RabbiO
הרב יונה בן זכריה
I'm glad you can understand what he is posting. Unfortunately, if it's not English, Hebrew or Aramaic I'm totally clueless.
-
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 Vs Bible in light of science
- Thread starter SuperNova66
- Start date
I'm glad you can understand what he is posting. Unfortunately, if it's not English, Hebrew or Aramaic I'm totally clueless.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Quran does not claim to be a text-book of science.
Quran is 100% accurate Word of G-d whereas no branch of science claims that it is 100% correct. Science creates nothing, it does not claim as such, science only discovers the things already existing naturally-created by G-d.
Yes, Quran does mention in many a verses events and signs that in overall position are described in the science but since science is not 100% accurate we don't mean that these are 100% correct.
Regards
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I will, very mildly, agree, Paarsurrey. I simply do not understand why all too many Muslims stoop to this kind of intellectual suicide of hallucinating "scientific understanding" into the Qur'an that is simply not there. If only they put a fraction of their brain power into real applied science, Muslims just might get somewhere in our modern world.
gnostic
The Lost One
There are not a spittle of science in both Bible or the Qur'an - together.
And SuperNova66. Dr Zakir Naik is not a good source, because he sprouted a lot of same "scientific miracle" rubbish that are so popular among Muslims. Even among some Muslims, Naik is a quack...or is "daff" the right word.
Naik is in the same boat, as his counterpart Christian creationist counterparts Kent Hovind and Brad Shockley. It is funny how creationists breed the dishonest ignorance.
And SuperNova66. Dr Zakir Naik is not a good source, because he sprouted a lot of same "scientific miracle" rubbish that are so popular among Muslims. Even among some Muslims, Naik is a quack...or is "daff" the right word.
Naik is in the same boat, as his counterpart Christian creationist counterparts Kent Hovind and Brad Shockley. It is funny how creationists breed the dishonest ignorance.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
I agree with you.the way i see things is that (if you believe in God)...he gave us brains and the ability to discover science ourselves. we aren't so dependent on having everything spelled out for us in a book or any other source. it's human nature itself that has helped us discover all we have.
you're right, it doesn't HAVE to be validated by any holy book. scientific evidence surely doesn't decide which holy book i'll follow.
and yes, this has been discussed, to no avail, to death.
Regards
OurCreed
There is no God but Allah
The Qur'an isn't a science book. Science books have theories and explanations of experiments and evidences for supposed facts, and all of that. The Qur'an is simply a book that details facts about reality. The Big Bang, the expansion of the universe, the existence of black holes, the process of embryology, all of this is in the Qur'an. These aren't scientific statements, they are factual statements.
Yes, we used science to understand these facts in today's day and age. But that doesn't mean the statements themselves are scientific. A lot of people get these two things mixed up. Neither the Qur'an, nor the Bible, are science books.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
"These aren't scientific statements, they are factual statements"
I would like to paraphrase it:
These aren't scientific statement per se, they are factual statements expressed in general terms for religious use.
Regards
OurCreed
There is no God but Allah
Exactly. Their main purpose is for humans to understand and reflect upon those statements to get a better grasp of the reality of God and to increase our faith. The scientific understandings of those verses is just a minor thing.
gnostic
The Lost One
Solomon having the abilities to talk to ants and birds, doesn't strike me as providing facts, but fable, fairytale or myth.
Solomon having the abilities to control winds, and army of jinns and birds, are also fable or myth.
I see no myth here. Even in 1 Kings 2 to 11 tell of Solomon's kingship was remarkable for receiving divine wisdom, but none of them speak of him being able to unrealistically control weathers (or winds), jinns or demons, communicate with animals.
I know the origin of Muhammad's story about Solomon's magical or supernatural powers. Jews have been living in the in towns and cities in Arabian peninsula, so apparently when Muhammad was younger, he heard such fairytale from these Jews.
Jews have a number of folklore, legends and myths, that were passed down, through oral tradition, before these oral traditions were written down by Rabbinical Jews after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE.
Among the oral tradition is what it is called Oral Torah, supposedly attribute to Moses himself; the written parts of Oral Tradition were in two main parts - Mishnah (the most important part of Oral Torah and written Talmud) and Gemara (commentaries by rabbis), which all come down under the Talmud.
There are no way to date the Oral Torah, because these collection of oral stories and exegesis came from all sort of sources, but most scholars now believe that the Oral Torah doesn't predate the Babylonian Exile (586 - 530 BCE).
The Mishnah was completed by early 3rd century CE. There are actually two versions of Talmud survived, written in different places and different times. The older Jerusalem Talmud was written down during 300 - 350 CE, while the Babylonian Talmud was compiled from 450 to 500 CE.
There were other oral traditions, that were written down in a collection known as Midrash or Midrashim that tell of other stories that post-date Moses, like David and Solomon. Other stories were collected from the Talmud and Midrash, and were written down in a collection known as the Haggada or Aggadah.
The reason why I am giving you this bit of Jewish history on the Oral Torah, Talmud, Midrash and the Aggadah is that not every Jews could read or access to the Tanakh or the Rabbinic literature (Talmud, Midrashim, Aggadah) and not every Jews were scholars on the scriptures or the written literature of oral traditions, so oral traditions persisted long after they were written down in the Talmud and Midrash. Jewish oral traditions were still being used as late as Maimonides (1135 - 1204).
All of these (rabbinic literature) were compiled before Muhammad's birth. And since Jews don't all have access to scriptures or the Rabbinic literature, oral traditions were still being used by Jews to tell stories from scriptures and others. Muhammad don't need to learn to read; he has ears to listen to stories being told publicly by Jews or by Christian preachers. The whole idea of Muhammad only learning the "Qur'an" from Gabriel, is far-fetched.
The things with the Midrash and Aggadah are, there are many more folklore, fables and fairytales in these two works that are not found in the bible.
And among these stories, whether are found in oral traditions or written down in Midrash or Aggadah, is the story of Solomon with the magical abilities of controlling winds, demons (jinns) and to communicate with animals.
Solomon's abilities are found in the Aggadah, translated into English by the famous late-19th and early 20th century scholar Louis Ginzberg, in the The Legends of the Jews (1909).
Solomon can be found in the Volume IV, Chapter 5 (Solomon).
Solomon having the powers to control demons and use magic (Solomon Master of Demons, The Legends of Jews, vol 4, ch 5):
Solomon Master of Demons said:
According to this, Solomon not only control the demons (jinns) to fight in his army, but to help him build the Temple (Solomon Master of Demons, The Legends of Jews, vol 4, ch 5):
Solomon Master of Demons said:
The episode of Solomon being able to talk to ant (in Qur'an ), don't come the bible, but from Aggadah (Lesson in Humility, The Legends of Jews, vol 4, ch 5):
Lesson in Humility said:
Qur'an 27:18-19 said:
Solomon also had the ability to talk to and command birds.
But whereas the birds rebuke Solomon for arrogance in Qur'an 27, it is the ant who have that role in the Aggadah.
You can read all of Solomon's abilities (controlling demons and winds) and his possession of magic ring and magic carpet in that chapter.
Qur'an 27 is just a poor-man adaptation and retelling of Jewish fairytale. The Qur'an has nothing of scientific merit, as can be seen in repeating fables and fairytales from older sources.
Tell me, OurCreed. Is there any scientific merits on Solomon's supernatural abilities of controlling winds, jinns or birds, or his abilities to communicate with birds and ants.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
As to the Big Bang or expansion of the universe, the Qur'an doesn't describe any of that. It is just Muslims attempting to projecting modern science into their own scripture. It is a really pathetic attempt by Muslims, because they are jealous that they are no leaders in science and technology, a very dishonest tactics.
Feel free to quote the expanding universe or Big Bang, and I will show you quotes from similar but much older scriptures or literature, that will refute your "scientific miracles".
If I can present myths from other religions that are strikingly similar, then it will show that Islam follow a similar line of superstitious belief.
There are no science in the Qur'an, just more myths that Muslims are trying their hardest to turn into reality. It is pathetic and dishonest.
You, or the Qur'an, or both, forgot evolution by natural selection and common descent.
Ciao
- viole
OurCreed
There is no God but Allah
Oooooh I love this. The Qur'an doesn't reject evolution, as a matter of fact, it clearly supports it.
Cool. But let me ask you a direct question.
Do you accept to have a common ancestor with a pig?
Ciao
- vioe
OurCreed
There is no God but Allah
As to the Big Bang or expansion of the universe, the Qur'an doesn't describe any of that. It is just Muslims attempting to projecting modern science into their own scripture.
Didn't you read my words? There is no SCIENCE in the Qur'an. Science is a method of study, you will see observations, theories, and tests to figure out an answer. The Qur'an isn't a science book! You are not going to see tests and theories in the book.
The Qur'an is simply a book of facts of reality and answers. So when it describes the Big Bang and the expansion, it's not going to be like how scientific theories are. The Qur'an simply states a certain fact of the universe, NOT for the purpose of showing that "Oh lookee mee, I has science."
No, the purpose of the Qur'an stating these natural phenomenon and events is so that people can find God.
And I am going to have to disagree with you. The Qur'an clearly describes how God has initially created the universe.
21;30
"Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We split them apart and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?"
The two words used in this verse, heavens and earth, are representative of space (heavens), and matter (earth). These concepts of matter and space were non-existent during the times of the Arab Bedouins. The Qur'an uses a language form which is applicable for both old and modern societies. God didn't expect the old Arabs to understand this verse, because this verse is directed to atheists today. Old Arabs had no way to observe or understand the initial creation of the universe, so this verse is referring directly to atheists today. Hence, "Have those who disbelieved not considered..." The old Arabs had no idea how the universe was created, so they couldn't ponder on this fact.
Now back onto topic. Heavens represent space whereas earth represents matter. Now the verse describes these two aspects as a "ratqan". This is an Arabic word that refers to something tight and compact. Something compressed. The ratqan represents the singularity.
Then the verse uses the word "fafataqna'ahum". Go on Google Translate, English to Arabic, and write down the word "parted". The definition of the word "parted" according to Google is two things moving away from each other or splitting apart. So go on Google Translate and write down the word "parted" and it should give you the ARABIC equivalent.
You will get, "aiftarqna" which is another form of the word, "fafataqna'ahum."
So 21;30 is clearly describing an event where two things (space and matter), were a ratqan, a JOINED ENTITY / SINGULARITY. Then God split them or parted them from each other.
According to physicsoftheuniverse.com, they state:
"Thus, space, time, energy and matter all came into being at an infinitely dense, infinitely hot gravitational singularity, and began expanding everywhere at once."
I can quote non-stop statements from other science websites to prove my point, which is pretty simple. The Qur'an states the basics in as few words as possible, to describe this event.
Now go find another verse from another scripture and prove this wrong, OR disprove it with your own scientific knowledge. We'll go over the expansion of the universe after.
OurCreed
There is no God but Allah
Yes.
OurCreed
There is no God but Allah
There is nothing scientific about these verses. You are reading metaphorical verses and taking them literally. Read the footnotes of these verses: http://www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=769®ion=EN
I could care less what other scriptures or text depict of the messengers which the Qur'an speaks about.
Shad
Veteran Member
Amusing. You declare those Muslims that read science into the Quran are wrong then you do the exact thing you just called wrong. Contradiction much? Space and matter are not separate nor were either parted from the other. You declare Earth mean matter itself with no argument at all. It just happens to fit the science as you read it, wrongly mind you, so you change the meaning. Nothing more than the post hoc rationalization you declared wrong.
"It is just Muslims attempting to projecting modern science into their own scripture." Look in the mirror. You are one of those Muslims.
OurCreed
There is no God but Allah
Amusing. You declare those Muslims that read science into the Quran are wrong then you do the exact thing you just called wrong. Contradiction much?
You don't seem to understand. Muslims claim there is "science" in the Qur'an. Yet I already explained that in order for something to be called "science", you have to have theories, observations, tests, analyses, etc. None of that is in the Qur'an, so there is no science in the Qur'an. The Qur'an only speaks about realities and phenomenon that already exist in the universe, and that is exactly what I explained in my post. If you still can't get this through your head, I don't know what will.
Space and matter are not separate nor were either parted from the other.
Yes they are. You have matter/energy which is a separate thing compared with actual space. They were once a single entity (the singularity) which was a compression of literally everything that exists. Matter/energy & space. When this singularity started rapidly expanding (the Big Bang), that is when matter became separated from the space, and that is how we have our universe today.
This is what Wikipedia says on the Big Bang:
Since Georges Lemaître first noted, in 1927, that an expanding universe might be traced back in time to an originating single point, scientists have built on his idea of cosmic expansion.
A single point, that is the "ratqan" which the Qur'an mentions, and something which you didn't even comment on. Whatever matter and space was, they were at a single point, a single entity. Then these two became separated, and we can observe that today with our own eyes. Space and matter are two separate things. Matter is composed of the basic particles and sub-atomic particles. Space is the absence of these particles (matter), it is essentially a vacuum.
You declare Earth mean matter itself with no argument at all. It just happens to fit the science as you read it, wrongly mind you, so you change the meaning. Nothing more than the post hoc rationalization you declared wrong.
You don't understand how interpreting the Qur'an works. The Qur'an is an Arabic book with many verses which have many different meanings, understandings, and mysteries to discover. There are mysteries that many of us have understood from some verses, and there are probably still many more mysteries that we are unaware of. The best humans can do is understand these verses through the light of science or other knowledge which we have currently. The more we humans increase our knowledge of science and the universe as the Qur'an commands us to, the more we will understand the Qur'anic verses. The reason I declared earth to be matter is because it fits with the modern scientific theory of the big bang. No human of course can declare their understanding of the Qur'an is 100% accurate, which is why the Qur'an says this about the interpretations of its OWN verses.
3;7
"...And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding."
This verse clearly tells the reader that only God knows the true interpretations of the unclear verses which are left in mystery. Those people who have knowledge will believe in ALL of the correct interpretations. This interpretation of 21;30 which mentions the heavens and the earth splitting apart, we didn't know any good interpretations of this verse until recently when mankind's knowledge increased regarding the universe. This process will continue on forward and more and more mysteries of the Qur'an will become uncovered as time goes by.
We aren't trying to manipulate any verses to fit with science. I didn't manipulate or change the meanings of any words. I have derived a correct interpretation from one verse regarding a certain reality of the nature of the universe.
There are no false statements in 21;30 if you don't take it literally. The Arabic word for "heavens" can represent space, and the Arabic word for "earth", can represent matter. The Qur'an isn't to be taken fully literally in all of its verses.
Shad
Veteran Member
You only pointed out how people misapplied the term of science but used the same arguments regardless of your issues with the label. Same type of arguments of reading modern science into the Quran. I pointed out your arguments are the same regardless of the label. It is these arguments which are still flawed regardless of the label one picks.
No you said matter and space are separate per your argument. However matter does not exist without space so there is no true separation of the two. More so the singularity still contains space, just a smaller amount of space than currently.
A "single point" is still space. The expansion is just a change from a single point in space to a larger one. However there is no separation of matter from space involved. Matter is still within space.
I didn't comment on ratqan because it was already obvious in the verse itself.
Actually no space is not longer considered emptiness between objects of matter.
So disregard traditional sources until it matches what you want it to say. Hilarious, you just admitted to post hoc rationalization by showing your interpretation changes to match science. You just admitted your use fallacious reasoning for your argument. Well done son..
More post hoc rationalization.
Yet you just admitted to this above
"There are mysteries that many of us have understood from some verses, and there are probably still many more mysteries that we are unaware of. The best humans can do is understand these verses through the light of science or other knowledge which we have currently. The more we humans increase our knowledge of science and the universe as the Qur'an commands us to, the more we will understand the Qur'anic verses."
Hence the interpretation and exegesis changes to match science. Hilarious.
Except that the Earth didn't exist at the time. You provide no justification for Earth meaning all matter in the universe. You just made a claim about it without support since it fits the science, which you admit to follow for your interpretation only. More post hoc rationalizations and fallacious reasoning. Well done son.
Also note that you selection of definition only aligns with your view which is based on science while no other translations even refers to matter but is specific that it is the Earth itself. This, son, is called confirmation bias. You picked the definition to match the theory and rejected 1400 years of tradition which puts forward no such view.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
The Qur'an doesn't describe any science, because every claims that Muslims have made, have been shown to be wrong.
First, Qur'an 21:30 doesn't describe the Big Bang.
If you actually understood the Big Bang, you would know that there was no Earth in the beginning of the universe. There were no galaxies, stars or planets. The universe is about 13.7 billion years old. The first generation of stars, didn't form until 560 million years after the Big Bang.
And the Earth (4.67 billion years old) along with the rest of the solar system didn't form until 9 billion years after the Big Bang. Our Sun is actually a much younger star, and at about the same age of earth; the Sun is probably 3rd, or even 4th generation star.
So how could 21:30 describe the Big Bang, when the earth didn't exist yet, for it to be cleave from the heavens (universe)?
Modern Muslims who used the 21:30 to claim this refer to the Big Bang cosmology are wrong, because the Earth didn't exist in the first place. And that because the verse is describing heaven as the SKY, and NOT as the universe.Which lead to my third point.
And earth wasn't the only object that didn't exist in the early young universe. And this leads me to my second point.
Second...
And the last part of the verse, "and made from water every living thing?" Muslims are wrong about that too, because in the the early universe after the Big Bang, there were no water. That's because before there were stars, there were no water.
Water is a molecule of one oxygen atom and 2 hydrogen atoms. The Big Bang explained that before there were stars, there were only elements in the periodic table that exist, the 3 lightest elements:
- Hydrogen
- Helium
- Lithium
It is star that make heavier elements in the earlier universe.
The star, especially at the birth of young star, they are mostly comprise of hydrogen, with helium being the second abundant element in a star. The star used lighter element, more specifically hydrogen, to bind two hydrogen atoms to form helium. This process of heavier element formed from lighter elements, is known as stellar nucleosynthesis.
It is only when the star run out of hydrogen fuel to bind them into helium, that the star will begin to fuse helium atoms to into elements heavier than helium, like the other gases - nitrogen, oxygen and carbon. Heavier elements will only form at NEAR the last stage of star life cycle.
So there were no Earth and no water, at the early stage of the young universe.
...THIRD. The verse 21:30 describe the SKY, not the universe, because the author is not aware of the universe. The word "heaven" is not the only word to describe the sky; there are also "dome", "vault", "firmament", "roof", "canopy" (or "tent" or "pavilion"), "expanse". See point 4.
The sky only referred to what WE, humans, can see from the ground, without the aid of optical telescopes and radio telescopes. The "heaven" that the Qur'an described are the same one that the bible (Genesis 1) and every other religious cosmologies describe - the SKY.
And that would lead me to my fourth point.
FOURTH. The verse 21:30, in which the verse describe about separation of the SKY from Earth, is not a original idea. What 21:30 describe, is precisely the same with Genesis' "second day" of creation:
Genesis 1:6-8 KJV said:
Genesis 1:6-8 NRSV said:
Genesis 1:6-8 NJPS said:
Genesis 1:6-8 Dead Sea Scroll Bible said:
The reasons why I have provided 4 different translations, is so that (A) you can compare these translations that show the separation of the sky (or heaven) and the Earth, and (B) like the verse in Qur'an 21:30, Genesis also provided water, so that you can compare that against them to the Qu'ran.
The translations to the Qur'an 21:32 show that like Genesis 1:6-8, chose to give different names to the SKY or heaven, like roof, ceiling and canopy:
Qur'an 21:32 Yusuf Ali said:
Qur'an 21:32 Sahih International said:
Qur'an 21:32 Pickthall said:
And even the bible (Genesis) is not the first to describe dividing the Earth from the sky.
In Sumerian poem of Gilgamesh - Bilgames and the Netherworld - from the late 3rd millennium BCE:
None of the texts I had quoted (Genesis, Qur'an or the Epic of Gilgamesh), describe the Big Bang.
And personally I don't think you (or any other Muslims here) understand the concept of the Big Bang, especially if you think the Earth was there, before all the earliest stars.
This is why I think most Muslims are backward thinking with science and technology; they have lost the abilities to think. All I see Muslims (who mixed science with religion) here taking their own verses OUT-OF-CONTEXT, and twisting science to fit with their scriptures.
If you don't understand the science, then don't make silly claims of what you don't understand.
One of the biggest fool out there, is Zakir Naik. Naik has done the same things as so many Muslims have done here, they used propaganda, not science, to promote the Qur'an, and it is disgustingly dishonest of Naik. This is why there are only so few respected Muslim scientists out there today, but even these scientists have made no new discoveries, because they have lost the abilities for scientific inquiry and scientific discoveries.
Last edited: