Quran Scientific Miracles.

[Clara Tea]

As your source admits (but downplays) several philosophers had described a heliocentric system centuries before the Quran was written, so any mention of heliocentricity in the Quran could not be claimed to be miraculous. However, the Quran describes a geocentric system. It claims that night and day are caused by the sun and moon moving in their orbits (21:33), when it is actually because of the rotation of the earth. The moon has nothing to do with night and day

No there aren't.

This is just dishonest apologetics. The Quran does not say that. It says "And the sun runs unto a fixed resting-place". The word for "runs" (tajrī) is used many times in the Quran to describe the flowing of rivers and sailing of boats, etc. It is describing a sun moving along a path. This is confirmed in 13:1221:33 and 31:29.

There is no suggestion of axial rotation.

But they don't. Such an observation implies a geocentric system. They only appear to move because of the rotation of the earth. They are fixed points relative to earth's position (which is why astronavigation works) And there is only one universe (heaven) containing the stars we see.

Even disingenuous apologetics deliberately designed to mask the errors in the Quran are wrong!

Scientists May Have Discovered How the Ancient Greeks' 'First Computer' Tracked the Cosmos | Smart News | Smithsonian Magazine

In 1901, found on an ancient sunken Roman ship, the Antikythera mechanism is thought to be a mechanical computer to compute orbits of planets, and thought to have been invented by Hipparchos (lived 190 BC to 120 BC). The website above says that it combined Babylonian astronomy, Plato's math, and Greek astronomical theories in 30 bronze gears, and 82 fragments. Apparently it placed the earth at the center of the universe. In 2006, Freeth (University College, London) noticed a "user guide" inscription. It predicted phases of the moon

 

[Clara Tea]

If there were no mountains at all the earth would shake less because the main forces that caused mountains to appear also cause earthquakes.

So no mountains would require a reduction in the forces that causes mountains to appear and thus a reduction in the forces that cause earthquakes.

Lets also consider the newly discovered harmonic link between moons, planets, and the sun. That exerts gravitational pressure which might influence quakes.

 

[Clara Tea]

Yeah, not so much. You're referring to verse 78:7, but you completely defeat your own argument by doing so, A peg is, by definition, a foreign material such as wood or steel that is imported and driven into the ground to secure a tent or blanket.

Mountains are not that. They are comprised of the material that you claim is being secured. Verses 21:31 and 15:19 restate Allah's error by saying, "We have set on the earth mountains", thereby clearly implying they are imported rather than upheaved. The only miracle is that people can be made to believe that which is so easily debunked.

What about Mt. Lassen and Mt. Shasta....volcanoes. They were not pushed up, but they erupted up.

 

[sayak83]

If no mountains, sure no earthquakes, but no land either, but just water everywhere. He's saying if we have the land now and move mountains off, it would be severe constant earthquakes.

No. He is saying if one removes mountains, the mass imbalance that this removal causes will result in earthquakes and volcanism.
But this will happen if you remove any massive object from earth....plateaus, plains, ocean basin whatever. The mass imbalance is what matters. Mountains is irrelevant in this context.
Next it is wrong to say there would be no land without plate tectonics. What will happen is that continents will not move and collide and create mountains etc. Cratons will still form and there will be land.
Anyways, in no case here are mountains acting to damp earthquakes.

 

[KWED]

Scientists May Have Discovered How the Ancient Greeks' 'First Computer' Tracked the Cosmos | Smart News | Smithsonian Magazine

In 1901, found on an ancient sunken Roman ship, the Antikythera mechanism is thought to be a mechanical computer to compute orbits of planets, and thought to have been invented by Hipparchos (lived 190 BC to 120 BC). The website above says that it combined Babylonian astronomy, Plato's math, and Greek astronomical theories in 30 bronze gears, and 82 fragments. Apparently it placed the earth at the center of the universe. In 2006, Freeth (University College, London) noticed a "user guide" inscription. It predicted phases of the moon

Indeed, and there are many more such examples. The Eastern Mediterranean & Middle East region was a hotbed of philosophical, mathematical and scientific enquiry for a thousand years before the Quran was written, yet the "scientific miracle" proponents would have their audience believe that no one knew anything about anything - their favourite phrase being "Only discovered recently by western science".

 

[viole]

There would be a lot more shaking without mountains.

Oh yes, we noticed that since we moved to Switzerland. My husband could hardly shave without risking to cut his throat before.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

If no mountains at all, would earth shake a lot more? IT's actually very simple. This is a fact it got right.

Why should it?

And by the way, The earth still shakes sometimes. Quite badly. Does that mean God was sloppy in computing what is really needed for stability? Another instance of SD, maybe?

Ciao

- viole

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Read whole thing dude.

You mean, the part where you need to invoke magic to win the argument?




If earth's mountains were magically instantly removed, there would be immediate repercussions

 

[sayak83]

Earthquakes greater than magnitude 5, from 2000 to 2008. Bands of earthquakes mark tectonic plates. Narrow bands with shallow earthquakes (marked in red) indicate transform boundaries or mid-ocean ridge divergent boundaries. Wider bands with earthquakes at a range of depths are subduction zones. Wide bands of scattered earthquakes mark continent-continent convergent margins (e.g., between the Indian and Eurasian plates), or continental rift zones (e.g., in eastern Africa). Source: Lisa Christiansen, Caltech Tectonics Observatory (2008)

I wonder where the mountains are located in this map? Which regions are regions which are old flat lands (cratons) devoid of mountains here?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You are avoiding my actual argument.
The Quran uses "tajrī" to describe the movement of the sun. That word refers to a linear movement along a path. The "to", "unto" "towards" is how several bilingually fluent, Islamic scholars translate "limus'taqarrin". (So yes, I have consulted Arabic speakers. Several experts in the Quran)
Additionally, there are several other passages that describe the sun moving "in an orbit" etc. Muhammad explicitly confirms this in sahih hadith.
There is nothing in the Quran that suggests a heliocentric system and much that suggests a geocentric one.
Why are you not addressing all this rather than focussing on a straw man? (Rhetorical question )

The issue is of translation.
The word tajri, means it is moving. But, it does not give any info if this movement is rotational or linear. It can mean either.
The fact is, the literal translation does not say, it moves to its place. It says it is moving in its fixed place. I think because the translators could not make sense of moving in its place, then they imagined it means, it is moving to its place.
I agree, a more accurate word would have been, the Sun rotates around its axis. But, I am not sure if 1400 years ago, the Arabic language had that many accurate and detail words for a precise description.
At the end it is upto each person to interpret it. If you think when the Author says, the sun is moving to its place, then fine. But I suggest, you think why then He did not say "to"?
I don't recall Quran has any verse that actually says the sun has an orbit. People read more than what it says. After all Quran is not a science book, and the intention of its Author was not to teach science, so, I wouldn't expect to see a detailed scientific info in it. I have no problem with believing it to be from God though.

 

[danieldemol]

The word tajri, means it is moving. But, it does not give any info if this movement is rotational or linear

Thank you for your admission, but Abdul-Baha states, "One of them is “The sun moves in a fixed place,” which shows the fixity of the sun, and its movement around an axis."

Movement around an axis constitutes rotation, and as you have correctly stated, the verse does not say it was rotational.

Is Abdul-Baha guilty of telling us that which is not true

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Thank you for your admission, but Abdul-Baha states, "One of them is “The sun moves in a fixed place,” which shows the fixity of the sun, and its movement around an axis."

Movement around an axis constitutes rotation, and as you have correctly stated, the verse does not say it was rotational.

Is Abdul-Baha guilty of telling us that which is not true

I believe Abdulbaha gave His honest and sincere interpretation and explanation of the verse. If He was here, and we told Him, are you guilty, I think He would have said "you know I did not study the Quran, maybe I made a mistake"

 

[stevecanuck]

What about Mt. Lassen and Mt. Shasta....volcanoes. They were not pushed up, but they erupted up.

Seriously?

First, mountains, not volcanoes, were the subject.

Second, volcanoes are still NOT a foreign material imported for the purpose of 'setting them on the land'.

If that's your best, perhaps just reading and learning would serve you better.

 

[Daniel Nicholson]

Wouldn't it be more impressive if the Qur'an gave humans new information or insight into anything scientific?

Science does all the leg work making new discoveries and then religion says "this proves God exists because the discovery was prophesied with this obscure ambiguous verse"

I have yet to see evidence of scientific insights in the Qur'an, but if you show me one I can give you 50 scientific blunders in the text, not least of which the assumption that the earth is flat!

 

[Suave]

I have been hearing a lot of talk about the Quran containing specific scientific knowledge that could not possibly have been known at the time it was written, and that has only recently been confirmed by modern science.

Could anyone present a couple of best examples of these science miracles so we can see if they are what they claim to be?
Also, could you show where Islamic scholars have revealed this knowledge before science did?
Thanks

@MyM

Sunrise to sundown fasting as prescribed by the Quran for all healthy Muslims could not be followed by anybody in polar regions during summer demonstrates the Koran's lack of understanding there is perpetual daylight in Artic regions during summer.

 

[KWED]

The issue is of translation.

I guess this this is where a random person on the internet claims many bilingually fluent, Islamic scholars have all translated it wrong/didn't understand the Quran, but the lone internet expert can correct them all!

The word tajri, means it is moving. But, it does not give any info if this movement is rotational or linear. It can mean either.

There is no context where the word is used to indicate rotation rather than linear movement. The root word means "to run". Every single use elsewhere in the Quran describes linear movement. The other verses that refer to the sun's movement use words that explicitly describe linear movement.
You simply don't have a leg to stand on here.

It says it is moving in its fixed place.

No it doesn't. That is clearly a mistranslation. Could you link to your source material? Thanks.

I think because the translators could not make sense of moving in its place, then they imagined it means, it is moving to its place.

Ah, so all those expert translations couldn't understand the simple concept of something like a child's spinning top, or a spinning wheel - but you can?

Here are some modern translations.
And the sun runs on its fixed course for a term (appointed).
The sun is running its course to its appointed place.
And the sun runs [on course] toward its stopping point.
And the sun runs to its resting place.

Why do you think every single translator, all fluent in Classical Arabic, most of whom are also Islamic scholars, have all made the same mistake, but only you know the truth? Perhaps you need to consider the possibility that its you who is wrong, not everyone else.

I agree, a more accurate word would have been, the Sun rotates around its axis. But, I am not sure if 1400 years ago, the Arabic language had that many accurate and detail words for a precise description.

They had words that would better describe the concept of rotating round an axis than one which is exclusively used to denote linear movement. Wheel, for starters. I mean, how could you not have seen that?
Also remember that the Quran was not written by Arabs. It was revealed by an infallible, omniscient god. He would have been able to use a combination of words that perfectly described the concept of spinning about an axis.

I don't recall Quran has any verse that actually says the sun has an orbit.

21:33 & 36:40.

People read more than what it says.

Which is ironically, exactly what you are doing here.

After all Quran is not a science book, and the intention of its Author was not to teach science, so, I wouldn't expect to see a detailed scientific info in it.

Indeed. And it doesn't. Or any accurate science info.

I have no problem with believing it to be from God though.

So, what does convince you that it is the work of an omniscient, omnipotent, infallible, most just, merciful and beneficent god, rather than 7th century Arabs?

 

[KWED]

Sunrise to sundown fasting as prescribed by the Quran for all healthy Muslims could not be followed by anybody in polar regions during summer demonstrates the Koran's lack of understanding there is perpetual daylight in Artic regions during summer.

Indeed. Written by 7th century Arabs, for 7th century Arabs.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I guess this this is where a random person on the internet claims many bilingually fluent, Islamic scholars have all translated it wrong/didn't understand the Quran, but the lone internet expert can correct them all!

There is no context where the word is used to indicate rotation rather than linear movement. The root word means "to run". Every single use elsewhere in the Quran describes linear movement. The other verses that refer to the sun's movement use words that explicitly describe linear movement.
You simply don't have a leg to stand on here.

No it doesn't. That is clearly a mistranslation. Could you link to your source material? Thanks.

Ah, so all those expert translations couldn't understand the simple concept of something like a child's spinning top, or a spinning wheel - but you can?

Here are some modern translations.
And the sun runs on its fixed course for a term (appointed).
The sun is running its course to its appointed place.
And the sun runs [on course] toward its stopping point.
And the sun runs to its resting place.

Why do you think every single translator, all fluent in Classical Arabic, most of whom are also Islamic scholars, have all made the same mistake, but only you know the truth? Perhaps you need to consider the possibility that its you who is wrong, not everyone else.

They had words that would better describe the concept of rotating round an axis than one which is exclusively used to denote linear movement. Wheel, for starters. I mean, how could you not have seen that?
Also remember that the Quran was not written by Arabs. It was revealed by an infallible, omniscient god. He would have been able to use a combination of words that perfectly described the concept of spinning about an axis.

21:33 & 36:40.

Which is ironically, exactly what you are doing here.

Indeed. And it doesn't. Or any accurate science info.

The Tajri, in other verses implies a linear movement, because the word after it.

For example, verse 9:89

أَعَدَّ ٱللَّهُ لَهُمْ جَنَّتٍۢ تَجْرِى مِن تَحْتِهَا ٱلْأَنْهَرُ خَلِدِينَ فِيهَا ۚ ذَلِكَ ٱلْفَوْزُ ٱلْعَظِيمُ

The word "min" (من) means "from" or "through"


"God has prepared Gardens with rivers flowing through them. There, they will remain eternally. This is the ultimate victory!"

Or another example, verse 31:29


لَمْ تَرَ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُولِجُ ٱلَّيْلَ فِى ٱلنَّهَارِ وَيُولِجُ ٱلنَّهَارَ فِى ٱلَّيْلِ وَسَخَّرَ ٱلشَّمْسَ وَٱلْقَمَرَ كُلٌّۭ يَجْرِىٓ إِلَىٰٓ أَجَلٍۢ مُّسَمًّۭى وَأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ خَبِيرٌۭ


"Hast thou not seen how Allah causeth the night to pass into the day and causeth the day to pass into the night, and hath subdued the sun and the moon (to do their work), each running unto an appointed term; and that Allah is Informed of what ye do"

Here the word after yajri, is (الى) ( ilaa), meaning unto, or towards.

So these translations are correct literally. The translation corresponding word to word.

But in verse 36:38, there is no (ilaa), meaning (unto, to, towards).
So, to translate it as (moves to) is incorrect. Its correct translation would be it moves in its own fixed place.

Because the word after Tajri, is لمستقر لها، it means the sun has its own fixed place, and in this fixed place, moves.

It is not like, impossible that almost all English translations could be incorrect in this case.

So, what does convince you that it is the work of an omniscient, omnipotent, infallible, most just, merciful and beneficent god, rather than 7th century Arabs?

I am a Bahai, and my Faith confirms Quran as a precious Revelation.

 

[KWED]

"Hast thou not seen how Allah causeth the night to pass into the day and causeth the day to pass into the night, and hath subdued the sun and the moon (to do their work), each running unto an appointed term; and that Allah is Informed of what ye do"

So you accept that the Quran describes the sun as moving in a linear manner.

It is not like, impossible that almost all English translations could be incorrect in this case.

No, but it is extremely unlikely that many fluent, native Arabic speaking Islamic scholars all independently made the same mistake, while some random on the internet holds the truth. Unlikely to the point of being indistinguishable from impossible.
(And don't forget that you have just admitted that they are actually correct)

I am a Bahai, and my Faith confirms Quran as a precious Revelation.

That is mere circular logic.
So, why are you a Baha'i?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

So you accept that the Quran describes the sun as moving in a linear manner.

Each verse is different.

In the example i gave, it means they run unto an appointed term.

This implies each have "an end time".
Not that they literally move, but it means, the sun remains during Day only. And moon remains only for a certain period of time.
It is not describing scientific movement.

No, but it is extremely unlikely that many fluent, native Arabic speaking Islamic scholars all independently made the same mistake, while some random on the internet holds the truth. Unlikely to the point of being indistinguishable from impossible.
(And don't forget that you have just admitted that they are actually correct)

I just explained the reasoning and word to word translation.

That is mere circular logic.
So, why are you a Baha'i?

I am OK to answer why I'm a Bahai, but it would be a topic for another thread. Here you made thread to discuss miracles in Qur'an.