@
redredredThere is a peculiarity in discussions with moslems. They seem to take as a starting position,
on the basis of no reason at all, that the koran cannot be in error.
For them, this seems to be an absolute given.
In a discussion about the koran, one might reasonably assume that the discussion would include three possibilities:
1. the koran is wrong
2. the evidence is wrong
3. the explanation of the evidence is wrong
and that the problem lies within one of those possibilities (or some combination thereof).
However, muslims seem to completely disregard (1). For them, there is absolutely no possibility that the koran is wrong.
This seems to be why, when faced with rock-solid evidence, they take that as proof only that the explanation must, absolutely must, be incorrect. In their minds, the possibility that the evidence shows the koran to be wrong simply does not exist… cannot exist… cannot be allowed to exist. I am forced to consider the startling possibility that their indoctrination is so complete, so comprehensive, that they are actually incapable of even considering such a possibility.
It also means that, in any such discussion, the terms of the discussion are not balanced. You expect that, in principle, any one of the three possibilities above may apply… but the muslim has already excluded one of them (solely on the basis of self-interest). Consequently, during the discussion the muslim will bounce between (2) and (3), but can never… not ever… go anywhere near (1).
However bizarre the claims about (2) or (3) need to become, the muslim can never, not ever, follow the huge, glaring, neon-lit arrow of reason that points to (1).
Any diversion,
any circumlocution,
any claim of mistranslation (a common tactic),
any appeal to any authority (however laughable),
any evasion whatsoever will be used in order to avoid (1).
This means that the discussion is not an attempt to arrive at the truth. It has no intellectual merit, because it is not conducted openly and honestly.
It is a mere pretence.