Some Scientist's comments on the Quran.

As I remember, Keith L. Moore & E. Marshall Johnson were paid by the Saudi government to find scientific colorations with the Quran. I don’t know about the rest of the men listed.

I always see people showing that known scientific facts can be found in the Quran.

My questions are:
Has anyone ever used the Quran to find a new scientific fact?
Or is it a case that you need to know the answer before you can find a reference?

Hay IsaAbdullah, did you read the article?
Quote Keith L. Moore "For the past three years, I have worked with the Embryology Committee of King cAbdulaziz University in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, helping them to interpret the many statements in the Qur'an and Sunnah referring to human reproduction and prenatal development.”

No “Search Button” on your computer?

This is not the only time I have read about Moore.

By the way, got any answers to my questions?

And why did he not convert to Islam?

format_quote Originally Posted by wilberhum

My questions are:
Has anyone ever used the Quran to find a new scientific fact?
Or is it a case that you need to know the answer before you can find a reference?

Well, a few 100 years ago, many of the facts would have been 'new'

Well, a few 100 years ago, many of the facts would have been 'new'

This is the con. If yiou think about it:

Science makes a discovery, then the Koran and the thousands of hadiths are systematically scanned for any relavence. Depending upon the interpretation, some text may be seen as supporting the discovery and hey presto. A scientific miracle is claimed or advanced scientific knowledged was already known.

Problem is it works for the bible, Nostra Darmus and a whole host of other religions.........

Fact still remains it was not known 100 years ago.

There are problems with tying to prove anything. You need to always question who funded the research, and if the research concludes to something the sponsor would benefit from, one should always be skeptical. A researcher may also unknowingly conduct bias test to prove what he or she thinks is true. So it is very hard to “prove” anything.

I think the best way to prove something like this would be if a non-Muslim scientist sought out to research the science of the Qur’an and in turn converted to Islam.

Or if a Muslim scientist sought out to research the science of the Qur’an and in turn defected away from Islam.

I have yet to find such a research article. But I have read both sides of the argument, “it the science of the Qur’an factual?” Both are very convincing.

Let’s just say the science is wrong or could have already been known. I don’t think that should detour anyone from Islam.

The book of Genesis offers a simple explanation of how the became to be. This story has been proven wrong by modern science. However, do you think God could have possibly explained such a complicated thing to a simple minded person? Even if he tried, there is no way anyone could possibly comprehend even a little of how the world came into existents, in that time era anyway (possibly even now). If God himself told him how the world came to be, when trying to record how it all happened, it would probably come out something like the book of Genesis.

Muhammad may have too lacked the capability to comprehend such things. That does not make him any less of a prophet.

And this is only assuming that the Qur’an’s sciences are wrong.

If it is wrong, it shouldn’t shake anyone’s faith.

how come i never heard of "scientist and mirracles of the bible"?

The bible and science completely clashes, this is why many christians eventually go athiest and why muslims do not have this problem, one can belive in everything the Quran says and still be scientific for the most part..

I mean thier are so many mirracles of the Quran that they are showing them on movies. Its impossible for any creature to pass time, only god can. But scientist all over the world always fined mirracles about the quran in, science, math, future and more. surprisingly some people still say (Its not convincing). However, i have never seen any scientist fined anything wrong with the quran and i promise you i will never experience such a thing. Obviously, "IF" the quran was written by men thier would of been so many mistakes. Humans make mistakes and the human mind is limited to somethings. For example, prophet Muhammed (PBUH) said that in the future people would be able to here thier own voices. My main point is and its all my opinion, its impossible for any one to write the quran. Becuase if the Quran was written or added by men ideas(NOT!) , then i can asure you people would of found many mistakes. God said it him self that he will protect the Quran from man ideas.

Why is it that the three top religions in the world are from God. Allah(SAW) is perfect! MEN ARE NOT.

format_quote Originally Posted by Hussein radi

scientist all over the world always fined mirracles about the quran in, science, math, future and more.

Can you list one scientist who has supported the Quran’s science as not only remarkable, but also 100% true?

If so, tell me.

Note: For it to be non-bias, he/she should not be Islamic or anti-Islamic. Nor should the research be funded by an Islamic or anti-Islamic organization.

I have read many articles from both sides.

People who are Islamic or are funded by Islamic organizations tend to say that the Quran is 100% right, and that there was no way in hell that Mohammed could have know such things.

People who are anti-Islamic seem to arguer that Mohammed very well could have know about the sciences in the Quran. Moreover, say that most claims are, in fact, not 100% right.

The question is, since we are not scientists, who do we believe?

Most would just pick the one that supports what they personally believe. However, one’s beliefs could be wrong.

What is needed, is a scientist who does not care one way or the other to come up with some kind of analysis of the Quran. Unfortunately, everyone seems to have an opinion about Islam, making every attempt to do that tainted with the possibility of them trying to prove what they personally believe to be true.

The issue is this, everytimes a prophet of god teachings is corrupted god sends down another prophet. Now clearly the bible is corrupted and it is Obviously to suggest that god will send down another prophet to guid men kind with Allah(SW) teachings. And it is the same teaching that Allah(SAW) has send downed over and over ever since it started with Abraheem(PBUH).

Now is islam corrupted? no

will it ever be corrupted? Never. God said it wont and so far it hasnt

Is islam the final message? yes.

so isn't it obvious to conclude that islam is the true message of god.

What is it that makes Prophet Muhammed(SAW) so different from all the other prophets?

Also god him self challenged anyone to write a book that is better then the Quran. Has anyone beated Allah(SAW) challenge NO!. Allah(SAW) is all knowing, i mean he created knowledge.

look at all these evidence. Why are they not convincing?

Video
http://www.harunyahya.com/download/d...d.php?id=19959

Websites
http://www.geocities.com/islamicmiracles/index.htm

http://www.-----------------------/

http://www.muhammedhasenoglu.com/miracles_quran.htm

I found a far greater number of scientific comments in support of The Church Of The Flying Sphagetti Monster:

"As a scientist, I'd like to say that the currently accepted scientific theory is evolution. But, some competing ideas have been proposed, such as ID and FSMism, and discussion to include one should include the other, as these ideas are equally valid."
-- Mark Zurbuchen, Ph.D.

"As a medical practitioner and scientist, I wholeheartedly believe that every theory and hypothesis needs full consideration and explanation with formal ratification by peer review. We have a duty to inform our schools and presumably pasta should form a staple part of our educational diet."
-- Dr. A. Macintyre (UK)

"Letting the religious right teach ID in schools is like letting the Marines teach poetry in advanced combat training. As a scientist, I see these the relevancy between the two sets to be equal. If Kansas is going to mess up like this, the least it can do is not be hypocritical and allow equal time for other alternative "theories" like FSMism, which is by far the tastier choice."
-- J. Simon, PhD

"One of the hardest things to do as a scientist is to put my personal beliefs aside when discussing matters of science. So as a professional, I have to say that both forms of Intelligent Design - ID and ID-FSM are equally valid and if intelligent design is taught in schools, equal time should be given to the FSM theory and the non-FSM theory. But, speaking personally now, it seems to me the FSM theory is MUCH more plausable than the non-FSM ID theory, because it is the only one of the two that takes into account all the discrepancies between ID and measureable objective reality."
-- Professor Douglas Shaw, Ph.D

More scientific endorsements can be found here:
http://www.venganza.org/endorsements.htm

So, how many scientists today endorse Islam?