Print Page | Close Window

What is Islam?

Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Islam for non-Muslims
Forum Description: Non-Muslims can ask questions about Islam, discussion for the purpose of learning.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17353
Printed Date: 30 April 2024 at 5:27am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: What is Islam?
Posted By: samirfaithful
Subject: What is Islam?
Date Posted: 28 August 2010 at 11:29pm
bismi allah erahman erahimSmile
 
The literal meaning of Islam is to submit or surrender.

A Muslim is one who submits himself and surrenders his will to that of Allah (The Creator and Sustainer of The Universe).

The message of Islam was brought to The Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) more than 14 centuries ago.

The Quran was brought by Angel Gabriel (Peace be on Him) directly to the Prophet (p.b.u.h.). It carries a Divine guarantee of safeguard from corruption and confirms the teachings of the earlier messages from Allah.

The most important Message of Islam is the Unity of Allah (That He is One, has no partners and is the only one deserving of worship) and that Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) is His Messenger and Servant.

A Muslim believes in:

1. Allah.

2. Allah�s Angels.

3. All the previously revealed books by Allah.

4. All the prophets, from Adam to Muhammad (peace be upon them all).

5. The day of Judgment.

6. The decree of good and evil.

The fundamentals of Islam are five:

Shahadah -Testimony to the Unity of God and messengership of Muhammad (p.b.u.h.).

Salah - Performance of the five daily prayers.

Zakah - Giving of Zakat.

Fasting - Fasting the month of Ramadan.

Hajj - Performing the pilgrimage to Makkah.

Islam teaches:

That each person is born pure.

That Allah has given human beings a choice between good and evil and to seek Allah�s pleasure by practicing goodness.

Justice for Allah to all, even against oneself, parents or near relatives.

Respect, kindness and obedience to parents.

Caring for the orphans and the needy.

Respect for women and giving them the due rights.

Kindness to all.

Chastity.

Honesty.

Mercy.

Courage.

Patience.

Politeness.

Leading a healthy and active life.

And every form of goodness.

In short, Islam is a perfect and complete code for the guidance of individuals and communities alike. The entire message of Islam is derived from the Quran and indeed the Sunnah (practices, sayings and confirmations of the Prophet). It is inalienable in the face of change in time and place. It may appear rigid to the casual eye, but in fact it is most adaptable to the circumstances and need of humanity.

Islam teaches that the path to spiritual development is open to all. Any individual who searches the One Creator can seek nearness to God through sincere and earnest worship. This positive message for humanity fills hearts with hope and courage. At present there are 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide and they form the majority in more than 50 countries of the world. Today Islam is the fastest growing faith in the world. Its beautiful message is reaching millions in the far corner of the earth.




Replies:
Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 31 August 2010 at 6:27pm
I have heard recently that the Quran predicts with great accuracy some of the scientific discoveries of the last century.  Is this true?


Posted By: samirfaithful
Date Posted: 02 September 2010 at 6:31am
salaaam http://www.islamicity.com/forum/member_profile.asp?PF=63300&FID=7 - schmikbob
 
thanks so much for let in me a comment i can say yes just check this link only my friend ok:)
 
http://kaheel7.com/eng/index.php - http://kaheel7.com/eng/index.php
 
enjoy ur reading:)
 
essalam aleykoum.


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 06 September 2010 at 10:13pm
samirfaithful, thank you for referring me to the website  concerning miracles contained it the quran.  However, I didn't get very far in that site.  It seems to want to sell be a lot of books.  It also very early on tried to attach some miraculous intent to things like the sun being mentioned in the Quran more times than the moon and saying that this is a sign of the Quran being somehow prophetic.  Surely you don't believe this and surely there must be better reference material out there somewhere.


Posted By: honeto
Date Posted: 07 September 2010 at 9:04pm
Salam,
I would like to add that submission to Allah or Islam was not a new idea brought through prophet Mohammed (pbuh), rather this was the way Allah had shown to Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus and many prophets since Adam. They all submitted to the will of Allah and thus were Muslims.
 
42:13 (Y. Ali) The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah - the which We have sent by inspiration to thee - and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: Namely, that ye should remain steadfast in religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him).
 
Hasan


-------------
The friends of God will certainly have nothing to fear, nor will they be grieved. Al Quran 10:62



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 11 September 2010 at 6:00pm
Anyone else??  Can anyone refer me to an authoritative or at least persurasive source for any prophetic aspects to the Quran that have to do with modern science?/


Posted By: truthseeker100
Date Posted: 12 September 2010 at 7:27am
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

Anyone else??  Can anyone refer me to an authoritative or at least persurasive source for any prophetic aspects to the Quran that have to do with modern science?/
 
Hello schmikbob,
 

First of all, it is important to understand that the Qur�an is primarily the book of guidance. Yes, it also has many verses that conform to modern science.

 

For example, in seventies (less than 50 years ago), the scientific theory taught in the classroom with regards to the Sun was that it was stationary and the planets revolved around it, whereas the modern theory describes that the Sun is also moving along with other bodies in the space that confirms to Islamic position.

 

And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.

And the Moon,- We have measured for her mansions (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date-stalk.

It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).

Qur�an 36:38-40

 

Another instance relates to the field of embryology. Here is an article by world renowned embryologist Dr. Keith Moore:

 

http://www.quranandscience.com/human/135-dr-keith-moore-confirms-embryology-in-quran.html -  



-------------
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5


Posted By: samirfaithful
Date Posted: 12 September 2010 at 8:04am

essalam aleikoum schmikbob Smile,

i have an other link for u wich scientific discoverd is related with holy quran book of muslim communities:)

 
just check and open it and read it carefuly ok:)
 
http://www.truth.org.ye/ - http://www.truth.org.ye/
 
essalam aleikoum.Smile


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 13 September 2010 at 8:15am
Truth seeker, I am trying to understand your statements.  You write "For example, in seventies (less than 50 years ago), the scientific theory taught in the classroom with regards to the Sun was that it was stationary and the planets revolved around it, whereas the modern theory describes that the Sun is also moving along with other bodies in the space that confirms to Islamic position "  I am not sure what schools you are referring to but in the United States the stationary sun theory has been relegated to the dustbin centuries ago.  Also after reviewing Dr Keith Moore's article it appears to me that he goes far out of his way to stuff meaning into very nebulous/vague Quranic verses.  I become suspicious when he say things like "This could mean this or this might mean this."  Very true statements but, logically, then they could or might mean something very different.  I seem to be getting farther away from what I was after here and not closer.   


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 13 September 2010 at 11:39am
samirfaithful, I tried to go to your link but was unable to open it.  Any ideas?


Posted By: truthseeker100
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 8:59am
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

Truth seeker, I am trying to understand your statements.  You write "For example, in seventies (less than 50 years ago), the scientific theory taught in the classroom with regards to the Sun was that it was stationary and the planets revolved around it, whereas the modern theory describes that the Sun is also moving along with other bodies in the space that confirms to Islamic position "  I am not sure what schools you are referring to but in the United States the stationary sun theory has been relegated to the dustbin centuries ago.  Also after reviewing Dr Keith Moore's article it appears to me that he goes far out of his way to stuff meaning into very nebulous/vague Quranic verses.  I become suspicious when he say things like "This could mean this or this might mean this."  Very true statements but, logically, then they could or might mean something very different.  I seem to be getting farther away from what I was after here and not closer.   
 
Well, that is what many people I know learned during their schooling in seventies. When did they revise the stationary sun theory in the US? And even if I accept the US educational system centuries ago, the fact is that the Qur�an was revealed much earlier, more than 14 centuries ago.
 

With regards to Dr. Keith�s article, please see his statement for more clarity:

�The interpretation of the verses in the Qur'an referring to human development would not have been possible in the 7th century A.D., or even a hundred years ago. We can interpret them now because the science of modern Embryology affords us new understanding. Undoubtedly there are other verses in the Qur'an related to human development that will be understood in the future as our knowledge increases.�



-------------
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:30pm
William Herschel was the first to discover and prove that not just our sun but our entire solar system was moving through space and he actually defined it's direction in 1785.  This has been known, at least in the
West for that long.  I'm not quite sure why you feel this discovery would have been lost for the last two centuries but I assure you, it wasn't.  Also, I still see nothing in the Quranic verses you have quoted to indicate that in says or even intimates anything about the sun and solar system moving through the galaxy, or anything about the discoveries of modern embryology.  I see a few very vaguely worded suras that could mean a multitude of things, and just because you and the source you are quoting have chosen to interpret them to fulfill a modern agenda doesn't mean they are any more valid than another interpretation.  Dr Keith's statement adds no more clarity than his 'rabbit out of the hat' interpretation of the Quran.  I originally commented on this link because I thought someone might actually be able to show me something in the Quran that truly was prenscient or miraculous.  I am now getting the feeling that all I'm going to get are obfuscations and hand waving. 


Posted By: truthseeker100
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:37am
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

William Herschel was the first to discover and prove that not just our sun but our entire solar system was moving through space and he actually defined it's direction in 1785.  This has been known, at least in the
West for that long.  I'm not quite sure why you feel this discovery would have been lost for the last two centuries but I assure you, it wasn't.  Also, I still see nothing in the Quranic verses you have quoted to indicate that in says or even intimates anything about the sun and solar system moving through the galaxy, or anything about the discoveries of modern embryology.  I see a few very vaguely worded suras that could mean a multitude of things, and just because you and the source you are quoting have chosen to interpret them to fulfill a modern agenda doesn't mean they are any more valid than another interpretation.  Dr Keith's statement adds no more clarity than his 'rabbit out of the hat' interpretation of the Quran.  I originally commented on this link because I thought someone might actually be able to show me something in the Quran that truly was prenscient or miraculous.  I am now getting the feeling that all I'm going to get are obfuscations and hand waving. 
 

I have lived and taught in many countries, and at least in one country, the educational system in the schools followed the stationary sun concept in the seventies. I am not aware of the US educational system as to when they included the latest research in the school system.

The main point here is that the Qur�an clearly refuted the stationary sun concept more than 1400 years ago.

Being able to comment on the work of the top embryologist requires advanced knowledge of embryology. He has written the article after meticulous investigation and experimentation. To counteract that would require similar or even higher level of effort. Just calling something �vague� that you don�t understand doesn�t mean that the theory is necessarily wrong. It only means further study is required to study the theory.

Regardless of what the theory means, as I said in the beginning, the Qur�an is primarily the book of guidance. The Muslims believed in the Qur�an more than 1400 years ago, they do so now, and they would do in the future. It is not the science that proves the Qur�an. It is the Qur�an that can be a guiding source for science.



-------------
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 10:02pm
Truthseeker, "clearly refuted the stationary sun concept" to me means "clearly refuted" and not simply introducing one more interpretation of these words of which there are many interpretions, even among Islamic scholars.
You have also stated "

Being able to comment on the work of the top embryologist requires advanced knowledge of embryology. He has written the article after meticulous investigation and experimentation. To counteract that would require similar or even higher level of effort. Just calling something �vague� that you don�t understand doesn�t mean that the theory is necessarily wrong. It only means further study is required to study the theory."

This would be true if Dr Moore's statement was about embryology where he is a top notch scholar.  However, his statements are clearly not about his chosen field of expertise but rather about his chosen religion and therefore commenting on them is not only easily done but justifiably done.
Lastly, when religion becomes a "guiding source" for science we get outrages like the heresy trials of Copernicus and Galileo.  Religion and science shouldn't mix without serious trepidation. 


Posted By: truthseeker100
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 5:52am
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

Truthseeker, "clearly refuted the stationary sun concept" to me means "clearly refuted" and not simply introducing one more interpretation of these words of which there are many interpretions, even among Islamic scholars.
You have also stated "

Being able to comment on the work of the top embryologist requires advanced knowledge of embryology. He has written the article after meticulous investigation and experimentation. To counteract that would require similar or even higher level of effort. Just calling something �vague� that you don�t understand doesn�t mean that the theory is necessarily wrong. It only means further study is required to study the theory."

This would be true if Dr Moore's statement was about embryology where he is a top notch scholar.  However, his statements are clearly not about his chosen field of expertise but rather about his chosen religion and therefore commenting on them is not only easily done but justifiably done.
Lastly, when religion becomes a "guiding source" for science we get outrages like the heresy trials of Copernicus and Galileo.  Religion and science shouldn't mix without serious trepidation. 


-------------
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 11:00pm

OK, lets move very slowly.  The Ptolemaic model of the universe, which is generally regarded as the start of astronomy was an Earch centered model.  That is it put the Earth at the center of the universe and had the planets and the sun revolving around it in there own orbits in epicycles.  This tortuous system was used because it explained previously unexplained observations like retrograde motion and changes in planetary brightness.  We can go back even further than this to see the first inklings of Earth centered thought but for now this will suffice.  Now, as you can see, this system had the sun orbiting about the earth in about the first century of the first millenium.  So, as you can see, your statement that the Quran predated the modern discovery of solar motion "more than 1400 years ago without any advanced astronomical instrument of the modern science" is not really accurate at all.  The solar motion that was observed in 1785 by Herschel was the motion of our entire solar system through space.  I hope this is not what you are trying to say these Quranic verses actually indicate because that would stretch my imagination to it's breaking point.   



Posted By: truthseeker100
Date Posted: 18 September 2010 at 4:16pm
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

OK, lets move very slowly.  The Ptolemaic model of the universe, which is generally regarded as the start of astronomy was an Earch centered model.  That is it put the Earth at the center of the universe and had the planets and the sun revolving around it in there own orbits in epicycles.  This tortuous system was used because it explained previously unexplained observations like retrograde motion and changes in planetary brightness.  We can go back even further than this to see the first inklings of Earth centered thought but for now this will suffice.  Now, as you can see, this system had the sun orbiting about the earth in about the first century of the first millenium.  So, as you can see, your statement that the Quran predated the modern discovery of solar motion "more than 1400 years ago without any advanced astronomical instrument of the modern science" is not really accurate at all.  The solar motion that was observed in 1785 by Herschel was the motion of our entire solar system through space.  I hope this is not what you are trying to say these Quranic verses actually indicate because that would stretch my imagination to it's breaking point.   

Well, it is not just the sun, see other verses. Verse 36:40 says, �Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).�

036.038
YUSUFALI: And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.
PICKTHAL: And the sun runneth on unto a resting-place for him. That is the measuring of the Mighty, the Wise.
SHAKIR: And the sun runs on to a term appointed for it; that is the ordinance of the Mighty, the Knowing.

036.039
YUSUFALI: And the Moon,- We have measured for her mansions (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date-stalk.
PICKTHAL: And for the moon We have appointed mansions till she return like an old shrivelled palm-leaf.
SHAKIR: And (as for) the moon, We have ordained for it stages till it becomes again as an old dry palm branch.

036.040
YUSUFALI: It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).
PICKTHAL: It is not for the sun to overtake the moon, nor doth the night outstrip the day. They float each in an orbit.
SHAKIR: Neither is it allowable to the sun that it should overtake the moon, nor can the night outstrip the day; and all float on in a sphere.

Earlier I wrote about the sun�s motion commenting on the modern scientific theory and its predecessor. The Qur�an doesn�t say that the sun orbits the earth as per your description of the knowledge of the first century of the first millennium.

This section is strictly for the learners. I think I tried to give you some information as you asked for. So, take what you can, and leave what you cannot.



-------------
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 18 September 2010 at 6:59pm
Truthseeker100, my intent here is not to insult anyone's intelligence.  All I wish is for you to show me which verses you think show foreknowledge of scientific discoveries of the modern era.  I think it is not clear, at least to me, that the Quran stretches beyond the scientific knowledge of the 7th century.  These verses seem to indicate that the sun and the moon have different phases or cycles which doesn't imply anything beyond an Earth-centered model. 


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 22 September 2010 at 8:34pm
Come now Truthseeker, I await some answer.  Please don't tell me you have none.


Posted By: truthseeker100
Date Posted: 24 September 2010 at 10:15am
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

These verses seem to indicate that the sun and the moon have different phases or cycles which doesn't imply anything beyond an Earth-centered model. 

Please read my last post where I mentioned that the Qur�an doesn�t say that the sun orbits the earth. So, these verses don�t refer to Earth-centered model. Is that clear?



-------------
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 25 September 2010 at 8:13am

Oh yes, very clear.  You are saying that the Quran doesn't refer to an Earth-centered model.  What then are you saying these verses do refer to??  They do seem to refer to periodicity.  In most cases that would refer to either an Earth centered model or a sun centered model with the sun moving within the galaxy.  "All translations clearly state that the sun is in motion. How was the Qur�an able to state it more than 1400 years ago without any advanced astronomical instrument of the modern science?"  Since you have very clearly stated that the Quran miraculously predicts the sun centered model of more modern times, you must have some evidence to make you believe that this motion refers to the sun's motion through the galaxy.  I would love to see this evidence that you have because, I assure you, nobody else with an understanding of astronomy or logic has seen it. 



Posted By: truthseeker100
Date Posted: 26 September 2010 at 7:33pm
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

Oh yes, very clear.  You are saying that the Quran doesn't refer to an Earth-centered model.  What then are you saying these verses do refer to??  They do seem to refer to periodicity.  In most cases that would refer to either an Earth centered model or a sun centered model with the sun moving within the galaxy. 

 

In this age of science and technology, some research would eliminate any assumption or guess on the subject.  

So what does the modern science, in fact the latest research, say with regards to the sun�s motion and other celestial bodies?

According to the current theory, voluminous bodies exert gravitational force on the smaller bodies. Moon orbits around the earth. The earth and other planets in the solar system orbit around the sun. There exists a still bigger system around which the sun and the solar system orbit. The astronomical observations of our age have found that the sun is moving with a speed of 720,000 kph towards the star Vega in an orbit called the solar apex.

The most important point is that the stars, planets, and other bodies in space orbit in a very controlled fashion; they don�t strike one another. There is perfect harmony in their movement. These minute details about such orbits are available only by modern astronomical equipments.

In addition to the verses quoted earlier, at another place the Qur�an says:

�By the sky full of paths and orbits.� (Surat adh-Dhariyat, 7)

As I said in my first post in this thread, the Qur�an is primarily the book of guidance. It is not a book of science; it is rather a book of signs to guide humanity. So, you don�t see there the systematic progress of science from geocentric to heliocentric solar system, nor do you see the calculation of the sun�s speed in the modern-day solar system. But, you see the signs, revealed more than 14 centuries ago that contain no contradiction with the scientific facts of today.

Qur�an says:

041.053

YUSUFALI: Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?

PICKTHAL: We shall show them Our portents on the horizons and within themselves until it will be manifest unto them that it is the Truth. Doth not thy Lord suffice, since He is Witness over all things?
 
SHAKIR: We will soon show them Our signs in the Universe and in their own souls, until it will become quite clear to them that it is the truth. Is it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things?


-------------
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 27 September 2010 at 3:59pm

OK, lets see.  It looks like you now are backing off your earlier statements like "The main point here is that the Qur�an clearly refuted the stationary sun concept more than 1400 years ago." and "All translations clearly state that the sun is in motion. How was the Qur�an able to state it more than 1400 years ago without any advanced astronomical instrument of the modern science?"  Instead you are going with "the signs, revealed more than 14 centuries ago that contain no contradiction with the scientific facts of today."  You do realize that this is a big difference, right? 



Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 27 September 2010 at 10:18pm
Assalamu alaika Schmikbob etc.

Your post:
Instead you are going with "the signs, revealed more than 14 centuries ago that contain no contradiction with the scientific facts of today."
Response: The holy Qur'an narrates events 14 billion years ago comprising of 8 billion years of inorganic and 6 billion years of organic life. Indeed, if there is no contradiction with the scientific facts of today, what of that very JUICE we are looking for today? Yes, indeed the MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE FINAL MESSAGE IS SALVATION OF MANKIND IN THE MANNER THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WERE SAVED FROM THE CRUNCHES OF PHARAOH. WHY NOT GO BACK TO THAT GUIDANCE AND STOP BLOODSHED BETWEEN BROTHERS AND SISTERS!  What would have happened to humanity if the heavens and earth disobey Allah!
Friendship.



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 27 September 2010 at 11:14pm
Friendship, that is not a response to my post.  That is you going off on in tangent direction.  Earlier in this thread I was looking for someone to help me because I had heard that the Quran supposedly predicted the scientific discoveries of the modern era.  Truthseeker tried to help me with that in one very limited way but then ended up telling me that the Quran was only compatible with the scientific discoveries of the modern era which is not either surprising or profound.  


Posted By: truthseeker100
Date Posted: 28 September 2010 at 11:51am
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

OK, lets see.  It looks like you now are backing off your earlier statements like "The main point here is that the Qur�an clearly refuted the stationary sun concept more than 1400 years ago." and "All translations clearly state that the sun is in motion. How was the Qur�an able to state it more than 1400 years ago without any advanced astronomical instrument of the modern science?"  Instead you are going with "the signs, revealed more than 14 centuries ago that contain no contradiction with the scientific facts of today."  You do realize that this is a big difference, right? 

I see no backing off here. My viewpoint becomes clear when you read all my previous posts in this thread, including the first two sentences of the very first post �First of all, it is important to understand the Qur�an is primarily the book of guidance. Yes, it also has many verses that conform to modern science.�

Yes, the Qur�an revealed more than 1400 years ago, contains no contradiction with many scientific facts discovered in our time. The sun was stationary in the heliocentric solar system, and the sun is in motion in the modern solar system, observed and proven by advanced astronomical instruments. That is just one example.  

For Muslims, knowing these facts and signs only enhances our faith that this book is the miraculous word of Allah.



-------------
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5


Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 28 September 2010 at 9:15pm
Assalamu alaika Schmikbob.

I am extremely delighted by your response. you want the truth and we shall certainly produce one for you.
Allah says: "let each one of you act according to his disposition." We must know what you have studied i.e. chemistry, physics, geography etc. Then we discuss. For example if I quote a verse indicating the functions of the kidney, or describing degenerative diseases, the placenta, chorion etc you may not be able to be convinced if you do not know physiology and obstetrics. For example, Allah says: he raised the heavens without pillars for one to see. What is Allah describing here? The gases in the atmosphere or what?
Friendship.



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 29 September 2010 at 8:05am
Friendship, I too am delighted to find someone that perhaps will be able to provide what I seek.  Truthseeker seems able to only walk in the same well worn circle.   My "disposition" is one of seeking the truth and open-mindedness.  I'm not sure why "acting occording to my own dispostion" has to do with your needing to know my educational background but I see no harm in it as long as I also have the advantage of knowing your "disposition".  I have been well trained as an engineer and the nature of my degrees are such that I was also required to study such nonrelated topics as economics, history, and philosophy.  However, I reject the premise that without an extensive background in a particular field I would not be able to be "convinced".  As far as I have been able to tell, the Quran does not delve deeply into the sciences, at least not by modern standards.  I love your example also.  If someone said to me "he raised the heavens without pillars for one to see" I would think he meant the heavens or sky appear unsupported which of course they do.  I await your next example with great anticipation.


Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 29 September 2010 at 3:07pm
Assalaamu alaika Schmikbob.

You posted: As far as I have been able to tell, the Quran does not delve deeply into the sciences, at least not by modern standards.
My Response: May Allah expand your heart to understand the continuity of the Old Testament as taught by Muhammad Rasulullah. You are perfectly right. The holy Qur'an does not delve deeply into the sciences for his opponents would have described him i.e. Muhammad Rasulullah as a super sorcerer, a magician and a deceit. Imagine Muhammad explaining sighting of the moon depending upon sun and moon's azimuth, declension, reflective index, angulation and telling them that the sun is 96million miles and the moon 448,000kms from the earth!
Sine you are an engineer, I have a common back ground with you for I studied Physics at advanced level in the British system. (We found it difficult to understand American authors in the University) I was taught about partition  co-efficient and immisibility constant of liquid. Qur'an 25:53 says, "It is He Who has let the two seas: this is palatable and sweet, and that is salt and bitter; and He has set a barrier and a complete partition between them." I saw this phenomenon during our physics experiment and we calculated the partition coefficient and immissibility constant. Now, Muhammad never mentioned anything close to what I learned in my advanced level studies. It was not his responsibility, but that of you and me. Now, I am a Physician. Qur'an 16:4 says, "He has created man from
 mixed drops of male and female sexual discharge. Muhammad Rasulullah did not tell or described the biochemistry and physiology of these discharges. I know them, but even if you know them, you have never analyzed sperm in a laboratory. so your knowledge is limited. I am not supposed to discuss that knowledge with you in order not to intimidate or provoke you, or dissuade you from belief. If the followers of Muhammad Rasulullah are sincere and sincerely want to propagate the continuity of the Old Testament, they would never restrict reading the holy Qur'an to them only. About 95% of the Ayat of the Qur'an are supposed to be read by all.
Friendship
.



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 30 September 2010 at 8:55pm
Friendship, thanks for the continueing dialogue.  You have included this quote in your latest effort to show me that the Quran has within it verses that predate modern scientific discoveries. "Qur'an 25:53 says, "It is He Who has let the two seas: this is palatable and sweet, and that is salt and bitter; and He has set a barrier and a complete partition between them.""  I am not sure this means anything more than a separation between two seas which could be as simple as the land between them.  You seem to be seeing much more and I'd surely like to know why.  You then state "I am not supposed to discuss that knowledge with you in order not to intimidate or provoke you, or dissuade you from belief".  You make it sound as though there is some organized group with secret knowledge and rules of order that must not be shared for fear of frightening off the unwashed masses.  To state that there is some information that can't be shared because I have not analyzed sperm in a laboratory is almost funny.  I would like to continue this dialogue but I'm afraid that unless you are able to be more forthright and avoid the dissembling it will be impossible.  I look forward to your thoughts on this


Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 30 September 2010 at 11:17pm
Assalamu alaikum.

Muhammad Rasulullah and his Sahabas established certain rules and guidelines for us. In the first instance we must respect the Children of Israel and not argue with them on what Allah revealed. One is required to know only that SIGN out of the billion SIGNS in the world that will make him understand Allah and follow HIM, because Allah addresses the living and not the dead. For example there are 6,200 verses (sentences) in the holy Qur'an. No one is required to know all of them to understand Allah. Just know one!
With regard to education there are many stages. For example at secondary level as a biologist, I began my practical lessons dissecting an earthworm. In the fifth year we dissected a rabbit. At Advanced level I dissected a dogfish and a frog. At University, I spent two years dissecting a cadever knowing details of every part of the body. In clinical years we began surgery by incising and draining abscess and then removal of lipoma. 
The verse I quoted meant what I told you as a physicist according to my understanding of relating Qur'an with the physical world.  Again this is a proof of the uniqueness of the teaching of Muhammad.
But you tend to disagree.You can check any authentic commentary of the Qur'an explaining the physical world. A Turkish Admiral in the 16th century according to my reference witnessed that phenomenon in the Persian Gulf. An American company drilling oil in Dhahran also observed that phenomenon.
Now, please ask NASA the meaning of this verse and its application in launching satellites:  O assembly of jinn and men! If you have power to pass beyond the zones of the heavens and the earth, then pass beyond (them)!. But you will never be able to pass them, except with authority (from Allah)! Then which of the Blessings of your Lord will you deny? Definitely from this verse a physicist cannot deny the existence of Allah (God- that angry God according to the Old Testament who was provoked ten times by the Children of Israel in Egypt).
I am sorry that I cannot convince you of the existence of Allah nor can anyone believe in that without being rational. Imagine the mummified body of Pharaoh! If you want to understand Qur'an you must begin by understanding what Allah revealed in the Old Testament especially the Book of Genesis and Exodus.
Friendship.



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 01 October 2010 at 8:17pm
Friendship, thank you for the dialogue.  However, anecdotal evidence about some 16th century Turkish admiral and an American oil company are not evidence to most people.  As far as NASA's opinion with regard to the Quran verse you sited I would say the verse does not offer any information beyond that of what was known in the middle of the last millenium.  I know, I know, you have some insight into the hidden meanings behind these verses that you can't share because I have not looked at sperm under a microscope.  It is apparent that I am going to have to look elsewhere if I going to get some insight into these Quranic verses that predict or predate the science of the last century.  You obviously do not intend to share your vast repository of hidden knowledge.   


Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 02 October 2010 at 1:45am
Assalamu alaika Schmikbob.

Yes, indeed if the Quraysh who witnessed the Revelation had difficulty in understanding it, I will not blame you. I hope Allah will not blame me for failing to explain Islam to you as a qualified engineer. As for me, Allah did not describe sperm to have a tail, head, PH, viscosity, life shelf, volume and the minimum number for it to fertilize an ovum . We scientists coined such descriptions and are authentic. Muslims regard them as explanation by Allah and Muhammad. Please remember what Allah told Muhammad, "You Muhammad cannot make the dead listen, nor the deaf when he deliberately turns away from the truth. Nor can you make the blind turn away from his lurch. You can only make one to listen who believed with Our signs". made me. I believe that your interest will one day show you the light  You are on to yourself.
Friendship.



Posted By: samirfaithful
Date Posted: 13 October 2010 at 9:08am
essalam aleykoum Man,
 
i want to confirm you that the link wich i given to you before can be opened i tryed it by myself.
 
so try again and let me now okei:))
 
have nice day enjoy ur reading
 
http://www.truth.org.ye/INDEX.HTML - http://www.truth.org.ye/INDEX.HTML .
 


Posted By: derbyjon
Date Posted: 02 November 2010 at 4:56am
Smile This is all very interesting I will have to read further


Posted By: kevin998
Date Posted: 05 November 2010 at 7:32am
I just want to thank Friendship for his posts and explanations. It is refreshing to read real dialog about real things and not just talking points.

Thanks again


Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 05 November 2010 at 3:13pm
Assalamu alaika Kevin 998.

Thanks very much for your comment. I have written an account of what the West should know about the nature of Islam and Muhammad. It will soon be published in the United States of America. I will inform you once published.


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 05 November 2010 at 6:19pm

Friendship, Bernard Lewis has written two excellent books on this very subject.  They are superbly researched and fascinating if you'd care to take a look.



Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 06 November 2010 at 12:54am
Assalaamu alaika Schmikbob.

Assalaamu alaika Schmikbob.

I have not come across it. Give me the site. Is it available from Amazon? I will google and find it.
Please kindly take it with respect this question: If you have read it you cannot be an agnostic.
Secondly, If the West have read it they would never support Muslim despotic regimes waging war and manufacturing arms to improve their economy by killing innocent lives.



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 06 November 2010 at 8:10pm
Friendship, the first book is "What Went Wrong" and the second is "The Crisis of Islam" and yes they are available through Amazon.  Next, the questions you pose "If you have read it you cannot be an agnostic." is not a question.  Finally the West does not support "Muslim despotic regimes waging war and manufacturing arms to improve their economy by killing innocent lives."  I'm not sure what your point is here. 


Posted By: davebane
Date Posted: 18 November 2010 at 11:29pm
I have a big respect to all religion in this world and i like to know more in different religion..and thank you for this forum for giving me so many information about Islam 


Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 20 November 2010 at 1:07am
Assalamu alaika davebane.

We wellcome you to this forum and we sincerely wish you understanding. But you must make effort to read, research think and then act.
Truly speaking there is only one Islam. Ad-din is a concept translated by the Greeks into religion. Ad-din has ten different meanings: accountability, reward governance, power, obedience, submission etc.
The holy Qur'an is a compendium of all that Allah revealed to mankind from Adam to Jesus the son of Maryam explaining why He is and called Allah. This is understood from the physical and non-physical world. Then He explained and proved beyond any doubt why He has to be obeyed. All what the world is saying about differences in Scriptures is not true. The hatred generated by inciting the Children of Israel against Muhammad is not true. Muhammad married their daughters. The terror the world is facing is due to the lack of that representative of Muhammad called his Khalifa in the world. This Khalifa can be an American a Red Indian, an Ethiopian and never Decreed by Allah to be an Arab. So Allah needs your hand in establishing the Khalifate.
 


Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 20 November 2010 at 5:52pm
Originally posted by schmikbob schmikbob wrote:

It is apparent that I am going to have to look elsewhere if I going to get some insight into these Quranic verses that predict or predate the science of the last century.  You obviously do not intend to share your vast repository of hidden knowledge.   

If you are opting to look elsewhere, try going through all the subjects here! Always keep in mind the references to these physical phenomena is being made to; are the illiterate bedouins by someone unlettered in order to end  Arabian long dark age and consequently dark age in the yonder! The man was not a scientist and not meant to be one but a Warner and Bringer of the good to people who will write the first book on physics and that is not something to ignore! It is not difficult to see the conquerors do rewrite the history and try to discount everything the vanquished people achieved in their glory! The same is true about the early Muslims...I don't think you knew the most celebrated physicist Ibne Haythem( Al Hazen/ Latanized)was the first scientist of the known world! aka as "The Physicist"  The author of the first book on Optics while the rest of the world thought the earth was flat!
 

http://scienceislam.com/quran_miracles.php - http://scienceislam.com/quran_miracles.php


-------------
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.


Posted By: ansari
Date Posted: 10 December 2010 at 2:45pm

 

schmikbob,

I was following your arguments. Quite interesting.

It is natural that you were not satisfied with certain statements found in the Quran that some people consider evidence of miracles. So you asked, �Anyone else??  Can anyone refer me to an authoritative or at least persurasive source for any prophetic aspects to the Quran that have to do with modern science?�

If you do not consider those Qur'anic statements valid answer to your question, may I ask what sort of miracles in the Qur�an would satisfy your quest? If you could specify, that would enable your readers in pin pointing such miracles if there are any.

 

Regards,

 

Ansari

 



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 12 December 2010 at 8:52am
ansari, the other posts have thus far answered my question very well.  From them I have gathered that the answer is "no, the Quran doesn't nor was it intended to predict or predate scientific discoveries of the modern era."  A genuine example would be something a lot more substantial than going through some wild mental gymnastics to get from the word "smoke" to the Quran describing nebula.  From what I can gather this whole Quran and science argument is a modern polemic to try to convince modern sceptics.


Posted By: Friendship
Date Posted: 12 December 2010 at 10:09am
Assalamu alaika Schmikbob.

Your post: this whole Quran and science argument is a modern polemic to try to convince modern sceptics.

Response: When did modernity begin? In the OT Genesis 1:19 Allah said: Have a lot of children! Fill the earth with people and bring it under your control.  .... Here Allah did not tell or describe the process of fertilization. By their civilization they might have understood sex chromosomes.
In Gen 1:20 Allah said, "I have provided all kind of fruit and grain for you to eat." Probably they ate without knowing how food is digested and transported across the body. They do not know ATP=ADP conversion. Do you know that
Please allow us to glorify Allah for we have submitted to Him based on what He created and challenged us to do the same but utterly failed. Note there was never recession or depression from Hijra to 101 A.H.   


Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 12 December 2010 at 12:07pm
Friendship, other than "When did modernity begin?" your response to my statement actually had nothing to do with my statement.  So in answer to the pertinent portion of your statement, when modernity began is highly subjective but for the sake of argument lets say it began with the year 1800.  Does that help?     


Posted By: ansari
Date Posted: 14 December 2010 at 6:16am

Schmikbob,

After reading through your posts, I begin to wonder if what you said about someone�s �mental gymnastics�, trying to attribute special significance to the word �smoke� could be right. But before I subscribe to your thought, I want to get further insight into your thinking. I believe that the word �smoke� we are talking about is found in the Quran 41:11. So, before I can assume if the �mental gymnastics� theory is correct, I hope you can clarify some of my doubts, namely:

1. Since the word is taken from the Quran, who do you think the author of this Quran is? I am sure you won�t agree it is Allah. Then the obvious answer is Mohamed. Or, do you think it could be someone else?

2. If you feel it is the latter, what kind of person was he? What do you know about him? Was he a liar, a magician, a lunatic, a tyrant, a terrorist etc. etc.? What kind of background did he live in? What is about his ancestors?

3. When Quran talked about prophets, some critics of the Quran said that Mohamed �learned� about these prophets from the earlier scriptures. In this case, do you believe that he had some sort of �education� about nature, astronomy, zoology, physics etc. etc. from previous scriptures or from anyone else?

4. How many other seventh century illiterate Mohameds, who talked about �smokes� �revolving stars�, �the moon following the sun�, �the star of piercing brightness� �the sky full of great constellations�, �the expanding universe� etc. etc. , did you learn about? How many such Mohameds lived before the 7th century A.D. (not including the prophets as we are not considering the Mohamed in question a prophet. If Mohamed is not a prophet, comparing him with prophets is not fair. Please note Question 3 above is a separate issue).Were there any other such Mohameds for the next 10 centuries after his death?

Answers to these questions are vital to see if somebody was doing �mental gymnastics�. Honest answers to these questions will also enlighten us to know him -  if he was one of many that existed, if he was talking something sensible, if so, from where did he get that information etc. Then we will also be able to consider whether there is anything miraculous about the Quran.

 

Regards,

 

Ansari

 



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 16 December 2010 at 10:02am
Ansari, since clarifying doubts is not what you are interested in (the tone of your post indicates you have already made up your mind), your questions are not as clever as you obviously believe them to be.  I will,however, indulge your game.
 
1. If by author you mean the originator of the spoken words that were transfered to the written word, I would say Muhammed is the author.  If you mean who actually wrote the words down I would say that is a matter of some dispute but probably not Muhammed.
2. This question is one that has been tackled by a great many historians and I don't think I can add anything to their compendium.  No I don't think he was a "liar, a magician, a lunatic, a tyrant, a terrorist etc".  These are simplistic labels that far too restricting.  I do believe he was a product of his times.  I also think he may have been epileptic but that is irrelavent.
3. I believe that whatever education Muhammed had about "nature, astronomy, zoology, physics etc" probably came from the exposure he had to a vast number of people during the years in which the words that make up the Quran were "revealed".
4. I know of no other "seventh century illiterate Mohameds".  Since I believe that any so called prophets only believe they receive revelation from God and don't actually do so, comparing Muhammed to other prophets is really just an exercise in semantics.
 
Finally, I will say that answering these questions has been fun but not vital to determining if the proponents of science in the Quran are simply trying on a new polemic for size (or, doing mental gymnastics).  Only a little common sense and logical thought is required.  Sadly they seem to be in short supply. 


Posted By: ansari
Date Posted: 19 December 2010 at 1:28am

Schmikbob,

 

When you said that I have already made up my mind, that is actually the fact and I do not wish to deny it. But as I said in my earlier post �I (still) begin to wonder if what you said about someone�s �mental gymnastics�, trying to attribute special significance to the word �smoke� could be right. I still hold on to it.

Now, let me go through some of the things you have mentioned in your latest post.

Let me borrow one of your phrases: �OK, lets move very slowly� as we are �trying to determine if the proponents of science in the Quran are simply trying on a new polemic for size�. You accept the fact that Quran was recited by Muhammad, and that somebody else had written it down. About the person who recited the Quran, you said that he may have been epileptic. After discarding all those adjectives I have suggested, you have chosen to believe him to be an epileptic. I am sure you have chosen this word very carefully; so I have to be careful in considering it

You were expressing your thought as an epileptic Muhammad recited the Quran and a scribe or a number of scribes had written it down. I can follow your thought up to that point. Then I stop to think:

1.      An epileptic Muhammad recited the Quran and there were scribes who were ready to be with him for 23 years (That is the time span during which he recited (received) the Quran). Do you believe its possibility?

 

2.         During these 23 years he recited 6,226 verses every one of which is free of grammar mistakes. At least that is the mental gymnastics� by some, but those critics of the Quran who scrutinised the Quran claimed that they found 13 grammar mistakes which was vehemently refuted by Arabic linguistic scholars. Let�s forget about the linguistic scholars. Let�s suppose the critics were right. Then, we have to admit that an �epileptic Muhammad� who was illiterate had recited 6,226 verses (of his own) during 23 years with 13 grammatical errors! Unbelievable! Don�t you think so?

 

3.         When you had difficulty in finding a word to describe the Muhammad in question, I decided to find a suitable one on my own. By checking through the internet, I found the following just in one page. There were thousands of such pages. On this one page alone, hundreds of people who were considered to be assets to human race and who themselves were not Muslims had said a lot about this Muhammad. Let�s see what some of them said about him:

 

1. the most influential person in all history

 

2. ... an honest and upright man who had gained the respect and loyalty of others who were likewise honest and upright men

.

3. Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire ...

 

4. .. He must be called the Savior of Humanity...if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness.

 

5. There is Muhammad the Prophet. There is Muhammad the Warrior; Muhammad the Businessman; Muhammad the Statesman; Muhammad the Orator; Muhammad the Reformer; Muhammad the Refuge of Orphans; Muhammad the Protector of Slaves; Muhammad the Emancipator of Women; Muhammad the Judge; Muhammad the Saint. .

..

6. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement ..., the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. .

.. 

7. one man single handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades.

 

8 ... when the peasant and king kneel side by side and proclaim: 'God Alone is Great'... I have been struck over and over again by this indivisible unity of Islam that makes man instinctively a brother."

 

9. "The league of nations founded by the prophet of Islam put the principle of international unity and human brotherhood on such universal foundations as to show candle to other nations. ... the fact is that no nation of the world can show a parallel to what Islam has done towards the realization of the idea of the League of Nations."

 

10. the honor of the Prophet have never transgressed the measure of human virtues; and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion." ...

 

These are just the tip of an ice berg.

 

Where is your position among these great souls? All that you could say about Prophet Muhammad was that he was an �epileptic�. Feel like reconsidering?

 

Regards,

 

Ansari



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 20 December 2010 at 7:03pm
Ansari, I am not sure what any of your questions have to do with my comment about mental gymnastics and the word "smoke".  Either you see my point or you do not.
 
1. Of course it is possible.  I have known many people for 23 years as have many people.  Relevance?
 
2. I actually don't think it's unbelievable at all.  Also, I am not one of the crowd that thinks of "iltifat" as a beautiful form of poetic license.
 
3.  I never said that I "had difficulty in finding a word to describe the Muhammad in question".  What I said was "This question is one that has been tackled by a great many historians and I don't think I can add anything to their compendium".  I hope that you are not implying that these are the same.  Also, no, I don't feel like reconsidering.  I still think it possible that Muhammed suffered from epilepsy.
Now, don't you think that you have danced around my question long enough?  Do you believe that the word "smoke" as used in the Quran has
some modern scientific meaning that has only recently come to light, or, do you believe that it reflects the scientific knowledge of the age in which it was written?


Posted By: ansari
Date Posted: 22 December 2010 at 4:44pm
 
schmikbob,
 
You said you were not sure if �...any of my questions have to do with your comment ...�

 

Let me reiterate: We are trying to find out if the word �smoke� as used in the Quran has any modern scientific meaning ...�. But why are we hasty about it? The word �smoke� is one of the 99,464 words that make up the Quran. Half of the people presently living on earth believe that every single word in the Quran has special meaning; and that the Quran itself is a miracle. We want to find out if there is any substance in what they think, and therefore we should have knowledge, especially the background knowledge of the book and its author, (that is, the Quran and Muhammad, according to what you believe). We can�t simply take the literal meaning of the word �smoke� and discuss it.

 

Does the Quran reflect the scientific knowledge of the age in which it was written ... I can�t believe it. For example I don�t know if anybody was talking about the expanding universe 1400 years ago.  I don�t know if people in those days were talking about galaxies. No doubt people were wondering about the nature. Naturally they were bewildered about the sun, the planets and stars. Especially in the field of astronomy, even during the primitive age, people had their own conclusions. Because of that we can�t say Muhammad �learned� about them and confirmed those ideas. If that were the case, the scribes who had written down whatever Muhammad said stood a better chance to do so. Muhammad was a person who spent his whole life in the Arabian Desert. Then, how was he able to get those ideas? Another thing we should remember is that these ideas were not published during the 7th century or earlier. And that not the whole mankind at that time was interested and talking about those things. So we can conclude that an ordinary illiterate Muhammad wasn�t reflecting the so called �scientific knowledge�. Those conclusions people made in those days were not scientific knowledge at all. They were just expressing their thoughts. Muhammad did not confirm any of the so called �scientific knowledge� of the time. Whatever he said was new in every sense. The future generations will NOT assess Muhammad and say, �some of the things that Muhammad said were right, but the rest were wrong.� And how was it possible for him to reserve a place in the human history? That is where THE GOD ALMIGHTY comes in.

 

To one of my questions I introduced for discussion, your answer was that it was possible during the 7th century for a number of scribes to follow an illiterate, epileptic person in order to take down whatever he recited, much of which was beyond the understanding of people of the time. Literacy usually goes along with education, and therefore the educated scribes were ready to listen and record whatever an �uneducated� person who was also epileptic. And it was done continuously for 23 years. As you said, it was possible; and that was what happened. But then, why did it happen?  Was PROPHET MUHAMMAD, as Muslims call him, uneducated? Was he epileptic? When you said it was possible, I am sure you have your own very good reasons to believe so. What�s about sharing your reasons?

 

You said you have nothing more to add to the compendia that the historians have compiled. Which of those great historians or which of those compendia stated that Muhammad was an epileptic? Was it your own discovery or invention? Either way, you may like to discuss your conviction. I am not sure if the great historians would forgive us (you and me) for such labelling if we can�t prove our stand. Otherwise we owe the world an apology.

 

Regards,

 

Ansari

 



Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 23 December 2010 at 8:03pm
Wonderful, "why are we hasty about it?".  Translation, "I have no intention of answering your question and instead am going to diverge into all sorts of dogmatic non relevant issues."  Ansari, I have asked this same question and many other similar questions about this same subject on this same subject site and gotten the same non answers.  I now realize that this is the modus operandi here.  Since I have asked and answered many of your questions and you have chosen to answer none of mine and simply asked more questions of me (not to mention misquoting me and not acknowledging it) I am through with this dialogue until you can at least reciprocate with courtesy.   


Posted By: ansari
Date Posted: 27 December 2010 at 4:51pm

schmikbob,

Your translation of my question was wrong. In fact the translation should read: We are not in a position to comment on anything about the book and �its author� yet, because we are not fully aware of what we are commenting about. Before we can open our mouths, we should know at least the basics about what we are talking about, and therefore it is better that we get more information.

 

Since you have threatened that you were �through with this dialogue until ...�, I better forget about gathering more information about the book �and its author�. What you wanted to know was �what is so miraculous about the word �smoke� mentioned in 14:11 of the Quran�. Let me admit that I have nothing else to add to whatever some of the world-renowned scientists said about it. In fact it was these scientists were the ones who concluded that the word �smoke� in the Quran is a miracle. Some of them further indicated that the Quran must be from our Lord, THE ALMIGHTY. Let me quote some of them, though these may be familiar to you and were quoted over and over again:

 

Alfred Kroner

 Professor of the Department of Geosciences, University of Mainz, Germany.

"Thinking where Muhammad came from... I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years with very complicated and advanced technological methods that this is the case."
"Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics 1400 years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind for instance that the earth and the heavens had the same origin, or many others of the questions ...

 

Yushidi Kusan - Director of the Tokyo Observatory, Tokyo, Japan.

"I say, I am very much impressed by finding true astronomical facts in Qur'an, and for us modern astronomers have been studying very small piece of the universe... So by reading Qur'an and by answering to the questions, I think I can find my future way for investigation of the universe."

 

Professor Armstrong-  works for NASA, Professor of Astronomy, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.

 

"I am impressed at how remarkably some of the ancient writings (the Quran) seem to correspond to modern and recent Astronomy. ..�

 

William Hay - Professor of Oceanogprahy, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.

 "I find it very interesting that this sort of information is in the ancient scriptures of the Holy Qur'an, and I have no way of knowing where they would have come from. But I think it is extremely interesting that they are there ...

And when he was asked about the source of the Qur'an, he replied, "Well, I would think it must be the divine being."

 

Professor of Marine Geology teaching at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

"It is difficult to imagine that this type of knowledge was existing at that time, around 1400 years back. May be some of the things they have simple idea about, but to describe those things in great detail is very difficult. So this is definitely not simple human knowledge. A normal human being cannot explain this phenomenon in that much detail. So, I thought the information must have come from a supernatural source."

 

Tejatat Tejasen -  

Chairman of the Department of Anatomy,  former Dean of the faculty of Medicine, University of Chiang Mai, Thailand.

 "In the last three years, I became interested in the Qur'an... I believe that everything that has been recorded in the Qur'an fourteen hundred years ago must be the truth, that can be proved by the scientific means.
Since the Prophet Muhammad could neither read nor write, Muhammad must be a messenger who relayed this truth which was revealed to him as an enlightenment by the one who is eligible creator. This creator must be God, or Allah.

 

Dr. Maurice Bucaille

Former chief of the Surgical Clinic, University of Paris,

 

 "...our knowledge of these disciplines is such, that it is impossible to explain how a text produced at the time of the Qur'an could have contained ideas that have only been discovered in modern times."

"... How could a man, from being illiterate, become the most important author, in terms of literary merits, in the whole of Arabic literature?
How could he then pronounce truths of a scientific nature that no other human-being could possibly have developed at that time, and all this without once making the slightest error in his pronouncement on the subject?"

 

For an ordinary person like me, after going through their explanations, what else should I wait for to conclude that the contents of the Quran on the matter under discussion are miraculous, especially when no other person with a comparative standing with these scientists disagreed with them? Arguments from me (and may be from you, too), however colourful they may be, will fall on deaf ears. We can keep on arguing until the cows come home, but nobody will pay any attention.

 

Here I would express my understanding of the Quran.

1. It is not a textbook. If it were, it would have run into hundreds of volumes. It is meant to be a SIGN from The God, THE ALMIGHTY.

2. It is meant to be for people, until the end of time. The following verses say so:

38:87 - This [divine writ], behold, is no less than a reminder to all the worlds

68:52 - [Be patient:] for this is nought else but a reminder [from God] to all mankind.

3. There won�t be any more periodical messages or messengers from God. The last messenger, who came with the final messages that are meant for mankind until the end of time, came centuries ago. But there are a number of so-called messages and/or messengers claimed to be inspired or sent by god. How are we to differentiate the true messages from The God from the others? To help us recognise them, HE has made the Quran a miracle, by building in universal truths that were realised centuries later, and that would be realised by future generations. We can be assured that no other so-called messages would contain these safety features. These safety features are the ones that enabled the scientists to recognise the Quran as the one that is from The God, THE ALMIGHTY. There are numerous such safety measures; for example there are mentions about ants, bees, birds, camels, clouds, light, darkness, lightning, moon, sun, mountains, night, day, spider, stars, planets, seas, growing of seeds, etc. etc. Things that are mentioned in the Quran about these things may not be sufficient for ordinary people to learn anything about them; for those whom God has blessed with investigative minds will be able to recognise the given cues, advance themselves and enlighten the world. Eventually, that will in turn help the people at large to realise that the Quran is from God.

Let me elaborate a little on this: In the Quran, it is stated:

29:41 The parable of those who take [beings or forces] other than God for their protectors is that of the spider which makes for itself a house: for, behold, the frailest of all houses is the spiders house. Could they but understand this!

For an ordinary person, this verse may not contain any significant information. But the scientist who came across this verse began to wonder why there is mention of the spider�s web in a religious book? He investigated further and found out that the thread from a spider�s web is the frailest. When an ordinary person comes to know about it, he would realise that such information was not known more than 1500 years ago, and therefore, the Quran must be from God. We will appreciate this fact when we know that an illiterate person could not have written this Quran 1500 years ago and therefore we will conclude that every one of about 99000 words in the Quran is a miracle, and that the Quran itself is a miracle.

 

Regards,

 

Ansari

 

 

 

 

 




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net