what scientific evidence from the Quran was not known to the peers of its time?
-
Peace,
The first phases of the development of the foetus. You have to have a lot of premature births that exactly happen during different time-phases of the pregnancy to give you a good clue of the order and differences in the phases. This is highly unlikely to occur in a time span for them to write it down in the Quran, plus, get ALL the observations right...
Ok lets start here then. Bring forth the relevant verses. You have set as a rule for debate that whomever people i refer to, must have been known in arabia, and as such India is a good choice, it will not be my only one however. i will decide my sources as we go along.
Peace
-
It is He Who has created you from dust then from a sperm-drop, then from a leech-like clot; then does he get you out as a child then lets you reach your age of full strength; then lets you become old,- though of you there are some who die before;- and lets you reach a Term appointed; in order that ye may learn wisdom.
Arnold, what is it in the above verse that one couldn't have observed a sperm to premature/miscarriage/abortion (leech like clots) to birth or dead babies to child to adult to aging, even long before Muhammad's time, which today you think it couldn't have been guesswork but divine intervention, hence deliberating and confessing the divinity of Quran? Is that your motive?
-
peace,
The rule is also what i gave above. Ok i will post things, and then let's see what you can come up with. I gave you the link of a book by maurice bucaille, start with refuting all those proofs he gave....
-
peace,
The rule is also what i gave above. Ok i will post things, and then let's see what you can come up with. I gave you the link of a book by maurice bucaille, start with refuting all those proofs he gave....
No i will not, but he is welcome to join the debate,. One point at a time please. And the rule above is nonsensical, i will not accept it, because you dont know for a fact that e.g the hopis didnt understand their songs and their meanings. The arabs, didnt know what much of this meant back then either, but someone in their comunity did. The discusion of whether the book can contain so many known facts is better kept for later. First each of these points on their own. Then when we have the amount we can agree is valid, it is my assignment to find a simialr scripture with the same amount or more facts in it, dating before or at the same time.
Peace
-
Peace,
You have to accept the rule as the author of the Quran presented the facts as proofs, so the author knew what they meant. And the Hopi's did not understand as i read books about them by Hopi's written themselves, where they say this. If the people didn't knew what it meant, then it cannot be taken as proof, it must be a known scientifical theory the people had, as it is also presented in the Quran. Also i didn't invite anybody. But to give you time, i'm not gonna give you any facts. You yourself go to Harun Yahya's site and refute the books there. As i'm not into a cut and paste debate. I don't have time for that. All the info is avaible on the web. I gave a link to one book already on this forum, it is with my first post on this thread. Go refute the facts in that article. Also go to
http//asadi.95mb.com/koranfiles/
http//www.miraclesofthequran.com/index2.html
http//www.muhammedhasenoglu.com/miracles_quran.htm
http//www.mucizeler.com/
http//home.swipnet.se/islam/quran-bible.htm
http//www.harunyahya.com/
Go refute these facts one by one. have fun. i'll be checking on your progress....
Peace
-
So are there anyone else interrested in a debate on this subject that doesnt come down to. X,y, and z who are infallible beings as me says its true, so its true? I have read a lot of Harun's stuff, and on several accounts it is merely wishfull thinking on his behalf, like the 7 layers of heaven. I saw a refute of that one somewhere, unfortunally after i did my own, based on the astrotheology of the arabs. However, the first subject raised to debate is the featus.
Any taker of this debate, will have to produce surahs, so we can see its not wishfull or fancyfull translation, and then we will check out the validity of the claims, and cross check with older or equal cultures. Rather than just take other peoples word for them, because its easyer and because their message is soothing our ears..
Peace
-
Salaam
So are there anyone else interrested in a debate
I am trying to work out what it is that you wish to debate. If it is that Quran is not a complete scientific book for everything. I must your superior logic here is way beyond us simpletons. I tried but I could not find this simpleformula force=mass X accelration (I am afraid it is the limit of my scientific knowldge) in the Quran therefore I must conclude you are right- soover billion people take a bow.
Any how simpleton like me thought that your point is that the Quran was complete jiggery pigery and you were going to prove this by showing that the scientific facts mentioned it are complete codswollop. So embryology was your starting point. So lets have it what is in the Quran that is completely and utterly wrong. Or perhaps I have it completely wrong and you simply could not find the answers to you biology homework from the Quran.
regards -
Salaam
So are there anyone else interrested in a debate
I am trying to work out what it is that you wish to debate. If it is that Quran is not a complete scientific book for everything. I must your superior logic here is way beyond us simpletons. I tried but I could not find this simpleformula force=mass X accelration (I am afraid it is the limit of my scientific knowldge) in the Quran therefore I must conclude you are right- soover billion people take a bow.
Any how simpleton like me thought that your point is that the Quran was complete jiggery pigery and you were going to prove this by showing that the scientific facts mentioned it are complete codswollop. So embryology was your starting point. So lets have it what is in the Quran that is completely and utterly wrong. Or perhaps I have it completely wrong and you simply could not find the answers to you biology homework from the Quran.
regardsWhy do you take so great offence, by this simple persuit of knowledge?.
Anyone else?
Peace
-
Hello Arnold and 'stillearning',
The verses (225, 4067, 753 that point to development of human in stages, from leech-like clot (meaning the clinging of embryo to umbilical cord) to birth to adulthood are basic concepts that man have known ?gazillion? years prior to Quranic injunctions for the simple reason that birth (dead, premature and grown), miscarriages/abortions, growth, old age and finally death, have remained the ultimate and norm of reality.
What the Quran mentions, in this case, is not wrong at all, rather generalized. But when those who insist that such simple phenomenon could have never been known, unfounded in other historical books and only revealed in Quran by a winged angel descended in secrecy to Muhammad who himself had no idea for which science has recently declared as truth, hence becoming Allah?s Words, is simply outrageous, incredible. I hope you understand my point. Also please do take note of Magi's and enquirer's well defined posts above.
Abortion and its history http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion
Miscarriage http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscarriage -
Peace,
Of course people observed miscarriages and so on, but i want to see a record where they put it in the same order as in the Quran, and in the same description. And the only good answers are from magi, enquirer's post i already refuted as it were not good arguments. He refered to the science known NOW, and the cutting edge science of NOW. A lot of things in the Quran could not have been known in Muhammed's time, so it is a wrong comparisons.
But go have fun with the links i gave.....
-
Peace all. I repeat,if the quran is a book containing 'irrefutable' science,and is 'guidance till the 'end of time',then WHERE are the verses on tv,test tube babies,internet,nuclear power,cloning,gentically modified food,automobiles,transistor radio,mobile phones,ipod,carbon dating,etc,etc....This is pretty conclusive,provable,obvious and irrefutable technology.....
ANYBODY please answer...
Or did god forget? -
Peace,
Of course people observed miscarriages and so on, but i want to see a record where they put it in the same order as in the Quran, and in the same description. And the only good answers are from magi, enquirer's post i already refuted as it were not good arguments. He refered to the science known NOW, and the cutting edge science of NOW. A lot of things in the Quran could not have been known in Muhammed's time, so it is a wrong comparisons.
But go have fun with the links i gave.....
You will find your answers in Magi's reply numbers 50 & 54 and the link she provided. My arguments are the same and confer with her viewpoints. Now let me see you refute enquirer's post above? His arguments are excellent because the Quran becomes deficient and lacking credibility for all times when it comes to sciences? Perhaps you are missing the point altogether and keep insisting upon presenting you with another book which carries the exact same order and description as stated in Quran. I'm afraid, your own arguments are incredible to begin with,
-
Uhm guys. This is totally off topic, but go here please http//www.farvardyn.com/shelagh.php thank you
Peace
-
Peace magi. This is also off-topic...I had pasta and mince-meat for breakfast... rotfl
No,only joking....can you give us a brief summary please,on some of your findings regarding masons,templar knights etc...? In other words the power elites who NOW play a big part in running the world....Start another thread if you wish...take it easy... )
peace all. ps;some of this history of power elites is very interesting and relevant... -
Peace all. I think it was Micheal foucault,the philosopher,who stated that science/knowledge does not always exist in a vacum,or is not always free from bias...In other words the 'establishments' scientific theories,religious theories,historical accounts,and propogation of 'public knowledge' are sometimes maintained or promoted just to consolidate the power of the elites/establishment/ and keep the status quo/keep the masses ignorant...This seems to me what certain parties are doing,just trying to make the quran/their wishes/their philosophies seem superior to other methodologies.....BUT we,THE PEOPLE,will not fall for this... bravo yay sun INCREASE THE PEACE... group
-
Peace all. And thank god for the internet,for all this easy access to information,so we can verify for ourselves... sun yay bravo welcome
-
Peace all. I think it was Micheal foucault,the philosopher,who stated that science/knowledge does not always exist in a vacum,or is not always free from bias...In other words the 'establishments' scientific theories,religious theories,historical accounts,and propogation of 'public knowledge' are sometimes maintained or promoted just to consolidate the power of the elites/establishment/ and keep the status quo/keep the masses ignorant...This seems to me what certain parties are doing,just trying to make the quran/their wishes/their philosophies seem superior to other methodologies.....BUT we,THE PEOPLE,will not fall for this... bravo yay sun INCREASE THE PEACE... group
Peace,
This is funny, as the Quran coincides with all main science that is know now, and all of these scientists don't believe in the Quran, so your comment would have worked if it were muslim scientists....so you THE PEOPLE, need to check first if a comment fits with the argument or not
-
Peace arnoldyasin. If you follow the argument,you will see that this means that SOME established science is embellished/mis-interpreted by the power elites, (be they muslim or not.) and these mis-interpretations are seized upon by people trying to justify the qurans correlation with science...
Also many people of 'islamic' background like to say that much modern science (algebra,medicine etc...) comes from the 'golden' period of islamic civilisation.....You think all those 'islamic' scientists were un-biased,and didint have a vested interest to promote the validity of the quran....?.
When you look at certain history,you can see that some of the mutazilites put reason above the quran,and stated if a verse contradicts reality it must be re-interpreted. (or even 'rejected'....Its just that 'traditional' history either 'obscures',or hides these important events...
You tell me,if the climate is such that a scientist would be ostracised,imprisoned or worse for discovering contradictions/opposition to science in the quran (such as during certain periods in history,when 'extremists' were in power.) do you think that a scientist would say 'hey abdul,i found this verse contradicting science' openly...? Yet what he said can be documented in history... Read tariq alis book 'clash' of fundamentalisms,and other oriental and 'islamic' history to see 'other' versions,maybe more complete than the 'edited','bleached' history we have from normal sources...
Also did you read phoenixs' post about the saudi government misquoting scientists,and mis-using their theories to justify the quran/their power base....That is exactly what foucault was talking about...
By the way,where is the mordern research from MUSLIM scientists Proving their claims ?(or are some muslims believing in this science blindly,just because it seemingly agrees,or can be interpreted to be in line with their book?.)
Im going to put a new thread in about why modern technology is not mentioned in the quran,because the question has gone TOTALLY un-answered in this thread...(even though its claimed to be a book relevant for all time,and supposedly contains scientific facts.)
Peace all. -
Peace,
Of course there is some truth in your statement, but 'main' stream science had to prove a lot of theories, till now they have not been refuted, and a lot of new theories that are still doubted and not accepted by the main stream, but do coincide with the Quran. A lot of scientists are or athiests or christains, and their findings prove a design and thus show there must be a Designer, so the atheists don't like this, but still share their findings even though it goes against their beliefs, the same holds for the Christians, even though their findings also shows a design, it also shows that the Bible's creation story is only a babylonian myth and the years between adam and jesus are not true , so also their findings go against their beliefs and shows their scripture cannot be the exact word of God. The persons who discovered the traces of the big-bang were athiests and knew this would disprove most atheistic claims, they knew it showed a beginning of space, and by thus a sign of creation. One of them even said "If you believe, you could see in this the face of God". So even it went against their own beliefs, they still shared their findings. This is only one example of the thousands i could mention where scientists shared findings that went against their beliefs. Of course not all of them do this. But a lot have done it. And those findings do coincide with the Quran....
So to say that all claims are only made to proof certain statements is certainly not true. As it doesn't serve no real cause or politics. And the Saudi's even promoted a flat earth 30 years ago, so your claim is again not completly true, as they followed the hadiths more. A lot of hadith goes against the Quran and show the ignorance of those times about science, still those hadiths are held as true. So why then did people uphold 'science' hadith that went against the science in the Quran, but using your claim only promoted science that coincided with the Quran? These contradict. If they were really scared of contradicting the Quran by your claim, then they would have treated the hadiths with the same attitude, because they didn't show their ignorance of scientific facts in those times.
Also that is why the claim that the Quran just copied known science of that time cannot be true, as all hadith show their ignorance of scientific truth's that contradict the Quran. If it were real common knowledge or avaible knowledge, then these contradictions and ignorance wouldn't have ended up in the hadith literature. We would have seen the same knowledge ending up in hadith, but we only see the opposite, which directly shows they didn't understood the facts mentioned in the Quran.
Peace
-
Peace arnoldyasin. You make some interesting points.
Some hadith do agree with the quran,especially those on embryology. Not all hadiths contradict the quran by any means...
Im not saying ALL scientists follow the government line,or have vested interests...
But the quran/habith/bible/scriptures/philosophies are DEFINATELY used by some people to hold on to their power and justify their theories/behaviours....And to give it more legitimacy,SOME of them INTERPRET the quran so that it agrees with science,or PICK the science that seemingly agrees with the quran. (or use some of the more 'vague',ambiguous verses.) Im not saying for one minute than there is NO scientific truth in the quran....
Do you think that if a mainstream islamic scholar in saudi stood up and said that the quran was wrong,(or the hadith) that he would be warmly welcomed for his research...?
And ARE there any western non-muslim scholars that think the quran is not scientifically correct? Because if there are, (and you and me know there are many.) then why dont you take note of their theories and explanations as to why the quran is not scientifically correct?
Or are you telling me that a MAJORITY of scientists believe the quran is 100% correct scientifically.....
Peace all.