PhD thesis: The earth is flat! An example of how religion and science doesn't mix wel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric H

The person who made me doubt evolution the most was Richard Dawkins and his anger against God, who he clearly says does not exist. Just one example is the evolution of the eye, he is dishonest by saying the eye is as simplistic as a bendy piece of cardboard and bag of water. Dawkin's evolution seems to exist in his imagination, because he keeps saying things like imagin if this happened, there is no hard evidence. He ignores the nervous system and the brain, which would have to evolve in stages alongside the eye. He ignores the evolution of limbs that would have to respond to information from the eye.


I am open to a more detailed explanation as to how the eye might have evolved.

---

Greetings Eric,
There are some people who seek and follow the truth wherever they find it, these are the ones who find success and will inevitably find God.
There are some people who came to doubt God due to finding that some of the things they came to be certain of appeared to conflict with what they believed was God's stance, whereas in actuality, the conflict was with the opinions of scholars and researchers who were only able to work with the data available to them at ther time, just as doctors of the past and present should have practised and shoud practice based on the data available to them in full sincerity and truth.
Then there are others (transgressors) who know the truth, yet use any fact they can find that conflicts with an opinion of a scholar, or appears to conflict with the word of God - to cause doubts and fitnah, upon these is the wrath of Allah and the curse of those who curse unless/until they repent. Allah tells us of their mentality and methods in the Quran:

57. When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example, behold, thy people raise a clamour thereat (in ridicule)!


58. And they say, "Are our gods best, or he?"
This they set forth to thee, only by way of disputation:
yea, they are a contentious people.


59. He was no more than a servant:
We granted Our favour to him,
and We made him an example to the Children of Israel.


60. And if it were Our Will, We could make angels from amongst you, succeeding each other on the earth.


61. And it shall be a Sign of the Hour (of Judgment): therefore have no doubt about it, but follow Me: this is a Straight Way.

From Quran, Chapter 43



Regarding the eye, now i come to my personal opinion based on the facts i have available to me (i myself have spent timethinking about the complex nature of the eye and it's functions in relation to the nervous system and used to disputeToE based on it, well, my opinions have somewhat changed and there's no point pretending the truth is false just because of my ego and knowledge that i feel sheepish when i look back and recall the days when i thought that major scholars of texts who lived 1000 years ago who had never studied biology in depth couldn't possibly have been wrong - even when lots of current data was available to raise questions.....since then (as i thought) it would mean that i was following something wrong, and would be giving the "opponents" a victory......actually, it's only God who always wins and it's humans who always find something whichthey never considered properly sometimes proves them wrong.....

The eye is a sensory organ and there are many creatures who dont have eyes, but feel around or who have a basic or advanced method of sensing the sunlight, and other data in their surroundings such as temp, humidity, sound, vibration etc computed with past perception, there are also creatures with limbs who see infrared, and others that can only see inverted or black and white or even a whole load more - or less- colours in the spectrum.
There are also people who see or notice different things or hazards with eyes and brain processing, or think they see things that are actually something else, such as a shrivelled leaf that looks like a piece of sh&t (lol) which others don't see, but the one who thinks they saw it scream and cause a panic or run off or take a different route and it changes their life for better or for worse.
Here is an example of how the nervous system, digestive system, limbs etc can work with just two or three hairs used as sensory antenae, two to recognise a moving creature, and another to be sure before it releases digestive enzymes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnY_cCRELvs

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JQuFK1M2lqA

But, of course, Allah knows best.

(If a scholar or scientist of the 8th century claimed that the earth was most likely flat because they sincerely believed it to be so, there should normally be no reason to doubt their sincerity or intellect since ships of the time were oar driven by hand and didn't do trips around the world in eighty days- i think. however, if they claim it to be the case now, i would give them a weird look and wonder if they're joking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric H

The same could be said for people following the ToE blindly; and who refuse to see or consider any evidence that may appear to contradict their deeply ingrained beliefs.

---

It certainly could, and each individual is duty bound to research and learn within the bounds of justice and good conduct from the cradle to the grave, and those who know more are duty bound to convey to those who know less - where they are able to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric H

In the spirit of searching for God,


Eric

---

When we sincerely search and accept truth, we'll find God there, and we'll realise that His thoughts are way above our thoughts (if they can even be called thoughts that is), and that His ways are way above our ways. and that He already knew before we even began to find out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noraina

So many people bash those with strong religious faith as having 'bind belief'. No doubt that's true in some cases, but I have heard many times people who have a strong faith in science having little understanding of the theories they support, or how the scientists came to those conclusions with their methods and analysis. And a lot of the time they can't even think of there being any conflicting theory, heaven forbid, otherwise the sky comes falling down.

I hear a lot religion being a 'closed belief system' and science being an 'open belief system'. It's not so black and white.

Science has been invaluable to the understanding of the world and has really improved our standards of living - but in some ways it has replaced religious belief in secular societies. People like Darwin seem to have 'prophet' status and his written works given the importance of a scripture.

I don't know why we've been taught religion and science are in mortal combat with each other. They are both two approaches to knowledge and complement on another beautifully. Yes, there may be disagreements, but that doesn't mean we have to pit them against each other all the time.

---

I see no reason to accept Islam and eemaan, and science as two different things -since science is research of the facts, and we come to the truth via facts, and we find Allah via sincere and true reasoning.
When Abu Bakr As-Siddeeq (the confirmer of truth) accepted that Muhammad :saws: Is the Messenger of God, what information did he use to come to that conclusion other than his faculties of intellectual reasoning based on the data he had and sincere acceptance of the conclusions he truthfully came to? did he consult a book of his ancestors or a scholar of Makkah to know whether he should accept what he already believed to be the truth? is that not scientific calculation made with the information contained within the billions of neurons in his braIn?
The same goes for the other sahabah, whether, ex - pagan, atheist, or people of the book.......
And us, do we consult the Quran because our forefathers did so or is it because our rational scientific reasoning leads us to believe that it is the truth? do we not upgrade our stance on what our forefathers taught us based on what we now know to be the truth or do we claim that they could never have been wrong on any given topic?

Why do governments make edicts (fatwas) for the masses (re-legion) regarding our health - based on scienctific research? why did the Allah :swt: and His messenger :saws: tell us to wash ourselves when the observation about fungi, mould, and infection etc are scientific observations about chemical / biological composition of skin, blood, bacteria, virus etc, why mix the "two"??? why mix biology and chemistry??? - unless, there is no real two as in completely separate but many parts of a consistent whole.

..... The things which are in real conflict are truth and falsehood. When they clash, truth knocks falsehood out of the stadium since the two cannot co-exist in harmony.

Some atheists are just mad at religion, they blame God for their loss of lives, wealth, health, and blame God when in discomfort.. In reality they have no understanding of why it happens.

They think they know better than Allah. In reality, most are arrogant and ignorant. Because none except the ignorant end up in Hell.

Here is some information on how a respected and intellegent scholar of the past considered reason as the primary tool

Quote:

---

There were some jurists who thought rulings derived through analogy could contradict a ruling derived from the Qur'an and the authentic hadith.[23] However, Ibn Taymiyyah disagreed because he thought a contradiction between the definitive canonical texts of Islam, and definitive reason was impossible[23] and that this was also the understanding of the salaf.[126]

Racha el-Omari says that on an epistemological level, Ibn Taymiyyah considered the Salaf to be better than any other later scholars in understanding the agreement between revelation and reason.[126]

One example for this is the use of analogy in the Islamic legal principle of maslaha (public good) about which Ibn Taymiyya believed, if there were to be any contradiction to revelation then it is due to a misunderstanding or misapplication of the concept of utility.[44][127]

He said that to assess the utility of something, the criteria for benefit and harm should come from the Qur'an and sunnah, a criteria which he also applied to the establishment of a correct analogy.[44][127]





An example of Ibn Taymiyyah's use of analogy was in a fatwa forbidding the use of hashish one the grounds that it was analogous to wine, and users should be given 80 lashes in punishment. "Anyone who disagreed was an apostate, he added, whose corpse ought not to be washed or given a decent burial."[119]






Reason (`Aql)Edit






Issues surrounding the use of reason ('Aql) and rational came about in relation to the attributes of God for which he faced much resistance.[44] At the time the Islamic scholars thought the attributes of God as stated in the Qur'an were contradictory to reason so sought other explanations instead.[44]
Ibn Taymiyyah believed that reasons itself validated the entire Qur'an as being reliable and in light of that he argued, if some part of the scripture was to be rejected then this would render the use of reason as an unacceptable avenue through which to seek knowledge.[44]
He thought that the most perfect rational method and use of reason was contained within the Qur'an and sunnah and that the theologians of his time had used rational and reason in a flawed manner.[44]



......Ibn Taymiyyah censured the scholars for blindly conforming to the precedence of early jurists without any resort to the Qur'an and Sunnah. He contended that although juridical precedence has its place, blindly giving it authority without contextualization, sensitivity to societal changes, and evaluative mindset in light of the Qur'an and Sunnah can lead to ignorance and stagnancy in Islamic Law. Ibn Taymiyyah likened the extremism of Taqlid (blind conformity to juridical precedence or school of thought) to the practice of Jews and Christians who took their rabbis and ecclesiastics as gods besides God. In arguing against taqlid, he said the salaf, who in order to better understand and live according to the commands of God, had to make ijtihad using the scriptural sources.[41] The same approach, in his view, was needed in modern times.[41]


Ibn Taymiyyah believed that the best role models for Islamic life were the first three generations of Islam (Salaf); which constitute Muhammad's companions, referred to in Arabic as Sahaba (first generation), followed by the generation of Muslims born after the death of Muhammad known as the Tabi'un (second generation) which is then followed lastly by the next generation after the Tabi'un known as Tabi' Al-Tabi'in (third generation). Ibn Taymiyyah gave precedence to the ideas of the Sahaba and early generations, over the founders of the Islamic schools of jurisprudence.[30] For Ibn Taymiyyah it was the Qur'an, the sayings and practices of Muhammad and the ideas of the early generations of Muslims that constituted the best understanding of Islam. Any deviation from their practice was viewed as bid‘ah, or innovation, and to be forbidden. He also praised and wrote a commentary on some speeches of Abdul-Qadir Gilani.[132]He criticized the views and actions of the Rafaiyah.




https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Taymiyyah

---

You shall not base your scientific knowledge on what you understand from the scripture...

:salam:

While we should indeed use reason to come to the Truth, etc. There are things (like the existence of Angels) we believe because Allah said so.

Or a ruling we don't understand. If Allah :swt: showed us the Akhira, or the Angels, with our own eyes. Where would the test be?

What would Faith then be? It would not be about Imaan anymore, because it then would become certain knowledge of the eye. Although we are certain of it, with no doubt in it (we should have no doubt and full certainty)

Allah does not show Himself, because that is part of our test. Of course we should use reason, and there is no doubt about it, it is impossible for reason / logic / science to contradict Islam.

Allahu alam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serinity

:salam:

While we should indeed use reason to come to the Truth, etc. There are things (like the existence of Angels) we believe because Allah said so.

Or a ruling we don't understand. If Allah :swt: showed us the Akhira, or the Angels, with our own eyes. Where would the test be?

What would Faith then be? It would not be about Imaan anymore, because it then would become certain knowledge of the eye. Although we are certain of it, with no doubt in it (we should have no doubt and full certainty)

Allah does not show Himself, because that is part of our test. Of course we should use reason, and there is no doubt about it, it is impossible for reason / logic / science to contradict Islam.

Allahu alam.

---

Of course but the existance of Angels is not a scientific knowledge. Angels are not natural beings and thus cannot be explained by the natural sciences. They are spiritual beings and must be understood by spiritual sciences. It is all about faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serinity

:salam:

While we should indeed use reason to come to the Truth, etc. There are things (like the existence of Angels) we believe because Allah said so.

Or a ruling we don't understand. If Allah :swt: showed us the Akhira, or the Angels, with our own eyes. Where would the test be?

What would Faith then be? It would not be about Imaan anymore, because it then would become certain knowledge of the eye. Although we are certain of it, with no doubt in it (we should have no doubt and full certainty)

Allah does not show Himself, because that is part of our test. Of course we should use reason, and there is no doubt about it, it is impossible for reason / logic / science to contradict Islam.

Allahu alam.

---

Anyone can "believe" under the right circumstances, that is barely a test, and I don't see how "believing" makes you a better person. There are a lot of people who claim to "believe" and then who go on to do evil things.
What is much more difficult to do is to take these beliefs and actually go out of your way to do good things.

Either way, I fear we are straying off the topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

Anyone can "believe" under the right circumstances, that is barely a test, and I don't see how "believing" makes you a better person. There are a lot of people who claim to "believe" and then who go on to do evil things.
What is much more difficult to do is to take these beliefs and actually go out of your way to do good things.

Either way, I fear we are straying off the topic.

---

But what about believing when you lose your health wealth and all that which you have been blessed with? It is easy to believe when everything goes your way, but what about when everything seems to go against you?

Yeah, I think we are straying off the topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serinity

But what about believing when you lose your health wealth and all that which you have been blessed with? It is easy to believe when everything goes your way, but what about when everything seems to go against you?

Yeah, I think we are straying off the topic.

---

Call me weird but I tend to believe more in times of distress, as it is very reassuring to believe in a God that hears and answers prayers.

I base my scientific knowledge primarily on the Quran and believe in angels through reason, and that is the correct method in Allah's sight since I believe in Allah through reason and accept the absolute truth of the guidance contained in the Quran and through reason, accept the Quran to be the highest textual authority.

It would be useful at this point to look at the different methods of reasoning that Abu Bakr and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) used when the people began to mutiny at hudaybiyyah. Abu Bakr's method of reasoning prevailed since he submitted it to what he believed through reason to be the firmest foundation.
We also notice that although Umar tended to be more pragmatic in the worldly sense when it came to legislation, whereas Abu Bakr was more cautious to follow the Prophet :saws: 's method to the letter, Abu Bakr's method was more deep seated and enduring since his faith in what the Prophet :saws: said and did was totally consuming to the extent of denying his own heart and mind.
Still, Umar was also correct in his methods and his opinions often overcame Abu Bakr's during the prophet :saws: time and dueing the khilafah of Abu Bakr. We also see the Prophet :saws: wisdom in choosing them both as his primary advisers.

Umar further said, `I went to Abu Bakr and said: O Abu Bakr! Isn't he truly Allah's Prophet' He replied, `Yes.' I said, `Is not our cause just and the cause of our enemy unjust' He said, `Yes.' I said, `Then why should we be humble in our religion' He said, `O you man! Indeed, he is Allah's Messenger and he does not disobey his Lord, and He will make him victorious. Adhere to him for, by Allah, he is on the right path.' I said, `Was he not telling us that we would go to the Ka`bah and perform Tawaf around it' He said, `Yes, but did he tell you that you would go to the Ka`bah this year' I said, `No.' He said, `You will go to the Ka`bah and perform Tawaf around it.' Az-Zuhri said, "`Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, said, `I performed many good deeds as expiation for the improper questions I asked them."

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?opt...k=view&id=2005

See also:
https://www.--------------/unschoole...nt-hudaybiyyah


I think it's on topic since it's about using reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abz2000

I base my scientific knowledge primarily on the Quran and believe in angels through reason, and that is the correct method in Allah's sight since I believe in Allah through reason and accept the absolute truth of the guidance contained in the Quran and through reason, accept the Quran to be the highest textual authority.

---

I am not sure what you mean by this. There are plenty of scientific theories that are not contained in the Quran (the vast majority, I daresay). So, by your logic, are you ok with scientific theories as long as they don't go against the Quran, or do you believe that any "scientific knowledge" that is not contained in the Quran is not valid?

What do you think about the following established scientific theories:
- special relativity
- general relativity
- quantum mechanics (including concepts such as the uncertainty principle)
- the Big Bang

As far as I know, none of these are contained in the Quran. Once again, the Quran was not meant to be a book about science.

I am not at all a fan of this publication, but I do agree very much with this particular article (a good read): http://www.newstatesman.com/books/20...lim-scientific

"According to some Muslim scholars, everything from genetics to robotics and space travel is described in the Quran. What nonsense."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serinity

Some atheists are just mad at religion, they blame God for their loss of lives, wealth, health, and blame God when in discomfort.. In reality they have no understanding of why it happens.

They think they know better than Allah. In reality, most are arrogant and ignorant. Because none except the ignorant end up in Hell.

---

But when good (times) came, they said, "This is due to us;" When gripped by calamity, they ascribed it to evil omens connected with Moses and those with him! Behold! in truth the omens of evil are theirs in Allah's sight, but most of them do not understand!

Quran 7:131


Then there are among the people such as say, "We believe in Allah"; but when they suffer affliction in (the cause of) Allah, they treat men's oppression as if it were the Wrath of Allah! And if help comes (to thee) from thy Lord, they are sure to say, "We have (always) been with you!" Does not Allah know best all that is in the hearts of all creation?



And Allah most certainly knows those who believe, and as certainly those who are Hypocrites.

Quran 29:10-11

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

I am not sure what you mean by this. There are plenty of scientific theories that are not contained in the Quran (the vast majority, I daresay). So, by your logic, are you ok with scientific theories as long as they don't go against the Quran, or do you believe that any "scientific knowledge" that is not contained in the Quran is not valid?

What do you think about the following established scientific theories:
- special relativity
- general relativity
- quantum mechanics (including concepts such as the uncertainty principle)
- the Big Bang

As far as I know, none of these are contained in the Quran. Once again, the Quran was not meant to be a book about science.

I am not at all a fan of this publication, but I do agree very much with this particular article (a good read): http://www.newstatesman.com/books/20...lim-scientific

"According to some Muslim scholars, everything from genetics to robotics and space travel is described in the Quran. What nonsense."

---

If the oceans were turned into ink wherewith to write the words of my Lord, the oceans would be empty but the words wouldn't be completely written.
I use the Quran as the foundation and guiding light, since I have come to understand that the Quran is the word of God and His final revealed guiding book until the last hour, and that God knows everything, it is perfectly logical then -and the wisest decision one can make- to use the Quran as one's reference when evaluating, accepting, and rejecting information.
And it's a lot more reliable than bbc, cnn, fox news, or anything else I've found so far.

And actually the Quran shapes the way a person thinks, perceives, judges, and reasons, regardless of the subject or number of subjects at hand, it gives you a baseline and a critereon for discerning truth from falsehood, justice and injustice, good and evil. One of the descriptions of the Quran is Al Furqaan.
However, if a person has a warped sense of juastice or takes donald trump as his ultimate authority and judge, it will be difficult to see anything other than "tales of the ancients" when one reads it, actually it will repel them since it condemns and approves on a very deep level within the soul.
I'm sure donald trump doesn't know much about relativity and quantum mechanics, but you still accepted him above the scholars of those subjects to the extent that he can fund or ban their research projects.......it's actually atheist politics and science that don't go well since atheism is based on denial of the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6bftFL91pU

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abz2000

I'm sure donald trump doesn't know much about relativity and quantum mechanics, but you still accepted him above the scholars of those subjects to the extent that he can fund or ban their research projects.......it's actually atheist politics and science that don't go well since atheism is based on denial of the truth.

---

;) My friend, you sound very confused, and you have not answered my question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

;) My friend, you sound very confused, and you have not answered my question.

---

oh if you keep replying to him your in for a long ride lol.

The Quran is a book of signs and contain undeniable scientific facts.

I am not confused with respect to your questions one bit and had assumed that a general answer wouldbe easy for you to comprehend sincei am uaing a small phone and researching is a little cumbersome since i'ts not all in front of me on a large screen, I will however do my reasonable best given the circumstances:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

I am not sure what you mean by this. There are plenty of scientific theories that are not contained in the Quran (the vast majority, I daresay). So, by your logic, are you ok with scientific theories as long as they don't go against the Quran, or do you believe that any "scientific knowledge" that is not contained in the Quran is not valid?

---

If a scientific theory is real beyond reasonable doubt, I would not expect it to be contradicted by the Quran, but rather pointed at or alluded to via a hidden method as seen in the verse " likeness of jesus and adam" , and if it was contradicted with certainty, i would first question and further research the validity of the theory/finding, wait for more information, ask others who may know, then revise my stance on any book if it was found to be incompatible with truth, since it is impossible to believe that that a book is without mistake whilst at the same time believing that it is false and wrong, and I would expect people from all ways of life and adherents of all books to do the same, the Quran contains such challenges and i am certain that it will dominate all other texts 'til the last day.

I would however practice caution since when I was ignorant of the Quran, a person had told me that it was wrong since it says that sperm comes from between the backbone and the ribs whereas is is manufactured in the testicles, and it was only after a few years when I read the Quran in english for myself that I realized that it is not the Quran but the faulter that was flawed, since the rhythmic language of the Quran doesn't use commas, but sometimes joins, and sometimes separates concepts in verse, in this case it was a separate verse:
let man look at from what he is created,
is created from a fluid ejected,
Proceeds from between the backbone and the ribs.


Since I was near the end of the Quran I had already realised that the ribs part was referring to the fetus in the female....
Duh, and to think I doubted based on the words of a denier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

What do you think about the following established scientific theories:
- special relativity

---

Special relativity implies a wide range of consequences, which have been experimentally verified,[3]-includinglength contraction,-time dilation,relativistic mass,-mass–energy equivalence,-a universal speed limit-andrelativity of simultaneity. It has replaced the conventional notion of an absolute universal time with the notion of a time that is dependent on reference frame and-spatial-position.-


The Quran gives weight to the possibility of theory being true through the following verses:

Yet they ask thee to hasten on the Punishment! But Allah will not fail in His Promise. Verily a Day in the sight of thy Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning.
Quran 22:47

The angels and the Rooh [Jibreel] ascend to Him in a Day the measure whereof is fifty thousand years’
Quran 70:4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

- general relativity

---

Albert Einstein's-general-theory ofrelativity-is one of the towering achievements of 20th-century physics. Published in 1916, it explains that what we perceive as the force of gravity in fact arises from the curvature of space and time. Einstein proposed that objects such as the sun and the Earth change this geometry.

I am not at all well read on the topic so I will leave that to someone who can answer if it requires an answer or if I read up on it further and if I come back to this thread after that, but since I know that no two verses are coupled in the quran without reason andthat in chapter 55 the fact that the stars and trees prostrate is mentioned immediately after the mention of the sun and moon following computed courses, the subject may be of interest. But my God given faculties of reasoning indicate to me that this is true anyway since the gravity of the moon has an effect on tides and possibly wven on womens menstrual periods, and anyways, since the planets revolve arount the sun, it is obviously using inertia to keep it in orbit, and since the earth is a bi-polar magnet with n and s poles and is spinning whilst orbiting, and the sun realeases electromagnetic radiation, it obviously has a reletionship when it comes to gravity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

- quantum mechanics (including concepts such as the uncertainty principle)

---

Later if relevant, battery at six percent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

- the Big Bang

---

Do not the rejecters see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
Quran 21:30

:We have made the heavens with Our own hands and We expanded it.
Quran 51:47

The above verses coupled with newtons observed law of motion without an external force to impede it, along qith the way satellites an space debris orbit should be sufficient to theorise that the universe was zero in size, then existed in and is expanding, but wether it was a gentle sundering or a big bang, I don't know, God knows, but the theory is again given possible credibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

As far as I know, none of these are contained in the Quran. Once again, the Quran was not meant to be a book about science.

---

As far as I know, most of the above topics are alluded to and once again, my reasoning tells me that an illiterate shepherd -although intellectually gifted- who lived 1400 years ago could not have suddenly come to these conclusions by himself. My reasoning tells me that God is demonstrating His knowledge before we even begin to theorise, just so we don't get big headed when we find the equation to a law that He commanded the pen to write and willed the celestial bodies -which He created- to submit to in the first place.
A bit silly to find that two hydrogens and one oxygen make water, then get chuffed and think yourself to be cleverer than the one qho made hydrogen and oxygen and wrote the law that makes them combine to water eons before the dinosaurs even existed. Even sillier to find out that h two o equals water and then claim that you don't need Him anymore, immature actually, qorse than a child who learns to suck milk or read the alphabet and thinks he doesn't need mum or dad any more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

I am not at all a fan of this publication, but I do agree very much with this particular article (a good read): http://www.newstatesman.com/books/20...lim-scientific

"According to some Muslim scholars, everything from genetics to robotics and space travel is described in the Quran. What nonsense."

---

Talk to the hand.

^ I think we are going around in circles now. As I have already said at least 100 times now, if the Quran contained scientific evidence, people should have been able to derive theories such as The General Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics from the Quran. Instead, it is only much after the facts that people take vague verses from the Quran and claim that they prove this or that theory. Let's stop being dishonest with ourselves and others, and please realize that religion and science should not be confused and mixed together because they are not the same. The Quran is a book of faith, not a book of science.

It has become obvious by now that some people are contentious and narrow minded, and that even if they saw angels ascending and descending through a portal or dead were raised and made to speak to them, their lusts and evil desires would overwhem them and cause them to reject and deny the obvious truth that their hearts are convinced of.

It is not you they reject, it is the signs of Allah which the wicked strive against.

Maybe go through the above few posts and use your God given reasoning to realize how trollish and immature the last post was, maybe ask a few sound minded and truthful people to evaluate.
Or maybe go take a degree in david beckam studies since that too is possible.....

And when the ignorant address them, they say salaaman salaama.

Repent.

In line with the announcement here, this thread is now closed.

Ramadhan is a time when Muslims strengthen their connection with the Qur'an. Let us use this time to study and reflect on this miraculous Book إن شاء الله.

We will show them Our Signs in the universe, and in their own selves, until it becomes manifest to them that this (the Qur'an) is the truth. Is it not sufficient in regard to your Lord that He is a Witness over all things? [Qur'an 41:53]