Muslim claims of scientific accuracy in the Quran

[OnceConvinced]

In another thread:

Actually look through the Book(it's online I provide the link below lol) before you discredit it. I know the Title may throw you off, and you'll probably click the exit right then and there... but go through it.. check the table of contents and see whats most interesting...

http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/quran/qms.pdf

*~In reality what is in it could not have been known 1,400 years ago. So it proves God exists... and if you don't think so, well it lessens the chances that he doesn't... If you think one is vague go on to the next one, I assure you most of the verses are direct statements that meet up with what is now known.

Does this document prove that the Quran contains knowledge of the world that primitive man couldn't possibly have known? Does it prove that Allah is the one true God? Please justify your response.

[TrueReligion]

Ive been neutral here, unlike you who always attack and give personal remarks to others, which shows the bad behaviour of debate, anyway I;am not here to argue you, Im here to present truth and to do debate in a good and civilized manner. If you want in this way, I will be happy to discuss with you always.

You are not neutral, you have been arguing in favor of your claim the entire time. If you have a bias in the matter being discussed you can not be neutral.

To protect my claim, which is true, ofcourse Ive to stand for it, if standing for truth seems to be Bias to you, than what can I do for it,

[Wyvern]

Ive been neutral here, unlike you who always attack and give personal remarks to others, which shows the bad behaviour of debate, anyway I;am not here to argue you, Im here to present truth and to do debate in a good and civilized manner. If you want in this way, I will be happy to discuss with you always.

You are not neutral, you have been arguing in favor of your claim the entire time. If you have a bias in the matter being discussed you can not be neutral.

To protect my claim, which is true, ofcourse Ive to stand for it, if standing for truth seems to be Bias to you, than what can I do for it,

This means you are not neutral and should stop claiming you are. You seem to think you are the sole arbiter of truth but you fail to notice it is true only from one point of view. A truly neutral person would be able to see that every religion claims to be the truth, you on the other hand only see your own religion as being true. Do you understand why you are not neutral now?

[TrueReligion]

Ive been neutral here, unlike you who always attack and give personal remarks to others, which shows the bad behaviour of debate, anyway I;am not here to argue you, Im here to present truth and to do debate in a good and civilized manner. If you want in this way, I will be happy to discuss with you always.

You are not neutral, you have been arguing in favor of your claim the entire time. If you have a bias in the matter being discussed you can not be neutral.

To protect my claim, which is true, ofcourse Ive to stand for it, if standing for truth seems to be Bias to you, than what can I do for it,

This means you are not neutral and should stop claiming you are. You seem to think you are the sole arbiter of truth but you fail to notice it is true only from one point of view. A truly neutral person would be able to see that every religion claims to be the truth, you on the other hand only see your own religion as being true. Do you understand why you are not neutral now?

Ofcourse true person should stand on the claim, if some1 else is proving to be claim, lets see both evidence, and have to see which 1 is true and which 1 is not, care for this challenge?
It will show who is neutral and who is not, ok?

[Wyvern]

Ofcourse true person should stand on the claim, if some1 else is proving to be claim, lets see both evidence, and have to see which 1 is true and which 1 is not, care for this challenge?
It will show who is neutral and who is not, ok?

You still fail to understand after all this time. You are trying to prove you are neutral by taking sides, neutral parties don't take sides. Switzerland is a neutral country because during times of war they don't take sides, how hard is this for you to understand?

Also of course this is off topic and you really should get back to the OP.

[TrueReligion]

Ofcourse true person should stand on the claim, if some1 else is proving to be claim, lets see both evidence, and have to see which 1 is true and which 1 is not, care for this challenge?
It will show who is neutral and who is not, ok?

You still fail to understand after all this time. You are trying to prove you are neutral by taking sides, neutral parties don't take sides. Switzerland is a neutral country because during times of war they don't take sides, how hard is this for you to understand?

Also of course this is off topic and you really should get back to the OP.

Wow, what a perfect example you gave of switzerland, who took 1 side, and BAN Minaret without any genuine reason?

[Wyvern]

Ofcourse true person should stand on the claim, if some1 else is proving to be claim, lets see both evidence, and have to see which 1 is true and which 1 is not, care for this challenge?
It will show who is neutral and who is not, ok?

You still fail to understand after all this time. You are trying to prove you are neutral by taking sides, neutral parties don't take sides. Switzerland is a neutral country because during times of war they don't take sides, how hard is this for you to understand?

Also of course this is off topic and you really should get back to the OP.

Wow, what a perfect example you gave of switzerland, who took 1 side, and BAN Minaret without any genuine reason?

You really will latch onto anything wont you? Switzerland is allowed to make such decisions within its own borders you may disagree with it but unless you are swiss it does not affect you one bit, and of course this does not address the issue of what it means to be neutral. Now you are just arguing to argue and not coming up with any points at all.

[TrueReligion]

Ofcourse true person should stand on the claim, if some1 else is proving to be claim, lets see both evidence, and have to see which 1 is true and which 1 is not, care for this challenge?
It will show who is neutral and who is not, ok?

You still fail to understand after all this time. You are trying to prove you are neutral by taking sides, neutral parties don't take sides. Switzerland is a neutral country because during times of war they don't take sides, how hard is this for you to understand?

Also of course this is off topic and you really should get back to the OP.

Wow, what a perfect example you gave of switzerland, who took 1 side, and BAN Minaret without any genuine reason?

You really will latch onto anything wont you? Switzerland is allowed to make such decisions within its own borders you may disagree with it but unless you are swiss it does not affect you one bit, and of course this does not address the issue of what it means to be neutral. Now you are just arguing to argue and not coming up with any points at all.

I come up with point here Wyvern, you gave example of Switzerland that its a neutral country, only by not sending army does;nt make country neutral, the neutral part is shown already of Switzerland by implementing Ban of Minaret,

[Wyvern]

I come up with point here Wyvern, you gave example of Switzerland that its a neutral country, only by not sending army does;nt make country neutral, the neutral part is shown already of Switzerland by implementing Ban of Minaret,

You obviously have no idea what neutral means.

[TrueReligion]

I come up with point here Wyvern, you gave example of Switzerland that its a neutral country, only by not sending army does;nt make country neutral, the neutral part is shown already of Switzerland by implementing Ban of Minaret,

You obviously have no idea what neutral means.

Maybe your dictionary of term neutral is different than others.
Anyways, I've to get back to topic. See you.

THE EXPANDING UNIVERSE

In 1925, an American astronomer by the name of Edwin Hubble, provided
observational evidence that all galaxies are receding from one another, which
implies that the universe is expanding. The expansion of the universe is now
an established scientific fact.

This is what Al-Quraan says regarding the
nature of the universe:

With the power and skill Did We construct The
Firmament: For it is We Who create The vastness of Space. [Al-Quraan
51:47]
The Arabic word msin is correctly translated as expanding it, and it
refers to the creation of the expanding vastness of the universe. Stephen
Hawking, in his book, A Brief History of Time, says, The discovery that
the universe is expanding was one of the great intellectual revolutions of the
20th century.
The Quraan mentioned the expansion of the universe, before man even learnt
to build a telescope! Some may say that the presence of astronomical facts in
the Quraan is not surprising since the Arabs were advanced in the field of
astronomy. They are correct in acknowledging the advancement of the Arabs
in the field of astronomy. However they fail to realize that the Quraan was
revealed centuries before the Arabs excelled in astronomy. Moreover many of
the scientific facts mentioned above regarding astronomy, such as the origin
of the universe with a Big Bang, were not known to the Arabs even at the
peak of their scientific advancement. The scientific facts mentioned in the
Quraan are therefore not due to the Arabs advancement in astronomy.
Indeed, the reverse is true. The Arabs advanced in astronomy, because
astronomy occupies a place in the Quraan.

[Scotracer]

I come up with point here Wyvern, you gave example of Switzerland that its a neutral country, only by not sending army does;nt make country neutral, the neutral part is shown already of Switzerland by implementing Ban of Minaret,

You obviously have no idea what neutral means.

Maybe your dictionary of term neutral is different than others.
Anyways, I've to get back to topic. See you.

THE EXPANDING UNIVERSE

In 1925, an American astronomer by the name of Edwin Hubble, provided
observational evidence that all galaxies are receding from one another, which
implies that the universe is expanding. The expansion of the universe is now
an established scientific fact.

This is what Al-Quraan says regarding the
nature of the universe:

With the power and skill Did We construct The
Firmament: For it is We Who create The vastness of Space. [Al-Quraan
51:47]
The Arabic word msin is correctly translated as expanding it, and it
refers to the creation of the expanding vastness of the universe. Stephen
Hawking, in his book, A Brief History of Time, says, The discovery that
the universe is expanding was one of the great intellectual revolutions of the
20th century.
The Quraan mentioned the expansion of the universe, before man even learnt
to build a telescope! Some may say that the presence of astronomical facts in
the Quraan is not surprising since the Arabs were advanced in the field of
astronomy. They are correct in acknowledging the advancement of the Arabs
in the field of astronomy. However they fail to realize that the Quraan was
revealed centuries before the Arabs excelled in astronomy. Moreover many of
the scientific facts mentioned above regarding astronomy, such as the origin
of the universe with a Big Bang, were not known to the Arabs even at the
peak of their scientific advancement. The scientific facts mentioned in the
Quraan are therefore not due to the Arabs advancement in astronomy.
Indeed, the reverse is true. The Arabs advanced in astronomy, because
astronomy occupies a place in the Quraan.

Just because they don't take a neutral stance on every issue doesn't stop them being neutral in specific circumstances. Switzerland was a neutral country in the 2nd World War - them banning the Minaret 60 years on doesn't change that fact. They are completely separate issues and you are clutching at straws.

I also find it quite amusing that you are talking about neutrality then give us a copy-pasted spiel (which I might add is being plagiarised by you) that is clearly written to support one side of an issue. Classic

I don't speak Arabic and can't verify the translation of the word "msin" but I do like how they've put "correctly" in front of it. It is a totally superfluous word but its usage makes it clear what they are trying to do. Typical apologetics.

I also like how no one ever finds the knowledge within the holy books (Quran, bible, Vedas etc) but can always see them after. Mighty suspicious don't you think?