Quran is free of errors

[The Voice of Reason]

You all know that there was a time when no body was ever aware of anything called "Big Bang", and don't forget that until now it's just a theory, and they are not certain of everything they have concluded, because they are still studying the matter more in order to go beyond the big bang theory. So, it's really astonishing to see people here accusing the Quran to be wrong about something, just because scientists didn't reach in knowledge and in their experiments to what the Quran is talking about.

I'm just curious, TashaN. Are you saying that the Koran has verses that tell us about the Big Bang? If so, would you mind posting them for us?

 

[YmirGF]

I'm just curious, TashaN. Are you saying that the Koran has verses that tell us about the Big Bang? If so, would you mind posting them for us?

Here is one relatively poor example.

The Big Bang Theory and the Cosmic Crunch in the Noble Quran

I particularly loved this part:

Smoke is also ball-shaped and compacted together while it is hot and in the air. This description perfectly fits what the big bang theory suggests from the shape of the "compact ball" of gases that formed the Universe.

Staggering... absolutely staggering.

 

[themadhair]

To emphasise what the good folks prior to me are saying:

The people making the claim that the koran predicts the big bang are also the people who seem to know least about big bang theory.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I particularly loved this part:
Originally Posted by Nimrods for Islam
Smoke is also ball-shaped and compacted together while it is hot and in the air. This description perfectly fits what the big bang theory suggests from the shape of the "compact ball" of gases that formed the Universe.


Staggering... absolutely staggering.

To me, this is a perfect example of the utter BS that is flowing in all of these threads about the inerrancy of the Koran. Anyone that would take such a statement (as quoted from Nimrods of Islam's post) has completely given up any claim to credibility.

You would think that these people would have some sense of dignity and pride, that would preclude them from trying to make such ludicrous claims.

Then again - apparently not.

 

[TashaN]

Isn't is just as astonishing that some Muslims are willing to go through mental gymnastics into order to show some vague phrases from the Qur'an are talking about the Big Bang?

You said it yourself, some Muslims. They might be right and might be wrong.

I did ask Fatihah just that. What will Muslims do after accepting that this vague phrasing is talking about the Big Bang and then watch science go past the Big Bang theory and on to another theory? Muslims will look a bit silly at that point.

Again, some Muslims! not ALL Muslims, please.

The problem with this TashaN is that science does not recognize miracles so there is little point in Muslim's coining the term "scientific miracles". It's more than a bit of wishful think as well as being an oxymoron.

Well, they do believe that it's a miracle that something which has been written 1400 years a go have the same information as the recent discoveries.

If you have anything of value to add to the argument supporting the endlessly amusing notion of "scientific miracles" in the Qur'an, I'm all ears.

No thank you. I don't have time to go into details of the scientific miracles or whatever you guys were debating about. I came to talk about certain points only in the discussion.

 

[themadhair]

You said it yourself, some Muslims. They might be right and might be wrong.

No maybe about it – they are flat out wrong and you should not be defending their arguments since they reflect badly on all Muslims, making them seem like a shower of scientifically illiterate illogical muppets.

Again, some Muslims! not ALL Muslims, please.

When such discussions ensue and not one single Muslim will be a voice of common sense then I have to reject the above. Are you going to be such a voice of common sense or are you going to engage in vague pointless apologetics here?

Well, they do believe that it's a miracle that something which has been written 1400 years a go have the same information as the recent discoveries.

A genuine question for you TashaN – how can those Muslims make the above claim when, as this and other threads show, when those same Muslims are utterly ignorant/misinformed about those recent discoveries? How can a Muslims claim the koran predicted the big bang theory despite knowing virtually next-to-nothing about it?

I don't have time to go into details of the scientific miracles or whatever you guys were debating about. I came to talk about certain points only in the discussion.

Maybe you should read the thread before commenting upon it? Just a suggestion.

 

[TashaN]

Ok, i can't reply to all posts, but i guess i didn't make myself clear in my previous post, so allow me to elaborate.

Although i do believe that Quran is the word of God, i also believe that many Muslims have exaggerated when attempting to interpret certain verses to mean something which hardly can be proved or examined. I do believe that some verses speak about things which couldn't have been known at that time without the current technology, but at the same time, i don't like that some people snatch verses out of context and present them as facts and proofs without paying any consideration to the context of verses, their true meanings interpreted by learned scholars, etc. I think this is a double standard, because when some non-Muslim do the same thing with certain verses, we all protest, but when it comes in favor of the Quran, fewer Muslims would protest that, and mostly, those who would protest and disagree are the learned wise scholars who knows that not everything in the Quran can be compared to recent discoveries for instance, but at the same time, they do believe that the Quran is a miracle, and it contains miracle. It's not just a tradition, but it's a living miracle for all human beings till the last day of this earth.

I hope i made myself clear here.

 

[TashaN]

No maybe about it – they are flat out wrong and you should not be defending their arguments since they reflect badly on all Muslims, making them seem like a shower of scientifically illiterate illogical muppets.


When such discussions ensue and not one single Muslim will be a voice of common sense then I have to reject the above. Are you going to be such a voice of common sense or are you going to engage in vague pointless apologetics here?

I didn't read the entire thread, so i don't know all the things you been discussing about here. I just noticed the Big Bang theory issue and i didn't read the things you discussed before that.

A genuine question for you TashaN – how can those Muslims make the above claim when, as this and other threads show, when those same Muslims are utterly ignorant/misinformed about those recent discoveries? How can a Muslims claim the koran predicted the big bang theory despite knowing virtually next-to-nothing about it?

Because all what those Muslims you have seen do is to do a copy and paste job, but the real thing been written by real Muslim scholars, mostly in the West.

Maybe you should read the thread before commenting upon it? Just a suggestion.

Come on, all these pages? i really don't have the time for that, and all what i was ready to discuss about was the idea itself, instead of going into details about certain miracles, etc.

 

[themadhair]

I do believe that some verses speak about things which couldn't have been known at that time without the current technology…

Aside from the above which I strongly disagreeing with, the rest of your post represents the most coherent, logical and rational thing said by a Muslim on this thread.

Kudos.

 

[themadhair]

Because all what those Muslims you have seen do is to do a copy and paste job, but the real thing been written by real Muslim scholars, mostly in the West.

But those copy&pasted claims can be analysed and refuted. Three examples I recall that have sprung up:

1) Claiming the koran predicted embryology despite this knowledge being available to the Greeks five centuries before the koran was written.

2) Claiming the koran predicts that mountains prevent the earth from shaking despite this claim being false. I encourage you to read some of the lunacy which was used to try and defend this claim. It is simply madness.

3) Claiming the koran predicts the big bang when the koran verse is both extremely vague and actually an inaccurate description of big bang theory.

Making the above claims in the name of Islam must surely be insulting to the Muslim people since it makes them seem like uneducated morons. Question is why have no Muslims on this forum stepped in to mention this.

 

[TashaN]

Aside from the above which I strongly disagreeing with, the rest of your post represents the most coherent, logical and rational thing said by a Muslim on this thread.

Kudos.

Oh my, should i be flattered for the words you said about my post?

So you strongly disagree with that part you have quoted because?

But those copy&pasted claims can be analysed and refuted.

Unless ....

those same Muslims are utterly ignorant/misinformed about those recent discoveries? How can a Muslims claim the koran predicted the big bang theory despite knowing virtually next-to-nothing about it?

That's why you should direct your comments to either scholars or those posters who are in the field or at least who knows well about these issues.

Three examples I recall that have sprung up:

1) Claiming the koran predicted embryology despite this knowledge being available to the Greeks five centuries before the koran was written.

2) Claiming the koran predicts that mountains prevent the earth from shaking despite this claim being false. I encourage you to read some of the lunacy which was used to try and defend this claim. It is simply madness.

3) Claiming the koran predicts the big bang when the koran verse is both extremely vague and actually an inaccurate description of big bang theory.

Hmmm, i don't believe they meant to say it in this exact way. Anyhow, some Muslims take everything so literally without putting so much thoughts on it, so they become like a bad lawyer who failed to win a right case. These things might have something to do with some verses in the Quran or an influence of some early learned Muslim scholars who might have developed a certain branch of knowledge, but it might has been presented in an insuffient manner, or been explained in a wrong or incomplete way.

Making the above claims in the name of Islam must surely be insulting to the Muslim people since it makes them seem like uneducated morons. Question is why have no Muslims on this forum stepped in to mention this.

Because the case might be true sometimes, but the one who deliver the message might fail to let it get across in a smooth and rational way.

 

[YmirGF]

Thank you for a somewhat rational slant on all this, TashaN. As themadhair stated, at least we know that all Muslims are not quite so intellectually impoverished to believe this rubbish.

It's not just a tradition, but it's a living miracle for all human beings till the last day of this earth.

I do take exception to this, TashaN for the following reasons.

1. I simply do not accept that the Qur'an is a miracle in the first place.
2. The quality of writing exhibited in the Qur'an is too inferior to be considered worthy of being written by a god, let alone, God Almighty.
3. The "Noble" Qur'an is not "for me" regardless of what you, or it, would have us believe, so it is a stretch to claim that it is "for all human" animals.
4. I contemptuously reject the concept of "Judgment Day" and believe that adherents to the concept, Christians and Muslims alike, are seriously delusional.

I hope i made myself clear here.

Certainly clear enough.

 

[TashaN]

Thank you for a somewhat rational slant on all this, TashaN. As themadhair stated, at least we know that all Muslims are not quite so intellectually impoverished to believe this rubbish.

I do take exception to this, TashaN for the following reasons.

1. I simply do not accept that the Qur'an is a miracle in the first place.
2. The quality of writing exhibited in the Qur'an is too inferior to be considered worthy of being written by a god, let alone, God Almighty.
3. The "Noble" Qur'an is not "for me" regardless of what you, or it, would have us believe, so it is a stretch to claim that it is "for all human" animals.
4. I contemptuously reject the concept of "Judgment Day" and believe that adherents to the concept, Christians and Muslims alike, are seriously delusional.

:biglaugh:

Excuse me, but who are you again?

Are you sort of scholar in the linguistic studies and especially in Arabic, which allowed you to reach to the conclusion that it was inferior?!

And you keep saying "I" "I" "I. Dear YmirGF, you have the right to believe whatever you want but don't start throwing these beliefs at me as if they were facts.

Wikipedia is hardly a reliable source, but it's somehow acceptable to alot of people, so here we go:

Literary structure

The Qur’an's message is conveyed through the use of various literary structures and devices. In the original Arabic, the chapters and verses employ phonetic and thematic structures that assist the audience's efforts to recall the message of the text. There is consensus among Arab scholars to use the Qur’an as a standard by which other Arabic literature should be measured. Muslims assert (in accordance with the Qur’an itself) that the Qur’anic content and style is inimitable.[37]


Richard Gottheil and Siegmund Fränkel in the Jewish Encyclopedia write that the oldest portions of the Qur’an reflect significant excitement in their language, through short and abrupt sentences and sudden transitions. The Qur’an nonetheless carefully maintains the rhymed form, like the oracles. Some later portions also preserve this form but also in a style where the movement is calm and the style expository.[38]


Michael Sells, citing the work of the critic Norman O. Brown, acknowledges Brown's observation that the seeming "disorganization" of Qur’anic literary expression — its "scattered or fragmented mode of composition," in Sells's phrase — is in fact a literary device capable of delivering "profound effects — as if the intensity of the prophetic message were shattering the vehicle of human language in which it was being communicated."[39][40] Sells also addresses the much-discussed "repetitiveness" of the Qur’an, seeing this, too, as a literary device.

Qur'an - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also please read:

E H Palmer, as early as 1880, recognized the unique style of the Qur'an. But he seem to have been wavering between two thoughts. He writes in the Introduction to his translation of the Qur'an:

That the best of Arab writers has never succeeded in producing anything equal in merit to the Qur'an itself is not surprising. In the first place, they have agreed before-hand that it is unapproachable, and they have adopted its style as the perfect standard; any deviation from it therefore must of necessity be a defect. Again, with them this style is not spontaneous as with Muhammad and his contemporaries, but is as artificial as though Englishmen should still continue to follow Chaucer as their model, in spite of the changes which their language has undergone. With the Prophet, the style was natural, and the words were those in every-day ordinary life, while with the later Arabic authors the style is imitative and the ancient words are introduced as a literary embellishment. The natural consequence is that their attempts look laboured and unreal by the side of his impromptu and forcible eloquence.[7]
​

The famous Arabist from University of Oxford, Hamilton Gibb was open upon about the style of the Qur'an. In his words:

...the Meccans still demanded of him a miracle, and with remarkable boldness and self confidence Mohammad appealed as a supreme confirmation of his mission to the Koran itself. Like all Arabs they were the connoisseurs of language and rhetoric. Well, then if the Koran were his own composition other men could rival it. Let them produce ten verses like it. If they could not (and it is obvious that they could not), then let them accept the Koran as an outstanding evident miracle.[8]
​

And in some other place, talking about the Prophet(P) and the Qur'an, he states:

Though, to be sure, the question of the literary merit is one not to be judged on a priori grounds but in relation to the genius of Arabic language; and no man in fifteen hundred years has ever played on that deep-toned instrument with such power, such boldness, and such range of emotional effect as Mohammad did.[9]
As a literary monument the Koran thus stands by itself, a production unique to the Arabic literature, having neither forerunners nor successors in its own idiom. Muslims of all ages are united in proclaiming the inimitability not only of its contents but also of its style..... and in forcing the High Arabic idiom into the expression of new ranges of thought the Koran develops a bold and strikingly effective rhetorical prose in which all the resources of syntactical modulation are exploited with great freedom and originality.[10]
​

On the influence of the Qur'an on Arabic literature Gibb says:

The influence of the Koran on the development of Arabic Literature has been incalculable, and exerted in many directions. Its ideas, its language, its rhymes pervade all subsequent literary works in greater or lesser measure. Its specific linguistic features were not emulated, either in the chancery prose of the next century or in the later prose writings, but it was at least partly due to the flexibility imparted by the Koran to the High Arabic idiom that the former could be so rapidly developed and adjusted to the new needs of the imperial government and an expanding society.[11]
​

As the Qur'an itself says:

And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true. But if ye cannot- and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones,- which is prepared for those who reject Faith. (Qur'an 2:23-24)
​

Lastly, the beautiful style of the Qur'an is admired even by the Arab Christians:

The Quran is one of the world's classics which cannot be translated without grave loss. It has a rhythm of peculiar beauty and a cadence that charms the ear. Many Christian Arabs speak of its style with warm admiration, and most Arabists acknowledge its excellence. When it is read aloud or recited it has an almost hypnotic effect that makes the listener indifferent to its sometimes strange syntax and its sometimes, to us, repellent content. It is this quality it possesses of silencing criticism by the sweet music of its language that has given birth to the dogma of its inimitability; indeed it may be affirmed that within the literature of the Arabs, wide and fecund as it is both in poetry and in elevated prose, there is nothing to compare with it.[12]
​

What Is The Challenge Of The Qur'an With Respect To Arabic Prose & Poetry?

 

[themadhair]

That's why you should direct your comments to either scholars or those posters who are in the field or at least who knows well about these issues.

But TashaN, to claim that the koran contained modern scientific knowledge when that same modern scientific knowledge was not discovered by using the koran debunks that claim on its face.
The fact that no peer-reviewed science ever originated from using the koran speaks volumes.

Why are you seemingly defending these farcical claims?

Anyhow, some Muslims take everything so literally without putting so much thoughts on it, so they become like a bad lawyer who failed to win a right case.

You are making the dangerous assumption that these Muslims had a right case to begin with.

Because the case might be true sometimes, but the one who deliver the message might fail to let it get across in a smooth and rational way.

In this case those Muslims were simply flat out wrong. Why are you hesitant to see that?

 

[TashaN]

I'll go have some sleep. See ya!

 

[McBell]

you have the right to believe whatever you want but don't start throwing these beliefs at me as if they were facts.

Is this not a two way street?

 

[YmirGF]

Excuse me, but who are you again?

I think you know very well that I am Paul. I didn't realize that this was open to any kind of confusion, lol.

Are you sort of scholar in the linguistic studies and especially in Arabic, which allowed you to reach to the conclusion that it was inferior?

You misunderstand me, dearest TarshaN. I didn't say that it was without literary merit. In my view, and if only in my view, it falls far short of being what I would personally expect a god to write. It does meet the criteria for being what could be written by a man however. A small, but somewhat important difference, my friend. Frankly, I am unaware of any existing linguists who are experts on what a god would write, so their sentiments have no meaning to me beyond their face value.

And you keep saying "I" "I" "I. Dear YmirGF, you have the right to believe whatever you want but don't start throwing these beliefs at me as if they were facts.

To me, they are facts, TashaN. I simply resent having myself included in something I will have no part of and will never condone.

Again... I didn't say it had no literary merit, TashaN. Do try to keep up. :flirt:

 

[Shahzad]

If one needs to know Arabic to appreciate the "divine" literary quality of the Quran (because in translation it isn't very good) then it's not a miracle for all people. However if the literary superiority of the Quran over all other texts is, as the Muslims believe, like the superiority of Allah over his creation, then surely some of it's superiority ought to spill over into translation. There are many books which retain much of their quality in translation, Nietzche, Dostoyevksy, the Iliad, the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita , surely the Quran ought to be better than all of these.

 

[alwayswondering]

If one needs to know Arabic to appreciate the "divine" literary quality of the Quran (because in translation it isn't very good) then it's not a miracle for all people. However if the literary superiority of the Quran over all other texts is, as the Muslims believe, like the superiority of Allah over his creation, then surely some of it's superiority ought to spill over into translation. There are many books which retain much of their quality in translation, Nietzche, Dostoyevksy, the Iliad, the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita , surely the Quran ought to be better than all of these.

Not only does one need to know understand Arabic, but one also has to know the formal Arabic in which it is written, as well as understand the meaning of those specific words in the time they were written.

Language - the meaning of language - changes over time.

 

[alwayswondering]

3. The "Noble" Qur'an is not "for me" regardless of what you, or it, would have us believe, so it is a stretch to claim that it is "for all human" animals.

If the Qu'ran really is "for all human," and if everything really is "Insh2lah" (God's will), why isn't Islam the ONLY religion?