My favourite scientific contradiction in the Quran

[Limo]

• The Quran contains both explanations and loan words though

• Then what is the correct etymology for “quark” that the experts have missed?

• This is done by liberally interpreting archaic Arabic ambiguities, stripping them of their historical context, then applying them to modern science after the discovery. Even then you don’t seem to have made much sense in claiming the sky as a ceiling/canopy/roof when it is not suspended like any of these things

Provided sufficient explanation was given, and the necessary tools explained, there is no physical difference in learning capacity between a seventh century Arab and a modern human that i’m aware of, we simply have better knowledge due to a longer period of collective aquirement these days. Also much of knowledge will never become obsolete.

Regards

As I said, Quran is not book of science to detail the whole future discoveries and chemical and nuclear equation. Quran has signs for future science.
There is no archaic and new Arabic. Arabic is a living language that is used since thousands years and Quran kept it live.
We do benefit from the new discoveries to find a new reading/commentary on verses.

I see we're discussing high level concepts( which I've no issue to discuss )but If we go back to the issue of the post and tell me if you've comments on linguistic and scientific reasoning?
Regards

 

[Augustus]

There is no shred of evidence nor any reason to believe Dhul Qarnayan to be Alexander, zero, zilch, nada.

Other than the fact that the DQ narrative is pretty much identical to the Syraic Alexander legend, which is an evolution of the older Alexander romance. The fact that 'two horned' matched the iconography of Alexander. Hadith noting that DQ built a city formerly known as Alexandria, etc.

Al-Kahf is commentary on 3 religious stories common to the time period, although not Biblical ones. The 7 sleepers of Ephesus was also a common story in the Late Antique Roman Empire

Cyrus The Great on the other hand, as I already said, has a massive reputation with all three Abrahamic religions (regarded by Jews too as one of the messiahs of the Tanakh). Everything about Cyrus The Great perfectly aligns to it, historically and textually.
If you want Tanakh proof, start with Isaiah which highly praises him again and again and again. Then move your way through the Nevi'im, where again he is typified as the ultimate messianic archetype (aside from David and Moses respectively).

As pointed out, Alexander was also commonly used in Christian stories. Emperor Heraclius ('the new Alexander') was also using Alexander to enhance his reputation at the same time by means of imperial propaganda.

It's not only exactly the same story, it's the same story at the same time.

Claiming him to be Alexander is a modern thing though, it's an orientalist myth largely originated in the 19th century.

And they the Jews question you concerning Dhū’l-Qarnayn whose name was Alexander; he was not a prophet. Say ‘I shall recite relate to you a mention an account of him’ of his affair.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn (15th C)

Hadith and tafsir making a connection to Alexander despite it being a 'modern orientalist myth' with 'not a shred of evidence" seems a bit incongruous, no?

The identity of Qarnayan is never addressed in any Hadith, so you will have to either look at what makes the most logical sense (Cyrus, again and again) or admit that you don't know because it's way too vague otherwise. Qarnayan is only mentioned in around 20 Ayah in Surah 18, it's not explicit enough to any degree to justify your Alexander myth - and at that, the Alexander myth doesn't date back very far according to primary sources. There is very direct and clear continuity with Cyrus, but zero with Alexander.
And aside from that there aren't only two options to who he may have been (setting aside from that fact that Surah al-Kahf is an apocalyptic Surah dealing with parallelisms of past matters to future eschatological matters, it's a very unique Surah for a lot of reasons...)

The most compelling evidence is the fact that it is the same story that we know existed in the same time and the same place. Not 'slightly resembles', the same. Read the earlier linked article if you would like to see the evidence

 

[Duncan]

That one is a bit of a stretch to call an error as it's hardly supposed to be literal.

Dhul Qarnayan is Alexander the Great, and that passage is based on the Syriac Alexander Legend/Neshana which also has elements of even older stories like the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Going to the ends of the Earth is just metaphorical because the Neshana was from the Roman world, and they certainly didn't believe the earth was flat in the 7th C.

If you want to read an article about it:

"The prophecy of Ḏū-l-Qarnayn (Q 18:83-102) and the Origins of the Qurʾānic Corpus". Miscellanea arabica 2013–2014: 273-90.

Please dont compare Dhu al Qarnayn to Alexander they have nothing in common and the Story in the Quran relate the story of Dhu al qarnayn who was a pious man and not Alexander.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Because other than Lord Krishna - god does not talk to humans - he was the last one that spoke directly IMHO - and the evidence is overwhelming against a god dictated piece of content for anything else given all the errors and omissions and contradictions

So "we" know because of...something to do with your beliefs in your deity. That's not an answer and I'm sure the Gita can also be torn apart using modern rationalist methods, same as any other religious texts. "Faith and opinions", indeed.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Where was Aurangzeb when he invoked the Qu'ran and ordered the slaughter of Sambhaji and Guru Tegh Bahadur?
Where was Muhammad Ghazni when he called Indians infidels and plundered their lands and made slaves of their people?

A book that allows its adherents to commit such unspeakable atrocities, in the name of its author and creator that you, of many people, should be well aware of - is not content to be respected IMO let alone revered.

Find me one sentence - one sentence in the Gita that speaks ill of others or asks people to strike down disbelievers

Your respect is misplaced IMO

I call it like I see it - if you want to be respectful - be my guest - but take your own advice - read through the entire scripture that you purport to revere and respect and then come on here and pontificate.

That's more than a bit hypocritical given the Hindu mobs who have massacred Muslims, Christians and Sikhs using their religion as a justification. No group is innocent and any scripture can be twisted since humans are flawed and often given to depravity. But we should treat each other as individuals and seek to express the highest aspirations of our traditions. There's beauty in all of them and we should seek to reflect that.

 

[Augustus]

Please dont compare Dhu al Qarnayn to Alexander they have nothing in common and the Story in the Quran relate the story of Dhu al qarnayn who was a pious man and not Alexander.

"Nothing in common"...

Are you saying the following has "nothing in common" with the story of Dhul Qarnayan who reached the edges of the earth and built a wall against Gog and Magog and discusses the end of times?


1.2. The Narrative Structure of the Neṣḥānā
The story told in the Neṣḥānā is articulated in three main parts(henceforth addressed to parts 1, 2 and 3). In part 1, Alexander un-dertakes a journey until reaching the edges of the Earth. He first meets a sea of fetid waters (yamāsaryā) which he unsuccessfully attempts to cross. Then he reaches the place of the sunset, where he and his troops enter the “window of heaven”. Following the Sun’s night path, they arrive at the place of the sunrise9

In part 2, Alexander travels until the region of the Caucasus. Here, he meets local people who complain about the incursions of the Huns, among whose leaders are Gog and Magog. Alexander commands his followers to build a wall against the Huns and, once the task is achieved, he announces a prophecy which he orders to be engraved upon the door of the wall. The prophecy predicts the future incursion of the Huns and other events to come at the end of times.

"The prophecy of Ḏū-l-Qarnayn (Q 18:83-102) and the Origins of the Qurʾānic Corpus". Miscellanea arabica 2013–2014: 273-90.

 

[ManSinha]

That's not an answer and I'm sure the Gita can also be torn apart using modern rationalist methods, same as any other religious texts.

Try it and see how far you get - open challenge - don't just assert - all you have is an attitude - you got nothing of substance. Next time you answer me with an assertion - provide context specific evidence to back it up - else you are a liar or a hypocrite or both. Anyone can assert anything from behind a computer screen.

The Gita does not predict anything - if you read it, it is all about the devotee and his/her lord - I mentioned Lord Krishna tongue-in-cheek

Did you read through all the posts on the thread before your sanctimonious pronouncements? I mentioned that "Krishna speaking to Arjun" was mentioned tongue in cheek or did you overlook that in your haste to take me to task? Again - your reading comprehension needs work

That's more than a bit hypocritical given the Hindu mobs who have massacred Muslims, Christians and Sikhs using their religion as a justification.

It is not "hypocritical" when you cannot produce verses from the religious text that back up your actions - like I said above - I can quote violent verses against non believers from the Quran - produce something from the Gita or the Vedas - otherwise take your holier than thou attitude elsewhere. You are merely asserting without providing proof. I challenged anyone to find one verse in the Gita condemning non believers - you are avoiding the argument and inserting a spurious one - this is about religiously sanctioned or allowed violence - not anything else - get your reading skills in order before you incorrectly quote stuff and divert away from what is being addressed. That is disingenuous and shows your dishonesty.

Yes my people have been massacred from time to time since the religion took shape in the 13th century - the massacre has been largely Islamic - the Hindu one was in 1984 and that was driven by a political agenda not a religious one - again - get your facts straight

 

[Duncan]

"Nothing in common"...

Are you saying the following has "nothing in common" with the story of Dhul Qarnayan who reached the edges of the earth and built a wall against Gog and Magog and discusses the end of times?


1.2. The Narrative Structure of the Neṣḥānā
The story told in the Neṣḥānā is articulated in three main parts(henceforth addressed to parts 1, 2 and 3). In part 1, Alexander un-dertakes a journey until reaching the edges of the Earth. He first meets a sea of fetid waters (yamāsaryā) which he unsuccessfully attempts to cross. Then he reaches the place of the sunset, where he and his troops enter the “window of heaven”. Following the Sun’s night path, they arrive at the place of the sunrise9

In part 2, Alexander travels until the region of the Caucasus. Here, he meets local people who complain about the incursions of the Huns, among whose leaders are Gog and Magog. Alexander commands his followers to build a wall against the Huns and, once the task is achieved, he announces a prophecy which he orders to be engraved upon the door of the wall. The prophecy predicts the future incursion of the Huns and other events to come at the end of times.

"The prophecy of Ḏū-l-Qarnayn (Q 18:83-102) and the Origins of the Qurʾānic Corpus". Miscellanea arabica 2013–2014: 273-90.

Once again Dhu al Qarnayn was a pious man, a good man as described in surat al Kahf. alexander the great was a pagan hi teacher was Aristotle, they didn't believe in God. And Allah Knows best

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Try it and see how far you get - open challenge - don't just assert - all you have is an attitude - you got nothing of substance. Next time you answer me with an assertion - provide context specific evidence to back it up - else you are a liar or a hypocrite or both. Anyone can assert anything from behind a computer screen.



Did you read through all the posts on the thread before your sanctimonious pronouncements? I mentioned that "Krishna speaking to Arjun" was mentioned tongue in cheek or did you overlook that in your haste to take me to task? Again - your reading comprehension needs work



It is not "hypocritical" when you cannot produce verses from the religious text that back up your actions - like I said above - I can quote violent verses against non believers from the Quran - produce something from the Gita or the Vedas - otherwise take your holier than thou attitude elsewhere. You are merely asserting without providing proof. I challenged anyone to find one verse in the Gita condemning non believers - you are avoiding the argument and inserting a spurious one - this is about religiously sanctioned or allowed violence - not anything else - get your reading skills in order before you incorrectly quote stuff and divert away from what is being addressed. That is disingenuous and shows your dishonesty.

Yes my people have been massacred from time to time since the religion took shape in the 13th century - the massacre has been largely Islamic - the Hindu one was in 1984 and that was driven by a political agenda not a religious one - again - get your facts straight

You're coming across as very angry, and most of the things you're saying are a projection of your own nasty attitude towards others. Did I not say that all religions have beauty in them, meanwhile you're spewing hatred toward Islam and the Qur'an? So how in the world am I being "self-righteous"? You're the one making your tradition look ugly. I think you need to calm down because I'm not going to discuss anything with you like this. Salaam.

 

[ManSinha]

You're coming across as very angry, and most of the things you're saying are a projection of your own nasty attitude towards others. Did I not say that all religions have beauty in them, meanwhile you're spewing hatred toward Islam and the Qur'an? So how in the world am I being "self-righteous"? You're the one making your tradition look ugly. I think you need to calm down because I'm not going to discuss anything with you like this.

After seeing what was done to my people by muslim rulers in the name of "Islam" I have good reasons to feel strongly towards a religion that condones that - there may be "beauty" but that is in the eye of the beholder - I am not one of those - you have not answered my questions - if you want to run away using any excuse - that is fine with me

You seem internet savvy

Look up
Bhai Taru Singh
Bhai Mani Singh
Baba Zorawar Singh
Baba Fateh Singh

and this is just a small selection of what was done to my people - there are reasons for me saying what I say - I do not hate the people - but for religion that guides them - not so sure

Do look them up and make your own judgment

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

After seeing what was done to my people by muslim rulers in the name of "Islam" I have good reasons to feel strongly towards a religion that condones that - there may be "beauty" but that is in the eye of the beholder - I am not one of those - you have not answered my questions - if you want to run away using any excuse - that is fine with me

Conquerors don't tend to treat conquered people very nicely. But I know for a fact that Hindutva fascists exaggerate the damage done in order to stir up people, similar to how some Neopagans believed a lot of nonsense about the "Burning Times". Either way, I don't see what that has to do with the religion itself or ordinary Muslims today. Do you also hate British people and Christianity?

 

[ManSinha]

onquerors don't tend to treat conquered people very nicely

Yes - but that went way overboard - did you actually look them up or are you spouting off as usual?

But I know for a fact that Hindutva fascists exaggerate the damage done in order to stir up people

They cannot use religious texts to justify anything - whereas that is not true of the other side - as you may well know - terrorists routinely (rightly or wrongly) justify their actions using Qu'ranic verses

I don't see what that has to do with the religion itself or ordinary Muslims today. Do you also hate British people and Christianity?

Look at what I wrote and re frame your question - we may have been editing or posting simultaneously

You made a bold statement about "ripping the Gita apart" - I challenged you on that and the Vedas - I have yet to see anything from you - you are diverting the topic to escape the fact that you misstepped and misspoke -