How do we know that the Koran is true?

[Mustapha@]

hey czgibson, i see that you are atheist too...so I can say that you mean the i'm not the one who won the debate !!!

If so, it's just an imagination. because i provided him with many proofs and many scientist who believe in the Creator, Allah...I think that Qingu even never touched the microscope and he wants to debate with maurice bucaille. lol

 

[Mustapha@]

N.B: every time i wrote creativists, i wanted to say "creatists"
I'm sorry

 

[Qingu]

Francis Collins, one of the two scientist who deviphered the DNA code,

Collins didn't decipher the DNA code. You're thinking of Watson and Crick.

has announced that he had been an atheist until 30 years ago, but that he now believes in God.

But not Allah. And he still believes in evolution.

DO YOU BELIVE THAT Francis Collins IS insane as well?

No. His "God" doesn't sound anything like the personal God of religions like Islam or Christianity. It sounds more like Einstein's vague, universal-force God.

I call myself an atheist, but I'm not averse to the idea that the universe has some sort of "intelligence" or "direction." If you want to call that "God," then fine.

Just don't pretend that this guy supports anything you've claimed in this thread.

(Also, I don't think religious people are "insane"! I just think they're wrong.)

the best scientists are creativists who believe that there is a creator for this universe...but i respect you because Christians are Christians because their parents are so, Jewis are Jewish because their parents are so....BUT for you even if your parents were Christians, I think( for the majority of Atheists are Christians, because they were not satisfied with the hoax of trinity or something like this, that's why they forsoke Christianity). even so you did not CARE about your parents and you chosed a trend that seemed to you more fashionable...lol

You sure are assuming a lot about me.

As a matter of fact, my parents were sort-of-Jews.

because I'm still a student, but i believe in creativity. there were many ideas that were mines...and one day i will be able to silence people like you...that's why I'm interested in this field...but it think by the time I will be ready to debate with you...you will be gone to meet your Creator ...i'm not sure if you will remain atheist or you will convert like many atheists who are converting everyday to islam...

I think you are giving yourself too little credit. You are clearly an intelligent person and you're quire capable of making arguments. I hope you'll keep on questioning and looking for support for what you believe in your studies.

Also—how old do you think I am? Sheesh!

 

[aamirsaab]

That was supposed to be the funny part.

Oh in that case: Lol.

But it leaves out other prophets I don't believe in, including Zoroaster, Joseph Smith, and of course, the great and omnipotent Space Emperor Zargon.

It doesn't mention all of them - only about 25 by name from my recollection. My point was it's the only abrahamic religion that actually accepts the previous prophets.

Unless you can show how these scientists' beliefs about religion actually interacted with their scientific accomplishments, this seems rather irrelevant. I mean, you certainly wouldn't argue that Monistic Christianity is true because Isaac Newton was such a great scientist, would you?

I think the fact that Al-khawrizmi invented algebra during the golden age of Islam is proof enough, don't you?
Still, if it isn't, I have a couple of Ayats as backing a few points below.

What on earth are you talking about? How did the Quran help Europeans get out of the Dark Ages?

Whils Islam was at the forefrunt of pretty much every single academia, guess who was straggling behind in their own fecal matter?

Europe.

Islam comes along and freakin reinvents numeracy (making it easier to calculate) AND invents algebra - without which, the pc you used to type this reply wouldn't be able to run.

Now, I'm certainly willing to concede that Muslim scientists and philosophers helped the Europeans get out of the Dark Ages—not least because Muslims preserved the writings of ancient Greek philosophers and spread them to the Europeans. But again, this isn't a reflection of Islam, it's a reflection on the usefulness and value of scientific thought. (Incidentally, you could argue that the reason Islamic culture has been in a slump for the past 500 years is related to the fact that it hasn't produced much scientific thought during that time—whereas "The West" has.)

Which was BECAUSE of the teachings of Islam:

"We (Allah) will show you (mankind) Our signs/patterns in the horizons/universe and in yourselves until you are convinced that the revelation is the truth." [Qur'an, 41:53]

Encouraging exploration of this world.

Sura 2 Verse 282
Guidelines and information on conducting business contracts.

I happen to think morality has continued to progress since the time the Quran was written. (So does my girlfriend, especially with respect to women's status—she's not a fan of the passages that treat women as half-witnesses and half-inheritors, or the passage that compares women to fields that husbands can go into whenever they like.)

1) women are only half witnesses in relation to business transactions. Otherwise it is 1 for 1.
2) Er...you have to ask permission before you do anything like that to your wife in Islam...otherwise it is called rape. Which is a crime under sharia.

Muslims disagree. But then that's the whole point of religion, isn't it—to freeze moral norms to whatever time period your holy book was written...

Even if that moral norm is BETTER than modern norms?

Let me put it to you this way: Is your girlfriend happy with the way women are treated now? As sex objects used to sell sodding toothpaste and pretty much ANYTHING else? Or what about in business itself; the glass ceiling and different pay rates just because she is female?

Oh let's not end there either, remember the womens right movement (suffragettes/suffragists) started as a direct result of the way the West treated women - this was 40 years ago - 1.3 centuries AFTER Islam! Heck, need I remind you that the Porn Industry started and flourished in the Western world! I take it your girlfriend is not interested in showing her body that way - and neither would any self respecting person.

You say you prefer the modern western world's morals to the Qur'an's? I sincerely doubt that in light of the above paragraph.

... Enjoy your doritos.

Thanks, they were lovely.

 

[Mustapha@]

Also—how old do you think I am? Sheesh!

well i think you are between 26 and 35 years. even though that there is 9 years as a probablity...but i can not take the risk ...because I heard you before talking about a g/f..I might be wrong, but at any rate thank you for your time...

 

[Qingu]

It doesn't mention all of them - only about 25 by name from my recollection. My point was it's the only abrahamic religion that actually accepts the previous prophets.

Huh?

Christianity accepted Jewish prophets. Mormonism accepts Christian and Jewish prophets.

This is standard practice in all major religions and many cults. It's called syncretism.

It's basically good marketing. If you're going to start a new religion, you don't want to alienate all the people who believe in older and contemporary religions. So the easiest thing to do is just say that all of their prophets were actually pointing to your religion.

I could give many examples, but I don't want to derail the thread.

I think the fact that Al-khawrizmi invented algebra during the golden age of Islam is proof enough, don't you?

What on earth do you think this proves?

Isaac Newton invented Calculus and discovered gravity during the golden age of European colonialism. Why would that say anything about the truth-value of European colonialism.

Whils Islam was at the forefrunt of pretty much every single academia, guess who was straggling behind in their own fecal matter?

Europe.

I have never understood why Muslims always bring this up.

Yes, you are absolutely correct! 600 years ago, Islamic society was much more advanced than Christian society.

600 years ago, Chinese society was much more advanced than Christian society as well.

Do you want a pat on the back or something? What have Muslims done for science in the past 600 years?

Islam comes along and freakin reinvents numeracy (making it easier to calculate)

Actually they just took what the Hindus already had and spread it around, but okay....

AND invents algebra - without which, the pc you used to type this reply wouldn't be able to run.

Other things required for the PC to run:
• Calculus, invented by non-Muslims
• Quantum mechanics, invented by non-Muslims
• Integrated circuits, invented by non-Muslims

I mean, again, I'm confused as to why you even think this is an argument for Islam in the first place. The fact that there were important Muslim scientists says as much about Islam as the fact that there were important Christian scientists says about Christianity.

And it's an odd argument to make seeing as Islam has been scientifically stagnant for about half of its history.

Which was BECAUSE of the teachings of Islam:

"We (Allah) will show you (mankind) Our signs/patterns in the horizons/universe and in yourselves until you are convinced that the revelation is the truth." [Qur'an, 41:53]

Encouraging exploration of this world.

All religions have verses like this.

Sura 2 Verse 282
Guidelines and information on conducting business contracts.

Seems like it would work fine for bronze-age desert nomads.

1) women are only half witnesses in relation to business transactions. Otherwise it is 1 for 1.

Also for witnesses.

Edit: sorry, I misread. Here are the verses that I was thinking of:

Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of two females, and if there be women more than two, then theirs is two-thirds of the inheritance, and if there be one (only) then the half. -- Quran 4:11

... unto the male is the equivalent of the share of two females. -- Quran 4:176

2) Er...you have to ask permission before you do anything like that to your wife in Islam...otherwise it is called rape. Which is a crime under sharia.

Where does the Quran demand a woman's consent before sex?

Doesn't the Quran also say you can have sex with your slave-girls? (Well, assuming you are male)

Even if that moral norm is BETTER than modern norms?

How do you judge which is "better"?

I have an idea: let's see how many people would rather live in one society over the other. I notice a lot of Muslim immigrants to Western countries. Not too many the other way around.

Let me put it to you this way: Is your girlfriend happy with the way women are treated now? As sex objects used to sell sodding toothpaste and pretty much ANYTHING else? Or what about in business itself; the glass ceiling and different pay rates just because she is female?

Of course she's not happy about these things. And I'm not saying Western society is perfect. In this case, Western society doesn't live up to its own ideals of freedom and equality.

That said, I think it's hilarious that you brought up a "glass ceiling" when, just two paragraphs ago, you admitted that women are worth half as much as men as witnesses! I mean, are you seriously suggesting there wouldn't be a glass ceiling in Islamic society? Or are you saying that my girlfriend wouldn't have to worry about the glass ceiling in Islam because Islam would tell her not to care that she's worth half as much as men?

With all due respect, this just seems like an incredibly hypocritical line of criticism for you to bring up.

And (I just asked), she laughed at the prospect of choosing Islamic society over America.

Oh let's not end there either, remember the womens right movement (suffragettes/suffragists) started as a direct result of the way the West treated women - this was 40 years ago - 1.3 centuries AFTER Islam!

Really? Which Muslim countries could women vote in?

Heck, need I remind you that the Porn Industry started and flourished in the Western world! I take it your girlfriend is not interested in showing her body that way - and neither would any self respecting person.

That would explain why she doesn't buy or make pornography!

What's your opinion on male pornography, though?

You say you prefer the modern western world's morals to the Qur'an's? I sincerely doubt that in light of the above paragraph.

You're saying I should prefer the Quran's morals to the West because:

• Women in the West have a "glass ceiling" (which they have worse in the Quran)

• Women in the West sometimes sell things by looking sexy and make pornography (is this worse than being captured or purchased a slave-girl in the Quran)

Thanks, they were lovely.

I'm glad you enjoyed them.

 

[alcurad]

Huh?

I have an idea: let's see how many people would rather live in one society over the other. I notice a lot of Muslim immigrants to Western countries. Not too many the other way around.

but then Islamic concepts and morals are not being held up in those muslim countries. not to mention humans are never truly free to begin with. we confirm our submission to allah, and that eliminates all other forms of submission.
and women equaling half is in inheritance and other issues due to the situation back then, it couldn't have been otherwise to begin with, given the circumstances.
there are also verses about slaves and their treatment, but slavery is abolished mostly nowadays, that doesn't mean we'll omit those verses.

 

[Mustapha@]

Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of two females, and if there be women more than two, then theirs is two-thirds of the inheritance, and if there be one (only) then the half. -- Quran 4:11

... unto the male is the equivalent of the share of two females. -- Quran 4:176

this is because women in Islam are not obliged to work. the man is the one who is obliged to work...and imagine that women will get their shares from inheritence plus here husband will be the one who will be obliged to work not her.so all what she gets will be for her...not like the western women who go out to work and they divide what they earn monthly with their husbands with percentage...both the wives and husbands should pay to survive...but this is not the case in Islam...al what women inherit will be theirs...this is apart from the problem of work of women in the west...

slave-girls? (Well, assuming you are male)

you should know that slavery demolished with the advent of Islam. for example in the past some sins were atoned by setting free a slave...so the companions of Muhammed(pbuh) set many slaves free...till there were no slavery in the Islamic community...nowadays for Muslims to atone some sins. and there is no slaves nowadays...they should fast some days or give alms to poors...( i think you will not like the idea of sin)...maybe you think that we are controled with the idea of sins...but you can see it as you like...

have an idea: let's see how many people would rather live in one society over the other. I notice a lot of Muslim immigrants to Western countries. Not too many the other way around.

it does not matter who immigrate to the other, but what's matter is the one who will be able to benefit...I think western societies benefit from Immigrants and the work force...and the Muslim immigrants benefit from spreading islam and gaining experience to retrieve our glory...i know that western societies are well developed, but that does not mean that we wont develop too...

there are even western immigrants who immigrate to Gulf countries especialy to the UAE and qatar...

And (I just asked), she laughed at the prospect of choosing Islamic society over America.

it's normal to laugh because the Islamic law will be something strange for her...she will laugh even if she knows that islamic law offer a protection for her honour...she laughed the same way when we say to a drugg addict " you should give up drugs, this will harm you.." and he laughs at this...she is addicted to immorality...she does not want to be cured...do you want her friends to make fun for her...because she is cured? so she choosed to laugh instead of being cured and be exposed to mockery by her friends...and by you...

Really? Which Muslim countries could women vote in?

even if you vote, you will have no voice...democracy is just a dream...they only create words and concepts to control people...

:BeRightBack:

 

[Qingu]

but then Islamic concepts and morals are not being held up in those muslim countries.

Of course, the "No true Scotsmen" defense.

and women equaling half is in inheritance and other issues due to the situation back then, it couldn't have been otherwise to begin with, given the circumstances.

So the Quran's law should be rewritten for modern times where women can hold jobs?

there are also verses about slaves and their treatment, but slavery is abolished mostly nowadays, that doesn't mean we'll omit those verses.

Would it be wrong to own slaves? As a Muslim, could you say I was acting unjustly if I bought a young girl from Thailand to use as a sex-slave?

 

[Qingu]

this is because women in Islam are not obliged to work. the man is the one who is obliged to work...and imagine that women will get their shares from inheritence plus here husband will be the one who will be obliged to work not her.so all what she gets will be for her...not like the western women who go out to work and they divide what they earn monthly with their husbands with percentage...both the wives and husbands should pay to survive...but this is not the case in Islam...al what women inherit will be theirs...this is apart from the problem of work of women in the west...

As I said above ... are you saying the law in the Quran should be rewritten in light of the fact that women can work nowadays?

Do you think it's fair that women get half the inherentance if they work just as much as their brothers?

you should know that slavery demolished with the advent of Islam.

Why did it take so long for Muslim countries to outlaw it?

1923 for Afghanistan, 1928 for Iran, 1962 for Saudi Arabia and Yemen....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline

for example in the past some sins were atoned by setting free a slave...so the companions of Muhammed(pbuh) set many slaves free...till there were no slavery in the Islamic community...nowadays for Muslims to atone some sins. and there is no slaves nowadays...they should fast some days or give alms to poors...( i think you will not like the idea of sin)...maybe you think that we are controled with the idea of sins...but you can see it as you like...

I acknowledge the Quran's rather progressive views on slavery.

At the same time, it still condoned slavery. And there were still slaves in the Muslim world until the 20th century.

it does not matter who immigrate to the other, but what's matter is the one who will be able to benefit...I think western societies benefit from Immigrants and the work force...and the Muslim immigrants benefit from spreading islam and gaining experience to retrieve our glory...i know that western societies are well developed, but that does not mean that we wont develop too...

there are even western immigrants who immigrate to Gulf countries especialy to the UAE and qatar...

I certainly hope Muslim countries develop. But I think it's strange to say that Islam is better for societal on some grand basis than Western values when so many Muslims seem to want to escape from Islamic countries and move to Western countries. You'd think, if Islam was so great for society, they wouldn't want to move away from Islamic countries!

This is why Muslims like alucard often employ the No True Scotsmen argument—the reason Muslims emmigrate so much is because the Islamic countries are not real (tm) Islamic countries, even despite the presence of shariah law. A popular excuse is because there is no Caliphate. Though the Caliphate didn't really fare so well against the West either when it was around.

it's normal to laugh because the Islamic law will be something strange for her...she will laugh even if she knows that islamic law offer a protection for her honour...she laughed the same way when we say to a drugg addict " you should give up drugs, this will harm you.." and he laughs at this...she is addicted to immorality...she does not want to be cured...do you want her friends to make fun for her...because she is cured? so she choosed to laugh instead of being cured and be exposed to mockery by her friends...and by you...

It's interesting to see how you've projected the power dynamics of our relationship.

even if you vote, you will have no voice...democracy is just a dream...they only create words and concepts to control people...

Well, amir brought up the lack of female suffrage in the West as a flaw compared to Islamic society. So I was curious as to how women suffrage has historically worked out in Islamic societies.

And don't knock democracy. I worked my butt off to make sure Obama got into the White House instead of another despicable warmongering Republican. It's not perfect, but it's the best system we have.

 

[Mustapha@]

So the Quran's law should be rewritten for modern times where women can hold jobs?

but who told you that work of women will bring a good benifit for a society? do not you see the problems that occure because of women jobs...including adultery...delinquency of children who lack their mother's affection...when both the husband and the wife are at work...who will give affection to small kids...is it the baby sitter?....there are many things to say about this subject...

Would it be wrong to own slaves? As a Muslim, could you say I was acting unjustly if I bought a young girl from Thailand to use as a sex-slave?

what on the earth did you bring this information from...I think you are a good person...i think you know what a stereotype means...you should not judge a group because one of that group is a bad presentative...I think you grasped what i mean...if a person committ a sin that has nothing to do with relegion...you should criticize that person not the relegion that he disrespected...

 

[Mustapha@]

Do you think it's fair that women get half the inherentance if they work just as much as their brothers?

yes it's fair, taking into account that all what she inherits will be hers...and her husband will be obliged to work for her and for her kids...without taking any from what she inherits...

imagine I have two sisters...and i inhereted 50 % and they inherited 25 % for each one...when I marry I will be the one who will be obliged to work not my wife...and when they will marry they will not be obliged neither to work neither to give some of what they inherited to their husbands...but for me I will spend all my 50% on my wife and my kids...but my sisters will keep all their 25%...and their husband have no right to claim some from what they inherited, but they will be the ones who will work for them...in your opinion wont they be better than me?
did you grasp what i mean?

Why did it take so long for Muslim countries to outlaw it?

1923 for Afghanistan, 1928 for Iran, 1962 for Saudi Arabia and Yemen....

i told you that there is no slavery in Islam...and there are many verses in the Qur'an that buck up this...there is a well-known saying of Omar beno Al-khatab, the second caliphate in islam: " when did you enslave people while their mothers gave them birth free !"(this is my own translation)

so slavery in that country has nothing to do with Islam...and it's just a lie...the same lie that the USA made when it wantd to invade Iraq...they claimed that Iraq developed nuclair weapouns...where is the nuclair weapouns? and if there is a slavery in a country you should know that it has nothing to do with Islam...take this as an example, alcohol is prohibited in Islam, but there are many Muslim countries where alcohol is sold expressively...shall we say that alcohol is permitted in islam?

it's too late in here. take good care

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

Bs'd

How do we know that the Koran is true, and not the Jewish or Christian Bible, or the book of Mormon, or whatever other holy book of any religion?

Thanks,

Gold.

We know that the Qur'an is true and divine, because of its inimitability, as the Qur'an itself says, and as history has shown to be true.

Except for the parts where

• it refers to the existence of invisible magical spirits from Arabian mythology (djinn)

This isn't exactly a flaw or contradiction, since such beings are as real as death.

•*it claims that the entire world was covered in a flood and a man gathered all the million plus species onto an ark (11:40)

• it refers to the sun's orbit, usually in the same phrase as the moon's orbit, (13:2, 21:33, 36:40) along with places where the sun rises and sets (18:86)—just like most Mesopotamian myths

How exactly is saying that the sun has an orbit and that Zhul Qarnain found it setting into "murky water" a "flaw" or "contradiction"?

• it refers to splitting the moon into two pieces (54:1)

How exactly is this a flaw or a contradiction?

• it claims that the stars will "fall"; (81:2) and the lower sky has "lamps" in it (41:12)

The lower sky does indeed have "lamps" in it; stars, galaxies, etc. They're all over the place. Since it doesn't say that the stars would "fall" to the ground, it's not really a flaw or contradiction.

• it claims that humans are formed from a "gushing fluid" that comes from between your loins and ribs (86:5)

And indeed it does come from between the ribs and the backbone/loins. That is a fairly broad region after all, covering the entire torso and pelvic area.

This is exactly the kind of language you would expect from 7th-century desert nomads.

Of course, Muslims have all kinds of clever ways of interpreting these verses "metaphorically" or whatever so they don't seem as silly as they are—just like Christians interpret the Bible to seem less silly than it is.

I have no need to attach an metaphorical meaning to these ones. They're as clear as day for me.

I'm also a fan of the part in the Bukhari hadith that talks about Muhammad riding a magical flying donkey, al-Buraq.

What is it that makes you fan of it?

 

[Qingu]

but who told you that work of women will bring a good benifit for a society?

The entire history of the world post-Industrial Revolution.

do not you see the problems that occure because of women jobs...including adultery...

Adultery didn't exist before women had jobs?

Can you support your implication that it's increased because of women in the workforce?

delinquency of children who lack their mother's affection...

My mother raised me and she had a job.

Anything to support your implication that more children are delinquent because of working women?

Also: not all woman have, or want, children.

when both the husband and the wife are at work...who will give affection to small kids...is it the baby sitter?....there are many things to say about this subject...

And every woman I know would say that you are insulting their intelligence and worth as a human being by claiming they should not work.

what on the earth did you bring this information from...I think you are a good person...i think you know what a stereotype means...you should not judge a group because one of that group is a bad presentative...I think you grasped what i mean...if a person committ a sin that has nothing to do with relegion...you should criticize that person not the relegion that he disrespected...

I think you may have misunderstood me. Also, you may not be familiar with the verse from the Quran that explicitly allows you to have sex with your slave-girls. 23:1—

Successful indeed are the believers who are humble in their prayers, and who shun vain conversation, and who are payers of the poor-due; And who guard their modesty - save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy.

In light of this verse, could you—as a Muslim—say it is morally wrong for me to have sex with a slave-girl I purchased from Thailand? On what basis would you judge me as being in the wrong if I did that?

yes it's fair, taking into account that all what she inherits will be hers...and her husband will be obliged to work for her and for her kids...without taking any from what she inherits...

I fail to see the relevance? Will she be able to take what he inherits? And we are talking about a woman who works.

imagine I have two sisters...and i inhereted 50 % and they inherited 25 % for each one...when I marry I will be the one who will be obliged to work not my wife...

Again, we are talking about a world where women work. Not in the Islamic world of yesteryear where all women were expected to sit at home with the kids and cook all day.

If my sister works just as much as me, you think it's fair that she receives half of my inheritance?

i told you that there is no slavery in Islam...and there are many verses in the Qur'an that buck up this...

There are many verses in the QUran that allow you to have slaves.

The fact that the Quran encourages you to free your slaves on occasion does not mean "there is no slavery in Islam." That's absurd. It's like saying, because Budweiser encourages you to drink responsibly in its advertisements, Budweiser doesn't want you to drink beer.

so slavery in that country has nothing to do with Islam...and it's just a lie...the same lie that the USA made when it wantd to invade Iraq...they claimed that Iraq developed nuclair weapouns...where is the nuclair weapouns? and if there is a slavery in a country you should know that it has nothing to do with Islam...

This is a pretty terrible analogy.

take this as an example, alcohol is prohibited in Islam, but there are many Muslim countries where alcohol is sold expressively...shall we say that alcohol is permitted in islam?

Alcohol is prohibited in the Quran.

Show me where the Quran prohibits slavery. I understand that the Quran encourages you to free your slaves for penance. But do you see how that is entirely different from prohibition?

 

[Qingu]

This isn't exactly a flaw or contradiction, since such beings are as real as death.

Just like aliens and UFO's.

How exactly is saying that the sun has an orbit and that Zhul Qarnain found it setting into "murky water" a "flaw" or "contradiction"?

For the same reason it's a flaw when similar verses show up in Mesopotamian mythology. These verses clearly portray a universe where the sun revolves around the earth, as everyone believed during the time in which the Quran was written.

Now, you can of course split semantic hairs (so could a Mesopotamian apologist). But it's awfully strange that zero Muslims interpreted these verses to mean anything other than geocentrism ... until Copernicus showed up during the 1500's.

How exactly is this a flaw or a contradiction?

The moon splitting into two pieces? Because it's nonsense and did not happen.

The lower sky does indeed have "lamps" in it; stars, galaxies, etc. They're all over the place.

They are not actually in Earth's sky. They are thousands, millions, or billions of light years away.

Of course, people during the time the Quran was written though the lower sky was a solid dome or sphere, and that all the celestial objects were set into it. Which explains why the Quran says this is what they are.

Since it doesn't say that the stars would "fall" to the ground, it's not really a flaw or contradiction.

I'm not sure what else you think the word "fall" means. Is it possible to fall to a place other than the ground?

And indeed it does come from between the ribs and the backbone/loins. That is a fairly broad region after all, covering the entire torso and pelvic area.

Semen does not come from between the ribs and the backbone. It comes from your testicles.

I have no need to attach an metaphorical meaning to these ones. They're as clear as day for me.

You think semen comes from somewhere on your back, that stars and galaxes literally exist in Earth's lower sky, and that the sun actually revolves around the Earth?

What is it that makes you fan of it?

Because it's one of the most hilariously absurd things I've ever read. And it's unfortunate that we're talking on the internet, because I would love to see you answer this question with a straight face: Do you really believe Muhammad rode up into the sky on a magical flying donkey?

 

[Trumble]

Francis Collins, one of the two scientist who deviphered the DNA code, has announced that he had been an atheist until 30 years ago, but that he now believes in God.

The relevant report in the Turkish daily Vatan read:

"... Speaking to the Times about his book "The Language of God," 56-year-old Francis Collins said that he now believes in God and that ‘There is a rational basis for belief in God, and scientific advances draw man closer to God.’ The American scientist went on to state that he believes in miracles and angels; ‘I felt the presence of God while working in the laboratory. There is definitely a force greater than ourselves, and I believe in that. Deciphering DNA drew me a little closer to God. I saw people wracked by disease. But I saw them miraculously restored to health. That is the work of God.’ Collins says that deciphering the human genome gave him the opportunity to see that it was the work of God. He went on to say: ‘When you make a major discovery you experience a moment of scientific rapture, because you have researched and discovered it. What I discovered was something that no human being had ever known before. But God has always known it….

DO YOU BELIVE THAT Francis Collins IS insane as well?

I don't recall anybody suggesting anybody was insane. However, as you chose to mention Francis Collins, it might be worth having a little look at his book, which have read and indeed have my copy beside me as I type. I'd thoroughly recommend it, by the way, whichever side of the 'belief' fence you happen to sit on.

In one chapter Collins attacks atheism - specifically the view of it presented by Richard Dawkins. Admittedly I'm no fan of Dawkins, but Collins is convincing in his criticism particularly regard to the science, if rather less so regarding the philosophy. In the next chapter Collins attacks, indeed ridicules, creationism particularly the 'young earth' variety. In the chapter after that he does much the same regarding 'intelligent design'. Yes, you read that correctly.

The view Collins actually advocates is one he calls 'theistic evolution', about which he says;

"Yet theistic evolution is the dominant position of serious biologists who are also serious believers. That includes Asa Gray, Darwin's chief advocate in the United States, and Theodosius Dobzhansky, the twentieth-century architect of evolutionary thinking. It is the view espoused by many Hindus, muslims, Jews and Christians, including Pope John Paul II."

I'll let you research 'theistic evolution' for yourself, but you can probably work out the basics from name, and the fact that Collins specifically excludes 'intelligent design' from it.

Your original claim was not that some scientists believe in God (which only an idiot would deny, anyway) but that

most modern scientist refute darwinism

That is complete rubbish, regardless of the twaddle the likes of Harun Yahya like to peddle to the gullible. In fact, the vast majority of scientists accept Darwinism, including Collins. One reason for that, which you can gather from the quote I just gave, is that acceptance of Darwinian evolution is totally compatible with belief in God. What it may not be compatible with are the creation myths contained within certain religious writings, such as the Book of Genesis.

One reason your arguments are so unconvincing (and you are far from alone in this) is that, in failing to recognise that compatibility, you are hopelessly confusing two different issues. Darwinism is not an 'atheistic' belief, and being a 'Darwinist' (if there is such a thing) does not imply atheism. The inverse can't be true by definition.. there are obviously no atheist creationists! Collins, like millions of others, believes in God while also believing rejection of Darwinian evolution in favour of creationism to be totally irrational on the basis of scientific evidence which is overwhelmingly in favour of the former. A belief in creationism is therefore irrational unless you have such faith in the literal interpretation of whichever religious book it happens to be that that faith overrides all other considerations. That may well be the case for many who believe in God, but it is not the case for the vast majority of scientists, like Collins, who believe in God.

 

[aamirsaab]

Qingu. I'm not going to deal with all of your points since we're actually off topic. TBH we'd be here all week and I don't have that time or will to do so.

The reason why I raised such points was to answer the topic title: how do we know the Qur'an is true?

Now, you and I can argue on the moral issues raised by each and every point until Hell itself freezes over (or until the cows come home if you don't believe in hell) so there's no point in doing that (you can call this a cop-out of you want, I don't care - I'm not interested in debating with someone who clearly believes Islam is false - been there, done that, no point in doing it again.).

The points I were making should have indicated to you or anyone reading that there had to be at least some truth in the Qur'an. If it was a book of falsehoods, would it still be around 1400 years from its creation with approximately 1.5 billion (and increasing) following it, even with all the criticism it has received before, during and after its inception?

Somehow, I doubt it. Ultimately, it does come down to faith and belief. But since you lack any belief in Islam (and religion for that matter) there's little point in me trying to convince you - you won't/don't believe it anyway.

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

Just like aliens and UFO's.

You're claiming that it is a flaw of the Qur'an to say that something exists, that you don't believe does. This isn't an inherent flaw, nor a contradiction of the Qur'an. It's just your own personal opinion or belief.

The Qur'an also says God exists. But you don't really believe in an omnipotent, omniscient God. That isn't a flaw or contradiction in the Qur'an, it's your own personal opinion or belief.

For the same reason it's a flaw when similar verses show up in Mesopotamian mythology. These verses clearly portray a universe where the sun revolves around the earth, as everyone believed during the time in which the Quran was written.

Now, you can of course split semantic hairs (so could a Mesopotamian apologist). But it's awfully strange that zero Muslims interpreted these verses to mean anything other than geocentrism ... until Copernicus showed up during the 1500's.

However, the fact is, it still needs to be interpreted that way. At best, this only shows the flaw in its early interpretation, not in the statement itself. Both the sun and the moon do in fact have orbits, and that's all the Qur'an says.

The moon splitting into two pieces? Because it's nonsense and did not happen.

How is it nonsense, and how do you know it didn't happen?

They are not actually in Earth's sky. They are thousands, millions, or billions of light years away.

Of course, people during the time the Quran was written though the lower sky was a solid dome or sphere, and that all the celestial objects were set into it. Which explains why the Quran says this is what they are.

What makes you think that the "lower heavens" don't encompass that vast region?

I'm not sure what else you think the word "fall" means. Is it possible to fall to a place other than the ground?

dictionary definition of "fall"

Take your pick.

Semen does not come from between the ribs and the backbone. It comes from your testicles.

Which is between the ribs and the backbone. It's in front of the backbone and below the ribs (as is the the prostate gland and the bulbourethral gland). Hence, it's "between" them.

You think semen comes from somewhere on your back, that stars and galaxes literally exist in Earth's lower sky, and that the sun actually revolves around the Earth?

No, that's just what you interpret the Qur'an to be saying.

Because it's one of the most hilariously absurd things I've ever read. And it's unfortunate that we're talking on the internet, because I would love to see you answer this question with a straight face: Do you really believe Muhammad rode up into the sky on a magical flying donkey?

Yes I do. That's what he said, and I have no reason to deny it.

 

[Trumble]

Semen does not come from between the ribs and the backbone. It comes from your testicles.

Actually, the majority of it comes from the seminal vesicles, located between the bladder and the rectum.

As far as I understand it, the literal translation of the Arabic is between spine and rib-bones (which, despite muslimapoclypta's comment, is a ridiculous description of the location of the testicles), but there are several translations some of which might place it vaguely in the appropriate region. I don't think this one can really be treated as a 'contradiction', although it's hardly a startlingly accurate anatomical description, either.

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

Actually, the majority of it comes from the seminal vesicles, located between the bladder and the rectum.

As far as I understand it, the literal translation of the Arabic is between spine and rib-bones (which, despite muslimapoclypta's comment, is a ridiculous description of the location of the testicles), but there are several translations some of which might place it vaguely in the appropriate region. I don't think this one can really be treated as a 'contradiction', although it's hardly a startlingly accurate anatomical description, either.

How is it a ridiculous description?

Between the rib cage, and the tail-end of the spine, is a fairly broad region isn't it?