Are these scientific mistakes ???
-
My current understanding is that given that the quran is addressing people from all eras, it incorporates metaphorical verses so that no matter the scientific level of a people it is always appropriate for all. For example, this is why the quran never says explicitely that the earth is round nor flat but instead uses words that could be interpreted differently depending on the level of knowledge of a society. However, enemies of the quran fail to understand that and this causes them to see scientific errors in various verses.
-
Salaam,
The word samaa encompasses everything that you look up and see in the sky. Go outside and see the sun, moon and stars suspended in this medium. Space is a medium like water and air. Everything is floating in this medium. Who holds up these things except God? They all are floating in their orbits. Nothing holds them up except the command of God. Hope that gives you some idea of the power of God. Science can never give you ultimate truths because it is based in fallible ideas and perpetually being tested by trial and error. The aether theory was dominant before this new theory of space (vacuum). I can assure you that there is no vacuum as that would imply nothingness which was before the Big Bang. Anyway, use science as a stepping stone to the ultimate truth in the Quran. Once you know the truth, you will understand that science is only a way of looking at reality around us. My suggestion is to keep doubts active within you and keep reading the Quran and ask God for guidance. Our Lord guide us towards the truth for if you do not guide us then we will remain misguided as we do not have the means to guide ourselves. -
While it indeed appears that the sky is used as a metaphorical way of refering to anything in outer space and is not to be taken literally as some sort of roof, the verses about how god created the ''skies'', the earth and what is in between them add another dimension to the question.
-
The Koran describes the world exactly how you'd expect a 7th century Arab too.
-
I guess by now you must have met millions of Arabs of the 7th century... exactly...
Salaam
The way ancient people viewed the world around them is well established. Of course their might've been slight variations amongst the different groups but by and large they all believed in similar myths.
The ancient world generally believed the sky was solid
Astonishing as it may seem to the modern mind, with very rare excep-
tions the idea that the sky is not solid is a distinctly modern one. Historical
evidence shows that virtually everyone in the ancient world believed in a
solid firmament.http//faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hil ... nt-WTJ.pdf
They thought the sky was a canopy like structure
People did not realize how far away the heavens really were. It seemed reasonable to them that the sky was a canopy whose edges touched the surface of Earth..
http//solarsystem.nasa.gov/scitech/dis ... ?ST_ID=525
So did Allah confirm this myth
02.22
PICKTHAL Who hath appointed the earth a resting-place for you, and the sky a canopy;Allah is asking these people who made the sky a canopy for you!!
Allah is confirming their ignorance to them!! ;DAllah also claims he made the sky a roof and that this roof was a sign of Allahs existence
021.032
PICKTHAL And we have made the sky a roof withheld (from them). Yet they turn away from its portents.Once again Allah confims 7th century nonsense by telling his ignorant audience that the sky roof they 'see' is being kept up for them and that this is a sign of Allahs existence!!
This alone is is sufficient, however their are verses too implying a solid sky canopy such as a piece of the sky falling on earth and the sky be rolled up etc..
Allah has clearly confirmed their ignorance by describing the sky just as people erroneously did and not only does Allah appeal to these myths but he also vlaims it's a sign of his existence!! ;D
No rational person would view this description from a God but it is what you would expect from an ignorant person living over 1400 hundred years ago. -
The way ancient people viewed the world around them is well established. Of course their might've been slight variations amongst the different groups but by and large they all believed in similar myths.
The ancient world generally believed the sky was solid
Astonishing as it may seem to the modern mind, with very rare excep-
tions the idea that the sky is not solid is a distinctly modern one. Historical
evidence shows that virtually everyone in the ancient world believed in a
solid firmament.http//faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hil ... nt-WTJ.pdf
They thought the sky was a canopy like structure
People did not realize how far away the heavens really were. It seemed reasonable to them that the sky was a canopy whose edges touched the surface of Earth..
http//solarsystem.nasa.gov/scitech/dis ... ?ST_ID=525
So did Allah confirm this myth
02.22
PICKTHAL Who hath appointed the earth a resting-place for you, and the sky a canopy;Allah is asking these people who made the sky a canopy for you!!
Allah is confirming their ignorance to them!! ;DAllah also claims he made the sky a roof and that this roof was a sign of Allahs existence
021.032
PICKTHAL And we have made the sky a roof withheld (from them). Yet they turn away from its portents.Once again Allah confims 7th century nonsense by telling his ignorant audience that the sky roof they 'see' is being kept up for them and that this is a sign of Allahs existence!!
This alone is is sufficient, however their are verses too implying a solid sky canopy such as a piece of the sky falling on earth and the sky be rolled up etc..
Allah has clearly confirmed their ignorance by describing the sky just as ancient people erroneously did. Allah then appeals to these myths as a sign of his existence!! ;D
Today no rational person would view this as a description from God but it's what you would expect from an ignorant person living over 1400 hundred years ago. -
Salaam,
The word samaa encompasses everything that you look up and see in the sky. Go outside and see the sun, moon and stars suspended in this medium. Space is a medium like water and air. Everything is floating in this medium. Who holds up these things except God? They all are floating in their orbits. Nothing holds them up except the command of God. Hope that gives you some idea of the power of God. Science can never give you ultimate truths because it is based in fallible ideas and perpetually being tested by trial and error. The aether theory was dominant before this new theory of space (vacuum). I can assure you that there is no vacuum as that would imply nothingness which was before the Big Bang. Anyway, use science as a stepping stone to the ultimate truth in the Quran. Once you know the truth, you will understand that science is only a way of looking at reality around us. My suggestion is to keep doubts active within you and keep reading the Quran and ask God for guidance. Our Lord guide us towards the truth for if you do not guide us then we will remain misguided as we do not have the means to guide ourselves.That's a really poor understanding of science. Science works ... where as these "ultimate truths" only get you into fights.
Science cures diseases and gets you to Saturn. God doesn't need to hold up anything. -
My current understanding is that given that the quran is addressing people from all eras
I disagree, otherwise you'd have to cherry pick verses.
For example; Public lashing for fornication, do you think that has a place in a civilized society. There are plenty of verses that simply can't be applied today.
-
peace rationalthinker,
The most telling thing about your post was the following word (highlighted in bold)
This alone is is sufficient, however their are verses too implying a solid sky canopy such as a piece of the sky falling on earth and the sky be rolled up etc..
If you actually have solid explicit errors, then create your own thread with the strongest 5 your rational thinking mind can fathom from all your research. If you do create a thread I want you to explicitly state these are the strongest errors you can find after much research. Then we can see if they hold up to scrutiny.
-
A psychological punishment for fornication is just as effective as a physical one and even better actually. If the society disapproves heavily of the fornication then the culprit will suffer mentally. The method of psychological punishment should be considered, to totally disown the person forever may be taking it too far.
The physical punishment is just ridiculously barbaric and primitive showing of a low level of development. Since mentally afflicting a mind is harder on that person than a physical punishment it is still better and leaves no scars for when the person has repented from their wrongdoing.
The alleged prescribed punishment of lashing via Quran is just showing how out of phase it is with the reality of a supernatural being. Either the text says something else or it is not of a supernatural origin. Not would it prescribe lashing if it was from a supernatural origin (i.e. what you refer to as God/Allah).
Furthermore, fornication causes only mental harm to the spouse(s) of the one(s) involved in the act, so in the Law it was prescribed "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life etc" meaning the punishment for the culprit(s) fall/s under mental pain since that is the equivalent punishment to the culprit as the spouse(s) suffer mental pain. The lashing is contradictory to how justice is served via the ancient so-called Mosaic law including the famous "eye for an eye".
And if the spouse(s) can forgive the fornication then this is clearly merciful by them and then their lives can move on as long as the trust can be repaired.
If none of the culprits were not bonded then this is just a case of vain intercourse unless they decide to bond thereafter with each other and thus it is not a sin since declaring to stay as bonded is equal to an oath of bonding and it can be done in private, but before a couple of witnesses is safer FOR THEMSELVES as if the other one lied then they have witnesses which can prove the oath was indeed uttered and the liar can be judged both under the "false testimony" (no lies) and "fornication" (vain sex) commandments of the Law and be inflicted psychological pain upon by showing the community does not approve of wrongdoing.
That above is the jurisdiction of a supernatural being (God/Allah).
Be well
Qarael Amenuel -
The alleged prescribed punishment of lashing via Quran is just showing how out of phase it is with the reality of a supernatural being. Either the text says something else or it is not of a supernatural origin. Not would it prescribe lashing if it was from a supernatural origin (i.e. what you refer to as God/Allah).
At the same time it is not logical to say the verse (242) was added later on because if it in fact was added or straight fabricated it would not be lashing but stoning to death so that there would be no cotradiction between both the Torah and the hadith. I often catch myself thinking that one of the primary reasons I believe there is something entirely different about the Qur'an compared to previous Scriptures is the fact it does not contain stoning to death and a number of other things. At the same time wars in self-defense and physical punishments are still cautious to me. I am not sure why are these things there, either Qur'an was written in another language or there is something very inconstant about the classic Arabic.
-
At the same time it is not logical to say the verse (242) was added later on because if it in fact was added or straight fabricated it would not be lashing but stoning to death so that there would be no cotradiction between both the Torah and the hadith. I often catch myself thinking that one of the primary reasons I believe there is something entirely different about the Qur'an compared to previous Scriptures is the fact it does not contain stoning to death and a number of other things. At the same time wars in self-defense and physical punishments are still cautious to me. I am not sure why are these things there, either Qur'an was written in another language or there is something very inconstant about the classic Arabic.
It is true that traditionalists changed word meanings. I still need to research on how much truth is there in the claim that the concept of "sin" in the interpretation was brought to Quran to cater to Arab Christians who were converting at the time. Mr Ibn Hanbal who later became the apple of Mutwakkil's eyes admitted to not liking the overall interpretation of the Quran back then despite the fact that his contemporaries said Hanbal knew very less about Islam. Both of those people were partners in crime of forcing hadiths on Muslims. I am suspicious of the meanings like prostration, bow with those who bow and establish salat,
I don't see much in lashing since it can only be done if there are witnesses. Plus, public orgy dedicated to certain gods and goddesses has been talked about many times throughout the centuries.
-
I don't see much in lashing since it can only be done if there are witnesses. Plus, public orgy dedicated to certain gods and goddesses has been talked about many times throughout the centuries.
I have a problem with anything 'public'. Who will execute the lashes? The leader? Caliph? Mr. President? Who has elected him/her? Which drives made people accept his/her authority? Hierarchy and the need of the feeling of personal protection? Public punishments are the signs of the community, and I am of opinion that anything spiritual is against any form of society. Person with faith is a citizen of the world, he/she can never be a patriot of any state, since worshiping the flag is the same as worshiping the idol.
It does not mean people will abandon society and governments, there will always be states. But people who are seeking spiritual growth or the faith in God should not execute anything physical against anybody, even fornicators. It is between you and God, nobody has the right to be judge, while the civil judge is a person of authority and authority and hierarchy is clearly instinctive. So there is nothing I believe dedicated to God alone in case public punishments are done. Same as I don't believe there have to be any animal sacrifices in the name of God.
Public orgies dedicated to gods are the same as public punishments dedicated to gods. The state authority and personal faith are incompatible.
Public punishments is a sigh of authority and authority is about herding the sheep. That is why people translate ma malakat aymanakum as girl slaves, because that's what they want - to have girl slaves as their war bounty. That is why majority's views on Heaven and Hell is purely instinctive. Heaven = free and constant pleasure (mostly masculine pleasure btw), Hell = constant pain, not good.
-
A psychological punishment for fornication is just as effective as a physical one and even better actually. If the society disapproves heavily of the fornication then the culprit will suffer mentally. The method of psychological punishment should be considered, to totally disown the person forever may be taking it too far.
The physical punishment is just ridiculously barbaric and primitive showing of a low level of development. Since mentally afflicting a mind is harder on that person than a physical punishment it is still better and leaves no scars for when the person has repented from their wrongdoing.
The alleged prescribed punishment of lashing via Quran is just showing how out of phase it is with the reality of a supernatural being. Either the text says something else or it is not of a supernatural origin. Not would it prescribe lashing if it was from a supernatural origin (i.e. what you refer to as God/Allah).
Furthermore, fornication causes only mental harm to the spouse(s) of the one(s) involved in the act, so in the Law it was prescribed "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life etc" meaning the punishment for the culprit(s) fall/s under mental pain since that is the equivalent punishment to the culprit as the spouse(s) suffer mental pain. The lashing is contradictory to how justice is served via the ancient so-called Mosaic law including the famous "eye for an eye".
And if the spouse(s) can forgive the fornication then this is clearly merciful by them and then their lives can move on as long as the trust can be repaired.
If none of the culprits were not bonded then this is just a case of vain intercourse unless they decide to bond thereafter with each other and thus it is not a sin since declaring to stay as bonded is equal to an oath of bonding and it can be done in private, but before a couple of witnesses is safer FOR THEMSELVES as if the other one lied then they have witnesses which can prove the oath was indeed uttered and the liar can be judged both under the "false testimony" (no lies) and "fornication" (vain sex) commandments of the Law and be inflicted psychological pain upon by showing the community does not approve of wrongdoing.
That above is the jurisdiction of a supernatural being (God/Allah).
Be well
Qarael AmenuelI do nto hink you got it. Youhave to read the whole set of ayas till 30 to get the picture of what it is all about. Which is about thing the best of people and about respecting intimacy and not slandering, particularly women. Peopleseem to have got like hypnotized by the first ayas of 24 and that is not it. You have to read on nd realise what the Qur'an s doing. It is in fact withdrawing any power from hearsay and people to harm other people particularly women.
But it seems that as soon as we see the first little thing that is not "civilised" enough we loose all rationality and capacity to think through and get happy with whatever nonsense.
Really, many, many, many times inthsi forum not only I do not see any more entlightment amongs "qur'an only" than amonst sectarians. Some times many "sectarians" are far more reasonable than some of the things that people trade here. Their mental picture of what is really revelation and what is not may be blurred, but they have far more common sense and generosity of spirit.
This is not particularly about you, Man of Faith (save for the lashes) but in general. Sometimes I get the feeling that some prople are here just because this is a more "select" place than "sectarian places" but that they do not have to change any narrowness of mind and spirit.
Salaam
-
I have a problem with anything 'public'. Who will execute the lashes? The leader? Caliph? Mr. President? Who has elected him/her? Which drives made people accept his/her authority? Hierarchy and the need of the feeling of personal protection? Public punishments are the signs of the community, and I am of opinion that anything spiritual is against any form of society. Person with faith is a citizen of the world, he/she can never be a patriot of any state, since worshiping the flag is the same as worshiping the idol.
It does not mean people will abandon society and governments, there will always be states. But people who are seeking spiritual growth or the faith in God should not execute anything physical against anybody, even fornicators. It is between you and God, nobody has the right to be judge, while the civil judge is a person of authority and authority and hierarchy is clearly instinctive. So there is nothing I believe dedicated to God alone in case public punishments are done. Same as I don't believe there have to be any animal sacrifices in the name of God.
How does one punish for something done privately?
Public orgies dedicated to gods are the same as public punishments dedicated to gods.
Exactly! That's the point.
The state authority and personal faith are incompatible.
Not much. The entire faith is not personal.
Public punishments is a sigh of authority and authority is about herding the sheep. That is why people translate ma malakat aymanakum as girl slaves, because that's what they want - to have girl slaves as their war bounty. That is why majority's views on Heaven and Hell is purely instinctive. Heaven = free and constant pleasure (mostly masculine pleasure btw), Hell = constant pain, not good.
I suppose that is why we don't agree with them?
-
I do nto hink you got it. Youhave to read the whole set of ayas till 30 to get the picture of what it is all about. Which is about thing the best of people and about respecting intimacy and not slandering, particularly women. Peopleseem to have got like hypnotized by the first ayas of 24 and that is not it. You have to read on nd realise what the Qur'an s doing. It is in fact withdrawing any power from hearsay and people to harm other people particularly women.
But it seems that as soon as we see the first little thing that is not "civilised" enough we loose all rationality and capacity to think through and get happy with whatever nonsense.
Really, many, many, many times inthsi forum not only I do not see any more entlightment amongs "qur'an only" than amonst sectarians. Some times many "sectarians" are far more reasonable than some of the things that people trade here. Their mental picture of what is really revelation and what is not may be blurred, but they have far more common sense and generosity of spirit.
This is not particularly about you, Man of Faith (save for the lashes) but in general. Sometimes I get the feeling that some prople are here just because this is a more "select" place than "sectarian places" but that they do not have to change any narrowness of mind and spirit.
Salaam
Point is that I do not believe it says anything about lashes, but I was speaking hypothetically based on common understanding among people. I am trying to show points of logic in order to show the inconsistency. I am not trying to change the Islam people adhere to, only giving people another perspective and perchance they shall understand Quran is indeed grossly misinterpreted, not only lightly and thus pursue the truth, with or without my help, I do not care as long as people become more sound mentally.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel
