Faith Freedom International

by **Hombre** » Sat Sep 10, 2016 6:25 pm

Mughal wrote:

Quote: No other nation had more scientific discoveries then Islam - from Andalusia to China."
How conventionality he omits Ancient Greeks discoveries, to which we still celebrate today. In fact, most same discoveries which this guy (and other Muslims) brag about, were copied or otherwise translated from Greek.

Interesting through, he credits the Chinese for inventing the papers, but Muslims for proliferating its use throughout the region.

Finally. It is funny, when Muhammad is credited for Muslims desire to learn from others. If that is true, while himself never bothered learn read & write - despite the fact he had the best educated scribes under his disposal .

by **Fernando** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:52 am

I found this quite interesting, to be fair. His boasting about Islamic science was just his warm-up act. He was frank enough to admit that the Islamic world/Arabian empire began to decline when it became inward looking. He seems to put this down almost to accident, seeing the rejection of printing as a major cause rather than a sign of a bigger problem. I don't know enough about
the history ot this to be sure, but I always had the impression that the cause was the ascendancy of what you might call the religious right of those days. Rejecting modernity - as he agrees they did - not out of arrogance or isolationism but because of rise and dominance of religious conservatism. Depressingly, he concludes by doubting that Islam will ever fully adapt to modernity.

by **Fernando** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 11:09 pm

Fernando wrote:As for all languages once being the same, I'd have to read a bit before I accept that. Certainly lots of languages are related and derive from an earlier one - eg from Latin. or earlier a hypothetical Indo-European, but ALL derived from ONE?

It looks as though I might be wrong Mughal, although the evidence has only just come to light. Sorry!

Humans may speak a universal language, say scientists

Humans across the globe may be actually speaking the same language after scientists found that the sounds used to make the words of common objects and ideas are strikingly similar.

The discovery challenges the fundamental principles of linguistics, which state that languages grow up independently of each other, with no intrinsic meaning in the noises which form words.

But research which looked into several thousand languages showed that for basic concepts, such as body parts, family relationships or aspects of the natural world, there are common sounds - as if concepts that are important to the human experience somehow trigger universal verbalisations.

"These sound symbolic patterns show up again and again across the world, independent of the geographical dispersal of humans and independent of language lineage," said Dr Morten Christiansen, professor of psychology and director of Cornell's Cognitive Neuroscience Lab in the US where the study was carried out.

"There does seem to be something about the human condition that leads to these patterns. We don't know what it is, but we know it's there."

The study found, that in most languages, the word for ‘nose’ is likely to include the sounds ‘neh’ or the ‘oo’ sound, as in ‘ooze.’

Similarly, the word for ‘leaf’ is likely to include the sounds ‘l,’ ‘p’ or ‘b’ while ‘sand’ will probably use the sound ‘s’. The words for ‘red’ and ‘round’ are likely to include the ‘r’ sound.

"It doesn't mean all words have these sounds, but the relationship is much stronger than we'd expect by chance," added Dr Christiansen.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/09/12/humans-may-speak-a-universal-language-say-scientists/

by **manfred** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:04 am

Similarly, the word for ‘leaf’ is likely to include the sounds ‘l,’ ‘p’ or ‘b’ while ‘sand’ will probably use the sound ‘s’. The words for ‘red’ and ‘round’ are likely to include the ‘r’ sound.

The Indonesian for leaf is "daun". (no l,p,or b)
Spanish: hoja (no l,p,or b)
Swahili : jani
Chinese: 叶 (pronounced ye, with the "e" sort of dropping of, as if you were telling someone off)
Arabic: ورقة الشجر (pronounced rather like waraqat alshajar(e)) (it has an "l" but that is part of the link word/article "al-")

Some languages have quite different words for a leaf of a tree and a "leaf" of paper, such as English, where we say "sheet of paper", other languages do not, Dutch uses "blad" for both.

I think the conventional theory is that languages come in "families" and as such are closer or more distantly related. Perhaps once there was only one language, a rudimentary one, and this diversified when mankind left Africa. It it equally possible that language developed separately in various isolated communities, and as these spread out and got into contact with each other, languages diversified and also influenced each other. To me that is more likely, as languages differ not only in words, but many have words for things other languages do not have, depending on environment, and grammar is wildly different... some languages have noun gender others do not, some have declension others do not, some do not even have tenses. And of course there are dozens of other differences. Sometimes these differences are so great that translation is tricky, and additional comment is needed to convey the entire meaning.

The notion that somehow Arabic was mankind's original language and even the divine language really is too silly to discuss.

by **Fernando** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 11:03 am

Thanks Manfred, that's interesting.
One way this could have happened is human bottlenecks. One is supposed to have happened as we left Africa, when only a small population existed who would perhaps all have had the same language (or grunts, depending on what stage in human development it occurred). I didn't know, though, that there are supposed to have been further, local bottlenecks as the wanderers split up and went their ways - although I suppose splitting, without further bottlenecks, could have been enough.
Either way, it must have been well after splitting that writing was separately invented, judging by what we see today.
http://www.techinsider.io/genetic-bottleneck-almost-killed-humans-2016-3

BTW, could this be an avenue for research?

Scientists discover dolphins talk to each other in sentences up to five words long

http://www.geek.com/science/scientists-discover-dolphins-talk-to-each-other-in-sentences-up-to-five-words-long-1670488/ (and widely reported elsewhere)

by **Mughal** » Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:45 pm

by **sum** » Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:03 am

Hello Mughal

Will you please explain the relevance of the videos that you posted to the subject of this thread?

sum

by **pr126** » Mon Dec 12, 2016 5:01 pm

Mughal is using FFI as an echo chamber.

by **Mughal** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 2:48 pm

A research work about the quran by dr saleem shahzad

Spoiler! :

by **manfred** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:13 pm

Hello Mughal, an while it nice to see you found your way back here, this kind of post is NOT appropriate for a discussion board.

You cannot seriously expect people to watch all those clips just in order to give a a reply.

Start making ONE specific point about the Qur'an in your own words (and use one or two clips perhaps...) Then, when that one has been discussed for a while, another one.

Otherwise you are unlikely to get a response. So, it seems, you want to have a discussion about the origin of the Qur'an? Good, so start a topic, and tell us briefly what you would like to talk about, and in a sentence or two, give a hint what your views are. That will develop into a proper discussion and enquiry.

Perhaps on this long list we can first point out two things:

a) "dr saleem shahzad" is a MEDICAL doctor from New York, it seems, so the "dr" does little to qualify him more than others to comment about the Qur'an.

b) The approach is not an open enquiry, but it STARTS with accepting the Islamic assumptions about the Qur'an, so it can hardly be called a serious study. Example: in the first clip he strongly advocates stoning as a "punishment from God".... that alone is enough to dismiss this as a serious study.

by **Nosuperstition** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:25 pm

Example: in the first clip he strongly advocates stoning as a "punishment from God".... that alone is enough to dismiss this as a serious study.

Did he do that?in this day and age?

by **manfred** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:16 pm

Well, that is what it certainly looked like to me... Feel free to watch it for yourself, of course.

And it surprises you? It is still practiced in some parts of the world...

by **Nosuperstition** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:19 pm

Mughal wrote:

Well in a district called Prakaasam in A.P in India during the British rule there occured a famine called dokkala karuvu or the famine of bellies going in/bowels going in.It was so called because people could not find solid food as a result of which they mixed curd with black soil and ate it as a result of which their bowels contracted from within.The missionaries saw it as an opportunity and converted many from that district.Now I do not know for sure,but people say that as of today if at all there is any fraud in the state,the roots will be in that district.Once upon a time that district supplied many soldiers to the armies of Hindu Vijaya Nagar Empire.

by **Nosuperstition** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:20 pm

manfred wrote:Well, that is what it certainly looked like to me... Feel free to watch it for yourself, of course.

And it surprises you? It is still practiced in some parts of the world...

Which countries?

by **manfred** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:22 pm

Nosuperstition wrote:
manfred wrote:Well, that is what it certainly looked like to me... Feel free to watch it for yourself, of course.

And it surprises you? It is still practiced in some parts of the world...

Which countries?

Stoning still happens today. There are 15 countries in which stoning is either practiced or authorized by law, or both. In Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria (in one-third of the country's states), Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen, stoning is a legal punishment. However, out of these countries, only in Iran, Pakistan and Somalia have stonings that actually occurred, and all instances in Pakistan have occurred outside the legal system, i.e. without a court judgement, but also without the police doing anything to stop it.

By comparison, three of the remaining five countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, and Mali) do not condone stoning in national legislation, but sharia sentences and executions have been carried out by non-state people. In the Aceh region of Indonesia, and parts of Malaysia, stoning is sanctioned regionally but banned nationally.

by **Hombre** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 7:41 pm

Hello Mughal,
we missed you friend. where have you been? . Last time we talked, you were rewriting the Quran - clearing misinterpretation of the Quran. Have you completed your work yet?

As manfred had pointed out - too any youtube video. Doubt anyone will watch them. so please post on link and we will go from there.

All the best.

by **Fernando** » Thu Jul 20, 2017 11:06 pm

Yes, Mughal, please continue but slow down a lot. Many of us are interested in the origin of the Koran but we would like new or little-known stuff. If it contradicts the old stuff, so much the better :sml:

by **sum** » Sat Jul 22, 2017 6:05 pm

Mughal has a difficult question to overcome and which he has so far refused to answer. While Mughal claims that the impressions we get from the Koran are wrong and the message is basically peaceful, when asked if Muhammad acted in accordance with the message of the Koran and the evil deeds perpetrated by Muhammad were in accord with the teaching of the Koran he leaves the thread because he can not answer this without either criticising Muhammad or the Koran. Despite all the evil deeds perpetrated by Muhammad there are no criticisms in the Koran and so one can only conclude that Muhammad did actually follow "Allah`s" the guidance in the Koran.

This is a major stumbling block for Mughal which is why he will not answer the question of whether Muhammad fully understood, and acted upon, the guidance of "Allah" in the Koran.

sum

Faith Freedom International

Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Re: Mughal the Infidel.

Who is online