Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it?

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Abdelrahman
Student
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:36 pm

Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it?

Post #1

Post by Abdelrahman »

Peace be unto all of you! Believers and Non-Believers alike!

As a Muslim, we put huge regard on scripture not clashing with modern science. We believe that if God created the scripture then it should not contain errors in it when referencing the natural world and what we've come to understand about it.

"Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction." - The Holy Quran (4:82)

Many Christian/Atheist debates exist out there, but I am saddened to see that no atheists debate Muslim scholars who read and write Arabic fluently. When debates are organized between people who don't understand arabic or science it goes no where.

Arabic is my mother tongue. I also speak English at home so I'd say im fluent in both. I am a science university graduate and I love the topic of religion and science.

In Islam, we don't have 'blind faith'. I am not allowed to believe something blindly, I must have reasons. Real reasons. That is why we believe God allowed the prophets to perform miracles - so as to give people a sign. And since we believe the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to be the last prophet, his sign and lasting miracle is the Qur'an. The Qur'an is meant to be a 'sign' to the end of time and I invite all members to reflect on its verses.

I am looking to debate someone on whether or not Islamic scriptural references to the natural world clash with modern scientific understanding!

User avatar
DrNoGods
Guru
Posts: 1313
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 69 times

Re: Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it

Post #2

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to post 1 by Abdelrahman]
I am looking to debate someone on whether or not Islamic scriptural references to the natural world clash with modern scientific understanding!
Why don't you give some specific examples of such references to discuss? It is very easy to show that many biblical stories could not possibly have happened as described in that book (eg. Noah's flood, the creation story of Genesis, people living to 900+ years, etc.).

Are there similar stories in the Qur'an? If so, then it should be straightforward to analyze them in light of modern science and determine whether or not they are viable, or if they are like Noah's flood and clearly nothing but myth. Do you have some examples from the Qur'an?
But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown..
Carl Sagan

The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain

Abdelrahman
Student
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:36 pm

Re: Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it

Post #3

Post by Abdelrahman »

DrNoGods wrote: [Replying to post 1 by Abdelrahman]
I am looking to debate someone on whether or not Islamic scriptural references to the natural world clash with modern scientific understanding!
Why don't you give some specific examples of such references to discuss? It is very easy to show that many biblical stories could not possibly have happened as described in that book (eg. Noah's flood, the creation story of Genesis, people living to 900+ years, etc.).

Are there similar stories in the Qur'an? If so, then it should be straightforward to analyze them in light of modern science and determine whether or not they are viable, or if they are like Noah's flood and clearly nothing but myth. Do you have some examples from the Qur'an?
Yes there are similar stories! However, let me explain something. The miracles that are described in scripture were miracles for their times. The Prophets of God were given the ability to perform miracles in order to convince people. God was not going to send a messenger without some sign or somesort of 'proof' for people who reflect because He is fair. Someone who would have witnessed Jesus cure the blind for example, during Jesus's time, would reflect upon what he/she saw and would reflect on whether it was possible for men to bring back the dead and cure the blind instantly. They would be looking at the evidence and battling in their minds where the Prophet was speaking the truth or whether there was some natural explanation to what they saw.

I cannot prove that any of these past miracles happened and if I can explain them away with science then they cease to be miracles. Besides Noah's flood (ILL COME BACK TO THIS), I cannot really prove much that these miracles happened. HOWEVER, what I can do is point you to the miracle meant for our time. The 'evidence' per say. And that is the Qur'an.

Yes the Qur'an contains stories about the Prophets that seem difficult to imagine, however, this is not our evidence. The Qur'an itself challenges us to ponder over its verses. To reflect upon its 'signs'. To think and challenge it when it describes natural phenomenon. For if the scripture makes a mistake scientifically when describing a natural phenomenon then we can attest that it is not from God.

"Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction." - The Holy Qur'an [4:82]

The scripture itself challenges us to find contradiction, error and that if we found any it would cease being 'from God'.

Here are some of those verses:

"And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander." - The Holy Qur'an [51:47]

Haven here does not mean Paradise but the sky and space. God makes the statement that space (the universe) is expanding.

"Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?" - The Holy Qur'an [21:30]

Professor Alfred Kroner, chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenburg University, Mainz, Germany said:

"Thinking about many of these questions and thinking where Muhammad came from, he was after all a bedouin. I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years with very complicated and advanced technological methods that this is the case."

The Qur'an makes the claim that the heavens and the Earth were once a connected entity. We are also told in the same verse that every living thing is made from water and then we are asked, will you then not believe? The Qur'an is basically saying that these are signs for belief. Since the Qur'an is a 1400 year old text, I ask where could have Muhammad (pbuh) have gotten these ideas about nature?

I can list many more, but lets just start with the ones I've listed!

ALMOST FORGOT! NOAHS FLOOD! Look up the work of Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson. Both men that are not religious. Graham Hancock studies ancient civilizations and shows us how the story of Noahs flood isn't exclusive to Christianity or Abrahamic faiths for that matter. He makes the case that such a flood was recorded in history in other traditions. Randall Carlson joins in with the science, geological evidence, ice core sample analysis, fossil records etc. I highly recommend any of their interviews with Joe Rogan on Youtube but start with the first ones where they go through all the evidence they're discovering. Pretty cool stuff if you have even a basic understanding of environmental science.

User avatar
DrNoGods
Guru
Posts: 1313
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 69 times

Re: Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it

Post #4

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to post 3 by Abdelrahman]
"And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander." - The Holy Qur'an [51:47]

Haven here does not mean Paradise but the sky and space. God makes the statement that space (the universe) is expanding.


It sounds like you are interpreting this vague text from the Qur'an as if it is describing an expanding universe in the sense that we understand it today based on observed red shifts, etc. What was the term "expander" derived from in the original language of the Qur'an? Does it exclusively mean the same thing as the expansion of space as in the modern interpretation of an expanding universe? I doubt that could be the case since obviously there was no knowledge of what space actually was 1400 years ago, how far away celestial bodies actually were, whether they were moving within the space they exist in, etc..

So whoever made the quoted statement you give above could not have meant an expanding universe as we understand it today. You are selectively interpreting it to equate the two which is easy to do when the statement is so vague and without context. If the claim is that people from 1400 years ago could not know about the expansion of space as we know it today as that science was far into the future, and therefore that the statement must have come from a god, then that is not science but religious speculation. But the fundamental problem with claiming that the quoted statement is evidence that the Qur'an predicted an expanding universe as we understand it today, is that the statement is too vague to conclude that this is what it means. The more vague a statement is, the easier it is to interpret it in many different ways.
ALMOST FORGOT! NOAHS FLOOD! Look up the work of Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson. Both men that are not religious. Graham Hancock studies ancient civilizations and shows us how the story of Noahs flood isn't exclusive to Christianity or Abrahamic faiths for that matter. He makes the case that such a flood was recorded in history in other traditions. Randall Carlson joins in with the science, geological evidence, ice core sample analysis, fossil records etc.


Yes, there are other flood myths such as the Epic of Gilgamesh. But you have to consider the time period of these myths along with any other considerations. Biblical chronology allows the Noah's flood myth to be dated to about 4300 years ago. So the question is, from a scientific standpoint, whether a global flood covering the entire earth to several meters above the highest mountain peak could have actually happened 4300 years ago. The answer is a resounding NO. If such a thing actually happened 4300 years ago (and again, you can't consider the scientific validity of this event without using that time frame), the evidence in support of it would be overwhelming. The distribution of humans, plants, etc. could not be what it is today if all but 8 humans (Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives) were killed along with all land plants, a measly 4300 years ago.

Nearly every scientific discipline can be used to show that a global flood as described in the Christian bible, could not possibly have occurred only 4300 years ago. There are many sources for detailed explanations of why this event could not have happened as described from the standpoint of geology, biology, genetics, anthropology, etc. It can be positively disproved by any one of these disciplines, and together they show it has 0% probability of happening as described. Many people try to show that it is scientifically feasible, but they almost always ignore one important aspect or another, particularly the time period in which it supposedly happened which is a key argument against it. It is a myth.
The Qur'an makes the claim that the heavens and the Earth were once a connected entity. We are also told in the same verse that every living thing is made from water and then we are asked, will you then not believe? The Qur'an is basically saying that these are signs for belief. Since the Qur'an is a 1400 year old text, I ask where could have Muhammad (pbuh) have gotten these ideas about nature?

Again, the statement that "the heavens and the Earth were once a connected entity" is too vague to base a scientific analysis on. What, specifically, is meant by "connected entity? You could argue that our solar system is a "connected entity" right now as it is a system of planets and other bodies orbiting a central star with gravity allowing the connected entity to exist as such. Our solar system is part of a galaxy, and our galaxy is part of a local cluster of galaxies, and these could all be described as part of a connected entity if such a vague term is used. The idea that everything living thing is made of water is also too vague to mean anything scientific. What does "made of" even mean? Does it mean all living things begin as some number of molecules of pure H2O, or only that they contain a lot of H2O? Are seeds all made of H2O? Are the female eggs that when fertilized to start the growth process of a human being or other mammal made entirely of H2O? Again, these vague statements from holy books are simply too open to interpretation to form the basis of a scientific analysis without a lot more definition and clarification, which usually isn't there. This is why they can be interpreted in many different ways to suit whatever argument is needed. They are not suitable as the basis of scientific analysis.
But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown..
Carl Sagan

The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain

User avatar
DrNoGods
Guru
Posts: 1313
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 69 times

Re: Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it

Post #5

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to post 4 by DrNoGods]
The distribution of humans, plants, etc. could not be what it is today if all but 8 humans (Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives) were killed along with all land plants, a measly 4300 years ago.
Correction (saw too late to edit post) ... I meant to say that if only those 8 humans survived, with all others killed along with land plants.
But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown..
Carl Sagan

The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain

User avatar
Purple Knight
Sage
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 75 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Post #6

Post by Purple Knight »

What interests me is if Abdel would still conclude that the Qu'ran says the universe is expanding from those verses if science said, "Screech. Wait. Hold on. The universe isn't necessarily expanding after all; it just happened to be that most of the things we could see happened to be moving away from us because of this phenomenon we only now discovered pushing galaxies in our area away from a central point. We just developed this new super amazing telescope and it turns out that the really far stuff out of range of this phenomenon is actually more blue-shifted. Our bad."

Abdelrahman
Student
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:36 pm

Re: Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it

Post #7

Post by Abdelrahman »

DrNoGods wrote: It sounds like you are interpreting this vague text from the Qur'an as if it is describing an expanding universe in the sense that we understand it today based on observed red shifts, etc. What was the term "expander" derived from in the original language of the Qur'an? Does it exclusively mean the same thing as the expansion of space as in the modern interpretation of an expanding universe?


The arabic word used is lamoosi3 with its triliteral root in arabic being "وسع" meaning to expand, to extend. I don't know what you mean with regards to the "same thing as expansion of space". Do you mean if the same word is used to mean expansion in science?

Well a simple google translate of "expansion of the universe" gives us "توسع الكون" with the same root word "وسع" being used to mean expand. So yes, it really means expand the same way we mean it when we use the scientific terminology. Remember, the word "expand" is not some super savy scientific lingo. It just means what it means when we use it in context.
DrNoGods wrote: I doubt that could be the case since obviously there was no knowledge of what space actually was 1400 years ago, how far away celestial bodies actually were, whether they were moving within the space they exist in, etc..


Exactly! There is no reason why 1400 years ago men could have known such things. We don't claim the Qur'an to be a book of SCIENCE but instead a book of SIGNS. Yes, it's not super detailed. God doesn't give us the theory of relativity, but He does state something so small yet significant. If man had written this text he would have reflected the views known by men at the time. The Qur'an challenges us that if it were a text from other than God you would find within it "many contradictions/errors" and yet we find none. To state something as significant as space is expanding, and to have it coincide with science... and to have the very text challenge us to reflect on that very verse.. it doesn't just happen once. Not just astronomy either but since you mentioned it here is another!

"And He is the One Who created the day and the night, the sun and the moon—each travelling in an orbit." - The Holy Qur'an [21:33]

The word used for travelling in arabic is "يسبح" which also means to swim. More meaning is derived when we look at the root of the word "سبح" meaning to both move as is be displaced as well as move itself. Like if I'm describing someone 'swimming' they are both being displaced in a general direction as well as moving their arms and kicking their legs. So when a used to describe a planet, the Qur'an states that not only are the planets moving but that they are also moving around themselves or moving in some other way. We know today that even the sun, moves around its axis, as well as is moving in space.

"Neither can the sun overtake the moon, nor does the night precede the day.
Each of them is floating in an orbit." - The Holy Qur'an [36:40]

"Surely, in the creation of the heavens and the earth,
and the alternation of night and day, there are signs
for those who possess intelligence." - The Holy Qur'an [3:190]

"They remember God while standing, sitting, and lying on their sides.
And contemplate on the creation of the heavens and the earth:
“Our Lord, You did not create all this in vain. Be You glorified.
Protect us from the torment of the fire.� - The Holy Qur'an [3:191]

Astrology is not even the only place this happens, the Qur'an makes references to the natural world that in many other fields of science. This is what i mean by science, that I want to debate these signs. The language used hints at someone knowing more than what was known at the time.
DrNoGods wrote: So whoever made the quoted statement you give above could not have meant an expanding universe as we understand it today. You are selectively interpreting it to equate the two which is easy to do when the statement is so vague and without context.
I'm simply translating it as I showed above!
DrNoGods wrote: If the claim is that people from 1400 years ago could not know about the expansion of space as we know it today as that science was far into the future, and therefore that the statement must have come from a god, then that is not science but religious speculation.
You're right, saying that this is from God isn't science. It's a conclusion im willing to make based on the evidence and fact that no man could have known this knowledge 1400 years ago. And the Qur'an uses said knowledge to prove to us, that the producer of the text is divine, and the creator of the world being described. It literally challenges us, and tells us that the reason is God. It makes no sense to me that God would produce a text riddled with errors and statements about the natural world we know to be incorrect whilst at the same time claiming to be creator of said world.
DrNoGods wrote: But the fundamental problem with claiming that the quoted statement is evidence that the Qur'an predicted an expanding universe as we understand it today, is that the statement is too vague to conclude that this is what it means. The more vague a statement is, the easier it is to interpret it in many different ways.
The statement is very clear, the universe is expanding. Not glowing, not growing, not stretching, not breaking, not bouncing, not flying....expanding. In the whole sense of the word expansion. Growth on all sides. There is no other interpretation.

Here are a few other 'vague' statements:

"We made from water every living thing." [21:30]

"Not absent from Him is an atom's weight within the heavens or within the earth or [what is] smaller than that or greater, except that it is in a clear register" [34:3]

States that there's things smaller than the atom, which was thought to be the smallest thing at the time. Obviously the age old concept of the atom was not anywhere near our modern day models, but the Greeks also had the concept of the 'atom' as the smallest indivisible quantity. So did the arabs, yet the Qur'an states there is smaller. If the atom truly was the smallest thing then why would the Qur'an state that there is record if even smaller.

"O company of jinn and mankind, if you are able to pass beyond the regions of the heavens and the earth, then pass. You will not pass except by authority [from Allah ]." - The Holy Qur'an [55:33]

The arabic word for 'except' here carries extra meaning, it also means that YOU WILL. I.e. you will not penetrate them except with a power, and that YOU WILL DO SO. We have arabic words for 'except' that allude to YOU WON'T. Arabic is descriptive, and differing conjunctions like 'if' can also carry separate meanings. So the 'except' used here is stating that eventually we will penetrate the heavens.

"Did we not make the earth a resting place? and the mountains as stakes?�[Quran, 78:6-7]

Hints at mountains having roots with the word 'stakes'.

"We sent down Iron with its great inherent strength and its many benefits for humankind.� The Holy Qur'an [57:25].

The key word here is 'sent down' literally meaning sent down to Earth. We only know now by modern science that Iron came to Earth in the form of asteroids and did not originate on Earth but came from space.

I could go on and on and on.

We don't only have statements in the Qur'an that would blow your mind. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself describes the future, and makes predictions about the end of times.

He has made predictions that people will "traverse long distances in short periods of time". That people will "hop between the clouds and earth". That when the anti-christ emerges hes going to travel the world on a "white donkey white donkey made of iron/metal whose span between its two ears is 40 cubits." and when asked about his speed he said "Like a wind that leaves a cloud in its trail.".

The Prophet (pbuh) also predicted that near the end of time, a man will leave his home and his whip will tell him whats going on back home.

As you can see. It doesn't say PLANE. It doesn't say MOBILE. But to a simple bedouin arab from 1400 years ago receiving visions of the future, this is what it looked like to him. People riding a plane looked like people riding a white metal donkey with long ears. People pulling out their mobiles from their pockets talking to family back home looks like some man taking his whip from his side.

He also predicted that "people will dance late into the night", music will become widespread, intoxicants will be widely consumed. He predicted that we will see "barefoot, naked, destitute Bedouin shepherds competing in constructing tall buildings.'

Look at Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. 50 years ago it was a desert with bedouins. Oil is struck, overnight the region is filthy rich and now Dubai has the tallest building in the world with Saudi Arabia now planning to build the 'Jeddah tower' competing with Dubai and Kuwait. 50 years ago they were shephards, naked and destitute.

Are you starting to get the picture now? Vague does not do this justice. There are too many signs in Islam. God leaves no room for blind faith. How does one man predict so much about the world. Any one letter slip and the meaning is altered and it would be a mistake. I can show you soo many more of whatever example you'd like. There are mathematical patterns in the Qur'an, there are predictions about the rise and fall of historical civilizations in the Qur'an and they actually come to pass.

Here is an interesting hadith from the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) probably very relevant to our time:

"If you hear of an outbreak of plague in a land, do not enter it; but if the plague outbreaks out in a place while you are in it, do not leave that place."

A man with no scientific background.

"The blessings of food lie in washing hands before and after eating."

1400 years ago.

"Those with contagious diseases should be kept away from those who are healthy."

Hes no expert and these aren't super mind blowing statements to us today. But 1400 years ago.. this was gold.
DrNoGods wrote: Yes, there are other flood myths such as the Epic of Gilgamesh. But you have to consider the time period of these myths along with any other considerations. Biblical chronology allows the Noah's flood myth to be dated to about 4300 years ago. So the question is, from a scientific standpoint, whether a global flood covering the entire earth to several meters above the highest mountain peak could have actually happened 4300 years ago.
Haha comon man I'm a muslim. I believe the bible to be only a part reflection of the original gospel of Jesus (pbuh), and thus it was corrupted by man. Jesus came with one book not a 'collection of books that contradict each other'. So no, I don't believe the world is 5,000 years old or that Noah's flood happened 4,500 years ago. The Qur'an states no such thing. In fact the science discussed by Graham Hancock and Randal Carlson points to about I think 12,000-14,000 years ago right around the end of a certain ice age.
DrNoGods wrote: There are many sources for detailed explanations of why this event could not have happened as described from the standpoint of geology, biology, genetics, anthropology, etc. It can be positively disproved by any one of these disciplines, and together they show it has 0% probability of happening as described. Many people try to show that it is scientifically feasible, but they almost always ignore one important aspect or another, particularly the time period in which it supposedly happened which is a key argument against it. It is a myth.
Just look at the research man. An asteroid hit the north pole during the ice age, an asteroid like the one that is theorized to have killed off the dinosaurs. The resulting melting polar ice caps flooded Earth. Watch their videos, they use a lot of science to describe their work and these are nonreligious men. Spiritual maybe but non-religious.
DrNoGods wrote: Again, the statement that "the heavens and the Earth were once a connected entity" is too vague to base a scientific analysis on. What, specifically, is meant by "connected entity? You could argue that our solar system is a "connected entity" right now as it is a system of planets and other bodies orbiting a central star with gravity allowing the connected entity to exist as such.
The arabic word is "رتقا" meaning 'joined entity' as in physically one piece. It's not figurative, or symbolic. Its quite literal. They were one piece, from the same cloth, the same material. Not connected wirelessly but physically. How does one predict such things and then challenges me to find a mistake.
DrNoGods wrote: The idea that everything living thing is made of water is also too vague to mean anything scientific. What does "made of" even mean? Does it mean all living things begin as some number of molecules of pure H2O, or only that they contain a lot of H2O? Are seeds all made of H2O? Are the female eggs that when fertilized to start the growth process of a human being or other mammal made entirely of H2O?
Made from.. could mean many things. It could mean water is essential to its formation. It could also mean that all living things are composed of water. But regardless of which it is, it still makes the remarkable claim that life is associated with water. No matter what type of life, they all contain clues as to their dependence on water. Even bacteria require water for survival. With the number of species of microorganisms, animals that live in super dry climates, and all extremophiles - water is still necessary for life. What a remarkable claim 1400 years ago made by an illiterate man.
DrNoGods wrote: Again, these vague statements from holy books are simply too open to interpretation to form the basis of a scientific analysis without a lot more definition and clarification, which usually isn't there. This is why they can be interpreted in many different ways to suit whatever argument is needed. They are not suitable as the basis of scientific analysis.
You are incorrect my brother! This isn't the Bible, one need only understand arabic to read the Qur'an in its original language. You may need further interpretation because you are not an arabic speaker and you may wish to derive the full meaning of the word when translating, but to the arabic speaker, the words are clear as day.

So the Qur'an is not a book of science but a book of signs so that people may believe.
Last edited by Abdelrahman on Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Abdelrahman
Student
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:36 pm

Post #8

Post by Abdelrahman »

Purple Knight wrote: What interests me is if Abdel would still conclude that the Qu'ran says the universe is expanding from those verses if science said, "Screech. Wait. Hold on. The universe isn't necessarily expanding after all; it just happened to be that most of the things we could see happened to be moving away from us because of this phenomenon we only now discovered pushing galaxies in our area away from a central point. We just developed this new super amazing telescope and it turns out that the really far stuff out of range of this phenomenon is actually more blue-shifted. Our bad."
Words are words Purple Knight. They carry meaning. Those meanings can be looked up. Expanding means expanding. Extending means extending. Arabic is like english based n rooot words that you can trace back to a backbone structure for its meaning. If I say:

The red ball is bouncing.

That is all I can mean. There is no other interpretation to the word bounce. I can look up its root and why bounce means bounce. Same with Arabic. Yes some words carry multiple meanings, in this case we aren't having that issue which is simply solved with context.

The Qur'an simply states what it states. Not my fault lol.

hERICtic
Apprentice
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 12:30 pm

Re: Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it

Post #9

Post by hERICtic »

My apologies, how does one quote selected sections?

You: "Did we not make the earth a resting place? and the mountains as stakes?�[Quran, 78:6-7]

Hints at mountains having roots with the word 'stakes'.

Me: The Quran does not say that mountains have roots. It says they're like tent pegs, stabalizing the earth.

And He has set firm mountains in the earth so that it would not shake with you... (Quran, 16:15)

First, the Bible mentions that mountains have roots, predating the Quran. Second, mountains do not stabalize the earth. The reason for the mountians are the plates shifting. In fact, many mountains regions have quite a few earthquakes due to the instablity of the earth in that location.

So your comment how could Mohammed have known this 1400 years ago is wrong on two fronts.

It was known that mountains have roots (which the Quran does not state to begin with)and mountains do not stabalize the earth, and the earth DOES shake. So its scientifically incorrect.

You: "We sent down Iron with its great inherent strength and its many benefits for humankind.� The Holy Qur'an [57:25].

The key word here is 'sent down' literally meaning sent down to Earth. We only know now by modern science that Iron came to Earth in the form of asteroids and did not originate on Earth but came from space.

Me: The exact same word which you imply means sent down is used 90 times in the Quran...never once refering to outerspace. You are adding to the Quran to make it say what you want to believe.

Second, the Egyptians called iron "metal from the heavens."

So again, you ask...how could Mohammed know this? He didnt.

It does not say iron was from outerspace. Plus, it was already known.

Last but not least your comments on the sun's orbit. Nowhere in the Quran does it mention the earth revolving around the sun. At that time, it was believed the sun did have an orbit arond the earth, thereby creating night and day.

Which is how the Quran describes it.

It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)(Sura 36: 40).

Verse 39:5 ...He wraps the night over the day and wraps the day over the night and has subjected the sun and the moon, each running [its course] for a specified term...

Abdelrahman
Student
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:36 pm

Re: Why Islam does not clash with modern science, or does it

Post #10

Post by Abdelrahman »

My apologies, how does one quote selected sections?
You type [-q-u-o-t-e-] (without the dashes) before the sentence you are trying to quote and [-/-q-u-o-t-e-] (also without the dashes) at the end.
First, the Bible mentions that mountains have roots, predating the Quran.
Two points. Firstly, we Muslims believe in the Gospel sent with Jesus (pbuh) and don't believe the modern day Bible to be an accurate record of said text. So there may very well be inspired verses in there that stem from the original infallible word of God, but there are also many verses in there that come from man. Need I quote any of the scientific inaccuracies of the Bible, or self contradictions? These verses could not have come from God and are interpolations written by man reflecting the scientific knowledge of their day.

Second, there are many instances where the Qur'an and Bible reference the same thing but the Qur'an differs, providing a more scientifically viable explanation. For example. The Bible says:

"God made two great lights--the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars." - [Genesis 1:16]

While the Qur'an says:

"Blessed be He Who has placed in the heaven big stars, and has placed therein a great lamp (sun), and a moon giving light." - The Holy Qur'an [25:61]

Describing the sun as a 'lamp' and the moon as reflecting light that isn't its own. The arabic word is noor, which is used when describing reflection.

If Muhammad (pbuh) had gotten these ideas from the Bible, then he would have also copied all these other inferences to nature the way the Bible did. But instead it goes beyond and describes the moon as reflected light and the sun as a lamp or 'source', which is found no where in the Bible. Also none of the other scientific inaccuracies found in the Bible are found in the Qur'an. Surely man did not have advanced scientific instrumentation at the time to filter through the Biblical content and select that which is accurate.. how did they know which to pick and choose? We would find much more inaccuracies in the Qur'an if he (pbuh) had copied from the Bible.

I think this next verse speaks to you.

"Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah , they would have found within it much contradiction." - The Holy Qur'an [4:82]
Second, mountains do not stabalize the earth. The reason or the mountians are the plates shifting. In fact, many mountains regions have quite a few earthquakes due to the instablity of the earth in that location.
Most mountain ranges are the result of high-impact compression stress when two tectonic plates collide. They release the tension built up inside the crust. If we assume that that mountain had not formed, what would all that compression stress result in? Earthquakes. So the release of the pressure by creating mountains prevents Earthquakes.

You may even look up the concept of 'isotacy' that describes why roots form and why certain topographic heights exist and how this relates to the equilibrium between the crust and mantle.

Simply put, if plates could not form mountains (i.e. move up or down) then they can only rub against other plates and result in Earthquakes. And yes, mountainous regions are unstable sometimes. But they are still more stable than that area would be if a mountain had not formed and released the stress.
It was known that mountains have roots (which the Quran does not state to begin with)and mountains do not stabalize the earth, and the earth DOES shake. So its scientifically incorrect.
As I proved above, if muslims had copied from the Bible, we would have copied all the scientific inaccuracies presented in your text as well but we don't see that. In fact we see the Qur'an go above and beyond in stating its differences proving it could not have been copied from the Bible. And even though the Bible mentions roots, we did not discover this knowledge until science established it. This was not established knowledge at the time. Again, without mountains, the world would be 'shaking' alot more.
Me: The exact same word which you imply means sent down is used 90 times in the Quran...never once refering to outerspace. You are adding to the Quran to make it say what you want to believe.
First off, the word used 'sent down' means 'sent down'. It does not mean outerspace, the word for outerspace means outerspace. Im sure the word 'sent down' is used more than once and I'm sure it means just that...'sent down'.

See sentences are made of words. Seperate words. Sent down can mean sent down from the sky, from a mountain, from a spaceship. You must add another word to the sentence if you want to define sent down from where. So the three arabic words 'sent down', 'from', 'space' are used. Three seperate words when put together mean one thing. All those words are used in the Qur'an so i'm not sure what your case is here. It clearly states that Iron was 'sent down' 'from' 'space'.
Second, the Egyptians called iron "metal from the heavens."

So again, you ask...how could Mohammed know this? He didnt.

It does not say iron was from outerspace. Plus, it was already known.
Comon man. People didn't translate the hieroglyphics until hundreds of years later in 1799 with the discovery of the Rosetta Stone. No one knew what the hieroglyphics meant at the time, everyone knows that. Are you trying to say that a group of bedouin Arabs translated Egyptian hieroglyphics hundreds of years before Western civilization? Ancient Egyptians were long gone. We would have evidence of such in our history and would have probably discovered many other things along with it. Not only that, we have no evidence of any ancient Egyptian beliefs in Islam. If the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) had copied from the ancient Egyptians, why copy this one small fact and leave out everything else after having cracked the code to deciphering the hieroglyphics. Just doesn't make sense.

It is only with modern scientific knowledge did we know that iron truly was an artifact of space. This was not known. Even if it had existed in culture as a myth, why choose this myth and leave all the other myths people believed at the time. How did he know which parables to select and which myths were true without scientific knowledge? He was a Prophet (pbuh) of God that how.
Last but not least your comments on the sun's orbit. Nowhere in the Quran does it mention the earth revolving around the sun. At that time, it was believed the sun did have an orbit arond the earth, thereby creating night and day.

Which is how the Quran describes it.

It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)(Sura 36: 40).

Verse 39:5 ...He wraps the night over the day and wraps the day over the night and has subjected the sun and the moon, each running [its course] for a specified term...
With regards to [36:40], the significance is the use of the word for 'move'. In arabic this word means something which is moving in two ways at the same time; in a general direction as well as moving around itself. So if I use the word to describe someone in water, it would mean swimming -someone moving forward as well as kicking his legs. If I'm describing someone on the ground, they would be walking. Not floating across.. but moving their legs as well as moving in a direction. When you describe a planet, its stating that not only are they moving in a general direction but that they are moving around themselves or in some other way as well. No one knew that planets rotated on their axis at that time.

With regards to [39:5], there are two interesting points. Firstly the word used for 'wrap' is yukawero which stems from "كرة" which means ball. So it is the wrapping of something in spherical fashion. Contrast that with the Bible that refers to the Earth as a circle and flat [Matthew 4:8]. People had already known that the Earth was round, but still interesting to note the Qur'an doesn't copy the Bible.

Secondly, the verse states that the moon and the sun both will run for a specified term. Indicating that they have an end and are not permanent. This is also something only discovered recently.

It does not matter what topic, when the Qur'an references the natural world it does not contradict modern scientific understanding like other religious texts. It also challenges the reader to ponder on such verses and tells us if they had been from other than God you would find errors. Yyet 1400 years later, we have not found one yet.

Thus why the Qur'an is described as a 'timeless miracle' for the proof of God.

Post Reply