There is a view of the world that designates ‘culture borrowing’ as the sole explanation as to why a later culture may contain features that mirrors or matches a pre-existing culture. Often this is the most probable or plausible explanation. Let us call this the ‘Negative-Material-Contingent’ explanation of cultural continuity, which utilizes solely secular or empirical evidences, attempting to find patterns and then make general deductions based on the material evidence available. Its blind-side is with the dearth of material evidence its generalisations will become wider and, therefore, more likely to be off-the-mark. Another blind-side is not only its delimitation to material evidence but its insistence to deny any explanation involving ‘genuine’ revelation. Such an explanation will never be factored-in as plausible, because this approach has no measuring tool to assess the veracity of such a truth-claim and its possibilities. (See ‘The Challenge of the Qur’an‘ for an example of an attempt to demonstrate in ‘Open’ secular terms, material evidences for revelation.)
The atheists talk (in this video) about the need for evidence(s) for God, which is a good and reasonable point. And because of a supposition that, “there is none”, they conclude: there is no God.
(See God Focussed or Self Focussed to see how Evidences for (or against) God can be (or can’t be) gleaned based on our perspectives. How can we be conclusive about the answer to this question? (See a later post, pending.) But the point that must be acknowledged is that there are evidences being proposed; not that there are no evidences for God.
ALLAH, Most Exalted, says:
“And on the earth are signs for the certain [in faith]
And in yourselves. Then will you not see?
And in the heaven is your provision and whatever you are promised.
Then by the Lord of the heaven and earth, indeed, it is truth – just as [sure as] it is that you are speaking.” (Qur’an, Adh-Dhariyat 51: 20-23)
The SHORT ANSWER:
Sometimes, bad things happen to you. And in your opinion, they aren’t good. AT ALL. But your opinion is mortal, limited, finite. And ALLAH Knows Best (for He is immortal, unlimited, infinite).
To ‘St Paul’ something is now ‘a thing’ it seems. Continue reading
In this video, Mustafa Aykol talks about his book, ‘The Islamic Jesus’, where – amongst other things – he tracks the movement of the Early Jewish-Christian community. This is a must read for anyone interested in a scholarly account of the supposed ‘paradox’ in the (not-so?) surprising affinity from two divergent traditions: a) the up-to-date, historical analysis of that community and b) the normative Islamic presentation of early ‘Jewish-Christianity’, which it calls ‘Islam’ (literally translated as ‘The Revealed Way to Submit to only ALLAH [God]’).
What is the challenge of the Qur’an?
Well, traditionally – that is to say – qur’anically, the challenge was literary or perhaps one of orality, because the culture the Qur’an came into was a time where the poets were esteemed and would hold sparring verbal competitions like modern day spoken word slams and rap battles; spontaneity and immediacy was the order of the day.
However, putting the spontaneity aside to make things easier for the challengers, the Qur’an itself says, a number of times with slight differences of emphases each time, the following:
Ten Surah Challenge: ‘Or do they say, “He invented it”? Say, “Then bring ten surahs like it that have been invented and call upon [for assistance] whomever you can besides Allah, if you should be truthful.”‘ (Qur’an 11:13)