PDA

View Full Version : The scientific miracles of the Quran.



mariam.
04-17-2007, 09:43 PM
THE COMING OF THE UNIVERSE INTO EXISTENCE:


Until the mid-20th century, the prevalent view across the world was that the universe was infinite, had existed forever and that it will continue to do so for all time. According to this view, known as the "static universe model," the universe had no end or beginning.

In maintaining that the universe is a collection of fixed, static and unchanging substances, this view has constituted the basis of materialist philosophy and has consequently rejected the existence of a Creator. However, as science and technology progressed during the 20th century, the static universe model has been completely uprooted.

We have now entered the 21st century and a new dawn is upon us. Through numerous experiments, observations and calculation conducted by some of the world's most prominent thinkers, modern physics has proven that the universe did indeed have a beginning, that it came into being from nothing in a single moment in a huge explosion. Furthermore, it has been established that the universe is not fixed and static, as materialists still stubbornly maintain. On the contrary, it is undergoing a constant process of movement, change and expansion. These recently-established facts all act as nails in the coffin of the static universe theory. Today, all these facts are universally accepted by the scientific community.

The origin of the universe is described in the Qur'an in the following verse:

He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. (Qur'an, 6:101)

This information is in full agreement with the findings of contemporary scientists. As we stated earlier, the conclusion that astrophysics has reached today is that the entire universe, together with the dimensions of matter and time, came into existence as a result of a great explosion that occurred a long time ago. This event, known as "The Big Bang," is the catalyst for the creation of the universe from nothingness. This explosion, all parties in the scientific community agree, emanated from a single point some 15 billion years ago. (See Harun Yahya, The Creation of the Universe, Al-Attique Publishers Inc. Canada, 2000)

Before the Big Bang, there was no such thing as matter. From a condition of non-existence in which neither matter, nor energy, nor even time existed-and which can only be described metaphysically-matter, energy, and time were all created in an instant. This fact, only recently discovered by modern physics, was announced to us in the Qur'an 1,400 years ago.

The sensitive sensors on board the COBE space satellite, launched by NASA in 1992, captured evidentiary remnants of the Big Bang. This discovery served as evidence for the Big Bang, which is the scientific explanation of the fact that the universe was created from nothing.

THE EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE

In the Qur'an, which was revealed fourteen centuries ago at a time when the science of astronomy was still primitive, the expansion of the universe was described in the following terms:

And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (Qur'an, 51:47)

The word "heaven," as stated in the verse above, is used in various places in the Qur'an. It is referring to space and the wider universe. Here again, the word is used with this meaning, stating that the universe "expands." The Arabic word "moosiaaoona" in the term "inna lamoosiaaoona," translated into English as "it is We Who are steadily expanding it", comes from the verb "evsea," meaning "to expand." The prefix "la" emphasises the following name or title and adds a sense of "to a great extent." This expression therefore means "We expand the sky or the universe to a great extent." This is the very conclusion that science has reached today.

Until the dawn of the 20th century, the only view prevailing in the world of science was that "the universe has a constant nature and it has existed since infinite time." However, modern research, observations, and calculations carried out by means of modern technology have revealed that the universe in fact had a beginning and that it constantly "expands."

At the beginning of the 20th century, the Russian physicist Alexander Friedmann and the Belgian cosmologist Georges Lemaitre theoretically calculated that the universe is in constant motion and that it is expanding.

This notion was confirmed by the use of observational data in 1929. While observing the sky with a telescope, Edwin Hubble, the American astronomer, discovered that the stars and galaxies were constantly moving away from each other. This discovery is regarded as one of the greatest in the history of astronomy. During these observations, Hubble established that the stars emit a light that turns redder according to their distance. That is because according to the known laws of physics, light heading towards a point of observation turns violet, and light moving away from that point assumes a more reddish hue. During his observations, Hubble noted a tendency towards the colour red in the light emitted by stars. In short, the stars were moving further and further away, all the time. The stars and galaxies were not only moving away from us, but also from each other. A universe where everything constantly moves away from everything else implied a constantly expanding universe. The observations carried out in the following years verified that the universe is constantly expanding.

In order to gain a clearer understanding of this, let us imagine the universe to be the surface of a balloon being inflated. In the same way that the more the balloon is inflated, the further away the points on its surface move from one another, celestial bodies also move away from one another as the universe expands. This was theoretically discovered by Albert Einstein, regarded as one of the greatest scientists of the 20th century. However, in order to avoid violating the "static universe model" that was generally accepted at that time, Einstein laid that discovery aside. He would later describe this as the greatest blunder of his life.

This fact was explained in the Qur'an in a time when telescopes and similar technological advancements were not even close to being invented. This is because the Qur'an is the Word of Allah: the Creator and Ruler of the entire universe.

From the moment of the Big Bang, the universe has been constantly expanding at a great speed. Scientists compare the expanding universe to the surface of a balloon that is inflated.

THE END OF THE UNIVERSE AND THE BIG CRUNCH
As we have stated above, the creation of the universe began with a huge explosion. From this point, the universe has been expanding ever since. Scientists say that when the mass of the universe has reached a sufficient level, this expansion will come to an end because of gravity, causing the universe to collapse in on itself.

It is also believed that the contracting universe will end in a fierce heat and contraction known as the "Big Crunch." This would lead to the end of all forms of life as we know them. Renata Kallosh and Andrei Linde, professors of physics from Stanford University, made the following statements on the subject:

The universe may be doomed to collapse and disappear. Everything we see now, and at a much larger distance that we cannot see, will collapse into a point smaller than a proton. Locally, it will be the same as if you were inside a black hole... We have found that some of the best attempts to describe dark energy predict that it will gradually become negative, which will cause the universe to become unstable, then collapse... Physicists have known that dark energy could become negative and the universe could collapse sometime in the very distant future... but now we see that we might be, not in the beginning, but in the middle of the life cycle of our universe.

This is how this scientific hypothesis of the Big Crunch is indicated in the Qur'an:

That Day We will fold up heaven like folding up the pages of a book. As We originated the first creation so We will regenerate it. It is a promise binding on Us. That is what We will do. (Qur'an, 21:104)

In another verse, this state of the heavens is described thus:

They do not measure Allah with His true measure. The whole earth will be a mere handful for Him on the Day of Rising the heavens folded up in His right hand. Glory be to Him! He is exalted above the partners they ascribe! (Qur'an, 39:67)

According to the Big Crunch theory, the universe will begin to collapse slowly and will then increasingly pick up speed. At the end of the process the universe will have infinite density and be infinitely hot and small. This scientific theory runs parallel to the Qur'anic explanation of this particular scientific concept. (Allah knows best)

The Big Crunch theory proposes that the universe, that began expanding with the Big Bang, will collapse in on itself with increasing speed. According to the theory, this collapse of the universe will continue until the universe has lost all its mass and turned into a single point of infinite density.

CREATION FROM HOT SMOKE

Scientists today are able to observe the formation of stars from a hot gas cloud. Formation from a warm mass of gas also applies to the creation of the universe. The creation of the universe as described in the Qur'an confirms this scientific discovery in the following verse:

He placed firmly embedded mountains on it, towering over it, and blessed it and measured out its nourishment in it, laid out for those who seek it-all in four days. Then He turned to heaven when it was smoke and said to it and to the earth, "Come willingly or unwillingly." They both said, "We come willingly." (Qur'an, 41:10-11)

The Arabic word for "smoke" in the above verse is "dukhanun," which describes the hot, cosmic smoke in question. This word in the Qur'an, in pinpoint fashion, describes this smoke very accurately for it is a warm body of gas containing mobile particles connected to solid substances. Here, the Qur'an has employed the most appropriate word from the Arabic language for describing the appearance of this phase of the universe. Let us note that only in the 20th century have scientists discovered that the universe emerged from a hot gas in the form of smoke.

The fact that such information about the creation of the universe is given in the Qur'an is nothing short of a miracle of the Qur'an

THE SPLITTING ASUNDER OF "THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH"
Another verse about the creation of the heavens is as follows:

Do those who disbelieve not see that the heavens and the earth were sewn together and then We unstitched them and that We made from water every living thing? So will they not believe? (Qur'an, 21:30)

The word "ratq" translated as "sewn to" means "mixed in each, blended" in the Arabic vernacular. It is used to refer to two different substances that make up a whole. The phrase "we unstitched" is the verb "fataqa" in Arabic and implies that something comes into being by tearing apart or destroying the structure of things that are sewn to one another. The sprouting of a seed from the soil is one of the actions to which this verb is applied.

Let us take a look at the verse again. In the verse, sky and earth are at first subject to the status of "ratq." They are separated (fataqa) with one coming out of the other. Intriguingly, when we think about the first moments of the Big Bang, we see that the entire matter of the universe collected at one single point. In other words, everything-including "the heavens and earth" which were not created yet-were in an interwoven and inseparable condition. Then, this point exploded violently, causing its matter to disunite.

THE CREATION OF WHAT LIES BETWEEN THE HEAVENS
AND THE EARTH

The Qur'an contains a great many verses concerning the creation of the earth, the heavens and what lies between:

We did not create the heavens and earth and everything between them, except with truth. The Hour is certainly coming, so turn away graciously. (Qur'an, 15:85)

Everything in the heavens and everything on the earth and everything in between them and everything under the ground belongs to Him. (Qur'an, 20:6)

We did not create heaven and earth and everything in between them as a game. (Qur'an, 21:16)

Scientists state that first of all, a mass of hot gas increased in density. This mass later divided into smaller parts to form galactic matter and later still, the stars and planets. To put it another way, the Earth along with stars around it, are all parts which separated from a united body of gas. Some of these parts brought the suns and planets into being, thus leading to the emergence of the many Solar Systems and galaxies. As we have set out in earlier sections of this book, the universe was first in a state of "ratq" (fusion: combined together, united) and then became "fataqa" (divided into parts). The emergence of the universe is described with the most suitable words in the Qur'an, in such a way as to confirm the scientific accounts.

On the occasion of every division, a few particles remained outside the new, fundamental bodies forming in space. The scientific name for these extra particles is "interstellar galactic material." Interstellar matter consists of 60% of hydrogen, 38% of helium and 2% of all other elements. 99% of the interstellar matter consists of interstellar gas and 1% of interstellar dust, which probably consists of heavy elements in small particles of 0,0001 to 0.001 mm in diameter. Scientists regard these substances as very important from the point of view of astrophysical measurements. These substances are so fine as to be capable of being regarded as dust, smoke or gas. However, when one considers these substances as a whole, they represent a larger mass than the total of all the galaxies in space. Although the existence of this interstellar galactic matter was only discovered in 1920, attention was drawn to the existence of these particles, described as "ma baynahuma"-translated as "everything between them"-hundreds of years ago in the Qur'an.

THE PERFECT EQUILIBRIUM IN THE UNIVERSE
He Who created the seven heavens in layers. You will not find any discrepancy in the creation of the All-Merciful. Look again-do you see any gaps? Then look again and again. Your sight will return to you dazzled and exhausted! (Qur'an, 67:3-4)

The billions of stars and galaxies in the universe move in perfect equilibrium in the paths set out for them. Stars, planets and satellites rotate not only around their own axes but also together with the systems of which they are an integral part. Sometimes, galaxies containing 200-300 billion stars move across each others' paths. Yet amazingly, no collisions take place that might damage the great order in the universe. This miracle is something over which all of us should reflect.

In the universe, the concept of speed assumes giant dimensions when compared to earthly measurements. Stars, planets, galaxies and conglomerations of galaxies-whose numerical properties can only be conceived by mathematicians-weigh billions or trillions of tons, and move through space at extraordinary speeds.

For example, the Earth rotates at 1,670 kmph. If we consider that the fastest-moving bullet today possesses an average speed of 1,800 kmph, we can see how fast the Earth is moving, despite its enormous size and mass.

The speed of the Earth as it orbits the Sun is some 60 times faster than a bullet: 108,000 kmph. If we were able to construct a vehicle capable of moving at that speed, it would be able to circumnavigate the Earth in 22 minutes. These figures apply only to the Earth.

Those for the Solar System are even more fascinating. The speed of that system is such as to exceed the bounds of reason: The larger the systems in the universe, the greater their speed. The Solar System's speed of orbit around the centre of the galaxy is 720,000 kmph. The Milky Way, with its 200 billion or so stars, moves through space at 950,000 kmph.

There is no doubt that there is a very high risk of collisions in such a complicated and fast-moving system. Yet nothing of the sort actually happens and we continue with our lives in complete safety. That is because everything in the universe functions according to the flawless equilibrium set out by Allah. It is for this reason that, as stated in the verse, there is no "discrepancy" in the system.

THE STRUCTURAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SUN, THE MOON AND THE STARS
We built seven firm layers above you. We installed a blazing lamp. (Qur'an, 78:12-13)

As we know, the only source of light in the Solar System is the Sun. With advances in technology, astronomers discovered that the Moon was not a source of light but that it merely reflects the light reaching it from the Sun. The expression "lamp" in the above verse is a translation of the Arabic word "sirajan," which most perfectly describes the Sun, the source of light and heat.

In the Qur'an Allah employs different words when referring to such celestial bodies as the Moon, the Sun and the stars. This is how the differences between the structures of the Sun and Moon are expressed in the Qur'an:

Do you not see how He created seven heavens in layers, and placed the moon as a light in them and made the sun a blazing lamp? (Qur'an, 71:15-16)

In the above verse, the word "light" is used for the Moon ("nooran" in Arabic) and the word "lamp" for the Sun ("sirajan" in Arabic.) The word used for the Moon refers to a light-reflecting, bright, motionless body. The word used for the Sun refers to a celestial body which is always burning, a constant source of heat and light.

On the other hand, the word "star" comes from the Arabic root "nejeme," meaning "appearing, emerging, visible." As in the verse below, stars are also referred to by the word "thaqib," which is used for that which shines and pierces the darkness with light: self-consuming and burning:

It is the star that pierces through darkness! (Qur'an, 86:3)

We now know that the Moon does not emit its own light but reflects that reaching it from the Sun. We also know that the Sun and stars do emit their own light. These facts were revealed in the Qur'an in an age when mankind simply did not have the means to make scientific discoveries of their own accord. It was an age when peoples' knowledge of celestial bodies was severely restricted, to say the least. This further emphasises the miraculous nature of the book of Islam.

by. harun yahya

to be continue........
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Hemoo
04-18-2007, 02:23 AM
good thread sister

and i hope you visit this thread and tell me your opinion

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...ing-quran.html
Reply

- Qatada -
04-18-2007, 07:12 PM
:wasalamex


Maasha Allaah that was really good! barak Allaahu feeki sister.
Reply

mariam.
04-18-2007, 07:21 PM
ORBITS AND THE ROTATING UNIVERSE

One of the most important reasons for the great equilibrium in the universe is the fact that celestial bodies follow specific paths. Stars, planets and satellites all rotate around their own axes and also rotate together with the system of which they are a part. The universe functions within a finely-tuned order, just like the wheels in a factory.

There are more than 100 billion galaxies in the visible universe and each small galaxy contains approximately a billion stars. Furthermore, each big galaxy contains more than a trillion. 16 Many of these stars have planets and many of those planets have satellites. All these celestial bodies follow the most finely calculated paths and orbits. For millions of years, each one has been moving in its own path in flawless harmony with all the others. In addition to these, there are also a great many comets moving along in their own pre-determined paths.

In addition, the paths in the universe are not restricted to a few celestial bodies. The Solar System and even other galaxies also exhibit considerable motion around other centres. Every year, Earth, and the Solar System with it, move some 500 million km from where they were the previous year. It has been calculated that even the slightest deviation from celestial bodies' paths could have drastic consequences which might spell the end of the entire system. For example, the consequences of the earth's deviating from its course by a mere 3 mm have been described in one source as follows:

While rotating around the sun, the earth follows such an orbit that, every 18 miles, it only deviates 2.8 millimetres from a direct course. The orbit followed by the earth never changes, because even a deviation of 3 millimetres would cause catastrophic disasters: If the deviation were 2.5 mm instead of 2.8 mm, then the orbit would be very large, and all of us would freeze. If the deviation were 3.1 mm, we would be scorched to death.

Another characteristic of heavenly bodies is that they also rotate around their own axes. The verse which reads "[I swear] by Heaven with its cyclical systems," (Qur'an, 86:11) indicates this truth. Naturally, at the time when the Qur'an was revealed, people had no telescopes with which to study bodies millions of kilometres away in space, advanced observation technology or our modern knowledge of physics and astronomy. It was therefore impossible to establish that space had "its oscillating orbits," (Qur'an, 51:7) as described in the verse. The Qur'an however, revealed at that time, provided clear information concerning that fact. This is proof that this book is indeed Allah's Word


Like many other comets in the universe, Halley's comet, seen above, also moves in a planned orbit. It has a specific orbit and it moves in this orbit in a perfect harmony with other celestial bodies.

All celestial bodies—including planets, satellites of these planets, stars and even galaxies—have their own orbits that have been determined with very delicate computations. The One Who established this perfect order and maintains it is Allah, Who created the entire universe.

THE SUN'S TRAJECTORY


It is stressed in the Qur'an that the Sun and Moon follow specific trajectories:

It is He Who created night and day and the sun and moon, each one swimming in a sphere. (Qur'an, 21:33)

The word "swim" in the above verse is expressed in Arabic by the word "sabaha" and is used to describe the movement of the Sun in space. The word means that the Sun does not move randomly through space but that it rotates around its axis and follows a course as it does so. The fact that the Sun is not fixed in position but rather follows a specific trajectory is also stated in another verse:

And the sun runs to its resting place. That is the decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing. (Qur'an, 36:38)

These facts set out in the Qur'an were only discovered by means of astronomical advances in our own time. According to astronomers' calculations, the Sun moves along a path known as the Solar Apex in the path of the star Vega at an incredible speed of 720,000 kmph. In rough terms, this shows that the Sun traverses some 17.28 million km a day. As well as the Sun itself, all the planets and satellites within its gravitational field also travel the same distance.

THE MOON'S ORBIT

And We have decreed set phases for the moon, until it ends up looking like an old date branch. It is not for the sun to overtake the moon nor for the night to outstrip the day; each one is swimming in a sphere. (Qur'an, 36:39-40)



The Moon does not follow a regular orbit like the satellites of other planets. As it orbits the Earth, it sometimes moves behind it and sometimes in front. As it also moves with the Earth around the Sun, it actually follows a constant pattern resembling the letter "S" in space. This route, traced by the Moon in space, is described in the Qur'an as resembling an old date branch and does indeed resemble the twisted form of the date tree branch. Indeed, the word "urjoon" employed in the Qur'an refers to a thin and twisted date branch and is used to describe that part left after the fruit has been picked. The way that this branch is described as "old" is also most appropriate since old date branches are thinner and more twisted.

Since the Moon revolves around the Sun together with the Earth, it follows a path through space which resembles the letter “S.” The appearance of this orbit resembles the twisted shape of a dry date branch, as is revealed in the Qur’an.

There is no doubt that it was impossible for anyone to have any knowledge about the orbit of the Moon 1,400 years ago. The way that this pattern, identified by modern technology and accumulated knowledge, was revealed in the Holy Book is yet another scientific miracle of the Qur'an.

CALCULATING THE LUNAR YEAR

It is He Who appointed the sun to give radiance, and the moon to give light, assigning it phases so you would know the number of years and the reckoning of time. Allah did not create these things except with truth. We make the Signs clear for people who know. (Qur'an, 10:5)

And We have decreed set phases for the moon, until it ends up looking like an old date branch. (Qur'an, 36:39)


In the first of the above verses, Allah has clearly revealed that the Moon will be a means of measurement for people to calculate the year. Furthermore, our attention is also drawn to the fact that these calculations will be performed according to the positions of the Moon as it revolves in its orbit. Since the angles between the Earth and Moon and the Moon and Sun constantly change, we see the Moon in different forms at different times. Furthermore, our ability to see the Moon is made possible by the fact that it is illuminated by the Sun. The amount of the lighted half of the Moon we see from Earth changes. Bearing in mind these changes, a number of calculations can be made, making it possible for human beings to measure the year.

In former times a month was calculated as the time between two full moons, or the time it took the Moon to travel around the Earth. According to this, one month was equal to 29 days, 12 hours and 44 minutes. This is known as the "lunar month." Twelve lunar months represent one year, according to the Hijri calendar. However, there is a difference of eleven days between the Hijri calendar and the Gregorian calendar, in which a year is the time it takes the Earth to orbit the Sun. Indeed, attention is drawn to this difference in another verse:

They stayed in their Cave for three hundred years and added nine. (Qur'an, 18:25)

We can clarify the time referred to in the verse thus: 300 years x 11 days (the difference which forms every year) = 3,300 days. Bearing in mind that one solar year lasts 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes and 45.5 seconds, 3,300 days/365.24 days = 9 years. To put it another way, 300 years according to the Gregorian calendar is equal to 300+9 years according to the Hijri calendar. As we can see, the verse refers to this finely calculated difference of 9 years. (Allah knows best.) There is no doubt that the Qur'an, which contains such pieces of information, which transcended the everyday knowledge of the time, is a miraculous revelation.

THE FORCE OF GRAVITY AND ORBITAL MOVEMENTS

No! I swear by the planets-that recede, that ride their course [and] hide themselves. (Qur'an, 81: 15-16)



The word "khunnas" in Surat at-Takwir 15 bears such meanings as shrinking and cowering, retracting and turning back. The Arabic expression translated as "hide themselves" in the 16th verse is "kunnas." The word "kunnas" is the plural form of "kanis" and refers to a specific path: entering a nest, the home of a body in motion or things entering their homes and hiding there. Again in verse 16, the word "aljawari," the plural form of the word "jariya" which means one that moves and flows, is translated as "that ride their course." Bearing in mind the meaning of these words, it is very possible that these verses refer to the gravitational forces of the planets and their movements around their orbits.

These words in the above verses fully describe orbital movements stemming from the force of gravity. Of these, the word "khunnas" refers to the planets' attraction towards their own centres and also their attraction towards the Sun, which is the centre of our Solar System. (Allah knows best.) The force of gravity already existed in the universe-although it was only possible to reveal this attractive force with mathematical formulae with Sir Isaac Newton, who lived in the 17th and 18th centuries. The word "aljawari" in the following verse emphasises the orbital movements that arise as a result of the centrifugal force that opposes this attractive one. There is no doubt that the use of the word "aljawari" together with "khunnas" (attraction towards the centre, shrinkage) and "kunnas" (path, entering the nest, the home of a body in motion) indicates an important scientific truth that nobody could have known about 1,400 years ago. (Allah knows best.) Moreover, these verses, one of the subjects sworn on in the Qur'an, are another indication of the importance of the subject.

THE ROUNDNESS OF THE EARTH

He has created the Heavens and the Earth for Truth. He wraps the night up in the day, and wraps the day up in the night.
(Qur'an, 39:5)

In the Qur'an, the words used for describing the universe are quite remarkable. The Arabic word which is translated as "to wrap" in the above verse is "takwir." In English, it means "to make one thing lap over another, folded up as a garment that is laid away." For instance, in Arabic dictionaries this word is used for the action of wrapping one thing around another, in the way that a turban is put on. The information given in the verse about the day and the night wrapping each other up includes accurate information about the shape of the world. This can be true only if the Earth is round. This means that in the Qur'an, which was revealed in the 7th century, the roundness of the world was hinted at.

However, it should be remembered that the understanding of astronomy of the time perceived the world differently. It was then thought that the world was a flat plane and all scientific calculations and explanations were based on this belief. However, the Glorious Qur'an has employed the most definitive words when it came to describing the universe. These facts, which we could only correctly fathom in our century, have been in the Qur'an for a vast length of time.

THE EARTH'S DIRECTION OF ROTATION

You will see the mountains and reckon them to be solid; but they go past like clouds-the handiwork of Allah Who gives to everything its solidity. He is aware of what you do. (Qur'an, 27:88)

The above verse emphasises that the Earth not only rotates but that it also has a direction of rotation. The direction of movement of the main cloud masses at 3,500-4,000 metres high is always from West to East. That is why it is generally the state of the weather in the West which is looked at in meteorological forecasts.

The main reason why cloud masses are pulled from West to East is the direction in which the Earth rotates. As we now know, our Earth spins from West to East. This scientific fact, only recently established by science, was revealed 1,400 years ago in the Qur’an, at a time when the Earth was believed to be flat, and to be resting on the back of an ox.

THE EARTH'S GEOID SHAPE

After that He smoothed out the earth. (Qur'an, 79:30)


In the above verse, the word "daha" is used in the original Arabic. It, translated as "smoothed out," comes from the word "dahv," meaning "to spread." Although the word "dahv" also means to cover or to set out, the meaning of the verb is more than just a prosaic setting out, since it describes setting out in a circle.

The concept of roundness is also present in other words derived from "dahv." For example, the word "dahv" also refers to children dropping a ball into a hole in the ground, games involving throwing stones into holes and games played with walnuts. Words derived from that root are also used for an ostrich making a nest, cleaning stones from where it is about to lie down, the place where it lays its eggs and the egg itself.

Indeed, the Earth is round, in a manner reminiscent of an egg. The slightly flattened spherical shape of the Earth is known as geoid. From that point of view, the use of the word "daha" contains important information about the shape that Allah has given to the Earth. For hundreds of years, people imagined the Earth to be completely flat and only learned the truth thanks to technology. Yet, this fact was revealed in the Qur'an fourteen centuries ago.

THE DIAMETERS OF THE EARTH AND SPACE
Company of jinn and men, if you are able to pierce through the confines of the heavens and earth, pierce through them. You will not pierce through except with a clear authority. (Qur'an, 55:33)

The Arabic word translated as "confines" in the above verse is "aqtar." This is the plural form of the word "qutr," meaning diameter and refers to the skies and the Earth having many diameters. It is possible in Arabic to tell from the form in which a word is used whether it is singular, plural (more than two), or employed in a dual form. Therefore, the form of the word used here, the plural, refers to another piece of miraculous information.

A three-dimensional body can only be said to have a single diameter if it is perfectly spherical. The term "diameters" can only refer to an irregular but basically spherical shape. This word chosen in the Qur'an-diameters-is important from the point of view of indicating the geoid shape of the Earth. The second noteworthy subject in the verse is that the Earth and the heavens are mentioned separately in reference to diameters.

According to Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, the universe is expanding. But this does not mean that the galaxies and other heavenly bodies are being dispersed in space. This means that space is expanding and that the distance between the galaxies is increasing.

The definition of the "confines of the heavens" in Surat ar-Rahman 33 indicates the spherical structure of space. (Allah knows best.) In the same way that the diameters of space will be different from different points in space, so the diameters of a constantly expanding space will also display differences. From that point of view the use of the plural form of the word confine is full of wisdom, and is one of the indications that the Qur'an is the revelation of our Omniscient Lord.

THE LAYERS OF THE ATMOSPHERE

One fact about the universe revealed in the verses of the Qur'an is that the sky is made up of seven layers:

It is He Who created everything on the earth for you and then directed His attention up to heaven and arranged it into seven regular heavens. He has knowledge of all things. (Qur'an, 2:29)

Then He turned to heaven when it was smoke. In two days He determined them as seven heavens and revealed, in every heaven, its own mandate. (Qur'an, 41:11-12)

The word "heavens," which appears in many verses in the Qur'an, is used to refer to the sky above the Earth, as well as the entire universe. Given this meaning of the word, it is seen that the Earth's sky, or the atmosphere, is made up of seven layers.

Today, it is known that the world's atmosphere consists of different layers that lie on top of each other.19 Based on the criteria of chemical contents or air temperature, the definitions made have determined the atmosphere of the earth as seven layers.20 According to the "Limited Fine Mesh Model (LFMMII)," a model of atmosphere used to estimate weather conditions for 48 hours, the atmosphere is also 7 layers. According to the modern geological definitions the seven layers of atmosphere are as follows:

1. Troposphere

2. Stratosphere

3. Mesosphere

4. Thermosphere

5. Exosphere

6. Ionosphere

7. Magnetosphere

The Qur'an says, "[He] revealed, in every heaven, its own mandate," in Surah Fussilat 12. In other words, Allah is stating that He assigned each heaven its own duty. Truly, as will be seen in following chapters, each one of these layers has vital duties for the benefit of human kind and all other living things on the Earth. Each layer has a particular function, ranging from forming rain to preventing harmful rays, from reflecting radio waves to averting the harmful effects of meteors.

The verses below inform us about the appearance of the seven layers of the atmosphere:

Do you not see how He created seven heavens in layers? (Qur'an, 71:15)

He Who created the seven heavens in layers… (Qur'an, 67:3)

The Arabic word "tibaqan" in these verses, translated into English as "layer" means "layer, the appropriate cover or covering for something," and thus stresses how the top layer is well suited to the lower. The word is also used in the plural here: "layers." The sky, described in the verse as being in layers, is without doubt the most perfect expression of the atmosphere. It is a great miracle that these facts, which could not possibly be discovered without the technology of the 20th century, were explicitly stated by the Qur'an 1,400 years ago.

THE PROTECTED ROOF

In the Qur'an, Allah calls our attention to a very important attribute of the sky:

We made the sky a preserved and protected roof yet still they turn away from Our Signs. (Qur'an, 21:32)

This attribute of the sky has been proved by scientific research carried out in the 20th century: The atmosphere surrounding the Earth serves crucial functions for the continuity of life. While destroying many meteors-big and small-as they approach the Earth, it prevents them from falling to Earth and harming living things.

In addition, the atmosphere filters the light rays coming from space that are harmful to living things. The most striking feature of the atmosphere is that it lets only harmless and useful rays-visible light, near ultraviolet light and radio waves pass through. All of this radiation is vital for life. Near ultraviolet rays, which are only partially let in by the atmosphere, are very important for the photosynthesis of plants and for the survival of all living beings. The majority of the intense ultraviolet rays emitted from the Sun are filtered out by the ozone layer of the atmosphere. Only a limited and essential part of the ultraviolet spectrum reaches the Earth.

The protective function of the atmosphere does not end here. The atmosphere also protects the earth from the freezing cold of the space, which is approximately -270oC.

It is not only the atmosphere that protects the Earth from harmful effects. In addition to the atmosphere, the Van Allen Belt-the layer caused by the magnetic field of the Earth-also serves as a shield against the harmful radiation that threatens our planet. This radiation, which is constantly emitted by the Sun and other stars, is deadly to living things. If the Van Allen belt did not exist, the massive outbursts of energy called solar flares that frequently occur in the Sun would destroy all life on Earth.

The magnetosphere layer, formed by the magnetic field of the Earth, serves as a shield protecting the Earth from celestial bodies, harmful cosmic rays and particles. In the above picture, this magnetosphere layer, which is also named Van Allen Belts, is seen. These belts at thousands of kilometres above the Earth protect the living things on the Earth from the fatal energy that would otherwise reach it from space.

All these scientific findings prove that the world is protected in a very particular way. The important thing is that this protection was made known in the Qur'an in the verse "We made the sky a preserved and protected roof" fourteen centuries ago.

On the importance of the Van Allen Belt, Dr. Hugh Ross says:

In fact, the Earth has the highest density of any of the planets in our Solar System. This large nickel-iron core is responsible for our large magnetic field. This magnetic field produces the Van-Allen radiation shield, which protects the Earth from radiation bombardment. If this shield were not present, life would not be possible on the Earth. The only other rocky planet to have any magnetic field is Mercury-but its field strength is 100 times less than the Earth's. Even Venus, our sister planet, has no magnetic field. The Van-Allen radiation shield is a design unique to the Earth.21

The energy transmitted in just one of these bursts detected in recent years was calculated to be equivalent to 100 billion atomic bombs, each akin to one dropped on Hiroshima at the end of World War II. Fifty-eight hours after the burst, it was observed that the magnetic needles of compasses displayed unusual movement and 250 kilometres above the Earth's atmosphere, the temperature suddenly increased to 2,500oC.

In short, a perfect system is at work high above the Earth. It surrounds our world and protects it against external threats. Centuries ago, Allah informed us in the Qur'an of the world's atmosphere functioning as a protective shield.

Most people looking at the sky do not think about the protective aspect of the atmosphere. They almost never think what kind of a place the world would be like if this structure did not exist. The above photo belongs to a giant crater caused by a meteor that fell in Arizona, in the USA. If the atmosphere did not exist, millions of meteoroids would fall to the Earth and the Earth would become an inhabitable place. Yet, the protective aspect of the atmosphere allows living things to survive in safety. This is certainly Allah's protection of people and a miracle proclaimed in the Qur'an.

to be continue........
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Trumble
04-18-2007, 07:46 PM
Originally Posted by mariam.

It was then thought that the world was a flat plane
No, it wasn't.

In early Classical Antiquity, the Earth was generally believed to be flat. Greek philosophers from that time period were prone to form conclusions similar to those of Anaximander, who believed the Earth to be a short cylinder with a flat, circular top.[1] It is conjectured that the first person to have advocated a spherical shape of the Earth was Pythagoras (6th century BC), but this idea is not supported by the fact that most presocratic Pythagoreans considered the world to be flat.[2] Eratosthenes, however, had already determined that the earth was a sphere and calculated its rough circumference by the third century B.C. [3]

By the time of Pliny the Elder in the 1st century, the Earth's spherical shape was generally acknowledged among the learned in the western world. Ptolemy derived his maps from a curved globe and developed the system of latitude, longitude, and climes. His writings remained the basis of European astronomy throughout the Middle Ages, although Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (ca. 3rd to 7th centuries) saw occasional arguments in favor of a flat Earth.
Source: Wikipedia (among a great many others).


You'll no doubt be delighted to know I really can't be bothered about the rest of the 'miracles' any more.
Reply

mariam.
04-18-2007, 10:12 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
No, it wasn't.
In fact I don't want to discuss with you with tendentious view, and I hope you do Like me.

I think we discuss before about this point, and I said that the important point in the Quran's miracles is .. Quran never run against the modern sciense.

Quran is a miracle not because it's comeing with some thing New ..

the Earth's spherical shape was generally acknowledged among the learned in the western world.
although Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (ca. 3rd to 7th centuries) saw occasional arguments in favor of a flat Earth.
can I ask you Questions?
have you ever heard that prophet Mohammad born saudi arabia?
have you ever heard that prophet mohammad was illiterate?that he don't know how to read or write?

So, please can you read your text that you quote it to me over again ..
did you read this " western world " .. did you read the last sentence
I hope you did .. with out partiality.

Originally Posted by Trumble
You'll no doubt be delighted to know I really can't be bothered about the rest of the 'miracles' any more.
as you want.

take care.
Reply

Trumble
04-18-2007, 10:51 PM
Originally Posted by mariam.
have you ever heard that prophet Mohammad born saudi arabia?
Of course.

have you ever heard that prophet mohammad was illiterate?that he don't know how to read or write?
Yes, I know what illiterate means. I know that Mohammed's political achievements alone identify him as a genius, and that while illiterate he certainly would have spoken to people from a wide variety of backgrounds. I know that that same knowledge would have resided in all centres of learning between Rome and India, and a great many people who generally resided or travelled elsewhere would have been exposed to it via others particularly when it may well have been 'common knowledge'. I also know that there is no evidence at all that, outside of such centres of learning, the general opinion was that the world was flat - there is simply no evidence to support that. It is just assumed in the hope it will slip under the reader's radar amidst memories of old movies about Christopher Columbus.

The idea that Mohammed's Mecca was somehow isolated in some bubble from the rest of the world simply isn't credible. If anything, it's rather insulting to its inhabitants. It was a trading town, on the route from Southern Arabia and even India to the Byzantine (and previously Roman) empires, not to mention assorted other places.


So, please can you read your text that you quote it to me over again ..
did you read this " western world " .. did you read the last sentence
I hope you did .. with out partiality.
Yup, "in the 1st century". Not the seventh - see above.

I hope you will consider my comments in the same way. Anyway, that is enough on this; I've been here far too often before and just ended up going around in circles. Do take care yourself, too. I admire your strength of belief and faith, and I'm sure it has much more secure foundations than the pen of Mr Yahya! I really hope so.
Reply

mariam.
04-18-2007, 11:51 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble

Yup, "in the 1st century". Not the seventh - see above.
Trumble .. I don't want to Oppose you, your said is legitimate but that doesn't mean that you are right because what you said just a premise with out proof.

and I said that Quran is a miracle not because it's comeing with some thing New .. So, that's not our point.

please don't understand me in wrong way .. I regard your opinion and I know that it's a hard step to be agree with me, but I ask one thing .. don't make your desire superior than what your God wants you to do.

Ok .. what about this one :statisfie .. This text said:
although Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (ca. 3rd to 7th centuries) saw occasional arguments in favor of a flat Earth.
and the prophet Mohammad born in 570.after christ ..

fainally,I hope you watch this 5 minute about co-existence
( press left media player logo If you want to watch it with out download)
take care
Reply

ranma1/2
04-18-2007, 11:56 PM
So are you posting this for me?
I guess i could go through various ones a check the validity of the miracles and what was known at the time etc...
Reply

Trumble
04-19-2007, 12:15 AM
Originally Posted by mariam.

Ok .. what about this one :statisfie .. This text said:

although Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (ca. 3rd to 7th centuries) saw occasional arguments in favor of a flat Earth.

and the prophet Mohammad born in 570.after christ ..
"Occasional arguments" does not equate to "it was then thought that the world was a flat plane" with the implication of widespread popular belief!

Oddly enough, the heyday of the 'flat-earthers' was actually many centuries later in Europe. In the muslim world Imam Al-Suyuti (15th century) believed the world to be flat (which, as I happily agree the Qur'an says it is round, seems rather odd), contrasting with earlier muslim opinion. There is just so much real history in all this, real human achievement from great thinkers muslim and non-muslim alike. I just find it sad to see that history ignored by the likes of Yahya in favour in chasing after another dubious 'proof' so full of holes you could drive a bus through it. The reality is just so much more interesting!
Reply

Philosopher
04-19-2007, 01:05 AM
Originally Posted by Trumble
"Occasional arguments" does not equate to "it was then thought that the world was a flat plane" with the implication of widespread popular belief!

Oddly enough, the heyday of the 'flat-earthers' was actually many centuries later in Europe. In the muslim world Imam Al-Suyuti (15th century) believed the world to be flat (which, as I happily agree the Qur'an says it is round, seems rather odd), contrasting with earlier muslim opinion. There is just so much real history in all this, real human achievement from great thinkers muslim and non-muslim alike. I just find it sad to see that history ignored by the likes of Yahya in favour in chasing after another dubious 'proof' so full of holes you could drive a bus through it. The reality is just so much more interesting!
Just a question: Where did you find that Imam Al-Suyuti say that the world is flat?
Reply

Trumble
04-19-2007, 06:24 AM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
Just a question: Where did you find that Imam Al-Suyuti say that the world is flat?
thetruereligion.org ("Your authentic guide to Islamic belief, culture and civilization")

The later belief of Muslim scholars, like as-Suyuti (died 911 AH / 1505 CE) that the earth is flat represents a deviation from this earlier opinion.
Reply

shible
04-19-2007, 07:13 AM
:sl:

good post

MashaAllah



:w:
Reply

mariam.
04-19-2007, 11:21 AM
Originally Posted by Trumble
"Occasional arguments" does not equate to "it was then thought that the world was a flat plane" with the implication of widespread popular belief!

Oddly enough, the heyday of the 'flat-earthers' was actually many centuries later in Europe. In the muslim world Imam Al-Suyuti (15th century) believed the world to be flat (which, as I happily agree the Qur'an says it is round, seems rather odd), contrasting with earlier muslim opinion. There is just so much real history in all this, real human achievement from great thinkers muslim and non-muslim alike. I just find it sad to see that history ignored by the likes of Yahya in favour in chasing after another dubious 'proof' so full of holes you could drive a bus through it. The reality is just so much more interesting!
Trumble ..... :enough!: enough!!!!
why you don't have any thing to say except this?
I think that I tell you Once and again ... Quran is a miracle not because it's comeing with some thing New But because Quran never run against the modern sciense.

what you said is just a supposal, maybe it's right and maybe it's wrong ...OK

and I have No disincentive to agree with you, If you are right.

what about the 5 minute media .. did you see it?

take care
Reply

Trumble
04-19-2007, 05:49 PM
Originally Posted by mariam.
Trumble ..... :enough!: enough!!!!
why you don't have any thing to say except this?
???!!!

I was only replying to this from you;

Ok .. what about this one .. This text said:

although Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (ca. 3rd to 7th centuries) saw occasional arguments in favor of a flat Earth.
Did you want an answer or not?! What did you expect me to say?

Yes, I did watch the vid. :)
Reply

جوري
04-19-2007, 06:37 PM
I don't know what your question is here... but all Islamic sources pointed to one fact.. earth being elliptical/ spherical.. can be deduced from both the word (da'ha'ha) in the Quran.. and of course by the map of Al-Idrisi The globe he presented Roger the II was crushed in favor of the medieval belief that the earth was flat.. but all Muslims knew it wasn't, from the Quran itself.. or are you now fluent in Arabic? go look the word highlighted in red in an Arabic dictionary


وَالْأَرْضَ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ دَحَاهَا

Quran 79.30

Al Idrisi was around Abu Abd Allah Muhammad al-Idrisi (Arabic: أبو عبد الله محمد الإدريسي; b.1100-d.1165 or 1166)

so what are you trying to do.. erase the Quran and history by finding one guy who had a different opinion? Are you going to quit these juvenile games or what?
Reply

Trumble
04-19-2007, 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
so what are you trying to do.. erase the Quran and history by finding one guy who had a different opinion? Are you going to quit these juvenile games or what?
Don't be absurd. Try actually reading the previous posts.

I clearly stated that the Qur'an says the world is spherical. I named Al-Suyuti (who, inconvenient as it may be, is a significant figure) merely to point out that the 'flat earth' idea was still around some considereable time later, and not only in Europe. I also implied that that was contrary to the vast majority of muslim opinion, and the article I linked to made that point quite specifically.

However, you are at it too.

.. was crushed in favor of the medieval belief that the earth was flat.. but all Muslims knew it wasn't, from the Quran itself..
Same old myth. The "medieval belief" was not that "the earth was flat". Some people thought it was. Most Arab intellectuals indeed knew it wasn't, but in all probability that knowledge could be traced right back to Eratosthenes. They knew it was spherical long before the Qur'an was revealed, although some of them afterwards no doubt obtained that knowledge from reading or listing to recitations of the Qur'an. But the fundamental point comes back to "could somebody in seventh century Arabia know the world was round not flat?". The simple answer is "yes". That was probably the prevailing opinion.
Reply

lavikor201
04-19-2007, 07:43 PM
Quran never run against the modern sciense.
Really? The moon just splits in half then?

Everything was created in pairs?

There are quite a few examples of organisms which are exclusively
parthenogenetic. I might refer you to Graham Bell's "The Masterpiece
of Nature", a weighty tome which has all you could care to know about
the evolution of sexual reproduction.

Even though there are quite a few example of parthenogens, they tend
to be taxanomically isolated, suggesting that they are all of recent
origin (often due to hybridization between two disparate specied) and
are short-lived in evolutionary time.

There is one notable exception, however, which is the topic of study
in my lab. Bdelloid rotifers are an entire class of animals which,
as far as anyone can tell, has been reproducing entirely without any
form of genetic exchange for quite some time (perhaps more than 50
million years), with over 350 species identified.

If you're interested in more info about bdelloids and our work, I'd
refer to our lab web page, which includes a copy of our research
proposal which gives a fair amount of background material. You can
reach the page at
http://golgi.harvard.edu/meselson/
.
[removed]
Reply

جوري
04-19-2007, 08:01 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Don't be absurd. Try actually reading the previous posts.

I clearly stated that the Qur'an says the world is spherical. I named Al-Suyuti (who, inconvenient as it may be, is a significant figure) merely to point out that the 'flat earth' idea was still around some considereable time later, and not only in Europe. I also implied that that was contrary to the vast majority of muslim opinion, and the article I linked to made that point quite specifically.

However, you are at it too.



Same old myth. The "medieval belief" was not that "the earth was flat". Some people thought it was. Most Arab intellectuals indeed knew it wasn't, but in all probability that knowledge could be traced right back to Eratosthenes. They knew it was spherical long before the Qur'an was revealed, although some of them afterwards no doubt obtained that knowledge from reading or listing to recitations of the Qur'an. But the fundamental point comes back to "could somebody in seventh century Arabia know the world was round not flat?". The simple answer is "yes". That was probably the prevailing opinion.
I find most of your posts.. run along the same tracks... and tedium to trace them back.. but from the looks of your thesis ... a few Arabs from the old worked diligently hard at copying works from others, far and near and incorporating it into one beautiful long poem.. Again I am not sure for what purpose...

So long as your thoughts are satisfactory to your person.. then I don't think we can ask for more!

Peace!
Reply

جوري
04-19-2007, 08:07 PM
Originally Posted by lavikor201
Really? The moon just splits in half then?

Everything was created in pairs?

[/B]
And you propose otherwise because you are an Astro-physicist? and your word should deem the Ariadaeus Rille an artifact?.. You always profess people are "clueless" when it comes to your Tanakh-- by the same token stop being such an expert quranic Texts.
Reply

lavikor201
04-19-2007, 08:17 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
And you propose otherwise because you are an Astro-physicist? and your word should deem the Ariadaeus Rille an artifact?.. You always profess people are "clueless" when it comes to your Tanakh-- by the same token stop being such an expert quranic Texts.
I'm no expert in Quranic texts by any means. I would welcome you to correct any misinterpration on my part when quoting the Quran, or even reffering to it. I welcome critisism, since I am by no means a Quran expert.
Reply

Woodrow
04-20-2007, 06:43 AM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Don't be absurd. Try actually reading the previous posts.

I clearly stated that the Qur'an says the world is spherical. I named Al-Suyuti (who, inconvenient as it may be, is a significant figure) merely to point out that the 'flat earth' idea was still around some considereable time later, and not only in Europe. I also implied that that was contrary to the vast majority of muslim opinion, and the article I linked to made that point quite specifically.

However, you are at it too.



Same old myth. The "medieval belief" was not that "the earth was flat". Some people thought it was. Most Arab intellectuals indeed knew it wasn't, but in all probability that knowledge could be traced right back to Eratosthenes. They knew it was spherical long before the Qur'an was revealed, although some of them afterwards no doubt obtained that knowledge from reading or listing to recitations of the Qur'an. But the fundamental point comes back to "could somebody in seventh century Arabia know the world was round not flat?". The simple answer is "yes". That was probably the prevailing opinion.
An interesting thing about Religious debate. It seems the biggest disagreements come from points that would be considered trivia if discussed in a non-Religious atmosphere.

But, the reality of life is, it is impossible to to prove a negative. It is not your responsibility to prove the Qur'an is flawed, it is our responsibility to prove it is true. Perhaps we take this task too seriously and some of the statements we show proof for are already known to the general population as being true. However, we are very much aware that every word, every line, every thought in the Qur'an is subject to scrutiny. We also know that there are things in the Qur'an that we do not have the means to show universally acceptable proof for, at this time. Therefore it is essential to point out every line of verifiable proof . Let the preponderance of evidence be the guide to demonstrate that the Qur'an is true.

I will agree that for some this is a long drawn out melodrama, and some what redundant and boring. But, because everything will be questioned, our job will not be complete until we can show to the strongest doubter that there is verification for every word.

The overall purpose of that statement was not to be a geography lesson, to point out to flat landers that the world is spherical. It is to show that there is verification that one statement is true.

This is what is demanded of the doubters, that we prove what is written. Even if it means taking it one word at a time.
Reply

mariam.
04-20-2007, 01:14 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
???!!!

I was only replying to this from you;
Iam so sorry ..

Originally Posted by Trumble
Did you want an answer or not?! What did you expect me to say?
did you read my last reply in "The Qur'an Is The Word Of Allah .."
I have nothing to said except this ....... but don't think that I can't unswer you :)

Originally Posted by Trumble
Yes, I did watch the vid. :)
I hope you appreciate it , what's your opinion about it?

take care.
Reply

mariam.
04-20-2007, 07:02 PM
Originally Posted by lavikor201
Really? The moon just splits in half then?

Everything was created in pairs?

DUALITY IN CREATION

Glory be to Him Who created all the pairs: from what the earth produces and from themselves and from things unknown to them. (Qur'an, 36:36)

While "male and female" is equivalent to the concept of "pair," "things unknown to them," as expressed in the Qur'an, bears a broader meaning. Indeed, we encounter one of the meanings pointed to in the verse in the present day. The British physicist Paul Dirac, who discovered that matter was created in pairs, won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1933. This finding, known as "parity," revealed the duality known as matter and anti-matter. Anti-matter bears the opposite characteristics to matter. For instance, contrary to matter, anti-matter electrons are positive and protons negative. This fact is expressed in a scientific source as follows:

... every particle has its antiparticle of opposite charge… [T]he uncertainty relation tells us that pair creation and pair annihilation happen in the vacuum at all times, in all places.

Another example of duality in creation is plants. Botanists only discovered that there is a gender distinction in plants some 100 years ago.48 Yet, the fact that plants are created in pairs was revealed in the following verses of the Qur'an 1,400 years ago:

It is Allah Who created the heavens with no support-you can see them-and cast firmly embedded mountains on the earth so that it would not move under you, and scattered about in it creatures of every kind. And We send down water from the sky and make every generous plant grow in it, in pairs. (Qur'an, 31:10)

It is He Who made the earth a cradle for you and threaded pathways for you through it and sent down water from the sky by which We have brought forth diverse pairs of plants. (Qur'an, 20:53)


There are antimatter equivalents of all the basic particles in the universe. Antimatters possess the same mass but carry opposite charges. For that reason, when matter and antimatter make contact they disappear by turning into energy.

by.harun yahya

what you read it about miracles is just a way to understand Quran, you have a choice to believe it or not ... So please don't Enter us in this empty discuss.

please read this verse " He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established, clear meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are not entirely clear. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is not clear, seeking discord, and searching for hidden meanings in it, but no one knows its interpretation except Allah.
And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding. " (3:7)

that what Our Lord Order us to do and I have nothing to said except this:
"We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord"

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
"The Hour (of Judgment) is nigh, and the moon was cleft asunder." (54:1)
and .. If you are really a Jew So, The sea just splits in half then?

this is a miracles .. are you understand

If you not .. then forget it
Reply

Muhammad
04-21-2007, 12:26 AM
Greetings Trumble,

Originally Posted by Trumble
I know that Mohammed's political achievements alone identify him as a genius, and that while illiterate he certainly would have spoken to people from a wide variety of backgrounds. I know that that same knowledge would have resided in all centres of learning between Rome and India, and a great many people who generally resided or travelled elsewhere would have been exposed to it via others particularly when it may well have been 'common knowledge'.
It is only an assumption that the knowledge of the earth being spherical was so widespread at that time, when "the Early Middle Ages (ca. 3rd to 7th centuries) saw occasional arguments in favor of a flat Earth". Furthermore:

Around 150 AD, Claudius Ptolemy, a Greek geographer, mathematician, and astronomer, compiled an encyclopedia of the ancient world from the archives of a legendary library in Alexandria, Egypt. His eight-volume Geography included extensive maps of the known world, all based on a curved globe.

Unfortunately, learning and intellect went out of fashion in Europe between 400 and 1200 AD. The storehouses of Greek knowledge were lost to Western society with the advent of the gloomy period known as the Dark Ages. Sea monsters and Vikings ruled the seas, and ships that ventured too far from shore were sure to fall off the edge of a flat Earth. Maps made in that time were based on religious beliefs or superstitions, not on observations, calculations, or scientific inquiry. Rectangular maps of the Earth represented the "four corners of the Earth." Circular maps usually placed the birthplace of Christianity, the holy city of Jerusalem, at the center of the world.
http://www.gma.org/space1/nav_map.html

So although some people may have known the earth was spherical, it cannot be said for certain that all centres of learning would have had this same belief. We also know about the Prophet's (pbuh) homeland:

In that benighted era, darkness lay heavier and thicker in one land than in any other. The neighboring countries of Persia, Byzantium, and Egypt possessed a glimmer of civilization and a faint light of learning, but the Arabian peninsula, isolated and cut off by vast oceans of sand, was culturally and intellectually one of the world’s most backward areas. The Hijaz, birthplace of the Prophet, had not passed through even the limited development of neighboring regions, and had not experienced any social evolution or attained any intellectual development of note. Although their highly developed language could express the finest shades of meaning, a study of their literature’s remnants reveals the limited extent of their knowledge. All of this shows their low cultural and civilization standards, their deeply superstitious nature, their barbarous and ferocious customs, and their uncouth and degraded moral standards and conceptions.
http://www.islamanswers.net/crossroads/prophet.htm

The idea that Mohammed's Mecca was somehow isolated in some bubble from the rest of the world simply isn't credible. If anything, it's rather insulting to its inhabitants. It was a trading town, on the route from Southern Arabia and even India to the Byzantine (and previously Roman) empires, not to mention assorted other places.
Makkah was a religious center more than anything, and the caravans would go to Syria in the summer and Yemen in the winter. It is also important to note that Muhammad (pbuh) lived as a shepherd for much of his life, and prior to Prophethood he would spend much of his time away from society contemplating. It is therefore quite apparent that the more we examine the life and location of Muhammad (pbuh), the more baseless the allegations about him become.

In fact, these claims are not new; the Qur'an itself makes mention of them:

Those who disbelieve say: "This (the Qur'ân) is nothing but a lie that he (Muhammad ) has invented, and others have helped him at it, so that they have produced an unjust wrong (thing) and a lie."

And they say: "Tales of the ancients, which he has written down, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon."

Say: "It (this Qur'ân) has been sent down by Him (Allâh) (the Real Lord of the heavens and earth) Who knows the secret of the heavens and the earth. Truly, He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

[25:4-6]


The commentary of these verses mentions:
Because this idea is so foolish and is so patently false, everyone knows that it is not true. It is known through Mutawatir reports and is a common fact that Muhammad the Messenger of Allah never learned to read or write, either at the beginning or the end of his life. He grew up among them for approximately forty years, from the time he was born until the time when his mission began. They knew all about him, and about his honest and sound character and how he would never lie or do anything immoral or bad. They even used to call him Al-Amin (the Trustworthy One) from a young age, until his mission began, because they saw how truthful and honest he was. When Allah honored him with that which He honored him, they declared their enmity towards him and came up with all these accusations which any reasonable person would know he was innocent of. They were not sure what to accuse him of. Sometimes they said that he was a sorcerer, at other times they would say he was a poet, or crazy, or a liar.
Many inerrancies arise if one goes down the path that such information was taught to Muhammad (pbuh) by others. For instance, why would this information be mentioned in the context of drawing attention to Allaah's creation? Wouldn't he subscribe to the Greek philosophy or widespread beliefs at that time whilst delivering the information in a more scientific, in-depth fashion? The Qur'an would be more of a scientific journal if such was the case.

Looking at it in context, this is just one aspect out of many which attest to the truth of the Qur'an. The Qur'an includes many other scientific references that do not go against our scientific understanding today. If we consider the time period of superstition and ignorance as well as the person to whom the Qur'an was revealed, how is this possible?


Originally Posted by Trumble
Oddly enough, the heyday of the 'flat-earthers' was actually many centuries later in Europe. In the muslim world Imam Al-Suyuti (15th century) believed the world to be flat (which, as I happily agree the Qur'an says it is round, seems rather odd), contrasting with earlier muslim opinion.
The wikipedia article goes on to mention:

Medieval Muslim World

At some time in the 9th century, with scholars like Al-Battani, the Muslim World was leading in astronomical knowledge, and the sphericity of the Earth was consequently a well known fact. Around 830 CE, Caliph al-Ma'mun commissioned a group of astronomers to measure the distance from Tadmur (Palmyra) to al-Raqqah, in modern Syria. They found the cities to be separated by one degree of latitude and the distance between them to be 66 2/3 miles and thus calculated the Earth's circumference to be 24,000 miles.[38]

Ibn Taymiya (died 1328 CE), said: "Celestial bodies are round - as it is the statement of astronomers and mathematicians - it is [likewise] the statement of the scholars of the Muslims; as Abul-Hasan ibn al-Manaadi, Abu Muhammad Ibn Hazm, Abul-Faraj Ibn Al-Jawzi and others have quoted: that the Muslim scholars are in agreement (that all celestial bodies are round). Indeed Allah has said: And He (i.e., Allah) it is Who created the night and the day, the sun and the moon. They float, each in a Falak. Ibn Abbas says: A Falaka like that of a spinning wheel. The word 'Falak' (in the Arabic language) means "that which is round." [39]

Many Muslim scholars declared a mutual agreement (Ijma) that celestial bodies are round. Some of them are: Ibn Hazm (d. 1069), Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 1200), and Ibn Taymiya (d. 1328). The later belief of Muslim scholars, like Suyuti (d. 1505) that the earth is flat represents a deviation from this earlier opinion .[40]

The Muslim scholars who held to the round earth theory used it in an impeccably Islamic manner, to calculate the distance and direction from any given point on the earth and Mecca. This determined the Qibla, or Muslim direction of prayer. Muslim mathematicians developed spherical trigonometry which was used in these calculations.[41] Ibn Khaldun, in his famous Muqaddimah, clearly says the world is spherical.

There is also a verse in the Quran [79:30] which some modern English translations give as "He made the earth egg-shaped"[42] which suggests that the Earth was not believed to be flat. Most translations ("And after that He spread the earth") suggest that this verse can be interpreted to support the flat Earth theory.
lavikor,

Really? The moon just splits in half then?
Miracles are different to scientific facts, since miracles, by definition, go against ordinary laws of nature.

Peace.
Reply

lavikor201
04-22-2007, 04:12 AM
While "male and female" is equivalent to the concept of "pair," "things unknown to them," as expressed in the Qur'an, bears a broader meaning. Indeed, we encounter one of the meanings pointed to in the verse in the present day. The British physicist Paul Dirac, who discovered that matter was created in pairs, won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1933. This finding, known as "parity," revealed the duality known as matter and anti-matter. Anti-matter bears the opposite characteristics to matter. For instance, contrary to matter, anti-matter electrons are positive and protons negative. This fact is expressed in a scientific source as follows:

... every particle has its antiparticle of opposite charge… [T]he uncertainty relation tells us that pair creation and pair annihilation happen in the vacuum at all times, in all places.
Did you not read my post? *Sigh*.

Miracles are different to scientific facts, since miracles, by definition, go against ordinary laws of nature.
Yes, I understand, I am just at a lost of words to why thousands of cultures did not write about this, nor attribute this action to their own gods. Such a thing like the moon splitting I would think create thousands of literrary works.
Reply

Philosopher
04-22-2007, 04:15 AM
Yes, I understand, I am just at a lost of words to why thousands of cultures did not write about this, nor attribute this action to their own gods. Such a thing like the moon splitting I would think create thousands of literrary works.
I would love to rip the Torah by listing all it's scientific inaccuracies, but I will not steep that low.
Reply

tresbien
04-22-2007, 03:07 PM
PLEASE watch a documantary type on quran miracle at
http://www.thedeenshow.com/video.html
Reply

mariam.
04-22-2007, 03:45 PM
Originally Posted by lavikor201
Did you not read my post? *Sigh*.

So? there is NO opposition between you and me ..... Iam talking about subject and you talk about another.

"And of every thing We have created pairs: that ye may receive instruction"

does This verse talk about reproduction?

please read carefully .. and be honest with yourself when you read Quran.
Reply

Muhammad
04-23-2007, 05:23 PM
:sl: and Greetings,

Posts about the splitting of the moon have been moved here:

http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...it-moon-2.html
Reply

Cyril
04-24-2007, 08:02 PM
Originally Posted by mariam.
THE EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE

In the Qur'an, which was revealed fourteen centuries ago at a time when the science of astronomy was still primitive, the expansion of the universe was described in the following terms:

And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (Qur'an, 51:47)

The word "heaven," as stated in the verse above, is used in various places in the Qur'an. It is referring to space and the wider universe. Here again, the word is used with this meaning, stating that the universe "expands." The Arabic word "moosiaaoona" in the term "inna lamoosiaaoona," translated into English as "it is We Who are steadily expanding it", comes from the verb "evsea," meaning "to expand." The prefix "la" emphasises the following name or title and adds a sense of "to a great extent." This expression therefore means "We expand the sky or the universe to a great extent." This is the very conclusion that science has reached today.
There is no mention in the Quran that God has expanded "heaven" steadily.

That "steadily" is an interpretation which has been added to make believe that the verse follows the theory of the expanding universe.

God could have expanded the universe instantaneously as well.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-24-2007, 08:36 PM
Originally Posted by Cyril
There is no mention in the Quran that God has expanded "heaven" steadily.

That "steadily" is an interpretation which has been added to make believe that the verse follows the theory of the expanding universe.

God could have expanded the universe instantaneously as well.

And your proof is from...? :?
Reply

Cyril
04-24-2007, 08:44 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
And your proof is from...? :?
From the Arabic Quran of course.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-24-2007, 08:49 PM
Originally Posted by Cyril
From the Arabic Quran of course.

Oh, so all the commentators of the Qur'an and interpretors have been wrong, and you've proved them all wrong? :?


Maybe you could clarify your position abit more?
Reply

Trumble
04-24-2007, 09:01 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
And your proof is from...? :?
It is at least implied in Mariam's quote which gives two translations;

"it is We Who are steadily expanding it"
and

"We expand the sky or the universe to a great extent"
Those who are fluent in Arabic can no doubt tell us whether "inna lamoosiaaoona" actually includes the 'steadily' or not?
Reply

- Qatada -
04-24-2007, 09:06 PM
Yes ^ therefore we get a fluent arabic speaker to clarify the situation, we don't start saying the persons wrong simply upon our own 'interpretation.' One interpreter may not have known the full science behind it and therefore not explained it in that context. Especially since the arabic language is a rich language.

We'll just have to get someone who is a fluent arabic speaker to answer the situation, and right now - we take the original context of it since that is what the article is referring to.



Regards.
Reply

Trumble
04-24-2007, 09:16 PM
Perhaps that Arabic speaker could also explain the following translations, and why they differ from the one quoted (whose translation is that, BTW?) ;

Yusuf Ali
With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of space.
Pickthal:
We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof)
Shakir:
And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-24-2007, 09:22 PM
Try creating a thread in the arabic section :) I think we have some similar threads there already for a topic related to this, so yeah - go ahead please. Since that's what the sections created for.
Reply

Cyril
04-24-2007, 09:28 PM
The first translation of the verse that has been given in the thread is from Adnan Öktar, Harun Yahya by his pen-name.

Most translators did not include the notion of "continuousness" in their work.

An Arabic verb does not give the notion of duration as the English present continuous does. That notion is given or not by the context.
Reply

جوري
04-24-2007, 09:41 PM
here is the verse in Arabic.. and I'll give meaning to it word by word

وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ {47}
[Pickthal 51:47] We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).

وَالسَّمَاءAs'sama = heaven or also skies.. when I say sab3 samawat means 7 heavens
when i say as'sama zarqaa= the sky is blue..

adding the و

is meant to denote (and) so the first would be and the heavens we've built

now the next word banynaha بَنَيْنَاهَا means we have built adding the B in banyenaha means we built
بِأَيْدٍ
be'ayd ( with might)


وَإِنَّا and we can one letter in Arabic can be a whole word hence the language of the quran is mighty powerful و by itself means (and)

لَمُوسِعُونَ lamowso3oon --can make it expand you can say (mawswoo3a alkalimat) for instance means an expanded dictionary or expanded words--
lamwisi3oon-- can we make it expand.. basically the heavens we have built and we'll expand

hope that was of help? I am not sure what the question is but that is the Arabic of it

peace!

Addendum
وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ {47}
[Pickthal 51:47] We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
[Pooya/Ali Commentary 51:47]
Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

Although the frontiers of space are confined, they are not fixed. They can be expanded.

you can find Pooya's explanation here without resorting to Yaha's page

http://www.--------------/quran/
or also
http://tafsir.com/Default.asp

peace
Reply

Trumble
04-24-2007, 10:03 PM
Originally Posted by Cyril
The first translation of the verse that has been given in the thread is from Adnan Öktar, Harun Yahya by his pen-name.
Now why doesn't that surprise me.... :D


PurestAmbrosia; thank you for your explanation of the Arabic.
Reply

جوري
04-24-2007, 10:10 PM
is my translation and that of pooya's explanation documented in the multilingual quran, whose link I provided not satisfactory?
Reply

Philosopher
04-24-2007, 10:12 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
is my translation and that of pooya's explanation documented in the multilingual quran, whose link I provided not satisfactory?
From the post above you, I think Trumble admits to his error.
Reply

Cyril
04-24-2007, 10:30 PM
The Arabic word lamuusi3uun(a) لَمُوسِعُونَ (the final "a" is not pronounced at pause) is the intensive prefix "la-" followed by muusi3uun which is not a verb actually but a plural active participle of the verb awsa3a which means to make vast.

So the name muusi3 in the singular means "he who makes things vast". It has also some derived meanings as "he who is rich" or "he who is able to do something".

The Arabic "wainnaa lamuusi3uuna" translates literally as "and We (=God) (are) indeed makers of vast things" or "givers of vastness to things" or as Shakir says "the makers of things ample".

That is the literal meaning. Most translators prefer to translate by a verb like to expand or to spread out.
Reply

جوري
04-24-2007, 10:37 PM
The translators differ simply because none of them are native Arabic speaker
Marmaduke Pickthall was British, stick him in any search engine, he was from a noble British family and fantastic breed, he became Muslim and was one of the first to translate the noble Quran
Yusufali was Indian, I believe him to be a shiite but that isn't the important point here Author: M H Shakir (1904-1959); Title: The Quran, Arabic and English; Published in 1981, with a brief biography indicating Mahomedali Habib (MH Shakir is a pen name) died 1959 days after completing this translation. This translation is largely taken from Maulana Muhammed Ali’s translation with English updated to middle century style-- in other words two non-native Arabic speakers and the third is modified!

better translations have come since. though the effort of the first pioneers is much appreciated.

Now.. I have several words that describe someone who cannot admit when they are wrong, and enjoy vain discourse...
Law konti tata'hadathi al'3rbya bila'baqa wa tastate3een an taqr'ey hazha fa anti 7imara...
did you understand what I just wrote? if you didn't then I'd suggest you refrain from looking for a translation that suits your fancy.
peace
Reply

جوري
04-24-2007, 10:43 PM
if anyone here is in doubt pls purchase

http://www.amazon.com/Al-Mawrid-Mode...7454189&sr=8-1

from Amazon ISBN-10: 9953630100 if you so wish to make your purchase from else where and look at page 327.. for the word "expand"... and put the pseudo intellects and so-called literary critics to rest!


peace!
Reply

thirdwatch512
04-24-2007, 10:51 PM
as a christian, I could care less about these so called "miracles."

the bible mentions MANY times, Old and New Testament, about false prophets, who will be able to perform miracles, show signs or wonders, and who will even tell you to love the Lord, but they woill be false, and sent as a test or something.

also, not for nothing, but the so caleld "science" in the qu'ran has ALL been debunked.

people seem to think that in 600 a.d., everyone was dumb and uneducated. but that's just not the case. it wasn't like that at all, especially in arabia.

and then you say that mohammad was illeterate.. ok, so?

then someone mentions how the qu'ran is really poetic.. well yeah, i bet it is! the arabic language s a poetic language. and arabs at that time were known for poetry.

i never forget the story of mohammad in mecca, and him being at a poet competition.. he recited the qu'ran, and no one gave him any attention. why? because it wasn't anything spectacular, especially for that time.

then of course, there's always the claim that the qriting style of the qu'ran is different then mohammads style, as quoted in the hadiths.. well, let me say, my writing style in essays is MUCH different then my writing style here. and whenever i write a poem, my writing style is CERTAINLY different! plus, let's not forget the Book of Mormon has 24 different writing styles in it.. oh, so is that all of a sudden from God!! my goodness, such double standard lol.

now as for the claim of the qu'ran expanding..

This is not so. Muhammad is simply saying that the universe is vast and not that it is expanding. This verse reads:

وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ

See how this is translated:
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

The fact that the universe is vast is prosaic and obvious. There is no mention of expanding universe in this verse. Any illiterate man could look around himself and see the world is vast. To the ancient people even the Earth looked vast. To us it looks very small. Some modern translators of the Quran have tried to give a scientific spin to the Quran and have translated the word continuity stating that the universe is expanding. This is not true. The word مُوسِعُونَhas no such connotation



also, if the qu'ran is from God, why does it speak of God in third person?

the science in the qu'ran is nothing spectacular at all.

sorry if i'm offending anyone, i am just stating my opinion.
Reply

Umar001
04-24-2007, 11:05 PM
Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
as a christian, I could care less about these so called "miracles."

the bible mentions MANY times, Old and New Testament, about false prophets, who will be able to perform miracles, show signs or wonders, and who will even tell you to love the Lord, but they woill be false, and sent as a test or something.
It'd be interesting to see if you as a Jew living in the time of Jesus would have follow him or just said 'Well my faith teaches you're wrong because many false prophets will come, so no matter what miracles you do I wont believe you'

Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
i never forget the story of mohammad in mecca, and him being at a poet competition.. he recited the qu'ran, and no one gave him any attention. why? because it wasn't anything spectacular, especially for that time.
Any chance for a source?

Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
then of course, there's always the claim that the qriting style of the qu'ran is different then mohammads style, as quoted in the hadiths.. well, let me say, my writing style in essays is MUCH different then my writing style here. and whenever i write a poem, my writing style is CERTAINLY different! plus, let's not forget the Book of Mormon has 24 different writing styles in it.. oh, so is that all of a sudden from God!! my goodness, such double standard lol.
Well I am sure as a logical person you'll understand that the miracle of the language of the Qu'ran is appriciated by those who know the language right? If so then why are you even bothering to talk about it, unless am mistaken and you know the language then noone here is begging you to believe the linguisitic miracle.

Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
now as for the claim of the qu'ran expanding..

This is not so. Muhammad is simply saying that the universe is vast and not that it is expanding. This verse reads:

وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ

See how this is translated:
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

The fact that the universe is vast is prosaic and obvious. There is no mention of expanding universe in this verse. Any illiterate man could look around himself and see the world is vast. To the ancient people even the Earth looked vast. To us it looks very small. Some modern translators of the Quran have tried to give a scientific spin to the Quran and have translated the word continuity stating that the universe is expanding. This is not true. The word مُوسِعُونَhas no such connotation
And you know this because your fluent in arabic right? I'd expect no less.


Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
also, if the qu'ran is from God, why does it speak of God in third person?
By this alone I understand you don't understand the arabic language.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-24-2007, 11:06 PM
Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
as a christian, I could care less about these so called "miracles."

the bible mentions MANY times, Old and New Testament, about false prophets, who will be able to perform miracles, show signs or wonders, and who will even tell you to love the Lord, but they woill be false, and sent as a test or something.

Jesus son of Mary and Moses did many miracles, and there followers depended upon them alot more. We don't need to see Moses split up the sea, nor do we need to see Jesus son of Mary cure the leper or the blind, the Qur'an in itself is a miracle and we believe in it. So in reality - we don't dpeend on the miracles which they perform, rather we depend on the message which is given - worship the One God, our Creator, Sustainer and Provider. And that is much more believable than claiming that One God is in three parts, and then dying.


also, not for nothing, but the so caleld "science" in the qu'ran has ALL been debunked.

No it hasn't.



people seem to think that in 600 a.d., everyone was dumb and uneducated. but that's just not the case. it wasn't like that at all, especially in arabia.

You really think so? The arabs were an illiterate nation, and the superpowers at that time [the Byzantinian Romans, and the Persian Sassanids] thought them to be of the most ignorant of people - so they never even bothered to translate their works to them.


and then you say that mohammad was illeterate.. ok, so?

then someone mentions how the qu'ran is really poetic.. well yeah, i bet it is! the arabic language s a poetic language. and arabs at that time were known for poetry.

Yeah, thats why the arabs who were well known for poetry couldn't even bring forward one chapter like the Qur'an? Why was that if they were the most poetic of people? That is because the Qur'an is revelation from God, and you havn't proved at all how it's not. And guess what? It's much more clearer than the bible, especially when Jesus son of Mary never even tells people to worship him at all.


i never forget the story of mohammad in mecca, and him being at a poet competition.. he recited the qu'ran, and no one gave him any attention. why? because it wasn't anything spectacular, especially for that time.

You really think? Let's listen to how it sounds:

Media Tags are no longer supported
Surah Qari'a [101 - Qur'an]

http://sabbir.com/DownloadHalal.html


then of course, there's always the claim that the qriting style of the qu'ran is different then mohammads style, as quoted in the hadiths.. well, let me say, my writing style in essays is MUCH different then my writing style here. and whenever i write a poem, my writing style is CERTAINLY different! plus, let's not forget the Book of Mormon has 24 different writing styles in it.. oh, so is that all of a sudden from God!! my goodness, such double standard lol.

Are you just trying to say that out of ignorance? Study the sciences of the arabic language and then come back.


now as for the claim of the qu'ran expanding..

This is not so. Muhammad is simply saying that the universe is vast and not that it is expanding. This verse reads:

وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ

See how this is translated:
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

It's explained by sister PurestAmbrosia, she's an arabic speaker. I think you're not, especially because of your claim:

also, if the qu'ran is from God, why does it speak of God in third person?
That's part of eloquency in the arabic language. Did you know that the queen says 'we' when referring to herself? Is she lots of people in one, or is she saying that using eloquence?


The fact that the universe is vast is prosaic and obvious. There is no mention of expanding universe in this verse. Any illiterate man could look around himself and see the world is vast. To the ancient people even the Earth looked vast. To us it looks very small. Some modern translators of the Quran have tried to give a scientific spin to the Quran and have translated the word continuity stating that the universe is expanding. This is not true. The word مُوسِعُونَhas no such connotation

Again, refer to sister PurestAmbrosia's post.




the science in the qu'ran is nothing spectacular at all.

Again, bring your proof if you're truthful. All you're trying to do is be a pro at the Qur'an when you have nothing to argue with, you just want to go on anti islamic sites to try to 'prove' islaam wrong when infact you're not good at it at all.

Maybe you could explain to us how the bible is so miraculous?


sorry if i'm offending anyone, i am just stating my opinion.
No, you're just purposelly attacking islaam without any knowledge - and you know it.
Reply

جوري
04-24-2007, 11:15 PM
وَسَّعَ a derivative of the word لَمُوسِعُونَ for any native speakers if you strip it of the Lam the meem (deeming us) ( the polite version) contrast to someone using vous or Tu in French will know that Vous denotes respect while tu is the vernacular.. that isn't the point here but thought I'd add it to the one who questions why G-D speaks in a particular tongue first person or third person...
وَسَّعَ from لَمُوسِعُونَspace , split , let , broaden , dedicate , open out , widen , space out , clear a passage for , make wide or spacious , open up , make room for , make wide or spacious , step aside for , expand

described here as a (fi3l) i.e verb

you can use this online dictionary, though deficient it serves its purpose if you can understand a word that is un-conjugated , but given that three of four sources already attesting to "expansion and وَسَّعَ" aren't sufficient and everyone is oh such a textual expert .. if you don't wish to shell out big bucks for a proper dictionary... you can see in plain site it says expand... http://dictionary.sakhr.com/idrisidi...A&sub=????????

peace
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
04-24-2007, 11:15 PM
This is not so. Muhammad is simply saying that the universe is vast and not that it is expanding. This verse reads:

وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ

See how this is translated:
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

The fact that the universe is vast is prosaic and obvious. There is no mention of expanding universe in this verse. Any illiterate man could look around himself and see the world is vast. To the ancient people even the Earth looked vast. To us it looks very small. Some modern translators of the Quran have tried to give a scientific spin to the Quran and have translated the word continuity stating that the universe is expanding. This is not true. The word مُوسِعُونَhas no such connotation
Lol, thats not even you writing that. Thats the only part where the Q in Qur'an is capitalized and the M in Muhammad(saw). You dont even know the purpose of the We, so I highly doubt you know what the Arabic says.
Reply

rav
04-24-2007, 11:36 PM
You really think? Let's listen to how it sounds:
Excuse me for asking what may seem to you as a very dense question, but what exactly does the way it "sounds" have anything to do with if it is poetic?
Reply

جوري
04-24-2007, 11:37 PM
This guy just has a really bad case of mythomania before it was about 3ad and thamud... stating the Jews said it first, funny enough citing an Islamic source, not a Jewish one. Just makes up stories as he goes along
The ever changing Christianity fosters his life style, so long as they turn the other cheek to what is considered blatantly a cardinal sin in all organized religions and ideologies then he is happy with it and looking to create all sorts of lies. what a joke a religion to fit the tides of society-- a few yrs down the line-- murder will be allowed and he'll be jumping all over it, and making up new stories, like a big drama queen..

Don't take advantage of Muslims being kind and letting your ill thought posts stand un removed ... unlike my brothers and sisters here, I have absolutely no reservation on saying it like it.

peace!
Reply

جوري
04-24-2007, 11:51 PM
Originally Posted by rav
Excuse me for asking what may seem to you as a very dense question, but what exactly does the way it "sounds" have anything to do with if it is poetic?
Arabic doesn't sound nice on its own (I personally like it) might not be a "romance language" but it is lovely to me, the Quran unlike the native tongue in which it is written-- sounds very poetic but in fact it isn't at all like a poem, it is scriptural. And nothing at the time or since has compared to it. A challenge from G-D was to ask the arab poets at the time to bring at least one sura like it, be it as short as suret Al kawthar, which is only three verses but none were able to-- There were times when people worshiped the Quran itself as an entity because they couldn't attribute it to a source..

As you can tell from the sound as recited, it might rhyme or flow like a beautiful poem, but the words as per translation speak of the day of judgement-- I believe that is what Bros. Fi sabililah is trying to say to correct a very unlikely story, made up by our mythomaniac friend.

I hope that answers your Q?
Reply

rav
04-25-2007, 12:10 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Arabic doesn't sound nice on its own (I personally like it) might not be a "romance language" but it is lovely to me, the Quran unlike the native tongue in which it is written-- sounds very poetic but in fact it isn't at all like a poem, it is scriptural. And nothing at the time or since has compared to it. A challenge from G-D was to ask the arab poets at the time to bring at least one sura like it, be it as short as suret Al kawthar, which is only three verses but none were able to-- There were times when people worshiped the Quran itself as an entity because they couldn't attribute it to a source..

As you can tell from the sound as recited, it might rhyme or flow like a beautiful poem, but the words as per translation speak of the day of judgment-- I believe that is what Bros. Fi sabililah is trying to say to correct a very unlikely story, made up by our mythomaniac friend.

I hope that answers your Q?
Shalom Aleichem,

I personally after listening to the Arabic words about five times, felt it had more to do with the actual “reciter” of the verse. Hebrew is not the most appealing language either, but the Torah flows when you have a great “reciter”. However the main apprehension I held was that whenever I hear anything recited by someone who has such a great tone of voice in Arabic (I have listened to some vocalists of the Torah, and other Hebrew texts in Arabic), it seems the same as the Quran would sound, although, to be honest, I have not heard the Quran to a great extent. It sounds like it is regarded as a great poetic work and when recited correctly can be attractive; in which my examination of the Torah when recited is the exact same way. An inquiry I have is, what precisely is the main difference between classical and modern Arabic? As for the discussion on if the poetic language of the Quran is a miracle or not, I am not here to dispute your religion, nor argue with you, so I will maneuver around having to get into a dispute which will only lead us to a stand-still and negative feelings which are superfluous, and will just have us squander precious time.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 12:28 AM
Originally Posted by rav
Shalom Aleichem,

I personally after listening to the Arabic words about five times, felt it had more to do with the actual “reciter” of the verse. Hebrew is not the most appealing language either, but the Torah flows when you have a great “reciter”. However the main apprehension I held was that whenever I hear anything recited by someone who has such a great tone of voice in Arabic (I have listened to some vocalists of the Torah, and other Hebrew texts in Arabic), it seems the same as the Quran would sound, although, to be honest, I have not heard the Quran to a great extent. It sounds like it is regarded as a great poetic work and when recited correctly can be attractive; in which my examination of the Torah when recited is the exact same way. An inquiry I have is, what precisely is the main difference between classical and modern Arabic? As for the discussion on if the poetic language of the Quran is a miracle or not, I am not here to dispute your religion, nor argue with you, so I will maneuver around having to get into a dispute which will only lead us to a stand-still and negative feelings which are superfluous, and will just have us squander precious time.
salaam A'lykoum Rav:

True.. recitors can make a difference but the overall feeling is the same, whether you have an inclination for one recitor or another...if you yourself were to read a random sura, you'd get a feeling from the beginning and the ending of the words. I can go into more details on that considering, the way the Quran was revealed isn't the way it is presented today, and what I mean by that is... For instance you can take a particular chapter, historically it can be both (makkya) or (madanya) or both and the verses can possibly be revealed 22 years apart yet, when meant for a particular chapter, you'll find in context, rhyme and meaning will be very fluid, it is not remotely comparable to the Hadiths which are the spoken words of prophet Mohammed PBUH. If prophet Mohammed were to recite his own hadiths, though still in Arabic, is nothing like Quranic text. You don't need to be a textual scholar to appreciate that, but in the very least you need to speak Arabic.

As per the middle part of your post, Hebrew and Arabic are sister languages as well as Aramaic. and I have no doubt in my mind that it would sound similar when recited, considering the Torah is also a book from G-D, Our dear member Lavikor posted a prayer tape here not so long ago of himself, and if you are far away listening it is almost indistinguishable from Arabic prayer... When I played it for my bros. his first instinct were of Friday prayer at some Mosque... when in fact it was Jewish...

I thank you for the last part.. and leave you with these two verse from the Quran
"For each we have appointed a divine law and traced out the way. Had Allah willed He could have made you one community. But that He may try you by that which He hath given you He made you as ye are. So vie one with another in good works. Unto Allah ye will all return, and will then inform you of that wherein ye differ." -- 5:48

"Do not dispute with the people of the Book [Jews, Christians, Sabeans], unless it be in a way that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that which has been revealed unto us, and revealed unto you; our God and your God is One, and unto Him we surrender." -- 29:46

peace!
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 03:45 AM
Originally Posted by Cyril
The Arabic word lamuusi3uun(a) لَمُوسِعُونَ (the final "a" is not pronounced at pause) is the intensive prefix "la-" followed by muusi3uun which is not a verb actually but a plural active participle of the verb awsa3a which means to make vast.

So the name muusi3 in the singular means "he who makes things vast". It has also some derived meanings as "he who is rich" or "he who is able to do something".

The Arabic "wainnaa lamuusi3uuna" translates literally as "and We (=God) (are) indeed makers of vast things" or "givers of vastness to things" or as Shakir says "the makers of things ample".

That is the literal meaning. Most translators prefer to translate by a verb like to expand or to spread out.
BTW, though, I have already answered you extensively in various posts (having included sources) & don't care to extend myself further-- .. I must ask you to clarify a few points that you have kindly brought to our attention-- first-- where do you see the "A" consonant in (لَمُوسِعُونَ)? to deem it silent or not? lamuusi3uun(a)? everyone knows that, that word is ending with a (noon) ن not an alif أ ( we have no vowels in Arabic) if you care to give us a lesson on (fat'ha, dama, kasra, shadda, and sikoon) as pertains to grammar and their usage, then pls go ahead. Admittedly I can't wait to be dazzled by your expertise...Also when you have a (fatiha) it isn't silent the whole point of a fati'ha is to make the (a) sound otherwise you'd have a SUKOUN = Used for consonants lacking a vowel after them. looks like a tiny little O instead rather than an opened dash ... While at it, won't you please tell us, why this liberal usage of number (3) to lamuusi(3)uun(a) or awsa(3)a? What do you mean by it? kindly refrain from running to your first "trusty" helper, as he or she hasn't gotten you very far.... The letter 3 or 7 or 6 or any of the others I have used will not be found in any respectful dictionary!

I can very much conclude with certainty that, you didn't get your preferred definition from a respectful source...

I will not get into what these numbers mean, ... but pls show some consistency when making a point... it is terribly embarrassing to go so far and still not be able to bring a presentable piece of evidence to the table.

peace!
Reply

thirdwatch512
04-25-2007, 04:16 AM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Jesus son of Mary and Moses did many miracles, and there followers depended upon them alot more. We don't need to see Moses split up the sea, nor do we need to see Jesus son of Mary cure the leper or the blind, the Qur'an in itself is a miracle and we believe in it. So in reality - we don't dpeend on the miracles which they perform, rather we depend on the message which is given - worship the One God, our Creator, Sustainer and Provider. And that is much more believable than claiming that One God is in three parts, and then dying.
Jesus was the son of Moses? wow, i never knew that. i always thought it was Joseph who raise Jesus. hmm, interesting.. moses came thousands of years before Mary.. hmmm.... ??




No it hasn't.
well show me science that hasn't been debunked in the qu'ran.



You really think so? The arabs were an illiterate nation, and the superpowers at that time [the Byzantinian Romans, and the Persian Sassanids] thought them to be of the most ignorant of people - so they never even bothered to translate their works to them.
oh please, we all know that the arabs were known for their astronomy and science, and poetry.



Yeah, thats why the arabs who were well known for poetry couldn't even bring forward one chapter like the Qur'an? Why was that if they were the most poetic of people? That is because the Qur'an is revelation from God, and you havn't proved at all how it's not. And guess what? It's much more clearer than the bible, especially when Jesus son of Mary never even tells people to worship him at all.
oh, is that so? because there are about 12 verses inthe bible of jesus being worshipped. and Jesus never opposed to it. ever. and if you know the Bible, you know that if people did something wrong, Jesus would try to correct them.

People in the Bible even call Jesus God! there's a dude named David in the Bible who did, Matthew did, John did, and many more times!




nothing fantastic about that.



Are you just trying to say that out of ignorance? Study the sciences of the arabic language and then come back.
here's one of the "you must know arabic" claims people make to try and defend their religion when they have no other way to.



It's explained by sister PurestAmbrosia, she's an arabic speaker. I think you're not, especially because of your claim:
oh, so she knows more then the other arabic translators?? quran 51:47 says the heaven expands. what does that have to do exactly with the UNIVERSE? plus, let's not forget the verse right after that..

And the Earth - we have stretched it out like a carpet; and how smoothly have we spread it forth!

oh, is the earth expanding too!!



That's part of eloquency in the arabic language. Did you know that the queen says 'we' when referring to herself? Is she lots of people in one, or is she saying that using eloquence?
once again, the "have to know arabic" claim. if arabic all of a sudden make sislam just sooo amazing, why is 10% of egypt christian? why do 600,000 people in africa convert to christianity each year!! (btw, that's coming from an ISLAMIC source too!)



Again, refer to sister PurestAmbrosia's post.
already have





Again, bring your proof if you're truthful. All you're trying to do is be a pro at the Qur'an when you have nothing to argue with, you just want to go on anti islamic sites to try to 'prove' islaam wrong when infact you're not good at it at all.
how about YOU show me some so called science in the qu'ran, and let's see what i can't debunk. go ahead.. paste articles, give me links, do anything. let's see what won't get debunked.
Maybe you could explain to us how the bible is so miraculous?
oh gosh,here's the "prove your religion is better then mine" thing..
the Bible isn't a scientific book. it's not made for science. it's made as a message from God. we(christians) don't need science in our book. we don't need it to be poetic to make people believe. it's the message that counts.. the message to love God.

the problem i see with islam in the future, is people are beginning to base it soley and science and nothing else. which, will eventually take away the faith values of it.


No, you're just purposelly attacking islaam without any knowledge - and you know it.
i'm not attacking islam. i'm merely stating my beliefs. you need to learn to accept that people don't always believe what you do. and people won't always agree with you.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 04:23 AM
No one is asking you to agree or disagree... but just write legitimate statements, not fallacies!... you are a dynamo of a hyperbole!
Reply

rav
04-25-2007, 04:33 AM
I hope to end this dispute by quoting Pirkei Avos Chapter 2, Mishna 16:
"Rabbi Yehoshua said: An evil eye, the evil inclination, and hatred of others (lit., of the creations) remove a person from the world."
On this note, I wish to remind people that life is far too short to bitterly argue over such inconsequential things. I would also like to leave you all with a quote from (Mishlei 20:3):
It is honor for a man to refrain from quarreling, and every fool [who does not refrain from quarreling] will be exposed.
Although I will quarrel on a very important matter, I strive to cease doing so in trivial matters. With that, I will say good night to you all, and pleasant dreams.
Reply

Philosopher
04-25-2007, 04:36 AM
Originally Posted by rav
I hope to end this dispute by quoting Pirkei Avos Chapter 2, Mishna 16:
"Rabbi Yehoshua said: An evil eye, the evil inclination, and hatred of others (lit., of the creations) remove a person from the world."
On this note, I wish to remind people that life is far too short to bitterly argue over such inconsequential things. I would also like to leave you all with a quote from (Mishlei 20:3):
It is honor for a man to refrain from quarreling, and every fool [who does not refrain from quarreling] will be exposed.
Although I will quarrel on a very important matter, I strive to cease doing so in trivial matters. With that, I will say good night to you all, and pleasant dreams.
LOL.....way to leave by posting irrelevant quotes :D
Reply

thirdwatch512
04-25-2007, 04:49 AM
phiolosopher - your signature is TOTALLY WRONG. that's NOT what it means at all..

what matthew 10:34-36 is talking about, is that when Jesus comes, families will be divided on whether to accept Him or not.
This is taken from Mic_7:6. Christ did not here mean to say that the object of his coming was to produce discord and contention, for he was the Prince of Peace, Isa_9:6; Isa_11:6; Luk_2:14; but he means to say that such would be one of the effects of his coming.
notice that jesus says A sword and not THE sword.

the Bible is very symbolic. please remember that, and maybe read some commentary. :)
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 05:09 AM
I just read your miserable other post... and I really don't even wish to dignify you with a response.. But will say this much-- Yes, I know Arabic better than the translators... One thing Arabic is my mother tongue... though I appreciate all the effort the translators have under taken to translate... none of them save the last (Shakir) was a native speaker, and he borrowed YusufAli's work simply making it modern English. If you'd read anything at all or did a simple google search you'd have already learned that .. You are very under educated... I hazard say even in your own bible... so DON'T come arguing Islam when the very basics of your own religion.. you ignore!
Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God.

Maybe your priest can absolve you.. who knows maybe he can speak on your behalf on the day of judgement or maybe he can become your "Sin Eater"?...



Good night!
Reply

Philosopher
04-25-2007, 05:14 AM
Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God.
No, it's not.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 05:18 AM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
No, it's not.
It is celebrated and encouraged? I must have misunderstood the verses?
Reply

Philosopher
04-25-2007, 05:19 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
It is celebrated and encouraged? I must have misunderstood the verses?
There's a reason why there are gay priests in churches.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 05:26 AM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
There's a reason why there are gay priests in churches.
Indeed... I had no idea the bible and and Christianity was so allowing... forgive me!... let homosexual/pedophile priests go after more alter boys-- and the folks they foster continue on the path of the righteous.

peace!
Reply

Philosopher
04-25-2007, 05:36 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Indeed... I had no idea the bible and and Christianity was so allowing... forgive me!... let homosexual/pedophile priests go after more alter boys-- and the folks they foster continue on the path of the righteous.

peace!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6119226.stm
Reply

Muslim Knight
04-25-2007, 05:37 AM
Maybe homosexuality is condemned in the Bible but hey, since those priests are vested with power to absolve sins why can they be absolving their own each and everytime after? Pretty much the convenience.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 05:43 AM
I'd hate to be tit for tat with this guy... he just got on my nerves and I am known to have a temper... (Need to work on it :-[ ). If I am needed as to translate verses or offer an opinion as far as science or (science as pertains to the Quran) .. then I'll happily oblige... I don't wish to engage him in vain discourse... It is a bad vortex and it really doesn't contribute to my life positively
Reply

Philosopher
04-25-2007, 05:46 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
I'd hate to be tit for tat with this guy... he just got on my nerves and I am known to have a temper... (Need to work on it :-[ ). If I am needed as to translate verses or offer an opinion as far as science or (science as pertains to the Quran) .. then I'll happily oblige... I don't wish to engage him in vain discourse... It is a bad vortex and it really doesn't contribute to my life positively
Listen woman, you need to be more obedient to your male counterpart.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 05:47 AM
Who is my male counterpart?
Reply

Philosopher
04-25-2007, 05:57 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Who is my male counterpart?
Males in general.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 06:02 AM
I have been épée fencing since I was in junior high school... If I am going to be "obedient" it had in the least better be earned by the so-called "counterpart" .... We have been so derailed far off topic here...
let's steer this back to original post...

gnight All
Reply

Hemoo
04-25-2007, 06:15 AM
Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
well show me science that hasn't been debunked in the qu'ran.

visit this thread and you will see both historical and scientific accuracy in the Holy Quran.

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...ing-quran.html

it will also be a good thing if you help bring up this thread to the first page.
Reply

Cyril
04-25-2007, 07:29 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
BTW, though, I have already answered you extensively in various posts (having included sources) & don't care to extend myself further-- .. I must ask you to clarify a few points that you have kindly brought to our attention-- first-- where do you see the "A" consonant in (لَمُوسِعُونَ)?
Excuse me in advance if I'll make some mistakes as I cannot correct my posts yet because I'm a newcomer on this forum.

The "a" is not a consonant but a vowel.
Where do I see it? I must say I find that question very strange if you can write and read Arabic.
The "a" is the fatHa at the end of muusi3uuna.

(you must have noticed that I transcribe emphatics with a capital letter and I duplicate long vowels. I use the same "3" as you do for 3ayn)

everyone knows that, that word is ending with a (noon) ن not an alif أ
Who said there is an alif at the end? I don't see any. Again I find that remark of yours rather strange.

( we have no vowels in Arabic)
You must be joking. There are six plain vowels in Classical Arabic "a", "i" and "u" and their long versions. Besides you find diphtongs which combine two vowels and two semi-consonants which can be either a consonant or a vowel, the "w" and the "y".

While at it, won't you please tell us, why this liberal usage of number (3) to lamuusi(3)uun(a) or awsa(3)a? What do you mean by it?
Have you forgotten that you have used that letter in your post? Here it is: "lamowso3oon".

If you know anything about transcription you must know that some Arabic sounds do not exist in the Western languages. So there are no way to type them properly with Western keyboards. The number "3" has been chosen by many for convenience's sake for the Arabic 3ayn because it looks similar to that Arabic letter.

If an Arabic word contains a 3ayn I must write it as many times that word is used. I cannot drop a letter (especially a consonant) just because it would hurt somebody's eye.

kindly refrain from running to your first "trusty" helper, as he or she hasn't gotten you very far....
I don't understand what you mean.

The letter 3 or 7 or 6 or any of the others I have used will not be found in any respectful dictionary!
We all know that. Dictionaries and scholarly works use ALA-LC or DIN romanization systems for example.

I can very much conclude with certainty that, you didn't get your preferred definition from a respectful source...
I got what you call "my preferred definition" from the Arabic grammar and the Hans Wehr dictionary among others.

I will not get into what these numbers mean, ... but pls show some consistency when making a point...
Are you projecting? Attributing to me what you think of yourself?

it is terribly embarrassing to go so far and still not be able to bring a presentable piece of evidence to the table.
peace!
I don't see where there is an embarrassment.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-25-2007, 10:27 AM
Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
Jesus was the son of Moses? wow, i never knew that. i always thought it was Joseph who raise Jesus. hmm, interesting.. moses came thousands of years before Mary.. hmmm.... ??

You're purposelly trying to avoid the issue aren't you? I never said Jesus was son of Moses, i mentioned them both specifically to show you that they did many miracles.



well show me science that hasn't been debunked in the qu'ran.
You're the one making the claim, you're required to put forward your evidences.


oh please, we all know that the arabs were known for their astronomy and science, and poetry.
Oh seriosly? Yeah - their poetry, the others i'm not too sure about. If that is so - bring forward evidences. Again, the majority of the arabs were an illiterate people.



oh, is that so? because there are about 12 verses inthe bible of jesus being worshipped. and Jesus never opposed to it. ever. and if you know the Bible, you know that if people did something wrong, Jesus would try to correct them.
No, i want proof that Jesus son of Mary ordered people to worship him. Since you guys claim he's god all the time right?


People in the Bible even call Jesus God! there's a dude named David in the Bible who did, Matthew did, John did, and many more times!
Did Jesus call himself a god? And did he ask people to worship him? He never since he is a Messenger like the Messengers' before, the only difference is that he was born of a miraculous birth - however Adam was created without a father nor a mother, yet he isn't classed as God. Nor does God die.



nothing fantastic about that.
Maybe you could truely show me what fantastic is then?



here's one of the "you must know arabic" claims people make to try and defend their religion when they have no other way to.
Okay, sure. Maybe you've never noticed, but we have our book in the original language. Something which you don't even have right? Maybe that's why we depend on the original language more, since that's how God revealed it to His Messengers'.



oh, so she knows more then the other arabic translators?? quran 51:47 says the heaven expands. what does that have to do exactly with the UNIVERSE? plus, let's not forget the verse right after that..

And the Earth - we have stretched it out like a carpet; and how smoothly have we spread it forth!

oh, is the earth expanding too!!

That's pure ignorance. The heaven refers to the universe. And the carpet on earth is referring to the earth being spread out for us.


Again, look at what the original poster said:


THE LAYERS OF THE ATMOSPHERE

One fact about the universe revealed in the verses of the Qur'an is that the sky is made up of seven layers:

It is He Who created everything on the earth for you and then directed His attention up to heaven and arranged it into seven regular heavens. He has knowledge of all things. (Qur'an, 2:29)

Then He turned to heaven when it was smoke. In two days He determined them as seven heavens and revealed, in every heaven, its own mandate. (Qur'an, 41:11-12)

The word "heavens," which appears in many verses in the Qur'an, is used to refer to the sky above the Earth, as well as the entire universe. Given this meaning of the word, it is seen that the Earth's sky, or the atmosphere, is made up of seven layers.

Today, it is known that the world's atmosphere consists of different layers that lie on top of each other.19 Based on the criteria of chemical contents or air temperature, the definitions made have determined the atmosphere of the earth as seven layers.20 According to the "Limited Fine Mesh Model (LFMMII)," a model of atmosphere used to estimate weather conditions for 48 hours, the atmosphere is also 7 layers. According to the modern geological definitions the seven layers of atmosphere are as follows:

1. Troposphere

2. Stratosphere

3. Mesosphere

4. Thermosphere

5. Exosphere

6. Ionosphere

7. Magnetosphere

The Qur'an says, "[He] revealed, in every heaven, its own mandate," in Surah Fussilat 12. In other words, Allah is stating that He assigned each heaven its own duty. Truly, as will be seen in following chapters, each one of these layers has vital duties for the benefit of human kind and all other living things on the Earth. Each layer has a particular function, ranging from forming rain to preventing harmful rays, from reflecting radio waves to averting the harmful effects of meteors.

The verses below inform us about the appearance of the seven layers of the atmosphere:

Do you not see how He created seven heavens in layers? (Qur'an, 71:15)

He Who created the seven heavens in layers… (Qur'an, 67:3)

The Arabic word "tibaqan" in these verses, translated into English as "layer" means "layer, the appropriate cover or covering for something," and thus stresses how the top layer is well suited to the lower. The word is also used in the plural here: "layers." The sky, described in the verse as being in layers, is without doubt the most perfect expression of the atmosphere. It is a great miracle that these facts, which could not possibly be discovered without the technology of the 20th century, were explicitly stated by the Qur'an 1,400 years ago.


once again, the "have to know arabic" claim.

I gave you proof from the english language, i think you still never understood that.

That's part of eloquency in the arabic language. Did you know that the queen says 'we' when referring to herself? Is she lots of people in one, or is she saying that using eloquence?


if arabic all of a sudden make sislam just sooo amazing, why is 10% of egypt christian? why do 600,000 people in africa convert to christianity each year!! (btw, that's coming from an ISLAMIC source too!)

First of all, when Islaam settled in Egypt - the muslims never forced the copts to become christian [there is no compulsion in religion (Qur'an 2:256).] So guess what? They remained christian.

Maybe we could go at it this way, name me one learned scholar on Islaam who became christian? I can name you loads of christian scholars who became muslim, and still are.



how about YOU show me some so called science in the qu'ran, and let's see what i can't debunk. go ahead.. paste articles, give me links, do anything. let's see what won't get debunked.

Theres loads of info on this thread already.


oh gosh,here's the "prove your religion is better then mine" thing..
the Bible isn't a scientific book. it's not made for science. it's made as a message from God. we(christians) don't need science in our book. we don't need it to be poetic to make people believe. it's the message that counts.. the message to love God.

Did i say the Qur'an was a science book? The Qur'an isn't revealed for that, rather it is the message of God to humanity. To tell them how to live with mankind and also their Sustainer, in kindness, peace and justice - each according to the right situation.


the problem i see with islam in the future, is people are beginning to base it soley and science and nothing else. which, will eventually take away the faith values of it.
Again, when did i say it was a science book? The facts mentioned within it fit in with logic and science, that shows that it is truely a book of God. Whereas christians can't even explain their main concept of 1+1+1= 1? Yet even a 3yr old knows that this concept doesn't make sense.



i'm not attacking islam. i'm merely stating my beliefs. you need to learn to accept that people don't always believe what you do. and people won't always agree with you.
I think you're the one who sparked this argument off in the first place, that's why bro Habeshi and i responded to it. You need to open your eyes abit more.



Regards.
Reply

rav
04-25-2007, 10:46 AM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
LOL.....way to leave by posting irrelevant quotes :D
Shalom Philosopher,

Although they may seem irrelevant to the naked eye, they are actually completely relevant in this thread. One speaks of hatred while the other speaks of fighting, and they are critical of the people who rely on them both. Both are traits that members are exhibiting towards each other in this current dialogue.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-25-2007, 12:06 PM
Hey Cyril.


I think the issue you're referring to has already been discussed by a member titled: mansio, who also had a similar position to you.


Here's the link:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...quran-com.html


I think that this issue has been discussed quite deeply, and if anyone wants to discuss it further - it would be better that it's discussed within that thread.

The praise is for Allaah that bro Ansar's given a good refutation there. :)



Thanks in advance.
Reply

Cyril
04-25-2007, 12:27 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
The praise is for Allaah that bro Ansar's given a good refutation there. :)
Thanks in advance.
I don't see any point for refutation. We have the Arabic Quran as the basis for discussion.

No one can have the Quran say another thing than what it says.
Reply

skhalid
04-25-2007, 12:42 PM
Jazakallah sista...oooh ma eyes are killing me after reading all that..but it was worth my time!!!
Ahsante
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 02:45 PM
Originally Posted by Cyril
Excuse me in advance if I'll make some mistakes as I cannot correct my posts yet because I'm a newcomer on this forum..
You can always make an extra post to correct gross error...

Originally Posted by Cyril
The "a" is not a consonant but a vowel. .
Thanks for mentioning that after we posted it ( the damma, kasra, fatiha, sukuon etc) You are so useful

Originally Posted by Cyril
Where do I see it? I must say I find that question very strange if you can write and read Arabic..
The question was per your misusage (not mine) .. you are the one who inserted an A which stands for an (Alif) not a fatiha and certainly not a noon for (N) which everyone can plainly see how the word ends! Don't tread into territories that are clearly over your head!

Originally Posted by Cyril
The "a" is the fatHa at the end of muusi3uuna..
that is earth shattering.. especially after we have already mentioned it!

Originally Posted by Cyril
(you must have noticed that I transcribe emphatics with a capital letter and I duplicate long vowels. I use the same "3" as you do for 3ayn).
and you learned that from which dictionary? I challenge you to find a dictionary that uses a number in place of a consonant.



Originally Posted by Cyril
Who said there is an alif at the end? I don't see any. Again I find that remark of yours rather strange..
what was the A doing in there? That is what an (A) symbolizes-- which you called a silent A! an Alif symbolizes an (A) not a fatiha.. since you are such a connoisseur we'd expect that you'd not make such a blatant mistake... especially for one down with the lingo and substituting consonants for numbers like such a pro..



Originally Posted by Cyril
You must be joking. There are six plain vowels in Classical Arabic "a", "i" and "u" and their long versions. Besides you find diphtongs which combine two vowels and two semi-consonants which can be either a consonant or a vowel, the "w" and the "y"..
There are no vowels in the form of alphabet consonants, we use them to substitute consonants but they are not found in the Arabic Alphabet! or as you have used! further your misusage of a fati'7a is even more amusing for what is the point of putting a fati7a and calling it silent? when silence comes only from sukon? .. Here is a little lesson for you, you can use it in your next post and claim it your own!
Damma ُ Damma is an apostrophe-like shape written above the consonant which precedes it in pronunciation. It represents a short vowel u (like the "u" in "but"). u بُت but
Wāw و Wāw is the long vowel ū (like the "oo" in "moon"). It also represents the consonant w. When Waw is used to represent the long vowel, damma appears above the preceding consonant. ū بُوت būt
Fatha َ Fatha is a diagonal stroke written above the consonant which precedes it in pronunciation. It represents a short vowel a (a little like the "u" in "but"; a short "ah" sound). a بَت bat
Alif ا Alif is the long vowel ā (a long "ahh" sound as in English "father"). ā بات bāt
Kasra ِ Kasra is a diagonal stroke written below the consonant which precedes it in pronunciation. It represents a short vowel i (like the "i" in English "pit"). i بِت bit
Ya' ي Ya' is the long vowel ī (like the "ee" in English "sheep"). It also represents the consonant y. When Ya' is used to represent the long vowel, kasra appears above the preceding consonant. ī بِيت bīt
Sukūn ْ Whenever a consonant does not have a vowel, it receives a mark called a sukūn, a small circle which represents the end of a closed syllable (CvC or CvvC). It sits above the letter which is not followed by a vowel. بِنْتُ bintu
Shadda (or tashdīd) ّ Shadda represents doubling (or gemination) of a consonant. Where the same consonant occurs twice in a word, with no vowel between, instead of using consonant + sukūn + consonant, the consonant is written only once, and shadda is written above it. ثَبَّتَ thabbata

so we wouldn't use an A where a fatiha would be. Hope we are clear on that?



Originally Posted by Cyril
Have you forgotten that you have used that letter in your post? Here it is: "lamowso3oon"..
I deliberately used a number... I know how to use it-- That is what happens when someone completely musters Arabic and can play with it. No translator or dictionary would use that in a place of an actual English consonant though! and it is such a conundrum to me-- since I know you don't speak Arabic or understand it, or have gone to a respectful source for your incandescent translation!

Originally Posted by Cyril
If you know anything about transcription you must know that some Arabic sounds do not exist in the Western languages. So there are no way to type them properly with Western keyboards. The number "3" has been chosen by many for convenience's sake for the Arabic 3ayn because it looks similar to that Arabic letter. .
and you have chosen it because you are an expert or because you are a plagiarizer of my work as you have just admitted I used it in mine first? or the most logical you ran into one of your little buddies who gave you an explanation to your liking?

Originally Posted by Cyril
If an Arabic word contains a 3ayn I must write it as many times that word is used. I cannot drop a letter (especially a consonant) just because it would hurt somebody's eye..
Sure you can.. no respectful dictionary uses a number as you have presented. you would in fact use a vowel in its stead! such as with this brief illustration:
instead of 3mar you'd write Omar
instead of 3imad you'd write Imad
instead of 3la'a you'd write Ala'a
you see easily A, O, and I replace that one letter. which you don't have in your alphabet.
and that is how it would be would be in any dictionary.. which again leads me to believe you've used the source of your interest, not a respectful source, but one say who uses the "vulgar tongue"?



Originally Posted by Cyril
I don't understand what you mean..
Which part was hard for you?

Originally Posted by Cyril
We all know that. Dictionaries and scholarly works use ALA-LC or DIN romanization systems for example..
Really?



Originally Posted by Cyril
I got what you call "my preferred definition" from the Arabic grammar and the Hans Wehr dictionary among others..
lol---You are full of **** .. as this definition isn't found in any dictionary especially with the usage of number. I have already given three other sources. One Pooya Ali from the noble Quran. Al-mawrid with ISBN from Amazon with which page number to look, as well as an online dictionary-- sakhr--all using the word Expand... none use your preferred definition a (3) for a 3yn oh learned on!



Originally Posted by Cyril
Are you projecting? Attributing to me what you think of yourself?.
Are you suffering from Klüver-Bucy Syndrome? I am just calling it like I see it!

Originally Posted by Cyril
I don't see where there is an embarrassment.
You must have really thick skin, which is admirable
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 02:51 PM
Originally Posted by Cyril
I don't see any point for refutation. We have the Arabic Quran as the basis for discussion.

No one can have the Quran say another thing than what it says.
We have already posted from the Quran as the source

and provided a ready link
http://www.--------------/quran/

click on the sura and the aya number and on Pooya/M.A. Ali Engl. Commentary and you'll see he says the exact same thing as Yahya's page... No sense beating a dead horse!
This topic has been discussed Ad nauseam, if you are having difficulty understanding Arabic or discerning the meaning of words that don't agree with your definition as you conceive it to be-- or wish it to be-- Maybe it is all falling on your blind spot who knows--- but that is your problem, not ours!


peace!
Reply

Cyril
04-25-2007, 03:55 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
You are full of **** .. as this definition isn't found in any dictionary especially with the usage of number. I have already given three other sources. One Pooya Ali from the noble Quran. Al-mawrid with ISBN from Amazon with which page number to look, as well as an online dictionary-- sakhr--all using the word Expand... none use your preferred definition a (3) for a 3yn oh learned on!
I still don't know exactly what you call "your preferred definition".

To remind you here is what I wrote: "That is the literal meaning. Most translators prefer to translate by a verb like to expand or to spread out."

The only thing I was arguing about is that the Quran does not indicate whether the "expanding" is instantaneous or continuous.

Some honest translators who think the process is continuous, add a "steadily" in brackets to show that it is not in the Quran but it is their added interpretation.

I did not understand too your allusions to some "buddies" I am supposed to get help from. If you could explain.

Btw I thank you for your lesson in Arabic script. But I did not need it as I learned it a long time ago from Farsi.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 04:27 PM
Originally Posted by Cyril
I still don't know exactly what you call "your preferred definition"..
Anything you use in (expanding') stead, to make a moot point!

Originally Posted by Cyril
To remind you here is what I wrote: "That is the literal meaning. Most translators prefer to translate by a verb like to expand or to spread out.".
& I question how you know what the literal meaning is? When we have given you other sources including one from the actual quran commentary and not some random webpage I quote


([Pooya/Ali Commentary 51:47]
Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

Although the frontiers of space are confined, they are not fixed. They can be expanded.)

and a link for you to check for yourself lest you think we are making it up.
As a side note I have profound deep respect for marmaduke pickthall , though Arabic wasn't his native tongue, he still made an effort to learn, leaving his social status and life style behind for the sake of Allah.. still there are much better translators that have come since... and I find it strange, that when presented with appropriate translation, You or anyone else with doubt would rather label one translator honest or dishonest out of whim rather than solid facts!

Words are powerful.. they will always stand powerful in Arabic, and is incumbent on people to make an effort to understand it if not in original tongue then as close as transliteration as possible. I make the analogy of
Pyridostigmine which might sound like physostigmine, they might even fall under the same class of cholinomimetics yet we use one for Mysthenia gravis, while we use the other one for glaucoma... if not careful lots more can be lost than meaning in the translation..


Originally Posted by Cyril
The only thing I was arguing about is that the Quran does not indicate whether the "expanding" is instantaneous or continuous..
Well now you know from various sources.

Originally Posted by Cyril
Some honest translators who think the process is continuous, add a "steadily" in brackets to show that it is not in the Quran but it is their added interpretation..
Until you can get some dexterity on Arabic I'd not call it (their added interpretation)

I am going to show you what a tedious effort it is to translate.. it isn't a peace of cake. There can never be on word to equate with another, especially with a language as difficult as Arabic.. the second most difficult in the world after Chinese.
In this sura I use as an example you can see how it takes a translator several words to mean just two .


بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِ


وَالنَّازِعَاتِ غَرْقًا {1} as you can see two words ( anazi3aat gharqan)

Pickthal used 7 to denote what that means.
[Pickthal 79:1] By those who drag forth to destruction,

وَالنَّاشِطَاتِ نَشْطًا {2} (wanashetat nashtan)

two words Picktal again uses 4
[Pickthal 79:2] By the meteors rushing,

وَالسَّابِحَاتِ سَبْحًا {3} (wasabi7at sab7an)

two words pickthal uses 5
[Pickthal 79:3] By the lone stars floating,

فَالسَّابِقَاتِ سَبْقًا {4} (fasabiqat sabqan) again two words

pickthal uses 4
[Pickthal 79:4] By the angels hastening,

فَالْمُدَبِّرَاتِ أَمْرًا }
(falmodaberat amran)

two words pickthal uses 6


[Pickthal 79:5] And those who govern the event,

All of them perfectly fluid in Arabic, in meaning, context, style and rhyme.. cannot be made so in English... Pickthal like others, made an honest effort.. but it is clearly not the same thing.. hence we call it transliteration not translation.

Media Tags are no longer supported


00 Quran 19 suret An'azi3at(2).mp3 ( 2835 KB ):
http://download.yousendit.com/50C4D43249DCB442

upload courtesy of bros. fi sabililah -- for ones who wish to listen to how simply it flows flawlessly like every sura in the Quran.

Originally Posted by Cyril
I did not understand too your allusions to some "buddies" I am supposed to get help from. If you could explain. .
Usage of numbers (3), (7), (5), (6).. isn't at all used in dictionaries, When you use it, I can safely assume, you have run to some person to do your research not a respectful dictionary!
as these numberes aren't readily used even by common folk, my mom though fluent in Arabic wouldn't know what these numbers are used to denote, SO how can you? You'd have to be an Arabic speaker, or have been offered the translation of your choice courtesy of someone who is down with modern spins used to substitute for consonants not available in the English alphabet!

Originally Posted by Cyril
Btw I thank you for your lesson in Arabic script. But I did not need it as I learned it a long time ago from Farsi.
You are most welcome! Farsi and Arabic are two different languages.. can everyone who speaks English, be as well fluent in french on the account they share an alphabet?

peace
Reply

Quruxbadaan
04-25-2007, 04:36 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Of course.



Yes, I know what illiterate means. I know that Mohammed's political achievements alone identify him as a genius, and that while illiterate he certainly would have spoken to people from a wide variety of backgrounds. I know that that same knowledge would have resided in all centres of learning between Rome and India, and a great many people who generally resided or travelled elsewhere would have been exposed to it via others particularly when it may well have been 'common knowledge'. I also know that there is no evidence at all that, outside of such centres of learning, the general opinion was that the world was flat - there is simply no evidence to support that. It is just assumed in the hope it will slip under the reader's radar amidst memories of old movies about Christopher Columbus.

The idea that Mohammed's Mecca was somehow isolated in some bubble from the rest of the world simply isn't credible. If anything, it's rather insulting to its inhabitants. It was a trading town, on the route from Southern Arabia and even India to the Byzantine (and previously Roman) empires, not to mention assorted other places.




Yup, "in the 1st century". Not the seventh - see above.

I hope you will consider my comments in the same way. Anyway, that is enough on this; I've been here far too often before and just ended up going around in circles. Do take care yourself, too. I admire your strength of belief and faith, and I'm sure it has much more secure foundations than the pen of Mr Yahya! I really hope so.

salaam


I truly dont see the point in this argument at all between the both of you

It is well known and very well documented that it has been the belief of many people long before islam that the earth was flat in form

I dont see the point in arguing otherwise its nonsence to do so

maa salaama
Reply

thirdwatch512
04-25-2007, 09:03 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
You are very under educated... I hazard say even in your own bible... so DON'T come arguing Islam when the very basics of your own religion.. you ignore!
Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God.

Maybe your priest can absolve you.. who knows maybe he can speak on your behalf on the day of judgement or maybe he can become your "Sin Eater"?...



Good night!
ok first off.. why is it that you ALWAYS try to bash me for being a homosexual? it seems that in ANY topic, no matter what it is, you find a way to go off topic and bash me. and i just don't understand why.

now as for the verses..

you quoted two from leviticus.. from a christian perspective, torah has 3 types of laws.. moral, Ceremonial, and Civil. as a christian, we use the Moral laws (which are basically what is right and wrong), but not the others. and we consider the leviticus ones you have posted to be Civil, and not Moral. therefore, i could case less about those verses.

then you show 1 corinthians 6:9-10.. you show a version that say "nor homosexuals." well, just like arabic translated in English, there will be problems with the translation.

"homosexuals" isn't what the word is supposed to mean. in fact, "Homosexual" wasn't even a word in Greek!

what the word really means, is lust.. of any type.

then you quote Romans 1:26-28 .. these verses are taliing about priests, and how they act.

the Bible condemns lust, yes.. no doubt. but it doesn't condemn two loving, consenting people who just want to love each others.

and to the members who are blatantly saying that Catholic Priests rape children and such.. YOU CAN'T STEREOTYPE AN ENTIRE DENOMINATION BY THE ACTIONS OF A FEW. i promise you, that if i went and said "all muslims are terrorists" or "oh, we better not get near that muslim, they might blow us up" i would be banned immediately, and i would have every right to be. why? because that's stereotyping an entire religion by the actions of a few. so what makes you guys think that you are all superior and can do a such?

the Catholic Church has STRONGLY condemned the acts of priests who have done so. ANY time there's a report of a priest molesting someone, the priest is IMMEDIATLY temporarily taken away His priesthood. he is then investigated by government authorities, and the Church itself. if he is guilty, then he is automatically excommunicated from the Church immediately.

purestambrosia - i don't find it pleasing that you can go and bash me simply because of who I am. if you don't approve of it, then fine. but that's no reason to harass me publically to get back at me. if you want to discuss my life, PM me. i will be happy to talk about it on PM. but please, don't publically humiliate me because you find it amusing.
Reply

جوري
04-25-2007, 09:05 PM
I am sorry!.. I don't approve of your life style but it was wrong of me to bring it up--you can ask a mod to remove the posts!
Reply

Philosopher
04-25-2007, 09:17 PM
LOL Cyril and thirdwatch got owned hard
Reply

thirdwatch512
04-26-2007, 02:07 AM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
You're purposelly trying to avoid the issue aren't you? I never said Jesus was son of Moses, i mentioned them both specifically to show you that they did many miracles.
but you said that Jesus was the son of Mary and moses. i was just pointing that out.




You're the one making the claim, you're required to put forward your evidences.
if you want me to debunk islamic science.. well, a topic of what you want me to debunk has to be brought up first.


Oh seriosly? Yeah - their poetry, the others i'm not too sure about. If that is so - bring forward evidences. Again, the majority of the arabs were an illiterate people.
mohammad's tribe was the smartest tribe there was in arabia. so that's one. two, mohammad was a trader.. he went to damascus, jerusalem, and many other places. it's amazing what you can learn when you travel, especially in that time. :)
there isn't anything in the qu'ran that sceintifically fascinates me. most seem to simply come from Jewish or gnostic sources. but that's only my opinion. and i hope i'm not offending you when i say that or anything. that's not my intention. my intention is to prove my side of the case.


No, i want proof that Jesus son of Mary ordered people to worship him. Since you guys claim he's god all the time right?
"But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God" (John 5:17-18).

"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by" (John 8:58-59).

"I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God" (John 10:30-33).

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty" (Revelation 1:8).

“And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean” (Matthew 8:2).

“While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live” (Matthew 9:18).

“Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God” (Matthew 14:33).

“Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me” (Matthew 15:25).

“Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him” (Matthew 20:20).

“And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him” (Matthew 28:9).

“And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him” (John 9:38).

“That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth” (Philippians 2:10).

Unlike the elect angels and the apostles who refused to accept worship (Acts 14:11-15; Rev. 19:10), not once did Jesus refuse it. The Bible teaches that it is idolatry and wickedness to worship any one or any thing other than the one True and Living God (Ex. 20:3-5; 34:14; Is. 42:8; Matt. 4:10). Therefore, the fact that Jesus Christ accepted worship is indisputable evidence that he is Almighty God.

there you go :)




Did Jesus call himself a god? And did he ask people to worship him? He never since he is a Messenger like the Messengers' before, the only difference is that he was born of a miraculous birth - however Adam was created without a father nor a mother, yet he isn't classed as God. Nor does God die.
yes, jesus did call himself God. John 10.. I and the Father are one. He also said "I am the beginning and the end."




Maybe you could truely show me what fantastic is then?
don't get me wrong.. i think the qu'ran is beautiful in arabic. but i think that people over exxaterate when they say that it is the most beautiful thing ever heard. sorry to say this, but i would prefer Ave Maria over the qu'ran. but that's just me, a non muslim. for muslims, of course it will not be like that.



Okay, sure. Maybe you've never noticed, but we have our book in the original language. Something which you don't even have right? Maybe that's why we depend on the original language more, since that's how God revealed it to His Messengers'.
the NT is in greek, aka the original language, so actually we do have it in its original language :)




That's pure ignorance. The heaven refers to the universe. And the carpet on earth is referring to the earth being spread out for us.


Again, look at what the original poster said:
so now you're going to show the so called "7 layers of the atmosphere." well, sorry to tell you, but there are FIVE layers in the atmosphere. look at wikipedia. google "atmosphere." since when has the ground been considered a layer of the atmosphere?







I gave you proof from the english language, i think you still never understood that.
i understood it.. but i just didn't find it extremely fascinating.





First of all, when Islaam settled in Egypt - the muslims never forced the copts to become christian [there is no compulsion in religion (Qur'an 2:256).] So guess what? They remained christian.

Maybe we could go at it this way, name me one learned scholar on Islaam who became christian? I can name you loads of christian scholars who became muslim, and still are.
one sholar i know right off the back is Father Zakariah. he has the Qu'ran and Hadiths memorized, and debates muslims very frequently. he's a convert to Chrsitianity :)



Theres loads of info on this thread already.
and?



Did i say the Qur'an was a science book? The Qur'an isn't revealed for that, rather it is the message of God to humanity. To tell them how to live with mankind and also their Sustainer, in kindness, peace and justice - each according to the right situation.
good.. so why do you keep proposing science in the qu'ran!!!!



Again, when did i say it was a science book? The facts mentioned within it fit in with logic and science, that shows that it is truely a book of God. Whereas christians can't even explain their main concept of 1+1+1= 1? Yet even a 3yr old knows that this concept doesn't make sense.
so i ask about islam, and all of a sudden you bring my religion into it. now answer this.. how does that all of a sudden make your case stronger? i just don't understand. if you want to talk about christianity.. then start up a topic :)

the trinity is obviously misunderstood by you, as we can see.

think of a 3 leaf clover.. it's one plant, but it has 3 leafs on it. or think of water.. it can be water in liquid, gas, or solid form. but it's still water nevertheless. we don't believe in 3 different Gods.. we believe that God manifested himself as Jesus, and then left the Holy Spirit to be with us :)


I think you're the one who sparked this argument off in the first place, that's why bro Habeshi and i responded to it. You need to open your eyes abit more.
i have opened my eyes plenty :) just because i don't believe islam is true doesn't mean that i'm for some reason close minded.
Reply

thirdwatch512
04-26-2007, 02:08 AM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
LOL Cyril and thirdwatch got owned hard
lol

Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
I am sorry!.. I don't approve of your life style but it was wrong of me to bring it up--you can ask a mod to remove the posts!
oh, it's perfectly fine. but i do ask you to PM me so we can understand each other more :)
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 12:08 PM
Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
but you said that Jesus was the son of Mary and moses. i was just pointing that out.

I never, since i know that Moses came to his people much longer than Jesus son of Mary did.


if you want me to debunk islamic science.. well, a topic of what you want me to debunk has to be brought up first.
I don't need to, if you really want to however - you can debunk the original posts in this thread.


mohammad's tribe was the smartest tribe there was in arabia. so that's one. two, mohammad was a trader.. he went to damascus, jerusalem, and many other places. it's amazing what you can learn when you travel, especially in that time. :)

Yeah it sure is, he went to Greater Syria for a short span of time and learnt all the history of the children of Israel? And he learnt the whole concept of christianity while he only spent maybe a few months max there?

And this was all done while going for a small business trip?



there isn't anything in the qu'ran that sceintifically fascinates me. most seem to simply come from Jewish or gnostic sources. but that's only my opinion. and i hope i'm not offending you when i say that or anything. that's not my intention. my intention is to prove my side of the case.
Kinda ironic since he never even met up with jews, especially in the Makkan era when alot of surahs regarding the earlier prophets were revealed.


"But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God" (John 5:17-18).

"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by" (John 8:58-59).

"I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God" (John 10:30-33).

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty" (Revelation 1:8).

“And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean” (Matthew 8:2).

“While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live” (Matthew 9:18).

“Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God” (Matthew 14:33).

“Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me” (Matthew 15:25).

“Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him” (Matthew 20:20).

“And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him” (Matthew 28:9).

“And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him” (John 9:38).

“That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth” (Philippians 2:10).

Unlike the elect angels and the apostles who refused to accept worship (Acts 14:11-15; Rev. 19:10), not once did Jesus refuse it. The Bible teaches that it is idolatry and wickedness to worship any one or any thing other than the one True and Living God (Ex. 20:3-5; 34:14; Is. 42:8; Matt. 4:10). Therefore, the fact that Jesus Christ accepted worship is indisputable evidence that he is Almighty God.

there you go :)

None of them state that Jesus told them to worship him.



yes, jesus did call himself God. John 10.. I and the Father are one. He also said "I am the beginning and the end."

The same god which was given birth to and stayed in a womb for a certain amount of months? Is it the god which you say was 'killed' by his own creation?

We even have greater respect for Jesus son of Mary since we know that he wasn't even killed, rather he was raised upto God in the heavens, yet you guys claim that god dies!? And then gets placed in a grave?



don't get me wrong.. i think the qu'ran is beautiful in arabic. but i think that people over exxaterate when they say that it is the most beautiful thing ever heard. sorry to say this, but i would prefer Ave Maria over the qu'ran. but that's just me, a non muslim. for muslims, of course it will not be like that.
That's upto you.



the NT is in greek, aka the original language, so actually we do have it in its original language :)

No it isn't in the original language, Jesus son of Mary spoke Aramaic [the syrian tongue] he never spoke greek.



so now you're going to show the so called "7 layers of the atmosphere." well, sorry to tell you, but there are FIVE layers in the atmosphere. look at wikipedia. google "atmosphere." since when has the ground been considered a layer of the atmosphere?

I've given you the list in the earlier post:

1. Troposphere

2. Stratosphere

3. Mesosphere

4. Thermosphere

5. Exosphere

6. Ionosphere

7. Magnetosphere
The ground isn't the heaven, rather it includes the sky which we can see.




i understood it.. but i just didn't find it extremely fascinating.

It's part of eloquence, even in the english language. You asked the question, i gave you the answer.



one sholar i know right off the back is Father Zakariah. he has the Qu'ran and Hadiths memorized, and debates muslims very frequently. he's a convert to Chrsitianity :)

Can he explain the trinity?



and?
Originally Posted by thirdwatch
how about YOU show me some so called science in the qu'ran, and let's see what i can't debunk. go ahead.. paste articles, give me links, do anything. let's see what won't get debunked.
Originally Posted by Me
Theres loads of info on this thread already.

You can start :)



good.. so why do you keep proposing science in the qu'ran!!!!
Because the Qur'an agrees with science.



so i ask about islam, and all of a sudden you bring my religion into it. now answer this.. how does that all of a sudden make your case stronger? i just don't understand. if you want to talk about christianity.. then start up a topic :)

the trinity is obviously misunderstood by you, as we can see.

think of a 3 leaf clover.. it's one plant, but it has 3 leafs on it. or think of water.. it can be water in liquid, gas, or solid form. but it's still water nevertheless. we don't believe in 3 different Gods.. we believe that God manifested himself as Jesus, and then left the Holy Spirit to be with us :)

So how about a drop of water? Can it be gas, liquid and solid at one time?



i have opened my eyes plenty :) just because i don't believe islam is true doesn't mean that i'm for some reason close minded.

Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
I think you're the one who sparked this argument off in the first place, that's why bro Habeshi and i responded to it. You need to open your eyes abit more.
Reply

thirdwatch512
04-26-2007, 06:59 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
I never, since i know that Moses came to his people much longer than Jesus son of Mary did.
i know, but you didn't write it like that. it was prolly just a mistake.


I don't need to, if you really want to however - you can debunk the original posts in this thread.
they all have been debunked.



Yeah it sure is, he went to Greater Syria for a short span of time and learnt all the history of the children of Israel? And he learnt the whole concept of christianity while he only spent maybe a few months max there?

And this was all done while going for a small business trip?
the qu'ran doesn't talk about "the children of israel" a whole lot.



Kinda ironic since he never even met up with jews, especially in the Makkan era when alot of surahs regarding the earlier prophets were revealed.
i never knew about mohammad until one day i met one muslim, we talked for 30 minutes, and i learned som much in just 30 mins.


None of them state that Jesus told them to worship him.
if you were a prophet, not God, just a prophet.. and someone started worshipping you.. you would correct them. you would tell them not to. Jesus never did that. and if you were a prophet, just a prophet, who wrote "don't worship people" but tohers worshipped you and you didn't oppose.. what message does that give? either 1. you are contradicting yourself, or 2. you're a higher being. now why would Jesus contradict himself!



The same god which was given birth to and stayed in a womb for a certain amount of months? Is it the god which you say was 'killed' by his own creation?
you obviously don't know much about the Trinity. God manifested Himself into a human form. as simple as that.

We even have greater respect for Jesus son of Mary since we know that he wasn't even killed, rather he was raised upto God in the heavens, yet you guys claim that god dies!? And then gets placed in a grave?
so do you think Jesus should be respected more then mohammad? because mohammad was poisined, whereas Jesus rose up straight to heaven(according to you.) God is perfect. He can do anything. while Jesus was crucified, He, being God, didn't really die. He went to the Father part of the Trinity per se.




No it isn't in the original language, Jesus son of Mary spoke Aramaic [the syrian tongue] he never spoke greek.
but his disciples did.





I've given you the list in the earlier post:

1. Troposphere

2. Stratosphere

3. Mesosphere

4. Thermosphere

5. Exosphere

6. Ionosphere

7. Magnetosphere
The ground isn't the heaven, rather it includes the sky which we can see.
hmm, from wikipedia, and other sources, I see the earth having 5 layers..






Can he explain the trinity?
can who?


You can start :)
how can i debunk something, when you haven't provided anything first?


Because the Qur'an agrees with science.
in your opinion. in my opinion, people take the verses extremely out of context.



So how about a drop of water? Can it be gas, liquid and solid at one time?
i was showing water as an example, silly!
Reply

Hemoo
04-26-2007, 07:17 PM
this man named Zakarya botros is a liar.

i have a video in arabic that exposes his lies and falsifications..

he also said that his god is every where even in the human stool. (makes me laugh at his insane belief)
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 07:38 PM
Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
i know, but you didn't write it like that. it was prolly just a mistake.
Alright, its ok.


they all have been debunked.
No they havn't.



the qu'ran doesn't talk about "the children of israel" a whole lot.
The children of Israel are mentioned the most in the Qur'an. And of the narratives mentioned in the ahadith - the children of Israel are mentioned the most there also.



i never knew about mohammad until one day i met one muslim, we talked for 30 minutes, and i learned som much in just 30 mins.

Kool, did you learn the whole history of a nation also? A nation which went through nearly any aspect of life which covered over around 5000 years or more?



if you were a prophet, not God, just a prophet.. and someone started worshipping you.. you would correct them. you would tell them not to. Jesus never did that. and if you were a prophet, just a prophet, who wrote "don't worship people" but tohers worshipped you and you didn't oppose.. what message does that give? either 1. you are contradicting yourself, or 2. you're a higher being. now why would Jesus contradict himself!

Prophet Joseph's brothers and parents bowed to him - that didn't make him God.



you obviously don't know much about the Trinity. God manifested Himself into a human form. as simple as that.
So God died?



so do you think Jesus should be respected more then mohammad? because mohammad was poisined, whereas Jesus rose up straight to heaven(according to you.) God is perfect. He can do anything. while Jesus was crucified, He, being God, didn't really die. He went to the Father part of the Trinity per se.

God only does what befits His Majesty, He doesn't need to be harmed by His own creation. The miracles performed by Jesus are miracles, and the miracles which Moses performed were miracles. Yet he wasn't god.



but his disciples did.
Since Jesus son of Mary spoke so much metaphors, how were they sure they translated the sayings in the correct way?



hmm, from wikipedia, and other sources, I see the earth having 5 layers..


We're not talking about the earth, we're talking about the skies and universe.

I've found some more info on the Ionosphere & Magnetosphere here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionosphere
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetosphere



can who?
That man who became christian?



how can i debunk something, when you haven't provided anything first?
I've checked over the thread again, and you havn't debunked it at all. So maybe you could debunk this thread as i stated earlier.



in your opinion. in my opinion, people take the verses extremely out of context.
And you know that because you're a scholar of Qur'an right?



i was showing water as an example, silly!

It wasn't a good explanation though right? Since ALL the prophets of God called to the worship of the Creator Alone, and they called people to shun all false deities.


And We sent to every nation a Messenger (saying): ‘Worship God alone and shun false deities.’ (Quran 16:36)


Jesus son of Mary had the same call - worship my Lord and your Lord, yet people took him and others as gods along with the true One and Only God, the One who gives us life, the One who sustains us, the One who causes us to die, and the One who will bring us back to life again, to judge us on what we differed.



If you want to carry on this discussion - then you can, however i think its just a waste of time.



Regards.
Reply

Trumble
04-26-2007, 07:41 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
No it isn't in the original language, Jesus son of Mary spoke Aramaic [the syrian tongue] he never spoke greek.
Actually, he most likely did, although his primary language was probably Aramaic (a few scholars think it may even have been Hebrew). There is both general historical evidence - Greek was used as a commercial language in Galilee and even as an everyday language in Judea - and Biblical evidence; it's highly unlikely that either Jesus spoke Latin or Pontius Pilate and the Roman centurion (Matthew 8) would have spoken Aramaic. They would have talked in Greek. Agreed his teachings would not have been in that language, though. Nevertheless the original language of the NT is Greek, not Aramaic. The words of Jesus form only a small part of it, albeit the most important part.


Originally Posted by thirdwatch512

hmm, from wikipedia, and other sources, I see the earth having 5 layers..
I think you may be wasting your time. I have already pointed out that;

- the concept of seven heavens and seven earths was well established (in assorted contexts) in pagan religion, Jewish mysticism, Buddhism and even Christianity long before the time of Mohammed.

- the number of 'layers' is purely arbitrary. Some articles refer to seven (obviously including the one selected for this purpose) . Other articles refer to five, six or even eleven (including the 'border' reasons). You could define as many as you like. The same 'miracle' would be claimed whichever of those numbers the Qur'an actually referred to.

and

- Muslim scholars (as opposed to popularists) have pointed out that the verse quoted has nothing to do with layers of the earth's atmosphere.

If that doesn't convince, nothing will. There are far more intriguing Qur'anic 'miracles' to talk about.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 07:47 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Actually, he most likely did, although his primary language was probably Aramaic (a few scholars think it may even have been Hebrew). There is both general historical evidence - Greek was used as a commercial language in Galilee and even as an everyday language in Judea - and Biblical evidence; it's highly unlikely that either Jesus spoke Latin or Pontius Pilate and the Roman centurion (Matthew 8) would have spoken Aramaic. They would have talked in Greek. Agreed his teachings would not have been in that language, though. Nevertheless the original language of the NT is Greek, not Aramaic. The words of Jesus form only a small part of it, albeit the most important part.

So you agree that Jesus son of Mary probably never spoke Greek? I find it quite confusing why it wouldn't be recorded in the Aramaic or Hebrew tongue then, because as stated - didn't Jesus speak in alot of metaphors etc?




- Muslim scholars (as opposed to popularists) have pointed out that the verse quoted has nothing to do with layers of the earth's atmosphere.

If that doesn't convince, nothing will. There are far more intriguing Qur'anic 'miracles' to talk about... but people will believe what they want to believe.

If that's the case, then i don't need to disagree with the scholars. There much more knowledgable than me. :)
Reply

Trumble
04-26-2007, 08:04 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
So you agree that Jesus son of Mary probably never spoke Greek? I find it quite confusing why it wouldn't be recorded in the Aramaic or Hebrew tongue then, because as stated - didn't Jesus speak in alot of metaphors etc?
No. I'm not quite sure where you get that from based on what I said; there doesn't seem much room for mis-interpretation in "they would have talked in Greek"! It is also likely that Jesus used the language in other contexts as he is hardly likely to have learned it for those particular events. However, I do agree that his preaching was most likely in Aramaic; it would seem the obvious choice in view of the intended audience. He did use metaphors, none of which would have presented any translation difficulties to someone familiar with both languages. There really isn't much room for confusion in "I am the good shepherd", "I am the light of the world" or even "I am the vine, you are the branches".

Actually, a few words were recorded in Aramaic in Mark (5:41, 14:36 and most famously 15:34). As to the rest, it was written down in Greek because that was the almost universal literary language of the time. What was the point in recording it in Aramaic if none of the anticipated audience could understand it - it hardly 'spreads the message', does it?
Reply

جوري
04-26-2007, 08:10 PM
^^^Jesus (PBUH) -- had no intent to "spread the message"
'I have not been sent except to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.' (Matthew 15:24)[1]

[1]. Hence every one of the famous twelve disciples of Jesus was an Israelite Jew. The one biblical passage where Jesus is supposed to have told his disciples to 'Go and preach unto all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.' (Matthew 28:19), commonly quoted to prove the Gentile mission as well as the Trinity, is not found in any pre-sixteenth century manuscript and is thus considered 'a pious fraud'.

The whole speaking in Greek, is nothing but a subjective opinion to perpetuate a popular fraud -- by the end of another century.. Christianity I have no doubt will mutate yet again to fit the tides...

peace!
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 08:21 PM
Kinda ironic since he never even met up with jews, especially in the Makkan era when alot of surahs regarding the earlier prophets were revealed.
Shalom Fi,

I would kindly like for you to clear up a possible misunderstanding I may have drawn from your posts. Are you suggesting that Mohammad never met up with any Jews at all? Nor was in any position to speak to Jews, or learn about Judaism.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 08:34 PM
Originally Posted by rav
Shalom Fi,

I would kindly like for you to clear up a possible misunderstanding I may have drawn from your posts. Are you suggesting that Mohammad never met up with any Jews at all? Nor was in any position to speak to Jews, or learn about Judaism.

In the Makkan era, no. :) And that was the time when many surahs were revealed regarding the previous prophets and righteous people of God, i.e.

- Prophet Jonah [Yunus] [Surah 10],

- Yusuf [Joseph] (Surah 12),

- Maryam [Mary] (Surah 19),

- Ibrahim [Abraham] (Surah 14),

- the narratives of what happened to Prophet Moses (many surahs throughout the Qur'an which go into depth i.e. Surah 20, 28, ),

- Nuh [Noah] (Surah 71)

You can check all the info up from here:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/



Regards.
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 08:38 PM
Shalom FI,

Can you present me the years the "Makkan era" was?

Thank you in advance.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 08:47 PM
Originally Posted by rav
Shalom FI,

Can you present me the years the "Makkan era" was?

Thank you in advance.

The Makkan era was about 13years, the Madinan Period was about 10 years.

The Makkan period was roughly between: 610 - 622 CE



Regards.
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 08:49 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
The Makkan era was about 13years, the Madinan Period was about 10 years.

The Makkan period was roughly between: 610 - 622 CE



Regards.
Shalom,

And to become more clear on your point of view, you believe Mohammad did not have any contact with Jews or Jewish teachings before or during this period, not considering that the account of many stories in the Torah is far different in the Quran.
Reply

Trumble
04-26-2007, 08:49 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
^^^Jesus (PBUH) -- had no intent to "spread the message"
'I have not been sent except to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.' (Matthew 15:24)[1]
I suspect you know perfectly well that the standard commentary on that is to the effect that it stood only until the crucifixion, upon which the disciples gained a new commission, as it were.

As to a 'pious fraud', possibly. But 'considered' by whom? It was Edward Gibbon's opinion that has, of course, been repeated ad nauseam on assorted Islamic websites but I've been unable to find any evidence that opinion is widely shared elsewhere, let alone as universally as you suggest.

As to the only one, no, it isn't.

And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
Mark 16:15-16

All of which, again, is beside the point, which was why Jesus' words were recorded in Greek and not Aramaic. Whether Jesus wished to "spread the message" is not the question at issue. The authors of the gospels certainly did.


The whole speaking in Greek, is nothing but a subjective opinion to perpetuate a popular fraud -- by the end of another century.. Christianity I have no doubt will mutate yet again to fit the tides...
Not quite sure of your point. It is a widely shared opinion based on both historical and Biblical evidence and is no more 'subjective' than any other opinion on any similar matter. Nobody is claiming that Jesus preached in Greek, only that he in all probablity was able to speak it.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 08:56 PM
Originally Posted by rav
Shalom,

And to become more clear on your point of view, you believe Mohammad did not have any contact with Jews or Jewish teachings before or during this period, not considering that the account of many stories in the Torah is far different in the Quran.

Yes, he never. :)
Reply

Trumble
04-26-2007, 09:04 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Yes, he never. :)
I have to ask, how can you possibly know that? We know there was a substantial Jewish presence in Medina which is what, all of 250km away? None of them ever travelled to Makka?!
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 09:10 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
I have to ask, how can you possibly know that? We know there was a substantial Jewish presence in Medina which is what, all of 250km away? None of them ever travelled to Makka?!

Why would they need to? They never needed to since it wasn't of benefit to them, there was no produce in Makkah so they never needed to trade there, they knew it was filled with pagans [since the arabs had added innovations to the religion of Prophet Abraham and started associating partners with God i.e. stone idols.] The people there were illiterate, so they never needed to go there to gain knowledge.

So there wasn't really a purpose for them to go there anyway. Infact it would be a waste of time for them.



Regards.
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 09:11 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Yes, he never. :)
Shalom Aleichem Fi,

I see that no quantity of proof nor logic will convince you otherwise, but I must express my concern, that your claim is highly illogical and contradicts many things I have read, but since I am not here to dispute Islam, but instead defend Judaism against some vicious attacks here, I will therefore, not wholly voice my concern nor will I begin an intellectual dispute with you in view of the fact that the belief you hold in this matter is exclusively rested upon faith.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 09:13 PM
Originally Posted by rav
Shalom Aleichem Fi,

I see that no quantity of proof nor logic will convince you otherwise, but I must express my concern, that your claim is highly illogical and contradicts many things I have read, but since I am not here to dispute Islam, but instead defend Judaism against some vicious attacks here, I will therefore, not wholly voice my concern nor will I begin an intellectual dispute with you in view of the fact that the belief you hold in this matter is exclusively rested upon faith.

Is there any authentic literature which states that he (peace be upon him) met and conversed with jews within Makkah? If there is, could you quote it and its authenticity so i could get a better understanding? :)



Regards.
Reply

جوري
04-26-2007, 09:14 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
I suspect you know perfectly well that the standard commentary on that is to the effect that it stood only until the crucifixion, upon which the disciples gained a new commission, as it were..
you are always presumptuous, which is mildly amusing--And I question which disciples were those? Does Barnabas count? certainly had a different opinion from what is "commonly found" in your typical (Hotel Bible) -- whether or not you care to acknowledge him as a disciple the versions I have here speak differently from what you describe as after math of "gaining a new commision"!

Originally Posted by Trumble
As to a 'pious fraud', possibly. But 'considered' by whom? It was Edward Gibbon's opinion that has, of course, been repeated ad nauseam on assorted Islamic websites but I've been unable to find any evidence that opinion is widely shared elsewhere, let alone as universally as you suggest. .
By many--You merely have to rummage through old biblical texts.. I am sure you can purchase an old copy and compare-- it isn't so difficult..

Originally Posted by Trumble
As to the only one, no, it isn't.

Mark 16:15-16

All of which, again, is beside the point, which was why Jesus' words were recorded in Greek and not Aramaic. Whether Jesus wished to "spread the message" is not the question at issue. The authors of the gospels certainly did..
Sure "his words" were recorded in Greek... which leads me to believe much is lost by (Chinese whispers)-- I notice, though I don't wish to bring it up again our dear member Thirdwatch states
"then you show 1 corinthians 6:9-10.. you show a version that say "nor homosexuals." well, just like arabic translated in English, there will be problems with the translation.".

so why is it that there are problems with translation only when fits a particular mood? Besides you were the one who brought about the idea of "spreading the message" why is it all of a sudden "Not the Question at issue"?


Originally Posted by Trumble
Not quite sure of your point. It is a widely shared opinion based on both historical and Biblical evidence and is no more 'subjective' than any other opinion on any similar matter. Nobody is claiming that Jesus preached in Greek, only that he in all probablity was able to speak it.
If you are not quite sure, then why do you participate in a topic?
it was a widely shared opinion to use troglitazone for DM just a few years ago, and now it is withdrawn off the market for reasons that I don't wish to get into as per this topic...however as relates to this topic, where there are humans, there will be human error! Also, subjective means (belonging to reality as perceived by your person )in other words an opinion... when you can't prove it as in passing a statement with bravado as a fact when it is not!... evidenced by you using the term "probably was able".

peace!
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 09:20 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Is there any authentic literature which states that he (peace be upon him) met and conversed with jews within Makkah? If there is, could you quote it and its authenticity so i could get a better understanding? :)

Regards.
Shalom Fi,

I personally would not know, but it is an incredible leap of faith, given that there was quite a Jewish presence in Arabia to claim that Mohammad never knew any Jews or Christians.

If you wish, I'll do some research. Just can you define "authentic" sources before I start. Are the only "authentic" sources of this era Islamic ones? If so, I will have to chuckle and walk away.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 09:25 PM
Originally Posted by rav
Shalom Fi,

I personally would not know, but it is an incredible leap of faith, given that there was quite a Jewish presence in Arabia to claim that Mohammad never knew any Jews or Christians.

If you wish, I'll do some research.

I know there were jews within arabia, infact there were many within Medina and also Khaybar [which were up north, closer to Greater Syria/Al-Shaam] However, i stated before that they wouldn't be in Makkah since it wasn't of any benefit to them. And this is why i mentioned that many surahs regarding the previous prophets were revealed in Makkah, which proves that they weren't forgeries or copies of what the jews or christians had. Along with that, there are many evil things said about the Prophets of Allaah in the previous scriptures, and we know that God wouldn't choose evil people to convey His Message, and none of that evil is in God's final revelation since it is the Criterion - to distinguish between truth and falsehood, good and bad etc.

The jews were rich and had many orchards within Medina and Khaybar, since they believed that the final Prophet would come in that area - thats why they settled there. Here's where we differ, and this is why the majority of the jews never accepted him either - since he wasn't a child of Israeel. However, we know that God sends the message to all of mankind so it's not hard for us to accept that.


PS: Yes they are Islamic ones, infact there much more authentic than any others, and its a whole science of its own:
http://www.islamicboard.com/islamic-...m-hadeeth.html



Regards.
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 09:33 PM
Shalom,
[quote=Fi_Sabilillah;723781]I know there were jews within arabia, infact there were many within Medina and also Khaybar [which were up north, closer to Greater Syria/Al-Shaam] However, i stated before that they wouldn't be in Makkah since it wasn't of any benefit to them. And this is why i mentioned that many surahs regarding the previous prophets were revealed in Makkah, which proves that they weren't forgeries or copies of what the jews or christians had.[/qoute]

So you are claiming that no Jews were in Mecca? Not one, they would not come because they had no use for it? That seems like a very odd claim to rest your belief on. I believe that the state of Montana in the USA has no use for me, since no Jews are there, and the majority of the people are intolerant towards Jews, but I go there sometimes. It is just relaxing, with few people.

The jews were rich and had many orchards within Medina and Khaybar, since they believed that the final Prophet would come in that area - thats why they settled there. Here's where we differ, and this is why the majority of the jews never accepted him either - since he wasn't a child of Israeel. However, we know that God sends the message to all of mankind so it's not hard for us to accept that.
Regards.
I'm sorry Fi, but I will have to call you on your statement which I bolded. I am not sure how rich the Jews were there, but I can tell you with 100% certainty, that no Jew ever settled in that area because a "final prophet" was there. They were in exile from the land of Israel. No prophet has ever been written about in Jewish text that even suggests what you are claiming, let alone the "final" one. G-d sent a message to mankind through the prophet Noah. Then a seperate one to the Jewish people. A message to mankind is not what we dispute. We dispute that you claim the Jewish people no longer should follow the Torah, Sabbath, etc, which is contrary to our teachings that show very clearly that the mitzvot of the Torah are eternal.
Reply

- Qatada -
04-26-2007, 09:41 PM
That's when the difference of opinion comes in. We believe the torah to be edited, since the message of Moses was the same as other prophets - worship none but God Alone and shun all false deities. Those who obey the Messenger are rewarded for their good in the real life of the hereafter - gardens beneath which rivers flow in the presence of their Lord, and those who disobey and disbelieve will be punished in the hellfire for their evil and disbelief in God and His Message.

That was the message of all the prophets of God, from Prophet Noah, to Abraham, to Prophet Israeel [Ya'qub/jacob], to Moses, to Jesus son of Mary, to Muhammad (peace be upon them all.) There were over 124,000 prophets which came to mankind. As is authentically recorded in Musnad Ahmad.


The final Messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him) just confirmed the message and this message would be for all of mankind, whether it was whites, blacks, jews, asians etc.


Again, to you your beliefs and to me mine.



Regards.
Reply

Trumble
04-26-2007, 10:19 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
By many--You merely have to rummage through old biblical texts.. I am sure you can purchase an old copy and compare-- it isn't so difficult..
You've done it, have you? Just which pre Vulgate copy did you manage to get your hands on? Please. Names, not waffle, are required. How about some links to Biblical scholars who share that opinion? The possibly exists, but it is also quite possible that the verses came from authentic sources, or at least as near to an authentic source as there are. There is also a literary explanation for the change to the longer version but I'm afraid my command of Greek is not really up to explaining it. You could always look it up.

Sure "his words" were recorded in Greek... which leads me to believe much is lost by (Chinese whispers)
Are you really just trying to dismiss Mark 16:15-16 by claiming that somehow they have mutated into something completely different? And you complain about me not 'proving' anything! At least that would kill the argument. If your position on the whole NT is is that any verse could have originally meant something completely to what is does now there seems little point in discussing any of it.

If you are not quite sure, then why do you participate in a topic?
I was not sure because you went swanning of at a tangent to that topic. The issue was why Jesus' words were recorded in Greek, not Aramaic.

Also, subjective means (belonging to reality as perceived by your person )in other words an opinion... when you can't prove it as in passing a statement with bravado as a fact when it is not!... evidenced by you using the term "probably was able".
I don't see how I can make it any clearer than what I said previously.

It is a widely shared opinion based on both historical and Biblical evidence and is no more 'subjective' than any other opinion on any similar matter
Can you not understand that? I am not attempting to 'prove' anything - you are quite happy to cry "fraud" on the basis of something far less substantial. In the case of events that happened two thousand years ago, 'probably' is a good as you get. We don't know that Jesus spoke Greek. It is however probable that he did. Unless you can produce some historical, or indeed Biblical evidence that indicates the opposite, you are merely waffling (again).


Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Is there any authentic literature which states that he (peace be upon him) met and conversed with jews within Makkah?
Is there any authentic literature that states he didn't? In what everyone keeps saying was an illiterate society both seem equally unlikely. The point surely is that he might have done. A complete denial of that possibility can only be a faith based position. And before PA starts off again, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with faith based postions!
Reply

جوري
04-26-2007, 10:43 PM
You can start with this The Barnabas bible (ISBN: 0060641282) .. there is quite a huge literary work accompanying it started by one of the brothers who founded Al-Ahram news paper in 1875 the two Lebanese-Christian brothers, Salim and Bisharah Taqla. had absolutely nothing to gain from proving the current versions of the bible wrong as he in fact died a Christian, but did quite an expose on the heresy of the church.

here is quite a bit on "Mark"-- admittedly not my work, but worth a thought nonetheless-- Do I personally dismiss the whole Gospel?.. .. I'll say this, it doesn't affect my beliefs one way or another. I find it rather, hypocritical the current state, where everything is interpreted at whim.. Jesus was sent but to the Jews, seems negligible, to say his stance on homosexuality which is apparently lost to us in translation.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ry/mmmark.html

The Gospel of Mark:

"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1488)"

So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not. And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?

I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!

Further regarding this Gospel, we read the following commentary about Mark 16-20:

"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"

This quote raises a very serious issue here. First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel". Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it. The issue of Mark 16-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying.

Removing Mark 16-20 is quite appreciated by me personally (to be quite honest with you), because it prevents people from dying from snake bites. But however, the serious issue of man's corruption of the Bible remains.

We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful. The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc... It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man. Let alone considering it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.

If John Mark wasn't the one who wrote Mark 16-20, then who did? And how can you prove the ownership of the other person? Let alone proving that it was GOD Almighty's Revelation. And as we saw in the first quote above, we don't even know that John Mark was indeed the one who wrote the so called "Gospel of Mark".

To say the least in our case here, we now have enough evidence to discard the entire Gospel of Mark from the Bible, because you can't take bits and pieces of it and say some of it belongs to him and some of it doesn't! Let alone considering the entire corrupted Gospel as the True Living Word of GOD Almighty, which is a complete blasphemy

I hope that keeps your inquiring mind busy while I have my dinner... what amazes me about you, are the extremes you are willing to go through to prove a point-- you water it down and dance around, until you are not sure from whence you started... I am not happy crying anything... I couldn't careless, what you do with your life or what butter statue you worship.. don't delude yourself into thinking engaging you holds some remote worth in my life. If I were really interested in such topics as the intensity you display, I'd most likely make birds fly around your head. That level of dedication and research wouldn't belong on a forum, but in a book, and I have no interest in writing one on LI

peace!
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 10:55 PM
Shalom Aleichem Fi, you wrote:
Again, to you your beliefs and to me mine.
Fair enough, I just wanted to point out the fact that no Jewish group, has ever held that a final prophet would come from Arabia, and no Jewish group, recorded in secular, or religious texts has ever even subscribed to the notion that the laws were not eternal. We are speaking about secular recording on Jews hundreds of years before Islam as well.

Shalom Aleichem PurestAmbrosia, you wrote:
I couldn't careless, what you do with your life or what butter statue you worship.. don't delude yourself into thinking engaging you holds some remote worth in my life. If I were really interested in such topics as the intensity you display, I'd most likely make birds fly around your head. That level of dedication and research wouldn't belong on a forum, but in a book, and I have no interest in writing one on LI
May I suggest with the hope that I do not enrage your temper more; that you try and calm yourself down. Hurling verbal abuse does not do anything to assist your position; all it does is give the section of your post that is actually on the issue, a lot less meaning, and reverence.
Reply

Philosopher
04-26-2007, 10:56 PM
Originally Posted by rav
Fair enough, I just wanted to point out the fact that no Jewish group, has ever held that a final prophet would come from Arabia, and no Jewish group, recorded in secular, or religious texts has ever even subscribed to the notion that the laws were not eternal. We are speaking about secular recording on Jews hundreds of years before Islam as well.
Secular records? We know that the Jewish religious texts have been corrupted, but what secular texts are you talking about?
Reply

جوري
04-26-2007, 10:57 PM
Deuteronomy 18:18 “I (God) will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee (Moses), and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”

what does this mean from a Jewish perspective then?
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 11:07 PM
Originally Posted by Philosopher
Secular records? We know that the Jewish religious texts have been corrupted, but what secular texts are you talking about?
Shalom,

Jospehus would be considered one that recorded many thoughts on the Jewish people from a secular stand point. The basic pretense on my post is that you do not know anything for certain. You of course can hold a belief that the Tanakh is corrupted based on misleading atheist websites, but it is still your belief, and you are welcome to hold that belief since Judaism is not under the opinion that it is your duty to follow the texts, nor believe in their teachings on Jewish law. With that said, peace be with you.

Deuteronomy 18:18 “I (God) will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee (Moses), and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”

what does this mean from a Jewish perspective then?
Shalom,

I hope this explanantion will suffice:

We must ask the following: who is "I", who is "you", who is "them/their"? "I" is G-d, "you" is Moses, "them/their" refers to the Israelites.
So a paraphrase could be: G-d will raise up for the Israelites a prophet from the Israelites' brethren some time in the future that will be like Moses and speak the words of G-d.
Having established that, what's the connection?
The assertion is that "from amongst their brethren" refers to the Ishmaelites, and as Muslims assert many times, Mohammed is descended from Abraham through Ishmael.
In order to properly analyze this, I will not make a table comparing Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, as many do on both Christian and Muslim websites in order to pervert the meaning of this verse.
Instead, I will make a minor sidestep into the world of Jewish thought.
For those of us that do not have the presumption that the Torah is wrong and faulty, there is a list of thirteen basic rules on how to deduce meaning from the Torah. They are provided as the introduction to Sifre, and are recited in the preliminary portion of the daily morning prayers.
Just as in the Torah where there are laws that are obviously "just" and those that we cannot comprehend, a parallel applies here. Some rules make sense, and others are assertions of rules. I will make use of two rules that make a good deal of sense.
Rule number 2 states quite simply "mig'zerah shavah" which means "From a decree of equality".
Rule number 12 is that "davar halamed m'inyano, v'davar halamed m'sofo" which is often translated like "An item is taught/clarified from it's context, or from nearby verses."
Why these two rules? Rule number 2 tells us that if we have a word in one location that is vague, and the same word elsewhere more clear, we can use one to clarify the other. The reason for the second rule will be evident shortly.
Just a chapter back, in Deuteronomy 17, we find a similar phrase, but the voice is different. This time Moses is delivering a message from G-d directly to the Israelites, speaking to the Israelites as a single group, instead of us hearing what G-d says to Moses.
Deuteronomy 17:15 You shall put (appoint) upon yourself a king that G-d will pick him; from amongst your brethren you shall appoint a king; you will not be able to give upon yourself a foreign man that is not your brother.
This verse, just a chapter behind the verse about the prophet is quite explicit. It uses the phrase "amongst (their/your) brethren" and then clarifies that a foreigner, which is definitely a non-Israelite, is not the Israelite's brother.

For further explicitness of the term foreigner, let's turn to Exodus 12.
Exodus 12:43 And G-d said to Moses and Aaron: This is the ordinance of the Passover offering, every son of a foreigner shall not eat of it.
Since we can now see that a foreigner does not take part of something as central as the Passover celebration, which is incumbant on all Israelite males when the Temple stands, we can see that a foreigner is simply a non-Israelite, and it doesn't matter their genealogy.

That being said, we have also shown that a foreigner is someone who is not from "amongst the brethren" of the Israelites.
Reply

جوري
04-26-2007, 11:14 PM
Do you think the Israelites never preverted the Book as you see it today? if so what is your take on these verses

How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"

The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"


Deuteronomy 31:25-29
"And it came to pass, when moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, That Moses commanded the Levites(Jews), which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death? Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt [yourselves], and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands."
Reply

Trumble
04-26-2007, 11:18 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia

So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not. And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?
That's hardly news. As to the "the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!", you seem to forget that I no more think the Bible represents that than I do that the Qur'an does.

don't delude yourself into thinking engaging you holds some remote worth in my life. If I were really interested in such topics as the intensity you display, I'd most likely make birds fly around your head.
I very much doubt it, you have shown few signs of such a talent. And it might involve actually sticking to the point. However, I do consider you more fun to debate with than most here; but perhaps it's time to move on to something of more 'worth' to both of us.

As you say, "peace".
Reply

rav
04-26-2007, 11:24 PM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Do you think the Israelites never preverted the Book as you see it today? if so what is your take on these verses

How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"

The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"


Deuteronomy 31:25-29
"And it came to pass, when moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, That Moses commanded the Levites(Jews), which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death? Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt [yourselves], and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands."
Two of the most taken out of context and misunderstood quotes you could have presented.

I will explain to you the meaning of both at length, but I currently have religious obligations to fufill, therefore I will expalin them to you very clearly when I get back ina few hours. I thank you in advance for your patients.
Reply

tresbien
04-26-2007, 11:25 PM
Please listen to me carefully with openeness and impartiality.Forget that you are muslims,christains , jews or whatever religion you belong to. We are not here to accuse one the other or blame each other.We should join hands and be cooperative to attain safety and achieve happiness.This universe does not come at random.There is one has created it and make it subject to us.
We benefit from the sun ,the rain , the wind , animals.what a nice shoes you have. Let have an outing and breathe a fresh air.The flowers and plants give away beautiful scent .Why snow is not black but white.Why my sister you were born female.Why you were born male. Why we have only too feet.How come human have a brain and animal instinct and no thought.Why we speak different languages.Why we have one tongue.Why we die .Why we sleep.DO all of these come by chance .If there were three or other deities .How would be our life.Why we leave the true God and worship others.Why we invoke others who can not hear us and if they hear us will they respond.If a person is given miracles by God ?which one shall we ask help.The Giver or receiver?

Let no satan laught at us and mislead us with empty promises.As there exist other creatures on earth who are living, he has his own world that we do not see.Even with our sophisticated techonolgy we have not discoved all the creatures that live on earth or underwater.
Reply

جوري
04-27-2007, 12:03 AM
Originally Posted by rav
Two of the most taken out of context and misunderstood quotes you could have presented.

I will explain to you the meaning of both at length, but I currently have religious obligations to fufill, therefore I will expalin them to you very clearly when I get back ina few hours. I thank you in advance for your patients.
Salaam 'Alykoum Rav:

My beliefs aren't contingent on yours being a preamble of monotheism so to speak -- unless I wished to extend duw'a to you, which I don't.. Though I have read the Torah, I am no where as familiar with it or its jurisprudence as I am with the Quran.. And even that is an ongoing learning experience!

with the best of intentions I write that you don't have to defend your position as per Moses' Quotes.. the topic is of scientific miracles in the Quran, not how can you believe The Torah to be absolute when according to such verses it has been tampered with. You may address them if you still so please under the Judaism thread at your own leisure- where you don't have to ask for patience or worry? about incurring some verbal lashing...

I am usually such a delight to be around :X

Peace!
Reply

rav
04-27-2007, 01:48 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Salaam 'Alykoum Rav:

My beliefs aren't contingent on yours being a preamble of monotheism so to speak -- unless I wished to extend duw'a to you, which I don't.. Though I have read the Torah, I am no where as familiar with it or its jurisprudence as I am with the Quran.. And even that is an ongoing learning experience!

with the best of intentions I write that you don't have to defend your position as per Moses' Quotes.. the topic is of scientific miracles in the Quran, not how can you believe The Torah to be absolute when according to such verses it has been tampered with. You may address them if you still so please under the Judaism thread at your own leisure- where you don't have to ask for patience or worry? about incurring some verbal lashing...

I am usually such a delight to be around :X

Peace!
I insist on answering them though. :statisfie Let me ask you, why do you not want to extend "duwa" to me, and what exactly is it? :?

Anyway:

About your "false pen" theory, I would like to answer it for any Jew who questions the verses sake.

False pen?

Not exactly. It is closer to "the pen of the scribe is in vain."


Koren translation:
How can you say, We are wise, and the Tora of the L-RD is with us? Surely, the pen wrought in vain, in vain the scribes. The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the L-RD; and what wisdom is in them?
They rejected Torah -- so they have no wisdom. THAT is the point.


Kimchi put it this way:
If G-d's torah is with you, of what use is it if you observe it not!!! He who used the pen to write did so in vain. . . likewise...the futility [shekher] of the scribes. They have written it in vain. Since you observe it not, it is as if it weren't written..... "LA-SHEKHER".....[this means] in vain as [in the verse] " Truly in vain have I heeded..."
They didn't heed to the Torah, so their study and writng is in vain.

As for the other claim, would you like a very long explanation and analysis, interconnected with Talmudic values, or the readers digest version?
Reply

جوري
04-27-2007, 01:59 AM
Originally Posted by rav
I insist on answering them though.
:statisfie


lol-- fair enough and thank you!

Originally Posted by rav
Let me ask you, why do you not want to extend "duwa" to me, and what exactly is it? :?

I don't think you'd accept my dawa for the following reasons:
to extend it would involve that I have some in depth knowledge of the Torah... when I have so admitted that I only have very superficial knowledge of it... further compounded by my on ongoing quest to perfect my own religion, in other words I am no scholar and I admit it-- making an extension of duwa'a to you not only an impossibility but a frank transgression of my sphere of expertise... I can't convince a man with a cut and paste job... we have some talented members who can do that though and unfortunately they are not participating at the moment..


Originally Posted by rav
Anyway:

About your "false pen" theory, I would like to answer it for any Jew who questions the verses sake.

False pen?

Not exactly. It is closer to "the pen of the scribe is in vain."


Koren translation:
How can you say, We are wise, and the Tora of the L-RD is with us? Surely, the pen wrought in vain, in vain the scribes. The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the L-RD; and what wisdom is in them?
They rejected Torah -- so they have no wisdom. THAT is the point.


Kimchi put it this way:
If G-d's torah is with you, of what use is it if you observe it not!!! He who used the pen to write did so in vain. . . likewise...the futility [shekher] of the scribes. They have written it in vain. Since you observe it not, it is as if it weren't written..... "LA-SHEKHER".....[this means] in vain as [in the verse] " Truly in vain have I heeded..."
They didn't heed to the Torah, so their study and writng is in vain.

As for the other claim, would you like a very long explanation and analysis, interconnected with Talmudic values, or the readers digest version?
I can't argue a belief with another, It will be a very expansive topic, ...but given your kind temperament, I'll accept your explanation and not further argue against it...

Aslaam Alykoum
peace
Reply

rav
04-27-2007, 02:00 AM
I don't think you'd accept my dawa for the following reasons:
to extend it would involve that I have some in depth knowledge of the Torah... when I have so admitted that I only have very superficial knowledge of it... further compounded by my on ongoing quest to perfect my own religion, in other words I am no scholar and I admit it-- making an extension of duwa'a to you not only an impossibility but a frank transgression of my sphere of expertise... I can't convince a man with a cut and paste job... we have some talented members who can do that though and unfortunately they are not participating at the moment..
Shalom,

Cool, but what is "Dawa"? :p
Reply

جوري
04-27-2007, 02:02 AM
Originally Posted by rav
Shalom,

Cool, but what is "Dawa"? :p
;D it means an invitation to be one of us :)
Reply

rav
04-27-2007, 02:03 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
;D it means an invitation to be one of us :)
Shalom,

Oh, lol, for some reason I thought I heard of the word, but I thought of it as respect. I was like, why can't she give me respect? :-[ My bad, reading over your posts now it seems like a silly thought since replacing "dawa" with "respect" makes no sense. :p
Reply

جوري
04-27-2007, 02:07 AM
lol... you have my respect... in fact you've earned it =)

English - Arabic
invitation noun call , appeal , the process of inviting or fact of being invited , esp. to a social occasion
اِسْتِحْلاف , تَحْلِيف , دَعْوَة

دَعْوَة
by itself an invitation though we mean it, in a religious sense...
Reply

Muslim Knight
04-27-2007, 02:08 AM
Originally Posted by rav
Shalom,

Oh, lol, for some reason I thought I heard of the word, but I thought of it as respect. I was like, why can't she give me respect? :-[ My bad, reading over your posts now it seems like a silly thought since replacing "dawa" with "respect" makes no sense. :p
Da'wah can be a sign of respect, if compared to indoctrination and forcing one's view unto others. We tell you what our religion means, that is peace, and invite you to think rationally and spiritually, and see the beauty of it.
Reply

rav
04-27-2007, 02:11 AM
Okay thank PurestAmbrosia. It has been nice speaking to you. May G-d strengthen your belief and happiness in this world. May you continue to follow G-d by following the seven laws of Noah which Islam in its beauty teaches, and may you gain spiritual satisfaction from your belief.
Reply

جوري
04-27-2007, 02:20 AM
Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
Da'wah can be a sign of respect, if compared to indoctrination and forcing one's view unto others. We tell you what our religion means, that is peace, and invite you to think rationally and spiritually, and see the beauty of it.
إِنَّكَ لا تَهْدِي مَنْ أَحْبَبْتَ وَلَكِنَّ اللَّهَ يَهْدِي مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِالْمُهْتَدِينَ
28.56
Reply

- Qatada -
04-27-2007, 12:14 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Is there any authentic literature that states he didn't? In what everyone keeps saying was an illiterate society both seem equally unlikely. The point surely is that he might have done. A complete denial of that possibility can only be a faith based position. And before PA starts off again, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with faith based postions!

I've been over the two famous Seerah's, one by Ibn Isshaaq, and the other by Ibn Kathir in his Al-Bidaayah wal-Nihaayah [the Beginning and the End.] And within them there are no mention of Allaah's Messenger (peace be upon him) talking to jews within Makkah or having any contact with them. And Allaah knows best.


Regards.
Reply

Hemoo
04-27-2007, 11:33 PM
in Sahih Bukhary :

Volumn 004, Book 055, Hadith Number 605.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By 'Aisha : The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), "What do you see?" When he told him, Waraqa said, "That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."



&

a long narration also in bukhary :

Volumn 001, Book 001, Hadith Number 003.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By 'Aisha : (The mother of the faithful believers) The commencement of the Divine Inspiration to Allah's Apostle was in the form of good dreams which came true like bright day light, and then the love of seclusion was bestowed upon him. He used to go in seclusion in the cave of Hira where he used to worship (Allah alone) continuously for many days before his desire to see his family. He used to take with him the journey food for the stay and then come back to (his wife) Khadija to take his food like-wise again till suddenly the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, "I do not know how to read."

The Prophet added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, 'I do not know how to read.' Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, 'I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?' Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said, 'Read in the name of your Lord, who has created (all that exists) has created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous." (96.1, 96.2, 96.3) Then Allah's Apostle returned with the Inspiration and with his heart beating severely. Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, "Cover me! Cover me!" They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, "I fear that something may happen to me." Khadija replied, "Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your Kith and kin, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guests generously and assist the deserving calamity-afflicted ones."
Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. Khadija said to Waraqa, "Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!" Waraqa asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?" Allah's Apostle described whatever he had seen. Waraqa said, "This is the same one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out." Allah's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?" Waraqa replied in the affirmative and said, "Anyone (man) who came with something similar to what you have brought was treated with hostility; and if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly." But after a few days Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while.
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah Al-Ansari while talking about the period of pause in revelation reporting the speech of the Prophet "While I was walking, all of a sudden I heard a voice from the sky. I looked up and saw the same angel who had visited me at the cave of Hira' sitting on a chair between the sky and the earth. I got afraid of him and came back home and said, 'Wrap me (in blankets).' And then Allah revealed the following Holy Verses (of Quran):
'O you (i.e. Muhammad)! wrapped up in garments!' Arise and warn (the people against Allah's Punishment),... up to 'and desert the idols.' (74.1-5) After this the revelation started coming strongly, frequently and regularly."
------------------------------------------------------------------------

but it is obvious in the hadith that he only meet Waraqa for a little time to ask him about the revelation that came to him and he didn't have the time to learn from him any thing about judaism or christianity.



Reply

جوري
04-27-2007, 11:36 PM
I have long wondered about the fate of "Waraqa bin Naufal" he didn't in fact live long enough to support prophet Mohammed PBUH-- did prophet Mohammed (PBUH) say anything about him after he passed??
thanks by the way great post!
Reply

- Qatada -
04-28-2007, 10:20 AM
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
I have long wondered about the fate of "Waraqa bin Naufal" he didn't in fact live long enough to support prophet Mohammed PBUH-- did prophet Mohammed (PBUH) say anything about him after he passed??
thanks by the way great post!
:salamext:


Waraqah ibn Nawfal

Al-Haakim reported with a saheeh isnaad from 'Aa'ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Messenger of Allaah (salAllaahu alayhi waSalam) said, "Do not slander Waraqah ibn Nawfal for I have seen that he will have one or two gardens in Paradise"

[Saheeh al-Jaami as-Sagheer, 6/1534, no. 7197]


Waraqah believed in the Prophet (sal Allaahu alayhi waSalam) when Khadeejah brought him to him at the beginning of his Call; he had asked Allaah to let him live until he saw His final Messenger so that he could support him. But Waraqah died really soon after the first revelation.

http://www.islamicboard.com/617640-post35.html
Reply

جوري
04-28-2007, 03:35 PM
Sobhan Allah akhi.. when I first read his story, I was really very concerned... it seems he was a Theist but was greatly disenchanted with both Judaism and Christianity at the time, and I don't believe he practiced either-- and unfortunately didn't hang around to support Prophet Mohammed as he had hoped.
Thanks for sharing that, I appreciate you finding it =)
:w:
Reply

Hemoo
05-03-2007, 12:58 AM
After the prophet migrated to the Madina he saw many jews and Few of them followed his message and the major of them was so arrogant to accept his prophethood.

in the authintic book of Sahih Bukhary, in the book named "Merits Of The Helpers In Madinah" :

Narated By Anas bin Malik : Allah's Apostle arrived at Medina with Abu Bakr, riding behind him on the same camel. Abu Bakr was an elderly man known to the people, while Allah's Apostle was a youth that was unknown. Thus, if a man met Abu Bakr, he would day, "O Abu Bakr! Who is this man in front of you?" Abu Bakr would say, "This man shows me the Way," One would think that Abu Bakr meant the road, while in fact, Abu Bakr meant the way of virtue and good. Then Abu Bakr looked behind and saw a horse-rider persuing them. He said, "O Allah's Apostle! This is a horse-rider persuing us." The Prophet looked behind and said, "O Allah! Cause him to fall down." So the horse threw him down and got up neighing. After that the rider, Suraqa said, "O Allah's Prophet! Order me whatever you want." The Prophet said, "Stay where you are and do not allow anybody to reach us." So, in the first part of the day Suraqa was an enemy of Allah's Prophet and in the last part of it, he was a protector. Then Allah's Apostle alighted by the side of the Al-Harra and sent a message to the Ansar, and they came to Allah's Prophet and Abu Bakr, and having greeted them, they said, "Ride (your she-camels) safe and obeyed." Allah's Apostle and Abu Bakr rode and the Ansar, carrying their arms, surrounded them. The news that Allah's Prophet had come circulated in Medina. The people came out and were eagerly looking and saying "Allah's Prophet has come! Allah's Prophet has come! So the Prophet went on till he alighted near the house of Abu Aiyub. While the Prophet was speaking with the family members of Abu Aiyub, 'Abdullah bin Salam heard the news of his arrival while he himself was picking the dates for his family from his family garden. He hurried to the Prophet carrying the dates which he had collected for his family from the garden. He listened to Allah's Prophet and then went home.

Then Allah's Prophet said, "Which is the nearest of the houses of our Kith and kin?" Abu Aiyub replied, "Mine, O Allah's Prophet! This is my house and this is my gate." The Prophet said, "Go and prepare a place for our midday rest." Abu Aiyub said, "Get up (both of you) with Allah's Blessings." So when Allah's Prophet went into the house, 'Abdullah bin Salaim (he was a jew) came and said "I testify that you (i.e. Muhammad) are Apostle of Allah and that you have come with the Truth. The Jews know well that I am their chief and the son of their chief and the most learned amongst them and the son of the most learned amongst them. So send for them (i.e. Jews) and ask them about me before they know that I have embraced Islam, for if they know that they will say about me things which are not correct." So Allah's Apostle sent for them, and they came and entered. Allah's Apostle said to them, "O (the group of) Jews! Woe to you: be afraid of Allah. By Allah except Whom none has the right to be worshipped, you people know for certain, that I am Apostle of Allah and that I have come to you with the Truth, so embrace Islam." The Jews replied, "We do not know this." So they said this to the Prophet and he repeated it thrice. Then he said, "What sort of a man is 'Abdullah bin Salam amongst you?" They said, "He is our chief and the son of our chief and the most learned man, and the son of the most learned amongst us." He said, "What would you think if he should embrace Islam?" They said, "Allah forbid! He can not embrace Islam." He said, " What would you think if he should embrace Islam?" They said, "Allah forbid! He can not embrace Islam." He said, "What would you think if he should embrace Islam?" They said, "Allah forbid! He can not embrace Islam." He said, "O Ibn Salaim! Come out to them." He came out and said, "O (the group of) Jews! 8e afraid of Allah except Whom none has the right to be worshipped. You know for certain that he is Apostle of Allah and that he has brought a True Religion!' They said, "You tell a lie." On that Allah's Apostle turned them out.
Reply

Abdul Fattah
08-28-2007, 02:54 AM
A quote from a different thread:
Originally Posted by ranma1/2
...
The subject of scientific miracles has been discussed many times on this forum and you being a mod surely have read them. It amounts to any actual knowledge in the quran was known at the time and borrowed from other sources. Any supposed knowledge is just misreading or changing meaning of words to fit some new concept. And some are just plain wrong. If you want to discuss this please post in the scientific miracles of the quran thread.
...
Ok here goes:

1. Wheter or not some information is "borowed" is unsubstantiated. There is no proof of a connection between those things that were known and the prophet (pbuh). Furthermore many of those things were not known at all, or weren't even considered or philosophized about.
Some examples of things that were definitely unknown:
-The expansion of the universe
-The internal waves
-The darkness of the depths of the sea
-The initial stages of an embryo (when it is still to small to see without microscopes).
-The effect mountains have on tectonic plates.
-The barrier in between seas
-the weight of clouds
-the formation of clouds
the list goes on, but I think that's 'll do for now.

2. When we look at tafsirs from scholars who commented on the Qur'an at a time that these scientific miracles were still unknown we see that often their interpretation of the verse is similar to the one that the proponents of the miracles apoint to these verses. So they did not alter it's meaning to "make it fit".

3. There might indeed be a few alleged ones that are dodgy. But that doesn't mean the many others are therefor false by association. Now since the list of miracles is so long it would be bothersome to debate them all, so I would propose to stick to the ones I listed before for now as I do believe those are not "plain wrong"
Reply

barney
08-28-2007, 03:13 AM
51 :47 And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

It's amazing how flexible the language of scripture becomes when faced with new discovery. :)
Reply

ranma1/2
08-28-2007, 03:19 AM
Originally Posted by barney
51 :47 And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

It's amazing how flexible the language of scripture becomes when faced with new discovery. :)
that pretty much sums it up.
Reply

ranma1/2
08-28-2007, 03:37 AM
Originally Posted by Abdul Fattah
A quote from a different thread:


Ok here goes:

1. Wheter or not some information is "borowed" is unsubstantiated. There is no proof of a connection between those things that were known and the prophet (pbuh). Furthermore many of those things were not known at all, or weren't even considered or philosophized about.
Some examples of things that were definitely unknown:
.....

2. When we look at tafsirs from scholars who commented on the Qur'an at a time that these scientific miracles were still unknown we see that often their interpretation of the verse is similar to the one that the proponents of the miracles apoint to these verses. So they did not alter it's meaning to "make it fit".

3. There might indeed be a few alleged ones that are dodgy. But that doesn't mean the many others are therefor false by association. Now since the list of miracles is so long it would be bothersome to debate them all, so I would propose to stick to the ones I listed before for now as I do believe those are not "plain wrong"
1.As with many things in the past it is pretty much impossible to show 100% that things did or did not happen. However we can tell what is likely. many of the predictions are similar to known knowledge at the time and we can not tell wether mohammad or his followers had contact with these knowledges. "however it is likely espeically over such a long period of the quran being written.

2. could you provide links or sources for this? It seems to me that in general its the imaginative interpretation of the poetry to stretch the meaning of something. Literally you cant take it as scientific predictions.
3. if some are dodgy then that does seem to take away from the divineness of the predictions or at least shows its the matter of interpretation.
Reply

Abdul Fattah
08-28-2007, 03:45 AM
Translation 1: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
Translation 2:We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
Translation 3:And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.
Translation 4:With Hands We constructed the heaven. Verily, We are able to expand the vastness of space thereof.
Translation 5:And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it.
(Qur'an, 51:47)

The word "heaven," as stated in the verse above, is used in various places in the Qur'an. It is referring to space and the wider universe. Here again, the word is used with this meaning, stating that the universe "expands." The Arabic word "moosiaaoona" in the term "inna lamoosiaaoona," translated into English as "it is We Who are steadily expanding it", comes from the verb "evsea," meaning "to expand." The prefix "la" emphasises the following name or title and adds a sense of "to a great extent." This expression therefore means "We expand the sky or the universe to a great extent." This is the very conclusion that science has reached today.

Now some translators might have not translated it perfectly because they didn't fully understand its meaning. However it has become obvious to us now. So to disregard it just because it wasn't well translated before is not fair.
Reply

barney
08-28-2007, 03:55 AM
it's so weird that the language needs 5 diffent intepretaions that can mean 5 different things.

This is a book that is easy, all accessible, plain & clear, universal, and divinely written.

Yet nobody knows what one line means.

Lets see if i can do better.

"Indeed We created the universe 251,765,675,322 years ago from whence we speak to you, It is expanding at 2000000 Light years per day in all directions from it's centre which is 7000 gigaparsecs from your current position"

Done.

Ok let me try and break that: Current might mean Electrical Current..this pertaining to magnatism? Current might mean a nice juicy current like a sultana or raisin and when space probes discover that the Galaxy is made up of bits of Fruit...this will confim the message.
Reply

Abdul Fattah
08-28-2007, 06:51 AM
Actually among those 5 translations there are only 2 different meanings. Three of the translations do indeed suggest that space is expanding, the other two say that space is expanded. I don't think that is as weird as you're trying to make it look.

As for "doing better". Better is relative. You're going under the assumption that more informative about numbers is better. Others might argue those numbers are irrelevant.
Reply

ranma1/2
08-28-2007, 07:59 AM
Originally Posted by Abdul Fattah
Translation 1: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
Translation 2:We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
Translation 3:And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.
Translation 4:With Hands We constructed the heaven. Verily, We are able to expand the vastness of space thereof.
Translation 5:And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it.
(Qur'an, 51:47)

The word "heaven," as stated in the verse above, is used in various places in the Qur'an. It is referring to space and the wider universe. Here again, the word is used with this meaning, stating that the universe "expands." The Arabic word "moosiaaoona" in the term "inna lamoosiaaoona," translated into English as "it is We Who are steadily expanding it", comes from the verb "evsea," meaning "to expand." The prefix "la" emphasises the following name or title and adds a sense of "to a great extent." This expression therefore means "We expand the sky or the universe to a great extent." This is the very conclusion that science has reached today.

Now some translators might have not translated it perfectly because they didn't fully understand its meaning. However it has become obvious to us now. So to disregard it just because it wasn't well translated before is not fair.
at best these seem to say that sky is big and it gets bigger.
it seems to be stretch to think that they could be referring to anything like the expansion of the universe.
Reply

Abdul Fattah
08-28-2007, 02:29 PM
Originally Posted by ranma1/2
at best these seem to say that sky is big and it gets bigger.
it seems to be stretch to think that they could be referring to anything like the expansion of the universe.
Like I said, the Arabic word that is used here is for both sky and space beyond it. So you can feel all you want, dictionaries don't lie.
Reply

جوري
08-29-2007, 03:17 AM
Originally Posted by barney
51 :47 And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

It's amazing how flexible the language of scripture becomes when faced with new discovery. :)
this has been discussed here before ( I believe on this very thread even?).. but here it is again for your viewing pleasure, I took the liberty to translate before with sources from dictionary although I think my translation was adequate... Arabic is an impregnable language.. You can't tamper with it. You'll have to modify yourself, not vice versa! you want to take it on, be my guest!
Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
وَسَّعَ a derivative of the word لَمُوسِعُونَ for any native speakers if you strip it of the Lam the meem (deeming us) ( the polite version) contrast to someone using vous or Tu in French will know that Vous denotes respect while tu is the vernacular.. that isn't the point here but thought I'd add it to the one who questions why G-D speaks in a particular tongue first person or third person...
وَسَّعَ from لَمُوسِعُونَ

space , split , let , broaden , dedicate , open out , widen , space out , clear a passage for , make wide or spacious , open up , make room for , make wide or spacious , step aside for , expand

described here as a (fi3l) i.e verb

you can use this online dictionary, though deficient it serves its purpose if you can understand a word that is un-conjugated , but given that three of four sources already attesting to "expansion and وَسَّعَ" aren't sufficient and everyone is oh such a textual expert .. if you don't wish to shell out big bucks for a proper dictionary... you can see in plain site it says expand... http://dictionary.sakhr.com/idrisidi...A&sub=????????

peace
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...tml#post722505
Reply

barney
08-31-2007, 05:06 AM
I've got a fiver on the last two translations being translated post discovery-of -expanding -universe.
Reply

ranma1/2
08-31-2007, 05:12 AM
وَسَّعَ from لَمُوسِعُونَ

space , split , let , broaden , dedicate , open out , widen , space out , clear a passage for , make wide or spacious , open up , make room for , make wide or spacious , step aside for ,
expand

not to mention when you have so many different meanings to a word.
Reply

جوري
08-31-2007, 05:15 AM
Originally Posted by barney
I've got a fiver on the last two translations being translated post discovery-of -expanding -universe.
who gives a fig what you think? do you speak Arabic? I am sure all the dictinaries are rigged to be in concert with what you really want to believe...
Get a life will you?
Reply

Abdul Fattah
08-31-2007, 05:32 PM
Originally Posted by ranma1/2
وَسَّعَ from لَمُوسِعُونَ

space , split , let , broaden , dedicate , open out , widen , space out , clear a passage for , make wide or spacious , open up , make room for , make wide or spacious , step aside for ,
expand

not to mention when you have so many different meanings to a word.
So you list the definitions of the word it's "derived" from and then assume all are possible interpretations for the verse :s

That's like saying the word "atheism" could mean "God" because it's derived from the greek "theoi" (god).
Reply

Ramadhan
07-21-2009, 10:25 AM
Originally Posted by Abdul Fattah
So you list the definitions of the word it's "derived" from and then assume all are possible interpretations for the verse :s

That's like saying the word "atheism" could mean "God" because it's derived from the greek "theoi" (god).
:thumbs_up :D
Reply

Gubbleknucker
07-21-2009, 11:51 AM
And Brothers, let it be known unto you this day that Energy is equal to mass times the speed of light multiplied unto itself, and that energy and mass are interchangeable: one and the same, as are the pull of the Earth and the pull of gathering momentum....
Reply

- IqRa -
07-21-2009, 11:55 AM
In English?
Reply

Gubbleknucker
07-21-2009, 03:11 PM
It has to say this stuff unambiguously.

"seven heavens" just isn't going to cut it, nor "round Earth," when the circumference of the Earth had already been calculated fairly accurately.
Reply

Faye
07-21-2009, 04:54 PM
The Quran indicates that there are signs in the unverse around us to lead us to the truth of God. It is true that there are indications, but I don't believe Quran contains any absolute irrefutable objective proofs, though the indications it contains can be very convincing, and to deny it may force you to admit some very strange 'coincidences'.

Many of the incidences that Muslims quote as 'absolute scientific evidence that the Quran is true', are not quite that absolute, and the Muslims who quote them end up looking like fools to the non-Muslims who disprove their claims. Islam is a religion based on faith, not absolute proofs.

Any 'proof' for which an alternate explanation can be found, is reduced from the level of a proof, to a very convincing coincidence.

Lets take the expansion of the Universe proof first. While grammatically, it can mean 'and we are constantly expanding it', it can also mean 'and we are the expander'.

And as for the end of the Universe physics, well it is good, but the ayaat refer to the end of the world, which according to the Quran appears to coincide with the end of the universe. Now the end of the universe as calculated by physicists, and described as the Big Crunch, will occur many millions of years after our sun goes supernova, taking out Earth and all humanity with it.

As for the splitting asunder of the Heavens and the Earth, there is a riwayat where a man came to Abdullah bin Umar RA to ask him an explanation for this ayat and so he sent him to Abdullah bin Abbas RA, who explained it as a metaphor, that the earth was 'sewn together', that it was barren, and that the sky was 'sewn together', that it would not rain, and then Allah ripped it asunder, that is, made the sky rain and the earth grow plants.
Now, I'm not saying that this tafseer is necessarily the best possible, I'm just saying that an alternate explanation exists.

And lastly, in the last proof, noor is discribed as reflected light, while the sun and the stars are discribed as actual sources of light. This creates a problem because in the ayat 'Allaho noor us Samawaati wal Ard' 'Allah is the noor of the heavens and the Earth', Allah is described as noor. If noor is reflected light, then whose light is Allah reflecting?
(The traditional tafseers often explain this by saying that noor means light, and Allah is the guiding light of all the beings in the Heavens and Earth.)
Reply

Ramadhan
07-22-2009, 12:07 AM
Originally Posted by Gubbleknucker
And Brothers, let it be known unto you this day that Energy is equal to mass times the speed of light multiplied unto itself, and that energy and mass are interchangeable: one and the same, as are the pull of the Earth and the pull of gathering momentum....
There are absolute limitations in physical laws that humans understand. why would Qur'an say E = MC2 if the formulae itself is not applicable in all circumstances, all the time?
Two centuries ago people thought Newtonian physics is all that govern the universe until Einstein proved their limits with his relativity theories, which still need to be supplemented by quantum dynamics/quantum mechanics laws to work on quantum level. Who knows what else we will find out in two centuries from now?

While Quran says:
And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (Qur'an, 51:47)

This statement that the universe is expanding is true from the Big bang until now. So what is unambiguous about this?
Reply

Ramadhan
07-22-2009, 12:10 AM
Originally Posted by Gubbleknucker
It has to say this stuff unambiguously.

"seven heavens" just isn't going to cut it, nor "round Earth," when the circumference of the Earth had already been calculated fairly accurately.
If you care to read the posts on the first few pages you would know that in the Qur'an it is said that the earth has "diameters", instead of a "diameter"
Reply

Ramadhan
07-22-2009, 02:34 AM
^ round with multiple diameters = ellipse
Reply

Basit
07-25-2009, 09:57 PM
Salam!

It has to say this stuff unambiguously.

"seven heavens" just isn't going to cut it, nor "round Earth," when the circumference of the Earth had already been calculated fairly accurately.
or have they at that time? have it been checked lately? im not 100% sure but i believe it will not be the same figure as it was before. a lot of issues have been reported, the sea level is rising, the polar reservoir is diminishing, the plates are moving (my country, the philippines, have separate tectonic plate and it is reported that it is subducting the china/japan plate at 40mm/year, in a millenium they will be our neighbors) and last but not the least volcanic eruptions that brings our materials from beneath the earth and remained in the surface after the eruption...............does these not mean expansion????

im not quite sure about this but it leads me to think the earth as well as the universe is expanding as revealed in the Qur'an. I believe it so, basing on some observations i enumerated above, the earth is expanding, slowly, very slowly. hehe, you wouldn't imagine the earth expanding very quickly brother. it would be like living in a rollercoaster if that would be the case. i just wonder if there have been a latest survey and to compare it to what is measured before.



Allahu Al-Basit (Allah, the Expander)
La Ilaha Illa Allah.
Reply

Pygoscelis
07-26-2009, 12:29 AM
This is confirmation bias.

This stuff will re-enforce the beliefs of a muslim. It won't be convincing to anybody else.
Reply

AntiKarateKid
07-26-2009, 03:11 PM
It is part of a bigger picture which should cause people to think. For example, the formation of rain in the Quran and the origin of iron. These signs are there but only to supplement the major miracle of the Quran (preservation, inimitability, rhythm) and the life of the Prophet pbuh (his actions, prophecies, miracles etc).

If you think these are only for Muslims then you might be looking at them from the wrong angle. Try to see them as part of a whole.
Reply

aamirsaab
07-26-2009, 06:36 PM
Originally Posted by Gubbleknucker
It has to say this stuff unambiguously.

"seven heavens" just isn't going to cut it, nor "round Earth," when the circumference of the Earth had already been calculated fairly accurately.
If it said the circumference of the earth was Pi, do you really think people 1400 years ago (in arabia, no less) would have understood that?

The Quran is written very clearly so that the majority of people can understand it. It is not a text book of science and math; rather it is a book of guidance.


Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
This is confirmation bias.

This stuff will re-enforce the beliefs of a Muslim. It won't be convincing to anybody else.
Then how do you explain non-Muslims converting to Islam? It has nothing to do with confirmation bias; it is simply a matter of acceptance - don't complicate it by mincing words.

Second of all you as an atheist don't even believe in the existence of God - so any miracle or scientific agreements from the Quran are moot to you. Once you have accepted the existence of God, then we can move on to discussing miracles and such.
Reply

- Qatada -
07-26-2009, 11:05 PM
:salamext:


This is clear;

In regard to the Qur'an having miraculous content, then yes there is mention of knowledge which was not known to the people at that time.


An example of this is as mentioned below;

1. The mountains are shaped like pegs:

Have We not made
the earth as a wide expanse, And the mountains as pegs? (Quran 78:6-7)


Early tafsir made prior to scientific discoveries commented on this verse [mentioned over 700 years ago - proving - he learnt this fact from Quran]:
Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir


Scientific article that confirms the shape of mountains:
Beneath the mountains

Article explaining how research confirms the function of mountains as insulators for earthquakes:
Effects of Large-Scale Surface Topography on Ground Motions, as Demonstrated by a Study of the San Gabriel Mountains, Los Angeles, California -- Ma et al. 97 (6): 2066 -- Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

"The mountains are shaped like pegs" is not vague, it gives a clear view of their shape, and this has been confirmed by science, and there was no way to discover these things without our current scientific advancement. Especially not over 1,400 years ago.



Another example;

One point which made me further strengthen my belief in the Qur'an was this verse;

"And the heavens* We** constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander." [Quran: 51:47]

(the word vaasi in Arabic means vast, moowsi’oon [which comes from the root word vaasi] is the word used in that verse which signifies that someone is an expander and expanding that certain thing, in the context of the verse – the heavens or space or universe is gradually being expanded by God’s control.]

*heavens = the skies and space above us (in arabic = sama' = heavens), Even linguistically in English and many other languages.

it isn't the Paradise promised for the believers. The gardens promised to the beiievers in the next life is Jannah (which means gardens.)

**We = Royal We, it is used by kings to refer to themselves in a respectful way. Allah - the One & Only God refers to Himself in this respectful Royal 'We' too.


Someone over 1400 years ago would probably think the universe is static (i.e. stays in a still state), but the Qur'an proves otherwise [that its expanding], which we've just discovered in the 20th century by Edwin Hubble [who came with the Theory of the Big Bang]. The basis of the Big Bang theory being that the universe is continuously expanding from one focal point.


That's just another sign that Islam has truth to it, and we are able to understand the universe around us using Qur'anic verses, and science - and by relating them together.



These are clear without a doubt.
Reply

Trumble
07-27-2009, 06:57 AM
Originally Posted by - Qatada -
"The mountains are shaped like pegs" is not vague, it gives a clear view of their shape, and this has been confirmed by science, and there was no way to discover these things without our current scientific advancement.
And hence, the skeptic will never agree!

The peg reference is clearly to function, not shape. That function ('to hold the earth in place, and keep it firm') has nothing to do with natural science. And as to shape;



A mountain.



A selection of period pegs. The similarity is less than staggering.

'Clear without doubt'.. only to those already convinced! To anyone else..... I don't think so.
Reply

AntiKarateKid
07-27-2009, 07:30 AM
The miracle of rain formation is indisputable.

http://quranmiracles.com/articles.asp?id=44

The miracle of iron is indisputable.

http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/562/


As time goes by, more and more signs are identified. I'm sure people argued against the rain miracle in earlier times but in modern times, it's been shown to be true. Soon every one you dispute will become indisputable. These were just two.

'Clear without a doubt'.... I think so!
Reply

barrio79
07-27-2009, 09:50 AM
here's a coupla sites of scientific nature that can excite some minds


http://www.co-intelligence.org/newsl...mparisons.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antares
Reply

Trumble
07-27-2009, 06:13 PM
Originally Posted by AntiKarateKid
The miracle of rain formation is indisputable.

http://quranmiracles.com/articles.asp?id=44
Hardly. The passage from 'Light' describes phenomena visible to anyone, and ascribes a supernatural explanation to them. The article then provides a simplified version of the natural explanation and then pretends that it is somehow this process that 24:43 is describing!


The miracle of iron is indisputable.

http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/562/
To be honest I first thought that article was some sort of joke. The only thing 'indisputable' about it is that the author's knowledge of astronomy is zero, or a reasonable approximation of it. I particularly enjoyed

When the amount of iron exceeds a certain level in a star, the star can no longer accommodate it, and it eventually explodes in what is called a "nova" or a "supernova."
.. not least because 'A.O' even provides a reference - to another 'Qur'anic miracles' book!

All but a tiny fraction of the iron present in and on the earth was present when the planet formed and wasn't 'sent down' from anywhere. That did originally form within stars, but then so did pretty much everything else. As Carl Sagan was fond of saying "we are all star-stuff". :)
Reply

AntiKarateKid
07-27-2009, 08:17 PM
Hardly. The passage from 'Light' describes phenomena visible to anyone, and ascribes a supernatural explanation to them. The article then provides a simplified version of the natural explanation and then pretends that it is somehow this process that 24:43 is describing!
The passage mentions how rain forms in a way that has been proven to be correct. At a time when no one knew about it, why was this mentioned? Do you need everything to be spelled out for you?

To be honest I first thought that article was some sort of joke. The only thing 'indisputable' about it is that the author's knowledge of astronomy is zero, or a reasonable approximation of it. I particularly enjoyed



.. not least because 'A.O' even provides a reference - to another 'Qur'anic miracles' book!

All but a tiny fraction of the iron present in and on the earth was present when the planet formed and wasn't 'sent down' from anywhere. That did originally form within stars, but then so did pretty much everything else. As Carl Sagan was fond of saying "we are all star-stuff". :)
It is true that iron makes up the core of the earth but the iron humans used is from meteorites containing it. We don't dig into the crust or the core to use.

The Quran's signs are for those who's minds are open. Your characteristic dismissive and condescending responses, along with their lack of any real substance, shows that you are not here to think about them, just to run them through the mental barriers you've made for yourself, lest you wake up.
Reply

Trumble
07-27-2009, 09:54 PM
Originally Posted by AntiKarateKid
The passage mentions how rain forms in a way that has been proven to be correct. At a time when no one knew about it, why was this mentioned? Do you need everything to be spelled out for you?
Lets's see.

Do not you see that God drives the clouds, then joins them together, then piles them on each other, then you see the rain comes forth from between them. And He sends down hail from the sky, where there are mountains of it. And strikes those with it whom He will and diverts it from whomever He wills.
Nobody knew that rain came from clouds. Really? You are seeing what simply isn't there. What is there, though, are 'mountains' of hail in the sky. Has anybody ever seen or photographed one?


It is true that iron makes up the core of the earth but the iron humans used is from meteorites containing it. We don't dig into the crust or the core to use.
Rubbish! All industrial iron is refined from mined iron oxides such as haematite, none of which originate from meteorites. The only metal items made from meteorites these days, and indeed from long before the time of Mohammed, are novelties.

.. along with their lack of any real substance...
Oh, dear... it really isn't me who needs to wake up. You know what I think about 'Quran'ic science' in general, but really, there are far more plausible examples than this nonsense. With your last you seem to have reached the state of just making it up as you go along.
Reply

barrio79
07-27-2009, 10:00 PM
Antares is the 15th brightest star in the sky. It is more than 1000 light years away. A very Long Way .A fact that would have been known to the Great Architect since the beginning of time but never thought once to impart this important knowledge to any of the scribes designated to write sacred manuals for devoted followers who were then implored to prepare themselves for time travel, ie a bit past the 1000 light year barrier , to the hereafter.
Reply

AntiKarateKid
07-27-2009, 10:20 PM
Lets's see.
Indeed.


Nobody knew that rain came from clouds. Really? You are seeing what simply isn't there. What is there, though, are 'mountains' of hail in the sky. Has anybody ever seen or photographed one?
Nonsense. No one is debating rain comes from clouds but the actual process in which rain is formed was not known. Second, either you are purposely deceiving yourself or you haven't read the article.

....And He sends down hail from mountains (clouds) in the sky, and He strikes with it whomever He wills, and turns it from whomever He wills. The vivid flash of its lightning nearly blinds the sight. (Quran, 24:43)

The mountains are the clouds. You try and sidestep the sign by arguing against a strawman and criticizing it's accuracy when it is perfectly accurate long before it's time.

You also skipped over the part about the formation of lightening.
Reply

Trumble
07-27-2009, 10:44 PM
I'm pleased you seem to have given up on the iron, anyway.

Originally Posted by AntiKarateKid
No one is debating rain comes from clouds but the actual process in which rain is formed was not known. Second, either you are purposely deceiving yourself or you haven't read the article.
Neither. That process is described in the article, not the quote from the Qur'an! Again, that says,

Do not you see that God drives the clouds, then joins them together, then piles them on each other, then you see the rain comes forth from between them. And He sends down hail from the sky, where there are mountains of it. And strikes those with it whom He will and diverts it from whomever He wills. The vivid flash of its lightning nearly blinds the sight.
Where is the bit about stretching "into cooler regions of the atmosphere where drops of water and hail formulate"? Or "when these drops of water and hail become too heavy for the updrafts to support them, they begin to fall from the cloud as rain, hail, etc." Not there.

....And He sends down hail from mountains (clouds) in the sky, and He strikes with it whomever He wills, and turns it from whomever He wills. The vivid flash of its lightning nearly blinds the sight. (Quran, 24:43)

The mountains are the clouds. You try and sidestep the sign by arguing against a strawman and criticizing it's accuracy when it is perfectly accurate long before it's time.
I'm not sidestepping anything, nor introducing a strawman. I am just using the translation in the article you linked to (but don't seem to have actually read) while you have conjured up a more convenient one.

The one I used states that "He sends down hail from the sky, where there are mountains of it", and has no suggestion of anything other than mountains of hail. Yours says "And He sends down hail from mountains (clouds) in the sky". What are the brackets there for?! Does it say mountains or clouds?

I accept, though, translations will not resolve this and perhaps one of our resident Arabic experts can resolve the issue.

You also skipped over the part about the formation of lightening.
What part about the formation of lightning?
Reply

AntiKarateKid
07-27-2009, 11:10 PM
I'm pleased you seem to have given up on the iron, anyway.
Hardly, you copped out by saying arguing that in essence all elements are sent down. It says "sent down" so naturally something had to be made for it to be sent down. "It was the drawing by gravity of the iron atoms to the center of the primeval earth that generated the heat which caused the initial chemical differentiation of the earth, the outgassing of the early atmosphere, and ultimately the formation of the hydrosphere."

Iron was sent down. Iron is the most essential element for life.


Neither. That process is described in the article, not the quote from the Qur'an! Again, that says,



Where is the bit about stretching "into cooler regions of the atmosphere where drops of water and hail formulate"? Or "when these drops of water and hail become too heavy for the updrafts to support them, they begin to fall from the cloud as rain, hail, etc." Not there.



I'm not sidestepping anything, nor introducing a strawman. I am just using the translation in the article you linked to (but don't seem to have actually read) while you have conjured up a more convenient one.

The one I used states that "He sends down hail from the sky, where there are mountains of it", and has no suggestion of anything other than mountains of hail. Yours says "And He sends down hail from mountains (clouds) in the sky". What are the brackets there for?! Does it say mountains or clouds?

I accept, though, translations will not resolve this and perhaps one of our resident Arabic experts can resolve the issue.



What part about the formation of lightning?
Again a copout. The article elaborates at the scientific underpinnings of that verse. The piling of the clouds is a clear sign because no one knew that at the time and it was contrary to the then current beliefs. The article explains the relation between the hail and lightening part (scroll down!) better than I can.

I'm not sure it would do any good. For a person who constantly claimed that the Quran plagiarized Greek Embryology (which in more than one instance was refuted by ppl like Imam) you refuse to see that these passages demonstrated events contrary to the current belief at that time and proved to be scientifically accurate.

I'll end my part in this discussion by simple asking you to open your mind. Otherwise nothing except an angel knocking at your door will convince you.
Reply

Trumble
07-28-2009, 12:09 AM
Originally Posted by AntiKarateKid
Hardly, you copped out by saying arguing that in essence all elements are sent down.
Nothing was 'sent down', there being nowhere in particular to send it down from or to. Apart from that, that's essentially correct, although how referring to the actual science rather than the rubbish in that article is supposed to represent a cop-out, I'm not sure!

"It was the drawing by gravity of the iron atoms to the center of the primeval earth that generated the heat which caused the initial chemical differentiation of the earth, the outgassing of the early atmosphere, and ultimately the formation of the hydrosphere."

Iron was sent down. Iron is the most essential element for life.
I can think of others with just as strong a claim (carbon, maybe.. which was also formed in stars, just like the iron) but that's by the by. We have now moved from

“And We also sent down iron in which there lies great force and which has many uses for mankind…”
to some sort of general claim about how important iron is to life in general. And you accuse me of a cop-out! :statisfie Perhaps you can provide a quote from the Qur'an that explains how "drawing by gravity of the iron atoms to the center of the primeval earth..." etc, etc?

Again a copout. The article elaborates at the scientific underpinnings of that verse. The piling of the clouds is a clear sign because no one knew that at the time and it was contrary to the then current beliefs. The article explains the relation between the hail and lightening part (scroll down!) better than I can.
Again, waffle, seemingly. A 'clear sign' of what? The verse describes what people could clearly see just by looking, can you please explain what was 'contrary to the then current beliefs'. I am not interested in what the article says, I am interested in what the Qur'an says! WHERE does it describe the formation of lightning?

I'm not sure it would do any good. For a person who constantly claimed that the Quran plagiarized Greek Embryology (which in more than one instance was refuted by ppl like Imam) you refuse to see that these passages demonstrated events contrary to the current belief at that time and proved to be scientifically accurate.
I 'refuse to see it' because there is not the slightest evidence of it. The second of the two can't even get the science vaguely right.

I'll end my part in this discussion by simple asking you to open your mind.
Probably best that I do likewise!
Reply

Detritavore
08-01-2009, 11:23 AM
Originally Posted by aamirsaab
If it said the circumference of the earth was Pi, do you really think people 1400 years ago (in arabia, no less) would have understood that?

The Quran is written very clearly so that the majority of people can understand it. It is not a text book of science and math; rather it is a book of guidance.
In the midst of all this jibber jabber, it's a wonder how people managed to miss such a blatantly obvious point!
Reply

Follower
08-01-2009, 08:07 PM
I don't understand the idea of Allah sending down iron and the fact that the Quran mentions it is a miracle. Many different things were send down by allah:

039.006
YUSUFALI: He created you from a single person: then created, of like nature, his mate; and he sent down for you eight head of cattle in pairs: He makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. such is Allah, your Lord and Cherisher: to Him belongs dominion. There is no god but He: then how are ye turned away?

010.059
YUSUFALI: Say: "See ye what things Allah hath sent down to you for sustenance? Yet ye hold forbidden some things thereof and lawful." Say: "Hath Allah indeed permitted you, or do ye invent to attribute to Allah?"

045.005
YUSUFALI: And in the alternation of Night and Day, and the fact that Allah sends down Sustenance from the sky, and revives therewith the earth after its death, and in the change of the winds,- are Signs for those that are wise.

Did you know that ancient Egyptians spoke of iron as -iron from heaven?
Reply

AntiKarateKid
08-01-2009, 08:46 PM
Egyptians referred to meteoric iron as iron from heaven to distinguish it from terrestrial iron.
Reply

AabiruSabeel
08-01-2009, 09:08 PM
I have lived for 4 years in a place where it rains nearly 6 months a year with heavy rains for some 3-4 months. My college was built on a rocky hill. During these rainy days, we used to see many big yellow frogs/toads wherever there was a small pond. And after a few months into the rainy season, these frogs would disappear. I have never understood where these frogs come from and where they suddenly disappear overnight? (Overnight is rather exaggerating, let's say within a week's time)

Our old house (family house) had a well in it. When my father was young, it rained heavily once and a tortoise/turtle (whatever lives in water) fell on the roof of the house. My father, and uncles picked it up and placed it in the well, and it lived for many years.

Do turtles live in the clouds?
Reply

Follower
08-01-2009, 09:32 PM
Gossamer brings up an interesting topic Matthew 28:19 - Jesus (PBUH) -- had no intent to "spread the message"
'I have not been sent except to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.' (Matthew 15:24)[1]

Many muslims seem to really like this verse, thinking it means we have to follow mohammad- it is said by Jesus before He has completed His mission.

[1]. Hence every one of the famous twelve disciples of Jesus was an Israelite Jew. The one biblical passage where Jesus is supposed to have told his disciples to 'Go and preach unto all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.' (Matthew 28:19), commonly quoted to prove the Gentile mission as well as the Trinity, is not found in any pre-sixteenth century manuscript and is thus considered 'a pious fraud'.

The whole speaking in Greek, is nothing but a subjective opinion to perpetuate a popular fraud -- by the end of another century.. Christianity I have no doubt will mutate yet again to fit the tides...

Greek was the language of the eastern Roman empire found on written remains of the time, Jewish inscriptions from the region, burial inscriptions, Dead Sea Scrolls include some Greek manuscripts etc.

When Jesus spoke to the Centurion in Capernaum, Matthew 8:5-13 was it in Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew? How about with Pontious Pilate, what language was spoken?

For those that believe the Aramaic version is the original and not the Greek:
Matthew 28
19 them) Nwna (& baptize) wdmeaw (the nations) amme (all of them) Nwhlk (disciple) wdmlt (therefore) lykh (go you) wlz
(of Holiness) asdwqd (& The Spirit) axwrw (& The Son) arbw (The Father) aba (in the Name of) Msb

It is interesting to note that early church fathers referenced this very verse in their writings- Jesus said it in the following way:

"Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name, teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I commanded you."

I find it interesting that Jesus had the power to say baptize all nations in His name and not GOD's?!
Reply

Follower
08-01-2009, 09:43 PM
http://scienceline.org/2006/09/17/ph...r-rainingfish/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raining_animals
Reply

AabiruSabeel
08-01-2009, 09:55 PM
^There are no waterspouts there. And my native town is far from sea.
Anyway, does it not prove that Allah does sends down things from the sky?
If science is unable to explain it, or finds it rather amusing, then that's because of the limits of scientific experiments that man can carry out. Allah SubHanahu waTa'ala is capable of sending down from the sky whatever He wants.

Edit: I think I misunderstood your doubt.
Reply

AntiKarateKid
08-01-2009, 10:08 PM
I find it interesting that Jesus had the power to say baptize all nations in His name and not GOD's?!
O rLy?! I find it interesting that Jesus saidI can of mine own self do nothing!"

Either your verse is misinterpreted or it is false! Let's not forget Jesus being sent "to the lost sheep of the House of Israel" and the instances of him and the disciples forbidding preaching to the gentiles!
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-31-2014, 11:19 AM
  2. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 12-05-2013, 02:50 PM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-19-2011, 02:34 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-13-2009, 10:18 PM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-01-2006, 10:38 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!