Comments by "Leslie William" (@lesliewilliam3777) on "@FaridResponds Has Given Up And Won't Defend Against the "Islamic Dilemma"" video.
-
14
-
7
-
6
-
4
-
4
-
"uh nope, its not “circular reasoning” as you assumed. As we presuposse the quran to be an authority"
When you presuppose the truth of a proposition and use that to justify the proposition, either immediately or a few steps removed, then that is EXACTLY what circular reasoning is.
And I didn't "assume" this; my university training as a philosopher taught me to identify such sloppy thinking.
Speaking of substandard thinking, claiming that the Qur'an is a revelation from God because the Qur'an tells you the Qur'an is a revelation from God is yet another instantiation of the question begging fallacy. The key to identifying whether revelation is from God or not was given in Torah by God to Moses. It was the same standard Jesus used to authenticate his claim to being the long-awaited Jewish Messiah. Islam invented its own self-serving criterion which is, as I have underscored, question-begs its veracity.
As far as not having evidence for Noah, Abraham or Moses, this is entirely false. We have multiple genealogies in the Bible, contained in its multiple authored books and, before it was reduced to ashes in AD 70, in the Jerusalem Temple repository, testifying to their existence. For example, the lengthy genealogical list in Genesis 5 that goes back to Adam (something Islam does NOT have), that of Exodus 1 & 2, multiple genealogies in 1 Chronicles, Matthew 1 and Luke 3.
Furthermore, we have the extant, extra-biblical source of Egyptian hieroglyphs strongly pointing to Noah and his family being the original 8 people of the world, as well as multiple mythic accounts from southern Africa to China of Noah and his family.
“Im saying that even for your own Old Testament you lack a historical chain back to moses.”
Wrong! Try this on for size: “The sons of Levi were Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. The descendants of Kohath included Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel. The children of Amram were Aaron, MOSES, and Miriam. The sons of Aaron were Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. Eleazar was the father of Phinehas. Phinehas was the father of Abishua. Abishua was the father of Bukki. Bukki was the father of Uzzi…[and so on]…Azariah was the father of Seraiah. Seraiah was the father of Jehozadak, who went into exile when the Lord sent the people of Judah and Jerusalem into captivity under Nebuchadnezzar.” (1 Chron 6)
“As for Moses, the man of God, his sons were included with the tribe of Levi. The sons of Moses were Gershom and Eliezer. The descendants of Gershom included Shebuel, the family leader. Eliezer had only one son, Rehabiah, the family leader. Rehabiah had numerous descendants…” (1 Chron 23)
4
-
2
-
@hotcharizard874 1. Your 1st premise: "at jesus his time[sic] the torah was already corrupted"
2. My 1st response: What evidence do you have for this claim?
3. Your 2nd premise: “the quran/hadith tell us this”
4. My 2nd response: The qur'an/hadith tell us that the Bible has been corrupted and we know that the Bible has been corrupted because the Qur'an/hadith tell us that the Bible has been corrupted.
5. Your 3rd response: “its[sic] not “circular reasoning” as you assumed. As we presuposse[sic] the quran to be an authority [for knowing that at jesus his time the torah was already corrupted because the Qur’an tells us]”
6. My 3rd response: When you presuppose the truth of a proposition and use that to justify the proposition, either immediately or a few steps removed, then that is EXACTLY what circular reasoning is.
7. Your 4th response: “its not circular reasoning, as the presuposition of the quran being authoritive is not one with ontological value in this discussion…this discussion is about the islamic dilema , which is an INTERNAL CRITIQUE and thus certain presuposition are granted. so there is no circular reasoning at place”
8. My 4th response: You made an initial claim that the Torah was already corrupted 2000 years ago. A robust argument would normally then support this contentious claim by providing some evidence independent from the source (the Qur’an) for this claim. But instead you doubled down and merely repeated the same again: The Qur’an is authoritative in all matters; it says the Bible is corrupted; QED, the Bible is corrupted because the authoritative source for this claim, the Qur’an, says the Bible is corrupted. Mention of “ontological”[sic] value, internal critique, Islamic dilemma, and the like, is irrelevant to whether your argument constitutes the commission of an informal logical fallacy, viz., petitio principii. I am in no doubt that YOU BELIEVE the Qur’an says the Torah was corrupted (whether it does is a question I am not addressing!); I am addressing the logical structure of your argument. (If you still question my logic, return to your first and second premises.)
Conclusion: If I presented the following argument, would it be immune to the accusation of circular reasoning?
Premise 1: The world is not round; it is flat.
Premise 2: The Bible is authoritative in all relevant matters and one of its areas of authority is topographical discourse as God created topography.
Premise 3: The Bible says the world is flat
Conclusion: The world is flat because the Bible is the highest authority and it says it is flat.
You’ve done the same thing arguing that Torah was corrupted by the time of Jesus.
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1