Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
19,746
edits
User talk:Saggy: Difference between revisions
→Scientific errors - response blog
| Line 243: | Line 243: | ||
::Yes, best to somehow improve the existing information on our side (if needed) or add additional supporting evidence where possible. A small "Responses to Apologetics" section can made for each error below the verse. | ::Yes, best to somehow improve the existing information on our side (if needed) or add additional supporting evidence where possible. A small "Responses to Apologetics" section can made for each error below the verse. | ||
::Yes I saw that the blog has rejected the Tafsir. When all else fails they resort to "The Tafsir/hadith is weak". I'm sure every single hadith can be considered weak if all the chain of narrators are examined. They just do the analysis for the hadiths they dont like. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 19:04, 14 June 2014 (PDT) | ::Yes I saw that the blog has rejected the Tafsir. When all else fails they resort to "The Tafsir/hadith is weak". I'm sure every single hadith can be considered weak if all the chain of narrators are examined. They just do the analysis for the hadiths they dont like. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 19:04, 14 June 2014 (PDT) | ||
:::I'll try to work on this too. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 03:19, 15 June 2014 (PDT) | |||