Posted by Mike on February 17, 1998 at 16:07:57:
In Reply to: Re: The Burden of Proof posted by Mohamed Ghounem on February 17, 1998 at 03:08:19:
Dear Brother Mike, Hi, well, again I'm pondering where to start with you.
M: Allow me to start by saying that Real Scientists and Doctors have tested and Re-Tested the Qur'an and found it valid.
Mike: This is example of the logical fallacy called card stacking or suppression of evidence. You are selecting those "real scientists and Doctors" who support your position while ignoring those you contradict your claims. At least you could offer a specific refutation of the cites I have given. See: http://www.answering-islam.org/Science/embryo.html, http://www.answering-islam.org/Science/index.html?
M: Show me according to your resources where it is not valid, you have shown me a web site that has been answered.
Mike: I am still awaiting specifics answers to the above cites and to my argument that the defense offered by your websites are logically invalid. See specific logical fallacies pointed out below.
M: I am not trying to change the subject when I ask you to give me an example in which you don't…
Mike: But you are changing the subject in fact when you refuse to answer my objections, which is a concession that Islam is indefensible.
M: I am confused as to what you want as proof and how you want it.
Mike: What I am insisting upon is that your arguments in defense of Islam be logically valid. I have pointed out to you that your defense (as posted on the website you gave me) of the Qur'an is invalid because it comments the fallacy of circular reasoning and the fallacy of composition. You have not answered by objections on points of logic.
M: the Bible has been proven to be corrupted "by former Priests" http://www.infidels.org/org/ffrf/lfif/stone.html
Mike: No Mohamed you have been conditioned with bad scholarship. See: http://www.jude3.org/resources/JPH_BUTWT_frame.html: http://users.why.net/think/apologia/stereo.htm: http://www.Christian-thinktank.com/ordorise.html: http://www.answering-islam.org/Bible/Contra/resurrect.html
M: The Qur'an has been proven to be uncorrupted by scientists and doctors http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch13.html
Mike: I am still awaiting a response to my previous post in which I demonstrated that the above is logically invalid. Specifically the authors commit the logical fallacies of circular reasoning:
a. The Qur'an is a literary work written in a rich and complex form of Arabic
b. In the noble Qur'an we find a challenge from Allah to compose a literary work on a par with [it].
c. Since all such efforts have failed then let them accept the Koran as an outstanding evidential miracle [of
God].
I will simple note again this is a classic example of circular reasoning.
And the so-called scientific proofs for the Qur'an are an example of the fallacy of composition. You cannot apply a part to the whole. In other words, just because the Qur'an may have some scientific facts you cannot generalize that the entire Qur'an is the Word of God. Therefore your argument is invalid.
Let's face it my objections cannot be answered. You have no good reason to continue to be a Muslim. Once you come to grips to this reality I will then make the case for Jesus' resurrection.
Peace and Blessings,
Your Brother in Christ: Michael