Debunking Zakir Naik (A reply to Unity)

[Kai Hagbard]

Since Muslims emphatically claim that Zakir Naik presented a complete defeat on Christianity in his debate with William Campbell in a recent debate on Islam Christianity and Science, and since this debate and these issues have come up on the thread: The Qur'an and Modern Science- Wow what an eyeopener!!!!!

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 4&start=20

I find it reasonable to create a new thread focusing only on the issues that were brought up in the particular debate between Zakir Naik and William Campbell.

Muslims presume that since Campbell did not answer all the questions and since Zakir Naik answered all the questions, the debate presented a knock out for the Christian faith.

However, it has to be said, that debates do seldom reveal the entire aspect of a subject. Furthermore being a teacher like Campbell is not necesserily compared to being a debater; these are significantly different.

Furthermore, just because one does not answer all question, does not mean there are no answers. And only because one answers all the questions does not imply that the answers are necessarily accurate.

In this thread I will start off by replying to a post by our Muslim friend 'Unity'.

In all fairness to Unity, it has to be said that the particular issues and arguments are not proposed by Unity himself, but by Zakir Naik, and Zakir Naik's use of Maurice Bucaille.

Hence we do not hold Unity responsible for the ignorance and misrepresentation of the material. We only refer to Unity as Unity posted the material, as a response to our challenge.

Since the propositions by Zakir Naik are of no significance (it took me virtually no time to deal with these issues), as we will God-willing prove here; I consider it vital to create this new thread.

I will start posting the reply within five hours.



Kai

[Kai Hagbard]

Kai wrote:

I did listen to Sakir Naik and I did not find him convincing, perhaps the reason being that I do study science and philosophy, while most of his listeners do not.

Unity answered:

while i do not support dr zakir naik, but i have seen him answwering tough questions about science on stage in live debates which are convincing compared to his opponents who just read their articles.
his audience is elite english speaking technology driven people and not mere blind faith seekers

Kai replies:

Live debate can be tricky as little room is left for covering an entire aspect, it also depends upon whether the other debater really is a debater and is able to deal with crucial questions face to face without the time to sit down and consider the issues. Zakir Naik has refused to debate e.g. Sam Shamoun who is a debater, while according to many debaters Campbell is a great writer and speaker but not a debater; there is a considerable difference.

Most followers of atheism are English speakers, does that support their case? They even belief in such stupid fairytales as Darwinist evolution. I assume that you refrain from the belief that our cousins are chimpanzees.

Kai wrote:

Let me encourage you to study Anaxagoras, Anaximander, Anaxamenus, Thales, Plato, Aristotle, Ptolemy and Lucretius, just to refer to a few.

Unity answered:

when we have prophets and messengers what is the piont in reading philosphy and old time sciences. above people may have been great in their time but nowdays even school children know more science compared to them as science has advanced. we know their findings many of them have been proved wrong .

Kai replies:

Well unity, the Qur’an itself makes this analogy, if we do not need philosophy why does the Qur’an say:

‘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? (Sura 21: 30)’

As I have already proven, the disbelievers believed this very thing, that the heavens and earth were one piece and were separated.

Here the Qur’an refers to various ancient philosophers, such as Aristotle’s writings and Lucretius!

Or look at Tabari:

‘The Prophet [Mohammed] replied: “Ali, they are five stars: Jupiter (al-birjis), Saturn (zuhal), Mercury (utarid), Mars (Bahram), and Venus (al-zuhrah). These five stars rise and run like the sun and the moon and race with them together. All the other stars are suspended from heaven as lamps are from mosques,… al-Tabari vol.1 p.235-236.”

This was exactly the belief of Plato, Ptolemy and the entire scientific enterprise prior, within and beyond Muhammad’s era.

Here is Plato in his Timaeus:

‘…the sun and moon and five other stars, which bear the appellation of “planets,” came into existence for the determining and preserving of the numbers of Time. And when God had made the bodies of each of them He placed them in the orbits along which the revolution of the Other was moving, seven orbits for the seven bodies. The Moon he placed in the first circle around the earth, the sun is the second above the earth; and the Morning Star and the Star called Sacred to Hermes…(78-9)

See also Ptolemy:

‘With regard to the planets only, and parts of the zodiac, aspects are properly considered as made to them by the fixed stars, when the said planets and fixed stars may be posited on one and the same of those circles which are drawn through the poles of the zodiac; or, also, if they be posited on different circles, provided a trinal or sextile distance between them may be preserved; that is to say, a distance equal to a right angle and a third part more, or a distance equal to two-thirds of a right angle; and provided, also, that the fixed stars be on such parts of the circle as are liable to be transited by any one of the planets. These parts are situated within the latitude of the zodiac, which circumscribes the planetary motions. And as far as the five planets are concerned, the aspects of the fixed stars depend upon the visible mutual conjunctions, or configurations, made in the forms above prescribed; but, with respect to the Sun and Moon, they depend on occultations, conjunctions, and succedent risings of the stars. Occultation is when a star becomes invisible by being carried under the rays of the luminary; conjunction, when it is placed under the luminary's centre; and succedent rising, when it begins to reappear on issuing out beyond the rays.’

(M. Ashmand (trans.), Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, London, Davis and Dickson: 1822; see Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, Chapter IV: The Influences of the Planetary Orbs, 14

http://www.sacred-texts.com/astro/ptb/ptb07.htm and Ptolemy's

Tetrabiblos, Appendix No_ I_ Almagest; Book VIII, Chap_ IV.htm, 144-7,
http://www.sacred-texts.com/astro/ptb/ptb74.htm

This is exactly what Tabari referred to as being the knowledge of Muhammad.

This idea implied that the there were seven planets, which included the five named planets and the sun and moon. These all orbited the earth, in seven tracts.

And We have made above you, Seven tracts…(Sura 23: 17)

Yusuf Ali states about these seven tracts:

‘Tara’iq: tracts, roads, orbits or paths of motion in the visible heavens’ (footnote 2876).

Take a good look at Plato and Ptolemy again, and see where the idea comes from; yeah exactly the Greeks. They believed that the five planets and the sun and moon orbited the earth in seven tracts.

Tabari reveals that Muhammad possessed this opinion.

Furthermore the Qur’an also refers to the universe possessing seven heavens and earths:

Allah is He who created seven firmaments and of the earth a similar number (Sura 65: 12)

Interestingly the Jews possessed this exact idea, of seven heavens and seven earths, and Muhammad’s close proximity with the Jews, and the fact that Jewish cosmologists were among the companions of Muhammad, explains how this concept entered the Qur’an.

See Aboth D ’Rabbi Nathan, chapter XXXVII in A. Cohen, The minor Tractates of the Talmud, vol.2, The Soncino Press, London, 1965: 185

That is refers to the Greeks and the seven tracts or heavens and the seven earths is confirmed by Sura 71: 15:

‘See ye not how Allah has created the seven heavens above another, and made the moon a light in their midsts and made the sun a glorious lamp’

This is exactly in accordance with Plato, in which the sun was a glorious lamp orbiting amongst the seven tracts.

It has to be pointed out however, that the Koran here, mixes Greek and Jewish philosophy.

Whatever, this is wrong science, as our solarsystem contains nine planets perhaps more and approximately eleven, say the sun and moon was included.

Furthermore the Koran is wrong in stating that the sun, moon and the planets seven or eleven orbit around the earth.

The Qur’an also states that the interstellar, the sun and moon float or swim out in space:

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

Lets see what Al-Tabari has to say about this:

‘God created an ocean three fasrakhs (18 kilometers) removed from heaven. Waves contained, it stands in the air by the command of God. No drop of it is spilled. All the oceans are motionless, but that ocean flows at the rate of the speed of an arrow. It is set free to move in the air evenly, as if it were a rope stretched out in the area between east and west. The sun, the moon, and the retrograde stars [5 planets] run in its deep swell. This is (meant by) God’s word: ‘Each swims in a sphere.’ ‘The sphere’ is the circulation of the chariot in the deep swell of that ocean.’ al-Tabari vol.1 p.235.

Then lets look at pre-Islamic philosophy; lets look at Lucretius, writing 550 year prior to Muhammad:

Or they may swim of their own accord, each responsive to the call of its own food, and feed their fiery bodies in the pastures of the sky (Lucretius, The nature of the universe, 1957: 186-7).

Do I need to continue? We see that there are striking similarities between the Qur’an and the ancient philosophers, and as we red in Sura 21 the Qur’an even makes this analogy.

Kai wrote:

Then try to compare the similarities between the Koran and these ancients scholars, this would be a choking experience.

Unity replied:

there is no piont of comparing betwwen them and quran. but i know for sure quran corrects scientific errors in the bible regarding creation , floods and so on
SCIENTIFIC COMPARISON BETWEEN QUR’AN AND BIBLE

Kai replies:

How can you be sure?

Ok lets look at the Bible and Koran then

Unity wrote:

If you glance through the Bible and the Qur’an you may find several points which appear to be exactly the same in both of them, but when you analyse them closely, you realise that there is a difference of ‘chalk and cheese’ between them. Only based on historical details it is difficult for someone who is neither conversant with Christianity or Islam to come to a firm decision as to which of the scriptures is true; however if you verify the relevant passages of both the scriptures against scientific knowledge, you will yourself realize the truth.

Creation of the Universe in Six Days
As per the Bible, in the first book of Genesis in Chapter One, the universe was created in six days and each day is defined as a twenty-four hours period. Even though the Qur’an mentions that the universe was created in six ‘Ayyaams’, ‘Ayyaam’ is the plural of years; this word has two meanings: firstly, it means a standard twenty-four hours period i.e. a day, and secondly, it also means stage, period or epoch which is a very long period of time.

When the Qur’an mentions that the universe was created in six ‘Ayyaams’, it refers to the creation of the heavens and the earth in six long periods or epochs; scientists have no objection to this statement. The creation of the universe has taken billions of years, which proves false or contradicts the concept of the Bible which states that the creation of the Universe took six days of twenty-four hour durations each.

Kai replies:

I know this was the assumption of Maurice Bucaille, but still this is only a claim, the Ayyaams can refer longer periods, but it can also refer to literal days.

However, the same claim is made by many in connection with the six days creation of the Bible.

In fact the Hebrew word Yom can refer to a literal day or a longer period.

Hence in the same way as Muslims argue for literal six days and some for six epochs, in the same way many Christians and Jews argue for the same possibilities.

Unity wrote:

Sun Created After the Day
The Bible says in chapter 1, verses 3-5, of Genesis that the phenomenon of day and night was created on the first day of creation of the Universe by God. The light circulating in the universe is the result of a complex reaction in the stars; these stars were created according to the Bible (Genesis chapter 1 verse 14 to 19) on the fourth day. It is illogical to mention the result that is the light (the phenomenon of day and night) was created on the first day of Creation when the cause or source of the light was created three days later. Moreover the existence of evening and morning as elements of a single day is only conceivable after the creation of the earth and its rotation around the sun. In contrast with the contents of the Bible on this issue, the Qur’an does not give any unscientific sequence of Creation. Hence it is absolutely absurd to say that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) copied the passages pertaining to the creation of the universe from the Bible but missed out this illogical and fantastic sequence of the Bible.

Kai replies:

Not entirely correct bro

In fact if you look at the Genesis one, the heaven and earth are created in verse 1:

In the Beginning God created heaven and earth

In ancient Hebrew, Akkadia and international language, this reference was not explicitly of a heaven and earth but the cosmos.

Hence it is in verse one, we see the heaven and its affair was created.

The earth is referred in verse 2 as in a process of being formed, formless and empty and covered with water.

In verse 3 light is created, and notice that the light is then separated from darkness

The day does not begin until verse 4 and from now on Genesis concentrates on earth science not on the heavens.

This particular light provides the daylight, so unless you look at the context you might get the idea that daylight is not derived from the sun but from some cosmological force or something.

Yet if we look at the context this idea sinks.

In verse 14-19 we have the reference of the sun, moon and the stars

However considering that the heaven and earth were created already in verse 1 it is illogical to assume that they are created here.

Furthermore the word ‘asah’ often translated ‘made’ in verse 16 can also be translated ‘bring forth’

Similarly the word ‘nathan’ in verse 17 implying the setting of the sun and moon in the heaven, simply means to ‘give’ and can also be translated bring forth, or as some would suggest make appear.

Hence in all fairness to the context, the sun, moon and star together with the earth are all in existence in verse 1.

In verse 4 Genesis focuses on earth science, in which the heavens are perceived from an earthly angle. Here light some how reaches the earth and day begins in verse 3-4, then the sun and moon appear in verse 14-19. Hence these are not matters of creation but appearance.

Furthermore verses 14-19 also clarify that the sun is the source of the daylight, and is not referred to as an entity that takes over from the previous light but the actual source.

Therefore we should assume that the chronology does not necessarily contradict modern science, as the text does not imply that the sun and moon were created after the earth; they merely appear from a earthly angle and interact with life on earth.

What does the Qur’an teach?

The Qur’an is however very specific about a chronological cosmology where the entire heavenly realm and its orbits are created after the earth and its origin of life.

In Sura 21: 30 the heaven and earth are split apart

In Sura 41: 9 the earth is created in two days (according to the Qur’anic context this might imply the splitting apart of heaven and earth)

In Sura 41: 11 the entire heaven, in other word its physical stratums exist co-exist as smoke along side the earth

In Sura 41: 10 the formation and sustainability of life on earth is created in four days

In Sura 41: 11 heavens are created and decked with the sun, moon and the stars

Hence in the Koran, it takes 8 days, starting of with the separation, then the earth, then the sustainability and then the heavens and starry host.

In other words according to the Qur’an plants and life existed before the creation of sun and its effect.

Unity wrote:

Creation of the Sun, The Earth and the Moon
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 9 to 13, the earth was created on the third day, and as per verses 14 to 19, the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day. The earth and the moon emanated, as we know, from their original star, the Sun. Hence to place the creation of the sun and the moon after the creation of the earth is contrary to the established idea about the formation of the solar system.

Kai replies:

Since you simply repeat the question, I will just quote myself again:

In the Beginning God created heaven and earth

In ancient Hebrew, Akkadia and international language, this reference was not explicitly of a heaven and earth but the cosmos.

Hence it is in verse one, we see the heaven and its affair was created.

The earth is referred in verse 2 as in a process of being formed, formless and empty and covered with water.

In verse 3 light is created, and notice that the light is then separated from darkness

The day does not begin until verse 4 and from now on Genesis concentrates on earth science not on the heavens.

This particular light provides the daylight, so unless you look at the context you might get the idea that daylight is not derived from the sun but from some cosmological force or something.

Yet if we look at the context this idea sinks.

In verse 14-19 we have the reference of the sun, moon and the stars

However considering that the heaven and earth were created already in verse 1 it is illogical to assume that they are created here.

Furthermore the word ‘asah’ often translated ‘made’ in verse 16 can also be translated ‘bring forth’

Similarly the word ‘nathan’ in verse 17 implying the setting of the sun and moon in the heaven, simply means to ‘give’ and can also be translated bring forth, or as some would suggest make appear.

Hence in all fairness to the context, the sun, moon and star together with the earth are all in existence in verse 1.

In verse 4 Genesis focuses on earth science, in which the heavens are perceived from an earthly angle. Here light some how reaches the earth and day begins in verse 3-4, then the sun and moon appear in verse 14-19. Hence these are not matters of creation but appearance.

Furthermore verses 14-19 also clarify that the sun is the source of the daylight, and is not referred to as an entity that takes over from the previous light but the actual source.

Therefore we should assume that the chronology does not necessarily contradict modern science, as the text does not imply that the sun and moon were created after the earth; they merely appear from a earthly angle and interact with life on earth.

And all we can conclude that it is in fact the Koran which makes these statements not the Bible

Unity wrote:

Vegetation Created on the third day and Sun on the fourth day
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 11-13, vegetation was created on the third day along with seed-bearing grasses, plants and trees; and further on as per verses 14-19, the sun was created on the fourth day. How is it scientifically possible for the vegetation to have appeared without the presence of the sun, as has been stated in the Bible?

Kai replies:

But the sun was present! The light you that rules the day, which appears in verse 4 is the same light that derives from the appearance of the sun in verses 14-19. Hence there is no problem here.

And again, let me point out that this is the exact problem that is proposed by the Koran:

041.009
YUSUFALI: Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in two Days? And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds.
PICKTHAL: Say (O Muhammad, unto the idolaters): Disbelieve ye verily in Him Who created the earth in two Days, and ascribe ye unto Him rivals? He (and none else) is the Lord of the Worlds.
SHAKIR: Say: What! do you indeed disbelieve in Him Who created the earth in two periods, and do you set up equals with Him? That is the Lord of the Worlds.
041.010

YUSUFALI: He set on the (earth), mountains standing firm, high above it, and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measure therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in four Days, in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance).
PICKTHAL: He placed therein firm hills rising above it, and blessed it and measured therein its sustenance in four Days, alike for (all) who ask;
SHAKIR: 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.
041.011

YUSUFALI: 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."
PICKTHAL: 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.
041.012

YUSUFALI: So He completed them as seven firmaments in two Days, and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command. And We adorned the lower heaven with lights, and (provided it) with guard. Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge.
PICKTHAL: Then He ordained them seven heavens in two Days and inspired in each heaven its mandate; and We decked the nether heaven with lamps, and rendered it inviolable. That is the measuring of the Mighty, the Knower.
SHAKIR: 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.

Now, notice verse 10, in which Allah forms the earth and provides everything for life and sustainance prior to the creation of the heavens and the starry host, the sun and the moon.

Unity wrote:

If Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) was indeed the author of the Qur’an and had copied its contents from the Bible, how did he manage to avoid the factual errors that the Bible contains? The Qur’an does not contain any statements which are incompatible with scientific facts.

Kai replies:

But as I have already pointed out, the Bible does not make these errors.

It is the Qur’an that portrays these ideas; not the Bible

Unity wrote:

The Sun and the Moon both Emit light

According to the Bible both the sun and the moon emit their own light. In the Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verse 16 says, "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night".

Kai replies:

No, the text does not make any such statement, Genesis 1: 16 merely says that one light ruled the day and the other the night. You are making the academic error of ‘eisegesis’, that is reading conclusions into the text.

[Kai Hagbard]

Unity wrote:

Science tells us today that the moon does not have its own light. This confirms the Qur’anic concept that the light of the moon is a reflected light. To think that 1400 years ago, Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) corrected these scientific errors in the Bible and then copied such corrected passages in the Qur’an is to think of something impossible.

Kai replies:

The sura usually referred to by Muslims to prove that the moon reflects the sun is sura 71: 15-6 says: ‘Did you see how God created seven heavens one above another and made the moon a light therein and made the sun a lamp? Zakir Naik has suggested that 'noor', the Arabic word for light, implies reflection, while 'siraj', translated lamp refers to the source of light. The problem with this idea is Sura 24: 25 in which nor also is a reference to Allah, which in that case implies that Allah reflects someone greater.

Bucaille makes a similar statement from Sura 25: 61, he translates it:

‘Blessed is He Who made constellations in the skies, And placed therein a lamp (siraaj) and a moon which has reflected light.’ Bucaille suggests that the moon here gives ‘light’ (munir), while the sun is compared to a torch (siraj) and a blazing lamp (wahhaj) (Bucaille 1995: 155-56).

Ali’s however translates it differently:

‘…and a moon giving light.

’

The problem with 'munir' is however that the Qur’an utilizes it several times but only as provision, not reflection.

We see this in Sura 3: 184 where it says kitab al-muneer, which is translated: ‘book of enlightenment’, and in Sura 25: 61 where we read qamar al-muneer, translated ‘a moon giving light’; hence ‘reflection’ is not a definite certainty. In addition the Qur’an depicts the moon as being made a light, not reflecting light (Sura 10: 5; 71: 16). This resembles some of the ancient philosophical statements, e.g. Anaximander, who assumed that the moon shines by its own light (Fairbanks, Aet. ii. 1 ; Dox. 327. 1898: 16).

Yet the concept that the moon reflects the sun was however common knowledge at Muhammad’s time and predated Islam with more than thousand years; this does not render the Qur’an as predicting anything of significance.

Let’s look at pre-Islamic knowledge on the moon’s reflection of the sun:
According to the Doxographi, the moon reflecting the sunlight was a fact already perceived Thales (585 BC):

The moon is lighted from the sun. 29; 360. Thales et al. agree with the mathematicians that the monthly phases of the moon show that it travels along with the sun and is lighted by it, and eclipses show that it comes into the shadow of the earth, the earth coming between the two heavenly bodies and blocking the light of the moon (Doxographi on Thales, Aet. ii. 1 ; Dox. 327) (6).

According to Aristotle (), Anaxagoras (500-428 BC) considered the moon be to a false-shining star (255). The Doxographist elaborate further on this:

The moon is below the sun and nearer us. The sun is larger than the Peloponnesos. The moon does not have its own light, but light from the sun (The Doxographists on Anaxagoras, Hipp. Phil. 8 ; Dox. 561) (260-1).

Empedocles (mid fifth century), made the same conclusion:

153. As sunlight striking the broad circle of the moon. 154. A borrowed light, circular in form, it revolves about the earth, as if following the track of a chariot (Empedocles, translations of the fragments I) (177)

Plato’s Timaeus informs us:

God lighted a fire, which we now call the sun, in the second from the earth of these orbits, that it might give light to the whole of heaven (Plato, Timaeus)

The later scientific conclusion followed; Ptolemy wrote:

The Moon principally generates moisture; her proximity to the earth renders her highly capable of exciting damp vapours, and of thus operating sensibly upon animal bodies by relaxation and putrefaction. She has, however, also a moderate share in the production of heat, in consequence of the illumination she receives from the Sun (Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos: Book the First: Chapter IV, The Influence of the Planetary Orbs) (13).

Lucretius in 50 BC followed in the same lead:

What then of the moon? It may be that it shines only when the sun’s ray fall upon it. Then day by day, as it moves away from the sun’s orb, it turns more of its illumined surface towards our view till in its rising it gazes down face to face upon the setting sun and beams with lustre at the full (192).

The idea was also known among the Jews; the Talmud claims that Abraham once worshipped the moon and said:

‘The light of the moon must be derived from the light of the sun’

(A Cohen, Everyman’s Talmud, London: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd/NewYork: E.P. Dutton & Co. Inc, 1949: 2; The passage is quoted from Midrash Hagadol; it is late collection of Midrashic material, but was present in the Talmud period).

Unity wrote:

11. ADAM (PBUH), THE FIRST MAN ON EARTH, LIVED 5,800 YEARS AGO

As per the genealogy of Jesus Christ given in the Bible, from Jesus through Abraham (pbuh) to the first man on earth i.e. Adam (pbuh), Adam appeared on the earth approximately 5800 years ago:

1948 years between Adam (pbuh) and Abraham (pbuh)
Approximately 1800 years between Abraham (pbuh) and Jesus (pbuh)
2000 years from Jesus (pbuh) till today
These figures are further confused by the fact that the Jewish calendar is currently on or about 5800 years old.

There is sufficient evidence from archaeological and anthropological sources to suggest that the first human being on earth was present tens of thousands of years ago and not merely 5,800 years ago as is suggested by the Bible.
The Qur’an too speaks about Adam (pbuh) as the first man on earth but it does not suggest any date or period of his life on earth, unlike the Bible - what the Bible says in this regard is totally incompatible with science.

Kai replies:

Well, Unity, generally most Christians do not claim that the historical genealogy of the Bible is solemnly detailed. Most Christian scholars I know believe in gaps between chronologies, e.g. Israel’s era in Egypt.

There is also the understanding that some of the genealogies exclude individuals.

Furthermore, the earliest written history we possess does not reach further than 2000 BC, that is 4000 years back. This documents are Egyptian, and its information leads to back to the civilisation about 1000 years earlier, to year 3000 BC.

The problem with this kind of reasoning is the dependence upon historical methods upon an era of which no historical evidences are available. From this thousands of conclusions are based, and the most predominant simply rely upon the most favourable scholar, who him/herself possesses not tangible and documented evidences.

Furthermore it is about year 3000 BC that many scholars place the so called Great flood. Hence historically seen, when we talk about actual evidence we end up with year 3000 BC, when the flood seems to occur; everything else relies upon speculation and theories.

Do you get the picture?

What am I saying here: 1) first and most that the Biblical genealogy contains gaps, and we simply don’t know neither do we presume that we are to follow it strictly. Secondly, this does not depict the Biblical account incorrect as history by evidence begins in year 3000 BC, and the rest is speculation; not necessarily wrong but still theoretical.

Unity wrote:

12. NOAH (PBUH) AND THE FLOOD


The Biblical description of the flood in Genesis chapter 6, 7 and 8 indicates that the deluge was universal and it destroyed every living thing on earth, except those present with Noah (pbuh) in the ark. The description suggests that the event took place 1656 years after the creation of Adam (pbuh) or 292 years before the birth of Abraham, at a time when Noah (pbuh) was 600 years old. Thus the flood may have occurred in the 21st or 22nd Century B.C.

This story of the flood, as given in the Bible, contradicts scientific evidence from archaelogical sources which indicate that the eleventh dynasty in Egypt and the third dynasty in Babylonia were in existence without any break in civilisation and in a manner totally unaffected by any major calamity which may have occurred in the 21st century B.C. This contradicts the Biblical story that the whole world had been immersed in the flood water. In contrast to this, the Qur’anic presentation of the story of Noah and the flood does not conflict with scientific evidence or archaeological data; firstly, the Qur’an does not indicate any specific date or year of the occurance of that event, and secondly, according to the Qur’an the flood was not a universal phenomenon which destroyed complete life on earth. In fact the Qur’an specifically mentions that the flood was a localised event only involving the people of Noah.

It is illogical to assume that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) had borrowed the story of the flood from the Bible and corrected the mistakes before mentioning it in the Qur’an.

Kai replies:

Is this not the proposition of the Koran bro; lets see what the Koran says about the flood.

"At length, behold! There came Our Command, and the fountains of the earth gushed forth! We said: `Embark therein, of each two, male and female, and your family- except those against whom the Word has already gone forth,- and the believers.' But only a few believed with him." S. 11:40

"Then the word went forth: `O earth! Swallow up thy water, and O sky! withhold (thy rain)! And the water abated, and the matter was ended. The Ark rested on Mount Judi, and the word went forth: `Away with those who do wrong!'" S. 11:44

This is exactly the same terminology as in the Bible, in which sky and the earth provide the water to submerge the earth.

"

So We inspired him (with this message): `Construct the Ark within Our sight and under Our guidance: then when comes Our command, and the oven gushes forth, take thou on board pairs of every species, male and female, and thy family- except those of whom the Word has already gone forth: and address Me not in favour of the wrong-doers: for they shall be drowned (in the Flood)." S. 23:27

Here Noah is ordered to bring a pair of every animal, why if the Egyptian and Babylonian kingdoms are already in existence, and if the flood was only local?

"So We opened the gates of heaven, with water pouring forth. And we caused the earth to gush forth with springs. So the waters met (and rose) to the extent decreed. But We bore him on an (Ark) made of broad planks and caulked with palm-fibre: She floats under Our eyes (and care): a recompense to one who had been rejected (with scorn)!" S. 54:11-14

Does this depict a universal flood or not?

Again, heaven pouring forth and the earth gushing springs seem to imply a universal event.

"And Noah said: `O my Lord! Leave not of the Unbelievers, a single one on earth! For if Thou dost leave (any of them), they will but mislead Thy devotees, and they will breed none but wicked ungrateful ones.'" S. 71:26-27

Here every unbeliever on earth is destroyed! Does this not contradict the idea that the Babylonians and the Egyptians lived throughout the local devastation?

Your reference to a flood in Babylonian times, needs to be referred to as well. In history we read of several floods, which are mentioned in several sources and through excavation, so I think you are mixing various historical sources here.

Unity wrote:

13. MOSES (PBUH) AND PHARAOH OF THE EXODUS

The story of Moses (pbuh) and the Pharaoh of the Exodus are very much identical in the Qur’an and the Bible. Both scriptures agree that the Pharaoh drowned when he tried to pursue Moses (pbuh) and led the Israelites across a stretch of water that they crossed. The Qur’an gives an additional piece of information in Surah Yunus chapter 10 verse 92:

"This day shall We save thee in thy body, that thou mayest be a sign to those who come after thee! But verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!"
[Al-Qur’an 10:92]

Dr. Maurice Bucaille, after a thorough research proved that although Rameses II was known to have persecuted the Israelites as per the Bible, he actually died while Moses (pbuh) was taking refuge in Median. Rameses II’s son Merneptah who succeeded him as Pharaoh drowned during the exodus. In 1898, the mummified body of Merneptah was found in the valley of Kings in Egypt. In 1975, Dr. Maurice Bucaille with other doctors received permission to examine the Mummy of Merneptah, the findings of which proved that Merneptah probably died from drowning or a violent shock which immediately preceeded the moment of drowning. Thus the Qur’anic verse that we shall save his body as a sign, has been fulfilled by the Pharaohs’ body being kept at the Royal Mummies room in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.

Kai replies:

First and most, the passage never states that the Pharaoh died, but simply that he was saved in his body; that could strongly imply that he survived.

Furthermore; that Pharaoh drowned is also referred to in the Bible, see Psalm 136: 15: ‘

but swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea’

That Rameses II persecuted the Israelites is also a view held by many Christians, hence if his mummie has been discovered and proves drowning in confirms the Bible equally as much as the Koran.

However, the presumption that the mummy reveals signs of drowning is probably a hoax.

This idea was already proposed in 1907 by Elliot Smith. I cannot help thinking that typical preparation of royal kings in Egypt would remove all such signs, furthermore salt would be used in this preparation. So exactly how Bucaille and others derive to their conclusion is still highly ambiguous, at least in my own view.

Unity wrote:

This verse of the Qur’an compelled Dr. Maurice Bucaille, who was a Christian then, to study the Qur’an. He later wrote a book ‘The Bible, the Qur’an and Science’, and confessed that the author of the Qur’an can be no one else besides God Himself. Thus he embraced Islam.

Kai replies:

I might shock you, that Bucaille is not a Muslim and has never been a Muslim. I have studied Bucaille’s book, The Bible, the Qur’an and Science, and the book is a joke, particularly when you have some insight into science, and particularly if you know Greek philosophy.

I think, he is of the same opinion.

In fact Bucaille is a master mind who knew that Muslims would fall for the trick of his book and make him very very rich.

Hence the book is simply a hoax!

Kai wrote earlier:

I heard Zakir Naik emphatically praise the Big Bang theory in the Koran as being a predictable miracle of modern science. Yet when you study pre-Islamic religions and philosophy they describe the exact same origin of the universe; hence frankly, in what sense is Zakir Naik correct to state that Sura 21 is a miracle.

Unity replied:

science is yet not so advanced it changes its spot .creator of the world is the best scientist.

Kai wrote earlier:

Furthermore in what sense is the Big Bang theory in the Koran, in which the heaven and earth are separated, a prediction of modern science; since in modern science there is no separation of heaven and earth; the earth originated within the heaven.

Unity replied:

let us discuss simple things such as shape of earth according to bible and quran and then later on discuss complex topics
All of the following assertions made in the Bible are scientifically false or impossible:

Kai replies:

Ok lets see the Biblical fallacies of science and compare them with the Koran

Unity wrote:

Earth is about 6000 years old, as calculated from the genealogies in Gen and Luke 3.

Kai replies:

I have already referred to this above; but as to your reference to Luke 3 and the genealogy of Jesus, which you utilize to prove that genealogies are exact, you or Zakir Naik have again failed to consider the context.

If you read verse 23 of Luke 3 it reads:

‘

Now Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought of Joseph’.

Notice the wording:

‘…so it was thought’

. Hence Luke is not making a definite statement here, but merely points out what people had concluded.

Unity wrote:

Earth was created in seven days (Gen 1).

Kai replies:

As I have already mentioned; there are various views here among Bible-believers; The Young theory states that it took 6 days, and the old earth theory states that the earth is significantly older.

I hold to the Old Earth Theory, due to verse two, in which the earth already exists, prior to the first day, which begins in verse 4.

In fact the seven days are not concerned with the cosmos, or the existence of the earth, but primarily with the shape and life on earth.

Yet Islam does also refer to 6 and 8 days of the creation of the universe. While the Bible concentrates on the earth and its shape, the Koran utilizes this number the entire cosmos.

Here the Koran not only implies and presents the possibility of a 6 or 8 days creation of the universe but also presents a contradiction:

Quran-7:54: Your guardian-Lord is Allah who created the heavens and earth in Six Days

Quran-25:29: He Who created the heavens and earth and all that is between, in Six Days

Quran-41:9 : Is it that ye deny Him who created the earth in Two Days ?

Quran- 41:10: He set on the (earth) Mountains standing firm high above it, and bestowed blessing on the earth, and measured therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in FOUR DAYS…

Quran-41:12: So He completed them (heavens) as seven firmaments in Two days and ...

Furthermore, Muhammad himself considered the shape and sustainability of the earth to be created in literal days:

Sahih Muslim, Chapter MCLV, The beginning of creation and the creation of Adam,

Hadith No. 6707:

"Abu Huraira reported that Allah's Messenger (mpbuh) took hold of my hands and said: Allah the Exalted and Glorious, created the clay on Saturday and He created the mountains on Sunday and He created the trees on Monday and He created the things entailing labour on Tuesday and created light on Wednesday and He caused animals to spread on Thursday and created Adam (pbuh) after 'Asr on Friday; the last creation at the last hour of the hours of Friday, ie. Between afternoon and night."

Unity wrote:

Sun and stars were created after the earth was created (Gen 1:16).

Kai replies:

This is your assumption; I have already answered this, but I think I will just repost what I posted above:

In the Beginning God created heaven and earth

In ancient Hebrew, Akkadia and international language, this reference was not explicitly of a heaven and earth but the cosmos.

Hence it is in verse one, we see the heaven and its affair was created.

The earth is referred in verse 2 as in a process of being formed, formless and empty and covered with water.

In verse 3 light is created, and notice that the light is then separated from darkness

The day does not begin until verse 4 and from now on Genesis concentrates on earth science not on the heavens.

This particular light provides the daylight, so unless you look at the context you might get the idea that daylight is not derived from the sun but from some cosmological force or something.

Yet if we look at the context this idea sinks.

In verse 14-19 we have the reference of the sun, moon and the stars

However considering that the heaven and earth were created already in verse 1 it is illogical to assume that they are created here.

Furthermore the word ‘asah’ often translated ‘made’ in verse 16 can also be translated ‘bring forth’

Similarly the word ‘nathan’ in verse 17 implying the setting of the sun and moon in the heaven, simply means to ‘give’ and can also be translated bring forth, or as some would suggest make appear.

Hence in all fairness to the context, the sun, moon and star together with the earth are all in existence in verse 1.

In verse 4 Genesis focuses on earth science, in which the heavens are perceived from an earthly angle. Here light some how reaches the earth and day begins in verse 3-4, then the sun and moon appear in verse 14-19. Hence these are not matters of creation but appearance.

Furthermore verses 14-19 also clarify that the sun is the source of the daylight, and is not referred to as an entity that takes over from the previous light but the actual source.

Therefore we should assume that the chronology does not necessarily contradict modern science, as the text does not imply that the sun and moon were created after the earth; they merely appear from a earthly angle and interact with life on earth.


Unity wrote:

There was "night" and "day" and "light" on the earth before sun was created (Gen 1:3-5, 14-18 ).

Kai replies:

Not really!

In Genesis 1: 3-5 we read:

And God said: Let there be light, and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day” and the darkness He called “night”. And there was evening and there was morning—the first day.

So, yeah this light was the source of the day, however continue reading. As I have already pointed out above, the particular appearances of the sun and moon in verses 14-19 do not refer to there creation but their appearance.

Then read verse 17-18:

God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night and to separate light from darkness…and there was evening and there was morning the fourth day.

Here it appears that the actual light in verse four comes from the same sources which appear in verse 14-19.

Hence, yeah light existed on the earth before the sun appeared (it existed already in verse 1), but the source for this particular light was the sun!


Unity wrote:

Plant life existed before sunlight existed (Gen 1:11-18 ).

Kai replies:

Well I do know about the theory that plant life must have existed for oxygen to appear, and the oxygen would be a necessity to remove the gaseous clouds from the earth. I know it is ambiguous, but we are not entirely certain about every aspect of science.

Furthermore, there is rich life deep down the oceans and beneath the oceans to which no sunlight reaches.

Furthermore, Read Genesis 1 again, the light appears already in verse 4, which separates the day and night. As I have already pointed out this light is in fact the sunlight, only that the sun is still not visible from the earth. Hence according to Genesis sunlight reached the earth prior to the creation of plants.

Unity wrote:

Birds were created before land animals (Gen 1:20, 24).

Kai replies:

Well, this only becomes a problem if you believe such fairytales, such as the evolution theory. I have noticed that Osama Abdallah tries to combine evolutionary theories with the Koran, but then how Islamic is that?

Unity wrote:

Heaven is above, earth below (Jer 10:11, 31:37, 1 Thess 4:16-17).

Kai replies:

If that is a problem, then what about all the Koranic passages making similar statements.

According to Sura 22: 65:

Allah withholds the sky from falling on the earth, how is that possible if the heaven is not above and the earth below?

Unity wrote:

The sky is solid, a "firmament" (Gen 1:6, Job 22:14, Isa 40:22).

Kai replies:

No the passage does not even indicate anything of the kind; the passage states: ‘…He stretches out the heavens like a canopy and spreads them out like a tent to live in.’

The passage is metaphorical, notice the word ‘like’ a canopy ‘like’ a tenth; the actual emphasis is on the stretching which is a prediction of the Continuous Cosmological expansion, a discovery which modern science did not figure out until the last century.

Furthermore the Koran makes similar statements, yet not metaphorically:

Sura 21: 32 states:

And We have made the heavens as a canopy well guarded…

God is the One Who raised the heavens without any pillars that you can see” (Qur’an, 13:2)

According to Sura 22: 65, Allah withholds the sky from falling on the earth.

Is this correct science? Can the heavens truly fall on the earth? Why does the Koran not refer to earth falling down colliding with the heavenly matter? If the heavens surround the earth, why is it falling down? Kathir himself proposes that the pillars refer seven layers of the universe and the earth its bottom, and the canopy at the top (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged Volume 5, 2000, 231-3).

Lets look at bit further at Kathir, he states:

These Ayat indicate that Allah started creation by creating the earth, then He made heaven into seven heavens. This is how a building usually starts, with the lower floors first and then the top floors.’ Then Kathir refers to Mujahid who states: “Allah created the earth before heaven, and when he created the earth, smoke burst out of it. This is why Allah said: Then He Istawa ila (turned towards) the heaven when it was smoke (41: 11). ‘And made the seven heavens’ means, one above the other, while the ‘seven earths’ means, one below the other” (Tafsir, Ibn Kathir, Volume 1, 2000: 179-81).

Unity wrote:

Earth has four corners,

Kai replies:

First and most let me point out, that if the reference to corners is a problem; the Qur’an itself is in error; let’s look at Sura 67: 15:

He is the One who put the Earth at your service. Roam its corners, and eat from His provisions. To Him is the final summoning.

Furthermore lets look at a passage in Abu Dawud, Muhammad according to your own perception uttered an embarrassing scientific statement:

The Prophet (saw) said: "Allah showed me all corners of the earth I saw its East and its West, and I saw that my Ummah will possess of it what He showed me from it." (Muslim, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, and Al-Timirdhi)

In fact then both the Qur’an and Muhammad agree with Biblical and ancient terminology!

Unity wrote:

and floats on water (Isa 11:12, Ps 24:2, 136:6, Rev 7:1).

Kai replies:

The particular verse you are referring says:

The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world and all who live in it; for he founded it upon the seas and established it upon the water.

To understand the verse we need to look at the actual meanings behind the words: ‘earth’ and ‘world’

The ‘earth’, in Hebrew ‘erets’ can refer to the actual planet earth, but also to the land, the ground, country, territory and soil (2304).

The ‘world’ in this case, in the Hebrew, the word Tevel, is generally used poetically; however, this word is also used of the habitable part of the world (Job 37: 12) (Psalm 90: 2) (Is.14: 17).
Furthermore, the book of Psalms are highly and mainly poetical! A proper exegesis of the book requires that you understand and differentiate between what is symbolic and metaphorical and what is historically and meant to be factual.

Furthermore the Hebrew word for ‘founded’ which is ‘yasadh’ has a multiple number of meanings and can be used both literally or metaphorical. Some of the meanings are: establish, set build up, appoint, assign, settle.

Hence in all fairness to the particular nature of the Psalms which are metaphorical, and the meanings of the actual Hebrew words, the passage makes no other claim than that the habited part of earth is above the waters, which agrees with e.g. Genesis 1.

If you look at the Koran however, it states Allah’s throne is over the waters:

He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six days – and His Throne was over the Waters (Sura 11: 7)

According to the Muslim scholar Ali Dashti, in his book 23 Years, 1994, page 162: this verse refers to the primordial material of the earth.

Furthermore in the Koran the sun and moon swim in parallel course in the realm of space:

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

Unity wrote:

Earth is a circular disk (Isa 40:22)

Kai replies:

Could you please provide the evidences that Is.40: 22 refers to a disk?

The Bible portrays an excellent picture of a spherical earth but never a disk:

Job 26: 7: …He hangs the earth on nothing

Job 26: 10: He drew a circular horizon on the fact of the waters

Proverbs 8: 27: When He prepared the heavens, I was there, when He drew a circle on the face of the deep, I was there

Isaiah 40: 22: It is He who sits above the circle of the earth

[Kai Hagbard]

Unity wrote:

Earth is flat (these verses were used for centuries by the church to prove this: 1 Chron 16:30, Ps 93:1, Jer 10:13, Dan 4:10-11, Zech 9:10, Matt 4:8, Rev 1:7).

Kai replies:

I simply fail to see where these passages refer to a flat earth

Some of these verses refer to the ‘end’ of the earth, I assume this is why Muslims consider it a reference to a flat earth, yet here again you need to consider what that means in e.g. Hebrew and Greek

7097. qatseh, kaw-tseh'; or (neg. only) qetseh, kay'-tseh; from H7096; an extremity (used in a great variety of applications and idioms; comp. H7093):-- X after, border, brim, brink, edge, end, [in-] finite, frontier, outmost coast, quarter, shore, (out-) side, X some, ut (-ter-) most (part).

Hence ‘end’ can refer to the entire earth or simply extremity and what is far away

Your reference to Daniel 4: 10-11, is useless as it refers to a dream, and furthermore within its context it does not literally refer to the ends of the earth, but great distances.

Jesus temptation in Matthew 4: 8 is also visionary, as every living individual realises that perceiving the entirety of worldly kingdoms would be impossible from one location. Furthermore, the passage does not state that every kingdom was seen from the mountain, but merely that they were located on a high mountain.

Unity wrote:

Earth does not move (Ps 93:1, 96:10, 104:5, 1 Chr 16:30).

Kai replies:

Well if this is a problem, why does the Qur’an make the same statement:
And among His Signs is that the sky and the Earth stand by His Command…." (Sura 30:25)

"Verily! Allah grasps the heavens and the Earth lest they move away from their places,…" (Sura 35:41)

"Is not He Who has made the Earth as a fixed abode……" (Sura 27:61)

It is God who made for you the earth A FIXED PLACE and heaven for an edifice; And He shaped you, and shaped you well, and provided you with the good things. That then is God, your Lord, so blessed be God, the Lord of all Being (Sura 40: 64)

[Kai Hagbard]

Unity wrote:

It has windows through which the rain falls (Gen 7:11).

Kai replies:

Here Zakir Naik refers to the sky, mainly that the Bible proposes heavens with windows, from which the rain comes.

Unfortunately Zakir Naik does not differentiate between metaphorical speaking and actual speaking.

But ok, lets play Zakir Naik's game. If Gen.7: 11 is a problem, then how about Sura 54: 11, which describes the water of the Great Flood to come through the gates of heaven:

"So We opened the gates of heaven, with water pouring forth. And we caused the earth to gush forth with springs. So the waters met (and rose) to the extent decreed. But We bore him on an (Ark) made of broad planks and caulked with palm-fibre: She floats under Our eyes (and care): a recompense to one who had been rejected (with scorn)!" S. 54:11-14

How in the wide world does the Muslim explain that rain dropped down from the actual heaven, through its gates, that is a pretty long distance, right. And are we truly to believe that the heavens possess gates and reservoirs of rain?

Well, we are just speculating in Muslim terms here.

THERE IS MORE TO COME

[unity]

Kai wrote:

I did listen to Sakir Naik and I did not find him convincing, perhaps the reason being that I do study science and philosophy, while most of his listeners do not.

Unity answered:

while i do not support dr zakir naik, but i have seen him answwering tough questions about science on stage in live debates which are convincing compared to his opponents who just read their articles.
his audience is elite english speaking technology driven people and not mere blind faith seekers

Kai replies:

Live debate can be tricky as little room is left for covering an entire aspect, it also depends upon whether the other debater really is a debater and is able to deal with crucial questions face to face without the time to sit down and consider the issues. Zakir Naik has refused to debate e.g. Sam Shamoun who is a debater, while according to many debaters Campbell is a great writer and speaker but not a debater; there is a considerable difference.
truth overcomes evil no matter how good may be debater. prophet himself was ummi and use to say few words but actions speak for themself. dr campbell wrote some book on contradictions in quran as many writers write all the time. it is unbelievable that around 600 books on average is written against islam and majority of websites/media try to run down muslims as terrorists , followers of evil religion, moon god etc etc and yet islam is number 1 fastest growing religion in the west alhamdulilah
Most followers of atheism are English speakers, does that support their case? They even belief in such stupid fairytales as Darwinist evolution. I assume that you refrain from the belief that our cousins are chimpanzees.

most of athiest are found in eastern part of world who are non english.
total agree to you regarding theory of darwin. for it will remain a theory and never a fact of evolution

Kai wrote:

Let me encourage you to study Anaxagoras, Anaximander, Anaxamenus, Thales, Plato, Aristotle, Ptolemy and Lucretius, just to refer to a few.

Unity answered:

when we have prophets and messengers what is the piont in reading philosphy and old time sciences. above people may have been great in their time but nowdays even school children know more science compared to them as science has advanced. we know their findings many of them have been proved wrong .

Kai replies:

Well unity, the Qur’an itself makes this analogy, if we do not need philosophy why does the Qur’an say:

‘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? (Sura 21: 30)’

As I have already proven, the disbelievers believed this very thing, that the heavens and earth were one piece and were separated.

Here the Qur’an refers to various ancient philosophers, such as Aristotle’s writings and Lucretius!

prophet was a ummi an unlettered man so how could he have copied such thing.even otherwise if i say a thing which you may have said a few years back does not mean that i copied such and such from brother Kai.
Or look at Tabari:

‘The Prophet [Mohammed] replied: “Ali, they are five stars: Jupiter (al-birjis), Saturn (zuhal), Mercury (utarid), Mars (Bahram), and Venus (al-zuhrah). These five stars rise and run like the sun and the moon and race with them together. All the other stars are suspended from heaven as lamps are from mosques,… al-Tabari vol.1 p.235-236.”

This was exactly the belief of Plato, Ptolemy and the entire scientific enterprise prior, within and beyond Muhammad’s era.

Here is Plato in his Timaeus:

‘…the sun and moon and five other stars, which bear the appellation of “planets,” came into existence for the determining and preserving of the numbers of Time. And when God had made the bodies of each of them He placed them in the orbits along which the revolution of the Other was moving, seven orbits for the seven bodies. The Moon he placed in the first circle around the earth, the sun is the second above the earth; and the Morning Star and the Star called Sacred to Hermes…(78-9)

See also Ptolemy:

‘With regard to the planets only, and parts of the zodiac, aspects are properly considered as made to them by the fixed stars, when the said planets and fixed stars may be posited on one and the same of those circles which are drawn through the poles of the zodiac; or, also, if they be posited on different circles, provided a trinal or sextile distance between them may be preserved; that is to say, a distance equal to a right angle and a third part more, or a distance equal to two-thirds of a right angle; and provided, also, that the fixed stars be on such parts of the circle as are liable to be transited by any one of the planets. These parts are situated within the latitude of the zodiac, which circumscribes the planetary motions. And as far as the five planets are concerned, the aspects of the fixed stars depend upon the visible mutual conjunctions, or configurations, made in the forms above prescribed; but, with respect to the Sun and Moon, they depend on occultations, conjunctions, and succedent risings of the stars. Occultation is when a star becomes invisible by being carried under the rays of the luminary; conjunction, when it is placed under the luminary's centre; and succedent rising, when it begins to reappear on issuing out beyond the rays.’

(M. Ashmand (trans.), Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, London, Davis and Dickson: 1822; see Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, Chapter IV: The Influences of the Planetary Orbs, 14

http://www.sacred-texts.com/astro/ptb/ptb07.htm and Ptolemy's

Tetrabiblos, Appendix No_ I_ Almagest; Book VIII, Chap_ IV.htm, 144-7,
http://www.sacred-texts.com/astro/ptb/ptb74.htm

This is exactly what Tabari referred to as being the knowledge of Muhammad.

This idea implied that the there were seven planets, which included the five named planets and the sun and moon. These all orbited the earth, in seven tracts.

And We have made above you, Seven tracts…(Sura 23: 17)

Yusuf Ali states about these seven tracts:

‘Tara’iq: tracts, roads, orbits or paths of motion in the visible heavens’ (footnote 2876).

Take a good look at Plato and Ptolemy again, and see where the idea comes from; yeah exactly the Greeks. They believed that the five planets and the sun and moon orbited the earth in seven tracts.

Tabari reveals that Muhammad possessed this opinion.

Furthermore the Qur’an also refers to the universe possessing seven heavens and earths:

Allah is He who created seven firmaments and of the earth a similar number (Sura 65: 12)

Interestingly the Jews possessed this exact idea, of seven heavens and seven earths, and Muhammad’s close proximity with the Jews, and the fact that Jewish cosmologists were among the companions of Muhammad, explains how this concept entered the Qur’an.

See Aboth D ’Rabbi Nathan, chapter XXXVII in A. Cohen, The minor Tractates of the Talmud, vol.2, The Soncino Press, London, 1965: 185

That is refers to the Greeks and the seven tracts or heavens and the seven earths is confirmed by Sura 71: 15:

‘See ye not how Allah has created the seven heavens above another, and made the moon a light in their midsts and made the sun a glorious lamp’

This is exactly in accordance with Plato, in which the sun was a glorious lamp orbiting amongst the seven tracts.

It has to be pointed out however, that the Koran here, mixes Greek and Jewish philosophy.

Whatever, this is wrong science, as our solarsystem contains nine planets perhaps more and approximately eleven, say the sun and moon was included.

Furthermore the Koran is wrong in stating that the sun, moon and the planets seven or eleven orbit around the earth.

The Qur’an also states that the interstellar, the sun and moon float or swim out in space:

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

Lets see what Al-Tabari has to say about this:

‘God created an ocean three fasrakhs (18 kilometers) removed from heaven. Waves contained, it stands in the air by the command of God. No drop of it is spilled. All the oceans are motionless, but that ocean flows at the rate of the speed of an arrow. It is set free to move in the air evenly, as if it were a rope stretched out in the area between east and west. The sun, the moon, and the retrograde stars [5 planets] run in its deep swell. This is (meant by) God’s word: ‘Each swims in a sphere.’ ‘The sphere’ is the circulation of the chariot in the deep swell of that ocean.’ al-Tabari vol.1 p.235.

Then lets look at pre-Islamic philosophy; lets look at Lucretius, writing 550 year prior to Muhammad:

Or they may swim of their own accord, each responsive to the call of its own food, and feed their fiery bodies in the pastures of the sky (Lucretius, The nature of the universe, 1957: 186-7).

Do I need to continue? We see that there are striking similarities between the Qur’an and the ancient philosophers, and as we red in Sura 21 the Qur’an even makes this analogy.

as i said earlier he did not go to school so he did not know copying business and one who copies can not do better than to whom is being copied . arabs did not read plato aristotle etc. he got the knowledge from God himself. 50% of science knowledge from these philosphers and scientist has been proved wrong by modern science and yet islam is gaining reverts from scientific fraternity just because of quran being consistent with modern science
Kai wrote:

Then try to compare the similarities between the Koran and these ancients scholars, this would be a choking experience.

Unity replied:

there is no piont of comparing betwwen them and quran. but i know for sure quran corrects scientific errors in the bible regarding creation , floods and so on
SCIENTIFIC COMPARISON BETWEEN QUR’AN AND BIBLE

Kai replies:

How can you be sure?

Ok lets look at the Bible and Koran then

Unity wrote:

If you glance through the Bible and the Qur’an you may find several points which appear to be exactly the same in both of them, but when you analyse them closely, you realise that there is a difference of ‘chalk and cheese’ between them. Only based on historical details it is difficult for someone who is neither conversant with Christianity or Islam to come to a firm decision as to which of the scriptures is true; however if you verify the relevant passages of both the scriptures against scientific knowledge, you will yourself realize the truth.

Creation of the Universe in Six Days
As per the Bible, in the first book of Genesis in Chapter One, the universe was created in six days and each day is defined as a twenty-four hours period. Even though the Qur’an mentions that the universe was created in six ‘Ayyaams’, ‘Ayyaam’ is the plural of years; this word has two meanings: firstly, it means a standard twenty-four hours period i.e. a day, and secondly, it also means stage, period or epoch which is a very long period of time.

When the Qur’an mentions that the universe was created in six ‘Ayyaams’, it refers to the creation of the heavens and the earth in six long periods or epochs; scientists have no objection to this statement. The creation of the universe has taken billions of years, which proves false or contradicts the concept of the Bible which states that the creation of the Universe took six days of twenty-four hour durations each.

Kai replies:

I know this was the assumption of Maurice Bucaille, but still this is only a claim, the Ayyaams can refer longer periods, but it can also refer to literal days.

However, the same claim is made by many in connection with the six days creation of the Bible.

In fact the Hebrew word Yom can refer to a literal day or a longer period.

Hence in the same way as Muslims argue for literal six days and some for six epochs, in the same way many Christians and Jews argue for the same possibilities.

Unity wrote:

Sun Created After the Day
The Bible says in chapter 1, verses 3-5, of Genesis that the phenomenon of day and night was created on the first day of creation of the Universe by God. The light circulating in the universe is the result of a complex reaction in the stars; these stars were created according to the Bible (Genesis chapter 1 verse 14 to 19) on the fourth day. It is illogical to mention the result that is the light (the phenomenon of day and night) was created on the first day of Creation when the cause or source of the light was created three days later. Moreover the existence of evening and morning as elements of a single day is only conceivable after the creation of the earth and its rotation around the sun. In contrast with the contents of the Bible on this issue, the Qur’an does not give any unscientific sequence of Creation. Hence it is absolutely absurd to say that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) copied the passages pertaining to the creation of the universe from the Bible but missed out this illogical and fantastic sequence of the Bible.

i thought you may not be believing in OT as commandments in OT are diametrically opposite to that in NT in matters of faith
Kai replies:

Not entirely correct bro

In fact if you look at the Genesis one, the heaven and earth are created in verse 1:

In the Beginning God created heaven and earth

In ancient Hebrew, Akkadia and international language, this reference was not explicitly of a heaven and earth but the cosmos.

Hence it is in verse one, we see the heaven and its affair was created.

The earth is referred in verse 2 as in a process of being formed, formless and empty and covered with water.

In verse 3 light is created, and notice that the light is then separated from darkness

The day does not begin until verse 4 and from now on Genesis concentrates on earth science not on the heavens.

This particular light provides the daylight, so unless you look at the context you might get the idea that daylight is not derived from the sun but from some cosmological force or something.

Yet if we look at the context this idea sinks.

In verse 14-19 we have the reference of the sun, moon and the stars

However considering that the heaven and earth were created already in verse 1 it is illogical to assume that they are created here.

Furthermore the word ‘asah’ often translated ‘made’ in verse 16 can also be translated ‘bring forth’

Similarly the word ‘nathan’ in verse 17 implying the setting of the sun and moon in the heaven, simply means to ‘give’ and can also be translated bring forth, or as some would suggest make appear.

Hence in all fairness to the context, the sun, moon and star together with the earth are all in existence in verse 1.

In verse 4 Genesis focuses on earth science, in which the heavens are perceived from an earthly angle. Here light some how reaches the earth and day begins in verse 3-4, then the sun and moon appear in verse 14-19. Hence these are not matters of creation but appearance.

Furthermore verses 14-19 also clarify that the sun is the source of the daylight, and is not referred to as an entity that takes over from the previous light but the actual source.

Therefore we should assume that the chronology does not necessarily contradict modern science, as the text does not imply that the sun and moon were created after the earth; they merely appear from a earthly angle and interact with life on earth.

What does the Qur’an teach?

The Qur’an is however very specific about a chronological cosmology where the entire heavenly realm and its orbits are created after the earth and its origin of life.

In Sura 21: 30 the heaven and earth are split apart

In Sura 41: 9 the earth is created in two days (according to the Qur’anic context this might imply the splitting apart of heaven and earth)

In Sura 41: 11 the entire heaven, in other word its physical stratums exist co-exist as smoke along side the earth

In Sura 41: 10 the formation and sustainability of life on earth is created in four days

In Sura 41: 11 heavens are created and decked with the sun, moon and the stars

Hence in the Koran, it takes 8 days, starting of with the separation, then the earth, then the sustainability and then the heavens and starry host.

In other words according to the Qur’an plants and life existed before the creation of sun and its effect.

Unity wrote:

Creation of the Sun, The Earth and the Moon
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 9 to 13, the earth was created on the third day, and as per verses 14 to 19, the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day. The earth and the moon emanated, as we know, from their original star, the Sun. Hence to place the creation of the sun and the moon after the creation of the earth is contrary to the established idea about the formation of the solar system.

Kai replies:

Since you simply repeat the question, I will just quote myself again:

In the Beginning God created heaven and earth

In ancient Hebrew, Akkadia and international language, this reference was not explicitly of a heaven and earth but the cosmos.

Hence it is in verse one, we see the heaven and its affair was created.

The earth is referred in verse 2 as in a process of being formed, formless and empty and covered with water.

In verse 3 light is created, and notice that the light is then separated from darkness

The day does not begin until verse 4 and from now on Genesis concentrates on earth science not on the heavens.

This particular light provides the daylight, so unless you look at the context you might get the idea that daylight is not derived from the sun but from some cosmological force or something.

Yet if we look at the context this idea sinks.

In verse 14-19 we have the reference of the sun, moon and the stars

However considering that the heaven and earth were created already in verse 1 it is illogical to assume that they are created here.

Furthermore the word ‘asah’ often translated ‘made’ in verse 16 can also be translated ‘bring forth’

Similarly the word ‘nathan’ in verse 17 implying the setting of the sun and moon in the heaven, simply means to ‘give’ and can also be translated bring forth, or as some would suggest make appear.

Hence in all fairness to the context, the sun, moon and star together with the earth are all in existence in verse 1.

In verse 4 Genesis focuses on earth science, in which the heavens are perceived from an earthly angle. Here light some how reaches the earth and day begins in verse 3-4, then the sun and moon appear in verse 14-19. Hence these are not matters of creation but appearance.

Furthermore verses 14-19 also clarify that the sun is the source of the daylight, and is not referred to as an entity that takes over from the previous light but the actual source.

Therefore we should assume that the chronology does not necessarily contradict modern science, as the text does not imply that the sun and moon were created after the earth; they merely appear from a earthly angle and interact with life on earth.

And all we can conclude that it is in fact the Koran which makes these statements not the Bible

Unity wrote:

Vegetation Created on the third day and Sun on the fourth day
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 11-13, vegetation was created on the third day along with seed-bearing grasses, plants and trees; and further on as per verses 14-19, the sun was created on the fourth day. How is it scientifically possible for the vegetation to have appeared without the presence of the sun, as has been stated in the Bible?

Kai replies:

But the sun was present! The light you that rules the day, which appears in verse 4 is the same light that derives from the appearance of the sun in verses 14-19. Hence there is no problem here.

And again, let me point out that this is the exact problem that is proposed by the Koran:

041.009
YUSUFALI: Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in two Days? And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds.
PICKTHAL: Say (O Muhammad, unto the idolaters): Disbelieve ye verily in Him Who created the earth in two Days, and ascribe ye unto Him rivals? He (and none else) is the Lord of the Worlds.
SHAKIR: Say: What! do you indeed disbelieve in Him Who created the earth in two periods, and do you set up equals with Him? That is the Lord of the Worlds.
041.010

YUSUFALI: He set on the (earth), mountains standing firm, high above it, and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measure therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in four Days, in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance).
PICKTHAL: He placed therein firm hills rising above it, and blessed it and measured therein its sustenance in four Days, alike for (all) who ask;
SHAKIR: 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.
041.011

YUSUFALI: 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."
PICKTHAL: 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.
041.012

YUSUFALI: So He completed them as seven firmaments in two Days, and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command. And We adorned the lower heaven with lights, and (provided it) with guard. Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge.
PICKTHAL: Then He ordained them seven heavens in two Days and inspired in each heaven its mandate; and We decked the nether heaven with lamps, and rendered it inviolable. That is the measuring of the Mighty, the Knower.
SHAKIR: 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.

Now, notice verse 10, in which Allah forms the earth and provides everything for life and sustainance prior to the creation of the heavens and the starry host, the sun and the moon.



Unity wrote:

If Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) was indeed the author of the Qur’an and had copied its contents from the Bible, how did he manage to avoid the factual errors that the Bible contains? The Qur’an does not contain any statements which are incompatible with scientific facts.

Kai replies:

But as I have already pointed out, the Bible does not make these errors.

It is the Qur’an that portrays these ideas; not the Bible

Unity wrote:

The Sun and the Moon both Emit light

According to the Bible both the sun and the moon emit their own light. In the Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verse 16 says, "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night".

Kai replies:

No, the text does not make any such statement, Genesis 1: 16 merely says that one light ruled the day and the other the night. You are making the academic error of ‘eisegesis’, that is reading conclusions into the text.

moon gives reflected light but actually it is provided by sun.
quran challenges the reader to find out mistakes as no other books do and in fact writers already beg to apologise in advance in the preface of the book they write.
quran is clear in the verses that earth is not flat or circular but rather spherical.

The Scriptural Basis for a Geocentric Cosmology

25 April 1999

A translation of this article into Hebrew (without the New Testament references) is also available through Hofesh -- an organization that combats Orthodox Jewish religious coercion in Israel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table of Contents
Preface
Introduction
Scriptural Cosmology
The mobility of the sun
The stability of the earth
The shape of the earth
The extent of the earth
The edge of the earth
The nature of the sky
The nature of the stars
The water surrounding the earth
The celestial and the terrestrial
Conclusion
Works Cited
Annotated Bibliography of Resources for Further Study
General
Geocentric-Heliocentric Debate
Geocentrism & Flat-Earthism
Confessional Statements on Creation

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Preface
Those who believe in the literal truth of the Bible are in for a shock. The Bible describes a cosmos that few of us would recognize today.

The earth is fixed and immovable and lies at the center of all things. The sun moves about the earth, not the other way around. Use of the phrase "solar system" should therefore be avoided in favor of the more accurate "geosystem."


The earth is flat and finite. Its boundary may be circular, but the earth is most certainly not a sphere as was hypothesized by Eratosthenes (a pagan scientist who lived two centuries before the birth of Christ). The placement of globes in public classrooms can only serve to promote ecology as a possible state religion.


The sky is the roof over the earth -- a solid impervious barrier that protects both believers and non-believers from the waters beyond. The term "outer space" is a notion perpetrated by secular humanists, new age gurus, and other freethinkers.


The stars on the sky are much smaller than the earth. (The word "on" is not a typographical error here.) The notion of "distant suns" is nothing more than a theory entertained by misguided scientists.


The laws of physics as they exist on the earth are different from those of the sun, moon, stars, and planets. Astronomers should look to the Bible and not the Principia before they aim their telescopes. The former is the unerring word of God while the latter is merely the word of Isaac Newton. Nearly all scientist now recognize Newtonian mechanics as flawed, having inadequately explained the precession of the perihelion of the planet Mercury. (Newtonian mechanics has since been replaced by Eisntein's general theory of relativity.)
You'd think Ralph Reed and Jerry Falwell would be up in arms over these facts. Massive government bureaucracies send spacecraft to distant planets. The liberal media are awash in images of a spherical earth. (The Universal Studios logo is a globe!) Children in public schools are taught from Kindergarten that the earth revolves around the sun. With the exceptions of the persistent use of the terms "sunrise" and "sunset," our modern world is flooded with images of heretical cosmologies that remove the earth from its God-given place at the center of all things. Only an atheist would buy the notion that we live on a tiny rock, circling an insignificant star in a galaxy of billions of stars in a universe of billions of galaxies. Why would God place his most holy of all creations in such location? Surely, no true believer in the Scriptures -- the divine and unerring word of God -- would accept the scientific notion that we live in place that is not special in the eyes of our Creator. I find it quite reasonable to insist on a Constitutional amendment requiring all Supreme Court justices to swear their allegiance to geocentrism and flat-earthism. Our souls and the souls of our children lie in their hands.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction
O.K. You can stop hyperventilating now. The previous paragraphs are an example of a rhetorical device known as hyperbole. A hyperbole is an exaggerated statement that is not meant to be taken literally, but is used to emphasize a point. The purpose of this essay is to demolish the notion that the Bible has any scientific relevance whatsoever. In particular, I aim to show that the same thinking that leads devout fundamentalists to deny evolution as atheism must also lead them to embrace geocentrism and flat-earthism as God-given truths.

So why would I do this? What got me started on the road to endless arguments? I work as a teacher in the New York City public school system. From time to time, I'm asked quite poignant and perceptive questions.

Who said so?
Why is this the way it is?
Why should I care about this?
Is this going to be on the next test?
So here I am one day, trying to remember all the details behind the progression from the geocentrism of Aristotle and Ptolemy to the heliocentrism of Copernicus and Galileo when this student asks me the question of the day?

Where does it say that the sun goes around the earth in the Bible?
Where, indeed? I remember learning that the earth was created in six days in Sunday school, but I don't remember anybody teaching geocentrism. And yet five hundred years ago, that would have been the case. If not in religion class, then in secular classes taught by church-sanctified masters, Europeans were learning that the earth was the center of all things and that the sun, moon, and planets revolved around it. Prior to that, they might have even learned that the earth was flat and that the sky was a solid covering that protected the earth from the waters beyond. Of course, they also learned reasonably useful things like literacy, numeracy, geography, and history. We have no problem accepting that these subjects were full of what we now recognize as errors and limitations, but when it comes to biology, the beliefs of two to four thousand years ago are accepted by some as fact. The earth and all that is on it, including all living things, were created in the literal span of six terrestrial days (today, roughly 24 hours).

O.K. If you want to play that game, then let's go. If you want to use millennia old Scripture to support your half-baked scientific notions then I can do the same with mine (which you must remember, I don't really believe in). What does the Bible actually say about the nature of cosmology? Let's open the Good Book and read it with the same uncritical eye as that of the anti-evolutionists. Let the Scriptures speak for themselves.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scriptural Cosmology
When more than one citation is presented below a descriptive paragraph, their order on the page is the same as their order in the Bible.

The mobility of the sun
The most important biblical quote supporting a geocentric universe can be found in the Book of Joshua. This will be used as the starting point for our scriptural cosmology.

Joshua 10:12-13
Then spoke Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord gave the Amorites over to the men of Israel; and he said in the sight of Israel, "Sun, stand thou still at Gibeon, and thou Moon in the valley of Aijalon." And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day.

The miracle of Joshua appears again as a reference in The Book of Habakkuk.

Habakkuk 3:11
The sun and moon stood still in their habitation at the light of thine arrows as they sped, at the flash of thy glittering spear.

The evidence in support of a geocentric model is overwhelming here. Joshua commanded the sun to stand still. He did not order the earth to cease rotating nor did he qualify his statement with the divine knowledge that the sun was merely made to appear stationary. The sun was commanded to stand still because it is the sun that moves. Descriptions of its motion can be rather poetic.

Psalms 19:4-6
yet their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them he has set a tent for the sun, which comes forth like a bridegroom leaving his chamber, and like a strong man runs his course with joy. Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them; and there is nothing hid from its heat.

Ecclesiastes 1:5
The sun rises and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises.

The stability of the earth
On the other side of the geocentric coin, if the sun moves then the earth must not move. There are a few passages which more-or-less forbid the motion of the earth.

1 Chronicles 16:30
tremble before him, all earth; yea, the world stands firm, never to be moved.

Psalms 93:1
The Lord reigns; he is robbed in majesty; the lord is robbed, he is girded with strength. Yea, the world is established; it shall never be moved.

Psalms 96:10
Say among the nations, "The Lord reigns! Yea, the world is established, it shall never be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity."

In addition, the notion of an earth with a "foundation" is quite common. This leads one to conclude that the earth is quite stable.

2 Samuel 22:16
Then the channels of the sea were seen, the foundations of the world were laid bare, at the rebuke of the Lord at the blast of the breath of his nostrils.

Psalms 18:15
Then the channels of the sea were seen, and the foundations of the world were laid bare, at thy rebuke, O Lord, at the blast of the breath of thy nostrils.

Psalms 102:25
Of old thou didst lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands.

Proverbs 8:27-29
When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle on the face of the deep, when he made firm the skies above, when he established the fountains of the deep, when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth,

Isaiah 48:13
My hand laid out the foundation of the earth, and my right hand spread out the heavens; when I call to them, they stand forth together.

John 17:24
Father, I desire that they also, whom thou hast given me, may be with me where I am, to behold my glory which thou hast given me in thy love for me before the foundation of the world.

The firmness of the earth's foundation is open to some discussion, however. Earthquakes may or may not be allowed.

Psalms 104:5
Thou didst set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be shaken.

Job 9:6
who shakes the earth from its place, and its pillars tremble.

Isaiah 24:18
He who flees at the sound of the terror shall fall into the pit; and he who climbs out of the pit shall be caught in the snare. For the windows of heaven are opened, and the foundations of the earth tremble.

The earth's geo-architecture is also uncertain. Compare the following passages.

1 Samuel 2:8
He raises up the poor from the dust; he lifts the needy from the ash heap, to make them sit with princes and inherit a seat of honor. For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and on them he has set the world.

Job 9:6
who shakes the earth from its place, and its pillars tremble.

Job 38:4-6
Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements -- surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone?

The shape of the earth
In any case, the earth is not spherical. According to the Scriptures, from a very high spot (heaven, for example) one could see the entire earth such that nothing would be hidden. Such a thing is not possible with a spherical earth as the opposite side can't be seen directly. This implies that the earth is flat.

Job 28:24
For he looks to the ends of the earth, and sees everything under the heavens.

Psalms 19:4-6
yet their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them he has set a tent for the sun, which comes forth like a bridegroom leaving his chamber, and like a strong man runs his course with joy. Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them; and there is nothing hid from its heat.

Daniel 4:10-11
The visions of my head as I lay in bed were these: I saw, and behold, a tree in the midst of the earth; and its height was great. The tree grew and became strong, and its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth.

Matthew 4:8
Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them;

Isaiah 40:22
It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in;

From a great distance, a sphere would look like a circle. Perhaps the phrase "circle of the earth" refers to the outline of the earth? Perhaps. But then how could one see "all the kingdoms of the world? Those on the back hemisphere would remain hidden. The next passages should remove this confusion.

Psalms 136:6
to him who spread out the earth upon the waters, for his steadfast love endures forever;

Isaiah 44:24
Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb; "I am the Lord, who made all things, who stretched out the heavens alone, who spread out the earth -- Who was with me? --

If the earth were spherical, one would use a verb other than "spread out" to describe its creation (balled up, gathered up, gathered together, anything but spread out). One might say they "spread out" batter to make pancakes but no one would ever say they "spread out" hamburger to make meatballs. The earth in the Bible was "spread out" because it is flat.

This next verse appears to describe an earth that tele-literate humans would recognize.

Job 26: 7
He stretches out the north over the void, and hangs the earth upon nothing.

The highlighted portion reads like a description of the earth as seen from outer space. The remainder is entirely obscure, however. What void are they talking about? What does it mean to "stretch out the north"? Help me somebody.

The extent of the earth
Not only is the earth flat, it is also finite.

Psalms 103:12
as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us.

On a spherical earth, one could travel east or west indefinitely. This passage seems to be saying that there is a limit to the directions east and west. That is, after some long journey, one would run out of east or west having reached the end of the earth. This contention is further justified in numerous passages.

Deuteronomy 28:64
And the Lord will scatter you among all peoples, from one end of the earth to the other; and there you shall serve other gods, of wood and stone, which neither you nor your fathers have known.

Deuteronomy 33:17
His firstling bull has majesty, and his horns are the horns of a wild ox; with them he shall push the peoples, all of them, to the ends of the earth; such are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and such are the thousands of Manasseh.

1 Samuel 2:10
The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces; against them he will thunder in heaven. The Lord will judge the ends of the earth; he will give strength to his king, and exalt the power of his anointed.

Job 28:24
For he looks to the ends of the earth, and sees everything under the heavens.

Job 38:13
that it might take hold of the skirts of the earth, and the wicked be shaken out of it?

Psalms 19:4-6
yet their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them he has set a tent for the sun, which comes forth like a bridegroom leaving his chamber, and like a strong man runs his course with joy. Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them; and there is nothing hid from its heat.

Psalms 22:27
All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the Lord; and all the families of the nations shall worship before him.

Psalms 46:9
He makes wars cease to the end of the earth; he breaks the bow and shatters the spear, he burns the chariots with fire!

Psalms 48:10
As thy name, O God, so thy praise reaches to the ends of the earth. Thy right hand is filled with victory;

Psalms 59:13
consume them in wrath, consume them till they are no more, that men may know that God rules over Jacob to the ends of the earth;

Psalms 61:2
from the end of the earth I call to thee, when my heart is faint. Lead thou me to the rock that is higher than I;

Psalms 65:5
By dread deeds thou dost answer us with deliverance, O God of our salvation, who art the hope of all the ends of the earth, and of the farthest seas;

Isaiah 41:9
you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, "You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off";

Jeremiah 51:16
When he utters his voice there is a tumult of waters in the heavens, and he makes the mist rise from the ends of the earth.

Daniel 4:10-11
The visions of my head as I lay in bed were these: I saw, and behold, a tree in the midst of the earth; and its height was great. The tree grew and became strong, and its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth.

Mark 13:27
And then they will send out the angels, and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven.

The edge of the earth
The phrase "the midst of the earth" from Daniel implies that not only does the earth have a boundary it also has a center. Since trees grow only on the earth's surface, the earth's center must also be on its surface. A sphere has its center beneath its surface which means that the earth is not a sphere but some sort of plane geometric figure. This raises another question. What is the shape of the earth's boundary? The answer is somewhat puzzling.

Job 26:10
He has described a circle upon the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness.

Job 37:3
Under the whole heaven he lets it go, and his lightning to the corners of the earth.

Proverbs 8:27-29
When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle on the face of the deep, when he made firm the skies above, when he established the fountains of the deep, when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth,

Isaiah 11:12
He will raise an ensign for the nations, and will assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

Isaiah 40:22
It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in;

Isaiah 41:9
you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, "You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off";

Ezekiel 7:2
"And you, O son of man, thus says the Lord God to the land of Israel: An end! The end has come upon the four corners of the land.

Revelation 7:1
After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on the earth or sea or against any tree.

Revelation 20:8
and will come out to deceive the nations which are at the four corners of the earth, that is, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea.

i think you may be putting on your impressions of the shape of earth when you read bible rather than impression bible conveys to you.

[unity]

BROTHER KAI
we ought to defend you being people of book
[url]Is the Qur'an the Bible's Savior ?[/url]


In the 19th century, Darwinian geology and biology have challenged the literal truth of Genesis and the divinity of the Bible. The hitch that prevents the modern scientific mind from accepting the divine version of creation is the extreme disparity between the enormous length of time required for the evolution of the earth, universe and the contradicting short period of six days. No wonder the Bible is branded as a 'myth', especially as each day of creation ends with the words "And the evening and the morning were the first day"(Gen. 1:5), etc.


In comparison to the Bible, the Quran uses the words "in six periods of time" in seven different passages on creation, but here, not once are the 'periods' defined as "the evening and the morning".


The Arabic word used in the Quran is "Ayam" which is from the Latin word eaon which literally means a "segmant or incrament of time"

In the light of these verses, we can surmise that the Bible is not a 'myth', as confirmed in the Koran. The Koran cooperates with the Bible in meeting the skepticism of any "Darwinian geology and biology", over 700 years before Darwin was born.


Another example of how the Holy Qur'an saves the revelations within the Bible is demonstrated in the story of Noah's Flood.


When seen in the light of modern knowledge, the Biblical description of the Flood as a Whole is unacceptable for the following reasons:


a) The Old Testament describes the Flood as a event which covered the entire world.


b) The Flood of Noah described in the Bible is estimated to a date in which a international Flood could not have occurred


The Sacerdotal narration states quite precisely that the Flood took place when Noah was 600 years old. According to the genealogies in chapter 5 of Genesis.


When we relate this to the age of Adam along with the age of Abraham in the Bible (Genesis 11: 10-32) , we calculate the Flood would be situated in the Twenty-first Twenty-second century B.C.


Knowledge of history during this time period would show it was a time of prosperity with civilizations such as Egyptian's Eleventh Dynasty and Babylonia's Third Dynasty at Ur in which we know for certain there were no breaks in these civilizations. Therefore to make such a claim that everything on earth was destroyed as the Bible claims (Genesis 7:21) is unsupported.


On the other hand, the Qur'an gives general details which do not promote any criticisms from a historical point of view.


In The Qur'an 11:25-49, Sura 71, and 26: 105-115, we see God inflicted on communities guilty of gravely infringing His Commandments. Whereas the Bible describes a universal Flood intended to punish ungodly humanity as a whole.


The Qur'an, in contrast, mentions several punishments inflicted on certain specifically defined communities. This is viewed in 25: 35-39,


"We gave Moses the Scripture and appointed his brother Aaron with him as vizier. We said: Go to the people who have denied Our signs. We destroyed them completely. When the people of Noah denied the Messengers, We drowned them and We made of them a sign for mankind. (We destroyed the tribes) of Ad and Tamud, the companions of Rass and many generations between them. We warned each of them by examples and We annihilated them completely."


Sura 7, verses 59 to 93 contains a reminder of the punishments brought upon Noah's people, the Ad, the Tamud, Lot (Sodom) and Madian respectively.


This is the method of how the Qur'an saves the Bible in the narration of the Flood of Noah, as in the case of Saving the Bible from Darwin, the case of the Flood could also not be verified until centuries after the Prophet Muhammad.


A shepherd from the desert could not know the archaeological history of the world around him to pinpoint or deny of whether or not the entire world was flooded or if it were only certain communities as the Qur'an clarifies.


Also in the Qur'an saves the Bible in the rule given by Jesus (Mt 5:39) But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also"


This basically means that if your enemy strikes or attacks you, you are to allow him or her to attack you without striking back. You are to take the punishment without reacting.


Now if Christians lived by this rule, than all Monotheists would be dead because the pagans despise the concept of One Single God. If the Christians in history allowed themselves to be attacked without retaliating as Jesus ordered, than there would be no Christians left today.


Here again the Qur'an saves the Bible and those who believe in Christ (which includes Muslims) by clarifying that when you are being attacked, it is best to have patience and forgiveness against the attack, But then if the attacks continue, than we are given the permission to retaliate only with the equal amount of force that was used against us.


" And if you take your turn, then retaliate with the like of that with which you were afflicted; But if ye endure patiently, verily it is better for the patient." {Holy Qur'an 16:126}


Therefore we are given the permission to repel attacks, to protect ourselves, although God prefers forgiveness.


Thus completing the teachings of Jesus who was sent by God as the Qur'an confirms to the Jews and Pagans to repel these and many more criticisms spoken by scientists and Logical people towards the God of the Bible, all centuries before the criticism was even known.


(I Thessalonians 5:21) "Prove all things; hold fast that which is Good."


http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/4229/koran.html

[url][/url]

[unity]

brother kai
you have emphasised too much of borrowing theory

On the Bible Borrowing Theories of the Qur'an: An Authoritative Refutation

Prev Next

The 'Charge' & Its Implications
So What Is The Implication Of This Charge?
The Theory Of Religious Borrowing
Does Similarities Imply Borrowing?
The Dilemma & The Double Standard
The Theory Of Innovation
Missionary Tautology & Its Implication
Important Questions To Ask
Conclusions
References

The 'Charge' & Its Implications

And they say: 'Tales of the ancients which he has caused to be written...'

'And they say: 'Tales of the ancients which he has caused to be written' This charge of borrowing ancient materials and composing it as the Qur'ân is, contrary to popular view among the Christians, not new. It is as old as its time of revelation. In fact the above quotation is from the Qur'ân itself! (Surah 25, verse 5). Since the Qur'ân, in the time of its revelation, talks about the people before them, as well as which was known to them from before, it was one of the excuses of unbelievers rejection of the Qur'ân.

Missionary Christians are now faithfully echoing this tradition of the excuse-makers.

So What Is The Implication Of This Charge?

It is that the Qur'ân is not a divine revelation since most of it is found narrated in ancient texts and traditions, some of which are known to be myths, legends and fables, while other parts just plagiarized from the Judeo-Christian scriptures. Therefore, by implication again form this is that Muhammad(P) is an imposter who is seen to be fabricating, plagiarizing and claiming to have received divine inspiration and thus deceived the people, i.e., Muhammad(P) is an imposter and the Qur'ân is a deception.

The Theory Of Religious Borrowing

The main theme of the theory of borrowing is as follows:

If a later text shows similarities to an older (i.e.earler) text(s) or tradition(s) or is similar to what is known (or thought to be known) before, then the later text has borrowed/plagiarized/copied/utilized the 'previously known'.

Ever since Abraham Geiger's Was hat Mohammed aus dem Judenthume aufgenommen? in 1833 which gave an over- exaggerated view of the Jewish 'contribution' in the Qur'ân, - the Jews, Christian and the Orientalists have gone at pains to show parallels in the Qur'ân from pre-Qur'ânic sources, thus to their satisfaction demonstrating Prophet Muhammad(P)'s spiritual debt to the Judeo-Christian heritage. The use of these 'scholarly' materials has become a missionary heritage in our present time. Some of which is seen at:

Material for the Evaluation of the Sources of the Qur'ân (Show a similarity and call it a borrowed material)


The Sources Of Islam (Basically a neat carbon copy of Tisdall's material)


Islam Unvieled
But before we go into that what needs clarification is whether similarities always imply borrowing.

Does Similarities Imply Borrowing?

Let's start with an example. Prophet Noah(P) was given certain commandments. So was Prophet Moses(P) after him. If we were to see that the followers of Prophet Noah(P) accusing of the followers of Prophet Moses(P), how do we expect the followers of Prophet Moses(P) to respond? We might hear a response like this:

The Law has come from the same source (from the one and only God),


Of course we would expect similar teachings and not such as God is a twin or has a daughter from eternity etc.,


Any differences from absolute similarities would mean correction of the message that got corrupted,


Any other differences would mean additional Law with the newer revelation,


The new revelation from the same source comes with its own proof and evidences, otherwise anyone can attempt to invent 'revelation' (while not coming from that same source - God) and mislead many thereby. If there were no proofs or evidences then how can someone verify its truthfulness and authenticity, believe in it and accept it?
We will thus see that the emphasis shifts to verifying the inherent proofs or evidences of the fresh revelation when older (or traces of the older) revelation still exists. Therefore, similarity between two revelations can even imply that the later revelation is from God.

The Dilemma & The Double Standard

Since it is the claim of the Christian missionaries that similarities imply borrowing then one can simply show the same in the Bible concerning the notion of God as depicted in the Old Testament as an aged diety, his dwelling place and heavenly court being borrowed from Ugaritic sources. The Flood narrative in Genesis and the Mesopotamian parallels are some of the most interesting parallels in the history. There are many more examples that can be shown.

Now the key question is: Are the Christian missionaries now ready to accept the conclusions of the orientalists with regards to biblical data being borrowed from ancient texts? Surely it seems unlikely. They will readily say that biblical data is derived from the same source from which earlier data was generated albeit now corrupted, and biblical data is providing true narratives that ought to be. This is what we Muslims have been saying all along! That is, the Qur'ân corrects the previous texts, testifies to their truthfulness and falsifies their falsities. But this alternative theory puts them into a dilemma. Hence they are seen resorting to a double standard.
They would accept the 'one source' theory when it comes to comparing biblical data with ancient literature or traditions; but resorts back to the borrowing theory when it comes to comparing Qur'ân with earlier literature or traditions. However, as we shall see, the problem lies elsewhere.

The Theory Of Innovation

It is not just the similarities between the Qur'ân and earlier texts but the differences also has given another problem to the missionaries. Suppose the Qur'ân was totally devoid of similarities, would they then accept it? Very unlikely. Rather they have come up with another theory: The theory of innovation. Why? Because it is not to be found in earlier revelation (which to them is the Bible). Because some of the concepts in the Qur'ân are not similar to earlier revelations, then they must have been invented. But this brings us back to square one.

Parallels imply borrowing, so can't accept.

Differences imply innovation, so can't accept.

This is the millenium bug of missionary evangelism: the tautological war you can't win either way, any way bug.

Missionary Tautology & Its Implication

This methodology is used not to prove why they don't believe in the Qur'ân; rather to deceive the uninformed Muslims to have doubts about the Qur'ân and to make them accept the Bible, as well as to prevent others from considering Islam.

The Jews and the Christians will never be satisfied until you changed to their religion.....

They wish that Qur'ân never had existed.

The problem lies elsewhere! Now suppose Qur'ân had similarities which totally agreed in doctrines to that of the Bible, would they accept it then? We don't think so. It all comes down to

Belief in the Bible being the only and last revelation of god with Jesus(P) being the revelation in person.
Belief in the man-god idea, i.e., God became man.
Belief in the unity of three gods (i.e., tri-unity or trinity of: 1. god the father, 2. god the son, 3. god the holy ghost) and ad nauseam.
Let's give an example:

Suppose the whole of the Qur'ân was just a single chapter consisting of 3-4 verses e.g., Surah Ikhlas 104, which when interpreted means:

Say or Proclaim: Allah is Ahad (one, unique, only). Allah is as-Samad (Absolute, independent, eternal, on whom every one and every thing depends). He is not begotten, and does not beget And there is none co-equal unto him (in whatever manner).

Would the missionary Christians accept this? If not, then it's not the concept of borrowing which is the problem in accepting the Qur'ân but it is what the Qur'ân has to say.

To make it clear: Not the alleged source(s) of the Qur'ân but the contents of it.

Important Questions To Ask

Furthermore, the assertion of Judeo-Christian borrowing raises a number of questions. Jamal Badawi puts forward the following six questions:

Why is it in spite of the abundance of historical material on Muhammad(P)'s life, and in spite of the extensive research on his life for centuries by his severe critics, that it was not possible to discover the mysterious teacher(s) through whom Muhammad(P) might have learned all that?
It is known that Muhammad(P) was opposed, ridiculed and persecuted for nearly 13 years by his own contemporaries. With this magnitude of severe enemies, was it not possible for them to prove to the masses that Muhammad(P)'s claim of revelation was sheer fabrication? Was it not possible for them to reveal and name the person whom they alleged to be the human source or sources of his teachings? Even some of his adversaries who had made this assertion, changed their minds later on and accused him, instead, of magic or being possessed by evil... etc.
Muhammad(P) was raised among his people and every aspect of his life was exposed to them, especially by the openness that characterises tribal life in the desert. How could the multitudes of his contemporaries, including many of his close relatives who knew him so well, how could they believe in his truthfulness if they had any doubt that he was claiming credit for ideas taught to him by some other teachers without bothering to give them credit ?
What kind of teacher might have taught Muhammad(P) a coherent and complete religion that changed the face of history? Why didn't he or they (if any) speak against the alleged student who continued learning from them, while ignoring them and claiming some other divine source for his teachings?
How could many Jews and Christians amongst his contemporaries become Muslims and believe in his truthfulness if they knew he was copying from their scriptures or learning from their priests or rabbis?
It is known that some of the Qur'ânic revelations to Muhammad(P) in the presence of people. The Qur'ân was revealed over the span of 23 years, where then that was mysterious, perhaps invisible teacher of Muhammad(P)? How could he have hidden himself for so long? Or how could Muhammad(P) who was constantly surrounded by companions, how was he able to make frequent secret visits to that mysterious teacher or teachers for 23 years without even being caught once?
The answer to all these questions are never given. But the Christian missionaries' logic is that still Muhammad(P) borrowed from the Judeo-Christian sources even though there is no evidence to show. What you do not know, you do not have to show; just say it and it becomes so.

Since the Christian missionaries are confused about their own ideology let us now refute some of the 'contents' which they think are borrowed by the Qur'ân.

Sufficient care has been taken to prepare the documents. Please let us know if there are any mistakes in quoting the references.

Conclusions

It could be mentioned in conclusion that even if Muhammad's(P) mission had started in the middle of Christians and Jews, this wouldn't matter. Secular scholars accuse Moses(P) and the Hebrews of borrowing from the religions and myths of neighboring cultures. However, anyone who has sincerely studied the life of the Prophet Muhammad(P) should be able to see that his sincerity negates conscious borrowing or fabrication.

Karen Armstrong in her book A History Of God writes about the revelation to the Prophet Muhammad(P) by God:

In about the year 610 an Arab merchant of the thriving city of Mecca in Hijaz, who had never read the Bible and probably never heard of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, had an experience that was uncannily similar to theirs.[1]

Roger DuPasquier, a Swiss journalist and author, asserts that:

To this day no-one has put forward a defensible explanation of how an unlettered caravan merchant of the early seventh century might have been able, by his own devices, to produce a text of such inimitable beauty, of such capacity to stir emotion, and which contained knowledge and wisdom which stood so far above the ideas current among makind at that time. The studies carried out in the West which try to determine the 'sources used by Muhammad', or to bring to light the psychological phenomenon which enabled him to draw the inspiration from his 'subconscious', have demonstrated only one thing: the anti-Muslim prejudice of their authors.[2]

References

[1] Karen Armstrong, A History Of God, 1993, Ballantine Books, New York, p.132.

[2] Roger DuPasquier, Unveiling Islam, 1992, The Islamic Texts Society, Cambridge, p.53



http://www.theholybook.org/en/a.49608.html

[Kai Hagbard]

Bro I will get back to your later on, as I am completing my dissertation at the moment.

However, it surprises me that this material you are posting repeats most of the issues I hava already focused on.

Furthermore I have in previous posts on other websites referred to most of this material. I will however post a fresh post.

So expect my post in say 10 days.

Until then, do me one favour, look at the terminology you are attacking in the Bible, and then read about the same issues in the Koran; basically you are only undermining your own book!