non choice even though he again never even address's the scenario I presented and again jumps to his "logically deduce that a repeating pattern can only originate from choice."

9th: I again point out he does not respond to anything I say, and just repeats himself.

10th: He states he addressed and refuted my points. Where?

I am not hoping his argument will change, I am hoping he will actually address the points I made. Or instead of me answering his questions when I asked the initial questions, he responds. I was hoping he would eventually respond with more than just: you failed the test, my god is real." I was hoping we would have an actual debate. I now understand its foolish of me to expect that. I am done until he responds to my points. This thread is just so everyone else can be real clear on whats going on here to the casual reader of the conversation Al-Fatihah and I had.

Al-Fatihah's picture


Stating proof is in Volcanology and at the same time openly admitting that your proof is not based on not seeing a choice made just made my point that you have absolutely no observable evidence of non-choice, even in volcanology. So since you admit to having no observable evidence of non-choice and science is based on observable, testable evidence, then your own logic shows that volcanology is not proof that it originated from non-choice, but from choice. Proving God exist.

As for the Qur'an,there is only one Qur'an so I do not know what is meant by thr Qur'an I'm referring to, as there is only one I can possibly refer too. Unless you are asking of what qirat, (mode of recitation), then your question makes since and in that case, I'm familiar with the the Hafs.

watchman's picture
"Stating proof is in

"Stating proof is in Volcanology and at the same time openly admitting that your proof is not based on not seeing a choice made just made my point that you have absolutely no observable evidence of non-choice, even in volcanology. So since you admit to having no observable evidence of non-choice and science is based on observable, testable evidence, then your own logic shows that volcanology is not proof that it originated from non-choice, but from choice. Proving God exist."...

No....just No..... I have no intention of schooling you in Volcanology... it would be a pointless exercise ,only to have you repeat your little mantra of ,"Proving God exist."
So no....

But.... you know when you posted ,"there is only one Qur'an ...." and then ,"there is only one ...... " did you hear a very faint metallic click....??

I know that you have been told that there is only one Quran....(the Uthmanic version) and that it has remained unchanged since it was first transcribed.....

But what you have been told put it bluntly ...untrue...
That is...its a lie... there are other older ,differing versions ....proving that the Quran underwent a process of editing...change....verses altered..... deleted.... changes in the order of verses..... non of which is supposed to have happened..... is it?

True ,two of the older versions (Samarkand and Topkapi) ,although incomplete show few changes to the standard Uthmanic texts but there is also the Sanaa Palimpsest which which has a differing order AND differing wording. The ,of course there is the Codex Parsinio-petropolitar which even includes some non canonical variations..... And now of course we have what is becoming known as the Birmingham Quran which is throwing new light on the traditional dating .

Of course any discrepancies are dismissed as clerical errors created during the copying process' ...but the more differing early copies that turn up...the harder it is to make this excuse believable.

And so.. slowly ,painfully slowly we are getting to see the true history of your book.

So..I ask again..... which version of the Quran are you referencing...? I'll settle for whatever translation you are using or even which publishing house....

Oh yes ..I too am familiar with both the Hafs and no need to run those particular smoke screens .

Al-Fatihah's picture


You cannot explain volcanology to me or anyone because you don't have knowledge of it yourself, as shown by the absurd claim that it originated from non-choice instead of choice, which would be Allah's choice.

As for the Qur'an, the Qur'an challenge presented in post 113 already proves the Qur'an is the true word of Allah, as supported by your failure to answer the challenge.

Instead, you try to persuade to us that the Qur'anic text may have been corrupted and your proof is the discovery of early manuscripts that differ. Yet that is not the definition of corruption. Corruption is when something has been added and was not in the original. The Qur'an in use today can be traced back to the original so even if you discovered 1,000 more manuscripts that differ it would mean nothing because what we use today can be traced back to what was in the original. Therefore, the original texts still exist.

So your logic failed.

watchman's picture
"which would be Allah's

"which would be Allah's choice." ....

No...that is arrant nonsense ..... it has to be Hubal's choice......or possibly the choice of the three cranes....

Each of which has exactly the same provenance as your Allah....(the ex-idol)

I'm not trying to persuade you of anything.... I'm merely pointing out facts..... and my point is that we now have the earliest copies of the Quran... perhaps even THE EARLIEST copies ...... and they don't say the same things as your current version..... so as your current version cannot be traced back to the original source .... by your own definition has to be corrupted.

Now you must come to your own conclusions as to how this can be ..... (you can always try your standard 'God did it' )
but for me...I just point you to the facts.... you'll note I didn't even post the links..... if you want to find out more you can just Google the headings.(or ask your Imam at the mosque ..... that will go down well....... even in Philly)

I know you won't but then I'm not trying to influence you...... my targets are those silent lurkers who may be attracted by the lies of the faithful.

By the way... After another member drew my attention to your debating efforts over on the Debate forum...I looked up your "stats"....

Debates =6
Wins = 0

and the topics...?
Why... the very same ones you posted here.

You may not be aware of one of the definitions of madness.... it is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

It might not be my logic that has failed.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.