Islam Creation In Islam

[Vikram singh]

Don't go by what one side says, some time it is good idea to
hear from the other side also, and then decide ?

 

[azizrasul]

insane debate of another's religion.

Then why r u in the Interfaith Dialgue section. Hmmm...

 

[Parma]

Get rid of this discussion on creation in islam on this website and I might start to add onto it. I dont want to discuss islam no offence. I just dont want to know. Could this be discussed totally on another section. This just makes me not want to discuss anything on this site any further. I want to discuss sikhism. Who cares about religious tolerance. Obviously the mulims dont otherwise they would leave this site alone. GO AWAY!! NO ONE REALLY WANTS TO KNOW!!!

 

[kds1980]

Maybe, just maybe the misunderstanding is wholly on ur side. U think? The link I showed u gives the evidence. The vast majority of the conversions r taking place in the educated west.

Azizrasul ji there is no confusion on my side.As i earlier told you majority ofnon muslim population lives in Inda ,china,africa .you can also add south america in it.now the combined non muslim population of these continents and countries is over 3 billion.so only a religion that is gaining converts in these continents and countries and claim itself to be fastest growing religion.as far as west is concerned there are people who converts to islam but there are 75 % of who leave islam within years.so what's the point.

------------------------
Muslim Immigration: A Winning or Losing Proposition for America? :: Faith Freedom International :: Only Truth can set us free!

75%OF MUSLIM CONVERTS LEAVE ISLAM WITHIN A FEW YEARS (AN ISLAMIST'S STUDY)
YouTube - 75% of New Muslims become Apostates - Muslim scholars admit.

Above study is by an islamist Dr. Ilyas Ba-Younus. The result sof this study was given to an islamic gathering. If you give a margin of at least 10% +/- of the typical extreme muslim bias in this study, 85% to 90 % of converts leave islam after conversion.
-----------------------
so muslims now themselves acept that more than 75% reverts leave islam.

 

[Archived_Member_19]

<<<
Quote:
I am using the same logic you are using to prove that Quran is work of God.
No ur not. No 1 has claimed that ur book on algebra is from God. It’s u who is not focusing on the point but playing silly games. If no 1 had said that the Qur’an was the word of Allah, we would not be having this discussion. The Qur’an gives us guidance how to conduct our lives, ur book doesn’t. Not exactly the same thing.


Quote:
"my little book of laws of algebra has no scientific mistakes...is it a work of God? "
Just more silly games. U obviously show immaturity and unable to conduct a proper discussion. >>>

tch tch Aziz bhai ji

the man who cried wolf is now down to calling names to me.

i still forgive you.

btw

who is no 1?

i am stating that you make an asseryion that:

quran tells scientific truths - so it is word of god

i say

My book of algebra has universal truths - it is work of God?

where is silly game in this?

i am just showing you the fallacy of your logic.

and btw

the little book of algebra teaches kids how to add up, substract..

i think these are very very useful in life , in conducting business..

maybe more important than when to stone people or when to behead them or how to circumcise or how to starve yourself


<<
Quote:
i firmly believe that Quran is work of a man.
Who?

>>>

not knowing the author doesnot mean it is work of God

there are many anonymous books or books by ghost writers...

are they all works of God?

<<
Quote:
i can assume that either your maths is weak
I can add up to 3. Don’t need ur book to work that 1 out. LOL.


Quote:
each one independently is having faster growth rate than islam
We were talking about the fastest conversions not birth rates. Ur going at a tangent.
>>>

poor shot at humor...failed...

you did not read the numbers which i qouted from your post..

and those numbers are talking about census of population in 1991 and 2001

so it includes conversions as well as population growth

there is no tangent dear sir

all you are doing is going in circles.

<<
Quote:

do you really believe what they say?????
The west is extremely unlikely to say anything good about Islam, hence on this occasion I do. The fact u go on about this subject perhaps shows how insecure u must feel. If u r firm in ur faith, why should u care. Huh?>>>

why would 25% of populaiton of world have nothing good to say about islam if it is so good.

only people i hear saying good about islam is arab fanatics or wannabe arabs

where does my faith come into picture...and why are you making personal comments about my personal faith?

 

[azizrasul]

so what's the point.

I have given the point a number of times.

the man who cried wolf is now down to calling names to me.

i still forgive you.

Since I have offended u, I seek your forgiveness.

My book of algebra has universal truths - it is work of God?

But does it guide us 2 how we should lead or lives? Does it give us lessons of what happened to people in the past and how we can learn from them? The Qur’an gives signs of Allah AND is a book of guidance. That’s the subtle difference.

 

[Satyaban]

My friend

"1. Islam is the oldest religion as the first homosapien Adam (peace be upon him) was a Muslim."

My friend it is very convenient to back date history and claim every person born was Muslim and then strayed but it just doesn't work. If you wish to believe the metaphors of Adam and Eve, the Great Flood etc etc to be literally true is up to you but you miss the greatness.

Whenever it was that humankind gained conciousness there was ony mankind and the Creator no intermediary, messenger, dogma, idealogy, good and evil, heaven and hell. What I mean is there was no religion simply creation and the Creator what is called Sanataana Dharma.

Peace
Satyaban

 

[azizrasul]

My friend it is very convenient to back date history and claim every person born was Muslim

The following shows that we testified to the belief of our Creator, hence on that basis we r born as Muslims. Some remain Muslims but the majority don’t, hence there r 20% Muslims and growing, masha-allah.

172. And (remember) when thy Lord brought forth from the Children of Adam, from their reins, their seed, and made them testify of themselves, (saying): Am I not your Lord? They said: Yea, verily. We testify. (That was) lest ye should say at the Day of Resurrection: Lo! Of this we were unaware;
173. Or lest ye should say: “Our fathers before us may have taken false gods, but we are (their) descendants after them: wilt Thou then destroy us because of the deeds of men who were futile?”
174. Thus do We explain the signs in detail; and perchance they may turn (unto Us).
Qur’an - Surah al-A`raaf (The Heights) 7:172-4

Whenever it was that humankind gained conciousness there was ony mankind and the Creator no intermediary, messenger, dogma, idealogy, good and evil, heaven and hell. What I mean is there was no religion simply creation and the Creator what is called Sanataana Dharma.

You have ur belief, I have mine. As the Qur’an says:

1. Say : O ye that reject Faith!
2. I worship not that which ye worship,
3. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
4. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,
5. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
6. Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
Qur’an - Surah al-Kafirun (The Disbelievers) 109:1-6

Verily We have revealed the Book to thee in Truth, for (instructing) mankind. He, then, that receives guidance benefits his own soul: but he that strays injures his own soul. Nor art thou set over them to dispose of their affairs.
Qur’an – Surah az-Zumar (The Groups) 39:41

 

[ProjectNaad]

When we examine the claim that Muslims make regarding the infallibility of their
codes, rules and regulations, it opens a whole new can of worms for the Muslim
community with no logical answers. One of the most obvious mathematical mistakes of
the Quran can be found in the division of inheritance. The laws of inheritance are
spread out in several Suras. One can find references to them in Al-Baqarah(2), Al-
Maidah(5) and Al-Anfal(8). But the details of these laws are spelled out in the Surah
Nisa (4).

14.2.1 Quotes from Islamic scripture
Q. 4:11
“Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a
portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is
two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth
share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the
parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or
sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of
legacies and debts…”

Q. 4: 12
“In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child; but if they
leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts. In what ye leave,
their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth;
after payment of legacies and debts…”

Q. 4:176
“If it is a man that dies, leaving a sister but no child, she shall have half the
inheritance: If (such a deceased was) a woman, who left no child, Her brother takes
her inheritance: If there are two sisters, they shall have two-thirds of the inheritance
(between them): if there are brothers and sisters, (they share), the male having
twice the share of the female. Thus doth Allah make clear to you (His law), lest ye
err. And Allah hath knowledge of all things.”

14.2.2 Analysis of Islamic laws
Despite the fact that it says “Allah made them clear”, these laws are far from clear.
Verse 4:11 says that if a man has only one daughter, she gets half of the inheritance
irrespective of other heirs. But since the same verse says that the portion of the male
is twice that of the female, her brother is supposed to get all the inheritance. Isn’t
this a discrepancy? Certainly there is an error in how this law is written. Yet the
problem is aggravated further when the share of other heirs like parents and wives are

taken into consideration.
There are cases when the total of the shares assigned to the heirs exceeds the
patrimony. Take for example the following.
According to the above verses, if a man dies leaving behind a wife, three daughters
and his two parents,
His wife’s share of his inheritance is 1/8. (In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if
ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth)
His daughters would receive 2/3 (if only daughters, two or more, their share is twothirds
of the inheritance
and his parents each will get 1/6 of his inheritance. (For parents, a sixth share of the
inheritance to each, if the deceased left children
When you add all these fractions the sum is more than the total of inheritance.
Wife1/8 = 3/24
Daughters 2/3 = 16/24
Father 1/6 = 4/24
Mother1/6 = 4/24
Total = 27/24

Now take another example. Say a man is survived by his wife, his mother and his
sisters.The wife receives 1/4 of the inheritance, (In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if
ye leave no child
the mother 1/3 (if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the
inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are
the heirs, the mother has a third
and the sisters 2/3. (If there are two sisters, they shall have two-thirds of the
inheritance (between them)
When we add up these fractions they too are more than the total.
Wife1/4 = 3/12
Mother 1/3 = 4/12
Sisters 2/3 = 8/12
Total = 15/12

In the above examples, the shares apportioned to the heirs exceed the total of the
inheritance. In both cases the total of the inheritance sums to exactly one BEFORE
taking into account the wife's share.

What should be done if a man has two wives, one with children and the other without
children? Does the one with children receive 1/8 and the one without children 1/4?
And is this justice?
Now suppose a woman dies leaving a husband and a brother:
Husband receives half (In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no
child.)

Brother receives everything (If (such a deceased was) a woman, who left no child, Her
brother takes her inheritance.)
Does this mean that the parents, sisters and husband do not get anything? In that case
where is the justice and if they do how can the brother get everything?
Husband, (1/2) = ½
Brother (everything) = 2/2
Total = 3/2

This verse does not specify that the brother gets everything only when there are no
other heirs. It just says when there are no children he gets everything. In the same
verse it says that if a man dies leaving a sister, she gets half. What will happen to the
other half?

Here is another example: A woman leaves behind a husband, a sister and a mother.
Husband, (1/2) = 3/6
Sister (1/2) = 3/6
Mother (1/3) = 2/6
Total = 8/6

We can conclude that the Quran in matters of inheritance is very obtuse. It is so
obtuse that Shiites and Sunnis practice this law differently.

For example:
If a man leaves a wife and the two parents, the Shiites will give the wife 1/4 and then
distribute the remainder as 1/3 for the mother and 2/3 for the father, i.e. they will
receive 1/4 and 1/2 of the original estate (see #2741). Sunnis give the wife 1/4, the
mother 1/3 and the father as the nearest male relative the rest, i.e. 5/12. As one can
witness, the Quran is anything but clear.
In order to solve these problems the Islamic doctors of law have devised a complex
“science” called “Al-Fara’id”. It contains rules of "Awl" and "Usbah," and the laws of
"Usool" of the Fara'id, the laws of "Hajb wa Hirman," and many other issues relating to
this matter.
The laws of “Awl” (accommodation) deals with cases when the inheritor's shares
exceed or "overshoot" the sum of the total inheritance. In such case the shares are
adjusted to accommodate everyone. This is how it works:
Wife1/8 = 3/24 is changed to 3/27
Daughters 2/3 = 16/24 is changed to 16/27
Father 1/6 = 4/24 is changed to 4/27
Mother1/6 = 4/24 is changed to 4/27
Total = 27/24 27/27
and for the second case,
Wife1/4 = 3/12 Is changed to 3/15
Mother 1/3 = 4/12 Is changed to 4/15
Sisters 2/3 = 8/12 Is changed to 8/15
Total = 15/12 15/15

Thus the problem is solved thanks to human ingenuity but the portions are not the
same as indicated in the Quran. Each party has to waive part of his or her share in
order to make this law work. This is a clear case in which the words of Allah needed
human intervention in order to become applicable.
There are yet cases when the shares of the inheritors do not sum to a whole 100% and
there is a surplus left.

Take for example a man who dies and leaves his wife and his parents.
Parents 1/3 = 4/12
Wife 1/4 = 3/12
Total = 7/12

Who will receive the balance 5/12 of the inheritance?
The following are other cases that after the distribution, there is a surplus of
Inheritance:
Scenario fund distributed surplus
Only a wife: = ¼ 3/4
Only a mother: = 1/3 2/3
Only a daughter = ½ 1/2
Two daughters = 2/3 1/3
Only a Sister = ½ 1/2
A mother and a sister = 1/3 + ½ = 5/6 1/6
A wife and a mother = ¼ + 1/3 = 5/12 7/12
A sister and a wife = ½ + ¼ = ¾ 1/4

In all these cases and many other combinations there is a surplus. What will happen to
this surplus? Who will inherit it?
To deal with this problem the law of "Usbah" comes to effect. This law is to regulate
the unclaimed shares, which have no corresponding people to receive them. Of course
if the Quran was clear with no errors, there would have been no need for all these
“sciences” and amendments.

The law of Usbah is based on the following Hadith.
Sahih Bukhari 8. 80. 724
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:The Prophet said, "Give the Fara'id (the shares of the inheritance
that are prescribed in the Qur'an) to those who are entitled to receive it. Then
whatever remains, should be given to the closest male relative of the deceased."
According to this law, a man who dies and is survived by only his daughter with no
other close male relative except a second cousin, his daughter will receive half of his
inheritance and the other half will go to the man’s second cousin. This seems quite
unfair to the daughter, but it would be especially unfair if the man had a needy aunt
or a female first cousin that would receive nothing because they are of the wrong
gender.

Now suppose that a man has no other heir except his wife and a distant male relative.
The wife will receive 1/4 and the distant male relative gets the balance, i.e. three
times the inheritance that his widowed wife gets. Is this justice?
What if the deceased has no male relative at all? What will happen to the rest of his
inheritance? What happens in the reverse case when a wife has no relatives? The
husband will receive half of her inheritance; who will get the other half?
Note that in the Quran there is no priority for the distribution of the inheritance. In
nowhere it says “first give to these and from what is left, give to those”. Even if we
had to reinterpret these laws and prioritize them in the order that they are
mentioned, it still does not work because in that case, each subsequent inheritor will
have his or her share shrunk. Also in most cases the total inheritance will never be
used up.

Muslims argue that: "If A [ the deceased] left a widow or widower, the widow's or
widower's share would first be calculated as in the first half of verse 4:1"
However with the insistence of Muslims to show unequivocal proof from a “divine
source” they must show this instruction in the Quran. There is no provision in the
Quran to pay certain inheritors first and divide the rest among other heirs. The fact
remains that the Quran in matters of the division of the inheritance is wrong
mathematically.

The obtuseness of these laws of inheritance is further emphasized in the following
example. Consider the case of a man with only one daughter and 10 sons. According to
the Quran, the daughter receives half while all the sons must share among themselves
the other half. So each will receive not more than 1/20 of the inheritance. But this
would contradict the other ruling that a male is to receive twice the share of the
female.

Of course for 1400 years Muslims have practiced Islam and somehow they managed to
make these confusing laws work. How they did it? They reinterpreted, adjusted and
compromised to make sense of these nonsense laws. They put all the inheritance in a
pool and gave to each male child twice the share of their female siblings. This
solution, though satisfies one of the ruling of the Quran about the inheritance, it
contradicts the other.

Despite all these incongruencies and errors the real problem with these laws is not the
fact that they do not add up. The problem is in the inherent injustice that they
embody. A fair minded person cannot avoid but to question, why daughters should
receive half of what the sons receive? Why sisters receive less than brothers? And why
a widower is entitled to double the share than a widow? Why the Quran states “to the
male, a portion equal to that of two females”? (4:11). Think of a man with four wives.
All the wives have to share the ¼ of his wealth, if he has no children and 1/8 if he
has. In the first case each wife will receive 1/16 of the inheritance and in the second
case 1/32. How a woman who may not be young enough to remarry can survive with
such meager share in a male dominated society as Islamic countries? On the other
hand a man who loses all his four wives will inherit half to ¼ of every wife’s wealth.
Isn’t this the formula to enrich the men and impoverish the women? It is easier to
forget the mathematical errors of the Quran than forgive its injustice.

 

[ProjectNaad]

15 Teachings of the Quaran
15.1 What does Islam prescribe for Apostasy?

Islam teaches that people who do not believe should be killed and tortured.

4:89 They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon
a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in
the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them
wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,”
(Sahih Bukhari 4.260)

Narrated Ikrima:
Ali burnt some people [hypocrites] and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I
been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish
(anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the
Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "
Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:

Narrated 'Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this
event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt
them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's
punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's
Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

8:60 And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to
terrorize thereby the enemy of Allah...

8:12 I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off
their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

15.2 How does Islam deal with Unbelievers?
What are the teachings of Islam with regards to treating the Kaffirs or unbelievers?

2:191, And slay them wherever ye catch them

2:193, And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression

2:216, Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike
a thing which is good for you

3:28, Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than
believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah

4:48 “Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth
anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin
Most heinous indeed.”

4:84, Then fight in Allah’s cause - Thou art held responsible only for thyself - and
rouse the believers. It may be that Allah will restrain the fury of the Unbelievers; for
Allah is the strongest in might and in punishment.

4:141, And never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way (to triumphs) over the
believers

5:33, The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and
strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion,
or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that
is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

8:12, I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks
and smite all their finger-tips off them

8:15-16, O ye who believe! when ye meet the Unbelievers in hostile array, never turn
your backs to them. If any do turn his back to them on such a day - unless it be in a
stratagem of war, or to retreat to a troop (of his own)- he draws on himself the
wrath of Allah, and his abode is Hell,- an evil refuge (indeed)!

8:17, It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah: when thou threwest (a handful of
dust), it was not thy act, but Allah’s: in order that He might test the Believers by a
gracious trial from Himself

8:60, Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including
steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your
enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know.
Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall
not be treated unjustly.

8:65, O Prophet! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you,
patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, they will
vanquish a thousand of the Unbelievers

9:5, But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans
wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in
every stratagem.

9:3, And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled)
on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty)
obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn
away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to
those who reject Faith.

9:14, Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame,
help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers,

9:23, O ye who believe! take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they
love infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.

9:28, O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year
of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque.

9:29, Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden
which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion
of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with
willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

9:39, Unless ye go forth, (for Jihad) He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and
put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least.

9:73, O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm
against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.

9:111, Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs
(in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:
a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur’an

9:123, O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find
firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.

22:9, (Disdainfully) bending his side, in order to lead (men) astray from the Path of
Allah: for him there is disgrace in this life, and on the Day of Judgment We shall
make him taste the Penalty of burning (Fire).

22:19-22; These two antagonists dispute with each other about their Lord: But those
who deny (their Lord),- for them will be cut out a garment of Fire: over their heads
will be poured out boiling water. With it will be scalded what is within their bodies,
as well as (their) skins. In addition there will be maces of iron (to punish) them. Every
time they wish to get away therefrom, from anguish, they will be forced back
therein, and (it will be said), “Taste ye the Penalty of Burning!”

25:52, So obey not the disbelievers, but strive against them herewith with a great
endeavour.

25:68 ”Those who invoke not, with Allah, any other god, nor slay such life as Allah
has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; - and any that does
this (not only) meets punishment. “(But) the Penalty on the Day of Judgment will be
doubled to him, and he will dwell therein in ignominy,-

37:22-23, “Bring ye up”, it shall be said, “The wrong-doers and their wives, and the
things they worshipped- Besides Allah, and lead them to the Way to the (Fierce) Fire!

47:4, Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At
length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them):
thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its
burdens.

48:13 And if any believe not in Allah and His Messenger, We have prepared, for those
who reject Allah, a Blazing Fire!

48:29, Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong
against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other.
"Unbelievers are those who do no judge according to God's revelations. We decreed
for them a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a
tooth for a tooth, and a wound for a wound" The Table #43-
"He that chooses a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him and in
the world to come he will surely be among the losers" The Imrans #85
"Believers, do not befriend your fathers or your brothers if they choose unbelief in
preference to faith. Wrongdoers are those that befriend them." Repentance (3)#23
"Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends1. They are
friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of
their number. God does not guide the wrongdoers." The Table (5) #51. (Response 1, 2)
"Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers
but merciful to one another." Victory 48:29
"Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people. They [the unbelievers]
will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is

evident from what they utter with their mouths, but greater is the hatred which
their breasts conceal." The Imrans 3:118

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 3, Number 111:
Narrated Ash-Sha'bi:
Abu Juhaifa said, "I asked Ali, 'Have you got any book (which has been revealed to the
Prophet apart from the Qur'an)?' 'Ali replied, 'No, except Allah's Book or the power of
understanding which has been bestowed (by Allah) upon a Muslim or what is (written)
in this sheet of paper (with me).' Abu Juhaifa said, "I asked, 'What is (written) in this
sheet of paper?' Ali replied, it deals with The Diyya (compensation (blood money) paid
by the killer to the relatives of the victim), the ransom for the releasing of the
captives from the hands of the enemies, and the law that no Muslim should be killed
in Qisas (equality in punishment) for the killing of (a disbeliever).
Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 38, Number 4348: (scroll down to no.4348)

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him)
and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did
not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet
(peace_be_upon_him) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly,
pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the
blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him)
was informed about it.

He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action
and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks
of the people and trembling the man stood up.

He sat before the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her
master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop,
and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from
her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I
took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is
payable for her blood.

"Ali Ibn Abi Talib encountered a man called 'Umru and told him, `I indeed invite you
to Islam.' 'Umru said, `I do not need that.' 'Ali said, Then I call you to fight.' (This was
the same policy Muhammad used with those who rejected his invitation.) 'Umru
answered him, `What for my nephew? By God, I do not like to kill you.' `Ali said,
`But, by God, I love to kill you"' (ibn Hisham, "The Biography of the Prophet", part 3,
p. 113; see also Al Road Al Anf part 3, p. 263).

Sura 4:144: Believers, do not choose the unbelievers rather than the faithful as your
friends. Would you give Allah a clear proof against yourselves?

Sura 5:17: Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely, Allah-- He is the Messiah, son of
Marium. Say: Who then could control anything as against Allah when He wished to
destroy the Messiah son of Marium and his mother and all those on the earth?

Sura 5:51: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends;
they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend,
then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

Sura 8:13: When thy Lord revealed to the angels, saying, 'I am with you; so make firm
those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Smite
them above their necks, and smite off all finger-tips.

Sura 8:40: And fight them until there is no persecution and religion is wholly to Allah.
But if they desist, then surely Allah is Watchful of what they do.

Sura 9:5: And when the forbidden months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever you
find them and take them captive, and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them at
every place of ambush. But if they repent and observe Prayer and pay the Zakaat,
then leave their way free. Surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful.

Sura 9:29: Fight those who do not profess the true faith (Islam) till they pay the jiziya
(poll tax) with the hand of humility.

Sura 47:4: When you meet the unbelievers in the Jihad strike off their heads and,
when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their
freedom or take ransom from them, until War shall lay down her

15.3 How does Islam deal with Thieves?
“5:38 Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment
for what they have done—a deterrent from God: God is almighty and wise.”

15.4 What does Islam recommend regarding the concept of “Freedom of religion”

3:85, If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it
be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have
lost (All spiritual good).

8:39, And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there
prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere.

15.5 What types of rules does Islam impose on Women?

2:223 Your women are a tilt for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilt as ye will, and
send (good deeds) before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will
(one day) meet Him. Give glad tidings to believers, (O Muhammad)

2:228, And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to
what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them

2:230, So if a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), He cannot, after that, re-marry
her until after she has married another husband and He has divorced her

2:282, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men,
then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them
errs, the other can remind her.

4:3, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall
not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right
hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.

4:11-12, Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children’s (Inheritance): to the male,
a portion equal to that of two females:

4:24 Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right
hands possess.

4:34, Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel
the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So
good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As
for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds
apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo!
Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

33:50
O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their
dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom
Allah has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and
daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makka) with thee;
and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes
to wed her;- this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what
We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right
hands possess;- in order that there should be no difficulty for thee. And Allah is Oft-
Forgiving, Most Merciful.

53:27, Those who believe not in the Hereafter, name the angels with female names.

66:10, Allah sets forth, for an example to the Unbelievers, the wife of Noah and the
wife of Lut: they were (respectively) under two of our righteous servants, but they
were false to their (husbands), and they profited nothing before Allah on their
account, but were told: “Enter ye the Fire along with (others) that enter!”

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 33:
Narrated Usama bin Zaid:
The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than
women."

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 31:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
Evil omen was mentioned before the Prophet: The Prophet said, "If there is evil omen
in anything, it is in the house, the woman and the horse."

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 122:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "If a woman spends the night deserting her husband's bed (does not
sleep with him), then the angels send their curses on her till she comes back (to her
husband)."

Volume 4, Book 54, Number 460:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "If a husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual
relation) and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her
till morning."

Volume 2, Book 18, Number 161:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Abbas:
The sun eclipsed in the life-time of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) . Allah's Apostle offered the
eclipse prayer and stood for a long period equal to the period in which one could
recite Surat-al-Baqara. Then he bowed for a long time and then stood up for a long
period which was shorter than that of the first standing, then bowed again for a long
time but for a shorter period than the first; then he prostrated twice and then stood
up for a long period which was shorter than that of the first standing; then he bowed
for a long time which was shorter than the previous one, and then he raised his head
and stood up for a long period which was shorter than the first standing, then he
bowed for a long time which was shorter than the first bowing, and then prostrated

(twice) and finished the prayer. By then, the sun (eclipse) had cleared. The Prophet
then said, "The sun and the moon are two of the signs of Allah. They eclipse neither
because of the death of somebody nor because of his life (i.e. birth). So when you see
them, remember Allah." The people say, "O Allah's Apostle! We saw you taking
something from your place and then we saw you retreating." The Prophet replied, "I
saw Paradise and stretched my hands towards a bunch (of its fruits) and had I taken
it, you would have eaten from it as long as the world remains. I also saw the Hell-fire
and I had never seen such a horrible sight. I saw that most of the inhabitants were
women." The people asked, "O Allah's Apostle! Why is it so?" The Prophet replied,
"Because of their ungratefulness." It was asked whether they are ungrateful to Allah.
The Prophet said, "They are ungrateful to their companions of life (husbands) and
ungrateful to good deeds. If you are benevolent to one of them throughout the life
and if she sees anything (undesirable) in you, she will say, 'I have never had any good
from you.' "

Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-
Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have
seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked,
"Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful
to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion
than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women
asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said,
"Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in
the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a
woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the
affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion."
It is forbidden for a woman to be seen by any man except her husband when she is
made up or well-dressed. (TR. P 430)

3. A woman is not a believer if she undertakes a journey which may last three days or
longer, unless she is accompanied by her husband, son, father or brother. (TR. P 431 )

4. A woman must veil herself even in the presence of her husband's father, brother
and other male relations. (TR. P 432)

5. She is forbidden to spend any money without the permission of her husband, and it
includes giving food to the needy or feast to friends. (TR. P 265)

6. A wife is forbidden to perform extra prayers (NAFAL) or observe fasting (other
than RAMADAN) without the permission of her husband. (TR. P 300)

7. If prostration were a legitimate act other than to God, woman should have
prostrated to her husband. (TR. P 428)

8. If a man is in a mood to have sexual intercourse woman must come immediately
even if she is baking bread at a communal oven. (TR. P 428)

9. The marriage of
woman to her man is not substantive. It is precarious. For example if the father of
the husband orders his son to divorce his wife, he must do so. (TR. P 440)

11. Majority of women would go to hell. (Muslim P 1431)

12. If a woman refuses to come to bed when invited by her husband, she becomes the
target of the curses of angles. Exactly the same happens if she deserts her husband's
bed. (Bokhari P 93)

13. The women who are ungrateful to their men, are the denizens of hell; it is an act
of ingratitude for a woman to say: "I have never seen any good from you." (Bokhari P
96)

14. A woman in many ways is deprived of the possession of her own body. Even her
milk belongs to her husband. (Bokhari P 27)
Adultery
Adultery in Islam is a great sin punishable by stoning and sin. But a Muslim can
commit adultery with his maid or a married woman if he invades her town and
captures her in the war.
[al-Mu'minun 23:1-7] The believers must (eventually) win through,-2] Those who
humble themselves in their prayers; 3] Who avoid vain talk; 4] Who are active in
deeds of charity; 5] Who abstain from sex, 6] Except with those joined to them in the
marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case)
they are free from blame, :7] But those whose desires exceed those limits are
transgressors;-
[Al Nisa 4:24] “And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives)
whom your right hands possess.”

 

[azizrasul]

It's very easy to swamp a thread by so much information, presumambly by copying and pasting from somewhere (not from an Islamic site\source), knowing full well that very few would have the time or patience to answer every point. In addition, much of what was posted takes u away from the thread topic, giving further reason to ignore the contribution, thus achieving nothing from my point of view.

Lo! the hypocrites say, and those in whose hearts is a disease: "These people,- their religion has misled them." But if any trust in Allah, behold! Allah is Exalted in might, Wise.
Qur'an 8:49

Whenever there cometh down a sura, some of them say: "Which of you has had His faith increased by it?" Yea, those who believe,- their faith is increased and they do rejoice.
But those in whose hearts is a disease,- it will add doubt to their doubt, and they will die in a state of Unbelief.
Qur'an 9:124-5

Or do those in whose hearts is a disease deem that Allah will not bring to light their (secret) hates?
Qur'an 47:29

And We have set none but angels as Guardians of the Fire; and We have fixed their number only as a trial for Unbelievers,- in order that the People of the Book may arrive at certainty, and the Believers may increase in Faith,- and that no doubts may be left for the People of the Book and the Believers, and that those in whose hearts is a disease and the Unbelievers may say, "What symbol doth Allah intend by this?" Thus doth Allah leave to stray whom He pleaseth, and guide whom He pleaseth: and none can know the forces of thy Lord, except He and this is no other than a warning to mankind.
Qur'an 74:31

 

[Sherab]

It's very easy to swamp a thread by so much information, presumambly by copying and pasting from somewhere (not from an Islamic site\source), knowing full well that very few would have the time or patience to answer every point. In addition, much of what was posted takes u away from the thread topic, giving further reason to ignore the contribution, thus achieving nothing from my point of view.

Lo! the hypocrites say, and those in whose hearts is a disease: "These people,- their religion has misled them." But if any trust in Allah, behold! Allah is Exalted in might, Wise.
Qur'an 8:49

Whenever there cometh down a sura, some of them say: "Which of you has had His faith increased by it?" Yea, those who believe,- their faith is increased and they do rejoice.
But those in whose hearts is a disease,- it will add doubt to their doubt, and they will die in a state of Unbelief.
Qur'an 9:124-5

Or do those in whose hearts is a disease deem that Allah will not bring to light their (secret) hates?
Qur'an 47:29

And We have set none but angels as Guardians of the Fire; and We have fixed their number only as a trial for Unbelievers,- in order that the People of the Book may arrive at certainty, and the Believers may increase in Faith,- and that no doubts may be left for the People of the Book and the Believers, and that those in whose hearts is a disease and the Unbelievers may say, "What symbol doth Allah intend by this?" Thus doth Allah leave to stray whom He pleaseth, and guide whom He pleaseth: and none can know the forces of thy Lord, except He and this is no other than a warning to mankind.
Qur'an 74:31

I encourage you to sift through each bit of info and make comments as needed over a period of a few days.

I am not supporting him, but we DO need a discussion.

 

[Vikram singh]

I tried my best to give him real knowledge of Islam, it did't work, now PHOTOS,

GLIMPSES OF PEACEFUL RELIGION


ENJOY THE FACE OF ISLAM

Islam promotes barbarism by fomenting mass hysteria.

Is this Satanism or religion of God?

What does this have to do with spirituality?

The mourners bleed after beating themselves with barbed chains

Self beating scene
The barb chain in designed to scar the skin and make the mourners bleed.

An Iranian boy holds the picture of Imam Ali. Ironically Ali was the man who massacred hundreds of thousands of Iranians and took them, their wives and daughters as slaves selling them in the markets of Mecca and Medina to a bunch of Savage Arabs, who thanked Allah for the bounty.

A father mutilating his son to bleed

A mother rejoices after inflicting wounds on the head of her toddler

the textbook for terrorism

Mod note July 2015: All pic links broken and removed.

 

[azizrasul]

I encourage you to sift through each bit of info and make comments as needed over a period of a few days.

I am not supporting him, but we DO need a discussion.

Copy & Paste merchants rarely indulge in any discussion. The only response u will get is more copying & pasting from anti-Islamic sites. I would like to stick to the subject of the thread as much as possible.

Some links were given e.g. on science & sikhism in which I asked a question but no one came back. U asked a quick question on Ramadhan, which I answered but u never came back with a response? Hence where is the DISCUSSION taking place? When people resort to copying & pasting which has nothing to do with the thread topic, I feel that they must agree with the subject of the thread and that is why they do what they do to distract and destroy the discussion. I'm not prepared to play that game.

 

[Vikram singh]

YouTube - Dispatches - Undercover Mosque (2 of 6)

Story tell lot of thing, if you can understand

One very good Video of Muhammad it tells of marriage of Muhammad,and status of women in islam,
I don't have to write or explain about Islam,it is self explanationy in this video,enjoy your religion,

 

[ProjectNaad]

Scuience in the Quaran

this has been taken from one of the chapters of the following document on Islam and Sikhism.
http://www.projectnaad.com/wp-content/uploads/leaflets/sikhism_islam_rebuttal.pdf

It exlplores the science of the Quran. It is a copy and paste job from the doc but the points are all valid. As you will not bother to read it I have had to resort to copying the contents here.

In summary: Quaran = No science

Muslim brother - I will answer your questions on Sikhism and Science 2night

___________________________________________________________

16.2 What does Quaran say about the Earth?

Dr Maurice Bucaille and Dr Keith Moore are 2 non Muslims who claim to have
discovered the ‘Big-Bang’, ‘expansion of the universe’, ‘theory of evolution of human
species’, science of ‘atoms and molecules’, ‘milky-way, ‘constellation’, ‘white dwarf’,
‘black-holes, ‘embryology’ etc in the Quaran.

We will have a look at some of these claims below:
“Hast thou not seen how Allah causeth the night to pass into the day and causeth the
day to pass into the night, and hath subdued the sun and the moon (to do their work),
each running unto an appointed term; and that Allah is Informed of what ye do?”
In this verse Allah clearly says that he is the one who converts the day into night and
vice versa; subjected the sun and the moon to follow a fixed orbit. We find many
similar verses elsewhere in the Qur’an as well. Here are a few samples: Sura Ya-Sin
(36:38), Sura Az-Zumar (39:5), Sura Al-Rad (13:2), Sura Al-Anbiya (21:33), Sura Al-
Baqara (2:258), Sura Al-Kahf (18:86), Sura Ta-Ha (20:130), just to name a few.
However, even a thorough, painstaking search of the entire Qur’an does not show a
single verse anywhere in it that supports the scientific reality of the rotation of earth.
According to Allah, the earth is motionless, completely static. Period.

In Sura An-Naml (27:61) it is stated clearly:
Is not He (best) Who made the earth a fixed abode, and placed rivers in the folds
thereof, and placed firm hills therein, and hath set a barrier between the two seas? Is
there any Allah beside Allah? Nay, but most of them know not!
In the same vein, Sura Al-Rum (30:25), Sura Fatir (35:41), Sura Luqman (31:10), Sura
Al-Baqara (2:22), Sura An-Nahl (16:15) exhorts the Allah’s decree that the earth is
completely immovable.

There is not a single verse, in the Qur’an that states that the earth moves round the
sun; or that the earth rotates on its own axis, at the least. The Arabic word for earth
is ‘Ard’ and the Arabic word for rotation is ‘Falak’.

In fact people during Muhammad’s time did not know where the sun went at night.
They thought that the sun proceeds to a far-off place to take rest - this was their
knowledge of the setting sun. This understanding can be seen from the following Sura
in the Quaran:

(18:86): “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.”
With such unscientific ideas, it would be inappropriate to consider the Quaran a book
of science.

Many readers may not be aware that the 'Muslim World' considers Muhammad to be the
greatest scientist, thinker and philosopher that Allah ever created. Now, think about
the answer, that this ‘greatest’ creator of science gave when people questioned him:
Where does the sun go at night? In a conversation with one of his companions (Abu
Dhar), Muhammad claimed that the sun ‘prostrates’ under the throne of Allah for the
entire night and seeks His permission to go to its usual work in the morning! Let us
read this hadis

Volume 6, Book 60, Number 326: Narrated Abu Dharr:
“Once I was with the Prophet in the mosque at the time of sunset. The Prophet said,
"O Abu Dharr! Do you know where the sun sets?" I replied, "Allah and His Apostle know
best." He said, "It goes and prostrates underneath (Allah's) Throne; and that is Allah's
Statement:--

'And the sun runs on its fixed course for a term (decreed). And that is the decree of
All-Mighty, the All-Knowing....' (36.38)

The Quaran also talks of a FLAT Earth at the following verses:

“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)

“Who hath appointed the earth as a bed and hath threaded roads for you therein and
hath sent down water from the sky and thereby We have brought forth divers kinds of
vegetation,…” (Sura Ta Ha 20:53)

“Who made the earth a resting-place for you, and placed roads for you therein, that
haply ye may find your way;…”(Sura Az-Zukhruf 43:10)

“And the earth have We spread out, and have flung firm hills therein, and have
caused of every lovely kind to grow thereon, …” (Sura Qaf 50:7)

“And Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you…” (Sura Nooh 71:19)

We can definitely deduce from the fixed prayer times that the ancient people were
quite accustomed to the notion of a flat earth. Aroj Ali Matubbar, the peasantphilosopher
of Bengal has further elaborated on this idea of flat earth in his book ‘The
Quest for Truth’ Let us take this opportunity to examine his elaboration.

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. These
complications will definitely keep increasing in future, no doubt. Here is a very
compelling illustration: if an astronaut or an aircraft pilot flies at a speed of 1041.67
miles an hour from the west, he will find the sun to be motionless, still. This means
that, for the air-passengers there will be no such time as morning, noon or evening—as
if the sun is standstill at one position only! What would happen to prayer and fasting—
come to think of it? If in future, human habitation is established in the North Pole,
there will be more problems. There is approximately six month of days and six months
of nights at this forlorn place. Will it be possible to strictly follow the rules of fasting
as well the dictums of five prayers a day between sunrise and sunset there? Please
ponder closely on this issue and you will surely discover that the root cause of this
problem is the erroneous idea of a flat and motionless earth.

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.’ In his book ‘The Demon-Haunted World’, Karl Sagan has enunciated this
fatwa in detail.

16.3 Does Quaran talk about a big bang?
It is quite astonishing that the so-called science experts discover ‘Big-Bang’ in this
verse! Is ‘Big-Bang’ or explosion mentioned in this verse?

“21:30 Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of
one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water? Will they
not then believe?”

“21:31 And We have placed in the earth firm hills lest it quake with them, and We
have placed therein ravines as roads that haply they may find their way.”

Furthermore, in Physics, the ‘Big-Bang’ is related with space-time singularity, not with
matter per se. The earth did not even exist when the ‘Big-Bang’ took place—the earth
having been born billion years after the ‘Big-Bang’! The above verses are clearly

referring to earth and sky being "joined" (which doesn't even have a common sense or
scientific meaning) together and then being split apart (again meaningless as per
science), and that is all.

Therefore, simply using a few jargons and playing with words in the above verse
(21:30), in no way expresses scientifically, the ‘Big-Bang’ incidence. We learn from
Quantum Physics that, just after the ‘Great’ explosion, the four forces of nature, the
strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, electro-magnetic force and the
gravitational force existed as a unified ‘super force.’ Where in the above verse one
can find this scientific truth?

16.4 What does the Quaran say about Thunder?
It is common knowledge, as scientists teach, that thunder is a sound caused by the
impact between electrical charges found in the clouds. Yet Muhammad, the prophet of
Muslims, has a different opinion in this matter. He claims that the thunder and the
lightning are two of God’s angels—exactly like Gabriel!

In the Qur’an there is a chapter under the title of "Thunder" in which it is recorded
that the thunder praises God. We might think that it does not mean that literally
because thunder is not a living being—although, spiritually speaking, all of nature
glorifies God. The expounders of the Qur’an and its chief scholars, however, insist that
Muhammad said that the thunder is an angel exactly like the angel Gabriel. In his
commentary (p. 329), the Baydawi comments on verse 13 of chapter of the Thunder,
"Ibn ’Abbas asked the apostle of God about the thunder. He told him, ‘It is an angel
who is in charge of the cloud, who (carries) with him swindles of fire by which he
drives the clouds."’

In the commentary of the Jalalan (p. 206), we read about this verse:
"The thunder is an angel in charge of the clouds to drive them."
Not only ibn ’Abbas asked Muhammad about the essence of the thunder, but the Jews
did too. In the book, "al-Itqan" by Suyuti (part 4, p. 230), we read the following
dialogue:

"On the authority of Ibn ’Abbas, he said the Jews came to the prophet (peace be upon
him) and said, ‘Tell us about the thunder. What is it?’ He told them:
‘It is one of God’s angels in charge of the clouds. He carries in his hand a swindle of
fire by which he pricks the clouds to drive them to where God has ordered them.’
They said to him, ‘What is this sound that we hear?’ He said: ‘(It is) his voice (The
angel’s voice)."’

The same incident—the question of the Jews and Muhammad’s answer are mentioned
by most scholars. Refer, for instance, to al-Sahih al-Musnad Min Asbab Nuzul al-Ayat
(stories related to the verses of Qur’an, p. 11) and al-Kash-shaf by the Imam al-
Kamakhshari (part 2, pp. 518, 519). He reiterates the same story and the same words
of Muhammad. Thus, the incident is in vogue among all Muslim scholars, and the story
and the dialogue between Muhammad and the Jews is well-known.

We have mentioned what the Baydawi, Jalalan, Zamakhshari, Suyuti, and ibn ’Abbas
have said. We do not know (among the ancient scholars) any who are more famous
than these. Concerning lighting, Muhammad affirms that it is an angel like the thunder
and like Gabriel and Michael. On page 230 of the above references, Suyuti alludes to
it. Also on page 68 of part 4 of the "Itqan", the Suyuti records for us the names of the
angels, which are: "Gabriel, Michael, Harut, Marut, the Thunder and the Lightning (He
said) that the lightning has four faces."

The Suyuti listed all these under the sub-title, "The names of God’s Angels". He also
indicated that Muhammad said that the lightning is the tail end of an angel whose
name is Rafael (refer to part 4, p. 230 of the Itqan).

16.5 What does the Quaran say shooting stars?
Muhammad had a strange belief in shadowy beings and ghosts that he called Jinn.
These Jinns were made of fire and would stand on top of each other’s shoulders all the
way to heaven to eavesdrop to what was being discussed. The prophet also believed
that the shooting stars and the meteors are the missiles thrown at the eavesdropping
Jinns.

Q. 72: 8
“And (the Jinn who had listened to the Qur'an said): We had sought the heaven but
had found it filled with strong warders and meteors.
9.
And we used to sit on places (high) therein to listen. But he who listeneth now
findeth a flame in wait for him;"
He repeated the same idea again.

Q. 37: 6/10
”We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars, (For beauty)
and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits, (So) they should not strain
their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side,
Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual penalty, Except such as snatch away
something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.
And

Q. 67: 5
“And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have
made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for
them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.”

The universe as was envisioned by Muhammad, obviously belongs to the realm of fairy
tales. The Earth for him was flat were the sun rises from one end and sets in the
muddy waters on the other. In Arabic the word “sama” stands for both heaven and
sky. And for Muhammad, just like his primitive contemporaries there was no
distinction between the two. He described the heaven (sky) made of seven layers and
placed the stars in the lowest layer, lower than the Moon. Then he envisioned the
mythical Jinns as if they were real beings, standing on each other’s shoulders all the
way to heaven to eavesdrop to the discussion of the “Exalted Assembly”. He assumed
that the stars are just lamps to adorn the lower heaven that are also used as missiles
to shoot the intruding Jinns. Can any reasonable person today accept these fables of
those primitive people as true?

The shooting stars, despite their names are not stars but meteorites that glow when
enter the atmosphere of the Earth. But Muhammad, could not see the difference; to
him the shooting stars were stars.

There is also a Hadith that confirms the above story.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 432

Narrated 'Aisha:
I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "The angels descend, the clouds and mention this or
that matter decreed in the Heaven. The devils listen stealthily to such a matter,
come down to inspire the soothsayers with it, and the latter would add to it onehundred
lies of their own."

16.6 Embryology in the Quaran?
In the early 1980s, Prof. Keith Moore, formerly an anatomist at the University of
Toronto, Canada produced a special edition of his embryology textbook, the standard
version of which has been widely used in medical schools around the world. Apparently
when he first read what the Qur'an had to say about the development of the human
embryo he was "astonished by the accuracy of the statements that were recorded in
the 7th century AD, before the science of embryology was established”. Much has
subsequently been written by Muslims in an attempt to demonstrate that the Qur'an,
which is claimed to be God's ultimate revelation contains statements about how
humans develop inside the womb which could not possibly have been known at the
time that it was revealed to Muhammed. Indeed, a recent book confirms the extent to
which this has been happening:

Dubai's medical school recently introduced a compulsory course for all students:
Islamic Medicine. The program seeks to link all modern medicine, including genetics,
to the Koran. Such courses have their genesis in orthodox Saudi Arabia. The Saudis
have spent considerable sums on medical conferences at which leading Western
scientists are asked to confirm that Koranic verses, which seem vague to the
layperson, are in fact specific predictors of modern science. Videos and pamphlets
from the conferences have been circulated throughout the Muslim world by the Saudis.
If it is indeed true that certain verses accurately foretell modern scientific ideas which
could not be tested in the seventh century, then it implies that the Qur'an must have
had a divine author. It is the intention of this paper to examine what exactly was
known about the human embryo at the time of Muhammed in order to see whether any
of the theories expressed in the Qur'an were true or indeed well known before this
time.

16.6.1 The origins of life according to the Qur'an
There are at least 60 verses which deal explicitly with human reproduction and
development, but these are scattered throughout the Qur'an and many of the themes
are repeated over and over again, as is common to much of the book. A useful place to
begin would be the material out of which we are created. One would expect the
Qur'an to be unambiguous about such an elementary matter, but the verses listed
show just how much uncertainty there appears to be in our origins. Note that except
where indicated the translation used is the translation of Yusuf Ali (Saudi Revised
Edition).

Could it be from earth?
11:61 It is He Who hath produced you from the earth
Or dry clay (Arabic Salsaal)?

15:26,28,33 We created man from sounding clay

17:61 ... Thou didst create from clay

32:7 He began the creation of man from clay
Did we come from nothing?

19:67 We created him before out of nothing
No, we did not!

52:35 Were they created of nothing?
Did we come from mud?

23:12 We created man from a product of wet earth (loam) (Pickthall)
23:12 Man We did create from a quintessence (of clay)
38:71 I am about to create a mortal out of mire
Or water?

25:54 It is He Who has created man from water (see also 21:30, 24:45)
Could it be dust?

3:59 He created (Jesus) out of dust

30:20 He created you from dust

35:11 Allah did create you from dust ....

Perhaps we arose from the dead or from one person?
30:19 It is He who brings out the living from the dead
39:6 He created you from a single Person (see also 4:1)

To resolve the considerable ambiguity about what exactly we are made of, it has been
suggested that all of the above are complimentary accounts, in the same way that a
loaf of bread could be said to be made of dough, flour, carbohydrate or molecules.
This evades the issue however. The metaphorical description of God making man out
of the dust of the earth is ancient and predates the Qur'an by thousands of years; it is
found in the Bible in Genesis 2:7. If this was literal it would be in direct scientific
conflict with evolutionists who maintain that life was created out of the oceans, but
Muslims maintain that we were created both from the oceans and from earth.

16.6.2 The drop of fluid or semen
In a number of places we are informed that man is created from a drop of fluid
(semen, seed or sperm):
16:4 He created man from a drop of fluid (Pickthall)
16:4 He has created man from a sperm-drop
32:8 He made his seed from a quintessence of despised fluid
35:11 ... then from a little fluid (Pickthall)
53:46 (he created) from a drop of seed when it is poured forth (Pickthall)
53:46 From a sperm-drop when lodged (in its place)
56:58 Have ye seen that which ye emit (Pickthall)
56:58 Do you then see? The (human Seed) that ye emit
75:37 Was he not a drop of fluid which gushed forth (Pickthall)
75:37 Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)?
76:2 We create man from a drop of thickened fluid (Pickthall)
76:2 We created Man from a drop of mingled sperm
80:19 From a sperm-drop He hath created him
86:6-7 He is created from a drop emitted - proceeding from between the backbone
and the ribs.

Could any of this have been known to sixth-century Muslims at the time of Muhammed?
Surely that procreation involves the emission of a drop of fluid has been well known
from the earliest days of civilization. In Genesis 38:9 the Bible tells us that Onan
"spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother". The
verses which describe the origin of life as a drop of emitted fluid are therefore no
more than a direct observation as to what is released during the act of sexual
intercourse. We hardly need to rely upon divine inspiration to inform us of this fact.
In the verses listed above nutfah is used when describing the fluid which gushes out
during sexual intercourse and clearly this can only refer to semen. However, Prof.
Moore is keen to translate nutfah in sura 76:2 as "mingled fluid" and explains that this
Arabic term refers to the male and female fluids which contain the gametes (male
sperm and female egg). While it is true that the ancient Greeks would not have been
able to see individual sperm or eggs, these only being visible through the microscope,
the Qur'an emphatically does not mention sperm or eggs; it simply says nutfah. This
can reasonably be translated semen, or at a push, germinal fluid - which was a term
used as early as Hippocrates who spoke of male and female reproductive fluids (but
obviously could not have been aware of the cells contained in the fluids). If Moore
wishes to translate nutfah as germinal fluid, he inadvertently reinforces that the
Qur'an is borrowing this term from the Greeks.

Sura 86:6 is interesting since it claims that during the act of sexual intercourse before
which a man is created, the "gushing fluid" or semen issues from between the loins and
ribs. Semen is apparently coming out of the area around the kidneys and back, which
is a real problem for we know that the testicles are the sites of sperm production
(although the ancient Greeks were not so convinced. Aristotle for example amusingly
believed that they functioned as weights to keep the seminal passages open during
sexual intercourse).

The explanation offered by Muslims for the strange statement in this sura relates to
the fact that the testicles originally develop from tissue in the area of the kidneys,
when the man from whom sperm is gushing forth was himself an embryo. In other
words, in a very convoluted fashion the sperm originates from the area between the
loins and ribs because that is where the testicles which are producing the sperm
originally form.

There is a rather less complicated explanation for this verse however. The Greek
physician Hippocrates and his followers taught in the fifth century BC that semen
comes from all the fluid in the body, diffusing from the brain into the spinal marrow,
before passing through the kidneys and via the testicles into the *****. Clearly
according to this view sperm originates from the region of the kidneys, and although
there is obviously no substance to this teaching today, it was well-known in
Muhammed's day, and shows how the Qur'an could contain such an erroneous
statement.

Of course it could be argued against all this that the reference to coming from the
loins is merely a metaphorical figure of speech. We can find examples of this in sura
7:172 "when thy Lord drew forth from the Children of Adam - from their loins - their
descendants" or 4:23 "prohibited to you (for marriage) are ... wives of your sons
proceeding from your loins". But if so then it has to be accepted that this is a common
usage for Middle Eastern cultures [8]; in the Torah God promises Jacob that "kings
shall come out of your loins (chalatzecha)" (Gen 35:11). Later in the Bible a promise is
made to David's "son that shall come forth out of your loins" (I Kings 8:19) and in the
New Testament Peter refers to the same person as "one from the fruit of his loins"
(Greek osphus). However, these are examples of a metaphorical use of the word "loins"
(Arabic sulb). Sura 86:6 is clearly talking about the physical act of intercourse; gushing
fluid and ribs (tar a'ib) are both very physical and in the context of this verse they

clearly refer to the site of semen production as wrongly taught by Hippocrates. So we
have found the first example of an incorrect ancient Greek idea re-emerging in the

Qur'an.
16.6.3 Embryological development in the Qur'an
Sura 22:5 says "We created you out of dust, then out of sperm, then out of a leech-like
clot, then from a morsel of flesh, partly formed and partly unformed ... and We cause
whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term, then do We bring you out
as babes." Sura 23:13-14 repeats this idea by saying God "placed him as (a drop of)
sperm (nutfah) in a place of rest, firmly fixed; then We made the sperm into a clot of
congealed blood (alaqa); then out of that clot We made a (foetus) lump (mudghah),
then We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then We
developed out of it another creature." 75:38 also says man becomes an alaqa and 96:2
says we came from alaq.

Moore however goes further and incredibly he claims in a later edition of his textbook
that the Qur'an "states that the resulting organism settles in the womb like a seed, 6
days after its beginning". This really would be amazing if it was true. Actually the

Qur'an says nothing of the sort.
We have to ask what the precise meaning of these words is in order to know whether
the verses contain important scientific statements that have only recently been
discovered, as Moore and others claim. In comparison with the meaning of nutfah, it is
rather more difficult to understand what alaqa means. Many different suggestions have
been made: clot (Pickthall, Maulana Muhammed Ali, Muhammed Zafrulla Khan,
Hamidullah), small lump of blood (Kasimirski), leech-like clot (Yusuf Ali), and "leech,
suspended thing or blood clot" (Moore, op. cit.). Moore suggests that the appearance
of an embryo of 24 days' gestation resembles a leech, though this is rather debatable.
In side view the developing umbilicus (genetically part of the embryo) is almost as big
as the "leech-shaped" part into which a human is formed and the developing placenta
(which also consists of tissue that is genetically from the embryo) is much larger than
the embryo. It is claimed that the ancient sages would not have been able to see an
embryo about 3mm long and describe it as leech-like, but Aristotle correctly described
the function of the umbilical cord, by which the embryo "clings" to the uterus wall in
the fourth century B.C. It is impossible to believe the suggestion of Bachir Torki that
alaq in 96:2 means links, referring to the gene code of DNA, as this makes a nonsense
out of other verses where the word is used, such as 22:5 ("we made you from a drop of
sperm, then from that a gene code, then from that a little lump of flesh....").
To establish a definition for alaqa we might take a look at the Qamus al-Muheet, one
of the most important Arabic dictionaries ever compiled, by Muhammed Ibn-Yaqub al-
Firuzabadi (AD 1329-1415) . He says that alaqa has the same meaning as a clot of
blood. In 96:2 the word alaq is used, which is both a collective plural and a verbal
noun. The latter form conveys the sense of man being created from clinging material
or possibly clay, which is consistent with the creation of Adam in the Bible from the
dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7) and some of the other Qur'anic verses listed above.
However, the translators of the Qur'an have all translated alaq as "clot" as opposed to
"clinging" in 96:2 because the use of the singular alaqa elsewhere forces them to use
"clot" here too, despite the attraction for the meaning "clinging" or leech-like which is
perhaps more scientifically accurate.

Another source of information are the early Muslim commentators. Ibn Kathir wrote
that when the drop of water (nutfah) settled in the womb it stayed there for forty
days and then became a red clot (alaqa), staying there for another forty days before
turning to mudghah, a piece of flesh without shape or form. Finally it began to take on
a shape and form. Both ar-Razi and as-Suyuti claimed that the dust referred both to
Adam's creation and to the man's discharge; nutfah referred to the water from the

male and alaqa was a solidified piece of blood clot. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (died
about AD 1350) wrote that "the foetus is a living or dead babe animal which is
sometimes found in the womb of a slaughtered animal, and its blood is congested".
Another great physician, Ibn al-Quff wrote some 13 out of 60 chapters from "On Health
Preservation" about embryology and pregnancy. He included a further stage of
development one week after conception, the foam stage or raghwah. Up to 16 days
the embryo was alaqa (clot) and after 27 to 30 days the clot turns into a lump of meat,
mudghah. These dates must be regarded as very approximate but are nevertheless a
major improvement on what one of the most reliable Hadiths says about foetal
development, as we shall see later.

A 26/27 day embryo, said to resemble a mouthful of flesh, but only 3 mm long
Moving onto the next stage of development, Razi described the mudghah as being a
little piece of meat the size of what a man can chew. The idea that mudghah means
chewed flesh is a later, and less accurate translation of the word, but the idea has
persisted because it is claimed that the somites from which the backbone and other
trunk structures develop bear a passing resemblance to teeth marks implanted in
plastercine. It must be said that not only is this an imaginative interpretation
however, but besides, Moore cannot claim that the mudghah should occur at 26-27
days since at that point the embryo is a mere 4mm long. One would have to wait
around 8 weeks before the embryo was the size of chewed flesh (if a mouthful is
defined as being 20-30mm wide), which is what mudghah really means. And in the
following Hadith, transmitted by Bukhari and Muslim, Muhammed claims that the
mudghah stage occurs between days 80 and 120. Yet by this time the foetus is
considerably larger than a lump of flesh the size of which a man can chew, and looks
very human-like and totally unlike meat.

"Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported that Allah's Messenger ... said: "Verily your creation is
on this wise. The constituents of one of you are collected for forty days in his mother's
womb in the form of blood [sperm?], after which it becomes a clot of blood in another
period of forty days. Then it becomes a lump of flesh and forty days later Allah sends
his angel to it ..."

Thus according to Muhammed, the drop of sperm remains in the womb for 40 days,
then becomes a clot for a further 40 days, then a lump of flesh for 40 days. It has been
shown that human sperm can only survive inside a woman's reproductive tract for a
maximum of 7 days; at 80 days the embryo has very definitely acquired the shape of a
human being and looks nothing like either a clot or a mouthful of flesh.
An eleven week foetus, real size 7.5 cm, but according to Muhammed still at the alaqa
stage, a clot of blood

The final stage of human development which the Qur'an describes is the creation of
bones, and the clothing of bones with flesh. However, according to modern
embryologists including Prof. Moore, the tissue from which bone originates, known as
mesoderm, is the same tissue as that from which muscle ("flesh") develops. Thus bone
and muscles begin to develop simultaneously, rather than sequentially. Whereas
however most of the muscle tissue that we have is laid down before birth, bones
continue to develop and calcify (strengthen with calcium) right into one's teenage
years. So far from bones being clothed with flesh, it would be more accurate if the
Qur'an had said that muscles started to develop at the same time as bones, but
completed their development earlier. The idea that bones are clothed with flesh is not
only scientifically completely false, but is directly copied from the ancient Greek
doctor Galen, as we shall see shortly.

16.6.4 Some possible explanations
Aristotle believed that humans originated from the action of male semen upon female
menstrual blood [18] which leaves us with something of a dilemma. If we translate
alaqa as "clot" it means that the Qur'an is completely wrong about human
development, since there is absolutely no stage during which the embryo consists of a
clot. The only situation in which an embryo might appear like a clot is during a
miscarriage, in which case the clotted blood which is seen to emerge (much of which
comes from the mother incidentally) is solidified and by definition no longer alive. So
if ever an embryo appeared to look like a clot it would never develop any further into
a human; it would be a dead mass of ****** miscarrying flesh. Since Muhammed had
several wives it is entirely likely that he would be very familiar with miscarriages.
Alternatively it could be hinting at Aristotle's incorrect belief that the embryo
originated from the combination of male sperm and female menstrual blood.
Moore avoids this problem by translating alaqa as a leech, since he is well aware that
there is no stage in development when the embryo is a clot. As we have seen however,
this is only to justify his interpretation that an embryo of 24-25 days is a clinging
leech-like alaqa and one at 26-27 days is a mudghah with teeth-marks. A further
problem with this view is that if the alaqa is translated "leech" because it appears to
be clinging to the uterus wall, does this mean that the foetus only clings to the uterus
wall for a few days? Obviously it remains attached for the entire nine months of
gestation.

There are other problems with Moore's interpretation too. Not least is the claim of
Muhammed that the dates of the alaqa and mudghah were 40-80 days and 80-120 days
of gestation respectively, rather than 24-25 days and 26-27 days. It also begs the
question as to why, if the Qur'an really is giving us a highly precise scientific account
of human development, it only mentions four stages, nutfah, alaqa, mudghah, plus the
clothing of bones with flesh. Between fertilization and day 28 for example Moore lists
no fewer than 13 stages in his textbook. Why does the Qur'an say nothing about any of
these other stages? The reality is that the more ambiguous the meaning of the Arabic
terms, and the more meanings that can be attached to certain words, the less
convincingly can they be said to be highly precise scientific terms.

However, the most convincing explanation, and the most worrying for those who
maintain that the Qur'an is God's eternal Word, untampered with and free from any
human interference, is that the Qur'an is merely repeating the teaching of the
enormously influential Greek physician Galen. If this is the case, not only is the Qur'an
wrong, but it also plagiarises ancient Greek literature!

The account of the different stages in embryology as described by the Qur'an, ar-Razi
and al-Quff is identical to that taught by Galen, writing in around AD 150 in Pergamum
(Bergama in modern Turkey). Galen taught that the embryo developed in four stages
as detailed below.

Galen: De Semine in Greek
English translation:
But let us take the account back again to the first conformation of the animal, and in
order to make our account orderly and clear, let us divide the creation of the foetus
overall into four periods of time. The first is that in which. as is seen both in abortions
and in dissection, the form of the semen prevails (Arabic nutfah). At this time,
Hippocrates too, the all-marvelous, does not yet call the conformation of the animal a
foetus; as we heard just now in the case of semen voided in the sixth day, he still calls
it semen. But when it has been filled with blood (Arabic alaqa), and heart, brain and
liver are still unarticulated and unshaped yet have by now a certain solidarity and
considerable size, this is the second period; the substance of the foetus has the form
of flesh and no longer the form of semen. Accordingly you would find that Hippocrates
too no longer calls such a form semen but, as was said, foetus. The third period
follows on this, when, as was said, it is possible to see the three ruling parts clearly
and a kind of outline, a silhouette, as it were, of all the other parts (Arabic mudghah).
You will see the conformation of the three ruling parts more clearly, that of the parts
of the stomach more dimly, and much more still, that of the limbs. Later on they form
"twigs", as Hippocrates expressed it, indicating by the term their similarity to
branches. The fourth and final period is at the stage when all the parts in the limbs
have been differentiated; and at this part Hippocrates the marvelous no longer calls
the foetus an embryo only, but already a child, too when he says that it jerks and
moves as an animal now fully formed (Arabic ‘a new creation’) ...
... The time has come for nature to articulate the organs precisely and to bring all the
parts to completion. Thus it caused flesh to grow on and around all the bones, and at
the same time ... it made at the ends of the bones ligaments that bind them to each
other, and along their entire length it placed around them on all sides thin
membranes, called periosteal, on which it caused flesh to grow.

Qur'an: Sura 23:13-14 in Arabic for comparison
English translation:
Thereafter We made him (the offspring of Adam) as a Nutfah (mixed drops of the male
and female sexual discharge and lodged it) in a safe lodging (womb of the woman).
Then We made the Nutfah into a clot (Alaqa, a piece of thick coagulated blood), then
We made the clot into a little lump of flesh (Mudghah), then We made out of that
little lump of flesh bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh, and then We brought
it forth as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of Creators!

The first stage, geniture, corresponds to [nutfah], the drop of semen; the second
stage, a ****** vascularised foetus with unshaped brain, liver and heart ("when it has
been filled with blood") corresponds to [alaqa], the blood clot; the third stage "has the
form of flesh" and corresponds to [mudghah], the morsel of chewed flesh. The fourth
and final stage, puer, was when all the organs were well formed, joints were freely
moveable, and the foetus began to move. If the reader is in any doubt about the clear
link being described here between the Galenic and the Qur'anic stages, it may be
pointed out that it was early Muslim doctors, including Ibn-Qayyim, who first spotted
the similarity. Basim Musallam, Director of the Centre of Middle Eastern Studies at the

University of Cambridge concludes
"The stages of development which the Qur'an and Hadith established for believers
agreed perfectly with Galen's scientific account ... There is no doubt that medieval
thought appreciated this agreement between the Qur'an and Galen, for Arabic science
employed the same Qur'anic terms to describe the Galenic stages".

16.6.5 Stages of Development - A Modern Idea?
It has been said that the idea of the embryo developing through stages is a modern
one, and that the Qur'an is anticipating modern embryology by depicting differing
stages. However many ancient writers besides Galen taught that humans developed in
different stages. For example in the Jewish Talmud we learn that the embryo has six
stages of development. Samuel ha-Yehudi was a 2nd century Jewish physician, and one
of many with an interest in embryology [22]. The embryo was called peri habbetten
(fruit of the body) and develops as
golem (formless, rolled-up thing);
shefir meruqqam (embroidered foetus - shefir means amniotic sac);
'ubbar (something carried);
v'alad (child);
v'alad shel qayama (noble or viable child) and
ben she-kallu chadashav (child whose months have been completed).

Yet with the benefit of modern science we now know that the formation of a human
being is a seamless continuation from conception to birth, hence the reason why there
is so much contemporary confusion about abortion and embryo research. For if we
develop as a continuous process it is impossible to draw hard-and-fast boundaries
about when life starts. This makes a nonsense of the Qur'anic verse which says (71:14)
"When He created you by (divers) stages".

16.6.6 More examples of borrowing from ancient Greek writers
If we look at what the ancient Greeks taught we can clearly see that all the other
references to embryology in the Qur'an and Hadith can also be traced directly back to
them. For example there is a Hadith in which Muhammed is questioned about why a
group of red camels have a grey camel among them, and it is due to a hidden trait.
But Aristotle noticed that babies who were born that looked unlike either of their
parents would often take on the appearance of their grandparents, so that the
characteristic skipped a generation, being what we now know as recessive. He also
tells us of a woman from Elis who took a black husband and although their daughter
was not black, their daughter's daughter was black, demonstrating a gene which
skipped a generation in exactly the same way as Muhammed described.
Another Hadith says "If a male's fluid prevails upon the female's substance, the child
will be a male by Allah's decree, and when the substance of the female prevails upon
the substance contributed by the male, a female child is formed". Surely this is not
referring to dominant and recessive genes at all, as certain Muslims have claimed, but
is simply repeating the incorrect belief of Hippocrates that both men and women
produce both male and female sperm. The sex of the resulting child is determined by
which sperm overwhelms the other in strength or quantity:
"... both partners alike contain both male and female sperm (the male being stronger
than the female must originate from a stronger sperm). Here is a further point: if (a)
both partners produce a stronger sperm then a male is the result, whereas if (b) they
produce a weak form, then a female is the result. But if (c) one partner produces one
kind of sperm, and the other another then the resultant sex is determined by
whichever sperm prevails in quantity. For suppose that the weak sperm is much
greater in quantity than the stronger sperm: then the stronger sperm is overwhelmed
and, being mixed with weak, results in a female. If on the contrary the strong sperm is
greater in quantity than the weak, and the weak is overwhelmed, it results in a male".
Earlier in the Hadith, Muhammed says that the reproductive substance of men is white
and that of women is yellow. This sounds very much like the content, white and
yellow, that is found inside developing chick-eggs, and which Aristotle was known to
dissect.

Later in the same Hadith an angel is apparently sent by Allah to shape the embryo and
ask what sex it is going to be. Notwithstanding that sex is actually determined at the
moment of conception according to whether the fertilised egg has two X chromosomes
(female) or an X and Y chromosome (male), and that there is some ambiguity about
the age of the embryo when the angel appears (Hudhaifa b. Usaid reported that
Muhammed said 40 or perhaps 50 days, not 42, and Abu Tufail maintains that
Muhammed said to Hudhaifa b. Usaid that sperm resided in the womb for 40 days),
Hippocrates taught that it took 30 days for the male genitals to form and 42 for the
female embryo. No wonder the angel has to wait for forty-two days before it learns
the child's sex. In reality, prior to 7 weeks of gestation the ovaries and testes appear
identical and the external genitalia only start to diverge around 9 weeks.
Sura 39:6 says that God made us in stages in threefold darkness. There have been
many interpretations of this verse, including that of as-Suyuti who said that there
were three membranes surrounding the foetus, one to carry nutrients to it, another to

absorb its urine, and the third to absorb other waste products. Elsewhere it has been
suggested that they are the abdominal wall, the uterine wall and the amniotic sac in
which the foetus sits. This is entirely observable to the naked eye, as Hippocrates
described dissecting pregnant dogs to find puppies sitting in the amniotic sac inside
the uterus. A rather macabre practice of Queen Cleopatra was to rip open the wombs
of her pregnant slave-girls in order to see their foetuses, according both to Rabbinic
traditions and Plinius. Furthermore, the Romans introduced the custom of opening the
womb of a pregnant woman if she died before she had delivered her baby; the woman
and her baby would be buried side-by-side, thus giving rise to the term "Caesarean
section".

It is said by Muslims that sura 80:20 describes how easy Allah has made it for delivery
of the infant, but this contradicts sura 46:15 ("his mother beareth him with reluctance
and bringeth him forth with reluctance"). In fact 80:19 is talking about man's origins
from a drop of sperm, and 80:21 about his death and burial, so it is entirely logical
that 80:20 refers not to the process of parturition (giving birth) but to the whole of
man's life being made easy for him by God. In the context this makes a lot more sense,
does not contradict 46:15 and does not go against the weight of obstetrical evidence
that makes giving birth one of the most dangerous things a woman can do in her life.
(In Mozambique, childbirth is the seventh most common cause of death in women, and
worldwide a woman dies in labour every 53 seconds.) The Biblical teaching that
women give birth with much pain (Genesis 3:16) is far more realistic.

Sura 46:15 also says, "The duration of pregnancy and separation [weaning] is thirty
months" and sura 31:14 informs us that "his separation is at the end of two years". This
implies that the duration of a normal pregnancy is six months. Nowadays with
advanced neonatal facilities it is just possible for a small proportion of babies born at
24 weeks' gestation to survive, albeit with severe disabilities in many cases. In
Muhammed's day no babies could have survived at so premature an age, and the Qur'an
is wildly inaccurate about the duration of a normal pregnancy.

Part 2 below

 

[ProjectNaad]

Science in the Quaran

Part 2 continued


Sura 33:4 says that Allah has not put two hearts into any man. Yet duplication of the
heart has been admitted, albeit with reluctance by Geoffrey-Saint-Hilaire and
celebrated anatomists including Littre, Meckel, Colomb, Panum, Behr, Paullini,
Rhodius, Winslow and Zacutus Lusitanus.
In other places the Qur'an contains commands which have been claimed to be
fantastically advanced and sensible, when in fact they were known and followed by far
more ancient civilizations. In sura 2:222, Allah tells Muhammed that menstruation is
an illness and men must not have sexual intercourse with their wives until they are
cleansed from their periods. Yet 2000 years earlier Moses received the command not
to have sexual intercourse during a woman's period (Torah: Leviticus 18:19) but this
was very definitely not for health reasons, but for religious, ceremonial reasons.
Having sex during one's period is hardly likely to cause male infertility, endometriosis
and fallopian tube damage, as has been claimed by some Muslims with no scientific
evidence, even if it might be unpleasant for the couple. But perhaps more importantly
menstruation is not an illness; indeed the shedding of the endometrial layer of the
uterus helps to prevent uterine cancer. Progesterone has to be included in hormonereplacement
therapy (HRT) in post-menopausal women to induce an artificial
menstruation every month to prevent a build-up of endometrium which could become
cancerous!

16.6.7 But how could Muhammed have known these things?
It is one thing to find the Qur'an repeating the same embryological ideas as those
described originally by the ancient Greeks, but is there any way in which we can be
sure that the material was familiar to the Arabs of Muhammed's day? Given that so
much of what the Qur'an says is based upon Galen's beliefs, it is particularly significant
that some 26 books of his work were translated into Syriac as early as the sixth
century AD by Sergius of Resh' Aina (Ra's al-Ain). Sergius was a Christian priest who
studied medicine in Alexandria and worked in Mesopotania, dying in Constantinople in
about AD 532. He was one of a number of Nestorian (Syriac) Christians who translated
the Greek medical corpus into Syriac; others included Bishop Gregorius, al-Rahawy, al-
Taybuti, the Patriarch Theodorus and al-Sabakti.

The Nestorians experienced persecution from the mainstream church and fled to
Persia, where they brought their completed translations of the Greek doctors' works
and founded many schools of learning. The most famous of these by far was the great
medical school of Jundishapur in what is now south-east Iran, founded in AD 555 by
the Persian King Chosroes the Great (also known as Anusharwan or Nushirvan), whose
long reign lasted from AD 531 to around 579.

The major link between Islamic and Greek medicine must be sought in late Sasanian
medicine, especially in the School of Jundishapur rather than that of Alexandria. At
the time of the rise of Islam Jundishapur was at its prime. It was the most important
medical centre of its time, combining the Greek, Indian and Iranian medical traditions
in a cosmopolitan atmosphere which prepared the ground for Islamic medicine. The
combining of different schools of medicine foreshadowed the synthesis that was to be
achieved in later Islamic medicine.

Arab medicine, to deal with only one side of this question, borrowed from many
sources. The biggest debt was to the Greeks ... The medicine of Jundi Shapur was also
mainly Greek. There must have been Syriac translations in the library of the hospital
there long before the Arabs came to Persia ... According to Ibn Abi Usaybi'a the first to
translate Greek works into Syriac was Sergius of Ra's-al-`Ayn [sic], who translated both
medical and philosophical works. It was probably he who worked for Chosroes the
Great and it was his translations in all probability which were used in Jundi Shapur.
According to Muslim historians, especially Ibn Abi Usaybia and al-Qifti, the most
celebrated early graduate of Jundishapur was a doctor named al Harith Ibn Kalada,
who was an older contemporary of Muhammed. "He was born probably about the
middle of the sixth century, at Ta'if, in the tribe of Banu Thaqif. He traveled through
Yemen and then Persia where he received his education in the medical sciences at the
great medical school of Jundi-Shapur and thus was intimately acquainted with the
medical teachings of Aristotle, Hippocrates and Galen."
He became famous partly as a result of a consultation with King Chosroes. Later he
became a companion of the Prophet Muhammed himself, and according to the Muslim
medical traditions Muhammed actually sought medical advice from him. He may even
have been a relative of the Prophet and his "teachings undoubtedly influenced the
latter" [i.e., Muhammed]. "Such medical knowledge as Muhammed possessed, he may
well have acquired from Haris bin Kalda [sic], an Arab, who is said to have left the
desert for a while and gone to Jundi Shapur to study medicine...On his return Haris
settled in Mecca and became the foremost physician of the Arabs of the desert.
Whether he ever embraced Islam is uncertain, but this did not prevent the Prophet
from sending his sick friends to consult him."

Harith Ibn Kalada was unable to father any children, and it is said that he adopted
Harith al-Nasar (Nadr), who was apparently a cousin of Muhammed, and also a doctor
by profession. Interestingly Nadr mocked Muhammed, saying that the stories in the
Qur'an were far less entertaining and instructive than the old Persian legends he had
grown up with. Perhaps he recognised that the Qur'an had human sources for some of
its stories? As a result of this Muhammed became his sworn enemy, and the Prophet
put him to death following his capture in the Battle of Badr in 624.

So we have just the link we need to show how "The translations (into Syriac) of Sergius
Ras el Ain, penetrated to Jandi-Shapur. During the first years of the 7th century [more
likely the end of the sixth century], Harith ben Kalada studied medicine there and
Muhammad owed to Harith a part of his medical knowledge. Thus, with the one as well
as the other, we easily recognize the traces of Greek (medicine)." To summarise:
Sergius died about the time that Chosroes the Great began his reign, and may even
have been employed by Chosroes to translate Galen from Greek into Syriac. Halfway
through his reign Chosroes founded Jundishapur, where Galen's manuscripts must
surely have been kept in translation. Towards the end of his reign he had an audience
with Harith Ibn Kalada, who later became associated with Muhammed.
We also know that according to Muslim traditions part of at least one verse in the
Qur'an that relates to the developing human came originally from human lips. While
Muhammed was dictating verse 23:14 to `Abdullah Ibn Abi Sarh, the latter got carried
away by the beauty of what he heard about the creation of man, and when Muhammed
reached the words "another creature" his companion uttered the exclamation "Blessed
be God, the best of creators!" Muhammed accepted these words as though they were
the continuation of his revelation and told Ibn Abi Sarh to write them down, even
though they were quite clearly his companion's words, not Muhammed's or Allah's
words.

This really does beg the question: since we know that at least one verse of the Qur'an
contains the added words of a mere human being, how can we possibly be sure that
this did not happen anywhere else in the Qur'an?

After the fall of Alexandria in AD 642 knowledge of Greek medicine spread even more
rapidly throughout the Arab world. In the 9th century Hunain Ibn Ishaq (AD 809-873)
made perhaps the definitive Arabic translation of Hippocrates and Galen and al-Kindi
wrote over twenty medical treatises, including one specifically on Hippocrates.
Indeed, the writers of the Arabic medical literature acknowledge as their sources the
major Greek and Indian medical traditions. For example, one of the earliest Arabic
compendiums of medicine is Ali at-Tabari's "Paradise of Wisdom", written by a
Christian convert to Islam in about 850 at Samarra in Mesopotamia. In it he said that
he was following the rules set down by Hippocrates and Aristotle regarding how to
write his treatise. It contains 360 chapters, and the fourth Discourse, beginning at
chapter 325 is entitled "From the Summaries of Indian Books". Chapter 330, from
Sushrata, "The Genesis of the Embryo and of the Members" claims that the embryo
results from mixing of sperm and menstrual blood (vis-a-vis Aristotle!) and describes
various constituents of the embryo. The medical historian Arthur Meyer summed up
the whole of the Arabic embryological tradition when he said that at-Tabari "depended
largely upon Greek sources, which would seem to imply that he could obtain little
from the Arabs. Moreover, since Aristotelian and Galenical teaching survived side by
side for over a thousand years without a known Arabic counterpart, it is doubtful if the
latter existed".

An extraordinary passage from the writings of the medieval philosopher Ibn Qayyim al-
Jawziyya shows how heavily the later Arabic writers depended upon the Greek
doctors; in one continuous discourse the words of Hippocrates explain the Qur'an and
Hadith, and the latter are used to explain Hippocrates. For example:
"Hippocrates said ... 'some membranes are formed at the beginning, others after the
second month, and others in the third month ...' That is why God says, 'He creates you
in the wombs of your mothers, by one formation after another in three darknesses'.
Since each of these membranes has its own darkness, when God mentioned the stages
of creation and transformation from one state to another, He also mentioned the
darknesses of the membranes. Most commentators explain: 'it is the darkness of the
belly, and the darkness of the womb, and the darkness of the placenta' ... Hippocrates
said, 'The ears are opened, and the eyes, which are filled with a clear liquid.' The
Prophet used to say, 'I worship Him Who made my face and formed it, and opened my
hearing and eyesight' etc. etc".

Here is someone writing a medical account who includes Hippocrates (bold type), the
Qur'an and Hadith (bold italics), commentaries on them (italics) and his own thoughts
(normal type) in one and the same paragraph. Of course the intelligentsia of
Muhammed's time would have been familiar with both Greek and Indian medicine.
Other embryologists were known but added nothing new to Galen, for example Abu Ali
al-Hasan Ibn 'Abdallah Ibn Sina (AD 980-1037) who wrote a Canon Medicinae. Clement
of Alexandria included familiar information and believed that the embryo was formed
through the combination of semen and menstrual blood. Lactantius of Nicomedia in AD
325 opened eggs at varying stages of development.

It seems that not even Prof. Moore is sufficiently convinced by the scientific "facts" in
the Qur'an to risk his reputation as a highly respected professor of anatomy in the
medical establishment. The Islamic edition of his textbook is not available even in the
British Library or the US Library of Congress, let alone other medical libraries in
Western countries, presumably because he is aware that not only do the Islamic
contributions in it contradict known science, but they also contradict what he has
written in the standard version of his textbook. And ironically in the bibliography for
the first chapter, "A history of embryology", in both the standard and Islamic versions
he refers to Needham's important work on the history of embryology. Needham
however is unimpressed with the Arabic claims of embryology and after writing almost
60 pages about ancient Greek, Indian and Egyptian embryology he dismisses the entire
Arabic tradition in less than one page, concluding that "Arabic science, so justly famed
for its successes in certain fields such as optics and astronomy, was not of great help
to embryology". After listing some of the verses in the Qur'an about embryology he
dismisses them as merely "a seventh-century echo of Aristotle and the Ayer-veda", in
other words a mixture of Greek and ancient Indian teachings. In the most recent
(1998) edition of The Developing Human, Moore also directs his readers to a book
which contains another essay by Basim Musallam, which again points out how similar
the Qur'anic science of embryology was to that of Galen, and how this close
association was never questioned by the ancient Muslim scholars.

In conclusion then there is not a single statement contained in the Qur'an relating to
modern embryology that was not well known through direct observation by the ancient
Greek and Indian physicians many centuries before the Qur'an was written. Morever,
much of what the Qur'an actually does say about embryology is scientifically
inaccurate. The ancient physicians' works were translated into Syriac in the century
preceeding Muhammed, and were therefore accessible to non-Greek speakers. We
know that one of the Companions of the Prophet was a doctor who trained at the very
same medical school that the Greek translations were kept and taught at. We even
know that at least one of the verses which describes embryology, sura 23:14 contains
the words of another of Muhammed's companions. We are forced to conclude that, far
from proving the alleged divine credentials of the Qur'an, its embryological statements
actually provide further convincing evidence for its human origins.

16.7 The Quaran and the Cerebrum
Sura 96:15-16
"Let him beware! If he desist not, We will drag him by the forelock,- A lying, sinful
forelock!" (Yusuf Ali)

It is important to note that Yusuf Ali, Sarwar, Khalifa, Al-Hilali & Khan, and Pickthall
use the term "forelock" (or the hair on the forehead) while only Shakir uses the word
"forehead".

Why did the Qur'an describe the front of the head as being lying and sinful? Why didn't
the Qur'an say that the person was lying and sinful? Is there a relationship between the
front of the head and lying and sinfulness?

We need to look at the historical and literary context of this passage before we make
generalizations concerning anatomy! What was the significance of the "forelock" in
Muhammad's time and how did this term fit into the events described in this passage?
The man with the "lying sinful forelock" was none other than Abu Jahl, a major enemy
and source of problems for Muhammad. Abu Jahl was a rather disgusting fellow. On
one occasion, he dumped a camel's intestine on Muhammad's back while he was
praying at the Kaa'bah. (see Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Number 241)
The incident recorded in Sura 96:15-16 is recounted in Sahih Muslim, Book 38, Number

6718:
Narrated Abu Hurayrah:
AbuJahl asked (people) whether Muhammad placed his face (on the ground) in the
presence. It was said to him: Yes. He said: By Lat and Uzza, if I were to see him do
that, I should trample his neck, or I should besmear his face with dust.
He came to Allah's Messenger (peace_be_upon_him) as he was engaged in prayer and
thought of trampling his neck. (The people say) that he came near him but turned
upon his heels and tried to repulse something with his hands. It was said to him: What
is the matter with you? He said: There is between me and him a ditch of fire and
terror and wings. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (peace_be_upon_him) said: If he had
come near me the angels would have torn him to pieces.

Then Allah, the Exalted and glorious, revealed this verse--(the narrator) said: We do
not know whether it is the hadith transmitted to AbuHurayrah or something conveyed
to him from another source: "Nay, man is surely inordinate, because he looks upon
himself as self-sufficient. Surely to thy Lord is the return. Hast thou seen him who
forbids a servant when he prays? Seest thou if he is on the right way, or enjoins
observance of piety? Seest thou if he (AbuJahl) denies and turns away? Knowest he
not that Allah sees? Nay, if he desists not, We shall seize him by the forelock--a
lying, sinful forelock. Then let him summon his council. We shall summon the guards
of the Hell. Nay! Obey not thou him" (lcvi.6-19). (Rather prostrate thyself.)
Ubaydullah made this addition: It was after this that (prostration) was made
obligatory, and Ibn AbdulAla' made this addition that by Nadia he meant his people.
Our claimants continue:

If we look into the skull at the front of the head, we will find the prefontal area of the
cerebrum. What does physiology tell us about the function of this area? A book
entitled, Essentials of Anatomy & Physiology, says about this area: The motivation and
the foresight to plan and initiate movements occur in the anterior portion of the
frontal lobes, the prefontal area (see Figure 9.1). This is a region of the association
cortex... The book also says: In relation to its involvement in motivation, the
prefrontal area is also thought to be the functional center for aggression...
Yes, but the question is: what is the meaning and significance of "forelock" in the
Qur'an and Hadith? In Muhammad's day, horses were often pulled by the forelock.
Wives and slave girls could also be pulled by the forelock:

Malik's Muwatta, Book 28, Number 28.22.52:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that the Messenger of Allah,
may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "When you marry a woman or buy a
slave-girl, take her by the forelock and ask for baraka. When you buy a camel, take
the top of its hump, and seek refuge with Allah from Shaytan."
Even Satan can grab us by the forelock:

Malik's Muwatta, Book 3, Number 3.15.61:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Muhammad ibn Amr ibn AIqama from Malik ibn
Abdullah as-Sadi that Abu Hurayra said, "The one who raises his head and lowers it
before the imam - his forelock is in the hand of a shaytan."......
Last, but certainly not least, God can lead us by the forelock, Sahih Muslim, Book 34,

Number 6551:
Narrated AbuHurayrah:
AbuSalih used to command us (in these words): When any one of you intends to go to
sleep, he should lie in bed on his right side and then say: "O Allah, the Lord of the
Heaven, the Lord of the Earth and the Lord of the Magnificent Throne; our Lord, and
the Lord of everything: the Splitter of the grain of corn and the date-stone (or fruit
kernel), the Revealer of the Torah, Injil (Bible) and the Criterion (the Holy Qur'an), I
seek refuge in Thee from the evil of everything Thou art to seize by the forelock
(thou hast perfect control over it).

The Qur'an tells us (Sura 11:56):
Yusuf Ali : "I put my trust in Allah, My Lord and your Lord! There is not a moving
creature, but He hath grasp of its fore-lock. Verily, it is my Lord that is on a straight
Path.
Pickthall: Lo! I have put my trust in Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Not an animal but
He doth grasp it by the forelock! Lo! my Lord is on a straight path.
Shakir: Surely I rely on Allah, my Lord and your Lord; there is no living creature but
He holds it by its forelock; surely my Lord is on the right path.
It is interesting to note that Shakir translated nassiyyah as "forelock" in this Sura while
he translated it as "forehead" in Sura 96:15.

So, this area of the cerebrum is responsible for planning, motivating, and initiating
good and sinful behavior, and is responsible for telling lies and speaking the truth.
Thus, it is proper to describe the front of the head as lying and sinful when someone
lies or commits a sin, as the Qur'an said: ...a lying, sinful naasiyyah (front of the
head)! Scientists have only discovered these functions of the prefrontal area in the
last sixty years, according to Professor Keith Moore.

But that is not what the Qur'an says! If we read Sura 96:15, paying special attention to
the denotative meaning of "forelock" (nassiyyah) used in the Qur'an and the Hadith, a
very different interpretation emerges. Sura 96:15 warns Abu Jahl that God will grab
him by the "forelock", or the hair on the front of his head, if he does not behave
himself. As I mentioned earlier, the Hadith tells us that animals as well as humans can
be grabbed by the "forelock" and, according to the Qur'an, God holds all living things
by the "forelock". The lying sinful part is probably a bit of hyperbole that Muhammad
threw in for good measure.

The Qur'an DOES NOT claim, nor does it imply, that man's thoughts or sins originate in
the "forelock". Where do these thoughts and sins originate according to the Qur'an?

Sura 11:5
Lo! now they fold up their breasts that they may hide (their thoughts) from Him. At
the very moment when they cover themselves with their clothing, Allah knoweth that
which they keep hidden and that which they proclaim. Lo! He is Aware of what is in
the breasts (of men).
and

Sura 3:119
Lo! ye are those who love them though they love you not, and ye believe in all the
Scripture. When they fall in with you they say: We believe; but when they go apart
they bite their finger-tips at you, for rage. Say: Perish in your rage! Lo! Allah is
Aware of what is hidden in (your) breasts.
So, according to the literal interpretation of the Qur'an, our thoughts, lies, and sins
are in our breasts, not in our "forelock"!

16.8 The Quaran and Geology
Professor Alfred Kroner, Professor of Geology and the Chairman of the Department of
Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenburg University, Mainz,
Germany is our next expert..

The Qur'an tells us:
Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together
[ratqan], before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing...

[Sura 21:30]
The meaning of ratqan in this verse, as Ibn Abbas, Mujaahid, and others said, may
Allah be pleased with all of them, is that the heavens and the earth were stuck
together or blended together, and that they were later separated from each other.
Professor Kroner used this as an example to prove that no human being during the
time of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu `alaihi wa sallam), could have known this.

There are several problems with this argument:
Problem 1: "Other sacred texts" contain similar stories. For example, the Rig Veda tells
us that the universe was created when the cosmic "egg" was split.
Problem 2: In an earlier chapter, you said that:
Then He turned to the heaven, which was only smoke at that time. He said to the
heaven and the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly." (Sura 41:11).
So, was the earth and universe original one substance, which was split, or was the
universe first split and then called together? Another small problem with Sura 21:30 is
that: were there any "unbelievers" alive (at this time) to witness the fact that the
heavens and earth were joined together and then split?
Problem 3: This Sura claims that every living thing is made from water. I thought, as
mentioned in several earlier chapters, that we were created from a blood clot! Which
is it, water or a blood clot?
Professor Kroner, so it seemed to us, has a special talent of being evasive. For
example, we asked him to describe the geological conditions of Arabia. `Was Arabia
full of orchards and rivers?' He said: During the Snow Age. And it is further known that
the North Polar icebergs are slowly moving southwards. When those polar icebergs
become relatively close to the Arabian Peninsula, the weather will change and Arabia
will become one of the greenest and wettest parts of the world. We asked him: `Will
Arabia become the land of orchards and rivers?' He said: Yes, it is a scientific fact.
First of all, there was no such thing as the "snow age". There was, however, an "ice
age" (Pleistocene). The fact there are large oil deposits in Arabia is proof that the
region once had lush vegetation. However, these deposits were not formed during the
relatively recent Pleistocene Epoch, they were formed during the Carboniferous Period
which was much earlier than the Pleistocene Epoch.

The second question is the issue of North Polar icebergs moving "relatively closer" to
the Arabian Peninsula. What route would these icebergs take to get there? Would they
go around the African continent and then turn north towards Arabia, or would they go
through the Mediterranean and then through the Suez? In either case, even the largest
iceberg would melt far from Arabia.

The third issue is the question of Arabia becoming a land of lush vegetation. The earth
is becoming warmer, there is very little debate about that. Will global warming make
Arabia greener and wetter according to the climate change models? The answer,
according to NASA and Environmental Protection Agency scientists is no.

Most of the earth's deserts are found at latitudes between 20 and 32 degrees. Soils are
extremely dry at these latitudes because the potential for evaporation and
transpiration is generally greater than the average rainfall. If global temperatures
were to rise by a mere 4°C, the potential evapotranspiration would increase 30-40
percent. However, precipitation would only increase 10-15 percent. As a result, the
area with a deficiency of precipitation, in this case Arabia, would expand poleward
and toward the equator. In other words, the Arabian desert, as well as most of the
world's other deserts, will expand, not shrink. In fact, scientists at NASA (David Rind et
al. 1990) have suggested that in the long run, there will be a worldwide expansion of
deserts.

This astonished us, and we wondered how he could state this as a scientific fact while
it was related to the future and we asked: `Why?' He said: Because the new Snow Age
has actually started. And we can see the snow crawling once again from the North Pole
southwards. In fact, the polar snow is now on the way to get closer to the Arabian
Peninsula. We can see the signs of this in the snow blizzards striking the northern parts
of Europe and America every winter. Scientists have other signs and information
proving the actual beginning of another Snow Age. It is a scientific fact.
This statement also astonished me. "Polar snow" is not moving towards Arabia, in fact
the polar ice caps are shrinking. Have you heard of GLOBAL WARMING? The earth's
climate is becoming warmer, not colder. Oh well, I guess the Qur'an missed that one!
So we said to him: `What you have just mentioned has only been known to scientists
after a long series of discoveries and with the help of specialized instruments. But we
have already found this mentioned by the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu `alaihi wa
sallam) 1400 years ago. He said in a hadith transmitted in Saheeh Muslim:
The Last Hour will not come upon us until the lands of the Arabs are once again
pasture lands and filled with rivers.

Once again, I searched the USC-MSA Hadith Data Base site and COULD NOT find this
hadith. Please give us a reference and/or quote the entire text. In any event, the
trend of global warming makes the possibility of Arabia having "pasture lands and filled
with rivers" highly unlikely.

16.9 The Quaran and Mountains
Today, now introduce a unique scholar. He differs from other scholars but at
the same time, he is a representative of a group of scholars. His name is
Professor Siaveda, one of the best known marine geologists from Japan. He is
also one of the most famous scientists in the world.

Honestly, I have never heard of him. I will take the author's word that Professor
Siaveda exists, however, I have not been able to locate any books or papers written by
him, which is rather odd considering the claim made on this site that he is "one of the
most famous scientists in the world". I also find it odd that this site, which holds him
in such high esteem, has two variant spellings of his name: Siaveda and Sieveda.

He replied and said: The fundamental difference between continental
mountains and the oceanic mountains lies in its material. Continental
mountains are made essentially by sediments, whereas the oceanic mountains
are made of volcanic rocks. Continental mountains were formed by
compressional forces, whereas the oceanic mountains were formed by
extensional forces.

Wrong. There are many volcanic mountains that are on land, both extrusive and
intrusive.

But the common denominator on both mountains are that they have roots to
support the mountains. In the case of continental mountains, light-low density
material from the mountain is extended down into the earth as a root.
What is your definition of "light-low density material"? If the mountain and its "root"
are composed of the same type of rock, the compressional forces would make the
"root" rock denser than the rock at the top of the mountain. Think about it for a
moment! In the case of mountains which are formed by block faults, as well as cinder
cone volcanos, there is little , or no, portion of the mountain that extends deep below
the surface of the earth.

In the case of oceanic mountains, there is also light material supporting the
mountain as a root, but in the case of oceanic mountain this material is not
light because the composition is light, but it is hot, therefore expanded
somewhat. But from the viewpoint of densities, they are doing the same job of
supporting the mountains. Therefore, the function of the roots are to support
the mountains according to the law of Archimedes.

Once again, this is not correct because compressional forces would make the "root"
rock denser than the rock at the top of the mountain. In any event, is this what the

Qur'an tells us?
Professor Siaveda described the shape of all mountains whether they are on
land or in the sea as being in the shape of a wedge. Could anyone during the
time of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu `alaihi wa sallam) have known of the
shape of these mountains?

That would be a logical deduction, however, where did Muhammad describe this? Is
this in the Qur'an or the Hadith? In any case, the shape of a mountain is something that
can be observed.

Could anyone imagine that the solid massive mountain that he sees before him
actually extends deep into the earth and has a root as scientists assure.
The depends on you definition of a mountain's "root". In the case of some igneous
(volcanic) mountains, molten rock "intrudes" into the "throat" of a volcano's opening
and cools, forming a relatively dense intrusion which extends below the surface of the
earth. The material surrounding this intrusion is then eroded away leaving a volcanic
"spine" or "neck". Ship Rock, in New Mexico, is an example. These features can have
the appearance of "pegs" and, perhaps, the portion below the surface could be called
a "root" - although the Qur'an does not say this! The term "root" is not in any of the

passages in this section.
Incidentally, not all mountains have these "roots". For example, block faulted
mountains and cinder cone volcanos have very different geological and
geomorphological characteristics than the aforementioned intrusions.

A large number of geography books when discussing mountains, only describe
that part which is on the surface of the earth. This is because they are not
written by specialists in geology, but modern science informs us about it and
Allah says in the Qur'an: And the mountains as pegs. (Qur'an 78:7).
Are you saying the Geography and Geology textbooks ARE NOT written by geologists
and geographers? Who writes these texts, Economists?

We asked Professor Sievada whether the mountains have a function in
establishing the crust of the earth. He said that this has not yet been
discovered and established by scientists.
Wow, that statement speaks volumes! Are you attempting to establish a statement as
fact without any evidence? That is not the methodology of science.
Now we get to the "science" of the Qur'an:

Allah said: And the mountains Has He firmly fixed. (Qur'an 79:32).
Really? Why are earthquakes so very common in mountainous areas? Some Muslims say
that this passage tells us that mountains do not change from day-to-day. Mountains are
not exactly the same from day-to-day, even though we perceive them as static.
Erosion, as well as mass wasting, glaciation, and vulcanism are processes which occur
frequently, often on a daily basis, but we cannot perceive many of these changes
without monitoring instruments. In this case, this ayah seems to be a mere human
observation - that mountains are static.

And He said: And the mountains as pegs. (Qur'an 78:7).
"Pegs" for what? Also, Pickthall translates this term as "bulwarks" while Shakir
translates it as "projections". In any case, what scientific fact can be derived from this
passage?

And He also said: And he has set up on the earth mountains standing firm, lest
it should shake with you. (Qur'an 16:15).

This is the most incorrect and absurd statement in this chapter! If you do not believe
me (I am a geologist), please check the University of Edinburgh's Global Earthquake
Map. Notice that nearly ALL of the recent seismic activity is in mountainous areas. If
the mountains are are "firmly fixed" and are supposed to prevent the earth from
shaking, then I suggest that they are doing a very poor job!

16.10 The Quaran and Seas and Oceans
Our expert in this chapter is Dr. William W. Hay, Professor of Geological Sciences at
the University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado. After the usual hand waving, the
authors present a self annihilating theory from the Qur'an.
We asked him many questions about the marine surface, the divider between the
upper and the lower sea, and about ocean floor and marine geology. We also asked
Professor Hay about the mixed-water partitions between the different seas and fresh
water rivers. He was kind enough to answer all of our questions in great detail. With
regard to the partitions between the different seas, he explained that these bodies of
water are not one homogeneous sea as it appears to us. Rather they are different
seas, distinguished by varying degrees of salinity, temperature and density. In this
slide, here the white lines represent partitions between two different seas.

Each partition divides two seas that differ in temperature, salinity, density, marine
biology and oxygen dissolubility. Scientists first had this picture, as you see it, in 1942
after hundreds of marine research stations were set up. Here we see the divider
between the Mediterranean and the Atlantic Ocean.

All right, so far so good. But, what does the Qur'an tell us?
Allah has informed us in the Qur'an that: He has let free (maraja) the two seas
meeting together: Between them is a barrier which they do not transgress. (Qur'an
55:19-20).

Sura 55:19-20
Yusuf Ali: He has let free the two bodies of flowing water, meeting together:
Between them is a Barrier which they do not transgress:
Pickthall: He hath loosed the two seas. They meet. There is a barrier between them.
They encroach not (one upon the other).
Shakir: He has made the two seas to flow freely (so that) they meet together:
Between them is a barrier which they cannot pass.
Now we are presented with the author's self defeating argument:
Traditionally, there have been two major interpretations of this verse. One opinion
states that according to the literal meaning of the term maraja seas do meet and mix
with each other. But the fact the Qur'an goes on to state that there is barrier between
them, means that this barrier will simply prevent the seas from encroaching upon each
other or flooding over each other.
All right.

Proponents of the second opinion ask how can there be a barrier between the seas so
that they do not encroach upon each other, while the verse indicates that the seas
meet together? They concluded that the seas do not meet and sought another meaning
for the term maraja, but now modern science provides us with enough information to
settle this issue. The seas do meet together, as we have seen, for example, in the
picture of the Mediterranean and Atlantic Ocean. Even though there is a slanted water
barrier between them, we now know that through this barrier the water from each sea
passes to the other. But when we the water from one sea enters the other sea, it
looses its distinctive characteristics and becomes homogenized with the other water.
In a way, this barrier serves as a transitional homogenizing area for the two waters.

There are two problems here:
Problem 1: The "slanted water barrier" between two different bodies of water is
something that humans can, and did, observe. When a river flows into the sea, we can
see a gradient, moving out to sea, of sediment which is deposited in a delta as the
velocity of river water decreases as it enters the sea. The relatively heaviest particles
of the suspended load are deposited progressively as the water velocity decrease
(away from the mouth of the river). Herodotus noted this long before the time of
Muhammad. Another "gradient", which was common knowledge long before Muhammad
and the Qur'an, is the increase in the buoyancy of a boat as it sails from a fresh water
body into saltier (denser) water.

Problem 2: You tell us that when the water of one sea enters another "it looses its
distinctive characteristics and becomes homogenized with the other water".. Those
are YOUR words. HOWEVER, the Qur'an says (in no uncertain terms):
Between them is a barrier which they cannot pass

But you are telling us that they become "homogenized with the other water". In other
words, they have "passed" between the barrier which the Qur'an tells us, it cannot
pass! You have now contradicted the Qur'an and have, by your original premise that
the Qur'an is scientifically accurate, destroyed your original argument; OR, you have
proved that the Qur'an is not telling us the truth about scientific phenomena - even
those phenomena which are observable and were common knowledge long before
Muhammad!

Problem 3: According to an article in the Wall Street Journal (by Daniel Golden,
January 23rd, 2002):
Marine scientist William Hay, then at the University of Colorado, was assigned a
passage likening the minds of unbelievers to "the darkness in a deep sea ...
covered by waves, above which are waves." As the videotape rolled, Mr.
Zindani pressed Prof. Hay to admit that Muhammad couldn't have known about
internal waves caused by varying densities in ocean depths. When Prof. Hay
suggested Muhammad could have learned about the phenomenon from sailors,
Mr. Zindani insisted that the prophet never visited a seaport.
Prof. Hay, a Methodist, says he then raised other hypotheses that Mr. Zindani
also dismissed. Finally, Prof. Hay conceded that the inspiration for the
reference to internal waves "must be the divine being," a statement now
trumpeted on Islamic Web sites.

"I fell into that trap and then warned other people to watch out for it," says
Prof. Hay, now at a German marine institute.
This is an excellent example of Islamic modern scientific research.
I agree! Islamic modern scientific research is in a lot of trouble!
Modern techniques can thus be used to prove the inimitability of the Qur'an.
Not in this case!


16.11 The Quaran – Deep Seas and Oceans
We present to you Professor Dorja Rao, he is a specialist in Marine Geology and he is
currently teaching at King Abdul-Aziz University in Jeddah.
Or (the unbelievers state) is like the depths of darkness in a vast deep ocean,
overwhelmed with billow topped by billow, topped by (dark) clouds: Depths of
darkness, one above another: If a man stretches out his hand, he can hardly see it! For
any to whom Allah does not give light, there is no light. (Qur'an 24:40).
The Qur'an goes on to say: When a man stretches out his hand, he can hardly see it!
For any to whom Allah gives not light, there is no light. (Qur'an 24:40)

To make a long story short, the "miracle" in this chapter is that light disappears as we
go deeper into the ocean.

Professor Rao replied: It is difficult to imagine that this type of knowledge was existing
at the time around 1400 years back. Maybe some of the things they have simple ideas
about such, but to describe those things in great detail is very difficult. So, this is
definitely not a simple human knowledge. A normal human being cannot explain this
phenomenon in that much detail. So I thought the information must have come from a
supernatural source.

Is the Qur'an telling us anything new? There are many poetic references to the
darkness of the depths of the seas that were written many centuries before
Muhammad received this "revelation". For example:
"..when in your ship you have now crossed the stream of Oceanus, where is a level
shore and the groves of Persephone...beach your boat there by Ocean's swirling
streams and march on into Hades' dark house." [Circe to Odysseus]
"Child, lying in the cradle, make haste and tell me of my cattle, or we two will soon
fall out angrily. For I will take and cast you into dusky Tartarus [River] and awful
hopeless darkness, and neither your mother nor your father shall free you." [Apollo to
Hermes]

So, in this case only Allah, Circe, and Apollo knew this! Honestly, this is something
that is easily observable and has been common knowledge since ancient times.

16.12 The Quaran – Facts about Astronomy
This chapter begins with the usual round of applause for the Qur'an. We are then given
this verse:
Sura 57.25
Yusuf Ali: We sent aforetime our messengers with Clear Signs and sent down with
them the Book and the Balance (of Right and Wrong), that men may stand forth in
justice; and We sent down Iron, in which is (material for) mighty war, as well as many
benefits for mankind, that Allah may test who it is that will help, Unseen, Him and
His messengers: For Allah is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might (and able to enforce
His Will).
Pickthall: We verily sent Our messengers with clear proofs, and revealed with them
the Scripture and the Balance, that mankind may observe right measure; and He
revealed iron, wherein is mighty power and (many) uses for mankind, and that Allah
may know him who helpeth Him and His messengers, though unseen. Lo! Allah is
Strong, Almighty.
Shakir: Certainly We sent Our messengers with clear arguments, and sent down with
them the Book and the balance that men may conduct themselves with equity; and
We have made the iron, wherein is great violence and advantages to men, and that
Allah may know who helps Him and His messengers in the secret; surely Allah is
Strong, Mighty.

Professor Armstrong works at NASA, otherwise known as the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, where he is a well-known scientist
there. We met him and asked a number of questions about Qur'anic verses
dealing with the expertise in Astronomy. We asked him about iron and how it
was formed. He explained how all the elements in the earth were formed. He
stated that the scientists have come only recently to discover the relevant
facts about that formation process. He said that the energy of the early solar
system was not sufficient enough to produce elemental iron.

Then, if all of the energy in the early solar system could not form elemental iron, how
did this element originate and why is iron so common?

In calculating the energy required to form one atom of iron, it was found to be
about four times as much as the energy of the entire solar system. In other
words, the entire energy of the earth or the moon or the planet Mars or any
other planet is not sufficient to form one new atom of iron, even the energy of
the entire solar system is not sufficient for that. That is why Professor
Armstrong said that the scientists believe that iron is an extraterrestrial that
was sent to earth and not formed therein.

I must repeat my previous question: how, and from where, did elemental iron
originate? Iron is the 4th most common element on planet earth, accounting for 5% of
the earth's weight and .5% of the earth's volume. If we are to believe that the energy
needed to form one atom of iron is equal to "about four times as much as the energy
of the entire solar system", then this hypothesis fails to explain the fact that the
earth, the other planets, and the stars contain a very large amount of this element.
Any model that does not explain and predict natural phenomena is unscientific and
worthless.

Another problem is the chronology of events. According to the ayah presented to us:
first, the messengers came to earth (with clear arguments/signs/proofs); second, the
Book and balance (which I assume was not made of iron) arrived; and, then iron came
to earth last, right? That is very interesting! How do you explain the fact that the core
of the earth is composed of iron? How did all that iron sneak under us, assuming that
the earth did not originally have any elemental iron? In fact, the Earth's core formed
relatively early as heavier molten iron sank towards the center of the planet. An
additional problem for this "chronology" is the fact that iron is a very important
element in the human body - we would die without it!

Then we asked him about the sky and whether it had any gaps or rifts in it. He
disproved this and replied that what we are talking about is a branch of
astronomy called the "Integrated Cosmos" which we scientists have only come
to know recently.

I have never heard of the "Integrated Cosmos" hypothesis. I searched the Bulletin of
the American Astronomical Society and found that there were no papers which
mentioned this idea.

For example, if you have a body in outer space which travels a certain distance
in any direction and then travel the same distance in a different direction, you
will find that the mass weight is the same in all directions. Because this body
has its own equilibrium, the pressures from all directions are the same.
Without this equilibrium, the whole universe would collapse.
I am not sure of the point that you are attempting to make. Why would the mass
(weight) of an object change simply because it travels in a different direction?
I recalled Allah's verse in the Qur'an:

Do they not look at the sky above them? How we have made it and adorned it,
and there are no flaws in it? (Qur'an 50:6).
First, how is this ayah related to your previous statements concerning the constant
mass of objects in outer space? Another problem is the question of "flaws" in the "sky".
What about "black holes"? Since they swallow matter and energy, including light, are
they not "flaws" which interfere with the way that God "adorned" the universe?
Then we talked to Professor Armstrong about the attempts of scientists to
reach the edge of the universe, and we asked him whether they were
successful in this. He replied that they are fighting an uphill battle to the edge
of the universe. We construct more powerful equipment to observe the
universe only to discover that the new stars we see are still within our galaxy
and that we have not yet reached the edge of the universe. He is aware of the
Qur'anic verse which says:

And we adorned the lowest heaven with lamps and we made such (lamps)
missiles to drive away Satans. (Qur'an 67:5).

Indeed, all these stars are adornments for the lowest heaven. He says that
scientists have not reached the end of the universe.The stars adorn the lowest heavens? Another verse from the Qur'an tells us that:

"Do you not see how God has created the seven heavens one above the other, and
made the moon a light in their midst, and made the sun as a lamp?" (71:15-16)

So, according to this verse, the moon is at least as far, or possibly ****her, from the
earth as the stars, since the moon is in the midst of the seven heavens! This clearly
does not conform to ancient, much less modern, astronomy! Another problem with this
ayah is that the stars are supposed to be "missiles" to "drive away Satans". If you are
claiming that this ayah is a scientific statement of fact, and not a metaphysical
statement, can we observe these star "missiles" driving away the Satans? Perhaps you
should ask Professor Armstrong if this has been observed by NASA!

16.13 The Quaran – on Clouds
One kind of rain cloud is the cumulonimbus cloud associated with
thunderstorms. Meteorologists have studied how cumulonimbus clouds are
formed and how they produce rain, hail, and lightning. They have found that
cumulonimbus cloud go through the following steps to produce rain:
Allah said in the Qur'aan:
Have you not seen how Allah makes the clouds move gently, then joins them
together, then makes them into a stack, and then you see the rain come out of
it...? [Qur'aan 24:43]
There are two problems with using this verse to "prove" the divine origins of the
Qur'an.
Problem 1: This is something that can be observed.
Problem 2: The explanation is incorrect.

Small clouds do not join together and "stack" up to form a thunder storm. These clouds
form when warm moist air is pushed higher by a cold front. As the warm moist air
rises, it cools (at the adiabatic lapse rate), therefore, it appears that the cloud is
growing in height as water vapor condenses.
The preceding verse, after mentioning clouds and rain, speaks about hail and
lightning:
And He sends down hail from mountains (clouds) in the sky, and He strikes with
it whomever He wills, and turns it from whoever He wills. The vivid flash of its
lightning nearly blinds the sight. [Qur'aan 24:43]
No kidding, did you need a divine revelation to tell you this?
This verse may raise a question. Why does the verse say ...its lightning in
reference to the hail?
Honestly, this is an observation which could be made by anyone!
Does this mean that hail is the major factor in producing lightning? Let us see
what the book entitled Meteorology Today, says on this. It says that clouds
become electrified as hail falls through a region in the cloud of supercooled
droplets and ice crystals. As liquid droplets collide with hail, they freeze on
contact and release latent heat. This keeps the surface of the hail warmer than
that of the surrounding ice crystals.
OK, that is what the textbook says, however, the Qur'an mentions none of this!

16.13.1 The Quaran and Astrological ideas
Professor Yoshihide Kozai: I say, I am very much impressed by finding true
astronomical facts in the Qur'an.
We asked him whether at some point in time the firmament was in a form of
smoke. He stated that all signs and indications are converging to prove that at
one point in time the whole firmament was nothing but a cloud of smoke. This
has come to be established as a proven visible fact. Scientists now can observe
new stars forming up out of that smoke, which is the origin of our universe.
Let us look at this passage:

Sura 41:11
Yusuf Ali: Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as)
smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly."
They said: "We do come (together), in willing obedience."
Pickthall: Then turned He to the heaven when it was smoke, and said unto it and unto
the earth: Come both of you, willingly or loth. They said: We come, obedient.
Shakir: Then He directed Himself to the heaven and it is a vapor, so He said to it and
to the earth: Come both, willingly or unwillingly. They both said: We come willingly.
There are many problems with this ayah. Beyond the questions of science, you also
have a huge theological problem in this passage.

Problems
1. According to Sura 41 (also see Sura 2:29), the earth existed while the rest of the
universe was "smoke". In fact, the previous ayah (41:10) decribes how God placed
mountains on the earth:
And He made in it mountains above its surface, and He blessed therein and
made therein its foods, in four periods: alike for the seekers.
and then, after calling the "smoke" together, God made the seven heavens in Sura

41:12:
So He ordained them seven heavens in two periods, and revealed in every
heaven its affair; and We adorned the lower heaven with brilliant stars and
(made it) to guard; that is the decree of the Mighty, the Knowing.
Therefore, according to this argument, the earth is the oldest body in the universe. In
fact, the mountains on the earth, are, according to this Sura, older than the stars.
This clearly does not agree with modern science. The Qur'an also has a serious problem
of internal consistency with respect to its cosmic chronology. In fact, there is a
contradiction between the previous passage (Sura 41:10-12) and Sura 79:27-32:
Are ye the harder to create, or is the heaven that He built? He raised the
height thereof and ordered it; And He made dark the night thereof, and He
brought forth the morn thereof: And after that He spread the earth, He
brought forth from it its water and its pasturage. And the mountains, He made
them firm,
Which suggests, in contradiction to Sura 41:10-12, that the heavens were created first,
then the earth, and then the mountains. Another question, unanswered by the Qur'an,
is: how, and from what, was the earth created?

2. In Chapter 10, we were presented with Sura 21:30-31 which says:
Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined
together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made
from water every living thing. Will they not then believe? And We have set on
the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with them, and We
have made therein broad highways (between mountains) for them to pass
through: that they may receive Guidance.
Now we have a problem. In Sura 41:10-12, we are told that God called the "smoke" and
earth to come together, then He created mountains, and last but not least, He
created the stars. However, in Sura 21:30-31, the earth and heavens were one unit
which God split apart. After that, God made the mountains. Therefore, according to
this passage, the mountains and stars are approximately the same age. So, did God
create the universe by bringing "smoke" together or by "cloving" one unit asunder?
Also, which is older, the mountains or the stars?

3. In the introduction, you said: "Scientists now can observe new stars forming up out
of that smoke, which is the origin of our universe", yet the Qur'an says "Then turned
He to the heaven when it was smoke, and said unto it and unto the earth: Come both
of you, willingly or loth. They said: We come, obedient." Therefore, the fact that
there is "smoke", which is now forming new stars, suggests that this ayah is not
accurate since it claims that the "smoke" came together, obeying God's command. Why
did this "smoke" not obey God as the Qur'an claims?

4. There is a theological issue when you use this ayah, which is clearly metaphysical,
to explain the creation of the universe in scientific terms. If we look at this passage in
the light of modern science, we cannot claim that any portion is metaphorical.
Therefore, the question is: does smoke have consciousness? In other words, did these
clouds of smoke hear God and could they have refused to obey Him? The Qur'an has
not only made a scientific error in this case (that smoke has consciousness and an
individual will that can refuse) but it promotes animistic concepts by giving attributes
and power to smoke that it simply does not have!
Some scientists describe this dukhaan or smoke "mist". But Professor Kozai
pointed out that the term "mist" does not correspond to the description of this
smoke, because mist is characteristically cold, whereas this cosmic smoke is
somewhat hot. Dukhaan indeed is made up of diffused gases to which solid
substances are attached, and this is the exact description of the smoke from
which the universe emerged even before the stars were formed. Professor
Kozai said that because that smoke was hot, we cannot describe it as "mist".
Dukhaan is the best descriptive word that can ever be. In this way Professor
Kozai continued to scrutinize each Qur'anic verse we presented to him.
You can call it whatever you wish, perhaps "dust" is the most accurate term. However,
when we consider all of the verses of the Qur'an which describe creation, we cannot
derive a clear scientific model of what happened.
Finally we asked him: `What do you think of this phenomenon which you have
seen for yourself, namely, that science is beginning to discover the secrets of
the universe, whereas many of these secrets have already been revealed in the
Qur'an or in the Sunnah? Do you think that the Qur'an was given to the Prophet
Muhammad (sallallahu `alaihi wa sallam) from a human source?'
This Sura, along with the other Qur'an passages that describe creation, are logically
and scientifically inconsistent. Also, if we ignore the metaphysical nature of this Sura
and attempt to extract science from a literal interpretation, this passage preaches
animism.

16.13.2 Concluding remarks about The Quaran and Science
The purpose of this rebuttal was to test the hypothesis that the Qur'an contains
statements that are scientifically true. The authors of this site began with a dogmatic
view that the Qur'an was, beyond question, the truth and then practiced "selective
thinking" - selecting favorable evidence, while ignoring unfavorable evidence to
support their hypothesis.
The authors also attempted to appeal to authority by parading several scientists who
appeared to support their viewpoint. Obviously, the authors did not mention any
experts who disagreed with their hypothesis! I have been involved, in one way or
another, with academia for the past twenty years. It is not difficult to find an expert
who supports any position - no matter how absurd. In the end, the truth or falsity,
reasonableness or unreasonableness, of a belief must stand independently of those
who accept or reject the belief. It is also interesting to note that few of the experts
cited on this site have expressed their beliefs, concerning the Qur'an, in writing. Even
Professor Moore has two different editions of his texts! The "Islamic" edition is nearly
impossible to find in the west. If these experts are convinced of the scientific validity
of the Qur'an why do they not put their professional reputations on the line to prove
their point?

The authors took great pains to extrapolate the text of the Qur'an to fit
modern science. There are four problems with the evidence presented to us. The
Qur'an's science:
1. Describes something that any human, of normal intelligence, can observe.
2. Was similar to the prevailing scientific opinions of the era
3. Many of these alleged scientific statements are contradicted by other passages from
the Qur'an.
4. Was, more often than not, completely wrong.
Chapter 2 - 7 are the most important for the author's hypothesis. The "embryology" of
the Qur'an is the same as the beliefs of the Greek Physician Galen (150 AD). These
beliefs are also scientifically wrong. Chapter 7 also mentions, but does not cite, a
Hadith that I cannot find. Some chapters, such as chapter 8 (burns and pain) and
chapter 14 (darkness of the deep sea) contains information that can be easily observed
and were common knowledge. Other chapters (such as chapter 17) implies animism
when it claims that the "smoke" answered God! Chapter 18 contains the absurdity that
iron did not originate in the earth and chapter 18 puts the icing on the cake by
claiming that we are entering another ice age, instead of the observed trend of global
warming!
After testing our research hypothesis, we can conclude that the Qur'an passages given
to us in this site DO NOT support the claim that the Qur'an contains accurate scientific
information

 

[Vikram singh]

no more long stories of ISLAM

One more Video of
Islam's X-RATED heaven

YouTube - Islam's X-RATED heaven

Enjoy aziz rasul

 

[ProjectNaad]

Aziz the following documnet mentions a number of other incocsistencies in Islamic thinking and lies spread by Muslims. The full document is available here. You will most likely loose your religion if you read this but better to live truth than live a lie for your whole life

http://www.projectnaad.com/wp-content/uploads/leaflets/sikhism_islam_rebuttal.pdf

Also as a side note the above website is not an anti -anythign website. It is focused on Sikhism. But we have done rebuttals to no-so-enlightened Muslims and CCristians who keep spreading their lies or false propaganda about their religions.

 

[ProjectNaad]

I will respond to any questions posed by our Muslim brother regarding sikhism tonight (assuming another fellow sikh doesn't do this).

APOLOGIES for the info I posted. It is a lot but it DOES disprove the silly claims about science in the quaran.