Saturday 9 January 2010

Debunking the claim that the Quran Predicts Modern Science: The Qur’an and the World of Atoms

Does the Qur'an Predict the Sub-atomic world and particles? This is the claim of certain Islamic apologists, such as Mustafa Mlivo, Muhammad Assaid and Zakir Naik among others:

Mustafa Mlivo, Quran and Science , The Qur’an prior to Science and Civilisation; see: http://www.preciousheart.net/Main_Archives/Links_Folder/SUPER_List_Islam.htmAnd

Muhammad Assadi, in his book: The Unifying Theory of Everything: Koran and Nature’s Testimony; see http://www.amazon.com/Unifying-Theory-Everything-Natures-Testimony/dp/0595129048

And Zakir Naik; see http://www.scribd.com/doc/18926563/Quran-and-Modern-Science-EnglishBy-Dr-Zakir-Naik

These among others claim that the Qur’an is miraculous in its prediction of the sub atomic world (that is sub atomic particles).

Let's assess the claim:

The particular Qur’anic (Sura 34: 3) passages reads:

‘...by him who knows the unseen,—from who is not hidden the least little atom in the heavens or on earth; nor is there anything less than that, or greater, but is in the record of perspicuous ’

See also Sura 10: 61:

‘He [i.e., Allah] is aware of an atom’s weight in the heavens and on the earth and even anything smaller than that...’

Firstly we need to consider that there is a debate whether the Qur’an is literally referring to atoms or insects or possibly dust.But let us for a moment assume that the Qur’an does refer to atoms and the sub-atomic particles, are we then correct to presume that this reference is miraculous or is possible that the Qur’an only makes a lucky guess or even that sub-atomic particles were already a common idea flourishing in the time of Muhammad?

The theory of atoms was founded by Leucippus (440 BC) and Democritus (432 BC), who proposed that atoms constituted and composed everything in existence even heaven and earth.

The theory perceived the atoms as physical particles, which are in constant motion; being indivisible, indestructible and infinite in number and varieties.

All this is slightly correct indeed, expect of course that the number of atoms and their varieties are infinite.

Indeed the early atomists predicted a range of up-to-date details, such as Democritus’ ‘moving at random’, which according to Russel in his book: 'History of Western Philosophy' suggests denotes the kinetic theory of gasses; and furthermore the collisions of atoms which collected them and formed vortices and later material bodies (Russell, 82-84); all this was in agreement with the latter theory of Lucretius (Lucretius, The Nature of the Universe, p. 185).

Yet Democritus and many early atomists seem to have committed the fallacy of considering atoms to contain no void, which made them impenetrable and indivisible (Russell, History of Western Philosophy, p. 88).

This error excluded the existing reality of e.g. the neutrons, protons and electrons, and the newly proposed theory of the quarks.

That is of course unless we move Democritus’ understanding as a theory of the Quark world and what preceded it.

Hence according to certain Muslim writers, e.g. Mlivo and Muhammad Assadi and Zakir Naik, this suggests that the Qur'an solely gets the information right and must therefore be of divine origin.

However, there are serious flaws within this Muslim proposition.

Its primary failure is the failure to grasp that atomic science developed through the centuries.

The emphatic claim of Democritus, that atoms were the first cause-particles which could not be further divided appears to be slightly diminishing at the time of Lucretius (approximately 50 BC); Lucretius seems to refer to new ideas in his time which suggests that atoms could be divided (at least he alludes to ideas quite different from those presupposed by Democritus); Lucretius writes in 50 BC:

It is with a mass of such parts, solidly jammed together in order, that matter is filled up. Since they cannot exist by themselves, they must stick together in a mass from which they cannot by any means be prized loose. The atoms therefore are absolutely solid and unalloyed, consisting of a mass of least parts tightly packed together. They are not compounds formed by the coalescence of their parts, but bodies of absolute and everlasting solidity. To these nature allows no loss or diminution, but guards them as seeds for things. If there are no such least parts, even the smallest bodies will consist of an infinite number of parts, since they can always be halved and their halves halved again’ (Lucretius, The Nature of the Universe 45)?

What are these least parts of which the atoms consist? And how about the opposite position, but otherwise proposed impossibility, that atoms can be halved and halved again?

This idea seems to have been raised 600 years prior to Islam. And there are further indications, that even the Epicurean's postulated particles smaller than atoms.

Epicurean theory theorized that our body throws off thin films, which travel to touch the soul-atoms to create sensation; if these were considered to operate between atoms, then we might assume they are smaller (Russell, History of Western Philosophy, p. 255).

If however, atoms are the principle of matter and thus life, why is it that the Qur’an, being a divine revelation does not provide further insight into the world of atoms or quantum? Why is the Qur’an making no reference to atoms in relation to compounds or the combination of atoms to form a greater mass, as was expounded upon by Lucretius more 600 years prior to Islam (Lucretius, The Nature of the Universe, p.41); Lucretius writes:

‘At that time the sun’s bright disc was not to be seen here, soaring loft and lavishing light, nor the stars that crowd the far-flung firmament, nor sea nor sky, nor earth, nor air nor anything in the likeness of things we know nothing but a hurricane raging in a newly congregated mass of atoms of every sort’ (Lucretius, The Nature of the Universe, 184).

This completely refutes Zakir Naik in his debate with William Campbell, in which he admitted the similarity between Qur’anic and Greek science but then claimed that Qur’anic science is more specific and even corrects Greek science.

The Qur’an does not explain that the atoms are the fundamental building blocks and existed prior to cosmological expansion and the accretion of the earth, nor does it describe their existence as prior to the galactic dimension the pre-stellar material existed.Lucretius’ description of a primordial congregated mass of atoms in the writings of Lucretius is fairly accurate and presents an idea that is much more advanced and explicit than the Qur’anic simple reference to the world of atoms and lesser matter.

Lucretius continues:

‘...they (the atoms) began, in fact, to separate the heights of heaven from the earth, to single out the sea as a receptacle for water detached from the mass and to set apart the fires of pure and isolated ether. In the first place all the particles of earth, because they were heavy and intertangled, collected in the middle and took up the undermost stations. The more closely they cohered and clung together, the more they squeezed out the atoms that went to the making of sea and stars, sun and moon and the outer walls of the great world’ (Lucretius, The Nature of the Universe, 184-5)?

While Lucretius’ postulate is outdated and contains a number of flaws, it does reveal a much more advanced insight into the atomic world than the Qur'an does and some details actually predicts modern science.

If the Qur’an is a miracle due to its reference to atoms and smaller matter, then certainly a number of Greek philosophers and indeed the atheist Lucretius were divinely inspired.

What is much more logical however is that the Qur’an simply describes the ideas that were flourishing within its time and era; unfortunately for the Muslim position is the fact that these pre-Islamic sources provide a much more advanced and accurate picture of the atomic world than the Qur’an.

31 comments:

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Hogan-- You should do a blog called

Debunking Biblical Science.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam,

great to see you again,

There are already a huge number of websites attempting to attack the science in the Bible, I guess we need to include the science of the Qur'an to the same extense, which is why I created the 'debunking Qur'anic Science' blog.

Now, you could also try to refute my posts.

I appreciate though if you replied to the topic of Qur'an and science either on answering-muslims blog or on the debunking the Qur'anic science blog. This blog is more general, but I intend in future to keep all the science posts on the Qur'an science blog.

Also I am finished with the MA so I have finally sufficient time to work on my website, which hopefully will be running soon.

Hence in future I welcome any dialogue with you, between your website and mine.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Do you have any comments on these posts I have presented.

So far I have argued from good sources, that the claims of Muslims of today concerning miracolous passages in the Qur'an predicting modern science, rather reveals that the author of the Qur'an merely reitarated the conceps that were common of his time.

Note, I am not saying that the author or authors of the Qur'an had access to all the books of antiquity but that they included the ideas that were flourishing within the ancient society.

Furthermore, I have argued that the Qur'an reveals nothing new and nothing of significance as to modern science.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Sure. I think I am banned from the Answering Muslims blog. If you can get me back, I would love to do a dialouge.

But what your saying, isn't 100% true. The reason why is because there are several statements in the Quran that science today has come to confirm BUT I AGREE that SOME passages in the Quran science were observable. So SOME PASSAGES in the Quran-- aren't really miracles. So I agree with you there.

Hopefully we can contiune to talk as I am not sure whether to return to school or take off and work for one semester. I'll let you know, your more than welcome to email me if your interested:

http://www.answering-christian-claims.com/index.html

BTW Have you ever seen The Office BBC version? Its soooo good.

Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Correction: http://www.answering-christian-claims.com/about.html

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

Sure. I think I am banned from the Answering Muslims blog. If you can get me back, I would love to do a dialouge.

Hogan replies:

I did contact David about that. Have you tried to post on the blog lately? I mean Osama Abdallah still writes on the blog, and the strictness of posting and censorship was mainly due to his behaviour. If Osama can write on the blog, I am sure you can do so.

Etheshaam wrote:

Hopefully we can contiune to talk as I am not sure whether to return to school or take off and work for one semester.

Hogan replies:

Well both steps are vital for future work. It’s always good to obtain more education, same with practical experience, of course if by work you mean a job related to your education. Otherwise I would finish my education.

Etheshaam wrote

I'll let you know, your more than welcome to email me if your interested:

http://www.answering-christian-claims.com/index.html

Hogan replies:

I might email you, but do let me know what step you are taking.

Etheshaam wrote:

BTW Have you ever seen The Office BBC version? Its soooo good.

Hogan replies:

Far too little time for television lately, I might have seen one episode or two, or parts of an episode, but I have forgotten all of it.

My favorite comedies are still ‘Everybody loves Raymond’ Fawlty Towers and ‘Mash’. But of course I am both family man and old fashion. I have seen some episodes of ‘Big Bang’, that’s funny. Black Adder is also a comedy I find very funny, but very black humour. I am not so sure its appropriate for me to watch programs of that nature. A Danish Series called Huset på Christians Havn, is also extremely funny, if you understand Danish and understand the mindset, culture and expressions.

Lately however, I have watched mainly children and young teenage programs. I have had to check out which programs are appropriate for my daughter to watch. Amazingly, some of these programs, such as Jake and Josh, Hannah Montana and I Carly, I find to be even more funny than the typical comedies for grow-ups and more innocent. Some of these are more or less appropriate for my daughter and we enjoy watching these programs together.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

But what your saying, isn't 100% true. The reason why is because there are several statements in the Quran that science today has come to confirm BUT I AGREE that SOME passages in the Quran science were observable. So SOME PASSAGES in the Quran-- aren't really miracles. So I agree with you there.

Hogan replies:

I would not say that science confirms the Qur’an on these matters, rather science may confirm the ancient ideas, which were common among the ancient people and are included in the Qur’an, such as the moon reflecting sun-light, the fact that galactic objects orbit, etc; there are numerous examples of this.

But then we have statements such as Allah separating the heaven and earth.

This was also a popular idea from the era prior to Muhammad and it is not scientifically accurate, unless the earth is central in the universe and an object which in size dominates the universe, which is inaccurate; yet this is what the ancient thinkers believed and hence they postulated that the heavens broke away from the earth in form of ether, smoke or vapour.

I might have accepted the wording in the Qur’an as simply a divine reference in a more metaphorical usage if it were not for the phrase: ‘have not the unbelievers seen’.

The unbelievers believed themselves to have seen this separation when they saw the seven earths or planets, the clouds, etc, which they believed were formed when the smoke-matter separated from the earth.

This is however not accurate science, neither do we observe such a cosmological structure today or evidence of such a cosmological development.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Thanks Hogan, I appreciate that. But I think I done with the Blog. There is no reason for me to come back there. You can keep visiting my site, soon I'll have an essay on the crucifixion, Biblical prophcies, why I am not a Christian and Biblical science.

Didn't know you were married and had a daughter. Good for you. Still no wife!

I would ignore Osama Abdullah. He's a disgrace to Muslims. He's not worth the time. Soon I'll have an article on my website to expose Osama.

I'll try to comment some more, since Pre-Islamic Arabia was mostly illiterate and there were no books or anything around as this hadith tells us:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e. sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."

(Bukhari Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137)

Moreover why are there several correct statements in the Quran? There isn't one mistake. How would the author of the Quran know to include correct information in the Quran and leave out the wrong information?

You may wanna view this debate:

http://www.examinethetruth.com/ahmed-giron.htm

Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

I'll try to comment some more, since Pre-Islamic Arabia was mostly illiterate and there were no books or anything around as this hadith tells us:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e. sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."

(Bukhari Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137)

Hogan replies:

There are few problems using this particular Hadith to refute my polemics.

Firstly, it relates to the matter of keeping account of days within the North Arabian society.

This does not refute the claim that the Arabs were not able to receive and pass on information.

Neither does the passage provide a full picture of the literary situation in Arabia in Muhammad’s time.

There were Jews living in Arabia, and educated Syriac Christians, there were also Southern Arabs who were more literate and advanced than the north; hence while the typical nomads might have been illiterate, this would hardly describe all the categories Arab settlers.

In fact Muhammad’s first marriage brought him into a educated circle.

We do know that Muhammad and in his brother-in-Law were good friends and that his brother-in-law was highly educated and literate.

We know also that Muhammad later had a number of Jewish and Syriac-Christian followers who were educated and literate.

So my polemics does not presume that Muhammad necessarily could read or had access to the entire library of antiquity but that the information of the early societies would easily be passed on to him.

In fact the philosophical ideas of the time were flourishing everywhere.

This becomes rather evident when you read the Qur’an if you are aquainted with the scientific ideas of the thinkers between 500 BC to 500 AD. Many of these ideas are quoted in the Qur’an sometimes word by word, such as: ‘the moon swimming by its own motion’.

Notice also that philosophical books were not necessary to pass this information on. The early society, particularly in educated circles valued memorization, and encouraged that the information was passed on orally.

In fact some historians state that Syriac Christianity was a zealous mission movement, which spread Christian theology and Greek philosphy as a combined message. We know that the Syriac Christian were highly found of Galen, the early expert on embryology.

Also Syria is a neighbor country with Arabia and these Syriac Christian missionaries were highly active in Arabia in Muhammad’s time.

Etheshaam wrote:

Moreover why are there several correct statements in the Quran? There isn't one mistake. How would the author of the Quran know to include correct information in the Quran and leave out the wrong information?

Hogan replies:

Actually the authors of the Qur'an do not differentiate between accurate and mistaken postulates, much of the Qur’anic science is based upon the limited knowledge of Greek and Roman thinkers, such as the separation of heaven and earth, the seven planets and their seven tracts, etc.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

You may wanna read this, Hogan:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/

This destroys the arguments your putting forth. Glad that your admitting that your material is polemical though.

Also the same arguement can be thrown against Christianity.

These arguements are as silly as me saying, the Pagan legends of Appolonis of Tyana, Osrisis, Inanna and other crucified and resurrected beings were circulating in the Middle East. The earliest Christians heard these stories and copied these stories and put them into the Jesus story.

Hogan Said: In fact Muhammad’s first marriage brought him into a educated circle.

My Response: Where is your evidence for this?


Also Syria is a neighbor country with Arabia and these Syriac Christian missionaries were highly active in Arabia in Muhammad’s time.

My Response: Islamic awareness DESTROYS this polemic:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBbible.html

This becomes rather evident when you read the Qur’an if you are aquainted with the scientific ideas of the thinkers between 500 BC to 500 AD. Many of these ideas are quoted in the Qur’an sometimes word by word, such as: ‘the moon swimming by its own motion’.

My Response: Even if that is true, which there is NO way you could prove the author of the Quran learnt from these people, how did the author of the Quran correctly know this stuff? Why couldn't he say something like

The Sun swims in an orbit and the moon doesn't, etc. So the author of the Quran had a 1/2 chance of getting that quote right.

It is completely irrelevant what people wrote about it before. The question is, "how did was the author of the Quran able to decipfer what are the true statements in an ocean of falsehood?" Therefore, the mere fact, that this is something.

The sun and the moon do indeed have orbits.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

If a statement in the Quran, or any book correlates with modern science, that does not make it automatically miraculous. There can be several human explanations. Therefore, in a discussion on Quran and science, there needs to be certain systems and procedures. The following algorithm will provide a systematic method of analysis without personal opinion or bias. This algorithm lists all the human possibilities, and also lists the supernatural possibility:



IF Statement in the Quran = Scientific fact THEN

(it can be one or more of the following 8 possibilities)

A. Perhaps the author of the statement was a genius.

B. A very good guess, luck.

C. Perhaps the author of the statement was a great scientist

D. Coincidence (ex: a poetic statement which just happened to match
up with science),, and the author had no intention of talking
about science; it was an accident. Coincidence is a form of luck.

E. Common sense (ex: rain causes grass to grow).

F. The scientific fact is observable.

G. The information already pre-existed in history.
(this can only be entertained if we have historical errors)

H. A source greater than man was involved.

END.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Also Syria is a neighbor country with Arabia and these Syriac Christian missionaries were highly active in Arabia in Muhammad’s time.

My Response: If that is true, how come many Arab Tribes were Pagan? Christianity was in Yemen and not really in Arabia. Most of the tribes were Pagan. Did these missionaries fail or were killed?

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Why is it in spite of the abundance of historical material on Muhammad(P)'s life, and in spite of the extensive research on his life for centuries by his severe critics, that it was not possible to discover the mysterious teacher(s) through whom Muhammad(P) might have learned all that?

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

You may wanna read this as well:

http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2005/were-there-any-influences-of-christianity-in-the-hejaz/

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

I think you should read my article on the Qur'an, science and the external sources; it answers a number of your questions.

Furthermore, Islamic-awareness does not real raise the issue I am emphasizing here.

It does attempt to debunk the case of Waraqa but excludes a number of vital passages.

I will respond to your posts later on today.

But I don't think you have adequately considered the history of the ancient world, etc.

As to the phrase 'the moon swims in its own motion', it's a phrase found in the work of the early Roman philospher Lucretius; which was a phrase of high significance in the ancient cosmological concepts, since the moon and sun were often believed to be swimming in water of the bottom-level heaven, water that had vaporated from the earth.

This was a view already proposed by Aristotle hundreds of years prior to Lucretius and was fairly common among the Greeks and the Romans.

The Arabic word 'dukhan' of translated smoke in the Qur'an but which also is translated vapour, derives in its meaning (in this context) from a Greek scientific word, in which smoke and vapour is one and the same word.

The ancient believed that the heavens we see originated from smoke or vapour, which departed from the earth under the process of their heaven-earth separation.

Even the church father Irenaeus refers to heavens being made from smoke in his work 'Against Heresies'.

The ancient thinkers believe that this smoke later developed into the heavenly structure we see, either because it intermingled with eather or because the cosmological expansion allowed the intermediate matter between the universal outer walls and the earth to settle down.

All these ideas come up in the Qur'an, I am sure these were not revealed by God, since these concepts are wrong. I am sure also that the author of the Qur'an did not get all these details so similar to the contemporary sources and ideas together in a book by share chance and without external influence.

Let me emphasise again, these sources were not flourishing only by books, but they were passed on orally. Hence Arabs did not need the writings of these authors to gain access to these ideas. Also as I pointed out and Islamic-awareness failed to point out, Muhammad had access to individuals who knew this information (read my article).

I think also you are referring to Islamic Awareness due to their attempt to debunk the Syriac connection. I have read that article, but the issue is a completly different from the one we are looking into here.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

I would say be consistent with your arguements. If you were to apply the same arguements to the New Testament, then we would have to reject the N.T. since the N.T. has absoultely no scientific facts in it-- in fact the Gospels contain many scientific errors:

When Jesus was crucified, there was three hours of complete darkness "over all the land." And when he died, there was a great earthquake with many corpses walking the streets of Jerusalem. It is strange that there is no record of any of these extraordinary events outside of the gospels-- See Matthew 27:45, 51-53.

When Jesus was crucified, there was three hours of complete darkness "over the whole land." It is strange that there is no record of this extraordinary event outside of the gospels. (See Mark 15:33)

"The wind bloeth where it listeth."
Jesus says that no one knows which way the wind is blowing. But, of course, he was wrong about that. The direction and speed of the wind are easily measured. (See John 3:8)

Jesus holds seven stars in his hand. Of course, it is possible that this is metaphorical. Perhaps. But it is clear from other verses (Revelations 6:13, 8:10, 12:4) that John thought of stars as being small, perhaps even small enough for Jesus to hold in his hand. See Rev1:16)

The dragon's tail smacks down to earth one third of the stars. To the author of Revelation, the stars are just little lights that can fall to the ground from the sky. (See Revelations 12:4)

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Christian apologists are constantly inconsistent when dealing with our faiths. Because almost all their arguements against Islam can be thrown right back at them.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Oh and don't forget my favorite New Testament scienctific error:

Jesus is incorrect when he says that the mustard seed is the smallest seed. (The smallest seeds are found among the tropical, epiphytic orchids
(Mark 4:31)

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

I'll try to respond to your other post, right now time for bed.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

When Jesus was crucified, there was three hours of complete darkness "over all the land." And when he died, there was a great earthquake with many corpses walking the streets of Jerusalem. It is strange that there is no record of any of these extraordinary events outside of the gospels-- See Matthew 27:45, 51-53.

When Jesus was crucified, there was three hours of complete darkness "over the whole land." It is strange that there is no record of this extraordinary event outside of the gospels. (See Mark 15:33)

Hogan replies:

This was a supernatural event, I can’t see its connection with the matter of science.

As to the lack of record in early literature; there are certainly references in early writers that indicate the darkness; however, only because records are missing does not exclude the reliability of the event; you seem to commit a serious fallacy here; firstly, most of the first to third century literature (of any kind) is no longer available; secondly, the event is recorded in Matthew’s Gospel a first century writing, which by first century apostolic successors was ascribed to the apostle Peter; thirdly, if you demand secular or independent sources to be necessary to verify an extraordinary event, you may as well rule out most of the Old Testament events which are also included in the Qur’an.

You would also have to deny a number of Qur’anic and early Islamic events, since these are only found in Muslim sources.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:


"The wind bloeth where it listeth."
Jesus says that no one knows which way the wind is blowing. But, of course, he was wrong about that. The direction and speed of the wind are easily measured. (See John 3:8)

Hogan replies:

No, Jesus does not say that at all; Jesus says about the wind: ‘you hear its sound but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going’.

That is actually accurate!

Yet even if you were right, nobody of the time of Jesus had the equipment to measure the speed of wind; this is both a misrepresentation of the words of Jesus and a ridicolous argument.

Etheshaam wrote:

Jesus holds seven stars in his hand. Of course, it is possible that this is metaphorical. Perhaps. But it is clear from other verses (Revelations 6:13, 8:10, 12:4) that John thought of stars as being small, perhaps even small enough for Jesus to hold in his hand. See Rev1:16)

Hogan replies:

Listen Etheshaam, you are playing with your integrity here (I am saying this not to disrespect you), one word of advise: when you deal with the Book of Revelation; keep in mind that you are dealing with both metaphorical and apocalyptic language here; its an art to master each of them. All the references you have brought up are metaphorical; they are not referring to literal stars; just read the passages you quoted. I have spent much time in my life studying the Revelation, and almost memorized the entire book (I love the book of the Revelation); the content of the book is often more metaphorical than most people imagine.

Furthermore, I think stars can also refer to any object of the sky, including meteorites.

Etheshaam wrote:

The dragon's tail smacks down to earth one third of the stars. To the author of Revelation, the stars are just little lights that can fall to the ground from the sky. (See Revelations 12:4)

Hogan replies:

The dragan stands for the devil, not a literary dragon (read the context). Stars were often viewed as angels or in this case of demons, in the Jewish language of metaphors, you will even find Old Testament passages confirming that; in the same chapter you read of the dragan and his angels being thrown down on the earth (again I encourage you to read the context).

Etheshaam wrote:

Jesus is incorrect when he says that the mustard seed is the smallest seed. (The smallest seeds are found among the tropical, epiphytic orchids
(Mark 4:31)

Hogan replies:

Jesus is not talking about seeds on a universal level, but ‘them’ the Jews or residents of Galilee and the seeds they planted in their gardens, this is evident if you read the entire context (Mark 4: 31-32). It may come more clearly out in Matthew 13: 32, which includes: ‘your seeds’.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

Hogan Said: In fact Muhammad’s first marriage brought him into a educated circle.

My Response: Where is your evidence for this?

Hogan replies:

The father of Kahidja and her cousin Waraqa

Etheshaam wrote:
Also Syria is a neighbor country with Arabia and these Syriac Christian missionaries were highly active in Arabia in Muhammad’s time.

My Response: Islamic awareness DESTROYS this polemic:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBbible.html

Hogan replies:

Islamic awareness attempts to debunk a research put forward by scholars of source criticism, that the Qur’an was based upon Syriac sources and language, possibly after Muhammad. I am not an expert on the matter, and you would have to be an expert in both Arabic and Syriac language to either propose the theory or refute it.

Funny however, that Muslims when it comes to the Qur’an take a stand against source-criticism but when it comes to the Bible they value it highly.

It is interesting though that there certainly is a Syriac connection and that the rythm of the Qur’an is similar to the writings of many Syriac Christian text used for liturgy, even in their English translations. I should try to find one of these for you.

However, in connection with the matter raised here, it does not involve the issues raise by source criticts or Islamic awarness. I am simply pointing out that Syriac Christians influenced the North Arabian community, not that the Qur’an was written in Syria under the influence of early Muslims and Syriac converts.

That might indeed be true, but I am not able to prove or refute it.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

This becomes rather evident when you read the Qur’an if you are aquainted with the scientific ideas of the thinkers between 500 BC to 500 AD. Many of these ideas are quoted in the Qur’an sometimes word by word, such as: ‘the moon swimming by its own motion’.

My Response: Even if that is true, which there is NO way you could prove the author of the Quran learnt from these people, how did the author of the Quran correctly know this stuff? Why couldn't he say something like

Hogan replies:

The fact that you find the same ideas in the Qur’an provides proofs that the author knew these ideas. The fact that Muhammad was aquainted with Syriac Christians, Jews, Southern Arabs, and that these were settled in his proximity provides evidence of the connection.

Etheshaam wrote:

The Sun swims in an orbit and the moon doesn't, etc. So the author of the Quran had a 1/2 chance of getting that quote right.

Hogan replies:

Sorry bro, I am not sure what your point is here

It was common knowledge among the ancient societies that both the sun and the moon were in orbits.

Etheshaam wrote:

It is completely irrelevant what people wrote about it before. The question is, "how did was the author of the Quran able to decipfer what are the true statements in an ocean of falsehood?" Therefore, the mere fact, that this is something.

Hogan replies:

It is relevant what people wrote prior to Islam, especially if when making a comparison we find the exact identical ideas with the identical terminology.

And the author did not differentiate between error and truth; he incorporated ideas such as the seven planets or earth, seven tracts, the separation of heaven and earth, the sun and moon swimming in their own motion.

Etheshaam wrote:

The sun and the moon do indeed have orbits.

Hogan replies:

True! But all the ancient thinkers knew this. But does the Qur’an clearly differentiate between a galactic orbit or a parallel orbit with the sun? It is not indicates even strongly that the sun and the moon orbit in parallel orbits around the earth, and must not catch up each others. This is a clear error in the Qur’an.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

Why is it in spite of the abundance of historical material on Muhammad(P)'s life, and in spite of the extensive research on his life for centuries by his severe critics, that it was not possible to discover the mysterious teacher(s) through whom Muhammad(P) might have learned all that?

Hogan replies:

I disagree with this;

there are a number of individuals clearly indicated in early Islamic sources that suggest such an external influence; such as Waraqa and the Syriac Christian who recorded the Qur'an for Muhammad and who later claimed to have fabricated the Qur'an together with Muhammad. There is also Abdullah Salim and former Jewish Rabbi.

Furthermore, the presence of Jews, Syriac Christians, Southern Arabs, etc, suggests that the author of the Qur'an had access to a significant range of individuals who possessed this information.

Also think about it, would early Muslims not have done everything to cover up such information.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

Christian apologists are constantly inconsistent when dealing with our faiths. Because almost all their arguements against Islam can be thrown right back at them.

Hogan replies:

I don't see how this is inconsistent and how it backfires.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Hogan replies:

I don't see how this is inconsistent and how it backfires.

My Response: As I said, scientific errors in the Bible:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZMHhT9CYrQ

See the entire debate, and William Campbell get destroyed.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Etheshaam wrote:

My Response: As I said, scientific errors in the Bible:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZMHhT9CYrQ

See the entire debate, and William Campbell get destroyed.

Hogan replies:

Destroying a debater is not the same as destroying a religion or a philosophy.

Believe me or not, but some years ago, on a Christian-Muslim debate forum, I responded to all the arguments of Zakir Naik.

I am not sure whether the particular site exists anymore, but I probably have the entire rebuttal on one of my older computers.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

But how do you respond to my arguments on this thread and how do you respond to my rebuttal to your criticism of what you describe as New Testament science?

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

I hope it is ok for you that I have made a link to our dialogue here from my other blog:

http://debunkingquranicscience.blogspot.com/2010/01/link-to-my-dialogue-with-etheshaam.html

Angela Sexen said...

One theory, which is based in part on the Feynman Equation, says that all possible universes should come into existence from a singularity - so-called quantum foam.

Don't forget that quantum events are often highly counter-intuitive so intuition is probably one of the worst ways to test a theory. There is no law which says reality has to conform to human intuition or perception. It's often said of quantum mechanics that if you think you understand it that's because you haven't understood it. Read more

Author Prayatna said...

Qiyamat has already arrived.
Still there are many who doubt the coming of Imam Mahdi (Mahamati Prannath) whilst there (were and) are still many who (had proclaimed and) proclaim to be the appointed one (Imam Mahdi). If that's so, I would like you to ask following questions to those false claimants of Imam Mahdi (and their supposed believers) like Mīrzā Ghulām Aḥmad, Muḥammad bin abd Allah al-Qahtani, Riaz Aḥmed Gohar Shahi etc to name a few claimants:
Can your Mahdi's claimant say that his entire life is fully based on the events described in the holy Quran ? If it is, then simply mention one. Only one.

True Mahdi is present only in Alif Lam Mim (Mahamati Prannath) and what more bigger authentication than the Events or the stories of the Quran itself. Recall the event (or story, to understand) in the life of Rasul (saw) when he was bewitched by a Jew (11 knots). The encrypted message of that event is actually the coming of Imam Mahdi in 11th century Hijri. Each knot of the 11 total knots represent a century and in each century a knot actually unties. Therefore, 1100 Hijri years meant the liberation of all the 11 knots and the starting of the Fajr (or the dawn) of Imam Mahdi's Khilafah(reign). The holy Quran backs this analogy in 34:29,30 whereby the coming of Qiyamat (Judgment day) will be known. Recall the holy Quran that 1 day = 1000 years and 1 night = 100 years of Allah. So, 1000 + 100 = the date of the starting of the dawn of the Judgment day, the glorious coming of Alif Lam Mim.

For more, go to:
http://sanandhonline.blogspot.com/2013/05/alif-lam-mim-unlocked-part-i.html and
http://sanandhonline.blogspot.com/2014/01/alif-lam-mim-unlocked-and-the-stories-of-Quran.html

A response and challenge to those who oppose the Christian faith.