You re-phrasing the question doesn't make a case for your thread, It makes for indolent redundancy, aside from the apparent need to beat a dead horse or go around in circles....perhaps I should make this as a color by number, you might see the whole picture?
1- The Quran isn't a book about scientific discoveries, it is a book of social and moral guidance ( an admonition) to man-kind.. should they choose to walk the straight path!

2-The fact that there are scientific discoveries in the Quran is an added bonus to those, so that all doubt is removed from their heart!

3-It is indeed wonderful that you have acquainted yourself with Greek philosophers and holy men alike.. still doesn't change a few known facts..

a- the west claims to have had its roots in Greek civilization, I ask you AGAIN, where was Ptolemy et al. when Roger the II crushed Al-Idrisi's globe or when Europe was steeped in the superstition of the dark ages? it phases me as to why you deliberately ignore those little factoids history has left us with... it wasn't lost to the Muslims, why was it lost to its supposed place of conception?


b- Muslims may or may not have taken Greek work, but not only did they introduce it to the ignorant west, but improvised many of the incorrect notions previousely thought especially in the field of mathematics, I reference you of course to the article by Dr. George Saliba a few pages ago


4- Others didn't claim to have divine revelation, simply because there was nothing divine about their revelations. I don't pick an article in the NEJM and say wow, this is inviting me to walk the stright path. For one to make such an inference to begin with, one must compare pieces of literature so as to not be constantly speaking out of their ***

Neither the sacrifices of early Muslims, Nor the plight of the prophet, is why I consider the Quran divine in source... There are Multiple reasons, at the very fulcrum of it, the language itself which hasn't been met on any stratum.

The one thing I have determined from this futile correspondence with your person, is that you are not at all whom you claim to be.. and it is such a shame that I had given you the benefit of the doubt for so long.. least you can do is offer some intellectual deference...'faysal'


It appears we have reached a cul de sac .. I prefer to part ways with folks whose company doesn't suit me on any strata..

best of luck to you

cheers

I agree. Best of luck to you as well, since I've already covered all of those points I will move on.

Thank you for your participation.

All the best wishes,


Faysal

Greetings,
Total misunderstanding of the argument. Never mind - it happens all the time.

Peace

Hi Faysal
Well things are bit more complex then how you suggest.
It's more then just a matter of did he understand it. The prophet (peace be upon him) didn't travel all over the world. A good start would be if you showed that he traveled to a region were this was known in the first place. I'm not a historian, and the Islamic tradition also speaks scarsly of what happened before the start of the revelation. So I genuinely wouldn't know whether or not these trips during his life as a merchant included destinations like Egypt or the Roman empire. But I grant that it is indeed beside the question since your claim was not that it was plagiarized. Nevertheless I still found it important enough to mention. My apologies for venturing off-topic ^_^

Well, you completely ignored the first question I asked. Can you show that this information was known to mankind uberhaut! Can you show that these specific details I listed in my previous posts were indeed known to other people besides the Prophet (Peace be upon him). My claim is that these details (especially the ones I picked out) were not known at all in any place. In fact I will take this claim even further, some of the details were so specific that it appears impossible for someone to find out without advanced knowledge of science as well as very specific tools to study the environment. So it's not just so much that I argue that nobody else knew, but also that there was no plausible way for people to discover it back then in the first place.

Secondly, lets say purely for the sake of argument, that you can show me that this knowledge was indeed already know by other people. Or lets just say you can illustrate how some of these specific details could have been discovered with primitive equipment and investigation, or perhaps merely by philosophical analysis. Even if you could show me that, then you still have to acknowledge that there's a huge difference between somebody who lives near an ocean and discovers some specific characteristics of the sea on one hand, and somebody who lives in the middle of the dessert and makes a discovery about very specific characteristics of the sea.

In other words, to put a long story in short, the Prophet (peace be upon him) had no plausible way of knowing these details other than trough revelation.

Scrolling back, I see that you have already made some claims about the works of Galen and Nemesius among others. So let my clarify the details so it becomes clear these early scientists did not cover this:
1. Microscopic form of embryo's (first few days/weeks, till to small to notice with naked eye)
2. The existence of different waves under the surface (not just the existence of undercurrent, but the knowledge that there is a clearcut division between layers of sea that acts similar to surface waves).
3. The correlation between those waves and the fraction and partial reflection of light
4. The constant expansion of the universe (As opposed to the idea of a steady-state-universe)
5. The underground structure of Mountains (I'm talking formations of Mountains up to kilometers deep, far further then their height above surface)
6. The effect mountains have on earthquakes (How mountains react to plate tectonic movement)

No misunderstanding.None of you could provide any evidence/proof that the Holy Prophet got science education from Syrian institutes or name of his teachers.Only Theories ,assumptions ,Nothing else {A classical modus operandi of atheists} I wish anyone of you could use his brain.

I'm afraid all you've done is proven his point.

For the purposes of the argument it is sufficient to establish that the possibility cannot be ruled out. To do that 'proof' is not necessary and a theory relying on plausible assumptions is perfectly adequate. To take another historical example to illustrate, it is quite possible that Napoleon ate Chicken Marengo for dinner on 13 June 1806. But I can neither 'prove' it nor name the cook.

For the atheist it suffices to show that the possibility being discussed is more likely than divine revalation. That is very easy to do for atheists, and of course impossible for muslims which is why the whole argument is pretty futile.

Suppositions Or possibilities Or theories without concrete proof or evidence = Atheism

Try to be scientific
Best of luck

'scuse me for injecting myself into the thread again.There are many biographies/histories of the Prophet's life that refer to his journey to Syria as a youth and again at the request of Khadija. I believe it is from Khatib al-Waqidi but I don't read arabic so you'd have to check that one.
Mingled fluids, clot, lump. People seem keen to push this point but why has noone said anything about God waiting 42 days to determine the sex and characteristics of the child?


24:40 Or [else, their deeds are] [60] like the depths of darkness upon an abysmal sea, made yet more dark by wave billowing over wave, with [black] clouds above it all: depths of darkness, layer upon layer, [61] [so that] when one holds up his hand, he can hardly see it: for he to whom God gives no light, no light whatever has he!

The scene seems to be illustrating extreme darkness by example of a dark and stormy sea, wave crashing over wave, rather than the ocean separated into vertical layers.

Not really sure what you're referring to, maybe you could slip in a verse to clarify?

If you're saying what I think you are, why would lower layers of water be relevant when refraction and partial reflection occur at the air/water interface?
"Thus said God, Jehovah, preparing The heavens, and stretching them out..." Isaiah 42:5
Quran 13:3 And it is He who has spread the earth wide and placed on it firm mountains and running waters.
Quran 78:6-7 Have We not made the earth as a bed, and the mountains as pegs?

Earth spread out and pegged down? How did the scientists miss that one?
Comparing mountains to pegs is possibly the biggest stretch I have seen so far, mountains are formed when tectonic plates collide and crumple or one rides over the other. If the Quran could be assumed to be speaking of the internal structure of mountains, "peg" tells us nothing about that, not to mention that the structure of one mountain can be vastly different from that of another.

Quran 16:15 And He has set firm mountains in the earth so that it would not shake with you.

Mountains form where tectonic plates meet and move against each other, also causing earthquakes. We also know that mountains were not 'set' here and are not fixed, but are continuously changing. There was a time when the current ones did not exist and new ones will be created in the future.

All the millions of muslims who have memorised and later recited those passages had to do so at an institute?
The whole of your initial claim i.e. Islam is true and is divine revelation is without concrete proof or evidence.

Both occur at the interface of two water layers of different density, as well as where air meets water. Rather academic, though, as (IMVHO) the so-called 'correlation' is a classic piece of Qur'anic sciento-tosh. Folks can make their own minds up.



source

Proof of Divine revelation :
1:There are millions of Huffaaz of the Holy Quran who recite the Holy Quran every year.I challenge you to bring only 1000 such person who can recite the any book of the size of the Holy Quran with such accuracy .
2:It is the Quran who told us that Procreation without union of male and female gamete is possible which Science is revealing today.
We do not believe in 'suppositions' theories ' assumptions' because we use our brains.

'Proof'? Only of some very impressive feats of memory. But the ancient Indian classics were memorised for centuries (and indeed still are) and are MUCH, MUCH longer than the Qur'an. Many actors could reel off Shakespeare of a similar word count to the Qur'an. It's all about motive, or necessity, to learn, not divine origin.

'Proof' only of willingness to throw reason to the wind when there is a need to believe. The Qur'an says nothing about "male and female gametes". Or at least not without suitable 'interpretation' and a large dollop of wishful thinking it doesn't.

And so on, and so on. There is no 'proof', or anything vaguely resembling it. It is, always has been and always will be a faith thing. I just don't see the problem with admitting the fact.

Hi azy
Come in, take a seat, fancy a cup of coffee? ^_^

That's only one part of the assignment, now show that they indeed had this knowledge in syria.

Could you clarify your point?

I've put three most accepted English translations to remove doubt:
YUSUFALI: Or (the Unbelievers' state) is like the depths of darkness in a vast deep ocean, overwhelmed with billow topped by billow, topped by (dark) clouds: depths of darkness, one above another: if a man stretches out his hands, he can hardly see it! for any to whom Allah giveth not light, there is no light!
PICKTHAL: Or as darkness on a vast, abysmal sea. There covereth him a wave, above which is a wave, above which is a cloud. Layer upon layer of darkness. When he holdeth out his hand he scarce can see it. And he for whom Allah hath not appointed light, for him there is no light.
SHAKIR: Or like utter darkness in the deep sea: there covers it a wave above which is another wave, above which is a cloud, (layers of) utter darkness one above another; when he holds out his hand, he is almost unable to see it; and to whomsoever Allah does not give light, he has no light.

Also I don't know if you know this, but the only place where waves "crash over" each other is at a few meters from the cost. At full sea waves don't crash in to each other but instead follow up. Also you're adding interpretation, you're saying that the reference to darkness, is the stormy weather, whereas the verse says quite clearly that the different waves them self cause darkness rather then "symbolically refer to it". It's kind of silly really, to infer that muslims interpret the verse in the wrong way because they want the miracle to be true. If you look at it, your the only one who's making interpretations. The muslim explanation of the verse is a literal and not an interpretative explanation.

See the thing is, each wave has it's own density, salinity, and temperature. So these different waves act like different mediums, between the waves is a surface, and light reflects partially at each wave it passes. In other words, each wave refracts light, and by the process a small part of light is reflected untill eventually you'll have complete darkness. That is the reason the bottom of the sea is dark sea, as the verse suggested.

Close, but not quite the same. This verse refers to methodology. the heavens were stretched out. Doesn't necessarily mean they are constantly expanded. There's definitely no emphasis on that. The Qur'an states quite clear "constantly" expanding the