Science & Technology - The irony in using science to deny Allah

The irony in using science to deny Allah

Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: General
Forum Name: Science & Technology
Forum Description: It is devoted for Science & Technology
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=29496
Printed Date: 26 April 2024 at 5:00am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: The irony in using science to deny Allah

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Subject: The irony in using science to deny Allah
Date Posted: 30 May 2014 at 12:29pm

The irony in using science to deny Allah

Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe? � Al Anbiya 21:30

Is it not ironic that science, one of the tools that should facilitate man in appreciating the grandeur of the creator is being used by some in fact to deny the creator?

One of the arguments raised by these advocates of science is that they don�t believe in god as the existence of god is not proven by scientific facts. I wonder does that mean science has already established the existence of everything and nothing more exists in this universe unless already proven by scientific facts? We all know the answer is an emphatic �NO�, because science keeps discovering new things everyday, which even though were already existing in this universe, were unknown to man till yesterday, and this being a continuous process, at no point is man capable of declaring that �yes, we know it all�. The point is that science being a mere tool created by man, has never been and never can be an absolute authority to decide non-existence of something in this universe, let alone the creator. So the argument of man denying the existence of god because it is not proven by science, sounds more like the argument of a fish in a small pond denying the existence of an ocean.

Now, if we try to make a high level summary of what science has been successful in doing so far, we can summarize it as below:

1.    Partly explaining the creation and existence of the universe
2.    Substantially improving the quality of our lives through scientific inventions and discoveries using already available resources

While all of us acknowledge the advancements made by science and are grateful to the geniuses behind all these works, still we can clearly see that none of our scientific achievements under the above categories form the basis for denial of the ultimate creator.

Another popular question from the advocates of science is that �if god created the universe, then who created god?� What I would like to ask them in return is �what existed before that which has now been theorized as the beginning of the universe as per our current scientific understanding?�We know none of the scientific minds can give a clear answer - what I would like to convey here is that however advanced we may be scientifically, still there are limitations to man�s understanding, or boundaries beyond which man cannot imagine, explain or comprehend.

Moreover, if we analyze our inventions at an absolute sense, we can clearly see that the ultimate ingredients of all our inventions were not made by us; all these raw materials came from the nature. The whole argument can be summarized as below:

1.    There are things in this universe which are beyond the comprehension of the best of human minds and there will be always
2.    Man can never be an absolute creator or controller � because he is already so dependent on things which were not created by his hands that his very existence is impossible even for a few seconds without being dependent on these (e.g. the oxygen we breath), and he is absolutely helpless in controlling some of the natural phenomena when it happens (death being the perfect example).

If we can really give some thought on the above facts and reflect our limitations, then that will be the perfect starting point of appreciating the existence of the ultimate creator. Once we are able to get to this point, then there are ample signs around us to take us closer to realizing the ultimate creator and sustainer � Allah

Now let us look at this - it took the time and efforts of some of the best of human minds to formulate a theory explaining the solar system. Having understood the mathematical precision, genius, artistry and flawless design which ensure the motion of each planet without causing any collisions, which is more logical for man to believe? That such perfect design came in to being just by chance without the intervention of an external power OR the presence of an ultimate creator whose words are in front of us to guide us?

Lo! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sendeth down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts therein, and (in) the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth: are signs (of Allah's Sovereignty) for people who have sense. � Al Baqara 2:164

And He it is Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. They float, each in an orbit. � Al Anbiya 21:30

Is it not really man�s pride that makes him puffed up to deny the ultimate creator in spite of the numerous signs available all around him, and that too just by partially explaining this universe, whereas he has no qualms to conveniently set aside his scientific mind and attribute things beyond his comprehension to mere chance?

So let not our scientific achievements make us puffed up with pride to deny the ultimate creator, rather make us reflect and bring humility in to our minds, to understand our lowliness and the greatness of the ultimate creator � Allah!

Replies:

Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 31 May 2014 at 3:22am

Science itself is a theory. Theory of this, that and the other.

Now if we want to talk about these atheist and agnostic types, what it boils down to is that they 'think' they know better than God Almighty.

Also it is Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala who guides whom He Wills. So all those whom He has guided should always be grateful.

Alhamdulillahi Rahman Ar Raheem.

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 31 May 2014 at 12:40pm

Ha,

there are many statements in your posts I can even agree on

1.��Partly�explaining the creation and existence of the universe�
2.��Substantially improving the quality of our lives through scientific inventions and discoveries using�already available resources� While all of us acknowledge the advancements made by science and are grateful to the geniuses behind all these works, still we can clearly see that none of our scientific achievements under the above categories form the basis for denial of the ultimate creator.�

Correct, No Problem! (well I'd replace "the ultimate" by "a")

another popular question from the advocates of science is that �if god created the universe, then who created god?� What I would like to ask them in return is �what existed before that which has now been theorized as the beginning of the universe as per our current scientific understanding?�We know none of the scientific minds can give a clear answer � what I would like to convey here is that however advanced we may be scientifically, still there are limitations to man�s understanding, or boundaries beyond which man cannot imagine, explain or comprehend.�

I would call this a draw: Religion cannot explain where God came from and Science can't explain where the laws of nature [which created the universe] came from. Both can equally claim that either God or the laws that govern nature simply existed for ever. Science does keep on searching however.

1.��There are things in this universe which are beyond the comprehension of the best of human minds and there will be always� 2.��Man can never be an absolute creator or controller � because he is already so dependent on things which were not created by his hands that his very existence is impossible even for a few seconds without being dependent on these (e.g. the oxygen we breath), and he is absolutely helpless in controlling some of the natural phenomena when it happens (death being the perfect example).�

Also this looks pretty ok to me (not sure about the death part though).

Now:

If we can really give some thought on the above facts and reflect our limitations, then that will be the perfect starting point of appreciating the existence of the ultimate creator. Once we are able to get to this point, then there are ample signs around us to take us closer to realizing the ultimate creator and sustainer � Allah�

Well, here my convictions start to diverge. First if the laws of nature existed for ever you do not need a creator anymore (In the end you use the same trick by saying God is eternal). But much less convincing is to call the creator Allah. I once heard that there are 2000 religions on earth. I have no idea whether this number is right or wrong but in the end it does not really matter. All believers do unanimously believe that their religion is [the only] true [one]. In this � rather sentimental than logical thinking- there is no difference between religions (I invite those that do not agree to start a little discussion with Jehovah's testimonies or the infamous Mormons). I have no objective arguments to think that Christianity (for example) is any �more true� than Islam (although I have a slight preference for Christianity in being a bit less harsh in its heaven/hell business).
Occams razor forces me to reduce the assumptions to a minimum which is that all religions are evenly likely to be wrong in their Deity.

Now coming to Abu Loren:

Sure, but also Islam is nothing else than a theory. Take away the [unproven] assumption that Mohamed is the messenger of god and your religion becomes pointless. The same applies to Christianity without resurrection. Of course will you keep running back to me saying: �But we do have prove that the Quran was sent by God�- well obviously not enough to convince the whole of humanity (nor me). This is by the way one of the striking differences compared to science: There is no Jewish nor Christian nor Hindu nor Islam science. Obviously science is a building that can convince beyond individual confessions.
To come to the main point: I openly admit that there are many things that I/we don't know. I also realize that we may never know the ultimate truth. It may not even exist. I go along with the (islamic) scientist Averroes who claimed that Logic combined with our senses are the [only] tool to get closer to the truth. I prefer this uncertainty to the [in my eyes] rather silly statement �We have the truth� (just google �Islam, truth� and you'll see). To me the claim of holding the [ultimate] truth just looks like bare ignorance.

Last not least: I'm agnostic not atheistic: This leaves the possibility of a god (even the one called Allah). There are other Gods that are thinkable: Some consider our Universe as a big Computer, in this case God is simply a (mega) programmer. Whatever the options are: I consider the likelihood that God (if he exists) is really interested in my very existence as so small that it doesn't impact my life by any means.

Very last not least: Indeed, science still permits a creator to exist, but saying that there are no conflicts is painting the picture in far too rosy colours. Just think about Giordani Bruno on the christian side or Darwins theory of evolution on the muslim side. Furthermore there are many logical conflicts in the muslim, as well as in the christian concept - unfortunately too many to add them here in two lines.

Glad to be of service: Airmano

Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 31 May 2014 at 1:31pm

Quranexplorer, what a long winded way of expressing the God of the Gaps argument. Let's fill all the holes in scientific theory with God.

Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 01 June 2014 at 4:11am

airmano wrote:

Now coming to Abu Loren:

I don't know if you have ever read the Qur'an or the Seera of the Prophet (SalAlaahu Alayhi Wa Salaam). If you did then you didn't understand a thing. Actually there are verses in the Qur'an for people like you. Here are some :-

Sahih International

The example of those who disbelieve is like that of one who shouts at what hears nothing but calls and cries cattle or sheep - deaf, dumb and blind, so they do not understand. 2:171

Sahih International

And among them are those who listen to you, but We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. Even when they come to you arguing with you, those who disbelieve say, "This is not but legends of the former peoples." 6:25

Sahih International

And whoever Allah guides - he is the [rightly] guided; and whoever He sends astray - you will never find for them protectors besides Him, and We will gather them on the Day of Resurrection [fallen] on their faces - blind, dumb and deaf. Their refuge is Hell; every time it subsides We increase them in blazing fire. 17:97

Sahih International

And when our verses are recited to him, he turns away arrogantly as if he had not heard them, as if there was in his ears deafness. So give him tidings of a painful punishment.

31:7

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 01 June 2014 at 5:03am

To Abu Loren:
Your reaction seems quite stereotypical to me. It is something I have experienced many times: Whenever somebody expresses a doubt about the ultimate truth of the Quran an avalanche of suras/verses is given back as a response. I guess it is difficult to accept for a muslim having grown up with the logic that the Quran expresses ultimate truth, that it (the Quran) doesn't impress people outside Islam. To me it rather feels like a form of religious "Shock and Awe - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe typically linked to threats of hellfire. In the end it is a circular reasoning which boils down to: "The Quran is right because it is written so [in it]". I can however assure you that I did read a good part of the Quran but I didn't find it convincing by any means I'm afraid. Personally I rather prefer arguments and/or development of thoughts and ideas than threats.

Regards: Airmano

Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 01 June 2014 at 7:37am

why do so many religions attribute such human qualities to their deities? a God that requires that I worship and believe in his greatness or burn in eternal hellfire is not acting like a deity at all but rather like a human which, actually makes sense, since man's capability to create things in his own image is unmatched.

Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 01 June 2014 at 9:04am

Quranexplorer wrote:

Is it not ironic that science, one of the tools that should facilitate man in appreciating the grandeur of the creator is being used by some in fact to deny the creator?

If you are starting from the assumption that the purpose of science is to "appreciate the grandeur of the creator", then you are not doing science at all.

One of the arguments raised by these advocates of science is that they don�t believe in god as the existence of god is not proven by scientific facts. I wonder does that mean science has already established the existence of everything and nothing more exists in this universe unless already proven by scientific facts? We all know the answer is an emphatic �NO�, because science keeps discovering new things everyday, which even though were already existing in this universe, were unknown to man till yesterday, and this being a continuous process, at no point is man capable of declaring that �yes, we know it all�.

No scientist would ever claim that we "know it all". Only religion could be that arrogant.

The point is that science being a mere tool created by man, has never been and never can be an absolute authority to decide non-existence of something in this universe, let alone the creator. So the argument of man denying the existence of god because it is not proven by science, sounds more like the argument of a fish in a small pond denying the existence of an ocean.

Whereas religion is like a fish claiming the existence of a magical ocean where they will live blissfully forever after their deaths.

The scientist fish, on the other hand, would respond something like, "Well, we have no direct evidence one way or the other about this hypothetical ocean; but if it did exist, there is no reason to suppose that it is anything like what your religion describes, nor is there any evidence that we would go there after our deaths. Moreover, if we did, our best cosmological models suggest that such an ocean would be far too salty for us to live; and if there were other creatures there, at least some of them would be a million times bigger than us and would probably gobble us up without even noticing."

Which fish would be closer to the truth?

Another popular question from the advocates of science is that �if god created the universe, then who created god?� What I would like to ask them in return is �what existed before that which has now been theorized as the beginning of the universe as per our current scientific understanding?�We know none of the scientific minds can give a clear answer - what I would like to convey here is that however advanced we may be scientifically, still there are limitations to man�s understanding, or boundaries beyond which man cannot imagine, explain or comprehend.

You're right. There will always be plenty of stuff we can't explain. I can't explain it, and neither can you. The difference is that I am humble enough to admit I can't explain it. I don't feel any need to make up nonsense to cover up my ignorance. You talk later about "man's pride", but you have it backwards. The prideful thing is to claim knowledge of things that you cannot possibly know.

-------------
Addeenul �Aql � Religion is intellect.

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 01 June 2014 at 11:00am

Al-E-Imran 3:190-191: Lo! In the creation of the heavens and the earth and (in) the difference of night and day are tokens (of His Sovereignty) for men of understanding, (190) Such as remember Allah, standing, sitting, and reclining, and consider the creation of the heavens and the earth, (and say): Our Lord! Thou createdst not this in vain. Glory be to Thee! Preserve us from the doom of Fire. (191)

airmano wrote:

To come to the main point: I openly admit that there are many things that I/we don't know. I also realize that we may never know the ultimate truth. It may not even exist. I go along with the (islamic) scientist Averroes who claimed that Logic combined with our senses are the [only] tool to get closer to the truth. I prefer this uncertainty to the [in my eyes] rather silly statement �We have the truth� (just google �Islam, truth� and you'll see). To me the claim of holding the [ultimate] truth just looks like bare ignorance.

So you are in a situation of uncertainty with no definite answers and you have seen neither science nor your reason can give you full answers. But a sincere approach to Quran can, the choice is yours whether to remain in dark or seek the light and of course with Allah's will:

Al-Maeda 5:16: Whereby Allah guideth him who seeketh His good pleasure unto paths of peace. He bringeth them out of darkness unto light by His decree, and guideth them unto a straight path.

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 01 June 2014 at 12:16pm

schmikbob wrote:

why do so many religions attribute such human qualities to their deities? a God that requires that I worship and believe in his greatness or burn in eternal hellfire is not acting like a deity at all but rather like a human which, actually makes sense, since man's capability to create things in his own image is unmatched.

What human qualities you can attribute to Allah after going through the below verses:

Al-Baqara 2:255: Allah! There is no God save Him, the Alive, the Eternal. Neither slumber nor sleep overtaketh Him. Unto Him belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that intercedeth with Him save by His leave? He knoweth that which is in front of them and that which is behind them, while they encompass nothing of His knowledge save what He will. His throne includeth the heavens and the earth, and He is never weary of preserving them. He is the Sublime, the Tremendous.

Ya-Seen 36:54-64: This day no soul is wronged in aught; nor are ye requited aught save what ye used to do. (54) Lo! those who merit paradise this day are happily employed, (55) They and their wives, in pleasant shade, on thrones reclining; (56) Theirs the fruit (of their good deeds) and theirs (all) that they ask; (57) The word from a Merciful Lord (for them) is: Peace! (58) But avaunt ye, O ye guilty, this day! (59) Did I not charge you, O ye sons of Adam, that ye worship not the devil - Lo! he is your open foe! - (60) But that ye worship Me? That was the right path. (61) Yet he hath led astray of you a great multitude. Had ye then no sense? (62) This is hell which ye were promised (if ye followed him). (63) Burn therein this day for that ye disbelieved. (64)

Al-Anaam 6:160:Whoso bringeth a good deed will receive tenfold the like thereof, while whoso bringeth an ill-deed will be awarded but the like thereof; and they will not be wronged.

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 01 June 2014 at 8:52pm

First of all, I am happy we have nobody here using science to deny the existence of Allah.

Ron Webb wrote:

If you are starting from the assumption that the purpose of science is to "appreciate the grandeur of the creator", then you are not doing science at all.

No such assumptions, Quran among its many miraculous characteristics has a number of scientific references beyond its time and science as a mere human tool should be looked at as a facilitating tool for man to appreciate the creator along with these references.

Ron Webb wrote:

No scientist would ever claim that we "know it all". Only religion could be that arrogant.

Good that we are on same page on science,but often people come up with this illusion that anything and everything should be testified by science for them to accept it, I am happy you accept it is not the case.Islam is not arrogant on this, it teaches man to accept his limitation and looks up to Allah as the only �know it all�.

Ron Webb wrote:

Whereas religion is like a fish claiming the existence of a magical ocean where they will live blissfully forever after their deaths.The scientist fish, on the other hand, would respond something like, "Well, we have no direct evidence one way or the other about this hypothetical ocean; but if it did exist, there is no reason to suppose that it is anything like what your religion describes, nor is there any evidence that we would go there after our deaths. Moreover, if we did, our best cosmological models suggest that such an ocean would be far too salty for us to live; and if there were other creatures there, at least some of them would be a million times bigger than us and would probably gobble us up without even noticing."Which fish would be closer to the truth? .

And there it is not up to this religious fish to convince the scientist fish because the limited free will to make a choice is already given by Allah and he leaves the scientist fishes to wander in its uncertainties with ifs, buts, probabilities and models till the day of resurrection.
An - Naba: 78: 39-40: That is the True Day. So whoso will should seek recourse unto his Lord. (39) Lo! We warn you of a doom at hand, a day whereon a man will look on that which his own hands have sent before, and the disbeliever will cry: "Would that I were dust!" (40)

Ron Webb wrote:

You're right. There will always be plenty of stuff we can't explain. I can't explain it, and neither can you. The difference is that I am humble enough to admit I can't explain it. I don't feel any need to make up nonsense to cover up my ignorance. You talk later about "man's pride", but you have it backwards. The prideful thing is to claim knowledge of things that you cannot possibly know.

Even I don�t make the claim of explaining it all and going a step further I use my senses to appreciate the ultimate creator whose numerous signs are around us including the unity of design in this universe and above all the Quran- a book full of wisdom:

Al-Baqara: 2: 2-7: This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off (evil). (2) Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them; (3) And who believe in that which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) and that which was revealed before thee, and are certain of the Hereafter. (4) These depend on guidance from their Lord. These are the successful. (5) As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not. (6) Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom. (7)

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 02 June 2014 at 6:24am

Well,

pouring more and more hellfire menaces over the non-believers won't congeal me in horror.
In clear terms: Quran citations are only convincing for those who do believe in Islam.
To impress me (regarding the Quran) you'd have to argue in logical terms or at least in good examples/comparisons.
Trying to prove that the Quran conveys ultimate truth on the basis of a verse stating that the sun heats and the moon doesn't (as you did in the other thread) is definitely not a good example.

Airmano

Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 02 June 2014 at 6:41am

Quranexplorer, if you are incapable of seeing the human qualities in these verses, then I am incapable of helping you. Of course I already knew that as you simply repeat the same verses again and again in the hope that this will somehow make it all true.

Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 02 June 2014 at 11:17am

This thread proves the point that talking to people without guidance is like talking to a brick wall.

Completely pointless (unless you have the time and patience).

Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 02 June 2014 at 5:02pm

Quranexplorer wrote:

No such assumptions, Quran among its many miraculous characteristics has a number of scientific references beyond its time and science as a mere human tool should be looked at as a facilitating tool for man to appreciate the creator along with these references.

Yes, I've seen most of those "scientific references". They are either intuitively obvious or laughably vague. But again, you're starting from the assumption that the Quran is the truth, and you're trying to use science to prove it. That's backwards.

Islam is not arrogant on this, it teaches man to accept his limitation and looks up to Allah as the only �know it all�.

If you asked me how life first came into existence, I would start by saying frankly "I don't know." I might then offer some speculations based on what little we do know about evolution, biochemistry, etc., but I would be very clear that these are just speculation.

If I asked you, on the other hand, you would tell me that God created it. You would state that opinion as a fact, quite confidently and unequivocally, despite having no evidence to back it up (beyond its having been written down in a book, whose authenticity you have no evidence for).

That, in a nutshell, is the difference. When I don't know something, I say "I don't know." When theists don't know something, they say "God did it."

You totally missed the point. The "religious fish" is wrong. He just made up a story because it sounded comforting, but it was nothing more than a fantasy. Just like yours, and just as wrong.

Al-Baqara: 2: 2-7: This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off (evil). (2) Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them; (3) And who believe in that which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) and that which was revealed before thee, and are certain of the Hereafter. (4) These depend on guidance from their Lord. These are the successful. (5) As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not. (6) Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom. (7)

This is your "loving" God, who deliberately blinds his creatures to the (alleged) truth and then punishes them for not believing it.

-------------
Addeenul �Aql � Religion is intellect.

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 02 June 2014 at 8:14pm

Abu Loren wrote:

This thread proves the point that talking to people without guidance is like talking to a brick wall.Completely pointless (unless you have the time and patience).

I tend to agree with you here, but the point is such discussions really show how fragile the arguments are of disbelievers trying to protect a castle of cards with smoke screens of science and reason. Alhamdulillah I think I can manage with patience, but time is really an issue :)

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 02 June 2014 at 8:38pm

schmikbob wrote:

Quranexplorer, if you are incapable of seeing the human qualities in these verses, then I am incapable of helping you. Of course I already knew that as you simply repeat the same verses again and again in the hope that this will somehow make it all true.

My apologies, maybe it was an over expectation from my part that you will get it straight. Let me explain you this way: Allah � the ultimate creator, cherisher and sustainer of man to whom man is indebted for his very being itself puts forward to man a clear Contract which stipulates:

1.     Man should be grateful and worship only Allah and live a righteous life as set out by Allah
2.     If man succeeds in this obligation, he is offered a reward much greater than what he rightfully deserves
3.     If he fails in this obligation, he will be punished only to the extend he has failed and he will not be wronged in the least.

And the striking point is that man�s credit account towards Allah is so huge having already availed all the benefits freely available to him in Allah�s universe which was not created by man�s hands (material things including air, water, minerals, animals, vegetation etc. and even man�s physical faculties or other abstract qualities etc.) that anything that he do to please Allah can never wipe off this credit. Still Allah accepts his creations who sincerely seeks his pleasure, with all their imperfections and admits then to eternal bliss out of his mercy.

Those who are punished are rebellious transgressors who after having availed all of Allah�s mercies, after having shown clear signs, after having given clear guidance through Quran- a book full of wisdom, after having guided through lives of numerous prophets and still under default on many counts. Even for such transgressors there is mercy with Allah that if they repent sincerely he can forgive their past sins and admit them to eternal bliss.

I�m just human and I�m incapable to express the full magnitude of Allah through my words which is much above this.

Now give me an example from the human world comparable to Allah if you can.

And what makes you think Allah should fit in to your reason when you make the below statement when you already know that your reason is not good enough to even explain many things observed in the natural world:

schmikbob wrote:

a God that requires that I worship and believe in his greatness or burn in eternal hellfire is not acting like a deity at all but rather like a human which, actually makes sense, since man's capability to create things in his own image is unmatched.

So the ultimate point is not of reason or science, but of choice, you choose to not believe whatever it may and it is up to you to choose the right path and of course with Allah�s will.

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 03 June 2014 at 12:37am

Originally posted by Abu Loren

This thread proves the point that talking to people without guidance is like talking to a brick wall.Completely pointless (unless you have the time and patience)

This translates to: Don't talk to people that do not believe in Islam, they are (too) narrow minded.
A truly open-minded statement !

To Quranexplorer:
You start to learn, no Quran citations and no hellfire in your last post. Thanks !
Obviously you can't accept the fact that (most of) the people on earth do not consider the "Allah construction" as being a serious concept. When you write:

Now give me an example from the human world comparable to Allah if you can

you silently assume that the most natural thing is to believe in Allah since replying to this question only makes sense for somebody believing in it.

But: YOU claim that Allah exists, so it is your job to "prove" it.

Airmano

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 04 June 2014 at 12:12pm

Ron Webb wrote:

Yes, I've seen most of those "scientific references". They are either intuitively obvious or laughably vague. But again, you're starting from the assumption that the Quran is the truth, and you're trying to use science to prove it. That's backwards.

The Quranic scientific references could be another topic of discussion, and I haven�t seen any credible opposition arguments except in the line �you maybe right, but I just can�t accept it�. Quran need not be proved by science and we've already seen science cannot prove or disprove Quran (explained hereunder again) so let�s remove the illusion of science as the ultimate "testifier".

Ron Webb wrote:

If you asked me how life first came into existence, I would start by saying frankly "I don't know." I might then offer some speculations based on what little we do know about evolution, biochemistry, etc., but I would be very clear that these are just speculation.If I asked you, on the other hand, you would tell me that God created it. You would state that opinion as a fact, quite confidently and unequivocally, despite having no evidence to back it up (beyond its having been written down in a book, whose authenticity you have no evidence for).That, in a nutshell, is the difference. When I don't know something, I say "I don't know." When theists don't know something, they say "God did it."

Good, so you acknowledge the limitations of science that it is no "know it all". But still would remain adamant on the argument that there can be no truth unless proved(testified by science)- this makes no sense. But what I do is I look beyond science and I see the Quran far superior in all counts specifically the following:

1. Quran gives a clear purpose for creation � science like in many other counts, have no clue about this.
2. The realm of Quran covers all aspects of human life with superior wisdom � the realm of science is very limited and cannot explain many things even in this limited realm.

So how can science which is so incomplete and operating in a limited realm as you also agree can possibly testify the Quran which covers all aspects of human life with superior wisdom . And if not science then what other way is left? The only way to understand the truth of Quran is to sincerely approach it, and once you do this you can see that it gives you perfect clarity on all aspects which science and human reason when applied independently fails to do miserably.

In a nutshell, the realm of Allah is beyond the comprehension of any human tools including science, so there is no point in trying to fit Allah in to science, whereas it is the opposite - many things from whatever little science is able to explain correctly, fits in to what Allah has revealed to man in the form of scientific references in Quran, as signs for men of understanding.

Ron Webb wrote:

You totally missed the point. The "religious fish" is wrong. He just made up a story because it sounded comforting, but it was nothing more than a fantasy. Just like yours, and just as wrong.

Now you contradict your earlier statement of science accepting things beyond its realm as "I don't know". This is clearly out of the realm of science and you should not be changing your words here.

Ron Webb wrote:

(5) As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not. (6) Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom. This is your "loving" God, who deliberately blinds his creatures to the (alleged) truth and then punishes them for not believing it.

Come on, I wish if you could spend half the energies that you spend in misinterpreting the verses in interpreting the verses correctly, what a change it could have brought to your life. Here the reference is about "disbelievers" not "creatures" which makes a huge difference. The act of disbelief by man is a grave default because then he is a rebellious transgressor who after having availed all of Allah�s mercies, after having shown clear signs, after having given clear guidance through Quran- a book full of wisdom and after having guided through lives of numerous prophets, still choose to reject the truth.

The turning point is the choice to believe or not believe.You are given the choice and you rebelliously chose not to believe and then you try to blame the creator for your failure.How does it make sense?

Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 04 June 2014 at 6:14pm

Quranexplorer wrote:

Those who are punished are rebellious transgressors who after having availed all of Allah�s mercies, after having shown clear signs, after having given clear guidance through Quran-

To some, perhaps. To others, Allah deliberately obscures those signs, as you quoted Al-Baqara: 2: 7: "Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom."

Now give me an example from the human world comparable to Allah if you can.

Comparable in what way? Every religion has its own deity or deities. As far as I can see they're all comparable.

So the ultimate point is not of reason or science, but of choice, you choose to not believe whatever it may and it is up to you to choose the right path and of course with Allah�s will.

People don't "choose" to believe or not. They are either persuaded by the evidence, or not. Could you "choose" not to believe in Allah? Then what makes you think I could "choose" to believe?

-------------
Addeenul �Aql � Religion is intellect.

Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 05 June 2014 at 4:17am

airmano wrote:

Originally posted by Abu Loren

This thread proves the point that talking to people without guidance is like talking to a brick wall.Completely pointless (unless you have the time and patience)

This translates to: Don't talk to people that do not believe in Islam, they are (too) narrow minded.
A truly open-minded statement !

Airmano

Not at all. It's just that this thread will have pages and pages of what you will stand on what we will stand on. By this I mean we could provide you with verses from the Qur'an then you will turn around and say we are trying to justify the Qur'an with the Qur'an. It will just go round and round in circles.

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 05 June 2014 at 6:11am

Abu Loren:

By this I mean we could provide you with verses from the Qur'an then you will turn around and say we are trying to justify the Qur'an with the Qur'an. It will just go round and round in circles.

Well observed, this statement is correct (in my eyes at least). As told, there is no point in bombarding people that do doubt the divine origin of the Quran with suras or verses in order to "prove" the veracity of the Quran.
And here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning - Circular_Reasoning is why I have a problem with this.

Regards: Airmano

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 07 June 2014 at 3:14am

airmano wrote:

you silently assume that the most natural thing is to believe in Allah since replying to this question only makes sense for somebody believing in it.

Ron Webb wrote:

Comparable in what way? Every religion has its own deity or deities. As far as I can see they're all comparable.

schmikbob came with an argument saying that Quranic depiction attributes some human characteristics to Allah suggesting a human origin for Quran.

I have cleared his misconception by explaining the Quranic depiction of Allah which is absolutely devoid of any human characteristics.

So unless he can give some credible explanation with an example comparable to Allah from the human world to attribute a human characteristic to Allah, it clearly shows the non-human origin of Quran by the counter argument (an absolute non-human depiction of Allah in Quran is the proof for its divine origin) � the ball is in your court now!

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 07 June 2014 at 5:26am

airmano wrote:

But: YOU claim that Allah exists, so it is your job to "prove" it.

Ron Webb wrote:

People don't "choose" to believe or not. They are either persuaded by the evidence, or not. Could you "choose" not to believe in Allah? Then what makes you think I could "choose" to believe?

Now coming to the �proof business� which seems to be the last resort of escape for the proponents of science and reason:

Having already seen both human reason and science when applied alone are not good enough even to explain or prove many things in the human world, please give some credible answers to below questions if you are serious about the proofs:

1. What proof are you looking at for you to believe in Quran and Allah?
2. What mechanism do you suggest to establish this proof having already seen the failure of both human reason and science to fully establish such proofs even in the much limited human world, let alone the realm of Allah?

Posted By: kingkory
Date Posted: 07 June 2014 at 6:38am

Sheep...we are all sheep. And to add to that all we need to do is look at the work of cloning ...I think that is why so many ppl look to science and the big bang theory for way to renounce a divine creator . After us "human" started cloning animals...that opened a whole new door on how we became..human

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 16 June 2014 at 9:51am

Quranexplorer:

1. What proof are you looking at for you to believe in Quran and Allah?

It could have been so easy:

Predicting (for example):

The existence of America,
The weirdness of quantum mechanics,
5 Eartquakes in a row(let's say with a precision of one day)
The (formulation and) proof of the four colour theorem
The supernova SN1054 in 1054.
....
just three or four of things/predictions like that and I'd turn into a believer. But there is nothing of that in the Quran. Nothing.

Sorry folks: Airmano

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 20 June 2014 at 4:49am

airmano wrote:

It could have been so easy:

Predicting (for example):

The existence of America,
The weirdness of quantum mechanics,
5 Eartquakes in a row(let's say with a precision of one day)
The (formulation and) proof of the four colour theorem
The supernova SN1054 in 1054.
....
just three or four of things/predictions like that and I'd turn into a believer. But there is nothing of that in the Quran. Nothing.

Sorry folks: Airmano

Good, so we have got the wish list from one out of 7.17 billion people on this earth. Going by an average of 4 predictions per each person, let's say that means 30 billion predictions approx to cover the whole population - what a practical way to prove Allah!! And that still leaves you with an option to ask for more - because human excuses can have no limit.

Instead if you really reflect on some of the Quranic verses, you won't be wasting your time on such silly arguments:

Al Anaam 6:158: Wait they, indeed, for nothing less than that the angels should come unto them, or thy Lord should come, or there should come one of the portents from thy Lord? In the day when one of the portents from thy Lord cometh, its belief availeth naught a soul which theretofore believed not, nor in its belief earned good (by works). Say: Wait ye! Lo! We (too) are waiting.

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 23 June 2014 at 3:21am

@Quranexplorer: You explicitly asked me

What [kind of] proof are you looking at for you to believe in Quran and Allah?

and I gave you some examples.

I could have stayed more abstract by answering: "3 or 4 claims [in the Quran] being really more than unprovable statements like: "If you [don't] do this and that you'll go to hell" which cover already 75% of the Quran.
Funny stories (like the bee) covering 24.8% and the remaining 0.2% telling things that were already known or obvious at the time.
Since you didn't understand what I meant with the examples I've given, I strongly doubt you would if I had chosen a more abstract wording.

Seriously, I'd expect a bit more from a book that claims to be of divine origin.

Airmano

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 04 July 2014 at 9:10am

airmano wrote:

@Quranexplorer: You explicitly asked me

What [kind of] proof are you looking at for you to believe in Quran and Allah?

Al-E-Imran: 3:66: Lo! ye are those who argue about that whereof ye have some knowledge: Why then argue ye concerning that whereof ye have no knowledge? Allah knoweth. Ye know not.

I see that you have come up with a 75-24.8-0.2% summary of the Quran. Now if you are truthful, share the basis for this summary in this forum. There are 114 chapters and 6,236 verses in the Quran, have you gone through these in full to come up with your statistics? Or you just threw some numbers without having the slightest knowledge of what actually is there in the Quran?

I and for that matter all those who read this post know that you just threw it, but what you fail to understand is that such baseless statements only show how ignorant you are, and do nothing to the Quran.

Since you have already proven your ignorance of Quran, I will try to give you a glimpse of what the Quran is all about, with my limited knowledge:

Quran is a unique book of divine origin providing guidance to all those who ward off evil. The Quranic teachings can be broadly put under the following categories:

1.     Quran exhorts man to wisely use his limited free will to make the right choice in this life i.e. submission to the will of Allah.
2.     It contains the foundations for an entire system of life for those who choose to submit to the will of Allah, covering a whole spectrum of issues, which range from specific articles of faith and commandments to general moral teachings , rights and obligations, crime and punishment, personal and public law, and a host of other private and social concerns. (Ref: The Holy Quran English Translation of the meanings and Commentary,IFTA)
3.     For those who choose to submit to the will of Allah it gives glad tidings of eternal success in the hereafter.
4.     For the rebellious transgressors who after having availed all of Allah�s mercies, after having shown clear signs, after having given clear guidance through Quran- a book full of wisdom, after having guided through lives of numerous prophets and still choose not to believe, it gives warning of a grievous chastisement in the hereafter.

To drive home these points, Quran explains things using a variety of ways including references to signs of Allah�s sovereignty in the nature, historic account of previous generations, superior reasonings probing the minds of those who choose to reflect etc.

Now this is just to make you understand the depth of your ignorance when you throw some baseless statistics on Quran so that you don�t repeat it.

I have already explained you in the previous post why it does not make sense to look for miraculous predictions to prove the divine origin of Quran, and Quran gives sound reasoning on this aspect at multiple places :

Al-E-Imran: 3:183: (The same are) those who say: Lo! Allah hath charged us that we believe not in any messenger until he bring us an offering which fire (from heaven) shall devour. Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Messengers came unto you before me with miracles, and with that (very miracle) which ye describe. Why then did ye slay them? (Answer that) if ye are truthful!

But for those who sincerely look for guidance there are enough signs for them to appreciate the truth of Quran:

Al-Baqara: 2:164: Lo! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sendeth down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts therein, and (in) the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth: are signs (of Allah's Sovereignty) for people who have sense.

Posted By: schmikbob
Date Posted: 05 July 2014 at 7:43am

Science verses non-science. A clear winner to the uneducated

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 05 July 2014 at 7:54am

schmikbob wrote:

Science verses non-science. A clear winner to the uneducated

No, it is Truth Vs Falsehood being attempted to cover with science and reason - and truth is the winner always.

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 06 July 2014 at 12:47am

@Quranexplorer
Thanks for posting the verses. Let's have a closer look at them:

Al-E-Imran: 3:66: Lo! ye are those who argue about that whereof ye have some knowledge: Why then argue ye concerning that whereof ye have no knowledge? Allah knoweth. Ye know not.

Good start. This sentence has absolutely no provable content. It belongs thus to the 75% group.
Let's carry on:

(The same are) those who say: Lo! Allah hath charged us that we believe not in any messenger until he bring us an offering which fire (from heaven) shall devour. Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Messengers came unto you before me with miracles, and with that (very miracle) which ye describe. Why then did ye slay them? (Answer that) if ye are truthful!

Another unprovable statement. Again this goes into the 75% group.
Now:

Al-Baqara: 2:164: Lo! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sendeth down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts therein, and (in) the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth: are signs (of Allah's Sovereignty) for people who have sense.

Pretty much as before. Nevertheless, ships are indeed usefull and were already known at the time as mentioned. They go into the 0.2%.

May be that you were actually right after all, in the sense that the funny stories make probably less than 24.8%.

Airmano

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 12 July 2014 at 5:29am

Okay, so you just threw your statistics without the least knowledge of Quran. Then you should at least give a try to understand what I explained in the previous post on Quran. Don't waste your time looking for provable content and miraculous predictions in all the verses of Quran.

Quran has been influencing the hearts of many worldwide due to a number of miraculous characteristics including the superior moral lessons, an unmatched ease in handling a variety of subjects as complex as creation of the universe to matters of our daily life, an impeccable consistency of facts throughout its verses, the fact that it has and will remain the same always, the superior elegance of its language, the sound reasoning it provides on various subjects, and the universal and timeless nature of its message etc, and not solely because of the provable contents and miraculous predictions.

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 17 July 2014 at 5:29am

QE:

Okay, so you just threw your statistics without the least knowledge of Quran

Wrong! I did read a good part of it. The verses you gave fit pretty much the given statistics, but feel free to post more for analysis.

Don't waste your time looking for provable content and miraculous predictions in [all] the verses of Quran

At least here we agree !

Quran has been influencing the hearts of many worldwide due to a number of miraculous characteristics including the superior moral lessons, an unmatched ease in handling a variety of subjects as complex as creation of the universe to matters of our daily life, an impeccable consistency of facts throughout its verses

Strange, Christians say exactly the same when talking about the bible, Jews on behalf of the Torah and Mormons - surprise - about the "Book Mormon".

...the fact that it has and will remain the same always, the superior elegance of its language

Gilgamesh, the Odyssey and the Torah will also always remain the same and they are unaltered for much longer than 1400 years already. And who judges, based on which rules, "the superior elegance of its language [of the Quran]" ?

...and not solely because of the provable contents and miraculous predictions

I'm still waiting for at least one useful example in terms of "provable contents and miraculous predictions" which is beyond triviality (like the lamp) and/or facts in the Quran that were/are really new (and not imported from the Greeks).

Airmano

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 25 July 2014 at 1:41pm

airmano wrote:

Wrong! I did read a good part of it. The verses you gave fit pretty much the given statistics, but feel free to post more for analysis.

Don't be under the impression that I have some obligation to clear your misunderstandings on Quran or to analyse some baseless statistics. However, I am happy for an analysis once you share the basis for your statistics.

airmano wrote:

Strange, Christians say exactly the same when talking about the bible, Jews on behalf of the Torah and Mormons - surprise - about the "Book Mormon".

The Bible and Torah in their original form are the words from the one god Allah. But it is an established fact that the current versions of the Bible and Torah have undergone many changes by human hands, seriously undermining their authenticity and this is acknowledged even by many among them. And the Book of Mormon clearly have a human origin. It is a different topic of discussion that how people can be guided by "divine books" that have been clearly established as having undergone changes by human hands.

airmano wrote:

Gilgamesh, the Odyssey and the Torah will also always remain the same and they are unaltered for much longer than 1400 years already. And who judges, based on which rules, "the superior elegance of its language [of the Quran]" ?

The Gilgamesh or the Odyssey are human works with no religious intent exhorting man to follow a system of life to achieve spiritual success. So nobody cares whether these remain same or not. And Torah as I have already mentioned has been established as modified by human hands.

Al-Baqara 2:23: And if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto Our slave (Muhammad), then produce a surah of the like thereof, and call your witness beside Allah if ye are truthful. (23) The Quran challenges anyone to create or write one Verse like the Quran. The pagans at the time of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh),at a time the elegance of the Arabic language was at it's height, failed to meet this challenge, and till this day 1400 years later no one has been able to meet this challenge.

airmano wrote:

I'm still waiting for at least one useful example in terms of "provable contents and miraculous predictions" which is beyond triviality (like the lamp) and/or facts in the Quran that were/are really new (and not imported from the Greeks).

There are plenty if you really heed. But human excuses can have no limit, let's see what excuse you have got on this one:

Al Anbiya 21:30: Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe? - This is perfectly in line with the modern scientific idea of primary nebula followed by separation of elements resulting in formation of galaxies. Also a clear reference to the aquatic origin of life.

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 30 July 2014 at 7:50am

Quranexplorer:

However, I am happy for an analysis once you share the basis for your statistics.

My main division is prove-/measurable (or not), the second one trivial/nonsense/or really new information.
Admittedly "funny" is a more personal view, may be you can live with the following separation: More than 90% of the Quran are unprovable statements. The remaining claims are either so vague that they can not be interpreted, trivial, or simply wrong (I come to your heaven/earth in a second). There are no important scientifically (=provable) unexpected/new claims in the Quran.
That there is some jitter in the separation between "provable or not" is in the nature of things.

Now:

Wow, tell this to a Mormon! ( I let you do the exercise).
Than: Why should God protect one holy book (The Quran) and not the others ? Are there more and less holy "holy books" ?
And who (besides the Muslims) says that the Quran is unaltered ? It is also a fact that Uthman destroyed all other versions of the Quran. Why has the Sanaa parchment been erased and overwritten? The original Quran is written in "rasm" which can not be read unambigously anyway. The translations vary substantially from each other, partly because of that.

Furthermore:

The Gilgamesh or the Odyssey are human works with no religious intent exhorting man to follow a system of life to achieve spiritual success. So nobody cares whether these remain same or not

Well, about the Quran being unchanged 80% of the world population do not care either. And writings about "Moral and spiritual life" is something you can find in a 1000 different versions from uncountable self-claimed apostles like my favourite:
http://vissarion.eu/en/ - http://vissarion.eu/en/ for example.

Now:

Al-Baqara 2:23: And if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto Our slave (Muhammad), then produce a surah of the like thereof, and call your witness beside Allah if ye are truthful. (23) The Quran challenges anyone to create or write one Verse like the Quran. The pagans at the time of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh),at a time the elegance of the Arabic language was at it's height, failed to meet this challenge, and till this day 1400 years later no one has been able to meet this challenge.

I am still waiting for the criterias and the committees deciding on that. Could you please reply to this question ?

Last not least:

There are plenty if you really heed. But human excuses can have no limit, let's see what excuse you have got on this one:

Al Anbiya 21:30: Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe? - This is perfectly in line with the modern scientific idea of primary nebula followed by separation of elements resulting in formation of galaxies. Also a clear reference to the aquatic origin of life.

Again a lot of wrong and vague statements.
It is written: "we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe?" First: Where is the credit to the Greeks, who postulated that the origin of live lies in water - again almost a thousand years earlier than Mohamed?

Now: The way it is written in the Quran the claim is also wrong: We are not(!) made out of water, we contain a high quantity of water. (The element that dominates our chemistry is Carbon). This is obviously not the same. It is likely (but not sure) that the origin of live on earth lies in the water but this is again not what is written in the Quran. And btw. are we now made out of clay or out of water ? Even within the Quran there are (plenty of) contradictions.

To finish:

Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water?

Let me come up with a counter-example:
if he Quran stated "And those who believe, know that the sky is green and the water red". Instead of realizing that this is bare nonsense you would immediately claim that the Quran holds information about the northern light (inexistent in Saudi Arabia) and reveals the existence of (than) unknown continents because there you can find lakes like this one http://miltonbell.photoshelter.com/image/I0000WyzD6kBUHKE - http://miltonbell.photoshelter.com/image/I0000WyzD6kBUHKE Therefore the Quran is of divine origin.

In clear terms: The sentence about heaven and earth can be interpreted in a zillion different ways (it belongs thus to the "vague" sub-category), but you always pick out the interpretation that suits you best AFTER the associated (scientific) findings have been made! And when I remind you that strong evidence means "predictive power" (= Correct claims made before(!) supporting evidence is found), you always take the escape lane by saying that the Quran is not a science book. Indeed, it is not.
I work in science and frankly, if I tried to "prove" my theories with vague statements like this, I'd loose my job the very same day.

Not good:

Airmano

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 11 August 2014 at 8:01pm

airmano wrote:

My main division is prove-/measurable (or not), the second one trivial/nonsense/or really new information.
Admittedly "funny" is a more personal view, may be you can live with the following separation: More than 90% of the Quran are unprovable statements. The remaining claims are either so vague that they can not be interpreted, trivial, or simply wrong (I come to your heaven/earth in a second). There are no important scientifically (=provable) unexpected/new claims in the Quran.
That there is some jitter in the separation between "provable or not" is in the nature of things.

Still you have not provided any basis for your statistics � it�s only a personal opinion. And what you are trying is to first throw some numbers and then try to fit things to that and here again your statistics keep changing. I would expect a clearly verifiable basis for the statistics on Quran, especially when a man of science like you makes a statement on a book that is available for verification in public domain .Anyway, let's not waste our time on this further.

airmano wrote:

Why should God protect one holy book (The Quran) and not the others ? Are there more and less holy "holy books" ?
And who (besides the Muslims) says that the Quran is unaltered ? It is also a fact that Uthman destroyed all other versions of the Quran. Why has the Sanaa parchment been erased and overwritten? The original Quran is written in "rasm" which can not be read unambigously anyway. The translations vary substantially from each other, partly because of that.

Asking questions with no intent to understand is one of the easiest thing in this world. There is no point in trying to fit your reason to Allah�s will in all things unless you have answers to all the possible questions. Even I wonder on things like why can�t the sea water be sweet? Or why can�t we humans have wings to fly? Or why can�t the date palms produce olives for a change sometimes? Or why can�t we stop someone from dying etc.

Instead of speculating, why don�t you produce two different versions of Quran in existence now, if you can? What Uthman (R.A) did was standardization of a hitherto non-standard text that people memorized and some kept in writing for their own purpose. The Sanaa parchments which dates back to around 671 AD falls under one of the non-standard texts. It will be worth a discussion if you can bring to the table some specific alterations if you are aware, instead of making surface level speculations.

�Rasm� is an Arabic script and has nothing to do with the variation in translations � there is no problem of ambiguity if you have the right intent. If I have to learn Chinese for a living, I have to do that even though I find it quite confusing now. The translations vary because of the difference in understanding between different translators for various reasons like sometimes it is quite difficult to find a suitable English word to really convey the full meaning of an Arabic word.

airmano wrote:

Well, about the Quran being unchanged 80% of the world population do not care either. And writings about "Moral and spiritual life" is something you can find in a 1000 different versions from uncountable self-claimed apostles like my favourite:
http://vissarion.eu/en/ - http://vissarion.eu/en/ for example.

You are wrong. More than any other book in existence, there are many people around the world other than Muslims who are concerned about the Quran (sometimes maybe for the wrong reasons, like you). If not, you won�t see so many non-Muslims including you discussing the Quran in this forum itself.

Regarding your link, all these apostle ideas are so incomplete like anything human that they fail to provide a complete system of life with a clear purpose for the human existence.

airmano wrote:

I am still waiting for the criterias and the committees deciding on that. Could you please reply to this question ?

Quran established itself as a book of superior wisdom not because it was judged by a committee according to some criteria and got some 5 star rating, but because it could transform human minds around the world due to its superior wisdom.

So if you think you can produce something similar or superior, you should not be worried about the criteria and committees, but should just go ahead with your work and if it is really a worthy opponent it will be judged and if successful it will get established the same way. And going by your claims of a human origin to Quran, I would expect you to produce a far superior work having the advantage of so much information at your finger tips compared to an illiterate man 1400 years ago!

airmano wrote:

Again a lot of wrong and vague statements.
It is written: "we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe?" First: Where is the credit to the Greeks, who postulated that the origin of live lies in water - again almost a thousand years earlier than Mohamed?

Now: The way it is written in the Quran the claim is also wrong: We are not(!) made out of water, we contain a high quantity of water. (The element that dominates our chemistry is Carbon). This is obviously not the same. It is likely (but not sure) that the origin of live on earth lies in the water but this is again not what is written in the Quran.

Having mentioned the origin of earth, here the background is clearly set on the origin of life on earth. So I don�t see the need to look beyond this.

For the argument sake � if you say we are not made of water but only contain water, then it should be possible for us to be alive with no water content in our body. But I think humans die of dehydration even if the water content in our body falls below a specific limit?

Again you are wrong, the element that dominates our chemistry is Oxygen, not Carbon.

It was only a postulate from Greeks not certainty as stated in Quran.

airmano wrote:

And btw. are we now made out of clay or out of water ? Even within the Quran there are (plenty of) contradictions.

I have a building that has used both cement and bricks for construction. Now can you say what the building is made of? Cement or bricks?

airmano wrote:

Let me come up with a counter-example:
if he Quran stated "And those who believe, know that the sky is green and the water red". Instead of realizing that this is bare nonsense you would immediately claim that the Quran holds information about the northern light (inexistent in Saudi Arabia) and reveals the existence of (than) unknown continents because there you can find lakes like this one http://miltonbell.photoshelter.com/image/I0000WyzD6kBUHKE - http://miltonbell.photoshelter.com/image/I0000WyzD6kBUHKE Therefore the Quran is of divine origin.

In clear terms: The sentence about heaven and earth can be interpreted in a zillion different ways (it belongs thus to the "vague" sub-category), but you always pick out the interpretation that suits you best AFTER the associated (scientific) findings have been made! And when I remind you that strong evidence means "predictive power" (= Correct claims made before(!) supporting evidence is found), you always take the escape lane by saying that the Quran is not a science book. Indeed, it is not.
I work in science and frankly, if I tried to "prove" my theories with vague statements like this, I'd loose my job the very same day.

Frankly, you being a man of science and someone always looking for proofs, I wonder why don�t you definitively establish a contradiction (like your imaginary example of �sky is green and the water red� statement) in Quran instead of relying on speculations, possibilities, ifs, buts and all.

I feel you are trying to evade this heaven and earth sentence from Quran and I would love to see one better explanation from your zillion interpretations.

Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 14 August 2014 at 2:42pm

Qranexplorer:

...Still you have not provided any basis for your statistic

I did: the criteria is "Provable Statement". I asked you whether you could provide any proof regarding the information content of the many verses you quoted and which I put into my 90% basket- you never did.
-----------------------------------------------------
Than

Instead of speculating, why don�t you produce two different versions of Quran in existence now, if you can? What Uthman (R.A) did was standardization of a hitherto non-standard text that people memorized and some kept in writing for their own purpose. The Sanaa parchments which dates back to around 671 AD falls under one of the non-standard texts. It will be worth a discussion if you can bring to the table some specific alterations if you are aware, instead of making surface level speculations.

Honestly, I don't understand what you mean. One one side you admit that there have been other versions (you call them "Non Standard") and at the same time you ask me to prove that there have been different versions of the Quran ?! All that Uthman did was assembling the pieces and saying "This is it" (burning the rest).
-------------------------------------------------------

�Rasm� is an Arabic script and has nothing to do with the variation in translations

This is correct, but it makes its reading ambiguous. In these cases (of ambiguity) it is not the translation but the meaning the translator gives it in the first place that varies.
-----------------------------------------------
Than

Again: If you use the word "superior" twice what is your criterion that allows you to compare ?
------------------------------------------------------

For the argument sake � if you say we are not made of water but only contain water, then it should be possible for us to be alive with no water content in our body. But I think humans die of dehydration even if the water content in our body falls below a specific limit?

Sure, I never doubted the importance of water but I contest the phrasing that we are "made out of water"
----------------------------------------------------

Again you are wrong, the element that dominates our chemistry is Oxygen, not Carbon.

Please google first before coming up with such statements.
--------------------------------------------------

It was only a postulate from Greeks not certainty as stated in Quran.

Sorry ? Is this a joke ?
--------------------------------------------------------

I have a building that has used both cement and bricks for construction. Now can you say what the building is made of? Cement or bricks?

Neither nor, I'd explain in more details.
---------------------------------------------------------

I feel you are trying to evade this heaven and earth sentence from Quran and I would love to see one better explanation from your zillion interpretations.

Not at all! The verse goes:
"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them..."
What's about looking at it in a biblic sense: "once heaven and earth were one" (until god kicked us out) ?
And before you get excited abot the "s" behind heaven, have a look at 2:29.

Airmano

Posted By: Matt Browne
Date Posted: 04 October 2014 at 3:15am

Quranexplorer wrote:

So you are in a situation of uncertainty with no definite answers and you have seen neither science nor your reason can give you full answers. But a sincere approach to Quran can, the choice is yours whether to remain in dark or seek the light and of course with Allah's will: Al-Maeda 5:16: Whereby Allah guideth him who seeketh His good pleasure unto paths of peace. He bringeth them out of darkness unto light by His decree, and guideth them unto a straight path.

Yes, we are in this situation. Uncertainty is part of our universe. For some questions there are no definite answers. Check out Werner Heisenberg or Kurt Friedrich G�del for example.

Uncertainty also applies to religious beliefs. We cannot prove God. We cannot disprove God. We cannot prove that one religion is true and another one is wrong. We can only believe and to me it's a good thing to allow for doubts and skepticism and keep an open mind.

I support an "your belief and my belief" approach. You believe in the Prophet Muhammad as the last prophet and that's fine. I believe in the power of the Sermon on the Mount. We can both keep our beliefs and they can coexist. Live and let live. That's the way forward. That's the way to spread peace.

-------------
A religion that's intolerant of other religions can't be the world's best religion --Abdel Samad
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people--Eleanor Roosevelt

Posted By: Quranexplorer
Date Posted: 18 October 2014 at 3:46am

Matt Browne wrote:

Yes, we are in this situation. Uncertainty is part of our universe. For some questions there are no definite answers. Check out Werner Heisenberg or Kurt Friedrich G�del for example.Uncertainty also applies to religious beliefs. We cannot prove God. We cannot disprove God. We cannot prove that one religion is true and another one is wrong. We can only believe and to me it's a good thing to allow for doubts and skepticism and keep an open mind.I support an "your belief and my belief" approach. You believe in the Prophet Muhammad as the last prophet and that's fine. I believe in the power of the Sermon on the Mount. We can both keep our beliefs and they can coexist. Live and let live. That's the way forward. That's the way to spread peace.

I would absolutely agree with you regarding one's freedom to choose the path he wants to follow. The following verses from Quran echoes this idea completely:

Al-Baqara 2:256 There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.

Also you are absolutely right when you say there are uncertainties or questions that are beyond human capabilities to answer.

I do keep an open mind as well. But, the part I don't agree is when you expect that open mindedness or reason to be the only way of guidance, as we can never have a human mind that could reason everything - the point is human reason when applied alone cannot be an absolute authority for guidance.

This is where the Quran comes in as an absolute guidance - a proven guidance which could transform an illiterate man into the most influential person in history (It's not only the opinion of Muslims, but also asserted by Michael H. Hart in his book "The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History"). A sincere approach to the Quran combined with an appreciation of the Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) life leaves no reason for a Muslim to have further doubts or skepticism regarding his faith.

Having said this, that still leaves all of us with the freedom to choose our path and I completely agree with you that we all can coexist in peace.