Is modern technology mentioned in the quran...?
-
Peace,
Show me one.......and i can say the same thing about you....but i don't as everyone is on a different level...
-
Peace arnoldyasin. This is getting a bit off-topic... Why dont you post your views on objectivity,subjectivity and reality,if you wish...there is a thread in the general section on this exact same topic (objectivity.)...we can discuss there,if you wish...
-
Peace,
Ok, but then why do you ask this topics question on a muslim site? We answer, and then we're not objective enough. Don't ask these questions on a muslim site then.......
-
Peace arnoldyasin. Are the sunni forums not muslim? Am i not muslim? This section is all about QUESTIONING the divinity of the quran...I appreciate it if you didnt tell me what to do...is that ok... yay group ps; and who is 'WE'...
-
Peace Arnold,
That honestly boggles the mind. This is not the first time someone has replied and been taken on a tangential jaunt through time and space.
-
Peace arnoldyasin. Are the sunni forums not muslim? Am i not muslim? This section is all about QUESTIONING the divinity of the quran...I appreciate it if you didnt tell me what to do...is that ok... ) yay group ps; and who is 'WE'...
yes, and i answered your questions, but then i'm not objective enough.... These are double standards. And i'm giving a statement based on your criteria. i'm not telling you what to do. The 'we' are the people who answer your questions that shows the divinity of the Quran.
I believe in the Quran not because i grew up with it, but because it proofed itself to me. I'm a scientist and i study theology, so i know what to trust and not to trust based on scientific criteria. I know the difference between wanting the Quran to be true and knowing it is true...For the first people twist to show it as proof, for the second the evidences coincide without twisting.
Peace
-
Peace.... sun group
-
And peace to you....
You're gonna say of course that you want to keep the peace, or that i'm not a good person to discuss with or that i'm not objective, or that i'm becoming hostile, non-friendly. I'm this and that.....i'm everything as long you don't need to go answer my responses. I respect you enquirer, as you're a person who wants the best in the world like me. That makes you a good person. But when it comes down to discuss facts, science and interpretations, you always falter. You avoid answering or fuss about rivial things, you claim the persons not worth listening to, they're not objective. When people give beautifull answers to your questions, you sometimes like them as they only refer to interpretation, but when it comes down that those answers proof the Quran true origin not being man-made, you deviade from the subject or refuse it without good reasons. You keep refering to objectivity, but i haven't seen it from your side. You already made up your mind. If you really wanted to investigate the Quran divinity, you would have taken some answers serious by investigating them together on the forum. The only thing i have seen you do is avoiding to accept answers for whatever reason. So this shows that deep inside, you're not objective. So these questions you post in this Quranic divinity section has nothing to do with really wanting to know the answers. They only reflect your inner doubts.
Don't get me wrong, i respect your approach to the world as it is similair to mine in a lot of ways. We both approach it with love and respect. But i just don't appreciate your points about objectiveness, as i haven't seen it from your side yet. I have clear reasons to believe in the Quran, as it proofed itself to me. And i haven't seen one thing coming by that takes away one of those proofs. You call that not being objective, i call that not being convinced yet. As a scientist i can only accept multiple proofs, not just one or two.
Peace and respect bro....
Arnold
-
Peace arnoldayasin.I have answered many of your posts,but like you,i need multiple proofs as well to convinse me of 'proofs'... To be honest we possibly do have similiar approaches to the world and how we look at it...All i am saying is that to ME and to others,some of these proofs are not objective....Now,you dont have to take that as personal criticism...
That is why i was saying lets clarify what we define as 'objective,subjective and reality...
If you think i run away from questions,or whatever it is i do,then that fine...thats your opinion...Fact is i have given you quite detailed answers back in this thread,i class the quran as containing some truths and wisdom in it,but am trying to highlight why it does not stand as perfect,irrefutable and for all times....yes that is my opinion,as the quran being 'perfect/divine' seems to be yours....I remain open to evidence proving my opinion wrong,but i havent seen convincing evidence yet...
Peace and respect...ps;i really do respect how you and others are trying to come to better translations/interpretations,as i feel this is much-needed in the muslim world...
I feel sometimes that asking tough questions is too much for some people,but this is how
interpretations move forward and are corrected... Take it easy...no hard feelings brother... -
Peace,
peace to you....
-
O yeah, to answer your question on why some technology is not mentioned. It is not that the technology saves people, it is the equal share of wealth that saves people, and that is directly outlined in the Quran that wealth must not stay only to one kind of people but equaly distributed. Poverty has nothing to so with technology level, but with sharing of wealth. So that is why it is not explained in the Quran.
I forgot to answer this as i missed that question.
Peace
-
Peace all. If people think electricity,internet,new farming techniques and vaccinations that save thousands of lives are 'trivial' or 'hooey',then thats up to their consciences...
And doesnt the quran say it is a complete book,and that nothing is ommited from it...? (6116 and others.)I'm not trying to be mean here but you've really studied the Qur'an for 25 years? I'm just curious because sometimes your posts....well, I'll just leave it at that. )
25 years though? Eek.
-
Peace cavemandoctor. One,i said i had studied ISLAM for 25 years,and two,instead of ad homineum,why dont you answer some of the questions posed here...
Peace all. ps; I bet some people who follow hadith,question,and object to the 'quran only followers' knowledge of quran as well... -
Gentlemen these all questions were asked with questions like "show me where is the law in Qur'an about speeding and computer hacking". These questions clearly show that how unintelligent and ignorant these people are and it is always wise not to get involved with such type of people.
You can read
Is Quran anti- secular? This thread. You can reach to the same conclusion which is not to get involved in any discussions with such people. Anyone of you who want to read more than there is a Democracy thread. -
Peace KGB and all. I like the way you brand all people asking these 'tough' questions,as ignorant and un-intelligent......Is that approach from the quran? ps; Im sure a verse will be produced to justify this 'lynch' like,defensive mentality...You can find whatever YOUR heart DESIRES from this book... ) Just like your friend bush,justifies his speeches from his god/book...
-
Peace all. Anybody want to get back on topic and answer a few questions...?
peace all. -
Peace all. If the quran is a book containing 'irrefutable' science,and is guidance for all times/today,then where are the verses on tv,test tube babies,internet,nuclear power,cloning,automobiles,genetically modified food,transistor radios,ipods,mobile phones,vcrs,electricity,carbon dating,etc,etc...?
This is very conclusive,irrefutable,provable,tangible,easily available,obvious mainstream technology,and cannot all be denied...
Is the book incomplete,did god forget,or is there some other explanation...?
Peace all.You know the quran doesn't contain this info as these things wern't around at the time.
And if that is the only way for God to be merciful - you could even say why doesn't he feed the poor aswell or just remove the need of food e.t.c
The thing of it all is he wants us to be the mercifull one's.
Then indeed he will be over the moon for having created something so subservient -i am sure .(Side joke)
Salaams enquirere.
-
Peace Simple. Thanks for the reply. What im trying to say is if its guidance for all times,why does it not mention future technology,when it is claimed it does mention embryology,big bang theory,etc,etc..?.(which were not supposedly known at the time of its revelation..)
I fully agree on the need for HUMANS to be practically merciful...
And please dont misunderstand me,the quran contains SOME great spiritual,moral and scientific principles.....
peace all. -
Peace cavemandoctor. One,i said i had studied ISLAM for 25 years,and two,instead of ad homineum,why dont you answer some of the questions posed here...
Peace all. ps; I bet some people who follow hadith,question,and object to the 'quran only followers' knowledge of quran as well...I'm in a dilemma here. On the one hand, I can very easily respond to your post. On the other hand, you'll either a) brush it off and go off on some random tangents or b) ignore it. I don't see what the point is. You may take that as an ad hominem attack; I call it "experience with enquirer." I'll respond, knowing full well it's probably pointless to do so.
Anyway, onto your points
If people think electricity,internet,new farming techniques and vaccinations that save thousands of lives are 'trivial' or 'hooey',then thats up to their consciences...
Talk about a red herring. Where did Nadia say anything about those inventions being hooey? Please provide a direct quote.
And doesnt the quran say it is a complete book,and that nothing is ommited from it...? (6116 and others.)
First, it's 6114-115. Second, from the verses themselves, it is painfully clear that the Kitab is "complete" and "fully detailed" in matters that are important for our spiritual growth/salvation. This is why the verses refer to God's word being complete "in truth and justice." This is why the verses say the Kitab is complete so that we need no one but God as judge/lawgiver. Read the verses. Let me rephrase read the verses without an agenda and take them for what they are worth. Far from us having to "bring out a NEW or DIFFERENT interpretation," this is just plain common sense and reading text within a context.
In all honesty, you're telling me you read those verses and said to yourself, "It says the Kitab is detailed and complete, WHY DOESN'T IT MENTION 27 INCH TELEVISIONS THEN?" I mean, really? Please answer honestly. Don't skirt around this issue. I expect a direct response to my question. When you read those verses, did you really ask yourself why the Qur'an doesn't mention inventions from the 20th century? Is that how you "interpreted" the verses about the Kitab being complete?
Semi-rhetorical questions aside, it is abundantly clear that these verses refer to the Kitab being complete in its purpose. The Qur'an posits itself as a reminder and a guide to mankind for the fundamental growth of the society as well as the individual, both spatio-temporally and spiritually. In that purpose, it is complete. In that purpose, God's words are complete with "truth and justice." In that purpose, it fully explains itself.
It never claimed to have everything about everything ever written in the history of everything. It simply boggles my mind that you even think it could mean that.
Just to beat a dead horse here, I'm going to give an example to reinforce my point
Let's say you buy one of the aforementioned 27 inch televisions (), and it comes with an Operating Instructions Manual. The first page of the manual says "Herein lie the fully-detailed instructions on how to operate the television set you have just purchased." You read the book patiently and finally get to the end of the book. Would you then throw your hands up in the air, and proclaim, "THE BOOK SAID IT'S FULLY-DETAILED. WHY THEN DOESN'T IT MENTION HUMAN CLONING? NUCLEAR PHYSICS? TOYOTA CAMRIES? WHY GOD WHY?"
Is the above question a reasonable one? Is the above question the result of a sane, logical mind? Or is the above question the result of a mind that is trying its absolute hardest to find fault where there is none?
And please don't say the two examples are divergent. Just as the Qur'an claims itself to be a reminder and guide to mankind on how to lead one's life (and in that respect, claims itself to be complete), the Operating Instructions Manual for the TV too claims itself to be a guide on how to use the TV (and in that respect, claims itself to be complete).
-
Is the book incomplete,did god forget,or is there some other explanation...?
God did not forget. And the book is not incomplete. If the book claimed to be an encylopedia of every scientific and technological breakthrough from the beginning of time to the end of time, then yes the book would then be incomplete and we could conclusively say that God indeed did "forget." Unfortunately for you, the book never claimed such a thing. )
If the quran is a book containing 'irrefutable' science,and is guidance for all times/today,then where are the verses on tv,test tube babies,internet,nuclear power,cloning,automobiles,genetically modified food,transistor radios,ipods,mobile phones,vcrs,electricity,carbon dating,etc,etc...?
Again, simple use of logic would negate this claim. This is a grave misundertanding about what the "Qur'an has a scientific miraculous aspect to it" camp claims. As far as I know, no one claims the Qur'an to be a galactic scientific encyclopedia. This isn't the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The Qur'an is, first and foremost, a reminder and guide for mankind. With that said, however, it very clearly makes many references to pieces of evidence that are testable and falsifiable by science. It has verses that have a biological, cosmological, geological, etc. aspect to them. This is undeniable.
The science camp make two claims
-
none of the Qur'an's references to pieces of data that are testable by science have been falsified by science. E.g. if a verse said that "your Lord has created the cow, with eight stomachs, and therein in a sign for those who are sincere." This would be testable by science. We would dissect a cow, realize it doesn't have eight stomachs, and consequently the Qur'an would be falsified. It would be deemed to have at least one verse that goes against science. So far, no verse has been found to contradict established science. Considering the book was written about 1400 years ago, this in itself should, at the very least, raise your eyebrow.
-
some of the very same verses that have scientific aspects to them evidence knowledge that was not known at the time of the Qur'an's writing. To be sure, many (like Harun Yahya) make outlandish claims and forced interpretations on verses to find "miracles." I do not ally myself with such people. But, the existence of these forced interpretations don't preclude the Qur'an from actually containing verses that have miraculous scientific aspects to them. If, for example, the Qur'an refers to a cosmological phenomenon that was not known 1400 years ago, but has now (in the past 100 years) been known to conform with science, we have to ask ourselves, "how did this get in there?" But that's just one piece of datum, and I agree that one piece of datum doesn't a miracle make. But what if other verses make similar references that again were not known 1400 years ago. Over and over again, this happens. At some point, you have to really say to yourself, "ok, something might be going on here. Either the author of this book was the world's luckiest man or there is more to the story."
Sorry for the long exposition. My point is us claiming the Qur'an to have some scientific aspects that are miraculous doesn't mean we expect to find every single scientific thing in the history of mankind in it.
One last thing you asked why it didn't mention these things if it were a "guidance for all times." You yourself answered the question. It is a guidance for all times. I ask you, what do ipods, electricity, etc. have to do with guidance? You can't call the Qur'an contradictory when it doesn't even abide by your assumptions.
You saying ipods, electricity, nuclear physics are components of "guidance" is your own assumption. It is not something the Qur'an claims. You can't then use that assumption and say, "aha the Qur'an claims its a guidance for all times, and yet it doesnt mention X, Y, Z (assumptions I've just made about what the Qur'an should include), therefore the Qur'an contradicts itself."
This reminds me of those Sunnis who say "you follow the Qur'an alone? But it doesn't tell you what side to sleep on." Yes, it doesn't. But that doesn't make it incomplete. That just means the author of the Qur'an didn't find dictating sleep habits to be necessary for one's spiritual growth. Similarly here, the Qur'an claims it is a guidance for mankind and you respond with "but it doesn't talk about ipods." The author of the Qur'an didn't think mentioning ipods would be necessary one's spiritual growth. And you know what, I don't blame him. )
Peace.
-