interesting post Jazaki Allah khyran..
yeah I too went to catholic school.. it really sucked.. glad it is way behind me..
wal7mdlilah
Salam,
When I was in high school, I went to a Catholic school. We were required to read and study the bible. I noticed many scientific and mathematical errors. When I confronted my teacher she felt as if I was mocking her religion and kicked me out of her class, but now that I am in the adequate environment would much appreciate it if someone were to explain the scientific errors
First off:
-Firmament, Its Biblical usage generally refers to the two apparent spheres of "heaven" as well as a solid roof over the earth, but how far above the atmosphere does this "roof" exist, "Dillow and other creation scientists, having rejected the
idea that "the water above the firmament" refers to terrestrial
clouds, have not really objected to locating "the water above" on
the top side of the firmament. This location is fine with them
because having taken the firmament itself out of its biblical and
historical context, they have redefined the firmament as mere
atmosphere (or a space between the earth and the sun). Their cano
py of water then sits literally above the atmosphere until it falls
as rain in the time of Noah. But even if this canopy theory
did not ignore the historical and biblical context which defines the
firmament as rock-solid, it would still be falsified by Gen 1: 14-17.
Gen 1:14-17 tells us that the sun, moon, and stars were
places in the firmament, so that if "the water above" is literally
above the firmament, then it must be above the sun, and hence
could not be a canopy of water beneath the sun. If the biblical
text is accepted in the straightforward way that creation scientists
way they want to accept the Bible, then defining "the water
above the firmament" as a water canopy below the sun is not
possible. Nor is it possible to define the firmament as
atmosphere, for the sun, moon, stars are not in the atmosphere."
does satellites in oribt competly break this soild roof?
-wrong deffiniton of illumination and moon, in the Genesis the moon is referred to as a light, scientificly the moon is just a reflection of the sun's light.
-The earth is flat,
Isaiah 11:12
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)
Revelation 7:1
1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV)
Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)
Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV)
Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)
interesting post Jazaki Allah khyran..
yeah I too went to catholic school.. it really sucked.. glad it is way behind me..
wal7mdlilah
I went to a catholic school too...but I liked it. About 60% of the sudents were muslims.
Christians were required to study the Bible just one hour every week...
Why go to a Catholic school if you're a Muslim?format_quote Originally Posted by Lara
^I wonder about that too.
Could you tell us more about these?format_quote Originally Posted by Shukri18
That's just the way it is in Lebanon. Parents are more concerned about the academic level of the school.Why go to a Catholic school if you're a Muslim?
If you go to a muslim school they won't try to convert you to Islam and if you go to a christian school they don't try to convert you to christianity. You don't have to attend religion classes if you don't want to.
There are religion classes in christian, muslim and public schools. It's only 1 hour a week. Religion is not discussed outside these classes.
Most religious schools are like that in Lebanon. They're more like secular schools.
Last edited by Silver; 03-27-2009 at 04:59 PM.
Better education then a regular public school.format_quote Originally Posted by Whatsthepoint
"He made a molten sea, ten cubits from one brim to the other: it was round all about, and its height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about" [I Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2]format_quote Originally Posted by Whatsthepoint
That equation says absolutely that the pool had to be 31.4 feet, not 30 feet.
Another error is the value of pi. The mathematical number Pi is the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference. The value of Pi truncated at 10 digits is 3.14159. The bible itself gives us a different value of Pi.
and then it is mentioned in Book of Ezra Ch.2: V.1 and Book of Nehemiah Ch.7:V.6, the context being that when the people returned from exile (from Babylon after released from the captivity), a list of the people is given in Ezra Ch.2:V.2-63 and in Nehemiah Ch.7:V7-65, the list of names and the number of people released is given. In these 60 verses, there are no less than eighteen times the numbers given different. The names are the same but the number of the people released is different. No less than 18 Contradictions in 60 verses of these two chapters. Further it is mentioned in Book of Ezra, Ch.2:V.64, that the total congregation (if we add up) it comes to 42’360. In Nehemiah Ch.7:V.66, it adds up to the same, 42’360. BUT, if you add up all these verses, in Ezra, it does not come to 42’360, but it comes to 29’818. And if you add up Nehemiah, it does not come to 42’360, it comes up to 31’089.
as for scientific errors [wrote out a few in the first post, not quite sure if you read it all?!?]
one that struck me was how the bible described light.
"divided the light from the darkness" (1:3-4). Light, however, is not something that can be separated from darkness. Light is an electromagnetic radiation from an energy source like the sun or stars, and darkness is merely the absence of light.
We know today that the color characteristics of animals is purely a matter of genetics, so a modern, scientifically-educated person would never write anything as obviously superstitious as this tale of Jacob's prosperity.
"Then Jacob took fresh rods of poplar and almond and plane, and peeled white streaks in them, exposing the white of the rods. He set the rods that he had peeled in front of the flocks in the troughs, that is, the watering places, where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when they came to drink, the flocks bred in front of the rods, and so the flocks produced young that were striped, speckled, and spotted"(30:37-39, NRSV).
Is it acceptable to post alleged scientific errors of any scripture in this thread, or only Biblical?
Azy feel free to post anything you want. But Keep in mind that the "scientific Miracles of the QUr'an" as explained by those such as Dr. Zakir Naik are based upon an incorrect interpretation of the Arabic Language and they are wrong. It's a shame that this "Scientific Miracles in the Qur'an" way of thinking has taken root and is misleading people muslims and non muslims alike.
Salam
For Azy:
-a knowleadgeable brother said that, and I posted it for you.Many of the "scientific Miracles in the Qur'an" are actually features of Quranic imagery. What you have come across on the internet are people claiming these verses as scientific descriptions, when in fact, they are not. It is a vast ignorance of the Quranic Arabic that makes people assert such things. What these verse constitute are examples of Arabic literary technique. The Quran is employing a metaphor, not a technical description in these verses. The metaphors may be common to other verses, or unique.
The Qur'an is not a science book. Don't listen to the erroneous interpretations and try and appreciate the Quran more from a literary perspective. To do that, I suggest you try and read translations of pre-Islamic poems, where the use of imagery was heavy for Arabs. Eyes are compared to ostrich eggs, skin is described like milk. The pre-islamic Arabic language was heavy in the usage of imagery. You can further read articles by Mustanir Mir, or the tafseer by Amin AHsan Islahi, and works by Neal Robinson in his Discovering the Quran for such wealth of information.
Salam a leikum
I didn't post these "alleged scientific errors" just to bash the bible. I only posted it so someone could correct me, and to give me a clear understanding of it.format_quote Originally Posted by Azy
If you have any confusion or scientific errors you've found in the Koran feel free to post it, and I or someone with greater knowledge then I would love to help you out.
He has been refuted on every topic he has participated in, he doesn't post with either intellectual or scientific integrity, just merely to get a rise out of everyone.. we keep him here for amusements' sake I have come to accept!format_quote Originally Posted by Shukri18
lol.format_quote Originally Posted by Gossamer skyeHe has been refuted on every topic he has participated in, he doesn't post with either intellectual or scientific integrity, just merely to get a rise out of everyone.. we keep him here for amusements' sake I have come to accept!
Thanks sister, that does explain a lot.
Baraka Allah feeki-- I appreciate your posts and insights (proud to have you as a sister)..format_quote Originally Posted by Shukri18
If what brother salamfromrom says is true and that many statements in the Quran which appear contradictory or incorrect are simply poetic, would it be fair to consider similar statements in the Bible in such a literal way?format_quote Originally Posted by Shukri18
The Quran tells in more than one chapter:
3: 7
He it is who has bestowed upon thee from on high this divine writ, containing messages that are clear in and by themselves - and these are the essence of the divine writ - as well as others that are allegorical.* Now those whose hearts are given to swerving from the truth go after that part of the divine writ** which has been expressed in allegory, seeking out [what is bound to create] confusion,*** and seeking [to arrive at] its final meaning [in an arbitrary manner]; but none save God knows its final meaning.**** Hence, those who are deeply rooted in knowledge say:
"We believe in it; the whole [of the divine writ] is from our Sustainer - albeit none takes this to heart save those who are endowed with insight.
*The above passage may be regarded as a key to the understanding of the Qur'an. Tabari identifies the ayat muhkamat ("messages that are clear in and by themselves") with what the philologists and jurists describe as nass - namely, ordinances or statements which are self-evident (zahir) by virtue of their wording (cf. Lisan at-'Arab, art. nass). Consequently, Tabari regards as ayat muhkamat only those statements or ordinances of the Qur'an which do not admit of more than one interpretation (which does not, of course, preclude differences of opinion regarding the implications of a particular ayah muhkamah). In my opinion, however, it would be too dogmatic to regard any passage of the Qur'an which does not conform to the above definition as mutashabih ("allegorical"): for there are many statements in the Qur'an which are liable to more than one interpretation but are, nevertheless, not allegorical - just as there are many expressions and passages which, despite their allegorical formulation, reveal to the searching intellect only one possible meaning. For this reason, the ayat mutashabihat may be defined as those passages of the Qur'an which are expressed in a figurative manner, with a meaning that is metaphorically implied but not directly, in so many words, stated. The ayat muhkamat are described as the "essence of the divine writ" (umm al-kitab) because they comprise the fundamental principles underlying its message and, in particular, its ethical and social teachings: and it is only on the basis of these clearly enunciated principles that the allegorical passages can be correctly interpreted. (For a more detailed discussion of symbolism and allegory in the Qur'an. see Appendix 1.)
**Lit., "that of it".
***The "confusion" referred to here is a consequence of interpreting allegorical passages in an "arbitrary manner" (Zamakhshari).
****According to most of the early commentators, this refers to the interpretation of allegorical passages which deal with metaphysical subjects - for instance, God's attributes, the ultimate meaning of time and eternity, the resurrection of the dead, the Day of Judgment, paradise and hell, the nature of the beings or forces described as angels, and so forth - all of which fall within the category of al-ghayb, i.e., that sector of reality which is beyond the reach of human perception and imagination and cannot, therefore, be conveyed to man in other than allegorical terms. This view of the classical commentators, however, does not seem to take into account the many Qur'anic passages which do not deal with metaphysical subjects and yet are, undoubtedly, allegorical in intent and expression. To my mind, one cannot arrive at a correct understanding of the above passage without paying due attention to the nature and function of allegory as such. A true allegory - in contrast with a mere pictorial paraphrase of something that could equally well be stated in direct terms - is always meant to express in a figurative manner something which, because of its complexity, cannot be adequately expressed in direct terms or propositions and, because of this very complexity, can be grasped only intuitively, as a general mental image, and not as a series of detailed "statements": and this seems to be the meaning of the phrase, "none save God knows its final meaning".
Does the bible make the same claim?
No, but that doesn't change the fact that the Bible does use metaphors extensively.
Isaiah 40:11 for example:-
"He tends his flock like a shepherd: He gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them close to his heart; he gently leads those that have young."
I've used "four corners of the earth" in conversation, even though it is quite apparent the earth is hexagonal.
Yes in literary terms the Bible does utilize metaphors, imagery, similes, figurative language etc.format_quote Originally Posted by Azy
James. 1.23-24: "Anyone who listens to the words but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror, and after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like."
Prov. 10.26: "Like vinegar to the teeth, and smoke to the eyes, so are the lazy to their employers."
Rather then attempting to correct sister Skye and I; please correct or at least try to correct me on the scientific and mathematical errors.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks