There are no mistakes in Quran

[paarsurrey]

firedragon said: ↑
I know a person like will bring this argument, thats why I did not quote scholars to support my argument. I dont need them.

No credible scholar agrees with you that is why you do not cite any.

The Scholars just give their opinions, not binding on anybody.
Regards

 

[Shad]

Brother. When the Quran says earth, or Ardha, it does not always refer to earth. As in the planet earth.

If you write aw fasadhin fil ardha, it means corruption on the land. Thus, ardha also refers to land. It depends on the context. Ma akthara ardha bani means "How many are the lands of the sons of such a one" as Edward Lane cites.

When God says U'tiya or come you two to Samaa or heavens and Ardha or earth, it does not mean earth like the planet earth. It means earth or land.

He says come to both the heaven that was like smoke and the land. Not the planet earth.

Read 41:11 with this light and you will see.

Problem is that there was no land during the Big Bang either. The verse is still wrong.

 

[Shad]

firedragon said: ↑


The Scholars just give their opinions, not binding on anybody.
Regards

Opinions from experts are of more value than laymen when the topic involved their expertise.

 

[Jabar]

@Shad Are you Muslim?

 

[Shad]

@Shad Are you Muslim?

No. I entertained, as in researched, Islam almost a decade ago. A local Imam was going door to door to raise support for the local Islamic center, there is no Mosque here, introduced me to Islam. Nice fellow.

 

[Jabar]

@firedragon I am terribly sorry, i apologize for jumping to conclusions. I am just getting confused on all this.

 

[firedragon]

Problem is that there was no land during the Big Bang either. The verse is still wrong.

Thanks.

 

[firedragon]

No credible scholar agrees with you that is why you do not cite any.



No you complained the example was Laraba then later claimed both were the same, you contradicted yourself



Still contradicted yourself.

Your own argument is from apologist websites. Same form too. You avoid citing scholars since those from the Muslim world reject your views. You reject ahadith since these show your argument to be nonsense.

Awesome. But again laraba and dharaba are the same.

 

[Shad]

Awesome. But again laraba and dharaba are the same.

Then you complaint was nonsense. You still contradicted yourself.

 

[Shad]

Thanks.

Well if you make up nonsense expect people to point the nonsense out.

 

[Jabar]

@firedragon I am glad that you admit your mistakes. Allah created the earth not land. The context was correct however i consider the fact that you have to deal with a lot of people about these type of discussions as i do. This suggests that we are bound to make errors. This however does not give Quran a error, as there is still no evidence or proof that you have stated that shows Quran mentions no errors and until you can prove me wrong i object. @Shad Thinking outside the box may cause you to say other things @firedragon but i respect you still due to the fact that you own up. @Shad I challenge you to give me one error in the Quran.

 

[Shad]

I challenge you to give me one error in the Quran.

I already pointed out an error. You claimed the Quran talks about the Big Bang but since the verse includes the Earth in this event this is an error. It talks about a creation event that never took place, that is an error.

 

[Jabar]

You never pointed a error @Shad The verse that show there is Big Bang theory is right here:
"Do not the Unbelievers see That the heavens and the earth Were joined together (as one Unit of Creation), before We clove themasunder?" [Al-Qur’aan 21:30]
So do not jump into conclusions, Shad.
The striking congruence between the Qur’anic verse and the ‘Big Bang’ is inescapable! How could a book, which first appeared in the deserts of Arabia 1400 years ago, contain this profound scientific truth? Haha, you have failed.

 

[Shad]

You never pointed a error @Shad The verse that show there is Big Bang theory is right here:
"Do not the Unbelievers see That the heavens and the earth Were joined together (as one Unit of Creation), before We clove themasunder?" [Al-Qur’aan 21:30]
So do not jump into conclusions, Shad.

The Earth didn't exist during or for 9 billion years after the event. Thus the verse is wrong. Also if Heavens means universe the Earth is still part of it, within it. There 2 errors pointed out. Research the Big Bang before you make more mistakes.

 

[firedragon]

Well if you make up nonsense expect people to point the nonsense out.

I shall take that into consideration.

 

[Jabar]

Scientists say that before the galaxies in the universe were formed, celestial matter was initially in the form of gaseous matter. In short, huge gaseous matter or clouds were present before the formation of the galaxies. To describe initial celestial matter, the word ‘smoke’ is more appropriate than gas. The following Qur’aanic verse refers to this state of the universe by the word dhukhan which means smoke.

"Moreover, He Comprehended In His design the sky, And it had been (as) smoke: He said to it And to the earth: ‘Come ye together, Willingly or unwillingly.’ They said: ‘We do come (Together), in willing obedience.’" [Al-Qur’aan 41:11]
@Shad This proves your misconception.

 

[firedragon]

@firedragon I am glad that you admit your mistakes. Allah created the earth not land. The context was correct however i consider the fact that you have to deal with a lot of people about these type of discussions as i do. This suggests that we are bound to make errors. This however does not give Quran a error, as there is still no evidence or proof that you have stated that shows Quran mentions no errors and until you can prove me wrong i object. @Shad Thinking outside the box may cause you to say other things @firedragon but i respect you still due to the fact that you own up. @Shad I challenge you to give me one error in the Quran.

I did not point out an error in the Quran. Also, I did not own upto anything. Youve misread something.

I just thought you understood Arabic and tried to explain that ardha does not always mean earth. Especially when it comes to the big bang theory or what's related to that.

If you thought I owned up because I said thanks you are mistaken. Sometimes I say thanks to pure hypocrites as well. If it's a truthful exegisis or at least if someone tries to hnderstand and then fails to, I will respond at least with a few more words, even if it's stupid.

Your knowledge in science is poor. Not to be derogatory.

Read up on the expanding universe and the beginning of it. And put ardha or land into the picture. Not the planet earth. I just tried to push you to figure it out yourself. Read the post again. That was only meant to you.

Peace.

 

[Augustus]

I challenge you to give me one error in the Quran.

You do realise that when you claim 'scientific miracles' you make the Quran far more open to errors.

Scientific ideas often change, and if you insist that a certain verse means 'miracle', then if the scientific view is later refined that you have just created an error. The people who claim these miracles are not scientists, but apologists. As such they frequently make mistakes with the 'science' part and end up looking foolish.

On the other hand, if you don't make any claims of miracles, you can simply treat the verse as being figurative scripture in which case there is no error. The Quran itself claims no scientific miracles, thats just something that some Muslims invented in the 1980s and was funded by the Saudis.

Actually, some apologists now reject the miracles hypothesis as it was causing people to apostatise when they found out it was false.

Since the eighties there has been a growing movement of Muslim academics and apologists using science to establish the miraculous and Divine nature of the Qur’ānic discourse. On a grass roots level, Muslims across the world, especially in the West, try to articulate the veracity of Islam by using verses that allude to science as evidence for the Qur’ān’s Divine authorship... Regrettably, the scientific miracles narrative has become an intellectual embarrassment for Muslim apologists, including myself. A few years ago I took some activists to Ireland to engage with the audience and speakers at the World Atheist Convention. Throughout the convention we had a stall outside the venue and as a result positively engaged with hundreds of atheists, including the popular atheist academics Professor P. Z. Myers and Professor Richard Dawkins. During our impromptu conversation with Professor Myers we ended up talking about God’s existence and the Divine nature of the Qur’ān. The topic of embryology came up, and Professor Myers being an expert in the field challenged our narrative. He claimed that the Qur’ān did not predate modern scientific conclusions in the field. As a result of posting the video[8] of the engagement on-line we faced a huge intellectual backlash. We received innumerable amounts of emails by Muslims and non-Muslims. The Muslims were confused and had doubts, and the non-Muslims were bemused with the whole approach... It is time more people from the Muslim community spoke out against this problematic approach to verifying the Divine nature of the Qur’ān. It has become an intellectual embarrassment for Muslim apologists and it has exposed the lack of coherence in the way they have formulated the argument. Significantly, many Muslims who converted to Islam due to the scientific miracles narrative, have left the religion due to encountering opposing arguments.

http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays...n-contain-scientific-miracles-a-new-approach/

 

[Jabar]

@firedragon Do not take the wrong idea, brother. Please stop making it as though i am trying to make you feel low. But you should be telling that to @Shad because he obviously does not read it when he pointed that mistake out and made me confused as i thought it was accurate. I did read the Quran, just he confused me for a second. I just admit that i made a mistake, this happens a lot especially with debates against other beliefs.
Peace.

 

[Jabar]

@Augustus How does it not contain any scientific evidence that has been approved of. Yes there are things that are changed in science but are they really based on a lot of accuracy, no. You are using an If scenario either way, which could possibly be true do not get me wrong but they are not accurate once again. You say some apologists have disapproved of Quran being divine. Well yes, there are always people like that in every religion and belief. You are merely stating your beliefs and not giving evidence. The Quran contains scientific evidence that science has approved of once again so to say that it is not a book that contains miracle is absurd. You say they do not have expertise in science but if it is approved by science then how could have it possibly contain an error? As we live in a society where science is regarded as absolute. Some do, some do not.