Unscientific Quran
-
.
.
.
http//members.aol.com/masadi/sci.htm
.
.
.I have seen many times all these arguments of Mauricie Buccaile, Asadi, Keith Moore etc ....they are NOT SERIOUS , they are very weak and imo cant be called scientific proofs-if not all, then most of their arguments does not hold water....
best wishes
-
if not all, then most of their arguments does not hold water....
I say most, not because i believe that some of their examples have merit but because i have not studied all of the examples, particularly not in detail...
First, because of the physical improbability to study them all, they are innumerable and are created on a daily basis...it seems that there is as much of them as there is authors who write about such things...
and the second, because some of them are based rather on the very subtle and highly specialised scientific findings and theories and not upon the undeniable facts observable by anyone-..these findings and their interpretations, or theories based on them, might be disproved in future and are hard to check even for a scientist in the field let alone for a layman like me -and others like me who, unlike myself, believe in such scientific "confirmations"...
best wishes, Zlatan
-
The assumption that the civilisations or nations prior to ours or those of Muhamad`s time were astronomicaly or scientificaly undeveloped in a measure that would prevent them from understanding or inventing so called scientific prophecies is highly questionable...if not outright false...
best wishes
-
salam Zlatan.
what do u think about the falsification tests in the koran ?salam Saladin!
can you be more specific?
salam zlatan.
i mean , the challanges that the koran gives , that koran challanges to falsify it , do u think it can be falsified too ? like u think the "scientific" stuff is incorrect . -
Peace
I am sorry saladin D but i realy do not understand what exactly your question is about....maybe its my poor english...can you cite some verses to which your question is reffering?
are you asking me could the scripture be imitated or contain contradictions?best wishes, Zlatan
-
-
Peace Zlatan,
It is an interesting point you are making, I think that the great reading should not be put forward as anything but what it claims to be 'a beacon and a mercy for the believers'. You make a great point about the fact that parts are narrated from man's point of view.
Lotetree, I agree that we shouldn't treat the book as a science book or limit it to that, but I cannot ignore some of the interesting findings in the book, the confirmation of tested science, I think these are remarkable.
All that is needed is common sense when reading this great book, this is why we are encouraged to REFLECT upon this message.
Nural