Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (15434)	6/4/2001 4:44:04 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"A long-imbedded cultural reason." I understand your concern. Since you presume that a "male" was the architect of the language of the Quran, it is not even an unfair observation. It is a challenge for me. The Quran can not be passed along by its adherants as oral tradition and beliefs that were eventually documented, by men. The book itself either is God's words, in God's words, delivered directly to humans as a message from God, or it is a total fraud. If it is true that a male embedded his ego into the language of the Quran, the entire book is rubbish. For this reason I have looked at this particular challenge with some concern. I gave what I thought was a thoughtful and fair analysis of the situation and one that I feel stands up as a very credible and plausible explanation. I didn't expect it to cause you to have revelations, conversions or convulsions but I did think it would lend to some understanding of a different perspective. I was taken short by your reaction which did seem uncharacteristically knee jerk.