Quran Vs Bible in light of science

[David M]

point no 1) you said , embryology was known to ancient Indian tribes , first of all Hazrat Muhammad (pbuh) never went to that part of world...lol

And there was extensive trade with india and the exchange of ideas, just more ignorance of real history then. lol.

point no 2)those tribes new few basics of embryology out of which many were wrong , and Modern Embryology is developed just recently in last 50-100 years back

Basics that match up with the concepts in the Quran, showing that they were the source for what is in the Quran. Because the Quran does not match modern embryology unless you seriously the meaning of the verses.

this shows pathetic and desperate attempts of atheists , to prove quran wrong

The only pathetic desparation here is yours.

Going to answer the question as to how the Quran can teach that the 7 heavens are the atmosphere and teach that the stars are in the lower heaven?

Either you are wrong about the 7 heavens applying to the atmosphere (which invalidates the argument you made about that "scientific" revelation) or the Quran is wrong about where stars are located. Your choice.

 

[Islam432]

Ah!!! I found the quote.

If the 7 layers of heaven referred to the "7 layers of atmosphere", then why would the lower atmosphere have stars. This is clearly flawed.
.

"And He created seven skies (heavens) in two days, and taught each sky its duties. And He adorned the nearest sky (or: the sky of this world) with lamps (stars)…" (Fussilat 41: 12)

The above verse refers to the fact that God has adorned the closest sky with stars (nowhere it says the seven layers of earth atmosphere) its referring to the sky of our world and there are six other above that

We know that science has not yet been able to determine the boundaries of even the universe. It is therefore not only improbable but impossible to explain this verse in scientific terms. The reason, as should be quite clear, is the limit of our scientific knowledge

 

[Islam432]

Basics that match up with the concepts in the Quran, showing that they were the source for what is in the Quran. Because the Quran does not match modern embryology unless you seriously the meaning of the verses.

thats why Professor Keith Moore and other scientists agreed with Quran

Going to answer the question as to how the Quran can teach that the 7 heavens are the atmosphere and teach that the stars are in the lower heaven?

It's your fault that you dont understand the verses , and try to prove them wrong with your homemade theories..lolz

 

[gnostic]

The above verse refers to the fact that God has adorned the closest sky with stars (nowhere it says the seven layers of earth atmosphere) its referring to the sky of our world and there are six other above that

Did you not state that the 7 heavens refer to the 7 layers of atmosphere in your past posts?

In post 128, you have compared the verse 7 heavens with 7 layers of atmosphere or 7 firmaments (in verse 2:29), but now in verse 41:12 and verses 67:3-5, you don't think it has anything to do with the atmosphere.

Sorry, islam432, but you are changing the rules of interpretation when it does suit your agenda. You are nit-picking with your interpretation.

It is really depends on the translation, whether it uses "nearest sky" or "lower heaven" or "lowest heaven". I don't know which translation you are using.

The following are translations from Yusuf Ali, ok?

It is He Who hath created for you
All things that are on earth;
Moreover His design comprehended the heavens,
For He gave order and perfection
To the seven firmaments;
And of all things
He hath perfect knowledge.

So he completed them
As seven firmaments
In two Days, and He
Assigned to each heaven
Its duty and command.
And We adorned
The lower heaven
With lights, and (provided it)
With guard. Such
Is the Decree of (Him)
The Exalted in Might,
Full of knowledge.

3 He Who created
The seven heavens
One above another:
No want of proportion
Wilt thou see
In the Creation
Of (God) Most Gracious.
So turn thy vision again:
Seest thou any flaw?

5 And We have,
(From of old),
Adorned the lowest heaven
With Lamps, and We
Have made such (Lamps)
(As) missiles to drive
Away the Evil Ones,
And have prepared for them
The Penalty
Of the Blazing Fire.

Notice the big purple bolded words used in Yusuf Ali's translation in 41:12 and 67:5. It used "lower heaven" (41:12) and "lowest heaven" (67:5).

In the Pickthall's translation it used "nether heaven" for verse 41:12 (which is the same as using "lowest heaven") and simply "world heaven" for 67:5 (whatever that mean).

In Palmer's translation, "lower heaven" for both 41:12 and 67:5.

The Rodwell's translation: "lower heaven" for both 41:12 and "lowest heaven" for 67:5, same as the Yusuf Ali's translation.

What translation are you using?

So when you are using "nearest sky" do it has to do with the "lowest heaven" or "lowest firmament". If you do, then you are contradicting yourself.

 

[McBell]

thats why Professor Keith Moore and other scientists agreed with Quran

Nice appeal to authority fallacy.

It's your fault that you dont understand the verses , and try to prove them wrong with your homemade theories..lolz

You are one to talk about "homemade theories"...

 

[AxisMundi]

for God's sake can you keep it shorter , thats why i dont read your complete post you repeat a point in ur post 10 times and again thats the interpretation of the verse what the non-Muslim , i gave you the interpretation of verse which we muslims give , if you agree good enough if not ,

if you really want to know what the verse says pick up a arabic dictionary see the meaning word by word , you'll see what i was trying to say

It's shorter than a lot of the copy/paste junk YOU throw at us.

And we know what you were trying to say, you've merely been caught with your hand in the Apologetic cookie jar.

 

[YmirGF]

Still no response to post #228, which was a followup to post #157.

Not surprising, really.

Why should we bother to consider what the verses REALLY say.

 

[AxisMundi]

its like iam talking to stones, have you posted anything useful in this entire thread??so STFUP

Have you posted anything useful?

No.

I'm literally suprised you even bother posting anymore, considering the number of time you have been proven wrong.

You are simply an embarassment to the Muslim community and Islam in general.

 

[beenie]

this thread has gone from ridiculous to absurd.

luckily have thick skin or I would be embarrassed. Islam432, it has been repeated over and over again that you can't prove the Qur'an right by quoting more from the Qur'an. I'm not sure why you're having so much trouble understanding that.

 

[YmirGF]

this thread has gone from ridiculous to absurd.

luckily have thick skin or I would be embarrassed. Islam432, it has been repeated over and over again that you can't prove the Qur'an right by quoting more from the Qur'an. I'm not sure why you're having so much trouble understanding that.

More to the point, I can't help but notice how selective he is with his translations. He definitely prefers to quote the revisionist variants that are predisposed to support his absurd thinking. One thing I have also noted is that he is happy to explain what some words have come to mean, but isn't terribly interested in what meanings were prevalent during the time of Muhammad... which, of course, trumps anything the revisionists wish to claim.

 

[David M]

The above verse refers to the fact that God has adorned the closest sky with stars (nowhere it says the seven layers of earth atmosphere) its referring to the sky of our world and there are six other above that

You a quite correct, nowhere in the Quran does it mention 7 layers of the atmosphere, it mentions 7 heavens, with the stars being in the lowest.

YOU are the person who claimed that the 7 heavens are the 7 layers of the atmosphere in your posts and that this demonstrated that the Quran contained scientific knowledge.

Good to see that you have realised that you were wrong when you made that claim. Now are you going to admit publicly that this claim was wrong?

 

[AxisMundi]

Apologetics can't keep their fantasies straight either.

 

[cynic2005]

[youtube]ReV0nCuObcs[/youtube]
YouTube - Religulous - Religion taught as science

 

[gnostic]

luckily have thick skin or I would be embarrassed. Islam432, it has been repeated over and over again that you can't prove the Qur'an right by quoting more from the Qur'an. I'm not sure why you're having so much trouble understanding that.

That's the problem with some of these today's Muslims, who tried to use the Qur'an and force meaning into the scripture that are not there. The verse that have been used are so vague that people can freely interpret anyway they want it.

Using the scripture for science wouldn't work because of the very nature of ambiguity of the scriptural texts.

It simply is not science, this thread.

Science is Islam would be those medieval Muslims who made important contribution to science: their minds, their discoveries. I don't think any non-Muslim members here would have problems should supernova66 and islam432 post about these medieval Muslim scientists.

 

[Islam432]

That's the problem with some of these today's Muslims, who tried to use the Qur'an and force meaning into the scripture that are not there. The verse that have been used are so vague that people can freely interpret anyway they want it.

Using the scripture for science wouldn't work because of the very nature of ambiguity of the scriptural texts.

It simply is not science, this thread.

Science is Islam would be those medieval Muslims who made important contribution to science: their minds, their discoveries. I don't think any non-Muslim members here would have problems should supernova66 and islam432 post about these medieval Muslim scientists.

first of all i didn't try Qur'an and force meaning into the scripture

some people claimed that Quran was wrong about

Mountains don't prevent earth from shaking, Quran describes earth as geocentric etc all i was doing was proving them wrong wasn't trying force meaning of scripture , you were the one who asked on first place

 

[Islam432]

Did you not state that the 7 heavens refer to the 7 layers of atmosphere in your past posts?

In post 128, you have compared the verse 7 heavens with 7 layers of atmosphere or 7 firmaments (in verse 2:29), but now in verse 41:12 and verses 67:3-5, you don't think it has anything to do with the atmosphere.

Sorry, islam432, but you are changing the rules of interpretation when it does suit your agenda. You are nit-picking with your interpretation.

It is really depends on the translation, whether it uses "nearest sky" or "lower heaven" or "lowest heaven". I don't know which translation you are using.

The following are translations from Yusuf Ali, ok?


first,lowest haven or lowest sky can be used as same meaning




Notice the big purple bolded words used in Yusuf Ali's translation in 41:12 and 67:5. It used "lower heaven" (41:12) and "lowest heaven" (67:5).

In the Pickthall's translation it used "nether heaven" for verse 41:12 (which is the same as using "lowest heaven") and simply "world heaven" for 67:5 (whatever that mean).

In Palmer's translation, "lower heaven" for both 41:12 and 67:5.

The Rodwell's translation: "lower heaven" for both 41:12 and "lowest heaven" for 67:5, same as the Yusuf Ali's translation.

What translation are you using?

So when you are using "nearest sky" do it has to do with the "lowest heaven" or "lowest firmament". If you do, then you are contradicting yourself.

first lowest haven or sky are both the same

second why are you comparing 2:29 with 41:21 they are both different verses

and yes i admit my mistake while replying to you i didnt read the complete thing

 

[Islam432]

You a quite correct, nowhere in the Quran does it mention 7 layers of the atmosphere, it mentions 7 heavens, with the stars being in the lowest.

YOU are the person who claimed that the 7 heavens are the 7 layers of the atmosphere in your posts and that this demonstrated that the Quran contained scientific knowledge.

Good to see that you have realised that you were wrong when you made that claim. Now are you going to admit publicly that this claim was wrong?

i already did , and what about you , when time and again i proved you wrong??

 

[gnostic]

first lowest haven or sky are both the same

Yes, I know. Heaven have been used as metaphors for religion and mythology for millennia. Heaven is often a metaphor for sky and firmament. You were the one who compared heaven with atmosphere, not us.

This is your post #128.

2)Atmosphere

"It is He who hath created for you all things that are on earth; moreover His design comprehended the heavens for He gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments; (sab'a sama_wa_t(in)) and of all things he hath perfect knowledge"
Surah Al-Baqara Surah 2 Ayah 29
Two words are used for heaven or sky in the Quran: "asma" and "taraiq". One can be translated as firmament (asma) and the other one as heaven (taraiq). Both have a distinguished scientific meaning and implication. The meaning of heaven (taraiq) will be dealt with in Astronomy 2, the meaning of firmament (asama) is being dealt in this chapter.
The seven firmaments are the seven layers of the Earth's atmosphere. According to modern geological definition these are defined as the following: Troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere, exosphere, ionosphere and magnetosphere (Compton's Encyclopaedia), exactly seven in number:

THE SEVEN LAYERS OF THE ATMOSPHERE

Read the above quote in purple. That's what you wrote.

Your post, your words, your interpretation, your comparison (you equated heaven=firmament=atmosphere).

Do now disagree with your own post?

second why are you comparing 2:29 with 41:21 they are both different verses

I know they are different. I had put 2:29 because they were your quotation in post 128. See the above quote in red.

You used verse 2:29, to prove your assertion that seven heavens or firmaments with the 7 layers of atmosphere.

I was the one who provided the other 2 quotes (41:12 and 67:3-5).

 

[McBell]

i already did , and what about you , when time and again i proved you wrong??

I know not which is sadder...
That he has had his arse handed to him repeatedly, or that he is oblivious to the fact.

 

[YmirGF]

I know not which is sadder...
That he has had his arse handed to him repeatedly, or that he is oblivious to the fact.

Or that he continues to dodge my assertion that he is using revisionist texts, with deliberately embellished phrasing, that is not a part of the actual texts.

I'm tempted to delve into his sources to see just how much credibility they enjoy even in the Muslim world. That might be an eye-opener.