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.

[Wyvern]

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.

Arabs had excelled in astronomy not hundreds but literally thousands of years before the rise of islam. In particular Egypt and the mesopotamian city-states of Isin, Larsa and Babylon were very advanced in the field of astronomy.

Could you cite the source of your article, otherwise you are plagiarising anothers work which is not allowwed on this forum.

[TrueReligion]

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 dont have to argue for switzerland here, however as you point out to me specificaly, I have to say tht just by not taking part in WWII does;nt mean the country is neutral, many countries in the world didnt took part in that war, why your emphasis is on Switzerland only?

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?

Than you have to find in arabic-english dictionary, maybe it would help you the meaning of word msin.
Your last argument, thinks its just ignorance from you, otherwise world many of the non-muslim scientists acknowledged the scientific facts given in Quran. But if you say why earlier people didnt recognised it, ofcourse those discoveries were notmade that time, at that time people know less about galaxies and other things.

But anyway, you can see these non-muslim scientists remarks about Quran.

http://www.islamicmedicine.org/nonmuslim.htm

[TrueReligion]

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.

Arabs had excelled in astronomy not hundreds but literally thousands of years before the rise of islam. In particular Egypt and the mesopotamian city-states of Isin, Larsa and Babylon were very advanced in the field of astronomy.

Could you cite the source of your article, otherwise you are plagiarising anothers work which is not allowwed on this forum.

Sorry Wyvern, but the countries you mentioned were not arab countries, Egypt was not an arabic country before, same others.
Also there was no influence of these countries culture in Mecca at the time of emerg of Islam.
Further their discoveries were of not much authentic, some of them was little authentic.
The point here is to make, that in ignorant and illeterate society of arabia, how this got mention in Quran, when no other influence effect the society..

You asked for my reference, you can check below, all the details are given there.

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

[Wyvern]

You asked for my reference, you can check below, all the details are given there.

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

Thank you for now we can examine the author of your book you take to be the absolute truth. The author of the book you have been taking this from wholecloth is one Zakir Naik.

In November 2008, a fatwa was issued against Zakir Naik by Islamic scholars in Lucknow India for supporting Osama Bin Laden and glorifying Yazeed, the 'killer' of Imam Hussain, a prominent figure in Shia Islam. [29] Lucknow's shahar qazi Mufti Abul Irfan Mian Firangi Mahali described Naik as a kafir (non-Muslim) in his fatwa, which states he should be ex-communicated from Islam.

In response to questions about Naik, Darul Ifta, an Islamic organization in India which issues advice and fatwas has said that "one should not rely upon his speeches"[23], "his knowledge is not deep"[24] and that"he is deviated from the path of well-versed Ulama"[25]. They also say that Naik is "spreading mischievous things and misguiding simple Muslims to wrong path"[26] and that "he is religiously deviated, some of his talks are unauthentic." [27] They advise other Muslims that "one is most probably feared to fall in fitnah by listening his speeches."[28]

[McCulloch]

But anyway, you can see these non-muslim scientists remarks about Quran.

http://www.islamicmedicine.org/nonmuslim.htm

Many of the links on that page are dead.

From Scientists Comments on the Scientific Miracles in the Holy Quran

Dr. T. V. N. Persaud is Professor of Anatomy, Professor of Pediatrics and Child Health, and Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. There, he was the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy for 16 years. He is well-known in his field. He is the author or editor of 22 textbooks and has published over 181 scientific papers. In 1991, he received the most distinguished award presented in the field of anatomy in Canada, the J.C.B. Grant Award from the Canadian Association of Anatomists. When he was asked about the scientific miracles in the Quran which he has researched, he stated the following:

"The way it was explained to me is that Muhammad was a very ordinary man. He could not read, didnt know [how] to write. In fact, he was an illiterate. And we're talking about twelve [actually about fourteen] hundred years ago. You have someone illiterate making profound pronouncements and statements and that are amazingly accurate about scientific nature. And I personally cant see how this could be a mere chance. There are too many accuracies and, like Dr. Moore, I have no difficulty in my mind that this is a divine inspiration or revelation which led him to these statements."

Do you not find it interesting that in Dr. Persaud's book, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (written with Dr. Moore), there are seventy one books citings. Most of the cites are to various technical books, as expected. However, they cite The Origin Of Species: 150th Anniversary Edition by Charles Darwin on page 11 but there are no citations from the Holy Qur'an. A number of books have cited Persaud's work, including Contemporary Buddhist Ethics (Curzon Critical Studies in Buddhism) by Damien Keown, The Silent Subject: Reflections on the Unborn in American Culture by Brad Stetson, Human Dignity and Contemporary Liberalism by Brad Stetson, Human Growth in the Past: Studies from Bones and Teeth (Cambridge Studies in Biological and Evolutionary Anthropology) by Robert D. Hoppa, The Human Embryo Research Debates: Bioethics in the Vortex of Controversy by Ronald M. Green, The Facts of Life: Science and the Abortion Controversy by Harold J. Morowitz, The Prenatal Person: Ethics from Conception to Birth by Norman M. Ford, Human Dignity in the Biotech Century: A Christian Vision for Public Policy (Colson, Charles) by Charles W. Colson and Jewish and Catholic Bioethics: An Ecumenical Dialogue (Moral Traditions & Moral Arugments) by Edmund D. Pellegrino. Oddly no Islamic books.

To me, it looks more like he was unwilling to state publicly any criticism of Islam, because we all know by example what can happen to people who are openly critical of Islam.

[TrueReligion]

But anyway, you can see these non-muslim scientists remarks about Quran.

http://www.islamicmedicine.org/nonmuslim.htm

Many of the links on that page are dead.

Just a use of little mind can help.

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... tists.html

Do you not find it interesting that in Dr. Persaud's book, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (written with Dr. Moore), there are seventy one books citings. Most of the cites are to various technical books, as expected. However, they cite The Origin Of Species: 150th Anniversary Edition by Charles Darwin on page 11 but there are no citations from the Holy Qur'an. A number of books have cited Persaud's work, including Contemporary Buddhist Ethics (Curzon Critical Studies in Buddhism) by Damien Keown, The Silent Subject: Reflections on the Unborn in American Culture by Brad Stetson, Human Dignity and Contemporary Liberalism by Brad Stetson, Human Growth in the Past: Studies from Bones and Teeth (Cambridge Studies in Biological and Evolutionary Anthropology) by Robert D. Hoppa, The Human Embryo Research Debates: Bioethics in the Vortex of Controversy by Ronald M. Green, The Facts of Life: Science and the Abortion Controversy by Harold J. Morowitz, The Prenatal Person: Ethics from Conception to Birth by Norman M. Ford, Human Dignity in the Biotech Century: A Christian Vision for Public Policy (Colson, Charles) by Charles W. Colson and Jewish and Catholic Bioethics: An Ecumenical Dialogue (Moral Traditions & Moral Arugments) by Edmund D. Pellegrino. Oddly no Islamic books.

To me, it looks more like he was unwilling to state publicly any criticism of Islam, because we all know by example what can happen to people who are openly critical of Islam.

The argument that Keeith Moore and Presaud were afraid to critise Islam, is just funny, as why can;t some good remarks be given to their work and their acceptance?
I mean, any proof that some1 put gun on their head to say these things? or its just coming out of mind that "NO WE DONT WANT TO HEAR ANYTHING GOOD ABOUT ISLAM'?
Further, about Darwin, ofcourse he want to reject religion, so he wont keep anything from religious scripture, even its truth, but his book and account is of no use to humanity , and sensible humans Even many of his fellow scientists reject his false claims.
Anyway, we are discussing scientific facts mention by Quran, if any point against these, you are most welcome to bring.

[TrueReligion]

You asked for my reference, you can check below, all the details are given there.

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

Thank you for now we can examine the author of your book you take to be the absolute truth. The author of the book you have been taking this from wholecloth is one Zakir Naik.

In November 2008, a fatwa was issued against Zakir Naik by Islamic scholars in Lucknow India for supporting Osama Bin Laden and glorifying Yazeed, the 'killer' of Imam Hussain, a prominent figure in Shia Islam. [29] Lucknow's shahar qazi Mufti Abul Irfan Mian Firangi Mahali described Naik as a kafir (non-Muslim) in his fatwa, which states he should be ex-communicated from Islam.

In response to questions about Naik, Darul Ifta, an Islamic organization in India which issues advice and fatwas has said that "one should not rely upon his speeches"[23], "his knowledge is not deep"[24] and that"he is deviated from the path of well-versed Ulama"[25]. They also say that Naik is "spreading mischievous things and misguiding simple Muslims to wrong path"[26] and that "he is religiously deviated, some of his talks are unauthentic." [27] They advise other Muslims that "one is most probably feared to fall in fitnah by listening his speeches."[28]

hehehe, your all arguments is same, as catholic is saying dont follow protestant, and protestang saying same about catholics
It does;nt mean what these councils say about Zakir Naik, as he is regarded as best scholar by all muslim countries, and what these councils are doing, is because of enemity and professional jealousy.

But, we are discussing Quran here anyway, we dont need to go in detail about him, as he is just pointing out the facts, if you want to agree, well enough and will show neutral debate .

[Wyvern]

You asked for my reference, you can check below, all the details are given there.

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

Thank you for now we can examine the author of your book you take to be the absolute truth. The author of the book you have been taking this from wholecloth is one Zakir Naik.

In November 2008, a fatwa was issued against Zakir Naik by Islamic scholars in Lucknow India for supporting Osama Bin Laden and glorifying Yazeed, the 'killer' of Imam Hussain, a prominent figure in Shia Islam. [29] Lucknow's shahar qazi Mufti Abul Irfan Mian Firangi Mahali described Naik as a kafir (non-Muslim) in his fatwa, which states he should be ex-communicated from Islam.

In response to questions about Naik, Darul Ifta, an Islamic organization in India which issues advice and fatwas has said that "one should not rely upon his speeches"[23], "his knowledge is not deep"[24] and that"he is deviated from the path of well-versed Ulama"[25]. They also say that Naik is "spreading mischievous things and misguiding simple Muslims to wrong path"[26] and that "he is religiously deviated, some of his talks are unauthentic." [27] They advise other Muslims that "one is most probably feared to fall in fitnah by listening his speeches."[28]

hehehe, your all arguments is same, as catholic is saying dont follow protestant, and protestang saying same about catholics
It does;nt mean what these councils say about Zakir Naik, as he is regarded as best scholar by all muslim countries, and what these councils are doing, is because of enemity and professional jealousy.

But, we are discussing Quran here anyway, we dont need to go in detail about him, as he is just pointing out the facts, if you want to agree, well enough and will show neutral debate .

As Darul Ifta says, his knowledge is not deep and you accept and defend everything he says unquestioningly. You claim Egyptians, Iraqis and Syrians are not arabs just to make what he says correct. What exactly is an arab then if these groups are not?
No the arguments are not the same, one is different sects telling you not to follow the opposite sect. While the other is indian muslims telling other indian muslims that this person is a charlatan and will lead you away from the truth.

[TrueReligion]

You asked for my reference, you can check below, all the details are given there.

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

Thank you for now we can examine the author of your book you take to be the absolute truth. The author of the book you have been taking this from wholecloth is one Zakir Naik.

In November 2008, a fatwa was issued against Zakir Naik by Islamic scholars in Lucknow India for supporting Osama Bin Laden and glorifying Yazeed, the 'killer' of Imam Hussain, a prominent figure in Shia Islam. [29] Lucknow's shahar qazi Mufti Abul Irfan Mian Firangi Mahali described Naik as a kafir (non-Muslim) in his fatwa, which states he should be ex-communicated from Islam.

In response to questions about Naik, Darul Ifta, an Islamic organization in India which issues advice and fatwas has said that "one should not rely upon his speeches"[23], "his knowledge is not deep"[24] and that"he is deviated from the path of well-versed Ulama"[25]. They also say that Naik is "spreading mischievous things and misguiding simple Muslims to wrong path"[26] and that "he is religiously deviated, some of his talks are unauthentic." [27] They advise other Muslims that "one is most probably feared to fall in fitnah by listening his speeches."[28]

hehehe, your all arguments is same, as catholic is saying dont follow protestant, and protestang saying same about catholics
It does;nt mean what these councils say about Zakir Naik, as he is regarded as best scholar by all muslim countries, and what these councils are doing, is because of enemity and professional jealousy.

But, we are discussing Quran here anyway, we dont need to go in detail about him, as he is just pointing out the facts, if you want to agree, well enough and will show neutral debate .

As Darul Ifta says, his knowledge is not deep and you accept and defend everything he says unquestioningly. You claim Egyptians, Iraqis and Syrians are not arabs just to make what he says correct. What exactly is an arab then if these groups are not?
No the arguments are not the same, one is different sects telling you not to follow the opposite sect. While the other is indian muslims telling other indian muslims that this person is a charlatan and will lead you away from the truth.

Ok, so I guess you know more the lectures of Zakir Naik. and as per you said he is not giving the right view of Islam, so can you please tell me wats wrong in his lectures and teachings?

[Wyvern]

Ok, so I guess you know more the lectures of Zakir Naik. and as per you said he is not giving the right view of Islam, so can you please tell me wats wrong in his lectures and teachings?

Well right off the bat it's obvious he plays fast and loose with the facts, saying anything he needs to in order to be right at the time. Just like you denying that Egyptians are arabs just to be right and then ignoring any requests to explain your position. Or how Naik claimed women greatly outnumbered men in order to justify his stance on polygamy, but when the facts are checked he is shown to be wrong. Does Naik go on to admit he was wrong, just like you the answer is no.

It seems like you do not want to follow any islamic authority other than this persons. A fatwa has been released on him and still you say it is everyone else and not him. The facts are thrown in your face as to how wrong he is and still you say everyone else is wrong not him. I'd say you should reflect on how much adoration you are giving this man and ask yourself who are you really worshipping, Allah or Naik.