Actually they don't need that.
Well, to know the speed of something, you have to do distance divided by time. We know how long it takes affairs to reach the throne, that is, 50000 years in one day. But we do not know how far away the throne is.
We know exactly the speed of the moon. So we can calculate the distance that the moon travels in 1000 lunar years. We call this distance X.
first of all the verse isn't refering to a distance but to a speed, and even if it would refer to a speed, that still doesn't explain why one would change the mentioned time into an unmentioned distance.
Actually the argument against it essentially complained of ambiguity of the verses and asked why more precise numbers were not stated like 1023 instead of 1000. The point of course is that the Qur'an could have simply replaced its opening chapter with a list of mathematical constants, but that has nothing to do with its purpose of revelation. The Qur'an is a book of guidance for human beings.
True, but think how many more muslims there would be if the Qu'ran HAD had such a first chapter! At that point, it would become very difficult to hold up any sort of argument against the Qu'ran being the Word of God... and I say that as a non-muslim.
True, but would Islam still be a "belief"? Does knowing equal believing? I think if we were put here to be tested, then making religious obvious would defeat the purpose of test.
Actually the argument against it essentially complained of ambiguity of the verses and asked why more precise numbers were not stated like 1023 instead of 1000. The point of course is that the Qur'an could have simply replaced its opening chapter with a list of mathematical constants, but that has nothing to do with its purpose of revelation. The Qur'an is a book of guidance for human beings.
