₦airaland Forum

tbaba1234: ^


Makes no sense

There is no direct equivalent translation in english or any other language...

They are synonyms for almost every word in english and they would be employed in different ways... I can give you over 100 translation for one sentence in arabic,

It is an Arabic palidrome not a latin or english palindrome

I am asking for any palindrome in any language that matches in style and content.... (tamil fails the style test)

It is a very fair challenge.....

I knew you would fail, There is nothing like the Quran...

Keep trying to look for excuses...

Point proven

Now I can see that you are joking. Languages are all in different styles. . . .Arabic as a language is very different from tamil, their style of writing is very different. . .How can they have the same style when the style of writing is very different?. . .Does it make sense to you. . .You asked for a palindrome one was provided and you refuse to accept it based on style?. . This is the same thing as me telling you to bring a word that best describes a thing in any language that you know so that we will compare to my language, after you present it, I tell you that they are pronounced in different styles as such, I refuse to accept your word. .How wont the style be different when the languages are not the same?. . .You can see how bogus your logic is. . .There are so many things like the quran. . .You have failed to show one thing in the quran that can not be written by men. . .

Cheers01: But I must admit, Tbaba was giving us a hard time with this issue. He was hiding behind Arabic but with some research, he got exposed.


If we cant use Tamil palindromes to compare with English palindromes because they are somewhat different, the same rule goes for Arabic and English palindromes.

Simple

I admit I fell for his trap. . .Just realized the game he was playing later on. . As you said if we can't use Tamil palindrome to compare to english as he is suggesting because of difference in language and how they are structured, then we can't use arabic palindrome to compare to english. . .Case closed. . .Miracle of the quran debuked. . .

tbaba1234: ^ Makes no sense

There is no direct equivalent translation in english or any other language...

They are synonyms for almost every word in english and they would be employed in different ways...

Makes a lot of since if you accept that languages differ. . .For languages like Tamil where palindrome are deducted using syllabus not letters, you can never have the kind of palindrome in arabic as such the quranic verse can never be be a palindrome in the Tamil language. . .There you have it, you whole premise is even a bogus one considering the fact that languages differ, I repeat even the palindrome you presented is not a palindrome when translated to english. . So what exactly is it are you talking about?. . .You brought a palindrome in arabic, I brough one that matches it perfectly in Tamil but you are just running all over the place making excuses forgetting that languages differ a lot

Cheers01: The basic problem as I have said is that you're hiding behind Arabic. Assuming that what you're even saying is true the whole thing becomes xenophobic and borderline racist to suggest that God is best revealed in one language- Arabic.

Furthermore, the palindrome you put is an epic example of hypocrisy. The english palindromes and the arabic palindromes are like apples to oranges because when it is written in latin form or romaniztion, your Arabic palindrome is not a palindrome. English is written in latin form. Yet you claim that Tamil to english palindromes are apples to oranges.

Explanation/Illustration.


رب ب ك ف ك ب ب ر----------Arabic form is a palindrome

Rabba ka fakabbir--------- latin form/Romanization not a palindrome

'declare the greatness only of your Rabb(Lord)'" English translation not a palindrome

Perfect!! His claim completely debunked. . .He keeps insisting that the Tamil palindrome is comparing apples to oranges when the arabic palindrome he provided when translated to english is like comparing apples to sand since it is not even a palindrome at all. . .Different languages with how they deduce things. . .

tbaba1234: When i present a syllabic palindrome, we can look at the tamil one....

If that is your best bet...

Then you failed really badly.....

My point proven...

But your own word palindrome is not a palindrome in english so fail. . .

tbaba1234: There are true palindromes in tamil using the letter but they are very rare... that is why they use their syllables... We can only compare apples to apples... If i gave a syllabic palindrome then we can compare.

You see here you are lying again. . .From the link you posted. . .'Unlike the English Language palindromes where the letters of the alphabet forming the word (or sentence) are read one by one in reckoning the mirror image structure, Palindromes in Sanskrit and Tamil are reckoned by identifying the aksharas (syllables) and not the consonants and vowels. . . .It clearly says that UNLIKE english palindromes in Tamil are reckoned in a very different way. . . Saying that the use letters is your own making. Even the link you provided has stated how they identify their own palindromes and if we go by it it matches what ever palindrome you can bring from the quran. . .I gave very good examples but the post were hidden. . .They used it to praise their own god as well. . .Because of how languages and words differ even the palindome you brought in the quran is not a palindrome in english because of how languages differ and how the words are structured, the example of palindrome you gave is not even a palindrome in english if i am to go by the games you are trying to play here. . .The verse you quoted is NOT a palindrome in english and as such is not really a palindrome. . .The way palindromes are structured differ in languages. . What you are trying to say is that words must be spoken or written the same way in different languages for them to be the same. . .Your approach obviously a bogus one. . .Since languages are different and the way they are written or deducted are not always the same. . .I repeat your arabic palindrome is not a palindrome in english. . .So if am to play your games you have presented nothing. .

Na wa for you o!! Your problem is your stubbornness to accept the truth... Remove your pride and face the truth.... Stop accusing me of dishonesty... i have been totally straight with you.

Which truth?. . .I gave you very good palindrome, you are actually lying about the Tamil palindrome so which truth is it you are talking about?. . .

What are common mistakes? that is ambiguous as one can get.... This statement on its own has very little content....

It could be applied in any sentence and it will give meaning. . .Common mistakes are made every day at work. . .

Common mistakes happen .... That is as ambiguous as they come?? What are common mistakes exactly?? common mistakes in what field ....

When i say ' Declare the greatness only of your lord' there is zero ambiguity....

There

There is no comparison in the level of content between the two statements.... One is unambiguous, the other is ambuiguous

You know what, quit trying... I don't want it to seem as if i am just making fun of you guys.... you will not find a palindrome of similar content.....

See you!![/quote]I have presented the Tamil palindrome and its content is very at par with the one in the quran. . .

Chrisbenogor: Na wa oh see as mazaje don turn star for here?
My guy me and you be P square before oh.

Na only Jesoul been even dey send me that year, but before I know she don go too.

Baba mi, you don run na. . . .How far broda? You dey this world so?. . .

mkmyers45: So

- You are of the opinion that the universe may actually be the work of a creator

Sure, its possible the universe has a creator or creators, there is no concrete evidence for such but i personally allow the possibility for such. . .Since there is no signature evidence for such an assumption, i just leave it as a possibility. . .What I do know is that NON of the god/gods of man made religion has anything to do with the universe since such gods are all a creation of men. . .

- Origin of life is a question without a 'truly universal' answer?

No one knows, people are only speculating. . .I do not believe in the "it is either god or its nothing concept". I am very OK with the I don't know option since that is the fact anyway. .No body knows. . .As such no one can provide any evidence at all. . .So far all we have are speculations and mythologies proffered as evidence. . .

I hope my assumptions are right

Yep

tbaba1234: lol.... I have read about palindromes in tamil... This is about tamil palindromes

'Unlike the English Language palindromes where the letters of the alphabet forming the word (or sentence) are read one by one in reckoning the mirror image structure, Palindromes in Sanskrit and Tamil are reckoned by identifying the aksharas (syllables) and not the consonants and vowels. As a result, one cannot simply look at the internal representation of the text and perform a string match by comparing the forward and reverse text string unless of course the representation conforms to a syllabic form. '

http://acharya.iitm.ac.in/linguistics/palindromes.php

I have no reason to lie mate..... How can you expect that a palindrome in arabic would be the same in english, if it is the same in english then it should be the same in french, spanish, german... etc. There are no equivalent translations for many words in arabic in the english language...

You can't compare mangoes with oranges... That is my simple point

You see the sheer dishonesty again, Tamil is NOT english, and it was made clear even in your entry, a palindrome in Tamil has its own way of recognition unlike the english language. Same with arabic language that is why a palindome in arabic can NOT be the same in english. . .It still does NOT negate it from being a palindrome. . .I have given you Palindomes in Tamil that completely match what you have provided in the quran. . .So much for divine origin. . . . . .I repeat show me what is written in the quran that can NOT be written any where else so far you are yet to do so. . .

Here is another one in Portuguese

"Erro comum ocorre" which in english means "Common mistakes happen". . . .It has a real application, It fits perfectly into any discussion and it is applicable, It gives useful information and can be used because it talks about something meaningful. . .

tbaba1234: You chose the wrong language... There are very few (hardly any) true palindromes in the tamil language what you have are semi palindromes; they use syllables not letters, We have to compare oranges with oranges not mangoes with oranges...... The letters in their 'palindromes' do not read the same forward and backwards. The structure of the script does not allow for complete or true palindromes... Well, they still call them palindromes abi.... . . I gave you a true palindrome not a semi palindrome... I have seen many of the best true tamil palindromes and none compares... Unless you want me to start looking for 'syllabic palindromes' in the quran as well so we can compare ... If that is what your hidden post is about, then it is another fail...

I won't give you a challenge, if it was that easy...

You see dishonesty and lies at display. . .How did I choose the wrong language?. . .How do you know that there are hardly true palindromes in the tamil language?. . .Why lying muslims apologist told you that?. . .I provided true palindrome and as usual you came with this weak attack that it is not really a palindrome . . .How did you know that they dont read the same forward and back wards?. . .Can you speak tamil? who lied to you that they don't?. . .Who lied to you that they are semi palindromes?. . .The ones I gave you compare to the ones you gave from the quran, you english translation of the ayah is not even a palindrome.So there you have a fail. . Stop being dishonest. . .That's all what you people are good at. . . .You don't speak tamil so stop lying. . .

mkmyers45: Ok ....Firstly we have pantheist who believe the universe as the god....Secondly What if the true 'creator,catalyst,supernatural being,god etc' in question is either unknown, unpronounced or exclusive to human knowledge? As a professing atheist im finding hard to believe that you dont have a clear-cut stance on life origin which is the key to the 'god' question....

Sure, the universe could be god for whom ever wishes to give it that label. . .My position is if the universe has a creator or creators no body know what it is or what they are, every body is just speculating, the hypothesis that religions proffer of the creator or creators of the universe if anything like that exist deserving worship, answering prayers, speaking the human language, interacting with them, having a chosen men, or a right religion is all FALSE and pure DELUSION. . . .All religions and the gods they worship are man made, 5000 years ago in ancient egypt Ra was the only god, Jesus god and allah god as we now know them came into existence 2000 and 1400 years old respectively, before then gods like zeus, Amun etc were the true gods to various people depending on their location. . .

I do not care about the origin of life because nobody knows that for sure, all the hypothesis and speculations out there do not have substantial evidence to back them up as such I reject all of them. . . Some are more valid than others though. . .Some religious creation myth make more sense than others. . .But all are myths and that's all they are. . .

What is it with my hidden post, I already provided palindrome that is at par with what is written inside the quran in the Tamil language. . .I wonder why the post is hidden. . .

mkmyers45: and don't you think the real answer to how the universe came back may lie with a 'God' known or unknown?

God is a loaded term. . .Its possible that the universe was created by something or so many things, I don't know and I don't care because we as humans do not have the answer for now. . .Its also possible that the universe self created it self. . .I do not know and do not care. . .All I know is that the universe was NOT created by Yahweh, Allah, Vishnu, Palagon, and all the other gods of man made religions. Humans created this gods for various reasons. . . like to help explain away many things they couldn't or because the want to propagate their own ideas, way of life and use it to dominate others. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]In other words, you didn't really believe it to be true, you only liked the theory of it.[/quote]I believed it was true, one thing with religious faith that I notice is that you first believe and then you see, it becomes the truth after you believe, unlike in real life where you first see before you believe. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]So in other words, what you believe now is true all other narratives are false. Did you also believe at the time you were in Thailand that what you believed was true and their narrative false?[/quote]At that time I was indoctrinated and made to believe that one religious myth was superior to all other religious myths. . .I did my own research and realized that all religious myths are equally valid or invalid. . .

musKeeto: Mr. Anony, you're killing the thread...

I don't think he is killing the thread. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lol, so you believe that there can be a multitude of different truths?[/quote]Nope, I believe that there are multitudes of mythical narratives and legends all claiming dominion as the true words of the creator/creators of the universe. . .

gendebs: When my pastor went to Jerusalem he snapped the pics of where Jesus was buried and so many pics that i cant remember. can u please tell me how those things came up if there re no real

I just hope that you know that there are two different tombs of Jesus presently in Jerusalem. . .People visit both tombs. . .The two tombs are just symbolic, they are not the real tombs of Jesus as reported in the bible. . .

mkmyers45: Are you a firm believer in the big b[b]a[/b]ng and evolution?

Nope, i am not a firm believer of the two hypothesis. . . .They are possiblities but they don't present the kind of factual evidence i need. . .So for that I am not a firm believer in them. . .Personally I believe we don't know anything about how the universe came about, every body is just speculating no one truly knows. . .

Have I been banned here or what?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]No, it's like saying that after 2000 years, we have only one surviving document that reports the 9/11 attacks. You can't claim it not to be true simply because you can't find another such report.[/quote]Nope, not one surviving, because there are many other documents from that time that survived and recorded all the major events that happened, most of what we know about First century Palestine we know from Josephus and other historians that lived at that time who wrote detailed events of what happened. . .Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence, you can make extra ordinary claims that happened in history and provide religious document that disagree with some historical events as their evidence. . .

You have no better reason to reject miracles other than you simply don't believe in them and to me that is a very weak reason to give.

No clear cut Miracle has EVER been shown to happen, if the bible is true then you should be able to perform clear cut miracles yourself after all Jesus PROMISED those of you that believe in him to have the ability to do GREATER things than he did if ONLY you believe, if you believe in Jesus and his PROMISE then you should be able to perform clear cut miracles like healing amputees and restoring their amputated limbs back or raising people that have already been buried from the dead, Jesus we are told in the story book did them and PROMISED his followers and all those that believed in his the ability to go GREATER things, the fact that no one can do clear cut miracles in his name says miracles are nothing buy lies. . NO clear cut miracle has ever been demonstrated any where, if you believe in Jesus then you should be able to do those things yopur self as he PROMISED. . .

I didn't want to delve into genealogy because I felt was irrelevant since we both agree that Jesus existed. It is said though that Matthew does not give a strict genealogy as Luke and uses the word gennao which can be translated loosely to mean an ancestor and not necessarily father. Luke on the other hand uses the word ho which is a stricter definition "born of" this should explain for the unequal number of ancestors.

You don't want to delve into genealogy because you know you have NO feet to stand on there. . .Both were reporting their made up tales with different account and genealogies, you attempted the one was his father and the other was his mother nonsenses when you saw that it didnt fly the new explanation is "it can be loosely translated". . .I just dislike dishonesty and that is what christian apologist fo all the time, it can be loosely translated to mean ancestor and not father, in the context it means father and as such some bible translations used the word father, unless if you are trying to lie to me that you know greek and how it should be applied more than those that translated the bible into english because father is what the wrote not your loosely translated ancestor nonsense and fraudulent attempt to explain away the obvious contradiction. . . Where you the one that wrote the book of Luke? why should any body pay attention to your dubious loose translation of the word, if we are to go by your nonsense attempt we can also say born of an ancestors as well, any body can play this nonsense games. . .The bible is clear, and as long as the bible is concerned their genealogies are different. . .I go with what is written in the bible not your nonsense apologetics that is neither here nor there. .

Please show me this verses you are talking about where first appeared to the same people at two different places. . . . . .(this is the only one of your points I'll consider a worthy contradiction if it was indeed true)

Here are the two very contradictory accounts, one says he appeared to his disciples first in Jerusalem and the other in another different city very far away over 150miles in Galilee. . .


Mat 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
Mat 28:6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
Mat 28:7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.
Mat 28:8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.
Mat 28:9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
Mat 28:10[b] Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me[/b].
Mat 28:11 Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
Mat 28:12 And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
Mat 28:13 Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him [away] while we slept.
Mat 28:14 And if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you.
Mat 28:15 So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.
Mat 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
Mat 28:17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.
Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Here is Luke's version. . .

Luk 24 : 9 When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others.
Luk 24:10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles.
Luk 24:11 But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense.
Luk 24:12 Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.
Luk 24:13 Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles [fn] from Jerusalem.
Luk 24:14 They were talking with each other about everything that had happened.
Luk 24:15 As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked along with them;
Luk 24:16 but they were kept from recognizing him.
Luk 24:17 He asked them, "What are you discussing together as you walk along?" They stood still, their faces downcast.
Luk 24:18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, "Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?"
Luk 24:19 "What things?" he asked. "About Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people.
Luk 24:20 The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him;
Luk 24:21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place.
Luk 24:22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning
Luk 24:23 but didn't find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive.
Luk 24:24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see."
Luk 24:25 He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!
Luk 24:26 Did not the Christ [fn] have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?"
Luk 24:27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
Luk 24:28 As they approached the village to which they were going, Jesus acted as if he were going farther.
Luk 24:29[b] But they urged him strongly, "Stay with us, for it is nearly evening; the day is almost over." So he went in to stay with them[/b].
Luk 24:30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them.
Luk 24:31 Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight.
Luk 24:32 They asked each other, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"
Luk 24:33 They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together
Luk 24:34 and saying, "It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon."
Luk 24:35 Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.
Luk 24:36 While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."
Luk 24:37 They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost.
Luk 24:38 He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds?
Luk 24:39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have."
Luk 24:40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet.
Luk 24:41 And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, "Do you have anything here to eat?"
Luk 24:42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish,
Luk 24:43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.

The two very different accounts are very clear and they both happened the same day Jesus was written to have resurrected from the dead. . .

The fact is that the copies of the gospel available to us now were written after Jesus died. You have no way of proving they were the first and original copies or that any of the gospels apart from Luke was or wasn't penned by an eyewitness, besides, Luke draws his text from eyewitness accounts.

Now you are here with your speculations again. . .The gospels we have with us were NOT written by people who knew Jesus or had ever meet him, they were written long after Jesus died, in a language neither he nor his disciples spoke . . .The unknown authors never said they ever witnessed any of the events the wrote about. They just wrote their stories. . .

As for the contradictory genealogies between Matthew and Luke. . .Your explanation does not fly. . .

Here is what I got from another site. . .The site completely destroys the bogus claim christians apologist use to explain away the obvious contradictions. . .

"Christians claim that Lukes account is Marys fathers genealogy through Heli and Matthews account is Josephs genealogy. This is very unlikely, as we shall soon see. If David was a common ancestor of both Marys fathers line and Josephs line then obviously the two genealogies split from David into his two sons, Nathan carried Mary's fathers line and Solomon carried Josephs line. All good to start off with, but we run into a major problem when we get to the name Salathiel and his son Zorobabel which are shared by both lists. See Mary's fathers line says that Salathiel was the son of Neri whereas Josephs line says that he was the son of Jechonias. Unless Neri and Jechonias were homosexual parents to Salathiel, there is no possible way to resolve this conflict. Even trying to go the way of father-inlaw like with Josephs father (both Heli and Jacob) doesnt work because if Salathiel wife's father was Neri and Salathiel's father was Jechonias then the Mary's fathers line would be broken. The only way to resolve the two accounts on this point is to say that one of the genealogies is wrong"

http://antecessor.hubpages.com/hub/Bible-Contradictions-The-Geneology-of-Jesus

mkmyers45: Mazaje (Mazan Kworai)

Lets Discuss 'Atheism'

Let me keep start it by asking you to

1. Define Atheism in your own words

Disbelief in all the gods of religion that men worship, because all the gods and religions are man made. . .

2. Give a little insight on your journey to finding atheism

Go through this post, I once narrated my story there. . .I actually started as a christian here on NL https://www.nairaland.com/316436/mazaje-when-did-leave-christianity

Ina fata za mu yi hiran cin gaba

kworai kuwa, za mu yi. . .

mkmyers45: real nawa...anyway mazaje do you mind me opening a thread just for two of us to discuss atheism?

Sure, i don't mind. . . ride on man. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Fallacy of arguing from silence. besides for a contradiction to occur, there must be two opposite statement. A statement cannot contradict silence.[/quote]A major event like that would have been reported by multiple sources at that time, its the same as saying the september 11 attacks was reported by only a single source. . .

The fact that they do not happen everyday is why they are rightfully called miracles. That you do not personally believe in miracles is just your problem.
The genealogy of Christ has been explained by some as one from the mother and the other flowing from the father.
Now Jesus spent a number of days on earth before ascending to heaven, it is very possible that he appeared on a mountain and in a room and many other places too during that time.
On what day was Jesus crucified? Please cite verses.

Miracles that happen only in the pages on stories, no?. . .The genealogies has been explained you say but the text does NOT say that so the explanation falls flat. . .This is nothing other than saying the writers do not know what they are stating so you complete it with your own unfounded speculations, when the writers are very clear in what they were stating. . . The lineage in Matt has 12 fewer generations between Joe and Abraham than the one in Luke. So if it were true that they were separate lineages of Joe and Mary, then Joe would have been a contemporary of Mary's great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfather. . .You have started with your speculations, the text clearly states what happened, according to one account it was in room in Jerusalem that he first appeared to his disciples, in another gospel account he first appeared to them on a mountain in Galilee. . .In both account when they first saw him they were scared and did not believe. . So which is it, was it on a mountain in Galilee or a room in Jerusalem?

Writing in 3rd person narrative is not proof that the author is not an eyewitness, it is just a style that any writer can adopt. That's a very weak point.

The fact that the gospels were written very long after Jesus and his disciples died in a language they did not speak is is enough evidence that the authors were NOT eye witness to the events. . .The author of Luke says he wasn't an eye witness. . .

Is this post a joke or what?. .

.. . Na wah ohh!!

tbaba1234: I will not go too far, i will give you just one included in the write-up.... Then you will tell me something that a human has made that is even close...

Palindromes are sentences and words that spell front and back the same way like wow, race car... The Quran has palindromes... One ayah (usually translated as verse) is a palindrome as a sentence on its own...

Surah Muddathir ayah 3 is a palindrome

the sentence is:

رَبَّكَ فَكَبِّرْ

look at it more closely:

رب ب ك ف ك ب ب ر

It means

'declare the greatness only of your Rabb(Lord)'

Your challenge is simple, provide a sentence palindrome from all of what humans have created in any language, that makes as much sense as this one ayah..... Thank God we have Google..

Some famous palindromes include:

T. Eliot, Top Bard, Notes Putrid Tang Emanating, Is Sad. I’d Assign It A Name: Gnat Dirt Upset On Drab Pot-Toilet

No, Mel Gibson Is A Casino’s Big Lemon

Swap God For A Janitor; Rot In A Jar Of Dog Paws

Read more: http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-palindromes.php#ixzz20opi7uG3

As you can see they make little sense.... This is just one ayah....

Here are some palindrome i got from wikipedia. . .

1.Was it a car or a cat I saw?

2. "A Toyota's a Toyota.

3. Step on no pets.

4. "Eva, can I stab bats in a cave?"

If compared to the ayah that says "declare the greatness only of your Rabb" you will see that they are at par. ..

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Wow lots of claims and allegations
When last I checked, to believe something meant to accept it as true.[/quote]I said I believe there is a man behind the Fable. . .

How do yo know for sure?

Because the little history written in them contradicts known history. . .The report extra ordinary events that would have been mentioned by others if they truly happend, like the resurrection of the saints who walked round Jerusalem for all to see when Jesus was crucified. . .If that really happened other MUST have written about it, that it gets no mention from any body says they are lying. . .

So you believe the gospels are lying about Christ? How do you come by this claim?

Because the gospels report events that are not true and do not happen in reality, people do NOT die and come back to life after many days. Some of the account cancel each other out, example the contradictory geneology of Jesus and some recorded events within the gospels. . example when and where exactly did Jesus appear to his disciples after he resurrected, one account says on a moutain in Galilee another says in a room in Jerusalem. . They both can not be true assuming it happened. . .When exactly was Jesus crucified and on what day, all these depend on which gospel account you read. . .

please cite the historical accounts each gospel contradicts

isnt that what you are debating here since?. . .

and you know this for sure because?

Gospels were written in 2nd and 3rd person narrative, gospels were written long after Jesus and his disciples died, gospels authors did not indicate who they were, church tradition ascribed the names to each gospels, gospels were originally written in greek a language not spoken by jess and his disciples. . .If we are to go by your claim that they might have been copied from a source in aramic it still doesnt help your case that it was written by the disciples of Jesus, because they gospels even if written in aramic were written in 3rd person narrative, authors still remains unknow because the authors did not still identify themselves, the fact that church tradition is what ascribed the names to the gospels destroys your argument that they were written by Jesus disciples. . .

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lol, you want to make a claim based on thin air?
You cannot prove that they are not factual events.
You say that Jesus existed but that the gospels talk myths concerning his life and that they contradict themselves several times. I have asked you to cite a few of these contradictions. All I have said is that you cannot cite events concerning Jesus' birth because you will be contradicting yourself by casting doubts on whether he was born at all.
Jesus' life was well documented by the gospels. Surely there is a lot of material left for you to fish out a few of these several contradictions you claim.[/quote]They are NOT factual events because they have no external evidence to support them. . Remember they also claim to happen at the time when other events happened and other historical records disagree with them(Even on this thread we are yet to determine when exactly Jesus was born according to the conflicting gospel accounts). . .All I said is that I believe that there is a man behind the Jesus fable, just as there is a man behind the Mohammed fable. . .I believe once the man died an embellished fable was written after him. The gospels are fables and NOT historical events. . .I never said that any of the things in the gospels are true, only said that I believe there is a man behind the gospel fables. . .The gospels are documents written by unknown authors, non of the authors witnessed any of the events they wrote about, they authors do not even know the Jesus they are talking about and have never meet him. . .

They wrote their fables long after the Jesus they were talking died in a language he does not even speak. . .Their account of events contradict other historical accounts. . .And NO the gospels were NOT copied from any source. . .They came originally in greek from very educated greek speaking christians. . .From people who never knew Jesus or ever meet him. . .If we are to go by your logic them Mohammed can be said to be truly the last messenger of god and everything written about him by his followers is true. .Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence, so far there is NO evidence outside the bible to support anything the bible claims about Jesus. . .Jesus life was well documented by the gospels that were written long after he died, by people who never meet him, eh?. . .Interesting. . .The gospels are not historical documents but documents of faith so based on that they are mythical and not real and for that I do not accept your premise. . .