"Let us search history. A famous Arabic scientist of the twelfth century
did think that the earth is not really flat but round. As soon as his idea
became known, all his works were declared as blasphemous, his books confiscated
and burnt. Just a few years ago, the supreme religious authority of Saudi
Arabia, Sheikh Abdel Aziz ibn Baaz issued a fatwa (Islamic edict) in this
fashion:
'The earth is indeed flat. Those who do not accept this are atheist - they
deserve to be punished.' "
And here's a pretty picture of the muslim solar system....
You know i'm not really suprised about this, i'm sure you can find readings
somewhere in the bible that are much like this.... They are more alike then they
would like to admit
This just shows people are gullible, and will belive anything they are told!
Shinsen89
merged: 07-27-2006 ~ 08:37am
Wow you know i think i'm going to convert! I mean this is " Real"
Evidence! <( Sarcasim)
The Day i convert is the day i become a Republican, that is never
happening....
Well thats one intepretation. But those passages should probably really be
interpreted as 1. Earth as the abode of humans and 2. the sun and moon moving
across the sky seeing as the author of the Quran was probably not an
accomplished astronomer.
No it's pretty much THE interpretation. Did you watch the video and read the
links or did you just look at the picture?
Islamic prayer times also reinforce the notion of a flat earth.
Quote: But those passages should
probably really be interpreted as 1. Earth as the abode of
humans
Why? You can't just reinterpret stuff when you find that it's wrong. The quote
doesn't say anything about "humans" and it does say "fixed".
By "interpret" do you really mean "change the entire meaning of
the sentence until it's no longer incorrect"? Everyone believed the world
was flat when the book was written. That is a fact. So if the book really did
say the world was round then why did it take 1500 years before it was finally
accepted? Same question can be posed to any religious scripture including the
bible. Why are they always reinterpreted after science discovers the truth on
its own (while getting massive resistence from religious organizations)? Why
isn't science going to the text of god to find out what is correct first to save
themselves time?
"Let us ask a drunken person about the model of this universe. At first,
the drunkard may simply look at the questioner with baffling eyes; pick up the
bottle from the street and drink more. Then he will throw the empty bottle in
the street and start walking. If we wished, we could easily liken the whole
episode to the affairs of the universe. We may compare the full bottle as the
expanding universe, the drinking and emptying the bottle means the drunkard was
saying that at a certain time this expansion (of the universe) will come to a
stop and then contraction will ensue. Then, when the drunkard cast away the
empty bottle he wanted to imply that before the contraction of the universe
starts, all creations will be annihilated, leading to the point of singularity.
Shall we accept this explanation as plausible?"
Quote: 2. the sun and moon moving
across the sky seeing as the author of the Quran was probably not an
accomplished astronomer.
Quote by Plunkies No it's pretty much
THE interpretation. Did you watch the video and read the links or did you just
look at the picture?
Islamic prayer times also reinforce the notion of a flat earth.
Yes I also read a number of other links that intepret the
same items very differently. Links follow USC link "Islamic
site"
and thats just from a few minutes worth of searching in which I found the
opposing view as well. I have not found any definitive answer as to the shape of
the earth in the items quoted on either side. I have found defnitive proof that
the geo-centric theory was maintained by the Arabic scientists (who were by the
way were most advanced for a relatively long period of time given that Islam
extolls the search for knowledge given that it agrees with what Allah
says)
Quote by PlunkiesGod wasn't an
accomplished astronomer?
No one knows who the author was.
Most Muslims believe it was Allah, some believe Mohammed receved Allah's
revelations and dictated them to his followers, and some factions do not even
recognize the Quran (which by strict interpretation means they aren't Muslims
since the Quran forbids sects and divisions). Others point to Mohammed (who was
supposedly illiterate) or even to Jewish or Christian origins (really thin ice
there and no real supporting evidence)
Quote by MnemethYes I also read a number
of other links that intepret the same items very differently.
Why are we forced to interpret and reinterpret the vague and impractical words
of a god? If it was written by god shouldn't it have more knowledge than the
primitive men who lived during that time? Is it just a coincidence that god
happens to be as stupid as the people of that same time period? How come
everything is ALWAYS interpreted AFTER the science comes in? Why aren't we
gaining insights and knowledge from the bible or the quran right now? If the
bible or the quran were written by god then we'd be gaining new knowledge from
it rather than constantly altering it to fit our current understanding of the
universe.
Saying the quran doesn't support a flat earth cosmology is an almost
indefensible position. You need look no further than their prayer
habits...
"In Islam, it is compulsory to offer prayers five times a day. Preset times
are appointed for these prayers. Offering of prayers apart from these set times
are forbidden. For example, a Muslim cannot pray at sunrise, at sunset or at
midday. We know from the diurnal rotation of earth that, at any fixed time, the
sun is seen at any position on earth and as such, a prayer can be offered at any
site on the earth. What does this mean? Consider the following fact. When the
sun is rising at Barisal (a district in Bangladesh), it has still not risen at
Calcutta (in West Bengal, India). However, in Chittagong (another port city in
Bangladeh), the sun is already up. So, when offering prayer at Barisal is haram
(forbidden), it is not haram at Calcutta or at Chittagong. Thus, can we find any
justification for imposing a ban on offering of prayers at some other times
apart from the set times of prayers? Aroj Ali Matbor, the rationalist, in his
book mentioned before has posed a very interesting question: Suppose, a Muslim,
after offering the Zuhr prayer at 1:30 PM, leaves for Mecca. Arriving in Mecca,
he will be surprised to note that it is yet not noon there. So, shall he offer
another Zuhr prayer at Mecca too? The answer to this enigma is actually
contained in the question itself. Aroj Ali, himself has answered this question
in a rational way. According to him, there was a
time when the concept of earth as stationary and flat was very much in
vogue. From this perception, the idea of fixed times for prayers emerged,
he opines. Nonetheless, this old concept is now dead; instead, the modern
science has proved that the earth is round and in motion. That is why
complications have arisen while trying to fit the modern day life-style with
age-old religious doctrines."
Your link says... [16:8] ...and He creates other
things beyond your knowledge... and [24:45] ...Allah creates what He wills... is proof that allah
creates new galaxies and is evolving species and that the quran foresaw it. How?
How is this any different from the drunk explaining the universe analogy? You
can't learn anything from these quotes. Only after they're taken out of context
and reinterpreted to mean something they don't even say do they finally support
reality. Why aren't scientists looking in the quran to figure out astronomy and
biology? Why did it take 1500 years to figure out the world was round if the
quran or the bible already supported it?
The difference is my links interpret the text literally, exactly as the text
interprets itself. No hokus pokus or mumbo jumbo or smoke and mirrors bs. God
wouldn't constantly speak in nonsense and irrelevent riddles. Science textbooks
aren't vague and metaphorical. If they were, they'd be useless for learning. If
I have to ALREADY know what textbook is teaching me before I can understand it
then it's a useless piece of garbage.
Here's another example from your link....
[21:30] ...And We made every living thing from
water...
[24:45] And Allah has created every animal from
water...
Supposedly this proves that allah had knowledge of evolution again. That animals
evolved from micro-organisms that lived in the water. But if that's the case
then why did allah not say just that? That all animals originated from lesser
creatures? Why didn't he go into anything specific or intelligent? If you
interpret these quotes literally it simply means that everything was constructed
from water, no different than the christian god making man from dirt.
[30:48] It is Allah Who sends the winds, and
then they raise clouds: then He spreads them in the sky as He wills and makes
them dark, then you see the drops issue from the midst of them...
[24:43] Don't you see how Allah drives clouds
with force, then joins them together, then makes them into a heap? - then you
see the drops issue from the midst of them. And He sends down from the sky
mountains (of clouds) wherein is hail: He strikes therewith whom He pleases and
He turns it away from whom He pleases. The flash of His lightning well-nigh
snatches away the sight.
Again your link claims that the author of the quran had knowledge of the water
cycle, yet the cycle is incomplete. The trick, the key, to the water cycle is
the evaporation of the water back into the sky. Yet it doesn't mention any of
that. It simply explains what any retard can see by going outside and looking up
at the sky. Rain falls down when it's cloudy. Duh. How are these the profound
words of an omniscient, perfect god?
Quote: No one knows who the author
was. Most Muslims believe it was Allah, some believe Mohammed receved Allah's
revelations and dictated them to his followers, and some factions do not even
recognize the Quran (which by strict interpretation means they aren't Muslims
since the Quran forbids sects and divisions). Others point to Mohammed (who was
supposedly illiterate) or even to Jewish or Christian origins (really thin ice
there and no real supporting evidence)
Isn't that the point? If god wrote it then why is it constantly wrong? I mean I
certainly respect muslims more for trying to make their scripture fit science,
rather than denying science altogether in favor of mythology, but it's still
incorrect.
Quote by PlunkiesGod wasn't an
accomplished astronomer?
You can look at it this way: God meant for the holy books to be read by humans,
and so had them written from a human perspective. For example the Bible is often
written as a first-person account.
"And I turned to see the voice that
spake with me. And being turned, I saw
seven golden candlesticks;" - Revelation 1:12
We can also look at it this way: We don't know God's perspective. For example,
the Earth is moving with respect to the sun. However the Sun is moving with
respect to the Milky Way. And is the Milky Way moving with respect to the
universe? We don't know, since we don't know the limits of the universe. So
which perspective is correct, when everything seems to be moving with respect to
something else? It makes more sense to me to use the perspective of the reader.
Quote by Persocom01You can look at it
this way: God meant for the holy books to be read by humans, and so had them
written from a human perspective. For example the Bible is often written as a
first-person account.
"And I turned to see the voice that
spake with me. And being turned, I saw
seven golden candlesticks;" - Revelation 1:12
I see. So god made the bible retarded and full of blatent errors and
inaccuracies because it was meant for humans? That makes perfect sense! No....no
wait.....the opposite of that....no sense....yeah that's right.
You're a perfect example of why religion is a curse on humanity. All the
evidence points to a normal human writing the book 2000 years ago but instead
you insist on making excuses for A GOD
and his apparent incompetence. I think if a god wrote it it wouldn't have to be
constantly corrected, reinterpretted, and explained. If a god wrote it it would
be a stunning and profound piece of literature rather than a shining example of
hate, ignorance, and violence from cover to cover. Have you ever read it? 95% of
it is incoherent drivel. That's not the work of an all-knowing being.
Quote: We can also look at it this
way: We don't know God's perspective. For example, the Earth is moving with
respect to the sun. However the Sun is moving with respect to the Milky Way. And
is the Milky Way moving with respect to the universe? We don't know, since we
don't know the limits of the universe. So which perspective is correct, when
everything seems to be moving with respect to something else? It makes more
sense to me to use the perspective of the reader.
Wait. Let me get this right. You say he wrote it in the human perspective to
cover up the scientific inaccuracies. Then you say it's written in god's
perspective where it can almost be considered technically correct by itself if
you interpret it in such a way where it doesn't make any sense in context. It's
a shame god didn't think to use astericks to straighten all this out.
From your perspective you say you seek the truth. But to me all you seem to do
is try to cover up ignorance and make excuses for lies. Hrm...I think I'm
getting the hang of this whole "perspective" thing.
Quote by PlunkiesSaying the quran
doesn't support a flat earth cosmology is an almost indefensible position. You
need look no further than their prayer habits...
You quote
neglects one key issue. Muslims of the ancient world did not have access to fast
transport from one part for the world to another (fastest transport was probably
by horse). Therefore the issue your quote describes did not exist in the ancient
world it has only come to light in the "modern world". Find a better
reasoning.
Quote by PlunkiesThe difference is my
links interpret the text literally, exactly as the text interprets
itself.
Literally? Tell me how does this "And the earth
have We spread out, and placed therein firm hills, and caused each seemly thing
to grow therein…(Sura Al-Hijr 15:19) " say the world is
flat. Literally interpreted this merely means the Earth is not flat (not talking
overall shape just shape of the land) has hills and lots of "seemly"
growing things.
OK this one: "Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found
it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O
Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness (Sura Al-Kahf 018.086)."
Hmm how far did Muslims of hte ancient world travel? How is this not like
watching the sun sink into the sea.
Some "literal" interpretations. They are nothing more than
interpretations so don't try to call them literal.
Quote by Plunkies [30:48] It is Allah
Who sends the winds, and then they raise clouds: then He spreads them in the sky
as He wills and makes them dark, then you see the drops issue from the midst of
them...
[24:43] Don't you see how Allah drives clouds with force, then joins them
together, then makes them into a heap? - then you see the drops issue from the
midst of them. And He sends down from the sky mountains (of clouds) wherein is
hail: He strikes therewith whom He pleases and He turns it away from whom He
pleases. The flash of His lightning well-nigh snatches away the sight.
Again your link claims that the author of the quran had knowledge of the water
cycle, yet the cycle is incomplete. The trick, the key, to the water cycle is
the evaporation of the water back into the sky. Yet it doesn't mention any of
that. It simply explains what any retard can see by going outside and looking up
at the sky. Rain falls down when it's cloudy. Duh. How are these the profound
words of an omniscient, perfect god?
Umm your first quote
killed your argument. Try this experiment. Place a bucket of water in an
enclosure and let it sit. Humidity will increase due to evaporation, add in air
flow and the humidity increases much rapidly. As for knowledge of the water
cycle ask any farmer at pretty much any point in time. You'll probably get some
interesting answers just based on thier most rudimentary observations (and the
fact that they wanted to keep their crops in good shape)
Quote by PlunkiesIsn't that the point?
If god wrote it then why is it constantly wrong? I mean I certainly respect
muslims more for trying to make their scripture fit science, rather than denying
science altogether in favor of mythology, but it's still incorrect.
Not really the point I was trying to make. I was actually
argueing from a science point of view on whether or not these different
scriptures contain evidence for or against the various subjects presented. As I
stated no evidence either way for the shape of the Earth, plenty of evidence for
the geo-centric model, and easily plenty of evidence for the water cycle.
I am curious since in all your arguements your provided references seem to
expect the Quran to be more like a science text book than a holy scripture based
soley upon the fact that people are trying to prove/disprove any science
contained within. I turn your own argument back on you in that alot of your
proof is just as interpretive as the links I gave.
Quote by MnemethYou quote neglects one
key issue. Muslims of the ancient world did not have access to fast transport
from one part for the world to another (fastest transport was probably by
horse). Therefore the issue your quote describes did not exist in the ancient
world it has only come to light in the "modern world". Find a better
reasoning.
God supposedly wrote the book. Why would
an all knowing being make such a massive oversight. I'm not arguing whether
muslims knew wtf they were talking about, they obviously didn't and they
obviously still don't. Why are you arguing for the people of that day? They
believed in a flat earth. Duh. That's not really up for debate. Nor do you need
to explain why they believed it. You only further support my position that it
was clearly written by man.
Quote: Literally? Tell me how does
this "And the earth have We spread out, and placed therein firm hills, and
caused each seemly thing to grow therein (Sura Al-Hijr 15:19) " say the
world is flat. Literally interpreted this merely means the Earth is not flat
(not talking overall shape just shape of the land) has hills and lots of
"seemly" growing things.
Uh, first of all no one is arguing that hills don't exist. I don't even
understand why you bothered to mention such a stupid, irrelevent point.
Second, all the quotes were taken from the same block of text, which contained
"And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh
71:19)". In context they all support a flat earth. If allah made the Earth
round why wouldn't he mention that a few times rather than giving people the
impression it was flat over and over again? Why does the text have to be
reinterpreted AFTER we find out the Earth is round? Why didn't we get the
information from the quran 2000 years ago?
Quote: OK this one: "Till,
when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy
spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish
or show them kindness (Sura Al-Kahf 018.086)." Hmm how far did Muslims of
hte ancient world travel? How is this not like watching the sun sink into the
sea.
Some "literal" interpretations. They are nothing more than
interpretations so don't try to call them literal.
Again the text tells the story of travel from one end of the earth to the other.
They are at the place where the sun rises. Then they go to the place where it
sets. It doesn't say they traveled until the sun set, it says they traveled to
THE location where it sets. Again, a book written by god shouldn't make such
careless mistakes. You understand what literal means right? The sun has no
"setting-place".
Quote: Umm your first quote killed
your argument. Try this experiment. Place a bucket of water in an enclosure and
let it sit. Humidity will increase due to evaporation, add in air flow and the
humidity increases much rapidly. As for knowledge of the water cycle ask any
farmer at pretty much any point in time. You'll probably get some interesting
answers just based on thier most rudimentary observations (and the fact that
they wanted to keep their crops in good shape)
Wtf are you talking about? They claim the quran has knowledge of the water
cycle. The only difficult part to grasp is the evaporation of water. Predictably
it mentions no evaporation of water back into the sky. Ask any farmer of that
time and he'll say the water disapears. He won't explain how the water turns
into vapor and travels back into the atmosphere. I can't figure out your point,
you've lost me here.
The whole point of mentioning the water cycle is to prove that the maker of the
quran (god) had some knowledge that humans of the time didn't have. Humans at
the time did infact know that rain falls down. Repeatedly mentioning the water
cycles texts as if they prove something is the issue, they prove nothing and
show no advanced knowledge of the world.
Quote: Not really the point I was
trying to make. I was actually argueing from a science point of view on whether
or not these different scriptures contain evidence for or against the various
subjects presented.
Obviously they don't contain any evidence for it or else we'd have gotten the
knowledge from the quran without needing science in the first place.
Quote: I am curious since in all
your arguements your provided references seem to expect the Quran to be more
like a science text book than a holy scripture based soley upon the fact that
people are trying to prove/disprove any science contained
within.
Ah the old Christian fallback works for the Quran too I see. It's a shame that
humans constantly need to make excuses for god. The Quran is obviously trying to
explain the world and is meant to be read as fact, so how is it not like a
science textbook? Why does god seem to only speak in metaphores in this day and
age and only literally 2000 years ago? Because it's wrong, thats why.
Quote: I turn your own argument
back on you in that alot of your proof is just as interpretive as the links I
gave.
Unfortunately you didn't seem to understand what 'literal' means so all that
reinterpretation only helped to prove my point further.
Quote by PlunkiesYou only further
support my position that it was clearly written by man.
I was
not aware that this is what we were arguing since I have not said one way or the
other who I beleive wrote the Quran. Please stay on subject.
Quote by Plunkies Uh, first of all no
one is arguing that hills don't exist. I don't even understand why you bothered
to mention such a stupid, irrelevent point.
Second, all the quotes were taken from the same block of text, which contained
"And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh
71:19)". In context they all support a flat earth. If allah made the Earth
round why wouldn't he mention that a few times rather than giving people the
impression it was flat over and over again? Why does the text have to be
reinterpreted AFTER we find out the Earth is round? Why didn't we get the
information from the quran 2000 years ago?
And you berate
me for intepretation? The arguement is whether or not it says the world is flat
and none of the quotes or the entire section taken in context states this. Gee
really which part of the meaning of literal do YOU not understand.
1. actual: being or reflecting the essential or genuine character of something
(this requires intepretation unless you are the individual that did the
writing)
2. without interpretation or
embellishment
3. limited to the explicit meaning of a word or
text; "a literal translation"
4. avoiding embellishment or exaggeration (used for emphasis); "it's the
literal truth"
Nowhere does the Quran say "the world is flat", or for that matter
"the water cycle is explained here". Your arguements are still
pointless since you obviously are still interpreting the passages to fit your
own understanding/belief. Since you are incapable of taking a literal
translation I'll do it for you using your added quote
And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh 71:19) = The
deity you beleive in created a large place for you. I can't get much more
literal than that. Anything other than that is interpretation based on what you
know about the author or the religion.
Quote by Plunkies Wtf are you talking
about? They claim the quran has knowledge of the water cycle. The only difficult
part to grasp is the evaporation of water. Predictably it mentions no
evaporation of water back into the sky. Ask any farmer of that time and he'll
say the water disapears. He won't explain how the water turns into vapor and
travels back into the atmosphere. I can't figure out your point, you've lost me
here.
The whole point of mentioning the water cycle is to prove that the maker of the
quran (god) had some knowledge that humans of the time didn't have. Humans at
the time did infact know that rain falls down. Repeatedly mentioning the water
cycles texts as if they prove something is the issue, they prove nothing and
show no advanced knowledge of the world.
Since I have no
idea who actually wrote the Quran (nor have I argued for or against any supposed
author) I find it interesting that you keep harping on the subject to make your
points. Since you obviously missed the point of my previous argument try this
one.
-Science first - Water cycle basics = heat or low humidity causes water to
evaporate/sublimate becoming vapor. This vapor is cooled or reaches its
saturation point and condenses/freezes (depending on the speed with which the
temperature/pressure changes) and falls as precipitation, collects on surfaces
(dew/condensation like on a pot lid), or even stays airborne for a while and
thenteh cycle begins anew
-Now that thats out of the way take part of the first quote "It is Allah
Who sends the winds, and then they raise clouds...." an obvous reference to
the creation of clouds which ocurs as a result of increasing amount water in the
air (BTW wind/moving air accelerates teh evaporation/sublimation process
especially when that air is dry) regardless of what words they used to describe
it. Add in the fact that they knew what steam was (think cooking which shows
both evaporation and condensation) and this proves that they did have a
rudimetary knowledge of the water cycle. Yea this is interpretation, but the
Quran is not a text book and I have no idea what our modern terminology would
have read as in the original poetic arabic (or even if it would have translated
at all). Therefore it appears that the water cycle is indeed mentioned although
not explained in the detail you expect.
Quote by PlunkiesObviously they don't
contain any evidence for it or else we'd have gotten the knowledge from the
quran without needing science in the first place.
? Where
did this come from. Did you not read my earlier post. Speaking of the muslims
"(who were by the way were most advanced for a relatively long period of
time given that Islam extolls the search for knowledge given that it agrees with
what Allah says)"
The Quran did/does not contain all the answers/knowledge.
Quote by PlunkiesAgain the text tells
the story of travel from one end of the earth to the other. They are at the
place where the sun rises. Then they go to the place where it sets. It doesn't
say they traveled until the sun set, it says they traveled to THE location where
it sets. Again, a book written by god shouldn't make such careless mistakes. You
understand what literal means right? The sun has no
"setting-place".
What mistake? where I am at the
sun rises in the East and sets in the West (a rising place and a setting place).
Same thing if I am in the Marshall Islands, Hawaii, France, Mexico (all places I
have traveled to). Hmm what were the "ends of the earth" at that time.
Regardless of how you interpret it , it still does not say "The Earth is
flat" nor, it seems, can you provide a passage that can be literally
translated to that phrase or its equivalent. If were were argueing the
geo-centric vs solar centric theories I would understand your arguement here and
agree with it (see earlier post) and I do understand that during that period of
time people thought the Earth was flat but nowhere in the Quran does it say
"The Earth is flat" or for that matter "The Earth is round".
Quote by MnemethI was not aware that this
is what we were arguing since I have not said one way or the other who I beleive
wrote the Quran. Please stay on subject.
Well then please explain to me what we're arguing about because you seem to have
no point at all. Hold on lemme see if I can figure out your stance....
Clearly you don't believe Allah wrote the quran since you confirm that it says
the earth is the center of the universe so.......
1. Man wrote the quran
2. Man at that time believed the earth was flat
3. The quran might say the earth is round.
Wtf? You're the kind of person who would look at an ancient cave drawing from a
million years ago picturing 2 circles under a larger rectangle and say they
might have had knowledge of automobiles.
Quote: And you berate me for
intepretation? The arguement is whether or not it says the world is flat and
none of the quotes or the entire section taken in context states this. Gee
really which part of the meaning of literal do YOU not understand.
1. actual: being or reflecting the essential or genuine character of something
(this requires intepretation unless you are the individual that did the
writing)
2. without interpretation or
embellishment
3. limited to the explicit meaning of a word or
text; "a literal translation"
4. avoiding embellishment or exaggeration (used for emphasis); "it's the
literal truth"
Nowhere does the Quran say "the world is flat", or for that matter
"the water cycle is explained here". Your arguements are still
pointless since you obviously are still interpreting the passages to fit your
own understanding/belief. Since you are incapable of taking a literal
translation I'll do it for you using your added quote
And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh 71:19) = The
deity you beleive in created a large place for you. I can't get much more
literal than that. Anything other than that is interpretation based on what you
know about the author or the religion.
"And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh
71:19)"
Allah. GOD. Has CREATED.
From god's point of view the
EARTH (THE WHOLE EARTH) is a
WIDE
1. Having a specified extent from side to side: a ribbon two inches wide.
2. Extending over a great distance from side to side; broad: a wide road; a wide
necktie.
EXPANSE
1. A wide and open extent, as of surface, land, or sky.
I can't get any more literal than this.
You wouldn't call a large balloon a "wide expanse" would you? God
wouldn't look down, see a giant round planet and consider it a wide expanse.
88:17,20 "Will they not regard the camels how they are created...... and
earth how it spread?"
"Even many Muslim scholars confess that In this phrase 'how it spread', he
denotes that earth is flat. All the scholars of Islam agree upon this. It is not
round as the physicists claim. "
Hence the fatwahs issued against people who believe the earth is round even
today...
Quote: "It is Allah Who sends
the winds, and then they raise clouds...." an obvous reference to the
creation of clouds which ocurs as a result of increasing amount water in the air
(BTW wind/moving air accelerates teh evaporation/sublimation process especially
when that air is dry) regardless of what words they used to describe it.
Heh...I see that quote and see "wind makes clouds float". You pull an
entire evaporation/sublimation process out of your ass. Who's interpretting now?
Quote: What mistake? where I am at
the sun rises in the East and sets in the West (a rising place and a setting
place). Same thing if I am in the Marshall Islands, Hawaii, France, Mexico (all
places I have traveled to). Hmm what were the "ends of the earth" at
that time. Regardless of how you interpret it , it still does not say "The
Earth is flat" nor, it seems, can you provide a passage that can be
literally translated to that phrase or its equivalent. If were were argueing the
geo-centric vs solar centric theories I would understand your arguement here and
agree with it (see earlier post) and I do understand that during that period of
time people thought the Earth was flat but nowhere in the Quran does it say
"The Earth is flat" or for that matter "The Earth is
round".
Again you interpret to fit today's reality without even realizing you're doing
it. You can go in the direction of east but you wouldn't say "I'm at
East" or "I'm at the place called East" nor would you say
"I'm at the place where the sun rises" or "I'm at the place where
the sun sets". (The only exception would be if they were in Japan and
called it the land of the rising sun)
"Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun..." (Sura Al-Kahf
018.090).
If you interpret that LITERALLY he is at the place where the sun rises. Since
the sun rises everywhere this is not something you would ever bother saying, so
we're left to the conclusion that the sun has a specific rising place and he
happens to be there, right?
Quote by Plunkies Well then please
explain to me what we're arguing about because you seem to have no point at all.
Hold on lemme see if I can figure out your stance....
Clearly you don't believe Allah wrote the quran since you confirm that it says
the earth is the center of the universe so.......
1. Man wrote the quran
2. Man at that time believed the earth was flat
3. The quran might say the earth is round.
Wtf? You're the kind of person who would look at an ancient cave drawing from a
million years ago picturing 2 circles under a larger rectangle and say they
might have had knowledge of automobiles.
Good try but you failed. Nice twist on words for a pointless attempt at
interpretation though. I've already stated several times what I am argueing for
and against, I'm not going to repeat all of it so heres the simple summary just
for you.
The question I am dealing with is: Does the Quran contain information pertaining to
the sciences? In particular, the shape of the Earth, the orientation of the
universe, and the water cycle since these are the only points I have
sounded off on.
Now that that has been explained for hoepfully the last time since it really
does not get any simpler than this (i.e. I am discussing the content and not the
supposed author of the book) lets see if you can stay on subject and stop being
insulting just because I disagree with you.
Quote by Plunkies "And Allah hath
made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh 71:19)"
Allah. GOD. Has CREATED.
From god's point of view the EARTH (THE WHOLE EARTH) is a
WIDE
1. Having a specified extent from side to side: a ribbon two inches wide.
2. Extending over a great distance from side to side; broad: a wide road; a wide
necktie.
EXPANSE
1. A wide and open extent, as of surface, land, or sky.
I can't get any more literal than this.
You wouldn't call a large balloon a "wide expanse" would you? God
wouldn't look down, see a giant round planet and consider it a wide expanse.
88:17,20 "Will they not regard the camels how they are created...... and
earth how it spread?"
"Even many Muslim scholars confess that In this phrase 'how it spread', he
denotes that earth is flat. All the scholars of Islam agree upon this. It is not
round as the physicists claim. "
Hence the fatwahs issued against people who believe the earth is round even
today...
No arguement on the creator interpreation.
I find it interesting that on the definition of wide you immediately assume two
dimensions even though we live in three physical dimensions and therefore wide
can be applied to a curved surface as well. As for expanse, it can be applied to
any surface regardless of shape.
The Muslim scholars do know more about the Quran than you or I do. However they
are not the authors. If you want to argue along this route then provide the
texts (simlar to the Dead Sea Scrolls partial compendium) that show how to
interpret these passages.
On another note that may put the issue in your favor, I don't think this is an
exact translation since the etymology of wide only
loosely matches all the definitions given. I think I'd like to see the literal
(word for word) not the interpretive translation of these passages before I
argue this point any further.
Quote by PlunkiesHeh...I see that quote
and see "wind makes clouds float". You pull an entire
evaporation/sublimation process out of your ass. Who's interpretting
now?
Did you read that entire text? Let me pull a part of it
forward.
Quote by MnemethYea this is
interpretation, but the Quran is not a text book and I have no idea what our
modern terminology would have read as in the original poetic arabic (or even if
it would have translated at all).
Quote by Plunkies Again you interpret to
fit today's reality without even realizing you're doing it. You can go in the
direction of east but you wouldn't say "I'm at East" or "I'm at
the place called East" nor would you say "I'm at the place where the
sun rises" or "I'm at the place where the sun sets". (The only
exception would be if they were in Japan and called it the land of the rising
sun)
"Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun..." (Sura Al-Kahf
018.090).
If you interpret that LITERALLY he is at the place where the sun rises. Since
the sun rises everywhere this is not something you would ever bother saying, so
we're left to the conclusion that the sun has a specific rising place and he
happens to be there, right?
Lets throw in the proverbial
monkey wrench here. Is this quote correct? I have found another translation that
seems to change the meaning of the quote used (too bad I can't read arabic, 1.
its a beautiful language and 2. I wouldn't have to rely on interpretive
translations of which I don't know if either, neither, or both are correct).
The quote from the Science myths page "Till, when he reached the
rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had
appointed no shelter therefrom (Sura Al-Kahf 018.090)."
to
Another Translation "018.090 Until, when he came to the rising of the sun,
he found it rising on a people for whom We had provided no covering protection
against the sun." This and reading the entire Sura it sounds like the
traveler/questor/apostle in question set out in one direction and traveled until
a time when the sun rose and then turned and then traveled until another time
the sun set (plus a few other directions) It makes no mention of the ends of the
Earth.
It seems that now a days all of us know way too much about EVERYTHING and KNOW
HOW TO GIVE OUR OWN THOUGHTS TOO much in EVERYTHING, that we forget the fact
that there are somethings that are only for personal purpose.
What I mean by personal purpose is that, you may have heard, "Wise men
don't talk." Well guess what? Those who can see the truth don't
talk........unlike those people who talk about things they don't know alot
about. Not to mention, people has a tendancy to find out about anything, but not
following PRECISE PROCEDURES, but simple "going through this book, that
book, this website, that website....and so on," while forgetting the very
meaning of 'acquiring knowledge'. This is why each year people are getting more
stupid and more idiotic.
Religion and Science are two things that are better left alone. If you are
interested in it, then just study alone, think alone, sooner or later you MAY BE
ABLE to find the truth. But if you are interested in finding the truth, just
knowing what is going on in a topic such as the one above, then leave it alone.
What I said above is what is lacking in our modern society. We human think of
ourselves as we can learn about everything, while the wise men (if there are any
now-a-days, there are few without a doubt) think of this as a waste of time to
even talk about the truths wide open with others; because they know what is GOOD
for them and others, because true knowledge is not something you can get and
talk about with others.
Look at us and just think about it, we don't even know ourselves quite well,
then how can we understand something that is of depth?
Quote by hikoseijuroIt seems that now
a days all of us know way too much about EVERYTHING and KNOW HOW TO GIVE OUR OWN
THOUGHTS TOO much in EVERYTHING, that we forget the fact that there are
somethings that are only for personal purpose.
What I mean by personal purpose is that, you may have heard, "Wise men
don't talk." Well guess what? Those who can see the truth don't
talk........unlike those people who talk about things they don't know alot
about.
You're absolutely right. People should just never talk about anything ever.
That's the best way to teach other people. And never ask questions about
anything. That's the best way to learn. And you know something, never question
religious scripture, because that's the surest way to find the truth and god
hates it when you find the truth. As soon as you start questioning all those
bible passages that show support for things like misogyny and slavery is when
jesus really starts to hate you.
Quote: Not to mention, people has a
tendancy to find out about anything, but not following PRECISE PROCEDURES, but
simple "going through this book, that book, this website, that
website....and so on," while forgetting the very meaning of 'acquiring
knowledge'. This is why each year people are getting more stupid and more
idiotic.
Yeah people have been getting stupider and stupider. All this damn technology
and this funny thing called the "internet" just proves that we're all
idiots. Religion and ancient books written by ignorant, violent, savages 2000
years ago are the only way to become wise. If only people believed the earth was
flat and that people should be stoned for the slightest indiscresions would the
world truly be wise. Like those religious fanatics in the middle east who don't
question anything in their lives, those guys are the most brilliant of them
all.
Quote: Religion and Science are two
things that are better left alone. If you are interested in it, then just study
alone, think alone, sooner or later you MAY BE ABLE to find the truth. But if
you are interested in finding the truth, just knowing what is going on in a
topic such as the one above, then leave it alone.
What I said above is what is lacking in our modern society.
Yes. Everyone should just stfu and never question anyones beliefs. If someone
believes praying will save their lives and they don't need surgery then who are
you to question that? No matter how stupid a belief is it should never be
questioned because you haven't found the truth. (whatever the truth is, seems
rather vague to me actually...)
Quote: We human think of ourselves
as we can learn about everything, while the wise men (if there are any
now-a-days, there are few without a doubt) think of this as a waste of time to
even talk about the truths wide open with others; because they know what is GOOD
for them and others, because true knowledge is not something you can get and
talk about with others.
Yes wisdom should never be passed on EVER. A true wise man is ignorant and
silent.
Quote: Look at us and just think
about it, we don't even know ourselves quite well, then how can we understand
something that is of depth?
You're right, we should just stop learning altogether. Lets all go live in mud
huts and eat squirrels.
/sarcasm off
Your beliefs are retarded and I will openly question them. If that makes me
unwise then so be it, but if we lived in a world where everyone thought like
you, then we'd all be idiots. (No offense)
Well hikoseijuro, Plunkies is completely right in his response to you. Question
everything even if you believe in an Almighty being. Thats the surest way of
learning. If you don't learn, you don't grow and if you don't get knowledge from
those that went before you, you end up starting back at the beginning and you
will only get as far as they did (if you're lucky and you manged to figure out
the path they took). Besides how did these "wisemen" learn? and isn't
it said that the fastest way to learn something is to teach.
Quote by MnemethGood try but you failed.
Nice twist on words for a pointless attempt at interpretation though. I've
already stated several times what I am argueing for and against, I'm not going
to repeat all of it so heres the simple summary just for you.
The question I am dealing with is: Does the Quran contain information pertaining to
the sciences? In particular, the shape of the Earth, the orientation of the
universe, and the water cycle since these are the only points I have
sounded off on.
Hrm, well I think I follow but I find the argument largely irrelevent if I can
easily prove it wasn't written by god. Whether it's meant to talk about science
or not, it's an obsolete 2000 year old book.
However, since they claim it's the word of god then I'd assume that any subject
they touch on is meant to be read as the truth.
"Unlike the Sunnah, the Qur'an is quite literally the Word of Allah,
whereas the Sunnah was inspired by Allah but the wording and actions are the
Prophet's. "
Quote: Now that that has been
explained for hoepfully the last time since it really does not get any simpler
than this (i.e. I am discussing the content and not the supposed author of the
book) lets see if you can stay on subject and stop being insulting just because
I disagree with you.
Insulting? Meh, fair enough, I suppose I argue with perso too much.
Quote: No arguement on the creator
interpreation.
I find it interesting that on the definition of wide you immediately assume two
dimensions even though we live in three physical dimensions and therefore wide
can be applied to a curved surface as well. As for expanse, it can be applied to
any surface regardless of shape.
The Muslim scholars do know more about the Quran than you or I do. However they
are not the authors. If you want to argue along this route then provide the
texts (simlar to the Dead Sea Scrolls partial compendium) that show how to
interpret these passages.
On another note that may put the issue in your favor, I don't think this is an
exact translation since the etymology of wide only
loosely matches all the definitions given. I think I'd like to see the literal
(word for word) not the interpretive translation of these passages before I
argue this point any further.
071.019
YUSUFALI: "'And Allah has made the earth for you as a carpet (spread
out),
PICKTHAL: And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you
SHAKIR: And Allah has made for you the earth a wide expanse,
Quote by PlunkiesHeh...I see that quote
and see "wind makes clouds float". You pull an entire
evaporation/sublimation process out of your ass. Who's interpretting
now?
Did you read that entire text? Let me pull a part of it
forward.
I think you forgot to do whatever you were going to do there....
Quote by MnemethLets throw in the
proverbial monkey wrench here. Is this quote correct? I have found another
translation that seems to change the meaning of the quote used (too bad I can't
read arabic, 1. its a beautiful language and 2. I wouldn't have to rely on
interpretive translations of which I don't know if either, neither, or both are
correct).
The quote from the Science myths page "Till, when he reached the
rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had
appointed no shelter therefrom (Sura Al-Kahf 018.090)."
to
Another Translation "018.090 Until, when he came to the rising of the sun,
he found it rising on a people for whom We had provided no covering protection
against the sun." This and reading the entire Sura it sounds like the
traveler/questor/apostle in question set out in one direction and traveled until
a time when the sun rose and then turned and then traveled until another time
the sun set (plus a few other directions) It makes no mention of the ends of the
Earth.
018.090
YUSUFALI: Until, when he came to the rising of the sun, he found it rising on a
people for whom We had provided no covering protection against the sun.
PICKTHAL: Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun, he found it rising
on a people for whom We had appointed no shelter therefrom.
SHAKIR: Until when he reached the land of the rising of the sun, he found it
rising on a people to whom We had given no shelter from It;
In all quotes he's going to the place where the sun rises, and again I don't
think it's japan.
Earlier it says....
018.086
YUSUFALI: Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a
spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: "O Zul-qarnain!
(thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with
kindness."
PICKTHAL: Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it
setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O
Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness.
SHAKIR: Until when he reached the place where the sun set, he found it going
down into a black sea, and found by it a people. We said: O Zulqarnain! either
give them a chastisement or do them a benefit.
Again he reaches the specific setting place of the sun, and the sun actually
goes into the water. You could argue that the sun is setting behind the sea, but
again, a really poor choice of words to use...particularly for a god.
Furthermore, after he reaches these two locations, he travels yet again and
doesn't find another setting place for the sun. He uses rising and setting
places to discribe his location (a foolish thing to do for obvious reasons) and
then travels somewhere else and doesn't mention the sun again (even though you
would expect the sun to rise and set wherever he went).
Quote by PlunkiesHrm, well I think I
follow but I find the argument largely irrelevent if I can easily prove it
wasn't written by god. Whether it's meant to talk about science or not, it's an
obsolete 2000 year old book.
Really, not sure I completely
follow that line of reason since whether or not God wrote it (or dictated it
word for word to one person who dictated word for word to scribes/scholars) has
no bearing from my point of view. I am going completely off the text regardless
of who the author/speaker/revealer was. If you bring authorship into the mix you
bring in how the recevier of the words interpreted them (given Allah dicatated
the text to Mohammed) regardless of the fact they are written verbatim (remember
this is written in a poetic style as it is meant to be recited) or, in the case
of say divinely inspired human authorship (which would support your arguements
more) it contains references to the knwon sciences of the time. While I don't
think of it as obsolete I do agree it is a very old book.
Quote by Plunkies 071.019
YUSUFALI: "'And Allah has made the earth for you as a carpet (spread
out),
PICKTHAL: And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you
SHAKIR: And Allah has made for you the earth a wide expanse,
From this link
Good attempt but you need to read the warning
on this page from
the same website. I've been trying to find a word for word translation but the
language barrier could be making that quite difficult since some words just
don't translate well so everyone attempts to translate teh concept
instead.
Quote by PlunkiesInsulting? Meh, fair
enough, I suppose I argue with perso too much.
Nah,
arguements are fine (gets and keeps the blood to the brain flowing) its the
personal attacks perceived or otherwise that I can't stand so thanks.
Quote by PlunkiesI think you forgot to
do whatever you were going to do there....
Nah, I actually
quoted my self inteh same format I use to quote your statements so you probalby
read right over it. Here it is straight
"Quote by Mnemeth: Yea this is interpretation, but the Quran is not a text
book and I have no idea what our modern terminology would have read as in the
original poetic arabic (or even if it would have translated at
all)."
Quote by PlunkiesAgain he reaches the
specific setting place of the sun, and the sun actually goes into the water. You
could argue that the sun is setting behind the sea, but again, a really poor
choice of words to use...particularly for a god. Furthermore, after he reaches
these two locations, he travels yet again and doesn't find another setting place
for the sun. He uses rising and setting places to discribe his location (a
foolish thing to do for obvious reasons) and then travels somewhere else and
doesn't mention the sun again (even though you would expect the sun to rise and
set wherever he went).
I disagree since some of the
translations do not mention a rising or setting "place". Looking at it
from a poetic standpoint (get ready for it this is really interpretation since
my poetry background is fairly limited) this could mean either a place where the
sun rises (or sets) or that the apostle (?) traveled until the sun rose (or
set). I don't think its necessarily a poor choice of words since this is really
supposed to be written in a poetic style (and poets have butchered just about
every language knonw to man in their attempts to describe the world in a
pleasing or macabre (sp?) manner.
Quote by MnemethReally, not sure I
completely follow that line of reason since whether or not God wrote it (or
dictated it word for word to one person who dictated word for word to
scribes/scholars) has no bearing from my point of view. I am going completely
off the text regardless of who the author/speaker/revealer was. If you bring
authorship into the mix you bring in how the recevier of the words interpreted
them (given Allah dicatated the text to Mohammed) regardless of the fact they
are written verbatim (remember this is written in a poetic style as it is meant
to be recited) or, in the case of say divinely inspired human authorship (which
would support your arguements more) it contains references to the knwon sciences
of the time. While I don't think of it as obsolete I do agree it is a very old
book.
Written by god: Arguing that it could have been talking about a round earth
makes sense.
Written by man: Obviously they believed the world was flat, so the text supports
a flat earth.
If you state that you don't think Allah wrote the quran then arguing that the
text doesn't support a flat earth is just bad logic unless they were psychic or
something.
Quote: I disagree since some of
the translations do not mention a rising or setting "place". Looking
at it from a poetic standpoint (get ready for it this is really interpretation
since my poetry background is fairly limited) this could mean either a place
where the sun rises (or sets) or that the apostle (?) traveled until the sun
rose (or set). I don't think its necessarily a poor choice of words since this
is really supposed to be written in a poetic style (and poets have butchered
just about every language knonw to man in their attempts to describe the world
in a pleasing or macabre (sp?) manner.
Do you have a translation that doesn't mention a setting place?
You seem to be needing to retranslate the text to support your argument (or say
the translation might be wrong). For me I just point at the text and go
"look!" and I'm done. See the problem?
It's a religious scripture, if you have to retranslate all the
"poetry" then how can you follow its religious doctrine? It's telling
you what to do, who to worship, what to do with those who don't worship. Whether
humans or Allah wrote it they wouldn't want every line to be questionable in its
credibility.
Sorry for the long wait on reply. Been so busy I've only had time to pop into a
couple of the chat lounge threads.
Quote by PlunkiesIf you state that you
don't think Allah wrote the quran then arguing that the text doesn't support a
flat earth is just bad logic unless they were psychic or
something.
With that I agree although some one could have
asked the simpler question of why can't I see beyond the horizon but I can
travel beyond it.
Quote by Plunkies Do you have a
translation that doesn't mention a setting place?
The translation I linked to just mentioned the rising and setting of the sun and
don't mention a rising or setting place although it can be intepreted that
way.
Quote by Plunkies You seem to be needing
to retranslate the text to support your argument (or say the translation might
be wrong). For me I just point at the text and go "look!" and I'm
done. See the problem?
Actually due to the different translations that (whther or not they are
incomplete/conceptual translations) is a valid point. All of our arguements are
based on the translation (however good or bad it may be) of the text and not the
text itself. I don't know about you but I can't read or speak Arabic.
Quote by Plunkies It's a religious
scripture, if you have to retranslate all the "poetry" then how can
you follow its religious doctrine? It's telling you what to do, who to worship,
what to do with those who don't worship. Whether humans or Allah wrote it they
wouldn't want every line to be questionable in its credibility.
Well since most of the followers of Islam (that recognize
the Quran) can understand it in its original language (whether written or
spoken) its not that much a problem for them to follow its teachings. I've
attempted to learn other languages before (basically got to the point where I
could be mostly understood but could not speak them fluently) and the little
differences of how someting is intoned or phrased can make a world of difference
in the meaning of something. There are words in every language in existence
today that will not fully translate into other languages other than on a
conceptual basis and even then they lose alot of meaning. I can't say if this is
or is not the case here because I cannot speak or read Arabic.
I don't want to responds to this thread as it will take 24 hours for me to give
details of most verses in th Quran about Allah's Creation.
merged: 09-06-2006 ~ 11:19pm
By the way, those articles and pics are from false source. They manipulate the
true meanings and miracle of Quran. Though they put the real meanings of each
verses, Quranic verses need detail explanations. Those sources are unbelievable
as they were created by Atheist and former Muslims.
merged: 09-06-2006 ~ 11:30pm
I just found the specific evidence that Earth is a round in shape as in Surah
88, verse 20
And at the Earth,
How it is spread out?
Detail explanation (by this book: The Meaning of Holy Quran) :
"The fourth and last instance given is that of the Earth as a whole, the
habitation of mankind in our present phase of life. The Earth is a globe, and
yet how marvellously it seems to be spread out before us in plains, valleys,
hills, deserts, seas, etc.! Can man, seeing these things, fail to see a Plan and
Purpose in his life, or fail to turn to the great Creator before Whom he will
have to give an account after this life is done?"
I just found this video interesting, he seemed relatively reasonable aside from all the lying and stuff...
Zakir Naik Video
Couple of minutes of searching led me to these links...
Qur'an myths about science.
Article on the lying of religion and finding science in scriptures
Funny excerpt from that article...
"Let us search history. A famous Arabic scientist of the twelfth century did think that the earth is not really flat but round. As soon as his idea became known, all his works were declared as blasphemous, his books confiscated and burnt. Just a few years ago, the supreme religious authority of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdel Aziz ibn Baaz issued a fatwa (Islamic edict) in this fashion:
'The earth is indeed flat. Those who do not accept this are atheist - they deserve to be punished.' "
And here's a pretty picture of the muslim solar system....
You know i'm not really suprised about this, i'm sure you can find readings somewhere in the bible that are much like this.... They are more alike then they would like to admit
This just shows people are gullible, and will belive anything they are told!
Shinsen89
merged: 07-27-2006 ~ 08:37am
Wow you know i think i'm going to convert! I mean this is " Real" Evidence! <( Sarcasim)
The Day i convert is the day i become a Republican, that is never happening....
Well thats one intepretation. But those passages should probably really be interpreted as 1. Earth as the abode of humans and 2. the sun and moon moving across the sky seeing as the author of the Quran was probably not an accomplished astronomer.
No it's pretty much THE interpretation. Did you watch the video and read the links or did you just look at the picture?
Islamic prayer times also reinforce the notion of a flat earth.
Why? You can't just reinterpret stuff when you find that it's wrong. The quote doesn't say anything about "humans" and it does say "fixed". By "interpret" do you really mean "change the entire meaning of the sentence until it's no longer incorrect"? Everyone believed the world was flat when the book was written. That is a fact. So if the book really did say the world was round then why did it take 1500 years before it was finally accepted? Same question can be posed to any religious scripture including the bible. Why are they always reinterpreted after science discovers the truth on its own (while getting massive resistence from religious organizations)? Why isn't science going to the text of god to find out what is correct first to save themselves time?
"Let us ask a drunken person about the model of this universe. At first, the drunkard may simply look at the questioner with baffling eyes; pick up the bottle from the street and drink more. Then he will throw the empty bottle in the street and start walking. If we wished, we could easily liken the whole episode to the affairs of the universe. We may compare the full bottle as the expanding universe, the drinking and emptying the bottle means the drunkard was saying that at a certain time this expansion (of the universe) will come to a stop and then contraction will ensue. Then, when the drunkard cast away the empty bottle he wanted to imply that before the contraction of the universe starts, all creations will be annihilated, leading to the point of singularity. Shall we accept this explanation as plausible?"
God wasn't an accomplished astronomer?
Yes I also read a number of other links that intepret the same items very differently. Links follow
USC link
"Islamic site"
and thats just from a few minutes worth of searching in which I found the opposing view as well. I have not found any definitive answer as to the shape of the earth in the items quoted on either side. I have found defnitive proof that the geo-centric theory was maintained by the Arabic scientists (who were by the way were most advanced for a relatively long period of time given that Islam extolls the search for knowledge given that it agrees with what Allah says)
No one knows who the author was. Most Muslims believe it was Allah, some believe Mohammed receved Allah's revelations and dictated them to his followers, and some factions do not even recognize the Quran (which by strict interpretation means they aren't Muslims since the Quran forbids sects and divisions). Others point to Mohammed (who was supposedly illiterate) or even to Jewish or Christian origins (really thin ice there and no real supporting evidence)
Why are we forced to interpret and reinterpret the vague and impractical words of a god? If it was written by god shouldn't it have more knowledge than the primitive men who lived during that time? Is it just a coincidence that god happens to be as stupid as the people of that same time period? How come everything is ALWAYS interpreted AFTER the science comes in? Why aren't we gaining insights and knowledge from the bible or the quran right now? If the bible or the quran were written by god then we'd be gaining new knowledge from it rather than constantly altering it to fit our current understanding of the universe.
Saying the quran doesn't support a flat earth cosmology is an almost indefensible position. You need look no further than their prayer habits...
"In Islam, it is compulsory to offer prayers five times a day. Preset times are appointed for these prayers. Offering of prayers apart from these set times are forbidden. For example, a Muslim cannot pray at sunrise, at sunset or at midday. We know from the diurnal rotation of earth that, at any fixed time, the sun is seen at any position on earth and as such, a prayer can be offered at any site on the earth. What does this mean? Consider the following fact. When the sun is rising at Barisal (a district in Bangladesh), it has still not risen at Calcutta (in West Bengal, India). However, in Chittagong (another port city in Bangladeh), the sun is already up. So, when offering prayer at Barisal is haram (forbidden), it is not haram at Calcutta or at Chittagong. Thus, can we find any justification for imposing a ban on offering of prayers at some other times apart from the set times of prayers? Aroj Ali Matbor, the rationalist, in his book mentioned before has posed a very interesting question: Suppose, a Muslim, after offering the Zuhr prayer at 1:30 PM, leaves for Mecca. Arriving in Mecca, he will be surprised to note that it is yet not noon there. So, shall he offer another Zuhr prayer at Mecca too? The answer to this enigma is actually contained in the question itself. Aroj Ali, himself has answered this question in a rational way. According to him, there was a time when the concept of earth as stationary and flat was very much in vogue. From this perception, the idea of fixed times for prayers emerged, he opines. Nonetheless, this old concept is now dead; instead, the modern science has proved that the earth is round and in motion. That is why complications have arisen while trying to fit the modern day life-style with age-old religious doctrines."
Your link says... [16:8] ...and He creates other things beyond your knowledge... and [24:45] ...Allah creates what He wills... is proof that allah creates new galaxies and is evolving species and that the quran foresaw it. How? How is this any different from the drunk explaining the universe analogy? You can't learn anything from these quotes. Only after they're taken out of context and reinterpreted to mean something they don't even say do they finally support reality. Why aren't scientists looking in the quran to figure out astronomy and biology? Why did it take 1500 years to figure out the world was round if the quran or the bible already supported it?
The difference is my links interpret the text literally, exactly as the text interprets itself. No hokus pokus or mumbo jumbo or smoke and mirrors bs. God wouldn't constantly speak in nonsense and irrelevent riddles. Science textbooks aren't vague and metaphorical. If they were, they'd be useless for learning. If I have to ALREADY know what textbook is teaching me before I can understand it then it's a useless piece of garbage.
Here's another example from your link....
[21:30] ...And We made every living thing from water...
[24:45] And Allah has created every animal from water...
Supposedly this proves that allah had knowledge of evolution again. That animals evolved from micro-organisms that lived in the water. But if that's the case then why did allah not say just that? That all animals originated from lesser creatures? Why didn't he go into anything specific or intelligent? If you interpret these quotes literally it simply means that everything was constructed from water, no different than the christian god making man from dirt.
[30:48] It is Allah Who sends the winds, and then they raise clouds: then He spreads them in the sky as He wills and makes them dark, then you see the drops issue from the midst of them...
[24:43] Don't you see how Allah drives clouds with force, then joins them together, then makes them into a heap? - then you see the drops issue from the midst of them. And He sends down from the sky mountains (of clouds) wherein is hail: He strikes therewith whom He pleases and He turns it away from whom He pleases. The flash of His lightning well-nigh snatches away the sight.
Again your link claims that the author of the quran had knowledge of the water cycle, yet the cycle is incomplete. The trick, the key, to the water cycle is the evaporation of the water back into the sky. Yet it doesn't mention any of that. It simply explains what any retard can see by going outside and looking up at the sky. Rain falls down when it's cloudy. Duh. How are these the profound words of an omniscient, perfect god?
Isn't that the point? If god wrote it then why is it constantly wrong? I mean I certainly respect muslims more for trying to make their scripture fit science, rather than denying science altogether in favor of mythology, but it's still incorrect.
You can look at it this way: God meant for the holy books to be read by humans, and so had them written from a human perspective. For example the Bible is often written as a first-person account.
"And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;" - Revelation 1:12
We can also look at it this way: We don't know God's perspective. For example, the Earth is moving with respect to the sun. However the Sun is moving with respect to the Milky Way. And is the Milky Way moving with respect to the universe? We don't know, since we don't know the limits of the universe. So which perspective is correct, when everything seems to be moving with respect to something else? It makes more sense to me to use the perspective of the reader.
I see. So god made the bible retarded and full of blatent errors and inaccuracies because it was meant for humans? That makes perfect sense! No....no wait.....the opposite of that....no sense....yeah that's right.
You're a perfect example of why religion is a curse on humanity. All the evidence points to a normal human writing the book 2000 years ago but instead you insist on making excuses for A GOD and his apparent incompetence. I think if a god wrote it it wouldn't have to be constantly corrected, reinterpretted, and explained. If a god wrote it it would be a stunning and profound piece of literature rather than a shining example of hate, ignorance, and violence from cover to cover. Have you ever read it? 95% of it is incoherent drivel. That's not the work of an all-knowing being.
Wait. Let me get this right. You say he wrote it in the human perspective to cover up the scientific inaccuracies. Then you say it's written in god's perspective where it can almost be considered technically correct by itself if you interpret it in such a way where it doesn't make any sense in context. It's a shame god didn't think to use astericks to straighten all this out.
From your perspective you say you seek the truth. But to me all you seem to do is try to cover up ignorance and make excuses for lies. Hrm...I think I'm getting the hang of this whole "perspective" thing.
I shake hands with Lucifer and bow down to Satan. His Infernal Majesty's is the only true will of humanity!
You quote neglects one key issue. Muslims of the ancient world did not have access to fast transport from one part for the world to another (fastest transport was probably by horse). Therefore the issue your quote describes did not exist in the ancient world it has only come to light in the "modern world". Find a better reasoning.
Literally? Tell me how does this "And the earth have We spread out, and placed therein firm hills, and caused each seemly thing to grow therein…(Sura Al-Hijr 15:19) " say the world is flat. Literally interpreted this merely means the Earth is not flat (not talking overall shape just shape of the land) has hills and lots of "seemly" growing things.
OK this one: "Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness (Sura Al-Kahf 018.086)." Hmm how far did Muslims of hte ancient world travel? How is this not like watching the sun sink into the sea.
Some "literal" interpretations. They are nothing more than interpretations so don't try to call them literal.
Umm your first quote killed your argument. Try this experiment. Place a bucket of water in an enclosure and let it sit. Humidity will increase due to evaporation, add in air flow and the humidity increases much rapidly. As for knowledge of the water cycle ask any farmer at pretty much any point in time. You'll probably get some interesting answers just based on thier most rudimentary observations (and the fact that they wanted to keep their crops in good shape)
Not really the point I was trying to make. I was actually argueing from a science point of view on whether or not these different scriptures contain evidence for or against the various subjects presented. As I stated no evidence either way for the shape of the Earth, plenty of evidence for the geo-centric model, and easily plenty of evidence for the water cycle.
I am curious since in all your arguements your provided references seem to expect the Quran to be more like a science text book than a holy scripture based soley upon the fact that people are trying to prove/disprove any science contained within. I turn your own argument back on you in that alot of your proof is just as interpretive as the links I gave.
God supposedly wrote the book. Why would an all knowing being make such a massive oversight. I'm not arguing whether muslims knew wtf they were talking about, they obviously didn't and they obviously still don't. Why are you arguing for the people of that day? They believed in a flat earth. Duh. That's not really up for debate. Nor do you need to explain why they believed it. You only further support my position that it was clearly written by man.
Uh, first of all no one is arguing that hills don't exist. I don't even understand why you bothered to mention such a stupid, irrelevent point.
Second, all the quotes were taken from the same block of text, which contained "And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh 71:19)". In context they all support a flat earth. If allah made the Earth round why wouldn't he mention that a few times rather than giving people the impression it was flat over and over again? Why does the text have to be reinterpreted AFTER we find out the Earth is round? Why didn't we get the information from the quran 2000 years ago?
Again the text tells the story of travel from one end of the earth to the other. They are at the place where the sun rises. Then they go to the place where it sets. It doesn't say they traveled until the sun set, it says they traveled to THE location where it sets. Again, a book written by god shouldn't make such careless mistakes. You understand what literal means right? The sun has no "setting-place".
Wtf are you talking about? They claim the quran has knowledge of the water cycle. The only difficult part to grasp is the evaporation of water. Predictably it mentions no evaporation of water back into the sky. Ask any farmer of that time and he'll say the water disapears. He won't explain how the water turns into vapor and travels back into the atmosphere. I can't figure out your point, you've lost me here.
The whole point of mentioning the water cycle is to prove that the maker of the quran (god) had some knowledge that humans of the time didn't have. Humans at the time did infact know that rain falls down. Repeatedly mentioning the water cycles texts as if they prove something is the issue, they prove nothing and show no advanced knowledge of the world.
Obviously they don't contain any evidence for it or else we'd have gotten the knowledge from the quran without needing science in the first place.
Ah the old Christian fallback works for the Quran too I see. It's a shame that humans constantly need to make excuses for god. The Quran is obviously trying to explain the world and is meant to be read as fact, so how is it not like a science textbook? Why does god seem to only speak in metaphores in this day and age and only literally 2000 years ago? Because it's wrong, thats why.
Unfortunately you didn't seem to understand what 'literal' means so all that reinterpretation only helped to prove my point further.
I was not aware that this is what we were arguing since I have not said one way or the other who I beleive wrote the Quran. Please stay on subject.
And you berate me for intepretation? The arguement is whether or not it says the world is flat and none of the quotes or the entire section taken in context states this. Gee really which part of the meaning of literal do YOU not understand.
1. actual: being or reflecting the essential or genuine character of something (this requires intepretation unless you are the individual that did the writing)
2. without interpretation or embellishment
3. limited to the explicit meaning of a word or text; "a literal translation"
4. avoiding embellishment or exaggeration (used for emphasis); "it's the literal truth"
Nowhere does the Quran say "the world is flat", or for that matter "the water cycle is explained here". Your arguements are still pointless since you obviously are still interpreting the passages to fit your own understanding/belief. Since you are incapable of taking a literal translation I'll do it for you using your added quote
And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh 71:19) = The deity you beleive in created a large place for you. I can't get much more literal than that. Anything other than that is interpretation based on what you know about the author or the religion.
Since I have no idea who actually wrote the Quran (nor have I argued for or against any supposed author) I find it interesting that you keep harping on the subject to make your points. Since you obviously missed the point of my previous argument try this one.
-Science first - Water cycle basics = heat or low humidity causes water to evaporate/sublimate becoming vapor. This vapor is cooled or reaches its saturation point and condenses/freezes (depending on the speed with which the temperature/pressure changes) and falls as precipitation, collects on surfaces (dew/condensation like on a pot lid), or even stays airborne for a while and thenteh cycle begins anew
-Now that thats out of the way take part of the first quote "It is Allah Who sends the winds, and then they raise clouds...." an obvous reference to the creation of clouds which ocurs as a result of increasing amount water in the air (BTW wind/moving air accelerates teh evaporation/sublimation process especially when that air is dry) regardless of what words they used to describe it. Add in the fact that they knew what steam was (think cooking which shows both evaporation and condensation) and this proves that they did have a rudimetary knowledge of the water cycle. Yea this is interpretation, but the Quran is not a text book and I have no idea what our modern terminology would have read as in the original poetic arabic (or even if it would have translated at all). Therefore it appears that the water cycle is indeed mentioned although not explained in the detail you expect.
? Where did this come from. Did you not read my earlier post. Speaking of the muslims
"(who were by the way were most advanced for a relatively long period of time given that Islam extolls the search for knowledge given that it agrees with what Allah says)"
The Quran did/does not contain all the answers/knowledge.
What mistake? where I am at the sun rises in the East and sets in the West (a rising place and a setting place). Same thing if I am in the Marshall Islands, Hawaii, France, Mexico (all places I have traveled to). Hmm what were the "ends of the earth" at that time. Regardless of how you interpret it , it still does not say "The Earth is flat" nor, it seems, can you provide a passage that can be literally translated to that phrase or its equivalent. If were were argueing the geo-centric vs solar centric theories I would understand your arguement here and agree with it (see earlier post) and I do understand that during that period of time people thought the Earth was flat but nowhere in the Quran does it say "The Earth is flat" or for that matter "The Earth is round".
LOL! I cannot help but laugh. So, the Koran has the answers eventhough it contradicts scientific evidence.....right....
Well then please explain to me what we're arguing about because you seem to have no point at all. Hold on lemme see if I can figure out your stance....
Clearly you don't believe Allah wrote the quran since you confirm that it says the earth is the center of the universe so.......
1. Man wrote the quran
2. Man at that time believed the earth was flat
3. The quran might say the earth is round.
Wtf? You're the kind of person who would look at an ancient cave drawing from a million years ago picturing 2 circles under a larger rectangle and say they might have had knowledge of automobiles.
"And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you(Sura Nooh 71:19)"
Allah. GOD. Has CREATED.
From god's point of view the EARTH (THE WHOLE EARTH) is a
WIDE
1. Having a specified extent from side to side: a ribbon two inches wide.
2. Extending over a great distance from side to side; broad: a wide road; a wide necktie.
EXPANSE
1. A wide and open extent, as of surface, land, or sky.
I can't get any more literal than this.
You wouldn't call a large balloon a "wide expanse" would you? God wouldn't look down, see a giant round planet and consider it a wide expanse.
88:17,20 "Will they not regard the camels how they are created...... and earth how it spread?"
"Even many Muslim scholars confess that In this phrase 'how it spread', he denotes that earth is flat. All the scholars of Islam agree upon this. It is not round as the physicists claim. "
Hence the fatwahs issued against people who believe the earth is round even today...
Heh...I see that quote and see "wind makes clouds float". You pull an entire evaporation/sublimation process out of your ass. Who's interpretting now?
Again you interpret to fit today's reality without even realizing you're doing it. You can go in the direction of east but you wouldn't say "I'm at East" or "I'm at the place called East" nor would you say "I'm at the place where the sun rises" or "I'm at the place where the sun sets". (The only exception would be if they were in Japan and called it the land of the rising sun)
"Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun..." (Sura Al-Kahf 018.090).
If you interpret that LITERALLY he is at the place where the sun rises. Since the sun rises everywhere this is not something you would ever bother saying, so we're left to the conclusion that the sun has a specific rising place and he happens to be there, right?
(Hint: They were infact NOT in Japan.)
Good try but you failed. Nice twist on words for a pointless attempt at interpretation though. I've already stated several times what I am argueing for and against, I'm not going to repeat all of it so heres the simple summary just for you.
The question I am dealing with is:
Does the Quran contain information pertaining to the sciences? In particular, the shape of the Earth, the orientation of the universe, and the water cycle since these are the only points I have sounded off on.
Now that that has been explained for hoepfully the last time since it really does not get any simpler than this (i.e. I am discussing the content and not the supposed author of the book) lets see if you can stay on subject and stop being insulting just because I disagree with you.
No arguement on the creator interpreation.
I find it interesting that on the definition of wide you immediately assume two dimensions even though we live in three physical dimensions and therefore wide can be applied to a curved surface as well. As for expanse, it can be applied to any surface regardless of shape.
The Muslim scholars do know more about the Quran than you or I do. However they are not the authors. If you want to argue along this route then provide the texts (simlar to the Dead Sea Scrolls partial compendium) that show how to interpret these passages.
On another note that may put the issue in your favor, I don't think this is an exact translation since the etymology of wide only loosely matches all the definitions given. I think I'd like to see the literal (word for word) not the interpretive translation of these passages before I argue this point any further.
Did you read that entire text? Let me pull a part of it forward.
Lets throw in the proverbial monkey wrench here. Is this quote correct? I have found another translation that seems to change the meaning of the quote used (too bad I can't read arabic, 1. its a beautiful language and 2. I wouldn't have to rely on interpretive translations of which I don't know if either, neither, or both are correct).
The quote from the Science myths page "Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had appointed no shelter therefrom (Sura Al-Kahf 018.090)."
to
Another Translation "018.090 Until, when he came to the rising of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had provided no covering protection against the sun." This and reading the entire Sura it sounds like the traveler/questor/apostle in question set out in one direction and traveled until a time when the sun rose and then turned and then traveled until another time the sun set (plus a few other directions) It makes no mention of the ends of the Earth.
merged: 07-31-2006 ~ 09:50am
Sorry source of last translation is http://www.jannah.org/qurantrans/quran18.html
It seems that now a days all of us know way too much about EVERYTHING and KNOW HOW TO GIVE OUR OWN THOUGHTS TOO much in EVERYTHING, that we forget the fact that there are somethings that are only for personal purpose.
What I mean by personal purpose is that, you may have heard, "Wise men don't talk." Well guess what? Those who can see the truth don't talk........unlike those people who talk about things they don't know alot about. Not to mention, people has a tendancy to find out about anything, but not following PRECISE PROCEDURES, but simple "going through this book, that book, this website, that website....and so on," while forgetting the very meaning of 'acquiring knowledge'. This is why each year people are getting more stupid and more idiotic.
Religion and Science are two things that are better left alone. If you are interested in it, then just study alone, think alone, sooner or later you MAY BE ABLE to find the truth. But if you are interested in finding the truth, just knowing what is going on in a topic such as the one above, then leave it alone.
What I said above is what is lacking in our modern society. We human think of ourselves as we can learn about everything, while the wise men (if there are any now-a-days, there are few without a doubt) think of this as a waste of time to even talk about the truths wide open with others; because they know what is GOOD for them and others, because true knowledge is not something you can get and talk about with others.
Look at us and just think about it, we don't even know ourselves quite well, then how can we understand something that is of depth?
You're absolutely right. People should just never talk about anything ever. That's the best way to teach other people. And never ask questions about anything. That's the best way to learn. And you know something, never question religious scripture, because that's the surest way to find the truth and god hates it when you find the truth. As soon as you start questioning all those bible passages that show support for things like misogyny and slavery is when jesus really starts to hate you.
Yeah people have been getting stupider and stupider. All this damn technology and this funny thing called the "internet" just proves that we're all idiots. Religion and ancient books written by ignorant, violent, savages 2000 years ago are the only way to become wise. If only people believed the earth was flat and that people should be stoned for the slightest indiscresions would the world truly be wise. Like those religious fanatics in the middle east who don't question anything in their lives, those guys are the most brilliant of them all.
Yes. Everyone should just stfu and never question anyones beliefs. If someone believes praying will save their lives and they don't need surgery then who are you to question that? No matter how stupid a belief is it should never be questioned because you haven't found the truth. (whatever the truth is, seems rather vague to me actually...)
Yes wisdom should never be passed on EVER. A true wise man is ignorant and silent.
You're right, we should just stop learning altogether. Lets all go live in mud huts and eat squirrels.
/sarcasm off
Your beliefs are retarded and I will openly question them. If that makes me unwise then so be it, but if we lived in a world where everyone thought like you, then we'd all be idiots. (No offense)
Mohammad was on crack, and he had a hallucination, how do you think religion started? a couple guys and a crackpipe
Well hikoseijuro, Plunkies is completely right in his response to you. Question everything even if you believe in an Almighty being. Thats the surest way of learning. If you don't learn, you don't grow and if you don't get knowledge from those that went before you, you end up starting back at the beginning and you will only get as far as they did (if you're lucky and you manged to figure out the path they took). Besides how did these "wisemen" learn? and isn't it said that the fastest way to learn something is to teach.
Woops must have missed your post, my bad....
Hrm, well I think I follow but I find the argument largely irrelevent if I can easily prove it wasn't written by god. Whether it's meant to talk about science or not, it's an obsolete 2000 year old book.
However, since they claim it's the word of god then I'd assume that any subject they touch on is meant to be read as the truth.
"Unlike the Sunnah, the Qur'an is quite literally the Word of Allah, whereas the Sunnah was inspired by Allah but the wording and actions are the Prophet's. "
Insulting? Meh, fair enough, I suppose I argue with perso too much.
071.019
YUSUFALI: "'And Allah has made the earth for you as a carpet (spread out),
PICKTHAL: And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you
SHAKIR: And Allah has made for you the earth a wide expanse,
From this link
I think you forgot to do whatever you were going to do there....
018.090
YUSUFALI: Until, when he came to the rising of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had provided no covering protection against the sun.
PICKTHAL: Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had appointed no shelter therefrom.
SHAKIR: Until when he reached the land of the rising of the sun, he found it rising on a people to whom We had given no shelter from It;
In all quotes he's going to the place where the sun rises, and again I don't think it's japan.
Earlier it says....
018.086
YUSUFALI: Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness."
PICKTHAL: Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness.
SHAKIR: Until when he reached the place where the sun set, he found it going down into a black sea, and found by it a people. We said: O Zulqarnain! either give them a chastisement or do them a benefit.
Again he reaches the specific setting place of the sun, and the sun actually goes into the water. You could argue that the sun is setting behind the sea, but again, a really poor choice of words to use...particularly for a god. Furthermore, after he reaches these two locations, he travels yet again and doesn't find another setting place for the sun. He uses rising and setting places to discribe his location (a foolish thing to do for obvious reasons) and then travels somewhere else and doesn't mention the sun again (even though you would expect the sun to rise and set wherever he went).
Really, not sure I completely follow that line of reason since whether or not God wrote it (or dictated it word for word to one person who dictated word for word to scribes/scholars) has no bearing from my point of view. I am going completely off the text regardless of who the author/speaker/revealer was. If you bring authorship into the mix you bring in how the recevier of the words interpreted them (given Allah dicatated the text to Mohammed) regardless of the fact they are written verbatim (remember this is written in a poetic style as it is meant to be recited) or, in the case of say divinely inspired human authorship (which would support your arguements more) it contains references to the knwon sciences of the time. While I don't think of it as obsolete I do agree it is a very old book.
Good attempt but you need to read the warning on this page from the same website. I've been trying to find a word for word translation but the language barrier could be making that quite difficult since some words just don't translate well so everyone attempts to translate teh concept instead.
Nah, arguements are fine (gets and keeps the blood to the brain flowing) its the personal attacks perceived or otherwise that I can't stand so thanks.
Nah, I actually quoted my self inteh same format I use to quote your statements so you probalby read right over it. Here it is straight
"Quote by Mnemeth: Yea this is interpretation, but the Quran is not a text book and I have no idea what our modern terminology would have read as in the original poetic arabic (or even if it would have translated at all)."
I disagree since some of the translations do not mention a rising or setting "place". Looking at it from a poetic standpoint (get ready for it this is really interpretation since my poetry background is fairly limited) this could mean either a place where the sun rises (or sets) or that the apostle (?) traveled until the sun rose (or set). I don't think its necessarily a poor choice of words since this is really supposed to be written in a poetic style (and poets have butchered just about every language knonw to man in their attempts to describe the world in a pleasing or macabre (sp?) manner.
Written by god: Arguing that it could have been talking about a round earth makes sense.
Written by man: Obviously they believed the world was flat, so the text supports a flat earth.
If you state that you don't think Allah wrote the quran then arguing that the text doesn't support a flat earth is just bad logic unless they were psychic or something.
Do you have a translation that doesn't mention a setting place?
You seem to be needing to retranslate the text to support your argument (or say the translation might be wrong). For me I just point at the text and go "look!" and I'm done. See the problem?
It's a religious scripture, if you have to retranslate all the "poetry" then how can you follow its religious doctrine? It's telling you what to do, who to worship, what to do with those who don't worship. Whether humans or Allah wrote it they wouldn't want every line to be questionable in its credibility.
Sorry for the long wait on reply. Been so busy I've only had time to pop into a couple of the chat lounge threads.
With that I agree although some one could have asked the simpler question of why can't I see beyond the horizon but I can travel beyond it.
The translation I linked to just mentioned the rising and setting of the sun and don't mention a rising or setting place although it can be intepreted that way.
Actually due to the different translations that (whther or not they are incomplete/conceptual translations) is a valid point. All of our arguements are based on the translation (however good or bad it may be) of the text and not the text itself. I don't know about you but I can't read or speak Arabic.
Well since most of the followers of Islam (that recognize the Quran) can understand it in its original language (whether written or spoken) its not that much a problem for them to follow its teachings. I've attempted to learn other languages before (basically got to the point where I could be mostly understood but could not speak them fluently) and the little differences of how someting is intoned or phrased can make a world of difference in the meaning of something. There are words in every language in existence today that will not fully translate into other languages other than on a conceptual basis and even then they lose alot of meaning. I can't say if this is or is not the case here because I cannot speak or read Arabic.
I don't want to responds to this thread as it will take 24 hours for me to give details of most verses in th Quran about Allah's Creation.
merged: 09-06-2006 ~ 11:19pm
By the way, those articles and pics are from false source. They manipulate the true meanings and miracle of Quran. Though they put the real meanings of each verses, Quranic verses need detail explanations. Those sources are unbelievable as they were created by Atheist and former Muslims.
merged: 09-06-2006 ~ 11:30pm
I just found the specific evidence that Earth is a round in shape as in Surah 88, verse 20
And at the Earth,
How it is spread out?
Detail explanation (by this book: The Meaning of Holy Quran) :
"The fourth and last instance given is that of the Earth as a whole, the habitation of mankind in our present phase of life. The Earth is a globe, and yet how marvellously it seems to be spread out before us in plains, valleys, hills, deserts, seas, etc.! Can man, seeing these things, fail to see a Plan and Purpose in his life, or fail to turn to the great Creator before Whom he will have to give an account after this life is done?"