JMorris
Democratic Socialist
uhhh.......prove it!
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Quran is free of errors
- Thread starter Zhakir
- Start date
uhhh.......prove it!
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
But you can't. If i reject its because i don't BELIEVE. If you reject what i do for a job you're being intillectually dishonest.
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
i dont BELIEVE in geology (that is what you do right?):sarcastic
rocks are made of cheese
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
Ok then don't (i'm a trainee Geotechnical engineer, so basically geology)
If you're going to be a non-believer never enter a building more than a story high for your own safety. Can't trust those damn engineers
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
Ok then don't (i'm a trainee Geotechnical engineer, so basically geology)
i live in a tree!:areyoucra trees are made of stone...........
and people are made of clay:yes:
riverfox
A slave of Allah (swt)
Who said i do this?
I'm asking do you believe that the 7th century people could know that the universe was in a gaseous state?
No? then how did they know this?
Then He turned to the heavens, and it was in a gaseous state. And said to it, and the earth; “Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly.” They said, “We come willingly.”
41-Elucidated, 11
YimrGF only said that the earth wasn't there,but they were there existed in a diferent state.
Last edited:
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
ive heard many a muslim say that cannot really understand the quran without reading it in its original Arabic. and given that most of us dont know Arabic, how are we to know thats an actual true translation? and not something you or someone else simply made up?
i seriously doubt thats an accurate translation. was "gaseous" a reguarly used word in 7th century Arabia?
i have found this thread EXTREMELY entertaining, watching Muslims trying desperately to force in scientific facts into vague quranic quotes.
rather than prove anything, you've only made yourselves look silly. but please, continue, i like a good laugh.
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
The website you quoted on the previous page is a scientists worst nightmare. If you endorse this then you must reject the work i do because it is against the science you found on that website. In this thread, or one similiar to it, i went trough a few of the articles and highlighted some errors.
Why is it that Muslims are not credited with this scientific work when they already knew it existed? Why did muslims wait for the west to make these discoveries before putting their hand up to take credit?
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
You might want to reread what I actually said instead of applying your own misunderstanding to my points, son. I specifically said that Muhammad probably didn't know what a gaseous state was and so we can pretty well throw that interpretation out the window.
That aside, perhaps you could explain a mystery to me. Why is it that Muslims seem to be falling all over themselves to prove that the science created, researched and proven by infidels or non-believers exists in your holy book? If these so-called "scientific miracles" (which is an oxymoron) truly exist in the Qur'an, why is it that Muslim scientists are not the world leaders in virtually all areas of science, especially given the alleged fact that there are 1.5 billion Muslims on the planet. Why is it that there are less Muslim scientists per capita than in any other religious group?
Last edited:
riverfox
A slave of Allah (swt)
Qur'an can be understood in other languages,we give the translation if you think it's not the correct one that's not the Qur'an's problem,go and translate your own way.
ثم إستوى إلى السماء وهي دخان
you'll find that "Dukhan" means smoke,vapor and gaseous matter
You should have some knowledge of the history of science first. What ever you say about Muslims and their role in science is totally wrong.
Darkendless,refer to this please
Astronomy in medieval Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of Muslim astronomers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_science#Earth_sciences
Every one
Science in medieval Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of Muslim scientists - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Another thing that,YimrGF's comment isn't supporting his claims on Qur'an miracles,telling lies about the role of Muslims in science,even if we agree with that for the sake of argument,that Doesn't disprove the miracles of the Qur'an in anyway,they remain miracles no matter what role Muslims have in science,because no one could know any of these facts in the 7th century.
They do,and this means that it's the word of God (swt).
Last edited:
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Oh good grief.So what you are telling us is that the term "dukhan" is fairly vague.
The point is that Muslims have been conspicuously absent from the scientific realms for several centuries. You all did a good job as caretakers of knowledge and made significant contributions several hundred years ago. What has Islam done for science lately?
Aren't you the fellow who said that Wikipedia is not a reliable source not too long ago?
All one has to do is read the various passages to understand how intellectually barren the assertion of scientific miracles is in relation to the vague wording of the particular passages. Look, I realize that as a Muslim you cannot admit this, because it goes against everything you believe, but the simple fact is that these so-called miracles exist in the minds of Muslims and modern science, as a whole remains decidedly unimpressed with these claims.
For the most part, Muslims worked with the knowledge aquired from other sources and took that knowledge to new heights. The problem is that Muslims have contributed very little to science, in general, for nearly 500 years.
If you so wish it. You are certainly welcome to believe whatever helps you to sleep at night. The simple fact is if you took these claims to any recognized experts in the fields they would likely just laugh you out of the room.
To borrow a line from themadhair, "Have you ever heard of Galen?"
No actually it doesn't prove a thing, but you are welcome to believe whatever you like. :flirt:
Last edited:
riverfox
A slave of Allah (swt)
You failed to prove your claims about the Muslims' major role in science,more lying will not help you
Every one can refer to these:
Every one can refer to these:
- Campbell, Donald (2001). Arabian Medicine and Its Influence on the Middle Ages. Routledge. (Reprint of the London, 1926 edition). ISBN 0415231884.
- d'Alverny, Marie-Thérèse. "Translations and Translators", in Robert L. Benson and Giles Constable, eds., Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, p. 421-462. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Pr., 1982.
- Eglash, Ron (1999), African Fractals: Modern Computing and Indigenous Design, Rutgers University Press, ISBN 0-8135-2614-0
- Gaudiosi, Monica M. (April 1988), "The Influence of the Islamic Law of Waqf on the Development of the Trust in England: The Case of Merton College", University of Pennsylvania Law Review 136 (4): 1231-1261
- Graham, Mark (2006). How Islam Created the Modern World. Amana Publication. ISBN 1-59008-043-2.
- Hobson, John M. (2004). The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521547245.
- Hudson, A. (2003), Equity and Trusts (3rd ed.), Cavendish Publishing, ISBN 1-85941-729-9
- Huff, Toby E. (2003), The Rise of Early Modern Science: Islam, China, and the West, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0521529948
- Joseph, George G. (2000). The Crest of the Peacock. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691006598.
- Katz, Victor J. (1998). A History of Mathematics: An Introduction. Addison Wesley. ISBN 0321016181.
- Levere, Trevor Harvey (2001). Transforming Matter: A History of Chemistry from Alchemy to the Buckyball. Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-6610-3.
- Mintz, Sidney W. (1986). Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History (Reprint ed.). Penguin (Non-Classics). ISBN 978-0140092332.
- Morelon, Régis & Roshdi Rashed (1996), Encyclopedia of the History of Arabic Science, vol. 3, Routledge, ISBN 0415124107
- Phillips, William D.; Carla Rahn Phillips, Jr. Phillips (1992). The Worlds of Christopher Columbus. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 052144652X.
- Saliba, George (1994), A History of Arabic Astronomy: Planetary Theories During the Golden Age of Islam, New York University Press, ISBN 0814780237
- Turner, Howard R. (1997), Science in Medieval Islam: An Illustrated Introduction, University of Texas Press, ISBN 0292781490
themadhair
Well-Known Member
Try actually reading the posts you respond to. Seriously.
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
Riverfox sir, you failed to answer an important question:
Why are Muslims only making a big song and dance out of this now. Why is it, that the miracles of a "scientific" Quran not important when geologists were presenting theories of the earth's structure? Couldn;t muslims have said at the time, "we already know, the Quran says >this<." Why is it now that muslims are attempting to gain some credit for their work? It strikes me as strange that scholars have waited until the last 100 years to start claiming science out of the Quran. Where were these scholars (reading the same book) in the 1700's to challenge European scientists who proposed incorrect or incomplete theories?
Why are Muslims only making a big song and dance out of this now. Why is it, that the miracles of a "scientific" Quran not important when geologists were presenting theories of the earth's structure? Couldn;t muslims have said at the time, "we already know, the Quran says >this<." Why is it now that muslims are attempting to gain some credit for their work? It strikes me as strange that scholars have waited until the last 100 years to start claiming science out of the Quran. Where were these scholars (reading the same book) in the 1700's to challenge European scientists who proposed incorrect or incomplete theories?
gnostic
The Lost One
ymirGF said:
I don't think the Muslims understand that people of science don't believe in "miracle".
Miracle is phenomena that defy the law of nature, ie it's supernatural.
Scientific discovery is attempt to understand the law of nature, validating the phenomena with evidences, logic and mathematics.
Miracles don't required evidences, logic or mathematics. All it require is someone ignorant and gullible to believe in something that they don't understand, and take it on blind faith. That's the nature of a miracle. It required no understanding at all. As long as you believe in the miracle.
The scientists...or at least those who believe in hard science...don't take what they witness on its face value. It required thorough investigation: the search for evidences to support what has been found, test repeatedly, being able to observe or measure the test, and calculate it.
Last edited:
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I agree aGnostic, that is why I say that so-called "scientific miracles" is an oxymoron.
McBell
Unbound
OH.
I though the term was used for when you get a result that is especially beneficial but completely unexpected.
Ghostaka
Active Member
Simple man, people nowadays associate proof with science. Therefore it makes sense to refer to specific verses that have been revealed. This is also one of the best ways to answer a question you people like to ask "Where's your proof?" in relation to the Quran's authenticity. Why can't you understand that referring to a scientific proof 1400+ years ago (that would have been impossible to discover at that time) is clear evidence. The only thing you are left to utter is ... "But, that's not good enough":
And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad PBUH), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful. {The Holy Quran 2:23}
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. {The Holy Quran 2:23-24}
And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it [i.e. the Taurat (Torah), and the Injeel (Gospel), etc.], and a full explanation of the Book (i.e. laws and orders, etc, decreed for mankind) - wherein there is no doubt from the the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns,and all that exists).
Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it?" Say: "Bring then a surah (chapter) like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides Allah, if you are truthful!" {The Holy Qur'an 10:37-38}
Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it (this Qur'an)?" Nay! They believe not! Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Qur'an) if they are truthful. {The Holy Quran 52:33-34}
In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day, there are Signs for people of intelligence: those who remember Allah standing, sitting and lying on their sides, and reflect on the creation of the heavens and the earth: "Our Lord, You did not create this for nothing. Glory be to You! So guard us from the punishment of the Fire." {The Holy Quran 3: 190-191}
Lol, God revealed the answers to your questions 100s of decades before you or I were even born.
Peace be upon you.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
You have misunderstood YmirGF's post.
He said that Muslim scientists have done a great job in science for several centuries, but have no new discoveries in the last several centuries....which is true.
The books you have supplied has concentrated on past discoveries, not the last few centuries. Muslims contributions to science have been dismal from 1600 to today. Their contributions before 1600 is valuable but nothing of worth afterward. And the modern science begins around the 19th century, and early modern science is around the Renaissance to the 19th century.
And the 2nd thing is that M-U-S-L-I-M-S have made those discoveries in science, not the Q-U-R'A-N. The Qur'an is not science book, and shouldn't be treated as one. As a matter of science, the Qur'an is completely worthless. By giving credits to silly unscientific holy book instead of Muslim scientists, is to discredit the scientific findings of those scientists.
Last edited:
McBell
Unbound
So tell me, did you rewrite all of history or just the parts you do not like?